Nordic model demand in Daily Mail

I thought it was interesting that the judgement was all about the ability of the person in care to consent, no consideration at all given to the poor woman who was going to be purchased.

Sarah Ditum raised an interesting point about the man's history of violence. I've no idea how far his capacity to desire sex and arrange for its purchase is deemed to extend to his capacity at this point to manage his violence.

Judgment discusses C's history of violence and challenging behaviour such that C had to move out of the family home for everybody's sake. C was detained in a secure facility from 2014-17 from which is was discharged to his current home.

The package of support C receives requires the deprivation of his liberty and, since 2017, the Court of Protection has authorised the deprivation (see para 178 Schedule A1 Mental Capacity Act 2005, ‘MCA’)…C’s admission had become necessary as a result of a deterioration in his mental health and threats that he was articulating which were of a sexual nature. For accuracy, it is important that I record that the threats were never acted upon…

As a result of his progress it was possible for C to be discharged to his current home

It is important to emphasise that nobody considers it appropriate for the contemplated sexual activity to be arranged with a street sex worker. Indeed, because of the risks inherent in such a situation, not least and potentially not limited to C, the Local Authority’s plan is thought substantially to reduce the risk of this occurring.

I noticed another comment:

it has been noted by deputies that such [commercial sex] services have proved beneficial for clients and their support teams, particularly where difficult behaviour has been previously exhibited. This may be more prevalent for young male clients, particularly if they are living with a brain injury;

There is some discussion of managing risk factors by services suppliers who are vetted and have their preferences available in profiles on a managed support site.

At this hearing and in this judgment, I am not considering any plan for C to visit a sex worker. That decision will be for another day when a comprehensive risk assessment has been undertaken and a care plan devised which will illuminate whether and if so, how such a visit may be arranged. As is recognised, the matrix of risk in C’s present situation is likely to be very different from that which obtained in a psychotic episode he experienced as a young person
…
Those who read this judgment will notice that I have used the terms ‘prostitute’ and ‘sex worker’ interchangeably, for the reasons I have alluded to above. The former has an intentionally pejorative connotation, the latter signifies a degree of volition which will not always reflect the reality. Both terms are therefore unsatisfactory in different ways. I have taken some time in the above passages to set out some of the options and agencies that would be available to C.
…
The documents ends:
I will have in mind that it will never be in C’s interest to put himself or others at risk.

There is a fascinating potted history of consent issues for some groups. I'm left wondering about consent issues for the parties who provide services to some extent.

www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/A-Local-Authority-v-C-and-ors-judgment.pdf

I saw an interesting court case tweet today:

twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1387733202983440384?s=19

About whether care workers could legally facilitate someone to have sex with a prostitute. I thought it was interesting that the judgement was all about the ability of the person in care to consent, no consideration at all given to the poor woman who was going to be purchased. And I know this is the way the law is, but it made me angry, and I think illustrates why the purchase of sex should be criminalised.

The Sex Work is Work advocates are trying to have their cake and eat it.

Claiming endlessly that "sex work" is a job just like any other, but then if you are opposed to that work, you're a henious bigot.

Let's be very clear. Prostitution is hideous, exploitative work, which harms women as a class. We don't want it to exist anymore. To finish an industry, you need to remove demand for that industry and that's what the Nordic Model aims to do.

The arguments made against ending prostitution are exactly the same as those made against eliminating slavery and child labour. That it would be harmful to slaves and children forced into work and that they actually happy and would starve otherwise.

Those arguments, thankfully didn't work. That sex work advocates are dusting them off to justify the subjugation of women is predictable and unsurprising.

The latest signature for the DecrimNow letter is lionesscircle. "The Lioness Circle is a creative healing support network for black women and girls recovering from domestic abuse and sexual violence."

Have they been "Stonewalled" too?

I can't be the only one wondering why the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen are on that list.

Probably because they've been Stonewalled. It's all wrapped up together nowadays, this misogynistic shite.

Have you read the article about the situation in New Zealand labhra? Is that what you're advocating for?

Look, I'm not trying to say Sex Work is great and all roses. I was a Sex Worker for many years, I suppose it was the 'least worst' option for me when the disability benefits I needed are made so difficult to get in this country. I chose sex work over real poverty.

Yes, many former sex workers and indeed many people in general plead with parliament to end poverty. Yet have they been listened to over the past 10 years? No!! Benefits were cut and frozen for 10 years whilst living and housing costs rise and rise, the UN condemning the UK's treatment of the disabled, problems affording and finding childcare, and they even brought in the 2 Child policy and rape clause - which massively impacts women.

Unless and until poverty is eradicated, people (mostly women) WILL still trade sex for money. I'd rather that Sex Workers are able to be as safe as possible. The Nordic Model HINDERS our safety. Taking the ideology out of it, that's a fact.

If I had a bad experience with a punter, I could more easily go to the police just now as the law stands - with selling and buying being legal. If the Nordic Model came in, would I feel able to go to the police?? Like hell I would!! Because then the police would be able to use knowledge of where I work from to wait outside to 'catch' clients. The place would be un-workable. It can be difficult to find places to work from. Just now without the NM, the police can and do take my report seriously but it won't affect my place to work.

With buying being legal, the punters are not as cagey in giving out their details for screening. Under the Nordic Model, clients try to withhold this info for fear of getting arrested.

Like someone else said, the NM won't discourage the (few) clients out to be violent, but it will put off some of the other clients. Making Sex Workers have to take more risks to make up income because the pool of clients is less.

Condoms are used as evidence in Nordic Model countries.

Sex Workers have been evicted from their homes, lost custody of their Children, been killed in numbers exceeding before, in countries which have adopted the NM.

There are ALREADY robust laws regarding trafficking, coercion etc. It was made a strict liability offence a few years back, so even if the punter doesn't know the woman was trafficked or forced, he is still prosecuted. I support this, but I don't support the NM. There are already laws in place.

I don't give a fuck about the clients. We are not trying to defend the clients. We just care about our safety.

"All the studies indicate a very high rate of violence towards the people in prostitution, but there is no definitive evidence of any actual increase due to the sex purchase ban. Similarly claims that the sex purchase ban has driven prostitution underground and made it more dangerous are not supported by the research. Rather the evidence underlines the fact that prostitution is always dangerous."

nordicmodelnow.org/2019/12/22/has-the-nordic-model-worked-what-does-the-research-say/

"Why - that hasn't been found to be the case in Nordic countries. Claims that it will make punters more violent have not turned out to be true."

See my links in post Mon 26-Apr-21 23:50:20

Resharing this excellent Sheila Jeffreys quote posted on the feminist quotes thread, because it bears repeating:

The effect of legalised prostitution on women outside prostitution is to lower the status of all women. Women are recognised by the state in this system as the appropriate objects of male penetration with no consideration for their personhood or pleasure. This teaches that the penetration and use of an unwilling woman is ‘sex’, an idea that lies at the root of sexual violence against women in general. There is no chance of developing a sexuality of equality in which women’s pleasure, right to say no, and bodily integrity are respected whilst the violence of prostitution is allowed to continue with state support for men’s behaviour.

When I listen to sex work advocates it's clear they are describing the well educated, well paid self employed woman who does a bit on a side to afford a nicer handbag. They seem to not realise nor care that people like those you describe actually exist. That they can say so clearly "well, I'm alright, Jack" and ignore all those who aren't is actually sickening.

The sex worker I know is one of these so called happy, empowered, bossbabe type. But even she only does it when she's desperate for money. Can't think why she doesn't realise that.

Sex workers are not "forced" to do anything

How on Earth can you claim that for all sex workers?

Former sex workers are listened to in this debate and many in favour of the NM are former sex workers who plead with parliament to find safer ways for women to leave poverty.

I used to be a sex worker for many years. I DO NOT support the Nordic Model at all. It would just put sex workers in more danger.

For some reason sex workers themselves are not being listened to in this debate on issues which will affect them. We are telling you it will put us in more danger, and yet we are not listened to.

The Nordic model hasn't worked in Northern Ireland or the Irish Republic so why would you want to introduce it here. There are 2 reports, one for NI and the Republic, which show that it doesn't decrease demand, women are not getting help to exit and women are still arrested.

Amnesty International is sticking up for women not pimps and punters. Most sex workers in Britain are not abused and exploited. Modern day slavery takes many forms and we have to tackle it wherever we see it. A blanket ban on paying for sex won't work.

Margarita
So the trafficked women in German brothels who were beaten for not earning enough could just turn away a punter.

www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/jun/22/trouble-in-paradise-rise-and-fall-of-germany-brothel-king-jurgen-rudloff

Sex workers are not "forced" to do anything (that is called being raped). They can say no . If a client turns up stinking or if he is rude or refuses to use a condom for example she can ask him to leave, and if he refuses she can call the cops.

As a rough estimate, in how many countries is that accurate? As per squirrel's post, would you expect trafficked women would be free to contact the police (in the language of whichever country)?

"Forced to service every revolting punter who'd paid the entry fee...... and with no control over condom use."

These is a dangerous myth to spread. Sex workers are not "forced" to do anything (that is called being raped). They can say no . If a client turns up stinking or if he is rude or refuses to use a condom for example she can ask him to leave, and if he refuses she can call the cops.

In fact, countries which have criminalisation (including the Nordic model), condoms are used as evidence by cops. Which makes it more likely they won't be used. Health orgs understand this which is why they don't support this model.

Sex work is prostitution is the commodification of women's bodies is the exploitation of the default human is the degradation of the 'inferior' sex. It is not and should not be considered a career and that is where the Nordic model is clear - building a business based on selling women's bodies is not acceptable.

Think of it this way- if a violent client isn't going to be deterred by laws against murder/assault/rape/theft/etc he isn't going to be deterred by a law against buying sex will he?

With the Nordic model the pool of clients can be expected to shrink a little yes, but that means the clients which remain will be more saturated with violent ones and sex workers will have less choice of clients to take bookings from during the vetting process.

"Because claims it leads to greater violence against women have not been proven to be true in Nordic countries"

Sweden:
"The Swedish State Criminal Department warns that the sex trade may now be more violent. Especially worrying is the trade in foreign women, who often fall entirely under the control of pimps."
hivlawcommission.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FinalReport-RisksRightsHealth-EN.pdf p38

France:
www.pion-norge.no/aktuelt/more-than-10-sex-workers-have-been-killed-in-6-months/

Ireland:
"Sex workers in Ireland have reported a 92 percent increase in violent crime since the “Nordic Model” came into place in March 2017."
www.pion-norge.no/aktuelt/more-than-10-sex-workers-have-been-killed-in-6-months/