Nordic model demand in Daily Mail

If I were an all powerful deity, I would arrange a surprise for every person who chants the mantra that "sex work is work", derides ex-prostitutes as whorephobic, and insists on social media that selling access to your most private orifices is no different to cleaning toilets or working at McDonalds.

They'd fall asleep, and when they woke up they'd find themselves trapped in a mega brothel, in a country where they don't speak the language and their language is not understood by anyone else.

I'd leave them here for at least 6 weeks. Forced to service every revolting punter who'd paid the entry fee. Over and over again. With no right to refuse unsavoury clients, painful positions, or to restrict access to any of their tender, bruised orifices, and with no control over condom use.

Day after day and week after week of constant vilification, degradation, pain and exhaustion, with nowhere else to go and nobody to turn to.

I wonder how long it would take, under those circumstances, for the sex work is work mantra chanters to change their tune? Would any of them need to be sent back for a second stint? Even if they didn't learn any empathy, surely the thought of going back and experiencing it again would be a deterrent?

Most of the male SWIW enthusiasts picture themselves doing the buying, or skimming off the profits. The ones who insist that they find sex work empowering are picturing themselves as Pretty Woman style escorts, or getting money for old rope via their OnlyFans pages.

So I'm hoping that they'd get the message pretty quickly, and learn to feign empathy, even if they are too sociopathic to feel it. Or, failing that, and me being an omnipotent deity and all. I would just smite the fuck out of them.

A rather impressive list of orgs (including very established well-known ones) and individuals disagree with the Nordic model (see signatures at the end of above letter). It isn't just Amnesty.

I'm not very much impressed by many organisations when it comes to women's rights nowadays - which organisations are you referring to and what is their problem with the Nordic model? Because claims it leads to greater violence against women have not been proven to be true in Nordic countries: in fact all that's been proven is being involved in any sort of prostitution brings an increased risk of violence (mostly to poor/trafficked/vulnerable women).

"Prostitutes are not arrested under the Nordic Model. "

Not for selling sexual services, but they are for working together ("running a brothel"). And they end up evicted because it becomes illegal for landlords to rent property to a prostitute (whether she works alone or not).

The Nordic Model isn't the simple "selling sex is legal, buying sex is illegal" it is advertised as, it's made up of a bunch of criminalisation laws which may not be in the best interest of the sex worker. Which is probably why a large list of orgs and people don't support it.

In the UK, prostitutes working together in a flat are treated quite leniently unless there's another illegal activity going on like soliciting/drugs.

And you're completely confused about the Nordic model. Prostitutes are not arrested under the Nordic Model. The punters and enablers are.

*"So then why advocate for criminalisation or partial-criminalisation (eg Nordic model)

Because based on the available evidence this seems like the least injurious system for women if we have to accept prostitution in the short to medium term."*

decrimnow.org.uk/open-letter-on-the-nordic-model/

A rather impressive list of orgs (including very established well-known ones) and individuals disagree with the Nordic model (see signatures at the end of above letter). It isn't just Amnesty.

This description of how the Nordic model was successfully implemented in Ipswich is really interesting:
nordicmodelnow.org/2017/11/14/how-a-nordic-model-approach-to-tackling-prostitution-was-implemented-in-ipswich/

By contrast, in Germany, selling and buying sex have been legal since 2002. But this hasn't caused trafficking to disappear – in fact quite the reverse. By 2007, the UN had recognised Germany as a top destination for victims of trafficking.*

Which is common sense isn't it...

If you make it legal, it reduces the shame/potential impact for the men.

Demand goes up.

Supply has to follow.

Hence women trafficked in to meet the demand and/or more vulnerable women go down that route.

So then why advocate for criminalisation or partial-criminalisation (eg Nordic model)

Because based on the available evidence this seems like the least injurious system for women if we have to accept prostitution in the short to medium term.

"I have no desire to see prostitutes made criminals, only then people that exploit them. That's the traffickers, pimps and punters. You know, the people making profit out of selling women."

So then why advocate for criminalisation or partial-criminalisation (eg Nordic model) laws which result in the prostitutes themselves arrested for working together or being evicted or having their earnings reduced (with noone offering to compensate them for the money they would otherwise have made)?

"Sure in theory, but it doesn't really work in practice because you can't prove which woman is the manager. "

What makes you think there has to be just "one manager"? They are both arrested. See the link above in my 18:34:42 post about the raids in USA, the cops will arrest and charge all the prostitutes in a brothel.

Useful reminder, thanks Sophocles

I’ve fired off a quick email to my MP using the template from upthread

www.nmnow.org/support_women/find_your_mp

UK law enforcement is actually rather tolerant of prostitution. Look at Leeds! And this is decades after Kings Cross.

What does it say about our society that you can envisage a woman selling their body as a commodity would be her only available option to earn a living?

If you're going to advocate for laws that will enable the police to reduce or stop her business, who will pay her the money she would have otherwise made selling sex? You?

Wouldn't fighting poverty (ie the cause) be better than laws which result in prostitutes being arrested for prostitution/brothel-keeping or evicting them or by reducing their earnings?

What if that was her home and selling sex was her only income and her eviction would send her into the streets with nothing?

What does it say about our society that you can envisage a woman selling their body as a commodity would be her only available option to earn a living?

Re my first point have a look at this Twitter post:
twitter.com/MissKilahMarie/status/1379585028447989760

Look at how it's worded and have a look through what most comments are saying. Looks like the cops have busted 9 traffickers doesn't it?

Now read the article, again it looks just like they have made a successful "trafficking" bust doesn't it?
www.wsbtv.com/news/local/21-arrested-human-trafficking-sting-operation-set-up-by-metro-atlanta-police-departments/6UQRU6XV6JAAZEUU4Q6F2PSUHI/

Until you realise all the arrest were for "prostitution, pimping and drug charges". There is no evidence any trafficking took place and no arrests were made for trafficking, but the whole thing is made to look like "tackling trafficking" when most arrests were just prostitutes for prostitution.

The way this is reported is making a lot of people think ordinary prostitutes are "traffickers".

"I have a couple of rental flats and I would have no hesitation about evicting prostitutes using them as a brothel."

Would you still evict the prostitute if she wasn't using it as a brothel? i.e. just working as a prostitute by herself.

What if that was her home and selling sex was her only income and her eviction would send her into the streets with nothing?

"I can't recall seeing reports of these almost mythical 2 prostitutes working together being prosecuted. There certainly have been prosecutions of pimps, traffickers and brothel keepers."

In the eyes of the cops in Britain, if there is more than one prostitute working together at the same place they are guilty of "brothel keeping".

Email sent to my MP for the good it will do based on his previous responses. At least he can’t hide behind “none of my constituents have raise a concern”.

A very useful catch all word then.

Indeed MissBarbary

Thanks - have also written to my MP using the template. It takes less than one minute.
My MP is a female Labour MP who toes the TWAW line so I don't hold out too much hope but fingers crossed.

In Sweden when they introduced the Nordic model, part of this law made it illegal to rent property to a sex worker. This resulted in prostitutes being evicted as soon as the landlord found out and some ended up homeless

It's not illegal to lease a flat to a prostitute in the UK but using a flat as a brothel is a ground to terminate a lease. I have a couple of rental flats and I would have no hesitation about evicting prostitutes using them as a brothel.

Pimping", despite what many think, is actually a very broad term which means providing any service at all for a sex worker in return for payment. This includes things like make a website for a sex worker, provide transport eg driver her to/from a client, provide security eg wait in the car the entire time a sex worker is with her client etc

A very useful catch all word then.