Green party policy prostitution and porn

[NiceGerbil]

Just looking at green party policies for another topic.

Came across this statement. It goes further than anything I've seen and bit taken aback. I know this topic always gets lively discussion and so was in two minds about posting but it really is extreme IMO.

'Prostitution and the Sex Industry
RR550 The Green Party believes that the law should not seek to regulate consensual sexual activities between adults where those do not affect others. Where there are such effects, a balance must be reached. Adults should be free to do as they wish with their own bodies, and to practice whatever form of sexual activity they wish by themselves or with each other by mutual consent. This includes the freedom not only to engage in such sexual acts, but also to be photographed or filmed doing so, to make such images available to other adults with their consent, and to be able to view such images. That someone might receive payment for any of these activities should not affect this freedom.'

You mean Prof David Nutt? He was an advisor once but the Government (who want to keep illegal drugs illegal) got rid of him because he said things the Government didn't want to hear. You know, things like how cannabis has never killed anyone and is actually safer than alcohol.

"Have you missed a word? Just checking."

I believe I did. I blame the wine I've been drinking.

Yes I know who he is and what he said!

If you Google then you'll get way more info, it was much more involved than that.

@MargaritaPie

You mean Prof David Nutt? He was an advisor once but the Government (who want to keep illegal drugs illegal) got rid of him because he said things the Government didn't want to hear. You know, things like how cannabis has never killed anyone and is actually safer than alcohol.

Cannabis has never killed anyone? Google Christine Haye-Levy. She was murdered in front of her little girls by her partner who by his own admission had smoked to much cannabis that he had a psychotic episode. He thought he was hitting Christine with a wooden spoon but it was actually a 10" carving knife.

Don't tell me cannabis is not responsible for any deaths

Street prostitution is very different from indoors. Prostitution has also been illegal since 2007 (the Leeds approach was tolerated)

Eh? Prostitution is not illegal in England and Wales or Scotland. It is not illegal to buy or sell sex. Pimping, soliciting and brothel- keeping is illegal.

Northern Ireland adopted the Nordic Model. The SNP approved the adoption of the Nordic Model at a conference several years ago but unfortunately have done nothing to implement it.

I would list security as a basic need along with food, water and shelter. These are the survival needs. The rest, I’m afraid, are nice-to-have, and it takes a special kind of privilege to not know that. As for the level of privilege required to not see that basic survival needs for some - including security - can be in direct conflict to anyone else’s nice-to-haves, and that this is what causes human power struggles, well, it’s just unbelievable isn’t it. How the other half live.

I always knew Greens didn’t really welcome anyone from poorer backgrounds and they make themselves more irrelevant by the day.

As for the excuse that modern tech makes law breaking and abuse of other humans impossible to stop, therefore we shouldn’t try, why not just rid ourselves of all legal protections and ideas of law and justice and go back to the idea that might makes right. That is the way things are going at the moment - and it automatically means that there is no such thing as society. These same people would be so shocked and horrified if I walked into their houses and helped myself to their wealth though. Then they would use their version of law against me all right - you’d end up with starving working people being hanged for stealing loaves of bread again.

Seen it all before in the Victorian period, and I won’t vote for it or support it in any way.

@NiceGerbil

Ok going through the rest.

'Regardless of generally accepted standards of public morality in the past, no attempt to end various aspects of prostitution with prohibitive laws has worked. In addition, with the availability of sexually explicit material via the internet it is not realistic to expect that censorship laws will be able to stop access to such material in the future.'

Hmm bit tricky CBA. Awesome!

No attempts to end murder have stopped it happening either but they aren’t calling for that to be decriminalised

Tbf when I was young and naive/stupid I’d have possibly been ok with their policy statement, what has changed is my increased knowledge of how women are exploited and who these statements serve (and it’s not women)

'Adults should be free to do as they wish with their own bodies, and to practice whatever form of sexual activity they wish by themselves or with each other by mutual consent'

That made me think of this www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/dale-bolinger-guilty-what-sexual-cannibalism-9619716.html I can't find that actual case but I'm sure there was one where both parties were mutually consenting...

How do the Greens define consent?

Adults should be free to do as they wish with their own bodies, and to practice whatever form of sexual activity they wish by themselves or with each other by mutual consent

Completely ignores the wider societal implications.

So is there anything about what they will do to find and help the women who aren’t consenting? Or do we just ignore that part and focus on how to help the penis people?

"Eh? Prostitution is not illegal in England and Wales or Scotland. It is not illegal to buy or sell sex. Pimping, soliciting and brothel- keeping is illegal."

I accidentally missed a word out, I meant to say street prostitution has been illegal since 2007.

"brothel- keeping" also includes women working together.

"The SNP approved the adoption of the Nordic Model at a conference several years ago but unfortunately have done nothing to implement it."

A few years ago there was a private members bill by the Highlands MSP Rhoda Grant to criminalise sexwork which included a public consultation where everyone was invited to give their views. After the consultation ended the bill was defeated at the first stage.

I did read all the consultation responses and it was interesting to observe almost everyone who identified as a past or active prostitute was strongly against any form of criminalisation. Most of the responses in favour where people who had been shown an anti-sex trade video at church. Almost as if Rhoda Grant had been in contact with churches around Scotland to get them involved and to respond.

Then when the responses were summarised it was simply summarised as something like "40% support my bill, 60% don't"(something like that, I can't remember the stats), my issue with that is there was zero distinction made between who the people were who replied to the consultation. An actual prostitute obviously knows a lot more about the sex trade and how laws will affect them than someone who knows literally nothing about the sex trade other than a one-sided video their church has shown them.

That’s an excellent policy statement. Clear, coherent, concise and unambiguous.

It’s good to see that at least one political party takes issues of individual freedom and bodily autonomy seriously and does not seek to impose further authoritarian restrictions on the freedoms of consenting adults.

Those who disagree are, of course, free to vote for someone else.

why oh why can't they just stick to climate change and say they will put other important issues to referendum.

@MargaritaPie

"Eh? Prostitution is not illegal in England and Wales or Scotland. It is not illegal to buy or sell sex. Pimping, soliciting and brothel- keeping is illegal."

I accidentally missed a word out, I meant to say street prostitution has been illegal since 2007.

"brothel- keeping" also includes women working together.

I don't know what point you are trying to make. Soliciting on the street in Scotland was illegal long before 2007. It was a regular feature of the Monday morning roll in the Justice of the Peace court eons ago when I was a trainee. That's the Scottish position as far as I'm aware it's the same in England- soliciting has always been an offence.

And yes 2 prostitutes working out of the same flat is a brothel and is illegal. Quite rightly so.

@MargaritaPie

"The SNP approved the adoption of the Nordic Model at a conference several years ago but unfortunately have done nothing to implement it."

A few years ago there was a private members bill by the Highlands MSP Rhoda Grant to criminalise sexwork which included a public consultation where everyone was invited to give their views. After the consultation ended the bill was defeated at the first stage.

I did read all the consultation responses and it was interesting to observe almost everyone who identified as a past or active prostitute was strongly against any form of criminalisation. Most of the responses in favour where people who had been shown an anti-sex trade video at church. Almost as if Rhoda Grant had been in contact with churches around Scotland to get them involved and to respond.

Then when the responses were summarised it was simply summarised as something like "40% support my bill, 60% don't"(something like that, I can't remember the stats), my issue with that is there was zero distinction made between who the people were who replied to the consultation. An actual prostitute obviously knows a lot more about the sex trade and how laws will affect them than someone who knows literally nothing about the sex trade other than a one-sided video their church has shown them.

I don't quite think that is what Rhoda Grant's Bill did but it's now neither here nor there as it didn't happen- nor did the absolutely demented Bill by someone whose name I can't remember which called for the legalisation of brothels and pimping.

I'm completely unpersuaded by the notion that the voices of those who want to keep the "sex trade" alive and kicking should count for more than those who don't.

@Unfashionable

That’s an excellent policy statement. Clear, coherent, concise and unambiguous.

It’s good to see that at least one political party takes issues of individual freedom and bodily autonomy seriously and does not seek to impose further authoritarian restrictions on the freedoms of consenting adults.

Those who disagree are, of course, free to vote for someone else.

Glad to hear a frank response!

Note they have no stops on the limit of the sexual acts that may be performed, as long as consensual.

I remember the Germany case where consensually a man cut off another man's penis, cooked and ate it.

Consensual. No restrictions. Cool!

From reading the news and online content there are a fair few men who enjoy degrading women (and men) in extreme ways. Some men enjoy the fantasy of strangulation to death timed as best they can to coincide with their climax, or slitting their throat at that point. Others fantasise about locking a woman away for a period of time, for they and others to control. And so on.

The policy has no barriers. No mention of legality of the acts.

As long as it's sexy and mutual consent. Money is beside the point.

You can find someone to do anything if they are desperate enough.

Consenting to be killed.. If you feel there is no hope for you due to destitution or drugs. That the money is enough to give your children something. Severe depression. A last act to try and do something worthwhile.

It's a vision of a wonderful future that's for sure!

And the idea that no they don't mean that. Either they haven't thought about it (hard to believe) or autonomy is more important.

If they didn't mean what they say. Then they wouldn't have worded it as they have.

The wording deliberately says already there is no difference between consent due to desire and consent due to payment. Which is s huge step in itself.

So I think imagining a limit on acts is inappropriate. They could have put one and they didn't.

"And yes 2 prostitutes working out of the same flat is a brothel and is illegal. Quite rightly so."

You are happy for the women themselves who sell sex to be criminalised?

"I'm completely unpersuaded by the notion that the voices of those who want to keep the "sex trade" alive and kicking should count for more than those who don't."

It's not about what your opinion is that counts IMO, it's who you are that counts. IMHO the opinion of prostitutes current+former should weigh a little more than someone who knows literally nothing about prostitution other than something they've seen on TV.

I suspect the law also relates to footfall.

In a residential block of flats, having two or more women or men working out of the same flat will mean a lot of buzzing in and out etc. In itself disruptive and into late night I'd guess.

I have some experience of this- it's just a lot of pretty random people up and down etc and the noise/ random blokes in a smallish residential block is not great.

And in the end they're residential not for business.

Legalisation then?

Depends entirely on the sex workers' circumstances. Some only see one client a day. Some have another job as well and only do sex work on the side.

In general only one client will be in the brothel at once, and appointments are generally arranged so that after a client leaves there will be a gap before the next one arrives. So the sex worker can be ready and to avoid awkwardness of clients walking past each other.

"Legalisation then?"

I support decriminalisation- same model advocated for by many prostitutes themselves, health, anti-STD, anti-trafficking and human rights orgs. This model (unlike the Nordic model) means women won't be criminalised for working together.

Place marking to show ds who is a member of the Green Party, as a rape survivor there are things in this that make me very uneasy.

@MargaritaPie

"And yes 2 prostitutes working out of the same flat is a brothel and is illegal. Quite rightly so."

You are happy for the women themselves who sell sex to be criminalised?

"I'm completely unpersuaded by the notion that the voices of those who want to keep the "sex trade" alive and kicking should count for more than those who don't."

It's not about what your opinion is that counts IMO, it's who you are that counts. IMHO the opinion of prostitutes current+former should weigh a little more than someone who knows literally nothing about prostitution other than something they've seen on TV.

Yeah let's hear it for the pimps and punters. And there are plenty of ex prostitutes who don't support your pro- punter position.

And yes 2 prostitutes working out of the same flat is a brothel and is illegal. Quite rightly so."

You are happy for the women themselves who sell sex to be criminalised?

If they are running a brothel- yes I am.

I did read all the consultation responses and it was interesting to observe almost everyone who identified as a past or active prostitute was strongly against any form of criminalisation

The women I know who escaped prostitution are strongly in favour of the Nordic model. They see themselves as having been groomed - those that weren’t trafficked in the first place - and want to save young women from the abuse and trauma they themselves endured.

MargaritaPie
An actual prostitute obviously knows a lot more about the sex trade and how laws will affect them than someone who knows literally nothing about the sex trade other than a one-sided video their church has shown them.

What more is there to know about prostitution than this? Says it all

www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/local-news/gallery/inside-old-sheffield-brothel-naughty-21268826