An idea regarding prostitution

[GCRich]

Go gentle, I've not thought a lot or researched this idea, it just popped into my head last night...

Make paying for sex a criminal matter with unlimited fines for johns... UNLESS they are on the "Johns Register". If you want to use a prostitute without being at risk of prosecution you need to be listed on a public register of Johns. Name, town, age, photo and evidence of the results of an STI test conducted in the last 3 months.

One can debate the ethics of using prostitutes, but men who believe it is morally acceptable to do so should at least have the courage of their convictions and be open about it. They can't have it both ways and say it's fine but I have a problem with people knowing.

Portugal decriminalised (pall drugs in 2000 and offer safe drug consumption rooms to addicts. The sky didn't fall down and they haven't seen an outbreak of addicts or drug abuse. What they do have is being one of the European countries with the lowest rate of overdose deaths per 100,000 population.

Compare this to the UK(Scotland especially) who every year are always near the top of the list of most overdose deaths in Europe. We've tried "just say no" campaigns and we've tried a hard "war on drugs" approach yet the UK's drug abuse problem gets worse and worse.

*possession of small amounts for personal use I meant to add.

It is a very complicated area although lots of people think it is simple.

So given your experience, how do you think we reduce the amount of men who feel entitled to buy consent?

Why is it important to you to reduce demand OP? Lots of women work willingly in the industry and don't need 'saving'. It seems as though you are more interested in shaming/policing behaviour that you don't like. I don't see how having a register would protect women in the industry - but if there is a register, why would it be public and not just visible to the police?

Oh fgs
Lots of women who work in the industry are trafficked and coerced
Lots of women in the industry feel this is their only choice to make money given their life circumstances/drug addiction
Lots of women in the industry are choosing it as an act of self harm due to childhood trauma and abuse

Take all those women out and you are left with the minority who work "willingly"

How are you going to protect vulnerable women nala?

Reducing demand seems like a good start, especially for trafficked/coerced women. Less demand = less money to be made = less need for trafficking

Or are those women acceptable collateral damage in men's entitlement to sex?

Yuck. Apologists turn my stomach, on the feminist board too

And damn right I'm going to shame men who use prostitutes. They are entitled misogynists who think consent can be bought. I don't see why they shouldn't be shamed

So you take away the demand and these women have no way of making money - what do you propose they do now?

I'm all for more regulation to protect women, but I don't think a public register is the way to go. Do you also want a public register or people who watch porn as some of those women have been trafficked? What does an acceptable solution look like to you Adam?

Also, consent seemingly can be bought, unless you think all the women providing these services are being raped? I am obviously NOT saying that sex workers can't be raped btw - I'm just saying that it's possible to sleep with someone you otherwise wouldn't for money.

Reducing demand seems like a good start, especially for trafficked/coerced women. Less demand = less money to be made = less need for trafficking

This isn't how it works in reality. Make something illegal (eg prostitution) and you push it underground and give power to organised crime, pimps and traffickers.

There is little to no evidence to show the Nordic Model/end demand model works the way its supporters want it to work. Lots of evidence to show it just makes the sex trade more violent and gives more power to traffickers.

eg regarding Nordic Model Sweden:
"the sex trade remains at pre-law levels. It has
simply moved further underground"
"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

I have a question. If the Nordic Model does result in sexworkers making less money, who is going to compensate them for lost earnings? Are supporters of the Nordic Model going to give money to sexworkers as compensation?

Instead of laws which make the sex trade more violent for sexworkers; wouldn't it be a better idea to work on making the sex trade safer for sexworkers, to ensure their voices are heard and give them more control over their work? And perhaps to tackle poverty which may be the cause of some women entering the sex trade?

I already said I want to discuss how to stop men feeling they can buy consent so I won't be responding to this

In Germany where prostitution was legalised there was an increase in trafficking as there weren't enough prostitutes to meet demand

But anyway. What are we going to do to stop men feeling that buying consent is acceptable?

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

Maybe we could also ask what we are going to do to deal with men like Rudloff?

If I knew how to do it I'd tell you. As I've said two people in private making an agreement is nigh on impossible to police, quite apart from the fact it is legal.

If I was running things I'd concentrate on coerced/trafficked women rather than trying to interfere in consenting adults doing things.

Sorry, I'd also concentrate much more on the pimps. Unless things have changed it isn't easy to prove a case against a pimp. If women are working willingly I think they should be the ones getting the financial benefits.

The "demand" for prostitution has existed in every culture since the beginning of humans. There's a reason it's often called "the world's oldest profession". It isn't going anywhere.

Hmm. We have managed very successfully to reduce demand for cigarettes. Humans can change their behaviours and adapt. I don't think "well its always happened" is a good reason not to do anything. Prostitution damages women, both directly to the women themselves and indirectly as it sends signals that consent can be bought and men are entitled to sex. I think we could do lots to reduce demand, the problem is men don't want to. Patriarchy. You are showing that nicely margarita although at least you said you think it's impossible to stop men wanting to use prostitutes. That's more honest than most of the legalisation advocates who post on here.

"I think we could do lots to reduce demand"

In reality, all that happens is the Nordic Model increase violence for sexworkers and criminalises them in various ways.

"That's more honest than most of the legalisation advocates who post on here"

*decriminalisation, not legalisation. They are different.

I agree the focus needs to be on pimps and groomers. If they are the parents or family members of the sex worker then they need to be removed and the sex worker be offered rehabilitation. Lots of things continue in families for generations which are not safe or healthy, that's not a reason for authorities to allow it to continue.

Midwifery is the oldest profession. Prostitution was created as a bartering system by men as a way to trade women's bodies in exchange for goods and services. We all frown on slavery now but you still feel that men are entitled to use women's bodies as a masturbatory tool because they're too lazy or lack the imagination to do it themselves or actually develop a real human connection.

Ask the Germans how that worked out for them……

The big difference with cigarettes is that you go to a shop to buy them and you can put controls on the shops e.g making sure purchasers are a certain age. You can then control smoking in public. Smoking in private is harder to control but there are lots of points of control.

Most of prostitution goes on in private in unregulated premises. Street prostitution is the exception but you have certain constraints e.g. if someone goes into a shop, say a 16 year old, you know they have tried to buy cigarettes and if the shop sells them without checking the age you know they have done that (people get caught with secret shoppers either trying to buy or being in the shop observing.) Not quite so straightforward with kerb crawlers, is he trying to buy sex or asking for directions, is he kerb crawling or lost, so you have to get evidence, if police women go out and stand on street corners and a man stops and uses euphamisms or waits for the woman to speak you have no evidence, if you try to get him to say the equivalent of "I'll have 20 Marlboro" most men smell a rat and drive off.

Arresting a woman for soliciting is fraught with similar difficulties. You might look at a woman standing on a street corner and think she's soliciting but there isn't a law about standing on a corner. I had a funny experience with this, my husband was working away from home and one of his colleagues arranged to meet me halfway to handover his things. I knew a vague description of him and I knew the colour and make of his car. As I stood there clocking cars and drivers I suddenly realised I was being watched by two police officers in a police car and I realised they were building their evidence that I was looking into cars driven my a lone male and at a certain point they would have enough evidence and I was going to get arrested. I didn't get a chance to see their faces when the very senior police officer stopped to handover my husband's things. He couldn't understand why I was laughing until I pointed out we were in danger of being arrested.

When it all goes on with mobile phone numbers and internet sites it is even harder and of course it isn't dealt with as it isn't a crime unless more than one person is working there and as I've said before that particular law can be a source of added danger for women.

It isn't like dealing with burglary which is another activity that tends to go on in private as burglars don't usually like an audience. With a burglary you have a complainant and perpetrator. With doing something to a man buying sex the woman selling sex is unlikely to be a complainant unless a crime happens, he assaults her, robs her or whatever.

It isn't easy to deal with however much we want it to be but it is some years since I left that job and things might be different.

"Ask the Germans how that worked out for them"

As has been clarified many times, Germany has legalisation.

Decriminalisation is the model advocated for by a wide variety of human rights/health/anti-trafficking/sex worker orgs etc. Currently NZ, parts of Australia and (this year) Belgium have decriminalisation.

Laws aside, Germany's situation may be complicated by the fact it's a very populated country bang in the middle of Europe which makes it a major hub for immigration.

Germany have been criticised for not doing all they can to fight trafficking but they are making progress on this: borgenproject.org/human-trafficking-in-germany/

Why would decriminalisation decrease trafficking and legalisation increase it?

Unless, just maybe, sending a signal that using prostitutes is acceptable by legalising it increases demand?

In which case clearly demand isn't unchangeable and so we can do things to decrease it. What would those things be i wonder?

I've just been reading about "John Schools" in the US, kind of like a speed awareness course for men who use prostitutes. I like the sound of that, but of course there needs to be a criminal offence to trigger it so it would not be possible under decriminalisation

Why would decriminalisation decrease trafficking and legalisation increase it?
Unless, just maybe, sending a signal that using prostitutes is acceptable by legalising it increases demand?

I don't think legalisation does increase demand or trafficking. Might be more to do with as mentioned Germany's central location and it's large population and that (in the past at least) it hasn't been doing enough to tackle trafficking.

IMO Allowing sexworkers to work legally doesn't increase demand/trafficking. It's just catering to already existing (since the beginning of humans) demand which allows sexwork to happen as safely as possible for the sexworkers.