My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

MNHQ have commented on this thread

Guest posts

Amnesty's proposal to legalise prostitution is wrong - we can't let men who exploit women off the hook

693 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 29/01/2014 19:31

An Amnesty International document leaked this week argues for the legalisation of prostitution. It says that approaches like the Swedish Model – which criminalise buying sex, but legalise selling it – are guilty of "devaluing" prostituted women and "criminalising the contexts in which they live". In essence, the proposals say that most women who become prostitutes make a rational, informed choice – effectively , that they enter into a relationship of equals with the men who purchase their bodies.

I’m really disappointed in Amnesty. I'm a long term supporter of the Swedish Model and, for me, the idea that we should simply accept prostitution as a fact of life is totally wrong. It is particularly irresponsible at a time when it's being reported that austerity is driving many women – and in particular single parents – into prostitution.

I believe Amnesty have got it wrong. Firstly, I don’t believe prostitution is, in most cases, "consensual sex between adults", as the policy document describes it. The idea that women who go into prostitution are exercising 'free choice' just doesn’t stack up. Abuse and lack of alternatives are almost always a factor - many enter the sex trade young, and come from backgrounds fraught with suffering and abuse. Of course there are exceptions to the rule but, all things being equal, I believe most women don’t 'choose', in the true sense, to become prostitutes.

Secondly, I disagree with the idea there can be any real equality between a woman who sells her body and a man who buys it. As Amnesty admits, the conditions of the sex trade are "imperfect" to say the least. British 'prostitute review' sites like 'Punternet' – as well as the male-led 'Hands off my whore' campaign in France – show what so-called clients think of the women they buy sex from.

A large proportion of prostitutes say they experience aggression while working, and nearly seven in ten suffer the symptoms of post-traumatic stress. The dynamic between buyers and sellers of sex ranges from the disrespectful to the downright abusive – but there’s almost always an inequality at play.

Of course, there'll always be some who say that prostitution is "the oldest trade" and that there's not much we can do about it. But this argument is as untrue as it’s depressing. In Sweden, for example, stopping the purchase of sex changes social attitudes, making men less likely to purchase sex and more likely to support prosecutions for others - and there’s no reason why this can’t happen in the UK. Amnesty need to aim much higher. We can do better, surely, than just make the exploitation of women better regulated.

The role of charities like Amnesty should be to lift standards up, not drive them down. Amnesty are supposed to be an ambitious organisation. They shouldn’t just shrug their shoulders and say "c’est la vie". Over the years they've done an indispensable job in ending exploitation, improving human rights, and reducing inequalities. Legalising prostitution runs counter to all these things. It has turned Germany into a "giant Teutonic brothel", as the Economist puts it - and, according to Equality Now, has "empowered pimps and traffickers" in Amsterdam.

Women at risk or in economic need require more opportunities and better protection – not to be told their only option is a demeaning last resort. For the sake of women and mothers everywhere I sincerely hope Amnesty will rethink their position.

OP posts:
Report
SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 31/01/2014 23:36

Why should the document I linked to above be discredited just because one of the sources came from a sex worker organization?

Because afaics all the sources re prostitution are from pro-sex workers organisations. Petra Ostergren, for example, features too.

Report
SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 31/01/2014 23:40

The HIV report also features very dubious figures for convictions for buying sex - claiming that only 2 convictions have taken place. This is not the case - Swedish crime figures show otherwise.

The HIV commission should really be more careful about their sources.

Report
rhinoceer · 31/01/2014 23:41

By the same logic I could say we shouldn't pay any attention to the Mary Honeyball article in the OP because all claims in it come from anti-sex work sources such as Melissa Farley.

Report
Beachcomber · 31/01/2014 23:42

Why are you ignoring a straightforward question rhinoceer?

You are posting away here totally stonewalling me and others. It's making you look rather slippery.

Report
SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 31/01/2014 23:43

Well, you're not, are you?

You won't even believe the Invisible Men quotes - even though they're real.

Report
rhinoceer · 31/01/2014 23:43

I see noone is answering this:

How do we know whoever made the invisible man blog hasn't just used his/her imagination and made up a load of stuff that sounds shocking then falsely claimed it was taken from Punternet?

Report
rhinoceer · 31/01/2014 23:44

"even though they're real."

Or so says the person who wrote the blog (who we don't even know who he/she is).

Report
SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 31/01/2014 23:46

Why won't you answer beach's question?

Even if you dismiss everything on the 1000 post thread on the Invisible Men project, where it is discussed at length, you can still answer beach.

Report
Beachcomber · 31/01/2014 23:54

Stonewalling

The use of deflection in a conversation in order to render a conversation to be pointless, insignificant. Tactics in stonewalling include giving sparse, vague responses, refusing to answer questions, or responding to questions with additional questions.

Report
SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 01/02/2014 00:04

rhino - Here is a link to the Invisible Men:

The Invisible Men

I searched for the first line of text on pnternet: "House inside a pigsty" and it brings up a field report no. 110885. Go look it up. It is a genuine field report.

I'm not linking to p
nternet.

Report
SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 01/02/2014 00:24

^ refers to punter #126

Report
grimbletart · 01/02/2014 00:29

Had to leave the thread for a while. I know this is a very serious subject, but to come back and see my question to Rhino get him in such a logic fail that he is in danger of disappearing up his own fundament is faintly amusing.

Sex workers like to be called sex workers i.e. by their own definition what they do is work. If what they do is work then it is a job and like any other, yet suddenly Rhino claims they could never be forced to take that "work" under the benefits system - therefore it is not "work" by his own definition because they can refuse to do it.

Sorry, but I cannot take this person seriously. He is twisting in the wind.

Report
rhinoceer · 01/02/2014 00:33

I searched for the very top one.

#127 on invisible men blog is review #108757 on p'net

The review also says this which invisible man blog conveniently left out.
"Can't fault Hannah's enthusiasm"

And throughout the review the punter uses her name Hannah frequently yet on the invisible man blog it is always "she".

Report
WhentheRed · 01/02/2014 00:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

rhinoceer · 01/02/2014 00:36

"by their own definition what they do is work. "

If sex workers receive payment for what they do, then why isn't that work?

Report
SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 01/02/2014 00:43

And now you answer beach's question with a question.

Report
rhinoceer · 01/02/2014 00:47

ok I will change it to a statement.

If someone does something for payment then that is called work.

Report
horsetowater · 01/02/2014 00:47

Rhinoceer you still haven't answered my questions. Do you have to keep stonewalling like this?

Report
SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 01/02/2014 00:51

rhino, you acknowledge the quotes are not 'made up' now?

And do you really think Hannah being 'enthusiastic' makes a difference to my opinion of these field reports? Prostitutes are paid to appear enthusiastic, regardless of whether they really feel it. Unfortunately of course, there are plenty on there where the women were far from enthusiastic, and in filthy surroundings - but the punters still go ahead anyway. Cos they've paid their money, haven't they?

Positive reports are on there too - but the fact remains that the punters are rating women like cattle at a market, using the most misogynistic language to do so, and caring little for their actual welfare.

Report
rhinoceer · 01/02/2014 00:54

horse if your Q is about sex work and employment benefits I answered it like 5 times

Report
WhentheRed · 01/02/2014 01:12

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

horsetowater · 01/02/2014 02:36

I asked what your work is. Rhino

Report
WhentheRed · 01/02/2014 07:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.