Paying for sex could be made illegal

[Elizabetth]

politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,2165900,00.html

It's an uncomfortable subject but I'm glad to see that the government are finally trying to deal with the root cause of prostitution which is the demand created by men who use prostitutes.

Sweden is already leading the way in this sphere, decriminalising prostitutes themselves but prosecuting pimps and customers. The Swedes regard prostitution as violence against women and as an abuse of human rights, a conclusion shared with most people who do any serious investigation into prostitution and the experiences of women and children in it.

Sweden has had a lot of success, reducing trafficking dramatically and offering help and support for women who want to leave the life.

I thought it was already ilegal.

Oh, I nearly started a thread about this yesterday. I'll be very glad if it happens. The number of punters (lovely...) who have sex with trafficked women is disgusting.

Hows dh going to persuade me now?

Seriously though - thought it was already? Weren't they talking about making it legal so they could monitor it properly?

Apparently they did a survey on johns to see what would stop them using prostituted women. Knowing a woman had been forced into it (i.e. that they'd be raping her) wouldn't stop them. The only thing that would make them think again was if they were going to be arrested for it.

I think the point is that men who buy sex will be rigorously prosecuted, whereas at the moment it's one of those things that the police tend to turn a blind eye to. Not sure though...

Totaleclipse, I think the idea is to make the one paying for the service the criminal, rather than the prostitute.

I think they are both disgusting, personally.

Surely they should make it safer for the woman who are prostitutes - it's never going tp go away is it? I mean like they do in Amsterdam.

There was an article in the Guardian a while back about trafficked women in brothels. It quoted a user posting on the 'Punternet' website (a site used by men who buy sex to rate their experiences - Jesus). He was complaining about a prostitute he had had sex with (raped) who, he acknowledged, was obviously trafficked and being prostituted against her will. He signed off: 'Total waste of money - worst shag of my life'.

He actually COMPLAINED about the quality of the sex he was having with the woman he was raping.

Jesus, it was years ago and I still want to kill him.

Legalisation hasn't made it safer for prostitutes in Amsterdam. There is still a huge amount of trafficking and force involved. In fact the authorities moved to close down a third of the brothels there last year because of the criminality surrounding them.

The only place in the world where prostituted women receive any measure of protection is Sweden.

I stand corrected. My point is that there are alot of prostitutes out there (not the trafficked ones obv) who are prostitutes through their own choice. I still think legilisation is needed to make it safer,healthier and less dirty to the rest of society.Perhaps there woulodn't be such a market (the wrong word,i know) for the trafficked women. If Johns knew there was a safe way to do it - health wise and without being arrested.

numpty - I do take your point, and I also find the legalisation argument quite convincing in some ways - it would definitely make the lives of prostitutes safer. But I think that very few women (or men) would choose to sell their bodies of their own free will. I believe (no hard evidence to back this up so am prepared to be corrected) that most prostitutes are trafficked, addicted to drugs, in the clutches of violent pimps or otherwise coerced.

I agree that alot are but alot see as it as an easy way to make alot of money - kind of more down the escorts with extras. Whether they want to be therte or not,for whatever reasons they are and i think we should make as safe for them as possible.

The women doing it out of "choice" are a tiny minority and even then if you investigate further you will often find backgrounds of sexual abuse or violence. I think the number of women who would make a truly free choice to enter prostitution willingly as a career is vanishingly small.

Why should we want to make it easier for johns to sexually exploit vulnerable women? I for one am delighted that they might finally be facing prosecution. For far too long it's prostitutes who've had to shoulder the burden of being sexually exploited when it's the men who use them who ought to be made social pariahs.

Perhaps if it was legal for them and there was somewhere safe to work were they are protected they wouldn't need the pimps?

I realise this is turning into a bit of a back and forth but legalisation legalises the pimps and the johns numptysmummy. They are the ones who benefit from it. Pimps or brothel owners suddenly become managers and legitimate business people.

Also who do you think "persuades" women into prostitution if not pimps. They disguise themselves as boyfriends to young girls, get them hooked on drugs then manipulate them into selling sex. Either that or they go straight in there kidnap women, rape and beat them up (it's called seasoning) and turn them into prostitutes. It's happening all over Europe at the moment except in Sweden where pimps and johns are prosecuted.

There's another article here about what prostitution is like where it is legal. It is not better for the women, in many ways it's a lot worse:

www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2164271,00.html

Criminalising the punters doesn't necessarily help those women who are working in the sex industry against their will. What it does do is harm the trade of the women who are working of their own free choice. And they do exist.

It reduces demand madamez, thus reducing the incentives for traffickers to force women into prostitution. Everywhere prostitution has been legalised has seen a huge growth in trafficking and forced sex.

I'm sure you are right that there are a few women who want to work in the sex trade, the problem is that their positive voices always drown out the majority of those who don't and who need help to leave the life.

i think this is a brilliant proposal and i relaly hope they go through with it. Sweden is such a shining example on so many issues, and this one is no exception. Taking away the customers means taking away the pimps incentive to slave trade women and children over here from all over the place. Decriminalising the prostitutes, not the pimps, and the brothel owners, but the actual sex workers, means that the most vulnerble people in the whole equation are protected by law and do not risk proescution if they report wrong doing by another to them, whilst they are at work.

Well I'm going to bump my own thread because I really would like to hear other Mumsnetters' opinions on this. Good idea or not?

PSCMUM, it's amazing that no legal system thought of this before Sweden isn't it? It seems like the obvious way to help women out of prostitution.

What about paying for it in Le Creuset saucepans, though (like Jeanette Winterson and Home Counties wives)?

And what about being married to someone fat and ugly but taking their money in order to have a life of leisure - does that count?

Comrade UQD - you brave tavarisch!!

I have hard hat on beneath fur.

I thought the thread title was PRAYING for sex!

tsk, and all that brass I spent on laser eye surgery 2 yrs ago...

Madamez - they'll have to offer some training package to the women put out of work.