The greens and prostitutes

[IceBeing]

Be gentle as I am new to thinking about this.

I found the Natalie Bennett's comments on decriminalising prostitution pretty persuasive - what am I missing?

She basically said that sex workers would like this policy (having contributed to it) and that research from other countries indicated it was the way forward.

The Green's stance on prostitution has put me off voting for them - they were a contender for my vote, as I feel aligned to them in many other ways.

My issue with prostitution is the abuse of women which goes hand in hand with it. I'm not really bothered how many Brook Magnantis come on here and say they are happy with it- the fact remains that women who have been abused, who are drug addicted, who are impoverished, do it out of pure desperation.

Even more poignantly, women and girls are trafficked to do it totally against their will. One thing that happens fairly consistently with legalisation/decriminalisation is that the demand for prostitution goes up - give it the veneer of legal/social acceptability, a veneer of 'all's fine with prostitution' then more punters are happy to see it as just a transaction, just a job for women.

What happens when demand outstrips supply? Or when people see an opportunity to make money out of exploiting people? More women are trafficked. Research has shown this to be the case, and is the very reason Sweden introduced the Nordic model. The Nordic model protects the vulnerable, the abused, the trafficked women. The Brook Magnantis of this world have a loud and powerful voice. The trafficked, abused women have none. The Nordic model speaks for them, protects them.

I'm a regular NC'er btw in case you don't recognise the name.

Why the assumption that "their" accounts are representative? Some may say their lives will become more difficult and hazardous, but what if "they" are actually only a tiny minority of prostitutes?

Hrmm. I suppose it seemed representative to me because what the women put forward seemed reasonable. If the context were changed from sex to any situation where a supply is legal but consumption illegal I could see similar situations evolving. The two core problems they talked about were a lack of time to get a handle on the personality of the john, because being engaged in a criminal activity they wanted to limit their presence and exposure, wanting to go to places they felt safe rather than places the sex worker felt safe. Under time constraints with jumpy clients the women had difficulty working out in advance if the john would be a decent client and abide by what they permitted or whether he would be unreasonable, unstable or even dangerous. The second problem was inability to operate in a safe house/environment because if clients realised the location had become known to police they would no longer go there. The situations you mention, child and house removal, were not brought up.

A focus on making the 'demand' of prostitution illegal and 'supply' of sex from individual prostitutes (not brothels) legal has the following pro's:

1. Reduces violence, by giving physical abusers criminal records. Which is already in place to a degree in form of GBH but as we've seen in Sheffield police ignore reports of abuse from prostitutes because it is a 'grey area'.
2. Reduces demand and promotes men to seek healthy relationships. They can pay for sex discretely but will know if they abuse they will face consequences such as prison / be outed and lose their job / family etc. It takes power away from the punter.
3. Prostitutes seek alternatives to earn money without having criminal records. Government should be focussing on further education, reducing fees, increasing accessibility and investing in careers / skills.
4. Reduces misogynist views, increases overall value and view of women as equal in society and reduces oppression / inferiority.
5. Allows individuals to operate discretely, reduces trafficking and brothels, reduces sex being marketed as a commodity. No-one should profit from the sale of someone else's sexual organs.
6. Individuals reports of abuse should be acted on by police, support networks should be in touch. If the individual doesn't press charges there is no criminal record for punter, depending on level of abuse the decision can be taken out of her hands.

I think there are no perfect answers by looking at extreme ends of the spectrum but by reducing the negative impact on individuals and society while allowing them to make free choices is a good thing. I actually fail to see any cons if you consider the balanced view that it will never be eradicated completely; just needs to be regulated more closely.

I've just been 'discussing' this with someone campaigning for the SNP - they've been aligning a fair bit in Scotland and now Sturgeon has suggested English voters need to vote Green to get Labour.

When I raised it, the response I got was, 'you're damned lucky if that's all you've got to worry about.'

I was then talking to a publisher about work and was asked if I had any 'sex industry stories' (I'm a ghost writer). I am actually working with someone who wants to tell her story about being abused by a UK gang, so mentioned this. The response to that? 'Oh, that sounds a bit miserable really - anything a bit lighter?'

If this section of MN didn't exist, and I didn't lurk every day, I'm not sure what I would do.

I was discussing this 'greens' prostitution policy' with DP today.

I told him if he voted for them I'd stop giving him lifts in my car.

I wouldn't vote for them anyway but I'm really worried/annoyed that a party that people think of as 'good for women' is actually very misogynistic.

www.hackneygazette.co.uk/news/crime-court/i_m_invisible_i_m_the_ripper_serial_rapist_told_victim_1_3998741

Serial rapist of sex workers jailed for 12.5 years. Good!!

Christ - he tortured, raped and abducted 3 women and gets a shitty 12.5yrs - prob out in 6 with good behaviour? THIS is where the problem is. It's not about whether women go on the street or in a room - they go where the MEN want them to go. It isn't the women who are the problem in prostitution.

Are any London-based MNers going to the "London Thinks" event on 13 May? I'm dithering, not least because it's being filmed, but I really trust the organisers to make it a genuine debate.

(I've just been to the page, and am very glad to see they've changed their usual "if you attend this event you consent to be filmed" disclaimer to saying that only the stage will officially be filmed, but that people in the audience may take photos of their own, so they can't promise anything. I'd be happier if they just asked audience members not to take photos at all.)

No Lion, it isn't. However, every single time we've tried to frame the discussion looking at the men, punters, pimps, "boyfriends" etc, the conversation ALWAYS gets turned around onto the choices of women. It's almost as if some types of people believe that even if men didn't want to buy consent, then women would still choose to do this.

Which makes them idiots really.

"pand0raslunchb0x Wed 11-Mar-15 17:50:07
By decriminalising prostitution on the Greens watch does that mean the UK cities will look like Amsterdam? It is disgusting there and It's hardly discreet is it, as you say domestic violence increases in areas where it is legalised"

Netherlands has regulation, not decriminalisation. And the violent crime rate there is actually much lower than cities in the UK despite their more liberal attitudes to the sex industry and soft drugs.

Unless one goes around Amsterdam looking like a hopelessly lost naive tourist with valuables on display, it's a very safe city.

@pand0raslunchb0x , your list

1. Source?
2. Source?
3. Prostitutes can still get a criminal record if they work in a brothel in Sweden or N.Ireland.
4. Debatable
5. Since Sweden treats all prostitutes as trafficking victims and makes no distinction between consenting workers and trafficked victims, we have no idea how many really are trafficked.
6. IMO the Nordic model would deter prostitutes from contacting the police if it means what they do will be exposed which may result in visits from social workers (and if they don't admit to being trafficked they are labelled victims of self-harm unable to look after their children) and eviction (the landlord would be forced to kick them out).

@Jackie
"I told him if he voted for them I'd stop giving him lifts in my car."

He has a right to vote for whomever he wants and the right to keep his choice private.

I totally agree with pandora's list - and the source for most of her points would be the Swedish police dept in charge of enforcing the law.

Can you provide a link? As in a reliable source and not just a Julie Bindel column.

Physical abusers would get a criminal record regardless what the law is on prostitution. The penalty for buying sex in Sweden like I'm sure I said before is nothing more than a small fine or the chance to take it to court (and out of all the men who did choose to go to court, only 2 were found guilty and neither were jailed).

So many people so very very invested in ensuring that men are not hindered from purchasing access to women's bodies... They just can't stop coming back can they?

Julie Bindel isn't a reliable source? Wtf?

Really lost any credibility you were still clawing onto there.

Chopper... yes, funny that.

NI sex worker launching legal challenge over coming "Nordic model" law:

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/22/sex-worker-to-launch-legal-challenge-against-ni-prostitution-ban

Could be interesting...

I wonder who is paying for that.

It says in the article a combination of crowdsourcing and "sex worker campaign groups". But given the woman earns enough to justify commuting from Edinburgh to Belfast for work, it sounds like she's not short of a few bob herself.

So I suppose it's kind of understandable that she doesn't want to lose her business when her customers are criminalised.

In no other area of social justice would we say that we should prioritise the needs of the people with the most choice, most money, most connectios and most access to a platform. But we do so with prostitution.

This woman is a well-known activist who also spoke to the NI Justice and Health Committee (where she did not acquit herself well). I doubt she has the money to fund this. "Sex worker campaign groups" - whatever that means.

I agree ArcheryAnnie

But hang on. Annie is saying we shouldn't listen to her because she's one of the ones with "the most money" etc. But Flora is saying she must not have the money to fund her case. Both can't be right.

Are you maybe just looking for any way you can find to write her off, since you disagree with her?

Being a woman in prostitution with the most money does not mean a person can afford to take litigation through numerous levels of court processes. The first is a relative term compared with the many women in prostitution who are barely surviving, the second is a requirement for substantial amounts of wealth. Both statements can be correct.

She did not acquit herself well at all in the NI J&HC - and indeed, they ruled against her and for the Nordic model. Sex worker campaigns groups are all over the place, and very well funded. It's almost as if they're run by a small number of pimps sex work activists who want to protect their gravy train.