NUS and prostitution - confused...

[Ubik1]

They seem to haves passed a motion which holds anyone who thinks the Nordic model of managing prostitution is the preserve of right wing radical feminists.

I'm confused. I don't know much about sex work but I do know it is linked to trafficking of women and children and organised crime. I would be delighted if men were criminalised - but maybe I'm wrong?

Here's the motion but you might not be able to view it...

*What a lot of posters want is to punish men and don't really care about the logical corollary of also making things far worse for the women.

That's just not true*

There was an AIBU about someone's white MIL going on regular holidays to Barbados and Gambia to buy sex from young black men. Whilst young black men are unlikely to be at risk of physical danger from a 55+ women that is the only difference. The vast majority of posters , including me, thought it was equally reprehensible.

Thanks Still, interesting article.

Yes Still, prostituted men, while fewer in number would also be helped by the NM. And the IMP is a very difficult read. There was a thread about it, where we asked the same question as IMP, which is "What do you think of the man's choice" however, the discussion very quickly moved to concentrate on how much women love being prostituted. Iirc, that was the thread where a punter told us, with a hint of pride, that he had let the young prostitute fuss his dog while she cried about feeling forced to prostitute herself, and then fucked her anyway.

We are never allowed to concentrate on the punter. On his choices. It all has to be turned around to women's choices. Every. Single. Time.

Has he gone again? Twice. Oh I always miss these idiots. Probably a good thing, I need to lose weight, not be eating popcorn right now.

larrygrylls wrote - "With the buyers criminalised it pushes everything underground and affords zero protection to the women. What a lot of posters want is to punish men and don't really care about the logical corollary of also making things far worse for the women."

The Nordic Model in Sweden, Iceland etc. has not pushed everything underground.

I think claims that the Nordic Model makes things allegedly much worse for women is not so much a logical corollary, it's more just an opinion of the pro-punter and pro-pimp lobby.

I think it centres around men because there is no evidence that is has protected women at all.

www.petraostergren.com/upl/files/54259.pdf

Vesuvia,

Your evidence please?

One of the particularly chilling views from punters is that if prostitution didn't exist there would be more rapes, because would-be rapists can pay to have sex they would otherwise have to force on women. Which not only reinforces the right of men to sex come what may, but makes the horrific suggestion that there has to be a group of women (naturally among them the some of the most vulnerable and excluded in society) who must act as sacrificial lambs for the benefit of other women, "taking one for the team" - "if you allow us a group of women we can legitimately rape, we won't come for you". Just disgusting.

Yy chopper.

Exactly Chopper

And you have organisations like the Greens and amnesty international effectively supporting this view. AI has even said that sex is a human right so we should not criminalise those "unwilling or unable it access it through conventional means". That is when I stopped my direct debit to them.

The Paisley branch of Amnesty was one of the supporters of Rhoda Grant's bill and was castigated by headquarters for it.

Chopper, having prostitution as a viable career with the appropriate representation at uni career fairs, perhaps even a BTEC option at college is indeed the possible realistic outcome of the NZ model.

The NUS is made up of young people, many of whom can't see a future beyond their next assignment.

Actually this is wrong:

"if you allow us a group of women we can legitimately rape, we won't come for you"

Because given our present state of affairs, it is in fact:

"If you deny us a group of women we can legitimately rape, it will be your own fault if we come for you"

This myths about the nordic model page was written in direct opposition to the points raised in larry's linked article (it even mentions one of the authors. I don't know much about the prostitution arguments but it is interesting reading.

I particularly like this article's (linked in the one above) critique of Ostergren's work on methodological grounds, p. 461-3...

I find the idea of sex as a human right or basic need deeply troubling. Masterbation may be a basic need or right, but no one is entitled to anyone else's body.

This issue is a very good illustration of the way in which the extremes of individualistic liberal 'choice' feminism functions to support all sort of deeply problematic agendas. No one is allowed to talk about the horribly misogynistic views of punters because a minority of those involved in prostution actively choose it, discussion of the wider ramifications of that minority's choices is totally shut down, and the views of prostitutes as a group are (supposedly) represented by the madams and pimps who stand to gain from others' labour.

larrygrylls wrote - "Your evidence please?"

Your posting of a document from Petra Östergren's website suggests that the concept of the Nordic model is quite new to you. I think her findings and conclusions have been debunked on previous FWR prostitution threads. I see no point in just replicating that effort for you on yet another thread. If you really want more details of this, you could try doing a search on her name.

One point about Petra Östergren, that may not have been covered in previous threads, is that she is reported to believe that violence in lesbian relationships does not differ significantly from that in heterosexual relationships.

BUT her conclusion fails to explain statistics such as the following:

for England and Wales between 2011 and 2014,

Number of women killed by their male partner = 247
Number of women killed by their female partner = 1

As they say, "you do the math!"

Yet we are expected to take Petra Östergren's evidence, conclusions and opinions on prostitution seriously.

Punters and pimps are having a laugh!

The evidence of many years of experience with Larry's posts is that he is hardly receptive to helpful links.

Well I still found it helpful. I am new to the prostitution arguments. So there.

I am new to these arguments as well so find the links very helpful.

Those 'reviews' of women were utterly grim. I wish they had shown those at the NUS Women's conference and then asked them to pass that motion.

Oh sorry, I didn't mean the links weren't helpful, just that Larry is not the most receptive!

Those 'reviews' of women were utterly grim. I wish they had shown those at the NUS Women's conference and then asked them to pass that motion.

I wanted to disinfect my phone after reading them. I cleared all browsing history and cookies. Not rational but I really didn't want that content on my phone.