Nordic Model on the Big Questions tomorrow

[LauraMipsum]

The BBC's political equivalent of Jeremy Kyle is hosting "has the time come to decriminalise sex work" tomorrow morning.

I'm going to be in the audience; if anyone wants to support the Nordic model voice via twitter please do!

Fuck, I've heard everything now. Prostitution saves poor women. I can think of many ways to improve life for poor women but prostitution is never one of them. Fuck off with your lowlife justification for the abuse of women. Is your mother proud of you?

Hiring adjacent hotel rooms is too often how women who do not want to work parlours/saunas work. They work on the same hotel corridor and send text messages. Ideally they would share a flat or house but that runs the risk of prosecution.

I heard stories that a certain hotel chain by a London station think as much as 50% of occupancy is at times sex workers. In effect they are already a quasi brothel owner. They even go so far as to offer "day rates" acknowledging that the occupants only need it for work during normal hours.

So if these prostitutes already work together in this way without being prosecuted, what's your problem? Nothing in th NM would change it. They could still prostitute next door and text eachother couldn't they? No need for all your alarmist talk.

It is still not ideal. Women get robbed, beaten up and raped in hotel rooms.

Under the Nordic model men would not want to be on film entering a hotel or possibly have the hotel report them to the police for going to a room that a sex worker is operating from. Currently the vast majority of chain hotels turn a blind eye to men who visit sex providers on their premises. It is good for their business to profit from the trade.

Women get robbed, beaten up and raped in brothels, saunas and anywere else they are in private spaces alone with men who feel entitled to have sex with them. An 'ideal' form of prostitution doesn't exist.

Interesting insight into the mind of punters though - you seem very well able to empathise.

If she works one day a week and walks away with £500 and can still claim benefits

What she's doing is already legal - up to the point where she earns that money and then claims benefits as well, and I'm presuming doesn't declare her income for tax, or hold any kind of liability insurance.

As you point out, that's already well over what many families on mumsnet survive on, yet apparently, this hypothetical woman is doing the only thing she can.

This is a very odd example to say the least.

Plus of course, as a foreign national, why doesn't she move elsewhere, somewhere you can live on a supermarket wage? She has no family ties to London, the UK outside of London exists, and there are some very pleasant places to live.

No the women in "establishments" face a different kind of risk. They cannot vett the customers and will be pressured into taking drinks, people on drugs and working unsocial hours. They then face the problem of extortion, control and theft by other staff.

Independents who run their own business get good at vetting clients and get to choose hours and who they see. Because they mostly work alone or with a friend in a room down the corridor they are at greater risk of physical harm. Women who tour or just work hotels speak of "runners" fairly often (guys who once in the room overpower them and rob them), then nearly all of them will admit to have being raped at one point.

When you talk to women working in saunas as to why they give up as much as 50% of their earnings to the owner. Why they work long hours with a "drugs draw" on offer to them, they will tell you it is for safety. They do not want to be raped or murdered. In return for that they effectively let the business owner pimp them (all with the knowledge of the police).

There are strong arguments for women's collectives where they can work together for safety and share profits.

I think we should try the criminalising of buyers

It seems to work for other countries

I think its heaps better than the german model

It does sound like you have experience of the issues gender im not sure whether as an advocate, sex worker or customer

But i think i could probably hazard a guess

run their own business

Without H&S compliance, liability insurance, tax paid and pension provision, this is not a business. If you want to regulate, then it has to go the whole way, otherwise you're just throwing poor women under the bus for men to exploit because it's too hard to help them out of poverty or stop men abusing them.

Given so few prostitutes work legally now, even though they absolutely could, given so few prostitutes report crime now, what on earth makes you think that making it more acceptable will change that? What makes you think that it'll be women's collectives running these brothels, and not rich men - why would it be different here to in Germany?

She brings in more than the average poster here

You said in an earlier post prices in the U.K have the same for the last 20 years.

I am very pleased the SNP decided at their recent conference to support the Nordic model for Scotland.

I am happy to admit I am a buyer. I advocate responsible behaviour in buying sex. Not going overseas to exploit impoverished women. Buying from independents in your own area. Preferably women of a similar age or older. Being polite, letting the woman dictate the meeting and certainly never pressuring the woman into anything. Trying where possible to avoid the women whose online profiles look like they are pimped.

Prostitution does not have to be evil. I post on forums with sex workers and guys who are better behaved than UK Punting (a site that banned me for pointing out that married punters are narcissists). I meet up socially and many of my best friends are sex workers I would never now dream of paying for. In general I get on very well with sex workers. They are good company and very non judgemental.

They should have the freedom to earn money as they see fit and be protected from violence and coercion

gender I agree , and guardian your personal attack of cari Mitchell of the Ecp on p1 was unjustified and not how she comes across at all.

gender brothels, saunas, etc already exist- pretty much with impunity How many of these are 'women''s collectives'?
Why do prostitutes put up with using hotels at greater risk of murder (according to you) than setting up collectives, which they could do right now?
Why do you believe that decriminalisation of brothels, pimping and trafficking will lead to a proliferation of 'women's collectives' rather than just more brothels and saunas of the kind you mentioned no one wants to prostitute in?

hold I have seen things you haven't clearly

I am happy to admit I am a buyer.

Think most of us had worked that one out.

They should have the freedom to earn money as they see fit

Well when it comes to prostitution that's your opinion. Other ones are available.

and be protected from violence and coercion

We agree. I don't think we agree on how that should be achieved.

You are going to drive her customers away and force her into a life of poverty
Not going overseas to exploit impoverished women

Nope, staying home to exploit them instead. Nice. What a lovely man you are, paying these women to have sex with you, saving them from poverty, you're basically a hero with a happy penis. /s

No. Can't get on board with that at all. Invest time and effort into making a real connection so women want to sleep with you or masterbate. It's funny how you pitch it as wanting to save these women from violence and poverty, and it just happens to coincide with exactly what you want to do anyway.

Right now if well meaning women set up an establishment they still face the possibility of going to prison for controlling of prostitution. Under that charge the courts can strip them of all assets and impose a lengthy prison term. So currently the risk is not worth taking.

The people who currently run brothels justify the risk in that they effectively, control, coerce and pimp women. They will take 50% of earnings and be open 16 hours a day 7 days a week. It is worth millions. They will place "maids" in the establishment who will handle the day to day running and distance themselves if a police raid comes in (rare these days).

Legalisation would possibly mean a proliferation of these places. It would also give some women the option to set up ethical brothels or just work together from home. Hopefully then the police and councils could start weeding out the worst places. It might also take men to educate others as to the best way to go about finding sex outside of relationships whilst minimising the damage done to women

I don't think so guardian, your posts come across as very biased against the ECP and absolutely do not accurately portray the Cari Mitchell that I have seen speaking on many different occasions.

ChocChoc I do not want a relationship in the typical sense with women. Tried it and hated it.

Does that mean I go the next 40-50 years without sex?

The people who currently run brothels justify the risk in that they effectively, control, coerce and pimp women
Legalisation would possibly mean a proliferation of these places

How do you tally the above with the below?

minimising the damage done to women

Again. How do you propose to legalise it, in a way that actually does protect the health of women (and their clients) with respect to infection control?

What do you propose when it comes to regulation - do you think Prudential will branch out into Brothel coverage? I'm not sure they will, given they didn't even want to insure my house because it was next to a river..

ChocChoc I do not want a relationship in the typical sense with women. Tried it and hated it

Does that mean I go the next 40-50 years without sex?

Well yes, just like anyone else who can't find a willing partner, or those living in poverty of course who can't afford to exploit other people. Or find women that want a similar style of non-relationship sex.

You have no right to stick your penis in someone because it feels good.

A life without sex won't kill you, unlike a life in prostitution which has terrible outcomes for many women.

ChocChoc I do not want a relationship in the typical sense with women. Tried it and hated it

Now why isn't that a surprise.

Does that mean I go the next 40-50 years without sex?

Why not? You have the alternatives of developing relationships with women or masturbation. All you are doing at present is masturbating in to a bought female body.

I explained earlier that infection control is nigh on impossible. Unprotected oral and even ejaculation in the mouth are almost offered as standard now. Women rinse out with mouth wash afterwards but that is not going to stop much. It is rare when a woman encourages a guy to go protected. Usually they are pushing the upsell to the more expensive oral without.

Ethical brothels and educate men to stop them using coerced and pimped women outside of those. Start paying women a real wage again for the risk they undertake. Currently sex is too cheap and too easily available. 1 hour with a sex worker is cheaper than the average date in London.

A life without sex causes me to become really depressed.

Jumping into bed with a different woman every few weeks stops me from ending it all. Gives me reason to live