Woman’s hour on criminalising punters

[QuarksandLeptons]

Jess Philips on Woman’s hour now discussing how to reduce the abuse of women by criminalising punters. She’s such a great, clear, sane voice.

It’s not transgressive as such IMO, not transgressive re masculinity anyway.

The reality is that the vast majority of men have never and would never use a prostitute. Less than 4% of men do

One in ten men have used a prostitute.

The 4% are men who use them regularly

A recent analysis showed use of prostitutes in the UK raised around the same revenue as people going to the cinema. It's more common than most think.

Masculinity (a stereotype of manliness) is about being attractive, a protector, being decent, likeable - not being a monster

Visiting a prostitute is the ultimate male dominance display. A punter rarely reflects on their 'likeability'!

A recent analysis showed use of prostitutes in the UK raised around the same revenue as people going to the cinema. It's more common than most think

I don't believe that. I'm not sure how it is possible to accurately measure money in the black economy. I also think there are people who have a vested interest in talking up how much money is involved as part of the plan to legalise and legitimise prostitution.

In 2017 cinema audiences were 170.6 million attendances and box office revenue was £1,277.88 million.

I do not believe revenue raised by prostitution is around the same as that.

I think it is very naive to think dominating women is not the ultimate expression of masculinity or that this is not the ultimate domination; paying a woman to pretend to be into it.

offred Very interesting idea. So would you say that the ultimate expression of feminity is the opposite - to be dominated?

offred Very interesting idea. So would you say that the ultimate expression of feminity is the opposite - to be dominated?

Not Offred but I just want to jump in and say yes, I think so. The ideal woman is a submissive woman.

Femininity, IMO, only exists in relation to masculinity. It is whatever masculinity is not, whatever masculinity does not want for itself.

8th rule of misogyny: Men are whatever men say they are and women are whatever men say they are.

I would position it more as ‘the ideal woman is a dominated woman’

This is why it does not matter a jot what type of woman you are when it comes to being abused in a relationship. Some abusive men actually prefer to dominate strong women.

It’s the process of dominating that proves the masculinity.

Women don’t really exist in this type of culture except as objects and obstacles.

All this is why mainstream porn is so violent IMO.

I don’t believe the titilation re transgression is trangressing norms re masculinity, it is trangressing against women to soothe oneself re ones own masculinity.

This culture actually produces quite a lot of shame and cognitive dissonance in men IMO.

Most men are not really emotionally equipped to be such callous bastards re other people, rather they are trained to be so by culture and social sanctions for trangressing masculine standards throughout their lives.

Most eventually come to some form of peace and balance within themselves re what is expected by masculinity and what is expected by humanity.

Most men carry a deep sense of shame regarding sex as a result.

For women in relationships with men, obviously finding a balance between masculinity and humanity is not really good enough even when it falls more towards humanity. Heterosexual women, for many reasons, have little choice but to try and find the good in this dynamic hence endless refrains of ‘but he’s a good dad’ on the relationships board etc.

Although, and I believe this is socialised and not innate men grow up encouraged to self actualise more. We are taught to be successful, and woe betide those of us who fail, but the path we choose is pretty much according to our own preferences. Women by contrast have a lot of choices proscribed, and the pressures on what women choose are immense and those pressures come before forging the self.

All our sexual/emotional encounters occur under this shadow. Until women are taught in greater numbers to value and be themselves (as individuals and not as ‘women’), and men are taught to place
more importance on the other individuals they share the world with there is always going to be imbalances between us.

I guess I don’t like prostitution as it erases the woman (or indeed anyone who is selling the sex) as an individual from the equation.

There is a lot of fantasy here.

The issue with prostitution is surely only trafficking and abuse.

If it is consensual it is consensual. The idea that buying consent with cash is not ‘true’ consent is a load of hogwash. The chef in a restaurant would not be lovingly cooking me a meal if I were not paying for it. No one argues that I am stealing food though.

As for the character of men using prostitutes, from what I have read (mainly accounts by ex prostitutes) it varies from the lonely to the busy to the entitled and, yes, the abusive and dangerous.

I would not care if it were outlawed but I think that, if you criminalise it, you have to criminalise both parties. It is entirely iniquitous for someone to (legally) actively market something but the buyer to be a criminal (pretty much the opposite of the drugs model). Clearly if the prostitute had been coerced into it, that would be a defence. Equally, financial need would be mitigation (though not defence).

Are you really comparing someone sticking their dick in to you (aggressively/violently/etc) to someone cooking you a meal? If you think there is any kind of comparison, you are beyond reach.

Loving the lack of self-awareness of labelling others as fantasists, comparing prostitution to working in a kitchen and then complaining the Nordic model is iniquitous....yeah, prostitution isn’t exactly a fair and equal interaction. There’s really no need to counter those arguments.

TEMRA you’re not wrong at all with what you say in your last post, I agree, however I don’t think prostitution is the same as other heterosexual sexual/emotional encounters, and we don’t need to solve gendered socialisation completely in order to better protect prostituted women (and men).

Others have talked about it but I absolutely think anyone interested in this issue should watch the sex drugs & murder series on BBC iPlayer to get a feel of the women’s lives we are talking about. Prostitution doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Any legislation around prostitution is useless in the absence of sufficient social support provision, addiction treatment programmes, secure housing, mental health services etc.

Teaching females to self actualise is reasonably pointless when structurally in society self actualisation is pretty unlikely. That’s actually what is happening at the moment IMO.

It is confusing and disappointing for women and girls to be taught to self actualise, told they can and then find our society allows them anything but that.

It’s a pretty individualistic approach that is perpetuating the problem by creating this corrupted version of liberal feminism we are seeing, probably quite a lot of the ROGD in girls and it masks the real problems (structural/cultural sexism) by treating the consequences as individual failings.

IMO

The priority needs to be making it structurally and culturally possible for women and girls to self actualise.

This is essentially an entitlement issue though. Boys and men are being taught they are entitled to self actualisation and finding the world supports this only if actualising the self aligns with the values of masculinity (and capitalism) girls and women are currently being taught they are entitled to self actualisation and finding themselves awash in a culture and structures that still mostly doesn’t allow it.

All that has changed is really that some, particularly lucky women, achieve self actualisation and usually they are held up as a stick to beat the rest of us with ‘see, you must not be as good as this woman, as an individual you failed’.

upper

Some people like comparing prostitution to working in macdonalds for example

Im fairly positive that it was also compared to hairdressing

Fairly fucking stupid if you ask me...but then people are weird

Lass
In 2017 cinema audiences were 170.6 million attendances and box office revenue was £1,277.88 million
I do not believe revenue raised by prostitution is around the same as that

The Financial Times has estimated revenue from prostitution being in the billions. (£5.3bn) so equalling cinema revenue is quite conservative. Researcher Teela Sanders is my reference.

I'd completely disagree with the FT because it massively overestimates the earnings of the UK's supposed 60,879 prostitutes.

From the FT

What stood out from the sex worker Marianne Davis, made me more sure that the NM works for sex workers.

She claims "In countries that have NM demand has not reduced at all". JP pointed out when 1200 punters were asked 50% probably would stop using prostitutes under NM... not sure I trust the punters here.

I don't think NM does drop demand. The point is, under laws where punting is legal and selling is a grey area, there is nothing to stop a punter from abusing a WG. The police are not interested in any WG calling up "oh he removed the condom to cum" or whatever.

The point is under NM all you need to do is show they paid you for sex. You don't need to prove he did you up the arse when it wasn't agreed (technically rape) or he paid less than agreed (arguably rape) or all the shite WGs have to put up. The police couldn't give a crap about that sort of thing even when rape is illegal.

If all you need to do is say "this man paid me for sex" then instantly the punter is in the vulnerable position not the WG.

You still get work, there is still demand, but the WG is protected and the punter has to be respectful.

The WG tries to argue that of course all punters care whether the WG is trafficked my clients always ask I mean that's a load of bollocks.

The NM has proven to reduce trafficking and street work both of which involve the most vulnerable women and the most dangerous work.

The WG also argued that National Ugly Mugs (which lists abusers of WGs) rose by 77% in Ireland after they introduced the NM which to me proves how well it is working. When women feel brave enough to actually name their abusers to list them on Ugly Mugs.

I volunteer for an organisation and we update/dustribute "Ugly Mugs" for our area. I'm always encouraging the WGs to talk. Under NM thy will be heared.

Thanks for sharing Quarks

Unfortunately ugly mugs is run as a uk subsidiary of an international organisation lobbying for full decriminalisation including repositioning pimps as ‘managers’...

I feel deeply worried about an organisation with such an agenda having the responsibility for reporting on such things.

I wouldn’t want any lobby group for any approach to the legality of prostitution to be given this responsibility TBH. Not ones that agree with me re the NM, or ones arguing for full decriminalisation, it’s a massive conflict of interests for these reports/support services to be part of lobbying orgs.

Unfortunately ugly mugs is run as a uk subsidiary of an international organisation lobbying for full decriminalisation including repositioning pimps as ‘managers’

It still helps the girls though.

Ugly Mugs has been around since about year 2000. They can't have that much influence if decrim is what they want.

This is a brilliant thread. I love your insightful posts on masculinity offred. Thank you

Yes yes yes. Criminalise the men who think it's their right to rent a woman's body for their own carnal pleasure. Lets stop this narrative that because being a punter is legal it's ok, and that the prostitutes are the morally corrupt ones for tempting them.