Leeds managed zone 'glowing review'

[FoxBaseBeta]

WTF

www.leeds-live.co.uk/news/leeds-news/glowing-review-holbecks-managed-approach-18568851

You are all looking at the issue from the wrong angle.

Considering the welfare of every single woman and girl in a working class area of Leeds is, "the wrong angle?"

Have you heard of universal credit?? sanctions??

Seriously? You think we don't know about these things - that many aren't affected, and others involved in advocacy and advice work?

What about campaigning for a proper welfare system, for properly funded services so women can exit??

You think the women here aren't campaigning for those things - and many donating to charities seeking to secure those things? You think it's impossible for women to seek to reduce harm across the board?

Criminalisation may make you think you've 'solved' the problem, all the abstract concepts, but really criminalisation just pushes desperate women to take a higher level of risk.

Mumsnet is a large site, so they may be women who support criminalising desperate women who feel forced to submit to rape to make a living, but I've never seen any express that view. If they did, they would be harshly challenged. It's appalling to criminalise women who have to do this because they've been abysmally failed across the board. Your assumption is mistaken.

As for the comment that a percentage of the respondents were "sex workers ie people with a vested financial interest in the system" - why the hell shouldn't the sex workers themselves have a say?? They are people, you can't on one hand label them as vulnerable and on the other hand discount their views. Why not try .. actually .. listening to them.

Nobody has said the sex workers shouldn't have any say. They are saying that this policy impacts every single woman and girl in that area very badly, and that disproportionately highlighting only the views of the sex workers means the rest, who are the overwhelming majority, are left voiceless. Or is it your view that the only people allowed a voice on a policy which starkly impacts their lives are those actually engaged in sex work?

Most here advocate the Nordic model. I'm aware that this still leaves areas of vulnerability, and I am not sure what my own view is yet. I'm hesitantly of the view that we should also allow co-op brothels, with nobody allowed to profit who isn't also working in one themselves, so there was more protection against violence and abuse, and with a clear line out to the agencies and charities who could try to offer support to exit as part of the package. But I need to learn more about it, because presumably that's been tried and if it were effective, it would be more advocated for.

I do know that throwing an entire area under the bus, so every single one of the women and girls in that area lives with constant harassment and the threat of sexual violence, is not an answer anyone should accept. The attacks and assaults and harassment of even very young girls is completely unacceptable. Nobody should have to cope with that.

Two separate issues, albeit entwined in this country.

One is that the welfare state has been dismantled and universal credit is not fit for purpose, with anyone dependent on it (not just women in prostitution) at risk of starvation if (when) it fails them.

How the Nordic model performs relative to decrim in countries with adequate welfare systems - and I think there the comparison of Germany and Sweden (comparable welfare states, complete decrim versus criminalise the punters) shows that the Nordic model wins hands down when other factors are controlled for. (Trafficking has soared in Germany, whereas decrim has not brought the benefits it was supposed to in terms of safety, workplace protections and health insurance - instead, pimps now simply treat prostitutes as "independent contractors" who rent space in mega-brothels.)

So I completely agree that we need to campaign to fix the welfare system, to restore decent benefits which enable people to live while they exit prostitution.

But I can't and never will accept decrim, because that is simply colluding in the status quo and telling men it's okay to buy and sexually abuse women. And creating an environment where all women (whether they have "chosen", i.e. been forced by poverty, to enter prostitution or not) are at risk of rape and sexual assault.

Sorry, I just saw that you were yourself a sex worker. I apologise if the graphic language I used is distressing, and I am so glad, as well as impressed quite frankly, that you exited.

Nobody here is the enemy of women forced into this situation. Really. They aren't. If you have ideas on what can be done to support women in this situation, I for one would genuinely like to hear them.

In Ipswich, all the welfare and drugs rehabilitation people mobilised and worked hard to get women off the street and punters were stopped. It made a massive difference, but when the new government came in and cuts were made, these agencies lost funding and the people working in this area lost their jobs.

Try to put yourselves in our shoes.

Inadequate welfare system = cannot eat. cannot pay the rent this month.

It's not an abstract or intellectual concept for some!!

So we are forced into sex work.

Where it's illegal for the punter (not condoning punters, this isn't about them), ie the Nordic model, it is undoubtedly more dangerous for us. This is what we are trying to tell you. Why do you want to make it more dangerous for us??

The co-op brothels with nobody profiting idea someone posted, yes I think that would help us. Wouldn't help Street workers though. When I worked in a property sharing with another sex worker, I felt able to throw out anyone I thought was getting potentially dodgy. There was someone else on the premises, someone else who could call for help, someone else making noise which alerted punters to the fact I wasn't alone. I was only ever attacked after I started working alone, because the completely non-exploitative set up sharing with another sex worker, was criminalised under brothel laws.

When we don't have any choice but to engage in sex work, we want to be as safe as possible. Nordic model does not keep us safe, in fact the opposite. All for Nordic model IF a truly adequate benefits system exists to end survival sex work That does not exist here in this country. We need to be realistic about that.

Interestingly, on the article the poll asking about the scheme currently 56% thinks the approach needs to end immediately and 24% thinks there needs to be significant changes. So not the positive community support implied from their reading of the 120 responses.

So 80% of respondents believe change is needed and that counts as a success, does it? Would it need to be 100% saying "change it" for it to count as unsuccessful?

I've seen reports from people actually living in Holbeck. There was a notable lack of glowing enthusiasm.

The co-op brothels with nobody profiting idea someone posted, yes I think that would help us. Wouldn't help Street workers though. When I worked in a property sharing with another sex worker, I felt able to throw out anyone I thought was getting potentially dodgy. There was someone else on the premises, someone else who could call for help, someone else making noise which alerted punters to the fact I wasn't alone. I was only ever attacked after I started working alone, because the completely non-exploitative set up sharing with another sex worker, was criminalised under brothel laws.

Yep. I think we need to ban anyone profiting from the sex work of other people, but allow women to work together in a registered co-op. It would be light years safer, surely. The end point should be to end it as a trade, but we need to harm reduce first.

I do know it's not simple. But the women and girls in Holbeck don't deserve this, either: they are at risk from this zone approach, and the sex workers seem no safer either, actually. There have been murders, and attempted murders leaving catastrophic injuries.

What can be done, in your view, that could work better? Clearly a better welfare safety net, but so many sex workers grow up in care, or from homes where they are neglected and abused. What, in your view, could help at an earlier point - what interventions might make a difference, if any?

All for Nordic model IF a truly adequate benefits system exists to end survival sex work

I really don't think anyone would disagree with you on that. I have someone close to me who ended up in survival sex work and so I know that it can literally be a choice between sex work or not being able to feed your kids. No woman should ever have to make that choice.

@Melroses

In Ipswich, all the welfare and drugs rehabilitation people mobilised and worked hard to get women off the street and punters were stopped. It made a massive difference, but when the new government came in and cuts were made, these agencies lost funding and the people working in this area lost their jobs.

It has to begin with an adequate welfare system.

The welfare system has many flaws which push women into sex work.

The 5 week wait for any payment or take out a government loan to live on which is then taken out of your payments going forward.

Bedroom tax. Have a spare bedroom ie due to someone moving out, and the rent part of your benefits is reduced, but your rent due remains the same.

The rent part of benefits is supposed to reflect the bottom 30% of rents in the area. Often it doesn't and rents have to be topped up on money intended to eat with.

Debt deductions can be taken from benefits for stuff like old gas bills or court fines. Up to 30% of the amount intended to live on is taken.

The two child policy. Only the first two children are supported.

The rates themselves are so low. Pre COVID , a single person under 25 had £251 per month to live on after waiting 5 weeks with nothing , that's if they were lucky and didn't have debts. This has to include food, heating, hot water, water rates, clothing, travel..

The biggie is sanctions. Many people with mental health issues cannot engage with weekly job centre interviews, applications and complex processes, they lead chaotic lives due to addiction or simply mental health, so they end up sanctioned. That's 100% of their benefits gone. So they end up in sex work as it's quick money if nothing else.

Domestic abuse victims are only granted 'easement' to sanctioning if they can prove the abuse and can only get appeasement once in 6 months, and not if they are still living with the abuser.

THESE are the issues which if resolved, really give us a choice!!
-----------------

The other issue is lack of exiting services. Exiting sex work is a complex and difficult process. It requires a holistic, whole person approach.

I began to engage with the service slowly, it took a while for me to trust them. Some women never get trust, they just come for condoms or in a crisis.

It's stages, like precontemplation.

I was assigned a worker who helped me navigate the at times hostile benefits system (although benefits are often not enough to live on, if you can get them sorted it can at least reduce dependence on sex work, but you can still be prosecuted for fraud if you don't declare the income from this harmful work, fuck them). I received counselling there (short term due to funding), she helped me access volunteering mainly by chasing it up and trying to instill confidence in myself, which led to a job eventually and I left. I needed my hand held throughout all this process and it took me years to recover. I still fear every day falling through the welfare system cracks again, and having to go back there. Yet I still don't support Nordic model without adequate welfare in place. Because the fact is that it pushes us to have to take more risks with regard the clients, to survive.

The service which helped me quit?? Gone now due to funding cuts!!

You cannot have Nordic until you have proper welfare and exiting services in place , without further harming woman.

Apologies for huge post.

Please don't apologise for post size, it's useful information to hear, thank you.

@seonaseona don't apologise that's a great post

It's always a limited exercise to ask people if a new system is better than the one that it replaced. It might be, wholly or in some significant way.

But that isn't the same as saying it's actually good.

Your outcome can only be offered for all women if you push for the Nordic model. Particularly in the UK context, supporting decrim makes the Nordic model approach less likely. You legitimise it as a profit driven industry (we aren’t going to get the co-op, non-profit making model In the U.K.). Trafficking goes up and prices go down - Germany has shown this. There’s no incentive at all to improve your welfare system or to support women to exit. In fact, it’s great as you can validate women in poverty to find another source of income and reduce your welfare net.

I absolutely agree that there should be not only adequate services and funding in place but good services and benefits. Having worked with girls who entered and were abused at a very early age , i know that they were recruited even by guys in prison already. They were abused within houses which the police never raided. How was this any safer. There is no excuse that will make any of this safer for women and girls

@seonaseona that's a really, really useful post, thank you for taking the time to write it.

"The service which helped me quit?? Gone now due to funding cuts!!

You cannot have Nordic until you have proper welfare and exiting services in place"

What was available to you was enough to help you, it can be enough to help other women. It isn't perfect, but it's enough to help women now.

I support the Nordic model.

I'm a former prostitute who would like to say that I'm in favor of the Nordic model and that it would have been a true blessing in my life if it had been implemented when I was engaging in prostitution in order to survive.

If I could have turned my pimp in, I could have been free of his abuse and coercion. I might have still had to turn tricks for a while. But when one of those tricks raped me, I could have had him sent to jail, and had good proof he'd committed a crime. With decriminalized prostitution, women have a "he said/she said" situation when "dates" go wrong. A "he said/she said" where her input will be put down as "just a whore's."

Hope you are safe now and ok @wombofonesown

Oh yes, for many years. My own prostitution experience happened as a 17-18 year old runaway, jumping from the frying pan to the fire as abuse went.

Took about 10 years to claw my way all the way into polite company after lots of menial roles and emotional tolls, but after years of career advancement in the straight world I'm now living my "best life" with financial security, a beautiful home, and lovely children with another on the way. Things couldn't be nicer!

But I know how very lucky I am, and how many of the young women I knew back then didn't fare so well. It gives a unique sense of survivor's guilt.

@WombOfOnesOwn

I'm a former prostitute who would like to say that I'm in favor of the Nordic model and that it would have been a true blessing in my life if it had been implemented when I was engaging in prostitution in order to survive.

If I could have turned my pimp in, I could have been free of his abuse and coercion. I might have still had to turn tricks for a while. But when one of those tricks raped me, I could have had him sent to jail, and had good proof he'd committed a crime. With decriminalized prostitution, women have a "he said/she said" situation when "dates" go wrong. A "he said/she said" where her input will be put down as "just a whore's."

This is exactly the reason I support the Nordic model. I'd like the Nordic model to basically only kick in in the case of rape or coercion. So we all know that punters and pimps are criminalised, but that only matters when a woman reports an assault or coercion.

As Womb says, her word as a woman and a prostituted women at that are worthless, but the crime exists nevertheless. And can be prosecuted by the system.

I used to have to read the Bad Date file at work (shelters) because the women kept a list of descriptions of men who had raped, assaulted, robbed, kidnapped them. It wasn't one or two men described again and again. It was many many men. We need a way to prosecute these utter scumbags and the Nordic model provides that.

Sorry for not coming back sooner, thank you so much to Seonaseona and WombofOnesOwn for detailing your experiences and thoughts and I hope you both feel safe now, sorry it's difficult to say without sounding trite.

I also came back to say my local councillors are giving this a lot of scrutiny, but have come back to me with some initial thoughts, I'm posting with permission;

"I am appalled at this so-called independent review. The bias is explicit in its language of “sex work” and the research methodology is staggeringly flawed. Just 30 people were interviewed and fewer than half of those had no vested interest. There appears to have been no attempt to find successful ways of engaging the wider community.

A whole neighbourhood of Leeds has been given over to prostitution. Once again we see academics enthralled by “sex positivity” while they would never live in Holbeck, nor entertain the notion of themselves, their daughters, their wives “working” there.

The Nordic model, with adequately funded exit strategies, remains the only way to stop vulnerable women being sold by men to other men on the streets of Leeds, with our council calling it success."

The managed area is a destination zone for the dregs of men from all over the UK and beyond.

This frankly embarrassing piece of academic review should be thrown in the bin where it belongs. With needles and condoms and the detritus of male violence.

@FoxBaseBeta good to know there are still some decent, principled councillors up there (as a former Leeds resident).