Louis Theroux: Sex work is valid work

[Hestyo]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/6b668836-8849-11ec-a837-0153f5f4adaf?shareToken=82f93f7a57c728c82da0d575b5201d55

"It’s not something you’re especially proud of using. But there are times in your life when you can’t get a decent meal, or you’re in a rush, or you’re just trying to get a need met."

Theroux added that his children were approaching an age where their internet searches may lead them to pornography. “I have said to them, ‘When you see porn, if this is something you’ve stumbled across, just so you know, that’s not the real world. That’s not how people have sex,’ ” he added.

He said sex work should be seen as an acceptable alternative to a traditional career. Forbidden America will investigate the OnlyFans phenomenon, which has given performers their own online following and financial independence.

Thanks MargaritaPie, that's interesting.

but as a general argument, money = no consent seems quite weak to me?

The thing for me is that sex should always be consensual. A woman should be able to say "no, stop, I don't feel like it" at any point and be respected.

That doesn't apply when it's a job does it?

That doesn't apply when it's a job does it?

In theory it still does, but in practice you would be putting yourself in a very difficult situation I imagine . But that's one reason I would never call it a 'job' in that sense because you're absolutely right that it creates a narrative of obligation. In reality there is never any obligation to have sex.

I guess to use the analogy of 'normal' work again, you wouldn't be forced to do something, but you would lose your job or not get paid for work if you weren't comfortable doing the central element of it. But I don't agree with 'sex work is work', I just honestly don't know what the best approach is to keep women as safe as they can be in such an inherently risky situation. The more I read about it the more sad and hopeless I feel tbh.

So he wouldn't mind if his sons did it then?

It works in New Zealand. There has been no increase in the amount of prostitution there or trafficking.

I posted a link to this article about prostitution in New Zealand earlier in the thread, which says that trafficking is still rife.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/30/new-zealand-sex-work-prostitution-migrants-julie-bindel

The promises from the government – that decriminalisation would result in less violence, regular inspections of brothels and no increase of the sex trade – have not materialised. The opposite has happened. Trafficking of women into New Zealand into legal and illegal brothels is a serious problem, and for every licensed brothel there are, on average, four times the number that operate illegally. Violent attacks on women in the brothels are as common as ever. “The men feel even more entitled when the law tells them it is OK to buy us,” says Sabrinna Valisce, who was prostituted in New Zealand brothels both before and after decriminalisation. Under legalisation, women are still murdered by pimps and punters.

I also posted a link to this article by Sabrinna Valisce:

www.spaceintl.org/media/full-decriminalization-in-new-zealand/

After seeing marked declines in the very areas she’d campaigned to improve, Sabrinna hoped to fix these flaws while maintaining the decriminalized system, until she finally had to admit that Full Decriminalization was a failed model. She saw the successful outcomes from countries that had taken on the Abolitionist (Nordic) Model, and now campaigns to expose the truth about Full Decriminalisation, with the hope of seeing governments worldwide adopt The Abolitionist Model as their own.

@OldCrone

There has been no increase in the sex trade. I know that Melissa Farley said there was and Bindel is going with that, but it is untrue. There are no illegal brothels in New Zealand. If two or more women choose to work together for safety they are doing nothing illegal (unlike in Britain and Sweden) and they will not be arrested.

Do you have any evidence that more women are murdered now in New Zealand that before decriminalisation? The evidence is that no women who work in SOOBs (Small Owner Operated Brothels) have been murdered.

Bindel found one woman in New Zealand who doesn't believe in decriminalisation. I don't know why she didn't pretend that she had found lots, that's what she did with the one learning disabled woman that she found in Nevada when she reported on the brothels there. Bindel went on Womans Hour and said that she had found learning disabled women who had been double pimped. That's not what she wrote in her original report though, she wrote that she had found one, who she called Sindy (who had not been double pimped). I don't trust anything that Julie Bindel says, she is dishonest.

I just honestly don't know what the best approach is to keep women as safe as they can be in such an inherently risky situation.

The best approach has got to be getting women educated and skilled to do jobs that don't involve them being abused daily.

Normalisation of pornography and prostitution is not helping women.

There are no illegal brothels in New Zealand

i.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/8367052/Illegal-brothel-owner-fined

i.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/6118887/Black-market-brothels-thriving-in-Hamilton

www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/chinese-prostitutes-worry-sex-industry/WUYUNXOV5WMPFR67MSR6UTVALE/?c_id=1&objectid=10718424

i.stuff.co.nz/business/102248502/illegal-migrant-prostitutes-too-terrified-to-report-exploitation

www.odt.co.nz/business/mayor-says-brothel-rule-not-too-strict

"I'm also not 100% clear on the difference between legalisation and decriminalisation, so if anyone could explain that to me I would appreciate it"

If you get a chance to look at Oxford Professor Amia Srinivasan's book The Right to Sex she explains it very well. She believes in decriminalisation.

With legalisation there will be women who don't ask for or can't get permission to do sex work. They will do it anyway and they can be arrested. If they can't work together with other women they will work alone and can be murdered.

She says something else about legalisation, something about men becoming rich. I haven't got the book with me or I would quote from her. Legalisation favours men who can make a profit from opening brothels whereas decriminalisation favours women who choose to work with one or two other women for safety.

@NotBadConsidering

Brothel-keeping is not illegal. There are lots of things that people can't do, and that's a good thing. But two or three women can work together for safety without being arrested.

"Prostitution in New Zealand, brothel-keeping, living off the proceeds of someone else's prostitution, and street solicitation are legal in New Zealand and have been since the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 came into effect."

You said:

There are no illegal brothels in New Zealand

It doesn’t matter what you say the legislation says. Those news articles are all examples of brothels that failed to comply with legislation, and hence, were illegal. Too many women, immigrant women etc. They were illegal brothels. To claim there are none is unequivocally false. It’s also unequivocally ridiculous to claim there aren’t any other brothels in New Zealand right at this very minute that aren’t acting illegally.

Your assertion is wrong.

I think the issue there is that migrant women are in such a precarious situation. They would face those issues regardless of decriminalisation wouldn't they? That's the system that needs to change, so people who are being trafficked or coerced (in any industry) can actually get help without risking deportation.

@Aspiringmatriarch
“That's the system that needs to change, so people who are being trafficked or coerced (in any industry) can actually get help without risking deportation.“

I am sure you are right.

"can actually get help without risking deportation.“

This is a problem in Sweden under the Nordic model.

"Selling sex is considered a grounds for deportation as it is not “legitimate” work and migrant sex workers caught up in raids have been detained and denied medical support"

www.swarmcollective.org/blog/the-swedish-model

The Nordic Model is usually advertised as "legal to sell sexual services, illegal to buy sexual services" to make it sound good. But the small print is usually kept quiet.

Including the small print, the Nordic Model would be "It's legal to sell sexual services- but only if you work alone(if you work with someone else the police can burst in and detain you), your landlord will be forced to evict you if they find out what you do, Social Services can take your children off you, if you're a migrant you will be deported if caught, and your clients will be more likely to be violent towards you*"

*(If a client isn't worried about the legal consequences of committing violence, they aren't going to care about a law against paying for sex which carries low penalties, this means any clients which will be deterred will be the safer ones.)

(If a client isn't worried about the legal consequences of committing violence, they aren't going to care about a law against paying for sex which carries low penalties

Men are going to hurt women anyway, so why bother? Where have we heard that argument from you before Marg, I wonder? 🤔

Men are going to hurt women anyway, so why bother? Where have we heard that argument from you beforeMarg, I wonder? 🤔

No idea of the posting history, but I didn't get that from what Margarita said. I think it's just reiterating that certain policies will put women more at risk from creeps and predators because they will target anyone who is already (more) vulnerable.

IMO any man paying for sex is already in the creep category but under, say, the Nordic model women would be left with only the more extreme end of the creep spectrum, less ability to vet, and face lots of negative potential consequences if they did go to the police.

@lovelyweathertoday

but as a general argument, money = no consent seems quite weak to me?

The thing for me is that sex should always be consensual. A woman should be able to say "no, stop, I don't feel like it" at any point and be respected.

That doesn't apply when it's a job does it?

Of course it does. Do you have a job? Are you able to say no (albeit at the risk of losing your job)?

It's even easier when you don't have a job, but are just doing freelance work when you get it. Which is essentially what SW is.

I fundamentally disagree that so-called desperation = no consent. We are all 'desperate'. Why do you think I go to work every day, for the fun of it? I do it because I need the money. A(lmost a)ll work is done because people need the money, and they wouldn't do it otherwise.

The case has yet to be made why a consensual agreement to do riskier work for higher pay, is somehow not considered consensual.

Shelf stacking carries very little risk, but it means long, fixed hours, for min wage. SW carries greater risk, but far fewer, flexible hours, for much higher pay. As with most jobs, the reward is commensurate with the risk.

Here's an example quote to backup the last point I made above.

“Ever since the law [in Ireland] changed the worst crimes - attacks, robberies, rapes - have increased. Potentially aggressive clients are more likely to call than genuine clients.”

This is from the above link which uses this as the source: sexworkersallianceireland.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/SWAI-Research-Report-.pdf p50

So there are still clients paying for sex, but the pool of available clients will have a higher proportion of men who don't care about breaking laws.

@NotBadConsidering

It doesn’t matter what you say the legislation says. Those news articles are all examples of brothels that failed to comply with legislation, and hence, were illegal. Too many women, immigrant women etc. They were illegal brothels. To claim there are none is unequivocally false. It’s also unequivocally ridiculous to claim there aren’t any other brothels in New Zealand right at this very minute that aren’t acting illegally.

Yes you are right. There are brothels in New Zealand which are illegal. Just as there are nightclubs in Britain which are illegal. As far as I know there are no cases in New Zealand where two women working together for safety from a flat have been arrested, unlike in Nordic model Ireland where two Romanian women in their 20s were arrested. They were just the ones that made the newspapers.

Amnesty International have said that women in Nordic model Norway are suffering through arrest and eviction, and especially migrant women. The issue of migrant women seems to be the biggest problem with any system.

@Awwlookatmybabyspider

I personally agree. I'd go into sex work if I had to. I have no problem whatsoever with admitting that. It's called survival.

Before anyone considered going into sex work, they should consider that there are many types of sex work. A lot of it, perhaps most of it these days, is non-penetrative. A woman can make a small amount of money from giving a man a massage, and then more from 'extras'. That could just be a woman using her hands to bring a man to orgasm.

There's a difference between oral sex with a condom, oral sex without a condom, and CIM (cum-in-mouth). Many if not most sex workers don't do CIM. Also, it's very rare for a sex worker to get 20 clients in a day. More like 8 for a busy sex worker.

The reason why I am saying this is that someone said that sex workers have to give oral sex to 20 men a day. That's not the reality. You don't even have to have penetrative sex with clients if you don't like that idea. You can still make money from sex work. I'm not trying to promote sex work, I'm just saying that even if a woman was desperate for money she doesn't have to do penetrative sex.

@awwlookatmybabyspider

It looks like you've been offered a job 👍

Don't know if I'd trust Amnesty on anything anymore. Didn't they allegedly get Pimps to write up their policy on prostitution and exploitation of women. Also, called for the removal of franchise (and ability to access media/reporting) from women who stand up for their rights. I think such apparent complicity in trying to damage women's rights takes away credibility.

@Cailleach1

What do you think is more likely? That a human rights organisation has been taken over by pimps or that a government has been dishonest with their the nature and effectiveness of their policies?

Norway, like all Nordic model countries, states that it has decriminalised prostitutes. Amnesty say they haven't. Amnesty say that when the Norwegian police identify a prostitute they find her landlord and threaten him with prosecution unless he evicts her.

Women working together is still illegal and migrants have the additional problem of deportation.

I know that there were reports in the media that the first person in Amnesty to say that they should look into human rights abuses in Norway was a man who ran an escort agency. That's a long way from pimps writing their policy.

I think Amnesty would have done better to say that it's not going to tell democratically elected governments what they should do but that if Norway wants to have the Nordic model then it should be as advertised. They can continue to prosecute punters (they can look after themselves) but no more arrests or evictions of women.

I have not read anything about the removal of franchise that you write about. Perhaps what is meant is that people who believe in the Nordic model and are vocal about it can no longer represent Amnesty.

@Awwlookatmybabyspider

It looks like you've been offered a job

I think the way it works is that you offer them a job. Hand or otherwise.

"I believe that LT only has sons and no daughters"
Somebody should ask him if he'd be happy if one of his sons chose to do sex work.
These 'sex work is work' types never seem to wonder why, if it's so fulfilling and lucrative, almost no sex workers are male. Or, for that matter why they've never tried it. Funny that....