To those who consider prostitution rape...

[Ahsoka2001]

I recently found some old MN threads where posters debated whether a man who has sex with a prostitute commits rape. Those in favour argued that the woman's consent is not freely given - it is conditional on the basis money is exchanged and consent cannot be bought -

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3012135-Is-prostitution-rape

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/2791778-does-having-sex-with-a-prostitute-constitute-rape

To those who agree with this position, I'm wondering where exactly do we draw the line? If all prostitution is rape, then -

a) What about female pornstars? They only have sex on camera on the condition that they are paid for the shoot. Does this mean every male pornstar in history is a rapist because the woman's consent was bought and not freely given?

b) What about mainstream/narrative cinema actresses? If a female Hollywood star only consents to a sex scene on the condition of receiving a paycheck for the role, does that mean they're being sexually assaulted when they perform a scene in which they're kissed/touched sexually? Does this mean male Hollywood actors who partake in these scenes are sexual assaulters?

...Surely not! But again, if all prostitution automatically equals rape, then how and where do we draw the line?

I wonder if the difference between men's and women's view of prostitution comes from the very different experiences of the two sexes? No man has ever had the worry of an unwanted pregnancy, the risk of rape for men is much less, violence towards men tends to take different forms, plus a man is more evenly matched against another man. The societal value of girls is very different from that of boys. The flight or fight theory is very male, with little account taken of freeze or appease, which tend to be female responses. Women and girls grow up with the risk of casual sexual assault, which men don't.

Clarification- Germany and the Netherlands have legalisation, not decriminalisation.

Belgium (as of 2022) and parts of Australia also have decriminalisation as well as NZ.

There's a lot of evidence to show the Nordic Model is harmful to sex workers and women in general. More violence, more stigma, eviction (sex workers can't rent property in Sweden), sexworkers can have their children seized by social services (selling sex is seen as "self harm" in Sweden), no evidence it "reduces demand" which is the main selling point for it, sexworkers can't carry condoms anymore as they are used as evidence, attempting to enforce it costs a fortune and it's almost impossible to convict clients as sexworkers are unwilling to testify against clients.

In the first 2000 client arrests in Sweden, only 2 were convicted and that's only because they confessed. They received low fines. So basically all Swedish clients have to do if caught is deny, and if they do confess the worst that will happen is a low fine. Online the Swedish escort directories are very much active and the Swedish police don't really do much except a sting here and there which costs resources for little convictions, in the South of Sweden e.g. Malmo the law isn't enforced at all.

I think I posted this link already, in Sweden discrimination against women who "look like sexworkers" is legally permitted. Go to a Swedish bar or club and the bouncer thinks you "look like a prostitute"? He can refuse you entry and the law will be on his side.

https://www.thelocal.se/20130912/50200

Nordic Model France- more than 10 sexworkers murdered in 6 months.

http://www.pion-norge.no/aktuelt/more-than-10-sex-workers-have-been-killed-in-6-months/

"Nordic Model In Northern Ireland A Total Failure: No Decrease In Sex Work, But Increases In Violence And Stigma"
<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20230618235135/www.swarmcollective.org/blog/2019/9/20/nordic-model-in-northern-ireland-a-total-failure-no-decrease-in-sex-work-but-increases-in-violence-and-stigma" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://web.archive.org/web/20230618235135/www.swarmcollective.org/blog/2019/9/20/nordic-model-in-northern-ireland-a-total-failure-no-decrease-in-sex-work-but-increases-in-violence-and-stigma

There's an open letter by DecrimNow opposing the Nordic Model which has been signed by human rights orgs, health and anti-HIV orgs, anti-trafficking orgs, anti-rape orgs and women themselves who have lived experience of selling sex.

https://decrimnow.org.uk/open-letter-on-the-nordic-model/

So the NM isn't the "magic bullet" some make it out to be. It causes a lot of trouble to sexworkers for almost nothing in return. No "reduction in demand" but a few guys got some low fines.

Just to add- in all Nordic Model countries it's still illegal for sexworkers to work together. If a home or premise has more than 1 sexworker working there (even if it isn't at the same time) it's classed as a "brothel". The police have powers to raid brothels and arrest the women working there.

@Christinapple
So what is your solution?

That's a really good point.
Also, I felt quite cross reading the other post because I have worked as a cleaner, and as a pot washer. I was dating someone working in a factory at the time. I have family members working as care assistants. All hard physical jobs which aren't brilliantly paid and looked down on by some people. But they are important jobs (especially care work) and you can take pride in them even though they are difficult because they need doing. Having someone sneeringly compare prostitution to "scrubbing a toilet" feels so insulting but its not because I think there's something inherently wrong with prostitutes themselves. Its comparing honest working class jobs that need doing with something that inherently shouldn't be bought/sold. Its the same as earlier in this conversation someone compared stay home wives to prostitutes. It says so much more about their attitudes to women in general and possible the working class than they realise. They think their wife if she stays home with the kids, the cleaner in their offices etc are inherently degrading themselves.

Well maybe because neighbours don't want to live next door to, or share a common stair with a brothel. Are you suggesting that's unreasonable?

This is always put forward as one of the objections to the Nordic Model " oh but it prevents prostitutes sharing a flat for safety" - as if no one else matters.

Having someone sneeringly compare prostitution to "scrubbing a toilet" feels so insulting but its not because I think there's something inherently wrong with prostitutes themselves. Its comparing honest working class jobs that need doing with something that inherently shouldn't be bought/sold.

That's such a good point.

Yes. You are right about the SAHM wife thing too. I hadn't thought of that.
These men have such revolting attitudes to women

I agree - most women like sex and want to have sex in the same way most men do. But they view sex very differently on the whole because of the power dynamics/risk of pregnancy etc. I think some men find it impossible to empathise.

But also - in some cases it shows a lot about what some men think about women and "women's" work in general. "Its no different than cleaning toilet's for a living", "its no different to when women marry rich men". The contempt just oozes out.

And to add - my dad and family had absolutely no problem with me doing that job. he would have been absolutely devastated if I was a frigging prostitute (like most normal fathers/men would be).

@biscuitandcake
Absolutely agree about the contempt.

I wonder how well the Nordic Model would do if we both viewed women in general as full human beings and not objects and in addition stopped seeing prostitutes as having the lowest value amongst said object?

Just a thought.

I am just not sure why people don't understand that arguments that prostitution is bad, or should be illegal, are not the same as saying it is non-consensual.

Something being dangerous, or nasty, or even exploitative does not mean a person's does not have legal autonomy to make decisions.

There are many many women's who will have sex, not for money, that is unsafe, risky, potentially bad for their health, for some kind of benefit they perceive to themselves. I've known a few women to persue self-destructive and dangerous casual sex and really harm themselves.

I think it's really important to consider what it means to set a precedent where these kinds of things invalidate consent to sex or other transactions, and where making damaging choices can potentially invalidate them.

It's especially concerning to me that some think this really only applies to women, men have no such limits on their ability to consent because they are less vulnerable.

Also - there are different kinds of crimes and immoral behaviour. I can extort money from someone, scam them in some of kind of mass phone email saying they have won the lottery, legitimately manage their money but skim the profits or do some other weird financial things, or convince a vulnerable person to invest in a risky but legal venture. These are all immoral, often illegal, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the victims are unable to consent as such, and what's the main point here, these are not in any case the same as a mugging where violence or threat of violence is used to remove people's money without any pretense of consent. Words have meaning and we don't need to reduce every kind of crime or bad behaviour to one thing.

That would only apply if the vast majority of prostitutes were prostitutes by (real)choice. The statistics don't support that premise.

Random. Scamming someone or extorting money by deception is in no way equivalent to prostitution

I would personally oppose any form of the "Nordic Model" and advocate for decriminalisation- the "model" used by Belgium, NZ and parts of Australia and advocated for by human rights orgs, health and anti-HIV orgs, anti-trafficking orgs, anti-rape orgs and many women and men themselves who have lived experience of selling sex.

@IHaveNeverLivedintheCastle,
"Well maybe because neighbours don't want to live next door to, or share a common stair with a brothel. Are you suggesting that's unreasonable?
This is always put forward as one of the objections to the Nordic Model " oh but it prevents prostitutes sharing a flat for safety" - as if no one else matters."

NM supporters keep saying women who sell sex "aren't criminalised" under the NM as one of the main selling points. But they still are if they share a property/premise, that means they are not truly decriminalised and a lot of the media articles that claim they are, are misleading.

There have been cases where police have raided suspected brothels under the guise of "tackling trafficking", then when it turns out noone is trafficked they just arrest or charge the sexworkers for working in a brothel to justify the raid. Sometimes this is manipulated by the media who trick the public into thinking arrests made in "anti-trafficking raids" mean there is evidence of trafficking, when all that's happened was sexworkers being arrested for working together.

Rules about brothels in NZ etc seem to vary upon area, with some Councils making rules that brothels may not be permitted in certain areas or permit one's own home to be one.

https://www.nzpc.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Model

It's also worth pointing out that anti-brothel laws don't stop brothels from happening. For example it's illegal for sexworkers to work together in Britain despite prostitution being legal, doesn't make them magically disappear.

@Christinapple "NM supporters keep saying women who sell sex "aren't criminalised" under the NM as one of the main selling points. But they still are if they share a property/premise, that means they are not truly decriminalised and a lot of the media articles that claim they are, are misleading."
This isn't any different to decriminalisation, though.
I can speak from the Victorian perspective, if you want to set up a legal brothel there are lots of hoops to jump through. You have to bring your case to court, and in reality you need expensive lawyers if you want to get a "yes" from the judge. It also gives every person who doesn't want to share a stairwell (as it was put) with a brothel the opportunity to nix the process. If two or three women just decide to share a property to work from as prostitutes they will also not be truly decriminalised, as in, that's still illegal.
@SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice has given a good description of how the Nordic model works, what it's aims are. It's not really harm minimisation, it's about transforming society over time - over generations - so that the vast majority of people agree that we don't want prostitution in our society. And there's lots of evidence that's happening in Sweden, the documentary Som En Pascha said 90% adults in Norway support their country's legistlation in this area and most insterestingly there wasn't a big male / female split (that is a really good doco but only watch it if your in a good place and have support people nearby it's very very very distressing, https://likeapascha.com/).
I do agree with you, @Christinapple that it's probably true you can't stigmatise prostitution without stigmatising the women who provide the sexual services in the industry. I think that's why women who promote the Nordic Model emphasise so much that prostituted women are victims - to try and avoid them carrying the stain of making the whole sex industry an abomination in everyone's mind. I just don't think that can work.
Which is why I'm not 100% convinced by the Nordic model. But I also have no time for people who treat decriminalisation as the magic bullet that turns a hideous, mysogynistic industry in to a lovely, fluffy choosy-choice money spinner. It's always going to be about finding the least-evil option.

There are no such things as 'sex workers', there are only prostituted women.

Great post lily 👏

There are - strippers, porn actors, webcam performers all sex workers. Debatable if the term "prostitutes" applies to them.

I use the term "sex workers" for the above and prostitutes for people selling physical sex.

Semantics really, annoying though because some people do use "sex workers" to try to sanitise prostitution. Again, it's a way for the focus to be on the "choice" of the prostitutes rather than the punters.

There seems to be some sort of consensus on this board that it is impossible for a single woman to make a decision to sell sex without somehow being coerced into it. Of course, if you take that as axiomatic, then there is no such thing as a sex worker, only a ‘prostituted woman’.

From what I have seen and read (there was a program the other day about a female led escort agency, interviewing non judgementally the boss and the girls), at least some make that choice as adult human beings and don’t hate the work (one was interviewed on a two day engagement in London, for which she received £6,000). I think it would be really hard to argue that these women were being raped (which is where this thread started out).

You might say that these types are vanishingly rare and it is worth putting an end to this to stop the abuse that happens to the majority.

Also, there is this idea that any man (although women are given a free pass here) who has ever paid for sex is somehow a vile specimen of humanity. But when prostitutes are interviewed, they say the majority of their clients are very ordinary and often lonely.

Is giving these people criminal records a good thing? If it served as a real deterrent, it might be worth it but, again, as posted by many up above, it doesn’t seem to actually work, either as a deterrent or to keep women safe and healthy.

I think it is a totally unrealistic fantasy to be believe that sex won’t always be a commodity, be it indirectly and directly. It is interesting to see, as wealth and power equalises between the sexes, that more and more women are either buying sex directly (male escorts) or indirectly (‘Gambia’ and treating ‘Young boyfriends’ to a nice lifestyle in return for good sex). It is a power dynamic and, unless you are a communist, you can’t get rid of power dynamics.

I have read loads of these threads now and they never resolve anything. Personally I think the police should focus on the really dark area, the traffickers, the underage stuff etc.

There seems to be some sort of consensus on this board that it is impossible for a single woman to make a decision to sell sex without somehow being coerced into it.

Thats your interpretation of the discussion. Selling sex happens because women need money, not because women need sex.

Well yes. Feminists generally do object to actions that harm women, and prostitution is most definitely one of those actions.

There seems to be some sort of consensus on this board that it is impossible for a single woman to make a decision to sell sex without somehow being coerced into it. Of course, if you take that as axiomatic, then there is no such thing as a sex worker, only a ‘prostituted woman’

You are ignoring wider societal good. Prostitution is harmful on a societal level, not just the individual level. The effect of the actions of a woman "choosing" or choosing to be a prostitute goes beyond that individual.

It is a power dynamic and, unless you are a communist, you can’t get rid of power dynamics.

You don't know much about communism if you think communism destroys power dynamics.