Is the DWP morphing into a pimp?

[IwantToRetire]

... the government had announced in around 2010 that it was banning jobcentres from advertising sex industry jobs and surely this applied to OnlyFans? I then remembered being part of a campaign organised by the now defunct ‘Object: Women not sex objects’ group in around 2008. A few of us would go to a busy tube station after work with clipboards to ask commuters if they thought it was right that job centres were advertising lap dancing jobs to unemployed women. Most people were aghast and signed our petition.

The Government followed their announcement with legislation in 2012. Section 144 of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 inserted ‘Section 2A: Restriction on section 2 arrangements: sex industry’ into the Employment and Training Act 1973. Section 2A is as follows:

2A Restriction on section 2 arrangements: sex industry
(1) Arrangements made by the Secretary of State under section 2 may not include arrangements in respect of employment for sexual purposes.
(2) For the purposes of this section employment is for sexual purposes if—
(a) it involves the employee engaging in an activity, and
(b) the employee’s activity, or the way in which it is performed, may reasonably be assumed to be intended solely or principally to stimulate one or more other persons sexually (by whatever means).
(3) The Secretary of State may by order specify exceptions to subsection (1).
(4) A statutory instrument containing an order under subsection (3) is subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.

As far as we are aware, there is no statutory instrument altering Section 2A.

While we understand that the key aim was to ban sex industry businesses from placing adverts on the DWP job boards, it appears to us that the drafting is broad enough to cover most content on OnlyFans – although whether it applies to self-employment is a moot point.

However, as the anonymous work coach makes clear, it seems that this legislation has fallen out of use, that it is not included in standard DWP training, and few, if any, work coaches are even aware of it.

How could this happen?

But… But, you may be wondering, how could this be? How could the British Government fail to implement its own legislation – or at least the spirit of its own legislation?

Very easily is the answer where the sexploitation of women and girls is concerned.

Article continues at https://nordicmodelnow.org/2025/11/03/is-the-dwp-morphing-into-a-pimp/

Do you have evidence job centres are "advertising lap dancing jobs to unemployed women"?

Do try reading properly. It’s really not hard.

So that's a no.

Gosh golly, so you’re not just here to set us all straight on trans stuff, you really do think women habitually shouldn’t be believed, that the status quo of using them as sex objects and vessels for men’s pleasure should be maintained at all costs, and that their exploitation into the sex trade should be ignored? Careful, now, Ted, your misogyny is showing.

Can we just ignore the derailers. They keep coming back because they get responses.

Just to spell it out the OP is the start of a long article about Job Centres and that a Government regulation that "Object" a feminist campaign group helped bring about the sex work should not be advertised in job centres.

And now they are.

This is serious. Why let something that is plainly of malicious intent, stop talking about an issue important to women.

If you do then you are helping them make FWR pointless.

"And now they are"

Evidence please.

From the Guardian, 2008

“Jobcentres have been criticised for offering women as young as 17 work as strippers and lap dancers, with some vacancies listing the ability to "discuss sexual fantasies" as a useful skill. A charity that works with women in the sex trade told MPs on the home affairs select committee that the government was acting irresponsibly by putting the jobs on its database.”

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2008/apr/30/workandcareers

You would think in the UK that government institutions would never even think of promoting any kind of sex work, but it seems it needs to be spelled out in black and white. In the age of Only Fans they absolutely need to go further and ensure that this is not being promoted as a legitimate career path. It’s disgusting.

An article over 17 years old that doesn't actually give any evidence but only someone's anecdotal views, and a post just above said "and now they are" implying it is happening now?

As we've seen tabloid and online magazine articles can also be false. Julie Bindel lied about Pornhub falsely claiming they "had a war r*pe category" and the Telegraph lied about "German women facing loss of benefits if they decline to accetp work in brothels".

www.snopes.com/fact-check/hot-jobs/

In the interests of fairness, I think @Christinapple has a point. I can't see anything in the linked article which says that DWP job centres are advertising sex industry jobs.

It does however say that OnlyFans is used as an example of self employment in staff training sessions - which is of course horrible and disgusting.

The article says:

"What form does jobcentre encouragement of OnlyFans take?
This is how our jobcentre mole describes what she sees happening:
“Typically work coaches do not suggest that claimants set themselves up on OnlyFans – although work coaches have the freedom and discretion to do so if they wish. To my knowledge, there is no guidance to prohibit this, although the use of OnlyFans as an example of self-employment in training sessions would suggest that the DWP condones and approves it.
However, if claimants approach the DWP for universal credit while already involved with OnlyFans, under the rules, they must declare that involvement as self-employment and build their hours and income to justify claiming the benefit. This is how all self-employed claimants are treated. The DWP would then provide dedicated self-employment support to build their OnlyFans fan base and income.”

On the specific point of Universal Credit - would it actually be better to rule that if you are claiming UC and on OnlyFans, then your income does not have to be declared?
I most definitely don't think so.

Of course the DWP should not provide support for OnlyFans 'businesses' - but again there is no evidence that they are doing so.

Please correct me if I have missed something in the article.

Sex workers/prostitutes in Britain also have to declare their earnings for tax purposes. This doesn't mean anyone is saying their job is "desirable" or anything, it's so they can pay tax like anyone else and other reasons like ensuring they aren't going over any thresholds for benefit claiming etc.

So from the article, a work coach could suggest a young woman start an OnlyFans, and not be fired for sexual harassment?

I remember there used to be lap dancing and sex line jobs up in the jobcentre in the mid 90s.

I mean only fans isn't a job is it, it's just trying to sell dirty pictures of yourself with no guaranteed income. So I'd hope they wouldn't advertise that?

I'm shocked that it's still happening but not at all surprised.

I was only a few years back that Leicester University was suggesting that their fees could be paid [by female students] using sex work as a part time income stream. They issued a workbook to help them along this path. It was withdrawn but I believe that other universities were also suggesting this income stream and I don't know if their workbooks were ever withdrawn.

The 17+ year old article has someone talking anecdotally. "NordicModelNow" and Julie Bindel are not credible.

If anyone has any actual evidence of this happening or something the DWP have actually said themselves would be helpful.

If anyone had read the actual article in the OP and not just responded to the extract they would have seen that it is a follow up to another article.

https://nordicmodelnow.org/2025/09/20/how-long-before-uk-jobcentres-move-from-encouraging-unemployed-women-into-onlyfans-to-mandating-it/

Thankfully there are feminists who are activists and are pro-actively looking at the start of what is no doubt a slippery slope.

Personally if anyone is encouraging young women onto Only Fans at a Job Centre they should be sacked for pretending this is normal, not exploitation. (And in fact is rarely profitable because "competition" means to generate income you have to be extreme.)

It may be easier to arguing against mandating, but as far as I am concerned it should not be in any way referred to in a job centre, any more than telling women to take a job in a sweat shop.

Job Centres are an arm of Government.

And they claim they want to act against violence against women.

Hypocrites.

Thanks for this link. Although depressing that 17 years ago stripping was being questioned, but suspect now it is thought to be normal.

More evidence that you open a door a crack and in no time it is pushed wide open.

This is about sexual exploitation of women being normalised.

This isn't "equality". This is about a male dominated society telling women you are just a 2nd class citizen with less rights and have to accept what men tell you is what your worth is.

I may have misunderstood, but I read the main disadvantage as relating to women already doing sex work who then need to claim benefits. It sounds as if work coaches are being trained to withhold financial help unless the claimant first maximises what she can make from sex work. Whereas an ethos more in the spirit of S2a would be to support women while they find less degrading employment.