Pushing back against the so-called Nordic Model of sex work

[SnugFinch]

Hi. I'm aware that my views might not be the most popular, but I am posting here in good faith.

Many of you know that Ash Regan has been campaigning to get sex work legislation in place which follows the neo-abolitionist model, or Nordic Model. This so-called Nordic Model claims that it will punish buyers of sex work, while not criminalising sellers, and that this will benefit sex workers and stop sex trafficking.

However, this is untrue. By criminalising buyers, it ensures that the only people who will buy sex are criminals who don't care about breaking the law. And because sex workers have a smaller client pool, they have no choice but to put themselves at the mercy of these criminals, and can end up suffering violence as a result.

This so-called Nordic Model has been law in the island of Ireland for nearly a decade now, and it has made things worse for the women involved, and it has done nothing to stop sex trafficking, as the facts in this article (and the testimony of a former sex worker) prove.

https://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2025/02/07/on-problems-with-the-nordic-model-of-prostitution/

Ash Regan's bill has been delayed for the moment, but it hasn't been defeated. There is a growing worry that what happened in Ireland could happen in Scotland. And it could extend to England and Wales as well.

Feminists should want to end violence against all women. So why is there support for the Nordic Model, which has proven to be so hazardous to female sex workers?

I'm curious as to what your thoughts are.

This thread is such a good example of how some blokes argue about this subject.

They make it an intellectual argument and seem focused on "winning" rather than discussing.

Very different from how most women speak about it.

'I have no idea in how many women it might leave psychological scars'

Mate. Try asking some.

Then again, what's the point? Women's voices too high pitched, I guess.

"You may have heard at your feminist events that the proportion of Swedish men who pay for sex decreased from 12.7% to 7.6% after the Nordic Model was introduced there in 1999, or some version of this statistic. There were surveys in 1996, 2008, 2014 and 2017."

LOL!!!

You lot haven't been going to FEMINIST EVENTS have you? The scandal!

@StellaAndCrow Those of us who work in mental health or social services have a very good idea about the psychological scars. And more.

That is an excellent point. For example, it would be an excellent argument to say that, of who who think they want to do it and who choose to do it freely, many don't realise what kind of psychological scars they will have in the future.

But a point for what? A point against the glamorisation of sex work. Not a point in favour of the Nordic model, which doesn't work, which criminalises women working together for safety, and which prosecutes more women for that than men.

The criminalisation of punters appears to cause significant upset to some men. Their inability to consider that exchanging money for consent is a form of rape, suggests a lack of understanding of women's humanity.
This fits well with ex prostituted women's stories of punters who use foul slurs, during the sex act, slapping or hitting women. Once these men have paid for access to the woman's body, they believe that they have the right to use that body in any way they choose.
Women who leave prostitution often have CPTSD, with flashbacks and"hearing" the voices of punters. So much for being able to leave!

Okay I’ll spell it out to you in child-like terms.

All around the world there is a collective group of women. They are called prostitutes. They sell their bodies for sex in exchange for money. Estimates place this number at around 50 million.

Of this 50 million, many of them - millions - are trafficked, abused, drug affected, and murdered.

When you add up all the women who are prostitutes who have been trafficked, abused, drug affected, and murdered, this adds up to millions.

The Oxford comma is your friend here. It was pretty obvious what I meant but you seem to think you’re being clever by nitpicking. You’re not.

You also seem to think that the tiny percentage of women who enjoy this sort of work should take precedence over the millions of women who don’t. Personally I think these women are part of the problem by enabling men who think sex work is a noble profession bringing in the big bucks.

On the latter part of your reply, to confirm, you think that women shouldn’t be criminalised, and men should be prosecuted for abusing women by paying for sex. What would you call that model, then?

And how would you enforce it?

To be clear, you think men should be punished, correct?

It was pretty obvious what I meant but you seem to think you’re being clever by nitpicking. You’re not.

That pretty much sums up all @YetAnotherDude's posts.

Yes it's that oh so clever intellectualisation.
Just interested in winning the argument.

I've been out with blokes like that! Not any longer, thank goodness.

Would you support a working model that made sure men abusing women by buying their bodies would be prosecuted?
Of course.

So, @YetAnotherDude, it seems you agree with the Nordic model in principle, but you don't think it works in practice?

Surely the solution to that is to modify the model or the way it's applied so that it does work. If you want men who are involved in buying and selling sex to be prosecuted, you don't simply throw out a policy which criminalises those men in favour of one which lets them do as they please. How does that help anyone (apart from punters, pimps and traffickers)?

So if it was implemented such that women who work together for safety aren't criminalised, and the men who buy sex are criminalised - with very long sentences, up to life in prison - would you support that?

Or are you going to conjure up some arguments against that too, seeing as trying to prove women wrong appears to be your motivation here.

@ArabellaSaurus 'I have no idea in how many women it might leave psychological scars'
Mate. Try asking some.

I don't have access to a statistically significant sample of women who are or were in the sex industry.

@StellaAndCrow They make it an intellectual argument and seem focused on "winning" rather than discussing.
Very different from how most women speak about it.

I have TRIED to discuss. It has proven impossible. I have been accused of all kinds of nonsense and monstrosities. Noting that SOME women choose it and not all are trafficked (which, btw, is what female academics studying it also say) has been turned into "I don't think women are people".

Asking why the Nordic model criminalises women for working together, and why its advocates don't seem to bat an eyelid at the fact that more women are prosecuted for that than men for buying sex, has been met with a deafening silence.

Linking the research of a (female) LSE Academic and her speech at the British parliament on why she thinks the Nordic model doesn't work has been met with, again, a deafening silence.

Me: Data and academic research
You: accusations as an excuse to dodge the questions and research you don't like.

Yes, you and I are not the same

I am not surprised that you don't want to go out with "blokes" who dare form an opinion on a topic not on facebook but through academic research, and who are then annoyed when the resulting points and questions are dodged and met with a deafening silence. I am not surprised at all.

There is nothing to "win" here.

If you had presented equally sound research and data to show that the Nordic model is a success, I would have held my hands up and admitted that, in light of mixed evidence and in light of various sound studies reaching radically different conclusions, I simply do not know enough to have an informed opinion.
That is NOT what you have done.

It may shock you, because you have probably decided that me disagreeing with you makes me some kind of villain, but there are plenty of complex topics where I do not have an opinion, I cannot have an opinion, because the matter is complex, experts are divided, and I simply do not know enough.

Again, if the evidence is so clear-cut, why do academics studying it concluded that the Nordic model doesn't work? If the evidence is so clear-cut, it should be very easy to debunk these academics, right?

I spent many years working with people with histories of significant harm. Both men and women who were used sexually by adult men, starting when they were little more than children. Not one of them discussed this as being empowering. Those who then "chose" to enter prostitution found the harm to be compounded. Pimps are always, as far as I can tell, without exception criminals, they have contacts with drug dealers, illegal firearms etc. The punters may or may not be aware of this, but they would have no doubt if punters and pimps were treated as the rapists they are. It is illegal to sexually exploit for gain, but when did you last hear off a prosecution.
We have to change the discussion, pimping and being a punter needs to be seen as the appalling exploitation it is and those involved need to be prosecuted. It needs to be properly criminalised and men need to see women as full human beings. It would also help if men attempted to ask women about female sexuality, rather than imposing their own values on women.

@NotBadConsidering You also seem to think that the tiny percentage of women who enjoy this sort of work should take precedence over the millions of women who don’t.

Where did I say that?

Again, same cognitive biases: you lot hear something you don't like, you feel triggered, ideological fury blinds you, and you come up with all kinds of unsubstantiated nonsense.

Noting that a certain group of people exists does not mean saying they must take precedence.
In fact, you should remember my starting point was that I totally understand the argument that sex work should still be banned, IF such group (those who choose it freely) is tiny AND if the ban makes things better rather than worse. This is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you have just accused me of.

In other words, I try to have an approach based on data and evidence, not on abstract wishes or an abstract moral code. Thinking of what we would morally want in abstract, while ignoring actual consequences, is perverse.

@eatfigs , @OldCrone , @NotBadConsidering : I will answer your questions IF you answer mine, which have so far been met with deafening silence. The reason is banal: bombarding someone with questions while ignoring their inconvenient questions is not a sign of intellectual honesty and open-mindedness, without which any attempt at discussion is doomed to fail:

• why does the Nordic model criminalise women working together for safety?
• why are more women prosecuted for that than men for buying sex?
• why do advocates of the Nordic model keep quiet about this? Why has not a single advocate on this thread commented on it?
• what is your opinion on this? Do you not agree it is perverse? Do you not agree it is a failure of the Nordic model?
• why has no one answered my points about the LSE academic concluding that the Nordic model doesn't work, her research, and her speech at the British Parliament on this?

"So if it was implemented such that women who work together for safety aren't criminalised, and the men who buy sex are criminalised - with very long sentences, up to life in prison - would you support that?"

Yes, if the model isn't working as well as it could, then tightening it up and putting in more protections for women would seem like a good idea.

• why are more women prosecuted for that than men for buying sex?

Possibly because the criminal justice system is biased in favour of men.

Or because the Nordic Model is essentially unenforceable?

It's already been established in this thread N. Ireland has had one client conviction in a decade. The Crown Office have said AR's bill would be unenforceable and both N. Ireland and ROI Govs have said the Nordic Model has not reduced demand in their countries (which is the main selling point given by supporters of the NM).

A quick search for escorts in N.Ire and the ROI reveals escort websites for these countries can be found in seconds with plenty of active escorts.

It's not called the oldest profession for nothing. Buying and selling of sex is business as usual regardless whether you've got outright criminalisation, the Nordic Model, legalisation or decriminalisation. Decriminalisation is the safest option for sex workers hence it is the one supported by many human rights, health, HIV/AIDs, anti-trafficking and sex worker orgs.

But maybe the Catholic Church knows better? AR has bishops on her side lmao

www.heraldscotland.com/news/25803910.catholic-church-scotland-backs-ash-regan-unbuyable-bill/

The nordic model would work, if the governments, police and justice systems were prepared to enforce it. Any discussion of "unable", needs to be replaced with unwilling imo.
Why men feel the need to oppose the criminalisation of punters and pimps really needs exploring, by men.

@Dumbo12 Again, not a word on how perverse it is that the Nordic model criminalises women working together for safety.
Why is it?

I trust you will concur the prolonged, deafening silence on this matter leads one to wonder if the reason is that advocates of the Nordic model don't give a flying fig about the safety of sex workers. if you disagree, could you please kindly explain the reason for said deafening silence?

Why men feel the need to oppose the criminalisation of punters and pimps really needs exploring, by men.

I have no doubt that some men oppose it because they want to be able to buy sex no matter what.

However, if you had paid even only a modicum of attention, you would have noticed that there are plenty of NGOs and academics who oppose it not for that reason, but because they observe that it doesn't work and it makes things worse.

Again: think of the female LSE academic who presented evidence to the British Parliament on this. Would you accuse her of the same absurdities you are accusing me of? Or would you start from her research to try to understand what works and what doesn't? The answer is very telling.

The nordic model would work, if the governments, police and justice systems were prepared to enforce it. Any discussion of "unable", needs to be replaced with unwilling imo.

That's wishful thinking.
Norway and Sweden are some of the richest, most advanced countries on the planet. Sweden has had its share of problems lately, but Norway remains one of the richest countries ever, literally printing money with its oil and gas, and with a sovereign wealth fund which is the world's envy.

Why do you think the Nordic model doesn't even work there?
Lack of political will? Are you saying that even the countries which invented the model lack the required political will?
Resources? Are you saying that even the world's richest countries lack the required resources?

Your approach is a bit like saying that the problem of drugs would be solved if only the police were prepared to enforce the law.

If you want to pat yourself on the back while ignoring real-world evidence, that's the perfect approach.
If you are interested in what happens in the real world, why, and how to truly make the world a better place, it is not.

Which of the two is your approach?

One female academic isn't half doing a lot of heavy lifting!
Brothels, or prostituted women working in one building are not reliably safer. Studies back in the 80's in Australia showed that they were actually more at risk working in brothels than independently.

@Dumbo12 So your only evidence is... some undisclosed, unnamed study done 40 years ago in another continent?

I have no doubt that other academic studies may disagree with those I mentioned.
But then let's start discussing those, what they are, why they reach different conclusions, etc.

That would be a productive discussion. Not this.

I wonder why some men believe that they move discussion in a productive manner, by hectoring women and ignoring what they say about hearing the first hand experiences of prostituted women?
It does seem similar to punters believing that prostituted people find them attractive and actively want to have some form of sexual intercourse with them and possibly their friends.

@Dumbo12 Please, do tell me how looking into the research of an academic who has interviewed lots of sex workers means "hectoring women and ignoring what they say".

Please, do tell me how pointing out of being well aware that other research may reach different conclusions, but then we should discuss about that, about the details is "hectoring women".

Please, do tell me how an invite to do just that is "hectoring women".

Oh, wait, maybe you didn't appreciate my point that an unspecified, unnamed, mysterious report from 40 years ago from another continent is a valid challenge? Is that what you meant?

Me: here's recent research which disagrees with you
You: oh but someone in another continent 40 years ago said the opposite
Me: who? What? Any details?
You: stop hectoring women

OK, sure

This post is the epitome of hectoring women.

@Dumbo12 No, it is the epitome of holding people (regardless of sex gender genitalia etc) to account.

It is the epitome of showing the open-mindedness of being aware that there may well be additional research reaching different conclusions.

It is the epitome of a scientifically sound approach, which is open to challenges, as long as these challenges are sound. Mentioning an unspecified report from 40 years ago, while refusing to provide any details, is not sound.

How would you have reacted if the roles had been reversed? if you had presented recent research supporting a certain conclusion, and I had said that an unspecified report from 40 years ago said the opposite, while refusing to provide any other details?

Sex and gender have nothing to do with it.
But of course, when your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
So you must phrase it as a man vs woman thing.