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.

@KitWyn The female academic - Niina Vuolajärvi - has made a career out of saying things that those men who want to buy/sell the bodies of women and girls want to hear. That's her niche. That's how she makes her living.

Always easier to imply there is some kind of big conspiracy behind it all, rather than admit that maybe it is perfectly possible to look at the evidence and reach, in good faith, a different conclusion from yours, right?

They don't read as scientific papers more a set of lawyer's briefs to defend a guilty client.

May I ask what your academic experience in matters of sociology, migration, demographics, women studies etc is?

She has published in peer-reviewed journals, whose editors must have disagreed with your assessment.

There are of course a gazillion topics where there is no consensus, where things are not clear cut and where different people reach different conclusions.

Which is why I have been shouting from the rooftops: does any one know of other research or other reports which contradict these findings?
it would be interesting to read research and reports showing that the Nordic model works.
Just to be clear, are you or are you not aware of any such research and reports?

What we do know is that these 129 will not be a representative or random sample. By definition she can't access the most vulnerable prostitutes.

I hear you. So the question becomes: how different is the universe of sex workers from the sample she interviewed?
I hear you that she may have overestimated how "happy" sex workers are.
But the main conclusion is not that, it's that the Nordic model doesn't work and actually increases risks and dangers.

So, let's see, if the "happier" unrepresentative sex workers find that the Nordic model has made things more dangerous for them, would you not say that for the most vulnerable ones it is even worse?

I struggle to conceive scenarios in which the "happier" sex workers find that the Nordic model makes things worse, but the most vulnerable and exploited ones find that it makes things better!!! Can you elaborate please?

Same thing for reducing demand: where is the proof that it reduces demand?

We'd also, by criminalising buyers, be telling all women and girls that female bodies should not be rented by the hour, to be used/abused for sex by men. Because such an act is loathsome and wrong. We are (or should be) better than that.

Again: it seems to me you are more concerned with asserting an abstract moral principle, than with bothering looking into whether a reform works, whether it makes things better or worse

How many sex workers did Ash Regan consult for her bill? None by the looks of it except maybe 1 or 2 who agree with her. She isn't meeting with any sex worker orgs who represent thousands of sex workers across Scotland and rest of Britain. Yet she meets with the Christian Institute to give them a tour of Scottish Parliament to talk about her bill. A few days ago there were about a dozen news articles about how Catholic Bishops support her bill (what expertise do they have on this exactly and why are they so important???)

Source for image- comment on Scotland4Decrim's Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/p/DRnA9JJDX70/

The evidence by Dr Niina Vuolajärvi makes valid points. As well as issues relating to the criminalising the purchase of sex it also covers a part of her bill relating to "sexual exploitation by a third party". Evidence from other NM countries shows this can make living a normal life difficult for sex workers. If a husband in Sweden eats food paid for by his sex worker wife's wages or looks after his children while his sex worker wife is working he can be arrested for "pimping". Also in Sweden landlords are required by law to evict sex workers if the police find out, this has led to sex workers being evicted and made homeless and in one case a landlord blackmailing a sex worker to give him a free service.

Promised support services for sex workers in NM countries like Sweden, N. Ireland, ROI etc have not materialised.

bills.parliament.uk/publications/60710/documents/6485

You don't understand how the Scottish Parliament works at all.

It isn't a case of legislation being put through on the word of one MSP. There are calls for evidence, there are committees set up to hear lived experiences, consultations, engagement etc etc.

And if you actually read through the papers associated with the Committees, you'll see representation from both sides of the argument. I have many criticisms of the Scottish Parliament but it cannot be said that the information is hard to find. I've attached the Parliament's website page for Stage One of the Bill below -

https://www.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/bills/s6/prostitution-offences-and-support-scotland-bill

As an aside, I am unsurprised that you do not support the Bill.

And has been pointed out elsewhere, one presumes that any MSP who has previously paid for the services of a sex worker declares an interest before taking part in the debate and vote. It's their lived experience after all.

There’s nothing more likely to make me pro the Nordic model - or criminalising all of it - than these obsessive pro-prostitution posters with their tone-deaf hobbyhorse rants. The more posts appear, the less convincing it is.

Yes and I see Regan was unhappy of the outcome of the criminal justice committee she made some serious accusations against other MSPs:
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/snp-msps-accused-of-siding-with-pimps-and-sex-traffickers-as-prostitution-bill-h-5HjdRFh_2/

I asked how many sex workers AR has consulted with. Why does she have time to give Christian groups tours of Parliament to talk about her bill but still hasn't met with Scotland4Decrim?

Scotland for Decrim who met with the Committee on 13th November 2025 and which lengthy note of issues raised is posted in the link on my last post?

If we made buying sex illegal, we'd be telling the minority of men that buy sex, that what they're doing is very wrong

We'd also, by criminalising buyers, be telling all women and girls that female bodies should not be rented by the hour

Consent to sex must be happily, enthusiastically and freely given. Else it isn't consent, and the sex is an act of violence.

It’s amazing how these basic tenets of the issue can’t be acknowledged by prolific anti-Nordic model posters, even if they disagree with that particular model, leaving the inference that they do not believe them.

AR has refused to meet with Scotland4Decrim outside of the committee. No tour of the Scottish Parliament for sex workers by AR to talk about her bill yet she does it for Christian groups?

It would appear as if AR only wants to talk to people who agree with her, not the people who are sex workers (or have "lived experience" of selling sex).

Article from today "Sex workers urge FM not to back Regan bill as SNP split"

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25813266.sex-workers-urge-fm-not-back-regan-bill-amid-snp-split/?

https://archive.ph/SZrAY

I mean, you could ask her I suppose?

Other than to placate your own curiosity, it doesn't really matter. The Committee will hear evidence from various different organisations, from both sides of the debate (including Scotland for Decrim) and then the Bill will move to the next stage.

I take it yours is the current TRA chat point to be repeated ad nauseum? I'm actually quite surprised you answered my last post - I thought you'd do your usual of disappearing off the thread and then doing a copy and paste of the same soundbite on another thread, no matter how tenuous the link to the subject of the OP.

I did email her to ask her how many sex worker individuals and orgs she met with to obtain their views on her bill. She didn't reply...

"I take it yours is the current TRA chat point to be repeated ad nauseum?"

huh? You can see from my posts every point I make is backed up by a source and I am posting recent and relevant news articles related to the bill.

IMO MSPs should be taking an evidence-based approach on whether to vote for the bill based on if it is in the best interests of sex workers. Not a moral, emotive or shaming based approach e.g. supporting her just because "prostitution is bad" or because your hear her say buzzwords and phrases like "we must stop violence against women and children" and become emotive or because male MSPs who don't support her are having accusations thrown at them by her.

We can all agree prostitution is bad, but this is specifically about AR's bill. Agreeing the world would be a better place if prostitution didn't exist doesn't automatically mean we all support what she wants.

I wonder how she will react if she loses the stage 1 vote. She's going to end up getting herself sued for libel.

Again -

https://www.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/bills/s6/prostitution-offences-and-support-scotland-bill

All the submissions and committee notes to allow for MSP's to make an evidenced based decision. Right there. For everyone to see. Including MSP's.

tap.tap. Is this thing on?

My previous message has been cancelled without a notification.
I don't have the time to rewrite it nor to contact the admins, so I'll summarise the main points.

I had a look at some of the material presented by the lobby Nordic Model Now to the Scottish Parliament and I find it highly objectionable.

They imply that the European Court of Human Rights kinda ruled in favour of the Nordic model. It did no such thing. It simply ruled that criminalising and non-criminalising are fine, and that it is for each state to determine its rules.
Source: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22002-14363%22]}

The lobby then uses an academic study to support its thesis that the Nordic model reduced demand. In fact, the study concludes that too many factors are at play, and it's impossible to tell if the reform increased or decreased demand:

https://juridika.no/tidsskrifter/oslo-law-review/2017/2/artikkel/holmstr%C3%B6m

The criticism directed at the methods and sites used to collect data suggests how challenging it is to assess the extent of prostitution. Even if the above studies were taken to mean that there has been a decrease or increase in levels of prostitution in Sweden since the introduction of the Sex Purchase Act, this is very difficult to link to the introduction of a particular Act. The prostitution market is both highly flexible and international and this means that its development is influenced by many different factors. In such a market, the law has limited scope to produce predictable outcomes. When the official Swedish evaluation of the Sex Purchase Act takes various figures at face value and claims a causal link between these and the law, this indicates an understanding of the law as working independently of other social processes, as if the rule of law operates directly upon the world.

@NotBadConsidering It’s amazing how these basic tenets of the issue can’t be acknowledged by prolific anti-Nordic model posters, even if they disagree with that particular model, leaving the inference that they do not believe them.

It is truly amazing how the staunch defenders of the Nordic model fail to appreciate that saying the Nordic model doesn't work does NOT imply approving of sex work, does not imply glamorising sex work, does not imply saying that the clients of sex workers deserve the husband of the year award.

I am not sure that much other than some kind of cognitive deficit can explain the failure to appreciate such a self-evident banality.

It's as if someone pointed out that the war on drugs isn't working, and the reply was: "ah, so you are in bed with the narcos, so you approve of drugs, so you want our kids to do heroin"...

Always with the personal insults isn’t it?

So to clarify @YetAnotherDude , you agree with

If we made buying sex illegal, we'd be telling the minority of men that buy sex, that what they're doing is very wrong

We'd also, by criminalising buyers, be telling all women and girls that female bodies should not be rented by the hour

Consent to sex must be happily, enthusiastically and freely given. Else it isn't consent, and the sex is an act of violence.

?

Because

does NOT imply approving of sex work, does not imply glamorising sex work, does not imply saying that the clients of sex workers deserve the husband of the year award.

is not making that clear.

@NotBadConsidering It's not a personal insult at all. Noting that two concepts are radically different and wondering what can lead a person to confuse the two is not in an insult but an observation.

By contrast, some genius accused me of "cognitive deficit" because they asked me something like "if you wouldn't have sex with a man for money, why would a woman" and got all triggered when I dared point out that what I would or would not do is not representative of anything.
The same genius would have probably had a furious outburst if I had made the opposite argument, i.e. that women SHOULD do something just because I would, no??

Consent to sex must be happily, enthusiastically and freely given. Else it isn't consent, and the sex is an act of violence.

It is insulting that you even ask this question.
Do you think that all those who point out the flaws in the Nordic model think that consent must NOT be given?
Can you please either:

• point to examples of who has said it. I don't mean a random bloke on facebook but among the academics, activists, NGOs etc opposing the Nordic model,
• or admit you were wrong, retract, apologise for the captious and misleading accusation, and promise not to do it again?

If we made buying sex illegal, we'd be telling the minority of men that buy sex, that what they're doing is very wrong
We'd also, by criminalising buyers, be telling all women and girls that female bodies should not be rented by the hour

See, this is where you are concerned with abstract moral codes, with no regard for actual, real-world consequences.
What we "tell" men and women is, IMHO, less important than what ACTUALLY HAPPENS. But you do you.

It is insulting that you even ask this question.
Do you think that all those who point out the flaws in the Nordic model think that consent must NOT be given?
Can you please either:

• point to examples of who has said it. I don't mean a random bloke on facebook but among the academics, activists, NGOs etc opposing the Nordic model,
• or admit you were wrong, retract, apologise for the captious and misleading accusation, and promise not to do it again?

No, I am asking you, specifically, if you agree with this statement, which, remarkably, you still haven’t done. I am not interested in if people who oppose the Nordic model hold this position. I would like to see if you can actually acknowledge this.

See, this is where you are concerned with abstract moral codes, with no regard for actual, real-world consequences.
What we "tell" men and women is, IMHO, less important than what ACTUALLY HAPPENS. But you do you.

And once again, you have gone out of your way to not agree with these positions, but paint them as too moralistic to be worth considering in reality. It’s not like it’s impossible to hold a moral position and be concerned with real world consequences.

Why can’t you bring yourself to acknowledge clearly and openly your support for these positions? If it’s an insulting question, it should be easy to answer but you seem to find it hard to do so.

So do you, @YetAnotherDude , agree, that

If we made buying sex illegal, we'd be telling the minority of men that buy sex, that what they're doing is very wrong

We'd also, by criminalising buyers, be telling all women and girls that female bodies should not be rented by the hour

Consent to sex must be happily, enthusiastically and freely given. Else it isn't consent, and the sex is an act of violence.

If you find these questions insulting, it should be easy to say “yes of course I agree with those principles and I find it insulting you would even ask.”

You haven’t said this yet.

And finally,

and promise not to do it again?

“Oooh, yes Sir! Sorry Sir! Don’t punish me Sir!”

Do you realise how such demand for obedience is incredibly creepy? I’ll promise you that I’ll be “good” when Hell freezes over, mate. The entitlement there is off the charts 🤣🤣

I have explained to you how women can protect themselves against being raped, beaten or murdered. It is quite possible to reduce violence against women, but people who believe in the Nordic Model don't believe in harm reduction. They think that instead of harm reduction they can eliminate prostitution.

If challenged they may say that they can't eliminate prostitution but they can reduce it. What is the evidence they can do this? None. What is the evidence that the opposite happens? In 1996 according to surveys 1.3% of Swedish men were active sex buyers, having bought sex in the previous 12 months. The Nordic Model became law in 1999. In the next survey, in 2008, 1.8% of Swedish men were active sex buyers.

In 1996 in the same surveys 0.3% of Swedish women said that they had been paid for sex at some time in their life. In 2008 that figure was 1.1%. The most recent survey in 2017 showed that 1.5% of Swedish women had been paid for sex at some time in their life.

We have had reviews of the effectiveness of the Nordic Model in Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. None of the reviews show that the amount of prostitution has decreased, and the official Northern Ireland review said that it seems to have increased.

You start by ridiculing what I wrote. Something about marrying a rich punter and living happily ever after. I don't like the way that you take such a flippant approach to the issue of women's safety. Your vision of the future is that prostitution ceases to exist.

You see things in black and white. You think that prostitutes can only either be happy hookers or controlled by violence. You can't believe in the former so you have to believe in the latter. And in doing so you condemn generations of women to that reality.

You show no awareness of how law changes can affect the safety of prostitutes. In 1993 there was a new law in Ireland that was a disaster for prostitutes. Rachel Moran in her book said that it caused a lot of suffering to women, and that is backed up by the research of Ann Marie O'Connor and her colleagues.

Before 1993 most prostitutes in Ireland were independent. After 1993 if they couldn't afford to rent a flat, buy a mobile phone and advertise they became dependent on pimps. Ruhama has said that few Irish prostitutes are independent, which is a bit a cheek considering that they more than anyone has brought about this situation.

Rachel Moran in her book Paid For explains that the Nordic Model wouldn't be like the 1993 law. She wrote that the Nordic Model unlike the 1993 has been proved to work at reducing demand. That's not true, she had been misinformed.

@NotBadConsidering Let's start from a general point.

Do you accept that opposing the Nordic model does not necessarily mean approving of the sex industry, does not necessarily mean glamorising it, does not mean approving of pimps and traffickers, etc?
Yes or no? It is a simple YN question. Why have you been dodging it? Can you answer?

Do you accept that, among the opponents of the Nordic model, there may well be scumbags who want to keep exploiting women, but there are also plenty of honest people who have looked at the evidence and concluded, in good faith, that the model does NOT work?

Do you accept that misrepresenting opponents of the Nordic model is captious, unfair and intellectually dishonest? That misrepresenting your opponents as some kind of villains is a cheap excuse to convince yourself that it is not even worth looking into their arguments?

Yes or no? Can you answer?

You also didn't answer on my criticism of the Nordic Model Now lobby.
What they presented to the Scottish Parliament is here. https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/committees/current-and-previous-committees/session-6-criminal-justice-committee/correspondence/2025/supplementary-written-evidence-from-nordic-model-now-following-8-october-2025-meeting

I summarised above why what they said is false and misleading.

Especially the study on the impact of the law. They took a study which says "the impact is unknowable" and misrepresented it as saying "it reduced demand".

Do you agree or not agree that this is intellectually dishonest?

There is having a difference of opinions, and there is misrepresenting study to claim they said the opposite of what they said.

@NotBadConsidering Can you please answer? Thank you

@NotBadConsidering Consent to sex must be happily, enthusiastically and freely given. Else it isn't consent, and the sex is an act of violence.

I struggle to see why you are so obsessed with a random stranger on the internet.
Maybe because this random stranger has constantly debunked your falsehoods and demolished your nonsense, so you must somehow convince yourself that he is morally inferior, because this would be the perfect excuse for you to ignore all his points, his hard evidence and his difficult question which cause your ideology to crumble?

Of course consent must be freely given, and those who give consent should be able to withdraw it at any moment. It is such a banal question that it is insulting to even ask. Are you satisfied now? Do you want a different spelling? Different formatting? Different choice of words? Or are you happy now?

Will you now answer my questions above, or will you keep dodging them?

“Oooh, yes Sir! Sorry Sir! Don’t punish me Sir!”
Do you realise how such demand for obedience is incredibly creepy?

Pathetic. I demand intellectual honesty. And I demand it of whoever I may be debating with, regardless of the topic and regardless of sex gender genitalia etc of the other debater.

You have shown intellectual dishonesty. And I have called you out for it.

But of course you cannot admit that. You must rephrase it into "man vs woman" as, again, this gives you a convenient excuse to avoid the inconvenient arguments. Noted. Can't say I am surprised.

As for your other two points:

If we made buying sex illegal, we'd be telling the minority of men that buy sex, that what they're doing is very wrong

We'd also, by criminalising buyers, be telling all women and girls that female bodies should not be rented by the hour

The answer is twofold.

If you are asking whether I think that, in abstract, buying and selling sex is immoral and should be eradicated to the extent possible, I am not too sure what to think.
There are women who choose to do it freely. When I dared point this out, many posters lost their s**t and accused me of all kinds of monstrosities.
In general, I think that, if someone does it freely, is not coerced, is aware of the risks and accepts them, we shouldn't forbid it.
BUT I have also said repeatedly that I see the argument for a ban IF it can be proven that such women are a small minority, that most are forced AND IF it can be proven that a ban works and doesn't make things worse.

I said this a gazillion times so I am unsure why I need to repeat it again, but whatever.

The second side of the argument, which seems to trigger you for some reason, is that debating about abstract morality with complete disregard for actual, real-world consequences is flawed and perverse.

Oh, and if you are asking whether banning buying sex sends a clear signal, I disagree. There is no proof that it does. There is no proof that it reduces demand. Just like there are plenty of things which continue to be done even after being made illegal

@JennyShaw I have explained to you how women can protect themselves against being raped, beaten or murdered. It is quite possible to reduce violence against women, but people who believe in the Nordic Model don't believe in harm reduction. They think that instead of harm reduction they can eliminate prostitution.

I agree with many of your points, but my only comment is that your post might be misinterpreted as downplaying the risk of sex work.

The risks can be minimised but can never be eliminated completely.

One thing which troubles me is withdrawing consent: a person should always have the right to withdraw consent, at any point, no explanations given.
With sex work, I fear this becomes hard.
I suppose a sex worker can try to screen their clients. Can say upfront what she will and won't do. Can refuse to see a client.

But how many sex workers can really withdraw consent after, well, the deed has already started? How many can truly say: sorry, mate, can't go through with this, please take your money back and leave?

Of course consent must be freely given, and those who give consent should be able to withdraw it at any moment. It is such a banal question that it is insulting to even ask

Well done. That wasn’t hard was it?

I demand intellectual honesty. And I demand it of whoever I may be debating with

No one gets to “demand” anything here. I, nor anyone else will bow to your demands.

You have shown intellectual dishonesty. And I have called you out for it.

No I haven’t. As evidenced by the fact you actually have attempted to answer the questions I proposed to you. If my questions are intellectually dishonest, why does your latest post explain your position on the things I requested? Clearly you see an intellectual argument in them.

As an example, you state:

In general, I think that, if someone does it freely, is not coerced, is aware of the risks and accepts them, we shouldn't forbid it.
BUT I have also said repeatedly that I see the argument for a ban IF it can be proven that such women are a small minority, that most are forced AND IF it can be proven that a ban works and doesn't make things worse.

So you have taken my question, thought about it, and returned with an answer. As well as an answer on consent, and an answer on whether demand would be reduced. You obviously saw an intellectual argument in those questions.

On this issue of doing it freely, do you genuinely think that of the 50 million women partaking in some form of prostitution, that the percentage of women doing it “freely” is anywhere close to being a significant number? Do you honestly think there are tens of millions of women like this?!

people who believe in the Nordic Model don't believe in harm reduction. They think that instead of harm reduction they can eliminate prostitution.

It's unlikely that anyone realistically expects to eliminate prostitution entirely and it's ridiculous to say that none of those who support the Nordic model believe in harm reduction. My understanding is that harm reduction (for the women involved in prostitution) is at the heart of the Nordic model - it's the whole point.

I posted this link earlier in the thread, about how some German government ministers are thinking about bringing in the Nordic model. They are supported by some researchers over there.

'Brothel of Europe': Germany reopens debate on sex work | Euractiv

A renewed debate over prostitution has emerged in Germany after Bundestag President Julia Klöckner described the country as the “brothel of Europe” earlier this week, and Health Minister Nina Warken backed a ban on purchasing sex.

“When we talk about women’s rights, but say that prostitution is a job like any other, it’s not only ridiculous, it’s contemptuous of women,” Klöckner said at an event on Tuesday. Germany is “the brothel of Europe,” she added.

Prof. Dr. Julia Wege of Ravensburg-Weingarten University, who researches prostitution, trafficking, and women’s social vulnerability, welcomed the renewed discussion on the Nordic model as a way to end or reduce the adverse effects of prostitution on mental and physical health.

Women’s rights and survivor organisations argue that the legalisation of prostitution in Germany has not eliminated coercion, violence, or the influence of organised criminal networks. They call for stronger protections and enforcement, particularly for migrant women.

For Wege, Germany’s liberal approach to sex work failed because it was never designed as a women’s rights policy.

According to Wege, most women in prostitution do not act autonomously. The line between voluntary and forced prostitution, she added, is often fluid.

Her research identifies a small minority who work independently and a much bigger group – mainly migrant women – who are exploited, traumatised, and economically dependent.

Attempts to regulate the sector have failed to reduce violence against sex workers. “For the man, it’s a lifestyle product to visit a prostitute. But in reality, serious criminal offences are being committed,” Wege said, referring to violence by buyers and exploitation by pimps.

“Ultimately, we probably need to realise that there is no such thing as a country without prostitution,” she said. “But at least we can send out some very important signals with a Nordic model.”

The whole article is much longer, and there are a few links in there (some in German), but I just picked out a few relevant paragraphs.

@NotBadConsidering No one gets to “demand” anything here. I, nor anyone else will bow to your demands.

I demand intellectual honesty. Not in the sense that I can compel anyone, of course, but in the sense that I reserve the right to call out those who are guilty of intellectual dishonesty and reserve the right to ignore them. MN should really have a mute or block button...

Are you saying you do not think intellectual honesty is necessary in a debate?
If yes, I will stop wasting my time.
If not, what did you mean?

Yes, you have shown intellectual dishonesty. Because you kept framing your posts in a way which dishonestly implied a link between opposing the Nordic model and glamorising or approving of sex work, minimising the problems, etc.

So you have taken my question, thought about it, and returned with an answer.

Not exactly, because I had been shouting the same point from the rooftops since the beginning, before you even asked. I had already answered that question a gazillion times.

do you genuinely think that of the 50 million women partaking in some form of prostitution, that the percentage of women doing it “freely” is anywhere close to being a significant number? Do you honestly think there are tens of millions of women like this?!

I said I do not know.
You throw numbers from thin air. Why did you not reply to my criticism of the lobby Nordic Model Now? Do you not see how they misrepresented a study which said "the impact is unknowable" and claimed it said it reduced demand? Regardless of your opinions on the matter, is it or is it not dishonest to do so? Why do you keep dodging the question?

When you say 50 million I presume you mean worldwide? I don't know, I suppose that worldwide it may well be possible that most sex workers are coerced.
BUT we are not talking worldwide. We are talking about a limited number of specific Western European countries.

See? That's another example of intellectual dishonesty. Using worldwide stats when talking about specific countries.

I do not know how representative or not the London sex workers of the Netflix documentary are.
Like I said, a quick google search will show plenty of sex workers charging £300-800 for one hour, and thousands of pounds for "overnights".

Instagram, X and other social media are full of accounts of young, attractive women which do not state it explicitly but clearly imply that they are sex workers charging loads.

I do not know how many of these do it freely and how many are coerced.

When I dared point out that there are loads of women charging these figures and that, when a sex worker charges ££££, it becomes hard to claim that's her only alternative to destitution, many posters here lost their s**t and accused me of all kinds of monstrosities. But facts remain true even if you dislike them.