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.

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.

Instagram, X and other social media are full of random people claiming all sorts of random shit. Doesn't mean any of it is true. Surely you're not that gullible?

When someone demands sources of information, dates and authors of studies, etc etc, it is hardly appropriate for the same poster to cite " loads of young women" on social media as their source of information regarding who is making a lot of money from "sex work". Imo

@OldCrone Even if you want to think that every single sex workers who advertises on social media is a fake profile, you cannot deny that google is full of escorts who charge ££££. Are they all fake, too?

I posted press articles about the lady running a London escort agency where the women charged (12 years ago) £300+ for an hour. Was the press reporting of the trial fake, too?

See, that's another example of intellectual dishonesty: you cherrypick the points, ignore those you cannot disprove (like the trial), and attack only the cherrypicked ones. Yawn....

@Dumbo12
When someone demands sources of information, dates and authors of studies, etc etc, it is hardly appropriate for the same poster to cite " loads of young women" on social media as their source of information regarding who is making a lot of money from "sex work". Imo

I didn't do only that, though.
I mentioned the press reporting of the trial against a lady running an escort agency.
I mentioned a forum of English sex workers https://saafe.info/main/index.php
I mentioned a Netflix documentary
And I mentioned that a quick google search will show loads of ads.
But, again, intellectual dishonesty...

What are you saying exactly? That no London sex worker charges £300 to 800 for an hour? That only a tiny minority do? That all these ads are fake?

@OldCrone Germany is a large, rich country very close to many smaller, poorer countries which enjoy EU freedom of movement. This alone will always cause an influx of sex workers. You cannot compare Germany to other countries while ignoring geography.

In fact, we can think of at least 3 "models":

• The Nordic model, where buying sex is illegal, selling isn't, but many sex workers end up de facto criminalised
• The English model, where buying and selling is legal, but brothels, pimping etc are illegal
• The German model, where even brothels are legal

It is dishonest to compare the German vs the Nordic model ignoring the English one!

A better question would be: given Germany's unique geography, which is not comparable to Norway or New Zealand, has the German model of legalising brothels failed? Does legalising brothels incentivise trafficking and increase supply and demand? Would the English or the German model be better? Why? What does the data suggest?

Maybe the German model increases the supply of sex workers.
Maybe many young women working minimum wage jobs in neighbouring countries find it all too easy to find sex work in German brothels, but would find it much harder and might give up if they could work only from flats as in England.
Maybe the German model incentivises criminal gangs to traffic young women.

I don't know. These are just hypothesis. But it's something to look into. Do you disagree?

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.

So, because they “charge loads”, that means…what? That they’re doing alright out of it? Are you really that wilfully naive?

And if you don’t know how many are doing it freely or how many are coerced, why do you assume the natural position that doing it freely is a legitimate, viable and proportionate number? Of any country, let alone worldwide?

And why do you think the 50 million worldwide cannot be considered because it’s too broad compared to individual countries? Do you think each country produces its own homegrown prostitutes?! Is this like how the NHS is battling with doctors to prioritise UK trainees first?

So you have no awareness whatsoever, even tangentially, of how prostitutes in say, London, are trafficked there from a whole range of other countries? You think worldwide prostitution numbers aren’t relevant because they don’t apply to the London prostitution scene?

“I demand intellectual honesty!”

”Loadsa women on Twitter say it, so it must be true!”

🤣🤣

@NotBadConsidering And if you don’t know how many are doing it freely or how many are coerced, why do you assume the natural position that doing it freely is a legitimate, viable and proportionate number? Of any country, let alone worldwide?

Your poor text comprehension skills are not my problem.

I said very clearly that I totally see the argument for a ban IF those doing it freely are only a minority AND IF it can be proven that a ban works and doesn't make things worse.

Please, tell me what is unclear about my statement??

I NEVER said that I know how many are doing it freely. I do not. Again, please do not put words in my mouth. This is getting tiring. Thank you.

And why do you think the 50 million worldwide cannot be considered because it’s too broad compared to individual countries?

What works in one country doesn't necessarily work in another.
Not every country has the same problems.
Do you really think that addressing prostitution in stable Western countries is the same as addressing it in a Middle Eastern theocracy, in a failed state struggling with famine, or in a country where narcos or other criminal gangs have infiltrated the government? really?

@NotBadConsidering “I demand intellectual honesty!”
”Loadsa women on Twitter say it, so it must be true!”

Thank you for confirming a combination of poor comprehension skills and intellectual dishonesty.
I mentioned multiple sources, including a trial, which you of course ignore, choosing to focus only on the weakest one.

The NCA reports 1,249 cases of sex trafficking in the UK between October 2023 and September 2024.
''Adult victims of modern slavery and human trafficking are typically vulnerable due to economic factors, such as debt and unemployment''

https://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/threats-2025/nsa-msht-2025

@catontheironingboard The English Collective of Prostitutes estimates ca 73,000 sex workers in the UK https://prostitutescollective.net/prostitution-what-you-need-to-know-briefing/
Streetlight UK estimates 105,000 https://www.streetlight.uk.com/the-facts/

The cases found by the NSA are surely an underestimate of the real total.

Suppose, I don't know, that they are 5x as many. Would this mean that the vast majority are not trafficked?

Please, please, do not misunderstand me. Many here have a habit of misrepresenting stuff and putting words in people's mouth.

This might only answer the question of how many are trafficked vs how many are not.

It does negate that every single case is one too many.
It does not negate that every single case is a tragedy

I said very clearly that I totally see the argument for a ban IF those doing it freely are only a minority AND IF it can be proven that a ban works and doesn't make things worse.

Please, tell me what is unclear about my statement??

Because everyone else takes the (obvious) position that the vast majority of women involved in prostitution, even if you narrow it to one town in one country, are absolutely not doing it “freely” and work onwards from that viewpoint.

You take the position that you’re completely on the fence as to whether this is true or not and are willing to argue that it’s entirely possible that “enough” women are doing it “freely” that you’re willing to support them if it were true. It doesn’t matter if your argument is supported by weak arguments from “what I’ve seen on Twitter” or actual studies, because it clearly isn’t true. Do you honestly think that a good percentage of women in Leeds, Nottingham, Liverpool, Manchester are doing it “freely” as a significant proportion to you? What percentage would you consider significant?

What works in one country doesn't necessarily work in another.
Not every country has the same problems.
Do you really think that addressing prostitution in stable Western countries is the same as addressing it in a Middle Eastern theocracy, in a failed state struggling with famine, or in a country where narcos or other criminal gangs have infiltrated the government? really?

That wasn’t what I asked though, was it? My point was about how many of the women who end up in “stable Western countries” as prostitutes are part of the 50 million worldwide that has to be considered as the number of your “how many are doing it ‘freely’” conundrum.

I am pointing out that you can’t take a population of prostitutes in a “stable Western country” and consider if they are doing it “freely” because that population includes many of the 50 million of women worldwide who ended up in that place.

And it’s not as if being trafficked is the only reason to think someone is obviously not doing it “freely” either. There are a multitude of reasons that are blatantly obvious to anyone who has ever experienced life in a working class town or city in the UK. Drugs, poverty, violence, coercion. It’s right there, in front of your eyes if you’re willing to look.

The reason you’re posts are so pathetic @YetAnotherDude is because everyone else sees this and knows this and find it horrendous that someone would even question whether doing it “freely” is a legitimate percentage worthy of protection in debates on the best way to protect women. It’s so very far from the reality of life, as you’re so keen to focus on

1,249 cases of sex trafficking in the UK in one year. From a safeguarding point of view the percentage is irrelevant, its a thousand women a year. Even if you don't give a toss about those individual women and the effect it has on them, think of the cost to the taxpayer, and the cost of organised crime on society as a whole.

The industry is unable to tackle abuse, because its business model depends on it. At some point the Govt will have to step in with some form of regulation, because women are being trafficked around the country. Punters get bored with using the same women every time and want an endless supply of new, younger women. Its built into the system.

Those are just the ones they caught, too.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/snp-government-not-support-plan-36655472

The SNP Gov have came to a decision re AR's bill. They will not support it. They have heard all the evidence and still have concerns regarding it. There is also limited time before Parliament breaks up in May to make and debate on changes.

@NotBadConsidering Those are just the ones they caught, too.

Which part of "The cases found by the NSA are surely an underestimate of the real total." was unclear?

@Thelnebriati
1,249 cases of sex trafficking in the UK in one year. From a safeguarding point of view the percentage is irrelevant, its a thousand women a year.

The % is relevant in the context of the question: "what % are doing it freely vs what are not".

Even if you don't give a toss about those individual women and the effect it has on them

Why the usual sleazy accusation and strawman arguments? Which part of "every single case is one too many and is a tragedy" was unclear?

At some point the Govt will have to step in with some form of regulation, because women are being trafficked around the country.

And the logical question to that is: where is the evidence that the Nordic model decreases demand and trafficking? I mentioned above how the Nordic Model Now lobby misrepresented a study: the study said the impact cannot be known, they said it reduced demand.

I then asked two questions, the answers to which have been a deafening silence:

• do you or do you not agree that, regardless of your opinion on the matter, misrepresenting a study to claim it says the opposite of what is says is despicable bad faith?
• do you have other evidence that the Nordic model reduced demand and/or trafficking?

Will you lot keep dodging these questions? Or could I have the honour of an answer? Thank you!

@NotBadConsidering You take the position that you’re completely on the fence as to whether this is true or not and are willing to argue that it’s entirely possible that “enough” women are doing it “freely” that you’re willing to support them if it were true.

What is so bad with admitting ignorance and wanting to see some evidence before forming an opinion?

It doesn’t matter if your argument is supported by weak arguments from “what I’ve seen on Twitter” or actual studies, because it clearly isn’t true

What isn't true? I said that I do not know how many do it freely vs how many don't.
I said that at least some do it freely, and the evidence isn't twitter, but things like the trial of what the newspapers called one of the most known escort agencies in London.

If it so clearly isn't true, may I ask why and where the evidence is? That's all I am asking. I struggle to see why a banal "why / where is the evidence" question seems so triggering

That wasn’t what I asked though, was it? My point was about how many of the women who end up in “stable Western countries” as prostitutes are part of the 50 million worldwide that has to be considered as the number of your “how many are doing it ‘freely’” conundrum.

For the billionth time, I do not know.
If what you claim is so clearly and evidently true, it would be straightforward to find some evidence to support it.
If you are unable or unwilling to do so, the only logical conclusion is that you do not know, either, yet choose to believe, in the absence of evidence, what fits with your ideological preconceptions.

Women who believe that men who buy sex should be criminalised are described, on a forum largely for women, as bad faith actors and "you lot", after much denigration of participants cognitive abilities and comprehension skills. I wonder what this could be seen as a reflection of? Possibly it tells us what that poster thinks of women in general.

@Dumbo12 No. Wrong. You are resorting to the usual "when your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" approach, framing everything as a men vs women issue. No. Not so. Not in the slightest.

Individuals who (regardless of sex gender genitalia etc) have shown bad faith and intellectual dishonesty by:

• misrepresenting what other people have said
• dodging inconvenient questions
• acting all angry and triggered at the banal question "where is the evidence"
• refusing to comment on why the Nordic Model Now lobby misrepresented a study which claimed the impact was unknowable
• implying that claiming the Nordic model doesn't work means glamorising or approving of sex work, or ignoring pimping and trafficking

have been called out for it by another individual who (regardless of sex gender genitalia etc) happens to say the very same things some women (eg female academics) say.

But of course female academics cannot be accuses of the same monstrosities.

So forum posters accuse the man, accusing the person and painting him as some kind of villain, because that is a convenient excuse to convince oneself that the arguments do not deserve looking into and can be ignored safely, if put forward by a villain.

There you go, fixed it for you. This is a more honest representation

Your false representation of women's intentions etc in this thread are condescending and frankly not worth interacting with further.
I shall not respond again to your bad faith posting.
The manly man has managed to shut down the debate on men buying sex, with women who have at least heard first hand accounts from prostituted women, largely by wordy, dogmatic statements. The "intellectual rigour", is constant repeating of one academics work.
No man who has never had a penis inserted into any of his orifices, can begin to imagine what a woman or girl will experience of she is prostituted.

@Dumbo12 You could not have confirmed every single one of my points more clearly - thank you so much for that.

Asking for evidence, pointing out how pro-Nordic model lobbies misrepresented studies which in reality concluded the impact was unknowable, linking the many studies, including by female academics, showing how and why the Nordic model doesn't work, saying all the same things many women also say... all of this gets reduced to "the manly man has managed to shut down the debate".

Again, you could not have confirmed all of my points more clearly.
Especially the one on how this attitude exonerates you from answering the inconvenient questions you know you cannot answer. Like commenting on how that lobby distorted a study, or saying where is the evidence that the Nordic model works.

I posted the article about Germany, because some German government ministers and academics researching in this area think that Germany has got it wrong by making their country the 'Brothel of Europe' and are thinking about bringing in the Nordic model instead.

I wasn't 'comparing' anything. I simply posted a link with some excerpts from the text and made a short comment about it.

Did you even read the article I linked to? Do you think Bundestag President Julia Klöckner, Health Minister Nina Warken and Prof. Dr. Julia Wege have got this wrong? Perhaps you should pop over to Germany and give them the benefit of your superior wisdom.

@OldCrone I don't understand your tone and the need for these snarky replies.

Is it not true that the Nordic, German and English model are all different?

Is it not a perfectly legitimate question to wonder which of these 3 would work better?

Is it not a perfectly legitimate question to wonder if the English model (buying legal, brothels illegal) would help reduce supply and trafficking?

I don't understand your tone and the need for these snarky replies.

Snarky eh? When you've been so polite to us all.

@OldCrone I have called out and criticised those who accused me of falsehoods and monstrosities, those who have put words in my mouth, and those who refuse to answer inconvenient questions - and I make no apology for it.

For example, why can no one bring themselves to comment on how Nordic Model Now misrepresented a study which, in fact, claimed the exact opposite (ie that the impact was unknowable)?

Why does the answer continue to be... a deafening silence? How odd...

Well, as I said, why don't you go and give the German government and academics the benefit of your wisdom?

The EU seem to have got it wrong from your point of view as well, as they passed this resolution calling on member states to implement a Nordic model back in September 2023.

EUR-Lex - 52023IP0328 - EN - EUR-Lex

38.
Calls on the Member States to take action in the areas of prevention, decriminalisation of people and especially women in prostitution, demand reduction, punishment of clients, destigmatisation and the elimination of stereotypes, and to ensure sufficiently financed, easily accessible, high-quality exit programmes and pathways out; calls on the Member States to reduce demand while protecting people in prostitution and their rights and unconditional access to social security systems and integration; emphasises that the way forward is to adopt support measures that help people leave prostitution in order to build the life they want; calls on the Member States to ensure that people in prostitution are actively involved in policy-making concerning their rights;

41.
Calls on the Member States to ensure that it is punishable as a criminal offence to solicit, accept or obtain a sexual act from a person in exchange for remuneration, the promise of remuneration, the provision of a benefit in kind or the promise of such a benefit;

Better nip over there and tell them all they're wrong. Let us know how you get on (or not).

@OldCrone Another snarky, fact-free and evidence-free comment. Why am I not surprised...

That the EU passed that resolution does not answer the question: where is the evidence?

Can you answer that question?

Surely your approach is not that whatever a Parliament approves is sensible and sound, right?

Scotland passed the Gender Recognition Reform Bill, Does that mean we should accept it and not ask questions? That's not exactly the popular opinion around here, right?

Can you please answer these banal questions:

• where is the evidence that the Nordic model reduces demand and trafficking?
• do you not agree that the Nordic Model Now lobby misrepresented a study which, in fact, claimed the impact was unknowable?
• What is your opinion of a lobby group which misrepresents studies claiming they say the opposite of what they truly say?

Again, I trust you will concur that a prolonged unwillingness or inability to answer can only mean that you choose to believe whatever you want to believe because of ideology, not because of facts and evidence.

You think that 1,249 men have been convicted of sex trafficking in the UK in one year? That's not what the National Crime Agency are saying. They are saying that there were 1,249 referrals. Many of these will not be confirmed victims. The number of convictions is tiny.

The NCA say that sex trafficking is 15% of all trafficking in the UK. Almost double that are for Labour Exploitation. There's a little picture of someone washing a car above the number. There are people who are experts on the subject of trafficking, such as Emily Kenway, who understand the best ways of combatting trafficking. Emily Kenway does not support the Nordic Model. She doesn't believe that criminalising men who pay for sex will work any more that criminalising men who pay for hand car washes.

Ruth Breslin has done research into prostitution in Ireland. She used to work for Ruhama so she can hardly be described as part of the pimp lobby. Her research shows that approximately 10-15% of women in prostitution in Ireland fit the ‘classic’ definition of trafficked for the purpose of sexual exploitation recognised in Irish law. 80% she puts in her 'vulnerable' category, women who have chosen prostitution to support their families. There's another 5-10% of Irish prostitutes who have chosen prostitution when other choices were available to them.

An American professor, Ko-lin Chin, has done research on Chinese prostitutes working mainly in SE Asia. He says that about 1% of them were coerced, with about 15% experiencing problems such as an employer keeping their passport. Of those Chinese nationals who went to work in the USA, none of them were underage, in debt to sex ring operators, financially exploited, or denied freedom of movement.