Sex work isn't work. WIktor Szymanowicz/NurPhoto via Getty Images
“Men — emboldened by their newfound market power — are becoming more demanding… pushing for unprotected oral and anal sex.” This quote is from the long, voyeuristic read in the Financial Times headlined, “The women turning to sex work to make ends meet”. It’s about prostitution and the cost of living crisis; an uncomfortable read, it ascribes violence and abuse from punters to a failing economy. It paints a grim picture of the sex trade, notwithstanding the sanitised language throughout, such as “sex worker” to describe exploited women, and “customer” for punters.
Julie Swede, a sex trade survivor who was interviewed for the article, is angry that despite making it clear that she wholly rejects the term “sex work”, “because it is abuse, and neither ‘sex’ nor work”, she was described by the two female journalists (Alexandra Heal and Anna Gross) as being “groomed into sex work aged 15 and trafficked by a pimp”. How can a child be a “sex worker”, she asks me. “This is rape and abuse of a minor.” When I made a complaint to the paper, I was thanked for “pointing it out” and told that the wording would be changed.
I despair that I had to point out that referring to a child pimped and trafficked into prostitution was grossly offensive and inappropriate in the first place. But what is becoming clear — and what the female-authored FT article would seem to corroborate — is the way in which so many women are currently bending over backwards to adopt the cool stance that “sex work” is a job like any other.
Nadia Whittome, MP for Nottingham East and the youngest serving MP, elected aged 23, is the epitome of what currently passes for progressive and last week tweeted her support for Hookers against Hardship. This new group describes itself as a “coalition of the major UK sex worker-led orgs, campaigning for more support for sex workers during the cost-of-living crisis”.
This approach may look attractive to those concerned about the human rights of the prostituted person — but selling sex in the UK is not a criminal offence. What Hookers against Hardship and their ilk are calling for is the decriminalisation of all aspects of prostitution, as well as maintaining the legal activity of sex buying. But I know that the claim that prostitution is a job “like any other” does nothing to destigmatise the women involved; what it does is normalise paying for sex and increase the illegal aspects of the sex trade. Blanket decriminalisation means legitimising pimps, punters, and brothel owners.
We know how loudly men will speak up for their own interests; so shouldn’t women (especially those claiming to be feminists) protect women’s? After all, poverty is one of the driving forces that leads to women being exploited into the sex trade, and Whittome’s constituency is ranked as the 42nd most deprived area in the country (of 533 such areas). Surely she realises that the best way to support these women is to “put food in her mouth, and not [a] cock”, as sex trade survivor Rachel Moran said.
Young, female socialists like Whittome seem oblivious to this approach. As she told Channel 4: “I’ll be honest, I don’t really care about the men who are purchasing sex. That’s not what I’m interested in. I care about keeping women who are involved in sex work safe in the here and now. The solution is to fully decriminalise it and tackle the root causes.”
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe key acheivements of third and forthwave feminism:
Allowing women, en masse, to be used for sex and then discarded at the first opportunity, whilst making them firmly believe that the experience – to be played out again and again – is empowering.
Steadily falling happiness and life satisfaction, sky rocketing mental illness & despair.
Explosion of fatherless children, and the myriad social harms that go along with it.
As usual – when something is done under the banner of ‘progressivism’, the reality is the complete opposite.
Great going.
The main achievement of the xth-wave feminism is criminalising people and securing billions of subventions solely based on the mantras of a doctrine, made-up statistics and trauma porn sold by self-proclaimed victims who now live off abolitionism.
As the so-called Nordic Model ages, its failure becomes ever more visible.
In Sweden, its home country, 24 years of Nordic Model have NOT decreased demand and/or trafficking. Nor has it changed mentality: as time goes by, ever more clients are younger than the model.
Its only tangible effects are a decrease in street prostitution -the visible form of prostitution-, which is partly due to the internet, and a large number of abolitionists having subsidised desk jobs, being paid for articles and speeches,… In France for example, abolitionist lobbies ask for € 242 million per year. That is excluding all costs for police officers, judges and prison wards who have to do the dirty work. Abolitionism is an industry; the Nordic Model, a business model.
Abolitionism violates the sex workers’ human rights, it deteriorates their health and increases violence towards them -abolitionism is a form of gender-based violence.
In June, Belgium decriminalised sex work. South Africa, despite strong activity from the international abolitionist lobby, is about to decriminalise sex work.
Amnesty International, the World Health Organisation, the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, Doctors of the World (except for its Spanish subsidiary, which receives € 8 million per year from the abolitionist government),… recommend decriminalising sex work.
Hence why the French sex workers went to the European Court of Human Rights. November 2021, the Court accepted their case. This is also why the Canadian sex workers went to court. Finally, sex workers are giving carceral feminists a taste of their own medicine.
*Abolitionism violates prostitutes’ human rights, it deteriorates their health and increases violence towards them -abolitionism is a form of gender-based violence.
In June, Belgium decriminalised prostitution. South Africa, despite strong activity from the international abolitionist lobby, is about to decriminalise prostitution.
Amnesty International, the World Health Organisation, the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, Doctors of the World (except for its Spanish subsidiary, which receives € 8 million per year from the abolitionist government),… recommend decriminalising prostitution.
Hence why the French prostitutes went to the European Court of Human Rights. November 2021, the Court accepted their case. This is also why the Canadian prostitutes went to court. Finally, prostitutes are giving carceral feminists a taste of their own medicine.
*Abolitionism violates prostitutes’ human rights, it deteriorates their health and increases violence towards them -abolitionism is a form of gender-based violence.
In June, Belgium decriminalised prostitution. South Africa, despite strong activity from the international abolitionist lobby, is about to decriminalise prostitution.
Amnesty International, the World Health Organisation, the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, Doctors of the World (except for its Spanish subsidiary, which receives € 8 million per year from the abolitionist government),… recommend decriminalising prostitution.
Hence why the French prostitutes went to the European Court of Human Rights. November 2021, the Court accepted their case. This is also why the Canadian prostitutes went to court. Finally, prostitutes are giving carceral feminists a taste of their own medicine.
And it goes deeper than so called sex work. This idea that promiscuity is somehow “empowering” has wrecked the lives of untold millions of young women, especially in the Western world, who buy into it and find themselves alone with a handful of children living in a mobile home – and often watching their own young daughters start down the same disastrous path. Note: Nothing I’ve said is intended to relieve men of their responsibility in helping create this catastrophe, both in demanding sex and then in abandoning the young women they’ve used.
Under the Nordic model, buying sex is criminalized and selling sex is legal.
To understand how ridiculous this system is, consider applying this same standard to drugs and gambling.
Buying drugs would be against the law but selling drugs would be legal.
Developing a gambling addiction and getting into debt would be against the law but promoting gambling and operating a betting shop would be legal.
Correct. Why not apply the Nordic Model to all other activities in which there is human trafficking?
For example, agriculture: like prostitution, in agriculture there is trafficking and exploitation, including sexual exploitation.
Now, applying the Nordic Model to agriculture would turn into a criminal:
– anyone who sells or lends the farmer a spade;
– anyone who lends the farmer a plot of land;
– anyone who buys the farmer’s fruits and vegetables.
And if an abolitionist side-argues that one cannot compare prostitution with agriculture because the first is not a necessity whereas the latter is, well: people can grow their own fruits and vegetables instead of buying them. People have been doing that for centuries.
The same can be applied to construction, domestic services,…
Noticeable that in countries where sex work is legal or tolerated but nominally illegal but no enforcement there does seem to be less harm inc rapes and STDs and also less stigma. Most of these countries are in central and south America, plus Spain, Caribbean and parts of sub Saharan Africa. So they still have quite strong family, community and church systems, and seem to have reached a compromise on the issue of sex work. Compare that with the mainly protestant nations who persecute the workers and punters but strangely seem to ignore the pimps. Highly atavistic, individualist cultures who love to shame other people as long as they are different: pot heads, sex workers, poor people, roma, albanians….rockers, mods, keggies, catholics, punks, skins, gingers, quakers, etc etc the list is as endless as the bourgeoisies’ spite.
Low-IQ comment. Do you seriously think pimps aren’t pursued or condemned?
*Noticeable that in countries where prostitution is legal or tolerated but nominally illegal but no enforcement there does seem to be less harm inc rapes and STDs and also less stigma. Most of these countries are in central and south America, plus Spain, Caribbean and parts of sub Saharan Africa. So they still have quite strong family, community and church systems, and seem to have reached a compromise on the issue of prostitution. Compare that with the mainly protestant nations who persecute the prostitutes and punters but strangely seem to ignore the pimps. Highly atavistic, individualist cultures who love to shame other people as long as they are different: pot heads, prostitutes, poor people, roma, albanians….rockers, mods, keggies, catholics, punks, skins, gingers, quakers, etc etc the list is as endless as the bourgeoisies’ spite.
Low-IQ comment. Do you seriously think pimps aren’t pursued or condemned?
*Noticeable that in countries where prostitution is legal or tolerated but nominally illegal but no enforcement there does seem to be less harm inc rapes and STDs and also less stigma. Most of these countries are in central and south America, plus Spain, Caribbean and parts of sub Saharan Africa. So they still have quite strong family, community and church systems, and seem to have reached a compromise on the issue of prostitution. Compare that with the mainly protestant nations who persecute the prostitutes and punters but strangely seem to ignore the pimps. Highly atavistic, individualist cultures who love to shame other people as long as they are different: pot heads, prostitutes, poor people, roma, albanians….rockers, mods, keggies, catholics, punks, skins, gingers, quakers, etc etc the list is as endless as the bourgeoisies’ spite.
How much is the Nordic model for an hour?
Noticeable that in countries where sex work is legal or tolerated but nominally illegal but no enforcement there does seem to be less harm inc rapes and STDs and also less stigma. Most of these countries are in central and south America, plus Spain, Caribbean and parts of sub Saharan Africa. So they still have quite strong family, community and church systems, and seem to have reached a compromise on the issue of sex work. Compare that with the mainly protestant nations who persecute the workers and punters but strangely seem to ignore the pimps. Highly atavistic, individualist cultures who love to shame other people as long as they are different: pot heads, sex workers, poor people, roma, albanians….rockers, mods, keggies, catholics, punks, skins, gingers, quakers, etc etc the list is as endless as the bourgeoisies’ spite.
How much is the Nordic model for an hour?
If you approach all 3 abuses/ addictions from the status of the victim it will be clear to you that protection of the victim would require the opposite in the case of your 2 examples. Focussing on The word “user” doesn’t do it..
Your plausible response will resonate with many sympathetic readers but it’s based on a prevalent implicit bias.
Consider instead that women selling sex are empowered and the men who buy it are being exploited.
To draw a drugs parallel: sex workers are selling the drug and the men who buy are the drug users.
*To draw a drugs parallel: prostitutes are selling the drug and the men who buy are the drug users.
Which surely demonstrates by reductio ad aburdum that the ‘parallel’ is completely invalid!
Which surely demonstrates by reductio ad aburdum that the ‘parallel’ is completely invalid!
*To draw a drugs parallel: prostitutes are selling the drug and the men who buy are the drug users.
Your plausible response will resonate with many sympathetic readers but it’s based on a prevalent implicit bias.
Consider instead that women selling sex are empowered and the men who buy it are being exploited.
To draw a drugs parallel: sex workers are selling the drug and the men who buy are the drug users.
Correct. Why not apply the Nordic Model to all other activities in which there is human trafficking?
For example, agriculture: like prostitution, in agriculture there is trafficking and exploitation, including sexual exploitation.
Now, applying the Nordic Model to agriculture would turn into a criminal:
– anyone who sells or lends the farmer a spade;
– anyone who lends the farmer a plot of land;
– anyone who buys the farmer’s fruits and vegetables.
And if an abolitionist side-argues that one cannot compare prostitution with agriculture because the first is not a necessity whereas the latter is, well: people can grow their own fruits and vegetables instead of buying them. People have been doing that for centuries.
The same can be applied to construction, domestic services,…
If you approach all 3 abuses/ addictions from the status of the victim it will be clear to you that protection of the victim would require the opposite in the case of your 2 examples. Focussing on The word “user” doesn’t do it..
I believe the situation is more complex and that a one size fits all solution is therefore ill advised.
The example of a vulnerable 15 year old in the piece is hardly representative is it? Of course the perpetrators in that case should be severely punished: trafficker, pimp and punters all!
But surely if an adult female decides she wants to have consensual sex that’s her right? If she charges and the other is willing to pay, whose business is that but their own?
If there are appalling abuses, and I believe there are, then let those abuses be criminalised, each one, individually and appropriately. I would suggest flogging and castration as being appropriate by the way! And I’ll volunteer to carry out those punishments myself, for free in case anyone thinks I’m pro abuse. I’m the complete opposite.
Here is another situation which I see a lot. Very rich but old and ugly yacht owners attract young beautiful ladies on board who clearly are happy to oblige and perhaps receive jewellery as ‘gifts’ (as well as the ultra rich lifestyle) in return for sex. Is the yacht owner to be prosecuted? It seems only the ‘working class’ user in sordid circumstances is being considered here. As with all legal enforcement the rich will be exempt as usual.
They’re not even women anymore. Just chest feeders. Ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated? Still, at least upper middle class women managed to get massive pay rises and ridiculous amounts of maternity leave so happy days. Sod the girls of Rochdale and Rotherham.
Abolitionism is junk science. In 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada already unmasked its ideologues (Farley, Raymond, …): “almost all the evidence that demand-side prohibitionists rely on to substantiate their sweeping claims about the nature of prostitution derive from politically motivated studies.”
The main achievement of the xth-wave feminism is criminalising people and securing billions of subventions solely based on the mantras of a doctrine, made-up statistics and trauma porn sold by self-proclaimed victims who now live off abolitionism.
As the so-called Nordic Model ages, its failure becomes ever more visible.
In Sweden, its home country, 24 years of Nordic Model have NOT decreased demand and/or trafficking. Nor has it changed mentality: as time goes by, ever more clients are younger than the model.
Its only tangible effects are a decrease in street prostitution -the visible form of prostitution-, which is partly due to the internet, and a large number of abolitionists having subsidised desk jobs, being paid for articles and speeches,… In France for example, abolitionist lobbies ask for € 242 million per year. That is excluding all costs for police officers, judges and prison wards who have to do the dirty work. Abolitionism is an industry; the Nordic Model, a business model.
Abolitionism violates the sex workers’ human rights, it deteriorates their health and increases violence towards them -abolitionism is a form of gender-based violence.
In June, Belgium decriminalised sex work. South Africa, despite strong activity from the international abolitionist lobby, is about to decriminalise sex work.
Amnesty International, the World Health Organisation, the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, Doctors of the World (except for its Spanish subsidiary, which receives € 8 million per year from the abolitionist government),… recommend decriminalising sex work.
Hence why the French sex workers went to the European Court of Human Rights. November 2021, the Court accepted their case. This is also why the Canadian sex workers went to court. Finally, sex workers are giving carceral feminists a taste of their own medicine.
And it goes deeper than so called sex work. This idea that promiscuity is somehow “empowering” has wrecked the lives of untold millions of young women, especially in the Western world, who buy into it and find themselves alone with a handful of children living in a mobile home – and often watching their own young daughters start down the same disastrous path. Note: Nothing I’ve said is intended to relieve men of their responsibility in helping create this catastrophe, both in demanding sex and then in abandoning the young women they’ve used.
Under the Nordic model, buying sex is criminalized and selling sex is legal.
To understand how ridiculous this system is, consider applying this same standard to drugs and gambling.
Buying drugs would be against the law but selling drugs would be legal.
Developing a gambling addiction and getting into debt would be against the law but promoting gambling and operating a betting shop would be legal.
I believe the situation is more complex and that a one size fits all solution is therefore ill advised.
The example of a vulnerable 15 year old in the piece is hardly representative is it? Of course the perpetrators in that case should be severely punished: trafficker, pimp and punters all!
But surely if an adult female decides she wants to have consensual sex that’s her right? If she charges and the other is willing to pay, whose business is that but their own?
If there are appalling abuses, and I believe there are, then let those abuses be criminalised, each one, individually and appropriately. I would suggest flogging and castration as being appropriate by the way! And I’ll volunteer to carry out those punishments myself, for free in case anyone thinks I’m pro abuse. I’m the complete opposite.
Here is another situation which I see a lot. Very rich but old and ugly yacht owners attract young beautiful ladies on board who clearly are happy to oblige and perhaps receive jewellery as ‘gifts’ (as well as the ultra rich lifestyle) in return for sex. Is the yacht owner to be prosecuted? It seems only the ‘working class’ user in sordid circumstances is being considered here. As with all legal enforcement the rich will be exempt as usual.
They’re not even women anymore. Just chest feeders. Ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated? Still, at least upper middle class women managed to get massive pay rises and ridiculous amounts of maternity leave so happy days. Sod the girls of Rochdale and Rotherham.
Abolitionism is junk science. In 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada already unmasked its ideologues (Farley, Raymond, …): “almost all the evidence that demand-side prohibitionists rely on to substantiate their sweeping claims about the nature of prostitution derive from politically motivated studies.”
The key acheivements of third and forthwave feminism:
Allowing women, en masse, to be used for sex and then discarded at the first opportunity, whilst making them firmly believe that the experience – to be played out again and again – is empowering.
Steadily falling happiness and life satisfaction, sky rocketing mental illness & despair.
Explosion of fatherless children, and the myriad social harms that go along with it.
As usual – when something is done under the banner of ‘progressivism’, the reality is the complete opposite.
Great going.
As always, the left is inconsistent.
Rape – including date rape – is really, really serious. Always believe the victim. Protect her from intrusive questioning. More prosecutions! More convictions!
Sex work is real work. Don’t stigmatise us! It’s our choice to pursue a trade in which rape is an occupational hazard. What are you – some kind of moralist?
This is a very strange article. Firstly, there must be an acknowledgement that the left are the undisputed masters of language manipulation. To call prostitution ‘sex work’ is no different from mass racial and sexual discrimination being called ‘equity.’ Secondly, women are not being ‘forced’ into prostitution by poverty (perhaps at the lower end of the scale where other factors are involved such as substance abuse). By and large most prostitution in the UK is voluntary, motivated by greed/laziness, and advertised via the internet where sex is traded by both men and women, often for large sums of money.
Rather than criminalise this side of the market, we may wish to return to something a bit more radical… like… self-respect? Perhaps teaching young people that sex is transactional, that there is no God and therefore a life of comfort and pleasure is the ultimate goal… is not actually a good idea. How about teaching children that sex is a sacred union that ought to be closed off within marriage; that chastity is a virtue; that loveless sex is joyless and leads to nihilism; that selling your body, or a buying a receptacle for your pleasure is degrading to both parties, and… here’s a word you don’t hear very often…. ‘sinful!’
Christianity ought to be a bulwark against the sins of pornography, prostitution and sexual immorality in general. In its absence, we’ve been left with each man as King and final arbiter of his own moral universe. How’s that working out for everyone? I’m now off to hang billboard around my neck that say’s “Repent – for the Kingdom of God is nigh.” No doubt I’ll be laughed at…. by Nietzsche’s ‘last man.’
. “By and large most prostitution in the UK is voluntary, motivated by greed/laziness, and advertised via the internet where sex is traded by both men and women, often for large sums of money.” Your evidence for this sweeping statement?
OnlyFans?
Certainly. Visit Chaturbate, onlyfans, Adultwork to name a few and find tens of thousands of people in the UK selling their bodies either virtually, or in person, for sex…. and they all seem jolly well pleased about it too. The numbers involved dwarf the kind of women you might find ‘walking the streets.’ The kind of vulnerable women walking the streets are vulnerable for a whole host of reasons, but principally because they will be involved in substance abuse and are using prostitution as a means to fund it. The internet marketplace of sex is a different animal altogether. When a woman is offering sex for £500 per hour in a Mayfair flat, whilst insisting that her clients don’t turn up intoxicated, are clean and respectful and make use of the shower facilities on hand, it’s rather a stretch to think of such women as being.. ‘forced by poverty.’ I’m afraid this isn’t a niche market minority.. as a cursory use of the internet search option will reveal. We have an industrial scale sex industry that has exploded into being in this country, and no-one seems in the least bit bothered about stopping it… maybe because they’re using it!
An internet search will not give you a proper random sample – these are a self selecting group of individuals.
This is statistics 101.
Your assertions regarding motivations for different types of prostitution and the numbers involved are pure speculation.
They are not ‘pure speculation.’ If I search adultwork for prostitutes in Cambridge and get a 100 results… then walk the streets of Cambridge day and night and don’t find any then that rather suggests the market is on-line, and voluntary. The figures may not be accurate, but they are by no means speculative.
Do you seriously think there AREN’T many different types/reasons/motivations of prostitution available? ..that the picture painted in the article is representative of every case of prostitution? Surely you can’t be so naïve as that?
Of course there there are as many reasons to take up prosititution as there are prostitutes.
FC claims that there are a large number of prostitutes who indulge in this activity voluntarily with even maybe a majority in the UK falling into this category. FC uses a sampling methodology to illustrate this notion (comparing what can be found online versus a walk around Cambridge streets) that I think is flawed and proves nothing. For one thing, Cambridge is not a representative city for the UK + it has a large university.
From personal experience prosititution is an accepted mechanism nowadays for students to earn extra dosh (to make the rent, for a night out, for an overseas summer holiday). Another reason why Cambridge would be a biased sample.
Cambridge University is not large compared to other universities which take in unlimited numbers of undergraduates. Cambridge is a fixed number of undergrads.
Cambridge University is not large compared to other universities which take in unlimited numbers of undergraduates. Cambridge is a fixed number of undergrads.
Of course there there are as many reasons to take up prosititution as there are prostitutes.
FC claims that there are a large number of prostitutes who indulge in this activity voluntarily with even maybe a majority in the UK falling into this category. FC uses a sampling methodology to illustrate this notion (comparing what can be found online versus a walk around Cambridge streets) that I think is flawed and proves nothing. For one thing, Cambridge is not a representative city for the UK + it has a large university.
From personal experience prosititution is an accepted mechanism nowadays for students to earn extra dosh (to make the rent, for a night out, for an overseas summer holiday). Another reason why Cambridge would be a biased sample.
They are not ‘pure speculation.’ If I search adultwork for prostitutes in Cambridge and get a 100 results… then walk the streets of Cambridge day and night and don’t find any then that rather suggests the market is on-line, and voluntary. The figures may not be accurate, but they are by no means speculative.
Do you seriously think there AREN’T many different types/reasons/motivations of prostitution available? ..that the picture painted in the article is representative of every case of prostitution? Surely you can’t be so naïve as that?
..or maybe it’s doing far less harm than other commercial activities such as banksters, oil company gougers, supermarkets and other profiteers etc.?
We need a windfall tax on PPE makers.
Honestly Bindel always picks a tiny 1% subset of prostitution and explodes it as though it is the mean.
She’s total bullshit, desperately trying to remain valid in a changed world
Indeed. in 1984 feminist Gayle Rubin said: “radical feminist writers deliberately select the “worst available examples” and the most disturbing instances of abuse and present them as representative.”
When doing “research” on the legalisation of prostitution, Melissa Farley, chief ideologue of abolitionism, selected 54 prostitutes in a rehab shelter in Hannover. These 54 drug addicts were to represent the whole of Germany’s prostitution scene. Her conclusion? Legalising prostitution leads to more substance abuse and addiction.
Indeed. in 1984 feminist Gayle Rubin said: “radical feminist writers deliberately select the “worst available examples” and the most disturbing instances of abuse and present them as representative.”
When doing “research” on the legalisation of prostitution, Melissa Farley, chief ideologue of abolitionism, selected 54 prostitutes in a rehab shelter in Hannover. These 54 drug addicts were to represent the whole of Germany’s prostitution scene. Her conclusion? Legalising prostitution leads to more substance abuse and addiction.
We need a windfall tax on PPE makers.
Honestly Bindel always picks a tiny 1% subset of prostitution and explodes it as though it is the mean.
She’s total bullshit, desperately trying to remain valid in a changed world
I read, many years ago, that porn producers had no difficulty whatsoever recruiting female performers. Getting men to perform (with women) was much more difficult.
It’d take a special kind of bloke to get wood in a room full of cameramen though. You’d need to be a sort of sociopath
It’d take a special kind of bloke to get wood in a room full of cameramen though. You’d need to be a sort of sociopath
An internet search will not give you a proper random sample – these are a self selecting group of individuals.
This is statistics 101.
Your assertions regarding motivations for different types of prostitution and the numbers involved are pure speculation.
..or maybe it’s doing far less harm than other commercial activities such as banksters, oil company gougers, supermarkets and other profiteers etc.?
I read, many years ago, that porn producers had no difficulty whatsoever recruiting female performers. Getting men to perform (with women) was much more difficult.
OnlyFans?
Certainly. Visit Chaturbate, onlyfans, Adultwork to name a few and find tens of thousands of people in the UK selling their bodies either virtually, or in person, for sex…. and they all seem jolly well pleased about it too. The numbers involved dwarf the kind of women you might find ‘walking the streets.’ The kind of vulnerable women walking the streets are vulnerable for a whole host of reasons, but principally because they will be involved in substance abuse and are using prostitution as a means to fund it. The internet marketplace of sex is a different animal altogether. When a woman is offering sex for £500 per hour in a Mayfair flat, whilst insisting that her clients don’t turn up intoxicated, are clean and respectful and make use of the shower facilities on hand, it’s rather a stretch to think of such women as being.. ‘forced by poverty.’ I’m afraid this isn’t a niche market minority.. as a cursory use of the internet search option will reveal. We have an industrial scale sex industry that has exploded into being in this country, and no-one seems in the least bit bothered about stopping it… maybe because they’re using it!
To be fair, I couldn’t care less what some Bronze Age sky daddy deems sinful. We come from a whole history of trying to enforce your religious views around sex and no, they didn’t work out well for women. In the here and now, people should have real choices and, unlike you, I don’t believe that prostitution is motivated by laziness. If it were a choice, then the MPs in question would surely be right about it being work like any other? Framing it as women’s lack of character is just another iteration of the “blame the victim” mentality your religious views have offered us throughout history (and that can still be seen in some less happy parts of the world, with stonings of “sinful” women and the like). TLDR: women subjected to prostitution are victims and using 6 thousand-year-old fairy tales to blame them for their own misfortune won’t do.
To be fair, I couldn’t care less what some Bronze Age sky daddy deems sinful. Ad hominem – irrelevant.
We come from a whole history of trying to enforce your religious views around sex and no, they didn’t work out well for women Women in Countries founded on Christianity are the freest, safest and best educated in the world
Framing it as women’s lack of character is just another iteration of the “blame the victim” I speak of men AND women selling themselves, and buying sex. It IS a lack of character. Visit Adultwork.co.uk and see thousands of people merrily selling themselves from their own homes. No-one is forcing them.
I am a moral realist. I believe that objective moral values are grounded in the character of God… that all humans are divine image bearers.. that includes you. Yet we have untethered ourselves from this standard. The modern man has no objective standard for his moral compass; just the ‘feelz.’ We are now seeing the results of the desacrilization of man… a mass explosion of pornography, prostitution, abortion, assisted dying. You are simply a consumer and a unit of pleasure. I have no hope for any immediate improvement, and all I can do is ‘ride the tiger.’ Those of us who can see what’s coming down the road have no other choice.
Belief in a God that doesn’t exist doesn’t make one a moral realist, but rather someone who tries to outsource morality to a human construct that simply has no basis in reality.
I recommend ‘Meta-ethics: an Introduction’ by Andrew Fisher. Give it careful study and you’ll see that belief in God does, in fact, make one a moral realist.
Sure but how about belief in a God that might exist? See Pascal’s wager.
I recommend ‘Meta-ethics: an Introduction’ by Andrew Fisher. Give it careful study and you’ll see that belief in God does, in fact, make one a moral realist.
Sure but how about belief in a God that might exist? See Pascal’s wager.
Belief in a God that doesn’t exist doesn’t make one a moral realist, but rather someone who tries to outsource morality to a human construct that simply has no basis in reality.
The word ‘sin’ was actually an ancient archery term that meant ‘missing the mark’. Unfortunately, many people are happy to believe that the Old Testament was written by a group of grumpy old men keen to suppress all happiness and joy just because.
In fact, it’s a work that contains centuries of wisdom based on Judaic history and tradition. The ancient Jews discovered that in ‘missing the mark’ i.e. by deviating from wholesome living and reveling in sin, that they became soft and decadent thus leaving themselves exposed to attack by stronger and more ruthless enemies such as the Babylonians, and the Assyrians.
We find ourselves in a similar state today. With Man and his petty narcissisms replacing G*d as a cultural pillar, the more the vulnerable in our societies are left to the depredations of the cruel and capricious. Christianity, of course, was never perfect, but neither did it ever claim to be. In fact the main reason for its popularity was that no matter how imperfect we all are, we have it in us to live in divine grace and beauty. The avoidance of sin wasn’t about leading a moralistically unquestionable life (in fact the Bible warns against such puritanical thinking), but about avoiding degeneration and leading your best life. Granted, some of the concepts and stories may come across as anachronistic for today’s audiences, but given the fact that the ancestral and cultural remnants that composed most of the Bible are still around today – some thousands of years later, when the empires of their enemies have long crumbled to dust – must say something about the veracity of the Bible and the message it contains.
To be fair, I couldn’t care less what some Bronze Age sky daddy deems sinful. Ad hominem – irrelevant.
We come from a whole history of trying to enforce your religious views around sex and no, they didn’t work out well for women Women in Countries founded on Christianity are the freest, safest and best educated in the world
Framing it as women’s lack of character is just another iteration of the “blame the victim” I speak of men AND women selling themselves, and buying sex. It IS a lack of character. Visit Adultwork.co.uk and see thousands of people merrily selling themselves from their own homes. No-one is forcing them.
I am a moral realist. I believe that objective moral values are grounded in the character of God… that all humans are divine image bearers.. that includes you. Yet we have untethered ourselves from this standard. The modern man has no objective standard for his moral compass; just the ‘feelz.’ We are now seeing the results of the desacrilization of man… a mass explosion of pornography, prostitution, abortion, assisted dying. You are simply a consumer and a unit of pleasure. I have no hope for any immediate improvement, and all I can do is ‘ride the tiger.’ Those of us who can see what’s coming down the road have no other choice.
The word ‘sin’ was actually an ancient archery term that meant ‘missing the mark’. Unfortunately, many people are happy to believe that the Old Testament was written by a group of grumpy old men keen to suppress all happiness and joy just because.
In fact, it’s a work that contains centuries of wisdom based on Judaic history and tradition. The ancient Jews discovered that in ‘missing the mark’ i.e. by deviating from wholesome living and reveling in sin, that they became soft and decadent thus leaving themselves exposed to attack by stronger and more ruthless enemies such as the Babylonians, and the Assyrians.
We find ourselves in a similar state today. With Man and his petty narcissisms replacing G*d as a cultural pillar, the more the vulnerable in our societies are left to the depredations of the cruel and capricious. Christianity, of course, was never perfect, but neither did it ever claim to be. In fact the main reason for its popularity was that no matter how imperfect we all are, we have it in us to live in divine grace and beauty. The avoidance of sin wasn’t about leading a moralistically unquestionable life (in fact the Bible warns against such puritanical thinking), but about avoiding degeneration and leading your best life. Granted, some of the concepts and stories may come across as anachronistic for today’s audiences, but given the fact that the ancestral and cultural remnants that composed most of the Bible are still around today – some thousands of years later, when the empires of their enemies have long crumbled to dust – must say something about the veracity of the Bible and the message it contains.
Good for you: I admire your neck (in both senses of that phrase).. It is curious however is it not that Jesus befriended prostitutes and never supported their persecution: quite the opposite. It is also curious is it not that Jesus had very little to say on the subject of sex compared to His condemnation of hypocrisy, pedantry and zealotry? His focus seemed to be much more on getting in touch with your soul (and so God) with other issues very much secondary. I’m not being critical: it’s merely an observation..
Jesus did indeed spend time with prostitutes, but only to turn them from their sin. In John 8:1-11 we read of the woman caught in adultery. In this case the Pharisees weren’t interested in the woman’s adultery, rather they were interested in trapping Jesus. Yet we see that even though Jesus saved the life of this woman, He also stated very clearly: “Go and sin no more.” He knows that the dead don’t repent and offers her the chance of a new life.. one that leaves sin behind. Jesus recognises and condemns sexual sin.
Moreover, in Matthew 19 Jesus defends the institution of Marriage as instituted in Genesis. We also see this in Matt 5:32. He clearly condemns ‘porneia’ which may be translated as ‘sexual immorality.’ Bear in mind Jesus is addressing 1st century Jews. Where do they get their sexual ethics from? How do they understand sexual immorality? They get their sexual ethics from the Holiness Code in Leviticus.
“’Do not degrade your daughter by making her a prostitute, or the land will turn to prostitution and be filled with wickedness” Lev 19:29 (there’s some lessons in there for us!!)
Taken together, we may say that the Christian approach to this issue is to call out the sin – being a prostitute and/or using a prostitute debases the sanctity of life and is to be condemned. Yet we must foster an environment that offers the sinner a road to redemption. Save them from those who would use them for their own ends (as Jesus would) then command them to sin no more! (as Jesus would.)
I am no longer a Christian (raised as one) but as a religion it has a lot of sense, much grounded (as @Julian_Farrows observes above) in hard-learned lessons from lots of practical experience.
Of course, it’s not perfect – it’s a product of humans, who equally aren’t perfect.
I am no longer a Christian (raised as one) but as a religion it has a lot of sense, much grounded (as @Julian_Farrows observes above) in hard-learned lessons from lots of practical experience.
Of course, it’s not perfect – it’s a product of humans, who equally aren’t perfect.
Jesus did indeed spend time with prostitutes, but only to turn them from their sin. In John 8:1-11 we read of the woman caught in adultery. In this case the Pharisees weren’t interested in the woman’s adultery, rather they were interested in trapping Jesus. Yet we see that even though Jesus saved the life of this woman, He also stated very clearly: “Go and sin no more.” He knows that the dead don’t repent and offers her the chance of a new life.. one that leaves sin behind. Jesus recognises and condemns sexual sin.
Moreover, in Matthew 19 Jesus defends the institution of Marriage as instituted in Genesis. We also see this in Matt 5:32. He clearly condemns ‘porneia’ which may be translated as ‘sexual immorality.’ Bear in mind Jesus is addressing 1st century Jews. Where do they get their sexual ethics from? How do they understand sexual immorality? They get their sexual ethics from the Holiness Code in Leviticus.
“’Do not degrade your daughter by making her a prostitute, or the land will turn to prostitution and be filled with wickedness” Lev 19:29 (there’s some lessons in there for us!!)
Taken together, we may say that the Christian approach to this issue is to call out the sin – being a prostitute and/or using a prostitute debases the sanctity of life and is to be condemned. Yet we must foster an environment that offers the sinner a road to redemption. Save them from those who would use them for their own ends (as Jesus would) then command them to sin no more! (as Jesus would.)
I 100% agree with you. Unfortunately, we live in a time and place where women enjoy unbridled freedom and privilege, yet still find room in their hearts to blame men whenever things don’t go their way. This situation puts me in mind of a passage from Milton’s Paradise Lost that describes our situation very aptly.
Eve after eating the forbidden fruit:
Being as I am, why didst not thou the Head
Command me absolutely not to go,
Going into such danger as thou saidst?
Too facil then thou didst not much gainsay,
Nay, didst permit, approve, and fair dismiss.
Hadst thou bin firm and fixt in thy dissent,
Neither had I transgress’d, nor thou with mee.
To whom then first incenst Adam repli’d,
Is this the Love, is this the recompence
Of mine to thee, ingrateful Eve, exprest
Immutable when thou wert lost, not I,
Who might have liv’d and joyd immortal bliss,
Yet willingly chose rather Death with thee:
And am I now upbraided, as the cause
Of thy transgressing? not enough severe,
It seems, in thy restraint: what could I more?
I warn’d thee, I admonish’d thee, foretold
The danger, and the lurking Enemie
That lay in wait; beyond this had bin force,
And force upon free Will hath here no place.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
How many times does it need to be said that “teaching young people… that there is no God” does NOT mean that “a life of comfort and pleasure is the ultimate goal”.
We really do need to move beyond these tired platitudes. And again, quoting Nietzsche does NOT make an argument more valid!
True, but G. K. Chesterton would like to have a word with you:
“The modern world is not evil; in some ways the modern world is far too good. It is full of wild and wasted virtues. When a religious scheme is shattered (as Christianity was shattered at the Reformation), it is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do damage. But the virtues are let loose also; and the virtues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more terrible damage. The modern world is full of the old Christian virtues gone mad. The virtues have gone mad because they have been isolated from each other and are wandering alone. Thus some scientists care for truth; and their truth is pitiless. Thus some humanitarians only care for pity; and their pity (I am sorry to say) is often untruthful.”
The best approximation of what Chesterton is trying to say here is that people do more harm in the name of virtue than they do when acting out on vice. Without a basic principle that we are all equal under God we lose sight of the fact that our opponents are human too. Almost every cultural revolution that sought to overthrow G*d has the blood of millions on its hands. Even here in the West we now have a corrupted media system that pits women against men, children against elders, queer against straight, black against white, in the hopes of inciting social change (one I fear that benefits only those who would like nothing more than to rule over us). Without the social resilience and cohesion of Christianity we become more susceptible to ideologies that turn our virtues against us, much like how concepts such as compassion and kindness have become weaponized to generate sympathy and tolerance for unwholesome lifestyles.
Most pithily put as ‘The road to hell is paved with good intentions’. Were I Tsar, I would order that tattooed on everyone’s forehead (in reverse, so it could be read in the mirror).
If the road to Hell was in Britain it would be paved with potholes, speed cameras and endless unfinished ” roadworks”, full of people driving at 29 mph, leaving 4 car length ” coronaphobe” spaces between each other…
If the road to Hell was in Britain it would be paved with potholes, speed cameras and endless unfinished ” roadworks”, full of people driving at 29 mph, leaving 4 car length ” coronaphobe” spaces between each other…
The Reformation would never have happened had it not been for the corruption and malpractive of the Catholic Church.
An ancient, false, platitudinous formula was exactly what this debate needed. Do you have any more ancient, false, platitudinous formulae?
An ancient, false, platitudinous formula was exactly what this debate needed. Do you have any more ancient, false, platitudinous formulae?
Most pithily put as ‘The road to hell is paved with good intentions’. Were I Tsar, I would order that tattooed on everyone’s forehead (in reverse, so it could be read in the mirror).
The Reformation would never have happened had it not been for the corruption and malpractive of the Catholic Church.
Teaching them that there is no God means that a life of comfort and pleasure is the ONLY possible point to existence, if indeed having a ‘point’ even makes sense without God, which it doesn’t. Another of atheisms grand illusions.
True, but G. K. Chesterton would like to have a word with you:
“The modern world is not evil; in some ways the modern world is far too good. It is full of wild and wasted virtues. When a religious scheme is shattered (as Christianity was shattered at the Reformation), it is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do damage. But the virtues are let loose also; and the virtues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more terrible damage. The modern world is full of the old Christian virtues gone mad. The virtues have gone mad because they have been isolated from each other and are wandering alone. Thus some scientists care for truth; and their truth is pitiless. Thus some humanitarians only care for pity; and their pity (I am sorry to say) is often untruthful.”
The best approximation of what Chesterton is trying to say here is that people do more harm in the name of virtue than they do when acting out on vice. Without a basic principle that we are all equal under God we lose sight of the fact that our opponents are human too. Almost every cultural revolution that sought to overthrow G*d has the blood of millions on its hands. Even here in the West we now have a corrupted media system that pits women against men, children against elders, queer against straight, black against white, in the hopes of inciting social change (one I fear that benefits only those who would like nothing more than to rule over us). Without the social resilience and cohesion of Christianity we become more susceptible to ideologies that turn our virtues against us, much like how concepts such as compassion and kindness have become weaponized to generate sympathy and tolerance for unwholesome lifestyles.
Teaching them that there is no God means that a life of comfort and pleasure is the ONLY possible point to existence, if indeed having a ‘point’ even makes sense without God, which it doesn’t. Another of atheisms grand illusions.
. “By and large most prostitution in the UK is voluntary, motivated by greed/laziness, and advertised via the internet where sex is traded by both men and women, often for large sums of money.” Your evidence for this sweeping statement?
To be fair, I couldn’t care less what some Bronze Age sky daddy deems sinful. We come from a whole history of trying to enforce your religious views around sex and no, they didn’t work out well for women. In the here and now, people should have real choices and, unlike you, I don’t believe that prostitution is motivated by laziness. If it were a choice, then the MPs in question would surely be right about it being work like any other? Framing it as women’s lack of character is just another iteration of the “blame the victim” mentality your religious views have offered us throughout history (and that can still be seen in some less happy parts of the world, with stonings of “sinful” women and the like). TLDR: women subjected to prostitution are victims and using 6 thousand-year-old fairy tales to blame them for their own misfortune won’t do.
Good for you: I admire your neck (in both senses of that phrase).. It is curious however is it not that Jesus befriended prostitutes and never supported their persecution: quite the opposite. It is also curious is it not that Jesus had very little to say on the subject of sex compared to His condemnation of hypocrisy, pedantry and zealotry? His focus seemed to be much more on getting in touch with your soul (and so God) with other issues very much secondary. I’m not being critical: it’s merely an observation..
I 100% agree with you. Unfortunately, we live in a time and place where women enjoy unbridled freedom and privilege, yet still find room in their hearts to blame men whenever things don’t go their way. This situation puts me in mind of a passage from Milton’s Paradise Lost that describes our situation very aptly.
Eve after eating the forbidden fruit:
Being as I am, why didst not thou the Head
Command me absolutely not to go,
Going into such danger as thou saidst?
Too facil then thou didst not much gainsay,
Nay, didst permit, approve, and fair dismiss.
Hadst thou bin firm and fixt in thy dissent,
Neither had I transgress’d, nor thou with mee.
To whom then first incenst Adam repli’d,
Is this the Love, is this the recompence
Of mine to thee, ingrateful Eve, exprest
Immutable when thou wert lost, not I,
Who might have liv’d and joyd immortal bliss,
Yet willingly chose rather Death with thee:
And am I now upbraided, as the cause
Of thy transgressing? not enough severe,
It seems, in thy restraint: what could I more?
I warn’d thee, I admonish’d thee, foretold
The danger, and the lurking Enemie
That lay in wait; beyond this had bin force,
And force upon free Will hath here no place.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
How many times does it need to be said that “teaching young people… that there is no God” does NOT mean that “a life of comfort and pleasure is the ultimate goal”.
We really do need to move beyond these tired platitudes. And again, quoting Nietzsche does NOT make an argument more valid!
Yes. Always some kind of moralist, attempting to respect and support others, living being a difficult, risky business we each need all the help we can offer.
This is a very strange article. Firstly, there must be an acknowledgement that the left are the undisputed masters of language manipulation. To call prostitution ‘sex work’ is no different from mass racial and sexual discrimination being called ‘equity.’ Secondly, women are not being ‘forced’ into prostitution by poverty (perhaps at the lower end of the scale where other factors are involved such as substance abuse). By and large most prostitution in the UK is voluntary, motivated by greed/laziness, and advertised via the internet where sex is traded by both men and women, often for large sums of money.
Rather than criminalise this side of the market, we may wish to return to something a bit more radical… like… self-respect? Perhaps teaching young people that sex is transactional, that there is no God and therefore a life of comfort and pleasure is the ultimate goal… is not actually a good idea. How about teaching children that sex is a sacred union that ought to be closed off within marriage; that chastity is a virtue; that loveless sex is joyless and leads to nihilism; that selling your body, or a buying a receptacle for your pleasure is degrading to both parties, and… here’s a word you don’t hear very often…. ‘sinful!’
Christianity ought to be a bulwark against the sins of pornography, prostitution and sexual immorality in general. In its absence, we’ve been left with each man as King and final arbiter of his own moral universe. How’s that working out for everyone? I’m now off to hang billboard around my neck that say’s “Repent – for the Kingdom of God is nigh.” No doubt I’ll be laughed at…. by Nietzsche’s ‘last man.’
Yes. Always some kind of moralist, attempting to respect and support others, living being a difficult, risky business we each need all the help we can offer.
As always, the left is inconsistent.
Rape – including date rape – is really, really serious. Always believe the victim. Protect her from intrusive questioning. More prosecutions! More convictions!
Sex work is real work. Don’t stigmatise us! It’s our choice to pursue a trade in which rape is an occupational hazard. What are you – some kind of moralist?
Excellently said! Any activity that involves the systemic abuse of another person should be criminalised. Have these progressive politicians ever consulted with ‘sex-workers’?
“Any activity that involves the systemic abuse of another person”
And is prostitution such an activity? I.e. every single woman or man who does prostitution is systematically abused by another person? Does any objective evidence show this or is it just another mantra?
All over the world, sex workers themselves reject the “solution” Bindel and her peer abolitionists are imposing, i.e. the Nordic Model. Both in Canada and France, both abolitionist countries, sex workers have filed a court case against the model. For France, and Europe, it is the European Court of Human Rights which will decide.
The question is who is abusing whom in this context.
No one suggests drug users are abusing drug dealer and through their instable demand for narcotics are forcing dealers to engage in criminal activity.
Also
“We know how loudly men will speak up for their own interests; so shouldn’t women”
In my lifetime men have bee virtually silent while women have been conspicuously loud and vociferous
Yes, prostitution involves the systemic abuse of another person. Demanding “objective evidence” of the obvious is like demanding “objective evidence” that jumping off a cliff is a bad idea. Glad I could help.
Did you help? Repeating a mantra which ignores reality and comparing a means to make a living to suicide isn’t really helpful, is it?
Idiotic comparison!
Did you help? Repeating a mantra which ignores reality and comparing a means to make a living to suicide isn’t really helpful, is it?
Idiotic comparison!
*All over the world, prostitutes themselves reject the “solution” Bindel and her peer abolitionists are imposing, i.e. the Nordic Model. Both in Canada and France, both abolitionist countries, prostitutes have filed a court case against the model. For France, and Europe, it is the European Court of Human Rights which will decide.
The question is who is abusing whom in this context.
No one suggests drug users are abusing drug dealer and through their instable demand for narcotics are forcing dealers to engage in criminal activity.
Also
“We know how loudly men will speak up for their own interests; so shouldn’t women”
In my lifetime men have bee virtually silent while women have been conspicuously loud and vociferous
Yes, prostitution involves the systemic abuse of another person. Demanding “objective evidence” of the obvious is like demanding “objective evidence” that jumping off a cliff is a bad idea. Glad I could help.
*All over the world, prostitutes themselves reject the “solution” Bindel and her peer abolitionists are imposing, i.e. the Nordic Model. Both in Canada and France, both abolitionist countries, prostitutes have filed a court case against the model. For France, and Europe, it is the European Court of Human Rights which will decide.
They consult very frequently, sometimes using your tax money to pay the consultation.
It would have been useful if the author had herself consulted with several sexworkers and not just focussed on one appalling case of clear abuse of a 15 year old. There must be several reasons why women engage in the activity..
I feel sure different women would have different preferences based on different experiences.
It seems inappropriate to apply a single solution to what is clearly a multifaceted issue: and that unintended consequences will harm many people who are doing what they want to do harming no one in the process. That would be unfortunate.
Abolitionists like to sell trauma porn.
“Over the course of two years, Bindel conducted 250 interviews in almost 40 countries, cities and states, traveling around Europe, Asia, North America, Australia, New Zealand, and East and South Africa. Visiting legal brothels all around the world, Bindel got to know pimps, pornographers, survivors of the sex trade, and the women being sold by men classed as ‘business entrepreneurs’. Whilst meeting feminist abolitionists, pro-prostitution campaigners, police and government officials, and the men who drive the demand, Bindel uncovered the lies, mythology and criminal activity that shroud this global trade, and suggests here a way forward for the women seeking to abolish the oldest oppression. Informed by the lived human experience of those interviewed, this book will be of great interest to feminists, students, criminal justice advocates, criminologists and human rights activists.”
“The Pimping of Prostitution: Abolishing the Sex Work Myth”
https://www.thejuliebindel.com/books
250 interviews in 40 countries is hardly in depth research. How many in which country? And what is the breakup of interviews with all those different players?
When Melissa Farley, the ideologue of abolitionism, wrote “Prostitution in nine countries”, she selected 54 women in a rehab clinic in Hannover. These (ex) drug addicts were to represent the prostitution scene of a country, Germany, which had legalised prostitution.
When Melissa Farley, the ideologue of abolitionism, wrote “Prostitution in nine countries”, she selected 54 women in a rehab clinic in Hannover. These (ex) drug addicts were to represent the prostitution scene of a country, Germany, which had legalised prostitution.
250 interviews in 40 countries is hardly in depth research. How many in which country? And what is the breakup of interviews with all those different players?
*It would have been useful if the author had herself consulted with several prostitutes and not just focussed on one appalling case of clear abuse of a 15 year old. There must be several reasons why women engage in prostitution..I feel sure different women would have different preferences based on different experiences.It seems inappropriate to apply a single solution to what is clearly a multifaceted issue: and that unintended consequences will harm many people who are doing what they want to do harming no one in the process. That would be unfortunate.
Abolitionists like to sell trauma porn.
“Over the course of two years, Bindel conducted 250 interviews in almost 40 countries, cities and states, traveling around Europe, Asia, North America, Australia, New Zealand, and East and South Africa. Visiting legal brothels all around the world, Bindel got to know pimps, pornographers, survivors of the sex trade, and the women being sold by men classed as ‘business entrepreneurs’. Whilst meeting feminist abolitionists, pro-prostitution campaigners, police and government officials, and the men who drive the demand, Bindel uncovered the lies, mythology and criminal activity that shroud this global trade, and suggests here a way forward for the women seeking to abolish the oldest oppression. Informed by the lived human experience of those interviewed, this book will be of great interest to feminists, students, criminal justice advocates, criminologists and human rights activists.”
“The Pimping of Prostitution: Abolishing the Sex Work Myth”
https://www.thejuliebindel.com/books
*It would have been useful if the author had herself consulted with several prostitutes and not just focussed on one appalling case of clear abuse of a 15 year old. There must be several reasons why women engage in prostitution..I feel sure different women would have different preferences based on different experiences.It seems inappropriate to apply a single solution to what is clearly a multifaceted issue: and that unintended consequences will harm many people who are doing what they want to do harming no one in the process. That would be unfortunate.
Have they interviewed Amazon warehous employees or delivery drivers. Let’s look for abuse of humans !
“Any activity that involves the systemic abuse of another person”
And is prostitution such an activity? I.e. every single woman or man who does prostitution is systematically abused by another person? Does any objective evidence show this or is it just another mantra?
All over the world, sex workers themselves reject the “solution” Bindel and her peer abolitionists are imposing, i.e. the Nordic Model. Both in Canada and France, both abolitionist countries, sex workers have filed a court case against the model. For France, and Europe, it is the European Court of Human Rights which will decide.
They consult very frequently, sometimes using your tax money to pay the consultation.
It would have been useful if the author had herself consulted with several sexworkers and not just focussed on one appalling case of clear abuse of a 15 year old. There must be several reasons why women engage in the activity..
I feel sure different women would have different preferences based on different experiences.
It seems inappropriate to apply a single solution to what is clearly a multifaceted issue: and that unintended consequences will harm many people who are doing what they want to do harming no one in the process. That would be unfortunate.
Have they interviewed Amazon warehous employees or delivery drivers. Let’s look for abuse of humans !
Excellently said! Any activity that involves the systemic abuse of another person should be criminalised. Have these progressive politicians ever consulted with ‘sex-workers’?
Maybe a beginning would be to increase the age for those engaging in prostitution. Then those approaching or dealing with girls under that age face conviction. I know some will say that merely pushes it underground, but then at least the police have legitimate reasons for investigating and prosecuting. And it would certainly frighten off those who do pay for girls that age if they were faced with a prison sentence.
Maybe set the minimum age limit at 85.
Maybe set the minimum age limit at 85.
Maybe a beginning would be to increase the age for those engaging in prostitution. Then those approaching or dealing with girls under that age face conviction. I know some will say that merely pushes it underground, but then at least the police have legitimate reasons for investigating and prosecuting. And it would certainly frighten off those who do pay for girls that age if they were faced with a prison sentence.
‘But in 2016, Lucas met with trans activist Paris Lees’. Here, surely, is the nub of the matter. Many trans extremists acknowledge seeing trans porn as their Damascene moment, and have therefore tried to normalise it, and to make prostitution an honourable profession. Women who buy into the transwomen are women ‘argument’ have to buy into this moral inversion, along with all the others.
Yes, strangely enough it seems to be normal everyday women who are leading the charge in bullying society to accept that men in dresses are actually real women. I don’t understand why they can’t stand up for themselves.
Because they can’t.
Feminism only got where it is now because feminism benefits elite men. Why do feminists think there are all these Women’s Studies departments, quangos and charities all pumping out feminist propaganda?
Feminism was great for the elite. Dilute the electorate, dilute union power, play women off against men, promote female materialism and harm avoidance because they promote Big Government.
Feminism means smaller families and more single people. Create industries that feed off loneliness and spite towards the opposite sex. More money for the elites.
Feminism doesn’t need women and never did. It was always about elite power.
Because they can’t.
Feminism only got where it is now because feminism benefits elite men. Why do feminists think there are all these Women’s Studies departments, quangos and charities all pumping out feminist propaganda?
Feminism was great for the elite. Dilute the electorate, dilute union power, play women off against men, promote female materialism and harm avoidance because they promote Big Government.
Feminism means smaller families and more single people. Create industries that feed off loneliness and spite towards the opposite sex. More money for the elites.
Feminism doesn’t need women and never did. It was always about elite power.
Yes, strangely enough it seems to be normal everyday women who are leading the charge in bullying society to accept that men in dresses are actually real women. I don’t understand why they can’t stand up for themselves.
‘But in 2016, Lucas met with trans activist Paris Lees’. Here, surely, is the nub of the matter. Many trans extremists acknowledge seeing trans porn as their Damascene moment, and have therefore tried to normalise it, and to make prostitution an honourable profession. Women who buy into the transwomen are women ‘argument’ have to buy into this moral inversion, along with all the others.
Loss of a guiding moral compass, or Christianity as we used to call it and an hysterical wall of hatred towards women, by men and women, and only paying lip service to those whose choices are in scarce supply. You can add all the other progressiveisms as well, but the loss of God matters, no matter how much we sneer, be assured that God matters.
This should come as a surprise to no one. Leftists will support any cause that undermines the basic morality of Western Civilization— they will always claim to be advancing the interests of some allegedly disenfranchised identity group (e.g. women or “people of color”), but when the real interests of any group diverge from the main goal of undermining basic moral values, the group’s real interests will always take a distant second place— thus, women’s dignity, independence and value will cheerfully be sacrificed to promote the sex trade— simply because what is good for women is not— and never was— the left’s priority.
That is a downright lie. If it wasn’t for the trade union movement women (and most men!) would be slaves to the real villains in this world. Why do you suppose those villains now want to curtail the power of TUs? ..so that the rights of all but the chosen few (and their sickening lackeys) can be crushed as they were for 100s of years by the same evil gouging upper class!
I am self-employed. If I go on strike I get no money. Trade unions are fighting to keep working practices in the 1970s.
I am self-employed. If I go on strike I get no money. Trade unions are fighting to keep working practices in the 1970s.
That is a downright lie. If it wasn’t for the trade union movement women (and most men!) would be slaves to the real villains in this world. Why do you suppose those villains now want to curtail the power of TUs? ..so that the rights of all but the chosen few (and their sickening lackeys) can be crushed as they were for 100s of years by the same evil gouging upper class!
Hysterical hatred of women by women and men also has played a role. Feminism is anti-Christian and anti-male. Read “It’s Good to Be a Man” by Michael Foster. To attack a civilisation, you attack the men.
Hatred of men*
Hatred of men*
This should come as a surprise to no one. Leftists will support any cause that undermines the basic morality of Western Civilization— they will always claim to be advancing the interests of some allegedly disenfranchised identity group (e.g. women or “people of color”), but when the real interests of any group diverge from the main goal of undermining basic moral values, the group’s real interests will always take a distant second place— thus, women’s dignity, independence and value will cheerfully be sacrificed to promote the sex trade— simply because what is good for women is not— and never was— the left’s priority.
Hysterical hatred of women by women and men also has played a role. Feminism is anti-Christian and anti-male. Read “It’s Good to Be a Man” by Michael Foster. To attack a civilisation, you attack the men.
Loss of a guiding moral compass, or Christianity as we used to call it and an hysterical wall of hatred towards women, by men and women, and only paying lip service to those whose choices are in scarce supply. You can add all the other progressiveisms as well, but the loss of God matters, no matter how much we sneer, be assured that God matters.
Feminists claim feminism is the right for women to choose… except when feminists don’t agree with those choices.
By now a familiar contradiction in the land of feminist grievance: Women have agency when their actions bring success and fulfillment, but when their choices lead to failure and suffering, men must be to blame. So long as choosing the sex trade brings tax free lucrative income to women, it is empowering. But if it results at any point in emotional or physical trauma, then the path of grievance awaits, with feminists ready to to call out the trade as a harmful and degrading exploitation of women.
You’ve got a point there!
By now a familiar contradiction in the land of feminist grievance: Women have agency when their actions bring success and fulfillment, but when their choices lead to failure and suffering, men must be to blame. So long as choosing the sex trade brings tax free lucrative income to women, it is empowering. But if it results at any point in emotional or physical trauma, then the path of grievance awaits, with feminists ready to to call out the trade as a harmful and degrading exploitation of women.
You’ve got a point there!
Feminists claim feminism is the right for women to choose… except when feminists don’t agree with those choices.
“The buying and selling of Albanian refugee children in Kent.”
I wasn’t aware that there was (or could be by definition) such a thing as an Albanian refugee?
The term is accurate: even in this case as it includes escape from ‘natural disasters’. If dire poverty isn’t a disaster I don’t know what is? It is also ‘natural’ as it occurs naturally when social order breaks down. You may be confusing the word ‘disaster’ with ‘cataclysm’. Of course there is room for narrower interpretations to suit xenophobia..
Yes… You’ll be astonished to learn I think you’re wrong on the facts and insane in what you advocate, as you no doubt think I am in turn. Gave you an upvote for taking the time to answer though.
Funny how they buy international flights to Belgium and seek to pass through France to get here. Belgium and France must be impoverished, too.
There might be more truth than you imagine in your last sentence.
There might be more truth than you imagine in your last sentence.
Yes… You’ll be astonished to learn I think you’re wrong on the facts and insane in what you advocate, as you no doubt think I am in turn. Gave you an upvote for taking the time to answer though.
Funny how they buy international flights to Belgium and seek to pass through France to get here. Belgium and France must be impoverished, too.
The term is accurate: even in this case as it includes escape from ‘natural disasters’. If dire poverty isn’t a disaster I don’t know what is? It is also ‘natural’ as it occurs naturally when social order breaks down. You may be confusing the word ‘disaster’ with ‘cataclysm’. Of course there is room for narrower interpretations to suit xenophobia..
“The buying and selling of Albanian refugee children in Kent.”
I wasn’t aware that there was (or could be by definition) such a thing as an Albanian refugee?
Conflating adult women voluntarily choosing sex work with the sex-trafficking of minors undermines your argument.
Good point.
Bindel has to keep this torch burning, otherwise her life loses all meaning as well as income.
That is modern feminism for you – they achieved much more than they could have dreamed decades ago.
But if they were to admit so, they would have nothing in their lives. The campaigning and activism is so much part of their identities, that without it they would collapse
*Conflating adult women voluntarily choosing prostitution with the sex-trafficking of minors undermines your argument
Good point.
Bindel has to keep this torch burning, otherwise her life loses all meaning as well as income.
That is modern feminism for you – they achieved much more than they could have dreamed decades ago.
But if they were to admit so, they would have nothing in their lives. The campaigning and activism is so much part of their identities, that without it they would collapse
*Conflating adult women voluntarily choosing prostitution with the sex-trafficking of minors undermines your argument
Conflating adult women voluntarily choosing sex work with the sex-trafficking of minors undermines your argument.
It’s interesting that Ghislaine Maxwell got 20 years in prison for sex trafficing (aka pimping.) The pimps in this article go largely unnamed and unprosecuted.
Huge miscarriage of justice in the corrupt US court system.
Giuffre should be serving the same time: she’s a lying w***e who daren’t enter a court room.
Prince Andrew should have called her bluff as Alan Dershowitz did.
Huge miscarriage of justice in the corrupt US court system.
Giuffre should be serving the same time: she’s a lying w***e who daren’t enter a court room.
Prince Andrew should have called her bluff as Alan Dershowitz did.
It’s interesting that Ghislaine Maxwell got 20 years in prison for sex trafficing (aka pimping.) The pimps in this article go largely unnamed and unprosecuted.
A good article, but as ever Ms Bindel is barely able to suppress her hatred of men. It takes two to tango, supply and demand, for there to be prostitution. It seems that stigma is not sufficiently acting as a break on it anymore, so it needs further criminalisation and enforcement; against both buyers and sellers.
The world’s oldest profession isn’t going anywhere no matter what steps are taken.
Correct! What is required is the enforcement of current laws that prohibit abuse: better detection, better enforcement and more severe punishment. To focus on the actual sexual transaction is simply stupid.
I’m afraid you’re right. As long as there are men who want sex and women willing to supply it for the right price we’ll be having this conversation for the next one thousand years.
And thus supplying Bindel and her ilk with campaign stories in perpetuity.
Typical feminist – still on the march when society has already shifted decisively in their favour – decades ago.
They NEED to keep finding tiny infractions, otherwise their lives perpetually campaigning lose all their meaning
And thus supplying Bindel and her ilk with campaign stories in perpetuity.
Typical feminist – still on the march when society has already shifted decisively in their favour – decades ago.
They NEED to keep finding tiny infractions, otherwise their lives perpetually campaigning lose all their meaning
Correct! What is required is the enforcement of current laws that prohibit abuse: better detection, better enforcement and more severe punishment. To focus on the actual sexual transaction is simply stupid.
I’m afraid you’re right. As long as there are men who want sex and women willing to supply it for the right price we’ll be having this conversation for the next one thousand years.
The world’s oldest profession isn’t going anywhere no matter what steps are taken.
A good article, but as ever Ms Bindel is barely able to suppress her hatred of men. It takes two to tango, supply and demand, for there to be prostitution. It seems that stigma is not sufficiently acting as a break on it anymore, so it needs further criminalisation and enforcement; against both buyers and sellers.
All the same tired old feminist tropes on display. Unproven assertions of abuse. Insults to men. Silencing if counter argument. Quite like the good old days when feminists ruled the world.
You point is almost valid.. if toned down it would indeed be valid.. but we get it.
You point is almost valid.. if toned down it would indeed be valid.. but we get it.
All the same tired old feminist tropes on display. Unproven assertions of abuse. Insults to men. Silencing if counter argument. Quite like the good old days when feminists ruled the world.
Bindel, who supports abortion and concentration camps for men, is not someone I can really uphold as someone who values human life.
Nobody ever considers any of the following
Feminism has rendered dating pointless for men as there are far too many risks to dating, marriage and relationships. Feminists have made marriage meaningless and the only legal relationship where violation is rewarded.
So the choices are be celibate, watch porn or use sex workers. In a world that puts sex above companionship and loyalty, men will resort to sex workers and pornography.
The modern world offers zero incentive for men to commit to relationships with women. Throw in the fact that women select for (financial) status and there is no distinction between paying for sex and paying for dates that a woman might even depart from part-way through.
Casual sex is bad for men. It destroys the intimacy and power of sex as a tool of love.
Men should find women who are devoted to them for life, marry them, then stay married. If they cannot find such a woman, they should be celibate and abstain from porn. As for prostitution and porn, they will never be fully criminalised as the elites feel that single men could become politically dangerous if these two crutches were removed from them.
Men always pay for sex, one way or another. Watch some of the interviews on YouTube and you’ll see that even some of today’s feminists, when asked, admit that they expect the man to pay and, if he doesn’t, he doesn’t stand a chance of getting anywhere amorously. Most men know and accept this exchange of resources for sex so it’s not much of a leap to also accept payments on OnlyFans and the other forms of sex work that are common today. The legalisation of prostitution based in a secure working environment with regular health inspections makes sense, but archaic moral outrage stands in the way of progress. Many countries have addressed this issue quite successfully and present a model for the industry.
Men always pay for sex, one way or another. Watch some of the interviews on YouTube and you’ll see that even some of today’s feminists, when asked, admit that they expect the man to pay and, if he doesn’t, he doesn’t stand a chance of getting anywhere amorously. Most men know and accept this exchange of resources for sex so it’s not much of a leap to also accept payments on OnlyFans and the other forms of sex work that are common today. The legalisation of prostitution based in a secure working environment with regular health inspections makes sense, but archaic moral outrage stands in the way of progress. Many countries have addressed this issue quite successfully and present a model for the industry.
Bindel, who supports abortion and concentration camps for men, is not someone I can really uphold as someone who values human life.
Nobody ever considers any of the following
Feminism has rendered dating pointless for men as there are far too many risks to dating, marriage and relationships. Feminists have made marriage meaningless and the only legal relationship where violation is rewarded.
So the choices are be celibate, watch porn or use sex workers. In a world that puts sex above companionship and loyalty, men will resort to sex workers and pornography.
The modern world offers zero incentive for men to commit to relationships with women. Throw in the fact that women select for (financial) status and there is no distinction between paying for sex and paying for dates that a woman might even depart from part-way through.
Casual sex is bad for men. It destroys the intimacy and power of sex as a tool of love.
Men should find women who are devoted to them for life, marry them, then stay married. If they cannot find such a woman, they should be celibate and abstain from porn. As for prostitution and porn, they will never be fully criminalised as the elites feel that single men could become politically dangerous if these two crutches were removed from them.
You could have said “Whittome was delighted when feminists defeated a nil-cap for lap-dance clubs in Bristol”. Or do you get to define who is or is not a feminist?Note; Julie Bindel did a study on lap-dance clubs for Glasgow Council in 2004 – “ministers later conceded it was of low quality and could not be used to justify imposing a national ban.”
Julie Bindel producing a low-quality study. Imagine my shock.
Julie Bindel producing a low-quality study. Imagine my shock.
You could have said “Whittome was delighted when feminists defeated a nil-cap for lap-dance clubs in Bristol”. Or do you get to define who is or is not a feminist?Note; Julie Bindel did a study on lap-dance clubs for Glasgow Council in 2004 – “ministers later conceded it was of low quality and could not be used to justify imposing a national ban.”
“This approach [decriminalisation] may look attractive to those concerned about the human rights of the prostituted person.”
Indeed Julie. Obviously, you are not among those people.
“are calling for the decriminalisation of all aspects of prostitution”
No, they aren’t. They are not calling for the decriminalisation of pimping, trafficking, exploitation. You just make that up.
Bindel is fuelled by jealously, like former footballers who were paid a pittance before the Premier League, she resents the money women now make from internet prostitution, because she’s past it….
Geeat comment voted down by the feminists and simps
Geeat comment voted down by the feminists and simps
Bindel is fuelled by jealously, like former footballers who were paid a pittance before the Premier League, she resents the money women now make from internet prostitution, because she’s past it….
“This approach [decriminalisation] may look attractive to those concerned about the human rights of the prostituted person.”
Indeed Julie. Obviously, you are not among those people.
“are calling for the decriminalisation of all aspects of prostitution”
No, they aren’t. They are not calling for the decriminalisation of pimping, trafficking, exploitation. You just make that up.
Why does the modern Left do this? Simple: it’s the most direct way to subvert Western society which they loath, cause a revolution or at least a conflagration which they can exploit to impose their lunatic ideas (which wouldn’t stand a chance in fair and honest elections) and to get into power generally. It’s the same reason that they attack the most vulnerable in society; our children both born and unborn. It creates the perfect conditions for ending the civilization they loath. It’s the same reason they push postmodernism…it undermines the pillars of Western high culture.
In Spain, it is the modern Left which is pushing for abolitionism.
Prostitution is where Left and Right meet. Saying that you, as a politician, will abolish prostitution makes you popular, will bring you votes. Especially when you’re a man.
In Spain, it is the modern Left which is pushing for abolitionism.
Prostitution is where Left and Right meet. Saying that you, as a politician, will abolish prostitution makes you popular, will bring you votes. Especially when you’re a man.
Why does the modern Left do this? Simple: it’s the most direct way to subvert Western society which they loath, cause a revolution or at least a conflagration which they can exploit to impose their lunatic ideas (which wouldn’t stand a chance in fair and honest elections) and to get into power generally. It’s the same reason that they attack the most vulnerable in society; our children both born and unborn. It creates the perfect conditions for ending the civilization they loath. It’s the same reason they push postmodernism…it undermines the pillars of Western high culture.
It is worth having a look at New Zealand, which decriminalized the activity some time ago, and its experience which the article mentions but glosses over.
It is a rather obvious point to make but the review I read indicates the relationship between the workers and the police, being more straightforward and obviously no longer combative, can now be a source of protection and a worker has successfully sued her employer in the courts.
In typical Kiwi fashion, the view taken is it is not ideal but it deals with where we are rather than where we would rather be. As others have said this is not going away.
As for JB, if only she could hint just a little that men are equal to women in their capacity to positively contribute to the human experience. I have spoken to a number of Gay Women about this and they acknowledge that there is a kind of Lesbian who is not so much pro-woman but anti-men which is how JB comes across.
It is worth having a look at New Zealand, which decriminalized the activity some time ago, and its experience which the article mentions but glosses over.
It is a rather obvious point to make but the review I read indicates the relationship between the workers and the police, being more straightforward and obviously no longer combative, can now be a source of protection and a worker has successfully sued her employer in the courts.
In typical Kiwi fashion, the view taken is it is not ideal but it deals with where we are rather than where we would rather be. As others have said this is not going away.
As for JB, if only she could hint just a little that men are equal to women in their capacity to positively contribute to the human experience. I have spoken to a number of Gay Women about this and they acknowledge that there is a kind of Lesbian who is not so much pro-woman but anti-men which is how JB comes across.
How do they do it? How sociopathic does a bloke need to be before he gets turned on by the knowledge that a woman finds him so unappealing that she needs to be paid first?
And why on earth to do they even need to? Ordinary women love sex. Voluntary sex is not difficult to find, for heaven’s sake.
I have nothing but contempt for any man who pays an impoverished woman for sex.
How do they do it? How sociopathic does a bloke need to be before he gets turned on by the knowledge that a woman finds him so unappealing that she needs to be paid first?
And why on earth to do they even need to? Ordinary women love sex. Voluntary sex is not difficult to find, for heaven’s sake.
I have nothing but contempt for any man who pays an impoverished woman for sex.
My word for ‘sex worker’ is ‘prostitute’.
My word for ‘sex worker’ is ‘prostitute’.
Abolitionist Bindel twisting the facts yet again. Like the findings of the LSE report. Just read its conclusion and you will find out that the authors of the report do not conclude what Bindel pretends they conclude.
Neither is the Nordic Model a “human rights approach” since French sex workers filed a case with the European Court of Human Rights against the Nordic Model and in Canada, the Supreme Court has found it unconstitutional.
You wrote : “the authors of the report do not conclude what Bindel pretends they conclude.”
Bindel claims : “It is a human rights approach and effective in reducing trafficking, and the sexual exploitation of children. Research from the London School of Economics found that legalisation of the sex trade increases both.”
Conclusion of report states : “Our central finding, i.e., that countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, is therefore best regarded as being based on the most reliable existing data, but needs to be subjected to future scrutiny ”
and
“Countries with higher GDP per capita, larger populations, larger stocks of pre-existing migrants, and a democratic political regime experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, with all of these results being statistically significant at the five percent level.”
and
“Cho (2012) has shown that countries with larger shares of Catholics have smaller human trafficking inflows. As religiosity reduces sexual tolerance, it arguably reduces demand for prostitution services and thus implies less trafficking, all else equal (Saguy, 1999).”
Speculation is the order of the day here, as this LSE paper makes clear, because of the dearth of decent statistics surrounding an illegal trade.
Bindel writes the LSE report has found that legalisation of the sex trade increases both.
I claim that the authors of the LSE report conclude something different than what Bindel pretends they conclude.
The LSE report concludes:
“here is no “smoking gun” proving that the scale effect dominates the substitution effect and that the legalization of prostitution definitely increases inward trafficking flows”
It explains why:
“The problem here lies in the clandestine nature of both the prostitution and trafficking markets, making it difficult, perhaps impossible, to find hard evidence establishing this relationship”
That is why the authors admit:
“Our central finding, i.e., that countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, is therefore best regarded as being based on the most reliable existing data, but needs to be subjected to future scrutiny. More research in this area is definitely warranted, but it will require the collection of more reliable data to establish firmer conclusions.”
The authors also point out what Bindel & Co try to ignore:
“The likely negative consequences of legalized prostitution on a country’s inflows of human trafficking might be seen to support those who argue in favor of banning prostitution, thereby reducing the flows of trafficking (e.g., Outshoorn, 2005). However, such a line of argumentation overlooks potential benefits that the legalization of prostitution might have on those employed in the industry.”
Bindel writes the Nordic Model is “effective in reducing trafficking” and insinuates the report would have “found that legalisation of the sex trade increases both.”
Yet the LSE report concludes:
“here is no “smoking gun” proving that the scale effect dominates the substitution effect and that the legalization of prostitution definitely increases inward trafficking flows”
It explains why:
“The problem here lies in the clandestine nature of both the prostitution and trafficking markets, making it difficult, perhaps impossible, to find hard evidence establishing this relationship”
That is why the authors admit:
“Our central finding, i.e., that countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, is therefore best regarded as being based on the most reliable existing data, but needs to be subjected to future scrutiny. More research in this area is definitely warranted, but it will require the collection of more reliable data to establish firmer conclusions.”
The authors also point out what Bindel & Co try to ignore:
“The likely negative consequences of legalized prostitution on a country’s inflows of human trafficking might be seen to support those who argue in favor of banning prostitution, thereby reducing the flows of trafficking (e.g., Outshoorn, 2005). However, such a line of argumentation overlooks potential benefits that the legalization of prostitution might have on those employed in the industry.”
None of those three points support Bindel’s claim. Learn to read.
Bindel writes the LSE report has found that legalisation of the sex trade increases both.
I claim that the authors of the LSE report conclude something different than what Bindel pretends they conclude.
The LSE report concludes:
“here is no “smoking gun” proving that the scale effect dominates the substitution effect and that the legalization of prostitution definitely increases inward trafficking flows”
It explains why:
“The problem here lies in the clandestine nature of both the prostitution and trafficking markets, making it difficult, perhaps impossible, to find hard evidence establishing this relationship”
That is why the authors admit:
“Our central finding, i.e., that countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, is therefore best regarded as being based on the most reliable existing data, but needs to be subjected to future scrutiny. More research in this area is definitely warranted, but it will require the collection of more reliable data to establish firmer conclusions.”
The authors also point out what Bindel & Co try to ignore:
“The likely negative consequences of legalized prostitution on a country’s inflows of human trafficking might be seen to support those who argue in favor of banning prostitution, thereby reducing the flows of trafficking (e.g., Outshoorn, 2005). However, such a line of argumentation overlooks potential benefits that the legalization of prostitution might have on those employed in the industry.”
Bindel writes the Nordic Model is “effective in reducing trafficking” and insinuates the report would have “found that legalisation of the sex trade increases both.”
Yet the LSE report concludes:
“here is no “smoking gun” proving that the scale effect dominates the substitution effect and that the legalization of prostitution definitely increases inward trafficking flows”
It explains why:
“The problem here lies in the clandestine nature of both the prostitution and trafficking markets, making it difficult, perhaps impossible, to find hard evidence establishing this relationship”
That is why the authors admit:
“Our central finding, i.e., that countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, is therefore best regarded as being based on the most reliable existing data, but needs to be subjected to future scrutiny. More research in this area is definitely warranted, but it will require the collection of more reliable data to establish firmer conclusions.”
The authors also point out what Bindel & Co try to ignore:
“The likely negative consequences of legalized prostitution on a country’s inflows of human trafficking might be seen to support those who argue in favor of banning prostitution, thereby reducing the flows of trafficking (e.g., Outshoorn, 2005). However, such a line of argumentation overlooks potential benefits that the legalization of prostitution might have on those employed in the industry.”
None of those three points support Bindel’s claim. Learn to read.
You wrote : “the authors of the report do not conclude what Bindel pretends they conclude.”
Bindel claims : “It is a human rights approach and effective in reducing trafficking, and the sexual exploitation of children. Research from the London School of Economics found that legalisation of the sex trade increases both.”
Conclusion of report states : “Our central finding, i.e., that countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, is therefore best regarded as being based on the most reliable existing data, but needs to be subjected to future scrutiny ”
and
“Countries with higher GDP per capita, larger populations, larger stocks of pre-existing migrants, and a democratic political regime experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, with all of these results being statistically significant at the five percent level.”
and
“Cho (2012) has shown that countries with larger shares of Catholics have smaller human trafficking inflows. As religiosity reduces sexual tolerance, it arguably reduces demand for prostitution services and thus implies less trafficking, all else equal (Saguy, 1999).”
Speculation is the order of the day here, as this LSE paper makes clear, because of the dearth of decent statistics surrounding an illegal trade.
Abolitionist Bindel twisting the facts yet again. Like the findings of the LSE report. Just read its conclusion and you will find out that the authors of the report do not conclude what Bindel pretends they conclude.
Neither is the Nordic Model a “human rights approach” since French sex workers filed a case with the European Court of Human Rights against the Nordic Model and in Canada, the Supreme Court has found it unconstitutional.
My thanks to the desperately silly Julie Bindel for informing me of the existence of Hookers Against Hardship, part of Decrim Now, opponents of the disastrous Nordic Model. I have written to my MP, signed their petition, made a donation, asked to be signed up as a supporter, and I look forward to becoming involved in their excellent campaign. Thanks again, Julie!
My thanks to the desperately silly Julie Bindel for informing me of the existence of Hookers Against Hardship, part of Decrim Now, opponents of the disastrous Nordic Model. I have written to my MP, signed their petition, made a donation, asked to be signed up as a supporter, and I look forward to becoming involved in their excellent campaign. Thanks again, Julie!
I am tempted to rail against the middle-class do-gooder who wrote this stuff, but the sad truth is MEN… ALL MEN have a biological need that supports their physiological and mental health needs. Particularly in the confines of a loving stable relationship and marriage.
I am not one of those bible-bashing door sermonists pushing my neatly trimmed religious intolerances on a largely antipathetic populace, but a boomer, who having read: “Everything you always wanted to know about Sex, but were afraid to ask” at the tender age of 14, and a dozen other books on Sex, physiology, gender, relationships, the differences between men and women (i e.Men with Wombs) in the 50+ years since, so I can proffer an informed opinion.
We have got to this situation largely because of Victorian and Catholic attitudes to sex and the 60s through to the 80s feminist movements that said it’s fine for women to use their bodies as tools to get what they want from life in general, and men in particular… When in reality, being a willing partner in a loving relationship, ( in OR out of wedlock) is the most satisfying for both parties.
But in a society stripped of industry and the jobs that allowed working class men to support a family and working class women the financial support from a loving father, the STATE has increasingly attempted to destroy the family and assume the role of parent, encouraging teen age girls to get pregnant at the first opportunity to ensure she can have a job of looking after her child, while her unemployed man is kept in impoverished servitude. And the sex trade thrives in such an environment.
The puppetmasters have been asset stripping the West for decades, building their NWO, by automating, and developing AI while moving manufacturing to the lowest cost producer nation in the Tyrannical Despotic Bastion of Orwell’s imagination…a nation controlled by the CCP. AND they are building a pyramidal satanic control structure that sees humans as mere sheep to be enslaved, chipped and controlled via 5G everywhere.
Until people connect ALL the threads of this global Scheitstörm we will ALL be losers.
The puppets in Whitehall and Westminster, KNOW the causes and the solutions, but their controllers have other ideas.
Lockdown and Operation Lockstep have been long in the planning .. They are ALL from the same playbook.
Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars (given out in 1954 @ the 1st Bilderberg meeting)
Divide & Conquer…
Control or KILL.
mRNA, Jabs, and the feminist movements are just TOOLS of the same power elite
Who says so?
The people who funded it .
The Rockefellers, who were themselves set up by the Rothschilds.
The Jewish Mafia.
Satan Worshippers.
I am tempted to rail against the middle-class do-gooder who wrote this stuff, but the sad truth is MEN… ALL MEN have a biological need that supports their physiological and mental health needs. Particularly in the confines of a loving stable relationship and marriage.
I am not one of those bible-bashing door sermonists pushing my neatly trimmed religious intolerances on a largely antipathetic populace, but a boomer, who having read: “Everything you always wanted to know about Sex, but were afraid to ask” at the tender age of 14, and a dozen other books on Sex, physiology, gender, relationships, the differences between men and women (i e.Men with Wombs) in the 50+ years since, so I can proffer an informed opinion.
We have got to this situation largely because of Victorian and Catholic attitudes to sex and the 60s through to the 80s feminist movements that said it’s fine for women to use their bodies as tools to get what they want from life in general, and men in particular… When in reality, being a willing partner in a loving relationship, ( in OR out of wedlock) is the most satisfying for both parties.
But in a society stripped of industry and the jobs that allowed working class men to support a family and working class women the financial support from a loving father, the STATE has increasingly attempted to destroy the family and assume the role of parent, encouraging teen age girls to get pregnant at the first opportunity to ensure she can have a job of looking after her child, while her unemployed man is kept in impoverished servitude. And the sex trade thrives in such an environment.
The puppetmasters have been asset stripping the West for decades, building their NWO, by automating, and developing AI while moving manufacturing to the lowest cost producer nation in the Tyrannical Despotic Bastion of Orwell’s imagination…a nation controlled by the CCP. AND they are building a pyramidal satanic control structure that sees humans as mere sheep to be enslaved, chipped and controlled via 5G everywhere.
Until people connect ALL the threads of this global Scheitstörm we will ALL be losers.
The puppets in Whitehall and Westminster, KNOW the causes and the solutions, but their controllers have other ideas.
Lockdown and Operation Lockstep have been long in the planning .. They are ALL from the same playbook.
Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars (given out in 1954 @ the 1st Bilderberg meeting)
Divide & Conquer…
Control or KILL.
mRNA, Jabs, and the feminist movements are just TOOLS of the same power elite
Who says so?
The people who funded it .
The Rockefellers, who were themselves set up by the Rothschilds.
The Jewish Mafia.
Satan Worshippers.
Whilst the feminists deplore the industry, and attempt to criminalise men for the increase in “DEMAND”.
NOT ONE has bothered to ask WHY demand (request? Negotiate? Contract for?) That most basic of human needs is rising?
Physician heal thyself?
Socialism/Communism is determined to destroy the family and individual rights, in the name of collectivist, global tyranny, where the elite determine what is and is not acceptable and the two-tier legal system will protect them and enslave the rest… IF WE ALLOW IT.
Whilst the feminists deplore the industry, and attempt to criminalise men for the increase in “DEMAND”.
NOT ONE has bothered to ask WHY demand (request? Negotiate? Contract for?) That most basic of human needs is rising?
Physician heal thyself?
Socialism/Communism is determined to destroy the family and individual rights, in the name of collectivist, global tyranny, where the elite determine what is and is not acceptable and the two-tier legal system will protect them and enslave the rest… IF WE ALLOW IT.
Hateful , as it is almost always , prostitution of women is frequently another name for misogyny and exploitation with poverty as a driver.
Also coupled with child abuse . What is there in our social structures other than money that makes it remotely acceptable ? Are lives improved, the world a better place to live in ?
It makes me want to weep.
Hateful , as it is almost always , prostitution of women is frequently another name for misogyny and exploitation with poverty as a driver.
Also coupled with child abuse . What is there in our social structures other than money that makes it remotely acceptable ? Are lives improved, the world a better place to live in ?
It makes me want to weep.
Professionalism is generally a good thing, but there are some things which, for all sorts of reasons, are best left to amateurs.
Professionalism is generally a good thing, but there are some things which, for all sorts of reasons, are best left to amateurs.
Sex, drugs and gambling – it’s the suppliers who should be regulated and criminalised if necessary, never the hapless punters.
Why do I think you’ve got a huge stirrer in your hand? And a tongue firmly embedded in your cheek? And a wry smile on your naughty face?
Dia is Muire dhuit …
Dia is Muire dhuit …
Why do I think you’ve got a huge stirrer in your hand? And a tongue firmly embedded in your cheek? And a wry smile on your naughty face?
Sex, drugs and gambling – it’s the suppliers who should be regulated and criminalised if necessary, never the hapless punters.
It’s too bad we can’t pass a rule that says that everyone who advocates for decriminalization has to become a sex worker for a short, fixed period. After a week as a sex work, one wouldn’t need to explain to those oh-so-smart individuals (who, in an interesting paradox, don’t appear to be capable of simple thought) why sex work is a bad thing.
PS: That was a rhetorical flourish, not a serious proposal. I think it’s clear that to prevent the worst abuses, there has to be some legal constraints; people aren’t going to become good out of free will. The details I don’t have time/space to explore.
It’s too bad that we don’t have the totalitarian society such a scheme would require.
It’s too bad that we don’t have the totalitarian society such a scheme would require.
It’s too bad we can’t pass a rule that says that everyone who advocates for decriminalization has to become a sex worker for a short, fixed period. After a week as a sex work, one wouldn’t need to explain to those oh-so-smart individuals (who, in an interesting paradox, don’t appear to be capable of simple thought) why sex work is a bad thing.
PS: That was a rhetorical flourish, not a serious proposal. I think it’s clear that to prevent the worst abuses, there has to be some legal constraints; people aren’t going to become good out of free will. The details I don’t have time/space to explore.