>While some police forces still target women for loitering, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) now recommends not criminalising the women – who are often vulnerable – and instead targeting the men.
Interesting logic.
There’s been a long running discussion in criminology about the way to handle sex work.
Essentially though, there will never not be a supply, but if you make the demand prohibitively problematic by going after the purchasers, then you’re more likely to succeed.
What about escorts? Is that also illegal in the UK
The only thing illegal about this is that they met on the street. If the men emailed, phoned and agreed to meet in a house or hotel it be legal.
Men are doing badly! They are lonelier, poorer and kill themselves a ton! What do we do???
Obviously, criminalize the men who are lonely and poor enough to go to the cheapest possible escort! Amazing!
“…on a course to prevent reoffending and to learn about the women’s vulnerabilities….”
That course would’ve helped me a ton when I was a uni student and went to an escort because I wanted to see what sex is like before I offed myself! Sure would’ve!
So what is a guy who can’t get any intimacy and doesn’t have the money for a high end escort supposed to do, really? Off himself? Become a drug addict? Rape somebody? What is the socially acceptable path for a guy like that? Nobody cares.
On the other hand I don’t really understand why kerb crawling still exists when there is the internet to arrange meet-ups and it is anti-social behaviour on both sides, the nordic model is not fit for purpose.
Unusual how modern society and especially modern feminism see’s women support, and champion sex workers for empowering themselves, being girl bosses etc.
But the customers needed for them to fulfil this role are then seen as pigs, disgusting perverts who can’t get women normally
By the same people, you can’t have one without the other.
Edit –
For the troglodytes with agendas, you can clearly see from my above comment that I’m making no distinction between streetwalkers and escorts/online workers.
I’m speaking in general terms, that sex workers are championed for their empowerment and cause whereas their customers are only seen negatively.
There may be a difference in views on the difference of working practices, but the service is still the same. Sexual acts for money.
It’s only a matter of time until we adopt the Nordic model. Not for any sensible reason, just because it fits in perfectly with the ideology of punishing men and absolving women, which we also see in our legal system in general, such as intentionally focusing on closing women’s prisons and openly aiming to not imprison women, as the government (both Labour and before them Conservative) have openly stated, whilst continuing to imprison men.
The thing is you ban it completely then yout pushing the vulnerable who do this deeper and deeper into the gangs that they want to target!
One does have to wonder what would happen if, one day, this suddenly worked. What if men just decided to stop paying? Not just for prostitution but all of it, the entire sex industry gone overnight.
“the sex industry is controversial. That’s why we’re going after the consumers instead of the providers”.
This is like dehumanising and convicting a drug addict instead of going after the supplier. Bizarre take from the BBC, once again. Lots of “ooh what’s going on here, looks at this” but not contributing anything towards the issue. Too much “we followed this man into the bushes to catch him having sex with a prostitute” and not enough “we tracked this sex worker’s pimp and now he’s being investigated for unethical and immoral practices”.
On street prostitution needs to remain illegal. But there needs to be a legalising of massage parlours. These can be taxed and regulated.
Sex work is legal if it’s someone in their own home without more than one person operating as a sex worker (otherwise it’s a brothel)
It’s fair game imo going after the men buying sex by kerb crawling as the women offering this service are the most vulnerable ones, and from my own experience in the police were always doing it to find a drug habit
It’s the sex work aspect where they are most taken advantage of, and making money the only way they can outside of shoplifting, so I don’t see an issue with prosecuting the men buying sex in this manner, when they could easily purchase it legally (albeit slightly more expensive)
Police whinging that they’re under-resourced yet spending said resource going after kerb crawlers. Fuck me. What an utter waste of time and taxpayers money.
I still can’t decide how I feel about sex work. On the one hand, I believe anyone should be allowed to do whatever they like providing it’s consensual, non-coerced and between adults. On the other, I can’t imagine sex work is anyone’s first choice of career – it’s a job people (mostly women) do because they lack other options that pay the bills. That’s true of other jobs of course – lots of people work to pay the bills, not because they enjoy it – but sex *is* an intimate act, and as such I think quite distinct from other so-called ‘undesirable’ jobs.
Then there’s the nagging reminder that it’s mostly men buying sex from women, and this has been true since the dawn of civilisation. Why? Male sex workers obviously exist too, often catering towards gay men, but not exclusively (how big a market is there for female sex workers catering towards lesbian women? Going to hazard a guess and say: not very); however, the number is substantially smaller. Why is this? To what extent is this biological, or gender stereotypes that have been propagated throughout the centuries (e.g. that men ‘always think about sex’)?
I’m conflicted between my belief in personal freedom and a deep-seated feeling that sex work largely exists because of fundamental ills in society. Those ills including income and gender inequality, coercion, desperation and societal pressure. Then how does this tie in with incels? Why are there so many young men who want sex (which is a natural desire), but feel like they can’t get it, leading to wildly distorted and dangerous attitudes towards women? And why is this phenomenon more or less exclusive to men, and not women?
Edit: Something I am sure of is that vulnerable women, who may or may not have been trafficked, deserve to be protected and helped. What I am not convinced of is that cutting off a source of income without providing an alternative is remotely helpful.
Interesting to see the comments here. There was a similar thread a few months back that had people defending gay sex in a park in London
There is absolutely no perfect way to police sex work. Even the Dutch and German models saw an increase in trafficking. But research from LSE shows punishing consumers also does not work.
I don’t see how sex work can become the empowering thing many feminists wish it to be without a complete dismantling of capitalism and misogyny.
But that’s a pipe dream itself.
This is a far more complex issue than trying to decide if we punish the vulnerable woman selling sex or the lonely man who requires the contact many of us take for granted.
Imagine getting caught picking up street prostitutes. How embarrassing
If sex work is real work then people buying sex are simply customers. Can’t have it both ways.
We can’t build trainlines, keep the health service going, fund our military or even decide what our foreign policy is – but we lead the world in prosecuting nonsense.
Let people have sex, do drugs and – provided kids and cars aren’t involved – why the hell do any of you care.
Obviously the men are paying people who are vulnerable and in many ways exploiting them. Street sex workers are clearly desperate. To me it seems like an unpleasant exchange.
However isn’t the issue addressing the source of desperation. I imagine the vast majority have severe addiction issues. It seems a bit of waste of time going after these men, I doubt the sex workers want it either. If no one is purchasing sex from them their addiction remains and desperation for cash does to.
10 police could be focussing on the B”s and Whites the women are addicted to.
Still makes me laugh how people can be fined for simply standing still on a street, aka “Loitering”
> Their aim is to combat night-time exploitation and harm, focusing on criminalising the men, rather than the women.
I know this is the super nice feminist thing to do but it really makes no sense.
Street crawlers are absolutely engaged in anti social behaviour, it’s morally acceptable for the law to target them too. I accept sex work is always going to be done, but they should do it in small regulated brothels.
> Lol this is such nonsense. I’m not even going to dissect it.
In other words, you can’t refute it.
> Why is it addicts are arrested for possession when it’s a mental condition and they are being exploited by dealers but men are arrested for buying sex from streetwalkers and the women go free for providing that service and creating those conditions in the first place.
That is a false equivalence. Sex in of itself is not inherently wrong – you can’t OD on sex. Thus the sale of it has no detrimental effect on the customer. Whilst in a drug deal, the dealer takes no risk in the customer using the product, the sex worker takes on enormous risk (45-75% are raped). The exploitation therefore can’t be on the side of the sex worker – the power balance would not make sense.
Made a similar post replying to another poster, but I’ll post again and expand a bit. One thing I’ve seen over the years is that men who are interested in paying for sex just go to places like Thailand. It’s fairly economical and even an ‘average’ worker who works in a warehouse or something can afford to fly out, plus as well as getting sex you also get warmer weather, cheap hotels and food etc- so an average Joe can feel like a king for two weeks. I’ve worked alongside people who have done this and while I’m not into sex tourism I can see the attraction of why they would want to go. Thais and Western expats in Thailand even have a term for it ‘LBH’- loser back home.
Obviously in such circs can’t track down the health/wellbeing of the working women or the potential abusive/criminal behaviour of the men. I’m not sure if having a regulated buy/sell market in the UK would mean more would stay in the UK, or they’d stilll go to Thailand and similar Asian countries because they women are cheaper, the food is nicer, the weather is tropical etc, and you can’t replicate that on some godforsaken industrial estate.
Making it prohibitive in the UK and people will just go abroad. Unless they have serious convictions you can’t stop someone going abroad. Also the Nordic country nationals are very over represented for sex tourism abroad. To me that sums up the Nordic model in a nutshell, you keep your own house spotless like a 1950s housewife, just outsourced the ‘dirty’ stuff to other countries.
24 comments
>While some police forces still target women for loitering, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) now recommends not criminalising the women – who are often vulnerable – and instead targeting the men.
Interesting logic.
There’s been a long running discussion in criminology about the way to handle sex work.
Essentially though, there will never not be a supply, but if you make the demand prohibitively problematic by going after the purchasers, then you’re more likely to succeed.
What about escorts? Is that also illegal in the UK
The only thing illegal about this is that they met on the street. If the men emailed, phoned and agreed to meet in a house or hotel it be legal.
Men are doing badly! They are lonelier, poorer and kill themselves a ton! What do we do???
Obviously, criminalize the men who are lonely and poor enough to go to the cheapest possible escort! Amazing!
“…on a course to prevent reoffending and to learn about the women’s vulnerabilities….”
That course would’ve helped me a ton when I was a uni student and went to an escort because I wanted to see what sex is like before I offed myself! Sure would’ve!
So what is a guy who can’t get any intimacy and doesn’t have the money for a high end escort supposed to do, really? Off himself? Become a drug addict? Rape somebody? What is the socially acceptable path for a guy like that? Nobody cares.
On the other hand I don’t really understand why kerb crawling still exists when there is the internet to arrange meet-ups and it is anti-social behaviour on both sides, the nordic model is not fit for purpose.
Unusual how modern society and especially modern feminism see’s women support, and champion sex workers for empowering themselves, being girl bosses etc.
But the customers needed for them to fulfil this role are then seen as pigs, disgusting perverts who can’t get women normally
By the same people, you can’t have one without the other.
Edit –
For the troglodytes with agendas, you can clearly see from my above comment that I’m making no distinction between streetwalkers and escorts/online workers.
I’m speaking in general terms, that sex workers are championed for their empowerment and cause whereas their customers are only seen negatively.
There may be a difference in views on the difference of working practices, but the service is still the same. Sexual acts for money.
It’s only a matter of time until we adopt the Nordic model. Not for any sensible reason, just because it fits in perfectly with the ideology of punishing men and absolving women, which we also see in our legal system in general, such as intentionally focusing on closing women’s prisons and openly aiming to not imprison women, as the government (both Labour and before them Conservative) have openly stated, whilst continuing to imprison men.
The thing is you ban it completely then yout pushing the vulnerable who do this deeper and deeper into the gangs that they want to target!
One does have to wonder what would happen if, one day, this suddenly worked. What if men just decided to stop paying? Not just for prostitution but all of it, the entire sex industry gone overnight.
“the sex industry is controversial. That’s why we’re going after the consumers instead of the providers”.
This is like dehumanising and convicting a drug addict instead of going after the supplier. Bizarre take from the BBC, once again. Lots of “ooh what’s going on here, looks at this” but not contributing anything towards the issue. Too much “we followed this man into the bushes to catch him having sex with a prostitute” and not enough “we tracked this sex worker’s pimp and now he’s being investigated for unethical and immoral practices”.
On street prostitution needs to remain illegal. But there needs to be a legalising of massage parlours. These can be taxed and regulated.
Sex work is legal if it’s someone in their own home without more than one person operating as a sex worker (otherwise it’s a brothel)
It’s fair game imo going after the men buying sex by kerb crawling as the women offering this service are the most vulnerable ones, and from my own experience in the police were always doing it to find a drug habit
It’s the sex work aspect where they are most taken advantage of, and making money the only way they can outside of shoplifting, so I don’t see an issue with prosecuting the men buying sex in this manner, when they could easily purchase it legally (albeit slightly more expensive)
Police whinging that they’re under-resourced yet spending said resource going after kerb crawlers. Fuck me. What an utter waste of time and taxpayers money.
I still can’t decide how I feel about sex work. On the one hand, I believe anyone should be allowed to do whatever they like providing it’s consensual, non-coerced and between adults. On the other, I can’t imagine sex work is anyone’s first choice of career – it’s a job people (mostly women) do because they lack other options that pay the bills. That’s true of other jobs of course – lots of people work to pay the bills, not because they enjoy it – but sex *is* an intimate act, and as such I think quite distinct from other so-called ‘undesirable’ jobs.
Then there’s the nagging reminder that it’s mostly men buying sex from women, and this has been true since the dawn of civilisation. Why? Male sex workers obviously exist too, often catering towards gay men, but not exclusively (how big a market is there for female sex workers catering towards lesbian women? Going to hazard a guess and say: not very); however, the number is substantially smaller. Why is this? To what extent is this biological, or gender stereotypes that have been propagated throughout the centuries (e.g. that men ‘always think about sex’)?
I’m conflicted between my belief in personal freedom and a deep-seated feeling that sex work largely exists because of fundamental ills in society. Those ills including income and gender inequality, coercion, desperation and societal pressure. Then how does this tie in with incels? Why are there so many young men who want sex (which is a natural desire), but feel like they can’t get it, leading to wildly distorted and dangerous attitudes towards women? And why is this phenomenon more or less exclusive to men, and not women?
Edit: Something I am sure of is that vulnerable women, who may or may not have been trafficked, deserve to be protected and helped. What I am not convinced of is that cutting off a source of income without providing an alternative is remotely helpful.
Interesting to see the comments here. There was a similar thread a few months back that had people defending gay sex in a park in London
There is absolutely no perfect way to police sex work. Even the Dutch and German models saw an increase in trafficking. But research from LSE shows punishing consumers also does not work.
I don’t see how sex work can become the empowering thing many feminists wish it to be without a complete dismantling of capitalism and misogyny.
But that’s a pipe dream itself.
This is a far more complex issue than trying to decide if we punish the vulnerable woman selling sex or the lonely man who requires the contact many of us take for granted.
Imagine getting caught picking up street prostitutes. How embarrassing
If sex work is real work then people buying sex are simply customers. Can’t have it both ways.
We can’t build trainlines, keep the health service going, fund our military or even decide what our foreign policy is – but we lead the world in prosecuting nonsense.
Let people have sex, do drugs and – provided kids and cars aren’t involved – why the hell do any of you care.
Obviously the men are paying people who are vulnerable and in many ways exploiting them. Street sex workers are clearly desperate. To me it seems like an unpleasant exchange.
However isn’t the issue addressing the source of desperation. I imagine the vast majority have severe addiction issues. It seems a bit of waste of time going after these men, I doubt the sex workers want it either. If no one is purchasing sex from them their addiction remains and desperation for cash does to.
10 police could be focussing on the B”s and Whites the women are addicted to.
Still makes me laugh how people can be fined for simply standing still on a street, aka “Loitering”
> Their aim is to combat night-time exploitation and harm, focusing on criminalising the men, rather than the women.
I know this is the super nice feminist thing to do but it really makes no sense.
Street crawlers are absolutely engaged in anti social behaviour, it’s morally acceptable for the law to target them too. I accept sex work is always going to be done, but they should do it in small regulated brothels.
> Lol this is such nonsense. I’m not even going to dissect it.
In other words, you can’t refute it.
> Why is it addicts are arrested for possession when it’s a mental condition and they are being exploited by dealers but men are arrested for buying sex from streetwalkers and the women go free for providing that service and creating those conditions in the first place.
That is a false equivalence. Sex in of itself is not inherently wrong – you can’t OD on sex. Thus the sale of it has no detrimental effect on the customer. Whilst in a drug deal, the dealer takes no risk in the customer using the product, the sex worker takes on enormous risk (45-75% are raped). The exploitation therefore can’t be on the side of the sex worker – the power balance would not make sense.
Made a similar post replying to another poster, but I’ll post again and expand a bit. One thing I’ve seen over the years is that men who are interested in paying for sex just go to places like Thailand. It’s fairly economical and even an ‘average’ worker who works in a warehouse or something can afford to fly out, plus as well as getting sex you also get warmer weather, cheap hotels and food etc- so an average Joe can feel like a king for two weeks. I’ve worked alongside people who have done this and while I’m not into sex tourism I can see the attraction of why they would want to go. Thais and Western expats in Thailand even have a term for it ‘LBH’- loser back home.
Obviously in such circs can’t track down the health/wellbeing of the working women or the potential abusive/criminal behaviour of the men. I’m not sure if having a regulated buy/sell market in the UK would mean more would stay in the UK, or they’d stilll go to Thailand and similar Asian countries because they women are cheaper, the food is nicer, the weather is tropical etc, and you can’t replicate that on some godforsaken industrial estate.
Making it prohibitive in the UK and people will just go abroad. Unless they have serious convictions you can’t stop someone going abroad. Also the Nordic country nationals are very over represented for sex tourism abroad. To me that sums up the Nordic model in a nutshell, you keep your own house spotless like a 1950s housewife, just outsourced the ‘dirty’ stuff to other countries.
Comments are closed.