When this blog began it was about my experience of prostitution in South London and Soho. Now it is mostly about my experiences in North West England.
Saturday, December 31, 2022
my review of the year 2022
Sunday, November 20, 2022
down by the docks
Since my day trip to London in July I have been to Angel Lodge, the brothel in Liverpool that I have told you about before. I was hoping to see Megan, who I have seen several times before. Instead there was Olivia. Olivia is taller, thinner and younger than Megan. She has tightly-curled blonde hair, a light tan and very white teeth. She is also very friendly. I told Olivia that Megan let me use my ultra-thin condoms, if they were in an unopened pack.
I have also been back to the Thai brothel in Rock Ferry. I have seen Meena twice. Meena is older and not so attractive but I like her. She lets me use ultra-thin condoms. One of the things I like about her is that after I have had my orgasm she stays with me for the full half hour that I have paid for. She gives me a massage and we talk. I pay £60 to see Meena but only £50 to see Olivia (or £60 if I also want oral sex without a condom).
I told you before that I have been finding out about where the women go when they are not working in Rock Ferry. I know that Joy sometimes works for a couple of weeks from a flat in Southport. I went to see her there. It makes a nice day out. I thought Pepsi works there too, but it turns out another woman I have seen in Rock Ferry calls herself Pepsi when in Southport. I knew her as Emma and I don't like her. She is older like Meena but not friendly.
The old woman who owns and runs the Rock Ferry brothel also owns a brothel in Manchester and another one in Blackpool. I went to the one in Manchester (6 Park Place) for the first time. The old woman opened the door and recognised me. I was in luck because Pepsi (the real Pepsi) was there. I had half an hour with her. I didn't know about this place until recently even though it was in the next street to a favourite brothel that has closed permanently (Salon 24).
When I saw the advert for the new Liverpool brothel I thought it was going to be like the brothel in Rock Ferry but it is very different. I have not been to a place like that except once many years ago in Croydon. You phone the number and a woman answers. She will tell you the street (alley) to go to. It's near the Baltic Fleet pub. When she has seen you then she will tell you the number of the flat.
The door is opened by a Chinese man. He knows little English but gestures for you to sit and wait. He sits in the same room as you. It smells of Chinese food. When the previous customer has finished he will come down the stairs and walk past you to the door. You go up the stairs to a small room.
The woman I saw the first time was young and attractive. She told me her name is Yaya. She speaks next to no English and I realised that the woman I spoke to on the phone is not the same woman. I also wondered if she has washed since the previous customer or changed anything on the bed.
We did some kissing and touching and then I indicated I wanted to get on top of her. I was expecting her to reach over for a condom but instead I got a slightly puzzled look. It took me a couple of seconds for me to realise that I could fuck her without a condom. Foolishly I did. I really enjoyed it.
I had some ultra-thin condoms in my bag but I didn't think to use them. Afterwards she continued to be friendly, helping me on with my clothes. She looked me in the eyes and asked me if I am English. I have an unusual eye colour and she wanted to know which ethnic group has eyes like mine.
Later I thought that if I had known this would happen I would have used one of my ultra-thin condoms. Then I could have gone to a GUM clinic and got PrEP. I have been on it before and if you take it before unprotected sex you won't get HIV. Then I could have gone to the brothel again, fully prepared for any eventuality.
I searched for information about it and realised there is also something called PEP. You can take PEP after unprotected sex. I went to Boots and they said go to the GUM clinic in Liverpool. I went there and they said go to A&E. I went there and they said go to the walk-in GPs surgery in the same hospital. I went there and they said I would have to go back to A&E: they haven't got any PEP.
Two weeks later I went back to the Chinese brothel. A different girl was there. She was prettier, taller and thinner than Yaya. She wanted to use a condom so we did. She hardly spoke any English. I asked her name. I can't remember it because it sounded Chinese but I think it begins with an N. I asked her about Yaya. I think what she said was that Yaya is in London and wouldn't be coming back: there are only 3 girls who return there again and again.
I think the reason these women do this is because they can make a hell of a lot more money than in a garment factory in Shanghai. They aren't looked after properly though. They should all be told about condoms. They should be able to shower between customers. I might go back once more but it will never become somewhere I want to go again and again like the one in Rock Ferry.
I'm not sure I should even call it a brothel because it seems there is only one sex worker there at a time. There is the woman on the phone and the security man. I suppose it might be like many of the 'independent' sex workers in Liverpool. There are some truly independent sex workers in Liverpool. The best system is the one only found in New Zealand: women working together for safety and companionship making the rules themselves and keeping the profits for themselves.
Thursday, August 11, 2022
New Zealand decriminalisation model
I have just been reading a blog written by a sex worker in New Zealand. I think that what she has to say is so important I want to repeat it here. This comes from the post What the NZ model cheer squad get wrong on the Dollar Girl Diaries blog.
If what she is saying is true then it seems that the decriminalisation of sex work has succeeded even better than expected. Sex workers are turning away from pimps because they don't need them. I have always said that sex workers don't need pimps, they can work for themselves.
"So, what happened when we introduced decriminalisation? Something totally unexpected. The paradigm shifted and it shifted radically. The brothels and agencies got wiped out, they were forced out of business. Nobody predicted it. But why did it happen? Despite decriminalisation, the casual independent contractor model for brothel work stayed. The owners had no reason to change it, there was a lot of very good employment case law from around the world saying this was legal and changing would both increase their costs and reduce power over the workers. So they didn’t change it. Decriminalisation however meant you could work outside the brothel system without fear of arrest of police harassment. Suddenly independent work was every bit as safe from arrest as the brothel work. The PRA also includes a provision allowing up to four sex workers to work out of a single location and share the costs equally without a license. Only restriction is all have to control their income independently, you can’t pool the takings and share them out. Gives the safety benefits of a brothel without the exploitation of a manager. Of course this means you’re self employed, with all the issues that brings, but without half your income going into somebody else’s pocket, you can put aside for those things.
Now for the first time, brothel workers had a choice. They no longer needed the brothels and agencies to be safe from arrest. They could stay on in the brothels as self employed independent contractors, with the owners taking around half of what they earned and imposing shift fees, late penalties, controlling their shifts to keep them from complaining, pressuring them to take clients they didn’t want etc. Or they could cut out on their own as an independent worker, maybe get together with a couple of other workers and form one of those new fangled small worker collective brothels. Of course that meant facing the perils of self employment, but they were being treated as self employed in the brothel system anyway. Unsurprisingly, the vast majority elected to cut out on their own. The old brothel system very simply collapsed as the workers found they no longer needed it’s protection. The entire industry paradigm changed. The sex industry in New Zealand is now dominated by independent workers and small worker collectives. Before 2003 there were over 400 hundred brothels and agencies in New Zealand, there are 45 left."
This shows that the proponents of the Nordic model have got it wrong when criticising the New Zealand model. Finn Mackay in her book Radical Feminism on page 211 writing about the English Collective of Prostitutes (ECP) and the International Union of Sex Workers (IUSW). "Both groups commend the approach taken in New Zealand, where brothels of varying sizes from small owner-operated ventures to larger chains are allowed to operate legally, though the ECP favour small owner-operated ventures over larger big business brothel chains. The latter are thriving however under this regime."
Mackay also writes that there had been plans for a 15-storey brothel in Auckland that didn't go ahead. Three brothels in Queensland closed complaining about unfair competition. That doesn't sound as if big business is thriving.
People who believe in decriminalisation are not the pimp lobby. The last thing that pimps want is the decriminalisation of sex work just like the last thing that drug dealers want is the decriminalisation of drugs.
There are some people who will tell you that the amount of prostitution increased in New Zealand after decriminalisation. Mellissa Farley has said this, and so has Samantha Berg. They are both wrong, and I shall show why below. In the case of Samantha Berg, she doesn't seem to understand how statistics work. Just as with her examination of the statistics to do with Norway, she doesn't understand you have to compare like with like. If you have two statistics related to different time periods then they are not comparable. Christchurch had 100 street prostitutes in 2006 and 121 street prostitutes in 2007. However, we're talking about different time periods and different times of year.Monday, August 8, 2022
more than two types of sex work
They work for an agency. Customers phone the agency and the sex worker travels to where he is. This could be a hotel room or his flat or house. Escorts are also called call-girls. Some of them specialize in domination. Some of them specialize in 'sugar daddies' - older men.
Some of them will be independent but not all. Customers find their details on web sites such as Vivastreet. He must phone and make an appointment. Ethnic groups involved in this tend to be Eastern Europeans and Brazilians.
Brothels are often called saunas. Phoning to make an appointment might be encouraged but usually a man just turns up. There could be several women working there and he can choose which one he wants. There may be a pimp or madam involved or the sex workers could be working for themselves. Brothels are illegal even when there is no pimp or madam. Ethnic groups involved in this tend to be British and Eastern European.
The word 'massage' like the word 'sauna' can be used in the name of a brothel. The massage establishments I am thinking of though provide massage and usually 'extras'. The main extra is 'hand relief' (HR) also called a 'happy ending'. The masseur, after providing a standard massage, will use her hands to bring her customer to orgasm. Another extra is 'body-to-body'. This is where the woman will remove her clothes and rub herself against her customer. She may cover herself with oil and get on top of him. Oral sex and full sex will rarely be on offer. Ethnic groups involved in this tend to be Thai, Chinese and British.
Not all street-based sex workers are drug addicts and not all drug addicts are street-based. They don't usually give their money to a pimp, they give their money to a drug dealer. It won't always be the same drug dealer but even so drug dealers, pimps and boyfriends often merge into one. The most common drugs are crack cocaine and heroin. Often they also get money from shoplifting. Homelessness is common.
Tuesday, July 26, 2022
review of The Case Against the Sexual Revolution by Louise Perry
Right at the start of the book we have the idea that an archaeologist will say 'a pit of newborn babies' bones was how to spot a brothel'. One wonders what this is to do with the modern world. If you are interested in the remains of newborn babies in the modern world and not the ancient you will find them in great quantities in the grounds of a Magdalene laundry. The Magdalene laundries in Ireland where young women and girls were incarcerated. The laundries that would still be there were it not for the changes in attitudes in society which brought about the sexual revolution. UPDATE: the Tuam institution was not a Magdalene laundry it was a home for unmarried mothers and babies.
In Chapter 7 on page 147 Louise Perry writes this:-
"Decriminalisation or legalisation of the sex industry increases the demand for commercial sex. In countries that have adopted these legal models, the proportion of the male population who have ever bought sex is higher, and the sex tourism industry is larger. Given that the number of women who will willingly enter the sex trade is small, when demand grows, unwilling women must be sought out in order to meet it."
Decriminalisation and legalisation are two different legal models. I support the former not the latter. The only country that has adopted decriminalisation is New Zealand, although Belgium has recently adopted it too. In New Zealand demand has not increased. Some people say that it has but that is not true. I don't know if it has increased in the Netherlands or Germany. I have not seen evidence of that and Perry offers no evidence.
It is interesting that she uses the phrase 'the proportion of the male population who have ever bought sex'. From my analysis of statistics from Sweden I know that there is a difference between the proportion of men who are active sex buyers and the proportion who have ever bought sex. The proportion of men who were active sex buyers before the Nordic model was 1.3%, after it was introduced it was 1.8%. The proportion of men who had ever bought sex dropped from about 13% to about 8% in the same period.
That is because the proportion who have ever done it will change as older generations become too old to participate in surveys. The cut off age is 74 years old. It will depend on factors such as whether the country was at war or whether they had large scale conscription decades ago. It won't depend on recent changes in law. The proportion of men who are active sex buyers will probably change because of changes in the law but will certainly change because of a financial crisis when men have less money to spend.
When demand grows the existing sex workers make more money. They have more customers and each customer will pay more. It doesn't mean that women will be forced to become sex workers. They may be more incentivised to become sex workers, but that is a different matter.
On page 145 Perry quotes from sociologist Elizabeth Bernstein. These quotes however don't support her assertion that well-paid sex workers are 'highly unrepresentative'. Bernstein quite correctly states that there are two ends of the continuum. There are well-paid sex workers at one end of the continuum and homeless women addicted to crack or heroin who are pimped at the other. That doesn't mean that there are only two types of sex worker, and it doesn't mean that the vast majority are the pimped drug addicts.
In fact we know that drug addicts have never been more than about 15% of the total number of sex workers. That is what Professor Belinda Brooks-Gordon has said*. So does that mean that 85% or more of sex workers are the well-paid sort? That is what you would have to believe if you believed that there are only two types of sex worker. Far from being 'tourists' ie highly unrepresentative, these well paid 'call-girls, escorts, exotic dancers and masseuses' would be the norm.
We know that's not the case though. There are many different categories of sex worker. It isn't true that most working-class women in sex work are drug addicts or pimped. Women who come to Britain from abroad are rarely drug addicts. Most white British working class prostitutes are not drug addicts. There is no 'prostituted class'.
There was a revealing television series called Taken: Hunting the Sex Traffickers. Although they were trying to say that traffickers are evil, they didn't manage to do that. One of the Brazilian sex workers had been arrested and deported. They showed her at the airport returning to Britain to resume her life as a sex worker. She said she wanted money for university. Often women come to Britain so that they can invest in their future.
There are thousands of women in Britain from abroad who use their hands for massage and then sometimes use their hands to bring their clients to orgasm. That is all they do. This is the most visible form of prostitution. In the nearest city to me, Liverpool, there are several of these establishments in the centre and even more further out. They are not drug addicts, and often they are saving their money to invest in their future back home.
When Elizabeth Bernstein was writing about pimped drug addicts, it is important to remember that this in America. In America men are prosecuted for paying for sex. Women are prosecuted for selling sex. Yet still prostitution exists in America and is widespread. So how on earth does Louise Perry think that the Nordic model is going to get rid of prostitution? How does she think that she is going to save the drug addicted women of the world?
Drug addicts are helped by rehab. That is the way to help them. Not handing them ASBOs. Not trying to drive away their clients. Not putting all sex work in the hands of organised crime. Benefits and housing are important too. I support spending more money on rehab, benefits and housing. I support welfare workers who ask sex workers what they need. I know that this doesn't happen in Nordic model countries. That is what they promise, help to exit, but as Dr Geoffrey Shannon stated in the official report into the Nordic model in Ireland this has not happened.
The homicide rate for drug addicts is higher. The mortality rate due to drugs or alcohol is higher. Because some prostitutes are drug addicts that can make it seem that prostitution is more dangerous than it really is. Not letting prostitutes work together doesn't help. Not letting them work together means they work alone or for a pimp. That needs to change. It hasn't changed in countries that have adopted the Nordic model.
*I can't remember where Professor Belinda Brooks-Gordon wrote this. She is Professor of Forensic Psychology and Public Policy, Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck University. In one of Dr Brooke Magnanti's books she wrote that the estimate is between 5% and 20%. On this page the estimate is between 3% and 25%. We can say that the proportion of sex workers who are street based and drug addicted can't be more than a quarter. Especially when you think that some street based sex workers aren't addicts. It certainly isn't true what Janice Turner wrote in the Times this Saturday "The vast majority of prostitutes ... were abused as children, lured in by pimp-boyfriends and muffle their pain with drugs or alcohol".
Monday, July 25, 2022
Janice Turner in the Times
Friday, July 8, 2022
2 new films about sex work
There are two new films that are about sex work. Both are positive about it. The first is Good Luck to You, Leo Grande starring Emma Thompson. The second is How to Please a Woman starring Sally Phillips. Both are well-known comedians.
I found out about the second of these on Woman's Hour this morning. The presenter had no criticism of this film. Someone contacted the show and said how hypocritical they are in saying that men objectify women through prostitution and yet they accept the objectification of men. In both films the sex worker is male. I don't mean trans women, who the Radical Feminists regard as male.
I can see how the Radical Feminists are going to be critical of both of these films. Objectification means different things to different people. It meant one thing to Radical Feminist authors such as Catharine A MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin. It means something different to the majority of Radical or Revolutionary Feminists. It means something different again to ordinary people.
To ordinary people it seems to mean having a sexual attraction to someone outside of the context of a relationship. The idea is that a man is incapable of appreciating a woman's personality if he is lusting after her. This is an idea that goes back thousands of years.
If I have casual sex with a woman, let's say on holiday, am I objectifying her more than if I play a game of tennis with her or a game of chess? Why would sex have that special attribute, different from other activities? If I pay for sex with a woman, am I objectifying her more than if I pay for a taxi driver or a waiter? You can say that sex is different from playing the usual sort of game or working the usual sort of job. That's not answering the question though.
We use people all the time. We meet people briefly, do something with them, and don't want to get to know them further. Casual sex or paid-for sex could be seen as harmful to women, but that is at the very least an overgeneralisation of women. Not all women are the same. Treating all people in a group as if they are all the same is one aspect of objectification, according to philosopher Martha Nussbaum.
The weird thing is that Emma Thompson has had a lot to say about prostitution over the years. She has signed up to Princess Eugenie's organisation to fight trafficking. We all want to fight trafficking, if by that we mean coercion. However, most prostitution does not involve coercion. Some other forms of work also sometimes involve coercion.
Other organisations that have associated with Princess Eugenie's crusade are the International Justice Mission, who say they want to release the captives. However, their hidden agenda is to try to stamp out prostitution anywhere in the world, no matter how many women they harm. They are an American Evangelical Christian organisation.
In the past they have called for and participated in brothel raids in countries such as Cambodia and Thailand. Women are arrested and kept against their will. Most of these women have not been coerced, and so their first experience of imprisonment is in a so-called rescue centre.
Sunday, July 3, 2022
my day trip to London
Friday, July 1, 2022
another day trip to Sheffield
I decided to go to City Sauna to begin with. Jenni off the telly was there. There were two sex workers. One was the tattooed lady who had been there on my previous visit. There was also Charlotte. I chose Charlotte. She is an older lady, quite tall and attractive. She smiles and talks a lot. She has black hair done up and wears stockings. I shagged her for a while but didn't manage to orgasm despite her best efforts.
She tried to wank me off. They know that wanking over tits works for most men. It doesn't work for me. I tried to wank myself but that didn't work either.
Honeypot has a good reputation so I went there. It wasn't so easy to find. The entrance is not in Attercliffe Road, it is in Worksop Road. It does have 774A in big letters on the front though. I went up the stairs and rang the bell. An old woman answered the door and explained that there was a man with the sex worker and another one waiting. She said I could come back later. I think she said the sex worker's name was Jessica. I thought Jessica seems to be very popular.
I thought I will have a look at the other brothels nearby. I could see Athena Massage and Diplomat clearly. There's supposed to be another one nearby called Escorts but I couldn't see it. Athena and Diplomat are a couple of doors away from each other and with both of them the entrance is at the back. I went into the alleyway at the back and thought about what to do next. Neither of these places has a good reputation.
is this the seediest alleyway in Britain? |
I decided to go into Diplomat. I don't know why. It seemed quite nice, there was a bar and at the other end of the room were sofas with four women. One was a big black woman who was in charge. There were a couple of bored looking young women looking at their smart phones. And there was Alec.
Alec is an attractive blonde. She has a natural beauty but has a couple of tattoos, what look like enhanced breasts, and lips that might have been enhanced too. I thought she looked as if she could be a student. Later in the room I could see she was probably older than that but it was a wonderful experience. She is very friendly. I shagged her for a while but wasn't getting any further than I had with Charlotte. She seemed to be enjoying it, at one point she was playing with her clit while I was shagging her.
I don't like to ask if I can use one of my ultra-thin condoms. Usually the answer is no. I felt I could ask Alec. She asked to see them and then said that would be fine. So we put one on, I got back on top of her, and after a couple of minutes I had a powerful orgasm.
Alec took me downstairs to the bar and gave me a bottle of water from the fridge to take out with me. She's such a thoughtful nice girl. It wasn't a hot and humid day that day, unlike my previous trip, which I think was part of the problem.
Another thing that has happened to me is that I have found out one of the places where some of my favourite sex workers go to. I like to go to Rock Ferry Thai Massage near Birkenhead. I have a few favourites such as Joy. She works there some of the time but most of the time at other places.
I am planning a day trip to London. I intend to head straight to Greens Court in Soho to see if Poppy is still working there. I doubt it but I'll try there first. Then maybe head to Greek Street to find if they are still open.
Saturday, June 18, 2022
my day trip to Sheffield
I watched a TV series about one of these brothels. The series was called A Very British Brothel. The brothel - City Sauna - is run by a mother and daughter. They had another series called A Very Yorkshire Brothel. I thought the episodes were good, showing sex work as it mostly really is. The people at the Nordic Model Now! site were up in arms about it and made a complaint to ITV. 'They are concerned that women might be encouraged into prostitution on the basis of the programme.'
I thought it might be nice to go there. However, my research showed me that their place is not the best place to go in Sheffield. The best place seems to be GFE. I thought that I can go to Sheffield by train and have a look around the town centre, including Sheffield Winter Gardens. Then after lunch I could get a tram to Meadowhall South/Tinsley and walk to GFE. I expected there to be some young slender women there. I could enjoy spending time with one of them then perhaps go on to somewhere else that has the older fatter women that I prefer.
The man said I had to give the other £30 to the lady in the room, he had already explained that prices begin at £50. Millie led me to the room, chatting to me while she did so. I gave her £30 and she asked me to have a quick shower. On the bed she didn't seem to want to take her top off but was happy for me to look at and feel her pussy. I got on top of her and enjoyed looking at her pretty face. She told me she has Italian and Maltese ancestry as well as English.
After I made my way back to the tram stop which didn't take long. I got off somewhere near Attercliffe Road. I found City Sauna and went in. The daughter who I had seen in the TV series - Jenni - was there. I asked her how many girls she has there today. She said only one. There was a woman sitting on a sofa with lots of tattoos and a shaved head. I'm sure she must be some type of woman but I'm not sure what type but not my type. I said I'll leave it.
The funny thing is there were men sitting on other sofas in the same room. My guess is that there were other women there and these men were waiting for them to become available - having declined the offer of the tattooed lady.
I found Caesars in Stanley Street easily enough. A woman spoke to me through a tiny hatch. She wanted me to give her £30 through the hatch. I asked how many girls she has and she said there is her and there is an Albanian girl. All I could see were her hands. She seemed to be African. I walked away. Finally I found Paradise Studio. The place seemed not only closed but abandoned. A large window had been smashed.
My conclusion is that the brothels of Sheffield are in decline. GFE was good and good value for money at £50. I think most men spend more there than £50. I would have liked to ask Millie what perversions she negotiates with her clients. She's not as innocent as she can look.
the Scottish government and the Nordic model
The theory that prostitution is a form of violence against women and girls comes from Radical Feminist ideology. They say that a woman can't truly consent to sex with a man in a patriarchal society. If you accept this ideology then prostitution is not only violence it is also rape but all forms of heterosexual sex are rape too. You can't just apply the theory to prostitution.
The Scottish government think that they are using an accepted intellectual theory but there is no intellectual justification for it. They don't explain where this theory comes from, people are just expected to accept it, even though it's not the genuine theory. That's quite disturbing. Also, I can't find out who in the government brought in this policy: I would like to know if they are Radical Feminists or Evangelical Christians.
The Scottish government are copying what socially conservative Americans have done. President Bush reinstated the Mexico City Policy, also known as the 2001 Global Gag Rule. It banned NGOs from receiving funding if they are pro choice about abortion. Then in 2003 USAID stopped funding any group perceived to be encouraging sex work, including HIV outreach groups. A literacy class for Thai sex workers was denied funding.
In 2003 the Bush administration passed a Global AIDS bill that prohibits international agencies from receiving funds unless they explicitly sign an oath that they do not support or condone prostitution and that no funds will be going toward harm prevention among sex workers. See Running from the Rescuers: New U.S. Crusades Against Sex Trafficking and the Rhetoric of Abolition by Gretchen Soderlund.
It seems that the Scottish government is preparing itself to introduce the Nordic model into Scotland. That would be foolish because the official report into the effectiveness of the Nordic model in Northern Ireland shows that it has not reduced demand. There have been three reports into the effectiveness of the Nordic model in the Irish republic and none of them say there has been a reduction in demand.
I have been looking at books about women and violence. I looked at Enough: The Violence Against Women And How To End It by Harriet Johnson. As far as I can tell it has nothing to say about prostitution. It doesn't have an index but none of the chapter headings are about prostitution. It seems Harriet Johnson doesn't think prostitution is violence if it doesn't even get a mention.
I looked at Equal Power by Jo Swinson. She was the leader of the Liberal Democratic party. In Jo Swinson's book she writes about Sreypov Chan, who was 'sold into slavery in Cambodia as a seven-year-old girl'. "When she refused her first client, the pimp crushed up hot chilli peppers and pushed them into her vagina, then thrust a hot metal poker inside her." As an adult Srepoy Chan worked as an advocacy officer for the Somaly Mam Foundation.
Somaly Mam claimed to have been a sex slave and got others to make the same false claims. Long Pross and Meas Ratha were two of the girls who we know made false claims, and Sreypov Chan is another. Thomas Steinfatt has been looking into prostitution in Cambodia for a long time and has said that he has never encountered genuine instances of torture. Steinfatt has conducted research that shows coercion is not common.
So that's the fictional violence. What about the real violence against women in Cambodia? Sex workers are arrested by the police then held against their will in 'rescue' centres for months. Kept in poor conditions, there a near-total lack of psychological care for traumatized girls, an absence of meaningful job-training programs, and a blatant disregard for the young women’s privacy. One former worker said it was “like there was a revolving door for tourists and camera crews. It was like a zoo.”
American Evangelical organisations such as the International Justice Mission have conducted brothel raids in countries including Cambodia. The women they capture try to run away. IJM is funded by the American government. It would be good if the Biden administration stopped all funding to these organisations. It would help women more than the Scottish government refusing to fund good organisations such as Scot-Pep.
Jo Swinson learned about trafficking from Marie Claire magazine. Perhaps that is where Princess Eugenie learned about it too. She and one of her chums (Julia de Boinville) have teamed up to fight trafficking. It is clear that they support organisations such as the International Justice Mission and people like Nicholas Kristof. They are not doing good work helping women around the world, they are harming them. Instead of interviewing people like Kristof and the guy who made the Taken television series, they should interview people like Emily Kenway. At least they should read academics like Shelley Cavalieri and Gretchen Soderlund, who I have quoted below.
Below I have quoted from Between Victim and Agent: A Third-Way Feminist Account of Trafficking for Sex Work by Shelley Cavalieri.
In May 2003, law enforcement officers raided a brothel in Chiang Mai, the capital of the northern region of Thailand and the regional center for the many indigenous peoples or hill tribes that populate the surrounding mountains. They conducted this raid at the behest of a coalition of Thai non-governmental organizations and an American evangelical Christian organization [International Justice Mission]. The American organization, with funding from the U.S. government and in conjunction with the Thai non-governmental organizations, was dedicated to investigating and reporting brothels with children inside to the authorities, and tried to persuade the police to shut down such locales. The particular brothel raided in this story was a brothel like many others in the country, filled with ethnically Shan women from Burma. Most of the women were of the age of majority, but while accounts vary, some organizations asserted that there were teenagers working in the brothel as well. How these teenagers reached the brothel is unclear; the organizations claiming that teenage girls were there also asserted that the girls’ presence could not be voluntary due to their age and that the girls were victims of human trafficking.
The coalition of organizations effected what they termed a “rescue” of the women in the brothel because of the believed presence of children. What followed was a human rights debacle. Twenty-eight women and girls, most of whom were, by all accounts, adults, were involuntarily detained beyond the period of time that victims of trafficking may be confined under Thai law. They were not arrested or charged with crimes, but detained, according to the authorities, because they had been rescued from a situation of human trafficking. They were deprived of access to their belongings and saved earnings, which were locked inside the inaccessible brothel under police control; they never regained ownership of these possessions. After a lengthy period of time, the government deported many of these women to Burma. All of these actions, which the women experienced as both harmful and alienating, occurred under the guise of rescuing them from the brothel in which they worked.
According to social services workers who interviewed four women who escaped from the brothel as the police arrived, all of the women were ethnic Shan from Burma and were at least nineteen years of age at the time of the raid. Prior to immigrating to Thailand, their status as members of the Burmese Shan indigenous group rendered these women subject to summary detention and rape at any time at the hands of officers of the Burmese junta. Faced with the option of abuse by the authorities in a region of Burma overwhelmed by poverty, many Shan women chose, and continue to choose, to cross the mountains that demarcate the Thai-Burma border and move to a Thai city to work in a brothel. This choice has a certain logic, as forced labor, forced relocations, and food shortages remain an endemic problem in Burma. For many, work in a Thai brothel presented the opportunity to escape the repression of the Burmese junta and to send adequate money home in order to support families, educate children, and maintain households. From the perspective of these women, that they at times paid people to facilitate their passage to Thailand was merely incidental.
Further, the women who escaped the brothel prior to the raid claimed that they, like the women “rescued” in this particular scenario, and like many other Shan sex workers in Thailand, worked in the brothel of their own volition. According to these women, they were free to come and go as they liked; they were not subject to physical restraint in any way. They were not in debt bondage in the traditional sense of the phrase, although some did at times take pay advances from the brothel manager to travel home and back; they would repay such advances with a portion of their earnings over time, much like a loan against future paychecks that some workplaces offer in the United States. Yet from the perspective of the American evangelical organization doing this work, the women in the brothel, particularly the minors, needed to be rescued from the brothel. According to the IJM employee with whom I spoke during the summer following the raid, as all of the women had traveled across borders and left their communities to work in the sex industry, they qualified as exploited women in need of assistance, even when they personally denied that they experienced harm in the brothels. That they may have paid others to facilitate their migration was presented as further evidence of their exploitation.
Below I have quoted from Running from the Rescuers: New U.S. Crusades Against Sex Trafficking and the Rhetoric of Abolition by Gretchen Soderlund.
Journalist Maggie Jones’s interviews with safe house managers indicate that shelter escapes are commonplace in areas where anti-trafficking groups are currently targeting their efforts (2003). The manager of the Phnom Penh home that took in the 37 prostitutes after the Dateline initiated raids reported to Jones that at least 40 percent of the women and girls taken to his shelter escape and return to work in Svay Pak’s brothels. Indeed, six of the teens taken by MSNBC/IJM had run away from the home within a week of the televised busts. When Phil Marshall of the United Nations Project on Human Trafficking in Southeast Asia’s Mekong Region was asked by Jones what he thought of current rehabilitation strategies, he said he had “never seen an issue where there is less interest in hearing from those who are most affected by it” (Jones 2003,1). In 2003, Empower, a sex workers’ advocacy program, issued a report documenting a brothel raid in Chiang Mai, Thailand conducted by International Justice Mission in which several of the 28 arrested (or “rescued,” in abolitionist parlance) Burmese women escaped from a local institution in the first 24 hours. According to Empower, the raid—conducted ostensibly for humanitarian purposes—took on many of the same features as a criminal arrest:
As soon as they had their mobile phones returned [the] women contacted Empower. They are only permitted to use their phones for a short time each evening and must hide in the bathroom to take calls outside that time. They report that they have been subjected to continual interrogation and coercion by Trafcord [an anti-trafficking NGO formed in 2002 with U.S. financial support]. Women understand that if they continue to maintain that they want to remain in Thailand and return to work that they will be held in the Public Welfare Boys Home or [a] similar institution until they recant. Similarly, they understand that refusing to be witnesses against their “traffickers” will further delay their release. (Empower 2003)
By the end of the month, more than half of the women had escaped from the shelter. What does it mean that so-called sex slaves often thwart rescue attempts? Is it intellectually and ethically responsible to call every instance of a practice “slavery” when many women involved demonstratively reject the process of protection and rehabilitation, and when they escape from supposed rescuers who aim to force them out of a life of prostitution (“captivity”) and into a life of factory work or employment in the low-paying service sector (“freedom”)?
Saturday, May 7, 2022
finding out about good places
It has worked out quite well for me so far. In January I had sex with Emma. She's older but I was attracted to her. In February I had sex with Maya. She's middle-aged but that's what I like best. I took a viagra one and a half hours before going. I used their condoms instead of my own thinner ones. Even so I didn't have any problems having an orgasm with either of them.
Things didn't work out so well in March. Sometimes I think I might be bipolar. When I am slightly manic it works out well but when I am slightly depressive I don't orgasm. I saw several women in March, at Rock Ferry Thai Massage and at other places.
April and May have been the best months yet. In April I saw Maya again. She was even more friendly than when I saw her in February. She was talking about her life. She said that after a week or two in Rock Ferry she goes to Manchester. There is somewhere Victoria station. I think she might have said it is a hotel. Then after a week or two she goes somewhere else and then she has a holiday.
One of the places I went to in March was a brothel in Liverpool called Christys. I have posted about it before. It is also called 69 and it is near to Aintree racecourse. I just turned up there and I was surprised because a new fence has been erected where the steps lead up to the top floor flat. When I rang the doorbell I could see that the flat was being redecorated. Becky answered the door and told me there weren't any 'girls' there that day. They would be open tomorrow. I said to Becky that I would leave it a couple of days then come back.
Christys was always a bit of a dump. My first review of it was negative. Then I got to like the place. However, she seemed to have big problems getting women to come and work for her. Often I would phone and there would be no 'girls' there. She told me she lost contact with Jodie, who was my favourite. So she can't have been making much of a profit. All the more surprising that she would be willing to spend the money to redecorate.
In April I was ready to go back. I wanted to see what she had made of the place. However, when I phoned Becky she told me there were no girls there. I said shall I phone back later in the week. She said I could if I wanted. I could have gone there and had sex with Becky but I decided to go to Rock Ferry instead.
Good thing I did because there was a delightful young woman there. She is tall with a very nice figure. I will call her 'Coke' which is not her real name. I saw her again the next week and we had a snog together. She probably doesn't do that with all her customers so I don't want men turning up to see her expecting a snog when that is at her discretion.
Both times with Coke I had an orgasm. The second time with all the snogging was even better. Afterwards I could see that she wasn't quite as young as I had thought. She looks in her 20s but if you look closer she could be 40. I make a note of the women I have sex with and give the experience a score out of 5. The first time with Coke was 5 and the second time I had to increase the scale and go up to 6.
I didn't ask Coke if I could snog her. It's just something that happened. At one point she put her tongue in my mouth. I did ask her if she wanted me to lick her pussy. Straight away she said yes, so I did. She doesn't like thin condoms though, which is fair enough. I'm going to phone up next week and if Coke or Joy are there I will go again. My money saving strategy has gone out the window. Coke told me Joy might be there, I saw Joy twice last year, she is very nice and told me I can use thin condoms.
On an internet forum I have been finding out about different things. I wanted to find out about Christys. I wanted to know if anyone had been there since the redecoration. I wanted to know what's going on there: has it turned into some kind of sex club where debauchery of many kinds occurs behind closed doors? Somebody said that it's probably just that Becky will be working there on her own now. Perhaps that makes it legal so no chance of being closed down so why not spend money on the place? Especially because she lives there and will want it to be nice.
I have also been finding out about a flat not far from Rock Ferry Thai Massage. I have told you about it before. Different Thai women use the flat for a week or two. Some offer full sex, some only offer massage and hand relief. There was a ladyboy there recently. I've found out that the way to find out who is there is to go onto the adultwork site and type in 'Birkenhead'. The Thai girl that comes up will probably be working from there. You have to book, you can't just turn up there like you can with Rock Ferry Thai Massage.
There is a new Thai massage place in New Ferry/Bebington. There used to be a seedy brothel round the corner from it called The Penthouse but that seems to have closed permanently. Most Thai massage places in the Wirral don't do anything sexual, but apparently this place does hand relief. It's called Tongdee. I won't be going there. There's only one place I want to go now.
Saturday, April 9, 2022
Natasha Walter and Mary Whitehouse
In my last post I said that I had listened to a radio programme about Mary Whitehouse, the anti-pornography campaigner. Since then I have watched both episodes of a television documentary about her. In the second part the anti-censorship campaigner Nicolas Walter was mentioned. Then his daughter Natasha was interviewed.
She said she now believes that her father was naive. The permissive society was a mistake. I did a post about her in 2013. In her book Living Dolls she writes that the number of sexual assaults increased in Camden Town in London after lap-dancing clubs opened. This is totally false. Dr Brooke Magnanti in two of her books (The Sex Myth and Sex Lies & Statistics) shows how this is false.
So who is the one who is naive? She is naive for believing all of the false statistics. It seems more and more obvious now that the reason why some people want to end prostitution is because it is a form of promiscuity. They hate punters like me because we are promiscuous. They want to roll back the permissive society.
That is the real reason: nothing to do with compassion for prostitutes.
Another thing they don't realise in their naivety that promiscuity is nothing new. It didn't start in the 1960s. You only have to think about the people around Winston Churchill. Women such as Daisy Fellowes and Doris Castlerosse. Or the Prince of Wales with all of his mistresses (the one who became briefly Edward VIII). Rich people have always been promiscuous.
Saturday, March 5, 2022
pornography and violence
This blog is not about pornography. However, I came across some recent research about pornography and violence that I would like to share with you. It is Pornography and Sexual Aggression: Can Meta-Analysis Find a Link? The main conclusion is that "evidence did not suggest that nonviolent pornography was associated with sexual aggression". They found a weak link with violent pornography, but didn't know if this is just because violent people select violent pornography. This is especially interesting: "Population studies suggested that increased availability of pornography is associated with reduced sexual aggression at the population level".
So what journalist Libby Purves wrote recently in The Times is untrue. She wrote "Yet research across the world makes it clear that selling sex is not only an immediate risk but reduces the safety of all women. Men who buy it, whether online or physically, are significantly more likely than other men to rape or commit other violence against women." I'm not sure what she means by 'online' as opposed to 'physically', but it seems she is talking about pornography.
She doesn't give a reference for this 'research across the world' but it seems that she means the research done by Melissa Farley. I have dealt with this in a previous post. I am offended by the false allegation that someone like me 'reduces the safety of all women'. It is prudish journalists with their false statistics who endanger the safety of women: you can't have good laws based on fabricated statistics.
I have blogged about Sara Pascoe's book Sex Power Money. What I wrote is that I feel she has been very fair on the subject of pornography but unfair on the subject of prostitution. People might say why are you quoting a comedian, what would she know, but she has looked at the research.
page 198. "Some heartening statistics: if porn encouraged rape, then we'd expect rape rates to rise along with the availability of the internet. The 'Porn Up, Rape Down' study conducted at Northwestern University School of Law found that the incidence of reported rape declined by 85 per cent in the United States after technology made porn freely available."
page 200. "For comparison, twenty-eight thousand people completed the University of Chicago's General Social Survey between 1974 and 2010, and they found no connection between porn and sexism."
page 202. "The truth is that while there are plenty of hairless pussies, there is a rainforest of unshavens and anyone who is watching porn regularly has seen everything. Some interesting evidence against the influence of porn on young people is that all recent surveys have reported that up to 90 per cent of men prefer their partner to have pubic hair."
page 204. "The received wisdom is that porn is becoming alarmingly aggressive because easily bored consumers are demanding it. If this concerns you, the study 'Harder and Harder' published by the Journal of Sex Research in 2018 might put your mind at rest. Sociologists from McGill University in Canada studied the most popular videos on Pornhub, assessed the aggressive content in a random selection and found it wasn't true that viewers preferred aggressive content, or that the content was becoming more aggressive over time. They actually found, when measuring the length of time spent on visible aggression (biting, slapping, choking etc.) in these videos, that violence was a declining trend. And films where the female performer seemed to be enjoying herself were far more popular (in views and 'likes') than any in which women simulated or experienced distress."
page 224. "All I've found in my own research is middle ground. And that's reassuring - there is loads of middle ground, with extremes at either end."
page 227. "Hollywood releases about six hundred films per annum, so if you wanted to find out how many of those are violent (answer: loads) at least you could watch them all."
These are real researchers, not like biased Radical Feminist Melissa Farley. Real journalists (not Libby Purves) would look at real researchers (not Melissa Farley).
Since posting the above I have listened to a radio programme about Mary Whitehouse. Many decades ago she campaigned against pornography. She was a Christian. What she didn't realise was that a fellow campaigner and fellow Christian was a very sick criminal sadist who was a preacher for many years. His name was John Smyth.Friday, January 21, 2022
review of Radical Feminism by Finn Mackay
Finn Mackay has a lot to say about sex work in her book. Before we come on to that I want to tell you about her attitude to political lesbianism and celibacy. Radical Feminists often say that women should become lesbians: it doesn't mean having sex with women but it does mean definitely not having sex with men.
I've always suspected that this means that most of them don't have sex with anyone, they are celibate. They are trying to stop men and women from having sex together, and this is their main motivation in wanting to ban sex work. It's not that they are full of compassion for sex workers and wish to end their suffering.
Let us have a look at what is the clearest explanation of how political lesbianism usually means celibacy. Page 67.
"Contrary to much rumour since, the paper was not suggesting that women should simply pursue same-sex sexual activity. It was about the political choice to dedicate one's life to women. In fact, in the paper, the Leeds Revolutionary Feminist Group clearly reassured heterosexuals that the lesbian bit is not compulsory, and that celibacy is always an option."
The idea of heterosexual lesbians is an interesting one. Particularly as they are always telling us about reality and fiction. It is a fiction that a man can become a woman, it is not reality, so they tell us. Considering that most people are heterosexual, then most political lesbians would be celibate. Like the nuns of Ruhama they want to stop men and women fornicating. Ruhama campaigned for the Nordic model in Ireland.
The paper she is referring to is 'Political Lesbianism' by the Leeds Revolutionary Feminist Group which was led by Sheila Jeffreys. Jeffreys wrote "all feminists can and should be lesbians. Our definition of a political lesbian is a woman-identified woman who does not fuck men. It does not mean compulsory sexual activity with women."
Mackay explains that there are in fact four different types of feminist. The Radicals and the Revolutionaries, who are similar. Then there are the Liberals and the Socialists. I don't think this includes Third Wave feminists, who she doesn't have much time for.
Mackay quotes the opinion of an activist about sex work: "It is a form of exploitation, slavery: and a very specific one. I don't like the red umbrellas one bit." Page 207. Slaves don't get paid, neither do they choose their work or how they work. Sex work is the opposite of that: they are paid more than most people, and they do what they do in preference to the alternatives, having a great deal of autonomy in how they do it. Of course, there is modern slavery within sex work just as there is modern slavery within other types of work.
Mackay writes that so many feminists oppose prostitution because "they are against the presumption of a male right to sexual access to women's bodies." Page 208. I don't have a right to have sex with any sex worker, she can turn me down if I don't meet her criteria. Lots of sex work involves a masseur using her hands not just for massage but to bring her client to orgasm. Is that 'sexual access to women's bodies'? If not, then presumably she doesn't have a problem with it. Except of course she does because they always have a problem with sex between men and women, even in marriage.
She writes that under the Nordic model 'women are not criminalised'. She also writes that 'Any such legal move must go alongside a large and dedicated financial investment in both harm-minimisation and exit services ... ' (page 210). She doesn't know that women are arrested in Nordic model countries for brothel keeping just like in Britain. Women are evicted from their homes and deported. The promised exit services don't materialise and the authorities don't like anyone giving them condoms.
She doesn't distinguish between legalisation and decriminalisation. She writes that the ECP (English Collective of Prostitutes) and the IUSW (International Union of Sex Workers) advocate the New Zealand model. The ECP 'favour small owner-operated ventures over larger big business brothel chains.' Page 211. The big business chains are thriving in New Zealand though, she writes, and there was a planning application for a 15-storey brothel. Well, that's not true.
She writes that legalisation would result in a bigger demand and more women involved in prostitution. She also writes that there will be an illegal sector. Page 212. However, in New Zealand there was not an expansion of prostitution after decriminalisation.
There is no reason why exit services should not still exist under decriminalisation. If a factory worker wants to retrain to become an office worker they should be helped to do that. If a sex worker wants to retrain they should be helped too. They should be offered advice about debt, benefits and housing. For the minority who take drugs they should be offered rehab.
A sex worker is not a commodity. She is not like a bale of cotton that I can take home with me and later sell. She is offering a service, like millions of other people.
There is no reason why sex work needs to be more dangerous than other forms of work. It isn't true that 'the average age of entry into prostitution worldwide estimated at around only 14 years old.' Page 211. There is no credible evidence that the Nordic model reduces the amount of prostitution or the number of murders of prostitutes.
She goes on to write about 'markedly gendered' and 'structural inequalities' as if these phrases mean anything. They 'cannot be overlooked' she writes, without spelling out precisely what she means.
Below I have quoted from her book and replied to what she has written:-
Page 217. "To put it bluntly, being a builder does not involve making one's body sexually available to one's employers; the same is true of journalists, academics, waiters etc."
She is trying here to say that sex work is different from any other type of work. The only thing that she can come up with is that sex work has distinguishing characteristics. All types of work have their own distinguishing characteristics though. Working in an undertakers is the only work where you have to handle dead bodies: that doesn't mean that in essence it is not work.
Page 217. "But the debate around prostitution cannot and should not be shut down by turning to the refrain that all work is like prostitution - because it patently is not; and the great majority of people understand this."
In what way is all work not like prostitution, or prostitution not like all work? People have customers, they negotiate a price for a service. They choose their form of work by looking at how much it pays, how long it takes to earn money, and what it is required for them to do. I can see how celibates will never be able to accept this.
Page 220. "No feminist I know is arguing for those in prostitution to be criminalised."
She obviously hasn't read the web site of Nordic Model Now! They say quite clearly that they do not want the repeal of the law that criminalises women for running a brothel. This is the main law used to arrest women in prostitution. That law always stays in place when a country adopts the Nordic model. There is in addition the law that gets sex workers evicted from their homes.
Page 220. "It would be nonsensical to suggest that all those people - women, young people, men - earning an income through prostitution are forced or coerced in the bluntest sense. However, the fact that there are probably some people successfully navigating the 'sex industry' without any negative experiences, for both the love and the money of it, should not negate the fact that research suggests this is far from the experience of the majority."
There is no evidence that most sex workers are coerced, either in Britain or around the world. Some sex workers have had a negative experience. That is the same as in other types of work. Sex workers can minimise these experiences by working together. Another way is to end up with a limited number of regular clients. Some sex workers only see men that they have seen before, they don't have to advertise and they can refuse to see a man they don't like. When police raid a flat they arrest women who work together and confiscate their phones thus disrupting safe activity.
Page 221. "It is usually acceptable to say that one is against trafficking, although some sex-industry lobby groups do try to suggest that it is extremely rare and they prefer to talk about 'migration for sex work'. Indeed reliable statistics are hard to find when dealing with an illegal trade where people are hidden or hiding and I do not deny that some government attempts at statistics can never be anything else than guesses."
There is a reason why experts on the subject of trafficking say it is rare and instead talk about 'migration for sex work'. Before George W Bush became president the word 'trafficking' had to by definition mean coercion or deception. He put Evangelical Christians in positions of authority and they decided to change the definition. They didn't want to distinguish between voluntary and involuntary sex work.
The UK decided to do the same. The rest of the world didn't. So it's not surprising that experts don't use the US and UK definition and instead stick to the Geneva Protocol. Below I quote two paragraphs from a recent Daily Mail article by Julie Bindel:-
"A few years ago, I attended a conference in Vienna about prostitution. I was one of only four delegates out of 185 who sat on a panel declaring we were troubled by the vile trade at all. The others held the view that all aspects of the sex industry should be decriminalised."
"Progress on the issue has been slow in recent years, however — at least in part because the language around prostitution has been unhelpfully sanitised. The trade in women has been cleaned up as ‘sex work'. Pimps are often described as ‘managers' and, especially within academia, the trafficking of women into prostitution has been rewritten as ‘migration for sex work'."
We should listen to what the academics say, not Radical/Revolutionary Feminists such as Finn Mackay or Julie Bindel.
Page 222. "it is not surprising then that global research finds that around 90 per cent of those in it would leave if they had the economic freedom to do so (Farley et al 2003)."
The 'global research' she mentions is not lots of researchers around the world. It all comes from Melissa Farley who is a Radical Feminist. I have dealt with this particular piece of research here.
Page 223. "It is time to envision a society, and a world, without prostitution. This may sound idealistic, but the theory matters, the direction of travel matters, the aspiration matters, because if we can't envision such a society, then we cannot even begin to build it."
Page 224. "This is not natural, it is not inevitable, and it can be reduced, maybe ended; at the very least it can be challenged, rather than glamourised, normalised and condoned.
The real question about prostitution is the question of men's rights and, whether we as a society believe that men have the right to buy and sell women's bodies or whether they do not."
Page 224. "Imagine if every country stood up and said that this is not acceptable, as Sweden has done, stood up and said that every woman is worth more than what some man will pay for her and that we will criminalise rather than condone men who assume the right to buy the body of another human being."
There is no reason to believe that the Nordic model reduces the amount of prostitution. They have manipulated the statistics to make it appear so. The official report into the Northern Ireland law says that there has been an increase. The statistics from Sweden show an increase in the proportion of Swedish men who are active sex buyers and an increase in the proportion of Swedish women who have sold sex at some time in their life. They also show a decrease in the proportion of Swedish men who have bought sex at some time in their life, the widely reported drop from 13% to 8%, followed by an increase.
If it were possible to end prostitution, that would be one thing. But to burden sex workers and make their lives more difficult with no end in sight is not something we should contemplate.
I have never bought a woman's body. Trying to link it to slavery doesn't make any sense. I don't believe that women are only good for sex - only worth 'what some man will pay for her'. This explains more about why punters are hated - people are being told that we buy women and that we think that women have no value apart from sex. This kind of hatred can only come from a repressed sexuality.
If I go to see a doctor, and it turns out to be a female doctor, do you think that I would say 'I don't want to see you, you're a woman, you're only good for sex'? Of course not. I have respect for women, and I have respect for sex workers.
Page 225. "This is despite the changes in the Policing and Crime Act 2009 under the last Labour government, which were indeed a step forward, for the first time directing the eyes of the law onto those who fuel prostitution - punters. This victory was a result of the tireless campaigning by women's groups, led by the feminist, abolitionist 'Demand Change' campaign."
She must be referring to the law that can criminalise a man if he pays for sex with a woman who has been coerced or deceived, even if he didn't know. In some parts of the country no man has been convicted. The law was based on a false idea that most women in prostitution are coerced or deceived. It's not surprising that celibates like Finn Mackay believe that.
According to this study "section 14 had not been used by the majority (81%) of police forces across England and Wales". According to MP Fiona Mactaggart "In the first year of that being law there were 49 prosecutions—I was a bit disappointed because I did not think that was very many—with the men being found guilty in 43 cases. The following year there were 17 prosecutions, with 12 guilty verdicts, and the year after there were nine prosecutions, with six guilty verdicts".
So it's hardly some kind of great victory for the prohibitionists. They obviously thought that it was going to be their foot in the door. However, they are just wasting everybody's time. We would have to be mad to introduce the Nordic model in Britain.