Ash Regan's bill and evidence from France

Ash Regan's bill has been rejected by Scottish MSPs. So now there is no chance of having the Nordic Model in Scotland for the foreseeable future, not that there was much chance to begin with. I have been finding out what she has been telling people, and this document shows it more than any other that I have found. It is a transcript of a committee meeting from late last year.

"We can look at Sweden. After the buyers were criminalised, the share of men paying for sex fell by almost half, and Sweden now has one of the smallest prostitution markets in Europe."

This is not true. She may be referring to the surveys in Sweden that showed a drop from 12.7% to 7.6% between 1996 and 2008 in the proportion of Swedish men who had paid for sex at some time in their life (not 'men paying for sex'). Or she may be referring to the drop in the number of street-based sex workers. I have dealt with this extensively on other parts of this blog so I won't go over it again.

There is something new that I wish to talk about. Many people are saying that the reason why the Nordic Model failed in Ireland, both North and South, is because of lack of enforcement. Ash Regan has been telling people that France is different, France has enforced the law and it is working there.

"Other countries are not having trouble with enforcement. The latest statistics that I saw from France, which has not had the law in place for nearly as long as Sweden has, show that it has convicted 5,000 men. I know that France is a large country in comparison with Ireland and Scotland, so the context is different, but it shows us that enforcement of these offences is possible."

Again this is not true. There may have been thousands of fines but there haven't been thousands of convictions. If a man pays the on‑the‑spot fine there is no conviction. If a man doesn't pay the fine he often gets away with it. Many buyers simply ignore the notice. Enforcement agencies often lack the resources to chase non‑payment.

Then there is the question of increased violence against sex workers in France since the Nordic Model was introduced in 2016. It does look as if violence has increased. Ten sex workers were murdered in France in 2019.

It seems that the police in France have been going after men in Paris who pay for sex with street-based sex workers, leaving the men who pay for sex with indoor sex workers untouched. In any country, street based sex workers are only between 10% and 20% of sex workers.

"Most of the arrests take place in the public space (and not online) within the scope of street prostitution."

It seems that women are being forced off the streets and into flats. This is what happened in Ireland in 1993. I don't like street prostitution, I don't have anything to do with that, so I would not get arrested in France especially outside of Paris. The one advantage of street-based sex work and the reason why some women chose it is independence.

Before 1993 in Ireland there were many street-based sex workers. They were nearly always independent. When they were forced to work indoors many of them needed pimps. If they couldn't afford to rent a flat or to advertise they had to go to work for a pimp who could. So the 1993 law increased the number of pimps in Ireland.

You can read about this in Rachel Moran's book Paid For and in the research done in the 1990s by Ann Marie O'Connor and her colleagues.

I believe that this happened in Sweden in 1999, was made worse in Ireland in 2017, and would happen in Scotland too if Ash Regan managed to get her way. The pimps are benefitting from the Nordic Model. Pimps like it when women can't be independent.

I don't want to see more pimping. I want to see more women working without pimps, working together for safety, making the rules for themselves and keeping the profits for themselves. That can't happen with the Nordic Model, the only way it can happen is with decriminalisation. Or just stop arresting young women for 'brothel-keeping': you'd think that we could all agree on that.

"These fines "are very unevenly distributed across the territory," notes the Observatory led by the Interministerial Mission for the Protection of Women against Violence and the Fight against Human Trafficking (Miprof). A majority of them (58%) were issued in Paris, while over the same period no fines were recorded in 36 departments, he said.

For the secretary general of Miprof, Roxana Maracineanu, "it is clear that the victims of "prostitutional violence" are "still largely invisible, going under the radar of the security forces and the public authorities in general"."

Pimping is spreading over the Internet, as it says below. Prostitution of minors is on the increase.

"However, in some parts of France, the law continues to be only partially implemented: the criminalisation of 'clients' remains largely inadequate and too heterogeneous across the country, and pimping is spreading over the Internet."

"The digitalisation of the prostitution system goes hand in hand with the increasing digitalisation of society. As a result, the victims of prostitution are increasingly invisible, as are the "clients" and the pimps. All stages of prostitution are now dematerialised: recruitment of victims on social networks, advertisements published on specialised platforms, appointments arranged by SMS and encrypted messages, etc. This new reality is forcing associations working in the field to adapt by developing digital outreach services. At the same time, while France ranks as the 2nd country in the world in terms of pornography consumption, FACT-S observes that pornography has become the most commonplace and violent form of online prostitution."

review of the year 2025

This year started with me seeing a local Japanese woman. I saw her three times but decided not to see her again. In March I went to stay in London and saw eight different women in Soho. I intend to do the same in 2026.

I looked in Vivastreet and saw a Chinese place. I went there every fortnight from May to October. There is a different woman there each fortnight. I have seen 14 different women, although I saw one of them three times. So I've been there 16 times. Lily was so lovely I wanted to see her again.

Apart from Lily, the two best ones were the last two I saw there. There was a younger one who was wearing a maid's uniform. She wanted me to pay extra so that the oral sex would be without a condom. I declined because oral sex isn't especially enjoyable to me. Later I asked her what else she does for extra money. What about kissing? She said yes and we had a proper snog.

The last one was an older woman. She offered sex without a condom for another £60. I declined, even when a bit later she said I could do it for £40. There has only been one other who offered that, and she was an older woman too. One of them wanted me to wear two condoms, one on top of the other.

They all have smartphones with an app that translates between Chinese and English. Most of them have little English. I paid £60 to each of them for a half an hour. When I want to go there I don't have to speak to anyone on the phone, I text and someone texts me back with the details including the codes for the security gates to get into the block of flats.

As far as I can tell there is no one else in the flat when I go there. One of them told me that the air is cleaner here than where she is from.

I have been reading Invisible: Britain's migrant sex workers by Hsiao-Hung Pai. She writes about Chinese women and also Eastern European women in Soho. I am reading the chapters about Chinese women and I shall read the chapters about the Polish woman later.

Hsiao-Hung Pai worked as a maid in a Chinese brothel. The information she provides is anecdotal, unlike the information in Professor Ko-lin Chin's book that I reviewed. Ko-lin Chin said that 15% of the Chinese women he interviewed had problems although were not necessarily exploited.

It is always possible to find a woman from that 15%, although I wouldn't say these women were especially exploited, compared to cleaning or working in a clothing factory. On page 18 of Invisible the author said that the sex worker had worked 18 hours. Then the reader has to wait till page 79 before being told that they are only actually having sex for a fraction of that time.

Four, five or six men each day seems to be the usual amount. Most of the sessions will be half hour sessions. One woman said she makes £1,200 per week and had sent home around £70,000. Robbers not punters are the biggest risk to their safety. They had a strategy though, the sex worker would not open the door unless she had received a phone call from her boss and she would shut the door quickly if more than one man was there.

Recently I have gone to a Thai massage establishment. The woman I saw was called Maya and she doesn't do anything sexual. She told me though that Kim would come into the room and give me hand relief if I wanted. I didn't.

The next time I went Maya wasn't there, only Kim. So I had a nice time with Kim, massage then hand relief. She also does body-to-body. I said that next time we might go further, perhaps I could look at her pussy. She pulled down her pants and showed me her hairless pussy. I will probably go back to see her again. I gave her £35 for the half-hour massage, another £30 for the hand relief and an extra £10 for showing me her pussy, even though she hadn't asked to be paid for dropping her pants.

What happens to women who sell sex?

In my previous post I reviewed Modern Slavery by Kevin Bales and a couple of other people. I was interested in Chapter 4 because it is about prostitution. There is something interesting in Chapter 7 too. They write about a study that followed 130 prostitutes in London (I don't know why they write 'nearly 150', the number is precisely 130). The study is called "What happens to women who sell sex? Report of a unique occupational cohort" by Helen Ward and Sophie Day.

The title is misleading, because it is suggesting that if a woman begins to sell sex certain things will happen to her. Such as higher rates of murder, death through AIDS, death through alcoholic liver disease and intravenous drug overdose. As Kevin Bales et al state, this cohort did suffer from a higher mortality rate. They also had other health problems such as STIs.

What Bales et al don't point out though is that the authors of the study state quite clearly that 'The women followed up are not representative of sex workers in general or even the baseline cohort.' When you consider that '46 (of 72, 64%) reported previous or current addiction', it is obvious that they cannot be representative of sex workers generally. Only about 20% of sex workers are addicts.

There are two paragraphs in the study that put sex work in a completely different light from that which Bales et al intended. This takes some explaining, but it seems to me that we are talking about two different groups of women, the drug addicts and the non-drug addicts. The outcomes for sex workers in these two groups are very different.

Two points. 48% of the women owned their own homes, for women where household details were available. They found no major difference in health outcomes between those who left and those who remained in the sex industry. This suggests that structural factors (like addiction, housing, and social support) may be more predictive of long-term health than sex work itself.

I have quoted these two paragraphs below, adding emphasis for the most important points.

"The most significant problems related to mental ill health and substance misuse. The relation between these health problems and sex work is complex, and despite the longitudinal nature of this study, we are not able to determine causation. Multiple factors predispose sex workers in general to chronic ill health, including poverty and poor education. We were unable to control for these because of the relatively small numbers followed up, and limited baseline information on chronic health problems. However, it is clear that prejudice towards the sale of sex and legal penalties marginalised sex workers both during and after their time in the industry, and the majority of respondents attributed their symptoms to this burden of disrespect and the difficulties they faced in hiding what they did."

"Women also combined jobs within the sex industry with work, education, and training outside. Research participants reported that sex work created the opportunities for such initiatives (qualitative data not shown). However, on completing training, many women stayed in the industry. Given the new possibilities offered by higher education and vocational training, sex work must therefore be considered a positive choice, preferable to alternatives. In other words, sex work is not simply a form of social exclusion but a conduit to social mobility and opportunities such as home ownership and a family wage. Therefore, policies that emphasise ‘‘exiting’’ strategies are likely to have limited impact. Governments may sponsor training schemes for sex workers, but as we have shown women may well train but then combine new skills with sex work in order to retain the economic advantage and flexibility that the occupation can offer. In this study, sex work was a choice for the majority who were followed up, and for many a route out of poverty rather than a vicious circle of social exclusion."

review of Modern Slavery by Kevin Bales

This book isn't just about prostitution. There is one chapter on prostitution. The first sub-heading is Forced Prostitution in the West. Kevin Bales writes "The women and girls are commonly tortured if they  do not comply". The reference for this statement is for a 2004 paper by Gijsbert Van Liemt. This paper does not mention torture once. It does mention violence and the threat of violence without specifying the nature of this violence. It does not mention girls. So there is no physical torture.

Is there psychological torture? The paper mentions isolation for sex workers and domestic maids. It says that women are moved from brothel to brothel to prevent them from 'establishing relations of trust'.

There are two things wrong with that statement. Firstly women are moved to another brothel because some men don't want to see the same sex worker again and again. Secondly women in brothels often work with other women and are not isolated. If they do work alone then it isn't really a brothel and it will often be because it is illegal for women to work together.

Also they all have smart phones so they are in contact with anyone they choose either here or in their home countries. They have an app which means that even if they don't speak English they can have a conversation with anyone.

There is no doubt that some women are coerced into prostitution and some forms of coercion are subtle, but it's a bit of a stretch to call that psychological torture. In any case Kevin Bales isn't calling it psychological. Then to tack onto women 'and girls' seems deception to me.

The second sub-heading is Forced Prostitution in Africa and Asia. Kevin Bales writes about Japan as a destination for migrant sex workers.

"But another part of Japan's slavery problem is its euphemistically titled "Entertainment Industry," which includes brothels, strip clubs, bathhouses and street prostitution. The government has a special "entertainer visa," supposedly given to singers and dancers that will be giving performances in theatres and nightclubs. If this were true, then Japan would have more professional entertainers than the rest of the world combined.

In reality, the visa is used to import large numbers of foreign women to meet the demands of Japanese men for sex and "entertainment." Between 1996 and 2003, the number of visas issued each year more than doubled (see table 10).

In 2003, approximately 80,000 "entertainers" came from the Philippines and, over the years, around 40,000 women have come from Latin America on entertainer visas. Under intense pressure from human rights groups and other countries, Japan agreed to better police the entertainment visa system from March 2005, but no figures have been released showing a fall in the number of "entertainers" brought to Japan."

Kevin Bales has got this completely wrong. These entertainers were not prostitutes. Sociologist Rhacel Parreñas worked among them, interviewed them and saw the reality of their lives. She put it all in her book 'Illicit Flirtations: Labor, Migration and Sex Trafficking in Tokyo'.

70,000 out of 80,000 Filipina women have had their livelihood taken away from them. They were not prostitutes but some of them will now be. These do-gooders have forced women into prostitution. If Japan chooses to classify women who serve drinks and sing karaoke in nightclubs as 'entertainers' that is up to them and that shouldn't be a subject of sarcasm.

Professor Parreñas knows how to help these women. They should be paid during not just at the end of their contract. Middlemen brokers who take much of the profit should be removed from the system. This goes to the heart of the issue, do you avoid what exploitation there is by improving their conditions, or do you take away their livelihood? If you take away their chosen source of income they will be poorer and more likely to engage in actual prostitution. Whatever you do, you must be willing to try to understand the reality of their lives. Not making assumptions based on your (American conservative) world view.

The third sub-heading is Prostitution. In this section Kevin Bales states that some people believe all prostitution is slavery. For example, CATW. He mentions legalization but not decriminalization. He doesn't mention the Palermo Protocol.

He mentions the Nordic model in Sweden and writes that there is little evidence that it is working. He writes that there is no evidence that prostitution has been pushed underground in Sweden, which is odd because if there is just as much prostitution but it is now illegal then it is underground.

This is an interesting paragraph:-

"Ann Jordan, director of Global Rights' Initiative Against Trafficking in Persons, also points out that while "current federal law enables prosecutions of all enslavers and provides protection for all victims," the broad scope of the law "equates prostitution with trafficking, and is redirecting resources to end prostitution rather than to end trafficking." She suggests that the investigative and prosecutorial arms of the federal government are being diverted from their primary goals of eradicating all types of slavery, in order to pursue a war on prostitution."

This is something I have believed a long time. If we apply it to the case of the Filipina women who have been stopped from working in Japan, not only is there no evidence that they were prostitutes, even if they had all been prostitutes there is no evidence that they were forced into it. "If no one is forcing her to engage is such an activity, then trafficking does not exist." This is what one group of NGOs said in 1999, according to Bales.

This is the clearest case that we're not just talking about the desires of men here, we are also talking about the needs of women. The need for poor women to earn money. Having said that, it must be true that a few of these women might have chosen prostitution while in Japan. A few might even have intended to engage in prostitution before they applied for a visa to Japan.

Modern Slavery is not a good book about the subject. A much better book is The Truth about Modern Slavery by Emily Kenway.

It was John Miller of the American State Department who put pressure on the Japanese government to severely restrict entertainment visas. I have written about him here.

three attempts to introduce Nordic model

There have been three attempts this year to introduce the Nordic model into Britain. Ash Regan is a Scottish MSP. She has introduced a bill that will punish men who pay for sex. She caused much hilarity in social media when she responded to a question about prostitution being driven underground.

"If you had a lot of women in underground cellars with a locked door, how would the punters get to them?"

People thought that she didn't understand what 'underground' meant and thought that it meant literally moving to underground cellars. I don't think she actually meant that though, her point was that if a punter can find a prostitute then so can the police. Therefore the police can find prostitution and put a stop to it. I have heard this argument many times.

If that was her point, which she failed to get across, then she is wrong. A drug user can find a drug dealer but the police can't. People can buy drugs easily and the police can't put a stop to it. Also, even if the police could locate prostitutes that doesn't really help them because the prostitutes aren't doing anything illegal. All the police could do is to try to observe their clients but they still have to prove that the man has paid for sex or agreed to pay for sex.

"The data that we have shows that in Sweden [where prostitution is illegal], prostitution has reduced to a very low level," she said."

"It has not extinguished it completely but it has reduced it to a very low level. But fundamentally, sex trafficking is almost non-existent in Sweden, if not non-existent."

This is complete nonsense. Does she not know that the review of the Irish Nordic model law published this year shows that there has been no decrease in demand? There is also the 2020 interim review and the review of the Northern Ireland Nordic model law.

How can she believe that prostitution in Sweden has reduced to a very low level and that sex trafficking is non-existent or almost non-existent? The data we have does not show that.

Claims are being made that if the bill passes it will decriminalize prostitutes. That is not true. It is not illegal to be a prostitute but it is illegal for two or more women to work together for safety. Regan's bill will not affect that. Women will still be arrested. They talk about safety but if they want to make women safe they should stop arresting them for so-called brothel-keeping.

Prostitution is dangerous under certain conditions but in Soho no sex worker has been murdered since 1947. That is because there are always two women in the flat, the sex worker is never alone with a man, and because they are not drug addicts. A minority of sex workers are drug addicts and their world is a violent world.

Ash Regan's bill is called the Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill. She is also calling it the 'Unbuyable Bill'. Which is odd, because I have never bought anyone. Another attempt to bring the Nordic model to Britain is an amendment to a bill passing through the House of Commons called the Crime and Policing Bill. There are a few amendments proposed. The one that is of interest to me is "This new clause makes it an offence to pay for, or attempt to, pay for sex either for themselves or on behalf of others".

It seems to be Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi who proposed the amendment, but she is supported by over 50 other MPs and UK Feminista. They don't seem to care that help for women to exit prostitution and decriminalizing prostitutes were always regarded as an integral part of the Nordic model. You can't just take one part of it and forget about the others.

Also, you have to have surveys so that you can tell if a change in the law is working. One survey before the law change, and then regularly after that, asking both men and women all of the important questions.

I have no reason to believe that Ash Regan or Tonia Antoniazzi will get what they want. There is someone else who seems to be getting what they want though. Police in Bristol have been issuing 'community protection warnings' to men who they think are committing anti-social behaviour. This restricts the areas where he can go and he could face criminal action if he continues to go into them.

According to this newspaper article, they are saying they want to implement the Nordic model. There are some good things about what they are doing but they don't have the right to decide that 'anti-social' means anything that they choose it to mean. Especially when they don't have proof of what they allege.

It is for Parliament to decide if Britain adopts the Nordic model or some aspects of it. Parliament hasn't voted for the Nordic model and it seems that after the review of Irish Nordic model law published recently (see previous post) they are even less likely to accept it. We can't have police forces adopting aspects of the Nordic model haphazardly.

review of Ireland Nordic Model law

There has been a review of the 2017 law in Ireland that criminalised the purchase of sex. This review was long delayed. There was interim review in 2020 by Dr Geoffrey Shannon and a couple of unofficial reviews.

go here to see the press release

go here to download a pdf file of the review

These are the three key paragraphs from the press release:-

"Among its findings, the review highlights challenges to the effective enforcement of the legislation in its current form, with An Garda Síochána and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions noting significant barriers. These include limited power of arrest for detention and questioning, the requirement of an admission of guilt, and challenges in prosecution due to the necessary ‘proofs’.

It also finds that the ability to successfully support and protect is hindered by a lack of culturally appropriate support services including healthcare, social welfare, gender specific housing for women, and clear exit routes.

The review also notes that the prevalence of human trafficking among those involved in the sale of sex in Ireland is not fully known, and the lack of reliable data is cited by both advocates for and opponents of section 7A."

It is saying that the police in Ireland find it difficult to prosecute men, it seems that without an admission of guilt nothing can happen to them. There have only been 15 convictions. It is saying that that exit strategies for women involved in prostitution are not there. It is saying that they have no idea whether trafficking has increased or decreased.

When it comes to demand, the key issue, the review does not say that demand has decreased. The nearest the review comes to answering this question is this paragraph:-

"Demand reduction and enforcement
The measurement of demand continues to be challenging due to the lack of official and/or independent statistics being consistently and uniformly collected. This is evident across all jurisdictions and is driven by the nature of conducting research in this area."

There may be other information about whether demand has increased but I haven't found it yet. I did find this though on this page:-

"Minister O’Callaghan added: “My key focus on this issue is to seek to reduce demand, protect those involved in the sex trade, and support those who wish to exit. “Regrettably, the Review highlights that despite the criminalisation of the purchase of sexual services, demand has not decreased. The Review points to recommendations to address this around awareness raising; these are mirrored in the Programme for Government and the Zero Tolerance Strategy. “In addition, certain recommendations will be considered in respect of law enforcement, and my officials are consulting with An Garda Síochána in this regard.” According to An Garda Síochána, the DPP had directed 161 prosecutions for the offence of ‘Payment etc. for Sexual Activity with a Prostitute’ from January 2017 up to August 2024. Over that period, our police service recorded 15 convictions under the legislation."

So it looks as if the introduction of the Nordic model in Ireland has been a failure.

go here to see Irish Legal News on the review
Demand has not decreased in the Irish Republic and in Northern Ireland the ban has had “minimal to no effect” on the market.

go here to see another legal view

go here to see Sex Workers Alliance Ireland on the review

go here to see my page on Ireland

my trip to London (2025)

I had another trip to London. So many of the walk ups I knew have closed. My favourite was 8 Greek Street. Last year I saw Sabrina there. Fortunately, I found her in the walk up in Romilly Street. I had sex with her again and she told me that the Greek Street premises have been sold. There seems to have been a lot of development around there, they have opened up the back of Greek Street so that you can walk around there.

I asked Sabrina if she would be there tomorrow and she said yes. The next day though she was the maid and it was Julia who was the sex worker. Julia is much younger and more attractive than Sabrina so I had sex with her. Julia has straight black hair and looks very Mediterranean. I think she is in her 30s and she is not slender but not fat either. Just the sort I like best.

Julia is a bit bossy which I don't mind. It's better when they tell you that you're too heavy on top of them and you need to lift yourself up a bit.

The Romilly Street walk up has two flats and is right at the eastern end of Romilly Street not far from Charing Cross Road. How many people walking along Charing Cross Road know that in a couple of minutes they could be shagging a beautiful Spanish woman for £30? There is a pub on a corner with lots of people standing outside. How many of them pop up the stairs for a quick shag, hearing all the people talking outside the window and the traffic passing by?

After I had seen Julia I wanted to see another woman. I had told Julia she must be the most beautiful woman in Soho apart from Sonia. Julia wanted to know who she is and where she works. I thought I would find Sonia, but the maid said she wasn't there that day. The woman who was there was a nice Brazilian woman, very friendly. I think the maid said she was called Vivien, but when I asked her in the room she said her name was Fifi or something.

She looks about 30, is of average attractiveness and a darker skin. Slender. The Lisle Street walk ups seem to be unaffected, with numbers 2, 3 and 4 still open. Number 3 has only one flat and number 4 has two. The flat where I saw Sonia last year is the upper flat at number 4, although the maid told me on Tuesday that she works in the lower flat.

Two days later I was back in Soho. There is only one walk up in Greens Court now. I saw Bianca in the lower flat. She is a lovely young blonde. Very friendly. Even more friendly was Brazilian Katarina at 4 Lisle Street upper flat. She was very encouraging and the best I saw that day. Almost as good was Samantha at 3 Lisle Street. Samantha is quite pretty with a smiley face. She wanted me to shag her fast and hard: this might have been because she liked it that way or maybe she knew I would come sooner. She said she is half Russian.

So that was three nice ones. There was another one who was a disappointment. Laura is in the Greens Court walk up in the upper flat. She is not pretty and an odd shape. I asked her to lie on the bed and let me look at her pussy. She stared at me with a puzzled expression on her face. It was not conducive to me getting an erection. There was another one like her at 4 Lisle Street lower flat.

So I know who to see next time I come to London. Julia and Katarina were the best. Julia because she is so attractive and Katarina because she is so friendly. Bianca and Samantha are worth seeing. Sabrina and Vivien/Fifi are good. Laura and the other one best avoided.

The walk ups now are Romilly Street, Greens Court, the three in Lisle Street and the Thai one in Little Newport Street. There is also the other one in Greek Street. That is still open but seems to open later and works differently to other walk ups now. Romilly Street has the names of the women in the corridor but it seems the other places don't have that.

When I go to London I'm not just interested in women. I was staying in Pimlico and I found Tachbrook Street street market. It must be a posh area. I have never seen a fishmonger selling sea urchins and razor clams. I have never seen a greengrocer selling mangosteens and rambutans. Not everything was expensive, I bought a halloumi wrap for £5.