the brothels of Blackpool

In my last post I said that I thought I might have wandered into Blackpool's red light district - and that I would give you the name and number of the young lady I had a nice time with.

Research on the Internet showed that I was indeed correct in thinking that the King Street/Cookson Street area not far from Blackpool North train station is the red light district. There are five or six brothels in the relatively short road of Cookson Street, then a Thai brothel in King Street and a Thai massage place in a side street.

I could see on Google Streetview that they make no attempt to disguise what they are. You can guess from their names what they are. Natalie's Sauna, Frenchies Sauna, Secrets, Brooklyn's and Babylon. There's also Magaluf but that looked empty.

There may have been a few in Central Drive some distance away but they seem no longer to be there. They were supposed to be more discreet, usually with a back-alley and up steps entrance. There are supposed to be lots of street girls in Central Drive. I didn't see any, but I was there in the afternoon and I guess they only come out at night.

The Cookson Street brothels in Blackpool charge double the price of Manchester, there's less choice and they are less willing to do even basic things. You don't get the full half hour. They charge £70 for a blowjob and sex, but they might not let you get on top of them. If you just want a handjob they all charge £40. If you want blowjob or sex (but not both) they charge £60.

I went to Frenchies. There were two women there. I chose the one with black hair and glasses. No touching allowed, and the only sex was with her bending over at the end of the bed. She didn't tell me before I handed over the money that there was no touching and I wouldn't be allowed to get on top of her. Avoid her.

I also went to Babylon. There was one woman there. She was a middle-aged to elderly woman from Poland with hardly any English. I asked her if I would be able to use my ultra thin condoms. She couldn't understand to begin with but then was quite emphatic that I would have to use her condoms. She tried her best to make me happy although as I was walking away I realised I hadn't had my full half hour.

Her name is Victoria. She's of average attractiveness. She will be there for the next week or so before she moves somewhere else. Babylon is a nicer place than Frenchies. I also spoke to an attractive blonde at Natalie's Sauna who asked me why I was taking photos of the brothels. I told her it was for my blog.

I have also seen the nice young lady again in her hotel room. I wasn't intending to see her again but when I was investigating Central Drive I saw two women walking along. As we passed one of them smiled and said hello. They looked like ordinary young women, not street girls, and I didn't stop to talk.

A bit later I thought to myself 'Is that Erika?', the young lady I had seen on my previous trip. It's a bit of a coincidence but Hull Road where she lives is just round the corner from Central Drive. This woman looked prettier, with more makeup and nicer dressed than when I had seen Erika though.

I thought there's one way to find out. I still had her number in my phone so I texted her. I texted 'Hi Erika. You look very pretty today. Would you like to meet up later? About 5 pm like before?'. I was outside her hotel at 5 pm and she turned up late after numerous texts between us. She was wearing a skirt unlike the previous time and I could she had false eyelashes on.

In her room I handed over an unopened box of ultra thin condoms and she took one out for us to use. I don't know if she knows what the words 'ultra' or 'thin' mean: her English is not good. She gave me some oral sex, then she wanted to get on top of me, as before. I had given her £60, as before.

I wanted to get on top of her. She looked uncomfortable when I was fucking her. I asked if it was good, or bad. Sometimes what seem to be looks of discomfort can be looks of pleasure. She wasn't happy with me fucking her, so I stopped.

She had asked me if I wanted to lick her pussy. I said no. A bit later she asked me why I didn't want to lick her pussy. I said it's because I know she will ask for £20. She kept asking for it and I kept saying no. I said I would do it for £10 and she refused but then said yes. So obviously she prefers men licking her pussy to them fucking her. She likes a finger in her pussy when she's wanking herself.

She is on vivastreet (or she was) but the photos are not of her. She's plumper than the girl in the photos. Her mobile number is 07551226257. I almost got my full half hour with her. I won't be seeing her again. I probably won't be going back to Blackpool. Although there's a direct train from Liverpool Lime Street it takes more than an hour. I do like Blackpool though.

It's better going to the places near the part of Merseyside where I live, or Manchester. I had a choice of five girls once at the Piccadilly Club (Piccadilly Selecta) in Manchester, and they only charge £35 for half an hour. The local women charge £40 or £45 for a full half hour.

At Overpool Angels nearer to me there's a lovely young woman called Rochelle (also called Roberta or Robbie) who lets me use my ultra thin condoms. She also gave me oral sex without a condom. She told me she will be going on holiday to Mexico, but I think she would be back by now.

At The Office in Ellesmere Port is an older woman called Stella who said she would let me. Lucy did but doesn't work there any more, which is sad because she was good. She remembered me even though I hadn't seen her for weeks, and she remembered that I liked to use my special condoms. She said 'Have you got one of your condoms?', so I didn't even have to ask.

At Jays in Wallasey there was a woman there on Fridays called Stacey who said I could fuck her without a condom for extra money (she's not there any more). I told her I find nighties very sexy, and the next Friday she brought her nightie in and put it on for me.

I met a sad case at another place. I won't say who or where. She was going to get on top of me without a condom but I stopped her. I asked her to use a condom. I'm pretty sure she's a drug addict. She says she doesn't use them. I told her I do because it's always best to be safe. I thought to begin with she was being amateur and naive, but now I think she caters for abusive men because she really needs the money because of her habit.

I also saw lovely Thai girl Sara in Chester again. She was just as lovely as the first time I saw her in her nice flat down by the river.

UPDATE: Rochelle isn't at Overpool Angels anymore. She decided to quit, for reasons I might explain in a new post. There's a lovely young woman called Eva there some days. At The Office is a lovely young woman called Lily there some days. I might write more about them in a new post. I've seen both of them several times, and there is also a nice older woman called Amber at Overpool Angels.

my day trip to Blackpool

The first time I went to Blackpool was last week. Yesterday I went again, but this time I had the phone number of a woman I had found on vivastreet. It's quite simple, you just type 'Blackpool escorts' into Google and the first to come up is vivastreet. I texted her and asked if she was available that day. She replied that she was so I told her the time I wanted to see her.

Blackpool has a reputation for illicit sex. Men took their secretaries there for dirty weekends. Young men and women would meet each other and have sex. This happens at any holiday destination but Blackpool is notorious for it. Holiday makers stayed in boarding houses where you weren't allowed to share a room unless you were married, and this was the subject of a lot of humour.

Between the phallic symbol of Blackpool Tower and the sea is a paved area with the names of many comedians, both recent and from times past. These I expect are comedians who have appeared in Blackpool, I don't know if it was under the phallic symbol or at the end of the pier. There are some of their jokes there too, so many I didn't have time to read them all. Some of them are quite bawdy.

It would be nice if my favourite Benny Hill joke was there. I heard it again recently just by chance on the radio. He takes a woman to a boarding house and the landlady wants to see their marriage license. He gives her his dog license and she goes off to find her glasses. They lock the door, and when she comes back she bangs on the door and shouts "Whatever you're doing in there, stop it! Because this is not for it!".

I heard a comedian on the radio say that Benny Hill had made a rape joke and so it wasn't all innocent fun. Catherine Tate though made a rape joke more recently. Does that mean we shouldn't watch Catherine Tate? It seems many people don't like Benny because he appealed to working class people of a different generation. Catherine Tate had a character who one week was collecting money for 'all the little victims of sexual harassment in the workplace' and who said "Did you know that every 38 minutes some unsuspecting little temp in a short skirt bends over to file something in the bottom drawer and gets shagged up the arse?".

I texted her half an hour before I was due to see her but she didn't reply until 10 minutes before. I had to get to Hull Road. When I got there I could see that it was a street full of little hotels. I don't know if they would be best described as boarding houses or Bed-and-Breakfasts. I found the one where she was, but I wasn't sure what to do. There was an open door and I didn't have a room number that I could ring. I went into the lobby, then up the stairs. I could see that it was quite shabby and cheap.

She phoned me and said "Where are you?". She sounded a bit rough and I thought about abandoning it and walking away. I had taken a viagra an hour and a half before though so that would have been wasted. Up the stairs walked an attractive young blonde woman who gave me a lovely smile. She was wearing jeans and didn't seem to have any makeup on but she was of well above average attractiveness.

She led me to her small shabby but nice room. She went to the window and closed the curtains then started taking off her clothes. I couldn't quite remember how much it was for half an hour but I gave her 3 £20 notes and she seemed happy with that. She hardly spoke any English. She had the perfect body for me, not too skinny.

She looked lovely lying on the bed with her legs apart. Her pussy was beautiful. She played with her pussy and showed me how she wanted me to play with it, moving my fingers up and down on her clit. She made licking movements with her tongue and I could see she was inviting me to lick her pussy. Because it was so pretty and didn't smell I thought that could be good.

She wanted money for that though. I thought she said £10 so I got the money out of my trouser pocket. She wanted £20 though. I said I wasn't going to give her £20. There was a look of disappointment on her face, she thought for a second, then accepted the £10. I found her clitoris with my tongue, and also gave her labia minora a suck too. She put a condom on me (I had given her an unopened pack of 3 thin condoms) and got on top of me, riding me. Then she stood up and thrust her pelvis into my face, so I licked her cunt again.

We also did some fucking from behind, then with me on top. However, that didn't last for long because soon my time was up. I told her I would see her again next week for an hour. I'm not going to tell you her name yet because I don't want her to get booked up when I want to see her again. I can tell you her name in my next post. She definitely fits into the category of enthusiastic amateur.

When I was on my way back to the train station I went a different way from before. I saw this place which I thought looked like a brothel. On the outside it just said '10 King Street' and a neon sign saying 'Open'. I went to the doorway but was no wiser. I Googled '10 King Street' and it came up a Thai massage place. Different from any Thai massage place that I had seen before. I went inside the doorway again and a middle-aged Thai woman came out to talk to me.

I asked her how much is it for a half-hour massage. She asked if I wanted just a massage, then said they don't do just massage, they do full personal service for £60. I walked away and then just round the corner there was another Thai massage place. Unlike 10 King Street, this one said Thai massage in the window.

So I thought perhaps I had wandered into Blackpool's red light district. So if anyone can tell me about this little area, and especially about number 10 King Street, I will be very interested.

review of Paid For part 3

There are several different aspects to this book. One aspect, her own personal experiences, is very interesting. Another aspect, her comments on her experiences, is not interesting. For example, in Chapter 10 she says that she met 'advantaged middle-class women' who were prostitutes. That is interesting, because it contradicts what the 'abolitionists' say. When Moran comments that these women must all have something wrong with them, probably child abuse, that is not interesting, because that's just her opinion.

"They were privileged. They were educated, only to second level usually but even so, I am talking about well-to-do fee-paying private schools. They seemed to have had other viable choices open to them; they could have gone to university, they could have gone to work in daddy's business, but yet here they were in this awful place doing something they clearly hated and that obviously made them miserable." Chapter 10 page 96.

Moran wrote in the same chapter that she knew one woman who managed to save ten thousand pounds. This woman would have been even better off if she hadn't spent so much money on overheads - rent, advertising, mobile phone, taxis, clothes and shoes. Moran criticised her for this: "The whole idea was supposed to be about making a half-decent living, I'd say to her, for God's sake" page 92.

The ex-preacher Gavin Shuker (now an MP but not for much longer I hope) said this in a debate about prostitution in the House of Commons: "There is undoubtedly a huge supply of money, estimated by some to be £5 billion or £6 billion of our economy, but that money is not finding its way into the pockets of women who are exploited through this trade; it ends up in the pockets of pimps, exploiters and those who benefit from trafficking."

In the debate Moran's book was mentioned three times. It's almost as if they haven't read it. She wrote that the reason she and others became prostitutes was 'the opportunity to put roofs over our heads and food in our mouths' page 73. She didn't hand over her money to 'pimps, exploiters and those who benefit from trafficking'. So her experiences contradict what Shuker and other abolitionists say.

This leads us on to the question of is it a good idea to remove the opportunity for women to put roofs over their heads and food in their mouths. This is a question that has been answered by Molly Smith and Juno Mac in their excellent book 'Revolting Prostitutes'. On page 150 they write this:-

"One anti-prostitution organization, the Women's Support Project, write in support of the Nordic model: 'If men were not prepared to buy sex, then prostitution would not work as a survival behaviour.' When you enact a policy that makes a survival strategy 'not work' any more, some of the people using it to attempt to survive may no longer survive."

I don't believe that all women who become prostitutes do so because they would otherwise be homeless or starve. Many will survive by low-paid work and then they turn to prostitution when they want something better than survival. We can all agree that there should be social security so that nobody remains homeless or hungry.

If you really believed that prostitution exists because of destitution, then you would campaign to eliminate destitution. Prostitution would disappear, together with destitution, without the need to put men and women in prison or fine them. Without taking away anyone's rights. Without removing that safety net that should still be there while society works to achieve the goal of removing destitution, which is a worthwhile goal in itself. They don't campaign for that though.

Another important question that Molly Smith and Juno Mac answer in their book is about how some laws can make prostitution more dangerous for women. It is important for sex workers to be able to screen potential clients. Street sex workers could do this but the 1993 law in Ireland and the 1999 law in Sweden made this much more difficult. On page 144 they write this:-

"Everywhere in the world, regardless of the legal model, street-based sex workers use a familiar range of safety strategies. For example, they might work together with a couple of friends, they might take time to assess a client before getting into his car, and they might have a friend write down his car's number plate to signal to him that someone will know who she's with."

A woman who is was a street-based sex worker (as Moran was) either had to give up working on the street and work indoors (as Moran mostly did) or continue under more difficult circumstances. In either case she can no longer screen her clients in the way she used to. Moran said this was a big problem with the 1993 Irish law. Smith and Mac say this was a big problem with the 1999 Swedish law. Yet Moran and others successfully campaigned for the Swedish law to be enacted in Ireland. This happened in 2017, and according to newspaper reports it seems to have been a complete disaster.

A major theme of this book is trauma. She writes that she was traumatised by having to have sex for money. People don't usually do things that traumatise them a second time. You might think that she was forced to do it because she had no other way of making money. However, she seemed to have quite a few different ways of making money. I'm not talking about her early attempts at erotic dancing and erotic photography. I'm talking about her drug dealing and her pimping.

"I had progressed to snorting cocaine at that point and would procure it for certain punters, making a mark-up on it, so that I was profiting from the drug transaction as well as whatever bizarre fantasies I was helping these men indulge." Chapter 9 page 87.

"I rented an apartment in Terenure for a short time and opened an escort agency of my own. I was seventeen at the time and I'm quite sure I was the youngest person advertising an escort agency in Ireland. It was a very simple thing to do and only required an apartment, a mobile phone and an advertisement in the back of In Dublin magazine, but when I had to deal with the reality of the ridiculous overheads, I soon got rid of the apartment and advertised for call-outs only. I worked mainly in the brothels and escort agencies of others from then on and did my own call-outs to homes and hotels. If I'd get a request for a call-in on my agency line I'd use a bedroom in the brothel of one of the women I was associating with at that time. I'd pay them a fee for the use of the room, which was common practice. I'd made money that way when I had my own apartment." Chapter 10 page 93.

As someone who has spent years on Job Seeker’s Allowance I'm not very sympathetic to people who sell drugs or pimp and who justify it by saying they needed the money. I never did that, I lived within my means on benefits. Many people in Ireland travelled to England and worked night shifts in factories. So to say she had no other option is far from the truth.

She wrote that she never had the opportunity to do an ordinary job, such as working in a bank. She wrote that she didn't feel worthy of that type of work. Well I would never have been allowed to work in a bank. You don't have to feel worthy to live on the dole or work in a factory.

Many women and men become full-time drug dealers or pimps. If she hated 'paid intercourse' so much why did she not do one or both of these? She said she didn't want to deal with the reality of the ridiculous overheads. Is she saying that prostitutes keep more money than pimps? She was 17 and hadn't yet developed her cocaine addiction. I'm not saying that women should do anything apart from prostitution, but if you are really traumatised by it then it's odd you should continue because of something about overheads.

Not once in this book does she express regret about the harm she did when she sold drugs or pimped. She does express regret about having been a prostitute. I don't expect anyone to feel guilty about being a prostitute, but I do expect people to feel guilty about dealing or pimping. Especially when pimps (and men like me) are demonized by people like her.

I have said that there are several different aspects to this book. One of them is her own personal experience. Another is her comments about her experiences. A third aspect is the quotations from Ruhama and others which begin each chapter and which I commented on in the first part of my review of this book.

There is a fourth aspect, and this is where she writes about some of her experiences but in a very vague and ambiguous way. It is clear what she intends us to believe, but it is not clear if there is evidence to back that interpretation. Consider this:-

"What was going on was the very same thing that was going on when I was lifting my skirt in a backstreet alley. The nature of prostitution does not change with its surroundings. It does not morph into something else because your arse is rubbing up against white linen as opposed to roughened concrete." Chapter 10 page 100.

She said that she only did handjobs and oral sex up till 1993. Then, after a change in the law, she had to start working indoors. She went back onto the streets sometimes though. One can only assume this was because on the streets she didn't have to do the 'paid intercourse' that she disliked so much and only did 'sporadically'. So why is she writing about her arse rubbing up against roughened concrete? How would she know what street girls do?

My understanding is that street girls don't wear skirts. They wear jeans, and they pull them down a bit and bend forward so they can be taken from behind. So they don't experience their arses rubbing up against concrete, either that of paving or a wall. But then again, maybe they did it differently in Ireland in the 1990s. Why doesn't she make clear what the facts are?

Another thing that is odd is that for the first two years men accepted that she didn't want to do vaginal or anal sex. Later they accepted that she didn't want to do anal sex. Yet they didn't accept that she didn't want to be penetrated with fingers or objects both vaginally and anally. She says that men didn't accept the limits of the 'agreed contractual exchange'.

My own experience of prostitution is that few women allow digital penetration. It is not usual for a prostitute to say beforehand that she doesn't allow it. If I ask for it she will most likely say no, or sometimes she will say she charges extra for that. Occasionally she will let it happen without additional payment. I have never forced anything upon a woman.

If Moran had written "I told him to stop but he wouldn't listen" or "I told him he would have to pay extra for that but he went ahead anyway" then we would be clear about what happened. That would be sexual assault or rape. But she doesn't write that.

In Chapter 23 on page 252 Moran writes this:-

"A 2005 Ruhama research report on barriers affecting women in prostitution states: 'Studies in Ireland have found that 38% of women involved in prostitution have attempted suicide and 25% suffered from diagnosed depression and were in receipt of medical treatment'. It is my personal conviction that the twenty-five percent of prostitutes recorded as having depression in Ireland is a significant underestimate of the true figure and that many prostitutes have not been diagnosed simply because they have not presented their symptoms to a doctor."

If you look for this Ruhama report it does indeed say this:-

"There are also high levels of stress related illnesses. Studies in Ireland have found that 38% of women involved in prostitution have attempted suicide and 25% have suffered from diagnosed depression (O’Connor, 1994)."

The Ruhama report is Factors affecting prostitution – Damage and survival mechanisms. In the references section they give the full title of the work they say they derive these statistics from: O’Connor, A. M. (1994) Health Needs of Women Working in Prostitution in the Republic of Ireland, First Report for EUROPAP, Dublin: Eastern Health Board.

However, the O'Connor 1994 document says nothing about either suicide or depression. What's going on? There is another document, written by O'Connor and somebody else that does contain these statistics. It is O’ Neill, M. and O Connor, A.M. (1999) Drug Using Women Working in Prostitution, Report prepared by the Women’s Health Project, Dublin: Eastern Health Board.

Now that we know the correct title of the document we can tell immediately that it is not about prostitutes in general in Ireland, but about prostitutes who are drug addicts in Dublin. As the study itself says "Numerous studies have highlighted the fact that women working in prostitution who are drug users, particularly intravenous drug users (IDUs), appear to be a different population from those who are non-IDUs." The number of drug addicted prostitutes is a fraction of the total number of prostitutes.

The study was of 77 women. All were drug users. 95% were working on the streets. 45% were homeless. Between 11% and 28% had HIV. 52% had been charged with soliciting. This had resulted in 20% of those women being imprisoned and 12% fined. 29 of the 77 (38%) reported having attempted suicide. 19 of the 77 (25%) suffered from diagnosed depression and had received treatment.

"Living with drugs causes considerable strains. A woman drug user who is also a mother faces specific problems organising her drug-related needs around her commitments as a parent, especially where young children are involved. Another dimension to the drugs issue for women is dealing with the reality of prison sentences for themselves, their partners, their siblings or their adult children. Prison sentences for drug related offences severely cut across family networks and reduce still further levels of support for women." O’ Neill, M. and O Connor, A.M. (1999)

Their problems were numerous: addiction, homelessness, imprisonment, fines, and risk of HIV as well as street prostitution. We know that drugs can increase depression, and people with depression may be more vulnerable to addiction. So to say that a quarter of prostitutes are so unhappy in prostitution that they suffer from depression and that even more attempt suicide is simply wrong. It is a deliberate distortion of research. They have hidden the facts.

What they are doing is using research that applies only to drug addicted street prostitutes and pretending that it applies to all prostitutes. They have used this tactic time and time again. It is dishonest. Another tactic they use is to bury information. Instead of referring us directly to the research which is the source of the statistic, they refer instead to a document that refers to it. Or a document that refers to another document that refers to the research.

So if someone tells you that the number of active sex buyers in Sweden is the lowest in Europe, or that there is no evidence that criminalizing men increases the risk to women, you should remember that you have to trace the evidence back to the original study. They know that most people, no matter how much they say they care, can't be bothered to do that.

The O'Connor 1994 study is interesting, resulting from interviews with 18 street-based sex workers after the introduction of the 1993 law. It says twice that they are not a representative sample of sex workers in Ireland.

"Three (17%) of the women felt very strongly that the new law is leading to the emergence of pimps (male protectors) and therefore, an increase in violence and intimidation on the streets. One said "anyone with enough money to rent an apartment and a mobile phone can go into business as a pimp. These men are offering protection and a "safe house" to women who are working. "They leech (latch) onto the women providing protection and paying bail, that's when the violence comes in"." O'Connor, A.M. (1994)

We know that at least one woman was leeching onto the women and that was Rachel Moran. It seems that sex workers don't hate people like me, they hate people like her. I think that O'Connor and O'Neill did good work interviewing street-based sex workers. Their data should have been used to improve the lives of the most vulnerable women. Instead it has been abused by Moran (former pimp) and Ruhama (The Church) to bring in legislation that harms the most vulnerable women. She exploited them then and she's exploiting them now.

The only time Moran mentions decriminalisation is when she writes about the Nordic model decriminalising the sale of sex. It doesn't. Prostitutes go to jail under the Nordic model. There is no mention of New Zealand where prostitutes are genuinely decriminalised: they do not go to jail. She is not presenting both sides of the argument. She does not mention the difference between legalisation and decriminalisation.

There is the issue of why do sex workers get paid so much. At the end of Chapter 19 page 204 she writes this: "Their higher pay does not reflect gender parity; it reflects the difficulty involved in earning it". In a way she's right.

Incidentally, on this page she uses her most florid language. Phrases such as 'the decision to sell the flesh on one's bones' and 'to bear the burden of its corruption on their bodies' may go down well with the abolitionist audience and especially the Christians but to me they are laughable.

If you go to Manchester the going rate for half an hour with a sex worker is £35 to £40. If you go to Liverpool it is £70. In Liverpool the going rate for a straight massage with nothing sexual is £25 to £30 for a half hour. The reason why Liverpool sex workers demand more than Manchester sex workers is not because they hate what they are doing more but because the police have a different attitude. In Liverpool women find it more difficult to work and keep themselves safe. It is the police who create the difficulty not the punters.

Note that she doesn't say that the money goes to pimps and traffickers and not to the women.

In the epilogue on page 293 Moran writes that "Prostitution first fell sharply in one place and one place only. That is in the nation which suppressed demand. A global implementation of Sweden's laws, which criminalise demand, is the one thing I'd most like to see before I die." This repeats her statement that "prostitution in Sweden has plummeted" in Chapter 20 page 215. Although there has been an effect on street prostitution, none of the reports from Sweden show an overall reduction in demand. I have devoted a page to this issue, and I have devoted a post to the disaster that is happening now that the Nordic model has come to Ireland, with women being jailed not decriminalised. This dishonest book helped to bring this situation about.

In Chapter 21 page 233 she writes about 'pro-prostitution groups' who march in Gay Pride Festivals around the world. She writes that the gay community is being used and 'the pro-prostitution lobby is trying to pull a fast one here'.

By pro-prostitution groups/advocates/lobby she means people who believe in genuine decriminalisation for sex workers, as happens in New Zealand. They are not 'pro-prostitution', they just don't want sex workers to be arrested for working together for safety. It is the 'abolitionists' who are trying to pull a fast one by pretending that they don't want 'prostituted' women to be arrested. Ruhama is now pretending that they never intended this to happen in Ireland even though this issue was discussed before 2017.

Abolitionists are a threat to gay men and lesbian women. They are a threat to transsexual people. Jim Wells, the Northern Ireland DUP politician, is a Christian. He is a Creationist who has got into trouble with his views on abortion and gay rights.

He was instrumental in getting the Nordic model adopted in Northern Ireland, where the first man to be arrested was arrested along with three women. He used a false statistic to do that. He said in the Northern Ireland Assembly that 127 prostitutes were murdered in the Netherlands after legalisation there.

Rachel Moran repeated this false statistic on radio. Julie Bindel and Kat Banyard quote 'Mr Wells' in their recent books. Banyard uses his false statistic.

So it's not surprising that sex workers and people who genuinely believe in their decriminalisation are welcome at Gay Pride Festivals. Obviously they aren't a sexual minority, but then neither are transsexuals who are also welcome and also threatened by people like 'Mr Wells'. Third-wave sex-positive feminists belong here too.

If the abolitionists don't like it then they can have their own parade. What would that look like? They could have Jim Wells to lead it, but then maybe they would keep him out of sight because you don't want to let the mask slip. But you could have another evangelical like Ian Paisley junior or Gavin Shuker. Ian Paisley junior has said "We don't like poofs" and was Chair in a debate where Gavin Shuker and Fiona Bruce spoke in favour of the Nordic model.

Or MP Fiona Bruce from the Evangelical Alliance. She is trying to get the Nordic model adopted in Britain. She voted against gay marriage and wants to restrict abortion. The nuns of Ruhama would be there, the Sisters of Our Lady of Charity and the Good Shepherd Sisters could each have their own floats. It might seem odd that Evangelicals, Catholics and Radical Feminist lesbians can work together but one thing unites them: they don't like men and women having casual sex.

Radical Feminists like Julie Bindel and Kat Banyard would be there. There could be a guest speaker from America, a social conservative who could talk about incarceration of men and women: after all the American model is the same as the Nordic model just without the hypocrisy. Another guest could be an African preacher or politician, one of the ones who put gay men and lesbian women in prison. Maybe someone from the Taliban?

Pride of place would be the survivors. Women like Rachel Moran and Anna, who we are all supposed to be listening to, despite the fact that they tell different stories. Anna's book 'Slave' makes 'Paid For' look like 'Belle de Jour'. Dr Brooke Magnanti wouldn't be invited because she doesn't count as a survivor. Also she's an expert in statistics so she might upset the nuns.

The biggest problem with this book is that the main message is women go into prostitution to avoid poverty. This is different from the 'abolitionist' message and Anna's book which says it is all about violent pimps or traffickers. Also, Moran contradicts her own message when she writes about the 'advantaged middle-class women' that she knew.

A big problem for her message is that if you say that women do it to avoid poverty then you are open to the criticism that most people work to avoid poverty. If your answer to that is saying that you feel offended by someone saying that sex work might have some similarity to working in a factory (even though she compared sex workers to bank robbers) and something about someone putting his penis up your anus (even though no-one put his penis up her anus) it's not convincing.

I found these on a Radical Feminist site

two sex workers in their 20s jailed

Adrina P (25) and Ana T (20) were raided in November last year. They were jailed for nine months last week. I haven't given their full names even though they are in the media because this kind of exposure is harmful to sex workers.

This is the reality of the Nordic model, which has been in place in Ireland since 2017. You might say that prostitutes have always been jailed for 'brothel keeping', but the penalties were doubled when the new law came in. This is how the Nordic model was meant to work, they pretend that prostitutes are decriminalized. The welfare of women is a low priority; nothing must get in the way of their futile war against prostitution by any means necessary.

Sex workers say Kildare ‘brothel’ arrests prove law is not fit for purpose Belfast Telegraph June 10 2019 The two women, one of whom is pregnant, were jailed for nine months at Naas District Court last week.

Jailing of sex workers keeping brothel shows law ‘not fit for purpose’ Irish Times June 10 2019 ‘Nordic model’ legislation does not protect those selling sex, says alliance

Feminists, if you support the ‘Nordic’ approach to sex work, you’re co-signing the imprisonment of women The Independent

A change in Irish law was meant to help sex workers. So why are they being jailed? The Guardian June 12 2019

This article is even more recent.

Police question dozens in prostitution crackdown Independent.ie 14 June 14 2019 Kate McGrew, director of Sex Workers Alliance Ireland, said more women had been prosecuted for “so-called” brothel keeping, what she termed working together in safety.

Here are articles which show the introduction of the Nordic model in Ireland has been a disaster.

‘It’s clearly a brothel, yet nothing can be done’ Irish Times 29 July 2017 The vast majority of those targeted for brothel keeping are eastern European women; only three Irish people have been prosecuted in the past three years. The usual penalty is a fine, and about 35 per cent have received jail terms.

Does the Nordic model work? What happened when Ireland criminalised buying sex New Statesman March 26 2018 Another effect of the legislation was to double the punishment for brothel-keeping in an attempt to crack down on pimping. Irish law defines a brothel as a place where two or more people work, meaning women working in pairs for safety reasons can be charged for pimping each other.

Buying sex has been illegal in Ireland for one year but 'very little' has changed thejournal.ie February 23 2018

How the Irish State is Failing Sex Workers Rebel September 13 2018

FactCheck: Would a new government bill really decriminalise sex workers? thejournal.ie 18 September 2016

Man, 65, is the first convicted of buying sex Irish Examiner 22 January 2019 €200 fine

Finally, a couple of good news stories.

Nurses vote to back decriminalisation of prostitution Royal College of Nurses to lobby UK government in move to protect sex workers’ health The Guardian 1 June 2019

Mexico City will decriminalize sex work in move against trafficking The Guardian 20 May 2019

You might think that I am only criticizing the Nordic model because it would stop me from paying for sex. I know enough about it to know that it doesn't stop men from paying for sex. I have read the reports: there is just as much prostitution in Sweden today as there was 20 years ago.

Over the years I have met many women in prostitution and usually they are good people. I don't like the idea that they could be jailed for nine months. People who demonize men like me aren't going to believe that I care more about the welfare of women than they do.

These two young women have had their lives ruined. When they leave prison they will probably be deported. They may never be able to work. Any time anyone Googles their names it will come up 'prostitute'. It would not be surprising if they end up walking the streets at night in a red light district in Bucharest and die of an overdose or are murdered.

You may say they brought it upon themselves by coming to Ireland, selling sex, and trying to keep themselves safe by working together. They won't be doing that again. They brought it upon themselves. They were told though that Ireland had decriminalised prostitutes, that they were regarded as victims. You don't put victims in jail.

It will be Rachel Moran and Frances Fitzgerald who will be responsible for whatever happens to these two women. They are the ones who brought this vicious and hypocritical system to Ireland. Ireland has always had a problem with its 'fallen women' and that continues today. Fitzgerald is the former Minister for Justice and Equality. Where is the justice? Where is the equality?

I will be Googling the names of the jailed women in the years to come because I want to know what happens to them. I won't forget them the way that everyone forgot the three women who were arrested alongside the first punter to be arrested when the Nordic model came to Northern Ireland. If I could find out their names I would Google them too.

We need to record the arrests in Nordic model countries. We need to record if they are male or female, and their ages. How many of the arrests are of women in their 20s? Deportations and evictions should be recorded too.

Moran writes in her book about the decriminalisation of prostitutes in the Nordic model. That's the only time she uses the word. No mention of decriminalisation in the context of New Zealand. There is no proper discussion of the issues in her book.

So you might think that I don't accept the Nordic model. If the Nordic model was applied as it is supposed to be applied I wouldn't have a problem. I could accept the risk of a 200 euro fine. There has only been one punter convicted in Ireland, and he was given a €200 fine. Not much chance of detection then. Even if you are convicted, it just means you've spent more than you anticipated. I'm not bothered if anyone knows what I've been up to either. I wouldn't be deterred.

It's the reality of the Nordic model that I can never accept. I can never accept the jailing of prostitutes, or any of the extra-judicial punishments that they face eg eviction. Theory and practice are two different things, and the system can only spread through deceit.

Make no mistake, the punishment of women under the Nordic model is essential to that system. It's not a hangover from a previous system. It's not an unintended consequence that will be corrected by Moran campaigning for an adjustment and Fitzgerald taking notice. Moran isn't happy with the way the model has turned out in Ireland but she is goading the police into even more repressive measures.

There are political parties in Nordic model countries who want to get rid of the system. One way to do that would be to say "We don't want to get rid of the Nordic model, we want to implement the REAL Nordic model, one where women is their 20s don't get arrested". They would gain a lot of support, but of course people like Julie Bindel wouldn't be happy about that.

Radical Feminists like Bindel wouldn't be happy, but just as many feminists are third-wave sex positive feminists. Why should they be ignored? I'd like to see what answer Bindel could come up with if progressive parties in northern and southern Ireland campaigned for the true decriminalisation of prostitutes.

Frances Fitzgerald has said not prosecuting women would be a 'legal loophole'. That doesn't make any sense: under no circumstances should women in their 20s be arrested. Whatever scenario you're thinking of, they should not be arrested. They might be independent, pretending to be independent but pimped, or pimped: in none of these cases should they be arrested. "Women would come under pressure to claim they were working independently" she says. That shouldn't make any difference.

She wants to try to stamp out prostitution by any means necessary and for her the end justifies the means. The end will never be realised though, and so repressive measures will continue for decades to come as has happened in Sweden.

The 'Nordic Model Now!' site state this:-

"Legalising small groups of prostituted women operating from the same premises would serve to legitimise prostitution and put the “right” of men to buy sexual access and the “right” of prostituted women to operate in groups above the rights of all women and girls to not be commercially sexually exploited, and to be free from sexual violence, and of communities to dignity and safety for their most vulnerable members."

So they know about the issue but don't believe that women have a right to work together. So they don't believe in decriminalisation for prostitutes. They believe they should be jailed because of 'dignity and safety'! I've got a better idea. Instead of jailing them, just re-open the old Magdalene Laundries. They can wash their sins away the Ruhama way.

down by the river

Yesterday I went to Chester on the train. I wasn't intending to see a sex worker but I wondered what would happen if I went onto the internet and looked for escorts in Chester. I wasn't expecting much because I have tried to find sex workers using AdultWork years ago and gave up because of poor results. My phone is not a smartphone and I can't access AdultWork but I found some adverts on vivastreet.

It looked as if I would be able to send a text message easily. I chose one at random and asked if she would be available that afternoon. She replied and I made an appointment to see her at 3 pm. She didn't give me her full address but it was in an appartment block in Saddlery Way. That sounded familiar and later I realized that I'd been to Saddlery Way to see a sex worker before.

There are some lovely private apartment blocks between the racecourse and the river. The only two sex workers that I knew of in Chester are two 'mature ladies'. I know of them because they advertized in local papers. One of them works from a flat in one of those apartment blocks.

At 2.50 pm I was sitting next to the river and I texted the Thai woman to tell her I was next to the apartments so she could give me the number to go to. There was no reply so at 3 pm I phoned her. It went to voicemail. I wasn't bothered because I thought she would probably be older and less attractive than her advert made her out to be.

I thought as I am here now I might as well give the mature lady a call. She said she was busy till 4 pm but I could come then if I wanted. So I told her that's what I'll do. Minutes later the Thai woman texted. She asked me to give her five minutes then come to her flat. Another text message gave me her flat number and said come straight away.

When she opened the door to me I was very surprised. She was tall, slender, young and pretty. She had a lovely brown skin and long dark hair. I don't think I have ever been with a girl as attractive as her. Her English is very good and she seems to be an educated young lady. She is also fun loving.

I paid £70 for my half hour with Sara and I spent most of the time on top of her shagging her. Towards the end she put one of my fingers in her pussy. She moved her hand and pelvis so that I got a nice feel of the inside of her vagina. Her phone number is +447393482377 and I can recommend her.

As she was showing me to the door she had put her glasses on which made her look even more sexy. She looked like a student.

I still had my 4 pm appointment with the mature lady. I decided to keep it. I told her about Sara. The mature lady doesn't do vaginal or anal penetration, she only does oral sex or hand relief. She does oral sex without a condom. I spent 20 minutes with her and she only charged me £20. She told me that there's a brothel near to Chester station, I don't know about that one.

I might go to see both of them next Tuesday. Sara won't be there much longer. I think she said she will be there to the 15th of this month.

review of Paid For

Review of Paid For by Rachel Moran part 1

This book is an odd mixture of the author's personal experiences of being a prostitute with Radical Feminist ideology. The oddest thing about it is the numerous quotations from women who are so extreme in their attitudes to sex that they don't have sex with men, under any circumstances. Each chapter of the book begins with a quotation. Five chapters begin with quotations from Ruhama.

Ruhama is an Irish organization that works with prostitutes. It is run partly by nuns from two orders, the Sisters of Our Lady of Charity and the Good Shepherd Sisters. Both of them ran Magdalene Laundries for decades. These were institutions where women and girls were imprisoned, because they were unmarried mothers or because they had sex outside of marriage.

A 2014 UN report stated: “Girls placed in the institutions were forced to work in slavery-like conditions and were often subject to inhuman, cruel and degrading treatment as well as to physical and sexual abuse. They were deprived of their identity, of education and often of food … imposed with an obligation of silence and prohibited from having any contact with the outside world … unmarried girls who gave birth before entering or while incarcerated in the laundries had their babies forcibly removed from them.”

According to this site, on their website, the Good Shepherd Sisters and the Sisters of Our Lady of Charity boasted of “a long history of involvement with marginalised women, including those involved with prostitution”. They are quick to ignore that this 'long history' is a deeply troubled one – one that women all around Ireland try their best to forget and during which women and children were buried in unmarked graves.

Ruhama uses the language of Radical Feminists to campaign for the Swedish model, where men are criminalized for paying for sex. In 2015 the Criminal Law Bill did just that in Ireland.

We know that nuns don't have sex with men, but what about the other women whose quotations were used? Chapter 11 begins with a quotation from Sheila Jeffreys. According to an article by Julie Bindel in The Guardian, Jeffreys was the main author of Love Your Enemy which states "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."

I thought that a 'woman who does not fuck men' is called a nun. Sheila Jeffreys doesn't have sex with men and neither does Julie Bindel. They might not have sex with women either: their definition of lesbianism is a bit different from most people's.

Two of the chapters (10 and 19) begin with quotations from Andrea Dworkin. At the front of the book is an endorsement by Catharine A MacKinnon who states "THE BEST WORK BY ANYONE ON PROSTITUTION EVER". Dworkin and MacKinnon worked together on the theory of objectification. They took the philosopher Immanuel Kant's theory of objectification, changed it, and brought it into feminism.

Kant's theory was an attempt to find a secular reason why sex outside of marriage is unacceptable. Dworkin and MacKinnon however said that any sex between men and women objectifies women. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says "For MacKinnon and Dworkin, all women's consent to be sexually used by men cannot be true consent under the existing conditions of gender inequality." and "For Dworkin and MacKinnon, however, Kant's suggested solution is inappropriate. Objectification, according to these feminists, is present within all heterosexual relationships in our society and harms women's humanity. Marriage, or any other heterosexual relationship for that matter, is clearly not regarded as an exception by them."

The nuns of Ruhama, Sheila Jeffreys, Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon don't have sex with men for religious or ideological reasons. Are they really the best people to ask about issues such as prostitution? Is it not probable that they are motivated not by concern for the welfare of prostitutes but by a desire to stop men from having sex with women? Or stop promiscuity between men and women? They can't stop ordinary men and women from having sex with each other on a Friday or Saturday night or on holiday, but they can stop men paying for sex. Or they think they can.

Dworkin's quotations in the book include “... we are talking about the use of the mouth, the vagina, and the rectum" (chapter 10) and "It is the use of a woman's body for sex by a man, he pays money, he does what he wants" (chapter 19). From this you will get the impression that a man can do anything he wants to a prostitute, including anal sex. Dworkin goes on "It is the mouth, the vagina, the rectum, penetrated usually by a penis, sometimes hands, sometimes objects ...".

My experience is that a man can't do anything he wants. Anal sex is rarely available. Even rarer is penetration by hands: it is weird that she should write that. What's more, in Moran's book she states quite clearly that prostitutes decide what they will and won't do.

"Some men will cite examples to back up their certainties. Usually these will refer to the fact that most prostitutes try to impose physical boundaries on the sexual act. It is true that they do. I avoided vaginal intercourse for the first two years of my prostitution life and anal intercourse for all of it. That is very unusual. I met many women who would never perform anal sex; that was not at all unusual. One particular young woman I met in my first months on the streets would not perform oral sex, ever. She just could not stand to do it and she could not understand how I was of the opposite mindset. I clearly remember her wrinkling her nose up in disgust and shuddering when I told her that all of my jobs were either hand-relief or oral."

Moran's personal experience contradicts what Dworkin wants us to believe. It also contradicts what Moran said herself on television: "You don't go into a factory and have the boss put his penis in your mouth, and the janitor put his penis up your anus". Moran writes that prostitutes will do what is least sickening to them, but that it is still sickening, so they don't have a choice. Choice is a myth.

What is sickening about hand-relief? I can't see how it is any more sickening that working as a bikini waxer or a dentist. As for oral sex, there's a big difference between oral sex with a condom, oral sex without a condom, and a man ejaculating into a woman's mouth. Some women do it for fun. She's missed the point though, the point is that what Dworkin and others have stated or implied is false. Men can't do anything they want to prostitutes. It's a myth.

Chapters 12 and 17 begin with quotes from Melissa Farley, who is the nearest thing that the Radical Feminist have to an academic. Farley thinks that men see prostitutes because they like control. We've addressed the issue of what men can and can't do. If you see someone and you have to pay cash up front, you know you can't get your money back, and they are getting an hourly rate higher than anything you have ever earned, how does that give you a sense of control?

I realise this post is getting very long, so I will come back to it with part 2 in another post.

book review: Revolting Prostitutes

I have been reading a new book about prostitution called "Revolting Prostitutes: The fight for sex worker's rights" by Juno Mac and Molly Smith, who are both sex workers. They come to roughly the same conclusion as I do: decriminalisation is the best way forward. The Nordic model is shown to be no improvement for sex workers, they still get arrested and there have been no extra funds from the state to help them. Legalisation is shown not to be a good model either.

I have quoted two paragraphs below, chapter 4 page 114, about arrests of sex workers.

In the aftermath of the arrests in Swindon, sex workers organised to stop the deportations of the Romanian women. Most anti-prostitution feminists made no comment, but one speculated that maybe the Romanian women were pimps after all. The idea that a workplace might have three managers and no workers, and moreover that the 'managers' would all be migrant women in their twenties advertising their own sexual services online is patently absurd. Its absurdity speaks, as gender studies academic Alison Phipps has noted, to just 'how far people will go to avoid extending solidarity to those they disapprove of'. 

Almost everybody with any flavour of feminist politics proclaims not to want those who sell sex to be arrested. However, that sex workers patently are arrested as a result of brothel-keeping laws is, for most anti-prostitution feminists, unmentionable - because the legal model they are pushing for retains and even strengthens these exact same laws (see chapter 6). The fundamental awkwardness of this truth - one that ultimately reveals dedication to something other than sex working women's welfare - creates a frustrating culture of unseeing and unknowing among the feminist left. They stick their fingers into their ears while sex workers try, with increasing frustration, to make the impact of criminalisation clear to them.

Sex workers often like to work together for safety, but that doesn't mean that sex work is inherently violent. As the authors write "After the presumed murder of estate agent Suzy Lamplugh in 1986, estate agents were advised to work in pairs where possible or have a 'buddy' keep track of their whereabouts". The same with nurses and social workers. Sex workers are prevented from keeping themselves safe, unlike estate agents, nurses and social workers. The Nordic model doesn't change that, it makes it worse.

Some people believe that when a man pays for sex he can 'do what he likes with her body in the time he has purchased it'. I've never purchased a woman or a woman's body but I have paid for sex many times and I know that sex workers will tell you what they will do and will not do. In my experience anal sex is rarely available. Oral sex usually is but with a condom. Sometimes a sex worker might be willing to do oral sex without a condom but it costs more money. Even then it's probably not going to be 'cum in mouth'.

The authors explain this, and it's quite important because it is relevant to issues of consent, boundaries, and whether sex work can be considered to be work.

Some people believe that sex should be reserved for relationships, and dislike prostitution for that reason. People who feel this way are entitled to their opinion and can live their lives how they choose. The authors explain "Yet for many people, sex can indeed be recreational, casual, or in some way 'meaningless'. The meaning and purpose of sex varies wildly for different people in different contexts or at different times in their lives".

The authors state repeatedly that prostitution is a survival strategy. However, they give examples of women who have used domestic servitude, laundry work and cleaning jobs for survival then used prostitution when they wanted something more than survival. Prostitution may be survival for drug addicts and undocumented migrants but in countries like Britain they are a minority.

It's curious that this book is available in ordinary bookshops, whereas Julie Bindel's recent book on the same subject isn't. Yet if you go into the left-wing bookshop in Bold Street in Liverpool, Bindel's book is there but Mac and Smith's book isn't, despite the fact that Mac and Smith are very left-wing. They wan't to see an end to capitalism and borders - and an end to prostitution. So you would think that Revolting Prostitutes would be on their shelves. Could it be that the people who run the bookshop don't want people to know that not all left-wing feminists believe in the Nordic model?

Doing Money

On the 5th of November there was a drama shown on BBC Two which told the story of a woman involved in prostitution. It was called 'Doing Money'. The drama is based on a book that claims to be a true story, called 'Slave' by Anna (not her real name).

This is what is printed on the back of the book:-

"This is the heart-breaking true story of one of the UK's most shocking modern-day slavery cases.
Anna was an innocent student living in London when she was kidnapped, beaten and forced into the sex slave industry. Threatened and tormented by her pimps, she was made to have sex with thousands of men."

This book has nothing to say about the sex industry in Britain. She was taken from London to Ireland, and put to work in Dublin, Galway and Belfast. Some women were also taken to Sweden.

This is curious, because there are many brothels in London. Why were women taken to Ireland and Sweden? Could it be that gangsters like Ionut and Schwarz thrive in areas where prostitution is underground?

Swedish authorities say that Sweden is less of an attraction to traffickers now because of the law they have had since 1999 which criminalises men who pay for sex. That can only be guesswork though, and this book seems to be saying that Sweden is more of an attraction than than London or Manchester.

If this is true then having the same law in the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland will be counter-productive. Anna helped to bring this law about in Northern Ireland.

If you want to learn about one aspect of prostitution in Ireland and Sweden then you can watch Doing Money. If you want to learn about prostitution in Britain then A Very British Brothel and First Time Call Girl. They are both documentaries and they are consistent with my experience of prostitution.

Since I have read Rachel Moran's book Paid For I am struck by the differences between the two books. They can't both be 'the reality' of prostitution. Perhaps prostitution in Ireland in the 1990s was different to what happens now. Moran's book, together with three studies of Dublin sex workers, paint a picture of Ireland where things got more violent after the 1993 law. It seems that after the 2017 law things are getting even more violent. Yet this book helped to bring in the 2017 law.

These are the three studies of Dublin sex workers

• The Health Needs of Women working in prostitution in the Republic of Ireland 1994 O'Connor 
• Women Working in Prostitution: towards a healthier future 1996 O'Connor O'Neill Foran 
• Drug using women working in prostitution 1999 O'Connor O'Neill

Neither Moran's book nor these three studies say anything about women being kidnapped from the streets by violent pimps and raped. What one of the studies says is this

 "Three (17%) of the women felt very strongly that the new law is leading to the emergence of pimps (male protectors) and therefore, an increase in violence and intimidation on the streets. One said "anyone with enough money to rent an apartment and a mobile phone can go into business as a pimp. These men are offering protection and a "safe house" to women who are working. "They leech (latch) onto the women providing protection and paying bail, that's when the violence comes in"." O'Connor, A.M. (1994)

 It was the 1993 law which created the world that Anna experienced. Well-meaning but counter-productive laws create the problem and don't solve it. The 2017 law in Ireland as far as we can tell is like the 1993 law in that it will and has created more problems than it solved.

 Now we have an up to date study of prostitution in Northern Ireland. It is A Review of the Criminalisation of Paying for Sexual Services in Northern Ireland 2019 by Ellison, Ní Dhónaill and Early. It doesn't confirm what Anna, Rachel Moran and Lord Maurice Morrow have said about prostitution in Northern Ireland. If you want to know the reality of prostitution in Northern Ireland I suggest you read this report.

I have been following the case of Karl Ring and Ivett Szuda. Ring was sentenced to four years imprisonment with Szuda sent down for six and a half years. They were found guilty of human trafficking, controlling prostitution for gain, and 'money laundering'. They were not violent, and the most coercive thing they did was to take away some women's passports. This is not acceptable, but happens with migrant workers in different industries.

They rented flats in Chelsea Cloisters in London to women who wanted to work as prostitutes. They organized air travel between Eastern Europe and London. This is probably the reality of traffickers, at least in London. What happens in Ireland and Sweden could be different.

Below is one woman's experience, you couldn't get further from Anna's:-

"She showed me around the flat and she offered me two rooms. The smaller room was £60 per day and the bigger one for £80 per day." She explained that Szuda gave her a key to the flat at Chelsea Cloisters, which operated like a hotel. "The hotel had a reception and it worked like a hotel system but the rooms had kitchens and bathrooms,' she said. "They were basically hotel apartments. There was another girl when I arrived and she was doing sex work and there was another one who was just doing massage only. Everyone had their own rooms." But she said business was so bad for her that she went back to Hungary after six days. Another woman working for the couple went on holidays with Szuda and other prostitutes to the Bahamas and Miami as "team building exercises".

One woman said "On a good day I would see three to four clients a day, I earned £60 from each." So she earned £240 per day for what sounds like four hours work. She could stop anytime she wanted - like the woman who went back to Hungary after 6 days. She didn't have to do anything she didn't want - like the woman who was just doing massage only. Does this sound anything like the situation that Anna was in?

I think that the prohibitionists should think very carefully about what they want. Britain might become like Ireland and Sweden where the criminals reign. Just like in prohibition America where the do-gooders thought they were getting rid of a problem - alcohol - and they were just making it worse. Much, much, worse. Be careful what you wish for.

Novelist Liz Jensen said that men who use prostitutes should watch the drama and end up "squirming and feeling deeply regretful". I haven't watched the drama but I have read the book, and Rachel Moran's book. I have read the three reports on prostitution in Ireland in the 1990s. I have also kept up to date about trafficking through recent research and news reports. My conclusion is that it is abolitionists who have created this problem not people like me. Caring about people means looking at all the evidence and thinking about it deeply. It doesn't mean getting caught up in a drama. Don't think you can watch a drama and then you're an expert.

two documents on the subject of prostitution

Recently I came across two different documents on the web about prostitution. The first is the transcript of a debate in the House of Commons on 'commercial sexual exploitation' held in July this year. It wasn't much of a debate because although 15 MPs spoke they all supported the Nordic model where men are prosecuted for paying for sex. Lots of false statistics were used and I have made a web page to counter them.

The second document is the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report on Prostitution. It says many of the things that I have been saying for years. It debunks the false statistic that 50% of prostitutes start before the age of 18. It says that information about street prostitutes is wrongly used to apply to all prostitutes.

The report says that in Northern Ireland women can still be arrested for soliciting despite the idea that Northern Ireland has adopted the Nordic model. This model is supposed to be 'shifting the burden' of criminality from prostitutes to their clients, but in Northern Ireland nothing has changed for prostitutes. It says 'the current practice of treating soliciting as an offence is having an adverse impact'.

The report says that 'the model of decriminalisation implemented in New Zealand has worked successfully'. We should recognize that there is a difference between 'prostitution which occurs between two consenting adults, and that which involves exploitation'. It also says sex workers are often denied 'the opportunity to speak for themselves and to make their own choices'.

The most important conclusions and recommendations of the report are to do with changes in British law which should occur without delay to help protect women. I have quoted them below.

"The current law on brothel-keeping also means that some sex workers are often too afraid of prosecution to work together at the same premises and as a result often compromise their safety and put themselves at considerable risk by working alone.

We therefore recommend that, at the earliest opportunity, the Home Office change existing legislation so that soliciting is no longer an offence and so that brothelkeeping provisions allow sex workers to share premises, without losing the ability to prosecute those who use brothels to control or exploit sex workers."

"In the meantime, we have made clear our strong view that the first step of changing the existing legislation on soliciting, and on brothel-keeping as it relates to sex workers sharing premises, should be taken by the Government as a matter of urgency."

This is something I agree with and I have been saying for some time. I hope that the Government will do this without delay.

what I did during the world cup

The last time I paid for sex was in July when England were playing Sweden in the World Cup. I was in Liverpool and I had the idea that the brothels in Manchester would be less busy when the match was on. I would be able to take my pick from the women available. Often there may be four women at a brothel but most of them are busy. It's nice to have a choice of four. I'm not in the slightest bit interested in football.

I went to the big Boots in the centre of Liverpool and bought four viagra. At Lime Street station I bought a coffee and got onto the train. I took two viagra. I don't think you're supposed to take two. That's not the only risky thing I did that day. It takes one and a half hours with me for the viagra to start working, so I knew I would be ready when I got to the brothel.

I got off the train at Manchester Victoria and headed to a nearby brothel. I won't tell you which one or the name of the woman I saw for reasons which will become apparent. It's one I've been to a few times. The match had started, but to my surprise only one woman was available. She was a big black woman. I thought I might have seen her before, the name was familiar but her face looked different.

After I had paid my £40 she took me up to a small room that I hadn't been to before. She wanted me to hug her and kiss her. She didn't seem to mind big kisses on the mouth which is rare for sex workers. When I got on top of her it was very pleasant as it always is with big women. As usual I was finding it difficult to come. She gave me some oral sex without a condom and she let me finger her.

She told me to get on top of her and fuck her. I thought surely she knows that I haven't got a condom on. Anyway, I got on top of her and fucked her. It didn't take long before I came inside her. As I was getting dressed she said I could give her a tip. I said I would like to do that, and asked how much I should give her. She said anything I wanted and I gave her £10.

I had heard that there are women who will allow sex without a condom for extra money. I thought that it would always be a lot more money. So it was surprising what she did. I should have given her more money. It crossed my mind that if she has HIV then she wouldn't be bothered about unprotected sex because it wouldn't harm her. She is an African woman, and HIV is more common in Africa.

That's a possibility, but it may have been that she knew I had difficulty in getting to orgasm and was willing to try everything to achieve that. Sex with a condom and oral sex without a condom didn't work, so she was willing to try sex without a condom. It worked. I have been surprised how important it is for sex workers that their clients have an orgasm, it's as if they feel they have failed if it doesn't happen.

What usually happens with me is that I can usually get an erection but I can't come through shagging. I can often wank myself to orgasm while looking at the woman's pussy. Even when that doesn't happen I still feel that it is worth the money because it has been enjoyable. I can't help feeling though that if I can come through shagging then I have had a success. A bit like scoring a goal in a football match I expect. So as I was walking along the streets of Manchester I was feeling happy.

Men and women were standing outside pubs watching the match on big screens. The maid in the brothel had told me the score as I was leaving but I wasn't interested.

I could have gone home then but I thought as I am in Manchester why don't I go to see another woman. There isn't as much opportunity in Merseyside. It's only £35 at the Piccadilly Club so why not. There were three women available there. Two Spanish women who I had seen before, and another dark-haired young woman who I hadn't. Sonya was the most beautiful. Leila is beautiful too. I had seen Leila a few times recently when Sonya hadn't been available and enjoyed being with her.

Sonya has big dark eyes and she knows how to apply makeup to show them off. I said that I think I will have to have an HIV test. She asked why and I explained. She looked shocked. She asked me where I had done this and which country did she come from. I told her it wasn't a good idea for me to have done that. She seemed to forget about that though and we had a nice half hour. The viagra hadn't worn off and I shagged her a bit, with a condom. I gave her an extra £10 and she let me put a finger in her pussy. I washed my hands in the sink in the room first.

I hadn't come with Sonya but I hadn't thought I would. It was still very enjoyable though. I was going to walk to either Oxford Road or Piccadilly train stations to return to Liverpool but then I remembered that there had been disruption and the trains from there probably wouldn't be going to Lime Street. So I made my way back to Victoria station and on the way I went into the Mackie Mayor market.

The Mackie Mayor market is an old meat market that has been done up and offers food and drink. The central square has tables and benches and there is a beautiful old glass roof. There are different vendors providing a range of street food, coffee and alcohol. It is in Eagle Street off Swan Street in the Northern Quarter. When the people who go there have enjoyed their food and drink there are many opportunities for a sexual experience.

Smile Thai Massage is round the corner opposite the cat café (good if you want a little pussy). I have been to Smile once where I had hand relief from a lovely older woman called Saiphon. I asked her if she would have sex with me and she said she would only ever have sex with a man that she was in love with.

Orange Spa in Swan Street has Taiwanese women. Some of them are willing to have full sex. The Piccadilly Club in Great Ancoats Street is not far away. There is a brothel much nearer. Angels is at 56 Swan Street. I had been there a long time ago, and I had tried to go back. They're supposed to open at 7pm but they weren't open then so I went to Orange Spa a few doors along.

So I was surprised to see that Angels was open, even though it was only about 6.30pm. I couldn't resist going up the stairs. My curiosity was too great. A woman at the top of the stairs said they are open and invited me in. I asked her how many women were available. There were four, even though the match had been long over. I sat down and the women came in.

There was a young pretty tall slender Russian woman. There was an older shorter blonde woman. There was an older shorter Brazilian woman. There was a woman who had just come up the stairs and was in her normal clothes. It took me a minute or two to choose. The obvious choice would have been the pretty Russian. She must have wondered why I chose the podgy Brazilian.

Melissa took me up stairs and along corridors to a room. As I was undressing I looked through the open window to see the street below. She wanted to give me some oral sex with a condom to get me erect. That doesn't usually work for me though. I said I would like to look at her pussy. She said that would cost more: I think she thought was saying I wanted to lick her pussy. It took a while but I got an erection.

I got on top of her then after a while to my surprise I felt it was working and that if I continued I would come. Melissa was making a lot of loud sexy noises, although I don't think she was genuinely turned on. So I had my second orgasm of the day. The only time I have had two orgasms in one day through shagging was in 2014 when I came back from Whitstable in Kent and spent some time in Soho.

So I was well pleased. In the street I tried to identify the window of the room I had been in with Melissa. I took a photo on my mobile. If you are ever standing in Swan Street, perhaps spending the evening enjoying the delights of Mackie Mayor market, and you hear loud sexy noises, look up and it's probably coming from this window.

I've had an HIV check. I'm tempted to see the African woman again. She could be my regular. I could take a trip to Manchester once a month. I don't think I will though. I'll play it safe from now on.

Daily Mail interesting today

There are two things in the Daily Mail newspaper today that interested me. One is that Sir Martin Sorrell was accused of having sex with a prostitute in Shepherd Market in Mayfair, London. The other is MP Jess Phillips complaining about twitter trolling and demanding an end to anonymity online.

I am familiar with the Shepherd Market area of London. In 2012 I took photographs of the walk ups (brothels) there although I have never paid for sex there as it is slightly more expensive than Soho.

This is my photograph of 50A Shepherd Market which is the one that Sir Martin is supposed to have visited. The most interesting thing about the Daily Mail article is that the reporter tried to find out who owns the flat. The Land Registry says that it was owned until recently by Viscount Curzon, the 6th Earl Howe. There is an interesting interview with one of the women who works at the flat.

Jess Phillips was on Woman's Hour last week talking about the inquiry by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Prostitution and the Global Sex Trade (Behind Closed Doors). A sex worker also on the programme said that it's impossible to get rid of prostitution. Her reply was that we can reduce it. If you look on the report there are two statistics that appear to show that prostitution has been reduced in Sweden because of the new law.

Both are wrong though. I will quote the relevant paragraph from page 22 below:-

Sweden became the first country to adopt this abolitionist law in 1999. Anonymous surveys conducted in 1996 and 2008 revealed that the proportion of men in Sweden who reported paying for sex dropped from 13% to 8%. The most recent study conducted on prevalence rates found that 0.8% of men in Sweden had paid for sex in the previous 12 months - the smallest proportion recorded in two decades and the lowest level in Europe.

The first statistic (13% to 8%) is not to do with men who pay for sex, but men who at some time in their lives have paid for sex. So a 72 year old man would answer yes in the 1996 survey if he paid for sex when he was 18 in 1942 and a conscript in the Swedish army or navy. He would be too old to participate in the next survey in 2008. It tells us nothing about whether the amount of paid-for sex in Sweden is increasing or decreasing.

The second statistic (0.8%) is to do with people who pay for sex. Active sex buyers, who report that they have paid for sex within the 12 months previous to the survey being conducted. But when you look at the actual statistics, the number of people who pay for sex increased between 1996 and 2008 (1.3% to 1.8%). The new law criminalizing men who pay for sex was introduced in 1999. So it went up, not down.

The only way to explain this mismatch between the two sets of statistics between 1996 and 2008 is that the number of men who pay for sex did increase after the 1999 law was introduced, despite it now being illegal. Older men, who perhaps paid for sex while away from home as young men in the war, became too old to participate in the 2008 survey, or died. Sweden was neutral in the war but there was conscription.

Since 2008, the number of men who pay for sex has decreased (1.8% to 0.8%). Numbers can go up as well as down, as we have seen, and the changes have nothing to do with the 1999 law. Men aren't becoming too afraid to visit sex workers. I suspect that the Swedish figures have always been the lowest in Europe, between 1996 and 2014 the number dropped by only about a third.

This drop was probably something to do with the 2008 financial crisis. It certainly hasn't gone from 13% to 8% to 0.8%, which is what they may be trying to imply. The number of mdl who have paid at some time in their lives has decreased by a very small amount since 2008 (7.9% to 7.5%), which is consistent with older wartime men no longer participating in surveys.

The evangelical Christian politician Jim Wells used a false statistic to get the Nordic Model adopted in Northern Ireland. He said in the Northern Ireland Assembly that 127 sex workers were killed in a 15 year period after legalization in the Netherlands when in reality they were killed over a 30 year period with most killed before legalization not after. He's been in the news again after comparing abortion to the holocaust and has been castigated for his homophobic comments.

The evangelical former pastor MP Gavin Shuker is the leader of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Prostitution and the Global Sex Trade who produced the report. It seems he has learned from Mr Wells about how to get the Nordic model adopted. Gavin Shuker, Jess Phillips and her chums at the APPG want to use statistics creatively too to get the same law here. I hope they don't succeed.

watching loose women

I went to Manchester again and I did so many things I can't possibly tell you about them all. I started in Chinatown where I tried to find a girl in a massage establishment. I had read about her on a site, he said the place is a dump but she's so damned attractive he keeps going back. He'd got the name wrong - it was Lina not Lisa - and she wasn't there anyway so I moved on.

I'll skip ahead and tell you about Cosmopolitan in Portland Street. I went up the stairs and into the brothel. The receptionist was on the phone, I waited and then said "I'll sit down, shall I?". There was a big TV but I was watching the women. There was a blonde woman with tattoos who was looking through a carrier bag with some takeaway food in it. A skinny dark-haired girl came out of a room in a dressing gown and looked in the bag. She went back into the room. A tall blonde woman in a sexy dress came in.

Usually there are four women to choose from but I needed to choose between these three. I like dark-haired women but the skinny girl was too thin for me. She was from Portugal. The tattooed woman was nice, but I chose the Dutch woman. When I'd been there before I thought there were girls who looked like students. Manchester has a big student population and I liked the idea of a student girl.

Zoe was a disappointment though. She seemed very withdrawn, the opposite of Ling the Chinese woman who I'd seen at Cosmo before. Ling had been very enthusiastic, sucking on my cock without a condom and laughing and giggling when I was on top of her. Zoe only got interested near the end when I said "That Portuguese girl is too thin". I also told her that the receptionist is the most attractive of them and she agreed that she's very attractive.

I have been getting viagra from Boots in Manchester. I could have gotten a prescription from my doctor but instead I chose to get them 'over the counter' at the Market Street branch in the centre of Manchester. They do a check up first. So now I no longer have a problem with losing my erection when having sex.

I'd been shagging away at Zoe but hadn't come, so I thought I would go to the nearby Tropical Palms. There was one girl available and the receptionist said if I waited there will be another one coming out soon. I sat on one side of the room and the East European girl sat on the other side. She was reasonably pretty. I thought it's a bit like the school disco where the boys sat on one side and the girls on the other. If a boy liked a girl he could go over and invite her to dance.

I was thinking she was looking more and attractive and I might make an invitation but then a black man came up the stairs, dropped two twenty pound notes on the counter and she traipsed off with him. I thought 'What am I supposed to do now?'. I thought I'll wait for the other girl to come out. She was small and skinny though, another Eastern European, so I declined. She gave me a funny look.

Cherrys is not far away so I went there. There was the receptionist, a man sitting on a sofa, and a tall woman standing nearby. I knew straight away that I wanted her. She had a dark skin and a pretty face. I think the receptionist said something to the man, I paid my £40 and went into a bedroom with Amira. I asked her where she comes from and she said Algeria.

Amira was everything I'd been looking for. She's probably in her 20s or 30s and not skinny, a real woman. She lay down on the bed and opened her legs wide, holding open her pussy for me to see. Her natural skin colour is like a perfect all-over tan. When I got on top of her I enjoyed looking at her face and her big dark eyes. I had asked her to turn the light on so that I could see her properly.

I enjoyed myself so much with Amira that I could see her on a regular basis. In a recent post I said that I'd met Maisie and another Thai woman who were so nice I could see them again and again. Now there's Amira too.

Later I thought about the man at reception in Cherrys. I think what happened to him is what happened to me at Tropical Palms. He was waiting for all four women to become available so he could make his choice, but before that could happen I came in to spoil it for him. Maybe he waited long enough and he finally got his choice. I don't think he would have got better than Amira though.