Sex work in The Economist

[euwc888]

Sex work in the gig economy 

Sex work in the gig economy

WWW.ECONOMIST.COM

---

Sweden is banning OnlyFans content as the lines around sex work blur

Red lights, green lights

Jun 26th 2025

For decades Sweden was seen as the epitome of sexual freedom, so much so that President Dwight Eisenhower fulminated in 1960 that its people tended towards “sin, nudity, drunkenness”. In 1971 it followed Denmark to become the second country in the world to legalise all forms of pornography. Yet Sweden has been altogether more prudish when it comes to prostitution, having originated the so-called Nordic Model in 1999, which criminalised the purchase of sex, but not its sale, with the intention of reducing demand while protecting vulnerable women. This model has since spread widely. In the past decade, France, Ireland, Israel and the American state of Maine have all adopted it; Scotland is considering it.

Now Sweden is trying to apply its real-world Nordic model to the digital world. On July 1st a new Swedish law will come into force that criminalises paying for live porn on sites like OnlyFans, the platform best known for its adult content, but not those who perform the online sex acts. Those breaking the new law face a penalty of up to a year in prison.

The new law comes as sex workers increasingly embrace technology and move online. Many of those selling physical sex have already transitioned from soliciting on street corners to advertising on the internet. More recently the sale of virtual sex has gained momentum.

Buying sex and sexual content has also become easier—and more accepted—than ever. Fully 14% of young Americans say they would consider selling content on OnlyFans; 16% say they would become a “sugar baby”, selling companionship (and very often sex) to older men. In May 2024 one in ten British adults who were online visited Chaturbate, a live webcam-sex site. And the boundaries of what people consider to be sex work are becoming blurry, notes Teela Sanders of the University of Leicester. In Sweden, 8% of girls aged 15-19 say they have sent sexual content or met someone for sex in exchange for money, often via the social-media app Snapchat. On the gay dating app Grindr, it is common to trade sex for gifts or drugs. In an age where sex and relationships are often more overtly transactional, many in Generation Z do not see what they are doing as “sex work” at all (unlike, for example, work in brothels, which is usually perceived as more exploitative). Only 56% of Britons aged 18-25 say that “sugaring” counts as sex work, compared with 70% of over-65s.

These changes raise two important questions. Does the Swedish model work in the real world? And should it also apply to virtual sex work? 

Supporters of the Nordic model in relation to old-school prostitution argue that the purchase of sex is always exploitative, and that restrictions are needed not only to protect the vulnerable but also to crush demand. In this they hark back to abolitionist views of the 1920s, when the League of Nations sent undercover agents to infiltrate brothels, where they found examples of foreign women in debt bondage. Denying sex workers agency over their own bodies, they declared that many were “mentally abnormal” and of “poor heredity and poor environment”. Though attitudes have softened since, some of the stigma and denial of agency persist in the Nordic model, which is based on the idea that many prostitutes go into sex work because of childhood abuse or poverty rather than free choice, and that they should be “rehabilitated”.

To be sure, there are many sex workers like Samuel Vahlund, who turned to prostitution after childhood bullying and a traumatic sexual assault destroyed his self-esteem, and because he needed money for drugs. At the time, he believed he was consenting, but would dissociate during sex with other men. “I hated myself,” he says.

And similar trends appear to be the case for many of those entering online sex work. Meghan Donevan, a researcher at Talita, a Swedish charity, interviewed 120 people who had appeared in “commercial pornography”. Of those, 88% had been sexually abused as children and 69% had attempted suicide. Virtual sex work also creates the possibility for other sorts of harm. In thousands of webcam “studios” across Colombia, women work 12-hour shifts streaming from cramped, often filthy cubicles, keeping only a fraction of their earnings. 

“Doxxing”, whereby personal information is published on the internet, is common. “I know a lot of people who prefer old-school sex work because it’s safer,” says one Italian sex worker.

Sweden’s government argues that since virtual sex work also carries the risk of harm, it should get the same legal treatment as the sale of actual sex. Moreover, says Nina Larsson, Sweden’s minister for gender equality, “digital prostitution” can be a “gateway” to selling sex in person. Does the argument have merit?

Supporters of the existing Nordic model tout a fall in the share of Swedish men who say they have ever paid for sex, from 14% in 1996 to 9% in 2017. They also point to falling street prostitution as proof of its success. But that may well be because sex work has moved underground or out of the country. The government reckons that 80% of Swedish men who pay for sex do so when they are abroad. Janna Davidson, Sweden’s national rapporteur on human trafficking and prostitution, argues that the most important effect of the Nordic model has been normative: Swedes are far more likely than their rich-world peers to say prostitution can “never be justified”.

Yet there is little firm evidence that the Nordic model is achieving its main goals of protecting vulnerable sex workers or of putting a lasting dent in demand, especially since a growing proportion of men suspected of buying sex are under 30.

Worse, the policies in force since 1999 may have distracted authorities from reducing the genuinely harmful aspects of the sex trade. This is because police often find it easier to arrest johns than to pursue pimps and traffickers. Prosecutions for buying sex have risen in Sweden, but there were no convictions for trafficking in 2024.

Far from protecting vulnerable people, the existing laws may well be harming them. The stigmatisation of sex work means prostitutes and their clients are less likely to seek treatment for sexually transmitted infections. Migrants—who may make up 70-80% of those selling sex—are particularly vulnerable, because even though the sale of sex is not criminalised, it can be grounds for deportation. Paulina Bolton, who co-ordinates investigations into prostitution and human trafficking at the Swedish Gender Equality Agency, admits that support for victims is lacking.

The European Sex Workers Rights Alliance says that Sweden’s new law “will further isolate sex workers, particularly migrants and trans people”. It will also be hard to enforce. Instead of expanding the Nordic model online, Sweden should be looking at better alternatives for both the real and digital worlds.

Recently, in a church in Brussels, stalls offered lube, condoms and leaflets with titles such as: “So you’re dating a sex worker”; and “Anal health”. The event, arranged by the Belgian union of sex workers to mark International Whores’ Day, closed with a performance by a dominatrix, who stripped in front of the altar before hypnotising attendees with her whips.

In 2022 Belgium became the first European country to fully decriminalise sex work (and the second globally after New Zealand). Last December it granted sex workers formal labour rights, entitling them to sick leave, maternity pay and pensions, and obliging brothels to get a permit and comply with health and safety standards. In the past few years, the Australian states of Victoria and Queensland have decriminalised sex work; South Africa and Thailand have drafted similar bills. In contrast to the Nordic model, this approach is supported by many academics, who argue that full decriminalisation helps to reduce stigma, deters police harassment and helps separate the willing from the coerced.

Andrea, a sex worker (whose name we have changed) meets one or two clients a week in Brussels. She insists she is not the “victim” that abolitionists claim she is: “We’re all forced to sell ourselves to live.” Sex work gives her more agency and autonomy than waitressing, Andrea says.

Even so, prostitution has long been a profession with few rights or protections. This was made clear in the first covid-19 lockdown, when many sex workers had to rely on food parcels. When the government mandated the use of masks, disposable sheets and carbon-dioxide meters in brothels, it was a first step towards formal recognition. In South Africa, greater sympathy for those selling sex allowed the government to introduce a bill to decriminalise prostitution in 2022. In 2023 Costa Rica recognised sex work as labour. Sex workers were given a tax code and now pay vat.

Still, change can be slow. In Belgium just a handful of permits have been issued. Andrea has not registered as sex worker because of the paperwork and tax expense, she says. While legalisation of physical sex work has many benefits, from reduced violence against sex workers and better access to medical services—improving their and their clients’ health—it also needs sensible regulations to protect workers’ rights, says José Estrada Castro, a lawyer who advocated for Costa Rica’s reforms. An eu-funded project is helping draft a law to enshrine sex workers’ labour rights, such as by capping the profits of third parties and letting workers refuse clients or acts.

Extending protections to online sex work is trickier. Yet any experiments in regulation should start with an eye on the evidence, which, though incomplete, suggests that virtual sex work can be safer and give workers more agency than the physical sort. Like many other jobs, both kinds have risks. Regulation should minimise these while allowing innovation

[SirBillybob]

To be clear, it’s not prohibiting published content which is all I view anyway. In fact it’s news to me Onlyfans has a live cam option and I don’t utilize Chaturbate or other platforms. Phone and text chat not prohibited, so perhaps some will view while communicating. This could pull more women fine with cam work into the realm of in-person meets. 

I’m not about to swede it or have my fun held hostage Stockholm syndrome style. 

Edited June 30 by SirBillybob

[+ PhileasFogg]

It’s a very good read with direct application to risk taking and expected returns on risk 

 

 

[nate_sf]

I found the graph indicating percentage of survey respondents agreeing with the statement “prostitution is never justifiable” interesting:

 

Though the US percentage is higher than others, it’s declined 20 points between 1998 and 2022. 

[+ nycman]

5 hours ago, nate_sf said:

I found the graph indicating percentage of survey respondents agreeing with the statement “prostitution is never justifiable” interesting:

 

Though the US percentage is higher than others, it’s declined 20 points between 1998 and 2022. 

What the Hell happened in Sweden?

[mike carey]

5 minutes ago, nycman said:

What the Hell happened in Sweden?

Probably drank the Nordic Model Kool-aid.

[SirBillybob]

3 hours ago, mike carey said:

Probably drank the Nordic Model Kool-aid.

Tastes great; can’t wait … not.

[SirBillybob]

Sweden remains highly liberal in terms of sexuality. The Nordic model’s foundation is based on gender equality. Poor treatment of women when occurring, sex trafficking of women in particular, subverts equality. This rhetoric seeps into the notion that prostitution can never be consensual and can never be in keeping with the sexual liberalism that nevertheless accounts for good outcomes such as low teen pregnancy rates.

So it’s not necessarily sexual conservatism. It’s the argument that considering prostitution as legitimate is like chasing a woman around the kitchen brandishing a butcher knife and calling it cooking. Unfortunately, conflating the majority of men capable of kindness and supportive of equality with the bad actors drives women into places where men are more likely to cook up abuse. “Tough on crime” then overreaches and primes societal attitudes. 

No dick that pays is spared the ideology behind a rule that is challenging to implement. The rational idea that women’s safety contexts are not equal goes by the wayside for the sake of one flimsy win against the gender that runs the world.

Edited July 5 by SirBillybob

[nate_sf]

The article implies that one of the intentions (or at least outcomes) of the Nordic model has been to stigmatize the purchasing of sex, so that an opinion develops that prostitution is never justifiable. So the graph is interesting because it indicates Swedish opinion becoming more critical of prostitution (consistent with the Nordic model), while other places have been going in the opposite direction.

The article is skeptical of the Nordic model, however… among its observations is that the vast majority of Swedish men who do pay for sex, do it abroad.