1 1/2 Million German Men Use Sex Workers Daily

[Frankly Rich]

Not long ago, the NY Times did a story on a secret New York brothel that could have been written in the fifties. Using "brothel" as a search term, I couldn't find it as columnist Nicolas Kristof has so many stories on brothels exploiting women that you might think the whole paper was devoted to eradicating prostitution. But the NY Post today headlines on its web site a story written by an Australian journalist about German brothels thriving after the Prostitution Act of 2002 was enacted. Some 400,000 women work in the industry. They get health insurance and social security.

 

Germany is the most economically strong country in the European Union, which does some to dispel talk of exploitation. Surely with these many sex workers, forced work is not needed. The study showed that 1 1/2 million German men patronize brothels- every day!

 

So it's clearly a supply and demand proposition, and as a result, some rather fancy brothels have come to be. It's a 20 Billion US$ industry. yet still the article reporting on this wants to find a way to support the idea that 90% of the women working in German brothels are forced to do so. With a clean work environment, good pay, health insurance and social security surely most of these women want to do this job! All workers bitch at times about their bosses or their work conditions. It just seems that some journalists and groups are not willing to let go of the idea that this can be a voluntary, mutually consented business.

 

The article wants to make a big deal of what a "secretive" business this is, but with so many men visiting daily, surely most of the secrets are out!

 

That's my opinion. Here's the Post story: http://nypost.com/2014/06/10/germany-experiencing-brothel-boom-but-is-prostitution-safer/

[+ purplekow]

Based on the numbers you offered, each sex worker would need to see 3 patrons 7 days a week. Not a lot but certainly day after day, it would be a (bump and) grind. If 2/7 of the work force takes off each day, leaving the workers to work 5 days a week, each worker would need to see about 5 clients a day. So, how many of the escorts out there see 5 clients 5 days a week?

[+ Funguy]

Based on the numbers you offered, each sex worker would need to see 3 patrons 7 days a week. Not a lot but certainly day after day, it would be a (bump and) grind. If 2/7 of the work force takes off each day, leaving the workers to work 5 days a week, each worker would need to see about 5 clients a day. So, how many of the escorts out there see 5 clients 5 days a week?

 

Math major - show off! I still can't get the "if a train going towards you is traveling at 35 mpg and…"

[TruHart1]

Math major - show off! I still can't get the "if a train going towards you is traveling at 35 mpg and…"

 

"...you are standing on the train tracks, you had better move your ass!!!"

 

LOL

 

TruHart1

[+ quoththeraven]

Based on the numbers you offered, each sex worker would need to see 3 patrons 7 days a week. Not a lot but certainly day after day, it would be a (bump and) grind. If 2/7 of the work force takes off each day, leaving the workers to work 5 days a week, each worker would need to see about 5 clients a day. So, how many of the escorts out there see 5 clients 5 days a week?

 

Keep in mind the differences between male and female sex workers and brothels and those who do hotel and apartment-based in and outcalls. Men seeing female sex workers are mostly looking to get off quickly and women have a much shorter recovery time than men. So while it might not be pleasant, it's possible for women to see five clients five days a week.

 

For more, see this Toronto Star article on prostitution in Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden written in the wake of the Canadian Supreme Court decision invalidating Canadian laws regarding prostitution. It cites statistics that suggest 10 to 30% of German men have visited prostitutes. I haven't looked up the male population of Germany to figure out how that squares with the Post's reporting.

 

http://www.thestar.com/projects/prostitution.html

 

The author is clearly biased and seems not to realize that not all sex workers are women, but the facts themselves suggest that the brothel/regulatory approach used in Germany is not be ideal because of the manifold possibilities for exploitation in what is essentially a company town. The Der Spiegel article she cites - http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/human-trafficking-persists-despite-legality-of-prostitution-in-germany-a-902533-druck.html - is much less biased and detailed in its description of what amounts to coercion and pimping (e.g., flat-rate sex for as long as the customer wants, forced gangbangs, no choice about accepting clients, what kind of sex to have, and condomless sex, set "payments" (i.e., kickbacks) to the brothel owners), to a large extent of women from outside Germany. In essence, the brothels are sex factories. The Der Spiegel article suggests that most, if not all, of the foreign workers (65-80% of all female prostitutes, according to studies) are coerced in one form or another and that the truly independent female prostitutes -- those who choose the profession freely -- are few and far between.

 

What is best between the UK practice -- outlawing pimping, brothels, and public solicitation without criminalizing (or regulating) the exchange of money for sex -- and the Swedish model of criminalizing demand, pimping, and trafficking and offering social services and ways to exit the profession -- isn't clear. The Swedish model may work best for female sex workers by decreasing demand for the most exploitative end of the business, as studies suggest it has done. The UK model may be more internally and philosophically consistent, but it may not be as effective in ending exploitation.

[+ bigjoey]

As an aside, the EU is changing the inputs to GDP to include prostitution, illegal drugs and a few other normally under-the-table cash businesses. It is believed that this will boost the GDP numbers of European countries up to 5%. The various governments are trying to estimate the value of these activities. The final numbers will be interesting.

[Bargara Leatherboy]

I am just wondering how much male female sex worker interaction in penetration?

 

I've read reports that a lot of men visit sex workers for something they are not getting at home, maybe oral sex or role play, I guess if you gave 3 bj 1 hand job and had 1 penetration 5 clients would not be that hard a job. And if the ladies are showing up for an 8 hour shift - 5 hours work is pretty good .......

[SteveEscort]

The UK model may be more internally and philosophically consistent, but it may not be as effective in ending exploitation.

 

We do though have quite a bit of police backing and are not afraid to involve the police if we have incidents.

 

We don't live in fear of police entrapment, test calls or bogus police appointments like you do in the States.

[SteveEscort]

Based on the numbers you offered, each sex worker would need to see 3 patrons 7 days a week. Not a lot but certainly day after day, it would be a (bump and) grind. If 2/7 of the work force takes off each day, leaving the workers to work 5 days a week, each worker would need to see about 5 clients a day. So, how many of the escorts out there see 5 clients 5 days a week?

 

 

I see about 2 clients every day almost, my average is 50 is a month, it goes up to 55 sometimes and as low as 40 on others but it's around 50. I have never felt any "bump and grind" and I always offer an exceptional experience. I do work every day unless I have flu or travelling long distances (London, Germany or France) to see an overnight client, then I take a day off either side because I am exhausted.

 

I know female escorts that see up to 2-3 clients a day not 7, those that do 7 or 8 a day tend to be the walk up parlour type girls where its one after the other for cheap quickies, but those female escorts I do know can easily see 3 within school hours (10am to 3pm) and knock some back. I don't get that concentration, I will probably have a 10am appointment in, maybe one at 3pm and an evening outcall, or sometimes 1 x 2 hour incall, or nothing all day and a 3 hour outcall on the evening.

 

I work everyday, as I said. I have another job on top of this, which I am lucky to do from home, leaving me complete control and flexibility to fit in guys whenever they want.

[Newly]

I love the way that people here(with the exception of quotetheraven who knows her stuff) automatically bring up the US as a backwards place for not allowing prostitution. Folks, although the reactionary countries in Europe allow prostitution (they'd do anything for a tax dollar) Sweden, Norway and Iceland don't - they consider it to be inherently exploitative. You may or may not agree with them but each of these countries used to allow paying for sex and don't anymore because they felt it was hurting sex workers. One thought though. Many posters here claim to respect escorts and say they're the same as lawyers and doctors. So, how often do you call your doctor or lawyer boy and say horrible things about their opinions and looks right in front of them? I wonder what the next waiter who waits on me would say if I called him boy?

[Frankly Rich]

I love the way that people here(with the exception of quotetheraven who knows her stuff) automatically bring up the US as a backwards place for not allowing prostitution. Folks, although the reactionary countries in Europe allow prostitution (they'd do anything for a tax dollar) Sweden, Norway and Iceland don't - they consider it to be inherently exploitative. You may or may not agree with them but each of these countries used to allow paying for sex and don't anymore because they felt it was hurting sex workers. One thought though. Many posters here claim to respect escorts and say they're the same as lawyers and doctors. So, how often do you call your doctor or lawyer boy and say horrible things about their opinions and looks right in front of them? I wonder what the next waiter who waits on me would say if I called him boy?

 

What are you talking about?

[gallahadesquire]

Math major - show off! I still can't get the "if a train going towards you is traveling at 35 mpg and…"

 

According to Einstein (and Lorentz), you can't tell if the train is moving, or if you are moving.

[+ Funguy]

According to Einstein (and Lorentz), you can't tell if the train is moving, or if you are moving.

 

I rest my case!

[+ azdr0710]

What are you talking about?

 

 

newtothis usually knows what he's talking about.....and so do I....

[Steven_Draker]

I love the way that people here(with the exception of quotetheraven who knows her stuff) automatically bring up the US as a backwards place for not allowing prostitution. Folks, although the reactionary countries in Europe allow prostitution (they'd do anything for a tax dollar) Sweden, Norway and Iceland don't - they consider it to be inherently exploitative. You may or may not agree with them but each of these countries used to allow paying for sex and don't anymore because they felt it was hurting sex workers.

 

"Prostitution is something that’s always going to be present no matter what country you are visiting. While it may be harder to find in some countries than others, there are always ways of getting around the laws and of keeping the operations secretive. However there is some prostitution in Europe that is legal, and in these countries it is possible to use prostitutes completely legally. Prostitution in Europe is legal in eight countries: Austria, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Netherlands and Turkey. Meanwhile the laws against prostitution in Europe are enforced to varying degrees across the rest of Europe meaning that it’s more possible to find prostitution in some countries than others.

 

An interesting question arises when discussing legal prostitution in Europe and opinions are divided on whether it is something to be lauded. As prostitution in Europe is available even in the countries where it is not illegal, it is often believed that making it legal would be a better way to at least control and govern the prostitution that does occur rather than driving it underground. Where prostitution in Europe is legal, the prostitutes in question are subject to STI tests and screened for drugs, whereas illegal prostitution in Europe has no such benefits and often the prostitution goes hand in hand with a range of other crimes. There is also the belief that legal prostitution can help to prevent other crimes such as rape as those who have difficulty controlling their sexual appetite at least have an outlet. While there is no easy answer, legal prostitution in Europe does provide a model for how this could work in other countries."

 

source: http://www.europeword.com/blog/europe/prostitution-in-europe/

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/Prostitution_in_europe_corrected_2.svg/680px-Prostitution_in_europe_corrected_2.svg.png

 

dark green Prostitution legal and regulated, brothels are legal and regulated

light green Prostitution legal and regulated, but brothels are illegal

blue Prostitution legal but not regulated, brothels are illegal

pink Prostitution illegal: the clients are criminally prosecuted, but not the prostitutes

red Prostitution illegal: the prostitutes are criminally prosecuted

gray No data

[Steven_Draker]

"Prostitution is a controversial subject to say the least and one that almost everyone has an opinion on. Ask a group of people whether they think that prostitution should be legal or not, and most often you will get a colorful and impassioned mix of views. It seems that the same is true when you take this debate to an international level, and the rules and regulations regarding prostitution around the world vary greatly.

 

There are many countries in Europe where prostitution is legal for instance, and it might just surprise you where. For instance, contrary to popular belief the UK actually is one of the countries in Europe where prostitution is legal. Many people think that prostitution in the UK is illegal, but actually the act of exchanging sexual services for money is not a crime in itself. Rather it is the range of associated activities that are illegal in the UK – such as curb crawling, running a brothel, pimping, pandering and soliciting in public areas. In other words it is the institution of prostitution that is illegal, not the act.

 

There are many other countries in Europe where prostitution is legal in this sense. For instance it is legal in France, in Italy, in Poland and in Portugal to name a few. However in Germany and most famously Holland, prostitution is not only legal but so is the whole institution including the brothels and pimps. These are the countries in Europe where prostitution is legal in every sense, and this allows it to be properly governed. Many people travel to Holland specifically for this purpose in fact which is known as ‘sex tourism’.

 

However while there are many countries in Europe where prostitution is legal, there are of course also many countries in Europe where it is completely illegal in all forms. These countries include: Poland, Russia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovakia and others in the East.

 

Whether countries in Europe where prostitution is legal are a good thing or not depends on your point of view. On the one hand there is the argument that such countries are able to better monitor sexual activities and thereby ensure that there is a minimal occurrence of STIs and forced sex etc. There is no obvious victim in prostitution as long as all parties are willing and fully informed – and so it’s questionable whether it should be considered a crime. It may even prevent sexual crimes by providing an outlet. At the same time though, others will argue that such systems will always be abused and shouldn’t be encouraged, and will object to paid sex on religious or moral grounds."

 

source: http://www.europeword.com/blog/europe/countries-in-europe-where-prostitution-is-legal/

[Mark Gordon]

I wonder what the next waiter who waits on me would say if I called him boy?

 

Garçon! The cheque, please!

[+ quoththeraven]

I love the way that people here(with the exception of quotetheraven who knows her stuff) automatically bring up the US as a backwards place for not allowing prostitution. Folks, although the reactionary countries in Europe allow prostitution (they'd do anything for a tax dollar) Sweden, Norway and Iceland don't - they consider it to be inherently exploitative. You may or may not agree with them but each of these countries used to allow paying for sex and don't anymore because they felt it was hurting sex workers. One thought though. Many posters here claim to respect escorts and say they're the same as lawyers and doctors. So, how often do you call your doctor or lawyer boy and say horrible things about their opinions and looks right in front of them? I wonder what the next waiter who waits on me would say if I called him boy?

 

Thanks, newtothis. I should add that I'm personally in favor of the UK model. As Steven Draker mentions, it outlaws the institutions associated with this form of sex work, not the work itself, which I think we'd all agree will never go away completely. There will always be a demand for it. But I'm not convinced it's the most efficient way of attacking trafficking (which I think we'd all agree exists and should be prevented to the extent possible), because that requires investigations and prosecutions, things that are time-consuming and expensive.

 

Trafficking affects female sex workers far more than male sex workers, and female sex workers are by far a majority. A Swedish-style regime is cheap and easy on the enforcement end and provides economic disincentives to trafficking. Economic disincentives are far more powerful and efficient than legal ones. If a Swedish-style regime helps get criminal organizations out of the mix, as the statistics seem to suggest, isn't that a better solution? Or is it a problem because it's largely irrelevant to male sex workers but applies to them in theory anyway? For other objections to it, see this Toronto Star article:

 

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/06/03/laws_targeting_johns_only_increase_dangers_to_prostitutes_report_warns.html#

 

In any event, I've seen nothing to suggest that Sweden is going after internet-based, non-street sex work or after male sex workers. Even in the US, enforcement is primarily (though not entirely) aimed at female sex workers and at street prostitution.

 

As for the merits of regulation: the Der Spiegel article and common sense suggest that any regime that doesn't outlaw brothels and pimping is going to be exploitative. Once you put people in the mix other than the provider himself or herself and anyone s/he chooses to have involved with it, like an agent or personal assistant, you're opening the field up to economic and physical exploitation, often of the worst kind. There's enough of a stigma and possibility of information becoming public (even if there are confidentiality laws) that I don't see independent sex workers flocking to register or be tested. And as with HIV/AIDS testing for the general populace, the more you mandate, the more you drive people away. Fund free testing without regard to sex work, leave it up to the workers themselves to get tested, and let the market (on both sides) provide the incentive to do it. Sex workers generally don't have disability plans. If they become ill or can't work because of an STI, that's money out of their pockets. By the same token, clients can protect themselves by insisting on protective practices that render the sex worker's STI status less of an issue. And once regulation is part of the mix, you open up possibilities for corruption and make the government part of the sex trade. Historically, this hasn't worked out so well. One example: The use of so-called comfort women by the Japanese, for whom it was easy to think that the girls and women coerced, kidnapped, and lied to were doing it willingly because Japan had a history of government-regulated but nevertheless oppressive system of sex work. Oppressive in the sense that it was almost impossible to escape because of amounts owed to those who ran the brothels and that few of those involved chose the profession in any meaningful way. Many were sold into it (in other words, were trafficked) by their families.

 

The thing is, the reason why female sex workers are more vulnerable to trafficking than male sex workers has very little to do with sex work itself and much more to do with gender inequality, the role of women and men in society, and the ridiculous things boys and girls are taught about the supposedly inherent differences between men and women. Criminalizing demand is a stop-gap until we wind up with a society that is not ashamed or afraid of sexual desire or female agency and encourages a culture of mutual consent and pleasure rather than "he pursues, she gives in" as a heterosexual norm.

 

Slightly off-topic, but not: An example of how the US attempts to deal with trafficking doesn't work, aka how the people who want to "rescue" girls from prostitution don't accomplish anything: http://www.vice.com/read/sex-trafficking-how-i-survived-foster-care

[Newly]

Mark, you made me laugh my ass off! Remember, I'm in the Southern US where the word "boy" has a very different connotation. I wouldn't ask someone here for a fag either. Raven, I'm not sure how I feel about this either, but I agree that normally female prostitution is what is targeted, but how much of that is simply because of the way women in general are treated by society? I don't think that male sex workers aren't exploited however. I have read some threads here about how some young Eastern European guys are lured to the States and then treated. I don't know if it's true, but it was scary. Anyhow, I don't have an answer, but I just don't think people should think that no liberal country has laws against prostitution. For my part as long as I am hiring I will treat the guy with respect, not call him a "boy", and not think of them as an object. They have something I want, and I'll do my best to treat them as I would any other provider and not treat them as objects (unless of course it's role play). And of course I have qualities that I look for, but if an escort is not to my taste I certainly wouldn't publicly make fun of his looks, build, age or what not. I just find one that I think I would be more compatible with.

[marylander1940]

I love the way that people here(with the exception of quotetheraven who knows her stuff) automatically bring up the US as a backwards place for not allowing prostitution. Folks, although the reactionary countries in Europe allow prostitution (they'd do anything for a tax dollar) Sweden, Norway and Iceland don't - they consider it to be inherently exploitative. You may or may not agree with them but each of these countries used to allow paying for sex and don't anymore because they felt it was hurting sex workers. One thought though. Many posters here claim to respect escorts and say they're the same as lawyers and doctors. So, how often do you call your doctor or lawyer boy and say horrible things about their opinions and looks right in front of them? I wonder what the next waiter who waits on me would say if I called him boy?

 

http://www.indexmundi.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/prostitution-policies-by-country1.jpg

[Steven_Draker]

I love the way that people here(with the exception of quotetheraven who knows her stuff) automatically bring up the US as a backwards place for not allowing prostitution. Folks, although the reactionary countries in Europe allow prostitution (they'd do anything for a tax dollar) Sweden, Norway and Iceland don't - they consider it to be inherently exploitative. You may or may not agree with them but each of these countries used to allow paying for sex and don't anymore because they felt it was hurting sex workers.

 

You seem to be highly fascinated by the "Swedish model" without considering its pitfalls.

 

 

If Europe votes for the 'Swedish model' on prostitution, women will be at risk

 

"Prostitution is described as the oldest profession. It often feels as if the arguments between those who want it abolished and those who are pragmatic about it continuing have been going on for almost as long. Today, as the European parliament prepares to vote on whether men who buy sex should be criminalised, both sides are squaring up for yet another battle in this long-running war.

 

Sex work straddles a vast spectrum. Not everyone who engages in sex work is raped, trafficked, beaten and unpaid. Nor are sex workers, who are mostly female, all safe, happy and well remunerated.

 

Abolitionists say that the act of a woman "selling her body" to a man for sex is exploitation, irrespective of how much she is paid and whether or not the sex act is violent or accompanied by violence. Many sex workers and their advocates beg to differ. They are unlikely to agree any time soon.

 

Prostitution statistics are notoriously unreliable, as many sex workers are operating in a hidden, underground way and aren't included in any headcounts. But according to the Association of Chief Police Officers' 2010 report, 2,600 of 30,000 women working in indoor premises were trafficked. Yet Labour MEP Mary Honeyball, a keen advocate of the proposal to criminalise men who buy sex, insists that a majority of women in sex work are trafficked.

 

The abolitionists' arguments might work if every woman selling sex was desperate to stop doing so, and if there was a comprehensive support package in place to help women exit prostitution and provide them with lucrative, alternative employment.

 

But many sex workers say they are willing to engage in this work because they can earn more than they would be able to in other jobs. Those who do want to get out lament the lack of financial and emotional support available to them, and equate leaving sex work to tumbling into a bottomless, moneyless rabbit hole.

 

They insist that the proposals backed by Honeyball won't "rescue" them or prompt them to walk away rejoicing from their work but will simply make it more dangerous for them to continue doing what they have chosen to do.

 

Whether laws are passed to criminalise buyers or criminalise sellers, the impact on sellers who choose to remain in sex work is the same. It makes their work more dangerous. Working together in small groups, whether inside or outside, makes things safer for sex workers.

 

Yet women who work together indoors are committing a crime under current UK laws, and those who work on the streets together are more likely to attract negative attention from police and be charged with soliciting. Police chiefs have recently called for women to be allowed to work together to improve safety. Two sex workers were recently murdered in London. The first, Mariana Popa, was working alone outside as there was a police enforcement operation going on in the area, while the second, Maria Duque-Tunjano, was also working alone indoors to avoid prosecution. Would both these women still be alive today if they had been allowed to work in a small group with other women?

 

When sex workers raise their voices it is usually to call for their rights. Italian sex workers have been demanding the right to pay taxes so they can receive pensions, while sex workers in London's Soho have hailed a new court victory rejecting a closure order on two flats they have been working in. The judge ruled that the women were not being controlled for gain in their work, despite police putting forward a contrary argument.

 

Sweden, Norway and Iceland have already made the purchase of sex a criminal offence. France has voted the same way, and Ireland is considering following suit. Academic Jay Levy has recently completed a piece of research about the "Swedish model" of criminalizing men who pay for sex. He argues that levels of sex work in Sweden have not reduced, while the law has caused great harm to sex workers, especially the most vulnerable.

 

If the European parliament endorses the Swedish model, the very women they say they want to protect will be put at increased risk. Isn't it time to call a truce between both sides in the prostitution debate? Increase real support to women who want to leave sex work while allowing women who have chosen to sell sex to increase their safety by working together, without fear of prosecution, leaving police to focus on victims of trafficking and underage girls."

 

source: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/24/europe-vote-swedish-model-prostitution

 

Current map: http://gu.com/p/3yx8d/tw

[SteveEscort]

Anyone condoning the Swedish Model is no friend of escorts or clients

 

Also.... It didn't stop anything

[Frankly Rich]

newtothis usually knows what he's talking about.....and so do I....

 

Whenever one speaks in such generalities as newtothis did, it's doubtful. I'll remember your character reference- both of them!

[+ quoththeraven]

You seem to be highly fascinated by the "Swedish model" without considering its pitfalls.

 

 

If Europe votes for the 'Swedish model' on prostitution, women will be at risk

 

"Prostitution is described as the oldest profession. It often feels as if the arguments between those who want it abolished and those who are pragmatic about it continuing have been going on for almost as long. Today, as the European parliament prepares to vote on whether men who buy sex should be criminalised, both sides are squaring up for yet another battle in this long-running war.

 

Sex work straddles a vast spectrum. Not everyone who engages in sex work is raped, trafficked, beaten and unpaid. Nor are sex workers, who are mostly female, all safe, happy and well remunerated.

 

Abolitionists say that the act of a woman "selling her body" to a man for sex is exploitation, irrespective of how much she is paid and whether or not the sex act is violent or accompanied by violence. Many sex workers and their advocates beg to differ. They are unlikely to agree any time soon.

 

Prostitution statistics are notoriously unreliable, as many sex workers are operating in a hidden, underground way and aren't included in any headcounts. But according to the Association of Chief Police Officers' 2010 report, 2,600 of 30,000 women working in indoor premises were trafficked. Yet Labour MEP Mary Honeyball, a keen advocate of the proposal to criminalise men who buy sex, insists that a majority of women in sex work are trafficked.

 

The abolitionists' arguments might work if every woman selling sex was desperate to stop doing so, and if there was a comprehensive support package in place to help women exit prostitution and provide them with lucrative, alternative employment.

 

But many sex workers say they are willing to engage in this work because they can earn more than they would be able to in other jobs. Those who do want to get out lament the lack of financial and emotional support available to them, and equate leaving sex work to tumbling into a bottomless, moneyless rabbit hole.

 

They insist that the proposals backed by Honeyball won't "rescue" them or prompt them to walk away rejoicing from their work but will simply make it more dangerous for them to continue doing what they have chosen to do.

 

Whether laws are passed to criminalise buyers or criminalise sellers, the impact on sellers who choose to remain in sex work is the same. It makes their work more dangerous. Working together in small groups, whether inside or outside, makes things safer for sex workers.

 

Yet women who work together indoors are committing a crime under current UK laws, and those who work on the streets together are more likely to attract negative attention from police and be charged with soliciting. Police chiefs have recently called for women to be allowed to work together to improve safety. Two sex workers were recently murdered in London. The first, Mariana Popa, was working alone outside as there was a police enforcement operation going on in the area, while the second, Maria Duque-Tunjano, was also working alone indoors to avoid prosecution. Would both these women still be alive today if they had been allowed to work in a small group with other women?

 

When sex workers raise their voices it is usually to call for their rights. Italian sex workers have been demanding the right to pay taxes so they can receive pensions, while sex workers in London's Soho have hailed a new court victory rejecting a closure order on two flats they have been working in. The judge ruled that the women were not being controlled for gain in their work, despite police putting forward a contrary argument.

 

Sweden, Norway and Iceland have already made the purchase of sex a criminal offence. France has voted the same way, and Ireland is considering following suit. Academic Jay Levy has recently completed a piece of research about the "Swedish model" of criminalizing men who pay for sex. He argues that levels of sex work in Sweden have not reduced, while the law has caused great harm to sex workers, especially the most vulnerable.

 

If the European parliament endorses the Swedish model, the very women they say they want to protect will be put at increased risk. Isn't it time to call a truce between both sides in the prostitution debate? Increase real support to women who want to leave sex work while allowing women who have chosen to sell sex to increase their safety by working together, without fear of prosecution, leaving police to focus on victims of trafficking and underage girls."

 

source: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/24/europe-vote-swedish-model-prostitution

 

Current map: http://gu.com/p/3yx8d/tw

 

The problem with Levy's research is that he doesn't cite any statistics to counter those included in the Toronto Star article cited in my post above, doesn't address the issue of trafficking at all, and has a political agenda/ax to grind. I don't necessarily disagree with his political stance and I hold no brief for the views of Catherine MacKinnon, et al., but it's certainly not unknown for researchers -- even those at elite institutions like Cambridge -- to fall prey to confirmation bias or to err in favor of whoever funded or sponsored their research. I can't tell if the Sex Worker Open University had anything to do with his research or was simply a presentation venue, but I also can't eliminate it as a possibility.

 

Of course, this works both ways; the Swedish government has an interest in justifying existing law. But seeing as it has cited statistics, it behooves those on the other side to address them instead of relying on non-quantitative field research. Sex worker, social worker, police officer: they are offering their own subjective opinions and views and in that regard cancel each other out to some extent.

 

Anyone condoning the Swedish Model is no friend of escorts or clients

 

Also.... It didn't stop anything

 

Once again, no statistics, no quantitative backup. Levy's research isn't completely useless; it tends to show that Swedish policies are not as worker-friendly as they're portrayed. But it also shows that the Swedish model decreases and depresses the market for street prostitution and increases the use of the more invisible off-street escort model. How does that differ in effect from British laws that criminalize public solicitation?

 

I have to mention, though, that the idea of an arm's length tenancy turning a landlord into a pimp is just ludicrous and amounts to indirect criminalization of the sale of sex as opposed to buying it. The same is true to the extent the law prohibits pooling of resources.

 

To complicate matters further, here's a summary of a government-commissioned report from Norway, which also uses the Swedish model, that says similar things to the Levy's report but also has the same weaknesses:

 

http://therealpornwikileaks.com/selling-sex-dangerous-five-years-sex-purchase-ban/ (courtesy of Conner Habib's Twitter feed)

 

Just a reminder, I'm philosophically in favor of the more straightforward British/UK model (criminalize pimping, public solicitation, and brothels). My question is which (a) how many sex workers are trafficked or coerced (while there are pitfalls, it seems to me that a halfway decent random sample and a well-written and administered questionnaire/interview could approach an answer to this question) and (b) which model is more effective at reducing trafficking. If a majority of sex workers are trafficked or coerced (which wouldn't surprise me) and the Swedish model is more effective than the UK model (which would probably be less easy to determine, but let's assume we can), what then?

[Steven_Draker]

Back to Germany.

 

After doing some research online and watching a documentary last night, it appears that 90% of the prostitution in Germany is forced, meaning that sex workers are under constraint. We're not talking about high-end, Internet-based prostitution, we're talking about mega-brothels, Mama-sans and TRAFFICKING.

 

Here are some numbers:

 

Germany is a paradise for sex traffickers :

• 400,000 sex workers

• Every day about 1.2 m men visit sex workers (labor union Ver.di)

• 90% of prostitutes are under constraint

• The German sex industry rakes in some $US17.7 bn a year.

• Main destination in Europe for sex tourism

• Mega-brothels, bordellos with flat rates, package deals, airport quickies, „all you can eat“ principle, ....

 

– Reeperbahn street in Hamburg

– The biggest German brothel, the Pascha, in Cologne, services about 800 men every day.

– At the Pussy Club near Stuttgart, women are regularly forced to have sex with 60 men a day.

– Saarbrücken at the French border is known as Europe‘s prostitution capital: 1,000 call girls for a population of 170,000 inhabitants

 

source: http://www.gemeinsam-gegen-menschenhandel.de/images/downloads/20140417FrankHeinrichMdBHeidelbergMH.pdf