3 ms·

Jailing the women who practice is not the only option here. The nordic model advocates that it's only the buyers who are penalized. Women are then given servic

Jailing the women who practice is not the only option here. The nordic model advocates that it's only the buyers who are penalized. Women are then given services that provide a path towards a different means of earning income. The idea is that by making it riskier for the buyer, the average John won't bother with looking for that type of service. The aim is to reduce demand for prostitution in general, which in turn should reduce the demand for trafficking for the purposes of prostitution. Studies do indeed show that countries with this model (Sweden) have less incidence of human trafficking than countries with legalization (Netherlands). There is a tradeoff though with that model. Mainly that the Johns who remain in the market are more likely to be dangerous. This is not a clear cut feminist issue though. Many feminists do indeed believe sex work as an industry is harmful to women, even if regulated for worker safety. There are feminists who are ex-sex workers that advocate this position.

makomk 9y ago
For some context, while Sweden doesn't criminalize women who sell sex, it does criminalize everyone around them - including landlords who knowingly rent to them, with the main defence being that they evicted their tenant as soon as legally possible after finding out. So sex workers in Sweden have gone to the police about being raped by clients, only to have the police tell their landlords to evict them. They don't report rape to the police anymore. (I think the other Nordic countries that adopted this model have the same issue.) A few years ago, Amnesty International found out about this and took a strong position against the Nordic model because of it. The response amongst feminist supporters of the Nordic model was not to disown this part of the Nordic model or try and change the law in Sweden; instead they launched a campaign against Amnesty International to try and shut them up. Its proponents might try and spin it as something that protects women in the industry and only affects johns, but pretty much all of them are fighting hard to strip those women of any police protection against rape and violence. Occasionally, you'll even find someone who openly admits that they want those women to be more at risk of rape because they hope it'll encourage them to give up a trade that they think is hurting other women, and no-one else in the supposedly feminist anti-sex-work movement seems to have a problem with this from what I've seen.

makomk 9y ago

For some context, while Sweden doesn't criminalize women who sell sex, it does criminalize everyone around them - including landlords who knowingly rent to them, with the main defence being that they evicted their tenant as soon as legally possible after finding out. So sex workers in Sweden have gone to the police about being raped by clients, only to have the police tell their landlords to evict them. They don't report rape to the police anymore. (I think the other Nordic countries that adopted this model have the same issue.) A few years ago, Amnesty International found out about this and took a strong position against the Nordic model because of it. The response amongst feminist supporters of the Nordic model was not to disown this part of the Nordic model or try and change the law in Sweden; instead they launched a campaign against Amnesty International to try and shut them up. Its proponents might try and spin it as something that protects women in the industry and only affects johns, but pretty much all of them are fighting hard to strip those women of any police protection against rape and violence. Occasionally, you'll even find someone who openly admits that they want those women to be more at risk of rape because they hope it'll encourage them to give up a trade that they think is hurting other women, and no-one else in the supposedly feminist anti-sex-work movement seems to have a problem with this from what I've seen.