4 ms·

The ending was a bit fun for a Swede: >> But whereas progressive Swedes view their state as able to set positive goals, Germans (the Greens, especially) mistru

by berntb 13y ago

The ending was a bit fun for a Swede: >> But whereas progressive Swedes view their state as able to set positive goals, Germans (the Greens, especially) mistrust the state on questions of personal morality as a hypocritical and authoritarian threat to self-expression. Only this can explain why Swedes continue overwhelmingly to support their policy, and Germans theirs. Sweden is consensus driven. Only one opinion is allowed at a time in many subjects. No media(/political party) is arguing the German solution in Sweden, it would just be impossible. Me? I have an unusual attitude in Sweden. I ask: What works best? Frankly, I don't know. The Swedish way sounds nicer, but... does it really work? (I don't really trust Swedish research on this, a large part of that will come with an agenda.) Some other Swede will comment and claim I'm totally misrepresenting everything about just one opinion at a time. Then I will point out e.g. that in Sweden housing just isn't being built, because it would lose votes (and probably lobbying from the big building companies that like the present situation). This at the same time as the population is increasing quickly. This is insane -- but the media isn't screaming at the politicians anyway. Another thing not discussed [immigration]. (There, I saved HN from a few more stupid comments.) What I would really want to see is trafficking statistics for Sweden and Germany. This is a modern slave trade that destroy people's lives by torturing them for money. Worse than heroin. Edit: "k__", read the article. It isn't outlawed to sell sex in .se, it is outlawed to buy it. That is a difference compared to drugs. The effects of this is uncertain.

k__ 13y ago
Outlawing prostitution will end in the same shit like the war on drugs in the USA. The politicians see the problems and try to erase them instead of thinking about the causes. The problem isn't people having sex for money or people giving money for sex. The problem are those who force other ones to do their bidding.
dsco 13y ago
I think that your statement about Sweden being consensus driven is spot on. Whether it be issues on drugs, sex or religion we tend to pretty much have a consolidated view on things - and contrasting opinions are considered extreme. Imagine living in the bible belt, but replace the bible with politically correctness and you have Sweden in a nutshell.
oskarth 13y ago
For what it counts, I am also from Sweden and I completely agree with you (not that I have a choice not to...).
makomk 13y ago
Sweden's handling of sex workers gets a lot less scrutiny than it really ought to. In particular, while it's technically true that they don't criminalise the actual prostitutes (unless they're migrants who aren't legally allowed to work in the country), Sweden criminalizes everyone around them. For instance, there's an explicit provision requring landlords to evict any tenants whom they have reason to believe are having sex for money in the leased property and making it a criminal offense for them not to do so.
- DanBC 13y ago
  The UK has had some changes to its prostitution laws. It's legal for two people to exchange sex for money. But then there are some added technicalities: two or more women cannot share a property to use for sex work (because that becomes a brothel); people cannot control sex workers (pimping is illegal); it's illegal to pay a trafficked worker for sex; etc etc. These have been added over the years, and so we have a confusing situation. People don't really know what is or isn't legal. With this kind of stuff law should be clear because it's mostly about telling society what is acceptable. That guides people into making less unacceptable choices. (EG: Curb crawling: "Pay women to have sex is okay; but don't approach women on the street in your car and ask if they're prostitutes". That law should be about guiding people to use advertised prostitutes, but it's used to clamp down on all prostitution.)
patrickaljord 13y ago
> Me? I have an unusual attitude in Sweden. I ask: What works best? Frankly, I don't know. The Swedish way sounds nicer, but... does it really work? How is it nicer? Do you think it's ok for the State to decide what two consenting adults can do with their own bodies?
- alkonaut 13y ago
  Positive and negative freedoms. The right of a subset of the population (Non-consenting sex workers, i.e. traficking victims etc.) to NOT have to sell sex against their will, is stronger than the right for the larger group to be allowed to do so. Just like my right to walk the street without being shot outweighs anyone elses right to carry a gun there.
  - patrickaljord 13y ago
    That doesn't make sense, I just said that people who consent into prostitution should be allowed to do so and you say they shouldn't be allowed to do so because people shouldn't be forced into prostitution? Forcing people into prostitution should be illegal, I agree with that. But if two people consent into something concerning their own bodies, the state shouldn't have a say in that. If you don't even own your own body, what do you own? What freedom's left? > Just like my right to walk the street without being shot outweighs anyone elses right to carry a gun there. I disagree with that too, people should be free to own guns, not just the government. Using guns against people for anything but self-defense should be and is illegal though. It's fascinating how much people can trust their government to the point of giving them the right of what they should do with their own bodies, sexuality and more. I'm from Europe though, so I'm used to that.
    - alkonaut 13y ago
      An ideal law would of course let consenting people do what they want, while people who do it for other reasons should not be allowed to. And of course there are already laws against traficking just like there are laws agains shooting people. The problem is that such a law is both difficult to draft and enforce. So assume we are left with a choice of two laws: completely legal or completely illegal. This law will thus have one of two drawbacks: It will allow forcing people to sell sex without consent or it will make it illegal for consenting adults to do so. There is no more or less freedoms here, it's just different freedoms for different groups.

by berntb 13y ago

k__ 13y ago

Outlawing prostitution will end in the same shit like the war on drugs in the USA. The politicians see the problems and try to erase them instead of thinking about the causes. The problem isn't people having sex for money or people giving money for sex. The problem are those who force other ones to do their bidding.

dsco 13y ago

I think that your statement about Sweden being consensus driven is spot on. Whether it be issues on drugs, sex or religion we tend to pretty much have a consolidated view on things - and contrasting opinions are considered extreme. Imagine living in the bible belt, but replace the bible with politically correctness and you have Sweden in a nutshell.

oskarth 13y ago

For what it counts, I am also from Sweden and I completely agree with you (not that I have a choice not to...).

makomk 13y ago

Sweden's handling of sex workers gets a lot less scrutiny than it really ought to. In particular, while it's technically true that they don't criminalise the actual prostitutes (unless they're migrants who aren't legally allowed to work in the country), Sweden criminalizes everyone around them. For instance, there's an explicit provision requring landlords to evict any tenants whom they have reason to believe are having sex for money in the leased property and making it a criminal offense for them not to do so.

DanBC 13y ago
The UK has had some changes to its prostitution laws. It's legal for two people to exchange sex for money. But then there are some added technicalities: two or more women cannot share a property to use for sex work (because that becomes a brothel); people cannot control sex workers (pimping is illegal); it's illegal to pay a trafficked worker for sex; etc etc. These have been added over the years, and so we have a confusing situation. People don't really know what is or isn't legal. With this kind of stuff law should be clear because it's mostly about telling society what is acceptable. That guides people into making less unacceptable choices. (EG: Curb crawling: "Pay women to have sex is okay; but don't approach women on the street in your car and ask if they're prostitutes". That law should be about guiding people to use advertised prostitutes, but it's used to clamp down on all prostitution.)

patrickaljord 13y ago

> Me? I have an unusual attitude in Sweden. I ask: What works best? Frankly, I don't know. The Swedish way sounds nicer, but... does it really work? How is it nicer? Do you think it's ok for the State to decide what two consenting adults can do with their own bodies?

alkonaut 13y ago
Positive and negative freedoms. The right of a subset of the population (Non-consenting sex workers, i.e. traficking victims etc.) to NOT have to sell sex against their will, is stronger than the right for the larger group to be allowed to do so. Just like my right to walk the street without being shot outweighs anyone elses right to carry a gun there.
- patrickaljord 13y ago
  That doesn't make sense, I just said that people who consent into prostitution should be allowed to do so and you say they shouldn't be allowed to do so because people shouldn't be forced into prostitution? Forcing people into prostitution should be illegal, I agree with that. But if two people consent into something concerning their own bodies, the state shouldn't have a say in that. If you don't even own your own body, what do you own? What freedom's left? > Just like my right to walk the street without being shot outweighs anyone elses right to carry a gun there. I disagree with that too, people should be free to own guns, not just the government. Using guns against people for anything but self-defense should be and is illegal though. It's fascinating how much people can trust their government to the point of giving them the right of what they should do with their own bodies, sexuality and more. I'm from Europe though, so I'm used to that.
  - alkonaut 13y ago
    An ideal law would of course let consenting people do what they want, while people who do it for other reasons should not be allowed to. And of course there are already laws against traficking just like there are laws agains shooting people. The problem is that such a law is both difficult to draft and enforce. So assume we are left with a choice of two laws: completely legal or completely illegal. This law will thus have one of two drawbacks: It will allow forcing people to sell sex without consent or it will make it illegal for consenting adults to do so. There is no more or less freedoms here, it's just different freedoms for different groups.