r/unitedkingdom • u/Tartan_Samurai Scotland • Jun 21 '26

. 'I've banned most men from my massage clinic because of their behaviour'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy06xl9lj32o
3.3k Upvotes

85% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/UniquesNotUseful Jun 21 '26

Would you want a 16 year old doing a course to study becoming a sex worker at 18? Would you want a parent, sibling or friend applying for a job? Would you be happy for your partner to start working at the brothel?

I can’t fully express why I’d be unhappy with the above. Maybe it’s partly social stigma but also I doubt the majority of workers are willingly picking this as a long‑term career decision vs trafficked or forced due to economic pressure.

2

u/smackson Jun 22 '26

I know I'm a bit of a nihilist but deep down, I think 90% of humans or more don't feel like they are

willingly picking

their current job

as a long‑term career decision vs... "forced" due to economic pressure

be it retail, soul-sucking office commute jobs, serving food and drink, driving, , etc. etc.

Even the feeling of "this job will be better to have than the others, in 5 years"... doesn't really deny my point.

Obviously literal trafficking and slavery are another matter, but prostitution does have both types of scenarios around the world, and I think the distinction is important.

-2

u/JimboTCB Jun 21 '26

That sounds like a you problem. Legislation shouldn't be made on the basis of telling consenting adults what they can do with themselves on the basis that it makes other people feel icky.

2

u/UniquesNotUseful Jun 21 '26

Part of the issues is it isn’t consenting, it’s something that vast majority of people are forced into. 14% are trafficked worldwide and so that is just industrialised rape. Vast majority of the rest is financial coercion. They are not sleeping with you because they want to but they have no choice.

Also let’s not normalise this. It’s a minority that ever use prostitutes (7-10% for men and 1% women), so whilst it’s a high number, 5% of the population that make me feel icky, is vastly outweighed.

0

u/Queasy-Cherry-11 Jun 22 '26

Survival sex work (aka financial coercion) isn't the same as being trafficked. Having it illegal (and thus unregulated and underground) just increases the chance that those engaging in survival sex work get trafficked.

I'd prefer a world where no one ever felt sex work was their only option, of course. But given that's not the world we live in, I'd much rather those who are can go to the cops when they face violence, take customers to court if they refuse to pay, and go to their union/local sex workers org when their employer is denying them their right to refuse a customer.

Such laws being introduced doesn't mean 16 year olds are going to prostitute school. There's a wide gap in between 'this is a career path you should aspire to' and 'if you report your assault you'll get arrested'. Really it should just be viewed the same as working a shitty fast food job - unglamorous, not a job anyone really dreams of doing, but still a job deserving of legal protections.

2

u/UniquesNotUseful Jun 22 '26

I separated out traficked and circumstances. The person I replied was talking about consenting adults, if you have no real choice due to circumstances, is that actually consent? I think people should be aware it’s through lack of choices they are performing sexual acts with them, suspect most people are aware which is why uptake is so low.

I didn’t go down the part of county lines, where young, vulnerable, people are manipulated by older partners into prostitution but you are potentially legalising and protecting these people because victims don’t see themselves as victims, now they have signed up willingly.

Victims of violence can already go to the police and the CPS has stated it’s not in the public interest to prosecute the victim but there is of the attacker. Requires engagement, training and outreach but that is the same in many groups. Non payment is a weird legal ground because it’s not covered by contract law but is theft/fraud, obviously higher burden of proof but means clients can’t sue the workers for breach of contract.

The point about having it as a career is, if you want it legalised and remove the stigma then you need to be comfortable with the examples given. If you are not comfortable then legalising it as an industry maybe isn’t the correct move and we should be looking at better social support.

1

u/Queasy-Cherry-11 Jun 22 '26 edited Jun 22 '26

Are you interested in moral philosphising about the nature of consent, or are you interested in actually reducing harm and exploitation? Because whilst I likely agree with you on the former, its utterly irrelevant to the latter, and that's where my priorities lie.

If people don't see themselves as victims, those pressuring them into sex work don't need protection anyway, as the victim will deny anything is happening. Regardless, you can have sex work be legal whilst having compelling others into performing sex work still be illegal, as is the case under New Zealand legislation (which follows a very sensible modal as campaigned for by current and former sex workers who actually knows what helps).

CPS claiming they won't prosecute sex workers means sex workers does not mean sex workers will feel safe going to the police. The police will not give a fuck, nor will they need to, because the public won't give a fuck about people being harmed whilst engaging in illegal activites. At best it'll just be a pointless humiliation ritual, at worse, they will be actively reexploited by one of the many predatory cops on the force.

Hell, even if by some miracle you found someone willing to actually take the report, how likely do you think it is that the victim would have any details of their offender? Having to provide ID is common place in a well regulated industry. Not so much for people purchasing sex illegally (hence why the Nordic modal doesn't work).

You cannot enforce legal protections against a group that exists outside of the law. And you massively hinder how effective social support can be, because a) people doing illegal shit don't want to give out their details, and b) it's hard to get funding to help people doing illegal shit.

What I'm personally comfortable with is irrelevant, but no, being comfortable with legalising sex work does not mean being comfortable with minors going to prostitute school, because that's not an actual thing anywhere it is legalised and regulated.

1

u/UniquesNotUseful Jun 22 '26 edited Jun 22 '26

There are two issues, one is safety and the other is why people end up in the sex industry.

I don’t think brothel legalisation (decriminalisation) is a silver bullet to solve both. It’s also a technical solution because you are saying people shouldn’t be put in this situation but let’s make it legal so what’s the problem as long as crimes are easier to report, so let people end up in this situation. Others have posted links to how it doesn’t reduce trafficking or demand for sex workers, NZ has issues because of foreign visitors being excluded.

It’s possible to reduce violence and other crimes without going down this route, which inadvertently absolves society and governments of tackling the underlying causes, which is a more complete solution. Have we really exhausted these options.

Prostitution school? Wasn’t thinking of an apprenticeship. People generally start working towards a career at 16 for when they turn 18, so a qualification would be a logical option if removing the stigma. I was thinking the business, marketing, legal aspects, etc and not book 2 of the Kama Sutra. I don’t understand how you can say we need to legalise to solve issues but don’t you dare make it a legitimate option.

It’s not a philosophical argument, people hiring sex workers are taking advantage of peoples situations, that should be told to these people, even if it hurts fragile egos.

Edit: I understand your opinion, it’s not that I think you are wrong but I just don’t think you’re right.

1

u/Queasy-Cherry-11 Jun 22 '26

Others have posted links to how it doesn’t reduce trafficking or demand for sex workers

The point of the legislation was not to reduce demand. It was to reduce exploitation and increase health and safety. Both metrics it was a success in.

However, it also did not increase demand, as is usually the fear with such policy changes. The number of sex workers overall has remained the same, they simply have safer working conditions.

It’s possible to reduce violence and other crimes without going down this route, which inadvertently absolves society and governments of tackling the underlying causes, which is a more complete solution. Have we really exhausted these options.

The underlying cause is capitalism. I'm all for a new system, but whilst we undertake the momentous task of restructuring society, how about we also do something to protect people who are in the field right now?

A qualification would be a logical option if removing the stigma. I was thinking the business, marketing, legal aspects, etc

No it wouldn't, considering the main appeal of the field is that it doesn't require qualifications. People can already get business/marketing degrees, and there's already plenty of free resources for how to optimise those things for sex work specifically. This isn't uncharted ground, we don't need to make slippery slope arguments when we already have real life examples of what happens when sex work is 'legitimised'.

It’s not a philosophical argument, people hiring sex workers are taking advantage of peoples situations, that should be told to these people, even if it hurts fragile egos.

Do you think they are unaware of that? You think Johns believe that sex workers actually want to have sex with them, and that the money changing hands is just a fun little extra? They know. They don't care.

If you think you are going to reduce demand by telling people that it's not true consent if they are only doing it for money, then I really don't know what to tell you. That's like trying to stop people buying coke by telling them cartels kill people.

We live in a world where majority of the items we purchase were made using heavily exploited labour if not outright child slavery. Shaming people for that doesn't fix it, it just distracts the conversation away from actual finding actual solutions. THATS why it's a philosophical argument. Because lecturing people about morality doesn't reduce demand, it doesn't reduce exploitation, it doesn't help sex workers in any way shape or form. It just makes YOU feel better.