THREAD: Want to know why the @APPG_CSE's report on how to ' #bustthebusinessmodel' of trafficking in the sex industry is utter bullshit? This thread is for you.

1. "Commercial sexual exploitation, which includes prostitution and sex trafficking"

As usual with @DianaJohnsonMP & her ilk, sexual exploitation/ #trafficking are conflated with #sexwork in general. They say they want to stop trafficking, but they actually want to stop sex work.

I think it's very normal to feel uncomfortable with sex work existing in a patriarchal consumer capitalist society, but sex work does happen, so 'busting the business model' is actually 'busting a marginalised woman's livelihood'. Cheers, sisterhood.

Also, they think this:

"Exchanging money, food, accommodation, employment, services or other goods in
return for sex acts is sexual exploitation and abuse. It is never acceptable."

So I guess that includes rich wives who hate fucking their husbands but do it for the lifestyle.

No? Wait, so this is only directed at the livelihood strategies of poorer, more precarious women? Women who made choices *they* can't understand in their lives? Ahhh ok gotcha.

2. "The most common model of operation used by organised crime groups engaged in sexual exploitation involves [...] sexually exploiting the victims in ‘pop-up’ brothels"

Ah, the old pop up brothel story. I investigated this in my book - FOI'ing numbers of trafficking victims..

found in a specific part of the UK dubbed a centre of this trade and allegedly having a "sex den epidemic".

How many women do you think were referred as victims of trafficking by police over 2 years from that area?

2 per year.

That's not an epidemic. That's not a scourge across our country. It's an unacceptable harm against those women, but it does not need a moral panic to resolve it.

3. It contains excerpts of reviews from punters that are meant to shock and appall the reader (presumably a particular kind of reader who's only ever had joyful, highly enthusiastic sex).

Of course, it fails to situate those reviews within the broader context of bad jobs. There are plenty of jobs which make people unhappy - have they met any agency cleaners? underpaid carers? etc.

Sex work is work and the problem is decent work, immigration enforcement and labour rights, not the sex part.

4. "The need for demand reduction legislation: 1)
Reducing sex trafficking requires reducing demand for it;
2) Demand reduction legislation works"

Ok so many problems with this.

First, the 'demand' in sex work isn't only from customers. It's also from sex workers for a livelihood. So feel free to rebrand your shitty policy the "make poor women poorer" law, or similar.

Second, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT CRIMINALISING BUYING SEX REDUCES #TRAFFICKING.

I explore and explain this in the sex chapter of my book btw: https://www.plutobooks.com/9780745341224/the-truth-about-modern-slavery/

Basically, the law they propose makes #sexwork riskier, more dangerous and makes sex workers poorer, but does not reduce the number of sex workers (cos... ppl need to pay bills?!) nor reduce trafficking.

The academic papers these people always cite to support this claim both do NOT state this law achieves a reduction in trafficking.

And comparative analysis between countries of comparable geography and economy with this law versus legalisation have not identified the law as reducing trafficking.

5. "83% of the women selling sex in the brothels were non-British nationals, and the most frequently recorded nationality was Romanian."

Some victims of trafficking in the sex sector are Romanian, and many other nationalities.

But Romanian women have also been racialised as victims - @ProstitutesColl members have experienced this, the police presumption they are victims because of their nationality and their job. Let's consider actual EVIDENCE...

In 2020, there were 131 Romanian ppl identified as possible victims of #humantrafficking into mainstream labour sectors (e.g. farming, construction etc) and 77 into sexual exploitation.

77 is 77 too many of course, but that's no good reason to perpetuate the tarring of a nationality as victims.

(data from the data table 4 here https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/modern-slavery-national-referral-mechanism-and-duty-to-notify-statistics-uk-end-of-year-summary-2020)

6. "A study involving 133 women in prostitution in five locations across England found that over half of the women had been raped or indecently assaulted."

This is used as a reason to criminalise buying sexual services. In fact, using - again - EVIDENCE - the law they propose...

...has been found to increase violence and harm to sex workers because when clients are criminalised, a portion of them stop buying sex*, but it's the ones who are more willing to break the law, and more likely to be violent, who remain

So their proposal is actually going to increase abuse of sex workers. Again, cheers sisterhood.

*but remember, while the client base appears to contract a bit (c.10%) the supplier base does not because... people need to pay their bills!

If you actually want to stop women being abused at work, make sure they have rights, can work together for safety and can unionise. It's really not that hard.