OPINIONS

Decriminalizing victims: Let’s adopt the Nordic Model of prostitution law

Last November, the Daily featured an anti prostitution-legalization Op-ed. Sara Orton’s article “Sex workers in Amsterdam: Legal, but still demeaning, disturbing and degrading” is a passionate critique of legalizing prostitution. I agree with her premise but wish the author went into more depth about the legal framework she advocates: the “Nordic Model.”

Under this legal model, adopted by numerous Northern European countries and now Canada, the selling of sex is legal, whereas the buying is illegal. Customers of prostitutes are prosecuted while prostitutes are not. Advocating for the Nordic model is a daunting task: It is opposed by both those who want to legalize prostitution completely and by those who want complete prohibition (where both buying and selling sex is illegal, as in practically all of the U.S.).

A favored pro-legalization argument is that criminalizing clients is unfair to prostitutes who “willingly enter prostitution” as it decreases demand for their services. However, the notion of the “willing prostitute” should be discarded. Studies suggest prostitutes overwhelmingly wish they could exit the profession. Prostitution is almost always forced, not always by coercion or trafficking, but by circumstances such as poverty, abandonment or drug dependence.

Countries that criminalized sex buyers, such as Sweden, have seen a significant drop in sex trafficking. Sweden has seen far less sex trafficking inflow per capita than Denmark and Germany – nearby countries where buying sex is legal. Street prostitution halved and the Swedish government determined that this is not because prostitutes simply moved indoors or increasingly offered services via the internet. A major decrease is also observable in Norway, which, like Sweden, criminalized sex buyers.

Legalization supporters claim regulated brothels keep prostitutes safe. The Netherlands legalized brothels in 2000, but since then has experienced an increase in violent crime surrounding prostitution leading to the shutdown of many brothels. Moreover, two Dutch criminologists concluded in 2014 that legalizing brothels has undermined anti-trafficking efforts in the Netherlands. After 2000, the majority of trafficking-related criminal investigations dealt with legal, licensed establishments, not with pimps operating outside the regulated realm. Legalization supporters say this is because it’s easier to police brothels than street prostitution. The bottom line of the research, however, is that “regulated” brothels are considerably affected by sex trafficking.

The Nordic model, though rightfully seeing prostitutes as victims, allows for the hypothetical possibility that women may enter the trade freely, by preventing them from being criminalized. The immediate challenge one thus hears from the legalization camp is that “why should the client of a willing prostitute be criminalized?” and that one could ban only buying sex from prostitutes “subjected to force” as instituted in the U.K.

My answer is to consider this: If the buyer asks the prostitute whether she is selling sex willingly and receives an answer that she indeed is and then proceeds with the transaction, he is still likely contributing to the exploitation of a human being. A prostitute who has been coerced or is impoverished will not honestly explain her circumstances because she needs the buyer’s money to either appease her coercer or put food on the table. Do sex buyers care anyway? Purportedly banning the purchase of services from solely “forced” prostitutes produces no useful results in the fight against sex trafficking and exploitation. The only thing that works is banning all buying.

Prostitutes are overwhelmingly victims. This is why the American model, where both the buying and selling of sex are criminal, is unjust.  Police departments across the U.S. now even officially acknowledge that most prostitutes are victims. Accordingly, many departments claim to be shifting their focus to arresting purchasers as opposed to prostitutes. But there is limited evidence of this actually happening: in Southern California, for example, significantly more prostitutes are arrested annually than sex buyers. Adopting the Nordic model of law would require law enforcement officials to be consistent with their own realization of prostitutes’ victimhood. The criminalization of prostitutes only perpetuates the prejudice against them. Also, the criminal records that sex workers accrue prevent their reintegration into the labor market.

Adopting the Nordic model is a step towards solving an issue that legalization cannot.

William Wicki ’15

Contact William Wicki at wwicki ‘at’ stanford.edu.

  • Phil Thomas

    That’s nice, social services, counseling and support, but no jobs. Maybe someday laws will be written by people who have a clue as to what it’s like to work for a living.

  • Pat Geroud

    Actually much of this counseling revolves around finding alternate jobs for these women, so you’re mistaken.

  • Pat Geroud

    They actually offer job training!

  • Phil Thomas

    No, I’m not. Rescue fraud Somaly Mam got funding from Cambodia’s garment industry to force sex workers back into shitty factory jobs. If there were jobs out there paying as well as sex work, many (most? nobody knows) sex workers would be doing them.

  • Pat Geroud

    What does that have to do with anything? This is Sweden, not a third-world country, whatever the job may be it will be enough to make a living in decent working conditions.

  • Pat Geroud

    Why you talking about Cambodia?

  • Phil Thomas

    Did you miss #1 American Rescue Pimp Nick Kristof’s deification of Somaly Mam over the past few years? If he can talk about Cambodia, so can I.

  • Pat Geroud

    Sure you can talk about it. Just not in an irrelevant way, such as in the context of the Swedish model of law.

  • Phil Thomas

    It’s completely relevant. Pointing out that the rescue industry’s biggest star made everything up and either no one checked or no one cared is something you should keep in mind when evaluating the claims of the wonders of the Nordic model.

  • hookstrapped

    The point isn’t about trafficking but the safety and rights of sex workers where prostitution is decriminalized (including the right to sue an employer, a brothel manager, for sexual harassment – there was a recent case where a woman prevailed in such a lawsuit) compared to where it’s criminalized in any way. Though this study doesn’t offer such a comparison, it does provide a lot of data for a decriminalized context. You ought to at least read the executive summary

    http://www.justice.govt.nz/policy/commercial-property-and-regulatory/prostitution/prostitution-law-review-committee/publications/impact-health-safety/executive-summary

  • hookstrapped

    Why is that?

  • Pat Geroud

    Under the Swedish model where selling sex is decriminalized there is also no reason a woman can’t go to the police. The only thing that matters in that is whether the selling is illegal.

  • Pat Geroud

    Because NZ is a tiny island with no sex trafficking problem to begin with. It has a low population, is thus easy to police, there are not many (significant) ethnic enclaves (of course there are a few) where trafficking happens (compare with the U.S. where a lot of “massage parlor”s are in ethnic Asian neighborhoods. It’s like comparing oranges and apples. Practically no American police chief thinks outright legalization would work,

  • hookstrapped

    Again, I’m not talking about trafficking. Why wouldn’t decriminalization work in the US to reduce unsafe working conditions for sex workers and promote sex workers’ access to civil remedies for poor or exploitative working conditions through virtue of being covered under labor laws?

  • hookstrapped

    That appears true on the surface. But that the Swedish model continues to view the transaction as criminal, even if only one party is criminally liable, it continues to stigmatize the entirety of the industry. So these findings from NZ are not that surprising (though in no way conclusive):

    – Over half of all survey participants who had been working prior to the enactment of the PRA, reported that police attitudes had changed for the better following decriminalisation of the industry.

    – Participants in qualitative interviews were positive about police and said that they were more likely post-decriminalisation to report a bad incident to them.

    The larger issue is to what extent the Swedish model creates conditions for more abuse by pushing transactions underground compared to full decriminalization.

  • Pat Geroud

    The issues of trafficking and forced prostitution, by virtue of being a significant part of the entire industry, take precedence. People who have been exploited can already address their exploitation in civil court. Access to civil remedies, again, is only dependent on whether selling itself is legal, which the U.S. should indeed make happen.

  • Pat Geroud

    No it does not. When a Swedish sex purchaser is caught he is fined. The prostitute on the other hand is given access to social services. e

  • Pat Geroud

    trust me, people SUE like crazy in the U.S.

  • Pat Geroud

    Look at my answer below, regarding legalizing brothels, well the number of sex trafficking cases, and I know you don’t like to talk about trafficking and forced prostitution, in Dutch brothels and window prostitution clearly outweighs the number of trafficking cases on the street.

  • Pat Geroud

    I think Mr Wicki should have used better statistics for the Dutch case, but he is right(ish).

  • SomeGuys

    Ever heard of the following economic concepts: product differentiation, Giffen good, Veblen good, common law of business balance (“you get what you pay for”)… shall I go on?

  • Pat Geroud

    yes I learned about those things in high school, still… “Giffen goods are quite rare, to the extent that there is some debate about their actual existence” http://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/giffen-good.asp

    There’s no reason to assume theres this massive market of rich men that is bigger than the demand posed by the average joe who wants a street hooker. Rich men can afford to go on seekingarrangement.com (ever heard of preferable substitute competition?), which is definitely not prostitution. Again, high-end escorts are not necessarily prostitution.

  • hookstrapped

    Many people assume that coercion and trafficking account for the majority or vast majority of the women working as prostitutes. However there is no evidence to support this, as most statistics cited use samples of arrested street prostitutes. The issue of how representative street prostitutes are of all prostitutes is the crux of the issue since I think everyone agrees that the life of a street prostitute is generally quite dismal. The New Zealand survey of prostitutes found that 10% of all prostitutes are street prostitutes.

    And even among a group you would think, and are often portrayed, as being the most vulnerable to coercion and trafficking — underage prostitutes — the one study that does not suffer from the selection bias of cases where the police get involved because of assault or other reasons the prostitute seeks to flee her situation find that trafficking are involved in a very small percentage of cases.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/04/23/study_of_sex_workers_and_pimps_reveals_how_the_market_for_underage_sex_actually.html

  • Pat Geroud

    Theres a difference between coercion and trafficking, and poverty. Not every forced prostitute is forced by coercion or trafficking, you are right, but many more are forced by poverty. Regarding street prostitution as being the main place where exploitation happens: There’s a reason American law enforcement is cracking down on places such as craigslist, back page (http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/10/16/child-sex-trafficking-victims-suing-backpage-com/7lcO2fP91ToEdWt4dKLIVK/story.html) http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/05/24/feds-sex-trafficking-ring-used-backpagecom-ads/
    and the former myredbook.com, its because, and here is where you are absolutely right, a lot of solicitation today occurs on the internet. Stop using NZ as an example, its not representative of the situation in the U.S. BTW, all of the sites I just mentioned require the “escort” be 18 to signup, but look how well that works.

  • Pat Geroud
  • hookstrapped

    A big problem in comparing trafficking across countries and over time is the lack of a consistent definition of what constitutes trafficking. Here is an excellent piece that illustrates the problem in a number of ways.
    https://glasgowsexworker.wordpress.com/2012/06/01/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-trafficking-or-technically-ive-been-trafficked-you-know-part-one/

  • SomeGuys

    Look at P411 and you’ll find over 1700 verified, well-reviewed California escorts typically charging 400+ and hour. If not prostitution, explain what service escorts looking like porn stars in these ads are offering for higher rates than lawyers and surgeons. Maybe it’s time to update the Giffen goods Investopedia page.

  • Pat Geroud

    Considering there are around 10000 prostitution-related arrests in California annually, the clear majority are arrests of street prostitutes, this is not surprising at all. If 7000 street prostitutes were arrested in California then the real number of Californian street prostitutes is much higher, probably in the low tens of thousands as only a minority are actually arrested. This contradicts the figure you gave of 60% of prostitution being escorts. Don’t tell me theres tens of thousands of active California escorts at any given point in time.

    These escorts are not technically legally offering sex which is why they get away with it. As you very well know, they offer time and if there is sex within that time this is legally ok because it is not sex that is officially being paid for. This is why when police record conversations as part of undercover stings, they aim to record an explicit exchange offer of money for sex for the evidence to hold up in court.

    Independent, high-class escorts must also be distinguished from exploited escorts, who indeed are prostituted, forced prostitutes. Not every “independent” escort is actually independent. Not every escort is independent of a pimp, not every escort is 400 dollars (or roses LOL) an hour. P411 and similar sites are unique in that respect. Why do you think you hear news stories frequently of law enforcement arresting pimps who forced underage girls to sell services under the “escorts” section at Backpage.com?

    I’m not claiming the majority of escorts on back page are pimped out or exploited, that would be absurd, but many face great financial difficulty and are not doing this because they really want to. If surveys indicate the majority of street prostitutes want to exit the profession, the majority of lower-class non-elite escorts do too.

  • SomeGuys

    P411 is just one site requiring a fee to advertise one’s services, and potentially many more escorts advertise elsewhere at lower rates. By estimating the number of verified reviews across all such sites, I can easily envision ~10,000 escorts in California. Though there is much uncertainty regarding the actual proportions of escorts versus street prostitutes, there is a significant market of at least thousands of escorts each serving many hobbyists in California that hardly fits the exploiter/involuntary victim paradigm.

  • Pat Geroud

    Those thousands of escorts are already operating legally. Prostitution laws don’t touch them.

    But, here’s the thing, and maybe you can help me come up with an answer. Let’s say we live in a world there are 10000 exploited street and indoor prostitutes and 5000 non-exploited escorts. How do we possibly and effectively ban the purchase of sex from the former and not from the latter? The traditional outdoor-indoor distinction doesn’t always hold (massage parlors with exploited Korean girls alas) and neither are regulated brothels immune from sex trafficking. Do you not believe the necessity of fighting the exploitation caused by the clients of the exploited street and indoor prostitutes overrides the right of the clients of non-exploited escorts to get their jollies off? After all, the client of a non-exploited escort could be the client of an exploited escort tomorrow. I think one of the strengths of the guy’s article is that he envisions this problem in the paragraph banning buying of forced prostitutes. You can’t selectively address demand for one sector, so why not give the exploited the benefit of the doubt and ban all buying?

  • SomeGuys

    Prostitution laws wouldn’t touch exploited street and indoor prostitutes either if prostitution were legalized throughout the US. It would be interesting to see whether prostitution laws in the US have a significant deterrent effect at all, in addition to their known effect of giving criminal records to those who are already disenfranchised. Legal venues for regulated prostitution may also reduce the premium escorts command by providing a safe, reliable alternative at competitive prices.

  • SomeGuys

    Prostitution laws wouldn’t touch exploited street and indoor prostitutes either if prostitution were legalized throughout the US. It would be interesting to see whether prostitution laws in the US have a significant deterrent effect at all. I believe prosecuting Johns only will not alleviate the underlying conditions causing the disadvantaged to become prostitutes and may further economically disadvantage the low-end prostitutes. Legal venues for regulated prostitution may increase wages for would-be street workers and also reduce the premium escorts command by providing a safe, reliable alternative at competitive prices.

  • Pat Geroud

    But surely it should be illegal to pay for the services of an exploited prostitute… the John only contributes to that exploitation, without the John there would be no exploitation. My question was: how can we get the law to distinguish between purchasing sex from exploited prostitutes and voluntary prostitutes? I think we can’t, so let’s err on the safe side and criminalize all buying. Moreover, I think the aim should be to get people out of street work not promote it. By assuming wages for would-be street workers would increase after legalization , you are assuming that there would be an increase in demand for street workers. Thus criminalizing the purchase does have an effect on demand, so there is a deterrent effect, it is not perfect, but reduces demand for prostitutes, exploited or not, somewhat.

  • hookstrapped

    If consensual sex work were decriminalized, then people most likely to encounter and know about exploited, coerced, and trafficked prostitutes — consensual sex workers and johns — would not have the disincentive of themselves being arrested impeding them from reporting their suspicions to authorities. The current criminalization regime is in large measure the cause of being unable to distinguish between exploited and voluntary prostitutes.

    As for erring on the safe side, let’s criminalize the purchase of fish while we’re at it since some of the worst, most abusive examples of trafficking is in the commercial fishing industry. Also arrest people who hire domestic workers…

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/18/us-rights-trafficking-abuse-idUSKBN0LM00220150218

  • Pat Geroud

    It it is impossible to just decriminalize consenting sex work. Theres no way a John can or in many cases would care to know if a given prostitute or escort were exploited or not. This is one of the things Wicki’s article gets right: You think an exploited prostitute is going to tell a john that she was exploited? And most Johns would care? That’s wishful thinking. Not most johns are humanitarians or even have the knowledge to be humanitarians. I agree the current total criminalization regime in the U.S. is wrong. But i think legalizing the supply side of the transaction is sufficient in allowing sex workers to speak out and would prevent sex workers being disincentivized in reporting their own exploitation and suspected exploitation of others to the police. I think you attribute too much goodwill and knowledge to the average john.

    As for criminalizing the purchase of fish, the major act of exploitation for a forced prostitute IS the forced sex. When you purchase fish, yes you could be contributing to illicit industry practices, but it is not the actual act of buying and what it entails that is the exploitation.

  • SomeGuys

    Buying sex is already illegal, so in what sense can we gain by criminalizing it? Neither the dire circumstances of desperate street walkers nor the needs of Johns will all of a sudden disappear if laws against buying sex are more stringently enforced. The activities of buyers would instead be forced further underground, likely further endangering the lives of prostitutes. Holding Johns to a higher accountability standard than prostitutes may be worse than legalizing buying and selling sex or having both remain illegal because it codifies the supposed wholesale victimization of prostitutes articles like this attempt to convey. Part of the problem “victims” may have in practicing self-agency is the failure of the laws and media from treating them as anything but victims.

  • Chelsea Tornade-Hoe

    I have worked in the Auckland brothels for the last 10 years, and all of us want the Nordic Model, Please PLEASE can we finally have the Nordic Model in NZ?

  • beechnut79

    The question should be this: when are we going to realize that the prohibition of this activity is just as unsuccessful and when it was tried with liquor? I can see continuing to arrest streetwalker because there is more danger involved and it is usually all about drugs. But things like escort services should be legalized because there is a mutual agreement between the parties. But I do believe that most escorting is affordable only to the top 30 percent income-wise at best. I wonder if legalizing it would bring the costs down.

  • Arekushieru

    Someone who freaking gets it! You are teh awesome!

  • Arekushieru

    Another person who gets it! This is the framework from which I approach this. If sex-work is by and large chosen (although, I would argue that sex-work probably wouldn’t be recognizable in any shape or form to contemporary sex work OR, at least, wouldn’t be a thing that attracts mostly women, cis or trans, as the sellers of sex and men as mostly the buyers of sex if sex-work wasn’t a by product of the patriarchal paradigm that views women through the virgin/whore dichotomy. In other words, I DO think there is structural coercion built INTO the institution even IF there may not be personal coercion) then prohibiting the selling of sex in ANY way is structural violence. If it is NOT, however, by and large chosen (PERSONALLY), then prohibiting the selling of sex in any way is even MORE of a structural violence against women. I don’t understand how the people opposed to legal sex-work or advocating for the Nordic model CANNOT see that.

  • hookstrapped

    The sex workers I met through doing this project…

    https://www.lensculture.com/peter-schafer?modal=true&modal_type=project&modal_project_id=84656

    …are primarily concerned with safety and good working conditions and being able to make a decent living. That’s why most choose to work in brothels. One of the women who I’ve become friends with is now working in a brothel in Curacao on a 3-month contract and she talks about how this place stands apart from other places she has worked — there is a driver to take and pick up workers from outcalls, which has its supervision purposes but also helps ensure worker safety; all clients have to present their passport to be photocopied; there is an alarm button in all rooms to call security. This is what full decriminalization can look like. I think the photocopying of the passport is a pretty key deterrent for abusive behavior, and that is something impossible under john criminalization schemes like the Swedish model. She would one day like to start a brothel run collectively by workers and this place in Curacao has many of the features she would like to have in place (with better food).

    And here is a good panel discussion prompted by the protests of Dutch sex workers regarding closure of windows in Amsterdam (featuring a male sex worker on the panel)

    http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/5523d2f802a760557c000023

  • John Clark

    Another puff piece for a police state. There’s a reason why at the moment Sweden and Norway may be having no growth in an underground system of prostitution and trafficking. That’s because Denmark and Germany have not followed suit.

    So there is little economic incentive at the moment.

    If those two countries along with the Netherlands, were to follow suit, the underground system would revived and be alive and well.

    The argument is circular that ‘women are victimized by prostitution’. That’s because there is little in the way of education for becoming a prostitute because the criminalization maintains the low status.

    If training programs similar to ‘massage therapists’ were instituted, then the choice would be on a par with any other ‘provide physical service’ career.

    But these calls for criminalization do one thing, increase the need for a police state, such as the Deutsche Demokratische Republik, which also criminalized prostitution. (Maybe one can hire old Stasi personnel to enforce antiprostitution laws.)

    Then there’s Saudi Arabia. One could probably be executed for being a prostitute.

    And I will point out, that world wide, even in Sweden, women in Saudi Arabia are not considered to be ‘free’ or ‘free from violence’.

  • Carly Alyza

    My understanding of your argument for
    the United States to adopt the Nordic model of sex work law is to reduce the amount
    of sex trafficking in the county. The Nordic model has been adopted in a few European
    counties such as Sweden and Norway have seen you say a decrease in the purchase
    of sex workers as this law criminalizes the Johns but not the prostitutes. However there seems to be a flaw in the Nordic
    Policy as it sees all prostitution workers as a victim. The article states that
    all are victims whether they are trafficked or they have suffered some abuse or
    are poor and thus have no choice but to enter this line of work. Now it may be
    due to my background as a feminist who believes that it is a woman’s right to
    do what she pleases with her body. That being said I understand there are victims
    in sex work but it is a choice to enter into that field of work, these woman
    who are poor and marginalized needed to find a way to support themselves and their
    families. By using their bodies they are able to market themselves in a way
    that provides more money than any other minimum wedge job would. The Nordic model makes it legal for these
    workers to sell their bodies but is drives away their customer base. This model
    makes it so that those who are impoverished and find themselves in need of sex
    work are unable to make as much money as they could if sex work where to become
    legal in general.

    By making prostitution only half
    legal we are unable to regulate and provide proper health care and education to
    the workers. Without implementing health and safety regulations for sex workers
    we are as a whole allowing the spread of STI’s into the general public. Both
    sex works and John’s have sex with other people in the general population and
    have already shown in studies to spread these sexual infections due to the lack
    of education and regulation of the business. Not only that but by keeping half
    of the industry illegal does allow for proper safely regulations for the
    workers. It is well known that violence is common in this line of work but it
    is more well kwon that this industry is never going to go away. It is already
    called the world’s oldest profession and as long as there are humans on the
    planet there will be a desire to have sex.
    With that basic human desire where will always be people willing to pay
    for sex. There is a saying that comes to
    mind when thinking about sex work. If you can’t beat them, join them. I am not
    saying to become a sex worker, but I am saying if the trade is not going to go
    away then it is in the public’s best interest to make it as safe as
    possible. The safely umbrella includes,
    education, regulation, counseling programs, and above all decriminalization for
    both parties. And in a perfect world when decimalized and all other safely measures
    are put into effect will society be able to change the social stigma surrounding
    this line of work. Sex is a basic human desire and therefore shouldn’t dehumanize
    the woman and men who enter into this field.

  • Pat Geroud

    You’re a lousy excuse for a feminist. Most women DO NOT willingly enter this work. Seriously put your puerile, pseudo-“feminist” crap elsewhere.

  • Chelsea Tornade-Hoe

    We DO so have a trafficking problem in NZ, there are asian brothels filled with women trafficked from china into nz for prostitution.
    The whole world needs to adopt the nordic model, it’s time that raping women was illegal even if you pay her to not fight back.

  • Kenneth Cole-Rieser

    “Sex worker rights groups” who oppose the Nordic model are reprehensible. They claim to represent all sex workers, when they basically represent high-end escorts and high(er)-end prostitutes… not pimped-out prostitutes that suffer daily from exploitation. Sex worker rights groups that call for full legalization thus profit, in many cases off the backs of those that are truly exploited: They are driving up overall demand for prostitution by lobbying for full legalization to improve their profits.