Maine's Bad Prostitution Law Could Be Coming Soon to Your State
Beware the “Equality Model” of sex work law reform in 2024.

In 2023, Maine became the first U.S. state to partially decriminalize prostitution. It's unlikely to be the last. And sex-worker rights activists are concerned.
By criminalizing prostitution customers but not sex workers, Maine's law may seem like a step in the right direction. But it threatens to derail momentum for full decriminalization, while recreating many of full prohibition's harms.
It also represents a paternalistic philosophical premise: that sex workers are all victims and their consent to sexual activity is—like a minor's—irrelevant. And this premise is used to justify all sorts of bad programs and policies, including drastically ramping up penalties for people who pay for sex.
Orwellian "Equality"
The new Maine law removed criminal penalties for selling sex under certain circumstances, while keeping in place a ban on buying sex and other activities surrounding prostitution. It also rechristened prostitution as commercial sexual exploitation.
This has long been known as the Swedish model or Nordic model of sex work law after Sweden implemented it in 1999 and Norway and Iceland in the 2000s. It's also referred to as the "End Demand" strategy—a term cribbed from 1980s Drug War plans to "end demand" for illegal drugs by shifting law enforcement focus from drug dealers to people buying drugs (and we all know how that worked out…). Its lodestar is ramping up penalties for prostitution customers, whom prohibitionists still refer to using the old-timey slang "johns," and devoting lots of law enforcement attention to "john stings" in which undercover cops pose as women selling sexual services.
In an Orwellian twist, U.S. activists have been trying to rebrand it the "Equality Model"—an egregious misnomer, considering that the whole point of this model is that those selling sex (largely women) and those paying for it (largely men) should be treated differently under the law.
The underlying premise of the "Equality Model" is that no one consents to paid sex; that they're all victims, and thus shouldn't be penalized for their part in such transactions. In turn, anyone paying for sex—even with someone who seems to be consenting—is a perpetrator who should be criminalized harshly. Likewise, anyone who abets prostitution should be treated as a sex trafficker, even when the person being "prostituted" is ostensibly a consenting adult.
Nordic/End Demand/Equality Model advocates reject the term sex worker in favor of terms like prostituted women or sex trade survivors—phrases that remove all agency from those engaged in selling sex. Their whole premise infantilizes sex workers and, by extension, women, since a majority of sex workers are women.
Maggie McNeill wrote the ultimate essay on this more than 10 years ago. "The 'Swedish model' posits that paying for sex is a form of male violence against women," McNeill noted. "This is why only the act of payment is de jure prohibited: the woman is legally defined as being unable to give valid consent, just as an adolescent girl is in the crime of statutory rape. The man is thus defined as morally superior to the woman; he is criminally culpable for his decisions, but she is not. In one case, a 17-year-old boy (a legal minor in Sweden) was convicted under the law, thus establishing that in the area of sex, adult women are less competent than male children."
Coming Soon to a State Near You?
We will not stop until the Equality Model is understood and implemented nationwide. Are you with us? #STSC #FullDecrimHurtsEveryone #EqualityModel #NordicModel pic.twitter.com/7wT202cJzG
— Sex Trade Survivor Caucus (@STSCaucus) December 24, 2023
I talked to Kaytlin Bailey, founder of Old Pros—a nonprofit media organization dedicated to elevating sex worker stories—late last month about what political trends were on her group's radar for 2024. Bailey said the biggest one is the push in the U.S. to pass Nordic/End Demand/Equality Model prostitution laws, which she and other sex worker rights activists know will make their work more difficult and less safe by criminalizing clients and people whom sex workers live and work with.
There's no doubt that the political profile of such policies has been rising.
Maine may be the only state to pass a Nordic Model bill last year, but at least two additional states—Massachusetts and New York—considered them.
Last year also saw big new grants available for people pushing the "Equality Model," new symposiums on its implementation and enforcement, and applause for it from old school feminist entities like Ms. Magazine.
Making Men Who Pay for Sex Pay
One of the biggest dangers of the Nordic model push in the U.S. is that places will take the pro-carceral part of it—in which prostitution customers are serious criminals who deserve steeper penalties—to heart while ignoring the parts that at least provide sex workers some relief from prosecution. We're already seeing this take effect in several states.
Texas made soliciting paid sex a felony in 2022. Last year, several states, including Oklahoma and Tennessee, considered measures to do the same. A bill to this effect was introduced in Delaware just last month.
Montana last year raised possible penalties for patronizing prostitution from a maximum of $1,000 and/or five years in prison to a maximum of $5,000 and/or 10 years in prison.
Montana also created a mandatory minimum of two years (and a possible sentence of up to 20 years) for "sex trafficking," which it defines as any third-party involvement in prostitution, regardless of whether the person being paid for sex was a consenting adult. Driving a sex worker to meet a customer is now "sex trafficking." So is renting a place to a sex worker, or benefiting in any way financially from prostitution—opening up landlords and motels to sex trafficking charges if they don't kick sex workers out.
Why This Will Catch On…
"End Demand" policies are catnip to a certain sort of politician. They have a pro-woman veneer without being radical departures from the status quo.
They defy easy left/right labels and provide opportunities for bipartisan legislative efforts.
They can be framed as a way to get tough on crime, or as a type of criminal justice reform.
"End Demand" activists have even started co-opting the language of racial justice and social justice for their efforts. See, for instance, the prohibitionist group Rights4Girls tweeting about how prostitution customers are mostly white men exploiting marginalized women.
A growing number of jurisdictions are recognizing that their sex buyers are predominantly white men who are often purchasing access to marginalized women & girls. Normalizing the sex trade ignores this inequitable reality. #EndDemand pic.twitter.com/SshxPtNjQ8
— rights4girls (@rights4girls) December 18, 2023
People who don't pay close attention may genuinely think that they're doing a good thing by implementing the "Equality Model."
But they would be wrong.
… And Why It Shouldn't
Advocates of asymmetrical criminalization say it's beneficial for people selling sex, but a wealth of evidence suggests otherwise. Because no matter what you call it, this model keeps prostitution a black market—which means most of the things that make prostitution dangerous remain intact.
Under "partial decriminalization" like Maine's, it's still illegal for sex workers to work together, to work in safe locations, or to employ people to help keep them safe. Their work is still policed, only now it's deemed for their own good. They still can't advertise openly. They still face reluctance from clients—perhaps more than ever—to submit to screening procedures. And because some segment of law-abiding or risk-averse people are going to be turned off by a criminalized system in a way they might not be under decriminalization, the pool of prostitution customers is tilted toward people who might be riskier in a number of ways.
Being a black market also makes things more risky for prostitution customers, police targeting notwithstanding.
Louder for the people in the back: End Demand laws that criminalize the client but not the SWer give clients a dangerous upper-hand in the negotiating process because they are the only ones taking a legal risk.
— Old Pros ☂️ Decriminalizing SW (@oldprosonline) July 21, 2023
And it still means that cops are going to waste a lot of time and resources—and invade a lot of privacy—going after people for private, consensual sex acts.
"The conflation of adult consensual behavior with exploitation is a direct attack on the bodily autonomy of adults and assumes that sex workers in Maine are not competent enough to make informed decisions about their own private choices," Melissa Sontag Broudo, co-director of the SOAR Institute, testified to the Maine judiciary committee last year. "Additionally, criminalizing the purchase of sex misdirects law enforcement resources towards consensual interactions, further limiting resources available to address exploitation and trafficking."
Evidence from countries that have implemented Nordic-style policies suggests they're not what it's cracked up to be.
One study published in 2023 found that liberalizing prostitution laws led to lower rape rates overall, while passing stricter prohibitions led to increases in rape rates. Implementation of the Nordic Model was associated with the biggest increase.
Research on the Nordic Model in various European countries has found it failed to decrease the prevalence of prostitution,
Here's a massive 2021 report detailing "the impact of passing and implementing Nordic Model legislation on sex workers' lives and working conditions." The researchers found "sex workers still face high levels of policing, and often remain criminalized under third party or organizing laws. Because policing of the buyer involves policing and surveillance of the sex trade and the transaction of commercial sex, sellers of sexual services still experiencing policing and its associated harms."
The philosophical underpinnings of the Nordic/End Demand/Equality Model also leave room for institutionalizing a lot of conservative/rad-fem nonsense about sex, power, porn, gender relations, and more. For instance, at the Villanova University Law School's 2023 symposium on sexual exploitation, "Tricia Gant discussed her work in the sex buyer accountability program… a 10-week diversionary program for sex buyers which encourages them to engage in reflective interviews and discussions of loneliness, trauma, porn, and the harms of commercial sexual exploitation," per a blog post about the event.
Why Full Decriminalization Should Be the Ultimate Goal
Sex workers and human rights activists around the world say the real way forward is full decriminalization—removing criminal penalties for both buying and selling sex. In the United States, we've seen small but encouraging signs that this idea is catching on, including decriminalization legislation introduced last year in Hawaii, New York, and Vermont.
Full decriminalization should be the ultimate goal. But in places where that's not feasible yet, there are other policies that can make a positive difference, and we've seen some momentum around a few of these as well.
Rhode Island and a number of other states have been debating immunity bills, which can provide sex workers immunity from prostitution prosecution when they report crimes against them or others.
New York, California, and Dallas have ended "loitering for prostitution" or "manifesting prostitution" policies, which let cops harass and arrest anyone they deem likely to be a sex worker, even when that person is just standing around. The California and New York reforms came from state lawmakers. In Dallas, the county Criminal Court of Appeals struck down the law in response to a legal challenge.
And, in some places, prosecutors have vowed not to prosecute prostitution cases. It's not an ideal situation, since it leaves things up to the discretion of individual actors and political whims. But it's better than nothing, and certainly beats the trend toward increased sex stings we've seen in many places.
End Demand for Fake Progress
The growing profile of the "Equality Model" threatens to stall all this progress.
For one thing, a lot of people will be confused. For instance, Maine's law was described by many publications as a measure to decriminalize prostitution. People who don't read closely may not realize that End Demand policies don't actually do that.
And even those who do read closely may not realize that this isn't what's generally meant by decriminalization. They might think that it's what sex worker rights organizations and groups like the United Nations, Amnesty International, the American Civil Liberties Union, the World Health Organization, and Human Rights Watch have been pushing for, when what all of these entities have advocated is full decriminalization of prostitution.
Meanwhile, the movement to fully decriminalize sex work—to champion "rights, not rescue," as the slogan goes—now has to spend a lot of time and effort educating people about the "Equality Model" and explaining the difference between their agenda and this one. It adds another layer of work and complication to their organizing, education, and lobbying efforts.
It looks like one of the biggest challenges for sex worker rights, sexual freedom, and civil liberties advocates in 2024 will be not letting "Equality Model" shenanigans eat up any momentum available for reforming prostitution laws the right way.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
As a Mainah, sex workers here is something I could get behind. Not sure how I feel about the new law.
I get paid more than $120 to $130 every hour for working on the web. I found out about this Qg activity 3 months prior and subsequent to joining this I have earned effectively $15k from this without having internet working abilities Copy underneath site to..
Check It—>>> http://Www.Smartcareer1.com
If you talking about "manual labor", doesn't your arm get tired from the number of hand jobs you have to give to earn that much?
As to the criminalizing, and penalizing of sex work, here is another of the periodic articles that Reason puts out that cries out for the publication of and education about jury nullification!
Behind...in front of...on top of...under...over...all over it, G....pick your prepositional word or phase, and it's me!
🙂
😉
Every economic transaction has a buyer and a seller. To make selling legal and buying illegal is a contradiction in terms. And neither side gets what they want.
One way or the other, the customer gets fucked.
Is this the one where the SOS gets involved? She is prostituting her position out for sure.
Shenna bellows loudly.
Wonder how long it takes interns to figure out "brandy" means "Allen's and milk."
Allen’s and Moxie.
Like I need another reason to avoid Lisbon.
Its how the guys from northern Mass get a piece of fat girl ass.
That's the only kind of ass native to this state.
The kind found in androscrotum county.
So you spend a lot of time in The County, eh?
Nope, though some of the County girls I know aren’t obese heifers.
By Maine standards Dolly Parton has a small rack.
Wicked fat.
Making to love to that would be a real corker.
Ran into STP in the bar after some show in the 90s. Drummer kept yelling about how all the women were fat. Great Lost Bear or something.
Gritty's.
"Shit On a Shingle"? Is chipped beef gravy on toast a fetish?
🙂
😉
"Hey, I'll mow your lawn for $20" - guy 1/illegal immigrant
"Deal" - guy 2
WeeWoo *Sirens* WeeWoo
Guy 2 gets arrested. Nothing happens to guy one because he is a "victim". The phrase "fucking dumb" gets thrown around a lot. But this is fucking dumb.
Prostitutes do yard work?
If you ask nicely.
Gas, grass, or ass! NO ONE rides my riding lawnmower, OR my hookers, for free!
The prostitutes that do are able to rake in the cash.
And as Popeye would ob-soive, da hooker yard-woiker blows and leaves! *Ack!Ack!Ack!Ack!*
🙂
😉
Stay At Home mummy From the large apple Shared Her Secret On but She Was ready to clear 5000 US dollars Weekly From on-line Work merely 3 Weeks once Losing Her recent Job… https://jobstime0909.blogspot.com
By criminalizing prostitution customers but not sex workers, Maine's law may seem like a step in the right direction. But it threatens to derail momentum for full decriminalization, while recreating many of full prohibition's harms.
Washington has been doing this for years... and years. I'm not sure if it's codified into law, but this is the doctrine that they operate with here and have been for quite a long time.
It also represents a paternalistic philosophical premise: that sex workers are all victims and their consent to sexual activity is—like a minor's—irrelevant. And this premise is used to justify all sorts of bad programs and policies, including drastically ramping up penalties for people who pay for sex.
ENB, just so you know, this is the #MeToo version of prostitution law. Be very careful who you make friends with.
Example.
Example 2.
Year: 2015.
I remember decades ago, Oprah Winfrey had a show where she was praising one community for posting pictures of “Johns” in the local print and (I think) TV media and requiring the the “Johns” to undergo compulsory classes on the “evils” of sex work.
Absolutely Gang Of Four Cultural Revolution Maoistic! And Oprah Mountain was the propagandist using her show as agitprop!
Fuck her! Or better yet not!
No wonder sarc is always so angry.
What else does your mom say about me?
Instead of this approach couldn't we do what we did with pot? Start by legalizing medical sex and require a doctor's note, for fuck unknown reasons. Then eventually legalize recreational sex.
Sure, and that's how I look at these prostitution measures. Once prostitutes can operate legally, even if their customers can't, that fact will be showing people that it can be done safely, which can't help but then promote legalization all around. Don't attack a measure because it applies only to a part of what you want to accomplish.
But a transaction where one person can legally sell but no one can legally buy is a contradiction in terms, Dummy!
Get back to your slave den while real Libertarians fight the good fight!
The problem with the present set-up with pot is that banks and insurance cannot finance or insure dispensaries without violating Federal laws against “money laundering” and “conspiracy”.
The dispensaries are thus all-cash businesses that can be robbed, vandalized, or burned down with legal immunity. And, of course, the question of Federal Supremacy was answered 159 years ago to the tune of around 600,000 lives.
All this, of course, equally applies to sex work. I’m sure there’s additional bad implications for health insurance of sex workers, which guarantees that disease will spread in the sex worker and sex consumer communities.
Pardon the pun, Eeyore, and to paraphrase Leonard Read, but Freedom is not is not a half-assed place.
that sex workers are all victims and their consent to sexual activity is—like a minor’s—irrelevant
Do you think she means it like "The sex workers are all victims and they can't consent... like minors." or do you think she meant it like "The sex workers are all victims and they can't consent but should be able to... like minors."?
Hahaha who am I kidding? This is ENB! Of *COURSE* she means the latter! The only people incapable of consenting in her feminist libertarian worldview are the fetuses women are encouraged to frappè every month as part of their obligation to modern/libertarian womanhood.
Ok, your link made me LOL. Not familiar with that movie, but I do like that actor. Don’t know who the blonde young thing is.
Edit: Oh shit, the Martian. Ok, I actually saw that movie. Hell I don't remember that scene. Another reason that movie was a tad overrated in my mind.
Don’t know who the blonde young thing is.
I know she starred in a similar role in Halt and Catch Fire, but I haven't seen that and, so far, it's the only role I've seen her in that I can stand.
Another reason that movie was a tad overrated in my mind.
Bigger fan of Furious 7? I understand. RIP Paul Walker.
FYI, there is a 3000 word comment here about 'class' differences in the perceptions of sex work and how it should (or shouldn't) be regulated.
If you're an upper middle class white Jezebel/Magazine feminist who can build a website, manage a client list and be featured in Reason interviews because you use your prostitution career as a segue into Data Science, then a 'decriminalized' sex work industry seems like a no-brainer. But when you're a poor Korean immigrant with little knowledge of the language or culture, and you're told you can pay off your familial debt by working as a prostitute until a time specified by the gruff looking ex-Mossad 'manager', then the world of unregulated sex work starts to look a lot different. Because in the world of completely unregulated/decriminalized sex work, there is literally no reason why both the former AND the latter wouldn't be true at the same time.
Also, the contextual oblivious juxtaposition of "I shower 40 times a year to support my microbiome!" vs. "I shower 40 times a year because that's how frequently I come across running water!" reminds me of this.
Monkeypox doesn't care!
Apropos of my link above, even if we eliminate all the ‘libertarian-ish’ bromides surrounding the uplifting, empowering world of unregulated sex work, I kind of liked this passage:
OMG, they treated these women as if they’re appetizers on a menu! How objectifying!
Hey! Subscribe to my OnlyFans!
Also:
One view of sex work comes from a twenty-something gender studies major with a sex-work substack page, the other you don't hear about because she doesn't know what substack is.
So, only allow educated white women to do sex work?
They're the only ones I'd patronize~
Consider sex work as a business model. In most sales/retail businesses, the cost of restocking merchandise is a major expense. The other major expenses are renting of floorspace and cost of labor (employees). Prostution has a prospectus that the average retail business cannot even approximate.
You have to have and apartment, so there is no floorspace expense unless you consider the minimal extra cost for you to have an extra bedroom devoted exclusively to “commercial activities”.
There is no employee expense unless you elect to hire an intermediary/”business manager” (aka pimp) or a wipe-up gal to clean up the drippings.
And best of all, there is no restocking expense. You have it. You sell it. You still have it. You sell it again. And on-and-on.
Certainly you can see why this would be regarded as unfair competition by women who want a ring on their finger, a ring in their penetrator’s nose, and a court-levied attachment to part of their penetrators income forever.
Actually, you don’t pay a prostitute for the sex. You pay her to get up and quietly leave after the sex.
Edit button still doesn't work so can't cleen ip tupos.
To hear Reason tell it, sex work is a career option as valid as truck driver, store stocker, accountant, or brain surgeon. For some strange reason, though, the reaction of most parents to "Hey, Mom! I've decided to become a *sex worker*!" or "Hey, Dad! Guess who got the job as a new porn star?!" isn't nearly so positive.
Reason's Rational Mom of the Year: https://www.ibtimes.com/robert-marucci-florida-teen-pornstar-kicked-out-cocoa-high-school-job-porn-industry-1545089
But when you’re a poor Korean immigrant with little knowledge of the language or culture, and you’re told you can pay off your familial debt by working as a prostitute until a time specified by the gruff looking ex-Mossad ‘manager’, then the world of unregulated sex work starts to look a lot different.
And are we just assuming our "gruff looking ex-Mossad manager" isn't creative enough to think of any other lines of work he can force poor Korean immigrants into? Wasn't there a big thing some years ago about this happening in Chinese restaurants? Why didn't we ban those?
Well, I guess we'll have to see what happens when the restaurant industry is completely unregulated. But for now, when we find that kind of thing going on, the law kind of... you know, steps in.
But when you’re a poor Korean immigrant with little knowledge of the language or culture, and you’re told you can pay off your familial debt by working as a prostitute until a time specified by the gruff looking ex-Mossad ‘manager’
Ex-Mossad are skilled intelligence operatives; they don't need to run prostitution rings. And if they did, they'd run them with very high end escorts, not "poor Korean immigrants".
You're thinking stuxnet ex-Mossad and not Paragliding Palestinians ex-Mossad.
Somebody had to lose their job over that shit and managing illegal Korean immigrant sex workers seems like the lateral move at that point.
Ummmm...
"when you’re a poor Korean immigrant with little knowledge of the language or culture"
Let me challenge a few assumptions. If sex work was legalized, then there would be a sufficient amount of legit Americans with access to the law and trial lawyers to make their work fairly safe.
And if there was enough, exploitation of foreign workers wouldn't be profitable.
Also, is it possible that the poor Korean immigrants had a better life being sex trafficked to American cities compared to their situation in rural Korea?
Why ex-Mossad and not ex-KGB? Prithee, tell us more...
A growing number of jurisdictions are recognizing that their sex buyers are predominantly white men who are often purchasing access to marginalized women & girls. [74% of sex buyers in PA are white men]
What a coincidence! 75% of Pennsylvania men are white!
Not to mention, LOL, another one of those "I'm trying not to be offensive." backhands.
'Gotta legalize the sex work 'cuz the poor brown 'women' can't say "No." to a white guy with cash!' Again I say, LOL.
By criminalizing prostitution customers but not sex workers, Maine's law may seem like a step in the right direction. But it threatens to derail momentum for full decriminalization, while recreating many of full prohibition's harms.
Like the vast majority of Americans, I'm neither a seller nor a buyer of sex. So I really don't care. Ditto for drugs. Stop beating dead horses like this.
There are several types of prostitution:
-drug addicts on the street. Total weirdo men stop by my alley to pick up a drooling woman on their way to work, get a bj and head to the office
-Ones that work the boulevard in the evenings, looking good, presumably a pimp watching closely and taking profits
-the sex trafficked women like the Korean women in this article
-Professional sex workers that help people with their needs, probably mostly emotional, and are committing no crime
The major problem with this issue, like most issues, is that you are talking about hugely different people, harms, experiences, and legislation is not able to address it with a broad brush. Take the $ spent on enforcement and spend it on finding the traffickers, and leave the rest of the people alone.
Take the $ spent on enforcement and spend it on finding the traffickers, and leave the rest of the people alone.
I agree with this sentiment, but unfortunately, that requires prostitution... erh "sex work" be legalized, not decriminalized- as one of Reason's featured interview subjects with a substack page demanded. "legalization" she claims, creates a corporatized market that only benefits brothel owners, where decriminalization allows sex work to go completely unregulated and unfettered. Which, as I say above means that both conditions will be true at the same time: Substack-writing umbrage feminists will be able to pay their gender-studies college debt off using sex work with carefully managed client lists and the utilization of price discrimination to keep out the riff raff... and foreigners who don't know what substack is, and whose use of the internet consists of a weekly visit to an internet cafe where they can contact their families back home in a cube for a per-minute charge will be exploited by unscrupulous "managers".
In 2003 NZ fully legalised prostitution. It is legal to be a pro, a john, a madame or a pimp. Brothels are regulated and legal. There are age restrictions etc.
Strangely (to non libertarians?) after 20 years, there are no major problems. You can walk down (most) streets without seeing any (they stick to known areas), it isn’t pushed as a career path at schools etc. There is no call to repeal the law, a try to get a referendum to do that went nowhere, people don’t see it as a problem anymore (if they ever did).
The only losers in this are the criminal gangs who used to ‘tax’ pros, or murder them.
Now if only we could do the same for cannabis…
(Full disclosure, i am not or never have been a pro, john, madame or pimp)
Strangely (to non libertarians?) after 20 years, there are no major problems. You can walk down (most) streets without seeing any (they stick to known areas), it isn’t pushed as a career path at schools etc.
You just lost modern Libertarianism.
But on a serious note, what you're describing is legalized prostitution, not decriminalized prostitution. And again, depending on the flavour of your libertarianism, some are supportive of the former, others support the latter. Your mileage may vary.
Another AWFL sucker oblivious to your point above: In 2018 the Gini Coefficient in New Zealand was 35.2% (more equal), the US' was 43.4% (less equal) since then, the NZ's has fallen and the US' has risen.
Not that the Gini coefficient makes any sort of predictions but does acknowledge some facts and the fact is that prostitution in NZ is more like borrowing some sugar from a neighbor and choosing from some non-conventional payment options to pay them back while, in other places, prostitution is more like selling your body because you have no other marketable skills and you don't want your kids to starve or you need your car to get to work but your paycheck's still a week away and your boss turned down your advance before he left for Fiji over Xmas break.
You're forgetting the most important thing.
Are 74% of the johns in New Zealand white?
Strangely (to non libertarians?) after 20 years, there are no major problems.
New Zealand is a beautiful country populated by lots of sheep, both of the two legged and four legged variety. Strangely (to New Zealanders), what works in their country doesn't necessarily work everywhere else.
In 2003 NZ fully legalised prostitution. It is legal to be a pro, a john, a madame or a pimp. Brothels are regulated and legal. There are age restrictions etc.
Wait what? You mean 12 year olds can't decide, in conjunction with their parents or even against their parents' wishes, what is best for the 12 year old?
This will not sit well with the American progressive community, I am sure.
I wish people would stop calling this "partial decriminalization" - that's like saying somebody is "a little bit pregnant".
Not to mention that sex workers in fact still get harassed & arrested by police under this law, using whatever remains illegal like "running a brothel" (sharing an apartment with another sex worker) or "pimping" (helping another sex worker book an appointment).
New Zealand, Belgium & New South Wales have shown that full decriminalization works best for sex workers & the whole community, esp at fighting police corruption & abuse.
Kiwidude above says they're fully legalized and regulated, you're saying they're fully decriminalized. Which is it?
And, again, per your social strata/diversity is our strength context, I'm not seeing a lot of... Americans... reflected New Zealand and New South Wales' social policies. Especially as it applies to any Shacks outside La Grange in the modern era.
It depends what meaning is given to those words.
The "obvious" meaning of "decriminalize" is the one used in drug reform: to make an act no longer a crime. It might still be against the law, but only a civil violation.
The "obvious" meaning of "legalize" is also the one used by drug reformers: to make an act legal, i.e. no longer illegal. It says nothing about conditioning legality on regulations or not.
However, the sex reformers have adopted their own meaning of these terms that contradicts their plain meaning. They would have "decriminalize" mean repeal of both criminal and civil laws against an act, followed by total laissez-faire in an anomistic anarchic way: No law, no recourse to law if someone is cheated or otherwise wronged.
The sex reformers would have "legalize" mean making an act legal but only as conditioned by a system of regulation that usually entails licensing. They don't contemplate that an act could be legalized the way ownership of gold was legalized, i.e. unrestricted.
Sex reformers also would have you believe that decriminalization/legalization ought to mean total societal acceptance and likely non-discrimination protection.
likely non-discrimination protection
Not just "likely" and more like 1A-eroding, society-redefining, internet-link-tax non-discrimination protection.
New Zealand, Belgium & New South Wales have shown that full decriminalization works best for sex workers & the whole community, esp at fighting police corruption & abuse.
And by "works best", you mean "reduces some short term measures of criminality".
Countries make prostitution illegal for long term effects, what you call "morality". That is, a society in which OnlyFans and prostitution are considered acceptable lifestyle choices for women don't "work", least of all for women.
Now, I don't think prostitution should be made illegal. Rather, culture should be such that people know that if they choose to engage in sex work, they will be outcasts for life.
Then just man-up and make it illegal. Only an asshole on a high horse would shame people based on YOUR morals. The only sex worker I know is a millionaire.
Then just man-up and make it illegal. Only an asshole on a high horse would shame people based on YOUR morals.
This isn't about "my morals", it is about punishing objectively destructive and harmful behavior. Either the state does it (progressivism, socialism, social conservatism) or private parties do it (libertarianism), but someone has to do it.
A society in which behaviors like prostitution and drug use are unpunished and widely tolerated simply won't survive. And libertarianism certainly doesn't advocate such a society.
...
It didn't do that for marijuana.
Take a pause from work in your slave den if you can get away with it, look through the bars, and see my reply to Eeyore above.
10 years in prison? Is nobody worried that they just gave a 'john' a good reason to permanently shut up a prostitute if they think they might simply talk openly and inadvertently narc on them? There's less danger of this if both parties are doing something criminal.
And even less danger if neither is treated as a criminal.
...
But that would leave it still illegal, just a civil violation. Wouldn't legalization be better: making it legal, i.e. not illegal?
Oh, yeah, I forgot — the sex reformers have adopted a quirky understanding of the words, different from that of the drug reformers.
There you go! Now you are starting to understand Libertarianism.
If Wikipedia is to be believed Pennsylvania is 76.6% white. Would it not be logical that 74% of men that pay for sex is white? Proggies always try to make everything about race.
The reason for the quirky language is that sex workers have too much experience of "legalization" that isn't. Some examples:
Several countries where prostitution is "legal", but most advertising is banned, and if two hookers are room-mates, they'll be arrested for running an illegal "brothel".
Nevada: Prostitution is legal - but only in rural counties far from most of the customers, and only in brothels. That is, to be legal, prostitutes have to cut a brothel owner in on half or more of the revenue. And if I understand correctly, they are confined to the brothel in their time off.
I see signs of disaster every time the state tries to get into bed with ordinary citizens. Adults have the right to free sex in the same way as to watch xxx videos. It is stupid to allow one thing and prohibit another. Make a separate area for adult entertainment and leave people behind with your ideas.
KAR, why the name change?