this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
208 points (99.5% liked)

Europe

5953 readers
833 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in !yurop@lemm.ee. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media. Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
federalreverse@feddit.org
poVoq@slrpnk.net
anzo@programming.dev
EuroMod@feddit.org
208
Sweden bans buying OnlyFans content (www.euractiv.com)
submitted 3 days ago by CAVOK@lemmy.world to c/europe@feddit.org
52 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Sweden's parliament has passed a law banning the purchase of sexual performances for viewing online, including those on platforms like OnlyFans, marking a major update to the country’s sex purchase legislation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Distractor@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You're missing the point, this law is not anti-sex work. You can be pro sex work and still be in favour of this law.

Legalising prostitution doesn't make illegal prostitution go away. On the contrary, by normalising prostitution, the demand increases but the legal (voluntary) supply doesn't. This increased demand is then supplied via increased sex trafficking by crime syndicates. This is a huge problem in the Netherlands that they haven't managed to solve in the 25 years prostitution has been legal.

Even for the legally registered prostitutes, the improvements are limited. Financial exploitation and violence remain rampant.

By decriminalising the prostitutes, the Swedes are effectively providing them with legal protection. By criminalising the buyer, they suppress demand, which reduces sex trafficking, and is the best protection for society as a whole.

As a feminist, I'm a staunch advocate of bodily autonomy and have no issue with sex workers. However, what cost should society accept for their right to provide these services? If for every 10 legal prostitutes, 1 additional person is forced into sexual slavery, is that cost worthwhile to you? How about 1 sex slave for every 5 legal prostitutes? How about a 1 to 2 ratio?

According to this source:

the [Netherlands] government struggles to calculate the number of individuals in its regulated sex trade (numbers range from 6,000 to 30,000)

The law has also failed to curb trafficking, with a reported 5,000 to 8,000 victims each year, two thirds of which for purposes of sexual exploitation

So, best case scenario = 30,000 prostitutes vs 3,333 (5000 x 2/3) sex slaves = 1 slave for every 9 registered prostitutes

Worst case scenario = 6,000 prostitutes vs 5,333 sex slaves = 8 slaves for every 9 registered prostitutes

Now some of these people would have been trafficked anyway, but there is a lot of evidence that trafficking has increased substantially since legalising prostitution.

So, where do you draw the line? Personally, I find the societal cost to be unacceptably high to justify legalisation of prostitution.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Legalising prostitution doesn’t make illegal prostitution go away.

How many illegal banana vendors are there? How would a banana vendor benefit from turning towards black market operations? Because there's banana plantations around which engage in slave labour, should we outlaw bananas?

On the contrary, by normalising prostitution, the demand increases but the legal (voluntary) supply doesn’t.

Why would demand increase? Why would supply not increase? After all, legal prostitution doesn't make people hornier or lonelier, and legalisation improves workplace conditions.

By decriminalising the prostitutes, the Swedes are effectively providing them with legal protection.

I see, you still haven't read the link. "Come to the police for help and we'll arrest all your clients" is not a good situation to be in if you're trying to make a living. Swedish sex workers are forced to be co-conspirators, they are forced to keep their clients anonymous, or they're out of business. Can't keep records around, can't keep customer information around.

As a feminist, I’m a staunch advocate of bodily autonomy and have no issue with sex workers

Then why are you ignoring what they're saying?

Let's look at your source. Your source:

Furthermore, those in prostitution face abuse and degradation on a daily basis; studies – even from groups that advocate for the decriminalization of the sex trade – find that 90% of women in prostitution have experienced violence at the hands of sex buyers, pimps, or other exploiters.

The source that's from:

The sex workers in this research were asked whether they had experienced violence in the past twelve months and which forms those had been. 60% said they had experienced physical violence, 78% sexual violence, 58% financial-economic violence and 93% social-emotional violence.

And further:

Social-emotional violence as well as other forms of violence often stem from the stigma attached to sex work.

...so not only is your source narrativising, it's right-out bending the truth: That 90% figure is violence inflicted by general society. Among others, SWERFs who ignore their voices. You are engaging in it yourself.

The source of the source then recommends:

  • Make sex workers the center of prostitution policies and address violence against sex workers.
  • Lower the threshold for filing police reports.
  • Decriminalize sex work so that all sex workers have once again access to (labor) laws, thereby reducing the risk of violence.

...all three of them are incompatible with the Swedish model: The Swedes systematically ignore the voices of sex workers, make it harder to seek help from authorities, and they don't have access to usual labour protections, either. In particular (towards the end) they point out that a majority of sex workers in the Netherlands aren't licensed because the licensing regime isn't up to to the task, can't be arsed to go into detail now but I suppose it's stuff like municipalities being allowed to declare prostitution off-limits everywhere within their territory, without giving actual reasoning why that's necessary. Obviously, getting help from the police isn't that easy when you would have to admit that you're not licensed.

I'm sure there's plenty of stuff that the Dutch could do better, their approach to law enforcement is weird overall with police wilfully, and systematically, ignoring law breaches. Like yes it's all good that you're not cracking down on the cannabis trade but maybe then actually legalise and regulate it, don't leave it to criminal gangs?