We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
ON 27 MARCH it became illegal to buy sex in Ireland – a law which legislators and campaigners said would change the industry for the better.
But for many women who offer sexual services throughout Ireland, the new laws have forced them to operate on their own – away from the women they leaned on not just for help with day-to-day activities but for emotional support and other issues.
Today marks International Sex Workers Day and TheJournal.ie spoke with four women who are currently in the trade -two Irish and two from central Europe.
While the stories of Annett, Kathy, Lyndsay and Sinéad are different, they have one common thread – the new laws have made their jobs more dangerous and made their lives more secretive.
Sinéad has noticed a significant drop in her business since the new laws came into effect 10 weeks ago. The prospect of arrest has created a greater sense of paranoia for her clients who are now convinced that they are going to be caught.
But not only that, she now feels lonelier and more isolated – something which is having a detrimental effect on her mental health.
Before the laws came in, many women would share an apartment. They would take different shifts and would look after the place. Since the new laws came in, this has changed.
Sinéad explained: ”Those that think you are sharing won’t come to see you as they believe there is a higher risk of getting caught. I was sharing before the law came in but now I work alone. It is very isolating and lonely and the days are very long never talking to anyone but clients.
I feel unsafe and nervous when I am alone and this also affects the quality of my job as I do not feel comfortable and I am sure this uneasiness passes onto my clients.
“I can get quite low some days as with feelings of isolation brings feelings of depression, whereas when I have another person there we are company and safety for each other and it really helps. Two girls should be allowed to work together for this reason. Just one other person there would be a great ease.”
Lyndsay is in a similar situation. She says she knows there are serious problems with human trafficking and pimps exploiting a large number of women in Ireland. She believes the new law doesn’t do anything to tackle this. In her mind, the legalising of the industry would force these pimps to move away from Ireland and move to another country to make any money.
“Trying to criminalise clients is not the solution to targeting the real criminals within the sex industry. There is a fun, enjoyable side to the sex industry that people won’t consider as to them it’s wrong.
In Ireland, we are brought up so set in our ways and in a time to come I hope that people are more open to hear the side of view of sex workers that enjoy this industry and facts about it. I would like to see a more unbiased take on sex workers instead of bashing down our views and our lives without listening to our side of the debate.
Annett believes she is in a more dangerous profession now but business has been steady since the new laws.
She said she has noticed the change but that things “aren’t the worst” for her right now.
“The business was always up-and-down, you never know what will happen on the next day. You have to do every day on 100%, I am doing the same how I used to work, among my personal criteria, safety is the first step. I know, I am not the easiest person if I work, but I have high standards.
“If he is not able to follow my instructions – I won’t see him. If I don’t like his voice or he is rude or he can’t talk to me nice it’s the same. But I can do it because of this is my job, I have to be careful all the time.”
The women see all walks of life using their services. There is no “typical client”. According to the women we spoke to, those who use the services range from doctors and barristers to “men that were training for triathlons and needed some escape time to a client that wanted to have some fun before he went on a 16 hour flight”.
But although they try to vet the men who they see, there are those who slip through the cracks, making their jobs very unsafe.
One Central European sex worker told TheJournal.ie: “I feel unsafe in every moment in this country, there’s no system for the sexual work in Ireland.
I worry because my client can be a robber and it’s dangerous because I have to work alone and I cannot control a man if he take off the condom.
While there are women in Ireland who are working as independent escorts, there is a large element which is made up by human trafficking controlled by illegal pimps.
The Immigrant Council of Ireland along with prostitution support group Ruhama estimate that there are between 800-1000 women available to buy for sex nationwide at any one time. The biggest change in recent years, according to Ruhama CEO Sarah Benson, is that the women are now being brought in from Eastern European countries and sub-Saharan Africa
Both groups campaigned for the new law to be enacted.
While the days of the “underground Love/Hate style brothel” are almost over, Benson described how widespread the sex industry is, especially in the capital.
“Christchurch, Smithfield, the IFSC as well. Point at an apartment block there and you’ll find a brothel. It’s a very mobile and extremely profitable business for pimps. If you get thrown out of one apartment, you can be in another quite quickly,” Benson said.
“There have also been cases where children have been trafficked around Ireland. When Ruhama comes into contact with these people, they are immediately referred to Tusla.”
Benson added: “We have worked with minors. Some of the adult women we deal with would have been trafficked as minors.”
While Kate McGrew of the Sex Workers Alliance of Ireland (SWAI) understands that there is a serious criminal element within parts of the industry, her argument is that a legal route which safeguards the women and clients is the only way forward.
In a statement to TheJournal.ie, she said: “Ireland should put a serious effort into listening to sex workers about how the law is affecting us and about what we are saying would help us to stay safer.
Criminal laws don’t deter hungry humans. Prohibition hasn’t worked anywhere, and has only pushed sex workers into riskier environments, away from supports. We must put proper attention towards creative real viable alternatives, so that people who would rather not do this work don’t feel like they have no other option.
“The best model we see worldwide is full decriminalisation, as they have it in New Zealand. It is the harm reduction and human rights model. It gives workers the most realistic access to the justice system because we can report abuses without fear of being arrested or having our income taken away.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Reader should be aware that the two groups mentioned here, the Immigrant Council of Ireland and Ruhama, both campaigned for this flawed legislation and are both backed by the same Catholic religious organisations that ran the Magdalene Laundries.
Both Ruhama and The Immigrant Council of Ireland have Sister Stanislaus Kennedy as a prominent activist. She still sits on the ICI Board. There are two nuns on the Board of Ruhama. Gerardine Rowley, Ruhama’s Communications and Policy Manager, is a Good Shepherd Sister.
The ICI is part of Turn Off the Red Light and StopTraffick. In fact, the ICI is the registered owner of both the turnofftheredlight and the stoptraffick domains.
The 2009 report ‘Globalisation, Sex Trafficking and Prostitution: The Experiences of Migrant Women in Ireland’ was published by the ICI in collaboration with Ruhama (and the HSE, though the ongoing state support for these groups is another issue). The report is hosted on the turnofftheredlight website, and was funded by the Religious Sisters of Charity. These links may go some way to explaining Ruhama’s insistence on ignoring the distinctions between prostitution and trafficking made in this article.
What this also shows is how this whole group of organisations is run with a unified, Catholic ideological drive. They have been less concerned with genuinely effective protection for sex workers and with understanding what sex workers actually need and want than with trying to impose Catholic moral standards and controls on individuals’ sexual behaviour.
To be clear: none of this should be taken as an attempt to minimise the misery that sex work causes for many, many people. This new law is not the best way to help them.
A 2012 report by the UN’s Global Commission on HIV and the Law considered this ‘Swedish’ model of sex-work legislation and was severely critical of it. It found that the law worsened the lives of sex workers, driving the trade underground and making it more violent. The report recommended that such laws should be repealed.
In their wisdom, our Fine-Gael-led government did the exact opposite, preferring to take the advice of Catholic lobbying groups.
@Skangerland: they have a say things they shouldn’t. Places on boards they shouldn’t. Creeping in the background. If they want a say in government they should run for a place. Let’s see who would vote for them if it was all out in the open
@Skangerland: There is more I could add but I don’t seem to be able to comment on this issue.
@غاي دالتون:
Ruhama have a brand new suite of plush offices since this law passed.
https://mymythbuster.wordpress.com/exploiting-sex-workers-and-desperation/
“The business was always up and down”,
You couldn’t make it up.
She should feel unsafe as she’s inviting total strangers into her room to engage in intimate behaviour in which she’s expected to perform as she’s being paid to do it. If you don’t want to feel exposed then quit the night job and get a safer day job
@dodofrey: She’ll do it during the day as well…..
@dodofrey: once you get involved in the game .. it’s hard to give up that kind of cash for an ordinary day job …
@Suzie Sunshine: aww Suzie
I see you haven’t always standing by the
Kitchen sink you naughty girl go for it lol lol lmao
@dodofrey: ya like politics, that’s full of hoors too
@Fran Kembo: New account ” Megs”?
@Suzie Sunshine: Suzie you got me bang to rights lol mind you I did give you starter for 10 by mentioning the kitchen sink
But pleasantly surprised by your comment that you are working girl lol lmao
@Suzie Sunshine: aww you must be still
Out working
@Fran Kembo: Megs. .I do work very hard my back does be broke sometimes ..
@Suzie Sunshine: well you do need to get a job that you’re not on your back so much but then as you pointed out you could not earn that kind of money in the day job Suzie I never realised that you were such good fun
@Fran Kembo: I’m tied to many other things beside the kitchen sink …
@Suzie Sunshine: such as you’ve got me thinking now mum wife
@Fran Kembo: Suzie what comments page are you want tonight it’s taking your interest
@Fran Kembo: I never give anything away .. explain your last comment?
@Suzie Sunshine: I meant who’s comment page into journal are you want tonight I could give you some back up that’s all
@Fran Kembo: that last message was full of typos I’m sorry I’m dictating should have read before I posted
@Fran Kembo: fair play .. but I must admit I’m finding strange ! I’m only used to you giving me abuse. are you feelin ok ??
@Fran Kembo: that makes a change .. you’re usually dictating to me about my kitchen sink ! ..lol
@Suzie Sunshine: we’ll that’s true I just Realized you are a good craic and full of fun
Think?
@Fran Kembo: well i do have my moments! .. you remind me of someone though …
@Suzie Sunshine: well I could tell you more but not on here lol
@Fran Kembo: do you have WhatsApp
@Fran Kembo: nah I don’t have WhatsApp …
@Suzie Sunshine: everyone base what’s app no problem
@Fran Kembo: I must get what’s app so ..
@Suzie Sunshine:
How is the craic what are you up to did you go to bloom also did you get WhatsApp
Wasn’t London attack shocking I know that locality very well used to live close by
@Fran Kembo: I didn’t get a chance to go to bloom . I liked the winner of super garden though .. I was planning to go to London for a concert this weekend but couldn’t get the tickets . Kinda glad now
@Suzie Sunshine:
I don’t think it safe anywhere now dees type of people fundamentalist even Ireland could well get hit the government tells that they have it all under control but I don’t think there’s a chance of the The Brits love them or hate them they are on the ball anyway who is going to see in London InConcert I bet it was Daniel O’Donnell lol lol lmao
@Fran Kembo: there’s not a lot we can do to stop it from happening really . 8 minutes was a fantastic response time though ! Ah you’re having a laugh .. Daniel ? ? I wouldn’t even bring my granny to see him ! It was Depeche Mode in the London Olympics arena actually. .lol
@Suzie Sunshine:
Never let me down again
Just can’t get enough lol
@Fran Kembo:
You are giving away your age
So you are in your mid 40s yes
@Fran Kembo:
And if you are mid 40s your granny would be too old for Daniel lol
@Fran Kembo: lol no I am not in my mid 40′s .. oh the cheek ..lol . You’re actually on the ball with the banter . I’m impressed!
@Suzie Sunshine:
This is far too slow for communicating to have a banter and the crack we need WhatsApp lol
I sent the message and it takes an hour before I can send another one while waiting for a reply and also everyone else is reading your messages lmao
@Fran Kembo: ye I know.. contact me on Twitter. I’m sure you’ve a few accounts on the go . Lol
@Suzie Sunshine:
Do you know honest to God no lies I don’t do Facebook or I don’t do Twitter SO ? What other way is there I mean oh my God my wife could be reading this upstairs but then thinking again she doesn’t do the journal
Lol lol hehehe hahahehe lmao
@Fran Kembo: lol unless your real surname is Kembo ( which I doubt ) then she’ll never know .ha ha .. so how are ya logged in .. with your Facebook page .. lol I don’t do Facebook though or what’s app .
@Suzie Sunshine:
No Kembo is made upie
I did make up a Facebook acc only
for the Journal and I would not have a clue what password I used BUT what’s your excuse for no What’s app
Awww husband has access to your phone
lol lol lol am I flirting with a married woman omg
@Fran Kembo:
I think you are Old Gabby Johnson as we’ll ratrlmao
@Fran Kembo: lol Old Gabby . Ah you’re funny .. I’ve only the one account but I’d say you’re a bit of a dark horse so I’d say you’ve a few accounts .lol. nothing wrong with what’s app .. just never installed it .
@Suzie Sunshine:
Aww Suzie
This is taking too long it’s not easy to flirt with somebody I thought you were gone to bed with old gabbys husband or toy boy
@Fran Kembo: talking about accounts now I know what happened I have used megs four years in the journal but not so long back I tried to sign in to the Journal and it wouldn’t allow me SO it tied me to an old Facebook Acu from years ago that I set up for business but long time ago forgot password
@Fran Kembo:
As Depeche would say
ENJOY THE SILENCE
I believe I’m pending on twitter
@Fran Kembo you’re not pending anymore .. lol
@Suzie Sunshine:
I had a very quick brief look on your twitter
Page it was like looking in your nicker drawer
@Fran Kembo:
OMG it’s a good thing that I joined your
Twitter page NOW you have 9 followers LOLi have often slept with more than you have followers lol lol hehe he hahahehe hahaheaww hehehahahe RATRLMAO
aww your lovely especially for an auld Dub who is almost 50
@Fran Kembo:
OMG where have you gotten
To I suppose you’re tired after Dublin city marathon I was keeping an eye out for you but there was to many 50 year old auld ones with Soft cell haircuts
Ahahhehehehehehehaha Lmao
@Fran Kembo: you are are cheeky git ! Plus , by your thinking of what I do for a living then I’ve slept with a lit more than you .. lol
@Suzie Sunshine: plus I only joined Twitter so I could comment on here ..
@Suzie Sunshine:
I think you will have to stop commenting on here because they’re all slating you I’m the only one who is nice to you you could change your username but I don’t know Susie is cute
Lol
@Fran Kembo: I’m not really bothered about what others think or say ..who’s they ? Plus I’m used to you slating me aswell !
@Suzie Sunshine:
Aw Suzie I’m sorry
Please forgive
@Fran Kembo:
Did you have a bad day
@Fran Kembo: it’s all good Megs ..
@Suzie Sunshine:
My name is not Megs or Fran lol
@Fran Kembo: i do know that .but my name is Suzie. ..
Prostitution should be legal and so should some and if all drugs be legal too
@abcyz: both are widely available either way so yea at least an attempt to put some controls on them can be implemented,currently there are none for buyer or seller of sex or drugs
@abcyz: Ooooo…
@abcyz: No, being a prostituted woman, child, or man should be legal, but paying for their consent should absolutely NOT be legal.
Germany did that and it destroyed itself. Human trafficking skyrocketed.
@Veronica: they legalised it in Australia and it worked fine
@willypearson: Did it? What gives you that idea? Have you looked at the statistics for Australia? In NZ they’re realising what a massive failure it was to legalise prostitution. All legalising prostitution does is protect pimps and make it easier for them to make money.
@Veronica: these sorts of statements never cease to amuse me. “They” are realising in New Zealand? They who? The government? The prostitutes? The police? How do you quantify “realising” ? How do you measure it?
It’s nonsense.
The simple solution to your problem is this – make pimping illegal. Prostitution can be legal if brothels are similar to law firms – partnerships between the workers themselves.
Simple. Effective.
@Stephen Adam:
Do you honestly think the key to all of this, preventing the physical and mental abuse and degradation that women and children suffer, is by making pimping illegal? That’s extraordinarily naive.
@Veronica: No Veronica – the answer to your problem:
“Legalisation allows pimps to make money”
As you stated in your previous post – is to make pimping illegal. Prostitutes are therefore in business for themselves – not exploited by a, currently, criminal pimp. H
The law (Sexual Offences Act 2017 Part 4), specifically criminalises sex workers who work indoors. The result is they will go on the streets where they are in greater danger. Sex workers who work in groups can be charged with pimping. The Act includes prison terms for the sex workers and fines for the sex purchasers. So using your own body for a consensual sexual act can land you in jail. The Nanny State at its most intrusive.
@Rosa Parks: True, but why should my daughters have to grow up next door to a working woman with strange men calling at all hours. One of them could be a paedophile or psychopath for all we know.
I’ve paid mucho dollar for my house so why should I have to put up with a knocking shop next door?
@Good Early: you don’t. You can move. Just like you would have to deal with an irritating neighbour of any other kind.
@Good Early: There is no evidence customers of adult prostitutes are more likely to be paedophiles.
Maybe our government should adopt the New Zealand solution. This might be the most appropriate way to deal with the situation. Prostitution exists because the clients exist. You cannot penalise the client without penalising the prostitute and vice versa. People who do not approve of the “service” have a free choice not to participate or avail of it.
Despite the claims of the “switch off the red light” campaign criminalising clients hasn’t worked. In my opinion nobody should be criminalised and it should be legal.. the case for doing that is compelling…
It’s illegal so it can’t exist. It’s the easiest cop out for doing nothing about problems available. Anyone remember that in 2009 Minister Dermot Ahern made it impossible for sports shooters to licence newly lawfully acquired center fire handguns because of increasing gun crime incidents ? Roaring success that was, nobody has been shot with a pistol since in Ireland…. .Complex problems have no simple solutions.
This is the most ridiculous and sexist law ever made. It’s legal now to sell sex but illegal to buy sex Would the government make it legal to sell drugs but illegal to buy them. Would they make it legal to sell contraband but illegal to buy it. Would they make it legal to sell stolen goods but illegal to buy them No they wouldn’t because it would be ridiculous. What’s happening today is that the religious craw thumpers have been replaced by the politically correct virtue signalers. Who demand stupid laws like this.
@Michael: Its not legal to sell either if its done indoors (considered brothel keeping).
@Michael: Next pay for sex with drugs?
I’m unable to understand how this law is protecting sex workers? In order to ply their trade, they now have to become more hidden and therefor take even greater risks? Surely the answer is to legalise the industry and put dedicated supports in place where information can be gathered to rescue those that are trafficked into prostitution or are being left with little choice but relying on survival sex?
@Carina Clarke: The Nordic model has been shown to be the most effective at protecting prostituted women and girls. Legalisation has been proven to be a failure in many countries, most notably in Germany, where SO many women and children are trafficked to meet the rising demand of the “men” there.
Over 90% of prostituted people want out. We need to help them, and stop socially pardoning the men who pay to rape women and children. The average age of entering prostitution is 14 btw.
@Veronica: Trafficking is a red herring. An entirely separate issue. If there’s a problem with trafficking then the investment in prohibiting and enforcing prostitution laws should be directed there.
If prostitution is legal there should of course be age restrictions and inspections. Vigorously enforced.
It’s always the case that those in favour of prohibiting prostitution throw up a variety of side issues such as youth exploitation, rape and trafficking, none of which are actually of direct relevance.
@Stephen Adam:
>It’s always the case that those in favour of prohibiting prostitution throw up a variety of side issues such as youth exploitation, rape and trafficking, none of which are actually of direct relevance.
@Veronica:
They are indeed of direct relevance. When prostitution is legalised incidences all of those things go through the roof, when prostitution is decriminalised and buying it is criminalised, they are all reduced.
@Stephen Adam: Sorry, it wouldn’t let me comment go though without separating it for some reason. I can’t seem to comment here pretty often, and I’m not even using curse words!
@Veronica: But they’re not of direct relevance Veronica. Exploitation of children, abuse, human trafficking are all illegal and should remain so. Money wasted investigating and prosecuting a consensual transaction between adults should be re-invested in investigating and prosecuting those crimes.
More to the point – in the history of man no society has succeeded in removing the human need for intimacy and sex. So long as that exists so will prostitution. It’s a fools errand. An exercise in futility.
@Stephen Adam: Can I ask what you mean by direct relevance then? Because to me, when the demand for prostitution goes up and women and girls are trafficked into the country to meet that demand, that that would be direct relevance.
>the human need for intimacy and sex
What about the human need to have control over your body and not be forced into being raped over and over again. Prostitution destroys women, why don’t you seem to care about that? I don’t care about men’s erections, I care about the fact that women and girls are suffering.
@Veronica: I’ll explain direct relevance:
The issue: legalising an agreement between a consenting, free, adult to transact with another consenting adult for sexual interaction at a cost.
The exploitation of children: this is irrelevant. No one is advocating for this to be legal. It is and would remain illegal. It should continue to be policed and prosecuted.
Trafficking – see above. This is and would remain illegal. Police efforts should be increased to prevent it in accordance with law.
What you seem to struggle with Veronica is that trafficking and child sexual abuse are in and of themselves illegal activities. Prostitution is illegal and largely run by criminal gangs which is why trafficking and child exploitation are so linked to it.
@Stephen Adam:
So you think that by making prostitution legal, that would cause the gangs and traffickers to detach themselves from it?
@Veronica:
That would certainly be a goal and history has shown that legalising and regulating an industry goes an enormous way to removing it from the grasp of criminal gangs. Liquor and drugs are two perfect examples. Just ask Al Capone.
@Stephen Adam: Well data shows that when prostitution is legalised that gangs and trafficking soar. We need to remove the “demand” for prostitution. What will stop gangs and traffickers is if they can’t make any money. The best way to reduce the demand is to encourage men to see women and children as people and not just objects for their sexual gratification. In the countries that have adopted the Nordic model, the demand for prostitution has gone down, and people’s attitudes towards it are changing.
@Veronica:
Sigh. I’m afraid this all too thin. Do you have a source for this data please? How are these “changing attitudes” measured? I suspect such attitudes are not reliably quantifiable.
If you want to take away the profit for criminal gangs the logical solution is legalisation. Not further criminalisation.
And once again – you bring children into it. Why?
The real question is this – Do you object to two consenting, free adults exchanging money for sex? No children. No trafficking. No exploitation. Simply two adults privately conducting a transaction. Do you object to that?
Because that’s the issue. Ask yourself honestly if you have a problem with that. I may be wrong but I suspect you do. The question is why?
@Stephen Adam:
Sure I do.
I’ll put them in the next comment after this if I can, the Journal sucks and won’t let me post them in one comment, if they’ll let me do it at all. So, sorry in advance the doing this over several comments.
Some quotes:
“The starting point for Swedish prostitution legislation is that prostitution is seen as men’s violence against women. The law can be characterized as normative, because its main purpose is to influence the general public’s attitudes and beliefs regarding prostitution.”
“Additionally, a German UNICEF report of October 2003 characterized a region in the Czech Republic close to the German border as a “haven for peadophilia.” German media reports have claimed that children as young as 5 years old are involved with prostitution in this border area [12].
The kids are not mainly from the border region, but pimps bring them from Eastern Europe. Some children, including babies, are sold to the foreign customers to serve as prostitutes in Western Europe and customers come in cars with German number plates, most from nearby Bavaria and Saxony.
They pay the children €5-25 (around $6-30) for sexual favors while locals turn a blind eye “
@Veronica: i haven’t the time right now to read those reports in detail but in glancing at them and reading your quotes I see absolutely no causal link between legalisation and trafficking and child abuse.
Can you quote any section of those reports showing that directly links legalisation to an increase in child abuse or human trafficking?
@Stephen Adam:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10657-011-9232-0
From this paper:
“Using two recent sources of European cross country data we show that trafficking of persons for commercial sexual exploitation (as proxied by the data sets we are using) is least prevalent in countries where prostitution is illegal, most prevalent in countries where prostitution is legalized, and in between in those countries where prostitution is legal but procuring illegal.”
@Veronica:
“The Swedish case thus seems to support the claim of a causal link from law to reduced trafficking. Furthermore, there are indications that traffickers consider the legal rules surrounding prostitution when choosing destination countries. For instance, Swedish police investigations using taped phone conversations show that traffickers have problems due to the Swedish law which criminalizes buying sex since; (i) time is lost because street prostitution is not viable; (ii) Swedish men fear being arrested which requires a lot of (costly) discretion; (iii) to avoid detection, several apartment brothels have to be used; this is costly and often requires more local contacts. Furthermore, victim testimonies have shown that traffickers prefer to operate in countries where prostitution is tolerated or legalized”
@Veronica: I just read the Fight the New Drug article which contains no data in relation to an increase in gang activity in countries where legalisation has occurred. That’s all I have time for now
.
@Stephen Adam: it also had no data relating to “changing attitudes in Nordic countries” which you mentioned.
@Stephen Adam: Not that one. I linked you to several articles and studies. Read them all. I probably won’t check here again, if you want to continue, tweet me!
@Stephen Adam: Agreed. It’s no better than the classic attempt to use the issue of paedophiles who abuse young boys to try and outlaw homosexuality.
Guy walks into a sex shop. Asks what you sell? Told they are sex shop. He then says he will have 10euros worth.
@Ian Moloney: Ian, you are really out of touch with reality here – you poor soul !
Best stick to your best
As they say, it is only illegal if you get caught?
Backward kip this place in so many ways. Why dont all them bible bashers with their poxy morals feck off to some island somewhere and practice their crap there. I know it’s not really comparable to Isis and their caliphate but in some ways it is. They’ll destroy your life for choosing what you want to do with your life, be it a sex worker, a client of the sex trade, a cannabis smoker or personal grower. Ffs, closing the off licences at 10.00? Why dont they open pubs 24 hour? They don’t cater for night shift workers who can’t unwind like everyone else in a social setting with a cold one after work. It’s getting more ridiculous by the hour almost
@Tommy Sea: totally agree Tommy an adult in this country is treated like a child as for the church its a a case of do as i say not as I do! Paedophiles, murderers, baby killers,and worse of all those who cover it up! telling, no preaching to us how to live our lives.
@Adrian: yes there was terrible abuse perpetrated by a minority of Catholic Religious and and attempts to cover it up. However there is a blind denial by many in this country that 96% of child abuse was perpetrated by family members (fathers, uncles close family friends) that had nothing to do with Catholic clergy or religious. It’s too easy for people to deflect the reality of child abuse away from the cold fact that on any day the vast majority of lay men and women are more likely to abuse. Recent revelations about State Agencies and their failures in the area of child protection should be a wake up call. For the record I am NOT attempting to deny the horror of what happened in the Catholic Church just merely pointing out reality.
@John Campbell:
I agree John ,two children taken into care every day who have been abused and neglected by their parents is heartbreaking and not enough Social Workers to handle all the cases.
And this is happening now.!!
And me just cracking a joke but I am sure those in media and politics have done that?
Not surprised that it’s practically only men who want prostitution to be legalised. Clearly none of them have done any reading about it or know any statistics.
Methinks they have a vested personal interest in making sure that women’s bodies are constantly made available for them.
@Veronica: “Practically only men and sex workers”, you mean. It’s an ugly business and there should be help available to those who want to escape the cycle. Prohibitionists seem to entertain this fantasy that if they can just ban it hard enough, it’ll go away. It won’t. Ever. The best approach is centred around harm reduction and client-initiated intervention.
@Jefferson Airplane: I don’t refer to prostituted persons as “sex workers”. Prostitution is not “work”.
The point isn’t to ban it “hard enough that it goes away”, it’s to change the idea in society that men are entitled to women’s bodies, and can pay for consent. When men stop believing that they can pay to jizz into women, then we will once and for all end prostitution and porn. Can’t have any semblance of equality when women and children are being bought and sold at men’s whims.
@Veronica: no prostitution or porn Veronica? Ironic how feminism has twisted itself into so many knots that it’s policy positions are now aligned to the church!
@Pat Mustard: Wanting women to be free from sexual and non-sexual violence makes me a righty churchy goer now? You know, it’s possible to think for yourself instead of just going along with what everyone tells you.
And yes, no porn. Why do men have to base their entire sexuality on the abuse of women? Surely you’re able to get pleasure without either raping a woman (in prostitution) or watching one being abused (porn)? I’m able to, my boyfriend is able to. Don’t know why it’s such a difficult thing for so many men to swallow.
@Veronica: I’m sorry Veronica – your views are wildly unrealistic and extraordinarily sexist. You’re advocating rewriting human nature – which is frankly impossible and basically painting men as abusers and sadists.
The notion that these men believe hey have a “right” to anything is surely undone by the transactional nature of the deed? They don’t force themselves on a prostitute. They pay for a service.
@Veronica: Very little hinges on how you personally refer to them, so cool beans on that front.
The relationship between the legal climate and “ideas in society” is complex and inevitably there are feedback loops, which makes it hard to cleanly divide the cause from the effect. But I think a study of the history of prohibition as a tactic will almost trivially confirm that banning things doesn’t eliminate the desire for them. You could even infer that it only becomes necessary to ban something when a demand for it exists – so the laws you favour will become unnecessary once you achieve your goal.
Regardless of that: I don’t have some utopian vision of a world free from, uh, porn or whatever. I’m motivated by what will produce the best results for the people most at risk from trafficking and sexual exploitation. It’s a complicated issue where no outcome is perfect and each involves a trade-off. Nevertheless I think this outcome is among the worse available, largely for the reasons referred to by the people interviewed for the article.
@Jefferson Airplane:
Studies have shown that “demand” for prostitution in countries that have adopted the Nordic model has gone down. It’s seen as socially unacceptable to pay to use a woman’s body for sex.
I’m not wearing rose tinted glasses here, I know how awful the whole industry is, and how hard it is trying to tackle it. However, the Nordic model, which we’ve just adopted, has consistently been shown to have the best outcome for the people within prostitution.
@Stephen Adam:
I’m not saying it’s “human nature” for men to rape women and children, I’m saying it’s an outcome of patriarchy.
>They don’t force themselves on a prostitute.
There is no such thing as coerced consent.
@Veronica: it’s human nature for people to want sex Veronica. So long as that exists – prostitution will exist. It can’t be removed as history has shown.
@Stephen Adam:
Obviously people like sex, but when there’s no free consent, it’s rape, and that’s not so fun for the person on the receiving end.
Getting rid of the idea that women can be bought and sold will make sex better anyway. From an removed point of view, I don’t even get what the pleasure is of having sex with somebody who isn’t attracted to you and doesn’t want to be having sex with you. The only reasonable thing after that is that they’re getting off on the power they have over the woman. I mean, I could never have sex with somebody who I knew was only there because I was paying them and they desperately needed the money. I would rather get off alone.
@Veronica: That is simply not true. But I can see you don’t have any flex on the issue.
@Jefferson Airplane: What is not true?
@Veronica: again Veronica – that’s another irrelevant side issue. No one is discussing a situation without consent.
The only thing being discussed is a mutually consensual transaction.
@Stephen Adam: There is no consent where there is coercion. Prostitution is all about coercion, therefore there is no consent. What’s consent is if I meet you somewhere and am attracted to you, and we both decide to have sex together. What’s not consent is if I find you and say that even though you’re starving (for example), I’ll give you money if you let me do sex to you, and you agree because you need the money because you need to eat.
>The only thing being discussed is a mutually consensual transaction.
Do you really think that’s what’s happening the majority of the time? Sure, there’s a tiny portion of women who choose to have sex for money, and are making the choice freely, but in the vast majority of cases that’s not what’s happening.
I just can’t accept that men’s right to pay to do sex to somebody trumps women’s and children’s right to safety and bodily integrity.
@Veronica: @Veronica:
Again Veronica you’re conflating issues. You don’t seem to grasp the differences between a proposed legal model and the current legal model.
Firstly how is someone being coerced? Forcing someone to do something against their will is not part of the discussion. No one is suggesting that should be legalised.
It happens now because prostitution is illegal and these people are beholden to criminals. In a legal system that is no longer the case
You ask “do I think that’s what happens in the majority of cases”? No is the answer. Because it’s currently illegal. That changes when you legalise it.
And where did anyone mention a mans “right” to “do sex” to “children”
You’re just changing the proposal to suit your objections Veronica.
@Stephen Adam: If you wouldn’t do something freely, but somebody is holding something over you so that you do it, then it’s coercion. Why is that hard to understand? ALL of prostitution is coerced, otherwise it wouldn’t be prostitution, it would just be two people who wanted to have sex with each other having sex with each other.
“It happens now because prostitution is illegal and these people are beholden to criminals.”
Selling sex in Ireland is not illegal, just buying it is. The men who pay to have sex with anybody are criminals, yes.
My original comment in relation to your comment about child prostitution isn’t going through, this is super irritating. Anyway, the gist of it is that you’re pushing for prostitution to be legal. As it stands the average of entry is 14. More men = more people forced into prostitution = more children in prostitution.
Prostitution isn’t all flowers and gentle lovemaking with candles and perfume. It seems like that’s what your idea of it is. Why do so many women in it have PTSD if it’s so nice and all about genuine consent?
@Veronica: this is pointless Veronica. Full of spin and diversion. You’re arguing tooth and nail against something which isn’t being proposed by anyone.
The average age into ILLEGAL prostitution may well be 14 but LEGAL prostitution subject to regulation inspection and policing is designed to be very different. No children.
Coercion is not an issue – it’s consensual. Your point about offering money for food to a starving person is hyperbole.
I also asked whether you objected to adults with free will entering into the transaction but you didn’t answer.
@Stephen Adam:
Adults with free will, fine. Although if that was the case I don’t really see money changing hands. My issue is that it’s never really two people with free will though, the prostituted person rarely has a fully-free choice in the matter. What you’re talking about is pretty woman fairy-tale prostitution, where the woman is always happy and healthy and has loads of options but chooses to work in prostitution because she just *looooves* servicing men. Do you honestly think that exists?
Read the links I sent you above.
@Stephen Adam: Actually, just to clarify, I’m proposing the Nordic model, which we now have. So I’m actually happy out with things since the law passed. Are you saying you want full legalisation, a la Germany?
@Veronica: Sigh. No one mentioned fairy tale prostitution Veronica. It’s just a reality. An inescapable, immutable, ever present directly resulting from
A) human nature – an irrevocable need/desire for sex
B) cash based economy – the trading of goods and services.
So long as both of those exist we will have prostitution. Forcing it underground puts the participants in danger and finds criminal organisations.
Legalising it between willing participants, if done properly, undermines gangland and gives the participants access to protection from police, the courts, and employment legislation as well as healthcare.
@Stephen Adam:
Literally all evidence does not support that theory though Stephen, which is what I’m saying. You can dream up all these nice men and gangs that won’t traffick women and children, but the reality of it is that when prostitution is legalised, trafficking goes up.
>employment legislation as well as healthcare.
The idea is good, the practice doesn’t work like that. You can read the links I sent you later on, or google some other articles about what’s going on in Germany.
@Veronica: men and gangs will always traffic people Veronica – I never said otherwise. By also like I said that’s a separate issue. One the police should be focussed one rather than on sex.
@Veronica: ‘men base their entire sexuality on the abuse of women’ are you for real? That’s your view on half the human race? Why is porn abuse of women? It’s one of the few industries where they get paid more than men (gender wage gap for bonus point score) and is a bigger industry than Hollywood in California. Lots of people do it voluntary for the money and fame. The fact that you overlay almost every interaction between a man and a woman as being characterised by abuse is pretty twisted.
The law is not designed to protect sex workers, but to discourage people from offering sex as a “proper” job. Young Irish boys and girls should not be growing up and thinking sex work as a career choice.
@Uchechukwu: We aren’t, the majority of people in prostitution are there because they have no other viable choice. The average of entry is 14. More prostituted women have PTSD from their “work” than soldiers who went to war.
@Veronica: which surely means that it’s right for it to illegal?
@EvieXVI: Do you mean that it’s right that it should be illegal? I think it should be legal to sell it, and illegal to buy it. We shouldn’t punish the people who ended up in the situation because for so many it’s not a choice. We also shouldn’t punish the children who are prostituted. Did you know that in the US they arrest children who are “caught soliciting” for prostitution? CHILDREN!!!!
As we have now, we should make it illegal to buy, and legal to sell. It’s about protecting vulnerable people, and changing the say society treats women.
@Veronica: Do you honestly think that we are going to prosecute children in this country? The US has many laws, and variations and interpretations of those laws, that would not be tolerated anywhere else. It is not a good example, and is certainly no indication of what might happen here.
Of course it should be illegal to buy sex, as you have said, prostituted women suffer. But how can we have a situation where it is legal to sell something but illegal to buy it?
@EvieXVI:
>But how can we have a situation where it is legal to sell something but illegal to buy it?
The same way they have it in Norway and Sweden for example!
Punish the abusers, not the abused. Men should not want to buy consent from women or children, and this is a proven way of reducing the acceptability among society of men paying to use women/children’s bodies.
@Veronica: Veronica this is ridiculous. No one ANYWHERE has advocated “buying consent from children”.
It’s a total straw man – made entirely to distort the issue. Children are a non-factor in the legalisation debate yet you keep throwing them in – to make it seem as appalling as possible when in fact it’s entirely irrelevant.
Legalisation of prostitution does not mean legalisation of sexual with a minor.
@Stephen Adam: The average of entry into prostitution is 14. From accounts I’ve read, the demand for very young “women” is huge. And 14 is just the average age, there’s a lot younger too. Girls and boys.
Whether you’re paying to have sex with somebody who is over 18 or not, chances are you’re paying to have sex with somebody who was a victim of child sexual abuse.
@Veronica: what you mean Veronica is “the average entry age into ILLEGAL prostitution is 14″
Once again. Legalising prostitution means there’s rules – no one under age for example.
You’re applying the circumstances of illegal prostitution to a different model which is designed in part to prevent those very issues.
I
@Stephen Adam:
Who is going to enforce that? The same people with no choices are going to end up going into prostitution, and the men aren’t exactly lining up to check ages of the people they buy.
Genuinely, look up how legalisation went in Germany. Things are much worse there for women, children and transwomen, than they were. Better for men, because now they can pay to rape at low rates, and can shop around. Which is starting to sound like that you want.
@Veronica: the police and government agencies enforce it Veronica – that’s the advantage of having a legal industry.
People being forced into undesireable jobs due to financial necessity is a problem everywhere but I’d suggest your issue is with government policy – education, opportunity and the economy. Not with the actions of consenting adults.
@Veronica: The average age of entry is NOT 14 as you know full well. This supposed statistic was debunked years ago, yet you still insist on posting it. Why?
The PTSD ‘fact’ is equally flawed. Is your argument so threadbare that you have to keep trotting out these myths to justify yourself?
All im reading from this article is that paying for sex is now illegal but this women are still breaking the law and want someone to hear their side of the story “I can get quite low somedays as with feelings of asolation brings feelings of depression….” quit your whinning and get a f***ing friend, boyfriend or a f**k body
@Michael alder: You are not reading it correctly. These women are working fully legally. Selling sex has been decriminalized as long as you work alone and outdoors. Buying sex is now illegal. Sex work in groups or indoors is illegal. It’s the puritan principal of if you dont stop hurting yourself we will hurt you more.
>There is no “typical client”
Well they all have one identical feature in common, don’t they? They’re (virtually) all men.
@Veronica: If a woman decides to have casual sex with a stranger (and many do) does she need to pay for it do you think?
I used to work on a commercial fishing boat, I too felt unsafe, so I retrained as a chef. Less money but safer working conditions. These girls need to wise up, stop selling their bodies to creeps and get into something legit.
@Leo Powers: So rather than trying to make conditions safer for those on commercial fishing boats, you simply left the area? It’s a good thing everyone doesn’t have that attitude.
Making working conditions safer for sex workers by allowing them to lawfully work together isn’t exactly rocket science. And both commercial fishing and sex work have been ‘legit’ work for centuries.
This is what happens when you allow an alliance of bible-bashing loons and hardcore feminists to influence policy-making. Stupid laws cooked up by hypocrites who suffer absolutely no consequences themselves but make life miserable for innocent people – simply because it offends their politics. Selfish, short-term moral lecturing. These imbeciles should be ashamed of themselves.
@Mike Howard: your condescending tone doesn’t make you right.
Please do your research before shilling for the poor oppressed pimps of Ireland. The brothel keeping law has been in place since 1935. Look it up. The new law decriminalizes prostituted women, tipping the balance of power in their favor while criminalizing the men who buy and sell them. This shift in the balance of power is why prostituted women living under the Nordic (or Equality) Model are much less likely to be raped, beaten, and murdered than those living in countries where pimps and sex buyers have free reign. The comparable murder and trafficking rates are not secret. Count the bodies. Count the trafficking victims. The only reasonable conclusion is that the Nordic Model saves lives and reduces trafficking.
@Penny White XX: Penny how exactly are indoor sex workers more decriminalised in Ireland today than they were last year? Was selling sex illegal in Ireland before this law was introduced? If two of them work in the same building, will they no longer be charged with brothel keeping? If apprehended by the police, will they be allowed to keep their earnings? What other situations can you think of where a woman is legally forced to work alone?
You claim that the Nordic Model means that sex workers are ”much less likely” to be murdered and you point out (correctly) that the murder rates are not secret. So you’ll be well aware that there wasn’t a single murder of a Swedish sex worker in the decade BEFORE the model was introduced. Also do you really believe that the very small number of men who are intent on murder will somehow be deterred by the threat of a fine for buying sex?
As regards trafficking, can you tell us the number of Swedish sex trafficking victims prior to Sweden adopting the Model as compared to today? How much has trafficking reduced (if at all) since 1999?
@Penny White XX: Indoor sex workers are still criminalised by this law.
have your say