214
Sweden bans buying OnlyFans content (www.euractiv.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/europe@feddit.org
49 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
[–] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

The Government of Germany complies with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking, but has not implemented European Union recommendations to reduce sexual slavery.[3]

That references an article from 2013, the whole article is generally out of date. What's absolutely true is that Germany is a hub for trafficking in Europe, for the simple reason that it's a hub for anything in Europe that involves transportation: You can hardly go east to west, north to south, without crossing through Germany.

The article also isn't particularily good at distinguishing between sex trafficking and for other purposes. Most of the dates (2009) refer to a time barely past regularisation of prostitution, the criminal statistics in the years following 2002 are full of cases that were only brought to light because operating shady brothels became financially untenable.

Then, important to keep in mind about statistics: German law says that it's illegal to recruit under 21yolds into prostitution. I think it's a good thing, but OTOH someone driving around in the Romanian countryside asking gals whether they want to make money in Germany shouldn't be confused, much less equated, with chained to the radiator type of trafficking, but that's exactly what happens when you just take the "human trafficking" numbers out of the police statistics, both types have the same subheading.

This arises in no small degree from the revisions to the EU Anti-Trafficking Directive, which must be implemented rapidly and in full

The revisions were done July of 2024, the report is from October. No shit Sherlock it can take a couple of months to implement legislation.

The whole thing, the wikipedia article that is not the report, reads like a hitpiece with an agenda... in particular, SWERF. SWERFs also like to ignore any- and everything sex worker unions have to say about this topic (which isn't kind towards the Nordic model), up to including slandering them as "pimp-run".

Most of the sources in the article are also before 2017, which saw a law reform, in particular now there's licensing. Sex worker unions really didn't like that, I don't think it's doing much but OTOH is also not terribly damaging -- lots of professions have some kind of licensing regime. I would have rather seen more investment in street work.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The Wikipedia article refers to the decades after legalisation of prostitution. The recent report from 2024 shows that Germany is still behind the EU standards. I don't know what you mean with "SWERFs". It is a simple matter of fact that in Germany legalisation of prostitution did not come with proper safeguards and helped enable human trafficking.

    Also it remains clear that Germany is still lacking behind EU standards. While it is true that it takes time to implement new standards, the EU processes to establish them take years, so the German governments know about these standards since much longer. There is also no prohibition on implementing these before they become official EU standards.

    And this brings us back to the problems with digital sex work. While countries can enforce protections against human trafficking in analog spaces, it is much more difficult in digital spaces. The "onlyfans model" in some other country could have traffickers standing outside the video with a gun pointed at them and there is hardly any way to find out. There is no access for street workers or investigators to talk with the people involved. They could be kept in some basement and never see the light of day and the consumers seem rather willfully ignorant to that possibility. As in the example with the "casting couch" trafficker ring, human trafficking is rather happily ignored by the consumers, who ultimately make themselves complicit in heinous crimes.

    Sweden is doing the right thing here. It is impossible to regulate that "market" to prevent human trafficking. Thereby the only option is to shut that market down.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I don’t know what you mean with “SWERFs

    Sex-worker exclusionary radical feminist. TBH not knowing that acronym disqualifies you from discussing the issue.

    The “onlyfans model” in some other country could have traffickers standing outside the video with a gun pointed at them and there is hardly any way to find out.

    And that doesn't also apply to call centre employees, youtube hosts, news anchors, whatnot?

    As in the example with the “casting couch” trafficker ring, human trafficking is rather happily ignored by the consumers,

    Ignoring requires knowledge. Consumers are happily unaware of issues, sure, but so are you when it comes to who picked the coffee you're drinking.

    I'm all for throwing the book at anyone who traffics people, for whatever reason, sex work included. And the only way to do that, that has actually data behind it and not just "sex work inherently bad" type of ideology, is regulation.

    Sweden is doing the right thing here. I

    Read this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Sex-worker exclusionary radical feminist. TBH not knowing that acronym disqualifies you from discussing the issue.

    Does this apply to people who are voluntarily or by force engaged in sex work too? This seems more like academic leftists gatekeeping.

    And that doesn’t also apply to call centre employees, youtube hosts, news anchors, whatnot?

    Who are at a much lower risk of human trafficking, have access to labor unions and workplace protections...

    but so are you when it comes to who picked the coffee you’re drinking.

    While not perfect, i buy fair trade coffee, which means at least some level of oversight. And picking coffee under exploitative circumstances is terrible, but a different level than being raped for the entertainment of millions of people, where the recordings remain even decades after, if the exploitation can be stopped.

    And the only way to do that, that has actually data behind it and not just “sex work inherently bad” type of ideology, is regulation.

    Which is much harder in the digital space and cannot be enforced realistically by Sweden. Even if they would create a certification process and do regular workspace inspections, these could only be enforced inside Sweden. And even that is limited by the trivial ease of using VPNs to claim a different location. So the only option is to prohibit that market.

    Read this.

    Earlier you criticized that i provided a source discussion the situation multiple years ago. Now you provide a source that is from the same time and does not address nor distinguish between analog and digital.

    There is a fundamental difference between digital and analog. So the criticism needs to distinguish between these two. You gave the example of street workers yourself.

    If you criticise the Swedish ban on buying digital sex work, how do you envision to protect digital sex work from human trafficking, provide access to social work and the like? What is the better alternative?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    have access to labor unions and workplace protections…

    And Swedish sex workers don't. I rest my case.

    Earlier you criticized that i provided a source discussion the situation multiple years ago. Now you provide a source that is from the same time and does not address nor distinguish between analog and digital.

    It explains, in detail, how the Swedish model hurts sex workers. The Swedish model didn't change so it's still up to date.

    It also goes into detail, and that is something you should really have a look at, how SWERFs systematically deny and undermine the agency of sex workers. For SWERFs it is not possible to choose, out of your own free will, to be a sex worker, so all are victims so all must be ignored if they're saying that sex work should be legal and regulated so they can have a safe working environment.

    There is a fundamental difference between digital and analog. So the criticism needs to distinguish between these two. You gave the example of street workers yourself.

    I wasn't talking about digital at all but reacted to the claim that Germany wouldn't give a fuck about human trafficking.

    So... you're saying that Sweden should completely outlaw porn? At least the procurement of it? Because that'd be the equivalent of what they're doing in the analog space. Then the only people left producing porn would be criminal organisations and I don't think they care much about being kind to the workers.

    Prohibition never works when there's demand. It just doesn't, never has, never will, not with alcohol, not with cannabis, not with porn, not with prostitution. Regulation does work.

    And just for the record Sweden is just as prudish when it comes to alcohol and cannabis. All they know is abolitionism, and bringing up anything else is politically impossible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent