As the only country in the world, Sweden in 1998 made it illegal to pay for sex but not to offer it for sale. For my occasional Saturday series of translations from the Scandinavian press, I have rendered an op-ed by a Swedish gay prostitute pleading for decriminalization. His view is that people should be free do what they like with their bodies as long as noone else is harmed. He also supports the findings of an official Norwegian study of the Swedish experiment: Criminalizing johns harms the most vulnerable sex workers and makes it harder to prosecute traffickers and pimps.
I have snipped two segments addressing an ongoing scandal where a Supreme Court justice has lost his seat after buying sex from a man. Their omission does not change the overall argument.
Stop harassing my dear clients
JOHANNES ERIKSSON
[From the Swedish by Sirocco][SNIP]
Riksdagen [the Swedish Parliament] passed the Sex Purchase Act in the late 1990s, swayed by the argument that it was needed to improve the social standing of women. Criminalizing sex would make women think twice before starting to sell sex, it was maintained. They would more easily resist pressure to offer sexual services, and those already in the sex trade would find it easier to quit (which they were all assumed to want). And perhaps most importantly, criminalization would show that society takes a moral stand against trade in sex.
A majority of MPs bought this argumentation right off the shelf. For me and many other prostitutes, however, reality is a little too complicated for that.
To begin with, one should bear in mind that the Sex Purchase Act criminalizes all commercial sex regardless of whether the parties are consenting. This came as a surprise to those of us who thought sex between consenting adults ceased to be a matter for the police when homosexuality was made legal in 1944. The explanation is the ever-repeated political cliché that prostitution always amounts to violence against women and is never done with genuine consent.
I have sold sex to men for four years now and have no plans to quit. I chose to leave a stable but dull white collar career for the more uncertain, but all the more rewarding, prostitution. My new career in the sex industry has gone through various phases and not always been a cakewalk. I have at times worked for small money to pay my bills, debts, and other expenses, but usually I have made enough to afford all that life has to offer. And no matter how dire my straits, it was always a choice. Noone has forced me to do this. To me it has been purely a question of consensual sex between adults, and after four years in the business I daresay this goes for the great majority of prostitutes I have met – men, women, and those in between.
My clients belong to every layer of society, though most earn above median income. Their reasons for seeing me vary: They may feel lonely or insecure, need adventure or relaxation, or – typically – be horny and unwilling to spend time, energy, and money on the non-commercial sex market. I have to be sure encountered the odd bastard, just like in my office job, but the vast majority of my clients are really, really sweet men who would never dream of threatening or beating me or anyone else.
Unlike the government officials who penned the Sex Purchase Act, I have practical experience with the activity they have outlawed. And that is why their argument rings so very false to me and many other prostitutes. I have so far met noone who has abstained from selling sex due to criminalization, and those I know who quit did so for quite different reasons. On the other hand, many prostitutes and social workers can attest to how the Sex Purchase Act has done nothing but worsen the situation, especially for street walkers and those arriving through trafficking. And if prostitution is violence against women – how come the law also curbs activities like mine, where no woman was ever involved?
[SNIP]
I realize that the decision to sell – or buy – sex is incomprehensible to many, but for those of us who chose to enter the sex trade it has seemed the best available option. A lot of us would appreciate for the government to stop treating us as little children in need of being saved from ourselves and put the resources into more sensible undertakings than to punish people who have done no harm.
Fortunately the world is slowly noting what is going on in Sweden. In Norway – despite intensive marketing from the Swedish side – there is now a broad political majority against criminalizing the purchase of sexual services. The difference is that the Norwegian debate lets prostitutes offer their views on how criminalization would affect them. I sincerely hope the Swedish government will do the same one fine day. The sooner the better – enough have been punished and tarred unnecessarily.
JOHANNES ERIKSSON
The Norwegian study of Sweden (and the Netherlands) I mentioned in the ingress found that outlawing johns only drains the street of the more ‘respectable’ clients who actually help shield the street walkers from violence. In the words of its chairman, Ulf Stridbeck, it also documents “increased demands of unprotected sex, increased risk of STDs, more pimps, and problems with respect to follow-up from social and health authorities.” And it is unclear whether it has decreased the volume of trafficking. Meanwhile, the Swedish national police reports that the law has made it “difficult getting clients of prostitutes to testify against pimps and other backmen.” Source (in Swedish)
Sweden has a strong tradition of being at the vanguard of progressivism, and the Sex Purchase Act was meant to continue that proud tradition. But in my opinion it was a step backwards instead. Here in Norway, only pimping and trafficking is a crime – both in principle and in practice a better arrangement. Even that is not ideal, however, since ‘pimping’ is defined as ‘making money on somebody else’s prostitution,’ which makes it illegal even to rent a flat to someone who plies that trade there. In theory, the objectionable elements of pimping and trafficking (violence, threats, fraud, human smuggling, etc.) are illegal already. I accept however that, in practice, the legislation may be needed to get at the organized crime syndicates behind the influx of prostitutes from abroad.
I understand that anything to do with prostitution is illegal in the US outside of northern Nevada. That is truly backwards.
Thanks Sirocco, it’s an important topic, which is usually drowned by righteous noise.
This has been discussed in France as well, where one of Sarkozy’s first measures when he became minister of the interior in 2002 was to criminalise prostitution, by making “racolage” (i.e. “marketing” your wares – solliciting) illegal – including “racolage passif”, i.e. just standing in the street with light clothes.
Of course this had the effect to make prostitution less visible and more underground, and to make prostitutes more vulnerable.
Very near my office is one of the streets where you have prostitutes in the street at lunch time and in the evening, servicing the office crowds. They are all pretty easy to spot, and if you come in the neighborood a fes times, you’ll get to recognise all of them. When the law came in force, they started dressing up in suits but stayed around. Now They are pretty much back to normal. But these are probably the “aristocracy” of the business, with a good spot, less danger (unless those that offer their wares in minivans at night in the Bois de Boulogne or other isolated areas), and enough regulars not to need to show off too much flesh anyway.
demagoguery get easily in the way of good policy.
Thanks for this. You do a lot of good thinking west of that long border of ours.
There’s a great deal of hypocritical discussion around this issue.
There are many, many people (male and female) who, because of age, looks, disability, shyness or a hundred other reasons, find it almost impossible to find a partner – whether for friendship, relationship, sex or marriage. Metropolitan life especially is often very lonely and frustrating.
The fact is that they often desire partners (for whatever reason) ‘outside their league’. This is because we all have some kind of fantasy about our ideal partner. Some of these fantasies can be fetishistic – making it even harder to find a partner.
Sadly people tend to see prostitution as a black and white issue, like a male friend of mine who gets very annoyed if he takes a date for an evening out, buys the expensive meal, spends a lot on wine, taxis, dancing etc etc and then doesn’t get to sleep with the woman. He always boasts ‘ I’ve never paid for a woman in my life’. And doesn’t see the irony.
It is not a black and white issue. I am totally against SUVs, and yet I drive a small new Fiat Punto. I have a need – but I satisfy it just enough to make sense to me. So I believe there are many sex workers who have their own morals about what they will or will not do.
I am absolutely against pimping and trafficing, but, like everything else in my libertarian worldview, what two people mutually agree to do privately without hurting anyone else, is their own business.
Thanks a lot for your comment – I agree.
By the way, being Finland based and well acquainted with the other Nordic countries, are you familiar with the more extremist wing of the Swedish feminist movement? It has always puzzled me how strong the Andrea Dworkin style of ‘victim feminism’ is in our mutual neighboring country. It is this movement that, via sympathizers like the former Minister of Gender Equalization, Margereta Winberg (picture here), drove through the Sex Purchase Act and now block any attempt to review or reconsider its merits. And some of these people have serious issues, as brought out in a recent Swedish TV documentary which is causing great brouaha at the moment. A taste from an interview with Ireen von Wackenfeldt, chair of the powerful and state sponsored feminist organization ROKS (picture here):
Source (in Swedish)
This feminist leader also describes gender relations as a ‘world war’ and touts discredited theories of a vast international ring devoted to Satanic ritual abuse and murder of women and little girls. This is the sort of ideology from which the Sexual Purchase Act emerged in the 1990’s – a fact reflected in the key premise of the Act that Mr. Eriksson disputes: that prostitution in itself counts as violence against women. I’m afraid this is an ideology-based, not reality-based, position.
I was not aware of these Swedish super-fems, but they sound totally ‘Wacken’ to me!
The latest scandal in Finland involves members of the Russian Trade Commission who owned and operated apartments in Helsinki for Russian prostitutes.
In a sense, of course, ‘Wacken’ is right that men are animals – but then, so are women. Great apes, to be exact.
The Russian Trade Commission sounds like a resourceful… trade commission.
Indeed.
“Well, we are all monkeys …”
“OOK!”
“Ouch!”
Hello there. Relative newcomer, aren’t you? Welcome!
Hello, Yes (long time unregistered lurker, first time stander-upper), and thank you!
Är ni svenska? (re: your comment below about exile). Then we only need to dig up a Dane, and the family is complete – we already have an Icelander and a Finnish resident.
How would you judge my humble attempt at translating the Swedish piece? My first time between two foreign tongues.
By the way, great celebration yesterday, at least around here! 😉 You know, the air raid sirens engaged earlier today – I figured maybe you guys were taking action, a century late…
Halvparten Svensk, halvparten Bærumsoss. Not actually able to speak Norwegian properly, however, as I’ve never really tried.
The translation? No complaints. Since I know it’s from Swedish I can spot the idioms, but I’m not sure I could have otherwise.
Oh right June 6th. It’s actually a national holiday from this year. No one knows what we’re actually supposed to be celebrating, since we haven’t had any real trouble at home in 500-odd years (unlike all our neighbors.)
Actually I had in mind the June 7 celebration of Norway’s 1905 secession… 🙂
Oh, right.
Well, that’s something we are all greatful for I think – not a bit fan of fishing myself! 🙂
(Aargh, just remembered about the oil. Let’s see, what does our wise goverment do. Yes, that’s it.)
“You Norwegians are so nationalistic.”
(There. Now they will give us oil.)
This (thankfully small) group of people is one of the reasons I am considering remaining abroad for another five years.
There was another great comment a few years ago to the effect that men should be kept away from children and computers.
Thanks for bringing up the subject. Certainly a hot-none-topic here in the US. It’s illegal, so therefore no need to discuss something so distasteful. They keep trying to close down more and more strip joints, however – which is a hot topic.
I have discussed the subject with my more liberal friends here – interestingly enough men feel it should be legalized, but the women do not(for the most part). The women feel it degrades women, personally I don’t see it that way – having grown up with legalized prostitution myself I think it odd that it would be illegal.
The issue here is – if the women in general feel it is a humiliation to women, and the society in general feels it is an immoral act, then this will reflect on the health of these women in a negative way. First, it has always and will always exist – no matter what society does. That means if it is illegal it will be subject to pimping and protection rackets, which is not doing these women any favors. Secondly these women will have a greater likelihood of contracting and transmitting disease. And, thirdly, after their careers are done with, since generally prostitutes don’t work into old age, they will both be poor, and humiliated by society itself. As a result of the latter, since social “values” are a powerful form of peer pressure, they will end up devaluing themselves.
In short people need to learn to stay out of other peoples lives and mind their own business. There are many careers I find distasteful, such as butchery, petty law enforcement, slaughterhouse work, prison guards, medical work – yet society needs these things, just as it needs prostitution and pornography.
Prostitution, in some form or another, seems to have existed since the beginning of time (and probably people have been trying to shut it down since then as well). So far, it hasnt worked and it doesn’t look like it’s going to. I would much rather have it out in the open and legal, with protection for the sex workers, scheduled medical checkups (thus protection for the customers and the wider society, as well) and all that. It would make much more sense, I think.
On a related note, the “death is better than sin (if you are poor)” Christianists in the US govt are attempting to withhold AIDS funds from various countries unless they also condemn prostitution, instead of working with the sex industry to reduce the dangers and effects of HIV and AIDS and the spread of the disease. Brazil has told them to take a flying leap, I believe.
Having lived in Nevada and lived with a brother who paid at times for overnighters for one of the women from one of the cat houses to spend the night at our place I guess you could say I have first hand experience with prostitution and some of the women who work in the houses in Nevada.
Was going to write more about this but have to go and get a few things done -that I keep putting off cause I spend to much time here..
A topic that can be debated endlessly I think and no it isn’t a simply black and white issue by any means…but then not many issues are.
I voted for plain and pure legalization. Trafficking can be hit by other laws as can the worst pimps.
Crime needs a perpetrator and a victim. If an “event” has neither, why is it a crime?
When I buy a joint from someone in Washington Square, who is the victim?
When I buy a blow job from someone on Syngrou Avenue (Yiasemi will know), who is the victim?
When I dress up and sell someone my body in the Bois de Boulogne, who is the victim and who the perp?
Trafficking in humans has clear victims and perpetrators. It is a crime and a heinous one. However, the economic imperatives that fuel trafficking MUST be examined, for both sex-workers and others.
What can we do, as rich world consumers of immigrants from our neighbors? Maybe, just maybe, we ought to be making life easier in our Mexicos, Ukraines, Russias, Vietnams, etc.
Pimping on the other hand, does not necessarily have clear victims and perpetrators. Imagine if prostitution is legal but madams are not. Just think about it… The most aggressive pimps will take over the business, whereas hard-boiled businesswomen will avoid it.
For me this is a matter of principle. What hurts no one specifically is not, can not, be a crime. If you argue that somethings hurts all America or Americans. as opposed to specific people or sectors, I tend to be skeptical.
If you get stoned while directing traffic, you should pay even if no one gets hurt. If you get drunk before flying a passenger (or any) plane, you should pay even if you land safely. If an illegal alien prostitute sucks you off while driving a school-bus, you should pay even if no kids die. These are positions of responsibility,.
If, on the other hand, you are not in a position of responsibility, none of these things should be crimes: getting stoned, getting drunk or getting blown, even by an illegal alien.
While a brothel has many other factors involved (overhead, bouncers, management) I would agree with you about pimping. Streetwalkers who use hotels and pay the room fees, should really not have to answer to anybody. They should have the right to police protection like any other citizen, and not forced to pay protection rackets and pimps. Especially if it is legal and they pay their taxes.
Aye, there is the crux.
{and there was to be much more but it nearly five thirty in the morning and I must go to bed. Given how much thus subject fascinates me, I’ll probably be back tomorrow, if this thread lives.]
Good night,
Thanks for your comment, man. I like your principled take on this:
This point of view is sadly missing in the Scandinavian debate. Even in Norway the objections to criminalizing either side of the sex trade are primarily pragmatic. They correspond to the ‘cloth hanger’ arguments for the right to voluntary abortion: Criminalization will not significantly shrink the volume of the activity but only make it more unsafe, unhealthy, and so on. And I totally endorse those arguments; but there are also more principled reasons why both activities should be legal. The feminist pro-criminalization lobby seems blind to the contradiction of their position. With respect to abortion, they shout “our bodies, our choice” – and rightly so; but somehow that right to choose does not extend to trading a blowjob or whatever for cash.
Needless to say their allies on the religious Right have no such contradiction in their position, which should set off some alarm bells.
Indeed. See this interview with a Minnesota madam who spent a year in jail just so some local pols could strike a ‘moral’ pose. Her story brings out the parallells between this stuff and the meaningless ‘War on Drugs.’
While governor, Jesse Ventura came under a great deal of fire for his stance that prostition should be decriminalized in MN. (Along with other beliefs he expressed in a controversial Playboy interview) That was probably one of the most coherent policy platforms in his administration, yet it was that very policy that made him viewed by many as being beyond the fringe.
Formerly the land of progressives – MN has evolved into the land of no social safety nets, and no creative thought.
This is one of the best diaries I have read on Booman.
As a criminal defense and civil rights lawyer, I have occasionally has to represent people arrested for soliciting sex from undercover officers or young people who are marginally involved in the gay and straight escort trade. These people never have deserved the stigma of having their behavior criminalized.
Besides, if escorts did not fear prosecution, maybe we would have a lot more “conservative” politicians finding Jesus in a public way. No wonder they have to keep it illegal.
I read a cute book a couple of years ago about a couple of young men who set up a gay escort business through a government sponsored SBA program. It is a light read, but I found it helpful in understanding the social complexities of those like the author of the op-ed piece. The Book is “Can’t Buy Me Love” by Chris Kerry.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1575668467/qid=1117372499/sr=8-17/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i2_xg
l14/002-4800794-7100814?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
(I acknowledge that there are others.)
It’s good to see a diary with this perspective on a left-leaning site. Too often, we only read a kneejerk, doctrinaire, supposedly “feminist” perspective on this issue (and on the closely linked issue of pornography). Certainly no one can deny that women have been sexually exploited in virtually every culture, but that doesn’t mean that ALL sex-for-pay is (demeaning) exploitation. And it’s much easier to see this when the sex-seller and the sex-buyer are the same sex.
It’s long struck me as weird that we applaud people who spend thousands of dollars on makeovers, gym memberships and personal trainers to get more sexual attention, yet we condemn people who are willing to invest a few hundred dollars on an hour of sexual fun.
Gays have a somewhat unique point of view in this matter because, at least here in Texas, up until the Lawrence decision, all of our sex was illegal whether or not pay was involved. Having the Sheriff in your bedroom was more than a theoretical fantasy. Of course here in Travis County our openly Lesbian Sheriff (recently retired) and I had a mutual disinterest in each other’s bedrooms, though I did occasionally find myself sharing the dance floor at the Rainbow Cattle Company with her, but then any Texan will tell you Austin is another planet.
As a lawyer I am adamantly and steadfastly opposed to the overuse and abuse of the criminal sanction, which serves really only to water down all laws and breed disrespect for law enforcement, who have enough more important work to do, and for our Courts, which need all the respect they can get.
Couldn’t agree more. But then I am way above average anti-paternalist as Nordic social democrats go – one reason I am fond of the term ‘liberal,’ which is not so widely used here and carries somewhat different connotations.
A quote I like:
By the way, when I cross-posted this on dKos, one commenter made the following observation regarding the ‘libertarian’ perspective on this issue:
That’s an interesting objection, I guess. Any ideas on how to refute it?
In Austria, for instance, there are strict rules regarding weekly testing. When I was growing up we lived across from the Health Ministry(?) where prostitutes would line up for check-ups every Monday morning. They are registered, pay taxes (though I’m sure they don’t declare it all), and are licensed. They also get information regarding safe sex, etc…
Not a service supplied when it’s illegal, so that’s a non argument in my book.
Good point. But registration, licensing, etc. means more than de-criminalization; it presupposes wholesale legalization. I.e., the authorities don’t just abstain from punishing the activity, they also involve themselves actively in regulating it. This is how it works in the NL and, if I’m not mistaken, Germany, and I’m all in favor of it.
It should be viewed as a public health matter as opposed to the State being actively involved (in providing a service).
And then again the State pimps the entire workforce – maybe legalizing prostitution would point this out? Statutory rape here is a big issue. A 17-year-old cannot have sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend, yet in some communities it’s OK to marry off your 14-year-old daughter to a 50-year-old man. To me that’s a moral issue.
Having lived in Nevada in several counties where we have legalized brothels aka cat houses…no one in Nevada calls them brothels…the women there must be tested regularly.
Which leads me to a funny story about a tiny town I lived in wherein I had to go in for my yearly pap test for my birth control pills to be renewed. I was only 21 and pretty naive even though I been married for about a year. Anyway I’m sitting in the tiny office with about 4 other women waiting for my name to be called and wondering why these other women keep staring at me.
It turn out it was one of the ‘pap test’ days for the girls at the cat house in town and they were apparently wondering if I was one of the new girls….
Whoever scheduled the apt. I guess just figured why not make it a pap test kinda day for the doctor….it might also explain why the doctor tried to feel me up and get a bit to friendly.
Not very professional, to put it mildly… Did you report him? Though I suppose it might not be worth the hassle.
You wrote in your first comment:
No offense to your brother – but isn’t that a little rude to do for a guy living with his sister…? Although maybe it’s just a prejudice showing through – in principle it’s no different, I guess, from a regular one-night stand.
My brother at the time was slowly loosing a good paying job as foreman in a gold mine due to his alcoholism and didn’t show a lot of judgment in certain areas. Mainly loosing most of his money quite literally to said cat houses. Wouldn’t be out of the realm to say he spent probably over a hundred thousand dollars in these places…..and from what I gather for pretty much nothing as he couldn’t do anything or too drunk to be able to function.
He was incredibly exploited in this way to a certain extent…they would call him up if missed days or even send someone to get him when he lost his license(DUI).
As for being me being offended as to having one of the ‘girls’ at our place…didn’t particularly bother me and in fact I ended up usually talking and drinking with them when my brother passed out.
Strange to think in a way that many of these women thought I was cool simply cause I didn’t look down on them. Although I did certainly learn what they thought of men. Every single one I knew also came from abused homes and were in some way pretty damaged goods….and I mean that mentally. And were either on drugs or alcoholics or both.
The owner of the one particular cat house, a guy and his Mother were a fine pair of scumbags who pretty much exploited the girls and the customers like my brother.
How is your brother now? I hope he has recovered.
thanks for asking Othniel. I had move away and my brother continued his descent-losing his job and everything he had, literally and was as we understood it just about living on the street.
However about 4 years ago he did quit drinking cold turkey and no AA meetings either(can’t even imagine what he went through after some 30 years of alcoholism) and has been clean and sober as they say and has a job again in a casino in Nevada.
As it is Memorial Day I’ll mention also that my brother happens to be a Vietnam Vet-and something he seldom talks about or only in a general way.
That is great news. It must have been very difficult for him. I will say a special prayer for him this Memorial Day that he may have the strength to stand firm in his sobriety, and asking that he feel a sense of honor and peace for his service to our country.
Is that because men are referred to as cats, or the women?
I’ll second Sirocco. You need to stand up for yourself – especially with doctors. He probably felt he could get away with it because of his clientele.
that was a loooong time ago when I was young and wasn’t very good at standing up for myself. As for why cat house?…don’t know off hand-just what there always called. I’m sure there must be some reason though how that came about.
simply because greater prostitution likely (in theory, anyway) means greater STD infection, which means higher medical costs which will ultimately be borne by society in terms of medical care, which finally will mean higher insurance premiums for everyone else
from your comment above, seems to fall in the same argument as the one about Aids, and that is the base assumption that all these people will have to have free medical services, which I do not think to be the case. I may be wrong. Tell me if I am.
Perhaps the way to deal with prostitution is to legalize and educate as to prevention, rather than to ‘criminalize’ and not educate which is our current course.
It is interesting to note, with the high crime stats in Los angeles, the police force devotes a significant portion of man power to tracking down prostitutes and their customers.
Yep — I think it’s actually pretty well established that women prostitutes, in particular, are in a better negotiating position (i.e., are more able insist on condom use, more able to choose their working environment, more likely to actually control their earnings and less likely to be exposed to violence) where prostitution is legalised.
For example, women prostitutes are considerably less likely to carry condoms — much less be able to insist on their use — in places such as California where possession of condoms can be used as evidence to convict people of prostitution. It looks like there were similar laws in the U.K. in the 90’s — I’m not sure if that’s still the case.
Also, criminalising prostitution means that prostitutes have less control over their working environments, and thus face a higher risk of violence and sexual assault. And if they are victims of violence and sexual assault — or worse, murder — their colleagues and clients alike may well fear to assist the police lest they too be prosecuted. Guess who pays the costs of the albeit-all-too-often-cursory police investigations?
Great points!
In Norway we have this half-way house where prostitution is legal but not officially recognized in any way, so that prostitutes cannot, for instance, pay tax and get benefits in return. The argument is that allowing this would make the state a pimp – which, of course, begs the question of why prostitution is bad in the first place. I agree it is often is, but not necessarily – it depends on a lot of factors, above all how society regards it. And fundamentally it is a matter of choice, as long as crime is not involved, in which case it is rightfully a matter for the police.
Finally replied to your comment over on dKos, by the way!
I would guess, but without any facts to prove it, that European female prostitutes all use condoms with every client. It is in their own interests to protect themselves from disease, as well as pregnancy.
This would make professional prostitution (in W. Europe) far safer than casual sex.
I have no guess on homosexual prostitutes, though I would think the same self protective instincts would apply – maybe someone else has info on this?
According to the press around here, it’s becoming more and more usual for prostitutes to offer unprotected sex. The reason is apparently that trafficking has boosted the supply side, worsening the negotiating position of the workers. What I don’t get though is why anyone in their right mind would want, let alone insist on, unprotected sex with a prostitute. I honestly can’t understand that!
That is indeed strange….why either party would wish it so.
I should check out the Finnish state statistics site STAKES – they seem to have the numbers for everything…
This is certainly not the case, at least with prostitution (both gay and straight) in NYC. Most sex-for-pay — I’d say over 95% — is now scheduled via the Net or by phone, which gives both sex-workers and customers the chance to “negotiate” safe or unsafe sex before they actually meet. In the gay male scene, it’s actually a lot easier to find “barebackers” for free than it is to find “pros” willing to take that risk.
On a tangent, there are indications that the world’s “oldest profession” may be going the way of the village shaman. (Gay) sex is so readily available for virtually everyone now that there’s less and less reason to pay for it.
Here’s an excerpt from an incredible ,New Yorker article on the current gay male sex scene:
Complete article here:
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/050523fa_fact
Amazing…