There's another consultation, this time from the Scottish government. It's called "Equally Safe: A consultation on challenging men's demand for prostitution, working to reduce the harms associated with prostitution and helping women to exit".

The questions and wording are quite biased and obviously they're gunning for buyer criminalisation regardless of the impact it'll have on us.

The consultation is here: https://consult.gov.scot/violence-against-women-team/equally-safe-reduce-harms-associated-prostitution/ .

Scot-pep have published some guidance on it here: https://scot-pep.org.uk/consultation/ .

As always they seem uninterested in seeking out sex workers opinions on our work so if you can, please fill it in.

also, any sex worker can submit evidence, you don't have to work in Scotland

I already responded there after I wrote my response here. Though I did use less strong language in my condemnation. 

I think my answers are quite strong, especially since they mainly come from your previous advice to me.  But I will listen to any new advice.  This is what I am requesting.
If and when you answer this inquiry (or consultation), do read the ministerial foreword, the introduction, and the preamble to each question.  The info in those sections will be crucial to your answers, IMO.
As you know, our responses may not stop the Scottish Government's bid to "tackle prostitution" (or, to be exact, to adopt the Nordic Model).  We've got nothing to lose by protesting that, though, IMO.

***

1. Do you agree or disagree that the Scottish Government's approach to tackling prostitution, as outlined in this section, is sufficient to prevent violence against women and girls?

If “prostitution” is, as the Scottish Government believes, a true synonym of “commercial sexual exploitation”, and if female prostitutes represent the main category of female victims of violence in Scotland, then I would argue that, with the aim of reducing violence against females, the Scottish Government is not doing enough to “tackle” prostitution.

I believe, however, that not only is there such thing as autonomously-engaged, fully consenting prostitution (instead of just forced prostitution), prostitutes of this kind vastly outnumber victims of sexual slavery.

Moreover, I believe that the vast majority of those who buy sex both seek and expect to buy from autonomously-engaged, consenting prostitutes.

In addition, I am under the impression that the vast majority of autonomously-engaged, consenting prostitutes do not suffer violence from their customers.

For the reasons that I have just given, then, I do not agree that “tackling prostitution” will significantly reduce violence against women.

If, however, the Scottish Government feels that “tackling prostitution” will reduce violence against females, then the Scottish Government should, I feel, recognise the fact of autonomously-engaged, consensual prostitution and treat it separately to forced prostitution (if they have to “treat” consensual sex between adults at all, that is).  To me, it is both ignorant and insulting to conflate consensual prostitution with sexual slavery.  Doing so not only discredits the plight of actual victims of sexual exploitation but also demonises every individual - man or woman - who buys sex.  According to this way of considering prostitution, to be exact, everyone who purchases sexual services is effectively a rapist.  Yet, as far as I am aware, far from doing any harm to those from whom they buy, the vast majority of sex-buyers are a source of benefit to prostitutes.

I agree that forcing indoors-based prostitutes to work alone (in line with the law on brothel-keeping) renders us more vulnerable to violence (and to other harms) than we would be otherwise.  I agree that having soliciting and “kerb-crawling”, practices involved in street-prostitution, as criminal offences leads to rushed screening practices on the part of prostitutes and to our transacting with our customers in remote, secluded locations.  In my view, these two points again render prostitutes more susceptible to violence than we would otherwise be.  I agree, lastly, that the Scottish Government’s desire to “tackle prostitution” demonstrates what I consider its essentially bigoted, vindictive, and archaic attitude towards autonomously-engaged, consenting prostitutes and towards their customers. 

I note, lastly, that the stated number of victims of labour exploitation in Scotland in 2019, such as confirmed by the National Referral Mechanism (and such as presented in this very consultation) is significantly higher than the stated number of victims of sexual exploitation.  Does the Scottish Government plan to initiate a consultation on how to “tackle” demand for nail technicians, Chinese takeaways, and car-wash services?  These are roles, I believe, in which labour exploitation is commonly encountered (labour exploitation, moreover, possibly entailing violence, links to organised crime, and other significant harms).  If not, why not?

2. What are your observations as to the impact of the coronavirus outbreak on women involved in prostitution in Scotland?
Pass.

3. Which of the policy approaches (or aspects of these) outlined in Table 3.1 do you believe is most effective in preventing violence against women and girls?

Tackling violently-behaved individuals, rather than tackling innocent individuals, is the way to reduce violence, I believe.  There are further reasons, moreover, why I believe that policy approach 3 - Prohibitionism, the policy that the Scottish Government seems, according to the introduction, to favour - is likely to be of significant detriment to prostitutes.

Of the 200 (mostly independent) prostitutes surveyed in a joint project, from a few years ago, between NUM (National Ugly Mugs) and Northumbria University, 96.2% said the purchase of sex should not be criminalised.  (SOURCE: link given)

Please listen to us.

In the introduction to this consultation, the Scottish Government says the following of its research of 2017 into the effect of the criminalisation of the purchase of sex (also known as The Swedish Model, The Nordic Model, and the Sex-Buyer Law, a version of Prohibitionism):

“The research did conclude, however, that in countries where purchasing sex has been criminalised, there appears to be a continued but decreased demand for prostitution.”

Criminalisation of a practice usually drives the practice underground.  There is also no mention of any evidence that violence against females has decreased as a result of the Sex-Buyer Law.  The same study quotes evidence, moreover, showing that this law has increased violence against prostitutes and that hurting prostitutes was amongst its key objectives. (Dr Jay Levy, 2014,  “Criminalising the Purchase of Sex: Lessons from Sweden”). 

Moreover, in the UK, the matter of sexual exploitation (including sex trafficking), which the Sex-Buyer Law is meant to reduce, is already addressed by the law.  In this consultation itself, the Scottish Government quotes that is a crime to

procure someone to into becoming a prostitute to have sex with other people
traffick persons for the purposes of sexual exploitation

A further key law that tackles sexual slavery is the following:

It is a crime to buy sex, whether wittingly or unwittingly, from someone who has been coerced or exploited 

The laws against slavery, false imprisonment, and assault, amongst many others, also effectively address the matter of sexual slavery.

With the Sex-Buyer Law, a government creates a class of criminals who are, in principle, easy to catch but who, in reality (and in general), do no harm.  I consider this an outrageous abuse of power by a government.  My choice to suck cocks for a living is no business of anyone's but mine and my punters, as far as I am concerned.  Moreover, having worked, in the course of my 44 years of life to date, as a fast-food restaurant employee, a home-help, an au pair, a bouncer, a media sales executive, and a teacher,  I can report that being an au pair was the most exploitative role of them all.  I was treated like a slave.  Teaching, meanwhile, which I did for thirteen years, was the single most oppressive and de-humanising work-role that I have ever held, extreme and unrelenting bullying having been at its core and having been visited on me every single day of the job.  Having sex with several random men for money from day to day, on the other hand, as I have been doing since July 2015, is by far the most enjoyable, financially rewarding, and, thanks to the warmth and respect that my punters usually afford me, dignified job that I have ever had.  It is a job, furthermore, that offers me a life of total freedom.   

Full decriminalisation of all elements of autonomously-engaged, consensual prostitution, then, is, to my mind, the one true model that protects prostitutes from violence (and other harms).  This includes the autonomous, consensual employment of a third party by a prostitute for the purpose of procuring trade.  (Criminalising consensual procuring is my objection to policy approach 1 - Abolitionism).

4. What measures would help to shift the attitudes of men relating to the purchase of sex? Do you have any examples of good practice either in a domestic or an international context?

To me, the 2008 study by Jan Malleod, Melissa Farley PhD, Dr. Lynn Anderson, and Jacqueline Golding PhD entitled “Challenging Men’s Demand for Prostitution in Scotland”, which the Scottish Government cites in this consultation (and in which 110 men were sampled), can only be rooted in anti-freedom bigotry.  As long as adult individuals, whether men or women, do no harm to prostitutes (which means, for one thing, only buying sex from autonomously-engaged, consenting prostitutes), I do not see why they should not buy sex.  In conclusion, demand, whether from men or from women, for autonomously-engaged, consensual prostitution should not be challenged at all, in my opinion. 

Desire for sex is, after all, a natural and intrinsically healthy attribute of the human species.

5. Taking into account the above, how can the education system help to raise awareness and promote positive attitudes and behaviors amongst young people in relation to consent and healthy relationships?

In my opinion, it is the job not of teachers but of parents to educate children appropriately in the matter of consent and healthy relationships.  On reaching adulthood, a well-raised child is, in my view, likely to prove to be a sexually responsible individual.

That said, according to my former experience as a secondary school teacher, the sexual attitudes of the young tend to be determined predominantly by their peers.

Whatever the sexual tendencies of the young may be determined by, there is no justification whatsoever, in my opinion, for state-sponsored brainwashing of children and teenagers.  I correspondingly consider it offensive and wrong of the Scottish Government to have, in its mission to educate school pupils about prostitution, “The intention that prostitution is framed as sexual exploitation”.

6. How can the different needs of women involved in prostitution (in terms of their health and wellbeing) be better recognised in the provision of mainstream support?
Pass.

7. In your opinion, drawing on any international or domestic examples, what programmes or initiatives best supports women to safely exit prostitution?
Pass.

8. Support services are primarily focussed within four of Scotland’s main cities – Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow – how can the needs of women throughout Scotland who are engaged in prostitution be met, noting that prostitution is not solely an urban issue?
Pass.

9. If there are any further comments you would like to make, which have not been addressed in the questions above, please use the space below to provide more detail.

Policing consensual sex between adults would, I feel, be a gross misuse of police time and resources.  The taxpayer deserves better than this, in my opinion.

The Nordic Model is potentially a gateway step to criminalising the selling of sex, in my opinion.

All those who either deny or disregard the fact of autonomously-engaged, consensual prostitution, who effectively (and, I feel, ignorantly) seek to end sexual freedom for adults, should, I believe, be excluded from the the process of law- and policy-making relating to autonomously-engaged, consensual prostitution.  (This is if we have to have any such laws and policies in the first place).

Instead of conducting an endless number of consultations on (eradicating) prostitution, please let the relevant authorities enact the recommendations made by

a) the Home Affairs Select Committee in their 2016 inquiry: link given
b) SCOT-PEP: link given

I would cut the above by at least a third and more if you can...

Well, I haven't cut even a third, but, having revised my submission in response to your feedback, Amy, I feel it is far more concise now.
I am emailing it to the Scottish Government in an attachment in order to maintain the numbered format of the paragraphs; this is how they now look.
Thank you for your advice, Amy.

***
1. Do you agree or disagree that the Scottish Government's approach to tackling prostitution, as outlined in this section, is sufficient to prevent violence against women and girls?

Tackling violent individuals, instead of innocent individuals, will reduce violence against everyone, including women and girls, in my opinion.

To me a “prostitute” is someone who consentingly has sex with others for payment (like me).  To my mind, anyone who is forced to have sex for payment which is usually confiscated by a third party is not a prostitute but a victim of sexual slavery.  Being paid to do a job makes someone an “employee”.  Being forced to work for (practically) nothing makes someone not an employee but a slave.

In keeping with 1-2 above, I do not agree that “tackling prostitution” will reduce violence against women and girls.

I agree that forcing indoors-based prostitutes to work alone (in line with the law on brothel-keeping) renders us more vulnerable to violence (and to other harms) than we would be otherwise.
 
I agree that having soliciting and “kerb-crawling”, practices involved in street-prostitution, as criminal offences leads to rushed screening practices on the part of prostitutes and to our transacting with our customers in remote, secluded locations.  In my view, these two points again render prostitutes more susceptible to violence than we would otherwise be. 

I agree, lastly, that the Scottish Government’s desire to “tackle prostitution” demonstrates what I consider its essentially bigoted, vindictive, and archaic attitude towards both prostitutes and their customers. 

I note, lastly, that the stated number of victims of labour exploitation in Scotland in 2019, such as confirmed by the National Referral Mechanism (and such as presented in this very consultation) is significantly higher than the stated number of victims of sexual exploitation.  Does the Scottish Government plan to initiate a consultation on how to “tackle” demand for nail technicians, Chinese takeaways, and car-wash services?  These are roles, I believe, in which labour exploitation is commonly encountered (labour exploitation, moreover, possibly entailing violence, links to organised crime, and other significant harms).  If not, why not?

2. What are your observations as to the impact of the coronavirus outbreak on women involved in prostitution in Scotland?
Pass.

3. Which of the policy approaches (or aspects of these) outlined in Table 3.1 do you believe is most effective in preventing violence against women and girls?

See 1 under Question 1.  There are further reasons, moreover, why I believe that policy approach 3 - Prohibitionism, the policy that the Scottish Government seems, according to the introduction, to favour - is likely to be of significant detriment to prostitutes.

We prostitutes do not want the purchase of sex to be criminalised, any more than a supermarket-owner wants the purchase of food to be criminalised.  (SOURCE: National Ugly Mugs in partnership with Northumbria University).  Please listen to us.

According to at least one study, against the claim made by the Scottish Government in the introduction, there is no evidence that the Sex-Buyer Law has reduced demand for prostitution in Sweden, its very country of origin.  The same study quotes evidence, moreover, showing that this law has increased violence against prostitutes and that hurting prostitutes was amongst its key objectives anyway.  (SOURCE: Dr Jay Levy, 2014,  “Criminalising the Purchase of Sex: Lessons from Sweden”).

Moreover, in the UK, the matter of sexual exploitation (including sex trafficking), which the Sex-Buyer Law is meant to reduce, is already addressed by the law (including the law against buying sex, whether wittingly or unwittingly, from someone who has been coerced or exploited).  In this consultation, the Scottish Government itself acknowledges this.
   
With the Sex-Buyer Law, a government creates a class of criminals who are, in principle, easy to catch but who, in reality (and in general), do no harm.  I consider this an outrageous abuse of power by a government.  My choice to suck cocks for a living is no business of anyone's but mine and my punters, as far as I am concerned.  Moreover, having worked, in the course of my 44 years of life to date, as a fast-food restaurant employee, a home-help, an au pair, a bouncer, a media sales executive, and a teacher,  I can report that being an au pair was the most exploitative role of them all.  I was treated like a slave.  Teaching, meanwhile, which I did for thirteen years, was the single most oppressive and de-humanising work-role that I have ever held, extreme and unrelenting bullying having been at its core and having been visited on me every single day of the job.  Having sex with several random men for money from day to day, on the other hand, as I have been doing since July 2015, is by far the most enjoyable, financially rewarding, and, thanks to the warmth and respect that my punters usually afford me, dignified job that I have ever had.  It is a job, furthermore, that offers me a life of total freedom.   

Full decriminalisation of all elements of prostitution, then, is, to my mind, the one true model that protects prostitutes from violence (and other harms).  This includes consensual employment of a third party by a prostitute for the purpose of procuring trade.  (Criminalising consensual procuring is my objection to policy approach 1 - Abolitionism.  I have myself autonomously and consentingly engaged third parties - namely, escort agencies - to derive customers, for instance).

4. What measures would help to shift the attitudes of men relating to the purchase of sex? Do you have any examples of good practice either in a domestic or an international context?

As long as those who buy sex, whether men or women, do no harm to prostitutes, I do not see why they should not buy sex.  Accordingly, in my opinion, demand, whether from men or from women, for the services of prostitutes should not be challenged at all. 

Desire for sex is, after all, a natural and intrinsically healthy attribute of the human species.

5. Taking into account the above, how can the education system help to raise awareness and promote positive attitudes and behaviours amongst young people in relation to consent and healthy relationships?

In my opinion, it is the job not of teachers but of parents to educate children appropriately in the matter of consent and healthy relationships.  On reaching adulthood, a well-raised child is, in my view, likely to prove to be a sexually responsible individual.

That said, according to my former experience as a secondary school teacher, the sexual attitudes of the young tend to be determined predominantly by their peers.

Whatever determines the sexual tendencies of the young, there is no justification whatsoever, in my opinion, for state-sponsored brainwashing of children and teenagers.  I correspondingly consider it offensive and wrong of the Scottish Government to have, in its mission to educate school pupils about prostitution, “The intention that prostitution is framed as sexual exploitation”.

6. How can the different needs of women involved in prostitution (in terms of their health and wellbeing) be better recognised in the provision of mainstream support?
Pass.

7. In your opinion, drawing on any international or domestic examples, what programmes or initiatives best supports women to safely exit prostitution?
Pass.

8. Support services are primarily focussed within four of Scotland’s main cities – Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow – how can the needs of women throughout Scotland who are engaged in prostitution be met, noting that prostitution is not solely an urban issue?
Pass.

9. If there are any further comments you would like to make, which have not been addressed in the questions above, please use the space below to provide more detail.

Policing consensual sex between adults would, I feel, be a gross misuse of police time and resources.  The taxpayer deserves better than this, in my opinion.

All those who either deny or disregard the fact of autonomously-engaged, consensual prostitution, who effectively (and, I feel, ignorantly) seek to end sexual freedom for adults, should, I believe, be excluded from the the process of law- and policy-making relating to prostitution.  (This is if we have to have any such laws and policies in the first place).  I am aware that such parties include members of the Scottish Government itself (who may read my submission).

Instead of conducting an endless number of consultations on (eradicating) prostitution, please let the Scottish Government enact the recommendations made by

a) the Home Affairs Select Committee in their 2016 inquiry: link given
b) SCOT-PEP: link given.