Ashley Madison

Buying Sex Now Illegal in France

French sex workers failed in their bid to overturn a law that bans paying for sex, as the country's Constitutional Council ruled that it does not breach the constitution.

A law introduced in 2016 made it illegal to buy sex in France but not to sell it, shifting the criminal responsibility to clients who can be fined if caught.

The Swedish-inspired law has sharply divided French feminists and reopened a debate on whether women should be allowed to sell their bodies.

Some groups say the law helps protect women from trafficking and exploitation by discouraging prostitution.

But many active sex workers say it has made their jobs more dangerous and deprived them of income.

Nine campaign groups had joined forces with around 30 sex workers to launch a constitutional challenge, arguing that the law breached fundamental rights to sexual liberty and to do business.

But the Constitutional Council ruled Friday that the law helped protect women "by depriving pimps of their profits".

The law "fights against this activity and against the sexual exploitation of human beings, criminal activities founded on coercion and enslavement."

The groups who brought the case immediately blasted the ruling as "a bad decision, dangerous for the health and rights of sex workers".

The law, which took years to make its way through parliament after fierce debate, punishes first-time offenders with fines of up to 1,500 euros ($1,700). People caught repeatedly paying for sex can be fined up to 3,750 euros.

Sex workers say the risk of these fines has led clients to pressure them into agreeing to go with them to more isolated places where they are vulnerable to attack.

The murder of a Peruvian transgender sex worker named Vanesa Campos last August, in the Bois de Boulogne park west of Paris, sparked protests over the issue.

Campos was shot dead in the woods while trying to stop a group of men robbing her client, and protesters charged that were it not for the law, she would not have been working in such an isolated place.

Sex workers say the drop in business since the law was brought in has also forced them into agreeing to riskier work, such as unprotected sex.

Friday's ruling recognised that the law "restricted all prostitution, including sexual acts presented as taking place freely between consenting adults".

But it concluded that "in the vast majority of cases, people who end up working in prostitution are victims of pimping and trafficking".

Patrice Spinosi, the lawyer for sex workers who brought the case, complained that the law was "schizophrenic".

He argued that "it should have banned prostitution" outright if its conclusion was that the trade represented the exploitation of women.

He also accused the state of "infantilising prostitutes".

"Who are you to forbid me from doing what I want with my body?" he asked.

© 2019 AFP
 

Jasmine Raine

Well-known member
Jul 28, 2014
4,044
49
48
Buy sex is not a constitutional right. The lawmakers who changed the criminality from escorts to clients was smart. There is really no way to challenge that you have a right to buy sex. I can't see anyone ever saying that in the political or legal forum.
 

Grimnul

Well-known member
May 15, 2018
1,474
28
48
Prohibition of vice never works. There are countless historical examples. Prohibition of alcohol in the US comes to mind. Making a vice illegal does not reduce demand for it. If someone wants to drink, they’ll still drink. It’s incredibly naive for people to think this sort of legislation works. On the flip side, especially when it comes to sex work, it basically just lowers all boats. Sex workers need to take more risks to do business, their customers risk being arrested, it increases instances of STIs because sex workers are less likely to be screened or seek medical care if they have symptoms of something.

This is what irks me so much. These laws are invariably made under the banner of protecting women, but these laws very obviously don’t do that, so it’s bullshit. I’d have much more respect for these governments who pass laws like this if they would just come out and say “yeah, we’re a bunch of uptight puritans, and we think sex is icky/a sin, so we don’t want you to be able have it outside of marriage” (alternatively: “we’re virtue signalling morons who pander to angry radical feminist types who just want to punish men”). I mean, I’d still be pissed, but at least they’re being honest about why they’re really doing this.
 

corrie fan

Well-known member
Nov 13, 2014
971
396
63
It's true that there is no specific constitutional right to buy sex. There also is no specific right to ride a motorcycle, eat ice cream, play golf or anything else humans do. I see the issue as one of privacy. It is no one's business who I or anyone else has sex with. A sex worker organisation in California used this argument to challenge the prostitution law in that state but they were unsuccessful. They are planning to try again in a different court.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
32,190
2,707
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Buy sex is not a constitutional right. The lawmakers who changed the criminality from escorts to clients was smart. There is really no way to challenge that you have a right to buy sex. I can't see anyone ever saying that in the political or legal forum.
there is also no constitutional right to drive a car, become a plumber, etc
 
Toronto Escorts