Why the Nordic Model is the Right One For Canada!

by Penney Kome

In 2014 the Federal Government conducted public discussions and supported a decision to go with some form of Nordic Model for Canada.  It passed legislation making it legal to sell sex, but illegal to buy it with fines and potential jail terms for the Johns.  We have not heard of any money being allocated to assist women in prostitution settings to get out and receive appropriate counselling.  Since this decision working prostitutes have been extremely vocal that this Nordic model makes it more difficult for them to ply their “legitimate business” and has made their work more unsafe because they have to do it in hidden and vulnerable settings.  Penney Kome gives the arguments why the Nordic Model is the correct model and that these vocal prostitutes are a small fraction of the prostitutes and that most prostitutes will find protection and support under this law.  Penney says:

“Successful prostitutes don’t like the Nordic model because it disrupts their business model. OTOH, the 90% of prostitutes who want to get out of the game rarely speak up. My point is that women who sell sex are not the only stakeholders in this game. Laws on prostitution affect the safety of all women, especially the most vulnerable (Aboriginal, underage, intellectually challenged).

“The problem with prostitution is not the sellers but the buyers, who see all women and girls as fair game — either prostitutes or potential prostitutes, but in any case, sex sellers who have something they want and that they are willing to pay for or take any way they can.


“The men knew, to some extent, about abuse and coercion in prostitution – they weren’t operating under the ­convenient illusion that women enter the trade because they love sex. More than half admitted that they either knew or believed that a majority of women in prostitution were lured, tricked or trafficked. More than one third said they thought the prostitutes they visited had been trafficked to London from another country, and a small number said they suspected that they had ­encountered a trafficking victim based on the woman’s inability to speak the local language or on how young or vulnerable they appeared. “I could tell she was new to the country,” said one man. “To be new in a country and be a prostitute – it can’t be a choice . . . She looked troubled.”

“One of the most interesting findings was that many believed men would “need” to rape if they could not pay for sex on demand. One told me, “Sometimes you might rape someone: you can go to a prostitute instead.” Another put it like this: “A desperate man who wants sex so bad, he needs sex to be relieved. He might rape.” I concluded from this that it’s not feminists such as Andrea Dworkin and myself who are responsible for the idea that all men are potential rapists – it’s sometimes men themselves….”

“Prostitution offers more money than most women can earn any other way. The solution is to raise women’s wages, or to give everyone a GAI, not to sacrifice women’s equality to the economy. Prostitution feeds the myth that men are unable to control their sexual impulses to the extent they’re not responsible for sexual assaults if they’re frustrated. Men need to grow up and learn how to treat women with respect. Millions of diabled men have sex every day without paying for it.

“Most of all, of course, organized crime earns about $150 billion a year from prostitution. As I said, they don’t like competition and they don’t like independents. Look at what happened in Amsterdam. http://globalnews.ca/news/540131/amsterdam-turns-out-the-red-lights-in-famed-district/

“Would CUSJ go to the wall for a person’s right to fight in Ultimate Fighting? Or boxing? Because those activities are less dangerous than prostitution.



“Letting prostitutes set social policy on selling sex is like letting generals decide foreign policy. They have their own interests to promote.”

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.