Adding to the pathetic nature of prostitution by decrying violence in the sordid sex industry, does little to recruit sympathy from a society which barely tolerates this degrading activity, an activity which is the totally unnecessary anti-thesis to pure womanhood!
Governments world-over have abandoned any pretext of care and concern by the act of decriminalisation; this is an unwanted enterprise in free-fall; buyer and seller both beware!

The author fails to distinguish between consensual and non-consensual activities, which means the whole article is moral nonsense.

"We need to provide empowerment to those involved in the sex industry and we need legislation that ensures they can go to the police whenever they experience assault or harassment. This can only happen under the Nordic model of prostitution policy – a policy that criminalises the purchasers of sexual services but decriminalises the sellers, and offers them opportunities to exit the sex industry."

Why? Why can prostitutes only report assault if the purchase of sexual services is criminalised? What's stopping them from reporting assault etc. if it's decriminalised?

And why are other people's private and consensual sexual relations any of Matthew Holloways's business? Remember, don't jumble up consensual and non-consensual relations in your answer.

Talk of "prostituted people" of course implies that they are merely passive objects: they take no part in the decision-making process. But this is nonsense, which is why thousands of years of attempting to criminalise prostitution have never worked.

The fact that people have sex in exchange for money doesn't magically turn it into abuse or exploitation, any more than any other kind of consensual exchange or employment is axiomatically slavery just because money changes hands.

No-one talks about "dentisted people" - people who are "commodified" as dentists, dentists who are "exploited" as evidenced by the fact that they are being paid; or talks about the employment of dentists as "dentist trafficking". It's complete krap.

And of course if women who are paid to have sex are ipso facto being exploited, then it's hard to see how women who aren't being paid could be in any better position. According to Matthew's garbled illogic, all sex should be criminalised, which of course is exactly what the Catholic church would like: c.f. St Paul's advice on sexual incontinence.

By the way, everything Matthew says about violence towards women and unsafe workplaces applies much more to Australian men, so it's just more of the typical fake concern and trendy bias of the professional welfare-statists.

"Whether we choose to admit it or not, violence against women is an endemic part of Australian culture"

Stopped reading after the first line Matt, if you begin an argument on false premises then nothing which follows is credible.
Violence against women is neither a cultural artifact nor endemic, it's not tolerated either overtly or covertly nor is it even commonplace, as anyone who bothers to look at statistics would know.
The number of men who are violent toward or who abuse women is somewhere around 4%, their actions account for 96% of assaults upon women and their average number of victims is 14, they are anti social criminals who victimise everyone the come across and who commit other forms of crime as well.
And surprise surprise, such men gravitate toward vulnerable women such as prostitutes, the mentally ill and the poor.

Jardine,
I'm big and strong,I make my living off my body in the building industry,it's often degrading and dangerous work, I've come close to death from electrocution and falls on several occasions. I've been subjected to violence and intimidation, been ripped off, been exploited and had people misrepresent me to make money for themselves.
I dunno, I've been beaten up a few times and it's less scary than having an Accrow prop or a scaffold plank dropped on you or going crashing through a rotten floor...or having a trench partially collapse on you, or seeing a workmate sever his finger..or put a nail from a nailgun into his hand.

Just have to agree with Jay Of Melbourne, which in Jay's inimical and very informed way, just says it all!
Rhrosty.

Oh...and I wonder how many prostitutes die or are permanently disabled while going about their normal activities on the job each year in comparison to building workers or farm labourers?
Rhetorical question I know and most labourers, like most prostitutes have little choice but to take up the most dangerous and unappealing work available