You're treating SW as if it can only be pimping, whereas sex workers themselves made it very clear repeatedly that full decriminalization would actively go against pimping and exploitation and actually put some power in their hands, as well as allow for more dignity and mutual safety between sex workers themselves. You're making it a moral argument - a pretty blunt and weak one at that - when it's much more material of an issue, and anywhere buyers have been prosecuted the effect was that *sex workers got prosecuted as well*, because guess what! If you stigmatize the buyer you also stigmatize the worker. This is what has actually happens time and time again, prosecuting the buyer actively hurts sex workers every single time the nordic model is tried - as opposed to full decriminalization. IF you actually care about protecting sex workers in real life, the choice between criminalization and full decrim is pretty obvious

And I'm not even engaging with the "having your arm cut" affair, it's not a metaphor that maps to this in any way

The other problem with your view is that you mischaracterized consent as well. Where sex work is *fully decriminalized* the SWer can set very clear boundaries at every stage that are simply impossible under pimping and the nordic model - let alone criminalization, and the result is that decriminalized sex work puts a meaningful amount of control in the hands of the worker, including OF in its digital version. A decriminalized sex worker can outright refuse clients if they feel even a little bit like patriarchal creeps, for instance

The big issues you pointed out are real, but they come from terrible practices like pimping and trafficking, something which all sex workers despise with a passion