You know when the article starts, "I don't get anything out of sex with prostitutes except for a bad feeling", you've gonna get an impartial view on sex work. The Guardian apparently found the most fucked-up guys to interview about why they go see prostitutes, and the original study gave guys plenty of room to self-select for men who dislike prostitution. The study also focused on finding out what the men thought about rape, child abuse, coercion, trafficking, etc., which no doubt steered the resonses of future questions. In fact, the report didn't address any positive aspects - the focus was on how to stop prostitution, not better regulation of brothels or improving the lives, business, and health of independent sex workers - where's the research on how to improve customer experience? You ask questions about a bunch of negative aspects, you're going to get a bunch of negative response. "How horrible is trafficking?" means you get one of two answers: the guy supports the position and says, "yes, it's very bad!" or the guy says, "no, trafficking isn't a problem," in which you put a mark in the column for men who don't care about the women who are prostitutes. "When did you stop beating your wife?", so to speak. It's pure manipulative propaganda, a manipulation of supposed 'scientific rigor', to reach an outcome of one result. It's too bad that a group purporting to do good for women - and I certainly hope they make headway against trafficking and abuse - would mess up their methods with shoddy work.