Sex Work, Feminism, Policies and Stigma: How do
They Interact?
Femke van Casteren (102.197.30)
Anthropology Bachelor’s Course, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
This thesis discusses how feminism, prostitution policies and stigma of sex work interact. I explain several complexities of sex work and why sex work is stigmatized. I then discuss how three theoretical paradigms of sex work (oppression, empowerment and polymorphous paradigm) are influenced by (radical) feminism, and how these paradigms could broadly be translated in prostitution policies as implemented in Sweden, the Netherlands and Australia. I show how the Swedish and Dutch policies in practice reinforce the stigma of sex work. In conclusion, I argue for a polymorphous paradigm when researching sex work and designing prostitution policy, to fully take into consideration the nuances and paradoxes of sex work.
KEY WORDS: sex work, stigma, theoretical paradigms of sex work, feminism, prostitution policies
Bachelor’s Thesis Cultural Anthropology and Development Sociology
Thesis supervisor: dhr. dr. V.A. (Vincent) de Rooij Second reader: mw. dr. M.P.C. (Marie-Louise) Janssen Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences
femke.vancasteren@student.uva.nl 11,243 Words
‘It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.’
- Ronald Reagan
I have read and understood the University of Amsterdam plagiarism policy.1 I declare that this thesis is entirely
my own work, all sources have been properly acknowledged, and that I have not previously submitted this work, or any version of it, for assessment in any other paper.
1
http://student.uva.nl/binaries/content/assets/studentensites/uva-studentensite/nl/a-z/regelingen-en-reglementen/fraude-en-plagiaatregeling-2010.pdf?1283201371000
Introduction
The opinions on sex work all around the world are as diverse as sex workers themselves, and so are the prostitution policies that follow from these opinions. The debate is heavily moralized: sex work lays bare our deepest notions on male and female sexuality and to which extent every individual should have the freedom of self-determination of their own body. The stakeholders in this polarized debate stand on incompatible grounds. The one side, inspired by radical feminism, is fighting for the abolishment of prostitution, since the existence of female sex workers inexcusably blocks the way to achieving gender equality for all men and women. The other side is trying to make the world see that many sex workers love their work, and how they are endangered by abolishing policies that deteriorate their social position and working conditions; it even compromises their fundamental freedom of self-determination. At the heart of this debate lies the stigma of sex work, which strongly influences, and is strongly influenced by, the different prostitution policies, that arise from the different sides of the debate. The enormous variety in the phenomenon that is sex work complicates this debate even further. In this thesis, I ask myself the question: what is the interaction between feminism, prostitution policy and stigma of sex work?
It is now more than ever important to examine the ways in which sex work is addressed: the radical feminist movement that wishes to abolish prostitution by prohibiting only the purchase of sex, is becoming increasingly influential. A form of this policy has already spread from Sweden, to Norway and Finland, and many other countries are researching the effects this policy could have in their society.2 In order to prevent the deterioration of the working conditions of voluntary sex
workers and the deprivation of their freedom, I will argue for a way of addressing sex work that honors all its complexities, paradoxes and nuances. I thus argue for a prostitution policy that takes into consideration these complexities and the effects of policies on the sex work stigma. Therefore, I will first discuss in detail five of the complexities of sex work, that show the wide varieties found in this field. I will then explain why sex work is heavily stigmatized, with all the dire consequences. Finally, I will elaborate on how feminism influences different prostitution policies and impacts the stigma of sex work. Through this thesis I hope to enlighten you, if you are not already in the know, to the paradoxical world of sex work, to enable you to form a well-founded and informed opinion on sex work, whether it agrees with or opposes my point of view on how feminism and policies ought to deal with it.
2 http://prostitution.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000772
PART I
Sex work
Before I can elaborate on the stigma of sex work, and how different feminist standpoints influence this stigma, I have to explain several complexities that are inherent to sex work: a major factor in the persistence of the stigma of sex work is the lack of attention to the differences within the field. The public image of sex work is influenced by the one-sided focus of research and mass media on illegal street prostitution, which is in many cases a problematic form of sex work, as I will explain in part two (Weitzer 2009: 217). The lack of eye for the many differences in sex work and the lack of nuance in the debate on sex work reinforce the stigma. In order to enable you to form a well-founded opinion on sex work, if you have not already done so, I first highlight five factors that complicate the field of sex work: the variety in types of sex work, gender of the sex worker, the conflation of sex work and human trafficking, the notion of free will and the regional focus of this thesis.
It is important to realize there is a wide variety in the kinds of sex work that exist: ‘sex work is best considered in terms of a continuum ranging from firmly organized forms … to unmediated transactions and chance encounters’ (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 13). A sex worker is basically someone who performs sexual acts in exchange for money or commodities, that can vary from stripping via webcam to a complete ‘girlfriend experience’ (Weitzer 2009: 225-6). In this thesis, my focus will be on the most common kind of sex work, prostitution: providing physical sexual services for direct pay, monetary or other. In this thesis I use the term ‘sex worker’, which is thus actually the umbrella term that encompasses this large range of sexual activities for payment, instead of the term ‘prostitute’: I adhere to the notion that ‘sex worker’ is a more correct and adequate descriptor (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 12). Many sex workers and their allies prefer the term ‘sex work’, because it incorporates a labor framework that contributes to the normalization of sex work, thus reducing the stigma, and allows for a claim on certain labor rights (Saunders and Kirby 2010-11: 108). However, some who engage in sexual commerce on an informal basis may not subscribe to the notion of sex ‘work’, others may feel the term ‘prostitute’ describes them more accurately, still others, such as dancers and porn actresses, may not want to be related to ‘prostitution’, to distance themselves from the stigma (ibid.). While this self-identification is a personal preference for the many involved, I use the term ‘sex work’ because stigma and normalization are important themes of this thesis. I thus refer strictly to prostitutes when using the term ‘sex worker’.
Besides prostitution, there are many other forms of sex work. Sociologist Ronald Weitzer has done extensive research hereon: he notes that of the existing kinds of sex work, in-depth sociological research on the pornography business is almost non-existent (Weitzer 2009: 213-34, Weitzer 2010 [2000]). Likewise, little is known on telephone sex agencies and their employees. Weitzer also
briefly mentions online entertainment, such as performing sex acts via webcam (Weitzer 2009: 215-6). In contrast, stripping in clubs has been studied thoroughly, including some differences between male and female strippers regarding stigma, audience and client relationships (ibid.). Since
prostitution is the most common, visible, and in many cases a problematic, form of sex work, it holds a central role in the debate on prostitution policy, and will therefore be my focus.
An overall distinction within prostitution can be made between indoor and outdoor sex work. Indoor prostitution includes call girls, escorts, brothel workers, massage parlor workers and bar or casino workers. In the case of outdoor prostitution, the first encounter occurs in a public place, such as a park, the sidewalk or a parking lot; the sex act can take place either in a public or private area, such as a hotel, alley or car (Weitzer 2009: 217-8). Later on, I will elaborate on the specific characteristics of indoor, as opposed to outdoor, prostitution and why this dichotomy is important in relation to the stigma of sex work.
While there is a vast body of research on female sex workers, research on male sex workers is scarce; the research that has been done shows that male sex workers have different reasons for engaging in sex work. For instance, sexual pleasure is more often a reason for men to engage in sex work (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 13). Weinberg et al. (1999) found striking differences in sexual enjoyment: female sex workers are more likely to never enjoy their commercial sex, in comparison to both male and transgender sex workers. However, Prince’s large-scale study (1986: 482) shows sexual enjoyment of female sex workers varies highly in relation to the type of sex work: 75% of call girls, 19% of brothel workers, but none of the street workers frequently had orgasms with
customers. These are however specific kinds of sex work: overall, male sex workers are more likely to have a recreational reason for entering sex work (Weinberg et al. 1999). In contrast, many female street prostitutes use ‘survival sex’: they sell sex out of dire necessity or to support a drug habit (Weitzer 2009: 218). These different reasons to enter sex work are expected to influence the way male sex workers experience the general stigma of sex workers (Smith et al. 2013, Weitzer 2009: 116, Vanwesenbeeck 2012).
Furthermore, the stigma of sex work might be different for male than female sex workers. Male sex workers may be less affected by stigma: male sex work can be understood within the traditional frameworks of masculinity and femininity (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 14). As Vanwesenbeeck puts it: ‘one has only to imagine the many ways in which the qualification slut operates to know that the stigma is harsher and more consequential for women. The alternative stigma of victim is more often applied to women as well’ (ibid.: 15). I will elaborate on the relation between these
frameworks, the stigma of sex work and the ‘victim stigma’ in parts two and three. Browne and Minichiello (1995) showed how male sex workers in Australia, where sex work is legalized, avoid
being objectified as sex objects, and deflect the stigma of sex work, by associating their work with masculinity, sexual prowess, career and entrepreneurship. However, it must be noted that, under the conditions of illegality and repression, male sex workers also suffer from discrimination and violence. They too experience stigma and its vast social consequences (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 15). More research is needed on the extent to which, and the way in which, male sex workers experience stigma. Because male and female sex workers differ in these, and perhaps even more, ways, I will focus solely on female sex workers.
Sex work and human trafficking have become intertwined over the past years of increasing globalization. The anti-trafficking lobby has encouraged the demonization of human trafficking and sex work in general. In that process, they have effectively blurred the distinction between the two and conflated the concepts (Csete and Seshu 2004). For instance, according to the E.U. study on Sexual Exploitation and Prostitution and its Impact on Gender Equality: ‘human trafficking has been associated with prostitution ever since it was included in Dutch criminal law’ (Schulze et al. 2014: 37). Human trafficking in itself is a term heavily debated: there is no international consensus on whether it only relates to coercive and exploitive relations between trafficker and trafficked, whether international borders have to be crossed and if it needs to include mediation by third parties (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 14). Since human trafficking is a debated term, and sex work has a widely nuanced and varied character, the entanglement of the two terms has heavily complicated the clarity of the debate on sex work, and how to address it politically. Janssen showed in her study (2007) on Latin-American sex workers who migrated to the Netherlands, that many of the
researched women to some degree knowingly cooperated with human traffickers in search of financial prosperity. As Vanwesenbeeck (2012: 14) puts it: ‘the contention that every migrant sex worker is a deceived victim of evil traffickers is a short-sighted denial of many women’s initiative and agency.’ A study on trafficked women from Central and Eastern Europe to the Netherlands
reinforces Vanwesenbeeck’s notion: ‘[T]he greater number of victims [of human traffickers] had – at a certain time – made the decision to place their future in the hands of traffickers’(Vocks and Nijboer 2000: 383).
It is true however, that immigration restrictions often make migrant sex workers dependent of intermediaries; their financial exploitation is omnipresent. The fact that sex workers in multiple countries lack rights and protection makes this group of migrants even more vulnerable. However: ‘the conflation of female sex workers with trafficking is a fundamental mistake’ (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 14). It follows from an analysis of sex work as so degrading to women that no one in her right mind would freely choose it. I discuss this point of view, inspired by radical feminism, in more detail in part three. In the course of this thesis, it is important to keep in mind that many institutions
reinforce the connection between forced human trafficking and victimized sex workers. In so doing, they complicate the nuance in the debate by obscuring the possibility that some women knowingly and deliberately decide to engage in sex work.
Free will is a complicated and much debated concept. I would first like to specify that this thesis does not cover those trafficked against their will or otherwise forced into prostitution. However, to which extent is a decision made out of free will? Especially in the field of sex work, those forced into prostitution by circumstances form a difficult category: their entry in sex work is explained with an expanded concept of coercion. These coercing circumstances can, for instance, be social (poverty, insurmountable debts) or psychological (mental instability, psychoses, the
psychological damage of childhood (sexual) abuse or neglect) (Wagenaar and Altink 2012: 287). Another frequently occurring issue in the field of sex work is drug addiction, which might also impair the freedom to choose to quit doing sex work (Weitzer 2009: 218). The discussion on the extent to which decisions can be made out of free will could fill an entire thesis on its own, that could go as far as to the question whether free will even exists. For the sake of argument, I therefore focus in this thesis on women who entered the field of sex work consensually, meaning they decided to start doing sex work on their own. While this decision might have been influenced by people in their environment or their economic circumstances, they are nonetheless basically free to stop doing sex work if they change their mind.
As I will further elaborate on, prostitution policies vary greatly around the world and all policies carry out a distinctive ethical view on prostitution.3 The legality or illegality of sex work
directly influences working conditions of sex workers: ‘female sex workers in particular are targeted by violence and extortion because of their illegality—not the least of which occurs at the hands of state officials and the police’ (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 14). However, and in contrast to the hopes of many, legalization of sex work does not necessarily lead to an improvement in society’s perception of sex work or a decrease of stigma, as I will elaborate on in part three (Begum et al. 2012: 89). In the course of this thesis I discuss in detail the policies of the Netherlands, Sweden and Australia, how they are informed by different theoretical paradigms and feminist standpoints and what their influences are on the stigma of sex work.
Now that I have specified that this thesis refers to voluntary female sex workers in the Dutch, Swedish and Australian prostitution business, I can elaborate on why these women are so severely stigmatized, with all the dire consequences.
3 http://prostitution.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000772
PART II
Why is sex work stigmatized?
In the next part, I explain why sex work is so strongly stigmatized, by first showing the consequences on the stigma of the overrepresentation of outdoor sex work. Secondly, I shortly discuss the stigma of sex work, using Goffman’s fundamental work Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled
Identity (1963), which I then link to the influence of gender norms on the stigma. Finally, I elaborate
on the intercommunication between stigma and Othering of sex workers by society. But first: why is it important to address the stigma of sex work?
The stigma of sex work has enormous consequences for the sex workers themselves. In the first place, the stigma complicates their daily lives: sex workers have difficulty opening a bank
account, getting a mortgage, renting an apartment; many sex workers lead double lives and feel they have to lie about their occupation, even to their family and friends.4 Secondly, the
intercommunication between stigma and prostitution policy has severe consequences on the working conditions of the sex workers and thus their safety. It is impossible to precisely explain how policy implementations are the direct consequences of the stigma of sex work: stigma has an infinite amount of effects and implications on people and affects our behavior, decisions and points of view in an equally large amount of ways. So while we are unable to directly attribute the consequences of policies to stigma: stigma does inevitably play a role in policy designs and implementations. As I will further explain in part three, different policies have different effects on the stigma: the Dutch and the Swedish policy reinforce the stigma, with the practical consequences that more and more facilities where sex workers can safely do their job, are shut down, forcing sex workers to go underground. This has devastating consequences on their safety: when no one knows the
whereabouts of the sex worker when she is with a client and things take a turn for the worse, there is no one to help. No one can check if these sex workers are working voluntarily, if they are using protection and if they are legally in the country. Sex workers can more easily be taken advantage of, for instance when a client refuses to pay after the services. Thus, policies that ignore the interests of the sex workers reinforce the stigma and can have severe consequences for all sex workers.
To illustrate the contrary: Antwerp is implementing a policy that does not enforce the stigma, but tries to improve the working conditions of sex workers as much as possible (Loopmans and Van den Broeck 2011: 557-8). In 2005, the state of the art brothel Villa Tinto opened its doors. One hundred girls work, in shifts, 24/7; opposite of the brothel entrance is a police station; each room has a panic button in case a client turns violent and a doctor is just around the corner. One of
4 See for instance: http://behindtheredlightdistrict.blogspot.nl/2014/05/normalizing-prostitution.html,
http://www.collegetimes.tv/felicia-anna-interview/
the most important technological features is the biometric keypad: every door of the 51 rooms opens by using a finger print. Only voluntarily working women, with an EU passport, can thus work in Villa Tinto. Due to the fingerprints, there is no sub-letting to unauthorized prostitutes. As former mayor of Antwerp Patrick Janssens states: ‘We have concentrated prostitution into three streets and that means we can put in place tough criteria. Most of these people are working in extremely good conditions.’5 Villa Tinto is a revolutionary brothel, which evolved from a policy that considers
voluntary sex workers’ interests and difficulties in doing their job. It takes into consideration the safety and needs of the sex workers, as well as the interests of the residents in the area of the brothel: the three ‘tolerance’ streets are pedestrianized to limit nuisance of clients cars, there is a high police presence and the area has been completely renovated (Loopmans and van den Broeck 2011: 557). These developments are the exact opposite of what is happening in the Netherlands and Sweden, where respectively facilities are closed down and sex workers are forced into unclean and unsafe working environments. Why this is happening, I shall explain in part three; we will now first turn to the question why sex work is so harshly stigmatized.
Overrepresentation of outdoor prostitution
Villa Tinto and its working conditions present an image of sex work that is not widely known. As said before, the complexities, variations and gradations in sex work, and especially the inattentiveness hereto in public debate and prostitution policy, are of the utmost importance in understanding sex work and its stigma. I have already mentioned the dichotomy between indoor and outdoor
prostitution. This distinction is significant in relation to the persistence of the stigma of sex work: illegal street prostitution is overrepresented in the literature and media, and therefore distorts the overall image of sex work (Weitzer 2009: 217). The overrepresentation of this kind of sex work has contributed to the generally negative view on sex work: many street prostitutes experience abysmal working conditions, use addictive drugs, work and live in crime ridden areas, are socially isolated, risk sexual disease, are exploited by pimps and vulnerable of being assaulted, robbed, raped or killed on the streets. Many street prostitutes use ‘survival sex’: they sell sex out of dire necessity or to support a drug habit (Weitzer 2007: 144, Weitzer 2009: 218). On the other hand, and contrary to the general view on sex work, indoor sex work is undoubtedly generally safer than street prostitution; indoor workers tend to be more satisfied with their work than street workers and they differ little in self-esteem and mental health from non-prostitutes, while psychological problems are more
prevalent among crack cocaine-using street prostitutes (Weitzer 2009: 218, 220). Especially in the
5 ‘Passports and panic buttons in the brothel of the future’, Stephen Castle, 23 September 2006
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/passports-and-panic-buttons-in-the-brothel-of-the-future-417159.html
case of indoor sex work, self-esteem can even increase after entering this field of work. In one study, 97% of the call girls had reported an increased self-esteem after entering the field of sex work, compared to 50% of brothel workers and 8% of street prostitutes (Prince 1986: 454). While indoor sex workers are in most cases far better off than outdoor sex workers, sex workers in all categories experience stigma and condemnation (Weitzer 2009: 218-21).
The overrepresentation of street prostitutes thus contributes to a distorted picture of sex work in general. This is especially important in relation to prostitution policy: outdoor prostitution is a highly visible, and in many cases problematic, form of sex work. Prostitution policy is thus often aimed at reducing outdoor prostitution. However, the fact that outdoor prostitution differs greatly from other forms of sex work, is often overlooked and prostitution policy thus regularly addresses the entirety of sex work as problematic, enforcing stigma and a negative view of sex work.
Furthermore, Sex work is stigmatized on the deeper level of hegemonic gender norms. Goffman’s work on stigma provides a framework of looking at the stigma of sex work on this level. According to Goffman, a stigma is an attribute, behavior, or reputation that is socially discrediting in a particular way (1963: 3). It causes an individual to be mentally classified by others in an undesirable, rejected stereotype rather than in an accepted, normal one (ibid.). In relation to prostitution, Goffman explains attempts of ‘passing’: attempting to disguise or hide the stigma from whom you wish to conceal it (ibid.: 73-91). He also elaborates on presenting a false image of oneself. This is underlined by Begum et al., who describe the ‘dual identity’ of sex workers: their participants felt they were forced to lie about their job to family and friends; they had a ‘working name’ and ‘real name’ (2012: 95-7). This made them feel like living a double life (ibid.: 95). The strategy of living a double life as a result of social stigma, is also documented by Goffman (1963: 76).
Furthermore, Goffman states that social deviants express a denial of the social order (1963: 145-7). This strongly influences social stigma in the case of sex workers, as Vanwesenbeeck states: ‘fundamental to all analysis of the stigma of sex work is the notion that the female prostitute transgresses norms of femininity and female sexual modesty. Under double standards for gender and sexuality, female sex workers in particular are stigmatized as having ‘a spoiled identity’ (Vanwesenbeeck 2009: 268-9, Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 14). These gender norms on masculinity and femininity are deeply anchored in all societies around the world, while the interpretations of what is
means to be a man or a woman differ. One of the most prevailing gender norms, is masculinity being
synonymous with ‘active’, and femininity with ‘passive’ (Sawyer 1970: 1). This translates in the double standard on normative sexual behavior: men are expected to actively propagate their sexuality, while women are expected to carry out sexual modesty (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 14). It is
important to mention that this statement is a highly generalized dichotomy, as there are for instance many marginalized groups of men who are emasculated or over-masculinized (Lu and Wong 2013). However, this standard is deeply embedded in the public perception of normative sexuality and has far reaching consequences for the stigma of sex work.
A vast body of research in countries around the world has documented the workings and consequences of these gender norms and its resulting double standard in hegemonic normative sexual behavior for men and women. In the United States, Sanchez et al. (2012) conducted research on the consequences of following traditional gender roles of female submissiveness and male dominance in sexual relationships. They conclude that traditional sexual norms are harmful for women’s, as well as men’s, ability to engage in authentic, rewarding sexual expression, although the female submissive role may be particularly debilitating (ibid.: 172-4). In Brazil, Moore conducted a research (2006) that showed why women believed they had to act passive the first time they have sex: taking the initiative, by for instance using contraception, would lead men to accuse women of having previous sexual experience; an accusation that would have negative social consequences (ibid.: 48). They also believed women had to say no to sex under all circumstances to protect their reputation, which strongly complicates situations of sexual assault (ibid.: 48-50). In South Africa, Varga’s research showed how expectations of appropriate male and female sexual behavior encourage gender based power imbalances, by creating behavioral double standards (2003: 168). Along the same lines, Ostrowska (2005), Lawoyin and Kanthula (2010), Ahlberg et al. (2001) and Bertens et al. (2008) conducted research on gender norms and its consequences for men and women in respectively Poland, Kenya, Sweden, the Netherlands and Namibia. The basic premise in these studies is the dichotomy between male dominance and female submissiveness.
How do sex workers relate to these gender norms? They experience social stigma, negative social reactions and condemnation from the wider society (Vanwesenbeeck 2005, Weitzer 2009: 221). In their representation, they are often denied any kind of agency (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 14, Swedish Ministry of Industry, Employment and Communications 2004, Weitzer 2009: 214-5). A significant cause of the stigma lies in the fact that female sex workers transgress the hegemonic notions of femininity: they do not abide norms on female chastity, submissiveness and passivity with regard to sexual behavior (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 14). On the contrary: they not only express and exert their sexuality explicitly, this is even their profession. Thus, by opposing femininity, they also oppose hegemonic masculinity, by exerting masculine sexual behavior. As Goffman said, stigma stems from socially discrediting behavior (1963: 3): due to their transgression of normative sexual behavior, sex workers are stigmatized.
Deviant groups of people form a danger for the coherence of a society, which thus tries to find a way to deal with these groups. This is done by stigmatizing the deviant group, therefore placing them outside the ‘normal’ society. Stigmatizing is however not the only way society tries to deal with the deviance of sex workers. Sex workers are inconsistent with and contesting, hegemonic femininity norms of passiveness, submissiveness and sexual modesty: this creates an ambiguity between the way women are expected to behave, and the way female sex workers behave. To redress this ambiguity, sex workers are often seen as passive victims of patriarchy: in order to ‘make’ these women passive and submissive once again, instead of active and independent. For instance, the Swedish Ministry of Industry, Employment and Communications uses typical, passive, language to address sex workers, such as ‘victims’, ‘prostituted women’ and describing sex work ‘ a serious form of oppression of women’ (2004: 1, my emphasis). Levy and Jakobsson state how radical feminist discourse sees sex workers as passive victims of gendered violence (2013: 333). On the contrary, the sex workers themselves, in the research of Begum et al., state they did not identify with the discourse of being victims of patriarchy (2012: 97, see also Brewis and Linstead 2000). I therefore hereby propose the link that because women are, according to normative hegemonic femininity, supposed to be passive and submissive in sexual relations with men, and sex workers actively use their sexuality in their profession, sex workers are therefore seen as passive victims of patriarchy, to redress the ambiguity between normative passive female sexual behavior and the active sexual behavior of sex workers.
Othering
The phenomenon of Othering the sex worker is a result of the stigma of sex work, and reinforces in turn the stigma (O’Neill 2010). Perceiving a specific group of people as the Other, as opposed to one’s Self, helps to emphasize the perceived weaknesses of marginalized groups, as a way of stressing the alleged strength of those in positions of power (Said 1977). It is an effective way of placing sex workers outside society, which often happens to stigmatized people, according to Goffman (1963). As the Other, sex workers are seen as ‘matter out of place’ (Douglas 1966): ‘they confound and challenge boundaries of public and private, scandal and decorum, gift and commodity, agent and object’ (Kulick 2003: 208).
Seeing the sex worker as the Other gives way to designing prostitution policy without including the voices of the sex workers themselves: they are, after all, the weaker Others and they should be ‘helped’ by the dominant group. This notion is strongly represented in the Swedish prostitution policy. In part three I will further elaborate hereon, for now I only mention the
the home, and the law prohibiting the purchase of sex, implemented in 1999, while keeping the sex worker free from prosecution (Kulick 2003: 203). While the effects of the law against spanking children are contested among researchers and policy makers, there is a popularly felt consensus in Sweden that the law made spanking socially unacceptable, and rates of child abuse have dropped. The argument for the prohibition on purchasing sex stated that the law would similarly lead to seeing the purchase of sex as immoral. The resemblance in the perception of children and sex workers is striking: society has a duty to protect children as well as prostitutes, ‘who, in Swedish debates, are unvaryingly portrayed as exploited victims who need others to speak for them and the state to protect them’ (ibid.).
Furthermore, in many discourses sex workers are seen as the immoral Other, in contrast to the moral Self (Levy and Jakobsson 2013, Kulick 2003, Weitzer 2007: 143, Weitzer 2009: 220). The understanding of sex workers as immoral and dishonest is deeply entrenched and widely spread (Levy and Jakobsson 2013: 337-8). The specific discourse on sex work in Sweden is more
complicated. Radical feminist thought, in which sex workers are seen as victims without a voice, is very influential in this case. The authorities use this radical feminist discourse to appear as a progressive state that recognizes and treats the sex industry as inherently violent towards women. According to them, many other countries have not yet reached this level of morality (Kulick 2003). However, part of the government used that same progressiveness to create public support for their opposition of Sweden’s entry of the EU. The debate on Sweden’s entry of the EU took place between 1989 – 1995. It was strongly polarized, and sex work was at the heart of the debate. The opponents of Sweden’s entry argumented that Sweden would not be unable to uphold their progressive morality and their ‘Swedishness’ after the entrance in the EU, because they would be flooded by immigrant sex workers from former Soviet countries (ibid.: 200). To create support for the opposition of Sweden’s entry to the EU, the opponents depicted these immigrant sex workers as immoral, and thus threatening Sweden’s progressive morality (ibid.: 208-10). In the process, the distinction between Swedish and immigrant sex workers was lost.
So the stigma of sex work primarily stems from the transgression of hegemonic gender norms by sex workers: it brings forward and is reinforced by seeing sex workers as the deviant, immoral Other and ‘matter out of place’. This stigma can have severe consequences for the safety and working conditions of sex workers themselves, as the stigma inevitably influences and is influenced by the design and implementation of prostitution policies, on which I will now elaborate.
PART III
How do different prostitution policies influence
the stigma of sex work?
So far we have discussed the complexities of sex work and the reasons for the stigma’s persistence. In the next section I elaborate on the influences of different prostitution policies on the stigma. I discuss three different theoretical paradigms concerning sex work: the oppression, empowerment and polymorphous paradigm. Each of these paradigms carries feminist ways of addressing sex work, which stand on diametrically opposed grounds on how prostitution policy is best shaped. I will discuss these underlying feminist notions of the paradigms, and link each theoretical paradigm to a prostitution policy. It is important to note that these paradigms are theoretical: the policies
conducted in the ‘real world’ are not identical to the theory. I will merely show how these paradigms inform sex work policies in Sweden, the Netherlands and Australia, how these policies work out in practice and what their influence is on the stigma. I would like to specify that this section is on
prostitution policy: the policies thus apply to outdoor and indoor prostitution, and do not address
other forms of sex work. I will however, as specified in part one, use the term sex work to specifically denote prostitution.
Before I can elaborate on the underlying feminist standpoints in the theoretical paradigms concerning sex work, I should first note that feminism has always been a movement heavily debated. Over the past centuries the world has seen waves, movements, protests, books, lectures and what not, that were calling attention to gender inequality, although the term ‘feminism’ was not coined until 1837 (Goldstein 1982: 92). While the Mariam Webster defines feminism unambiguously as ‘the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes’6, in practice there is a wide range
of views on how to establish equality or even what equality is. Waves of feminism are interrelated and sometimes overlapping; feminists have seldom agreed on the ‘course of treatment’ of inequality of the sexes. For instance, during Le Querelle des Femmes (1400 – 1600), in which the institution of marriage was being questioned, many women supported a change in men’s and women’s roles, while they did not agree unanimously on how they ought to change (Kelly 1982). This disunity is still ever present: some feminists, for example, argue for a decrease in the number of stay-at-home-mothers to improve society’s view of women in general, while others stress the freedom of life choices (Ruitenberg 2014). The same fundamental notion lies as the basis of the discussion on how to address sex work: are individuals free to determine how they use their own body, if that usage might harm the struggle for equality of all men and women?
6 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism
Theoretical paradigms of sex work
Different feminist standpoints reflect different views on an ideal prostitution policy. The three theoretical paradigms of sex work provide different ways of looking at the phenomenon, have different effects on the stigma and are based on distinct assumptions concerning sex work: the oppression paradigm and the empowerment paradigm stand on opposite grounds of interpreting gender relations (Weitzer 2009: 214-5). I elaborate on these paradigms using respectively Sweden and the Netherlands. The third, the polymorphous, paradigm, integrates aspects of the other two, which I explain using a study conducted in Australia (ibid.).
Besides the theoretical paradigms, there are five models of addressing sex work via policy; as with the theoretical paradigms, these models are never precisely implemented in practice, but they provide a framework for classifying sex work policies. The models, which I will elaborate on in the course of this section, are: criminalizing sex work, abolishing sex work, prohibiting the purchase of sex, regulating sex work and decriminalizing sex work (Kulick 2003: 200-1).7
The empirical research of Scoular (2010) stresses the fact that these paradigms and models are theoretical. Scoular notes that while Sweden and the Netherlands are often described as ‘representing a two-way ideological mirror’, the results on the ground are remarkably similar: in both cases, the more public forms of sex work (street sex work) and its participants are increasingly marginalized and both countries share a relative inattentiveness to many forms of indoor sex work (ibid.: 13). However, this statement is already partly outdated: the Netherlands has implemented a rigid process of shutting down more and more indoor sex work facilities, but more on that later. Legal frameworks can still be supportive, or reflective, of hegemonic power relations in many ways, despite the gap between law in the books and law in action (ibid.: 13-4), as I will now explain.
o Oppression paradigm
As defined by Weitzer (2009: 214), the oppression paradigm ‘holds that sex work is a quintessential expression of patriarchal gender relations’. This paradigm, in its most prominent form, holds that exploitation, subjugation and violence against women are inherent to sex work, regardless of historical time frame, national context or type of sex work. Some writers make generalizing claims about specific aspects of sex work, that are applicable to a part of, but not all, sex workers. For instance, that most or all of the sex workers were abused during childhood, are tricked or forced into prostitution, use or are addicted to drugs, experience routine violence by costumers, work under abysmal conditions and desperately want to exit sex work (Farley 2004, Raymond 1998). Writers who subscribe to this paradigm use typical language to describe sex work, such as ‘prostituted
7 Lecture dr. M.P.C. Janssen, course: Local and Global Complexity of Prostitution, 5 December 2014, University
of Amsterdam
women’ and ‘prostitution survivors’ (Weitzer 2009: 214). The passive language of ‘prostituted persons’ indicates that sex work is not a chosen profession, but is something that is done to a person (Weitzer 2009: 214). Dworkin (1997: 145) even goes as far as to say: ‘when men use women in prostitution, they are expressing a pure hatred for the female body.’
How could this standpoint be translated to a prostitution policy? Some of the aspects of the oppression paradigm are found in the argumentation behind the Swedish prostitution policy. In accordance with this policy, implemented in 1999, obtaining, or attempting to obtain, sexual services for compensation was criminalized, while the sex worker is free of prosecution (Wagenaar et all. 2013: 114-5). The fact sheet on sex work of the Swedish Ministry of Industry, Employment and Communications (from here ‘Swedish Ministry’) states that ‘women and children who are victims of prostitution and trafficking do not risk any legal repercussions …. By adopting these measures Sweden has given notice to the world that it regards prostitution as a serious form of oppression of women, and that efforts must be made to combat it’ (Swedish Ministry 2004: 1). This statement incorporates the typical vocabulary of the oppression paradigm, using the words ‘victims’,
‘oppression’ and ‘combat [prostitution]’. Perhaps the most strikingly use of words in the Ministry’s fact sheet is consistently calling sex work the buying a women’s body and calling the client the buyer: ‘prostituted persons are considered the weaker party, exploited by both the procurers and the
buyers’ (ibid., my emphasis: not here also the passive language denoting the sex worker). As Lyle
Muns, student, sex worker, and sex worker’s rights activist8, explained9: buying something gives the
buyer control over what happens with whatever it is he bought. In contrast, sex workers provide a service, and stay in control of what happens during the time with the sex worker that the client has bought. Seeing sex work as buying someone’s body is thus a strongly subjective way of defining sex work, which indeed implicates a submissiveness, powerlessness and passiveness of the sex worker, that is often not the case.
In relation to before mentioned differences between male and female sex workers: the Swedish policy problematizes sex work as gendered violence against women, perpetrated by men (Swedish Ministry 2004). In so doing, the policy entirely disregards non-female sex work: in the fact sheet of the Swedish Ministry, sex workers are consistently defined as ‘exploited women and children’. Also, the existence of a female client of a female sex worker is denied, however small their numbers may be. The fact sheet explains the existence of sex work as follows: ‘prostitution and trafficking in women requires a demand among men for women and children, mainly girls. If men did not regard it as their self-evident right to purchase and sexually exploit women and children,
8 http://lylemuns.blogspot.nl/
9 Guest Lecture Lyle Muns, course: Local and Global Complexity of Prostitution, 18 November 2014, University
of Amsterdam
prostitution and trafficking would not exist’ (Swedish Ministry 2004: 2). We see in this statement that the existence of male sex workers and female clients is again denied all together; sex work and trafficking are once again intertwined; and sex work is once more defined as the purchasing of women and as inherently exploitative. Furthermore, the Swedish Ministry seems to assume in this statement that in countries where the purchase of sex work is not prohibited, men have a widely spread impression that they are entitled to the availability of female sex workers. To my knowledge, the existence and if so, substantiality, of this impression has not been researched.
The Ministry also states: ‘because it is traditionally assumed that men who buy and exploit prostituted women and girls act out of a ‘natural’ male sexual need, their underlying motives have seldom been studied or even questioned. Instead, attention has been focused on the prostituted women and girls, despite the fact that prostitution is sustained entirely by men’s sexual desires and behavior’ (Swedish Ministry 2004: 2). Here we see the important goal of the Swedish policy to influence the public moral view of sex work, as with the law on prohibiting the spanking of children. The policy shifts the focus from the sex worker to the ‘buyer’, in an attempt to propagate a view of the buyer as a violent, exploitive and immoral person. However, since this policy does not regard sex workers as possibly self-employed and empowered women, it reinforces the stigma of the sex worker as also immoral; even though the sex worker cannot help being immoral, since she is the victim of a patriarchy that enables gendered violence in the form of sex work. To underscore the importance of the moral message behind the policy: the total number of street prostitutes in all of Sweden has, by all accounts, never exceeded 1000 (Kulick 2003: 200).
The policy is not only supposed to influence the realm of sex work, it is also a clear
statement on gender equality for all men and women. Dodillet and Östergren’s extensive research on the claimed successes and documented effects of the policy emphasizes the claim that in order to achieve a gender equal society, prostitution must cease to exist: not only because it is inherently violent and exploitative of female sex workers, but also because all women in society are harmed as long as men think they can ‘buy women's bodies’ (Dodillet and Östergren 2011: 1-2). The Swedish Ministry’s fact sheet states: ‘gender equality will remain unattainable as long as men buy, sell and exploit women and children by prostituting them’ (2004: 1). Here we see a clear standpoint on the fundamental notion whether every individual should be free to determine how they want to use their body, or whether the government should interfere herein to make a moral standpoint on how bodies may not be used, as to influence the perception of all women. This standpoint stands on paradoxical grounds with the history of feminism. During former feminist waves, feminists have fought to give women a voice in public debate. The statement ‘the personal is political’ (Hanisch 1969) laid bare the connections between personal experience and larger social and political
structures, and the ways in which all women are affected by these structures and should thus have a say in social and political debates. In contrast, the feminist political figures in Sweden are once again denying certain women a voice in a debate that concerns them and affects them greatly. The Swedish Minister for Gender Equality stated: ‘it isn’t up to individuals to decide whether or not they want to sell their bodies’. The deprivation of sex workers’ voices in the debate on prostitution policy is also apparent through the fact that the policy harms the sex workers: the demand for their services is criminalized, driving them underground, with all the before mentioned, severe consequences for their safety and working conditions.
As said before, there are five policy models of sex work. Before 1999, the Swedish
prostitution policy was designed along the lines of the abolitionist model, in which the legal system holds that prostitution in itself is not an offence, but the exploitation of the prostitution of others is; thus any third party recruiting, profiting from, or organizing prostitutes is penalized (Kulick 2003: 200). The strict implementation of this former policy already had far-reaching consequences, as it was illegal to profit in any way from sexual services performed by someone else. Thus, sex workers could not rent a workplace, hire someone to do their administration, advertise in newspapers; it was even difficult to live together with anyone, since that person could profit from the sex workers income through shared expenses (ibid.: 201). With the implementation of the new law in 1999, Sweden went one step further and carried out a policy that Kulick named the prohibitionist model: the exploitation of prostitutes remained criminalized and the purchase, or attempt to purchase, sex was also criminalized, while the sex worker remained free of repercussions (ibid.: 200). While this model also seeks to abolish prostitution, the policy is so exceptional that is justifies defining another model: Sweden was the first country in the world to criminalize the purchase of sex, but not the sale of sex (ibid). The sex worker will not be penalized, since she is invariably seen as the victim. Instead, the policy’s focus regarding sex workers lies on rehabilitating them: ‘it is important to motivate persons in prostitution to attempt to exit without risking punishment’ (Swedish Ministry 2004: 1). This further reinforces the image of the sex worker as the victim that wants to exit sex work. While sex workers can work legally, their work is made extremely difficult.
This radical feminist-inspired view on prostitution, which is in line with the oppression paradigm, endorses the stigma of sex work. It uses a distinct discourse in which the sex worker is always female and always the victim of men. Their existence hinders achieving gender equality for all men and women. Those who subscribe to the oppression paradigm strive to abolish sex work, by prohibiting the purchase of sex, and focus on rehabilitating the sex worker.
o Empowerment paradigm
The empowerment paradigm stands on the other side of interpreting gender relations. According to Weitzer (2009: 215), this paradigm ‘focuses on the ways in which sexual commerce qualifies as work, involves human agency and may be potentially empowering for workers.’ The mutual gain to both parties is stressed, as in other economic transactions. Empowerment theorists tend to neglect highly negative experiences of sex workers, and highlight instead success stories to demonstrate that sex work can be, but not necessarily is, empowering (ibid.).
The prostitution policy carried out in the Netherlands shows similarities with the
empowerment paradigm, according to the Dutch government itself. As the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs (from here ‘Dutch Ministry’) states: ‘prostitution as such has never been a criminal offence in the Netherlands, provided it was voluntary and that no minors were involved. Brothels, however, were illegal [but tolerated / gedoogd] until 1 October 2000 ... It is now legal to run a business where men or women over the age of consent are voluntarily employed as sex workers’ (2012: 4). This statement clearly endorses the empowerment paradigm; in contrast to the Swedish Ministry’s discourse on sex work, the Dutch Ministry takes into account the existence of male sex workers, and the possibility of voluntarily working sex workers. While it has long been forbidden for a third party to profit from prostitution in Sweden, this has been legal in the Netherlands since 2000, and was in practice tolerated before that. However, exploitation of sex workers is forbidden in the Netherlands (ibid). As the Ministry states: ‘Brothels were banned in the Netherlands in 1911 to protect
prostitutes from exploitation. However, the ban has not been enforced for the past 50 years … To end abuses in the sex industry, the Netherlands decided to change the law to reflect everyday reality’ (2012: 5). The ban was thus lifted to provide a legal framework for controlling the sex industry by providing regulation and monitoring the facilities. These regulations include a minimum size of working areas and the obligation to provide every room with a panic button, hot and cold running water and condoms. They are intended to govern safety, fire precautions and hygiene (ibid). The goal of the legalization of brothels was to improve the position, rights and status of sex workers, and the sector as a whole, through the licenses, and by tackling abuses through firmer action against illegally operating businesses (Wagenaar et all. 2013: 53, Dutch Ministry 2012: 3, 5). The Dutch ministry estimated the amount of prostitutes to be 25.000 at the time that the ban on brothels was lifted in 2000. They say recent estimates are unavailable (2012: 11-2). Vanwesenbeeck states the estimated amount of sex workers in the Netherlands is between 15.000 and 20.000, of which 5% are estimated to be men, 5% transgender and 90% women. Around 60% of the total amount of sex workers is reckoned to have immigrated to the Netherlands (Vanwesenbeeck 2012: 14).
Of the five models on prostitution policy, the Netherlands are located in a grey area between decriminalization and regulation.10 The Dutch government seems to advocate a
decriminalizing policy. According to this model, sex work is a normal occupation. The whole sex industry should therefore be decriminalized, classifying prostitution under labor law. This model strongly destigmatizes sex work by taking the morality out of the sector. According to this model, it would thus be normal for sex workers to share their experiences, knowledge and wisdom with other sex workers, for instance in a course given to new sex workers. The Dutch Ministry makes claims along the lines of the decriminalization policy: ‘the Netherlands is one of the first countries in the world to recognize voluntary adult prostitution as a normal occupation … So sex workers now have the same rights and obligations as other professionals’ (Dutch Ministry 2012: 4, 6). One of these obligations, in accordance with labor law, is that sex workers and their employers are required to pay tax (ibid.: 13). This is the position of the Dutch government on paper. In practice, however, the authorities seem to carry out the regulation model. According to this model, sex work is a necessary evil. Since it will inevitable be present in any society, the best thing to do for a government is to regulate it, in order to prevent excesses. Prostitution must therefore not flourish freely, as a normal occupation could, but should be controlled by the government. In so doing, sex work is isolated from society, thus the stigma of sex work is endorsed.
The exact design and implementation of prostitution policy in the Netherlands, is left to local authorities. Municipalities have to formulate and implement policies tailored to the circumstances prevailing in their area; they lay down their own rules for brothels operating within their jurisdiction and are thus responsible for issuing the licenses (Dutch Ministry 2012: 5). This has had several consequences that show the underlying arguments for the regulation model. First, the ‘Bibob’ law was implemented nationwide in 2003. Bibob stands for bevordering integriteitsbeoordelingen door
het openbaar bestuur which translates roughly to ‘facilitating governmental integrity assessments’. 11
This law is a preventive administrative instrument. 12 As translated from the current legislative text,
the therefore authorized administrative body can deny a request for a license, or revoke a license, when there is a suspicion of criminal activity or abuse of the license in the applying company. This law applies to all business, including those outside the sex industry. To determine ‘the level of danger’, as the law states, in a certain business, the administrative body can request an advice, in
10 Lecture Marie-Louise Janssen, course: Local and Global Complexity of Prostitution, 5 December 2014,
University of Amsterdam
11 Current legislative text ‘Wet bevordering integriteitsbeoordelingen door het openbaar bestuur’,
http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0013798/geldigheidsdatum_08-12-2014#
12 https://www.justis.nl/producten/bibob/wet-bibob/
the form of an assessment, from the Ministry of Security and Justice. 13 As the law clearly states,
there is no evidence needed to support the refusal or revoking of a license: a mere suspicion is enough. This vagueness leaves room for interpretation, and gives way to a selective application of the law, namely: on the sex industry.14 For instance, world renowned, high-end brothel Yab Yum was
closed down in 2008, after the owner ‘went through Bibob’ and it became clear to the authorities that his brother in law was a member of the Hells Angels. Therefore, the ‘level of danger’ was too high; the connection could mean that this criminal organization owns and operates Yab Yum, or so the argument went.15 This argumentation clearly represents the regulation model: prostitution must
be controlled and regulated by the government.
Furthermore, in 2007, the municipality of Amsterdam has started Project 1012.16 This
project entails the renovation of the area with the postal code 1012, including the red light district. The municipality would like to ‘upgrade’ this district by closing down low-end, unwanted,
businesses: casinos, coffee shops, smart shops, café’s, small souvenir shops and brothels. These businesses are depicted as unwanted, since they are prone to criminal activity, although again: unproven to actually be criminal. In the media, ‘prone to criminality’ quickly became ‘criminal’, and the public opinion was quite easily ‘massaged’ into seeing the sex workers as victims of criminals in the shady and unwanted business of sex; the project receives little resistance from the public. On the contrary, some sex workers are openly opposing this policy: so far without any result. The government officials of Project 1012 have asked sex workers for their opinion on the project, but according to Marianne Jonkers17, former sex worker and herself asked as an adviser, the number of
sex workers asked to advise was too small to represent them. They were simply asked to participate so the project could be presented as approved by sex workers. Using the Bibob law, the municipality closes down all the sex work facilities that are not in the areas designated for sex work by the government. As a consequence of the law, the trust of sex workers in the authorities has plummeted and their working conditions have worsened: reporting violence or oppression can lead to the closing of their work place.18 This project thus stands in sharp contrast to the statements of the
Dutch government, among which: ‘this approach [the legalization of brothels] is in the interests of
13 Current legislative text ‘Wet bevordering integriteitsbeoordelingen door het openbaar bestuur’,
http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0013798/geldigheidsdatum_08-12-2014#
14 Guest Lecture sex worker Kaya, course: Local and Global Complexity of Prostitution, 18 November 2014,
University of Amsterdam.
15 Guided tour Yab Yum, Singel 295, 1012 WH Amsterdam. 27 November 2014. 16 Amsterdam Municipality. 2014.
http://www.amsterdam.nl/gemeente/organisatie-diensten/sites/project_1012/1012/
17 Lecture L.J. Buijs MSc, course: Local and Global Complexity of Prostitution, 2 December 2014, University of
Amsterdam.
18 Present at debate after lecture by L.J. Buijs MSc, course: Local and Global Complexity of Prostitution, 2
December 2014, University of Amsterdam.
sex workers themselves’ (Dutch Ministry 2012: 6). Sex worker Kaya, who has spent years trying to deal with the governmental bureaucracy to obtain a license to open her own brothel, stated: ‘it seems like the ban on brothels was only lifted so the government could close them down (freely translated)’.19
Another consequence of the Dutch policy concerns the mandatory registration of self-employed sex workers, in accordance with labor legislation. The Dutch Ministry states: ‘sex workers will be required to register with their local authority, who will enter them in a national computerized system that will be accessible only to the competent authorities. Under current legislation … only self-employed sex workers and businesses are required to register with the Tax and Customs Administration and the Chamber of Commerce’ (2012: 9). Administratively, many sex workers are ‘zzp’ers’: independent, self-employed workers who work as an independent call girl or rent their own room or window in a brothel. The latter was for instance the case in Yab Yum.20 As Kaya
explained, the obligatory registration in the publicly available Chamber of Commerce21 has
enormous consequences for sex workers: every individual, all around the world, has at any time access to the address and real name of those registered as ‘prostitute’.22 Unfortunately, due to the
persistence of the severe stigma of sex work, this is highly problematic.
As we have seen in the Netherlands, the way in which the prostitution policy was actually implemented, reinforced the stigma of sex work and did not lead to normalization. Taking a step back from the case of Dutch prostitution policy: could legalization in general lead to normalization? Weitzer states: ‘stigma does not necessarily erode where prostitution is legal’ (2009: 230). On the other hand, Weitzer claims that three-quarters of citizens in Holland consider prostitution an acceptable job (2010: 24). As a result of the just presented analysis of the implementation of the prostitution policy in the Netherlands, I highly doubt this conclusion. The research by Begum et al. (2012) on legalized sex work in Melbourne states that ‘[their participants] agreed that despite the legalization of sex work, there had not been an improvement in society’s perception of their work’ (ibid.: 89). Donegan (1996) suggested that because prostitution is underground, young women suffer from social stigma: Farley and Kelly however point out that this notion does not address the social stigma and enormous contempt also aimed at women in areas where prostitution is legal–for example, in Nevada (2000: 37).
19 Guest Lecture sex worker Kaya, course: Local and Global Complexity of Prostitution, 18 November 2014,
University of Amsterdam.
20 Guided tour Yab Yum, Singel 295, 1012 WH Amsterdam. 27 November 2014.
21 Kamer van Koophandel:
http://www.kvk.nl/inschrijven-en-wijzigen/inschrijven-bij-de-kamer-van-koophandel/handelsregister-en-persoonsgegevens.
22 Guest Lecture sex worker Kaya, course: Local and Global Complexity of Prostitution, 18 November 2014,
University of Amsterdam.
In conclusion, the empowerment paradigm focusses on the labor aspect of sex work, as does the decriminalization policy model. Those who subscribe to this paradigm strive to reduce the stigma of sex work, as it is harmful to those who voluntarily engage in sex work. The Dutch Ministry appears to uphold this paradigm and model, but one could argue that in reality, the Dutch policy
implementation shows characteristics of both the decriminalization and the regulation model. Several of the policies of local authorities reinforce the stigma of sex work and hinder the facilitation of safe working places for sex workers.
o Polymorphous paradigm
According to Weitzer, both the oppression and empowerment paradigm are one-dimensional (2009: 215). He proposes an alternative perspective, the polymorphous paradigm, that takes into account the huge varieties, complexities and paradoxes that are found in sex work. Exploitation and empowerment are both present in sex work, as there are many variations across time, place and sector and prostitution cannot be reduced to one or the other. This paradigm incorporates the ways in which complexities and structural conditions shape the uneven distribution of agency,
subordination and job satisfaction (Weitzer 2007, Weitzer 2009).
Prostitution policy in Australia varies per state, ranging from decriminalized, to legally regulated, to criminal. The criminalization model penalizes the sex worker as well as the client. The policy on brothels is consequently similar: 4 states permit brothels, 1 allows them as part of a containment policy, and 3 prohibit. The containment policy is not a written, approved policy, but an informally established arrangement between police and brothel operators. 23 The research by Begum
et al. (2012) on legalized sex work in Australia lays bare several of the paradoxes inherent to sex work. The research explicitly adheres to the polymorphous paradigm: ‘a range of occupational environments, power relations and worker experiences make up the diverse field of ‘sex work’ … a polymorphous paradigm [recognizes and articulates] these differences [and] should be adopted in any attempt to explore this industry’ (ibid.: 85). Their research shows exactly how complex and paradoxical sex work is: the strongest theme that emerged from their data, was sex workers’ own descriptions of six contradictions inherent in their work (ibid.: 90). The first paradox the participants mention, is how sex work is both financially rewarding and entrapping. Financial reward is the most common reason for voluntary entrance of sex work (see Vocks and Nijboer 2000, Groves et al. 2008, Weitzer 2007, Vanwesenbeeck 2012). The participants in the research by Begum et al. stated that the money signifies freedom, for instance to travel and be independent (2012: 90). However, getting
23 Queensland’s Prostitution Licensing Authority (PLA): Summary of Laws
http://prostitution.procon.org/sourcefiles/australiaQueenslandsPLASummaryOfLaws.pdf See also: http://www.pla.qld.gov.au/
used to a reliable, good income and an expensive lifestyle was also considered entrapping and difficult to explain to others (ibid.). Furthermore, sex work can be both empowering and demeaning: it provides sex workers with financial security, empowers them in their sexual lives and gives a sense of control (ibid.: 91). This is confirmed by Weitzer, who quotes several studies that show self-esteem can increase after entering sex work (2009: 221). While sex workers themselves can take pride in their profession, the reality remains that wider society condemns sex work (ibid.). The participants of Begum et al. state for instance that disrespectful attitudes from clients and bad work experiences can lower the sex workers’ self-esteem (2012: 91).
Sex work also increases and decreases other opportunities. Within the sex work industry other opportunities than sex work can arise, such as doing graphic designing for parlor websites, producing advertisements for strip clubs or working at the reception of a brothel (Begum et al. 2012: 92). Weitzer also mentions mobility options, which are mostly lateral, such as pornography actresses who perform in strip clubs while on tour, or escort agency girls who go independent to maximize their freedom and income (2009: 222). While sex workers themselves may perceive they have learned valuable skills and experience, the social stigma impedes them from listing ‘sex work’ on their resume, therefore decreasing their chances of moving to the ‘normal’ workforce (Begum et al.: 92-3). Sex work is also perceived to be both flexible and demanding. Flexible working hours are perceived as an advantage to the job, while the frequent night shifts are demanding (ibid.: 93-4). The participants described the sex work as physically, mentally and emotionally demanding, especially the constant monitoring and maintaining their own safety while with clients (ibid.: 94).
Furthermore, colleagues offer both intimacy and competition. The sex workers in the research by Begum et al. often described more intimacy with their workmates than with their family and friends, while there is also competition and tension between colleagues (2012: 94). The
difference in intimacy of sex workers with colleagues and friends and family, may be a result of the stigma of sex work: the participants stated that they led a ‘double life’. They felt they were forced to lie about their occupation to their friends and family, which could lead to feelings of guilt and anxiety. The sex workers described that it is ‘hard work’ to maintain their double lives; for instance, they used a ‘work name’ and their real name, which can cause confusion and embarrassment when the façade is accidently lost. Leading a double life is a typical strategy of people suffering from severe social stigma. Sex workers also use other normalizing strategies to cope with the stigma, such as using professional terms to describe their job (Weitzer 2009: 221-2).
The three theoretical paradigms and the feminist notions herein influence the stigma in different ways: the radical feminist line of argumentation in the oppression paradigm reinforces the stigma of
sex work by seeing sex work as violence against women, perpetrated by men, thus victimizing sex workers. Subscribers of the empowerment paradigm strive to normalize sex work by depicting it as just that: work. They actively try to reduce the stigma of sex work, by highlighting the empowering possibilities of sex work. However, due to the complexities, paradoxes and wide range of varieties in sex work, it is in my opinion best to study sex work through the polymorphous paradigm and I consequently argue for designing prostitution policy that is sensitive to these complexities.
Conclusion
In this thesis I have focused on voluntary sex workers, and have thus showed a tendency towards the empowerment paradigm. I have taken this stance in order to counteract the overrepresentation of problematic forms of sex work, that have contributed to the rising influence of the oppression paradigm. However, when considering the design and implementation of prostitution policy, it is of the utmost importance to forgo my one-sided representation of sex workers. The reality remains that it is a field of work with extensive varieties on the scale of free will, ranging from voluntary to abducted and forced sex workers. However, abduction and exploitation occur in many other fields of work as well and are addressed in criminal law. The conflation of the concepts sex work, exploitation and forced human trafficking has impeded designing prostitution policies that take into
consideration the complexities and paradoxes experienced by unforced sex workers. Although they work voluntarily, their difficulties must not be forgotten. With this thesis, I hope to have opened your eyes, if they may have been shut, to the way in which many prostitution policies, how liberal they may seem, reinforce the stigma of sex work and often throw the baby out with the bathwater. By fiercely trying to help the forced sex workers out of their abysmal circumstances, the voluntary sex workers are the oft forgotten. Their social status and working conditions have deteriorated under many prostitution policies. Thus, a polymorphous paradigm that is sensitive to the paradoxes and complexities of sex work should be upheld when discussing sex work and prostitution policy.
This is clearly my opinion. However, we must all ask ourselves, as have many prostitution policymakers undoubtedly done: what are the criteria for ‘good’ prostitution policy? Is prostitution something that a society must facilitate? If so, must it be facilitated because it is a necessary evil or could sex work be a job like any other? Or should prostitution be fought at all costs, as the existence of prostitutes reinforces our most deeply entrenched notions on male and female sexuality, that condone male sexual prowess and deprive women of sexual freedom? Though how can we achieve (sexual) equality for all, when those women whose chosen profession is sex work, are stigmatized as victims and denied a voice in this debate? All we know for sure is that more research is needed on
legalized prostitution: in what ways does legalization influence the stigma of sex work? Could legalization lead to normalization? What are the effects of normalization of sex work on our notions of normative sexual behavior? And perhaps most importantly: could normalization of sex work improve the equality between all men and women? I hope to have helped you in answering these questions for yourself. We can now only wish others will do too, hopefully in a way that honors sex workers as the independent women they may be.
