I recently had an interesting twitter interchange with Mistress Matisse on the subject of sex work. On December 4th, the National Assembly in France passed a bill criminalizing the purchase of sexual services. It is a move overwhelmingly supported by feminists around the world.
I wanted to express my opinion on this matter and my rationale. I am against the criminalization of sex work. I believe that legalizing sex work affords sex workers the rights that all other workers have to demand protection under the law against violence, theft, pandering, etc. I am aware that there has been a study showing that, in countries where sex work is legal, there has been a rise in organized criminal involvement in the sex industry and a rise in the child sex trade. This is awful news, but it doesn’t change my position on the issue. It just makes it patently clear that police have a history of shirking their duties when it comes to sex workers and nothing has changed.
I want to attempt to unpack the issue of why sex work is viewed differently than other forms of labour. We are certainly acculturated to view it differently, but why? Why is working with your mouth or your hands or your cunt somehow criminal, while working with other physical body parts is not? All over the world, women labour in physical drudgery. They do work that damages their backs, their hearing, their lungs, their eyes – and most of all, their minds. Where is the feminist hue and cry against this? Why is the focus on the particular kind of work being done rather than on the conditions under which is it done?
The response from feminists who support the criminalization of sex work is that their main goal is to stop ‘sex trafficing.’ I’d like to point you over to Mistress Matisse’s blog for her fine dissection of the wordplay underlying this issue. The phrase ‘sex trafficking’ is being used to encompass all sex work – including sex work by consenting adults with agency. It masks a very disturbing form of ‘gaslighting’ which argues that no ‘sane’ woman would agree to sex work. So all adult women who consentingly perform sex work are too brainwashed and victimized to know what they are consenting to. They have been, in fact, culturally relegated to the position of women who require the state to make decisions on their behalf because they can’t possible be freely making this decision on their own. This is as offensive and repressive as the laws and attitudes of the past in which women were thought intellectually incapable of voting or having say over their own reproductive functions.
***I am in no way denying that sex trafficking exists. It does and it is already criminal. Kidnapping and forced labour (or slavery) ARE illegal in almost every country on the planet. The fact that the forced labour in question involves working with one’s genitals is, from a purely factual perspective, irrelevant. Similarly sex with individuals under the age of majority IS already illegal and one of the main reasons for this is because it is believed that children cannot know what they are consenting to, so it is statutory rape, whether money changes hands or not. There are laws with teeth to protect both adults and children from being detained and put to work against their will, and when those laws are broken, the breakers should feel the full force of the law.
I am speaking here of adults with agency who wish to provide sexual services for money. Admittedly, it is not my choice as way to make money. I would find working in that kind of physical proximity disturbing. But I wouldn’t want to work as a masseuse, a wrestler or a proctologist either – but no one would have a problem with me doing that. Because it’s not about sex. It’s not about my vagina. It’s not about vaginal penetration. And I would suggest that this is what the history of all the anti-sex work prohibitions have been about. Whose cunt is it really?
What offends me is that we, as women, have somehow gone from religious power structures who sought to tell us what we could and couldn’t do with our cunts for the sake of our souls, or masculinist power structures who sought to dominate our wombs for the purpose of controlling heredity, to feminists who want to do the exact same thing for ideological reasons.
I am no more inclined to let a group of ideologically motivated women tell me what I can and can’t do with my cunt any more than I would let a priest or a medical institution do so. And I would like to challenge that there is anything even remotely feminist about women who seek to take public ownership of my body and legislate what I can do with it.
It seems to me that feminists are guilty of doing the very same thing that the church did, and that male-dominated institutions have done in the past. They are preferencing women’s reproductive organs above other parts of a woman’s body just like those who came before them did. They are seeking to exert control over them in exactly the same way – while telling us it is for our own good. At what point does an adult woman get to determine what her own good is for good and all?
Moreover, I find it deeply disingenuous that these ‘feminists’ are spending so much time obsessing about what sex workers in first world countries are doing with their bodies economically when there is a world full of women living in appalling poverty, working is dangerous and health-threatening labour environments. Why is the waste of someone’s hands, or back or brain less worthy of their concern than my cunt or my mouth? And if it is the risk of sexually transmitted diseases that concern them, then please, let them point their concern towards the millions of young people having unpaid and unprotected sex. Condom use is far more prevalent among sex workers than in the general population.
I don’t see a lot of daylight between the way that some feminists are using the excuse that these laws are to protect society from ‘sex trafficking’ and the way the NSA uses the excuse that they need to spy on us all to stop ‘terrorism.’ This is not about our protection, it’s about our domination. It’s about power – particularly the power to control sexuality.
On a side note, I’d like to say that I don’t have any more time for the 343 French Intellectual Boy’s club who man the ‘Hands Off My Whore’ movement than for the feminist pressing for criminalization. These aren’t THEIR whores. They aren’t the whores of feminists or the whores of French men. They are women who have self-determination and a right to agency over their own bodies.
For anyone who is just itching to comment with… ‘but some of these women don’t have agency and are forced or coerced,’ READ WHERE I HAVE STARRED, I did that specially for you. It is already illegal to force a person to perform ANY labour they do not wish to perform. It is illegal to hold them against their will. There is no need for more legislation. There is need for the enforcement of the legislation that already exists.
Has organized crime involvement actually gone up where prostitution has been decriminalized, or is it just better reported?
There’s plenty of evidence that the mob controls prostitution in Las Vegas, where it’s illegal. There’s also little involvement by organized crime in the legal brothels in rural Nevada. There’s just too much scrutiny from the Government (notably the IRS, see the Joe Conforte case).
I posit that we don’t really know how much organized crime is involved in illegal prostitution and therefore claiming it increases when legal is specious. There’s far more trafficking to support the Asian Massage Parlors in the US (illegal) than the Netherlands brothels (decriminalized), after all.
I linked to the study. I believe it was done by the Scottish government in order to look at differences in countries in Europe that have legalized prostitution and those that have not. I am not interested in debating those results. All they speak to is the fact that, as has always been historically the case, police and prosecutors don’t do their jobs when it comes to protecting sex workers.
I’ve long agreed with you, RG, and at one time, when I was young and before the ta-tas tried to kill me, was approached to work in the sex industry. My hesitation to do so was a feminist issue, because we’d just started burning bras back then (I’m o-l-d) and I did have other means of income. At the time, it was, I felt, a stand I needed to make. Were I young and still possessed of ‘working’ boobs today, if the chance (ahem) arose, I’d be far less likely to say no. An engineer sells his/her time; I sell my words; where’s the difference in selling my sex? And I emphasize as you have done, the issue of choice in the matter. If the choice is mine, the choice is mine.
Absolutely agreed.
It’s disheartening to find that women are against women as much as men are, and even more disturbing, that even in the so-called “modern” age, we’re all still in the dark ages. Fifty Shades had done NOTHING, in my opinion, to bring erotica or sex or anything else to mainstream reading or otherwise. Each day we seem to be going backwards, devolving instead of evolving.
RG,
Social ideas are so deeply engrained into our psyche, I enjoy how you analyze the various issues. I struggle with the ideas you relate, much has been deeply engrained into me as to whats right and wrong. I can understand why the feminist movement is an irritation. I have worked with some strong women who expressed the desire to be “equals” with men. Then I raise a brow and chuckle when the helpless woman card is played at the same time.
The sex trade, should follow the model of prescription drug or automobile industry. Make it legal, require licenses and insurance. A strong lobby in congress would mandate that the provider makes 16% profit of sale, tax the hell out of it all. Everyone gets paid, its regulated, safe, legal, and everyone is happy. Right? Note the state of Colorado just legalized recreational use of marijuana.
There is a big difference between legalization and decriminalization, and most sex workers support decrim. Legalization still involves laws and government, which means the most vulnerable who can’t afford licensing will still be criminalized, and leave us just as we are now. The police and government have consistently failed us, we’ve been regulating ourselves just fine without their help.
My opinions on this issue are based on the principle of treating sex-work like any other form of labour, arguing that it IS a form of labour and deserves equal treatment. So, yes, I’m for legalization and the requirements, responsibilities and protections under the law afforded to every other form of labour. My opinions are not based on making it easier or harder for sex-workers. It’s based solely on the principle of judgement-free equality.
I’m in full agreement with you, RG. Thank you for writing this piece and expressing so eloquently these sentiments about the issue of sex work that I’ve also had but never put down in words.
Simple prostitution is always going to be ripe for exploitation, because it is a textbook example of a proletarian job, one where nothing but the labor of your own body is being sold (this is probably why many of the discussions devolve into arguments over the split between more and less privileged sex workers). It is exceptionally hard to be balanced about an industry that is so full of exploitation, especially when it can be imagined as non-essential. Sex work probably needs a union more than anything, but it’s hard to unionize and industry that doesn’t take place anywhere in particular and doesn’t have central capital owners, even if things weren’t as anti-union as they are now.
The points you’ve made are excellent and extremely hard to dispute. My purpose in writing the post was to attempt to unpack it from the single cultural prejudice of which body parts are being used and to suggest that, in this case, the feminists who support its criminalization are being disingenuous.
But isn’t the idea of a “happy hooker” not a myth as well? Prostitutes who don’t want to exit are in the minority.
Also, *my* kind of feminism does not feel any sort of paternalism over prostitued people, and other kinds fully support legalization. I, however, do not. I’ve heard too many tesitmonies (straight from sex worker’s mouths) and read too many studies about how dangerous an industry it can be.
But I didn’t come here to cause anything. Just my opinion.
The myth of a happy hooker is about as much a myth as the happy factory worker or the happy floor cleaner. Would these people rather have better paying, more respected jobs? Yup.
Sex workers who don’t want to be sex workers should stop being sex workers. Period. And legalizing the industry will make it more likely that someone who feels coerced to do the job has some legal remedy. As an illegal industry, sex workers have no legal remedy at all.
How does keeping an industry illegal make it safer? Certainly making it illegal doesn’t stop it. Sex work has been going on since the dawn of time, and it has usually been taboo or illegal within a society. How does maintaining that status quo make it safer?
Thanks for your reply.
I see how sex work parallels with other careers. Any type of work can be difficult, bordering on degrading, etc.
But I do not agree that sex workers can just leave whenever they feel like it. It’s easier for exotic dancers, phone sex operators, and the like to exit, but not for prostitutes and porn actors. For them it tends to be more dangerous to leave.
And I do not want to see prostitutes be criminalised. That is the last thing I want. In Sweden, the pimps and customers are the concern, not the women who are prostitutes. I honestly am not sure which route is best, because both legalization and illegalization affect at least some prostitutes negatively. My kind of feminism (radical), wants to see that the role of female as purely a sex object to cease. We believe that the sex industry, which is ridden with violence ,exploitation, and drug abuse, perpetuates that idea. I’m just not sure that the way the sex industry is set up now actually benefits the female population. What exactly do any of us gain from sex work? Are there no other possible ways to express our sexuality?
One last thing, I know that changing an entire billion dollar industry is wishful thinking. This issue of prostitutuon vs no prostitution gets very complicated.
You wrote: “For them it tends to be more dangerous to leave.”
I guess I’m just not expressing myself clearly enough. So, I’d just like you to explain to me how having prostitution criminalized solves this problem?
That’s all.
There is NO world without prostitution. If there is a market demand, there will be both buyers and sellers. And for millenia, prostitution HAS been illegal, and things were so much better for sex workers before, right?
I don’t agree with prostitutes being criminalized. I’m currently reading “Without Apology” by Jaqueline Homan, a former prostitute who is living in poverty because prostitutes are stigmatized as criminals. The problem with the industry are the pimps and johns who harm them at alarming rates. That’s what I am worried about. These women aren’t working in a safe environment no matter how empowering it may seem from the outside looking in. That demand you say prostitutes supply comes from the males who believe that they have a right to sexual gratification via women’s bodies all day every day. What I’m doing is naming the agent, not attacking the prostitutes.
Prostjtution will be dangerous in ways no other job outside of the sex industry despite its legality. There is no way around that. And from where does this ‘oldest’ profession stem from? Definetly not pure, free, or sexy and consensual intentions. These women are trying to survive and make a living like the rest of us, but I won’t ignore them when they say that prostitution has been the platform for their pain and danger. Most of these women (and girls) want out. And they are being silenced.
I hope that I difn’t sound like I was on some rant on morality before. This isn’t about morality nor am I against sex workers. I’ve heard what a number of them had to say. And none of it was consensual or positive. The women who have the better experiences in prostitution are typically priveledged and have control over what they do, when they do it. They are the minority.
Again, I don’t want to see these women in cop cars or living in poverty. But I don’t think legalization is the way to go. It will make it easier for exploitation and forced work to occur. Just because it has been around for millenia doesn’t make it okay. Females have been been in a state of *not* being okay for millenia, seen as a womb and three holes, no more than that.
Maybe you could visit some radical feminists blogs to get a full and probably better view of my and other feminists’ opinions. Some of these bloggers are exited from the sex industry.
I’m just going to leave this qoute:
“In all the ‘debates’ about removing the stigma from prostituted women by legalizing prostitution and calling it a ‘job’, the voices of exited women get drowned out because our realities and lived experiences collide most uncomfortably with man’s penis interests.”
– Jaqueline Homan
Am I the only proctologist here? It was only part time for me. And it wasn’t really that bad, it was something you get used to quickly. It’s just a job, mostly not dangerous.
Your opinion is based on a ‘hetero-normative’ perspective, not that I disagree with it, but there are so many trans* and other workers today, and not to somehow include them is asking for trouble. Yet most ‘sex-work’ is a female provider and a male client. The minority, say 5%, do have a very loud voice.
If you ask why ‘sex work’ should be criminalized, surely the answer in western countries lies somewhere in ‘Christian’ ideas of morality and the role of women; the patriarchy, paternalism. Is ‘feminism’ the replacement for the Church? What about the Winchester Geese? And who lives off “immoral earnings”? Well it’s certainly not bankers. Criminalizing certain activities around what is really a consensual contract for services is peculiar, if not wholly hypocritical. But who today knows about these things, who wishes to understand? Who doesn’t have an instant opinion?
Is it all about power and control, mixed with a ‘holier than thou’ attitude?
And as an erotic fiction writer, does that make you a ‘sex worker’? And if it does, are you proud?
(I think you should be.)
Picking vegetables, cleaning hotel rooms, sucking cock. If a person without skills is allowed to choose which of these jobs they prefer, and keep the money earned, they have agency over their life.
One of the most helpful intellectual discoveries I’ve made in my life has been evolutionary psychology, because it permits two things wholly uncommon in the so-called “social sciences.” The first is the opportunity to look at human social phenomenon in an entirely new light, and the second is the ability to construct truth-tests, without which everything is mere assertion or “stamp collecting.”
Let’s look at why women should seek to control the sexual activity of others. For almost all of our evolutionary history females have had a binary choice: secure a long-term mate and all the material advantages that thereby accrue and thus significantly increase the prospects of passing on her DNA, or if that’s not an option then engage in a series of one-time trades whereby sex is exchanged for some material good (food, temporary shelter, protection, etc.).
In a world in which women are therefore competing for men and the resources associated with them, it is imperative for one set of women to do as much as possible to undermine the competition. So it’s women who are so often at the forefront of anti-prostitution campaigns, because this is merely one of many strategies employed to limit or eliminate potential competition. Even a married woman needs to ensure the continuation of the flow of goods from her partner to herself; any diversion of assets towards temporary sexual liaisons is a net loss to her.
While this may seem mechanical, and while obviously women today are not dependent on men for material resources, evolution takes a long time to catch up. We are still operating on behaviors evolved 30,000 years ago. And back then competition was fierce. Of course people aren’t conscious of their motivations, but that doesn’t mean the motivations aren’t there and can’t be examined. In general women seek resources while men seek transient mating opportunities. You can sum it all up by the man telling his wife “he can buy you lunch but don’t let him fuck you” while the wife can reply “you can fuck her but don’t buy her lunch.” Though of course hardly anyone is conscious enough of their inner drives to make these overt statements!
We should remember that even in the most regressive societies in which women are consigned to purdah or the niquab, it is generally other women who are the staunchest advocates of these repressions because they minimize the chance of mate competition. So women campaigning to make sex work illegal are no different, evolutionarily and morally speaking, from the Somalia mothers who insist on having their daughters genitally mutilated. It’s all about doing one’s best to minimize the competition.