Calls for decriminalizing sex work divide opinions in the United States
Although as of now, sex work remains illegal in much of the United States, the debate over whether it should be decriminalized has been gaining momentum in several states, including Maine, Massachusetts, and most recently in Washington D.C.. While the terms “legalization” and “decriminalization” tend to be used interchangeably when referring to sex work, they are in fact drastically different. Legalization would mean the regulation of prostitution by laws that would dictate when, where, and how prostitution could take place, but decriminalization would entail the elimination of laws related to prostitution, as well as the prohibition of state and law-enforcement officials from intervening in prostitution-related activities.
The debate around decriminalization, or decrim for short, has unsurprisingly been a polarizing one, at times even dividing allies. While opponents believe prostitution is an inherently exploitative industry and that decrim would fuel sex trafficking, proponents of decrim believe it would not only protect and empower sex workers but also have positive public health effects. This division was recently highlighted by a bill being considered by the District of Columbia Council that would decriminalize prostutition in the nation's capital.
At the initial hearing held on October 17th, more than 150 people joined to share their stories and opinions about decriminalizing sex work and the proposed bill. Many of them were current and former sex workers, and the sharp divide between prostitutes who had been sex trafficked and others who had not was brought to light. Supporters of the bill expressed the urgent need for a solution to prevent violence against sex workers, a reality that disproportionately affects women of color and transgender people. Rightfully so, they highlight the failures of the criminalization approach, which for decades has put already vulnerable individuals like undocumented immigrants, who have limited options in the formal economies, in even more precarious situations. They voiced the fact that sex work “has and always will exist”, and that modern law enforcement has done little to reduce the practice. To them, decriminalizing sex work will actually help combat sex trafficking, as prostitutes will feel safe enough to report any criminal activities, including abuse by pimps or sex buyers, without fear of arrest. Supporters of the bill claim that it will make life easier for people consistently getting turned away from jobs and decent housing, and allow them to have a viable and well-compensated profession. Eventually, obtaining financial stability might even allow them to exit the industry. However, they do highlight the fact that one trade-off of making an industry safer is that it will often lead to its growth. This is where opponents to the bill come in.
Opponents to the bill fear that decriminalization would intensify abuse and violence in the sex trade, due to an increase in demand for prostitutes. They believe that, consequently, pimps would be more likely to coerce and force vulnerable individuals, including minors, into prostitution. This would make it extremely difficult to detect sex trafficking cases, as the lines between voluntary and involuntary sex work might become blurred. Policing strategy would therefore have to change for police officers to distinguish pimps from sex traffickers. Opponents fear that decrim will therefore cause more harm and exploitation of marginalized people, fueling organized crime and underground sex trafficking. To some opponents, prostitution cannot be separated from exploitation, and nothing will equalize the power imbalances that exist in the commercial sex trade. People who end up in the industry are most often individuals who are both extremely vulnerable and desperate, with very few options to make ends meet. This makes it hard to define to what extent entering the sex trade is voluntary, a trade where rape, physical abuse, and drug use are still pervasive.
On the other hand, some opponents of full decriminalization support variations of it such as the Nordic Model, in which sex workers do not face criminal charges, and are instead offered social services such as housing. Also called the End Demand approach, the Nordic Model emphasizes the prosecution of people who buy sex, but not those who sell sex. Supporters of this alternative state it would help end the cycle of trauma and incarceration for sex workers while still criminalizing and holding buyers accountable. By centering efforts on reducing demand, they believe it will facilitate the collapse of a business model based on exploitation. Some critics of the Nordic Model highlight how it not only continues to make sex workers complicit in an illegal activity, but also presents them as victims, “lured or forced into sexual slavery by immoral” clients. In some ways, it strips sex workers of their agency and autonomy, and presents the idea that buyers in the sex trade are all perpetrators of violence that should be criminalized.
In any case, this debate around decriminalization highlights the “recent outgrowth of efforts that call attention to racial disparities in mass incarceration and mistreatment of women”. Indeed, many prostitutes in American cities are African-American, Native American and Latina women, and transgender people. It is clear to me that the policing of sex work not only results in physical violence and assault, but also leads to many secondary consequences including healthcare isolation, decreased parental rights, and barriers to employment in the formal economy. This further reinforces the cycle of vulnerability that sex workers find themselves trapped in.
It isn’t suprising that the debate around sex work always gets linked to sex trafficking- individuals who are forced into the sex trade against their will. This includes not only individuals who are clearly coerced into prostitution through intimidation and violence, but also those who are trapped in the industry by economic necessity. These are the ones who should receive attention and resources from social reforms. As stated by Amnesty International, “Instead of punishing and shaming survival strategies, we should be invested in expanding choices”. Although I am still trying to figure out what kind of model would bring justice and safety to sex workers, while also protecting those susceptible to being trafficked, the current debate around decriminalizing sex work forces us to think more deeply about the root causes of vulnerability, and the structural issues that lead to exploitation. And today, the conversation has shifted from one centered around moral judgements about sex, to one about social, economic, housing, gender, racial, and trans justice.
Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/us/washington-legal-prostitution.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/31/nyregion/presidential-candidates-prostitution.html
https://time.com/3005687/what-the-swedish-model-gets-wrong-about-prostitution/
https://rewire.news/article/2019/07/15/the-fight-for-decriminalizing-sex-work-is-about-justice/