Global policy approaches to prostitution and sex work
An inquiry into the four main policy approaches worldwide.
Source: Public Domain Pictures
A visit to Amsterdam typically involves strolling along the canals, perhaps cycling, enjoying Indonesian food in one of the abundant small restaurants, admiring the beautiful and unique architecture, as well as an educational visit to the Anne Frank house.
There is another part to Amsterdam, one perhaps not traditionally conceived of as a tourist attraction. Walking around the Red Light District, the concept of prostitution emerges as an openly legalised field of work; women stand behind windows in the broad daylight for the whole world to see, compared to what is usual: an industry which seems to exist underground.
Prostitution and sex work has been a topic of controversy for centuries. The controversy arises from several difficult moral and legal questions pertaining to the topic. Predominantly women, especially those from a vulnerable economic backgrounds, engage in sex work activity. The fact that prostitution is a mainly gender specific issue throws up many different questions:
How has the law approached male prostitution? Should sexuality be commodified? Should the law support the commodification of sexual activity? Can prostitutes be supported better if the profession is legalised or if it remains completely or partially criminalised? How do you analyse which is “better”? Is the law in a position to make that choice? How relevant is it that women in prostitution are regularly subjected to violence by their clients? Does this decrease with legalisation? Do psychological and health issues stem from the work itself or from social stigma? Can legalisation reduce social stigma? Would decreasing stigma improve working conditions?
This article will not be able to answer all of the questions outlined above and does not attempt to do so, but it will try to give some insights into how the law in different countries has tried to tackle this issue.
Before going into the different approaches it is important to point out that the law often distinguishes between prostitutes selling their own services and auxiliary procuration services. These entail the facilitation of prostitution, such as by acting as an agent for the prostitute including such activities as pimping and brothel-keeping.
There are primarily four different legal schemes: Criminalisation, Neo-abolitionism, Decriminalisation and Legalisation. Perhaps the most radical approach is Criminalisation. Here, all acts related to prostitution are criminalised. Neo-abolitionism does not criminalise the actions of the prostitutes and sex workers themselves, but only of clients and agents. Legalisation provides a legal regulatory framework for prostitution. The main difference between Legalisation and Decriminalisation is that the latter only provides a very limited regulatory framework.
The main objective of Criminalisation is to reduce prostitution. The scheme is implemented within a criminal code including any related criminal offences, such as the act of being a sex worker. It can be divided into two groups: prohibitionists and abolitionists. Both of these groups are opposed to prostitution, but have some differences. These are typically grounded in moral, religious or feminist considerations. Additionally, by attempting to abolish prostitution, governments also hope that violent crimes, associated with prostitution and sex workers, will be greatly reduced. This is geared towards reducing the level of human trafficking within these countries.
Prohibitionists aim to criminalise all forms and types of prostitution as illegal. This can have detrimental effects on prostitutes. Since many engage in prostitution due to economic pressures, the additional threat of prosecution can be deleterious.
Prostitution is criminalised in Thailand. Under The Prevention and Supression of Prostitution Act 1996 selling sex and procuring sex is a criminal offence. However, the customer purchasing these services is not criminalised if the prostitutes are over eighteen. A majority of sex workers are Thais from a poor family background or from rural areas. Some of them are also undocumented migrants from the neighbouring countries of Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam and Myanmar. They mostly work in tourist cities such as Bangkok, Pattaya, Chiangmai and Phuket. Trafficked or migrant sex workers are often unable to report physical and sexual abuse to the police. As undocumented workers, this would lead to arrest on immigration or trafficking charges. It is also a common occurrence that sex workers, who reported abuse to the police, experienced fake “raid and rescue‟ missions by local authorities. They would move all sex workers out, and send them to another brothel as part of bribery negotiations or for money extortion.
Many sex workers in Thailand have faced assault and harassment, particularly by police officers. According to the Empower Foundation, the police pose a much greater threat to prostitutes and their personal safety than traffickers or clients.
Abolitionists don’t criminalise the selling of sex, but only related activities such as brothel keeping, soliciting, and procurement. This makes it incredibly difficult for sex work to be carried out without breaking one of the laws related to prostitution.
Several Nordic countries operate with Neo-abolitionism. The criminal code under this legal scheme is addressed towards the clients, who are typically men, rather than the sex workers. Sweden created this model in 1999, hoping that it would discourage people from purchasing any form of sexual service. Ten years after the implementation, the scheme was reviewed by the Swedish government, comparing levels and the demand for prostitution in Sweden to Norway and Denmark. It was deduced that the levels of prostitution and its prevalence was three times higher in Norway and Denmark than Sweden, compared to before the scheme was introduced. In 2009, Norway implemented a Neo-abolitionist scheme which had a similar effect in decreasing the levels of street prostitution. Finland and Iceland have implemented similar offences for prostitution, which target clients. There have been some criticisms of adopting such schemes from other countries due to the fact that this disregards wider social contexts. Policy transfers may not always be successful as countries vary socially, historically, and culturally.
There have also been some other criticisms of Neo-abolitionism. Some prostitutes say that the police force often harrasses them while trying to look for evidence such as used condomns etc. to enable them to prosecute the clients. It has also been criticised that these women feel like they are forced to go home with clients, who do not want to be arrested. Going home with clients may put prostitutes at greater risk of violence.
It has been found that women who solicit outdoors are usually at risk of physical violence, but women who solicit inside can be at greater risk of rape. This may be relevant for Neo-abolitionism, where women can’t organise themselves in groups, because the keeping of brothels is illegal.
Commenatators often argue that legalising prostitution may increase safety by allowing a certain amount of control over the industry. In the Netherlands, registered sex workers work in safer surroundings with cameras in front of every window. It is prohibited for minors to be involved in prostitution. A police force patrols the area for additional safety. Brothels are also equipped with an alarm system accessible at a moment’s notice, which can be heard from a considerable distance. Clean linen and towels are provided to improve health and hygiene. Sex workers can also access unlimited free STD checks and are encouraged to do check-ups regularly.
As independent workers, prostitutes in the Netherlands rent a window for a certain part of the day. The rents are extremely high: around 90 to 150 euros to rent a room for an eight hour shift. After factoring in the tax, this means that they need at least four to five clients per day in order to pay the rent. Moreover, they have to rent the window for at least six or seven consecutive days, or risk losing it to the competition. In times of economic crisis, it is difficult to pay these expenses. Wendel is a social worker for the public health site Prostitution and Health Center, PG292. She has contact with sex workers on a daily basis. The organisation helps prostitutes with resolving financial and psychological issues, and tries to assist them with developing small social networks.
She says: “You get 50 euros for a fuck and a blow job; you have to pay your rent and your tax, sometimes also your pimp. That leaves you with no money. Because the women are independent workers they can choose for themselves how much they work. If they need money they often make working days of sixteen hours. This is very exhausting for the body and the mind.”
When you walk around Amsterdam and pass the Red Light District, a certain visual impression lingers. When the sun sets and Amsterdam’s nightlife emerges, the scenery changes. The tired and elderly women that sit behind the windows during the day are switched out for more youthful women, who are lit up by flashy lights. It elicits the impression of “expired products” being replaced with younger, fresher bodies. The fact that these women are sitting behind windows creates the effect of a product that can be used, primarily, for the pleasure of men. As prostitution more commonly takes place during nighttime, the substitution of older women with more traditionally attractive women at night highlights the economic considerations which exist behind prostitution; how levels of demand affect the industry.
The policy argument for legalising prositution is the belief that prostitution cannot be abolished completely and that by controlling it there can be an improvement of working conditions as well as of social order. The idea is that legalising prostitution can be a method for reducing organised crime and child prostitution. The Netherlands is one of many countries which has taken this approach and has legalised brothels, with a license, and also individual sex workers who are classified as “freelance workers”, thus giving them rights that are no different to other people classified under this term. Anyone outside of the EU or the EEA is not allowed to participate in prostitution or work as a sex worker in the Netherlands.
Even though the industry has been legalised, sex workers face many issues. The influx of migrant workers from different countries, and trafficked workers from Eastern Europe including Bulgaria and Romania, leads to heavy competition amongst each other. This creates an environment in which women need to be more willing to perform acts that they normally would not be willing to do. Many are requested to have sex without the use of a condom for extra money. The obligation to accept the additional money is reinforced by other external pressures such as having to pay rent for a window, having to pay taxes and sometimes a pimp. Other acts include fisting and anal sex which many would prefer to turn down. Additionally, there is always the threat that clients can go to other prostitutes who are willing to perform those acts. Illegal prostitutes (who for instance originate from outside the EU and the EEA) may also be purchased at lower cost, which can expose them to higher risks of exploitation and abuse. According to reports, criminal activity has not decreased, despite efforts. It has rather moved to areas that have less control and may be more difficult for the government to control. However, “window trade”, which is the soliciting of prostitution through the window displays in the Red Light District in Amsterdam, has reduced after the implementation of the legalisation scheme. Even though prostitution has become a legalised, “more protected” economic activity, the heavy competition can force women into dangerous practices. This can effectively eliminate the protection afforded to prostitutes under the legalisation framework.
Most would expect human trafficking to decrease if prostitution is legalised as the “need” for soliciting illegal sex workers would be reduced. In an empirical study published in World Development, researchers found that when prostitution is legalised, there is a larger inflow of human trafficking, especially in higher income countries. The researchers looked at 116 countries. In particular, they analysed developments in Sweden, Germany and Denmark. Sweden prohibited prostitution in 1999, while Germany legalised it fully by allowing third-party involvement in 2002. Denmark legalised self-employed prostitution in 1999, but brothel operation remains illegal. In their analysis, Germany showed a significant increase in reports of human trafficking after the full legalisation of prostitution in 2002. In 2004, human trafficking victims in Denmark, where it is decriminalised, amounted to more than four times than that of Sweden, where it is illegal. That was the case, even though the population size of Sweden is about 40 per cent larger. When prostitution is legalised the market of the industry is expanded, which may lead to a higher demand and increased prices. Higher income countries will have higher purchasing power, causing the prices to go up. Effectively what happens is that legalised prostitution leads to an expansion of the prostitution market, which increases human trafficking overall. On average, countries where prostitution is legal reported larger human trafficking inflows.
Another country which has chosen to legalise prostitution is Senegal. As part of this policy, which is unique to Africa, sex workers over 21 years old are compelled to register with a health centre and to get monthly health check-ups to test for and treat STIs. Reducing the spreading of STIs, in particular HIV, was one of the main objectives for the government to legalise sex work in 1969.
The ownership of brothels remains illegal and so is the soliciting of prostitution, in an attempt to lower the rates of human trafficking. Prostitutes receive an official registration card with a photograph in order to keep a record of the visits made to the appointed health centre. Only an up-to-date card gives the right to soliciting clients and not complying with monthly health checks may lead to a prison sentence of up to six months. Despite its legal status, sex work is strongly condemned by Senegalese society and as a result, many try to keep their activities secret. Carrying the registration card leads to a signficiant risk of social exclusion if their sex work activity is discovered. 80% of female sex workers in Senegal and 57% in the capital city, Dakar, are not registered. Registered sex workers have very low level of well-being because of the stigma attached to the registration policy. It is therefore questionable how effective the policy is in Senegal and further illustrates that it may not be possible to simply distinguish between the different legal schemes, because one legal approach in a specific socioeconomic context may not be transposable to somewhere else.
Decriminalisation is when all laws against prostitution are removed and any aspects of prostitution that have been criminalised are abolished. It is commonly confused with legalisation as they are quite similar. However, there is a clear distinction between the two. Legalisation allows for prostitution to occur under government control and specific conditions, whereas, decriminalisation removes any law there is against prostitution or sex work. The lack of regulation within decriminalisation is what allows sex workers to work out of their own homes, compared to sex workers having to work in designated areas – such as the window displays in Amsterdam – in countries where prostitution is legalised.
One country which has taken this legal approach is New Zealand where decriminalisation of prostitution applies to sex workers working in any type of industry, whether this is in brothels or on the streets. However, their decriminalisation scheme also applies to the third party sector which includes the clients and those that are running the brothels. Since decriminalisation, private homes have become a more popular place for prostitution to take place as this allows the sex workers to work independently. According to research in New Zealand by the New Zealand Prostitute’s Collective (NZPC), many sex workers prefer working independently because it allows them to make their own choices. It also allows them greater financial independence, because they are not linked to or dependent on another party.
Nevertheless, many of the prostitutes that were interviewed through NZPC stated that they feared that brothels and other third parties within the industry exerted too much power over them, especially regarding working hours. In the research report it was stated by one brothel operator that they attempt to work around their schedules so that the sex workers are not overworked: “We do it all by appointment only, so they don’t have to do shift work. They pick their own hours, so they just choose. Like today, Monday, tomorrow they’ll be texting, “Hey, [Ingrid], my hours this week are this, this and this. Like I’m free all day Wednesday except I’ve got a lecture between 2 and 3”, so I work around that.”
There are many sex workers that wish for New Zealand’s decriminalisation approach to become more common world wide. Tamika Spellman is a sex worker in Washington, D.C. and has worked in the prositution industry for more than 30 years. Prostitution is criminalised in most states in the US, except for Nevada. Spellman and many other women working in this industry face a lot of shame for their area of work, including harassment from police officers. Spellman states that officers have called her names and asked her to buy them a meal to avoid getting arrested. She has also been sexually assaulted by police officers.
This article can only be seen as a guide, or perhaps a source, from which to branch out to other sources of information. Some arguments are more compelling than others. The fact that human trafficking increases under any legalisation scheme makes a persuasive and convincing case against legalisation and for neo-abolitionism. At the very least, it can be a key argument when evaluating any policy choices pertaining to prostitution. Nevertheless, other arguments can provide support for other positions. In the end, like all difficult policy questions it remains a matter of weighing up different factors. Additionally, the question of transposability of policies between countries with different cultural, social and historical backgrounds is also an important facet. What might work in one country might fail in the next. It is very much a legal area that is being continuously developed and restructured. What emerges is that it is unlikely that any solution will provide a perfect answer to the complex issues at stake.