Sex for Sale~Prostitution, Pornography and the Sex Industry (58 page)

RONALD WEITZER AND MELISSA DITMORE

rights, and the growing international awareness of the problem and efforts to assist victims and punish perpetrators are welcome developments.

We also know that sex trafficking can be quite lucrative for the third parties involved. In fact, there are “few other criminal activities in which the profit-to-cost ratio is so high.”12 The most exploitative procurers, traffickers, and managers make huge profits off the labor of workers who accumulate little if any money of their own, while other workers spend years working off the debt they owe for their travel expenses and other costs related to migration.

In addition, an unknown number of third parties are involved in sexual exploitation and violence, demanding sex from their workers, sometimes over a long period of time.

We do not know
how many
persons are trafficked across borders every year; neither do we know how many of these persons are trafficked for work in the sex industry versus other types of work. Likewise, we do not know the proportion of such people who have been trafficked by force or deceit versus the number who have migrated with full information and consent regarding the type of work and the nature of the working conditions. We do know that a proportion of migrants are indeed acting with awareness and volition. An investigation of Korean women working in massage parlors in New York, for instance, concluded: “Invariably, the Korean women said they knew the kind of work they were expected to perform. . . . The women had relative freedom of movement and had joined the sex business of their own free will. . . . [They]

had a lifestyle as prostitutes that did not fit the stereotype of the trafficked woman.”13

Even when no force or fraud is used, it would be mistaken to assume that facilitators are necessarily benign agents. Some trafficked individuals do not understand the terms of the contract or fully appreciate the impact of debt bondage or how difficult it can be to pay off the debt. Some facilitators alter the terms of the agreement after transit or renege on specific promises.

In this scenario, the woman’s initial consent is compromised by subsequent, unexpected job requirements. Other workers have little prior awareness of the specific working conditions or risks involved in sex work in the new locale.

For those who sold sex in their home country, working conditions in the destination country may be far worse in terms of health, safety, accommodation, and the sexual services required of them.14 Others enter the sex industry reluctantly, out of an obligation to support their families or because of tacit pressure from relatives—not uncommon in the Third World. A study funded by USAID found that many of the Vietnamese women working in Cambodian brothels had been recruited and transported by their mothers and aunts, not by professional traffickers.15

328

SEX TRAFFICKING: FACTS AND FICTIONS

The diversity of experience is illustrated in a recent report on individuals arrested during police raids in the United States.16 Lilly, who came from Asia, was categorized by the U.S. government as a victim of trafficking but does not self-identify as trafficked. She was not forced into sex work, but had to work off a debt for travel expenses. She was arrested during a raid: “At the time, I didn’t have any debt and I told them this. . . . I then continued to work in prostitution for my own reasons, to pay bills. . . . Then the law enforcement perceived me as a victim. I was identified as having been trafficked.”17 Some sex workers do not admit that they have been trafficked when pressed by government officials. Another woman self-identified as trafficked, and it was her husband who trafficked her into prostitution. She said: “I really loved my husband. But any money I earned I had to give to him, so I didn’t benefit and it didn’t make any sense for me to continue working like that and it made more sense for me to find other work and keep the money.”18

Marta traveled to the U.S. from Latin America. Her husband had also pushed her into prostitution, controlled her money, and was sometimes violent, but Marta did not want to leave him or prostitution. Marta described her situation as follows:

I wasn’t hoping someone would come take me out of prostitution. . . . I would say listen to the women, because some people do it out of necessity, some people are forced to work in prostitution, but there are others who are not. When I say for “necessity,” I mean that there are those of us who have nothing in our country, and we do it to get a little house or buy a piece of land, and it can be the easiest way to achieve that.19

In other words, some migrant women who have entered prostitution have complex experiences and relationships with intermediaries and a variety of goals and desires, including dreams of a better life for their families.

In her summary of research on the motives of migrant sex workers, Laura Agustín writes, “Many people are fleeing from small-town prejudices, dead-end jobs, dangerous streets, and suffocating families. And some poorer people
like
the idea of being found beautiful or exotic abroad, exciting desire in others.”20 This is not to romanticize the sex trade, but it serves as a useful counterpoint to the ways in which actors are depicted by antiprostitution crusaders. A study of Vietnamese migrants who had relocated in Cambodia found that almost all of them knew that they would work in a brothel in Cambodia and their motivations consisted of “economic incentives, desire for an independent lifestyle, and dissatisfaction with rural life and agricultural labor.” After raids on the brothels by “rescue” organizations, the women
329

RONALD WEITZER AND MELISSA DITMORE

“usually returned to their brothel as quickly as possible.”21 The researchers argue that criminalizing the sex industry “forces [the workers] underground, making them more difficult to reach with appropriate services and increasing the likelihood of exploitation.” Similar findings have been reported in Europe, where the women are “often aware of the sexual nature of the work. . . . Many migrants do know what is ahead of them, do earn a large amount of money in a short time selling sex, and do have control over their working condition.”22

One investigation of trafficking from eastern Europe to Holland, based on interviews with 72 women, found that few of the women were coercively trafficked and that a “large number” had previously worked as prostitutes: For most of the women, economic motives were decisive. The opportunity to earn a considerable amount of money in a short period of time was found to be irresistible. . . . In most cases recruiting was done by friends, acquaintances, or even family members.23

The facilitators made travel arrangements, obtained necessary documents, and provided money to the women. In Australia “the majority of women know they will be working in the sex industry and often decide to come to Australia in the belief that they will be able to make a substantial amount of money. . . .

Few of the women would ever consider themselves sex slaves.”24

These are not isolated reports; others have shown that a proportion of migrants sold sex prior to relocating or were well aware that they would be working in the sex industry in their new home. One analyst concludes that,

“The majority of ‘trafficking victims’ are aware that the jobs offered them are in the sex industry.”25 Whether this is indeed true for the majority of those who have relocated to another locale and end up selling sex, it is clear that traffickers do not necessarily fit the “folk devil” stereotype popularized by the antitrafficking movement. Some facilitators are relatives, friends, or associates who recruit workers and assist with migration, and these individuals have a qualitatively different relationship with workers than do predators who use force or deception to lure victims into the trade.

Another fact is that agencies often have difficulty both identifying and gaining the cooperation of individuals that they believe have been trafficked.

An assessment of local U.S. law enforcement responses to trafficking found:

“Law enforcement may also be reluctant to intervene in sex and labor trafficking situations due to a belief that victims were complicit with their own victimization.”26 Another problem involves the methods commonly used to “rescue” people, typically taking the form of aggressive police raids on brothels. Law enforcement officers typically rely on a person’s appearance,
330

SEX TRAFFICKING: FACTS AND FICTIONS

particularly fear and lack of cooperation with police, as a strong indicator of whether a person has been trafficked.27 However, this fear and uncooperativeness is also the single greatest obstacle to identifying a person as trafficked.28 Raids sometimes help to free individuals from coercive situations, but in the U.S. and other countries such raids are often counterproductive, resulting in the detention and further victimization of sex workers or their deportation from the country, rather than freedom or support services.29 In the U.S., some law enforcement agents interviewed by the Sex Workers Project insisted that raids are an ineffective antitrafficking tool: these officials believed that “the nature of the crime and the nature of the victims make raids not effective. . . . You need a victim to be willing to open up and tell you. . . . I don’t see raids being a consistently effective tool,” and another stated, “I question the effectiveness of raids. If the point of the raid is to uncover a trafficking operation, then the crux of the thing is the mental situation, people living in a situation of terror. The blitz approach of interviews that have to take place in raids are not that helpful.” The raids are “such an overwhelming situation, and why would they trust us?”30 One official revealed, “We lose lots of potential victims after the raids.” In other words, antitrafficking raids, which are the prevailing tactic, are viewed as ineffective if not counterproductive even by some of the agents involved, who are in the best position to assess them.

Antitrafficking raids are more likely to result in deportations than in assisting victims. A Department of Homeland Security press release revealed that in 2008, 483 people were placed in immigration proceedings after antitrafficking raids.31 One enforcement official revealed that the government had a larger objective than that of rescuing victims: “The goal is not to rescue victims, but to harm the network; women get deported . . . and you don’t rescue a victim, but do take out the network.”32 This approach was faulted by the Women’s Commission for Refugee Women and Children: “There is a need for immigration and labor reform that would yield dramatic results in protections for trafficked and exploited persons in the informal economy.”33

In short, the evidence indicates that (1) identifying and assisting trafficking victims is extremely difficult and (2) migration for sex work is a complex and varied process. There are
multiple migration trajectories and worker
experiences
, ranging from highly coercive and exploitative to informed consent and conscious intentionality on the part of the migrant. Such complexities, nuances, and variations in the forms and processes of trafficking have been ignored by abolitionist forces and by governments influenced by these forces.

In what follows, we have distilled the core claims made by crusade organizations and their allies in the Bush administration, claims that have largely converged over the past decade.

331

RONALD WEITZER AND MELISSA DITMORE

F I C TI O N S

Claim 1: Sex trafficking is inseparable from prostitution,

and prostitution is evil by definition

Prostitution is defined by the crusade as an institution of male domination and exploitation of women. CATW’s website proclaims: “All prostitution exploits women, regardless of women’s consent. Prostitution affects all women, justifies the sale of any woman, and reduces all women to sex.” It can never qualify as a conventional commercial exchange like other service work nor can it ever be organized in a way that advances workers’ interests. As activist and State Department official, Laura Lederer, insists: “This is not a legitimate form of labor. . . . It can never be a legitimate way to make a living because it’s inherently harmful for men, women, and children. . . . This whole commercial sex industry is a human-rights abuse.”34

Morality is central, of course, for religious conservatives, who view prostitution as sexual deviance, as a cause of moral decay, and as a threat to marriage because it breaks the link between sex, love, and reproduction. As the founder of Evangelicals for Social Action stated, the campaign against prostitution and sex trafficking “certainly fits with an evangelical concern for sexual integrity. Sex is to be reserved for a marriage relationship where there is a lifelong covenant between a man and a woman.”35 And an article in
Christianity Today
, titled “Sex Isn’t Work,” stated, “When sex becomes commerce, the moral fabric of our culture is deeply damaged.”36 A government crackdown on prostitution (as well as pornography) thus ratifies the religious right’s views on sex and the family.

The claim that prostitution is intrinsically evil is a tenet that does not lend itself to evaluation with empirical evidence, unlike most of the other claims outlined later. We do not, therefore, consider this claim a “fiction”

because it cannot be proved or disproved. But it is crucial to the abolitionist paradigm because it is the very keystone on which all other claims rest.

Activists argue that prostitution is the root cause of trafficking and inseparable from it. The conflation of trafficking and prostitution is motivated by the crusade’s ultimate goal of eliminating the entire sex trade.37 Activist Donna Hughes, for example, calls for “re-linking trafficking and prostitution, and combating the commercial sex trade as a whole.”38 Not only does she equate the two (“sex trafficking of women and children—what’s commonly called prostitution”),39 but also claims that “most ‘sex workers’ are—or originally started out as—trafficked women and girls.”40

This claim is fictional: studies have not demonstrated that “most” or even the majority of prostitutes have been trafficked. Moreover, prostitution and
332