UK Liberty

Sex

Posted in freedom of assembly by ukliberty on January 4, 2008

Just before Christmas, Harriet Harman MP said she wanted to outlaw paying for sex.

“I think we do need to have a debate

– ‘debate’ means we’ll listen but do what is politically expedient –

and unless you tackle the demand side of human trafficking which is fuelling this trade, we will not be able to protect women from it.”

Is trafficking “fuelling this trade”?

Ms Harman said she was convinced that a ban on paying for sex was necessary to halt demand for sex workers trafficked into Britain.

How on earth would a ban “halt demand” for prostitutes?! Surely demand would remain if there was a decrease in supply?

Last time I looked, in January 2007, there seemed to be just one ‘official published study on trafficking in the UK’ – a paper (245Kb PDF) by Liz Kelly and Linda Regan, entitled ‘Stopping Traffic: Exploring the extent of, and responses to, trafficking in women for sexual exploitation in the UK’ – and that seems to be the case still now, as the Government’s Crime Reduction Toolkit hasn’t been updated, which is surprising as the paper dates back to 2000.

But as I said then, read the study and it seems you’ll ‘officially’ know as much as anyone else. Probably more than Harman, anyway.

The crime reduction toolkit says,

Off-street prostitution has traditionally been an area of the sex industry that has been subject to minimal monitoring.

So unless monitoring has increased, I’m not sure how Harman can say with any certainty if trafficking is “fueling” prostitution.

The toolkit also says (quoting the study),

Equally, it is a difficult area to bring prosecutions – victims are wary of providing evidence for fear of reprisals and through fear of the legal system. When prosecutions have been brought it has been difficult to gain sentences with sufficient deterrent to offset the potential gains for traffickers.

Internationally, and the UK is no exception, trafficking people is a less risky activity for criminals than trafficking in drugs. The maximum sentences in most jurisdictions are seldom as long for people as for drug trafficking. The lower potential costs and higher profits, especially where the traffic is for the purpose of prostitution, have acted as powerful incentives to organised crime, smaller networks and ‘‘enterprising’’ individuals.

So, assuming there is a problem (I’m sure trafficking does go on, I just don’t know how important it is or how much there is), is prohibition going to help?

Indeed neither the Toolkit nor the paper suggest prohibition – what they suggest is increased monitoring, higher sentences, helping prosecution witnesses, and so on, in other words reducing incentive to traffick and increasing incentive to help stop it.

Furthermore, the paper also claims that some women volunteer to be trafficked because they dream of a better life in the UK than the one they have at home – so it seems to me that helping to improve life in their homeland would decrease trafficking too.

Harman also asked,

“Do we think it’s right in the 21st century that women should be in a sex trade or do we think it’s exploitation and should be banned?”

Well, if we think of as liberty as the freedom to do as one wishes (without harming another), then yes, it does seem right that women (and indeed men and other genders) should be able to freely sell their ‘services’. I don’t see any harm in that.

It seems to me the harm comes when prostitutes are exploited by others, particularly when it involves violence (or threats of violence). I don’t believe a ban will help with that, but talking about banning something is much more exciting and interesting than “improving monitoring, crime detection and prosecution”, isn’t it?

I think that Harman is more bansturbating than genuinely seeking to solve this problem.

Indeed, Sweden’s solution (which she claims to be looking at) is rather more involved than a simple ban.

Update

Someone pointed out that the claim people freely enter into becoming prostitutes is not true, that the majority are ‘forced’ into it by circumstance. I’m happy to concede that, without having any sort of survey or study, but noting that banning or prohibiting seems to be an inadequate solution, and indeed may make their lives worse – surely we should be addressing those circumstances that ‘force’ them into that way of life?

But it is so much easier to talk about banning things, isn’t it?

Update 2

Funny how normally legal things become illegal just because money changes hands.

Advertisements

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Heather said, on January 23, 2008 at 6:31 pm

    Shortly before the trial of convicted serial killer Robert “Willie” Pickton, who was found guilty in the deaths of six troubled women who worked as prostitutes on Vancouver, Canada’s Downtown Eastside, Orato.com put out a call for sex trade workers who would like to report on the trial alongside regular journalists.

    The response to the idea varied, but some people, such as Steve Sanborn, vocalized very strong disapproval. Steve thought we were being cavalier when we asked sex trade workers with a “passion for writing” to contact us and took particular issue with the fact we called them ‘workers.’

    Luckily there were two former sex trade workers who were determined to prove that they had something special to offer. For a year, Trisha Baptie and Pauline VanKoll delivered what we consider to be the most groundbreaking coverage in history, providing the fallen and missing women, over 60 in total, a voice. http://www.orato.com/pickton-trial

    Now that the Ipswich murders are going to trial, Orato.com is once again calling for sex trade workers who worked alongside the victims and want to report on the trial from their personal perspective. If you you fit this description, contact us at heather@orato.com

  2. […] We don’t in fact have much of a clue about people trafficking, particularly for the purposes of sexual exploitation.  Of course it goes on, but we do not know its scale. So, putting that aside for now, are we limited to merely creating new legislation, giving the police more money and developing new technologies? […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: