This weekend I received this message from Benjamin Perrin, author of Invisible Chains: Canada’s Underground World of Human Trafficking:

One of the things that “Invisible Chains” mentions you can do to help combat human trafficking and sexual exploitation in Canada is to write a letter to the editor when the topic comes up on the news. Well it has in a big way.

Kirk Makin is a “justice reporter” for the Globe and Mail. On Saturday, June 4, he wrote a 2,224 word piece cheerleading for legalizing prostitution. If you’ve read “Invisible Chains”, you know how devastating that would be for victims and the gift it would be to traffickers.

A link to Makin’s story can be found here.

If you’re willing, please take 5 minutes to write a LETTER TO THE EDITOR in your own words on why Canada should NOT legalize prostitution. It is so critical that the other side of this issue be heard.

Your letter should be less than 150 words, and must include your name, mailing address and daytime phone number. You can email your letter to: letters@globeandmail.com.

Thank you for taking a few minutes to speak up for those being sold!

To help you write your letters, here are some posts you can read:

• Dear Rob Ford: My Letter to the Mayor of Toronto
• Should Canada Legalize Prostitution? Panel Discussion with Gunilla Ekberg, Lee Lakeman & Trisha Baptie
• Prostitution Law for Dummies: Ontario’s Recent Court Ruling in 9 Simple Points
• The Booming Escort Service Industry: Another Reason Why Legalization of Prostitution is a Bad Idea
• A Swedish Sex Worker’s Thoughts on the Criminalization of Her Clients

Let’s write when it counts!

Michelle Brock

Last week I wrote a post about Toronto councillor Giorgio Mammoliti’s proposal to create a red light district on Toronto Island. You can read it here. As promised, here is my letter to the Rob Ford, the mayor of Toronto, regarding Mammoliti’s proposal.

*Update: Mayor Ford’s response below!*

Dear Mayor Rob Ford,

My name is Michelle Brock and I am a documentary film maker and writer at www.hopeforthesold.com, a blog about sex trafficking. I am also an Ontario resident. I recently had several concerned readers contact me in regard to Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti’s proposal of having a red light district on Toronto Island. From what I understand, Mammoliti is currently preparing a report on the matter, which he plans to bring to your attention sometime this spring.

Though regulating brothels would provide the city with some tax revenue, I would like to present you with the negative consequences of a regulated, legal prostitution industry. The proposed location adds its own set of repercussions.

Amsterdam is often heralded as an example of how a government can regulate the prostitution industry. Though the Amsterdam government had thought legalization and regulation would make organized crime easier to control and women safer within the industry, the opposite has proven true.

In 2003, a mere 3 years after the brothel ban was lifted, the City Council realized their actions had invited Nigerian and Estonian criminal groups into the area. Because legalization increased demand for paid sex and men from all over the world flocked to the region, human traffickers saw an opportunity to fill the supply side. Trafficking comes in threes – people, drugs, and guns – and the mayor of Amsterdam has called their decision to legalize an abysmal failure. The city is now back tracking by shutting down big sections of the red light district.

Project SECLUSION in Canada has found human trafficking suspects to be linked to other organized criminal activites such as conspiracy to commit murder, credit card fraud, mortgage fraud, immigration fraud, and organized prostitution, in Canada or abroad. We do not want more of these people flocking to Toronto.

Once demand for paid sex begins to increase, it will be impossible to contain it to an island. Illegal brothels, massage parlours, and strip clubs would spring up in other parts of Toronto as well. Following legalization in Victoria, Australia, illegal establishments quickly outnumbered legal ones at a rate of three and four to one. Escort services out of private residences and hotels are becoming the new mode of prostitution, which is almost impossible to regulate.

I understand that if Justice Himel’s ruling to strike down prostitution laws stands up to the appeal, you will be in the difficult position of having to make decisions about regulating such an industry in Toronto. To avoid this position, I would encourage you to speak up against the legalization movement. If the ruling does stand up however, I strongly advise you, on behalf of the anti-trafficking community, not to accept Mammoliti’s proposal of creating a red light district on Toronto Island. Though legalized prostitution would itself increase demand for paid sex, a sex island would increase it even more dramatically due to its novelty. Because demand for paid sex is an opportunity for human traffickers and pimps to provide supply, a red light district to increase tax revenue is not a wise move.

In contrast to legalization or full decriminalization of prostitution, Sweden’s approach has significantly cut down human trafficking levels. It has criminalized the purchase of sex while decriminalizing the selling of it. Women are offered exit programs. This has decreased demand for paid sex, reducing monetary incentives for traffickers to set up shop. Because its success has encouraged other countries to adopt it, this approach is now known as the “Nordic Model.” This is the direction we should be headed.

The costs outweigh the benefits when a regulated red light district becomes a tourist attraction. Tax revenue is not worth it in the long run when organized crime sees an opportunity to make money too.

I hope this gives you some points to think about regarding Mammoliti’s proposal. Thank you for your service and dedication to Toronto. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or want more information!

Some concerned HFTS readers recently sent me articles about a shocking proposal coming from Toronto Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti:  the creation of a red light district on Toronto Island.  This really should not come as a surprise, as a regulated brothel district was one of Mammoliti’s central campaign tenets in his (cut-short) run for mayor last year.

His argument?  It would provide millions of dollars in revenue for the city and provide a well-defined area where the sex trade can flourish.  Mammoliti told CBC news that such a place would increase Toronto tourism as well, and is planning to discuss it with Toronto’s mayor Rob Ford soon.

In response to these developments, I am writing a letter to both the councillor and the mayor (you can read it here).  I would encourage our readers, especially those living in Toronto, to write to them as well.  Contact information for Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti is:

Toronto City Hall
100 Queen Street West, Suite B27
Toronto, ON M5H 2N2

councillor_mammoliti@toronto.ca

Mayor Rob Ford’s contact information is:

Office of the Mayor
Toronto City Hall,
2nd Floor,
100 Queen St. West,
Toronto ON M5H 2N2

mayor_ford@toronto.ca

Here are some points you can include in your letter:

• Though a sex island would probably increase tourism, are large groups of men seeking paid sex the kind of tourist we want more of?

• When Amsterdam lifted its brothel ban and began a regulated prostitution industry, sex trafficking became easier and organized criminal groups moved into the area.  The City Council has since tried to back track by shutting down huge sections of the red light district and the mayor has called the lifting of the brothel ban an abysmal failure.

• When demand for paid sex begins to increase, it will be impossible to contain it to an island. Brothels, massage parlours, and escort services will likely spring up in other parts of Toronto as well.

I will give Mammoliti the benefit of the doubt that he is simply seeking tax revenues and is unaware of the implications a red light district would have on Toronto Island and the rest of the city as well.  Now it is our responsibility to tell him that the big picture looks very different, and that increasing demand for paid sex is a recipe for more sex trafficking, exploitation of women, and organized crime.  An island like the one proposed would draw crowds for the novelty of it, and it would be difficult to back track later on.

For articles on Giorgio Mammoliti’s proposal, check these out:

• Red light district pitched for Toronto Island by CBC News
• Mammoliti pushes for Toronto Island brothels by TheStar.com
• Build red-light district on Toronto Islands, Mammoliti suggests by The Globe and Mail

Get more informed on the legalization debate – this will help you as you write your letters/emails. You can also download and sign this letter from EVE and send it to your member of Parliament.  Special thanks to Carly Romano for raising this to my attention and dialogging with me this weekend!

Michelle Brock

**Update: read my letter to Mayor Ford and his response here**

If you have watched our film on sex trafficking in Canada, you will recognize the “Swedish model” as a strategy that has worked to curb sex trafficking and the exploitation of women in Sweden.  In 1999 Swedish government criminalized the purchase of sexual services and decriminalized those selling it, ensuring that men would be held responsible for prostitution and that women would have access to exit programs.  Due to its success, the law has been adopted in other Nordic countries.

Gunilla Ekberg, who played a key role in creating the Swedish model, is one of my favourite researchers and a well sought-after human rights consultant.  You can imagine my delight upon discovering that she was headed to BC!

On International Women’s Day last week, I had the opportunity to attend a panel discussion in Victoria entitled “Prostitution and Women’s Equality: Imagining More for Women,” organized by EVE (Formerly Exploited Voices now Educating) and REED (Resist Exploitation, Embrace Dignity).  The panel consisted of Gunilla Ekberg, EVE’s Trisha Baptie, and and Lee Lakeman from the Canadian Association of Sexual Assault Centres.  Prostitution law was the topic at hand, which is quite timely in light of the Bedford case and the push for legalization of prostitution in Canada.

THE HIGHLIGHTS:

• Trisha Baptie, who worked in the sex trade (both indoor and outdoor) for 15 years, kicked off the discussion by sharing that prostitution is violence against women that is “born out of sexism, classism, racism, poverty, and other forms of systemic oppression.”

• Lee Lakeman spoke about her experience answering crisis calls at sexual assault centres, explaining how social service cuts in the BC area led to more calls from prostituted women.

• The descriptions given by trafficking victims and “local prostituted women” were always similar.  This trend pushed rape crisis centres to take an official position on the prostitution issue.

• Due to the physical harm on the body and how paid sex contributes to the dehumanization of women, they believe that prostitution is violence against women and should not be legalized. Lakeman suggested that as a country we must look at how poverty and racism play into prostitution, and to not lord our wealth over other countries but forgive debts and build foreign aid to protect the vulnerable around the world.

Gunilla Ekberg, who participated in the negotiations at the UN Palermo Protocol and has directed several national and multilateral projects to combat human trafficking in the EU, had the following to say:

• Many pro-prostitution groups use Germany and the Netherlands as examples of where Canada should head regarding prostitution law.  Both countries have decriminalized prostitution, making it legal to buy sex.  Instead of proving that this approach works, these two countries are actually a case in point of how legalization fails to protect women, decrease trafficking, or curtail organized crime.

• On October 1, 2000, the Dutch Parliament decided to remove the provision in the criminal code that criminalized the brothel.  This came after 20 years of debate on how one would control organized prostitution.  The lifting of the brothel ban created a new economic sector, allowing anyone to establish a brothel, escort service, or massage parlour by simply applying for a license from the municipality.  The municipality cannot refuse such requests, and in fact many brothels are even found in farm houses.

• Contrary to popular belief, almost all those in brothels are independent contractors. They can easily receive a license, most regions simply requiring show of ID and a payment.  As independent contractors, their well-being is not guaranteed by the brothel owners. Many brothel owners have said in interviews that what happens behind the door is not their responsibility as long as it does not interfere with the commerce of the brothel.

• Though some rooms have a panic button, women struggle getting to it when they are in danger with a violent man.  Some in Canada argue that indoor prostitution is safer that street prostitution. But it is not the place that harms you – it is those who are paying for your body that cause harm.

• When you have a legal sector, police back off, and traffickers are drawn to the area. In 2003 and 2004, Amsterdam City Council realized that they had invited Estonian and Nigerian ‘mafia’ into the area, who can easily get girls into the country with ‘tourist’ visas.

• In an effort to have more control, the government said that girls need to meet with a social worker before getting a license.  A Turkish pimp who owned 100 brothels in the Netherlands sued the government for this mandate, on the basis that such an initiative would hinder his profits under corporate law. When you legalize prostitution, you enable organized criminal groups to establish corporations with rights to sue the government over lost profit. Is this what we want in Canada?

• Germany lifted their brothel ban in 2001.  To improve conditions for those in prostitution, they offered special social insurance benefits to those who wanted it.  The first evaluation of the law found that most of the women in the legal sector were from other countries. The second evaluation showed that the conditions of those in prostitution had not changed, and in 5 years only a handful of women (about 5) had taken advantage of the special social insurance benefits. In addition to this, the new law did not help women exit prostitution.  The law had failed to do what they had hoped.

• Therefore the German government finds itself in the same situation as the Netherlands. Traffickers have organized large brothel conglomerates with the rights of corporations, and both countries are trying to backtrack.  Is this what we want for Canada?

This can be contrasted to the approach Sweden took in 1998.  From 1994 to 1998, the percentage of women in Parliament rose from 27% to 47%.  The law they created, which criminalized the purchaser of sex, addressed the narcissistic sexual behaviour of men.  How has this worked?

• When the law came into effect, police in Demark noticed that traffickers were setting up shop there instead.  This demonstrates that traffickers try to avoid places with hostile laws regarding prostitution.

• Pimps, traffickers, and johns are convicted together in one trial, so that the victim only has to testify once.  This ensures efficiency in the system and protects the victim from even more emotional trauma.

• One woman from Russia was trafficked and sold around apartments in Stockholm.  She was forced to service over 500 men in 3 weeks, and said afterward that if it had not been for the law, she would have been dead.  The law made them stop the abuse and helped her to realize she had value.

• Violators of the law are dealt with swiftly, whether they are well-known or not.  Two famous football players, a police chief, a lawyer, two politicians, a CEO of International Securitus, and a Supreme Court judge, are among those who have been convicted recently.

• Twelve years after this law came into effect, a special government inquiry, led by the chancellor of justice (highest legal position in Sweden) was conducted.  It found that the number of people in street prostitution had halved since 1998.  In comparison to neighbouring Denmark (which does not have such a law), Sweden’s market for paid sex had plummeted.

• When asked about deterrence, the majority of men responded that legislation or public shame would deter them from paying for sex. This shows that the law can help change behaviour of some.

Instead of backtracking, like Germany and the Netherlands, Sweden is taking these laws further.  A new bill is coming into effect on July 1, extending prison terms for men who are convicted under the law.

Ekberg was hoping that the bill would also enable the courts to convict Swedish men who pay for sex in other countries with a similar prostitution law, but that portion did not pass.  ”Next battle!” she says.

The event ended off with some discussion and questions, including a statement from one person arguing that women should have the right to prostitute themselves, and that prostitution and trafficking were not the same thing.  To this, Lee Lakeman replied: “The brilliance of patriarchy is disintegration of issues,” and Trisha Baptie questioned:  “Why are we standing for our individual right to prostitute instead of standing with our sisters?”

Thank you Gunilla, Trisha, and Lee for sharing your experience and expertise with us, and for showing us that Canada can do better for prostituted women.

For more reading, check out Max Waltman’s article:  “Prohibiting Purchase of Sex in Sweden: Impact, Obstacles, Potential, and Supporting Escape”, and a Solutions Journal article entitled “The Swedish Approach: A European Union Country Fights Sex Trafficking”.

You can also get more information about the legalization debate at the EVE and REED websites.

What do you think about the Swedish model? About legalization?  If you attended the event, either in Victoria or Vancouver, I would also love to hear your thoughts below.

Michelle Brock

The last seven days have been kind of a big deal in Ontario when it comes to human trafficking and prostitution.  If you have somehow missed it in the news or are unclear as to what actually happened last week, here is a list of the basics you must know.

• Two sex trade workers, Terry-Jean Bedford and Valerie Scott (along with Amy Lebovitch and their lawyer Alan Young), launched a constitutional challenge of Canada’s anti-prostitution laws.  In simple terms, they want prostitution and everything surrounding the actual act to be decriminalized. This would make prostitution legal, allowing sex workers to operate freely. (To be more precise, the process of prostitution would be allowed.  Check out what John posted in the comments section to understand this more).

• Last week on September 28th the Ontario Superior Court ruled in favour of their proposal.  As a result, now in Ontario it is no longer illegal to keep a bawdy house (brothel), communicate for the purposes of prostitution, or live off the avails of the sex trade.

• Bedford said that is was like emancipation day for sex workers, because now they can work from the safety of their homes instead of facing the dangers of the street.  Valerie Scott said that now sex workers can “pick up the phone and call the police to report a bad client.”

• Not everyone is celebrating.  Many claim that prostitution and sex trafficking are linked. MP Joy Smith, who works with victims of trafficking, had girls call her in tears when they found out about the Ontario court ruling.

• Police point out that in some cases trafficking victims are unwilling to cooperate with police because they fear their traffickers.  In such cases, police have been able to charge the trafficker with living off the avails of prostitution.  Now they can no longer do this.  This means that pimps cannot be charged for living off the money that their girls bring them through forced prostitution.

• Some argue that prostitution is a chosen profession, just like any other.  However several studies show that most ‘sex workers’ chose their ‘profession’  because of dire circumstances that were not based on real choice at all.  Many are too drug-addicted and manipulated by pimps to make their own decisions.  Benjamin Perrin points out in his CBC radio interview and Globe and Mail article that though Bedford is a confident woman in her 50s today, her affidavit tells the story of a childhood filled with physical, psychological, and sexual abuse.  At 16 years old while she was under provincial child protection, she met “an abusive 37-year old drug dealer and drug addict” and was sold for sex to fund their drug addictions.

• Anti-trafficking groups want Canada to adopt the Swedish model of dealing with prostitution, which criminalizes the men who buy sex and offers the sellers of it with help to leave the industry.

• Justice Susan Himel, who made the court decision, stated that the information about sex trafficking brought to her attention was “incidental and not directly relevant to her decision.”  In other words, she does not believe there to be a link at all between prostitution and sex trafficking.

• The federal government is going to appeal the court ruling in an attempt to reverse the decision made by Himel.

The debate about prostitution and human trafficking in Canada is going to be quite a hot one for a while.  Here are a couple of resources that can help you gain an understanding about the ruling and the prostitution debate.

• CBC radio audio interview with MP Joy Smith and Benjamin Perrin
• Globe and Mail Sweden’s Fix: jail the johns by Benjamin Perrin
• Article Former Prostitutes Picket Trade by Calgary Sun
• Article Prostitution laws struck down by Ontario court CBC News
• Prohibiting Purchase of Sex in Sweden: Impact, Obstacles, Potential, and Supporting Escape by Max Waltman
• End Modern Day Slavery Now website
• Official Superior Court of Justice Record for Bedford vs. Canada
• CTV News video interview and write-up about why so many are concerned.
• Cops rail against prostitution ruling by Toronto Sun

I promise to keep you up to date with how this develops.  What do you think about the Ontario court ruling?  Feel free to post a comment to kick off the conversation!

Michelle Brock

According to an article by Sheila Jeffreys, the prostitution industry is changing.  In the Western world, brothels are being replaced by escort services which use the internet and cell phone to connect women with buyers.  This has huge implications for policy-makers who are trying to curb trafficking. Why?  Because traditional strategies are no longer valid.

Some policy-makers promote the legalization or decriminalization of prostitution, arguing that it makes sex workers safer and combats organized crime.  But Jeffreys says that “these assumptions are based upon the idea that prostitution will take place in brothels which can institute health and safety codes, and enable easy identification of the illegal brothel industry which can be closed down.” The escort sector, which operates through cell phones and delivers women to private houses, hotel rooms, and cars by the roadside, is beyond regulation.

In Queensland, Australia, where prostitution was legalized, 75% of prostitution is composed of outcall or escort services.  The Queensland PLA annual reports state clearly that legalization has failed to discourage illegal prostitution, mainly because of the development of the escort sector.  In both Queensland and the Netherlands, the illegal sector is larger than the legal sector.

Escort prostitution used to be seen as fancy, even classy.  But it has grown to include a broad bottom layer that consists of mostly foreign women and girls who are extremely vulnerable.  The so called “safety advantages” of legalization only benefit a small minority of women; it can only apply to brothel prostitution since there is no way of monitoring or preventing risks in the escort and street prostitution sectors.

Therefore, legalization of prostitution is an out-of-date strategy, and policy-makers should focus on other solutions if they are serious about reducing sex trafficking.

To read Sheila Jeffrey’s full article, “Brothels Without Walls: the Escort Sector as a Problem for the Legalization of Prostitution,” it is available for purchase here (students can gain access through their college/university online journal archives).  For more on this topic, check out our last two articles on legalization:

Post #1: Swedish Sex Worker’s Thoughts on the Criminalization of Her Clients

Post #2: Author Victor Malarek Responds to Swedish Sex Worker’s Statements

Michelle Brock

We received quite a few comments and messages from sex workers and pro-legalization individuals regarding our recent post on the criminalization of men in Sweden.  I’ve decided to write another post in response to the comments we received.

I’d like to begin with a response I received via email from Victor Malarek, an investigative journalist and senior reporter for CTV’s W5.  He has spent a considerable amount of time in Europe, specifically addressing the trafficking of Eastern European women and girls into Western Europe and North America.  He has talked extensively to victims, pimps, traffickers, johns, government officials, and people who rescue and counsel human trafficking victims.  He has been in the thick of it, on the front lines, watching how traffickers operate.  He has also seen first hand the effects of legalization on trafficked women, and written two books, The Natashas: The New Global Sex Trade, and The Johns: Sex for Sale and the Men Who Buy It, addressing some of these very issues. Here are his thoughts on our post:

“The pro-prostitution organizations…which are basically individuals used as fronts by the sex industry (which is only interested in making huge amounts of money), will come out of the woodwork and vociferously attack any group that fights legalization and decriminalization of the flesh trade.

The arguments put forward by the pro-prostitution groups are specious and full of lies and propaganda.  The fact is that wherever legalization has been implemented, it has led to a monumental failure in all aspects of the so-called trade.  It has always led to more and more women trafficked, and has not led to an improvement in the condition of women ensnared in the trade.

The pro-prostitution groups’ position against trafficking is a ruse.  Their attempts to separate trafficking from legalization are a divide and conquer tactic…they know full well that huge numbers of trafficked women make up the trade. To see how bad the situation is where legalization has been implemented, read ‘The Johns’ and what has happened in Amsterdam!  Moreover, the legal and illegal brothels in several Australian states which have legalized are filled with Southeast Asian women.  These women do not speak English, they don’t have any money.  They don’t have the business acumen to set themselves as business contractors.

It is interesting that in ALL my talks in Canada, the U.S., Australia, Britain, Ireland, Copenhagen, Madrid, Helsinki, Kiev…reps from the pro-prostitution orgs come out in force to take me on, and after my speech, not a peep!  Because they know I know B.S. when I hear it and can challenge their claims with ease.

My issue here is one of social justice for the vast majority of women who are forced into the sex trade fiasco…not the minority of twits who yell and scream on behalf of the sex industry!”

Legalization grows the size of the sex industry, which includes a rise in demand for paid sex.  When local women cannot provide enough supply, women migrate from other countries to take advantage of the financial opportunities.  If it ended here, I would not be blogging about legalization.  the problem arises when traffickers also see opportunity, and begin funneling girls into these countries where demand is booming.  Supply and demand, it’s simple economics!  If you were a trafficker, would you be drawn to a country where  men were criminalized for giving you business, or to a country where they felt free to roam?

Amsterdam legalized prostitution in 2000 and is known for its red light district.  Though the goal was the regulate the industry in such a way that helps women and reduces organized crime, in reality trafficking of girls and women has increased.  This has led the government to take some serious action.  Read these articles for more info on this:

Does Legalizing Prostitution Work? by Helene Mees

Stag Parties Fuel Sex Trafficking by BBC News

Amsterdam Buys Brothels in Red Light Cleanup by Google AFP

Turn Our the Red Light? by Newsweek

The Netherlands Rethinks Sex and Drugs by Olivia Ward

Mayor Unveils Plan to Clean Up Amsterdam’s Red Light District by CBC News

In 1999, Sweden passed a law the prohibits the purchase of sexual services.  Under this law, men who use prostituted women or buy sexual services are criminalized and nailed with a fine and/or or up to six months in prison.  Meanwhile, the women are not criminalized, but offered exit strategies to get them out of prostitution.  Though the majority of Swedes supported this law, there are a few that are not so pleased.

Here is a short interview with Swedish sex worker Pye Jacobsson, who has some serious issues with the legislation.  We have added our response to the interview below, addressing how this all relates to sex trafficking.  Please watch the clip, read our comments, and add yours.

• To begin, Jacobsson criticizes how the law states that “no prostitution is prostitution out of free will” and that “every woman engaging in prostitution is a victim.”  In our opinion, maybe the Swedish government did go a little too far in making this statement. We know that there are some women (usually white, middle-class) who choose to make this their profession for one reason or another. However, the majority of women and girls in prostitution do not have the luxury of sitting in an IKEA furnished room with a coffee, cigarettes, nice clothes, and a coy smile while chatting on camera about their choices when it comes to sex work.  If you throw in some drugs, second-hand clothing, and the watchful eye of a pimp, you’ve got yourself a more realistic picture of what the majority have for a work environment.

• Jacobsson claims to be representative of sex workers in Sweden. Maybe she is representative of her circle of sex worker friends.  She alludes later in her interview to the fact that they are able to compete against foreign sex workers because their clients feel safer with Swedish women.  Who does she mean by foreign sex workers?  The ones that came by their “free will” to prostitute themselves on the cold streets of Stockholm?  I highly doubt the is representative of these individuals as well.  Therefore, Jacobsson only represents Swedish middle-class sex workers who work indoors. This means she cannot speak on behalf of the sex trade industry, specifically when it comes to trafficking victims.

• She continues to criticize the law because it has had so many amendments.  To this we say: just because a law is not perfect does not mean it cannot be improved upon. It’s not about the law itself but the spirit of the law, which aims to protect those who are victimized.  Even laws regarding crimes like murder and drunk driving have developed over the years.  Ending the trans-Atlantic slave trade was an implementation nightmare, yet it was taken on because it was the right thing to do.  And eventually the trade came to an end.  Sure, business owners were no longer able to use slaves, and many revolted because their “rights to use free labour” were being taken away. But the law dictated that the rights of the downtrodden had to prevail over the profits and “rights” of the slave masters.   It is the same with prostitution.  Because sex trafficking increases when prostitution is legalized or tolerated, we believe that sex workers must make a sacrifice in order to spare those who are victims.

• Jacobsson expresses her concern that there are a number of women in the strip and porn industry who have had their children taken away from them.  I wonder, what is this number in comparison to the number of mothers who have lost their children to traffickers? Or the number of children that have been born with Johns as fathers?

• She claims that the law is responsible for the increased stereotypes of prostitutes; that the law makes society view them as less human – and that as a result sex workers are treated more poorly by the men that use them.  But what I would say to her is this:  the men that are willing to come rent your body parts already see you as less than human! Human beings are more than sexual objects.  Paying to have sex with a prostituted woman/sex worker is inherently dehumanizing because it takes the wholeness out of the woman’s humanity. So don’t tell me that it is the law that dehumanizes prostituted women.  Men do it just fine on their own.

• I think the most outrageous argument Jacobsson brings to the table is when she says that the normal way for the police to find out about trafficking victims is from “good clients, who report trafficking victims when they discover them.  She claims that now that the law is in place, these men are afraid to report them because buying sex is illegal, and therefore trafficking victims have no one to rescue them.  It is incredibly naive to think that there was ever a point in history where the users of prostituted women were the heroes that rescued victims of sexual exploitation by giving police the necessary alerts between their sexcapades. The financially secure CEO with five kids and a wife was calling the police regularly with updates on the trafficking situation in Sweden.  Right.  Sure, there may have been a few girls that were rescued from tips received by “nice Johns,” but if the Johns weren’t the ones creating demand there would be no trafficking problem in the first place. Jacobsson’s assertion that Johns need to feel safe while they fuel the industry through demand – so they can “rescue” victims –  is absurd.

• Finally, Jacobsson says that women are not offered exit programs.  But in fact the Representatives of the Prostitution Unit in Stockholm, a group that helps individuals leave prostitution, say that 60% of the people they have had contact with between after the law was put into place have left prostitution permanently.  Many of these women pointed to the law (and the funded exit programs) as their reason for seeking help.

According to Gunilla Ekberg’s article, The Swedish Law That Prohibits the Purchase of A Sexual Service: Best Practices for Prevention of Prostitution and Trafficking in Human Beings, here are some more facts about the law’s effectiveness Sweden.

• When buyers  risk punishment, the number of men who buy prostituted women decreases, and local prostitution markets become less lucrative.  By 2004, the number of buyers in Sweden had fallen by 75%-80%.

• Human traffickers now have to transport girls to various hidden locations and move them around, which requires more money,  more time, and more local contacts. As a result, traffickers (in conversations recorded during crime investigations) have expressed frustration about setting up shop in Sweden, and choose other, more profitable destinations.

• According to the testimonies of human trafficking victims, since the law was put into place, traffickers prefer Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain, where prostitution is legalized or tolerated, and men are not criminalized.

Though Pye Jacobsson makes some good points in defending her group of sex workers in Sweden, she fails to see that prostitution and sex trafficking cannot be separated.  This has been seen time and time again in several global contexts.  And because they are linked, the world should follow Sweden’s model by criminalizing men who pay for sex and offering exit programs to the majority of women and girls who are, in fact, victims.

Your thoughts?

Michelle Brock