Be heard on the issues that matter most to you!
Hi again,
I thought I'd bring up an issue that peeves me within the sex worker rights movement from time to time, which is class (and implicitly race) privilege. I'm concerned that the focus on decriminalization - which I support - best addresses the needs of independent, relatively privileged sex workers, and does little to address the needs of those on the street (or of migrant sex workers, for that matter). In theory, decriminalization might be taken to mean that people on the street would stop being arrested and that the police would help street-based sex workers, however in practice people on the street merely start getting arrested for other sorts of "crimes" (loitering, disturbing the peace, etc.), and continue to have a hostile relationship with the police. In San Francisco, a move toward de facto decriminalization resulted in just this type of situation, with some (more privileged) sex worker activists suggesting that it was OK for the police to go after this sector of sex workers, implicitly making it a trade-off for decreased police enforcement against other sectors. In other words, decriminalization, when done in an unthoughtful manner, can result in greater policing of the street, even as it allows others to work undisturbed by the police. I'm not sure this is such a good bargain.
I also think a great deal about a report released by the Urban Justice Project in New York City (available along with many other good publications at at http://www.urbanjustice.org/ujc/publications/sex.html?id=AyeiMowL under the title "Revolving Door"). This report suggests that the street-based workers themselves identify housing as a far higher priority in their lives than decriminalization. As I mentioned in a previous post, I think activists of all sorts need to put the interests of marginalized groups at the forefront of their thinking, and I therefore question why issues such as housing and a series of related issues that one could mention (policing policy, HIV and drug treatment services, etc.) are not so visible within the sex workers rights movement, which instead often seems to focus too narrowly upon questions of sex worker stigma and decriminalization.
There are lots of happy exceptions to this rule, of course, and I was particularly pleased to see that there is a panel about forging alliances between the sex workers rights movement and anti-prison groups at the upcoming Desiree Alliance Conference in Chicago. I just think that the narrow focus on sexual stigma/decriminalization is most meaningful within the personal lives of more privileged people, and that we need to challenge ourselves to act in ways that include but move beyond these understandable interests.
Alright then, 'nuff said!
Best to all,
kk
...because public space really matters!
Elizabeth
You put this so well, Elizabeth. In my experience, when talking with people on a one-on-one basis about these issues, when I bring up things like access to healthcare, housing, etc., and frame it in that way rather than being about the sex, I've noticed it's like a lightbulb goes on over their head. They honestly have never thought of it in those terms before, which is understandable, since for the most part sex work is sensationalized in some way or another in how it is portrayed and discussed.
I'm going to be lazy and quote myself now... I wrote this on my blog a few weeks ago:
"Whatever you, personally, feel about the morality of sex work - put that aside. It doesn’t matter. Sex workers are human beings. I don’t understand why the same people who urge conservatives to put aside their personal preoccupations with the mechanics of gay sex, in order to view gays and lesbians as full, equal human beings deserving of rights and dignity, can’t do the same thing when it comes to sex workers."
All the more reason why any discussion of sex work and human rights MUST be linked to a broader egalitarian struggle that directly confronts racism and sexism and economic inequality. Anything else opens up the floor to criticism of "liberal elitism" or "White sexual privilege" that has been so effectively thrown at sex work activists by the antiporn/antiprostitution feminists and their acolytes on the "Puritan Left."
Amber.....the only problem with attempting to avoid this issue of "it's not really about the sex, it's about being human beings" is that inevitably, it cedes ground to those who will insist that unequal treatment is justified BECAUSE OF TEH SEX; that, for example, gays and lesbians must never be seen as human beings because of the way they have sex. Once people see that what gay men and lesbians do in the privacy of their bedrooms is pretty much like what hetero people do, with the only real difference being in the gender of the other person (after all, I don't think that a clit or a vagina or an anal nerve of a mouth will care much about the gender of the dick or tongue or sex toy stimulating it), their objections usually fall apart quite quickly. In the end, it IS all about sex, and how we respect those who might have a slightly different approach to love and lust than we do.
Anthony
I think discussing class in terms of the sex industry and sex worker activism is particularly interesting because sex work is often the reason that people are/not in a particular class. I think for many sex workers, identifying with this class struggle is closely associated with understanding how to get the resources that you need for things such as housing, healthcare, education, etc. and then teaching that to others.
So while we're figuring out how to effectively work together with over-lapping movements such as prison reform or housing action, etc. I think we're also working to help people be as safe as possible and have as much information as possible to have control over their situations and maximize their resources. This is still an avenue that only works for some of course, with deeper issues such as mental/physical health being factors.
But I do think that when we consider poverty in the context of sex worker rights organizing, we have to consider what impacts are being made that are not visibly political, but ultimately have long-term results. I think this rings back to the discussion in Audacia Ray's post about informal networks. I think a lot of the real action that we associate with 'sex worker's rights' organizing is done in spaces that are not visible to the public- or even to some of us.
I think that a lot of people are making thoughtful and challenging comments about race/class in the context of sex work and I'm grateful that there is a lot of work to raise consciousness in this area. Sex workers definitely need more guidance on how to actually contribute to solutions, but I think we should also look deeper at the way that sex worker communities develop and grow over time because I think there is progress being made in less traditional ways and celebrating that will fuel people's enthusiasm to contribute to the more traditional/visible efforts for reform.
Redarding 'decriminalization'- I'm pretty unhappy with that term in general. I don't think it really accurately reflects our goals (not that any single term really will) but I think the word is problematic.
When the un-initiated hear that term, they freak out and think decrim means unrestricted sex-selling everywhere- and what about the children!!! The public really won't get behind that. And the fact is, as you pointed out, many sex workers won't even get behind that.
Phrases that I've been using more are 'alternatives to arrest-based policies' or 'alternatives to criminalization' but those are pretty chunky. I think we'd benefit from re-thinking some of the terminology collectively.
One more point about privilege and activism- Accessibility and communication. I think a major problem that state- and nation-wide groups (opposed to local/city- based) are facing is that long-distance communication methods by default create an exclusive space. We're desperately seeking solutions to this problem and we have a few avenues that we're exploring. But, again, stuff that Audacia mentioned in her post- how do we make sure that we're hearing from people? Even when communication resources are available, such as toll-free conference calls, etc, the nature of organizing by phone can be intimidating, or annoying, or at a bad time- or any number of issues. How much is class a factor in participation and how much of it is culture or inter-personal issues that make communication even more complicated? Is this stuff that can actually be measured as a way to help organizations develop practical solutions?
