De Anza College Sex Work and Sex Trafficking Article Discussion

User Generated

xneyyyhb

Writing

De Anza College

Description

In 500 words or more, identify 5 things you learned about sex work and/or sex trafficking from both Weitzer essays. You must include FOUR total in text citations, at least two from each Weitzer reading.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

SEXfor SALE PROSTITUTION, P O R N O G R A P HY, AND THE SEX INDUSTRY Second Edition EDITED BY RONALD WEITZER First published by Routledge 2000 This edition published 2010 by Routledge 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016 Simultaneously published in the UK by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2009. To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk. © 2000 Taylor & Francis © 2010 Taylor & Francis All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Sex for sale: prostitution, pornography, and the sex industry/Ronald Weitzer.—2nd ed. p. cm. Includes index. 1. Prostitution. 2. Pornography. 3. Sex-oriented businesses. I. Weitzer, Ronald HQ115.S49 2009 306.74–dc22 2009005994 ISBN 0-203-87280-0 Master e-book ISBN ISBN10: 0–415–99604–X (hbk) ISBN10: 0–415–99605–8 (pbk) ISBN10: 0–203–87280–0 (ebk) ISBN13: 978–0–415–99604–4 (hbk) ISBN13: 978–0–415–99605–1 (pbk) ISBN13: 978–0–203–87280–2 (ebk) C P T E H A R 1 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES Ronald Weitzer Sex work involves the exchange of sexual services, performances, or products for material compensation. It includes activities of direct physical contact between buyers and sellers (prostitution, lap dancing) as well as indirect sexual stimulation (pornography, stripping, telephone sex, live sex shows, erotic webcam performances). The sex industry refers to the workers, managers, owners, agencies, clubs, trade associations, and marketing involved in sexual commerce, both legal and illegal varieties. O V E R V I E W O F TH E S E X I N D U STRY Sex for sale is a lucrative growth industry. In 2006 alone, Americans spent $13.3 billion on X-rated magazines, videos and DVDs, live sex shows, strip clubs, adult cable shows, computer pornography, and commercial telephone sex.1 Rentals and sales of X-rated films jumped from $75 million in 1985 to $957 million in 2006.2 In just one decade, the number of X-rated films released annually more than doubled, from 5700 in 1995 to 13,588 in 2005.3 There are around 3500 strip clubs in America, and the number has grown over the past two decades.4 In addition to these indicators of legal commercial sex, an unknown amount is spent on prostitution. A significant percentage of the population buys sexual services and products. In 2002, 34% of American men and 16% of women reported that 1 RONALD WEITZER they had seen an X-rated video in just the past year.5 As of 2000, 21% of the population had visited an Internet pornography site (32% of men, 11% of women).6 The most recent figures on strip club attendance are from 1991, when 11% of the population said they had done so in the past year; fewer people (0.5%) had called a phone sex number in the past year.7 And a significant percentage of American men have visited a prostitute. The General Social Survey reports figures on the number of men who said that they had ever paid for sex—between 15–18% in eight polls from 1991 to 2006 (in 2006, 4% said they had done so in the past year).8 Remarkably similar figures are reported for Australia (16%) and the average within Europe (15%),9 and 11% of British men say they have paid for sex with a prostitute.10 Because prostitution is stigmatized, the real figures may be significantly higher. In some other societies, even more men say they have paid for sex. For example, in Spain 39% of men have done so during their lifetime, and in northeastern Thailand 43% of single men and 50% of married men had visited a prostitute.11 An unusual question was included in a recent British survey: respondents were asked whether they would “consider having sex for money if the amount offered was enough”: 18% of women said yes, as did 36% of men.12 A steady trend is toward the privatization of sexual services and products: porn has migrated from the movie house to the privacy of the viewer’s house. Video, Internet, and cable TV pornography have exploded in popularity, almost totally replacing the adult theaters of decades past. The advent of the telephone sex industry and escort services also has contributed to the privatization of commercial sex. And the Internet has changed the landscape tremendously—providing a wealth of services, information, and connections for interested parties. Internet-facilitated sex work has grown as a sector of the market, while street prostitution has remained relatively stable over time, although it has declined in some areas.13 Despite its size, growth, and numerous customers, the sex industry is regarded by many citizens as a deviant enterprise: run by shady people and promoting immoral or perverted behavior. There has been some “mainstreaming” of certain sectors of the sex industry (as documented in Chapter 12 by Lynn Comella), but it would be premature to conclude that sex for sale has now become normalized, as some claim. Polls show that 72% of Americans think that pornography is “an important moral issue for the country,”14 and 61% believe that it leads to a “breakdown of morals.”15 The most recent poll (in March 2008) reported that fully half the population defined viewing porn as “sinful behavior.”16 And almost half the population thinks that pornography is “demeaning towards women” (one-quarter disagreed and the remainder were undecided).17 When asked about the idea of “men spending 2 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES an evening with a prostitute,” 61% of Americans consider this morally wrong,18 and two-thirds believe that prostitution can “never be justified,” while 25% considered it “sometimes justified” and 4% “always justified.”19 (The term “justified” in this question is somewhat opaque, and we can only speculate as to what respondents have in mind when they say prostitution can “sometimes be justified.”) Two-thirds of the British population believe that “paying for sex exploits women,” and young people are even more likely to hold this opinion: 80% of those aged 18–24.20 Regarding public policies, most Americans favor either more controls or a total ban on certain types of commercial sex. More than three-quarters (77%) of the public think that we need “stricter laws” to control pornography in books and movies,21 and half believe that pornography is “out of control and should be further restricted.”22 In 2006, two-fifths of Americans (39%) felt that pornography should be banned, and this figure has remained about the same for two decades (41% held this view in 1984).23 A huge majority of women (70%) want porn outlawed today, compared to 30% of men.24 Stripping and telephone sex work also carry substantial stigma. Almost half of the American public believes that strip clubs should be illegal, while an even higher number (76%) thought telephone numbers offering sex talk should be illegal.25 Despite these personal opinions, people seem to think that the country is headed in the direction of increasing tolerance. There are no national polls on this question, but a 2002 survey of Alabama residents found that 73% believed that “society as a whole” sees stripping as an occupation for women to be “more acceptable today than ten years ago.”26 Many Alabama residents are dissatisfied with this trend, however. In the same poll, 54% felt that “stripping as an occupation is degrading or demeaning to the women,” and only 24% thought that it was not, with the remainder undecided. What we have, therefore, is a paradox: a lucrative industry that employs a significant number of workers and attracts many customers but is regarded by many people as deviant and in need of stricter control, if not banned outright. The sex industry continues to be stigmatized, even when it is legal. C O M P E TI N G PA R A D I G M S When I mentioned the topic of prostitution to a friend recently, he said, “How disgusting! How could anybody sell themselves?” A few weeks later an acquaintance told me that she thought prostitution was a “woman’s choice, and can be empowering.” These opposing views reflect larger cultural perceptions of prostitution, as well as much popular writing on the topic. 3 RONALD WEITZER Many people are fascinated, entertained, or titillated by sex work; many others see it as degrading, immoral, sexist, or harmful; and yet others hold all these views. Indeed, some prominent people have simultaneously condemned and patronized the sex industry, and have been caught in hypocritical behavior: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D-NY) prosecuted prostitution rings when he served as the state’s Attorney-General, but resigned the governorship in disgrace after it was revealed in March 2008 that he had spent $4300 on an escort employed by the exclusive Emperor’s Club agency. Shortly thereafter, it was reported that he had also been a client of another escort agency, Wicked Models. Prosecutors later determined that Spitzer had paid for sex “on multiple occasions,” yet they declined to press criminal charges against him.27 In 2007, Senator David Vitter (R-La) was linked to a Washington, DC, escort agency. He refused to relinquish his Senate seat, but nevertheless issued a public apology: “This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible.” He was also accused of repeatedly visiting a New Orleans brothel in the late 1990s, according to both the madam and one of the prostitutes. Vitter is well known for his conservative, “family values” positions. In 2006, the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, Rev. Ted Haggard, resigned after revelations that he had frequently paid for sex with a male prostitute and had used methamphetamine with him. The Association claims to represent 30 million evangelical Christians in the United States. In 1988, a prominent television evangelist, Rev. Jimmy Swaggart, resigned his church leadership after photos were released of him with a call girl in a New Orleans hotel (she later appeared on the cover of Penthouse magazine). He continued his television ministry. Three years later, when stopped by a police officer in California for a traffic violation, a prostitute in his car told the officer that Swaggart had propositioned her for sex. In Britain, Anthony Lambton, the Under-Secretary for Defense, resigned in May 1973 after being photographed in bed with a call girl. A few days later, another Cabinet member and the leader of the House of Lords, George Jellicoe, resigned after confessing his own liaisons with call girls, what he called “casual affairs.” Jellicoe had been in Parliament for 68 years, and he and Lambton were members of the Conservative Party. Another member of the British Parliament, Mark Oaten, resigned in 2006 after it was reported that he had a year-long relationship with a male prostitute. 4 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES These are just a few of the many examples of public figures who have purchased sex illicitly. And, in addition to political and religious elites, the clients include officials in the criminal justice system, with police chiefs and prosecutors sometimes caught buying sex even as they are obligated to enforce the laws against prostitution.28 The poles of condemnation and normalization are reflected in two paradigms in the social sciences.29 One of these, the oppression paradigm, holds that sex work is a quintessential expression of patriarchal gender relations and male domination. The most prominent advocates of this position go further, claiming that exploitation, subjugation, and violence against women are intrinsic to and ineradicable from sex work—transcending historical time period, national context, and type of sexual commerce.30 These indictments apply equally to pornography, prostitution, stripping, and other commercial sex. The only solution is elimination of the entire sex industry, which is precisely the goal of those who adopt the oppression paradigm. In addition to these essentialist claims, some writers make generalizations about specific aspects of sex work: that most or all sex workers were physically or sexually abused as children; entered the trade as adolescents, around 13–14 years of age; were tricked or forced into the trade by pimps or traffickers; use or are addicted to drugs; experience routine violence from customers; labor under abysmal working conditions; and desperately want to exit the sex trade.31 These writers often use dramatic language to highlight the plight of workers (“sexual slavery,” “prostituted women,” “paid rape,” “survivors”). “Prostituted” clearly indicates that prostitution is something done to women, not something that can be chosen, and “survivor” implies someone who has escaped a harrowing ordeal. Customers are labeled as “prostitute users,” “batterers,” and “sexual predators.” As shown later, these labels are misnomers when applied to most customers and most sex workers. Violating a core canon of scientific research, the oppression paradigm describes only the worst examples of sex work and then treats them as representative. Anecdotes are generalized and presented as conclusive evidence, sampling is selective, and counterevidence is routinely ignored. Such “research” cannot help but produce tainted findings and spurious conclusions, and this entire body of work has been severely criticized.32 Unfortunately, the writings of oppression theorists are increasingly mirrored in media reports and in government policies in the United States and abroad. A diametrically opposed perspective is the empowerment paradigm. The focus is on the ways in which sexual services qualify as work, involve human agency, and may be potentially validating or empowering for workers.33 This 5 RONALD WEITZER paradigm holds that there is nothing inherent in sex work that would prevent it from being organized for mutual gain to all parties—just as in other economic transactions. In other words, coercion and other unseemly practices are not viewed as intrinsic aspects of sex work. Analysts who adopt this perspective tend to accent the routine aspects of sex work, often drawing parallels to kindred types of service work (physical therapy, massage, psychotherapy) or otherwise normalizing sex for sale. Eileen McLeod argues that prostitution is quite similar to other “women’s work,” and that both sex workers and other women “barter sex for goods,” although the latter do so less conspicuously.34 Writers who adopt the empowerment perspective also argue that the tenets of the oppression paradigm reflect the way in which some sex work manifests itself when it is criminalized. Much less is known about prostitution in legal, regulated systems. It is important, therefore, to avoid essentialist conclusions based on only one mode of production. This kind of work may enhance a person’s socioeconomic status and provide greater control over one’s working conditions than many traditional jobs. It may have other benefits as well: “Many prostitutes emphasize that they engage in sex work not simply out of economic need but out of satisfaction with the control it gives them over their sexual interactions.”35 Some writers who adopt the empowerment paradigm go further and make bold claims that romanticize sex work. Shannon Bell describes her book, Whore Carnival, as “a recognition and commendation of the sexual and political power and knowledge of prostitutes,” which sounds rather celebratory. Both the oppression and empowerment perspectives are one-dimensional and essentialist. While exploitation and empowerment are certainly present in sex work, there is sufficient variation across time, place, and sector to demonstrate that sex work cannot be reduced to one or the other. An alternative perspective, what I call the polymorphous paradigm, holds that there is a constellation of occupational arrangements, power relations, and worker experiences. Unlike the other two perspectives, polymorphism is sensitive to complexities and to the structural conditions shaping the uneven distribution of agency, subordination, and workers’ control.36 Within academia, a growing number of scholars are researching various dimensions of the work, in different contexts, and their studies document substantial variation in how sex work is organized and experienced by workers, clients, and managers. Together, these studies undermine some deep-rooted myths about prostitution and present a challenge to those writers and activists who embrace monolithic paradigms. Victimization, exploitation, choice, job satisfaction, self-esteem, and other dimensions should be treated as variables (not constants) that differ between types of sex work, geographical locations, and other structural and organiza6 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES tional conditions. The chapters in Sex for Sale provide additional evidence in support of the polymorphous paradigm. T YP E S O F S E X W O R K A brief discussion of different types of sex work will illustrate the polymorphous approach. Prostitution Prostitutes vary tremendously in their reasons for entry, risk of violence, freedom to refuse clients and particular sex acts, dependence on and exploitation by third parties, experiences with the authorities, public visibility, number and type of clients, relationships with coworkers, and impact on the surrounding community. Table 1.1 presents a typology of prostitution. (Excluded from the table are borderline cases, such as lap dancing, “kept” women or men, geishas, etc.) Before proceeding to a description of the different types of prostitution, it is important to note that individual workers may cross one or more categories. For instance, independent call girls may also accept regular or occasional appointments from an escort agency, and massage parlor or brothel workers sometimes moonlight by meeting customers in private and keeping the earnings for themselves. It is rare, however, for workers to experience substantial upward or downward mobility. As a general rule “the level at which the woman begins work in the prostitution world determines her general position in the occupation for much of her career as a prostitute. Changing levels requires contacts and a new set of work techniques and attitudes.”37 Occasionally, an upper or middle-tier worker whose life situation changes (e.g., because of aging, drug addiction) is no longer able to work in that stratum and gravitates to the street. But transitioning from street work to the escort or call girl echelon is quite rare, because most street workers lack the education and skill set required for upscale indoor work. Likewise, very few call girls and brothel workers have previously worked on the streets. If a move takes place, it is usually lateral and of limited mobility, such as from the streets to a down-market peep show or from a massage parlor to an escort agency or from an escort agency to independent work. The most consequential division in Table 1.1 is that between street prostitution and the various indoor types. In street prostitution, the initial transaction occurs in a public place (a sidewalk, park, truck stop), while the 7 Escort agency; private premises/hotels Brothel Massage parlor Bar/casino contact; sex elsewhere Street contact; sex in cars, alleys, parks, etc. ESCORT BROTHEL WORKER MASSAGE PARLOR WORKER BAR OR CASINO WORKER STREETWALKER Low Low to moderate Moderate Moderate High High PRICES CHARGED High Low to moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Low to none Very high Low to moderate Very low Very low Low to moderate Low E X P L O I TAT I O N RISK OF BY THIRD VIOLENT PARTI E S V I C T I M I Z AT I O N High Moderate Low Low Very low None PUBLIC VISIBILITY Adverse Equivalent to impact of bar/ casino Little, if discreet None, if discreet None None I M PACT O N COMMUNITY Note: Table refers to female workers. The brothel and massage parlor workers depicted here do not include those who have been trafficked against their will or otherwise forced into prostitution, whose experiences differ from those who have entered this work consensually. Exploitation by third parties means third party receipt of at least some of the profits. Risk of violent victimization refers here to victimization of prostitute, not of customer. Impact on community refers to effects on the surrounding neighborhood’s quality of life. Independent operator; private premises/hotels BUSINESS L O C AT I O N CHARACTE R I STICS OF TYPE S OF PROSTITUTION CALL GIRL TA B L E 1 . 1 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES sex act takes place in either a public or private setting (alley, park, vehicle, hotel, etc.). Many street prostitutes are runaways who end up in a new locale with no resources and little recourse but to engage in some kind of criminal activity—whether theft, drug dealing, or selling sex. Many street workers, both runaways and others, experience abysmal working conditions and are involved in “survival sex.” They sell sex out of dire necessity or to support a drug habit. Many use addictive drugs; work and live in crime-ridden areas; are socially isolated and disconnected from support services; risk contracting and transmitting sexual diseases; are exploited and abused by pimps; and are vulnerable to being assaulted, robbed, raped, or killed on the streets. This is the population best characterized by the oppression paradigm. Other street prostitutes, especially those free of drugs and pimps, are in less desperate straits but still confront a range of occupational hazards. Judith Porter and Louis Bonilla’s chapter in this volume (Chapter 7) offers a close look at street prostitution and documents differences between three prostitution zones in Philadelphia. When most people think of prostitution, they are thinking of street prostitution, but off-street sexual transactions are just as important and, in many countries, far more common than street work even though we lack data on the exact numbers in each sphere. (In Thailand, for example, an estimated 0.7% of prostitutes work the streets, while the figures for the United States, Holland, and Britain are reportedly closer to 20%.)38 We do know that ads for escort agencies and for independent call girls on the Internet are abundant and ever increasing. Indoor prostitution takes place in brothels, massage parlors, bars, hotels, and private premises. Compared to street prostitutes, indoor workers are much less likely to have a background of childhood abuse (neglect, violence, incest), to enter sex work at a young age, to engage in risky behavior (e.g., to use addictive drugs and to engage in unprotected sex), and to be victimized by others. Off-street workers who have not been coerced into prostitution are much less likely to experience assault, robbery, and rape. A British study of 115 prostitutes who worked on the streets and 125 who worked in saunas or as call girls found that the street prostitutes were much more likely than the indoor workers to report that they had ever been robbed (37 vs. 10%), beaten (27 vs. 1%), slapped/punched/kicked (47 vs. 14%), raped (22 vs. 2%), threatened with a weapon (24 vs. 6%), or kidnapped (20 vs. 2%).39 Other studies similarly find disparities in victimization between street and off-street workers, with some reporting high percentages of indoor providers who have never experienced violence on the job.40 Although random sampling was not possible in these studies, the fact that they consistently document significant 9 RONALD WEITZER street–indoor differences lends credence to the general conclusion. In addition to differences in ever being victimized, street workers are more likely to experience more frequent and more severe victimization. This does not mean that indoor work is risk free: structural conditions are a key predictor of vulnerability—conditions that include workers’ immigration status, drug dependency, third-party involvement (as protectors vs. exploiters), etc. Moreover, indoor work in the Third World usually exists under harsher conditions than in developed countries, even when it is legal.41 Having said that, there is no doubt that indoor settings are generally safer than the streets. Overall, “street workers are significantly more at risk of more violence and more serious violence than indoor workers.”42 Moreover, it appears that legal context makes a difference: that is, the safety of indoor work increases where prostitution is legal (see later). Those who work collectively indoors—in brothels, massage parlors, saunas, clubs—have the advantage of the presence of gatekeepers and coworkers, who can intervene in the event of an unruly customer. Indoor venues often have some screening mechanisms, video surveillance, and alarm systems. Call girls and escorts are more vulnerable given their isolation when doing outcalls at hotels or clients’ residences. But they also have a greater proportion of low-risk, regular clients (see Chapter 8, by Janet Lever and Deanne Dolnick) and they have their own methods of vetting potentially dangerous customers (though these methods are not foolproof). They share with other workers stories of bad clients who are then blacklisted, and they routinely check in by phone with the agency or a friend at a designated time before and after a visit. As one agency booker stated: “The girls call to check in when they first get to an appointment. We had code words, like ‘Red Bull.’ If I heard her say she needed a Red Bull, I’d try to distract the guy on the phone so she could get out of there.”43 The autobiography of former prostitute Dolores French describes her unique ways of alerting her agent (Sarah) that she was in danger in a man’s hotel room: Sarah told me certain code names that were to be used for cops and crazies. . . . “Judy” meant a cop; “Phyllis” meant a crazy . . .. So I called Sarah and said: “Everything is fine here. By the way, has Judy been in the office lately? Well, if Judy comes by, tell her I’d like to meet her for coffee.” [Sarah said] “Did he ask you to have sex?” “Oh yes, he’s lots of fun.” Any positive answer I gave meant yes, any negative answer . . . meant no. It was amazing how wonderfully this all worked. As soon as Sarah understood there was danger, she was on full alert . . . She knew I was in a bad situation, and she knew it was up to her to help get me out of it.44 10 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES Such providers learn ways of screening their clients before they meet as well. A study of independent call girls noted that they develop “a sensitivity to detecting potential danger in the caller’s attitudes, manners, tone of voice, or nature of the conversation.”45 It is not widely known that indoor and street prostitutes differ in the services they provide. Because street workers spend little time with customers, their social interaction is fleeting. As one street worker remarked, “Usually, they’re not even interested in talking to you. What they want is quick sex.”46 Indoor interactions are typically longer, multifaceted, and more reciprocal. Diana Prince, who interviewed 75 call girls in California and 150 brothel workers in Nevada, found that most of them believed that “the average customer wants affection or love as well as sex.”47 Consequently, indoor workers are much more likely to counsel and befriend clients, and their encounters often include a semblance of romance, dating, friendship, or companionship—what has become known as a “girlfriend experience” and the counterpart “boyfriend experience” offered by male escorts (see Chapters 8 and 9). As one study of call girls discovered, “for many men, sex is the pretext for the visit, and the real need is emotional.”48 Indeed, escort agencies and independent call girls increasingly advertise their expertise in providing nonsexual benefits to clients. The Emperor’s Club escort agency, for instance, billed itself (on its website) as offering an experience that would make life “more peaceful, balanced, beautiful, and meaningful.” In a sense, the customer buys a kind of “relationship” with an escort rather than just sex. Some customers who become “regulars” have long-term relationships with providers and develop a real emotional connection, albeit one that is paid for.49 The nature of physical contact also differs, in the sense that it is more varied and more “romantic” than what a client and provider experience on the street. Indoor workers are more likely than street workers to be caressed, kissed, massaged, or hugged by, and to receive oral sex or manual stimulation from, a client (see Chapter 8).50 Indeed, in at least some indoor venues, the workers expect and request such sensual and sexual behavior from clients as a routine part of the encounter. Indoor workers tend to be more adjusted and satisfied with their work than street workers, and the former differ little from non-prostitutes in mental health and self-esteem. The stress and danger associated with street work contribute to psychological problems. By contrast, escorts and call girls tend to have the “financial, social, and emotional wherewithal to structure their work largely in ways that suited them and provided . . . the ability to maintain healthy self-images.”51 Although call girls generally express greater job satisfaction than do those employed by third parties (brothels, massage 11 RONALD WEITZER parlors, escort agencies) and are subject to employer demands, the latter are nevertheless more satisfied than street workers. An Australian study found that half of call girls and brothel workers felt that their work was a “major source of satisfaction” in their lives, while seven out of 10 said they would “definitely choose” this work if they had it to do over again.52 And a worker in one of Nevada’s legal brothels remarked: “I’ve always been a sexual person. I enjoy doing it. I mean, the money’s wonderful but, hey, I enjoy what I do for a living too. I love the people, it’s safe, it’s clean.”53 A majority of indoor workers in other studies similarly report that they enjoy the job, feel that their work has at least some positive effect on their lives, or believe that they provide a valuable service.54 Prince’s comparative study of streetwalkers and call girls in California and legal brothel workers in Nevada found that almost all of the call girls (97%) reported an increase in self-esteem after they began working in prostitution, compared with 50% of the brothel workers but only 8% of the streetwalkers.55 Similarly, a study of indoor prostitutes (most of whom worked in bars) in a Midwestern city in the United States found that three-fourths of them felt that their life had improved after entering prostitution (the remainder reported no change; none said it was worse than before); more than half said that they generally enjoy their work.56 Why would self-esteem be high or increase among those working in the upper echelons? Psychological well-being is associated with a range of structural factors, including education, income, control over working conditions, relations with third parties, and client base. Income is a major source of selfesteem among call girls. While middle range call girls earn $200–$500 an hour, top-tier workers charge between $1000–$6000 an hour (or a session) and they are also lavished with fringe benefits, such as expensive gifts and paid travel to meet clients.57 Escort agency, brothel, and massage parlor employees make considerably less because a large share (30–50%) goes to the agency. Another reason for an increase in job satisfaction is revealed by indoor workers who describe “feeling ‘sexy,’ ‘beautiful,’ and ‘powerful’ only after they had begun to engage in sexual labor and were receiving consistent praise from their clients.”58 In other words, in addition to the material rewards of high-end sex work, positive reinforcement and other good experiences may help enhance workers’ self-images. At the same time, prostitutes of all types experience stigma from the wider society, as shown by opinion polls and by public condemnation during sex scandals involving public figures. This disapproval compels sex workers to engage in various normalization strategies, including: compartmentalizing their deviant work persona from their “real identity”; concealing their work 12 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES from family and friends; distancing themselves from clients; using neutral or professional terms to describe their jobs (“working woman,” “provider”); and viewing their work as a valuable service (providing pleasure or sex therapy, comforting lonely men, keeping marriages intact). The studies reviewed here and by other scholars provide strong evidence contradicting some popular myths and the central tenets of the oppression paradigm.59 While certain experiences are generic to prostitution (coping with stigma, managing client behavior, avoiding risks), the literature indicates that other work-related experiences, as well as the harms typically associated with prostitution, vary greatly. The prostitution market is segmented between the indoor and street sectors—marked by major differences in working conditions, risk of victimization, and job satisfaction and self-esteem. Other Types of Sex Work Some sex workers specialize in one type of work, but others transition between different sectors or work in two arenas simultaneously. Examples include strippers who meet clients outside the club for sex; porn stars who tour strip clubs where they are the “featured” entertainer and command much higher prices than local talent; dancers and porn stars, male and female, who advertise online for personal sexual encounters with their fans; and, as mentioned earlier, prostitutes who work in more than one venue. The variation characteristic of prostitution is no less true in other types of sex work. Strip clubs and their dancers have been studied fairly thoroughly, largely because of easy access to the clubs.60 One finding is that club structure and norms are a strong predictor of workers’ job satisfaction and experiences with both customers and managers, with some clubs being highly exploitative and disempowering for dancers and others affording them substantial control over their working conditions. In other words, the social organization of a club shapes the degree to which workers are exploited by managers, DJs, bartenders, and bouncers, as well as the routine experiences they have with customers. One study distinguished three types of clubs—“hustle clubs” where dancers get little protection from management and have fairly stressful relations with other dancers (because of intense competition) and with customers (because managers instructed dancers to mislead and “hustle” the men to extract money from them); “social clubs” that resemble the sociability of neighborhood bars and are marked by supportive relationships between the workers and friendships with many of the patrons; and “show clubs” that are more upscale, highly regulated by management, where a premium is placed on putting on a “good show,” and where dancers are taught 13 RONALD WEITZER to personify a “goddess” seeking adoration from and exercising power over male customers.61 Clubs vary in the amount of customer violations of dancers’ personal boundaries (such as uninvited touching and kissing, pulling off clothes), insults, and rejection. Over time, the accumulation of such experiences can deflate one’s self-esteem and result in job burnout.62 On the positive side, many dancers find the work exciting, validating, empowering, and lucrative. Customers may lavish them with compliments, tips, and gifts, and dancers develop a genuine liking for at least some of their regulars.63 In terms of empowerment, one study reported that dancers “derive a sense of satisfaction at the power they felt they had over men” including manipulating men’s fantasies and the “thrill of the chase” in the pursuit of money when they engage in “strategic flirting” and perhaps lap dancing with individual audience members.64 At the same time, and like other sex workers, dancers often attempt to normalize their work by trumpeting stripping’s “therapeutic” and “educational” effects on the audience.65 Few studies compare male and female strip clubs, but those that do suggest that female audiences tend to be more aggressive toward male dancers than male audiences in female strip clubs,66 and that female patrons attended clubs in groups as a bonding ritual or as part of a celebratory gathering, whereas male patrons are more likely to seek an individualized experience and are much more likely to be repeat customers.67 It also appears that male strippers experience less stigma than their female counterparts.68 Relations between customers and dancers in same-sex clubs have their own distinctive patterns, as indicated by a study of gay male clubs69 and by Katherine Frank and Michelle Carnes (Chapter 5) in their analysis of clubs featuring AfricanAmerican female dancers and customers, where the atmosphere is one not only of sexual performance but also cultural bonding between the black women involved. Of course, in both gay and straight clubs alike, power struggles over personal boundaries are evident.70 Much of the literature on pornography is psychological, confined to laboratory experiments in which (usually male) subjects are exposed to images and then tested to see if exposure affects their attitudes toward women. Most of these studies find that the key variable is violent content, not sexual content, in increasing the viewer’s negative views of or aggressive disposition toward women. Nonviolent pornography, like other nonviolent images, either does not have such effects on viewers or has a weaker effect—depending on the study.71 The main pitfall of such experimental studies is their problematic external validity—that is, whether the findings in a lab are meaningful and can be extrapolated to the real world. Laboratory experiments are highly 14 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES artificial conditions within which to watch and react to pornography; they are radically different from the private settings where viewers typically view porn; and the experimental subjects are typically male college students who may be unrepresentative of the larger population of real-life porn consumers. In light of these serious problems, it is surprising that so many lab experiments on pornography have been conducted. Parallel studies examine whether pornography has effects on the realworld treatment of women. Such research examines (1) whether places with high availability of pornography (magazines, adult theaters, video rentals) have higher rates of sex crime than places where pornography is less available or (2) whether increased availability over time in one state or nation increases rates of sexual offenses. A comprehensive review of the literature concluded that macro-level associations between pornography and sexual aggression were dubious: ■ ■ ■ These studies are bedeviled by their inability to control for all potentially relevant influences on male behavior. Some studies find that an apparent correlation between pornography and sex crime disappears after other variables are included in the model. Other studies report that increased availability of pornography coincided with a decline in sexual offenses, precisely the opposite of what the oppression hypothesis predicts. And some countries with an abundance of porn, such as Japan, have low rates of victimization of women.72 Part of the explanation for these findings may be the fact that most pornography in videos and magazines is nonviolent, as documented in several content analyses.73 One study found that the most sexually explicit or hardcore videos contained the least violence and the most reciprocal, egalitarian behavior between the actors.74 If violence is rare in porn, it is unlikely to promote sexual violence: “In the absence of any actual element of coercion, viewers would not have any messages about sexual coercion to process and would not be expected to change any of their attitudes in this area.”75 The abundance of narrow, statistical “effects” studies skews the literature in one direction. Few researchers have investigated the deeper meanings of pornography in the real world—to men and women, consumers and nonconsumers. The neglect of actual consumers (as opposed to lab subjects) is remarkable in light of the sweeping claims that are often made about pornography’s impact on viewers. Still, a handful of studies have shown that both men and women decode and use sexually explicit materials in a wide variety of ways. Some women dislike the portrayal of women’s bodies in porn 15 RONALD WEITZER and fear that men might compare them unfavorably to porn models,76 whereas other women find pornography to be educational, entertaining, or stimulating.77 Some women who have little familiarity with pornography nevertheless hold very negative views of it.78 Likewise, men interpret porn in multiple ways: exposure reinforces callous or sexist views of women for some men, while others interpret it quite differently. A study of 150 men by David Loftus found that most of them experienced porn as being about fun, beauty, women’s pleasure, and female assertiveness and power. They did not like depictions of domination or aggression against women on “the rare occasions they see it in pornography, and most haven’t even seen any.”79 It is “important to male viewers that the women really do seem to be enjoying themselves, that they are utterly involved in the sex for their own pleasure too, and not just serving the interests of the male actors and onlookers.”80 They also recognized porn as a fantasy world quite different from the real world in terms of people’s behavior and appearance.81 Men with this orientation, who distinguish the fantasy world of porn from the real world, seem to contradict some popular assumptions about such men as well as laboratory studies that hypothesize a unilinear, stimulus–response pattern when one is exposed to pornography. Surprisingly, in-depth research on the porn industry and its workers is almost nonexistent. This gap is partly filled by two unique chapters in this book, both of which go behind the scenes with ethnographic studies of actors and producers. Sharon Abbott (Chapter 2) interviewed male and female actors in heterosexual films, documenting both positive and negative aspects of their work experiences, their views of their work and their audiences, and how they manage stigma. Jill Bakehorn (Chapter 4) had inside access to another sector of the industry—pornography made by women for women. She finds that female producers are often motivated by loftier goals than their counterparts in the mainstream porn industry. Instead of just seeking to make money, many of these female artists are motivated by feminist objectives, sex worker activism, and a desire to create materials that are an alternative to conventional representations of heterosexual sexual relations. This sector of the industry is ignored by writers who view pornography as inherently objectifying and demeaning toward women, and Bakehorn shows how this genre challenges simplistic and monolithic characterizations of pornography. Studies of male sex workers are growing, but much more research is needed.82 These studies point to some important differences in the ways male and female sex workers experience their work, but few of these studies are truly comparative—examining male and female workers in the same work tier and asking them identical questions. Juline Koken, David Bimbi, and Jeffrey Parsons’ study (Chapter 9) helps to fill this gap. Not only does it compare male 16 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES and female workers but it also sheds additional light on the work experiences of independent escorts. Similarly, little is known about gay male pornography.83 Joe Thomas (Chapter 3) examines how gay male video porn has changed over time. Thomas also draws contrasts between gay male and straight pornography, specifically the radically different meanings of porn in gay and straight cultures. Pornography holds a fair amount of esteem within the gay community, but carries substantial stigma in the straight world. Finally, little is known about telephone sex agencies and their employees.84 Kathleen Guidroz and Grant Rich (Chapter 6) show that telephone sex workers hold a mix of negative and positive impressions of their work. They are troubled by callers who appear to be misogynists or pedophiles but they also feel that the calls can be therapeutic, as in other lines of sex work. The operators believe that they educate male callers about female sexuality and that they help to deter those with perverse or violent tastes from acting on those fantasies; the workers see this as providing a valuable “community service.” P O LI C I E S A N D C O N F LI CTS Strip Clubs and Pornography Strip clubs and adult video stores are governed by local ordinances in America, which means that what is permitted varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and over time. Some places have ordinances restricting the location of such establishments, stipulating where videos can be displayed in a store, or regulating strippers’ attire and contact with customers. Many cities and counties restrict sexually oriented businesses to nonresidential areas or prohibit them from being near schools, parks, churches, and residences. Such curbs do not satisfy those who want such establishments totally banned. Local-level struggles occur periodically throughout the country. Tactics include picketing outside an adult business, lobbying municipal officials, petition drives, and videotaping customers entering clubs and stores. Such efforts can pay off in convincing local officials to impose stringent controls on adult entertainment venues. In addition to instrumental efforts to change policy, groups use symbolic tactics as well: an Indiana group, for example, recently erected a billboard with a red slash through a triple-X symbol next to a picture of a young woman. The caption read: “Someone’s Daughter”—an attempt to personalize the threat posed by porn.85 It is often claimed that adult stores and strip clubs have negative “secondary effects” on surrounding communities, such as increased crime. This argument was used successfully in the 1990s in New York City to justify the 17 RONALD WEITZER closure of many establishments in the Times Square area. A detailed discussion of the evidence supporting or contradicting the alleged adverse secondary effects is not possible here, but research studies give little credence to this claim. In fact: “Those studies that are scientifically credible demonstrate either no negative secondary effects associated with adult businesses or a reversal of the presumed negative effect.”86 The most sophisticated study found that crime was much more prevalent in the immediate vicinity of bars and gas stations than in the area near strip clubs, partly because of the security measures (bouncers, video surveillance) implemented by strip clubs.87 Pornography is legal in America as long as it does not depict minors and is not obscene. The prevailing test of obscenity remains the Supreme Court’s landmark 1973 Miller v. California decision, which held that local “community standards” are to govern definitions of what constitutes obscene materials. Local prosecutors decide whether to prosecute a producer or distributor for a particular sexually explicit film, magazine, or other work; if prosecuted, the item is presented to a jury that decides whether it is obscene. Miller stipulated that the obscenity test would be whether the average person in a community would find that the work appeals to “prurient interests,” depicts sexual conduct in a “patently offensive way,” and lacks literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.88 The community standards rule means that a work that is considered obscene in one jurisdiction may not be deemed obscene in another place. The only national standard on obscenity is the blanket prohibition on producing, possessing, or distributing child pornography. Antipornography campaigns have been launched at various points in American history, with mixed success. In the early 1980s, activists Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon succeeded in getting the city councils of Minneapolis and Indianapolis to approve far reaching antiporn ordinances. The laws allowed any woman “as a woman acting against the subordination of women” to initiate a lawsuit or file a complaint against anyone involved the production, exhibition, sale, or distribution of pornography. The individual would not need to demonstrate direct harm to oneself or others from pornography; instead, the claimant could simply act on behalf of women. The ordinances defined pornography vaguely as “the sexually explicit subordination of women, graphically depicted.”89 To be actionable, the work would have to include one of nine features, including images of women “presented dehumanized as sexual objects,” women “presented as whores by nature,” or women “presented in scenarios of degradation.”90 The terms “dehumanized,” “objects,” “whores by nature,” and “degradation” are extremely elastic, and some people see all pornography in these ways. In Minneapolis, the proposed ordinance was vetoed by the mayor but the Indianapolis ordinance became law only to be 18 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES overturned in the courts on the grounds that it would prohibit a range of materials that were legal under Miller.91 These municipal campaigns were followed by the equally controversial 1986 national commission appointed by Attorney-General Edwin Meese. The commission distinguished itself with its politically stacked membership, unfair procedures, and neglect of evidence running counter to its agenda.92 Almost all of the material presented in support of a government crackdown on porn was anecdotal, based on the testimony of self-described victims recruited to appear before the panel.93 It was therefore no surprise that the commission concluded that exposure to pornography contributed to sex crimes and other abuses of women. The Meese Commission marked a turning point in the government’s approach to pornography and demonstrated how quickly official policy and enforcement practices can change in the field of sex work. The U.S. Justice Department formally accepted the commission’s recommendations and produced a report outlining steps the department was taking to implement them.94 With a new Obscenity Enforcement Unit and its “Project Postporn,” the Justice Department assumed a leading role in the campaign against the industry. Drastic changes were envisioned, as the new unit proclaimed: “Only by removing whole businesses from society . . . will significant progress be made against the existing industry.”95 The unit used antiracketeering (RICO) forfeiture laws to close adult book and video stores and relied on the novel tactic of simultaneous, multidistrict prosecutions of pornography distributors in order to bankrupt and close these businesses. Under this innovative strategy, a company was charged with violations of federal criminal law in several states at the same time. The goal was to force a company out of business under the weight of logistical demands and legal costs incurred in fighting numerous court cases in various jurisdictions. The targets were not confined to child pornography or extreme porn (e.g., featuring bestiality or simulated rape scenes) but included mainstream porn as well.96 Prosecutors in the obscenity unit typically included Utah as one of the jurisdictions for multiple prosecutions, because its archconservative climate virtually guaranteed a conviction. Enforcement against the pornography industry increased dramatically after the publication of the Meese report.97 Whereas only 100 individuals had been prosecuted for violations of obscenity statutes between 1978 and 1986, the number of indictments quadrupled between 1987 and 1991. A top official in the obscenity unit revealed, “From 1988 to 1995, we [the Justice Department] got 130 convictions, took in $25 million in fines and forfeiture, and convicted most of the kingpins of the pornography industry at least 19 RONALD WEITZER once.”98 Meanwhile, several federal courts denounced the multidistrict prosecution strategy as a form of harassment. The Clinton administration discontinued the policy of multidistrict prosecutions of distributors,99 and it changed the obscenity unit’s focus toward child pornography, renaming it the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Unit (CEOS). But, in a return to the past, the second Bush administration launched a new effort against adult pornography. It expanded and allocated additional resources to CEOS.100 The Washington office of CEOS includes a team of specialists assigned to the daily task of searching the Internet for pornography, tracing the producers, and pursing tips sent in by citizens.101 In May 2005, Attorney-General Alberto Gonzales created a new office, the Obscenity Prosecution Taskforce, dedicated solely to the investigation and prosecution of hardcore pornography distributors.102 The taskforce’s agents work with the 93 local U.S. attorneys to prosecute obscenity crimes under the federal statutes that ban the transfer of obscene materials through the mail, via computer services, or through any other means of interstate or foreign commerce. Some leading officials from the Reagan years have been reappointed to the department’s obscenity unit, including the head of the unit, Brent Ward. As U.S. Attorney in Utah during the Reagan administration, Ward vigorously prosecuted distributors of video pornography, attempted to impose greater controls on strip clubs, prosecuted a phone sex company, and closed Utah’s two remaining adult theaters.103 Another major figure is Bruce Taylor, who served in the Justice Department’s obscenity unit in the Reagan years, was legal counsel for the nation’s premier antipornography group (Citizens for Decency through Law, founded in 1956), and served as president of another antiporn group (the National Law Center for Children and Families). He is now the obscenity unit’s senior legal counsel.104 Since he has been such a major player in the antiporn crusade, both as Justice Department official during two administrations and as an activist, Taylor’s views on pornography are especially noteworthy: I still believe that pornography has a bad effect on society and on families, and it’s not a good thing for guys to look at. It’s like the training manual for how guys get to be chauvinist jerks. I mean, you don’t treat a woman well if you treat her like she’s treated in a porn movie. It’s not the kind of thing you want your boy to be looking at or that the guy who comes to date your daughter is looking at. You don’t want your husband looking at it. You don’t want your boyfriend looking at it. You don’t really want your wife looking at it.105 20 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES Taylor has a rather expansive definition of obscenity, which may be much broader than what some community standards would define as obscene. For Taylor, all depictions of penetration are by definition obscene, which means that “just about everything on the Internet and almost everything in the video stores and everything in the adult bookstores is still prosecutable [as] illegal obscenity.”106 The continuing debate over pornography illustrates the twin trends regarding the sex industry in America. As noted earlier in the chapter, there is evidence of a degree of normalization or mainstreaming of sexual commerce and its growing availability via the Internet. At the same time, this trend runs up against a countertrend fueled by some powerful forces inside and outside local and federal governments—forces intent on criminalizing and stigmatizing the sex industry. The notion of a fierce “sex war” remains as apt today as it was in the past, and these two trends are apparent both in the U.S. and internationally. Prostitution: Decriminalization and Legalization Prostitution is treated in a more uniform manner in the United States, with criminalization being the reigning policy. This means that solicitation to engage in an act of prostitution is illegal, except in certain counties in Nevada, where about 30 legal brothels exist. Other offenses include pimping, pandering, trafficking, operating a brothel, and running an agency that offers sexual services. Approximately 80,000 arrests are made in the United States every year for violation of prostitution laws,107 in addition to an unknown number of arrests of prostitutes under disorderly conduct or loitering statutes. Most arrests involve the street trade, although indoor workers are targeted in some cities. Regarding street prostitution, arrests have the effect of either (1) containment within a particular area, where prostitutes are occasionally subjected to the revolving door of arrest, fines, brief jail time, and release, or (2) displacement to another locale where the same revolving-door dynamic recurs. Containment is the norm throughout the United States; displacement requires sustained police crackdowns, which are rare. During crackdowns, workers may simply relocate to an adjoining police precinct where enforcement is lax or move across the city limits into another jurisdiction. Full decriminalization would remove all criminal penalties and leave prostitution unregulated, albeit subject to conventional norms against nuisances, sex in public, or disorderly conduct. Under full decriminalization, street prostitution could exist on any street, so long as the workers and 21 RONALD WEITZER customers did not disturb the peace or violate other ordinances. Partial decriminalization would reduce but not eliminate penalties—the penalty might be a fine instead of incarceration or the charge may be reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor or violation. A third possibility is de facto decriminalization, which simply means that the existing law is not enforced, yet the offense remains in the penal code. Decriminalization may or may not be a precursor to legalization (government regulation). Proposals for full decriminalization run up against a wall of public opposition. A 1983 poll found that only 7% of Americans thought that there should be “no laws against prostitution” and, in 1990, 22% felt that prostitution should be “left to the individual” and neither outlawed nor regulated by government.108 American policymakers are almost universally opposed to the idea, making it a nonstarter in any serious discussion of policy alternatives. Advocates sometimes manage to get it placed on the public agenda, however. In 1994, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors created a Taskforce on Prostitution to explore alternatives to existing prostitution policy. After months of meetings, a majority of the members voted to recommend decriminalization,109 but the board of supervisors rejected the idea. In 2008, a measure on the ballot in San Francisco stipulated that the police would discontinue enforcing all laws against prostitution; the measure was rejected by 58% of voters. A similar ballot measure in Berkeley, California, in 2004 called on police to give prostitution enforcement the “lowest priority.” The measure was also defeated, with 64% voting against it.110 Opposition was likely due to both measures’ laissez-faire approach; people are more inclined to support some kind of regulation, just as they are with regard to some other vices. Still, it is noteworthy that 42% of San Franciscans voted for full decriminalization in 2008, suggesting that approval of this kind of policy shift remains a distinct possibility in the future, at least in this city. Unlike decriminalization, legalization implies regulation of some kind: vetting and licensing business owners, registering workers, zoning street prostitution, mandatory medical exams, special business taxes, or officials’ periodic site visits and inspections of legal establishments. A segment of the American public favors legalization (see Table 1.2), but only in Nevada do legal brothels exist, since 1971 (see Chapter 11). The 30 brothels are relegated to rural areas of the state and are prohibited in Las Vegas and Reno due largely to opposition from the gaming industry. A slight majority of the Nevada population supports this policy (52% in a 2002 poll felt that legal brothels should be retained), and the system is even more popular in counties with legal brothels. But this rural-only model is remote from the issue of prostitution in 22 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES TA B L E 1 . 2 AT T I T U D E S T O WA R D L E G A L I Z AT I O N O F P R O S T I T U T I O N U N I T E D S TAT E S AGREE (%) Legalize prostitution (1991)1 Legalize prostitution (1996)2 Decriminalize prostitution, Berkeley, CA (2004)3 Decriminalize prostitution, San Francisco, CA (2008)4 Prostitution does not hurt Nevada’s tourism industry (1988)5 Retain legal brothels, Nevada (2002)6 O T H E R N AT I O N S 40 26 36 42 71 52 F A V O R L E G A L I Z AT I O N ( % ) Britain (1998)7 Britain (2006)8 Canada (1998)9 Czech Republic (1999)10 France (1995)11 Israel (2005)12 Netherlands (1997)13 New Zealand (2003)14 Portugal (2001)15 Western Australia (2000)16 Western Australia (2006)17 61 65 71 70 68 65 73 51 54 71 64 Sources: 1 Gallup poll, 1991, N = 1216. Legalize and regulate prostitution to “help reduce the spread of AIDS”; 2 Gallup poll, 1996, N = 1019 (“prostitution involving adults 18 years of age and older should be legal”); 3 November, 2004, ballot measure (Measure Q), instructing Berkeley police to treat enforcement of prostitution law as the “lowest priority”; 4 November 2008, ballot measure (Measure K), instructing San Francisco police to discontinue all prostitution arrests and defunding the city’s john school; 5 Nevada poll, N = 1213, conducted November 1988 by the Center for Survey Research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. 22% thought that prostitution “hurts the state’s tourism industry”; 6 Nevada poll, N = 600, Law Vegas Review-Journal, September 17, 2002; 7 ITV Poll, reported in Agence France Presse, November 16, 1998, N = 2000 (“legalizing and licensing brothels”); 8 IPSOS/MORI Poll, January 6–10, 2006, N = 1790 (“prostitution should be legalized”); 9 Compas Poll, Sun Media Newspapers, reported in Edmonton Sun, October 31, 1998, N = 1479 (“legal and tightly regulated” = 65%, “completely legal” = 6%; 10 IVVM poll, reported by Czech News Agency, National News Wire, April 26, 1999 (“legalizing prostitution”); 11 French poll reported in Boston Globe, January 22, 1995 (“legalized brothels”); 12 Jerusalem Post, July 19, 2005, N = 500 (legalization of prostitution and licensing of prostitutes); 13 Dutch poll cited in Brants (1998) (“legalization of brothels”); 14 New Zealand Herald, May 14, 2003, N = 500. “Don’t know” responses removed from total (legal brothels); 15 Marketest poll of residents of Lisbon and Oporto, reported in Financial Times and Diario de Noticias, August 14, 2001 (“legal brothels”); 16 Sunday Times poll, March 26, 2000 (legalization of brothels); 17 Poll reported in The West Australian, February 15, 2006 (legalization of prostitution) 23 RONALD WEITZER urban areas. Illegal prostitutes flourish in Las Vegas and Reno, despite the existence of legal brothels in adjacent counties. What is needed is an urban solution to an essentially urban phenomenon. Since Nevada legalized brothels in 1971, no other state has seriously considered legalization. Legislators fear being branded as “condoning” prostitution and see no political advantages in any kind of liberalization. On those rare occasions when the idea has been floated, it has had a short life. As a Buffalo, New York, taskforce reasoned in 1999, “Since it is unlikely that city or state officials could ever be convinced to decriminalize or legalize prostitution in Buffalo, there is nothing to be gained by debating the merits of either.”111 This seems to put the cart before the horse, by preempting debate that might indeed result in new policy proposals. One exception to this cynical view occurred recently in Hawaii (discussed later). American opinion contrasts with that of some other western nations. Recent polls, presented in Table 1.2, show that majorities in several European countries endorse legalization, either in the abstract or in the form of brothels. This is the case for approximately two-thirds of the British and French populations, and similar majorities in France believe that legal brothels would make it easier to control prostitution and that the change would not lead to an increase in the French sex trade.112 A recent poll reported that 59% of the British public believed that “prostitution is a perfectly reasonable choice that women should be free to make”; this did not extend to family members, with 74% saying that it would be unacceptable for a female family member to work as a prostitute and 87% saying it would be unacceptable for a spouse or partner to pay a prostitute for sex.113 Dutch views on prostitution are equally noteworthy: in a 1997 poll, 74% of the Dutch public regarded prostitution as an acceptable job and 73% favored the legalization of brothels,114 and 2 years later, 78% said prostitution was a job like any other, so long as there was no coercion involved.115 As a Dutch woman told me when asked about prostitution in Holland, “It doesn’t even cross my mind that it should be illegal.” This is not the typical view of the majority of Americans, who seem to take criminalization for granted. Legalization raises several important questions. First, is it likely to lead to an increase in or proliferation of prostitution? The number of prostitutes is partly affected by demand, which might limit the growth of the sex trade, though it is possible that greater supply—especially under conditions of legality—might increase demand. Were legal prostitution limited to one or a few cities, it would undoubtedly attract an influx of workers into that locale. Were it more widespread, each locale would hold less attraction to outside workers, reducing the migration problem. The state may impose limits on the 24 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES number of sex establishments or the number of workers, as illustrated in the Nevada case, and in New Zealand nationwide legalization in 2003 has not increased the number of prostitutes.116 Prostitution has increased, however, in some Australian states after brothels were legalized. Second, will prostitutes comply with the regulations? This is an extremely important question. Insofar as legalization includes stipulations as to who can and cannot engage in sex work, those ineligible (e.g., persons who are underage, HIV positive, or illegal immigrants) would be forced to operate illicitly in the shadows of the regulated system. In addition, every conceivable form of legalization would be rejected by at least some eligible prostitutes, who would see no benefits in abiding by the new restrictions (e.g., mandatory registration or health examinations) and would resent the infringement on their freedom. A possible exception would be the zoning of street prostitution into a suitable locale: away from residential areas but in places that are safe and unintimidating for prostitutes and customers alike. Some streetwalkers would reject this arrangement for personal reasons, while others would find it satisfactory (as evidenced in some European cities). Red-light districts in industrial zones would be shunned because such areas typically lack places of refuge and sustenance, such as restaurants, coffee shops, grocery stores, bars, parks, and cheap hotels—amenities required by most streetwalkers.117 Even if a generally acceptable locale could be found, there is no guarantee that street prostitution could be confined to that area; possible market saturation in the designated zone is only one reason why some workers would be attracted to other locales. Moreover, while zoning presumably would remove street prostitution from residential areas, it would not necessarily remedy other problems associated with street work, such as violence and drug abuse. Indeed, such zones may simply reproduce these problems in a more concentrated manner. Although no U.S. jurisdiction has altered its prohibitionist policy toward street prostitution, some other countries have experimented with a more tolerant approach, including New Zealand and the Netherlands. A Two-Track Prostitution Policy If neither formal decriminalization nor legalization is a viable policy in the United States at present, is there any other alternative to blanket criminalization? Since prostitution manifests itself in fundamentally different ways on the street and in indoor venues, it may seem logical to treat the two differently. A two-track policy would (1) target resources exclusively toward the control of street prostitution and simultaneously (2) relax controls on indoor prostitution.118 25 RONALD WEITZER Track One: Indoor Prostitution Some jurisdictions in the United States, Britain, and some other nations have adopted an informal policy of de facto decriminalization of indoor prostitution—essentially ignoring escorts, brothels, and massage parlors unless a complaint is made, which is seldom.119 Police in other areas, however, devote substantial time and resources to this side of the sex trade, where it accounts for as much as half the prostitution arrests.120 Law enforcement policies can differ dramatically even between adjacent areas. In Riverside County in California, police have regularly arrested Internet sex workers and their clients in recent years, whereas next door in San Bernardino County, police focus instead on more serious crimes.121 Efforts against indoor prostitution typically involve considerable planning, and large-scale operations can last several months, becoming rather costly affairs. Seattle police recently launched an elaborate sting operation in which undercover female officers placed ads and photos on Craigslist and made appointments with men who responded to the ads; a total of 104 men were arrested after they appeared at an expensive condo rented by the police department and were observed discussing a price with the female vice cop.122 In another case, a vice squad officer in Omaha, Nebraska, posing as a visiting businessman, arranged a date with an escort he met online, had a limo pick her up and take her to a hotel where they drank wine, only to end in an arrest. A taxpayers group accused the Omaha police of wasting resources in the operation. The group’s president complained that the police “were not good stewards with the taxpayers’ dollars in spending the resources that were spent to have her arrested on a misdemeanor charge.”123 An even more shocking practice takes place in Nashville, Tennessee, where police pay confidential informants to help arrest indoor prostitutes, which typically involve some physical or sexual contact between the informant and the worker. The informants are paid $100 per bust and are used because police policy prohibits officers from disrobing during an investigation,124 but the district attorney argued that a recorded agreement on a price should be sufficient to make an arrest (as it is in most other jurisdictions) and added that it was “contradictory letting the confidential informant engage in the very act you’re trying to stamp out.” In response, the head of the vice unit defended the practice: “What’s the greater good? It may be distasteful to some people, but it’s better that we have those places shut down.” In 2002–2004, a total of $120,000 was spent to foster such encounters, with informants receiving more than $70,000.125 Such operations are usually launched by local police, but the federal government sometimes initiates a crackdown and it has done so more fre26 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES quently in recent years. In one case, federal agents raided more than 40 upscale escort agencies in 23 cities. The sting was the culmination of a 2-year undercover investigation, costing $2.5 million.126 Why so costly? The attorney for the “DC Madam,” Deborah Jeane Palfrey, describes how costs can skyrocket in major investigations of a massage parlor or escort agency: Her case most likely involved 10,000 to 15,000 billed hours of labor over a fiveyear period and cost taxpayers many millions of dollars. As an example of the resources deployed here, consider the fact that agents retrieved photographs of escorts as they mailed money orders to Jeane, going back ten years. Escorts were also trailed to their appointments, confronted, and asked to disclose the identities of their clients under the threat of prosecution. A spreadsheet of over 500 pages was compiled tracking these kinds of interactions.127 Under the two-track policy, these resources would be targeted toward street prostitution. Crackdowns on indoor prostitution can have the unintended result of increasing the number of streetwalkers—thus exacerbating the most obtrusive side of the prostitution trade. Closures of massage parlors and other indoor venues have had precisely this effect in some cities, as a New Orleans vice officer observed: “Whenever we focus on indoor investigations, the street scene gets insane.”128 Massage parlors offering sex proliferated in the 1970s, declined in the 1980s, but more recently have grown along with increasing immigration from Asia and Latin America.129 In some jurisdictions the police conduct ongoing surveillance on such establishments. The success of a policy of nonenforcement toward indoor prostitution would require that it be implemented without fanfare. A public announcement that a city had decided to take a “hands off” approach to this variety of sex work might serve as a magnet drawing legions of indoor workers and clients into the locale. But in cities where it is not already standard practice, an unwritten policy of nonenforcement might be a sensible innovation. It would free up resources for the more pressing problems on the street, and might have the effect of pushing at least some streetwalkers indoors, as one official commission reasoned: “Keeping prostitutes off the streets may be aided by tolerating them off the streets.”130 Does the two-track approach favor the higher class, indoor sector and unfairly target the lower echelon streetwalkers? Inherent in any two-track approach are disparate effects on actors associated with each track, and with respect to prostitution there are legitimate grounds for differential treatment: (1) certain other types of commercial enterprise and individual behavior (e.g., 27 RONALD WEITZER nudity, urination, being drunk and disorderly) are prohibited on the streets and (2) “this kind of policy may not be considered too inequitable if the costs inflicted on society by the street prostitutes are greater . . . than from those working in hotels” and other indoor venues.131 The legal principle on which this proposal rests is that the criminal law should not interfere with the conduct of consenting adults, provided that this conduct does not threaten the legally protected interests of others. Whereas street prostitution is associated with a variety of harms to workers and to host communities, indoor prostitution is in accord with the harm-reduction principle.132 As the San Francisco Committee on Crime flatly concluded, “continued criminalization of private, non-visible prostitution cannot be warranted by fear of associated crime, drug abuse, venereal disease, or protection of minors.”133 A Canadian commission agreed: “The concern with the law is not what takes place in private, but the public manifestation of prostitution.”134 And another Canadian task force determined that “the two objectives of harm reduction and violence prevention could most likely occur if prostitution was conducted indoors.”135 The policy implication is clear: “reassign police priorities to those types of prostitution that inflict the greatest costs,” namely, street prostitution.136 Track Two: Restructuring Street Prostitution Control One advantage of the two-track model is that resources previously devoted to the control of indoor prostitution can be transferred to where they are most needed: the street-level sex trade. Under this model, the central objective of the police and social service agencies would be to (1) protect workers from violence and (2) assist workers to leave the streets. Some British cities such as Liverpool and Manchester have experimented with this strategy, under a formal “multi-agency partnership” approach to street prostitution.137 It is certainly not the norm in the United States, but the policy was adopted in 2008 in New York State with regard to minors caught soliciting on the street. Under the new law, persons under age 18 arrested for prostitution will be channeled into services and programs (including safe houses, counseling, vocational training, healthcare) instead of being charged with a crime and prosecuted.138 The police still arrest the youths, which seems necessary in order to compel compliance, but those arrested are not stigmatized by prosecution in court and formal punishment. This policy could be extended to adult street prostitutes as well. This population has special needs because of their manifold, adverse life experiences—including drug addiction, sexual trauma, emotional problems, 28 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES social stigma, arrest records, and health problems.139 In most American cities, resources are scarce for both the homeless and sex-trading populations. For the latter, the dominant approach is overwhelmingly coercive rather than rehabilitative, yet past experience abundantly shows the failure of narrowly punitive intervention. Without assistance from service providers and meaningful alternatives to prostitution there is little opportunity for a career change. In order to reduce the amount of street prostitution, there is a desperate need for a comprehensive program of temporary housing, job training, drug treatment, healthcare, counseling, education, and other services. A few blue-ribbon panels have recommended changes consistent with the two-track model. Commissions in Atlanta and San Francisco advocated a dual approach for precisely the reasons just described.140 A landmark Canadian commission argued that abating street prostitution would require legislation allowing prostitutes to work somewhere else, and it recommended permitting one or two prostitutes to work out of their own residence,141 a proposal subsequently endorsed by another Canadian taskforce and by a British government commission.142 Indoor work by one or two prostitutes was seen as preferable to work on the streets or in brothels since it gives the workers maximum autonomy and shields them against exploitation by pimps and other managers. The commission also recommended giving provincial authorities the option of legalizing small, nonresidential brothels, subject to appropriate controls. Government officials rejected the recommendations of all three commissions. The state of Rhode Island is unique in its dual policy toward street and indoor prostitution. State law criminalizes loitering for the purpose of soliciting sex, but loitering occurs outdoors and indoor solicitation per se is not a crime. Police have busted massage parlors for employing workers lacking a massage license, but not for prostitution.143 Bills recently presented in the state legislature to criminalize all prostitution have failed, as a result of lobbying by the ACLU. Rhode Island thus stands alone in the United States in its formal adoption of the two-track policy. Some other nations also embrace the two-track approach—decriminalizing brothels or escort agencies and retaining enforcement against street prostitution. The legislature in Western Australia passed a bill of this nature in 2008.144 In 2007, the Hawaii State Legislature considered a bill that would decriminalize the indoor track and zone street prostitution. The bill stipulates the following: A person commits the offense of prostitution if the person engages in, or agrees or offers to engage in, sexual conduct with another person for a fee in a public 29 RONALD WEITZER place that is likely to be observed by others who would be affronted or alarmed. For purposes of this section, a “public place” means any street, sidewalk, bridge, alley or alleyway, plaza, driveway, parking lot, or transportation facility, or the doorways and entrance ways to any building that fronts on any of these places, or a motor vehicle in or on any such place except areas that are designated as exceptions to this section. . . . The legislature and counties shall designate areas within their jurisdiction as exempt from the penalty provisions. . . . Designated areas shall include portions of geographic areas that have a history of this offense. The designated areas may be described both by geographic boundaries and by time of day limitations.145 The first part of the bill decriminalizes indoor prostitution, and the second part limits street prostitution to certain areas. The latter therefore departs from the two-track policy because it does not provide resources to help street workers get off the streets. The bill was supported by the ACLU, but it failed to pass in the legislature. One of the sponsors of the bill, Rep. Bob Herkes, saw the bill as a strategic stepping stone: “It’s one of those bills you do it for public dialogue instead of trying to get it passed,” and the bill’s advocates hope to gain support for a similar bill in the future.146 Cracking Down on Clients A major shift in enforcement policy over the past 15 years has been the targeting of prostitutes’ customers. Traditionally, the act of patronizing a prostitute was not a crime in the United States, but it is now criminalized in all 50 states. In most areas, however, law enforcement falls most heavily on the prostitute. In 2002, for example, only 9% of all prostitution-related arrests in Phoenix were of men, 12% in Boston, and 14% in Las Vegas.147 However, some cities specifically target the customers. In 2002, men accounted for 61% of all prostitution-related arrests in Kansas City, 72% in Detroit, and 75% in San Francisco.148 Customers are targeted in different ways. Police decoys walk the streets and make arrests when they are solicited. Public humiliation is another common approach, and it can be used after an arrest, as an added sanction, or instead of an arrest. One common tactic is publishing the names of alleged clients in local newspapers or on television. Kansas City created “John TV”— a weekly cable TV show displaying the names, addresses, and pictures of men arrested for attempting to solicit a prostitute.149 Kansas City activists also created a “hooker hotline,” a recorded list of the names of persons arrested for soliciting a prostitute. The hotline received several hundred calls every month. 30 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES In New Haven, Connecticut, posters naming a “John of the Week” were stapled to trees and telephone polls in one prostitution stroll. Posters provided the name and address of men observed soliciting a prostitute, with the warning, “Johns! Stay out of our neighborhood or your name will be here next week.”150 In Miami, freeway billboards have been used to announce the names of convicted johns. Americans are divided on the idea of shaming johns in these ways. A 1995 poll found that 50% of the public endorsed punishing men convicted of soliciting prostitutes by placing their names and pictures in the news.151 At least 280 American cities are using some kind of shaming tactic against johns.152 A second tactic is a novel form of rehabilitation—the “john school” for arrested customers. San Francisco launched its First Offenders Prostitution Program in 1995, and between 1995 and early 2008, more than 5700 men had attended the program.153 As of 2008, 39 other cities in America (as well as cities in Canada and Britain) have created similar schools. The programs are a joint effort by the district attorney’s office, the police department, the public health department, community leaders, and former prostitutes. The men avoid an arrest record and court appearance by paying a $1000 fee, attending the school, and not recidivating for 1 year after the arrest. Every aspect of the 8-hour course is designed to shame, educate, and deter the men from future contact with prostitutes. The content and tone of the lectures are designed for maximum shock value. During my observations at the San Francisco school, the men were frequently asked how they would feel if their mothers, wives, or daughters were “prostituted,” and why they were “using” and “violating” prostitutes by patronizing them. The audience was also exposed to a graphic slideshow on the dangers of sexually transmitted diseases, horror stories about the wretched lives of prostitutes and their oppression by pimps, and information about the harmful effects of street prostitution on the host neighborhoods. My review of responses to a questionnaire completed by the men at the end of the day found that many seem to experience “consciousness raising” about the negative aspects of street prostitution and pledge to never again contact a prostitute, but others expressed cynicism or resentment at getting caught, at having to take the class, at being “talked down to” by the lecturers, and being otherwise demeaned. Some men insisted that they were innocent victims of police entrapment. The growing targeting of customers in the U.S. is part of a larger, international trend toward criminalizing clients. The focus of antiprostitution groups has increasingly been one of ending “the demand” for paid sex. In 1999, Sweden passed a law exclusively punishing the customers of prostitutes, 31 RONALD WEITZER based on the assumption that they are the root of all evil in the sex industry. Since then, some other nations have either adopted or are considering adopting the Swedish system. Policy changes are often driven by activists who hold a narrow view of sex work. Over the past 30 years, prohibitionists and liberals have been locked in battle, two sides that have clashing views regarding prostitution, pornography, and other sex work, and over government policies in this sphere. Prohibitionists adopt the oppression paradigm described earlier in the chapter, and actively promote it when they lobby public officials or appear in the media. Conservative prohibitionists are disturbed by the danger sex work poses to the family and moral fabric of society. Feminist prohibitionists denounce all sex work as the ultimate expression of gender oppression, violence against women, or “sexual slavery.” The other, liberal side argues that commercial sex services are legitimate or valuable occupations, that pornography is protected under the Constitution (the right to free speech), or that prohibition only drives the sex trade underground and exposes workers to greater harms. This side tends to favor legalization or decriminalization as policies best suited to harm reduction for prostitutes. These are fundamentally different paradigms, turning on different images of the workers involved: sex objects vs. sex workers, quintessential victims of male domination vs. agents who actively construct their work lives. These are not abstract debates. Quite the contrary. A sex war is raging in the public square in many nations around the world, reflected in growing media attention and political debates in Australia, Britain, South Africa, and the United States—to name just a few. Theoretical perspectives have real-world consequences insofar as they are used by policymakers as a basis for new laws or new enforcement tools. As indicated earlier, over the past decade, some nations, such as the United States, have embraced the oppression paradigm and increased penalties and enforcement against those involved in sex work. Some other nations have legalized prostitution and some of these states have explicitly embraced the polymorphous perspective by treating street and (all or certain types of) indoor prostitution quite differently.154 C O N C LU S I O N This book contributes to our knowledge of several aspects of sex work and the sex industry, including dimensions that have rarely been studied in the past. The book breaks new ground, but we need even more research on telephone sex work, off-street prostitutes, the porn industry generally and gay and 32 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES lesbian pornography in particular, legal prostitution systems, the dynamics of law enforcement, and the social forces driving changes in law and public policy. We know little about contemporary brothels, massage parlors, escort agencies, transgender prostitutes, and call girls, and we need much more research on the men involved at all levels—customers, workers, managers, producers, owners. This world does not offer easy access to the outsider, which helps to account for the paucity of research in many key areas; but gaining access should be viewed as a challenge rather than an insuperable barrier. N OTE S 1. Top Ten Reviews provides the following figures (in billions) for 2006: Video Sales/Rentals $3.62, Internet $2.84, Cable/PPV/In-Room/ Mobile/Phone Sex $2.19, Exotic Dance Clubs $2.00, Novelties $1.73, Magazines $.95. http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/ internet-pornography-statistics.html, accessed June 19, 2008. The site reports that worldwide pornography revenue in 2006 was $97.1 billion. 2. Eric Schlosser, “The Business of Pornography,” U.S. News and World Report, February 10, 1997; 2006 figure from Top Ten Reviews. 3. Top Ten Reviews. 4. William Sherman, “The Naked Truth about Strip Clubs,” New York Daily News, July 8, 2007. 5. James Davis and Tom Smith, General Social Survey: Cumulative Codebook, Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, 2002. 6. Zogby International poll, 2000, N = 1031. 7. Gallup Organization, Gallup Poll Monthly, no. 313, October, 1991. 8. Davis and Smith, General Social Survey. Another major survey found that 16% of American men aged 18–59 reported that they had paid for sex at some time (Edward Laumann, John Gagnon, Robert Michael, and Stuart Michaels, The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994). 9. Chris Rissel, “Experiences of Commercial Sex in a Representative Sample of Adults,” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 27 (2003): 191–197. 10. Ipsos/MORI Poll, January 6–10, 2006, N = 1790, aged 16–64. 11. Rissel, “Experiences of Commercial Sex”; Eleanor Maticka-Tyndale, “Context and Patterns of Men’s Commercial Sexual Partnerships in Northeastern Thailand,” Social Science and Medicine 44 (1997): 199–213. 12. Ipsos/MORI Poll, January 6–10, 2006, N = 1790, aged 16–64. 33 RONALD WEITZER 13. Hillary Rhodes, “Prostitution Advances in a Wired World,” Associated Press, March 11, 2008; Bruce Lambert, “As Prostitutes Turn to Craigslist, Law Takes Notice,” New York Times, September 4, 2007. 14. Scripps Howard News Service/Ohio University poll, February 10, 2005, N = 1001. 15. Davis and Smith, General Social Survey, 1994. 16. Ellison Research poll, March 11, 2008, N = 1007. This was the view of 42% of men and 57% of women. 17. Harris Poll #76, September 20–26, 2004, N = 2555. This was the view of 38% of men and 57% of women. 18. Time magazine poll, conducted by Yankelovich/Skelly/White, July 26–31, 1977, N = 1044 registered voters. 19. Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life poll, October 2006, N = 739. 20. ICM Research, Sex and Exploitation Survey, January 2008, N = 1023. Women (68%) were slightly more likely to take this view than men (62%). 21. NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, June 10–14, 1994, N = 1502. 22. Penn, Shoen, and Berland poll, sponsored by Democratic Leadership Council, July 23–27, 1997, N = 1009 registered voters. 23. General Social Survey, 2006 and 1984. The question asks respondents which policy is closest to their own view: “There should be laws against the distribution of pornography whatever the age.” “There should be laws against the distribution of pornography to persons under 18.” “There should be no laws against the distribution of pornography.” The figures presented here are for the first option, a universal ban on distribution. 24. General Social Survey, 2006. 25. Gallup, Gallup Poll Monthly, 1991: 46% thought female strippers and 45% thought male strippers “should be illegal at bars or clubs.” 26. Only 5% thought that stripping was less acceptable today than a decade ago. Institute for Social Research, University of Alabama, Capstone Poll, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, 2002, N = 484. 27. Danny Hakim and William Rashbaum, “No U.S. Charges against Spitzer for Prostitution,” New York Times, November 7, 2008, p. A1. 28. “Fresno Deputy District Attorney Busted for Soliciting a Prostitute,” Channel 47 News online, Fresno, California, accessed August 27, 2008; “Ex-Police Chief Charged in Pa. Prostitution Case,” Evening Sun (Hanover, PA), August 27, 2008. 29. Part of this section of the chapter draws on two articles: Ronald Weitzer, “Prostitution: Facts and Fictions,” Contexts 6 (Fall 2007): 28–33, and Ronald Weitzer, “Sociology of Sex Work,” Annual Review of Sociology 35 (2009). 34 SEX WORK: PARADIGMS AND POLICIES 30. Kathleen Barry, The Prostitution of Sexuality, New York: New York University Press, 1995; Andrea Dworkin, Pornography: Men Possessing Women, New York: Putnam, 1981; Andrea Dworkin, Life and Death, New York: Free Press, 1997; Sheila Jeffreys, The Idea of Prostitution, North Melbourne, Australia: Spinifex, 1997; Catherine MacKinnon, Feminism Unmodified, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987; Catherine MacKinnon, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989. 31. Melissa Farley, “Bad for the Body, Bad for the Heart: Prostitution Harms Women Even if Legalized or Decriminalized,” Violence Against Women 10 (2004): 1087–1125; Janice Raymond, “Prostitution as Violence against Women,” Women’s Studies International Forum 21 (1998): 1–9. 32. Ine Vanwesenbeeck, “Another Decade of Social Scientific Work on Prostitution,” Annual Review of Sex Research 12 (2001): 242–289; Ronald Weitzer, “Flawed Theory and Method in Studies of Prostitution,” Violence Against Women 11 (2005): 934–949, and Ronald Weitzer, “Rehashing Tired Claims about Prostitution,” Violence Against Women 11 (2005): 971–977. 33. Arlene Carmen and Howard Moody, Working Women: The Subterranean World of Street Prostitution, New York: Harper & Row, 1985; Frederique Delacoste and Priscilla Alexander, eds., Sex Work: Writings by Women in the Sex Industry, Pittsburgh: Cleis, 1987; Nadine Strossen, Defending Pornography, New York: Anchor, 1995; Wendy McElroy, XXX: A Woman’s Right to Pornography, New York: St. Martin’s, 1995; Wendy Chapkis, Live Sex Acts: Women Performing Erotic Labor, New York: Routledge, 1997. 34. Eileen McLeod, Working Women: Prostitution Now, London: Croom Helm, 1982, p. 28. 35. Noah Zatz, “Sex Work/Sex Act: Law, Labor, and Desire in Constructions of Prostitution,” Signs 22 (1997): 277–308, at p. 291. 36. Julia O’Connell Davidson, Power, Prostitution, and Freedom, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1998. 37. Barbara Heyl, “Prostitution: An Extreme Case of Sex Stratification,” in Freda Adler and Rita Simon, eds., The Criminology of Deviant Women, Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1979, p. 198. 38. Thomas Steinfatt, Working at the Bar: Sex Work and Health Communication in Thailand, Westport, CT: Ablex, 2002, p. 19. 39. Stephanie Church, Marion Henderson, Marina Barnard, and Graham Hart, “Violence by Clients towards Female Prostitutes in Different Work Settings,” British Medical Journal 322 (2001): 524–526. 35 RONALD WEITZER 40. See the studies cited in Ronald Weitzer, “New Directions in Research on Prostitution,” Crime, Law, and Social Change 43 (2005): 211–235. 41. See Patty Kelly, Lydia’s Open Door: Inside Mexico’s Most Modern Brothel, Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008; Prabha Kotiswaran, “Born unto Brothels: Toward a Legal Ethnography of Sex Work in an Indian Red-Light Area,” Law and Social Inquiry 33 (2008): 579–629; Kemala Kempadoo, Sexing the Caribbean: Gender, Race, and Sexual Labor, New York: Routledge, 2004; Kamala Kempadoo, ed., Sun, Sex, and Gold: Tourism and Sex Work in the Caribbean, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999; Denise Brennan, What’s Love Got to Do with It? Transnational Desires and Sex Tourism in the Dominican Republic, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2004. 42. Libby Plumridge and Gillian Abel, “A Segmented Sex Industry in New Zealand: Sexual and Personal Safety of Female Sex Workers,” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 25 (2001): 78–83, at p. 83. 43. Quoted in Joanne Kimberlin, “Women for Hire: Behind Closed Doors in the Escort Industry,” The Virginia-Pilot, May 18, 2008, p. A11. 44. Dolores French, Working: My Life as A Prostitute, New York: E.P. Dutton, 1988, pp. 152–153. 45. Roberta Perkins and Frances Lovejoy, Call Girls: Private Sex Workers in Australia, Crawley: University of Western Australia Press, 2007, p. 51. 46. Quoted in Elizabeth Bernstein, Temporarily Yours: Intimacy, Authenticity, and the Commerce of Sex, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007, p. 46. 47. Diana Prince, A Psychological Study of Prostitutes in California and Nevada, doctoral dissertation, San Diego: U.S. International University, 1986, p. 490. 48. Ann Lucas, “The Work of Sex Work: Elite Prostitutes’ Vocational Orientations and Experiences,” Deviant Behavior 26 (2005): 513–546, at p. 531. 49. A similar phenomenon has been documented for bar workers who spend extended periods of time with their customers. A survey of Thailand’s bar prostitutes found that more than 80% of them “had a relationship w...
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Hello! The final answer is ready. Hit me up for any edits.

Running Head: SEX WORK AND SEX TRAFFICKING

Sex Work and Sex Trafficking
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date

1

SEX WORK AND SEX TRAFFICKING

2

Introduction
Sex work and sex trafficking are common issues that are high and hotly debated all over
the world. Sex work is the exchange of sexual services, performance, and products in exchange
for compensation, mostly money. On the other hand, sex trafficking occurs when an individual is
forced or coerced to indulge in commercial sex work. These two terms are commonly associated
with each other. Due to the high levels of demand for sex work, sex trafficking has increased
drastically as individuals rush to meet the demands in the market. In this essay, I will analyze
two essays written by Ronal Weitzer and discuss points learned from the essays.
In his essay, Weitzer claims that moral crusades rely on horror stories about victims. The
criticism by these crusades is aimed at alarming the public and policymakers in an effort to
justify draconian solutions. Weitzer states, “Inflated claims are made about the magni...


Anonymous
I was stuck on this subject and a friend recommended Studypool. I'm so glad I checked it out!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags