Campaign failure
Of course,
such a campaign needs to be carried out in a slow, measured and comprehensive
manner. Unfortunately this did not happen - funding for the project was
discontinued after a year in operation. Many aspects of the campaign, including
a website, never saw the light of day and today, the incidence of STIs here
continues to rise. It is a symptom of the lack of vision and understanding by
some health authorities to serious issues. But it also points to the fact that
many people are not being cautious in their sexual lives.
This is backed up by an article released thejournal.ie (3rd November 2012), which shows recent
stats:
THE
NUMBER OF cases of STIs in Ireland has risen significantly, with gonorrhoea now
at the highest rate ever recorded for the country.
The report by the HSE’s Health Protection Surveillance
Centre found there were 13,259 notifications of STIs in 2011, an increase of
just over 12 per cent on the previous year.
Gonorrhoea cases increased by one third (33.4 per
cent) to 834 cases, and the incidence rate now stands at 18.2 per 100,000
population – a figure that is significantly higher than the European average
(10.4) as well as being the highest incidence recorded in Ireland. Men made up
almost 80 per cent of cases.
The
report was compiled using data from STI clinics, laboratories, and GPs. Other
findings include:
·
Chlamydia
remains the most common STI
accounting for 48.3 per cent of cases last year.
·
Genital
warts were the second most frequently
reported STI at 18.5 per cent.
·
Almost 60
per cent of people with STIs were aged
between 20 and 29.
·
There
were 653 cases of syphilis in
2011, a slight increase on the previous year.
·
Genital
herpes saw the single biggest jump in
the number of cases with an increase of 39.8 per cent year on year.
As a Sex Worker who currently works in Ireland (2013) I can
tell you that there are many men who do not understand how important it is to
use a condom, but as a Sex Worker, I insist on them being used. We are actively educating our clients to the
risks of not using condoms and the majority of us will not entertain a client
who is not willing to wear one.
There have been times where I
have been asked if I will perform sex without a condom, or they have told me
that they have had ‘the snip’ and therefore cannot get me pregnant, so will I
allow bareback sex. These kinds of
requests tell me that they have no idea of why we insist on condoms and that
they are not there to stop pregnancy, but to stop the spread of STI’s.
I am also very aware that Irish
men rarely if at all attend clinics and do not attend regular tests to make
sure that they are clean of sexually transmitted diseases. They assume that they would know if there was
something wrong, even though it is common knowledge that some diseases like
chlamydia for example, have no traceable side effects in the majority of people
who have it. Yet this can stop their
partner from having children if they pass it on without detection.
It is my opinion that Sex Workers
offering unprotected sex should be illegal; regardless of their working status
and that ladies who insist on using condoms for penetrative sex are legal,
along with their clients. This is
legislation that I would be keen to adopt.
Health should be taken very
seriously and it concerns me that Ireland is not already pulling out all the
stops to ensure that their young people are not fully prepared and aware of all
the reasons why they need to be taking full protection with condoms. With this in mind, I think the Swedish Model
would influence some Sex Workers to stop using condoms, especially if they have
been targeted by the Garda and further exasperate an existing problem in
Ireland that has not yet been combated.
Further to this there is also the issue of ‘stigma’. In Sweden the criminalisation of clients has
worked to further stigmatise Sex Workers and their clients and as such both
clients and Sex Workers are not receiving the care that they need with regards
to sexual diseases, including HIV/AIDS.
The information below states:
A fear raised by the Ombudsman was that the increased
stigma would lead to worse prospects for health promotion and HIV-preventive
work. It referred to UNAIDS, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS,
that discourages criminalization for this reason: social stigma might influence
the contact with social authorities, the health care system and the judicial
system.
RFSL(2) also referred to UNAIDS and expressed its
great concern for the Swedish situation: the organization has knowledge of
several instances where HIV-preventive measurements aimed at clients were
stopped with reference to the ban. It further believes that the point of view
expressed by the evaluation, that “increased stigmatization is positive” is an
almost counteractive attitude to harm reduction. For example, sex workers with
whom the RFSL has been in contact have reported that stigma prevents them
talking about their prostitution experiences when testing for HIV/STI. To
strengthen the stigma will lessen the chances to reach people who sell sex and
to conduct harm reduction measures, concludes RFSL. The organization also
points out that HIV-preventive needs are greater amongst men who sell sex to
men and transgender people, but that the official evaluation almost totally
ignores this population. Studies done by RFSL showed that 38.5 percent of the
men who sell sex never tested for STIs.
It is therefore possible that yet another negative
consequence of the ban is an increased level of STI and HIV amongst sex workers
and their clients. The Board of Health and Welfare, which also expresses
concern about the consequences of an increased stigma, writes in its response
that according to the 2010 Swedish UNAIDS report that only 18.5 per cent of
drug-using sex workers used a condom during their most recent intercourse.
Conclusion
We believe that one has to look at several factors to
understand the discrepancy between the stated success of the Sex Purchase Act
and its documented effects. While there are some police, social workers and
former sex workers who claim that the ban has indeed helped reduce prostitution
and trafficking and deterred clients without any adverse effects, the reports
and documents that have a scientific rather than ideological base do not
support these success claims. Hence, as we and others have written elsewhere,
we believe that it is in the ideological and cultural domains that the creation
of the “unique” Sex Purchase Act and the above mention discrepancy must be
found. It has to do with a desire to create and uphold a national identity of
being the moral consciousness in the world; with notions or “good” and “bad”
sexuality; with the whore stigma; with creating new forms of sexual deviancy;
with a communitarian, rather than liberal, political culture, and perhaps above
all: a stereotypical and uninformed understanding of prostitution. (3)
As mentioned previously, there is already a growing trend in STI’s
with regards to males in Sweden, which backs up the theory written above that
men are at greater risk of not being
treated for STI’s, which is on
the increase. With Ireland being behind
with regards to sexual education and already unsupported with regards to
educating people, this could be catastrophic to the population.
Analysis of the Swedish
Model
The "Swedish model"
consists of several laws and regulations. The three main laws that criminalize
or prevent prostitution involving adults are those addressing pandering, the
forfeiture of rental apartments and rooms used for prostitution, and the
purchase of sex. (4)
This means that Sex Workers if
discovered by the Garda will likely find themselves evicted, as the landlords
will be forced to drive them out or risk prosecution. The landlord may have had no idea, but the
second they are informed they would have no choice but to act.
In the Spotlight document
‘Prostitution regulation in Ireland: Which way now? It states that in Sweden
prostitution is partially criminalised.
The purchase of sexual services is a crime, but the sale of sexual
services is not. The Swedish law aims
for the promotion of equality for women and protection from violence. It aims for the abolition of prostitution in
the long run and for public support for this aim.
The first fault I find with this
is the ‘promotion of equality’. Sex work
is not only for females. Although it
does have a majority female work force, both males and females can and do
participate in prostitution. If they are
looking for equality in the work force, then perhaps they should be looking in
other fields of business where the majority of managerial positions are
dominated by men and men earn more than women when doing the same job. Sex Work is one of the few occupations where
a woman can earn money comparable with the higher end jobs that are normally
denied them. This IS equality!
Violence! Yes Sex Work can be a
volatile and dangerous occupation, but no more so than serving in the Military,
being a Nurse/Doctor or Fire Person, to name but a few dangerous
occupations. The work itself is not
violence and should not be considered so, as long as both parties are
consenting. Yes it is good to have
measures in place in case of violence, but it should not be presumed as part of
the occupation.
It also goes on to say that the
Swedish Model is based on the perception that all prostitution is viewed as
exploitation and involuntary. This
however is incorrect and as such the reasoning behind it is unfair to both the
purchaser and the provider. As someone
who has chosen to be a Sex Worker, I can categorically say that I am not
exploited, as I am paid well for my services and only offer services that I am
comfortable with. I have the freedom to
withdraw services at any point and I am at liberty to refuse services
completely if I believe the client to be of any risk to myself.
I chose this occupation after
carefully considering my skill base, time available and flexibility; it is
totally voluntary. The majority of Sex
Workers are Independent and have similar choices as myself.
Being Self-Employed I am a
registered tax payer. Admittedly I do
not use the title of ‘prostitute’ or ‘sex worker’ for my business due to the
stigma attached and not wanting any impact on future jobs, but I am keen to pay
my way and contribute to society. This
also allows me to claim expenses and build up on my credit rating, which will
improve my future with greater financial options. I think if Sex Workers were encouraged to
feel that their work was legal and above board, more would opt to pay tax and
like me contribute to Society financially.
This does not mean that the government are profiting from sex, but
profiting from self-employed people offering a service, which is exactly how it
should be viewed by all.
I am not sure where the law would
stand on this if our client base were made to be criminals? Would this not also make it even more
ambiguous as the government could then be seen to be profiting from criminal
activity? Surely it is better to encourage
transparency and participating in contributing to the Country, where we reside
most from earnings, without fear of discord? Also, if the person is paying tax,
is it not more reassuring that they are working of their own free will and not
an illegal immigrant, in turn creating another way to monitor trafficking.
Returning to the Spotlight
document it argues that the Swedish model means that trafficked prostitutes
will be more likely to seek help and get out of prostitution as they will not
be prosecuted for selling sexual services.
This makes no sense, as it is not illegal now, so what difference
exactly is there to make it ‘more likely?’
Arguing against the approach it rightly acknowledges that ‘the
criminalisation of the purchase of sexual services drives prostitution deeper
underground, which makes it both more difficult to find and assist trafficked
prostitutes and more dangerous for the prostitutes’. I am inclined to believe this is closer to
the reality and as such there would be less approaching for help, as they would
find it harder to reach out to any help offered, plus with the clients being
too scared to report concerns there would be less co-operation in finding them
out and on a more mercenary note. Sex
Workers who do not wish to lose income will likely work elsewhere, leaving less
choice for the purchaser; who may be more inclined to turn a blind eye, in the
knowledge that his activities are criminal anyway. Please do consider that the more law abiding
clients may have stopped visiting Sex Workers, leaving the less sympathetic
purchaser behind, possibly encouraging Sex Workers to agree to bookings they
may have previously rejected.
There are very few statistics to
be found with regards to how much prostitution there was before and after the
Swedish Model came into play, but with the figures that have been presented it
would be a fair analysis to assume that there is no difference in the amount of
people selling sex, but the way in which they work has changed in order to
avoid the negative consequences of the legislation.
Accordingly to the Malmö
Knowledge Centre, the changing technology has resulted in the “hidden” (indoor)
prostitution now making up four-fifths (80%) of the overall prostitution
prevalence, compared to two-thirds (67%) before the ban was introduced. This
would leave us with a similar total number of people involved in prostitution
as before the ban, or about 1,500 people.
In its 2007 report
the National Board of Health and Welfare summarized the situation in the
following manner:
It is also difficult to discern any clear trend of development:
has the extent of prostitution increased or decreased? We cannot give any
unambiguous answer to that question. At most, we can discern that street
prostitution is slowly returning, after swiftly disappearing in the wake of the
law against purchasing sexual services. But as said, that refers to street
prostitution, which is the most obvious manifestation. With regard to increases
and decreases in other areas of prostitution – the “hidden prostitution” – we
are even less able to make any statements.
The National Board for Health and Welfare. (5)
In short prostitution has been driven underground and with it the
trafficked minority, who would be even harder to find, rescue and help. This also makes the lives of the voluntary
Sex Workers harder and more susceptible to violence, which would not be
reported for fear of future surveillance.
It also proves that the legislation ban cannot be claimed as a ‘success’
as they are not substantiated.
Furthermore apart from not actually having any evidence of reducing Sex
Work in Sweden it can also be said that:
The
Sex Purchase Act can both be a hindrance to traffickers, but also a tool to
improve market conditions, due to the higher prices for sex that the ban
creates. (6)
This
supports my belief that trafficking will become worse under this legislation
and not work to improve conditions and accessibility to those who want to be
found and rescued, but make more money for the sophisticated criminal. This is further evident by the following
statement.
Serious organized crime, including prostitution and trafficking,
has increased in strength, power and complexity during the past decade. It
constitutes a serious social problem in Sweden and organized crime makes large
amounts of money from the exploitation and trafficking of people under
slave-like conditions.
National Police Board press release March 2010
(6)
The Swedish Model
legislation to criminalise the purchaser is not effective in combating
trafficking and in driving prostitution underground it has encouraged more
sophisticated criminals, which have a tighter grasp and money interest on
exploiting women for sex work. This
chart below shows the reported trafficked numbers and how many convictions
generated. (7)
A negative unanticipated
bi-product of the legislation has found purchasers being black mailed and fewer
convictions against traffickers due to less willing witnesses to step forward.
When it comes to clients, it
seems they are less willing to assist as witnesses in cases in which profiteers
who exploit the sexual labour of others are prosecuted, since they now find
themselves guilty of a crime. Clients are exposed to blackmail and robbery, and
the stigma associated with buying sex means people often have to leave their
jobs and positions, even on a mere suspicion. (9)
Consequently
the last convicted Pimp/Trafficker was in 2007, despite 77 cases being brought
forward between 2008 and 2010. This
would support the theory that criminalising sex purchasers has made it harder
to gain vital evidence in order for a conviction to be granted.
Religious, Feminist and
Moralising Organisations
With regards to morals, this
legislation is not really concerned with the morality of Sex Work. It should not really be a factor in today’s
society of whether it be right or wrong, but kept to the real facts that are
about reducing trafficking and people (not just women and children) entering
into a situation where someone else is profiting from them. It should also be about making the job as
safe as possible, with regards to violence and health and this won’t happen if
we are further stigmatised by criminalising the very people that pay our wages.
It is difficult to see how
representatives that are more interested in Feminism, religious beliefs and
Morals can contribute impartially and I think the evidence shows this is the
case with the existing Swedish Model as it stands.
On a final note it was concluded
in the Etute-suede 2011:
Our stance when it comes to
policy regarding prostitution is that it has to be based on knowledge rather
than morality or radical feminist ideology. We also believe that when policy is
developed, the actors at the heart of this policy must be adequately consulted
and duly respected. In our opinion, this has not been the case with regards to
“the Swedish model”. (10)
Isn’t this history repeating itself? Is it not possible to learn from the mistakes
of others and use them for the greater good of the whole community and not just
sectors that disapprove? This
legislation helps no one, but will do a lot of damage to the very people it is
alleged to help.
The Sex Purchase Act
The Sex Purchase Act was introduced by feminist
policymakers who argued that ‘prostitution is a form of
male violence against women, that it is physically and psychologically damaging
to sell sex and that there are no women
who sell sex voluntarily.’ Furthermore, it was claimed that ‘if one wants to achieve a gender-equal
society, then prostitution must cease to exist – not only for the
above-mentioned reasons, but also because all women in society are harmed as long
as men think they can "buy women's bodies". If the ban would have
adverse effects for individual women who sell sex, or if it violates their
right to self-determination would not matter. The gender-equal symbolic value
of the Sex Purchase Act is more important.’
We already know that the highlighted
statement is not true. Many women are
able to not just survive working within this industry, but prosper. It is condescending to suppose that women do
not know themselves well enough to succeed as a Sex Worker without some form of
damage, in the same way they would know if they were suited to the Military,
being a gymnast or a Scientist. We all
have different qualities to offer and select our work accordingly.
With regards to gender-equality
and men not being able to see us as equals as long as they are able to “buy
women’s bodies” is ridiculous. More
likely the objection is lack of control as many women control their men through
their inherent need for sex and ration them depending on what they want from
them. It is the man that is being controlled
and lacking gender equality in relationships and sometimes in the
workforce. Yet this goes
overlooked? It is also possible for
women to buy time from men or use their bodies as a bargaining tool, using
their marital status as a carrot, knowing full well that in the eyes of God
they are not able to obtain sexual relief anywhere else. The fact that some men choose to purchase sex
makes that dangling carrot redundant and despite the fact they would argue not
using their feminine charms to get what they want, it happens on a daily basis,
with no one batting an eyelid. At least
with purchasing sex there is no game playing, not agenda and no deception. It is a case of double standards.
The overall implications of these
laws is that no one can operate a brothel, rent
an apartment, room or hotel room, assist with finding clients, act as a
security guard or allow advertising for
sex workers. This in turn implies that sex workers cannot work together, recommend customers to each other,
advertise, work from property they rent or own or even cohabit with a partner (since that partner is likely to share part
of any income derived from sex work). In addition, the law against pandering
makes it difficult for the authorities to utilise harm reduction strategies.
For instance distribution of condoms, although perfectly legal under the Social
Services and Communicable Diseases Acts respectively, might be perceived by
non-legal experts as encouraging prostitution, (4i)
The highlighted areas I would
like to discuss. If I am unable to rent
an apartment or room, then I am being forced onto the street, which is putting
me in greater danger and exposure. If I
am not allowed to advertise, then it means that I am going to have to go underground
and offer different services to those actually offered. This means I will have more clients asking
for services I am not happy to offer and make complications that could lead to an
assault. Client recommendations are the
best word of mouth way to know that you are dealing with a safe and trustworthy
client. All businesses operate in this
way and give priority to good customers.
Cohabit with a partner. This is
the worst rule I have read so far. This
means that you are actively denying a Sex Worker a loving relationship. Where are the equal rights for women when a
woman is denied a normal life outside of work?
There is no relationship where the couple does not benefit from wages
earned. It is that which gives them
stability. How can a law be put in place
to deny a woman a loving relationship or marriage? I would imagine living a life without love
would be far more damning and psychologically detrimental than a life as a
voluntary Sex Worker; otherwise there would not be such a thing as a Swinger,
where they actively seek out sex with strangers for their own pleasure.
Looking at Sweden it seems that
the legislation has not worked to stop men purchasing sex. They are either going to different Countries
to indulge themselves or relating it to the same as a speeding fine, as the police
acknowledge there is still a great demand for the purchase of sex.
Many compared the illegal nature
of buying sex with speeding; it is illegal to drive a car too fast as well, and
one might or not get caught doing it – but it was still worth it. (8)
This
is in line with a small survey conducted with 113 active sex purchasers in
Ireland. As you can see from the pie
chart the majority said that they would continue to purchase sex, if
legislation criminalised the purchaser.
Conclusion
To wrap this up as simply as
possible I have to ask myself. Would
criminalising the purchasers of sex improve my life as a Sex Worker? Without doubt and categorically it would not
and I strongly believe it would make my life much harder and put me in
unnecessary danger. I would be
constantly scared that I may be thrown out of the accommodation I was
using. I would be constantly worried
about being under surveillance and my clients being made criminals and as such
I would be involved in various court cases as an accessory. I would feel unable to use local clinics in
Ireland should an accident happen where a condom splits, in case questions are
asked and I would not be able to tell them that I was a Sex Worker, as this
information may be passed on to the Garda, who would then be checking my
movements and questioning my clients.
Do I think it would help to
rescue trafficked women forced into Sex Work?
Quite the reverse! I think the
nature of criminalising the client will force Sex Work further underground and
with it the victims of trafficking. I
believe there would be more victims of trafficking, as the demand would
increase in line with Independent Sex Workers seeking work elsewhere.
Do I agree that all prostitutes
are working against their will and violated?
How can I believe that when I am one and don’t fit that mould? I personally have never come across anyone
who is working against their will and I have met many women all over the UK and
Ireland. I interact with them on a daily
basis on various forums and I have visited several in their work place, which
ranged from homely to plush. Many of the
women were in further education, or had families and thought of Sex Work purely
as a job. There are no hang ups, no
obvious side effects and in some cases we didn’t even discuss work, but normal
day to day topics, as of the real world.
It is wrong to label a whole
sector of society as incapable of knowing what is best for them. It is wrong to suggest that they are not
capable of making an informed choice and willingly choose to work in the sex
industry. It is a job that takes a
certain type of person and is not suited to everyone. It is not a job to be glamorised, but for
those it does suit, it can provide a good quality of life, provide financial
security and a path to a fulfilling future.
Some of us enjoy touring and enjoy visiting new places, new people and
have more enriched lives. It is a great
facilitator. I would also go as far as
to say there is great job satisfaction to be had, where purchasers have made
life changing differences to their lives, based on the experience they have had
with us. It does happen and it will
continue to happen. If you truly care
about my life and my fellow workers, be them male, female or transgender. Please don’t consider the Swedish Model of
criminalising the purchaser. It will
only make things worse for the willing Sex Worker and those that really need
your help. The minority, the trafficked
few!
Sources and Information
1.
Smi – Smittskyddsinstitute
2.
RFSL
– Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender
3. The Swedish Sex Purchase Act:
Claimed Success and Documented Effects, by Susanne Dodillet and Petra Östergren
4. Etude-suede 2011 – page 3
4i Etude-suede 2011 –
page 4
5.
Etude-suede 2011 – page 11
6.
Etude-suede 2011 – page 12
7.
Etude-suede 2011 – page 13
8.
Etude-suede 2011 – page 15
9.
Etude-suede 2011 – page 21
10.
Etude-suede 2011 – page 25
