I suppose redefining sex trafficking and sex slavery as migration and sex work solves the problem of those issues, in that once they are given euphemistic names, the pimps who are selling these women and the johns who are raping them can stop worrying that they are doing something against the law.

I thought the institutional motivation behind combatting sex trafficking was the humane idea that no woman should be a sex slave.

That's pretty much the opposite of what they're trying to do.

They believe that trafficking is a form of sex slavery, and that governments' focus on it as an illegal migration problem, organized crime and sex work is problematic. They suggest that it should be approached as a human rights and labor issue. Check out the site, they have a whole section on trafficking.

Except that quote right there says -

"and change the current focus on trafficking to migration, labour and human rights"

Why would anybody want to take the focus off of sex trafficking and refocus it as a labour or migration issue unless they want to deny the reality of what is happening to women?

These people are trying to muddy the issue, not clarify it. Everywhere prostitution has been legalised, sex trafficking and sex slavery has increased. The only exception is Sweden where pimping and buying sex has been made illegal and where because of that sex trafficking has not taken hold.

No one said anything about legalizing rape, and one of the aims of this conference is to extend legal protection against rape and abuse to those who willingly entered the sex industry.

From one of the articles:

In today's practice the first are called 'sex workers', and the others are called 'trafficked women' or 'slaves'. This is on the basis of the racist and classist assumption that a (migrant) woman from the South who works in the sex industries would never choose it, and the ones (if any) that are recognised the possibility of choosing it are usually white middle class EU citizens.
There are also other problems with the distinction between voluntary sex workers and forced sex workers. In particular “the so called forced women are denied autonomy and power to make choices, and this leads to an inadequate representation of their-our complex needs and realities, including those who work under exploitative and abusive conditions”(ICRSE).
Moreover, “this representation excludes the workers who consciously made the decision to work in the sex industries but who are subject to force or abuse in the course of their-our work or who were promised other working conditions than those in which they-we find themselves- ourselves. The abuses they-we undergo are considered to be the natural consequences of their- our willingness to work as prostitutes, meaning it is their-our own fault. This reinforces the classic dichotomy between ‘innocent’ and ‘guilty’ women, thus fostering the idea that ‘innocent’ women deserve of protection, whereas ‘guilty’ ones can be abused with impunity. This distinction between innocent and guilty women has been severely attacked in any debate on other forms of violence against women, such as rape, but continues to bias the debate on sex work and the protection of the rights of sex workers” (ICRSE).

Another great quote from the site:

"[R]ather than speak about the protection of specific categories of persons, we should speak of the protection of their rights. Let us not forget that in particular women don’t have very good experiences with being “protected” by the State and certainly not with the type of protection exerted “for their own best will”."

Of course, I am envious of these European sex workers who enjoy greater freedom and priviledge than do their fellow sex workers in the US. All but one of their grievances of sex workers throughout the EU is shared by their American counterparts, minus the priviledge of decriminalized or legal indie prostitution in any state in our so called land of freedom.

If a prostitute marries or cohabitates with her significant other, he (or she) is guilty of a felony (essentially pimping) and will be charged as such if she's found guilty of prostitution, even if he is gainfully employed in a different vocation.

Also, when a woman is found guilty of prostitution, her landlord/landlady is immediately informed by the authorities, and must then evict her or face criminal charges (even if the residence was not used as a place of business). He/she may not exclude the reason for eviction if contacted as a reference by potential future landlords, and anyone who knowingly rents to a prostitute is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Both of the above laws are set in place to prevent others from deriving support from the earnings of prostitution, and yet the IRS aggressively targets even lower income sex workers for failure to pay income taxes. We are expected to help fund our own persecution, and at the same time subjected to the same asset forfeiture laws as drug dealers and hit men.

It never ceases to amaze me how hated we are in some feminist circles. As a woman, feminist and sex worker I feel horribly betrayed.

I fail to see how someone claiming to be a feminist can support an industry that turns so many women into "acceptable losses", as in "Sure, x number of women are sold and trafficked and raped and murdered to feed and fuel the sex industry, but that number is acceptable due to the enormous benefit we get from it.

...that benefit being my paycheck."

When did "feminism" turn into a movement about women having the choice to do any number of patriarchy-enhancing things while selling other women down the river. Rather than about keeping women from being sold down the river by a patriarchy in the first place?

So viva prostitution! Viva pornography! and Viva the human trafficking required to feed both of them! Because, by god, it gives women choices.

...unless they want the choice not to be kidnapped and sold into slavery. Then we see just whose choices are the most important.

No offense, Vanessa, but it seems to me that the situation they're talking about is a tad more complicated than the "sex work is sexy!" feministing party line. The problem is that many sex workers come from developing countries, and they're in the EU illegally. If sex work were decriminalized, they would still vulnerable, because while they wouldn't be members of a criminal class on account of being sex workers, they would be members of a criminal class on account of being undocumented. The decriminalization movement doesn't make any sense unless you figure out a way to deal with that reality.

Did anyone actually read any of the articles provided on the site?

I do not accept the death, rape or physical assault of ANY prostitute, and every sex worker I know is far more outraged than the general population is, when a fellow prostitute is harmed.

You may think that you are more concerned with the well being of prostitutes, but the truth is that criminalization causes more harm to those in the business; and the unwillingness of most sex workers to come forward and report abuse due to fear of incrimination is the sad reality that those who abuse us rely on.

Compare countries like the US where monsters like the Green River Killer are able to carry out scores of killings of prostitutes over the course of many years to countries like Australia where prostitutes have been awarded large settlements after suing clients who removed the condom without their knowledge before completion of the act. I once had a client do that to me, and as traumatizing as it was, the thought of taking legal action did not even occur to me. Instead, I just learned to pay closer attention, and to check to see if it's still on from time to time.

What makes you think it has anything to do with patriarchy? Sex as something inherently debasing to women is all in your mind. Most men would much rather get it for free, and most of the legislators and enforcers of anti-prostitution laws are men.

All of the women I know in the business set their own boundaries, and if they offer services they consider unpleasant, it is because they can charge more for it and feel the payoff is worth it. Personally, I don't understand how they do it, but I'm not going to begrudge them for the choices they make. When clients push boundaries or take something by force, we have our own inner-networks to help other women in the business avoid them. I really believe that most crusaders against prostitution secretly relish any hardship faced by sex workers because they feel it validates their cause.

As for the involuntary trafficking or sex slavery aspect, there is little evidence supporting the allegations that it is occurring in any but the smallest of numbers. The recent busts of the Korean massage parlors here in SF turned up no slaves at all and a mere 15% will be testifying that they had to work off huge trafficking debts, not unlike those paid by Mexican handymen to avoid being shot at by border patrol vigilantes upon entry.

The only case I know of that led to a conviction for involuntary sex trafficking was that of the Carreto brothers and their co-horts. They withdrew their original plea of innocence (not of prostitution related charges, but of involuntary trafficking of Mexican women into the US) and pled guilty in exchange for leniency.

The story surrounding the case was horrendously vile, and if it happened the way the prosicutor claimed, then these brutes got off easily with sentances just under 20 years in prison. But there are certain things about the case presented that just don't add up. Like why would a Mexican national smuggle prostitutes from his country into the US to work in a brothel in Queens, but charge less than the going rate in Tijuana? He could have stayed in his native land where prostitution is legal, charged patrons higher rates, and enjoy the steady influx of men who hop the border every day to engage in legal sexual commerce at a price that is much lower than anywhere in the US, with the exception of Queens, apparently.

The same thing goes for all the alleged rape rooms in San Diego. Why would someone commit a felony a 45 minute drive from where it's legal? And I'm sorry, but the 30 clients a day story doesn't add up either. Even the harder working AAMP girls busted in SF early 2004 said that they saw about 10 clients a day and pocketed 2/3 of the money, and not a single one claimed to have been unwilling or coerced into the business. And this was under interrogation by the FBI and immigration agents who made it clear that as trafficking victims they would not face criminal charges and deportation as is the case for willing sex workers.

The best way to fight the demand for sex trafficking is to allow for willing participation in sex work. A shift in the supply demand ratio greatly reduces the incentive for sex trafficking, and decriminalization encourages those who chose sex work as a means of income to report abuses and put those who violate them behind bars.

French Kiss,

I strongly recommend you do actual research. In particular read a report by the CIA discussing trafficking. According to the CIA numbers there are 45,000 to 50,000 women and children being trafficked to the United States each year.

You did hear that, right? 45,000 to 50,000 to be used as strippers, prostitutes and in pornography.

Of course, I expect that you'll say something like "Well, sure, but those women WANT to be here and be forced into sexual slavery. It's racism, not sexism."

However, if you are interested the title of the report is "International Trafficking in Women to
the United States: A Contemporary Manifestation of Slavery and Organized Crime"
by Amy O’Neill Richard

I suspect that you'll meet this with your usual excuses but who knows, maybe you'll read it and decide that selling other women down the river is not your cup of tea afterall.

/ The best way to fight the demand for sex trafficking is to allow for willing participation in sex work. /

And the best way to fight the demand for child rape is to allow for willing participation of children in sex work.

Riiiiiight.

"In today's practice the first are called 'sex workers', and the others are called 'trafficked women' or 'slaves'. This is on the basis of the racist and classist assumption that a (migrant) woman from the South who works in the sex industries would never choose it, and the ones (if any) that are recognised the possibility of choosing it are usually white middle class EU citizens."

This is rubbish. No feminist who has any interest in the issue trafficking of women for sexual exploitation is under any illusion that some women do voluntarily choose to travel for sex work. However using that fact to obscure the issue that indeed many women are forced into sexual slavery is disgraceful. What exactly is the "human rights approach" to a woman who is being raped by twenty men every night in order to make money for her Albanian pimp?

Racism, classim and sexism lie with the idea that it is acceptable for poor women from Eastern Europe and the developing world to be sexually exploited by rich white men who will never be put in the position of having to make the "choice" to undertake sex work in order to feed their families or a drug habit.

Why isn't feministing posting articles like this one? Why is it always the rah-rahing for the legalisation of prostitution when the reality for so many women in prostitution is completely horrific -

http://tinyurl.com/dbewr

"A policeman met us and drove us across the frontier, avoiding the crossings. The Russian paid the policeman and we went to get false papers made.' They then proceeded by train to Moscow, where Katalina met another girl from near Balti, who told her what was expected. 'You can't get away from here,' said the girl. 'They will break your legs.'

So began Katalina's life as an enslaved prostitute, working a beat beneath a railway bridge, for which her traffickers paid local police. 'I was told never to say that I was pregnant, else the clients would not want me, and I would be beaten to pieces,' recalls Katalina. Some clients, she says, 'kept me for a number of days, and invited their friends. One man kept me for three or four days in a basement and invited 20 men. When I objected they told me I was a bitch. They had bought me and could do whatever they liked to me. Another time, I was on the 11th floor of a building with seven Moldovans, all of them taking drugs. After they had had their way, they insisted I smoke some drugs, too. When I refused, they became violent, and one of them opened a window and threatened to throw me out. But there was one man less stoned than the rest, who said, "You are just a dirty whore," and sent me from the room.'"

How does the legalisation of prostitution help women in this situation? It just makes pimps and traffickers legitimate businessmen and johns respectable consumers.

Hazel,
I read the link, that was a wonderful article, thanks for providing the link.

Not every woman in the world hates men and sex as much as some of you do. Some of us feel that getting paid to have a good time is very empowering and worthwhile.

Not a single hooker I know approves of child or forced prostitution, and no matter how poorly you might think of men, most of them don't want to have sex with children, and most don't want to have sex with a woman who isn't into it. I know a lot of men who have walked out of an appointment without getting what they just paid a couple hundred for because the woman didn't seem like she wanted to do it. Apparently you know very little about the male ego if you think that knowing how to satisfy a woman isn't important to them, even those who just don't get it.

You anti prostitution types have told so many lies to further your cause that I see no reason why any of it should be taken seriously. Janice Raymond and Donna Hughes were paid thousands of dollar in grant money to produce a jaded one sided terribly unprofessional, unfounded 144 pages worth of "research" that would be put to better use as toilet paper. What kind of "study" bases itself on the testimony of former sex workers in drug rehab and halfway homes, and tries to pass itself off as an accurate account of all sex workers? They found all the most offensive posts from johns, and yet somehow forgot about all the men who fell in love with RA's, paid of their trafficking debts and even sent thousands of dollars home to their families, in hopes of winning their love. It was the most skewed piece off rubbish I ever read.

If the story about poor little Katalina was true, the trafficker would have known that men will pay more to get busy with a pregnant chick. Kinda gross, I know, but men will pay a premium for a woman who is preggers.

I know lots of real sex workers, and I know far more about the women who come here from poor third world countries to make $800 a day than you do. So don't try to pass off your little make believe stories to me because I'm not buying them.

Prostitution has been illegal in the US since the early 20th century, and we still have tons of Korean sex workers in our massage parlors. And if you are suggesting that they'd be worse off if it was decriminalized, then take a look at Canada, Europe and Australia. They have plenty of the same, but fewer rabid feminazi kooks.

Be kind to your prostitute sisters. You need to stop joining forces with the religious right to bring us down.

I don't see the religious right in any of my posts or the other posts here. I see concern for women's desperate situations. Is that really the best you can do?

You can't counter anything that's been written here so you just accuse people of being man-haters and telling lies. There's no reason to disbelieve that Guardian article. The rape of trafficked women is well-documented.

Funny that you should see prostitution as the same as sex. Sex for me has always included the proviso that both parties be enjoying themselves, not that one of them is being paid to pretend.

If we are going to start flinging insults instead of debating I'm going to bring my own view into the discussion, that you aren't a woman FrenchKiss but rather one of those creepy men who like to sexually objectify women, so much so that they even imitate them sometimes. Your posts sound like they are a man's view of what a prostituted woman would say. If you don't know the type you should read a few stories in porn mags. You do sound exactly like them.

Do people get banned from this blog for calling feminsts "feminazis"?

/Not every woman in the world hates men and sex as much as some of you do./

Ok, just so long as we're clear:

Hates Human Trafficking = Hates Sex
Hates Pimps = Hates Men
Hates Prostitution = Hates Sex

Got it. Prostitution and human trafficking are synonyms for "sex", and pimp is a synonym for "man".

And she says WE'RE jaded and cynical.

You show me where I said that forcing women to be sex slaves and pimping is okay. I am 100% opposed to both, but there are lots of women in the business (including myself) who chose this line of work because we enjoy it and it pays well, and this war on protitution is hurting us.

Tons of women come here illegally from third world countries because they want to, and the current administration has been fighting prostitution around the world by placing conditions on AIDS funding. That's why we have such a high concentration of Korean prostitutes in this country right now. When the busts went down in early July of this year, women who had that day off were hiding out in their apartments for days, afraid to go out even for food because the FBI and ICE were combing their neighborhoods looking for them.

Here's a little logic 101 for you:

Beagle = dog
Does that mean that if it's a dog then it's a beagle?

The reason why I suggested that some women in here were anti-sex is because they think that sex is shameful for women. If they don't, then why is prostitution degrading for the woman when the only difference is that she's getting paid for it?

But then I suppose I'm talking to someone who thinks it's rape if a man pesters a woman for sex until she finally gives in, even if she's free to go at any time she pleases.

Since you completely dismiss what this prostitute has to say (that would be me) here are a few more for you to read...

Carol Leigh

Tracy Quan

Spread

Laura M. Augustin

And by the way, I wasn't calling all feminists feminazis. But I think it's important to make the distinction between true feminists, and those who want to control other women's bodies and tell them what's best for them. If any of you fit that description then you can draw your own conclusion, but I never actually called anyone such on this site.

"The reason why I suggested that some women in here were anti-sex is because they think that sex is shameful for women. If they don't, then why is prostitution degrading for the woman when the only difference is that she's getting paid for it?"

The difference is that the sex isn't freely chosen, she's doing it for money. Maybe prostituted women have customers that they fancy but I'm willing to bet that most don't. The money is to compensate for the disgust the woman feels for the man who she wouldn't look twice at if he didn't have a wad of cash in his hand.

The fact that you are confusing prostitution with sex says to me that you are anti-sex yourself. If you really were pro-sex you'd be fighting for freely chosen sex for women, not coerced intercourse which requires money for the act to take place.

So what if you weren't calling all feminists feminazis? It's still the oldest misogynistic trick in the book to divide and conquer. The feminsts who you agree with don't get called names, the ones who challenge you get called Nazis.

I freely choose to have sex for money. Just because it's my vocation, doesn't mean I didn't choose it.

It is true that I have had some clients that I wouldn't do for free. I have dated a few of them, though, including my current boyfriend who started off as a paying client. Now he only pays me with roses, dinner dates, and of course -most importantly- his love and affection.

So tell me, how many days do you put in at work for free? If your boss took you off the payroll but allowed you to stay on as a volunteer, would you do it? Full time? Does that mean that you hate your job? Can't a person get paid to do work she enjoys? So far my least pleasant experience with a client was still better than my typical day as an admin assistant. And my top 20% were good enough that I would have done them for free, had it not been my livelihood. I can't just go around returning the money whenever I have fun. Well, I could... but it wouldn't be very smart, would it?

It isn't the same thing. I do work-like things in my spare time, no problem. What I don't have to do at work is suck my boss's cock in order to get a payrise or promotion. My colleagues don't have to submit to anal sex with him to get their Christmas bonuses.

80% of men you have sex with you do it because you are getting paid, not because you enjoy it. That's not sexual liberation or sex, that's one human being's body being used by another for their own selfish gratification. Physical contact with a person you don't find attractive or appealing is a vile experience. Most prostituted women learn to disassociate in order to get through the ordeal.

Anyway this is a distraction from the subject at hand - the trafficking of women who do not "choose" to be prostituted.

"Anyway this is a distraction from the subject at hand - the trafficking of women who do not "choose" to be prostituted."

Uhmmm... actually this thread is about women who want to be prostitutes, remember? You're the one who has veered off in your own direction. It's supposed to be about the Sex workers' conference in Brussles, where prostitutes are converging to discuss their rights.

I bet I enjoy work-like activities in my spare time a lot more often than you do. My favorite way to spend my free time is a buswoman's holiday of sorts.

I am my own boss, and I set my own price and schedule. It's true that a lot of men I do for the money, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy myself with them. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't really, but it's never so vile that I have to disassociate myself. I admit, I couldn't have handled it in my 20's, but the time I got into the business I was comfortable enough with my body and sexuality that it wasn't as traumatic as the way you describe it.

I actually feel a bit philanthropic about it sometimes, when I see the joy and gratitude in their eyes, for being so intimate and open with them while taking care of their needs. I've helped painfully shy men (one as old as 37!) get past the awkwardness of losing their virginity, and showed them the patience and guidance they needed to boost their confidence. The 37 year old had his very first girlfriend before the end of his 38th year, and I haven't seen him since (though he still writes me from time to time).

I also had a man cry tears of joy -literally- because I gave him the first orgasm he'd had in over two years, since he had gone into chemotherapy. The treatment and follow up meds had really messed up his libido, and his doctor said he couldn't take Viagra. As is so often the case with men, the desire remained strong long after the ability began to fade. Yeah, sure, he was almost old enough to be my grandpa, but it made me feel good just to make him feel good again. I wasn't disgusted or traumatized in the slightest.

I supposed I'm just hardwired differently that you (maybe even most women) are. Besides, most men that I've been attracted to in my life, I wasn't attracted to at first sight. It's more about chemistry for me.

Frenchkiss

I find you interesting.
Would you mind if I emailed you and asked you some questions?

Hazel, you're right about this. When you expose the underbelly of the sex industry for what it is, people who are defensive about their own sexuality (and associated perversions) will attempt to defend the actions of these monsters without thinking about how it affects those who are truly enslaved. Keep it up and don't let them make you think you're narrow minded or not "cool and sexy" because you don't agree with an industry that supports slavery in its basest and most evil form.

"Of course, I am envious of these European sex workers who enjoy greater freedom and priviledge than do their fellow sex workers in the US. All but one of their grievances of sex workers throughout the EU is shared by their American counterparts, minus the priviledge of decriminalized or legal indie prostitution in any state in our so called land of freedom."

The slave trade in the capitals of Europe has much more in common with the Bosnian war than utopia. We have such horror in our midst that we have changed utterly to an extent we are blind to endemic atrocity. It has affected our culture & our institutions. For example, teacher-child 'relationships' in Britain have essentially become normalized. The death of morality has a wide collateral effect.