Sex Worker Critique of "End Demand" Campaign in Seattle

[+ quoththeraven]

The following is a well-reasoned critique of Seattle's "End Demand" campaign, which in many ways resembles the Swedish model of dealing with sex work, written by pro dom(inatrix) Mistress Matisse, that is particularly refreshing because it doesn't assume that all sex workers are women. The only part of this I would disagree with is her statement that sex work is about labor, not sex. That probably applies to the vast majority of female sex workers, but I'm not sure it's true for most male sex workers.

 

Seattle is, compared to other US cities, fairly progressive and compassionate in how it treats its citizens who are sex workers. Thus, I was unhappy to read about Seattle’s participation in a misguided moral crusade that is neither of those things — the “End Demand” campaign.

 

“End Demand” is a slogan coined by groups who advocate for the total abolition of all sex work. They want to do this by greatly increasing the number of people arrested on individual prostitution charges, and by intensifying the criminal penalties for either offering or agreeing to trade sex for money, even if both parties are consenting adults. If you think the End Demand strategy sounds a lot like the failed War on Drugs, you’re correct. It is also ruinously expensive, based on moral propaganda rather than fact, and it also destroys people’s lives for no purpose.

 

Press releases for End Demand campaigns will suggest that police will target only the clients of sex workers, not the sex workers themselves, and that arresting the buyers of sex will “end the demand” for sex. This is nonsensical on every level. Clients of sex workers have always been subject to arrest. The idea that making a media spectacle of arresting a few more of them will magically bring about an end to prostitution is manifestly ridiculous.

 

And more importantly, such statements are merely a PR screen. Nationally, far more sellers of sex are arrested than buyers every year. It’s easy to see why. Of sex workers who are arrested, the majority are people who work on the street or in situations of minimal control and safety. They are usually women, mainly people of color, and often low-income. Indeed, prostitution laws are often called “stop-and-frisk policies for women.”

 

End Demand activists are quick to say “prostitution is not a victimless crime.” Not while they’re around, it won’t be. If End Demand campaigns truly wished to rescue women and children who they claim are forced into prostitution, they would lobby to lift criminal penalties against them and vacate all previous convictions and sentences. They do not. No matter what End Demand campaigners claim, those vulnerable populations will continue to be arrested at a disproportionately high rate, and they will suffer the crushing consequences of serial arrests as a result.

 

Proponents of End Demand defend their actions by saying that even if some adults do choose to engage in sex work, arresting everyone is the only way to protect children and victims of sex trafficking. But sex trafficking actually makes up only a small part of all trafficked labor in the US, and the number of American minors who are forced into prostitution by adults is statistically fairly low.

 

No one wants human trafficking, or for minors to be forced into prostitution. Yet conflating consensual adult sexual behavior with these real, terrible crimes only muddies the problem. Rape is wrong, and it is an extremely serious problem in our society, but too often women who file complaints and seek justice for rape are ignored or silenced. While their rape kits sit untested, End Demand-ers want to direct limited public resources finding and incarcerating people who did consent to sex, because they consented for the wrong reason?

 

The basic assumptions of End Demand are simply wrong. Most sex workers began sex work as an adult, and because of economic necessity, but not by force or coercion. Sex worker rights advocates do not say that sex work is a perfect job that’s always fair and positive. But you know what else isn’t a perfect job? Working at a fast-food restaurant. Driving for Uber. Cleaning toilets. Standing outside Home Depot, hoping a builder picks you up. Sex work is about labor, not about sex, and any labor system has the potential to be exploitive. But as income inequality rises, and criminal justice systems remain heavily tilted against the poor, arresting someone because they’re trying to pay their bills is both misguided and cruel.

 

Yes, there are truly vulnerable people who are being exploited — but they need social services and support, not moralistic, media-hyped stings. Any time you bring disadvantaged populations into contact with police, the potential for a bad outcome rises sharply. Creating opportunities for people who want to leave sex work is a great idea, but those opportunities should not begin with a pair of handcuffs.

 

And it is not possible to arrest away the much larger population of consensual adult sex workers and clients. Seattle should not try.

 

 

Source: GUEST VOICE: Mistress Matisse on the "End Demand" Campaign (Seattlish)

[+ poolboy48220]

I love Mistress Matisse's columns, she used to be a regular contributor to "The Stranger" in Seattle.