The quote I supplied for this release was slightly edited; citing a price of $150 an hour for selling sex or $1.50 an hour for making tennis shoes was (perhaps correctly) deemed too specific and therefore possibly factually misleading. However the "initiation of force" language stayed in, and I think my linkage of sex worker rights with the libertarian position of people having the right to voluntarily choose to work in what people ignorant of conditions on the ground in developing countries often call "sweatshops" still comes across. I count it as a small victory whenever we can get such "economic liberty" points publicly advanced under the banner of organizations generally perceived (by their members and others) as being on the left, just as it is when we can get conservative groups to stand for values traditionally considered "liberal." It's all about cross-pollination. 8)
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
Sex Workers Outreach Project-USA * SWOP-USA(NORCAL) * www.swop-usa.org
SWOP-USA-1-877-776-2004
For Immediate Release: January 10, 2008
What: Press Conference-Sex Worker Activists Protest 'Accidental' Anti-Prostitution Rally
Time: 6:45 PM
Location: Steps of City Hall, San Francisco
Contacts: SWOP-USA (NORCAL) www.swop-usa.org; Trafficking Policy Research Project www.bayswan.org/traffick
Carol Leigh-415-751-1659; SWOP-USA-1-877-776-2004
Shame On You: SF Women 'Accidentally' Sponsor Anti-Prostitution Campaign
Sex Workers Respond-Support Sex Workers Rights-Stop The Deportation
"Oops! We didn't know that our little vigil to stop sex trafficking might wind up hurting sex workers more than helping them! Of course we thought that those nice cops and ICE agents could just go in there and help them out."
--A misguided, concerned person*
On January 11th, SWOP-USA (NORCAL) will hold a press conference to address an 'accidental' anti-prostitution rally billed as "a vigil to promote awareness of sex trafficking."
"Campaigns against sex trafficking have historically been used against sex workers themselves and voluntary commercial sex. These campaigns historically promote a repressive agenda fueled by moral panics and the public's fear and fascination with sex and sexual abuse, " says Carol Leigh, long time sex worker activist and former member of the Board of Supervisors' Task Force on Prostitution. "Repressive solutions are harmful and ineffective. Sex workers must be part of the solutions, but are excluded as a result of anti-trafficking policies."
"SWOP-USA and other sex work positive organizations are vehemently opposed to ANY and ALL kinds of forced or coerced work whether it's sex work, domestic workers kept against their will, or forced laborers on farms and factories growing our food and making our shoes," adds SWOP-USA member, S. Bacchus.
"It is clear to [the] trafficked woman that if she identifies herself as a
'victim of trafficking', she will eventually be sent home to be reunited
with her misery once again. So she chooses not to identify herself as a
'victim of trafficking' - in order not to become a victim of
anti-trafficking".
--'Collateral Damage: The Impact of Anti-Trafficking Measures on
Human Rights around the World', a recent report from The Global Alliance
Against Traffic in Women (GAATW).
"Under the guise of combating forced prostitution, immigrants who work voluntarily are arrested and deported. There is never a mention of these issues in the context of anti-sex trafficking campaigns. Of course, forced prostitution and abuses in the sex industry should be of concern and should be addressed. Empowerment and support for the rights of workers and migrants is central to the solution, not jail and deportation" said Robyn Few, founder of SWOP-USA.
"Are these women concerned about the rapist that recently got off, charged in Philadelphia with 'theft of services' rather than being charged with rape with a deadly weapon, because the woman was a sex worker? This kind of sexual assault is much more prevalent." says Mariko Passion of SWOP-LA. "A rally like this takes the focus away from sexual assault and abuses in our industry in general, and expresses interest only in 'sex slaves.' They turn a blind eye when a voluntary sex worker is assaulted. Do we have to be tied up in a dark room and duped and tricked to be of concern? Look at these sexploitative images of trafficking in the media and how this rally supports that false dichotomy of good whore vs. bad whore. They have adopted a patriarchal construction that they don't realize is a patriarchal construction."
Carol Leigh adds, "When I said to Lori Blair of Soroptimist, the organization sponsoring this campaign, that the definition of 'sex trafficking' in the U.S. Trafficking Victims Protection Act includes all voluntary commercial sex, so that a campaign against 'sex trafficking' is a campaign against all commercial sex, Blair explained that her organization doesn't take a stand on legal prostitution. 'Well, you just did,' I said."
Adds San Francisco sex worker and activist Starchild, "There is a deliberate blurring of the line between voluntary and involuntary actions. When someone makes a choice to do something, she or he has every right to do it so long as it does not involve initiating force against others."
"Some people want to stop certain free choices because they find them 'exploitative' to one person or another, but that is not their decision to make," says Starchild. If a person says she is not being forced to work at a trade but freely chooses it, then absent any proof of foul play we must take her at her word -- no matter whether the work involves selling sex or making tennis shoes. Or whether the worker is a she or a he. Sex negative groups like Soroptimist pretend there are only female sex workers because the sexist stereotypes of men as evil exploiters and women as helpless victims are easier to sell. They don't want to acknowledge the realities of male sex workers or gay, bisexual and female clients, all of whom have equal rights."
In fact, local service organization, SAGE, the featured presenter at this rally, was part of an amicus brief in support the Bush administration and in opposition to Soros' Open Society. Soros was suing sued the administration to challenge a gag order that prevented health service organizations from supporting sex worker empowerment strategies and sex worker rights. In May of 2005, 200 human rights groups protested this policy including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the Global Fund for Women. Local, well-funded San Francisco group, SAGE, defended the Bush administration's discrimination as part of an amicus brief (Amici Curiae) along with Melissa Farley's project, Prostitution Research and Education.
http://www.bayswan.org/traffick/Amicus_v_Soros.pdf
"Obviously most progressive people attending this rally are concerned and well-intentioned, but they know very little about the intricacies and specifics of issues relating to trafficking and sex worker rights. They see the stories on the news, and, although they would tend to question mainstream media portrayals of the issues of war and or economics, somehow, when it comes to U.S. policies on trafficking, they stop questioning. They don't seem to seek out alternative perspectives, or even critiques of U.S. policy. It makes no sense. I just don't get it. On the other hand, individual writers and reporters are beginning to ask questions," says Carol Leigh.
Our own San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom recently jumped on the bandwagon. At a pinnacle of hypocrisy, Newsom, freshly recuperated from his own adultery scandal with a staffer in which he admitted having an affair with the wife of his (former) friend and re-election campaign manager (who quit in protest). Next we see Newsom featured as an anti-trafficking zealot in an MSNBC documentary describing his part in the trafficking raids:
"A young girl is throwing off this guy as we raided the place, and this guy has a wedding ring on. This is real. It's a disgrace. The idea it's happening in San Francisco, is equally disgraceful. And I'm just humiliated as a guy who lives here, not just its mayor." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22056066/page/5/
Although some in the U.S. don't look deeper than the current framework of this issue, around the world human rights activists have begun to document the adverse effects of the anti-trafficking policies and framework. There is a growing awareness that the discourse about trafficking is superficial and xenophobic and that current solutions to slavery and trafficking are ineffective or harmful and discriminatory.
The December 2007 report issued by the California Alliance to Combat Trafficking and Slavery, a government task force, acknowledges the negative impact of anti-trafficking policies on sex workers:
"While many federal sweeps result in providing assistance to victims, others can lead to deportation or punishment. Many victims become scapegoats, while employers receive minor rebukes. Sex workers suffer even worse sanctions because they are often designated as criminals (prostitutes), which make it more difficult for them to re-enter the country once they are deported."
Additional information about adverse effects of anti-trafficking policies and frameworks is available: Collateral Damage (GAATW) discusses 'the victims of anti-trafficking'
http://www.awid.org/go.php?list=analysis&prefix=analysis&item=00411
Human Rights Impact of Anti-trafficking Interventions: Developing an Assessment Tool
http://www.bayswan.org/traffick/AIM_HumanRights_Traf.pdf
* This is satiric, and not an actual quote.