Prostitution: The debate
Recent comments by Harriet Harman have once again highlighted the current debate around prostitution in the UK. Harmen indicated her support for making the buying of sex illegal following a Home Office enquiry. An IPSOS MORI poll also states that 58% would support a ban on prostitution if it would reduce trafficking of women and children into the UK for prostitution purposes. This belated debate comes further to recent discourse into trafficking and the deaths of 5 women in Ipswich.
At present, soliciting, kerb crawling and controlling prostitution for gain are illegal in Britian but purchasing sex is not and police action has ranged from hard targeting the women, arresting them and serving them with ASBO’s to concentrating on kerb crawlers and hitting the demand. However, any statistical results from these measures has proved to be short lived so current discussions are around the possibility of criminalising the buying of sexual services as is the case in Sweden. However, opposing voices support the decriminialisation of prostitution, as is the case in Holland, saying it’s a legitimate way to earn a living and that more protection is given to women able to ‘work’ within a legalised, more transparent framework.
However, understanding of the issues are steeped in misinformation and over simplification as can be seen in this article which appeared recently in Politics.co.uk: http://www.politics.co.uk/news/opinion-former-index/policing-and-crime/feature-prostitutes-united-$1239426.htm
The facts around prostitution are clear: two thirds of women involved in prostitution are addicted to heroin/crack or alcohol. 72% of women are homeless. 81% of women working in street prostitution and 48% of women in indoor prostitution have experienced sexual violence. In countries where prostitution is illegal, trafficking is minimal. In countries where prositution is legal, trafficking is endemic. Over 90% of women state they would like to exit prostitution. Is Katherine Stephens of the International Union of Sex Workers (IUSW) as quoted in the above article really speaking for these women?
The debate continues. For more information see:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/02/2008_35_wed.shtml
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/sep/10/women.socialexclusion
http://www.eaves4women.co.uk/POPPY_Project/Documents/Recent_Reports/StreetsApart__14Jun07doc.pdfwww.fcap.btik.com
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/feb/22/ukcrime.gender
http://www.toynbeehall.org.uk/news_item.asp?
The facts are not clear. Most of the research Colley is quoting is written by a prohibition lobby, has not been through proper academic peer review, and loads of academics dispute the ‘facts’. Rich women ministers taking poorer women’s clients and jobs off them by criminalising them makes me uneasy. Maybe Harriet Harman own wealth and privilege mean she can’t understand that its good money and good job for a lot of men, women and trans sex workers. Get real.