Jeg vil tale om sex for penge. Jeg er ikke som de fleste folk I har hørt tale om prostitution før. Jeg er ikke politibetjent eller en socialarbejder. Jeg er ikke en akademiker, en journalist eller en politiker. Og som i nok har hørt fra Maryams bemærkning, er jeg heller ikke en nonne.
I want to talk about sex for money. I'm not like most of the people you'll have heard speaking about prostitution before. I'm not a police officer or a social worker. I'm not an academic, a journalist or a politician. And as you'll probably have picked up from Maryam's blurb, I'm not a nun, either.
(Latter)
(Laughter)
De fleste af disse mennesker vil fortælle jer at salg af sex er nedbrydende. at ingen nogensinde vil vælge at gøre det. At det er farligt; kvinder bliver misbrugt og dræbt. Faktisk, de fleste af disse mennesker vil sige "Det skulle forbydes!" Måske lyder dette fornuftigt for jer. Det lød fornuftigt for mig indtil slutningen af 2009, hvor jeg arbejdede i to hjernedøde mindstelønsjob. Hver måned kunne min løn kun dække mine overtræk. Jeg var udmattet og mit liv førte til ingenting. Som så mange før mig, besluttede jeg at sex for penge var en bedre mulighed. Misforstå mig ikke -- Jeg ville have elsket at vinde i lotteriet i stedet for. Men det ville ikke ske foreløbigt, og min husleje skulle betales. Så jeg meldte mig til den første vagt på et bordel.
Most of those people would tell you that selling sex is degrading; that no one would ever choose to do it; that it's dangerous; women get abused and killed. In fact, most of those people would say, "There should be a law against it!" Maybe that sounds reasonable to you. It sounded reasonable to me until the closing months of 2009, when I was working two dead-end, minimum-wage jobs. Every month my wages would just replenish my overdraft. I was exhausted and my life was going nowhere. Like many others before me, I decided sex for money was a better option. Now don't get me wrong -- I would have loved to have won the lottery instead. But it wasn't going to happen anytime soon, and my rent needed paying. So I signed up for my first shift in a brothel.
I de år der er gået, har jeg haft megen tid til at tænke. Jeg har genovervejet de ideer jeg engang havde om prostitution. Jeg har tænkt meget over samtykke og hvordan vi arbejder under kapitalismen. Jeg har tænkt over ulighed mellem kønnene og kvinders seksuelle og reproduktive arbejde. Jeg har oplevet udnyttelse og vold på arbejdet. Jeg har tænkt over hvad der er behov for for at beskytte andre sexarbejdere mod disse ting. Måske har I også tænkt over disse ting. I denne tale, vil jeg gennemgå de fire måder man lovgiver om sexarbejde i Verdenen, og forklare hvorfor de ikke virker. Hvorfor forbud mod sexindustrien faktisk forstærker enhver skade som sexarbejdere er udsat for. Jeg vil fortælle jer om hvad vi sexarbejdere faktisk ønsker.
In the years that have passed, I've had a lot of time to think. I've reconsidered the ideas I once had about prostitution. I've given a lot of thought to consent and the nature of work under capitalism. I've thought about gender inequality and the sexual and reproductive labor of women. I've experienced exploitation and violence at work. I've thought about what's needed to protect other sex workers from these things. Maybe you've thought about them, too. In this talk, I'll take you through the four main legal approaches applied to sex work throughout the world, and explain why they don't work; why prohibiting the sex industry actually exacerbates every harm that sex workers are vulnerable to. Then I'm going tell you about what we, as sex workers, actually want.
Den første måde er fuld kriminalisering. Halvdelen af verdenen herunder Rusland, Sydafrika og det meste af USA regulerer sexarbejde ved at kriminaliserer alle der deltager. Det er sælger, køber og tredjepart. Lovgiverne i disse lande håber åbenbart at frygten for at blive arresteret vil afskrække folk fra at sælge sex. Men hvis du er tvunget til at vælge mellem at følge loven eller skaffe mad til din familie, må du gøre arbejdet alligevel og tage risikoen.
The first approach is full criminalization. Half the world, including Russia, South Africa and most of the US, regulates sex work by criminalizing everyone involved. So that's seller, buyer and third parties. Lawmakers in these countries apparently hope that the fear of getting arrested will deter people from selling sex. But if you're forced to choose between obeying the law and feeding yourself or your family, you're going to do the work anyway, and take the risk.
Kriminalisering er en fælde. Det er svært at få et almindeligt job hvis du har ting på din straffeattest. Mulige arbejdsgivere vil ikke ansætte dig. Forudsat du stadig har behov for penge, bliver du i den uformelle økonomi. Lovgivningen tvinger dig til at fortsætte med at sælge sex, hvilket er det modsatte af den ønskede effekt. At være kriminaliseret tvinger dig til at være mishandlet af staten selv. I mange tilfælde vil du være tvunget til at betale bestikkelse eller endda have sex med en politimand for at undgå arrest. Politi og fængselsbetjente i Cambodia, for eksempel, er blevet påvist at have udsat sexarbejdere for hvad der kun kan beskrives som tortur: Trusler med pistoler, tæsk, elektriske stød, voldtægt og nægtelse af mad.
Criminalization is a trap. It's hard to get a conventional job when you have a criminal record. Potential employers won't hire you. Assuming you still need money, you'll stay in the more flexible, informal economy. The law forces you to keep selling sex, which is the exact opposite of its intended effect. Being criminalized leaves you exposed to mistreatment by the state itself. In many places you may be coerced into paying a bribe or even into having sex with a police officer to avoid arrest. Police and prison guards in Cambodia, for example, have been documented subjecting sex workers to what can only be described as torture: threats at gunpoint, beatings, electric shocks, rape and denial of food.
En anden bekymrende ting: Hvis du sælger sex steder som Kenya, Sydafrika eller New York, en politimand kan arrestere dig hvis du har kondomer på dig, fordi et kondom kan bruges i retten til at bevise at du sælger sex. Åbenlyst. Dette øger risikoen for HIV smitte. Forestil dig du er arresteret, mens du har kondomer på dig - det vil blive brugt imod dig. Det er et rimeligt stærkt argument for at lade dem blive hjemme, ikke? Sexarbejdere disse steder er tvunget til at tage nogle tunge beslutninger mellem at risikere arrest eller have usikker sex. Hvad vil du vælge? Vil du tage kondomer med på arbejde? Hvad hvis du er bange for at politimanden vil voldtage dig, når han har fået dig ind i salatfadet?
Another worrying thing: if you're selling sex in places like Kenya, South Africa or New York, a police officer can arrest you if you're caught carrying condoms, because condoms can legally be used as evidence that you're selling sex. Obviously, this increases HIV risk. Imagine knowing if you're busted carrying condoms, it'll be used against you. It's a pretty strong incentive to leave them at home, right? Sex workers working in these places are forced to make a tough choice between risking arrest or having risky sex. What would you choose? Would you pack condoms to go to work? How about if you're worried the police officer would rape you when he got you in the van?
Den anden tilgang til at regulere sexarbejde, set i disse lande er delvis kriminalisering, hvor køb og salg af sex er lovlig, men de omgivende aktiviteter, som bordeldrift eller tilbyde sig på gaden, er forbudt. Love som disse -- Vi har dem i UK og Frankrig -- siger grundlæggende til os sexarbejdere: "Hey, vi er ligeglade om I sælger sex, bare I gør det bag lukkede døre og alene." Og bordeldrift, for i øvrigt, er defineret som to eller flere sexarbejdere der arbejder sammen. At gøre det illegalt betyder at mange af os arbejder alene, hvilket naturligvis gør os mere udsatte for voldelige overgreb. Men vi er også sårbare hvis vi vælger at bryde loven ved at arbejde sammen. For nogle år siden, var en af mine venner så nervøs efter at hun var angrebet på arbejde, så jeg sagde at hun kunne møde sine kunder på mit sted for en stund. I den tid, havde vi en anden ubehagelig fyr. Jeg sagde han skulle skride eller jeg ringende til politiet. Og han kiggede på os og sagde: "I piger kan ikke ringe til politiet. I arbejder sammen og dette sted er ulovligt"
The second approach to regulating sex work seen in these countries is partial criminalization, where the buying and selling of sex are legal, but surrounding activities, like brothel-keeping or soliciting on the street, are banned. Laws like these -- we have them in the UK and in France -- essentially say to us sex workers, "Hey, we don't mind you selling sex, just make sure it's done behind closed doors and all alone." And brothel-keeping, by the way, is defined as just two or more sex workers working together. Making that illegal means that many of us work alone, which obviously makes us vulnerable to violent offenders. But we're also vulnerable if we choose to break the law by working together. A couple of years ago, a friend of mine was nervous after she was attacked at work, so I said that she could see her clients from my place for a while. During that time, we had another guy turn nasty. I told the guy to leave or I'd call the police. And he looked at the two of us and said, "You girls can't call the cops. You're working together, this place is illegal."
Og han havde ret. Han skred til sidst uden at blive fysisk voldelig. Men viden om at vi bryder loven gjorde manden istand til at true os. Han følte sig sikker på han kunne slippe afsted med det.
He was right. He eventually left without getting physically violent, but the knowledge that we were breaking the law empowered that man to threaten us. He felt confident he'd get away with it.
Forbuddet mod gadeprostitution gør også mere skade end det forebygger. Først, for at undgå at blive arresteret, gadearbejdere løber risici for at undgå opdagelse og det betyder at arbejde alene eller på isolerede steder, som mørke skove hvor de er sårbare for angreb. Hvis du bliver taget i at sælge sex udendørs, får du en bøde. Hvordan kan du betale en bøde uden at gå tilbage til gaderne for at sælge sex? Det var behovet for penge der sendte dig ud på gaderne til at starte med. Og således hober bøderne sig op, og du er fanget i en ond cirkel af at sælge sex for at betale bøder, som du får for at sælge sex.
The prohibition of street prostitution also causes more harm than it prevents. Firstly, to avoid getting arrested, street workers take risks to avoid detection, and that means working alone or in isolated locations like dark forests where they're vulnerable to attack. If you're caught selling sex outdoors, you pay a fine. How do you pay that fine without going back to the streets? It was the need for money that saw you in the streets in the first place. And so the fines stack up, and you're caught in a vicious cycle of selling sex to pay the fines you got for selling sex.
Lad mig fortælle om Mariana Popa, som arbejdede i Red Bridge, East London Gadearbejderne på hendes sted vil normal vente på kunder i grupper på grund af den fælles sikkerhed og for at advare hinanden om hvordan man undgår farlige fyrer. Men under en politikampagne mod sexarbejdere og deres kunder, var hun tvunget til at arbejde alene fora t undgå arrestation. Hun blev stukket ihjel i de tidlige timer den 29. Oktober, 2013. Hun havde arbejdet senere end hun plejede for at betale af på en bøde hun havde fået for at trække.
Let me tell you about Mariana Popa who worked in Redbridge, East London. The street workers on her patch would normally wait for clients in groups for safety in numbers and to warn each other about how to avoid dangerous guys. But during a police crackdown on sex workers and their clients, she was forced to work alone to avoid being arrested. She was stabbed to death in the early hours of October 29, 2013. She had been working later than usual to try to pay off a fine she had received for soliciting.
Så hvis kriminalisering af sexarbejdere skader dem, hvorfor så ikke kriminalisere de mennesker der køber sex? Dette er målet med den tredje tilgang som jeg vil tale om -- den svenske eller nordiske model for sexarbejde-lovgivning. Ideen bag denne lov er at sælge sex er i sig selv skadende og så man hjælper sexarbejderne ved at fjerne denne mulighed. Trods stigende støtte for hvad der er betegnet som "slut -fterspørgsel" tilgangen er der ikke nogen evidens for at det virker. Der er ligeså meget prostitution i Sverige som der var før. Hvordan kan det være? Fordi folk sælger sex ofte ikke har andre muligheder for en indkomst. Hvis du behøver penge, så er den eneste effekt en mindre efterspørgsel vil have er at du er tvunget til at sænke dine priser eller tilbyde mere risikofyldte seksuelle ydelser. Hvis du skal finde flere kunder, er en mulighed at få hjælp fra en bestyrer. Som I ser, snarer end at lave et stop for det som ofte er beskrevet som alfonseri, vil en lov som denne faktisk give ilt til potentielle udbyttende tredjeparter.
So if criminalizing sex workers hurts them, why not just criminalize the people who buy sex? This is the aim of the third approach I want to talk about -- the Swedish or Nordic model of sex-work law. The idea behind this law is that selling sex is intrinsically harmful and so you're, in fact, helping sex workers by removing the option. Despite growing support for what's often described as the "end demand" approach, there's no evidence that it works. There's just as much prostitution in Sweden as there was before. Why might that be? It's because people selling sex often don't have other options for income. If you need that money, the only effect that a drop in business is going have is to force you to lower your prices or offer more risky sexual services. If you need to find more clients, you might seek the help of a manager. So you see, rather than putting a stop to what's often descried as pimping, a law like this actually gives oxygen to potentially abusive third parties.
For at have sikkerhed i mit arbejde, prøver jeg ikke at tage opgaver fra nogen som ringer til mig fra et hemmeligt nummer. Hvis det er et hjemme- eller hotelbesøg, prøver jeg at få det fulde navn og detaljer. Hvis jeg arbejde under den svenske model, vil en kunde være for skræmt til at give mig den information. Jeg vil ikke have andre muligheder end at acceptere end opgave fra en mand som ikke er sporbar hvis han senere bliver voldelig. Hvis du har behov for deres penge, så må du beskytte dine kunder for politiet. Hvis du arbejder udendørs, betyder det at du må arbejde alene og på isolerede steder, ligesom du selv var kriminaliseret. Det betyder at du skal ind i bilen hurtigere, mindre forhandlingstid, det betyder forhastede beslutninger, er denne fyr farlig eller er han bare nervøs? Kan du tillade dig at tage risikoen? kan du lade være?
To keep safe in my work, I try not to take bookings from someone who calls me from a withheld number. If it's a home or a hotel visit, I try to get a full name and details. If I worked under the Swedish model, a client would be too scared to give me that information. I might have no other choice but to accept a booking from a man who is untraceable if he later turns out to be violent. If you need their money, you need to protect your clients from the police. If you work outdoors, that means working alone or in isolated locations, just as if you were criminalized yourself. It might mean getting into cars quicker, less negotiating time means snap decisions. Is this guy dangerous or just nervous? Can you afford to take the risk? Can you afford not to?
En ting jeg ofte hører er, "Prostitution er være ok hvis vi gjorde det legalt og regulerede det." Vi kalder den tilgang for legalisering, og den er brugt af lande som Holland, Tyskland og Nevada i USA. Men det er ikke nogen fin model for menneskerettigheder. Og under statskontrolleret prostitution, kan kommerciel sex kun foregå på bestemte lovgivne arealer eller steder, og sexarbejdere skal overholde specielle restriktioner, så som registrering og tvungne helbredstjek. Regulering lyder fint på papiret, men politikere gør med vilje reguleringerne omkring sexindustrien dyre og svære at overholde. Det skaber et to-lags system: legalt og illegalt arbejde. Vi kalder det nogen gange kriminalisering ad bagdøren. Rige bordelejere med forbindelserne i orden kan overholde reguleringerne, men mere marginaliserede folk finder disse forhindringer umulige at komme over. Og selvom det er muligt i princippet, at få en licens eller et ordentligt sted tager tid og koster penge. Det er ikke en mulighed for for en som er desperat og skal bruge penge i aften. Det kan være en flygtning eller på flugt fra hjemligt misbrug. I dette tolags-system, er det mest sårbare mennesker tvunget til at arbejde illegalt, så de er stadigvæk udsat for alle farerne fra kriminaliseringen som jeg nævnte før.
Something I'm often hearing is, "Prostitution would be fine if we made it legal and regulated it." We call that approach legalization, and it's used by countries like the Netherlands, Germany and Nevada in the US. But it's not a great model for human rights. And in state-controlled prostitution, commercial sex can only happen in certain legally-designated areas or venues, and sex workers are made to comply with special restrictions, like registration and forced health checks. Regulation sounds great on paper, but politicians deliberately make regulation around the sex industry expensive and difficult to comply with. It creates a two-tiered system: legal and illegal work. We sometimes call it "backdoor criminalization." Rich, well-connected brothel owners can comply with the regulations, but more marginalized people find those hoops impossible to jump through. And even if it's possible in principle, getting a license or proper venue takes time and costs money. It's not going to be an option for someone who's desperate and needs money tonight. They might be a refugee or fleeing domestic abuse. In this two-tiered system, the most vulnerable people are forced to work illegally, so they're still exposed to all the dangers of criminalization I mentioned earlier.
Så. Det ser ud til at alle forsøg på kontrol eller forhindring af sexarbejde i at finde sted kun gør det mere farligt for folk at sælge sex. Frygt for ordensmagten får dem til at arbejde på isolerede steder, og tillader deres kunder og selv politiet til at misbruges dem og få lov til at slippe afsted med det. Bøder og plettede straffeattester tvinger folk til at blive ved med at sælge sex snarer end at få dem til at stoppe. At slå ned på købere driver sælgerne til at tage farlige risici og tvinger dem i armene på potentielle misbrugende alfonser.
So. It's looking like all attempts to control or prevent sex work from happening makes things more dangerous for people selling sex. Fear of law enforcement makes them work alone in isolated locations, and allows clients and even cops to get abusive in the knowledge they'll get away with it. Fines and criminal records force people to keep selling sex, rather than enabling them to stop. Crackdowns on buyers drive sellers to take dangerous risks and into the arms of potentially abusive managers.
Disse love øger også stigmatiseringen af og hadet mod sexarbejdere. Da Frankrig midlertidigt indførte den svenske model for to år siden, tog almindelige mennesker det som en opfordring til at udføre overfald på folk der arbejde på gaderne. I Sverige, meningsmålinger viser, at en betydelig større andel af befolkningen ønsker sexarbejdere arresterede nu end før lovgivningen blev vedtaget. Hvis forbud er skadelig, kan du spørge, hvorfor er den så populær?
These laws also reinforce stigma and hatred against sex workers. When France temporarily brought in the Swedish model two years ago, ordinary citizens took it as a cue to start carrying out vigilante attacks against people working on the street. In Sweden, opinion surveys show that significantly more people want sex workers to be arrested now than before the law was brought in. If prohibition is this harmful, you might ask, why it so popular?
For det første, sexarbejde er og har altid været en overlevelsesstrategi for alle typer af upopulære minoritetsgrupper: farvede folk, migranter, folk med handicaps, LGBTQ folk, særligt transkvinder. Disse grupper er de kraftigst overvågede og straffede gennem forbudslove. Jeg tror ikke at dette er et tilfælde. Disse love har politisk opbakning præcist fordi de er målrettede folk som vælgerne ikke ønsker.
Firstly, sex work is and always has been a survival strategy for all kinds of unpopular minority groups: people of color, migrants, people with disabilities, LGBTQ people, particularly trans women. These are the groups most heavily profiled and punished through prohibitionist law. I don't think this is an accident. These laws have political support precisely because they target people that voters don't want to see or know about.
Hvorfor skulle de ellers støtte forbud? Well, mange folk har forståelig frygt for trafficking. Folk tænker at fremmede kvinder er kidnappede og solgt som sexslaver kan blive reddet ved at lukke hele industrien ned. Så lad os tale om trafficking. Tvunget arbejde finder sted i mange industrier, specielt dem hvor arbejderne er migranter eller på anden vis sårbare, og dette skal der gøres noget ved. Men det gøres bedst ved at målrette lovgivningen mod disse specifikke misbrug, ikke mod en hel industri. Da 23 ukendte kinesiske migranter druknede mens de samlede muslinger i Morescambe Bay i 2004, var der ikke noget krav om at forbyde hele seafood industrien for at redde traffickede ofre. Løsningen er tydeligvis at give arbejderne mere lovgivningsmæssig beskyttelse, som giver dem mulighed for at modstå misbrug og rapportere til myndighederne uden frygt for arrestation.
Why else might people support prohibition? Well, lots of people have understandable fears about trafficking. Folks think that foreign women kidnapped and sold into sexual slavery can be saved by shutting a whole industry down. So let's talk about trafficking. Forced labor does occur in many industries, especially those where the workers are migrants or otherwise vulnerable, and this needs to be addressed. But it's best addressed with legislation targeting those specific abuses, not an entire industry. When 23 undocumented Chinese migrants drowned while picking cockles in Morecambe Bay in 2004, there were no calls to outlaw the entire seafood industry to save trafficking victims. The solution is clearly to give workers more legal protections, allowing them to resist abuse and report it to authorities without fear of arrest.
Måden hvorpå ordet trafficking bruges indikere at al udokumenteret migration til prostitution er tvungen. faktisk, mange migranter har taget en beslutning, ud fra økonomiske behov, for at putte dem i hænderne på menneskesmuglere. Mange af disse gør det med fuld vidende at de skal sælge sex når de kommer frem til deres mål. Og ja, det kan ofte være tilfældet at disse menneskesmuglere tager eksorbitante priser, tvinger migranter til arbejde de ikke ønsker at lave og misbruger dem mens de er sårbare. Det er rigtigt for prostitution, men det er også rigtigt for arbejde i landbruget, service- og rengøringsjobs. I sidste ende ønsker ingen at udføre et arbejde man er tvunget til, men det er en risiko som mange migranter er villige til at tage, på grund af det som de forlader. Hvis folk kunne migrere legalt ville de ikke have behov for at lægge deres liv i hænderne på menneskesmuglere. Disse problemer stiger fra kriminaliseringen af migration, ligesom de gør fra kriminaliseringen af sexarbejde i sig selv.
The way the term trafficking is thrown around implies that all undocumented migration into prostitution is forced. In fact, many migrants have made a decision, out of economic need, to place themselves into the hands of people smugglers. Many do this with the full knowledge that they'll be selling sex when they reach their destination. And yes, it can often be the case that these people smugglers demand exorbitant fees, coerce migrants into work they don't want to do and abuse them when they're vulnerable. That's true of prostitution, but it's also true of agricultural work, hospitality work and domestic work. Ultimately, nobody wants to be forced to do any kind of work, but that's a risk many migrants are willing to take, because of what they're leaving behind. If people were allowed to migrate legally they wouldn't have to place their lives into the hands of people smugglers. The problems arise from the criminalization of migration, just as they do from the criminalization of sex work itself.
Det er en lære af historien. Hvis du prøver at forbyde noget som mennesker ønsker eller har behov for at gøre, hvad enten det er at drikke alkohol eller krydse grænser eller få en abort eller sælge sex, skaber du flere problemer end du løser. Forbud laver en minimal forskel på antallet af folk som faktisk gør disse ting. Men det gør en stor forskel om det er sikkert eller ej for dem at gøre det.
This is a lesson of history. If you try to prohibit something that people want or need to do, whether that's drinking alcohol or crossing borders or getting an abortion or selling sex, you create more problems than you solve. Prohibition barely makes a difference to the amount of people actually doing those things. But it makes a huge difference as to whether or not they're safe when they do them.
Hvorfor støtter folk eller forbud? Som feminist, ved jeg at sexindustrien er et sted med dybe sociale kløfter. Det er et faktum at de fleste købere af sex er mænd med penge, mens de fleste sælgere er kvinder uden. Du kan være enig med dette -- jeg er -- og stadigvæk syntes at forbud er en forfærdelig politik. I den bedre mere lige verden, vil der måske være betydeligt færre folk der sælger sex for at overleve, men man kan ikke lovgive en bedre verden ud af det blå. Hvis nogen har behov for at sælge sex fordi de er fattige eller fordi de er hjemløse eller fordi de er illegale og ikke kan finde lovligt arbejde, at tage muligheden fra dem gør dem ikke mindre fattige eller giver dem husly eller ændrer deres immigrationsstatus
Why else might people support prohibition? As a feminist, I know that the sex industry is a site of deeply entrenched social inequality. It's a fact that most buyers of sex are men with money, and most sellers are women without. You can agree with all that -- I do -- and still think prohibition is a terrible policy. In a better, more equal world, maybe there would be far fewer people selling sex to survive, but you can't simply legislate a better world into existence. If someone needs to sell sex because they're poor or because they're homeless or because they're undocumented and they can't find legal work, taking away that option doesn't make them any less poor or house them or change their immigration status.
Folk der er bekymrede over at salg af sex er nedværdigende. Spørg dig selv: Er det mere nedværdigende end at være sulten eller se sine børn være sultne? Der er intet krav om et forbud mod au pair-piger eller at få manicure, selvom de fleste af dem som udfører dette arbejde er fattige kvindelige migrantarbejdere. Det er specielt det faktum at det er fattige migrant kvinder sælger sex som har gjort nogle feminister utrygge. Og jeg kan forstå hvorfor sexindustrien provokere så stærke følelser. Folk kan have alle slags komplicerede følelser når det kommer til sex Men vi kan ikke lave politik på basis af blot følelser, specielt over hovederne på de folk som faktisk er påvirket af disse politiker. Hvis vi bliver fikseret på forbud mod sexarbejde ender vi med at bekymre os mere om en bestemt manifestation af ulighed mellem kønnene, snarer end de underliggende årsager.
People worry that selling sex is degrading. Ask yourself: is it more degrading than going hungry or seeing your children go hungry? There's no call to ban rich people from hiring nannies or getting manicures, even though most of the people doing that labor are poor, migrant women. It's the fact of poor migrant women selling sex specifically that has some feminists uncomfortable. And I can understand why the sex industry provokes strong feelings. People have all kinds of complicated feelings when it comes to sex. But we can't make policy on the basis of mere feelings, especially not over the heads of the people actually effected by those policies. If we get fixated on the abolition of sex work, we end up worrying more about a particular manifestation of gender inequality, rather than about the underlying causes.
Folk bliver hængt op på spørgsmålet om Nå vil du ønske at din datter gjorde? Det er et forkert spørgsmål. I stedet lad os forestille os at hun gør det: Hvor sikkert er hendes arbejde i nat? hvorfor er hun ikke sikre?
People get really hung up on the question, "Well, would you want your daughter doing it?" That's the wrong question. Instead, imagine she is doing it. How safe is she at work tonight? Why isn't she safer?
så vi har kigget på fuld kriminalisering delvis kriminalisering, den svenske eller nordiske model og legalisering, og hvordan at de alle laver skader. Noget som jeg aldrig hører spurgt er: Hvad ønsker sexarbejdere selv? Alt i alt, vi er dem som bliver mest påvirket af disse love.
So we've looked at full criminalization, partial criminalization, the Swedish or Nordic Model and legalization, and how they all cause harm. Something I never hear asked is: "What do sex workers want?" After all, we're the ones most affected by these laws.
New Zealand afkriminaliserede sexarbejde i 2003. Det er vigtigt at huske at afkriminalisering og legalisering ikke er den samme ting. Afkriminalisering betyder fjernelse af love som straffer målrettet sexindustrien, i stedet for at behandle sexarbejde som en anden type arbejde. I New Zealand, folk kan arbejde sammen for sikkerhed, og arbejdsgivere for sexarbejdere er ansvarlige overfor staten. En sexarbejder kan nægte at se en kunde til enhver tid, af hvilken som helst grund, og 96 % af gadearbejderne siger at de føler at lovene beskytter deres rettigheder. New Zealand har ikke set en forøgelse i antallet af folk der laver sexarbejde, men afkriminaliseringen har gjort det meget sikrere Så lektien fra New Zealand er ikke bare at deres lovgivning er god, men det afgørende er at den er skrevet i samarbejde med sexarbejdere navnlig New Zealands Prostitutes Collective. Når det drejer sig om at gøre sexarbejde sikre så var der klare til at høre om det fra sexarbejderne selv.
New Zealand decriminalized sex work in 2003. It's crucial to remember that decriminalization and legalization are not the same thing. Decriminalization means the removal of laws that punitively target the sex industry, instead treating sex work much like any other kind of work. In New Zealand, people can work together for safety, and employers of sex workers are accountable to the state. A sex worker can refuse to see a client at any time, for any reason, and 96 percent of street workers report that they feel the law protects their rights. New Zealand hasn't actually seen an increase in the amount of people doing sex work, but decriminalizing it has made it a lot safer. But the lesson from New Zealand isn't just that its particular legislation is good, but that crucially, it was written in collaboration with sex workers; namely, the New Zealand Prostitutes' Collective. When it came to making sex work safer, they were ready to hear it straight from sex workers themselves.
Her i UK er jeg en del af en sexarbejder ledet gruppe som Sex Workers Open University og English Collective of Prostitutes Og vi er en del af en global bevægelse der kræver afkriminalisering og selvbestemmelse. Det universelle symbol på vores bevægelse er en rød paraply. Vi er støttet i vores krav af globale organisationer som UNAIDS, Verdens sundhedsorganisationen og Amnesty international. Men vi har behov for flere allierede. Hvis du bekymrer dig om kønslig ligestilling eller fattigdom eller migration eller offentlig sundhed, så er rettigheder for sexarbejdere en sag for dig. Gør plads til os i jeres bevægelser. Dette betyder ikke bare at lytte til sexarbejdere når vi taler men at forstærke vores stemmer. At stå imod dem som vil få os til at tie, dem som siger at prostituerede enten er for offer-gjorte eller for skadede til at vide hvad der er bedst for os selv eller er for privilegerede og er for langt væk fra den virkelige verden, for at kunne repræsentere millioner af stemmeløse ofre. Denne skelnen mellem offer og selvrådende er tankespind. Den eksisterer kun for at nedgøre sexarbejdere og gør det for nemt at ignorere os.
Here in the UK, I'm part of sex worker-led groups like the Sex Worker Open University and the English Collective of Prostitutes. And we form part of a global movement demanding decriminalization and self-determination. The universal symbol of our movement is the red umbrella. We're supported in our demands by global bodies like UNAIDS, the World Health Organization and Amnesty International. But we need more allies. If you care about gender equality or poverty or migration or public health, then sex worker rights matter to you. Make space for us in your movements. That means not only listening to sex workers when we speak but amplifying our voices. Resist those who silence us, those who say that a prostitute is either too victimized, too damaged to know what's best for herself, or else too privileged and too removed from real hardship, not representative of the millions of voiceless victims. This distinction between victim and empowered is imaginary. It exists purely to discredit sex workers and make it easy to ignore us.
Ingen tvivl om at mange af jer arbejder for at overleve. Well, sexarbejde er arbejde også. Ligesom jer mange af os kan lide vores jobs, nogle af os hader det. Og endeligt de fleste af os har blandende følelser. Men hvordan vi føler om vores arbejde er ikke afgørende og hvordan andre føler omkring det er bestemt ikke. Hvad der er vigtigt er at vi har ret til at arbejde sikkert og på vores egen betingelser.
No doubt many of you work for a living. Well, sex work is work, too. Just like you, some of us like our jobs, some of us hate them. Ultimately, most of us have mixed feelings. But how we feel about our work isn't the point. And how others feel about our work certainly isn't. What's important is that we have the right to work safely and on our own terms.
sexarbejdere er rigtige mennesker. Vi har komplicerede oplevelser og komplicerede effekter af disse oplevelser. men vores krav er ikke komplicerede. Du kan spørge dyre escortpiger i New York City, bordelarbejdere i Cambodja, gadearbejdere i Sydafrika og enhver pige på gaden i mit gamle job i Soho, og de vil alle sige den samme ting. Du kan tale til millioner af sexarbejdere og utallige sexarbejder-ledede organisationer. Vi ønsker fuld afkriminalisering og rettigheder som arbejdere.
Sex workers are real people. We've had complicated experiences and complicated responses to those experiences. But our demands are not complicated. You can ask expensive escorts in New York City, brothel workers in Cambodia, street workers in South Africa and every girl on the roster at my old job in Soho, and they will all tell you the same thing. You can speak to millions of sex workers and countless sex work-led organizations. We want full decriminalization and labor rights as workers.
Jeg er bare en sexarbejder på scenen her i dag, men jeg bringer et budskab fra hele verdenen.
I'm just one sex worker on the stage today, but I'm bringing a message from all over the world.
Mange tak.
Thank you.
(Bifald)
(Applause)