‘Stop treating sex workers like outcasts’

Abuses in prostitution and human trafficking must be combated rigorously. But what is the best way to do so? The approach varies from country to country: from legalization and regulation to restricting sex work by reducing supply or demand. For her doctoral research, Lisa Hoekman compares legislation and its effects in countries such as Belgium, the Netherlands, Sweden, France, and Germany. She concludes: ‘Sex workers who choose the profession voluntarily are often the victim.’

_{Text: Gert Gritter, Corporate Communication UG / Photos: Henk Veenstra} 

Prostitution models

There are notable differences in the policies European countries deploy to combat sexual exploitation and human trafficking. Researchers broadly distinguish between three categories of what is known as ‘prostitution models’: criminalization, regulation-legalization, and decriminalization. First, there is the Nordic Model (also known as the End Demand Model) in countries such as Sweden, Norway, Canada, and France. Purchasing sex services is illegal and buyers of sex therefore risk punishment. Countries such as the Netherlands and Germany have opted for regulation-legalization. Sex work is considered legal, provided that certain conditions and rules are met.

Finally, there is decriminalization: sex work is permitted and treated like any other work. This is the case in only two countries: New Zealand and Belgium. In New Zealand, it seems to have been working well for 20 years, with the caveat that human trafficking is less common due to the country’s geographical isolation. Belgium is therefore an interesting case, as the model was introduced there only recently. Hoekman, who is also an assistant professor, often works from Ghent, to research, among other things, how the situation is developing in Flanders.

Stigma stress

Both the Nordic Model and regulation-legalization have disadvantages for sex workers. At first glance, they appear to be well-protected by the law in both cases, but in practice this often turns out not to be the case. Criminalizing prostitution does not lead to the cessation of sex work. It continues to exist, but clandestinely, which makes control and enforcement difficult. Moreover, it means that sex workers are unable to claim various labour law and other freedoms and rights. Regulation-legalization is also not ideal, because provisions such as compulsory registration sometimes indirectly force sex workers into secrecy, out of fear that their personal data will be misused.

Hoekman: ‘In all these cases, sex work is seen as an abnormal profession, which is subject to different standards and rules. There is a stigma on the profession that affects the professional group as a whole. Sex workers are treated with suspicion by institutions such as the tax authorities, housing associations, and banks. Sex workers find it difficult, for example, to open a bank account, obtain a mortgage or loan, or register as a house hunter. The opposition and disapproval from society lead to permanent stress, which can be harmful both physically and mentally. This also applies to the special category of sexual service providers: sex workers, also known as sex carers, who focus on, for example, people with disabilities or autism spectrum disorders.’

Openness

Hoekman is certainly not blind to the abuses of sexual exploitation. ‘There is an awful lot of misery.’ She also believes that every effort should be made to combat this and protect sex workers. ‘The main question is how this can best be achieved. By pushing sex work into the shadows and secrecy? Or by having it be clearly visible and in the open? Inspection, supervision, and control should primarily serve to protect sex workers, not to make their work more difficult.

Openness would also make it easier to enforce the law and intervene in violations, thus creating more safety. This would also increase the willingness to report crime and weaken the position of pimps, reducing the likelihood of extortion, threats, and coercion. If sex work was seen more like other professions and less criminalized, it would increase respect for the oldest profession in the world, which is still often seen as “slutty”. This would reduce the stigma and have a positive effect. It would bring sex workers out of the shadow. To begin with, it would already help if people listened to them more.’

A matter of principle

Hoekman’s doctoral research has not yet been completed, but it is conceivable that the conclusion will be that decriminalizing prostitution is better for the people who work in it. For Hoekman, this is also a matter of principle. ‘It is certainly true that many people are forced into prostitution against their will and sometimes with brutal violence. But we must not close our eyes to the fact that some sex workers choose to do this work and enjoy it. Their rights must also be taken into account. I feel a sense of rebellion rising within me when the freedom of such a group, which is often in an underdog position, is being trampled upon. Sex work can also be beautiful, and I personally believe that someone should be able to pursue that profession if it is truly their free choice. The government should not restrict the right of citizens to live their lives independently and self-sufficiently. That is patronizing or even paternalistic.’

Birthday party question

Hoekman is used to her research being met with incomprehension, and many people seem to have already made up their minds about it on moral grounds. ‘Among lawyers, we refer to this as the “birthday party question”. For example, when criminal lawyers mention their work at an informal gathering, they are often asked: “How on earth can you defend murderers?” I experience something similar when I explain that I defend the right of sex workers to practise their profession voluntarily and freely. A question I often get in this context is: “Would you want your daughter to be a prostitute?” But that is the wrong question. It should be: “If your daughter was a sex worker, would you want her to be optimally protected?” Sometimes, the criticism also gets tiring and difficult. The first time I took part in an international conference, in Florence, I was accused of “being part of the problem”. But afterwards, a participant came up to me to thank me for my lecture. She had been a sex worker in New Zealand herself and was now an academic researcher.’

More information

Lisa Hoekman