WEEK 2: Feminists and the Global Sex Industry

As you can see from the Reading & Discussion Schedule in your syllabus (pp. 9-11), WMST2207 is divided up into five parts. During this first part of the course, which we began last week, we’ll be reading and talking about feminists and the global sex industry.

You can already tell from our readings and discussions last week that jumping into a conversation among feminists about the global sex industry is, for those Harry Potter fans among us, a lot like watching a Quidditch match for the first time: Everyone around you is in a frenzy. They already seem to know all the rules, the players, and the team rivalries. And everyone’s got their opinions about who’s the best player. But eventually, if you work at it, you start to figure it all out, and Quidditch becomes not only accessible, but enjoyable. And you might even choose to join a team yourself.

This is what I’m hoping will happen as you start to read and learn more about the global sex industry, how and why it operates, and the various players involved in making it all happen. Analogies aside, my goal is to help you succeed in this course, and this blog is how I’ll provide information, clues, and questions to get you thinking about what’s most important in our reading each week.

At this point, I want to remind you again that WMST 2207 is not an introductory course. It is intended for second-year students who have already completed at least one full year of University-level coursework. Additionally, this course is student-driven seminar that builds upon the issues and concepts learned in prior Women’s Studies classes. It is therefore strongly recommended that you take WMST1172 or its equivalent before taking this course.

This information is not meant to intimidate you or scare you away. On the contrary, I want you to succeed, and staying in the course if you don't meet the prerequisites may adversely affect your situation. If you have any questions about this, or about anything else, please feel free to send me an e-mail at kawilliams(at)mtroyal.ca or drop by anytime during my office hours.

Now, let’s get started:

Feminist Frameworks

Last Wednesday, I asked you to answer several questions about that day’s reading, the last of which was, “What seem to be the political and ideological differences between each of the four key texts we’ll be using throughout the semester?”

This is the question that will frame our discussion this week. Our goal will be to identify the predominant feminist approaches to the “problem” of what I, a feminist researcher with my own positionality (Koken, in Ditmore, et al., 29-31) call SEX WORK. As we discovered last week, even language matters and reveals the foundational assumptions and premises upon which individual researchers, policy makers, pundits, journalists, legislators, and so forth base their analyses and suggestions for solving the “problem” of the global sex industry. Even what counts as the “problem” is different for each approach to this heated and complex conversation.

So, as you read this week’s materials, try to read them in the order that I’ve listed them on the syllabus. Jeffreys, an ABOLITIONIST FEMINIST, provides an excellent introduction to the various feminist frameworks that constitute the debate, arguing that feminist theorists in the late 20^th century became complicit with neoliberal economists and economic globalization by conceptualizing what she calls PROSTITUTION as labour just like any other form of work. She argues that this position has been widely accepted by governments and international agencies “because it offers no challenge to the rights of men to buy women for sex” (16) and then goes on to discuss the various arguments that the SEX WORK POSITION uses, including the notion that prostitution is a form of reproductive labour, a focus on choice and agency, and the postcolonial approach. She then responds to these facets of the SEX WORK POSITION by describing the ABOLITIONIST FEMINIST position.

As you’re reading Jeffreys, be sure to get a good grasp of each of these arguments and the assumptions and premises upon which they’re based. But also be sure to remember that Jeffreys, an ABOLITIONIST FEMINIST, is telling her readers about all these other feminist frameworks in order to argue that hers is most appropriate.

So, that’s when you should turn to Outshoorn, who provides a review of the feminist debates concerning prostitution and the traffic in women from what she (and Agustin in Ditmore, et al.) terms a MIGRATION STUDIES FRAME, arguing that the term SEX TRAFFICKING should be replaced by the term PROSTITUTION-RELATED MIGRATION to more accurately reflect women’s agency within the systemic poverty caused by neoliberal economic policies and globalization (148).

I want you to read both Jeffreys and Outshoorn, because both discuss the feminist debates over the global sex industry, but Jeffreys does it using an ABOLITIONIST framework, while Outshoorn clearly represents the SEX WORK APPROACH, which is recognized by the UN Trafficking Protocol. As you read each theorist, try to (a) identify the problem she is concerned with and why, (b) figure out what she envisions instead, and (c) identify what strategies (if any) she suggests. This is the best way to start to understand the assumptions and premises at the heart of each position.

Although not required reading, you may find the following websites interesting, as they are helpful in understanding the evolution of international law regarding prostitution, sex work, trafficking, and the global sex industry, which tends to incorporate the SEX WORK POSITION by acknowledging that consensual sex work is possible:

·         UN CEDAW (1979)

·         UN Vienna Declaration (1993)

·         UN Platform for Action (1995)

·         UN Trafficking Protocol (2000)

Then turn to the chapters in Ditmore, each of which attempts to break away from the above dichotomy to present a new conceptual framework for understanding the global sex industry. In chapter 1, Brents and Hausbeck discuss the causes of the SEXUALIZATION OF CULTURE and what that might mean for sex workers, sex businesses, scholars and activists. In chapter 2, Agustin critiques the fact that the ideological and political positions of funders has restricted research on the sex industry to themes related to HIV/AIDS, “trafficking” and/or violence against women and argues that a more appropriate framework may well be MIGRATION STUDIES, which is also Outshoorn’s argument. And in chapter 3, Koken discusses the portrayal of sex workers in academic scholarship, arguing (as Agustin does) that available funding drives the very questions that are asked about the global sex industry and those who work in it. She contends that research must “be expanded beyond the narrow focus on women, prostitution, and the underlying moral attitudes” to include the economic, social, and cultural context of globalization.

After you’re done reading this week’s required materials and are, no doubt, thoroughly confused and reeling from the complexity of and disagreements embedded in the above materials, I strongly suggest that you return to Nagle’s Introduction, which you read for last Wednesday. As the editor of an anthology is comprised entirely of writings by current and former sex workers who also self-identify as advocates of feminism, Nagle insists that

Traditional feminism can no longer in good conscience advocate rape crisis centers while simultaneously refusing to talk to whores. Similarly, in its rebellious fervor, which I understand and share, sex-positive feminism mustn’t make the mistake of disavowing stop feminism (9).

There are, Nagle, suggests, commonalities among these seemingly disparate approaches to the global sex industry, and our task throughout the semester will be, to paraphrase Nagel, to engage with and deconstruct the dichotomy in order to uncover hidden areas of agreement (9). I encourage you to become comfortable with ambiguity and having more questions than answers.

Next Week’s Classes

You will have noticed that your preparation for class this week involves reading and thinking through some rather complex concepts that are, as you will learn, at the heart of feminist approaches to the global sex industry. As I said above, starting to engage with these debates is like attending a Quidditch match for the first time. Or, if you prefer, it really is like learning a new language. So, be patient with yourself as you read and reread in preparation for class on Monday.

Also, don’t forget that your first CRP is due at the start of class on Monday. Details about the assignment can be found here. Be sure to include all the required components as described and also remember to bring a copy to submit to me as well as a copy for yourself so that you can refer to it during class.

I’ll see you all in class on Monday. In the meantime, happy reading, happy writing, and please don’t hesitate to stop by during my office hours or e-mail me at kawilliams(at)mtroyal.ca if you have any questions.