During the first half of the semester, we discussed SEX TRAFFICKING within the context, first, of feminist debates about its conflation with HUMAN TRAFFICKING and, second, of its frequent—and often specious—links to PROSTITUTION in attempts at policy-making by a variety of actors, from feminists to legislators. We also unpacked the three broad public policy options that currently exist for solving the “problem(s)” caused by the availability of (overwhelmingly) women’s bodies for sexual services: CRIMINALIZATION, LEGALIZATION and DECRIMINALIZATION.
For the next two weeks, in the third part of the course, we’ll continue our reading and talking about what I call in the syllabus “The Politics of Sex Trafficking.” We’re going to revisit the debates and conversations at the heart of this contentious issue, but from the perspective of sex worker rights feminist Joe Doezema. We read the Introduction to her book, Sex Slaves and Discourse Masters (2010) a bit earlier in the semester, and I highly encourage you to review/reread it before launching into chapters 2-4. Doing so will enable you to understand her broader argument and general research method so that you don’t get bogged down in those details as you’re reading her rather complex analyses of the historical evolution of contemporary trafficking DISCOURSE in Britain (ch. 2), the U.S. (ch. 3) and during the negotiations for the 2000 Trafficking Protocol (ch. 4).
In addition to rereading Doezema’s Introduction, another thing to help keep you from getting stuck in all the theoretical language she uses is to keep in mind not only her project in each chapter, but also the book’s overarching goal. For example, remembering the book’s subtitle will help: Doezema is exploring how the DISCOURSE of trafficking gets created and mobilized, by whom, why, and under what specific circumstances. So, as you’re reading, ask yourself these questions for each chapter.
Theoretical Tool Box
Before I say more about this week’s materials, I should provide some basic operational definitions of some of the trickier theoretical concepts that Doezema uses:
DISCOURSE: This is not, as it would seem, about people talking, at least not directly. People engaging in a conversation can (and usually do) participate in the formation of a DISCOURSE, but that’s only one part of it. Rather, DISCOURSE is “a mode of organization of knowledge in relation to material institutions” having to do with “the practices and configurations of power.” Discourses of trafficking, like all similar discourses (of, for example, medicine or education), “construct the possibility for certain truths to prevail, and for others to be without social effectivity or recognition. In so doing they draw upon and reinforce certain structures of discursive authority […], and displace others” (New Keywords, 93).
Remember I told you earlier in the semester that feminist scholarship is largely about asking questions about who has power, and why? This is Doezema’s project.
In her book, she approaches ‘trafficking in women’ as a discourse. She is thus “concerned with how certain definitions of the problem became dominant, with whose knowledge is accepted and sidelined, and with the social practices involved in constructing and legitimating knowledge: in short, [she is] concerned with the relationship between power and knowledge” (9-10).
NARRATIVE (ch. 2): Simply put, it is “a story, told by a narrator about events which may be factual, fictional, or mythical” (New Keywords, 230). Narratives are stories that make meaning; according to Doezema, “in their straightforward representation of a series of events, they work to give coherence to contradictory realities, to give closure” (53; italics in original). But, as Doezema asks us to think about, whose stories are left out, and why?
Doezema focuses predominantly on the contemporary discourse of sex trafficking as a mythical narrative because of its striking similarities to the myth of WHITE SLAVERY that circulated in Western Europe and North America at the end of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Narratives are heavily politicized, and Doezema takes on the typical project at the heart of narrative analysis, which is to “[contest] the power of institutions to offer their own versions of the world as the only legitimate versions” (New Keywords, 231).
METAPHOR (ch. 3): According to my trusty 10th edition of Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (yes, because I’m a life-long geek, I do keep a dictionary on my desk at home, right next to the 15th edition of the Chicago Manual of Style!), the primary definition of METAPHOR is “a figure of speech in which a word or a phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them.” More important to our understanding of Doezema, though, is the secondary definition: “an object, activity, or idea treated as a metaphor: symbol.”
For Doezema, the symbol, the idea treated as metaphor, is (WHITE) SLAVERY: She argues that contemporary discourses of trafficking share specific “genealogical signposts” with myths about the traffic in women from a century ago.
ORIENTALISM: During colonialism, the Middle East and Asia were collectively referred to by empire-builders in the West as “The Orient,” and Western scholars who studied these areas of the world were known as Orientalists” and their research “Orientalism.” The term “Orient,” as well as the imperialist and scholarly practices it enabled, came under criticism in the mid-20th century by a number of scholars, most famously Edward Said (New Keywords, 246-249). Since then, post-colonial feminist scholars (Chandra Mohanty, Gayatri Spivak, myself, and many others) have taken up these critiques and added their own, arguing that the women who live throughout the Middle East and Asia are often denied agency in narratives constructed by/in the West.
This concept is important to our reading this week because Doezema argues that abolitionist feminists and their allies construct the prostitute-victim “partially through the lens of orientalism” (135): Because all prostitution is considered violence against women, and all prostitutes are victims, there is no room for the voluntary SEX WORKER who has chosen, for whatever complicated reasons, to do that work. And in the international discourse of sex trafficking, the primary prostitute-victims are poor women of colour from the global South/East, so the prostitute-victim is not only gendered feminine, but also racialized and classed, as well. This “Third World” prostitute-victim is the perfect person for Western anti-trafficking advocates to “rescue,” and the narratives of colonialism and imperialism are reproduced in the process.
Questions to consider as you’re reading
With these basic operational definitions in your back pocket, be sure to think about the following questions as you prepare for class this week:
- What are the similarities between the white slavery myth and contemporary trafficking discourse? Take into account the social and political contexts of each, the constitutive rhetorical elements of each, and how, why and by whom gender, race and class are mobilized in each
- Which groups seem to be the primary anti-trafficking advocates internationally? Why? And how are they working together?
- Just before the break, we discussed the importance of language in talking about and trying to solve the problem of trafficking. We also conducted a feminist analysis of the Canada’s anti-trafficking efforts using policy documents authored by the Canadian Department of Justice and the RCMP. In that analysis, you all pointed out that, while the CDJ and the RCMP purported to be concerned with HUMAN TRAFFICKING, both documents focused heavily on SEX TAFFICKING. Nathans makes a similar argument regarding the U.S. anti-trafficking legislation, the TVPA. Why all the focus on SEX TRAFFICKING when, according to Nathan, statistics indicate that most people are, in fact, not trafficked for sex work but for other forms of forced labour and that most immigrants who work as prostitutes do so voluntarily?
A Reminder
Don’t forget to keep track of your CRPs, which are due at the start of class on Mondays. 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! In the meantime, happy reading, 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.
Reference:
Bennett, Tony, et al., eds. 2005. New Keywords: A Revised Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
