This week marks the last week in Part 5 of our course, in which we’ve focused, as Ditmore, et al. advocate, on moving beyond the sex in sex work. In the first part of this section, we read and discussed the fact that, for most sex workers, being a sex worker isn’t their only—or even their primary—identity. This is a theme that will pop up this week, as well, particularly at the end of chapter 12 and in Patty Kelly’s chapter on the regulated sex industry in the southern Mexican state of Chiapas.
Last week was all about putting the ‘work’ back in ‘sex work’ and thinking about why it is that researchers hardly ever seem to ask questions about the primary motivator for workers’ entry into the sex industry: money.
And this week, we’ll see a few different examples of how state policies and their implementation in Mexico, Germany, and the UK shape local sex industries within the context of NEOLIBERAL ECONOMIC globalization. You’ll notice that a common theme among these articles is the identification of a dominant national/federal discourse regarding prostitution and the global sex industry alongside different, more localized discourses that affect how/is the dominant discourse gets used in local contexts.
A Review: Neoliberal Economic Globalization
Before I jump into my thoughts on the three chapters in Ditmore that you’re reading for this week, I thought a refresher/primer on the basics of globalization and its (mostly) overwhelmingly negative effects on women, poor people, and people of colour (and not just in the global South, either) would be helpful.
In class on January 11th and then again in the Week 4 blog, I provided a very general overview of the basic tenets of NEOLIBERALISM and how this particular capitalist economic theory has been adopted by global policymakers and financial institutions as the only economic theory and implemented as the method through which economic globalization should be achieved.
According to Wikipedia, NEOLIBERALISM is a
contemporary form of economic liberalism that emphasizes the efficiency of private enterprise, liberalized trade and relatively open markets to promote globalization. Neoliberals therefore seek to maximize the role of the private sector in determining the political and economic priorities of the world.
Additionally, neoliberalism as economic policy “seeks to transfer control of the economy from public to the private sector, under the belief that it will produce a more efficient government and improve the economic health of the nation” (“Neoliberalism,” Wikipedia; accessed 1/11/12).
This economic theory is then implemented in the following ways, all of which I mentioned in the Week 4 blog post:
- There has been an increased emphasis on the role and power of the consumer-oriented marketplace (i.e., who buys what, why, and where).
- Because of this, countries around the world (and smaller regions like states and provinces; think Alberta’s oil and gas industry) have intentionally adopted an export-oriented approach to production, focusing on making stuff to sell to others, elsewhere; this has meant moving away from making/producing stuff for and to ensure the health and well-being of their own citizens.
- Multinational corporations (MNCs) have created layers of labour ranging from the corporation itself to subcontractors to home-based workers.
- Structural adjustment policies (SAPs) have been implemented since the 1970s as a condition of granting “development” loans to countries, and these SAPs require governments, as a condition of their “development” loan from the IMF or World Bank, to radically restructure their economies to conform to rules and regulations of capitalism.
These four components of NEOLIBERAL ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION have collectively caused the gap between rich people and poor people in most countries to widen and has actually served to increase the number of poor people in the world, most of whom are women. As a result of economic globalization, “the wealth of the world’s 200 richest people is greater than the combined incomes of the poorest 41 percent of humanity” (Anderson and Cavanagh, Field Guide to the Global Economy, p. 27). And that was more than ten years ago. A lot has happened since then, including the ramping up of the military-industrial complex as a result of the events of September 11, 2001 and the resultant “war on terror,” which is also wreaking havoc in the lives’ of people who were already suffering the effects of economic globalization, but that’s a topic for another course.
The money flow in conventional “development” projects is as follows:
Donor country (usually located in the Global North) à IMF or World Bank à In the form of a high-interest loan to the “developing” global South country.
It is the last part of this money flow that’s most important, because “development” projects fuel economic globalization through SAPs (see #4 above). But the material effects of SAPs on peoples’ lives in “developing” countries—and increasingly in the global North—are in complete opposition to the goals and spirit of “development” as a word in the dictionary that suggests “progress,” forward movement, and “growth.” Rather, conventional “development” projects rooted in SAPs cause the very circumstances that most negatively affect women globally—and men, too, but differently—within the context of ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION. And, as I wrote earlier in the semester, this is key to understanding how and why SEX WORK fits into the puzzle and processes of the global economy.
This week’s readings
I think the connection between the catastrophic effects of ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION on women and the growth in the global sex industry over the course of the last twenty years or so is particularly clear in Patty Kelly’s chapter about state regulation of sex workers in Chiapas. As she demonstrates quite effectively, the relationship between the sex worker and the state in Chiapas is analogous to the relationship between the sex worker and her/his pimp. Her argument is similar to that of Jeffreys’ regarding sex trafficking in which she (Jeffreys) discusses the various ways that “states are involved in procuring and trafficking women” through legalization/regulation of the local sex industry (The Industrial Vagina, p. 173). To more fully understand Kelly’s argument, you may want to review chapter 8 in Jeffreys.
Chapter 11 compares and contrasts the implementation of prostitution policy in two German cities, pointing out that implementation of a federal law looks quite different in different local contexts and is dependent upon how local politicians, law enforcement agencies, and social service providers each conceptualize sex work. The authors argue that “changing the law alone does not change the position of sex work or the situation of sex workers in a given society” (187). Interestingly, you’ll notice that the authors’ explanation of the two ways that prostitution is discussed in the mainstream German media is quite similar to the same discussion here in Canada (190).
Chapter 12 advocates for including sex workers and community members in discussions about and implementation of local (anti?)prostitution policies.
Questions to think about as you read
- What do MAQUILADORAS have to do with sex work? What are some gender stereotypes embedded in the connection?
- Identify and discuss OBLIGADAS, MANTENIDOS, and INDEPENDIENTES.
- Why does Kelly conclude that Mexico = pimp?
- Discuss the different discourses regarding prostitution in Leipzig and Dortmund. How were these discourses mobilized in each city to create and implement prostitution policy?
- What complications arise from engaging sex workers in research and consultation? And why do the authors of chapter 12 advocate doing so anyway?
- What can you conclude about the living and working conditions of sex workers in the UK Midlands based on their concerns and recommendations?
Two Reminders
Don’t forget about my office hours if you have any questions, would like to brainstorm about the Term Project, or just want to chat!
Also, as always, 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.
