Silences and Vulnerabilities

Suruchi Thapar-Björkert, M. Stevens, Å. Eriksson, Johanna Gondouin
{"title":"Silences and Vulnerabilities","authors":"Suruchi Thapar-Björkert, M. Stevens, Å. Eriksson, Johanna Gondouin","doi":"10.36615/the_thinker.v95i2.2518","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1999, Sweden introduced legislation that prohibits and criminalises the purchase of sex – while continuing to decriminalise the selling of sex. Referred to as the ‘Swedish model’, or the ‘Nordic model’ after neighbouring countries followed suit, this legal framework is built on an understanding of ‘prostitution’ as exploitation and a form of violence against women. Examined through this lens, the selling of sex can never be regarded as work. Through its feminist foreign policy platform (in place between 2014 and 2022), Sweden declared that it would engage in ‘persistent and robust commitment and agency’ to encourage other countries to adopt similar legal frameworks. Yet, evidence of the presumed success of the Swedish model is scant at best, with recent research raising concerns over how the Sex Purchase Act in conjunction with immigration law and third-party regulation has contributed to increasedvulnerability of migrant sex workers – who make up the majority of people selling sex in the Nordic region (Vuolajärvi, 2019).In South Africa, both the selling and buying of sex is criminalised, in spite of the country being party to several international treaties that recognise the right to free choice of work. As decriminalisation of sex work in South Africa is currently high on the public agenda,and the ‘Swedish model’ is one of the alternatives discussed, critically examining the possible consequences of adopting this model is crucial. In this paper, we draw on research and activist interventions in Sweden and South Africa to examine the possible implications of the adoption of the ‘Swedish model’ in South Africa – a country with markedly different historical and demographic trajectories, migratory patterns, and a much less extensive and supported social welfare system. We caution that such a move may not achieve the aim of reducing sex workers’ vulnerability and exposure to violence. Furthermore, framing the selling of sex as violence rather than work may risk silencing causes for social justice by stripping sex workers of their agency and autonomy, while simultaneously casting them as victims.","PeriodicalId":34673,"journal":{"name":"The Thinker","volume":"290 1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Thinker","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36615/the_thinker.v95i2.2518","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1999, Sweden introduced legislation that prohibits and criminalises the purchase of sex – while continuing to decriminalise the selling of sex. Referred to as the ‘Swedish model’, or the ‘Nordic model’ after neighbouring countries followed suit, this legal framework is built on an understanding of ‘prostitution’ as exploitation and a form of violence against women. Examined through this lens, the selling of sex can never be regarded as work. Through its feminist foreign policy platform (in place between 2014 and 2022), Sweden declared that it would engage in ‘persistent and robust commitment and agency’ to encourage other countries to adopt similar legal frameworks. Yet, evidence of the presumed success of the Swedish model is scant at best, with recent research raising concerns over how the Sex Purchase Act in conjunction with immigration law and third-party regulation has contributed to increasedvulnerability of migrant sex workers – who make up the majority of people selling sex in the Nordic region (Vuolajärvi, 2019).In South Africa, both the selling and buying of sex is criminalised, in spite of the country being party to several international treaties that recognise the right to free choice of work. As decriminalisation of sex work in South Africa is currently high on the public agenda,and the ‘Swedish model’ is one of the alternatives discussed, critically examining the possible consequences of adopting this model is crucial. In this paper, we draw on research and activist interventions in Sweden and South Africa to examine the possible implications of the adoption of the ‘Swedish model’ in South Africa – a country with markedly different historical and demographic trajectories, migratory patterns, and a much less extensive and supported social welfare system. We caution that such a move may not achieve the aim of reducing sex workers’ vulnerability and exposure to violence. Furthermore, framing the selling of sex as violence rather than work may risk silencing causes for social justice by stripping sex workers of their agency and autonomy, while simultaneously casting them as victims.
沉默与脆弱
1999年,瑞典立法禁止性交易并将其定为犯罪,同时继续将性交易合法化。这一法律框架被称为“瑞典模式”,或邻国效仿后的“北欧模式”,它是建立在对“卖淫”是一种剥削和对妇女的暴力形式的理解之上的。从这个角度来看,性交易永远不能被视为工作。瑞典通过其女权主义外交政策平台(在2014年至2022年期间实施)宣布,它将“坚持不懈地做出强有力的承诺和行动”,鼓励其他国家采用类似的法律框架。然而,瑞典模式取得成功的证据最多也就很少,最近的研究引起了人们的担忧,即《性购买法》与移民法和第三方监管相结合,如何导致移民性工作者的脆弱性增加——他们构成了北欧地区性交易的大多数(Vuolajärvi, 2019)。在南非,性交易和性交易都被定为犯罪,尽管该国是若干承认自由选择工作权利的国际条约的缔约国。在南非,性工作除罪化目前是公共议程上的重要议题,而“瑞典模式”是讨论的备选方案之一,因此严格审查采用这种模式可能产生的后果至关重要。在本文中,我们借鉴了瑞典和南非的研究和积极分子的干预措施,来研究在南非采用“瑞典模式”可能产生的影响——南非是一个有着明显不同的历史和人口轨迹、移民模式,以及一个广泛得多、得到支持的社会福利体系的国家。我们警告说,这样的举动可能无法达到减少性工作者的脆弱性和暴露于暴力的目的。此外,将性交易定义为暴力而不是工作,可能会剥夺性工作者的代理权和自主权,同时将她们塑造成受害者,从而有可能压制社会正义的诉求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信