In the USA human trafficking is not as big a problem as in, say, Germany or Turkey or Israel. That doesn’t mean it isn’t a serious problem, or a big money maker for criminal organizations. Sex sells, even in the most horrifying circumstances. The state department estimates that 14-17,500 people are trafficked into the U.S. annually, which is about the same rate as the number of Americans murdered every year. To me that’s a serious problem, and deserves the same sort of law enforcement response that murders get.

Slavery isn’t just an immigrant issue, either; you might have teenage runaways, or young women (even children) from the underclass, drug addicts, even suburban teenagers who are held captive through psychological intimidation or debt bondage (a guy buys them a lot of stuff at the mall, then says “you owe me”).

I can see where you’re coming from, that anti-trafficking legislation can be used to harass prostitutes and other “undesirables,” similarly to how the war on drugs is an excuse for all sorts of crimes and absurdities, like harassing black teenagers with a lid of pot. That’s a valid point. The best response is to be mindful of that as you work towards ending slavery, and seeing if any abuses occur, which they might. I think the only solution is to educate law enforcement, help slavery victims recover, and to increase the penalties for the real criminals, the pimps and the customers, as Sweden already does.

It disturbs me how many prostitutes rights advocates seem to regard trafficking victims, or anti-trafficking activists, as the enemy. I’m not saying you do, but some people do, and it worries me, especially since sex slaves are so damaged by the experience, it’s hard for them to have a voice of their own, and there is some common ground between anti-trafficking and prostitutes’ rights groups, which it’s important to recognize so the public doesn’t get mixed signals. We need to recognize that in situations of forced labor, women can be so degraded by their captors that they develop Stockholm syndrome, and say it’s a choice when, in reality, they’ve just given up hope of escape. It behooves all of us to to end this crime without punishing people who are guilty of nothing. How we do that is another essay entirely.

I’d REALLY like to see you blog more frequently, Veronica. You have the potential to be a strong voice in opposition to all the sex-negative insanity that has dominated our culture for so long.

-Jay

Namaste,
Emerald

One guy asked me if my children were in care !

I’d like to ask, though, whether or not there are cultural differences between New Zealand and the United States (or Canada, where I happen to live) which might lead to different results if the same laws were to be applied regarding prostitution.

Gun crime might be useful to consider here. It is perfectly legal in Canada to own guns, but because the culture here is different, it does not lead to some of the problems that it has led to in the United States.

Similarly, New Zealand may be culturally different from us. Criminals tend to gravitate their operation toward Europe and North America, since the market in these places is much greater. There is more flow of illegal immigrants here; and many of the networks used to bring illegal immigrants are used also to bring in kidnapped or coerced women from poorer countries. In other words, perhaps human traffickers are not looking at New Zealand as intently as they are looking at the United States.

This is not proof, I realize, I am just offering some points worth thinking about, it’s possible that none of it casts reasonable doubt on your thesis.

Aside from that, you said that we outlaw prostitution because it inflames the moral sensibilities of non-prostitutes. Isn’t that what any society must necessarily depart from to make laws? For example, gun control advocates say that it is immoral to own guns, but they don’t necessarily need the consent of gun owners to do this. Another example: I’m sure there are groups in the United States who would like to bring back slavery. But we do not legalize slavery because we think that slavery is immoral, even though objectively speaking, there is no right and wrong action in and of itself, it is we who attach that meaning to actions.

Ok, you will say that we do not legalize slavery because the slaves themselves oppose slavery, while prostitutes themselves might not oppose prostitution. However, this decision, to ask the people affected themselves for what they think, is an arbitrary decision to make, reflecting arbitrarily chosen values. So, are we not basing all our laws on arbitrary morals? Why is this bad in terms of prostitution?

I’m not trying to compare prostitution to slavery or anything, I mean that only conceptually, because I cannot find a better example. Please don’t respond (I don’t want to take up more of your time unnecessarily) if I’ve been too convoluted or if you’d rather not talk about this further.