Today’s guest post is about a topic that I’ve discussed on Twitter and Facebook but not here on my blog. My sex educator peers and the sex workers who run in adjacent circles are well aware of the costs of SESTA/FOSTA and similar policies in other locales. However, not everyone is. The following explains a bit more.
Sex work is a controversial topic. Some have moral and religious objections to the practice, while others view it as a normal way to make a living. Due to the nature of the vocation, there is risk of exploitation. Pimps manipulate the young and vulnerable into the practice against their will. They are often separated from their families and placed in dangerous situations. There is a high risk of:
- Emotional abuse
- Violence
- Drug use to control depression
- Death
As a society, we need to put measures in place to detect and stop sex trafficking.
On the other hand, some people voluntarily ent er the sex industry. Contrary to popular belief, it isn’t because they are from broken homes, or addicted to drugs. Some enjoy the perceived freedom, flexibility and relatively high earnings per hour rate of sex work. As of writing, the UK minimum wage is £7.81 an hour. An independent sex worker can expect to make £100 an hour in most cities. Therefore, it can be a rational choice.
The United States designed the FOSTA-SESTA bills in order to stamp out sex trafficking. FOSTA stands for ‘Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act’. SESTA stands for ’Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act’. Interestingly, there is no evidence that sex workers were consulted while creating this bill. Essentially, the United States government had meetings and decided what they thought was the best way to eradicate sex trafficking. It is difficult to solve a problem if you don’t know the root cause and complexities. In the end, they decided that the internet was a driver of sex trafficking. As a result, social media sites will be criminally responsible for content deemed to be promoting sex trafficking.
Let’s cross back over the pond for a second. It is difficult to get data on sex work because there is no national body. However, we use certain data to extrapolate from. Between 2002 to date, the percentage of soliciting of prostitution offenses has sharply declined. Interestingly, there is a positive correlation between internet access and the decline of prostitution. Could it be that those who might have been vulnerable to sex trafficking are now working independently in safe and controlled environments?
Since 1996, social media site operators were protected under ‘Safe Harbor’ in the United States. It stated, “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” This meant that users were responsible for their activities. The FOSTA-SESTA bills make internet service providers and platforms responsible for what their users post. In response, top social media sites closed certain sections of their site. For example, Craiglist no longer has a personals section.
Interestingly, UK politicians were planning a version of FOSTA-SESTA. This is likely to have the opposite effect. Instead of protecting sex workers, it will drive it further underground. Ironically, instead of limiting sex trafficking, it will provide the environment for it to flourish. Hypothetically, the government will be able to use carefully chosen statistics to show that the incidences of prostitution has reduced. Would it have reduced or simply driven underground? Out of sight, out of mind.
The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Prostitution and the Global Sex Trade, consisting of several members of Parliament, stood up in a House of Commons debate in July 2018 calling for a ban on “prostitution websites.”
They are also mulling the “Nordic Model,” in which selling sex is not illegal, but buying sex is. Ireland instituted this model in 2017, and immediately saw an uptick in violence against sex workers.
“People who are doing the worst of crimes are not deterred at all by this law,” says Kate McGrew, director of the Sex Workers Alliance of Ireland. “People see us as even more outside society, as vulnerable, as even less likely to call gardai or draw attention.”
Notably, the internet has increased the opportunities available for sex workers to operate in a safe environment. Some perform ‘cam work’ from home. They have no physical interaction with clients and are able to remain anonymous. Others sell video content and make passive income. Those who indulge in more ‘traditional’ prostitution, use social media to share information. For instance, they can notify their counterparts about violent clients or dangerous places.
The internet is an expression of freedom. It can’t be controlled, no matter how hard we try. Arguably, the FOSTA – SESTA bill is a form of political point scoring and a lazy way of trying to solve the big problem of sex trafficking. All it will do is increase the demand for underground sites which act as modern-day sex trafficking networks. The police should be trained on how to detect sex trafficking victims and establish rehabilitation programs to heal any emotional abuse or addiction.
Another issue is that the FOSTA – SESTA bill and any variations of it implemented around the world, is trying to limit a complex industry. For instance, some escort agencies, such as gentlemen4hire, strictly provide companionship. However, they are likely to be affected if such a bill was to be passed in the U.K.
There is a trend of governments trying to control the internet. In extreme cases, popular sites are banned. However, the internet is the exchange of information. People always find a way around it, Moreover, there are dark web sites which harbor all kinds of illegal activities. If governments truly care about stopping sex trafficking, they should train their police departments on how to detect and rehabilitate victims. They should also educate people on the tactics used by pimps and the effects it can have on one’s life. The FOSTA – SESTA bills are an ineffective bandage on a complex societal injury.
In conclusion, the passing of such bills has wide-reaching implications. Could businesses lobby to have other internet bills passed in order to protect their interests? This could open the floodgates to a world of scrutiny, and control over our lives – and perhaps that is the end goal. So, we need to take a deeper look into the issue of sex trafficking. Moreover, sex trafficking victims need to be listened to as they are best informed about how it works. Instead of trying to place a ban on sex work, more needs to be done to protect the vulnerable.
