countries where prostitution is legal have higher rates of human trafficking. that’s like an actual fact. not an opinion or anything. so tbh it seems a bit ‘swerfy’ to completely ignore that
Why would trafficking increase when you have legalized prostitution.
Because if prostitution is legal, demand increases. And if it is legal, pimps and traffickers have more room to exploit and sell women under the guise of legal sex work.
In fact, in countries where it is legal, pimps and brothel owners are considered sex workers themselves.
Just because you legalize prostitution doesn’t mean women are going to be anymore willing to do it, but more men expect to go to prostitutes, so the demand for prostitution increases. Where do you get prostitutes if women aren’t willing to be them? you kidnap and traffick them!!
Thank you for explaining this so concisely. I always thought trafficking would decrease if prostitution was legalized, so this is good to know.
it’s worth pointing out that Germany, who’s always touted as very progressive for legalizing prostitution and instituting prostitution unions, has become the human trafficking hub of Europe since those laws were implemented.
And because I’m an angry woman living in said trafficking hub of Europe (aka Germany), here’s a petition to make selling and buying woman illegal again. Thank you.
…You all do not know how to read.
The paper explains that there is no real correlation between prostitution and human trafficking in that “the legalization of prostitution is not equal to laxer
enforcement of anti-trafficking laws and, conversely, the fact that prostitution is illegal does
not imply stricter anti-trafficking enforcement. Human trafficking always remains illegal even
if prostitution becomes legal. Moreover, by erroneously equating the legal status of
prostitution with different levels of law enforcement with respect to human trafficking, Akee
et al. (2010a) overlook other demand and supply effects that the legalization of prostitution
may have on human trafficking. Jakobsson and Kotsadam’s (2011) paper is closer to our
theoretical analysis in this regard as they directly focus on the supply and demand effects of
legalizing prostitution. “In other words, in countries where prostitution is legalized, the law enforcement becomes more laxxed in dealing with actual human trafficking.
And also, the data conveniently leaves out all other forms of prostitution which exclude call girls, escorts, and etc. It’s only examining street walkers and brothels which is a very limited sample size. The paper even points out that illegality does not eradicate the market other than incriminate women, consensual or not. It simply examines prostitution via supply and demand.
And guess what, the paper even disagrees with you all.
“The likely negative consequences of legalized prostitution on a country’s inflows of
human trafficking might be seen to support those who argue in favor of banning prostitution,
thereby reducing the flows of trafficking (e.g., Outshoorn, 2005). However, such a line of
argumentation overlooks potential benefits that the legalization of prostitution might have on
those employed in the industry. Working conditions could be substantially improved for
prostitutes – at least those legally employed – if prostitution is legalized. Prohibiting
prostitution also raises tricky “freedom of choice” issues concerning both the potential
suppliers and clients of prostitution services. A full evaluation of the costs and benefits, as
well as of the broader merits of prohibiting prostitution, is beyond the scope of the present
article.”Tumblr spouting anti-sex work sentiment?
I am SHOCKED… SHOCKED I TELL YOU!!
(no, no really, most of you people are self-important little prudes)
It’s hilarious that you’d accuse others here of being incapable of reading, while you yourself either deliberately or ignorantly misrepresent and decontextualize the information in the paper.
In your first paragraph, you state that the paper explains there is “no correlation between prostitution and human trafficking” and then cite a paragraph dealing with law enforcement. Not only is this taken from the “theory” section where they clearly state “In this section, we discuss what economic theory suggests regarding the effect of the legalization of prostitution on trafficking”, but the sentences you cherry picked have NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the RATE of the inflow of human trafficking victims, and instead states that the legalization of prostitution has no effect on the ENFORCEMENT of laws regarding human trafficking. That isn’t “proof” of anything….that’s a clarifying statement made in the theory section of an academic paper. A+ reading and comprehension skills there, bucko.
You then state “in countries where prostitution is legalized, the law enforcement becomes more laxxed in dealing with actual human trafficking.” which is absolutely NOT what is being stated above. They state, quite CLEARLY, that countries where it becomes legalized do not in turn become more aggressive in their enforcement of trafficking laws.
Your next paragraph, once again, is taken from the theory section. For someone preaching about the poor reading skills of others, it’s rather telling when you seem to have only skimmed both the theory section and the very last paragraph of the conclusion.
You end by claiming “the paper disagrees with you all” and then cite a line that freaking opens with “likely negative consequences of legalized prostitution on a country’s inflows of human trafficking” and ends with how “some positives on the other hand could be better working conditions for those who choose to engage in prostitution!”
Like do you read what you yourself are citing? The question now becomes who do you care more for, the MILLIONS of women and children trafficked across the globe, who face a higher likelihood of being trafficked when prostitution is legalized? Or are their lives inconsequential so long as those who “choose” to engage in this work may potentially have better “working conditions”?
Here’s a line you seem to have willingly skipped in the opening of the conclusion:
“On average, countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger degree of reported human trafficking inflows. We have corroborated this quantitative evidence with three brief case studies of Sweden, Denmark and Germany. Consistent with the 26 results from our quantitative analysis, the legalization of prostitution has led to substantial scale effects in these cases.“
Since you have a clear aversion to actually sitting and reading an entire paper, here is the summation given by Harvard Law School:
- Countries with legalized prostitution are associated with higher human trafficking inflows than countries where prostitution is prohibited. The scale effect of legalizing prostitution, i.e. expansion of the market, outweighs the substitution effect, where legal sex workers are favored over illegal workers. On average, countries with legalized prostitution report a greater incidence of human trafficking inflows.
- The effect of legal prostitution on human trafficking inflows is stronger in high-income countries than middle-income countries. Because trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation requires that clients in a potential destination country have sufficient purchasing power, domestic supply acts as a constraint.
- Criminalization of prostitution in Sweden resulted in the shrinking of the prostitution market and the decline of human trafficking inflows. Cross-country comparisons of Sweden with Denmark (where prostitution is decriminalized) and Germany (expanded legalization of prostitution) are consistent with the quantitative analysis, showing that trafficking inflows decreased with criminalization and increased with legalization.
- The type of legalization of prostitution does not matter — it only matters whether prostitution is legal or not. Whether third-party involvement (persons who facilitate the prostitution businesses, i.e, “pimps”) is allowed or not does not have an effect on human trafficking inflows into a country. Legalization of prostitution itself is more important in explaining human trafficking than the type of legalization.
Like…you really do not know how to read, analyze, or comprehend information given to you, and I am shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU!! [except not at all because so many of you are so willfully ignorant and seem to only give a shit about what the privileged whites who write about how much they love their jobs on tumblr have to say]
Like how utterly depraved must you be to take a full on academic paper detailing the DIRECT correlation between the legalization of prostitution and the inflow of human trafficking victims and write it all off as “anti sex-work sentiment” like get your goddamn head out of your ass you disingenuous moron.
The legalisation of prostitution had the logical conclusion of a sharp increase of sec trafficking, rape and abuse
I honestly don’t know why pro prostitution idiots see themselves as the good guys they are actively evil
@mutantlexi calling women “prudes” makes you sound like a horny fuckboy trying to coerce a woman into sex. Are you going to call us frigid for opposing prostitution next?
Celtyradfem 