"Where I think the problem comes in is that there isn't a good, robust mechanism at present for establishing that the person you are buying sex from is definitely not being trafficked."
Yes Haus, that is one of the major problems, and exactly what others have pointed out about the proposal. Another would be succinctly defining what is meant by "being trafficked" or living off the avails of prostitution. It is an important point because, as I have stated earlier, it could incriminate a sex worker's family, friends, and legitimate business partners.
"If you want to put this sort of thing in place, rather than deciding on making the sex trade blanket illegal or blanket legal, I think you also need something like the HSE or the social services, to go to premises, examine the setup, and provide some sort of certification that a particular establishment or a particular practitioner is not being exploited - effectively, a stamp saying that sex with this person is not going to lead to potential prosecution.
In that context, it's the controlled part of controlled for another's gain that is key. I would imagine that these licensed premises would probably operate something akin to a chambers model - a group of professionals sharing some administrative and property costs."
Reasonable model. It has been done before and is still being done in various parts of the world. Although, not currently used specifically as verification of independence. Also, how would an agency register, or would working with an agency not be an option at all?
"Of course, running that kind of certification process would cost money, which is where the ability to tax earnings becomes significant, either directly through income taxes or through licensing fees for the certification process."
Funding through licensing seems less problematic. Possibly using an existing bureau to administrate. Not that I have anything against paying taxes, but it involves a whole other set of issues. Licensing is used in the erotic dancing aspect of the sex work industry in some of the cities in Canada. The licensing is mostly used to verify citizenship and age of majority. Tthere is a yearly renewal fee of, on average, $250.
There are some more complicated details that would need to be worked out in order to authenticate a sex worker as an independent. There is so much room for fraud, for the likelihood that a sex worker would end up just being coerced into getting a license. However, at least there would be some way to regulate the industry.
Which, leads me to an obvious question: This model has been developed by sex workers and used in similar situations. Then why isn't this model being proposed and developed to create the protection that the government claims to want to provide? The model is a no-brainer, really.
The obvious answer is: It's a catch 22. In order to develop this kind of model the government has to:
a) Accept and legitimize an industry that it's historically denounced, and...
b) Establish an administrative process that accepts the avails of prostitution in return for licensing fees.
Although, if it were to be instated, it wouldn't be the first instance of hypocrisy in government. (Which somehow makes the entire situation even more hypocritical) However, there are also other issues. There are definite moral issues (or perhaps better said as, "issue of moralizing") that prevent legislators from taking any real action to create better working conditions for sex workers. As much as people may want to believe the government is working from a logical position and not some moralizing, religious or political position, it is evident, by the decades, even centuries of ill-considered legislation that this is not the case. |
