Where the two meet: sex work and sex trafficking

In this blog I will be: 1.) connecting two prior posts Female Tourists Sexual Relations in the Caribbean: Condom use and HIV/AIDS and Human Trafficking: A Global Social Problem; 2.) present sex work-prostitution debate; 3.) present the basics of the 2000 Trafficking Victims Protection Act, including critics response to the policy; and 4.) present some aspects of the harm reduction model.

The post on female sexual relations takes a sex worker stance on the sexual encounters between the female tourists and local Caribbean males, while focusing on the importance of reducing harm by protection against HIV/AIDS. The other post on human trafficking uses more language associated with sex tourism, sexual exploitation and prostitution.

The topics of sex tourism, sex work/prostitution and human trafficking are distinct but intersect with one another. Leaving out the human trafficking component, there are different perspectives (debate) on sex work and prostitution. Briefly, the sex worker stance is to legitimize “prostitution” as a form of work and decriminalize it so that the industry could be better regulated to prevent harm. Where then the sex workers could be protected by laws. I would say they use a harm reduction model to promote safety for the worker and client. The other side of the debate thinks that prostitution is terrible and should be banned. The United States policy—Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) 2000—takes an abolitionist approach to prostitution. Funds for anti-trafficking work through NGO’s are only distributed to organizations that come out against prostitution. The “sex work vs. prostitution” debate is important here because it is a frame of reference; it changes how you view, work with and the services provided to people who have sex for an income. It is also important because it is at the base of United States policy against human trafficking.

In the late 1990’s, the U.S. government became concerned with human trafficking. Bill Clinton set out an anti-trafficking strategy which encompassed three main objectives: 1) prevention, 2) protection and support of victims, and 3) prosecution of traffickers. This strategy became the basis for the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (VTVPA). The VTVPA was created by combining the Violence against Women Act of 2000 and the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (Miko, 2002). I am focusing just on the Trafficking Victims Protection Act section of the overall policy. The TVPA, interestingly, is a domestic policy as well as a United States foreign policy.

TVPA created:
1. Definition of “severe forms of trafficking”
2. ‘Minimum standards’ for the elimination of human trafficking
3. Trafficking in Persons report (TIP)
4. Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons
5. “T” visa
6. Domestic Prosecutions
7. International Programs
8. International Sanctions

Critics of the TVPA, state numerous latent intentions of the policy. Desyllas (2007) states that the policy promotes ethnocentric language and a hegemonic position of the Global North, which defines the problem and creates the policy. Others argue along the same line, that the TVPA perpetuates imperialism by imposing the United States’ requirements and values on other countries and cultures (Clawson, 2003). Some critics say the victim-centered approach to human trafficking perpetuates the above characteristics by viewing “3rd” world women as weak and helpless and need to be saved or rescued (Desyllas, 2007 & Sharma, 2005). The Global Alliance against Trafficking in Women (GAATW) believes that the victim-center approach, represented in the TVPA, actually violates human rights, rather than upholding them (Huckerby, 2007). Others believe that the policy and anti-trafficking legislation is a form of immigration control, which arises and becomes a public concern with historic periods of increased migration (Desyllas, 2007, & Sharma, 2005).

Ten years sense the signing of the TVPA in 2000, many new programs have been formed to implement the policy; however, the long term impact is still not fully known. A variety of sources claim, it is hard to prove if the TVPA has had any significant impact internationally or domestically on ‘combating’ human trafficking, due to the unreliability of statistics. There are large variations in the numbers of trafficked persons into the United States; reports show that 14,000 up to 50,000 people are trafficked into the United States annually. Large fluctuations occur in governmental statistics in just a few years, making it hard to evaluate the impact of the TVPA (Tiefenburn, 2004, Huckerby, 2007, Miko 2002). The Department of Justice has also recognized that the data on the numbers in the U.S and worldwide need to be re-examined (Huckerby, 2007). Another problem with gauging the actual number of human trafficking victims is escalated by the lack of agreement of who should or is considered a victim. Often smuggled humans and trafficked humans are counted together, leading to inconsistent data (Schauer et al., 2006). As you can see, the TVPA has its share critics and problems. But what is the root cause of the human trafficking problem?

Poverty.

Personally, I look at sex work and sex trafficking on a continuum. Sex work is on one end of the continuum where two consenting adults are choosing sexual relations (often as a means to alleviate poverty). A lot of sex work is not tied to human trafficking at all. Sex trafficking is way on the other side of the continuum where women, men, and children are forced, coerced, kidnapped, or deceived into sex trafficking. I, like many others, believe that poverty is the greatest contributing factor to sex trafficking.

Sex work itself does not come without high levels of risk. Cusick (2006) describes within the various sex market there are a mixture of heightened vulnerability that increases harms to sex workers including: pimps, drug use, traffickers, violence, child abuse, sexually transmitted infections, effects on self-esteem and mental health. The author made clear that levels of vulnerably and harms are not universal in all sex markets. Money, drug dependency and sometimes status and lifestyle factors reinforce sex work. The article found a few personal vulnerabilities thought to lead to sex work including: mental health issues, low self-esteem, childhood neglect or abuse, family inadequacy, moral failing, and youth deviance (p. 2).

Cusick (2006) promotes the harm reduction (drug use model) approach to sex work, which does not mean that harm reductionists reject the abolitionist/prohibitionist ideal but rather recognizes that “abstinence programs cannot reduce harm to current users (sex workers)” (p. 7). To the author, promoting the harm reduction model means reducing existing vulnerability among sex workers.

As with any issue, the complexity is enormous but social workers can work on many levels to reduce harm associated with sex work. Social workers, as harm reductionists, working with sex workers need to be aware of the personal backgrounds, circumstances, motivations, and heightened vulnerability of the sex worker populations. Micro and macro practice are needed to insure their health and safety. While the TVPA does not use a harm reduction framework, it has created a domestic and international policy that has created a common ground for discussion, created definitions, and offered solutions to alleviate human trafficking on a global level. Wood (2008) identified a common ground: “What are the areas of agreement between the abolitionist/prohibitionist perspective and the human rights/harm reduction perspective?... We all agree that forced labor is wrong. We all agree that nonconsensual sex is wrong” (p. 2).

Clawson, H., Small, K., Go, E., & Myles, B. (2003). Needs assessment for service providers and trafficking victims. Prepared for U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

Cusick, L. (2006). Widening the harm reduction agenda: From drug use to sex work. International Journal of Drug Policy. 17(1); 3-11.

Desyllas, M. (2007). A critique of the global trafficking discourse and U.S. policy. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare. 34(4); 57-79.

Huckerby, J. (2007). United States of America. Collateral damage: the impact of anti trafficking measures on human rights around the world (pp. 230-256). Thailand: Global Alliance Against Trafficking in Women. Retrieved July 28, 2008, from http://www.gaatw.org/

Miko, F. (2002). Trafficking in women and children: The U.S. and international response. Congressional Research Services Reports 98-647 C. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

Schauer, E., & Wheaton, E. (2006). Sex trafficking into the united states: A literature review. Criminal Justice Review. 31(2); 146-69.

Sharma, N. (2005). Anti-trafficking rhetoric and the making of a global apartheid. NWSA Journal. 17(3); 88-111.

Tiefenbrun, S. (2005). Sex slavery in the united states and its law to stop it here and abroad. William and Mary Journal of Women and the Law. 11; 1-28.

Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, P.L. No. 106-386, Div. A., 114 Stat. 1464, enacted October 28, 2000. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

Wood, E. (2008). Sex in the public square presents: Sex work, trafficking, and human rights: A public forum New York, February 20, 2008. Retrieved April 1, 2010 from http://www.speardmagazine.org/blog/?p=146

Female Tourists Sexual Relations in the Caribbean: Condom Use and HIV/AIDS

Sex tourism has been long conceptualized as foreign men traveling to South East Asia to have sex with female or male commercial sex workers and children. In the 1990s, research started coming out about female sex tourism in the Caribbean. From then-until now, most literature/research on female tourist sexual relations with local Caribbean males—known commonly as beach boy, rent-a-dread or snaky panky—have been to prove or disprove that these relationships are or are not “sex tourism.” Is this sex tourism, romance tourism or maybe companionship tourism? Based on these studies particular gaps and inconsistencies were apparent, which includes the rates that condoms were used in the sexual relations between the local men and female tourists. Due to multiple contributing factors, tourist areas are epicenters for the transmission of HIV/AIDS. The low levels of condom use in these relationships pose a health risk to local and foreign populations.

The actual interactions between the beach boy and female tourist are fairly consistent, but the interpretation is where the debate lies. Studies about the sexual relations between female tourists and local men have been done in Jamaica, Barbados, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, and the Gambia-among a few others. Rather than focusing on the debate and the details or their relationships (characteristics and motives of beach boys, the seduction process, and female tourist motives), I am going to combine information previously researched on the sexual relationships of female tourists and local Caribbean males, with research on the tourism industry, to gain insight and determine the rates of male condoms used to prevent the transmission of HIV/AIDS.

Female Tourists
Studies throughout the Caribbean have common conclusions regarding sexual activities of female tourists and local male populations.

1. Many female tourists who travel alone engage in sexual relations with local populations (Forsythe, Hasbun & De Lister 1998; Herold, Garcia & DeMoya 2001; Taylor, 2000).


2. “True Love” or trusting relationships have a lower rate of condom use than “pearly physical” relationships (Taylor, 2001; Herold et al., 2001; Padilla, Guilamo-Romos, Bouris, & Reyes, 2010).


3. Female tourists are less likely to use condoms when engaging in sexual relations than male tourists (Forsythe et al., 1998; Taylor, 2001).

In the Dominican Republic, Herold et al. (2001) found that there is a common belief among beach boys that women who travel alone are seeking sexual relationships with local males. In this study, the beach boys estimated 70% of these women who travel alone would have a sexual relationship with a local male. This equaled about 1/3 of the women the beach boys approached. Taylor (2000) found that almost half of single tourist women in Jamaica had sexual relations with local men.

HIV/AIDS and Tourism
The UNAIDS (2009) reports that throughout the Caribbean region heterosexual transmission is the leading source of HIV infection rates, which can be tied sex work. Often when discussing sex work, the literature focuses on female sex workers or men who have sex with men (MSM). It is not until recently that there is a growing body of literature focusing particularly on male heterosexual sexual relations with female tourist populations. The thriving Caribbean tourist economy poses a considerable risk for local and foreigners. Risky sexual behavior among female tourists and local Caribbean males could lead to the spread of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and/or HIV/AIDS. The effect of STDs and HIV/AIDS transmission are continually a threat to the people of world. In the Caribbean alone 240,000 of the population is infected with the deadly virus (UNAIDS, 2009). The Caribbean has the second highest rate of HIV infections after Africa; Jamaica alone had a 9% infection rate among sex workers, in 2005. Padilla (2010) suggests that tourist areas are geographical, socially, and behaviorally distinct spaces that increase the risk associated with HIV/AIDS transmission (p. 71). Padilla (2010) points out that this increased risk for HIV transmission in tourist areas are due to four main reasons described as follows:

1. high HIV prevalence rates among sex workers and their clients,


2. high rates of HIV risk behaviors in tourism areas,


3. demographic changes resulting from labor migration, and


4. alcohol and drug use in tourism areas (p. 71).

According to Kempadoo (2004) and Padilla (2010), HIV rates are high among sex workers and migrant populations. The majority of young men working in tourist areas migrated from rural areas in search of economic advantages. Migration for labor purposes are often tied to sex work especially in tourist areas.

There have been concerns that the high rates of HIV/AIDS in the Caribbean could discourage tourists visiting the islands and affect the tourism industry. Forsythe et al., (1998) study in the Dominican Republic explored this concern. The research found that some tourists who engage in sexual relations believe HIV/AIDS rates are much higher than the actual prevalence; therefore, in these cases, the risk of HIV did not discourage sexual encounters. Single women traveling alone perceived their personal risk higher than men traveling alone. It was these people who perceived that their risk was high that would be the most receptive to HIV/AIDS prevention campaigns in the country. When making travel plans, the majority of tourists did not consider HIV/AIDS infection rates in the destination country.

Condom Use
When evaluating literature regarding the Caribbean in particular, there are inconsistencies in the actual rate that condoms are used among female tourists and Caribbean males. For example, Herold et al. (2001) found that in the Dominican Republic the beach boys response to how often they use condoms with female tourists was contradictory to the female tourists interviewed. The beach boys responded that condoms were mostly used during their first sexual encounter but decreased as the relationship progressed. The female tourist’s claimed using condoms every time they were involved in sexual activities. Common beliefs among beach boys were that overweight women were economically stable and less sexually experienced; therefore, the risk of contracting an STD or HIV/AIDS was reduced. Forsythe et al. (1998) interviewed hotel workers of those who engaged in sexual relations with female tourist and 95% of these hotel workers said they used condoms every time they had sex.

Taylors (2001) study, in Jamaica and the Dominican Republic found that 67% of the female tourist’s claimed using condoms as protection, much less than the previous studies suggested, while 15% used no protection at all. Interestedly, women seeking romance or were in ‘true love’ were less likely to use condoms than women seeking ‘purely physical’ or casual sexual adventure. Also, the women who had multiple partners or who acknowledge ‘helping’ out the beach boy financially were more likely to use condoms. Previous studies have pointed out the age of the tourist, saying that older women are normally more financially stable and willing to give gifts or payments; many have purely physical motives, which in turn may lead to more condom use (Taylor, 2001).

This research is consistent with global studies that have documented the link between trusting relationships and decreased condom use (Padilla et al., 2010). Overall research on tourist relations suggests that female tourist use fewer condoms than male tourists, while engaging in heterosexual relationships with local populations. This research states that 75% of female tourists who have sex with local partners use no condom, while 42% of males do not use condoms (Forsythe et al, 1998).

Conclusion
Since the tourism industry brings people closer to one another, it is inevitable that sexual relations will occur. As more female tourist begin to travel alone, there will be more sexual relationships between local men and tourist women. Inconsistencies in condom rates were apparent between the female tourist and local males and between studies. It was found that purely sexual encounters are more likely to have openly economic incentives and increased condom use. On the other hand, romance is often built on ‘friendships,’ which produce trusting, emotional relationships and in turn decrease condom usage. Tourist areas represent unique spaces that are practically vulnerable to high rates of HIV/AIDS transmission.

Recommendations
Due to the unacknowledged/unawareness element (not fully discussed previously) of the beach boy and female tourist relationship, condom use campaigns and education cannot be approached the in the same way as purely sexual encounters by acknowledged sex workers and their clients. New and innovative techniques to promote safer sexual practice have to be created to reach this particular population. Creating ways to encourage safer sexual practices between female tourists and local males will ultimately minimize the risk of transmission HIV/AIDS.

A more thorough investigation of the tourism industry and practically tourist areas in the Caribbean and throughout the world need to be explored more fully to understand the complex and unique social, geographic, behavioral patterns in regards to the sexual relations between the female tourists and local males. The tourist centers mix multiple high risk populations, alcohol/drug use, and a low level of condom use creates and epicenter for STDs and HIV/AIDS transmission. Reducing the spread of STDs and HIV/AIDS, by encouraging greater awareness among foreign women and local males, regarding their own personal risk of contracting and/or spreading STDs and HIV/AIDS, is crucial to the development of our societies and for people to lead full healthy lives.

Forsythe, S., Hasbun, J., & De Lister, M. (1998). Protecting paradise: tourism and AIDS in the
Dominican Republic. Health Policy and Planning. 13(3), 277-286.

Herold, E., Garcia, R., & DeMoya, T. (2001). Female tourists and beach boys romance or sex
tourism? Annals of Tourism Research, 28(4), 978-997.

Kempadoo, K. (2004). Sexing the Caribbean: Gender, race, and sexual labor. Dying for sex:
HIV/AIDS and other dangers (p. 167-190). New York, NY: Routledge.

Padilla, M., Bouris, A., & Reyes, A. (2010). HIV/AIDS and tourism in the Caribbean: An
ecological systems perspective. American Journal of Public Health, 100(1), 70-77.

Taylor, S. J. (2001). Dollars are a girl’s best friend? Female tourists’ sexual behavior in
the Caribbean. Sociology, 35(3), 749-764.

Taylor, S. J. (2000). Tourism and ‘embodied’ commodities: sex tourism in the Caribbean. S.
Clifts & S. Carter (Eds.), Tourism and sex: Culture, commerce and coercion (p. 41-53). London, England: Pinter.

UNAIDS. (2009). AIDS epidemic report. December 2009, from
http://data.unaids.org/pub/Report/2009/JC1700_Epi_Update_2009_en.pdf