Image via Carys Boughton
***
It is not surprising that the legal status of sex work varies all around the globe. Even sex between two consenting adults is considered a traditionally taboo topic, whether it occurs within a marriage or during a one-night stand. Sex is designed for procreation, not for intimacy or desire, and certainly not as a means of income.
Although members of social media may come across creators who describe themselves as a “mattress actress” or “midnight ballerina,” performing any act of sex work comes with tremendous amounts of stigma, societal disapproval, or straight-up disgust. Choosing to work as a stripper, OnlyFans creator, or a hooker is not something to boast about at the kitchen table or on your LinkedIn profile. These jobs all make money, but abolitionist feminists like Julie Bindel claim that the sex industry is an inherently patriarchal institution, exploiting women for their bodies.
While it is undeniable that sex work (in all of its forms) can be violent, demonizing, and degrading towards women, it is equally true that the demand for buyable sex will always exist. Prostitution is one of the oldest professions in the world, meaning societal stigma and criminalization will not eradicate the industry. Similar to abortion and reproductive health, people will always find a way to receive the services they need or desire, even if they face penalization or incarceration.
Since sex work will never cease to exist, it is the state’s responsibility to protect those who provide sexual services. Sex work is work, no matter how the general population perceives its morality. Consequently, the state should decriminalize the sex trade as a means of protecting workers from violence, exploitation, and marginalization from resources. Although interpretations vary, the full decriminalization of sex work is the legal model favored by sex workers around the world, alongside global leaders in public health, human rights, and gender equality.
While there are numerous models a state can implement to protect women, children, and public health, the full decriminalization model is the only approach that recognizes workers’ rights, privacy rights, and bodily autonomy. In most Western progressive countries, individuals are granted the legal right to privately own pornography and the freedom to choose who they wish to have sexual relations with. Consequently, in extension of the fundamental right to privacy, countries like the United States should fully decriminalize sex work, including the sale, purchase, and third-party involvement.
The key legal models utilized by states include criminalization, legalization, decriminalization, and the Nordic Model, which decriminalizes the sale of sex but not the purchase. In countries that utilize the criminalization model, sex work is prohibited in its entirety, meaning the sale, purchase, organization, and solicitation of sex for money. Criminalization is typically used by countries with deeply religious and traditional values, such as a majority of the United States, Russia, Iran, and Thailand.
In the United States, sex work is prohibited in all fifty states except Maine and specific counties of Nevada. In the remaining forty-eight states and Washington, D.C., legal penalties vary from state to state. The past and present criminalization model is influenced by moral crusades, a movement that seeks to protect morals and traditional values like sobriety and abstinence outside of marriage. Historically speaking, the prohibition of sex work was influenced by anti-immigration legislation that sought to prevent the presence of immoral women and practices. The government seeked to prevent “immoral women from China,” even making it so engaging in sex work would be cause for deportation.
More recently, the partial and full criminalization models seek to protect women from degradation, violence from customers, and risks to personal and public health. Calls for full criminalization or the Nordic Model also claim that consensual sex work is inherently linked to the sex trafficking industry. Abolitionist feminists assert that because the main drive to become a sex worker is economic necessity, consent is tainted by the need for money.
Maine recently adopted the Nordic Model or partial decriminalization process, which, following the policies of countries like Sweden and Norway, removes legal penalties for sex workers, but maintains the criminalization of its purchase. Since it is a criminal act to buy sexual services from offering individuals, it is interpreted that the legal model would end the demand for commercial sexual services from women, therefore freeing sex workers.
However, data shows that the Nordic Model, sometimes referred to as the “Equality Model,” correlates with an increase in violence against them. Because sex workers are reliant on criminalized clients, they are more likely to pursue work in remote locations, where they are less likely to utilize harm reduction strategies. There is also evidence of increased levels of sex trafficking, as sex workers fear stigma and brutal treatment from the police. Under this legal model, state governments threaten the bodily autonomy and the freedom of choice of sex workers in an attempt to protect them from sexist and abusive clients.
Another popular model is legalization, which often makes the city or state authorities the sole regulator of the sex trade. In countries with legalization, such as Germany, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, the government heavily monitors the industry through compulsory registration, mandatory registration, and criminalization of non-compliance.
Although such regulations may appear to promote the best interests of sex workers and the general population, they raise concerns over data protection, voluntary access to healthcare, and the right to privacy. Those who refuse to comply, often undocumented migrant workers, face fines, arrests, and deportation. In Germany, it is estimated that as much as 90 percent of sex workers operate illegally, undermining the benefits of legalization.
Decriminalization, the legal model of choice for sex workers, is the best policy option as it ensures that individuals who offer sexual services for money are provided with workers’ rights, bodily autonomy, and the right to privacy. In comparison to the legalization model, under decriminalization, the state does not impose new laws of regulation and restriction. Unlike in the legalization model, sex work is understood as a form of employment like any other job, meaning the health and safety standards that apply to other industries also apply to sex work.
Because sex work is decriminalized, workers are able to choose who and where they offer services to, and more importantly, are allowed to seek healthcare and legal services on their own accord. Rather than experiencing stigma or criminal repercussions when speaking with a medical professional about their work, workers feel more comfortable and safe when receiving reproductive healthcare. For instance, in New Zealand, where sex work is decriminalized, 97 percent of sex workers access voluntary health checks.
While the decriminalization model does not eliminate existing stereotypes or acts of violence against sex workers, the removal of legal barriers creates an improved relationship between workers and law enforcement. Unlike under criminalization, where sex workers and clients may purposely avoid reporting violence or exploitation to the police, the decriminalization model encourages individuals to report inappropriate behavior to law enforcement. It has been found that without criminal penalties, sex workers are less subject to violence, and therefore, reports of incidents of violence decrease. In New Zealand, the decriminalization law ultimately improved health conditions for sex workers and did not cause an increase in sex trafficking or increase the number of minors involved in the industry.
Considering how the United States finds privacy rights to be fundamental rights, it is troublesome that the federal and state governments do not understand sex work as an extension of bodily autonomy, sexual freedom, and the right to privacy. Lawrence v. Texas (2003) found that all adults have the freedom to engage in consensual sexual acts, and Stanley v. Georgia (1969) held that legal adults are allowed to privately possess obscene materials like pornography; however, engaging in sexual acts for money is criminalized.
Each state certainly has the right to attempt to protect women from violence, exploitation, and degradation, but the current legal framework only broadens how sex workers will experience violence. If the government wishes to protect sex workers, the United States and other countries that recognize a fundamental right to privacy must understand that institutional punishment only perpetuates mistreatment and social stigma. There will always be a demand for explicit content or services that fulfill the innate desire for pleasure, so why don’t we attempt to utilize a legal framework that recognizes this circumstance and attempts to protect those who choose to be sex workers?
***
This article was edited by Abigail D’Angelo.
Jonathan Kho 
Samantha Kornsey 
Anika Bobeck