Members of Queer Strike showing their support for #pledgedecrim.
Show Hide image

How #pledgedecrim takes sex worker rights to the mainstream

Sex worker rights campaigners are hoping that the strategy that is working in the highest echelons of power will also work as well in the housing association meeting hall, or in the shouting grounds of Twitter.

Last week, the Safety First Coalition, a project that brings together sex worker rights campaigners, anti-rape groups, and health and legal professionals, launched a national pledge to decriminalise sex work. The pledge, which is being promoted in a Twitter campaign under the hashtag #pledgedecrim, highlights the most important and broadly accessible arguments in support of the decriminalisation of sex work - worker safety and worker rights.

“We want this demand for decriminalisation to register on the national stage,” says Niki Adams, spokesperson for the English Collective of Prostitutes. The pledge, which has been developed over the past several months in extensive consultation with sex workers and experts, is designed to reach those who have traditionally opposed decriminalisation or may not have thought about how decriminalisation is connected to the issues that they are concerned about. The goal of the pledge is to unite feminist and anti-austerity campaigns behind decriminalisation, and to break out of circular arguments. “What we know is that the public is in favour of decriminalisation on grounds of safety - the safety issue is the vehicle by which people have been able to put aside their feelings of morality or personal apprehension and come to support decriminalisation on the strength of the arguments that sex workers should not be forced to work in isolation, sex workers should not be deterred from reporting violence to the police. The pledge incorporates issues like safety, health, workers rights and policing, the targeting of immigrant women - the issues that people come to the issue of decriminalisation of sex work through. We have our eyes on the autumn and taking our fight to Parliament,” she says.

The pledge, which has already garnered support from luminaries including Grayson Perry (below), is a broad and innovative document. Hosted on a dedicated website, the pledge offers rarely considered arguments in support of decriminalisation, and included documentation offers short, clear real - life examples in support of each point. For example, criminalisation actually can keep people stuck in sex work. Workers who are arrested or convicted of a crime face barriers in seeking other employment. On the pledge site, an anonymous sex worker explains: "As the mother of a disabled child, I know a lot about caring. But I couldn’t apply for a caring job because I had convictions for loitering and soliciting."

According to Adams, the document’s approach has helped to convince politicians, bringing them in line with a public majority that she says supports decriminalisation on safety grounds. “One of the things we noticed is that MPs have studied the pledge background document, which flags up support of key organisations and gives examples for each pledge point. They’ve said, ‘This is helpful - I am going to use this example. This has changed my point of view,’” says Adams.

For sex workers, new approaches and changed minds can result in improved policy outcomes. Last year, when Labour MP Fiona MacTaggart introduced a measure into the Modern Slavery Bill to criminalise the purchase of sexual services, actor and Labour Party member Sarah Solemani had a series of meetings with shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper. Those meetings and the groundswell of opposition led to Cooper offering an alternative amendment, calling for a period of review and research - and this led, fortunately, to the failure of the MacTaggart amendment. “As soon as Cooper indicated that she would no longer support the blanket criminalisation of clients, other Labour MPs backed off from supporting the MacTaggart amendment,” says Adams.

But how mainstream are sex worker rights? As the Labour leadership race dominates the news, many sex worker rights activists are excited by Jeremy Corbyn’s frontrunner status. Corbyn has long supported decriminalisation. “We’ve been contacted by quite a lot of people asking where do the candidates stand on decriminalisation, and it’s fantastic to be able to say Jeremy Corbyn is completely on board,” says Adams. “But the fact that he stands against austerity is also a really crucial issue for sex workers. Prostitution is one of the things that women especially are going into, because more and more of us are struggling. Even those of us who have been working for years have to work harder, for lower rates, and take more risks - people feel in crisis, and to have a candidate who we feel could represent real change on austerity is a massive relief for sex workers,” says Adams. However, the progress made by campaigners over the past year means that sex workers need not pin their hopes wholly on Corbyn. “The relief that comes from that massive grassroots campaign in November and the widespread realisation that criminalisation undermines safety is that if someone like Cooper did prevail, that we would hopefully not be up against immediate legislation to criminalise clients or increase criminalisation of sex workers. You feel like the terrain has shifted - we’re in with a much better chance,” she says.

As austerity continues to bite, decriminalisation becomes ever more important. According to Adams, sex workers are reporting that benefit cuts and sanctions are increasing risks and lowering pay for existing sex workers and the many new sex workers driven by economic need. “They’re talking about cutting the support to the children of asylum seekers by thirty percent - money for mothers seeking asylum with children would go down from seven pounds a day to five pounds a day, which is a dramatic cut. Most mothers would get out there and do prostitution because there’s nothing worse than not being able to feed their kids. Women seeking asylum living in absolute poverty is likely to be behind the next big increase in prostitution. Already women who are destitute are working for tiny amounts of money and have to solicit for men in informal ways, because they can’t risk going to the established red light areas. They are in a very poor negotiating position and that makes them more vulnerable to exploitation and violence. Sex workers are increasingly describing themselves as precarious workers - in the category of people working in coffee bars, cleaning and doing care work. Prostitution has become one of those types of jobs, and people are not earning loads of money,” says Adams.

The Labour Party remains strongly divided on sex work and decriminalisation, but with its end run around traditional, polarising arguments, the pledge is making a headway that would once have been unthinkable. Apart from her conversation with Cooper, Solemani has had several successes reaching other senior politicians with the pledge. “I had a conversation with Harriet Harman, and she was very anti-decriminalisation - she is from the old school, I think she equated sex work with rape, she didn’t buy that there was any agency for sex workers. She said to me, ‘how would you feel if your daughter was a sex worker?’ That argument feels to me such a representation of the doublethink involved - the tangle of the issues. I said that the same argument, making it personal, was used before gay sex was decriminalised. One would argue, ‘would you want your father to have gay sex?’ Just because you do not like the idea of something doesn’t mean you can legislate against it. I don’t think I’ve yet persuaded her completely, but she said to me, ‘I hadn’t thought of it like that,’” said Solemani.

In today’s overheated politics, a politician changing their mind can seem rare. Sex worker rights campaigners are hoping that the strategy that is working in the highest echelons of power will also work as well in the housing association meeting hall, or in the shouting grounds of Twitter. Time will tell whether sex worker rights will continue with their momentum, or will face a backlash; with last week’s confident launch, sex workers and supporters are betting that history is on our side.

Margaret Corvid is a writer, activist and professional dominatrix living in the south west.

Daily Mail
Show Hide image

Who "speaks for England" - and for that matter, what is "England"?

The Hollywood producer Sam Gold­wyn once demanded, “Let’s have some new clichés.” The Daily Mail, however, is always happiest with the old ones.

The Hollywood producer Sam Gold­wyn once demanded, “Let’s have some new clichés.” The Daily Mail, however, is always happiest with the old ones. It trotted out Leo Amery’s House of Commons call from September 1939, “Speak for England”, for the headline on a deranged leader that filled a picture-free front page on David Cameron’s “deal” to keep Britain in the EU.

Demands that somebody or other speak for England have followed thick and fast ever since Amery addressed his call to Labour’s Arthur Greenwood when Neville Chamberlain was still dithering over war with Hitler. Tory MPs shouted, “Speak for England!” when Michael Foot, the then Labour leader, rose in the Commons in 1982 after Argentina’s invasion of the Falklands. The Mail columnist Andrew Alexander called on Clare Short to “speak for England” over the Iraq War in 2003. “Can [Ed] Miliband speak for England?” Anthony Barnett asked in this very magazine in 2013. (Judging by the 2015 election result, one would say not.) “I speak for England,” claimed John Redwood last year. “Labour must speak for England,” countered Frank Field soon afterwards.

The Mail’s invocation of Amery was misconceived for two reasons. First, Amery wanted us to wage war in Europe in support of Hitler’s victims in Poland and elsewhere and in alliance with France, not to isolate ourselves from the continent. Second, “speak for England” in recent years has been used in support of “English votes for English laws”, following proposals for further devolution to Scotland. As the Mail was among the most adamant in demanding that Scots keep their noses out of English affairs, it’s a bit rich of it now to state “of course, by ‘England’. . . we mean the whole of the United Kingdom”.

 

EU immemorial

The Mail is also wrong in arguing that “we are at a crossroads in our island history”. The suggestion that the choice is between “submitting to a statist, unelected bureaucracy in Brussels” and reclaiming our ancient island liberties is pure nonsense. In the long run, withdrawing from the EU will make little difference. Levels of immigration will be determined, as they always have been, mainly by employers’ demands for labour and the difficulties of policing the borders of a country that has become a leading international transport hub. The terms on which we continue to trade with EU members will be determined largely by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels after discussions with unelected bureaucrats in London.

The British are bored by the EU and the interminable Westminster arguments. If voters support Brexit, it will probably be because they then expect to hear no more on the subject. They will be sadly mistaken. The withdrawal negotiations will take years, with the Farages and Duncan Smiths still foaming at the mouth, Cameron still claiming phoney victories and Angela Merkel, François Hollande and the dreaded Jean-Claude Juncker playing a bigger part in our lives than ever.

 

An empty cabinet

Meanwhile, one wonders what has become of Jeremy Corbyn or, indeed, the rest of the shadow cabinet. The Mail’s “speak for England” leader excoriated him for not mentioning “the Number One subject of the hour” at PM’s Questions but instead asking about a shortage of therapeutic radiographers in the NHS. In fact, the NHS’s problems – almost wholly caused by Tory “reforms” and spending cuts – would concern more people than does our future in the EU. But radiographers are hardly headline news, and Corbyn and his team seem unable to get anything into the nation’s “any other business”, never mind to the top of its agenda.

Public services deteriorate by the day, George Osborne’s fiscal plans look increasingly awry, and attempts to wring tax receipts out of big corporations appear hopelessly inadequate. Yet since Christmas I have hardly seen a shadow minister featured in the papers or spotted one on TV, except to say something about Trident, another subject that most voters don’t care about.

 

Incurable prose

According to the Guardian’s admirable but (let’s be honest) rather tedious series celeb­rating the NHS, a US health-care firm has advised investors that “privatisation of the UK marketplace . . . should create organic and de novo opportunities”. I have no idea what this means, though it sounds ominous. But I am quite certain I don’t want my local hospital or GP practice run by people who write prose like that.

 

Fashionable Foxes

My home-town football team, Leicester City, are normally so unfashionable that they’re not even fashionable in Leicester, where the smart set mostly watch the rugby union team Leicester Tigers. Even when they installed themselves near the top of the Premier League before Christmas, newspapers scarcely noticed them.

Now, with the Foxes five points clear at the top and 7-4 favourites for their first title, that mistake is corrected and the sports pages are running out of superlatives, a comparison with Barcelona being the most improbable. Even I, not a football enthusiast, have watched a few matches. If more football were played as Leicester play it – moving at speed towards their opponents’ goal rather than aimlessly weaving pretty patterns in midfield – I would watch the game more.

Nevertheless, I recall 1963, when Leicester headed the old First Division with five games to play. They picked up only one more point and finished fourth, nine points adrift of the league winners, Everton.

 

Gum unstuck

No, I don’t chew toothpaste to stop me smoking, as the last week’s column strangely suggested. I chew Nicorette gum, a reference written at some stage but somehow lost (probably by me) before it reached print.

Editor: The chief sub apologises for this mistake, which was hers

Peter Wilby was editor of the Independent on Sunday from 1995 to 1996 and of the New Statesman from 1998 to 2005. He writes the weekly First Thoughts column for the NS.

This article first appeared in the 11 February 2016 issue of the New Statesman, The legacy of Europe's worst battle