Week 3 - Nordic model of prostitution

Introduction

• Prostitution framed as a violation of women’s rights promotes an agenda against commercial sex, as seen in Sweden and Finland's policies.

• The Nordic model prioritizes criminalization of sex buyers, aiming for gender equality across the EU.

• Acknowledges a growing global trend towards the Nordic model, with countries like Canada and Ireland adopting similar laws.

• Critical gap exists between the law as planned and its enforcement, especially regarding migrants.

The Emergence of the Nordic Model

• The Nordic model combines feminist ideologies with welfare state principles

  • countries that are focus of this study all adopted some form o client criminalization while continuing to decriminalize the selling of sex

  • the client criminalization has background in feminism and welfare state ideology wherein commercial sex is regarded against the ideals of the welfare state and an expression of male domination

• Social movements since the 1970s have influenced perceptions of commercial sex as detrimental to women, essential for addressing gender inequality.

• Sweden’s Sex Purchase Act, passed in 1999, views sex work as an abuse of women’s rights and aims to decrease demand for commercial sex.

• The act serves both as a method for criminalizing clients and as a way to signal societal rejection of viewing women and girls as commodities

• The Nordic model’s emphasis on protecting women has an appeal in a media environment where sensationalist and violent accounts of sex trafficking.

Fieldwork conducted for the study

Overview of the study:

• multi-sited ethnography on commercial sex in the Nordic region

• fieldwork conducted between 2012-2018, totaling over 2 years of ethnographic research

• Countries studied: Finland, Norway, Sweden

Methods of fieldwork:

1. Ethnographic observations

   • conducted in diverse environments

     • social and healthcare providers for sex workers

     • nightclubs and streets environments where sex is sold

   • immersive participant observation to gain a nuanced understanding of the context

2. Interviews

   • 195 semi-structured interviews

   • 113 participants → individuals who sell sex

     • others included police, social and healthcare workers, and state officials in the field of commercial sex

   • Format:

     • most interviews were recorded

     • ranged from 30 min to 6 hours

     • some participants were interviewed multiple times

Key themes of the interviews:

• For individuals selling sex

  • Migration and work history.

  • Experiences of discrimination.

  • Interactions with police and other officials.

  • Views on laws regulating commercial sex.

  • Organization of commercial sex activities.

  • Aspirations and future plans.

• For social workers, healthcare providers, police, and policymakers:

  • Issues faced by people selling sex.

  • Legal frameworks and their enforcement.

  • Broader context of the commercial sex industry in the Nordic Region.

Demographic of participants:

• Countries of origins:

  • migrants: Russia, Eastern Europe (e.g., Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia), Latin America (e.g., Colombia, Brazil), Nigeria, Thailand.

  • Local: Finland, Sweden, and Norway.

• Diverse representation:

  • work setting: Street-based, online/indoor, parlors, and striptease clubs.

  • Legal status: Citizens, permanent residents, temporary residents, EU citizens, tourist visas, undocumented migrants.

  • Education and skills: Varied levels.

• Gender and age:

  • Predominantly women (109 participants).

  • Ages ranged from 20 to 64.

Recruitment methods:

• Through service providers and workplace observations

• via online platforms such as escort advertisements and discussion forums.

• Personal networks and informal contacts.

Focus of the findings:

• Scope and limitations:

  • Covers three countries but does not provide a full comparative analysis or detailed account of specific group conditions.

  • Emphasizes the Nordic model's implementation and its effects on migrants selling sex.

Findings

The Sex Purchase Act: Tensions and Experiences in Practice

• Sex Purchase Act: Central legislation in the Nordic model, aiming to criminalize the purchase of sex to protect those selling it, particularly women.

• Primary Aim: Framed as feminist-humanitarian, targeting buyers to reduce demand for commercial sex.

• Contradictions Observed: While claiming to protect sellers, the Act often increases risks, marginalization, and stigmatization for sex workers.

Key themes:

1. Contradictions in the Nordic Model:

   • Claims to protect individuals selling sex but results in greater control and insecurity.

   • Puts individuals selling sex in precarious positions without offering real safety or rights.

2. Impact on Work Conditions:

   • Street-Based Work:

     • Increased police monitoring leads to intimidation and psychological pressure.

     • Frequent identity checks can result in names being added to police records.

   • Indoor/Apartment-Based Work:

     • Enforcement discourages working in apartments or hotels due to criminalization of landlords and property owners.

     • Sellers are forced to vacate apartments and constantly relocate, creating instability.

   • Client Behavior:

     • Clients feel nervous about being caught, leading to rushed transactions and demands for outcalls.

     • Sellers often must accompany clients to unfamiliar and unsafe locations, reducing their security.

3. Relationship with the Police:

   • Sellers avoid contacting police due to:

     • Fear of eviction or deportation (for undocumented migrants).

     • Lack of protection against violence or robbery.

     • Discrimination or negative treatment by authorities.

   • Police often enforce laws in ways that reinforce stigma and insecurity for sellers.

4. Diverse Perspectives on the Sex Purchase Act:

   • Supportive Views:

     • Some believe it deters exploitative clients and offers protection against harmful individuals.

     • Those who have left the industry see it as a measure to discourage others from entering commercial sex.

   • Critical Views:

     • Many sellers believe the law increases stigma and endangers their safety.

     • Criminalizing clients pushes sex work underground, making it harder to negotiate and operate safely.

     • Emotional labor increases as sellers must portray themselves as "happy escorts" to appease clients.

Lina’s Perspective → A case study

• Background: Lina, a Latin American transgender woman in her 30s, working primarily in Norway and Sweden.

• Observations:

  • The law is contradictory: it appears to allow sex work but criminalizes key aspects of the practice.

  • Police use laws to enforce immigration checks and evict sellers from apartments.

  • Sellers face intimidation and psychological pressure from police interactions.

  • Fear of contacting police due to potential repercussions, such as deportation or eviction.

  • Uncertainty about rights in the face of police power.

Country-specific Implementation

1. Finland:

   • Criminalizes buying sex only in cases of trafficking or pimping.

   • Police focus on trafficking investigations, leaving sellers less affected by the law.

2. Norway:

   • Fully criminalizes buying sex.

   • Police use the law alongside anti-trafficking measures to conduct immigration checks and enforce third-party legislation.

   • Sellers experience psychological pressure from frequent identity checks and apartment raids.

3. Sweden:

   • Most active enforcement of the law.

   • Police use online advertisements to identify locations of commercial sex.

   • Focus on investigating trafficking and fining clients.

   • Sellers report feeling unsafe due to increased demands for outcalls and rushed negotiations with clients.

Safety and stigma issues:

1. Client Behavior and Seller Safety:

   • Increased client anxiety leads to unsafe practices:

     • Clients demand transactions in isolated locations.

     • Sellers spend more time per client, increasing exposure to risk.

   • Sellers feel less secure, especially during outcalls to unfamiliar places.

2. Stigmatization:

   • Sellers feel victimized by societal attitudes and police treatment.

   • Law intensifies negative perceptions of sex work, leading to increased discrimination.

   • Sellers often perform emotional labor to reassure clients of their independence and happiness.

3. Lack of Police Protection:

   • Sellers fear reporting violence or harassment due to potential legal or social consequences.

   • Instances of dismissive treatment by police, including cases where violence against sellers is trivialized.

   • Fear of attracting additional scrutiny from authorities (e.g., tax or child services).

Social and policy implications

• Broader Challenges:

  • Irregular migrants face compounded difficulties due to lack of legal protections and access to services.

  • Police enforcement often targets sellers rather than addressing broader issues like trafficking or client behavior.

  • Evictions and housing instability are common consequences for sellers.

• Public Perceptions:

  • Swedish opinion surveys indicate increasingly negative attitudes towards both buying and selling sex since the law’s implementation.

  • Sellers in Sweden report feeling judged and marginalized by society and service providers.

Different perspectives

Concluding insights:

• The Sex Purchase Act, part of the Nordic model, creates significant contradictions in its attempt to regulate commercial sex.

• While aiming to protect individuals selling sex, the law often exacerbates their vulnerabilities by:

  • Criminalizing clients and landlords.

  • Increasing sellers’ exposure to unsafe conditions.

  • Reinforcing stigma and limiting access to police protection and social services.

• Future reforms should address the law’s unintended consequences and focus on ensuring safety, rights, and dignity for all individuals involved in commercial sex.

Immigration Regulation and Market Access

Key issues faced by migrants in commercial sex

1. Restricted Access to Welfare and Labor Markets

   • Migrants, especially irregular ones, cannot access welfare services or enter formal labor markets.

   • Majority are in Nordic countries on tourist visas, or as residents of another EU/Schengen country.

   • Non-EU/Schengen nationals (third-country nationals) face additional restrictions and threats, including deportation.

2. Prioritized Policing

   • Migrants, especially third-country nationals, are frequently targeted by police for identity checks.

   • Deportations are common for third-country nationals if caught selling sex or suspected of it.

   • EU citizens selling sex face fewer restrictions and less police scrutiny compared to third-country nationals.

3. Deportation and Racialized Policing

   • Deportation is a constant fear, especially for Nigerians who report higher levels of police interaction and deportation than other groups.

   • Nigerians are frequently targeted through racialized policing practices.

     • Example: Police using escort ads to identify and deport third-country nationals.

     • Statistics in Finland show disproportionate deportation rates for Nigerians (70%) compared to Russians (30%).

4. Consequences of Deportation Threat

   • Fear of deportation discourages migrants from reporting violence or abuse.

   • Clients exploit deportability, using threats of reporting to immigration authorities to coerce migrants.

   • Women without EU citizenship experience higher levels of intimidation and harassment.

Case studies:

Impact on working conditions;

1. Forced Into Specific Hours and Areas

   • Nigerians work late at night (e.g., after 1 a.m.) to avoid police patrols.

   • Other groups, such as Russians and Romanians, work earlier without similar risks.

   • Police policies push Nigerians out of indoor workspaces (clubs, Internet) and onto the streets.

2. Obstacles in Reporting Abuse

   • Third-country nationals refrain from reporting violent clients due to fear of police.

   • EU citizens feel more empowered to report abuse due to greater legal protections.

Labor Market and exit challenges

1. Barriers to Formal Employment

   • Work permits are required in Finland and Sweden; in Norway, permits are limited to skilled workers.

   • Employers are reluctant to sponsor permits for third-country nationals.

   • Migrants like Lucy are trapped in commercial sex due to these barriers despite desiring regular work.

2. Failed Exit Strategies

   • Without access to permanent residence or state services, migrants find it nearly impossible to leave commercial sex.

   • Social workers report frustration with the inability to provide meaningful support to foreign nationals.

State policies and social interventions:

1. Nordic Differences in Social Support

   • Finland and Norway: Harm-reduction services (basic health, legal aid) available but limited.

   • Sweden: Focuses on "exit" through counseling and therapy, excluding harm reduction.

     • Migrants without permanent residence receive little to no aid except deportation assistance.

2. Victims of Trafficking (VoTs)

   • Reflection periods and temporary permits offered during criminal investigations.

   • Sweden does not grant permanent residence for VoTs, requiring deportation after six months.

   • Non-cooperative victims face immediate deportation.

3. Service Use Disparities

   • Migrants comprise ~79% of service users in Norway and Finland but only 30% in Sweden.

   • Swedish policies prioritize national citizens over migrants, worsening outcomes for the latter.

Overall effects of immigration regulation:

1. Exploitation and Vulnerability

   • Migrants face increased violence, harassment, and exploitation due to limited legal protections.

   • Fear of deportation prevents accessing police protection.

2. Systematic Marginalization

   • Racialized policing and unequal treatment exacerbate challenges for African migrants, particularly Nigerians.

   • Nordic welfare states fail to adequately address the needs of third-country nationals.

3. "Trapped" in Commercial Sex

   • Lack of labor market opportunities and restrictive immigration policies leave migrants few options outside selling sex.

   • Social support is often inaccessible, leaving migrants vulnerable and excluded from mainstream society.

Third-Party Regulation: Housing Challenges

Key focus:

• The third-party regulation targets pimps and traffickers but primarily affects sex workers, making housing difficult and precarious.

• Its enforcement varies across Sweden, Norway, and Finland, impacting the safety and well-being of those in the sex industry.

Impact of Third-Party Regulation on Housing

1. Purpose of Third-Party Laws:

   • Designed to criminalize those providing housing for sex work (e.g., landlords, hotels).

   • Supposed to target trafficking but disproportionately harms sex workers.

2. Sweden and Norway: Severe Housing Consequences:

   • Regular landlords and hotels face accusations of "pimping" for renting to sex workers, regardless of their knowledge or intent.

   • Police actively use these laws to evict sex workers.

     • Tactics include visiting homes, notifying landlords, or threatening legal action.

     • Hotels cooperate with police, maintain blacklists, and discriminate against known sex workers.

3. Finland: Milder Enforcement:

   • Liability for landlords requires proof of awareness or profits from sex work.

   • No landlord has been convicted; police rarely evict based on housing arrangements.

   • Despite this, police still contact sex workers via ads, risking deportation.

Examples of Third-Party Regulation in practice

1. Lina’s Experience in Norway:

   • Hotels discriminate openly (e.g., refusing rooms or assigning undesirable ones).

   • Hotels collaborate with police and civil organizations to identify and report sex workers.

2. Eliana’s Challenges:

   • Kicked out of rental apartments in Norway, losing deposits and income.

   • Could not sell services without stable housing, leading to significant financial strain.

3. Clara’s Story in Oslo:

   • Shared a single room with nine people, engaging in "sleeping rotations."

   • Paid inflated rents through exploitative arrangements due to lack of alternatives.

4. Julia’s Vulnerability:

   • Lived with an old, disabled client in exchange for caregiving services.

   • After his death, faced unstable housing and high shared-room rents (e.g., €350/month).

Broader impacts:

1. Exploitation and Increased Pimping:

   • Informal housing markets flourish, with landlords charging exorbitant rents.

   • Housing deals often involve coercive or exploitative practices, including sexual exchanges.

2. Violence and Fear of Reporting:

   • Fear of eviction or deportation prevents sex workers from reporting violence or robbery.

   • Operation Houseless (Norway): Active eviction campaigns left sex workers vulnerable to violence and exploitation.

3. Heightened Risks for Migrants:

   • Foreign nationals face dual threats: loss of housing and deportation.

   • Vulnerability heightened due to inability to seek protection from police.

Comparison between countries

Key consequences:

1. Housing Insecurity:

   • Displacement to informal, often unsafe housing arrangements.

   • Increased financial exploitation and dependency on precarious networks.

2. Safety Concerns:

   • Third-party laws inadvertently increase risks of violence and harm.

   • Fear of eviction limits access to legal protections.

3. Structural Disempowerment:

   • Policies undermine sex workers’ autonomy and increase reliance on exploitative arrangements.

   • Particularly harmful for migrant women, compounding their vulnerabilities.

Critical analysis:

• Unintended Outcomes: While aimed at reducing trafficking, third-party regulations exacerbate sex workers’ vulnerability and perpetuate conditions they seek to eliminate (e.g., pimping, exploitation).

• Policy Implications: Highlights the need for reform to address the indirect harms caused by criminalization and to ensure basic rights like housing and safety are upheld for sex workers.

Discussion

Overview of the Nordic Model:

• Contradictory Outcomes:

  • Stated Aims: Protection of women selling sex, gender equality, and abolition of commercial sex.

  • In Practice: Migrants face deportation, evictions, and difficult living conditions; governance shifts focus to immigration control.

• Key Tensions in the Model:

  1. Protection of Women: Through the Sex Purchase Act and third-party laws.

  2. Exclusion of Migrants: Driven by immigration policies (Aliens Act).

  3. Abolition of Commercial Sex: Enforcement often prioritizes punitive measures over protective ones

Double Standards in Application:

• Migrants vs. Nationals:

  • Migrants: Face deportation and exclusion from welfare services.

  • Nationals: Access to social benefits but still risk punitive measures like child custody loss.

• Governance Shift:

  • From prostitution regulation to immigration enforcement.

  • Especially harsh on non-EU migrants who are effectively criminalized.

Implementation Across nordic countries

• Sweden:

  • Strongest ideological adherence to abolition of commercial sex.

  • High public support for the Sex Purchase Act.

  • Broad policing involves state agencies, NGOs, hotels, and other entities.

• Norway:

  • Less ideological commitment, but practices heavily target migrants.

  • Regulations often fueled by anti-immigrant sentiments.

  • Policing includes evictions and deportations under broad third-party laws.

• Finland:

  • Partial criminalization (e.g., public spaces restricted under Public Order Act).

  • Policing is less repressive for indoor sellers compared to Sweden and Norway.

  • Focus on regulation rather than abolition, leading to relatively better conditions.

Key findings on third-party regulation:

• Evictions:

  • Pushes individuals into insecure, exploitative housing.

  • Fear of eviction prevents reporting violence and seeking protection.

• Increased Pimping:

  • Paradoxically fosters exploitative arrangements with third parties (e.g., landlords, informal networks).

  • Examples include exploitative rents or compensating with sexual services.

• Institutional Barriers:

  • Migrants face barriers to legal employment, leading to dependency on informal networks.

  • Welfare services focus on "exit strategies" or "tickets home," rather than harm reduction.

Punitivist Humanitarianism

• Definition: Governance framed as "protection" but primarily punitive and exclusionary.

  • Combines surveillance, policing, and violence under a guise of care.

  • Moral Justification: Abolition of commercial sex seen as advancing gender equality.

• Examples of Punitivism:

  • Deportations and evictions.

  • Limited support for migrants beyond a return home.

  • Exclusion of marginalized groups from rights and protections.

Underlying ideologies and critiques

• Feminist-Humanitarian Framework:

  • Rooted in advancing gender equality and protecting women from exploitation.

  • Critiqued for "selective feminism" that benefits nationals while marginalizing foreigners.

• Humanitarian Governance:

  • Aligns with broader global trends of moral sentiment politics (Fassin, 2012; Ticktin, 2011).

  • Focuses on saving victims rather than empowering individuals or addressing structural inequalities.

  • Reproduces racial, gendered, and geopolitical hierarchies.

• Role of Media and Public Perception:

  • Sensationalist campaigns around trafficking emphasize victimization over rights-based solutions.

Structural Inequalities and Global Context

• Drivers of Migration and Exploitation:

  • Inequalities in global wealth distribution.

  • Restrictive immigration policies contribute to exploitation.

• Overlooked Aspects in International Debates:

  • Focus on humanitarian aims while ignoring punitive and exclusionary outcomes.

Conclusion:

• Punitivist Humanitarianism: The Nordic model is a mechanism of governance that uses the language of care and protection while implementing punitive measures.

• Paradox: It seeks to eliminate commercial sex but creates conditions that foster exploitation and inequality.

• Critical Reflection: Advocates for the model must recognize and address its destructive impacts on marginalized populations, particularly migrants and non-nationals.