An interesting exchange posted at Sex Worker Problems raises what seems like an imminently testable research question into whether or not sex-work legalization increases or decreases worker safety. First, here's the post
Anonymous asked
I am a dancer. Yes, though I may face social stigma as well, my cash flow is at least legal, so I couldn't even imagine the terror of possibly facing legal issues to earn my income. Out of curiosity... is the issue of illegality daunting/frustrating/scary? --- Much love and respect. This blog is amazing.
Thank you so much! The issue of illegality IS really daunting and scary. There are of course all kinds of resources for sex workers to do their best to screen clients, but yeah, the likelihood that a cop or a serial killer might be the next person you meet is… well it’s not high, really, but it’s much higher than it is in a lot of other occupations.
Source: Sex Worker Problems
And now here's the research question. Two questions, really. Ok, actually maybe a whole series.
First, what are the assault, robbery, on the job harassment, and law-enforcement-action rates against dancers vs. otherwise comparable non-dance customer-contact employees (wait staff, bartenders, greeters, etc.) in "strip clubs?"
Next, what are the assault, robbery, harassment, and law-enforcement-action rates against dancers vs. otherwise comparable non-dance customer-contact employees in non-"stripper" bars and nightclubs?
In both these cases, above, both indicated professions are legal. (The comparisons would be even more informative if data could also be gathered in areas where dancing is not legal.)
Next question, slightly further afield:
What are the assault, robbery, harassment, and law-enforcement-action rates against "escort" sex workers vs. otherwise comparable non-dance customer-contact workers who work in similar circumstances (e.g. massage therapists, housecleaners, or even legal "strip-o-gram" delivery persons.)
Offhand my guess would be that in all cases where both sets of professions are legal rates will be fairly similar. My further guess would be that in all cases where one set of professions is legal but the other is not, workers in the non-legal arena are subject to considerably greater jeopardy.
I'm... pretty sure the results would not be prediction-defying. It's also entirely possible that the research has already been done.
Still, considering the rather incessant drumbeat about the relative perils of legalized vs. non-legal sex work it would be nice to have some solid data to base actual policy on.
Tags:
You think that strippers, in
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 2012-02-02 23:56.You think that strippers, in places where stripping is legal, don't get assaulted any more than, say, bartenders at ordinary nightclubs?
That can't be true. Anyone -- any woman in particular -- whose job involves presenting herself in a sexualized way is going to be seen as less of a person and more of a sex object than someone whose job isn't sexualized, and that's bound to affect assault rates.
When strip club customers get grabby, maybe their grabbiness does overflow onto the non-stripper employees; maybe they even grab them just as much as the strippers. But in non-strip clubs, they don't get as grabby as often. And they certainly don't get as grabby in spas and massage clinics. I'm not saying assault doesn't happen there, but I'm sure it can't be as common in places where the workers aren't being sexualized.
You know, there are places
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 2012-02-03 01:01.You know, there are places where prostitution *is* legal. Why not look at their overall rates of violence for comparable professions?
Of course this is also an
Submitted by figleaf on Fri, 2012-02-03 14:45.Of course this is also an excellent idea. I had been thinking in strictly local terms where other conditions would tend to be easier to factor out. And also staying local would tend to make it logistically more feasible for small-scale researchers. But no reason not to compare across regions or nationalities if resources were available to do so. Thanks, Anonymous(2). --fl
Hi, Anonymous. A couple of
Submitted by figleaf on Fri, 2012-02-03 11:02.Hi, Anonymous. A couple of quibbles before I get to my main point: I'm not at all sure that "cocktail waitresses" or "hooters girls" or ordinary "go-go" dancers are significantly less sexualized than dancers in strip clubs. Second of all, while I agree that dancers are more *overtly* sexualized than other kinds of "show girls" I have never heard anyone say that policies or bouncers in strip clubs are more lenient than the ones in regular bars. This is not to say women in one kind of establishment are respected more than in another (based on my experience in the "hospitality" industry I'd say neither) and nor do I think workplace sexualization of employees is a good thing, period. But in terms of pure physical safety on and around the job I wouldn't be sure that non-dancers are really better off than dancers industry-wide.
BUT!
That's all quibbling. My real point in the post was... we shouldn't have to guess! It's an experiment that could be conducted by undergrads in public safety or sociology. I'm sure either way we'd both prefer to have solid numbers either to back us up or let us down. Thanks! --fl