Sex Work and Perspectives of Gender and Public Policy

This essay explores the intricate relationship between sex work, gender perspectives, and public policy in Canada, particularly in light of the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Bedford v. Canada. This landmark ruling highlighted the impact of Canadian prostitution laws on sex workers, emphasizing the need for a reevaluation of these laws to ensure the rights and safety of individuals engaged in the sex industry.

The case was brought forth by three plaintiffs—Terri-Jean Bedford, Amy Lebovitch, and Valerie Scott—who argued that existing prostitution laws infringed upon their rights to security and personal safety. The laws in question included prohibitions against operating common bawdy-houses, which compelled sex workers to negotiate prices in private settings, often leading them into unsafe environments. These spaces not only heighten the risk of violence but also leave sex workers vulnerable to exploitation.

Another significant prohibition is the criminalization of living on the avails of prostitution, which effectively prevents sex workers from establishing safe working conditions. This law prohibits individuals from hiring bodyguards or implementing security measures, further endangering their safety. Additionally, the ban on communicating for the purpose of prostitution in public spaces creates barriers for sex workers in forming families and having children, further exacerbating their marginalization.

Implications of Bill C-36

In response to the Bedford ruling, former Justice Minister Peter McKay introduced Bill C-36 on December 6, 2014. This legislation sought to regulate the sex industry through the Criminal Code of Canada, aiming to protect both sex workers and those who purchase sex. However, the bill criminalized several aspects of sex work, including:

• The purchase of sexual services
• Gaining material benefit from sex work
• Advertising sexual services
• Communicating for the purpose of prostitution in public

While the stated objective of Bill C-36 was to provide protection, it effectively rendered prostitution illegal and marginalized sex workers further. This legislation has opened up discussions around organized crime, health safety, human trafficking, abuse, and violations of human rights—issues that policymakers must address both nationally and internationally.

Consequences of Criminalization

The criminalization of sex work has led to a lack of government support for sex workers, leaving them without access to essential services such as mental health support and safe working environments. The absence of regulation means that sex workers often operate in clandestine conditions, exposing them to violence and abuse. The stigma associated with sex work further complicates matters, as societal perceptions often label sex workers as unworthy or immoral. This negative portrayal is perpetuated by media narratives that depict prostitutes as drug addicts or criminals, reinforcing the cycle of marginalization.

The criminalization of prostitution has also distorted public perceptions, leading to a culture where sex workers are seen as victims rather than individuals exercising agency. This perspective shifts blame from perpetrators of violence to the sex workers themselves, further complicating efforts to improve their conditions. The media often portrays sex workers as vulnerable and in need of rescue, rather than acknowledging the systemic issues that contribute to their marginalization.

The Need for Decriminalization

To create a safer and more equitable environment for sex workers, it is essential to decriminalize prostitution. Doing so would allow for the implementation of regulations that can protect sex workers' rights and well-being. Decriminalization would facilitate:

• Access to health services and support
• Regulation of brothels and working conditions
• Reduction of stigma and societal discrimination
• Creation of safer working environments

By decriminalizing sex work, the government can foster a more stable relationship between itself and the sex industry. This change could lead to better resource allocation, improved safety measures, and ultimately a healthier outlook on sex work as a legitimate profession.

Conclusion

The discourse surrounding sex work in Canada is deeply intertwined with issues of gender, public policy, and human rights. The existing laws, particularly following the enactment of Bill C-36, have created an environment where sex workers are subjected to violence, exploitation, and social stigma. A reevaluation of these laws is not just a legal issue but a matter of safety and human dignity. It is imperative for policymakers to consider the voices of sex workers and engage in meaningful dialogue to create a legal framework that prioritizes their rights and well-being.

In conclusion, addressing the complexities of sex work through a gendered lens and public policy perspective is essential for fostering a society that values the safety, autonomy, and rights of all individuals, particularly those in the sex industry.

References:

• Bedford v. Canada, Supreme Court of Canada, 2013.
• Bill C-36, An Act to amend the Criminal Code in response to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Bedford v. Canada, 2014.
• Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform. (2020). The Impact of Criminalization on Sex Workers.
• Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. (2019). Sex Work and the Law in Canada.