The first time I came across the labeling theory was in my second year sociology of deviance class. There are several theoretical perspectives and critiques when it comes to the labeling theory. Some of the names that come up when I think of labeling theories are Mead, Lemert, Becker, and most significantly, Ervin Goffman.
These two terms, defining and labeling, are almost synonymous to one another. It is almost as if the one cannot exist without the other. If you define one’s lived experiences, then you label their lived experiences and if you label one’s lived experiences, then you define their lived experiences. One does not exist without the other.
So what does defining one’s lived experiences mean, and what does it mean to label another person’s lived experiences? This question is extremely relevant to the Bedford case which is going to be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada in June (and to have your case go all the way to the SCC is pretty darn important).
Just recently, J. Wagner of the SCC denied leave to intervene to several prominent sex work organizations in Canada that would have represented the voices of sex workers from various geographic regions (Maggies, 2013) In Maggie’s press release, Kara Gilles, was quoted as saying, “When POWER and Maggie’s intervened in Bedford at the Ontario Court of Appeal, we were able to share sex workers’ perspectives and experiences that the Court would otherwise not have heard. It’s a shame that this time around, both sex workers and the judiciary will miss out.” And that is accurate on so many levels: both sex workers and the judiciary will miss out.
The fact that the judiciary denied leave to this coalition of sex workers is an act of defining and labeling in an extremely political sense. It says that this group is incapable of speaking or defining their own lived experiences and labeling their own lived experiences. More importantly, it says that this type of work isn’t real work.
From the principles of Maggie’s, sex work is real work and it is socially legitimate and valuable!
sex work
Decriminalization of Canada’s Anti-Prostitution Laws
Caught in human traffic Lies!
Here is a story that I read last week entitled “Caught in human traffic”. Coincidentally, I also happened to read it the day before I was presenting my paper on human trafficking of Indigenous women/girls which argues that these new anti-human trafficking legislation(s) and/or policies are in effect an attempt to control Indigenous women’s bodies/sexuality, and in a much broader significance, Indigenous sovereignty. I am not alone in this argument as Laura Agustin describes this social phenomena in similar terms. Smith on Agustin writes,
She said that the words “human trafficking” started entering the lexicon in a serious way around 2003 and 2004. Now, she maintained that the language is shifting to emphasize slavery. She bluntly described this movement as a colonial initiative. (Smith, 2011)
I was not impressed with the above LFpress story and the significant claim being made by the alleged victim in this story. After speaking to multiple mutual friends who both know the victim in this story and the dancer who committed suicide (who is mentioned in this story), I decided to write this blog post. The article reads,
Most importantly she throws a lifeline to the women being trafficked on the circuit she once worked. But sometimes the rope misses. “The hardest part is losing them,” she said, referencing a girl who hung herself three months ago. “Her stage name was Alex, but I want to say her real name out loud – it’s Michelle – because she was a real person,” said Stacey.
The suggestion that this victim knew Alex/Michelle well enough to know her reasons for suicide is a falsification of Alex/Michelle’s story to sensationalize the alleged victim’s own story to solidify the argument that human trafficking in London ON (or in Ontario in general). Most importantly, it is also a complete disregard for the families/friends of Alex/Michelle. I even commented on the article and another reader suggested that I was in denial that her suicide was connected to human trafficking. I can tell you right now that the suggestion that Alex/Michelle committed suicide because of human trafficking is a blatant lie. I can also tell you that the victim in the story did not know Alex/Michelle. In fact, she was not allowed in the club or anywhere near the club where Alex/Michelle worked (from a mutual friend who knows the victim and Alex/Michelle). So to suggest she tried to “save her” is another blatant lie. Also, the article has Alex/Michelle’s death date wrong because she died last August 2012 not three months ago. To put it plainly: another blatant lie, and she just doesn’t know what she is talking about when it comes to someone I lived with, was my neighbor, had a relationship with, knew her parents, was there for the birth of her child, and a magnitude of other life events.
This idea that anti-human traffickers make up statistics or stories or use the lives/deaths of people no longer around anymore always seem so distant to me. However, after reading this article, I knew that I had to do something; hence, I am writing this blog post.
I am not here to suggest that people who are exploited or victimized should not have their stories acknowledged; however, if claims are going to be made about certain populations then these claims need to be legitimate and not further exploited for financial gain which is what is happening here with this idea that human trafficking occurs in London ON. I wrote about the research that suggests that “1:5 in sex workers” are trafficked (you can read more HERE). There are huge amounts of government grants and research grants that are being poured into program planning and program implementation locally, nationally, and internationally. In fact, Agustin mentions that one does not even have to mention “trafficking” to receive funding. I guess that is why the research report that I cited in my previous blog post “Human Trafficking in London?!?!’ mentions “Aboriginal women” only briefly (I mean, there are loads of money pouring into organizations and institutions that seek to investigate the lives of this “vulnerable population.”). While describing the picture of two white-abled bodied men drawing attention to “vulnerable women,” Agustin writes,
They don’t mention trafficking too loudly, but that is now the keyword to access much funding for ‘women’s issues’. It wouldn’t matter that these two guys are unlikely to have met any trafficked victims or know what to do if they did.
Another issue that needs to be addressed with the anti-human traffickers’ crusade is the organizations involved. As state in the article, the alleged victim received help from the Salvation Army and is a member of the London Anti-Human Trafficking coalition (LAHTC). I had a class last year and it was entitled “Sociology of Deviance.” In this class I learned that the LAHTC argues that the strippers/exotic dancers who are being trafficked travel in groups along the Windsor Corridor which is also described in the LFPress article. The reason strippers/exotic dancers travel in groups to various clubs in Ontario is because it is safer! It can even be argued that it is suggested that non-sex work women should not travel alone or employ safe travel practices when traveling alone like changing rooms if a stranger over hears the hotel agent announcing the room in the lobby while presenting a room key to the female guest. So then why is there a difference in traveling advice/tips for sex workers? Must they absolutely travel alone in order not to be considered a trafficking vicim? Must they put the consideration of anti-human traffickers and their ideals of sex workers above their own income/employment by sticking to one club, absolutely?
Not only does the LAHTC propose outlandish ideas that suggest a sex worker is being trafficked, the training manuals that have been created also create problems for all those involved in this anti-human trafficking crusade. This short 6 minute video is a fine example of the problems associated with training for the rehabilitation of human trafficking victims:
Although not obvious, the training manual suggests that prostitution can be found at health clinics (???), and that God intended for sexual relations to only happen between man/woman (hello transphobia/homophobia), and the there needs to be a “restoration” of sexuality to this natural intention, and finally, what to expect from human trafficking victims: masturbation (!?!?!?), confused sexuality (!?!!??!), and STIs (!?!??!). So not only does it cause stigmatization among the victims, it assumes that the only way for a victim to be truly saved he/she must conform to societal gender/sex norms. It also suggests that all those in the sex industry have STIs. I always wondered where this idea came from and why the reader in the above LFpress article suggested that prostitution be legalized (not decriminalized which is what is really being asked of the courts with the Bedford et al. case before the SCC), and that all “prostitutes” should undergo mandatory STI testing–I guess this is where the idea originates from that all those involved even those who are considered human trafficking victims will have STIs which is also indicated in this US based website. Hello stigmatization!!!
In addition to the above paragraph, what is really alarming about this video is the role-playing suggestions for facilitators of groups and as the voice-over announces, “it is a perfect example of sexual exploitation” because the facilitator must call on a volunteer (actually a woman), then blindfold one and then gag the other, and having the gagged-other to call out for help. A big WHAT-THE-EFF! This training manual is the training manual of the same Christian/Faith based organization mentioned in the LFpress: the Salvation Army.
So hey people of London, while you read about these stories and these suggestions that human trafficking exists in Southern Ontario, please be critical of where you are reading the information, who is presenting the information because it is clear that the organizations involved will exploit the lives/deaths of others for their own agenda and own gain.
Human Trafficking in London ON?!?!
Just recently I had the opportunity to speak at an event on Kings Campus. This event was organized by one of my peers and we were having a discussion on Idle No More (www.idlenomore.ca), and after the event we had an opportunity for attendees to ask us questions or converse with us.
At one point I was congratulated on my opportunity to present at Flaunting It 9 (an undergraduate conference on main campus). My paper was chosen for this conference and I am speaking on “Human Trafficking and Indigenous Women in the 21st Century.” At the moment I announced this, I was immediately asked about what I thought of the recent article in the Metro newspaper on human trafficking in London which cites that one in five (1:5) sex workers are trafficked (read article HERE). I read this article before this young man had asked me about my thoughts on this and I knew well in advance how to answer this.
In addition to this, when people ask me what my thoughts are on human trafficking the first thing I ask them is “where do you think this problem comes from?” Almost everyone has no reply or no response, and I get it, they are probably not used of receiving that type of reply. They are probably confused with the term human trafficking too.
The current research that is being done in London ON on this subject is quite questionable. I am not saying that is shouldn’t be done or that those who experience victimization or exploitation should not have their experiences examined or investigated to further enhance the services available to them. What I am saying is that the research that is currently out there should not be blanketed on all those who are doing sex work.
That statistic that I quoted earlier is the one major issue I have with the discussions around human trafficking in London ON. This statistic was taken from the recent research done at My Sister’s Place (MSP) which is a social service agency that provides social supports, referrals and other services to women struggling with a range of issues including mental health, addiction, poverty, homelessness, and violence (Orchard et al 2012). The methodology states that “over half of the 100 women who come to the agency daily have taken part in the sex trade” and this statement is problematic in itself because how do the researchers conclude that over 50% of the women who enter MSP on a daily basis are have taken part in the sex trade? One possibly cannot determine this upon simply looking at an individual and one cannot determine if another has partaken in the sex work by a simple conversation–unless of course they asked every single women at MSP “are you in the sex trade?” upon entering. This was not the case as the data they collected only involved 33 semi-structure life histories and they only spoke with 23 women and of those 23 women, four categories of sex work emerged. Of those four categories, it was discovered that 4 of the 19 women who did sex work were forced whereby forced is defined as kidnapped, pimped, or coerced by a criminal organization. I find the sections dealing with human trafficking in the Criminal Code of Canada quite excessive. If the women were kidnapped/pimped/coerced, then there are already sections in the CCC to deal with those offenses.
In addition to this, the research indicated that there was an overrepresentation of Aboriginal women (25% interviewed but make up for 1.5% of London’s population. They do not account for this overrepresentation with being connected to the effects of colonialism (not once is this mentioned) and they ignore the fact that London is surrounded by some of Canada’s largest First Nations.
Much of the media’s focus on human trafficking in London has been focused on this research that was released last October 2012. However, to say that 1/5 women in sex work are being trafficked is not generalizable to sex workers in London ON. The research gathered their participants from an already vulnerable population and due to this fact, it is quite a reality that you are bound to find someone who has been exploited or victimized. As I stated earlier, I am not saying that this work shouldn’t be done. I am just saying that we have to be careful how we apply research to a specific population in a specific region. To say that 1/5 sex workers are trafficked in London is questionable.
Not only is this statistic questionable, but so is the suggestion that trafficking does happen in London. In the metro article, the police officer is quoted as saying that no charges for human trafficking have been laid and that these charges mostly end up as charges relating to assault and extortion.
Perhaps future research should include an accurate representation of sex workers in London and not just the most vulnerable and most visible. If the research being done on sex work is going to affect sex work, then the voice of all sex workers need to be included. Also, as a young Indigenous woman, I am tired of researchers that discuss Aboriginal women but the discussion remains lost or buried in the population being investigated. This was the case in this report since Aboriginal women and their experiences were only discussed briefly in the methodology section.
I thought I would write a brief blog post on this topic since it is coming up a lot in my life at the moment and since I will be presenting my paper on the topic this coming Friday. If you have any questions/concerns, please do not hesitate to leave a comment or contact me via twitter or Facebook.
Have a great day all!
Xo
Resources:
- Metro Article: http://metronews.ca/news/london/583628/violence-against-women-learning-network-addresses-human-trafficking-at-london-forum/
- LFpress Article discussing street based sex work and where the research report was first published: http://www.lfpress.com/2012/10/11/zeroing-in-on-londons-sex-trade
- Research report: http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/916/art%253A10.1007%252Fs13178-012-0097-y.pdf?auth66=1365102306_45602200f0d487f42c607b7e558d6bc1&ext=.pdf