BODIES ACROSS BORDERS: EXPERIENCES OF TRAFFICKING AND MIGRATION

       Melissa Ditmore and Juhu Thukral

       ISSUE 2.4 (2007)

When people think of “human trafficking,” they generally imagine “sex slaves:” women and children, usually from Eastern Europe or Asia, forced into prostitution by a heavy who beats them and takes their money. This image conjures strong emotions and eclipses the reality, which is that people, including men, are trafficked into many labor sectors—construction, cleaning, manufacturing, sweatshops, agriculture, and sex work. People who leave their homes to move to another country are usually ambitious and are often the “go-getters” of their hometowns. Some anti-prostitution activists look at all migrant sex workers as trafficked, even when they don’t identify as trafficked themselves. Conceptualizations of trafficking have traditionally reflected sexist assumptions. The discussion often centers on the category of “women and children.” The UN has protocols both on “smuggling people” and another on “trafficking in persons.” At meetings to discuss these laws, it became clear that “trafficking” was the term used to discuss women and children, while “smuggling” was used to refer to men. The gendered agenda is clear in the title of the trafficking protocol, United Nations Optional Protocol to Prevent, Suppress, and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children. There is no gendered coda on the title of the Protocol Against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Air, and Sea.

These stereotypes—of women and children who are victims who need to be protected, in contrast with men who are self-motivated agents—get in the way of the real issues: migration within and across borders, travel restrictions, economic opportunity, and taking advantage of one’s situation. Media reports add to these stereotypes with salacious stories of girls forced into the sex industry, giving far less attention to other forms of trafficking.

       Recent Trafficking Cases

An activist from Cambodia recently described being duped and forced to work in a brothel the first time she left her family. Her story is common. “When I came back to Koh Kong with the owner, they forced me to put my thumbprint on paper to say that I borrowed money and that I owe an amount that I didn’t even know . . . They sold me to a brothel in Srae Ambel [a place known for crime, near the Thai border and not far from the beach resort of Sihanoukville]. My friend was also sold to another brothel. We both had to work hard day and night to send back money to the owner. If we had clients, it was OK, but if we had no clients, the owner beat us and blamed us and said ‘you cannot find money for me.’ Even if we were sick, they forced us to have sex with clients . . . Whenever I went outside, there was always a guard who followed me. I knew only that house in the whole year I lived in Srae Ambel.”

In one recent case here in the United States, an elderly Eastern European woman was brought to the United States by a relative. Upon arrival, the relative took her passport and then tore up her return ticket. The elderly woman was forced to be a domestic slave for the relative, who also found under-the-table outside work for her and kept all of her money. This case was exposed when the relative who enslaved her died after a long illness through which the trafficked woman cared for her. Because the trafficker died and there is no one to prosecute, the government does not want to help the trafficked woman stay in the United States. In the United States, a trafficker brought two teenage girls into the country claiming that he would help them get jobs and reunite one of the girls with her mother. He won their trust by creating personal relationships with both girls: he told one that he wanted to marry her and acted as a boyfriend, and created a platonic “older brother” friendship with the other. Ultimately, he sexually assaulted both girls and forced them to work against their will in a brothel. They were helped to escape by other sex workers: they then found someone on the street who spoke their language and assisted them.

Some Central American men involved in construction work in the United States are here illegally. An acquaintance from their hometown lent them the money for transportation to the United States and arranged for clandestine travel. When they arrived, they worked for his construction company for a few years without pay. They are in debt bondage and do not know how long it will take to “earn” their freedom. None of them have been willing to speak to police or press charges against the person who arranged their travel and work. Many keep working and do eventually earn money to send home to their families. Such remissions have vastly improved life in their hometown, making the trafficker a hero. This makes it even more difficult to confront this abuse.

       Government Response

The conservative movement in the United States and the current administration are prioritizing trafficking as an important human rights issue, and the United States is promoting anti-trafficking legislation around the world. However, this campaign against trafficking is really a campaign against sex work. All US government funds for anti-trafficking activities are given only to organizations that pledge not to support sex workers organizing. The majority of trafficking cases in the United States do not involve sex work, yet US government rhetoric on trafficking consistently focuses on it. In fact, policies that are ostensibly aimed at eliminating trafficking in persons adversely affect all sex workers around the world, the overwhelming majority of whom are not trafficked. This is part of a larger government campaign against sex outside of heterosexual marriage and is shown in the government’s campaigns against abortion, reproductive rights, condom promotion, and gay marriage.

One critique of the US strategy on trafficking comes from the government itself. In a July 2006 study, the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that all current estimates of the number of people trafficked into any kind of work, including sex work, are questionable: “The accuracy of the estimates is in doubt because of methodological weaknesses, gaps in data, and numerical discrepancies. For example, the US government’s estimate was developed by one person who did not document all his work . . .” The questionable numbers are also hard to compare. While the US government estimated that 68 percent of cross-border trafficking in 2003 involved commercial sex, the International Labour Organization estimated that 43 percent of cross-border and internal trafficking from 1995 to 2004 involved commercial sex. Moreover, girls, children, and trafficking itself were defined differently in each case. It is through this lack of clarity that some policymakers and advocates have been misled by these unreliable estimates into the belief that human trafficking and sex work are inextricably linked and that all sex work is coerced. The reality is very different.

Anti-prostitution rhetoric cannot be used constructively to address the issue of trafficking. Much research on sex work is widely viewed as flawed and inaccurate. Studies in radical feminist literature consistently violate the canons of objectivity in conducting social science research. In evaluating anti-prostitution literature, experts find that “[a]necdotes are generalized and presented as conclusive evidence, sampling is selective, and counterevidence is routinely ignored.” In light of the poor quality of research, scholars attribute government agencies’ use of anti-prostitution findings to political connections rather than academic integrity.

There is dubious or little indication that increased criminalization of sex work and clients decreases instances of abuse of sex workers. Treating human trafficking as the same as prostitution ignores the large population of victims trafficked into labor such as manual labor and domestic service. Defining sex work as identical to trafficking into sex work negates sex work as a voluntary choice, further criminalizes sex work, and exaggerates the negative conditions that harm sex workers. In most places, people who identify themselves as victims of trafficking to the police may be assisted, while those who do not are treated as criminals. This is an artificial distinction, forcing people to “choose” to be a whore or a victim.

       Migrant Sex Workers in New York City

In 2005, the Sex Workers Project released a report, Behind Closed Doors, in which we presented data from interviews with fifty-two sex workers who lived in New York City and worked in gang clubhouses, bars, hotels, nightclubs, and dungeons, as well as through the internet and other sex workers. Twenty-one of these fifty-two were migrant sex workers from countries in Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean, and Europe. These sex workers spoke openly of their reasons for doing sex work. Their stories highlight the wide variety of reasons for entering the sex industry.

Thirteen of the twenty-one sex workers from other countries who took part in the study had some form of legal immigration status, although not all were authorized to work in the country. Eight of the twenty-one were completely undocumented and had no legal status in the United States. Most entered the country legally with tourist or student visas, which they overstayed, while one, Maria, entered the country with no documents at all “by running across the border.” Four of the twenty-one migrant sex workers were trafficked into sex work, meaning they were coerced into working in prostitution.

       Reasons for Coming to America

Sex workers offered a wide variety of answers to the question of why they left their home countries, ranging from a lack of economic opportunities to enjoying greater freedom by avoiding discrimination and stigma based on gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Luciana said, “I had a friend from Brazil in New York City [who] told me to come here, that I could make good money. I was looking for change after my parents’ passing.” Transgender women and gay men reported that their families were ashamed and that they were discriminated against in their home countries. Scarlett came to the United States “for a new life” and to be accepted for “the way I was.” Grace said that “people didn’t understand that [I am] gay.” She added that her family would kill her and themselves if she had remained in the country as a woman.

The United States is a destination for immigrants from around the world, including migrant sex workers. When asked why they came to the United States, Connie and Emiko referred to the “American dream” and Maria said that “in the US . . . people have everything.” Some said that the “American dream” is inextricably linked to jobs and financial opportunities. Others referred to sexual freedom in the United States. Emiko came to the United States with a student visa—she talked about cultural forces making her want to leave Japan. For example, she felt too old there to be a single woman.

Twelve of the twenty-one immigrant sex workers described having some assistance during the migration process, ranging from consulting firms that arrange for visas, to people like “coyotes” who smuggle people across borders. Keiko said, “I applied to school and they [the consulting firm] issued the F1 Visa. They said they have some residence, so the first month or two you don’t have to worry about anything. If you pay this consulting it’s very easy.” Rita came to New York to escape from an abusive husband. It was her husband’s aunt who helped her arrange her visa and passport. The trafficked women came to the US through arrangements made by the people who trafficked them.

       Involvement with Sex Work

Sex workers interviewed for this report generally became involved in the sex industry for monetary reasons. Some turned to the sex industry out of desperation, such as Keiko, who said, “I didn’t know anything about how to make money, but I knew I needed to find out how to make money.” Others made a decision to utilize the sex industry rather than struggle in employment that did not pay them a living wage. Yoko said, “I was already working as a hostess in Japan, so I just started looking for it naturally in the US.”

The decision to enter the sex trade was not always an easy one for these migrants. For respondents who did not have legal immigration status or proper documentation, the ability to settle, find housing, and support themselves was compounded by fear of deportation and a lack of employment authorization. This led some participants to look at sex work as their best economically viable option. Respondents in this situation discussed the fact that they could work out of their apartments independently without involving an employer. In addition, many escort agencies and brothels do not check for legal immigration status.

Connie spoke of being “afraid to give fake papers” to a potential employer, saying that sex work seemed to be a better option than that kind of fraud. She was essentially weighing one unlawful act against another. This reflects an unexpected ethical decision in opting to enter the sex industry.

In making her decision, Connie also considered sex work to be more lucrative than other jobs available to her. Immigrant and undocumented respondents often spoke of the need for “work papers” and “a green card.” For example, Maria spoke of limited employment options, saying that “with papers, I could go more easily to school and apply for other jobs.” Grace worried that she “can’t find a regular job because [I’m] illegal . . . Can’t have health insurance.” Scarlett has a B.A., but says “I can’t get a job because of my [undocumented] status.”

Luciana spoke of her ambivalence about engaging in sex work to support herself: [I started] when I met Regina. I was a dog walker at the time. I was afraid at first and took a month to decide. I’d stripped before and worked in a restaurant/bar. I was a sex worker for a month, then didn’t do full service and started stripping again, but [it was] not enough money and too much talking/objectification, so I returned to sex work. I don’t do full service, only touching and blow jobs, everything but penetration and intercourse. I made a lot, $200 from no full service, so I wouldn’t go back to full service because I didn’t make more money doing it. I’m not comfortable with full service and I think guys prefer non-full service because it’s safer.

Perhaps one of the most significant findings among the immigrant respondents in the sample relate to the relationship between their motivation to engage in sex work and the remittances that they send home to their families in their countries of origin. Eight migrant sex workers reported sending money home to their families. Having immigrated to the United States for economic reasons and often having the pressure of supporting family members at home, a number of participants mentioned that sex work was the only work that would support their daily needs in the United States while allowing them to save enough money to send home. Because legal work was unavailable or did not pay enough to allow for this, a number of respondents turned to sex work for employment.

       Violence and Coercion

The four trafficked women spoke of experiencing coercion and slave-like conditions. Two of these women thought that they would be involved in other types of work and did not know that they were going to be involved in prostitution. The other two had worked as prostitutes in their native countries and knew that they were to continue as sex workers in the United States. However, they did not realize that they would be beaten or threatened, and have their money taken from them. For the women who did not know that they were going to be prostitutes, the act of engaging in prostitution itself was a violent one because they were being forced into having sex with customers against their will.

The sex workers who were not in abusive situations were very concerned about violence from customers, but the violent experiences that affected the trafficked women more deeply were the threats and assaults from the traffickers themselves. The women told of being threatened, beaten, raped, and having their money withheld by the traffickers as a means of keeping them in line. Belinda did report that occasionally johns “would get a little rough,” a sentiment echoed by Raquel. However, they were predominantly concerned with violence from the traffickers.

Thirteen of the twenty-one sex workers who were not US citizens described having concerns about their participation in the sex trade, especially worries about immigration policies and agents. This fear reflects a greater stress on sex workers who lack citizenship because they worry not only about police interference but also about the immigration consequences related to their work. In addition, Louise makes an important point, saying, “I worry [about immigration authorities] when I’m working, but it’s not my biggest concern. Safety is always my biggest concern.”

Migrants in the sex industry—like other migrants—pursue their dreams and make decisions that they hope will lead to financial opportunity and security for them and their families here and abroad. Trafficking in persons is a serious problem, but it by no means afflicts all migrant sex workers. Many migrants, including sex workers, speak of economic need and the desire to support their families, often in situations that offer them few options for financial freedom. US policies on migration and trafficking undermine security for all sex workers, including those who have been trafficked, rather than achieving their stated goals.

MELISSA DITMORE writes about gender, development, health, and human rights, particularly as they relate to marginalized populations such as sex workers, migrants, and people who use drugs. She edited the Encyclopedia of Prostitution and Sex Work. When her piece in this anthology was written, she was the coordinator of the Network of Sex Work Projects.

JUHU THUKRAL is a leading expert on the rights of low-income and immigrant women in the areas of sexual health and rights, gender-based violence, economic opportunity, and criminal justice. She is director of law and advocacy at The Opportunity Agenda, and is a founding Steering Committee member of the NY Anti-Trafficking Network. Juhu was the founder and Director of the Sex Workers Project at the Urban Justice Center in New York City.