Prostitution is virtually the only part of the personal services industry in the Netherlands that works. One can’t get a manicure in Amsterdam without booking an appointment two weeks in advance, but men can buy sex anytime — and at an attractive price. The legalization of prostitution in October 2000 merely codified a long-standing Dutch tradition of tolerance towards buying and selling sex. But is legalization the right approach?
Even in the Netherlands, women and girls who sell their bodies are routinely threatened, beaten, raped and terrorized by pimps and customers. In a recent criminal trial, two German-Turkish brothers stood accused of forcing more than 100 women to work in Amsterdam’s red-light district.
The attorney who represented one of the victims said that most of the women came from families marred by incest, alcohol abuse and parental suicide. Or they come from countries in Eastern Europe or Southeast Asia and have fallen victim to human trafficking, lured by decent job offers or simply sold by their parents.
These women are Amsterdam’s leading tourist attraction (followed by the coffee shops that sell marijuana). But an estimated 50 percent to 90 percent of them are actually sex slaves, raped on a daily basis with police idly standing by. It is incomprehensible that their clients are not prosecuted for rape, but Dutch politicians argue that it cannot be established whether or not a prostitute works voluntarily.
Appalled by their daily routine, police officers from the Amsterdam vice squad have asked to be transferred to other departments. Only this year, the city administration has started to close down some brothels because of their ties to criminal organizations.
A study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology found that the average age of death of prostitutes is 34. In the US, the rate at which prostitutes are killed in the workplace is 51 times that of the next most dangerous occupation for women, working in a liquor store. Other studies show that nine out of 10 prostitutes urgently want to escape the job. Almost half have attempted suicide at least once.
In 1999, the Swedish government decriminalized the sale of sex, but made it an offense to pimp or to buy sex. Under Sweden’s so-called “Sex Purchase Law,” paying for sex is punishable by fines or up to six months in prison, plus the humiliation of public exposure.
Swedish authorities say the number of prostitutes in Sweden has dropped 40 percent as a result. Human trafficking rings tend to avoid Sweden, because business has gone sour.
Norway, a country that has a reputation to lose when it comes to women’s rights, carefully compared the Swedish and Dutch models and concluded that Sweden’s was the one to follow. It has now changed its legislation accordingly.
The success of the Swedish approach is not so surprising. A study in California found that most men who bought sex would be deterred by the risk of public exposure. For example, 79 percent said that they would be deterred if there was a chance that their families would be notified. And a whopping 87 percent said that they would be deterred by the threat that the police might publish their photographs or names in the local newspaper.
Most of these men showed pathological behavior towards women. One in five admitted to having raped a woman, while four out of five said that going to prostitutes was an addiction.
Prostitution is often dubbed “the oldest profession.” But this is merely a way of justifying the exploitation of mostly vulnerable women (there is also a much smaller number of male prostitutes in the Netherlands, but they are not pimped out like female prostitutes). It takes leadership and a vision of true gender equality to put an end to prostitution.
The Swedish practice of naming and shaming is quite un-Dutch. But, for some men, part of the pleasure of buying sex may be the humiliation conferred on the woman involved.
For others, like former New York governor Eliot Spitzer, the promise of discretion and anonymity may be the most appealing aspect of buying sex. In any case, pillorying the clients is both a just punishment and an effective deterrent.
Heleen Mees is a Dutch economist and lawyer.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS