by frog
So, the Press is trying hard to feed the moral panic surrounding the 2003 liberalisation of prostitution law by shouting in a headline this morning:
Number of prostitutes rises 40pc
The story, written by Colin Espiner, leads with:
A 40 per cent leap in the number of sex workers, along with a sharp rise in those working the streets, is concerning critics of the law decriminalising prostitution.
As police in Christchurch investigate the suspected homicide of a street worker, opponents of the Prostitution Law Reform Act are pointing to evidence in a new report that the number of sex workers on the streets and in unlicensed brothels is growing.
The Prostitution Law Review Committee’s benchmark report on the state of the sex industry in New Zealand, tabled in Parliament yesterday, will be used by lawmakers to decide whether changes to the act are necessary in 2007 or 2008.
The review committee’s report estimated there were 5932 sex workers operating in New Zealand in April last year, 10 months after the act was passed – up nearly 40 per cent from the 4272 identified in a 2001 police survey.
Well, the problem with the story is three-fold.
First, the research was specifically aimed at assessing the size of the sex industry in June 2003, when the law was passed, not after. While the telephone surveys of police districts were conducted in the months after the law came into effect, they were asked specifically to estimate the size of the sex industry at the time the law was passed.
Second, the report states specifically that any attempt to estimate the size of the sex industry shouldn’t be treated as having any precise statistical accuracy. The report’s executive summary states explicitly:
Any attempt to establish the size of the sex industry must be viewed with caution. It is an industry where much of its activity has been ‘hidden’ and the non-regulated and fluid nature of the industry means that any estimate will simply be an indication of actual numbers. In addition, limitations in the accuracy of data also mean that the findings in this report cannot be taken to be an accurate assessment of the size of the sex industry in New Zealand.
Third, the comparison Espiner tries to draw between this benchmarking exercise and a 2001 police survey is flat-out meaningless because the methodologies used for the two studies were vastly different.
This, of course, won’t stop moral panic erupting as a result of Espiner’s report, and other similar stories. United Future’s Larry Baldock told Espiner:
Everyone is saying there is an increase in young people on the street, which is the most dangerous part of this whole industry and which should not have been decriminalised. It’s absolutely nuts.
Well, no. But what is absolutely nuts is a debate about important social legislation taking place in an atmosphere of flat-out inaccurate and self-serving reporting.
Also, why this obsession with prostitute numbers? Why not do a survey of the number and type of people who use prostitutes? One suspects that whether it’s legal or not won’t change the urges of those people, mainly men, who decide to buy sex.
UPDATE: And, right on cue, United Future unleashes some of that predictable (and, indeed, predicted) moral outrage.
Published in Justice & Democracy | Media by frog on Tue, April 19th, 2005
Tags: environment
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
The Prostitution Reform Act did not legalise prostitution. It legalised brothel-keeping to help ensure some safety for those who go on the game. That was reinforced with all the OSH stuff thrown into the Act too.
I agree with your issue dissection, frog. Surveys and polling on hookers, or any black market endeavour, is like comparing the numbers of angels on assorted pinheads.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hi frogblog, I hope you are not trying to paint men as always being the villains in this sordid enterprise. The whole festering industry is founded on mutual exploitation. Men who reduce women to slabs of meat to be purchased. Cynical hookers who reduce men to ‘johns’ to be exploited for maximum cash. Pimps who are parasites on this rotten meat market. Instead of criticizing worrisome headlines or other’s moral stand, please state plainly whether you are willing to endorse/condone/legitimise prostitution. As the provious commenter noted, it has merely been decriminalised, not legalised. Do you think it is OK for Kiwis to sell their daughters on the streets? For pimps to hang around outside school gates? Do you think people who object are some kind of moralist puritans anti-fun wowsers? There’s a lot of subtext in your blog article. I think moral panic is warranted. Clearly you don’t mind the negative outcomes for real people, as long as your theory of sexual liberation is foisted upon a reluctant public.
http://www.stoptheabuse.org.nz/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Rude peasant, you raise a number of issues:
1) “I hope you are not trying to paint men as always being the villains in this sordid enterprise.”
Nope. There’s exploitation of both men and women by men and women in the prostitution industry. I was just making a statement of fact that most users of prostitutes are men. Nothing more, nothing less.
2) “Instead of criticizing worrisome headlines or other’s moral stand, please state plainly whether you are willing to endorse/condone/legitimise prostitution.”
If your question is, “do you support the decriminalisation of prostitution?”, then my answer is “yes”, because it does allow for sex workers to work in safer, cleaner conditions. If your question is, “do you personally think that the fact that there is prostitution is a good thing (morally, ethically, metaphysically, whatever)?” then I guess my answer would be, “in an ideal world, no-one would either want to buy or sell sex because everyone would be in some sort of loving relationship(s) in which they could fulfil their sexual needs, but we don’t live in an ideal world, and we’re thus not legislating for one.”
3) Do you think it is OK for Kiwis to sell their daughters on the streets?
Nope. Of course, no parent has a right to sell their daughters into prostitution, and I would hope the police would prosecute anyone doing this.
4) “Do you think it’s okay for pimps to hang around outside school gates?”
Nope. Of course adults shouldn’t be coercing children into prostitution, and I would hope the police would prosecute anyone doing this.
5) “Do you think people who object are some kind of moralist puritans anti-fun wowsers?”
No, not at all. I was simply making the point that exaggerating the prevelance of prostitution does public debate on the issue no-one any favours.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)