Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T15:18:40.573Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Governing Prostitution: New Formations, Old Agendas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2014

Jo Phoenix
Jo Phoenix
Affiliation:
School of Applied Social Sciences, Durham University, 32 Old Elvet, Durham, DH1 3HN,United Kingdom, email: Jo.Phoenix@durham.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent governmentality literature distinguishes between government from above and government “from below” in an attempt to avoid “top-down” analyzes of state-centered government and to acknowledge the multiple and diverse ways in which the governance is achieved. By analyzing key shifts and changes in the regulation of prostitution in the UK in the last three decades, it is possible to complicate the distinction between the two modes of government. Whilst some writers highlight the ways in which government from above and below become increasingly blurred, this article argues that although the agendas and modes of government from above and below are difficult to disentangle, the effects on sex workers are not. Regulation remains rooted within coercive and punitive state-centered criminal justice responses, even though organizations “from below” may well be the very organizations tasked by the state with carried out those responses.

Résumé

Les travaux récents sur la gouvernementalité distinguent comment celle-ci peut s'exercer «d'en haut» comme «d'en bas» afin d'éviter des analyses verticales de l'État et de reconnaître les modalités multiples d'expression de ce pouvoir. En analysant des mutations clé de la régulation de la prostitution au Royaume-Uni depuis trois décennies, il est possible de compliquer la distinction entre ces deux modes de gouvernance. Bien que plusieurs auteurs soulignent que la distinction est de plus en plus brouillée entre ces deux modes, nous soutenons que s'il est difficile de débrouiller les programmes de gouvernement «d'en haut» et «d'en bas», ce n'est guère le cas dès qu'il s'agit des conséquences sur les travailleuses du sexe. La régulation demeure enracinée dans les réactions coercitives et punitives de la justice pénale, même si les associations «d'en bas» peuvent être chargées par l'État de les exécuter.

Type
Urban Governance and Legality from Below/Gouvernance Urbaine et Légalité d'en Bas
Information
Canadian Journal of Law and Society / La Revue Canadienne Droit et Société , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , August 2007 , pp. 73 - 94
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Law and Society Association 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Stenson, K., “Sovereignty, Biopolitics and the Local Government of Crime in Britain” (2005) 9:3Theoretical Criminology 265 [Stenson, “Sovereignty”]CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Stenson, K., “Beyond Histories of the Present” (1998) 27:4Economy and Society 333 [Stenson, “Beyond”]Google Scholar.

3 Stenson, “Sovereignty”, supra note 1 at 272.

4 Stenson, “Beyond”, supra note 2 at 348.

5 Ibid. at 348-9.

6 Ibid. at 335.

7 United Kingdom, Home Office, The Wolfenden Committee's Report on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution (London: HMSO, 1957)[Wolfenden Report]Google Scholar.

8 Street Offences Act, 1959, c. 57.

9 Wolfenden Report, supra note 7 at 9–10.

10 Ibid. at 10.

11 Ibid. at 82.

12 Ibid.

13 Self, H., Prostitution, Women and the Misuse of Law (London: Frank Cass, 2003)Google Scholar.

14 The Wolfenden Report was implemented with the Street Offences Act 1959. However, the Sexual Offences Act 1956 also consolidated some prostitution-related offences and made it illegal to control the activities, live on the immoral earnings or procure a prostitute. As will be seen later in the article, these provisions protecting women in prostitution are not policed at the same rate or level.

15 Matthews, R., “Beyond Wolfenden” in Matthews, R. & Young, J., eds., Confronting Crime (London: Sage, 1986) [Mathews, “Beyond”]Google Scholar; Edwards, S., Sex, Gender and the Legal Process (London: Blackstone Press Limited, 1997)Google Scholar; Phoenix, J., Making Sense of Prostitution (London: Palgrave, 2001) [Phoenix, Making Sense]Google Scholar; Sanders, T., Sex Work: A Risky Business (Collumpton: Willan Publishing, 2005)Google Scholar.

16 Matthews, “Beyond”, Ibid.

17 Source: United Kingdom, Office for Criminal Justice Reform, Home Office.

18 Edwards, supra note 15.

19 Smart, C., Law, Crime and Sexuality: Essays in Feminism (London: Sage, 1995)Google Scholar; Phoenix, supra note 15.

20 Phoenix, J. & Oerton, S., Illicit and Illegal: Sex, Regulation and Social Control (Collumpton: Willan Publishing, 2005)Google Scholar.

21 See Matthews, “Beyond”; Phoenix, Making Sense, supra note 15.

22 Walkowitz, J., Prostitution and Victorian Society: women, class and the state (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Roberts, N., Whores in History (London: Harper Collins, 1992)Google Scholar; O'Neill, M., Prostitution and Feminism, (London: Polity Press, 2001)Google Scholar; ECP, “Campaigning for Legal Change” in Scambler, G. & Scambler, A., eds., Rethinking Prostitution (London: Routledge, 1997)Google Scholar.

24 ECP, Ibid.

25 Phoenix, Making Sense, supra note 15.

26 One of the contradictions at this point in the analysis is that at least in its early manifestations, the new sexual health agenda was part and parcel of government of above. It was located within the Department of Health and had as its object the creation of self-regulating individuals who posed no threat of health to the body of the general populace. In this respect, there is little to distinguish the early sex health agenda (and the workings of the various organisations connected with it) from other shifts in modes of neo-liberal governance that deploy strategies of individual responsibilisation.

27 See also Matthews, R., “Policing Prostitution: Ten Years On” (2005) 45 British Journal of Criminology 877 [Matthews, “Policing”]CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 Source: United Kingdom, Criminal Justice Reform Group, Home Office.

29 See especially Matthews, “Policing”, supra note 27.

30 Lee, M. & O'Brien, R., The Game's Up: Redefining Child Prostitution (London: The Childrens' Society, 1995)Google Scholar.

31 Van Meeuwen, A. et al. , Whose Daughter Next? Children Abused Through Prostitution (Barnardos: Ilford, 1998)Google Scholar.

32 United Kingdom, Department of Health, Home Office, Safeguarding Children in Prostitution (London: HMSO, 2000) [Safeguarding Children]Google Scholar.

33 Ibid. at 3.

34 I am not challenging the veracity of claims about the victimisation of young people and children who sell sex. Rather, I am pointing to the difficulties inherent in reducing their social experiences and existence to their status as victims.

35 For a fuller explanation, see Phoenix, J., “Youth Prostitution Policy Reforms: New Discourse, Same Old Story” in Carlen, P., ed., Women and Punishment: A Struggle for Justice (Collumpton: Willan Publishing, 2002) [Phoenix, “Youth Prostitution”]Google Scholar.

36 Ibid.

37 Safeguarding Children, supra note 32 at 27–8.

38 On publication of the White Paper for the Sexual Offences Act 2003, Protecting the Public, the then Home Secretary David Blunkett announced the government's intention to investigate the possibility of piecemeal reform to prostitution related offences. The intention was only to “examine the scope for a review of the issues surrounding prostitution and the exploitation, organized criminality and class A drug abuse associated with it” (Home Office, 2002 at 31). Subsequently, the resulting consultation document, Paying the Price (2004) sought input only in regards to three areas: (i) preventing young people's coercion into or exploitation in prostitution; (ii) protecting and supporting those adults already involved and in ways which would help them leave; and, (iii) providing justice for families and communities “blighted” by prostitution and against pimps, traffickers and exploiters. In January 2006, the New Labour government announced the outcome in a document entitled A Coordinated Prostitution Strategy and a summary of responses to Paying the Price. The document drew together descriptions of existing provisions and made recommendations as to how statutory and voluntary organizations should respond to the issues raised by prostitution. It made no suggestions for radical reform, although it did signal the intention of government to introduce primary legislation to address the gendered nature of some of the prostitution-related offences as well as to change the legal definition of a brothel to facilitate safer working environments for indoor sex workers.

39 United Kingdom, Home Office, A Coordinated Prostitution Strategy and a summary of responses to Paying the Price (London: The Stationary Office, 2006) at 1 [A Coordinated Strategy]Google Scholar.

40 United Kingdom, Home Office, Paying the Price: a consultation document (London: The Stationary Office, 2004) [Paying the Price]Google Scholar.

41 Ibid. at 55.

42 Phoenix, Making Sense; Sanders, supra note 15.

43 A Coordinated Strategy, supra note 39 at 37.

44 Ibid. at 39.