25 Eric Lacey – Attitudes on Sex Work Legislation

Eric Lacey is from Camillus New York and is majoring in Political Science.  This work was prepared for Rena Holcomb’s ENG W20: Argumentative Writing.  Professor Holcomb states this work is, “Probably one of the more original and unexpected, well done student paper I have had the honor of reading and assessing.” 

Attitudes on Sex Work Legislation

Sex work legislation is a long-standing and widespread controversy. Prostitution, often regarded as the world’s oldest profession, involves an estimated one million workers and generates over $14 billion annually in the United States (Gale Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, 2023; Anderson, 2021). The literature repeatedly references criminalization, decriminalization, legalization, and abolition as common arguments for how to address sex work. Many advocates argue for decriminalization as a harm reduction method to improve safety (Albright & D’Adamo, 2017; Brooks-Gordon et al., 2021; Anderson, 2021; Vuolajärvi, 2022), while others assert that total abolition is needed to criminalize buyers (Farley, 2016). Less is known about how individual factors influence these arguments. To learn more about public attitudes toward sex work legislation, I conducted a survey research project hypothesizing that a personal connection to sex work influences the attitudes toward sex workers.

Method

The survey process began with a literature review of causes, consequences, and possible solutions related to sex work legislation. Langenbach et al. (2023) emerged early in search results as an example of survey research methods. In 2023, Langenbach et al. sampled German healthcare providers. Demographic questions included age, gender, level of education, profession, working area, and location, as well as the frequency of professional contact with sex workers. The “Attitudes Towards Prostitutes and Prostitution Scale” (Levin & Peled, 2011) was also adapted. Findings showed that providers who had more frequent professional contact with sex workers viewed sex work as a lesser choice (Langenbach et al., 2023).

The current survey design used the methodology of Langenbach et al. (2023) as a foundation. The survey began with a captcha verification question to help ensure that respondents were authentic humans and not spam, as recommended by Qualtrics. Some demographic questions were adapted from Langenbach et al. (2023) and styled using the language and formatting from the census (United States Census Bureau, 2020). Slider questions measured attitudes on sex work policy issues, causes, consequences, and solutions identified in a previous literature review. Formatting was similar to statements found in “Attitudes towards Prostitutes and Prostitution Scale” (Levin & Peled, 2011).

The survey link was distributed to this writer’s private Facebook account and two Reddit survey-sharing groups called r/SurveyExchange and r/SampleSize. Reddit approximates that the survey post received 8,900 views on r/SampleSize and 461 views on r/SurveyExchange. Although Facebook does not provide similar statistical data, 710 Facebook friends could hypothetically view and complete the survey for a total possible sample size of 10,071 respondents. This estimation is likely excessive as Reddit does not adjust for multiple views by the same user or views by the posting account. The survey received 200 responses between November 1 and November 16, 2024, for an estimated completion percentage of 1.99%.

Results

Of the total 200 responses collected, Qualtrics flagged four responses as potential bots and were discarded. The remaining 196 “quality responses” were used for data analysis. Respondents mostly identified as white (87%), non-Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish (92%), males (60%), and with a bachelor’s level education (32%). Some total demographic percentages exceeded 100% due to rounding and respondents identifying with more than one identity per demographic.

More respondents viewed sex work as a legitimate form of employment (N = 119, 79%) and sex workers as vulnerable victims of exploitation (N = 103, 68%). Most respondents favored legalization (N = 119, 81%) and decriminalization (N = 104, 70%) over criminalization (N = 16, 14%) and abolition (N = 17, 16%). This perspective extends to disagreement with penalizing sex work buyers (N = 92, 61%), buyers and sellers (N = 114, 75%), and individuals forced into sex work (N = 104, 69%). Interestingly, when respondents were asked about their level of agreement with sex work policies using a scale of 0 to 10, most selected the scale extremes of strongly disagree (N = 113, 22%) or strongly agree (N = 127, 25%).

In this sample, 31% of respondents participated or knew someone who participated in sex work, while 57% of respondents had no personal experience with sex work. Similarly,  Langenbach et al. (2023) found that  32% of providers had professional contact with sex workers. Respondents with personal sex work experiences were more likely to view sex work as a legitimate form of employment, view criminalization of sex work as a violation of constitutional rights to liberty and privacy, and favor decriminalization and legalization arguments than their counterparts without personal experiences. Respondents with personal sex work experiences were also less likely to view sex work as inherently harmful, spreading STIs and increasing human trafficking.

In contrast with Langenbach et al. (2023), respondents with personal sex work experience were less likely to view sex workers as vulnerable victims of exploitation. This result may be related to samples from different geographic locations. This means that the current survey was authored by a United States resident who was more likely to connect with respondents from the United States, while Langenbach et al. (2023) sampled German healthcare workers. It is also possible that the general public sees sex work as empowering, especially those from marginalized groups who benefitted from COVID-19’s increase in online sex work (Anderson, 2021). Langenbach et al. (2023) do not specify under what circumstances providers are working with sex workers. If providers are primarily seeing patients in emergency medical situations under distress, it is logical to see their patients as vulnerable victims of exploitation.

Causes

The argument for the legalization of sex work is founded on public health concerns and safety risks. Anderson (2021) offers a historical perspective where, during the Civil War, military resources were going toward the treatment of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) linked to prostitution, framing sex work as a threat to national security, resulting in anti-immigration legislation and criminalization. Research has since shown that public health concerns are unrelated to commercial sex work, as seen through the decriminalization of non-marital sex acts like adultery (Anderson, 2021). However, the public still associates sex work with an increasing STI incidence (43%).

The fear of increased human trafficking is another factor considered in sex work legal arguments (Albright & D’Adamo, 2017). Vuolajärvi (2022) found, however, that most sex workers in Sweden, Norway, and Finland were motivated by financial reasons, not trafficking, to engage in sex work. Niina Vuolajärvi has a Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology and is an Assistant Professor in International Migration at the Columbia University European Institute in New York, New York (London School of Economics and Political Science, n.d.). Most survey respondents (N = 124, 82%) agreed that most individuals are motivated by financial reasons, and 72% (N = 108) disagreed that sex work increases human trafficking.

Issues

Most of the literature reviewed defined decriminalization arguments based on critiques of criminalization (Brooks-Gordon et al., 2021; Anderson, 2021). In “Ending the War against Sex Work: Why It’s Time to Decriminalize Prostitution,” Linda Anderson relies on her expertise in law as a Juris Doctor and is a Professor of Law at Stetson University in Gulfport, Florida (Stetson University College of Law, n.d.). She argues that criminalization violates constitutional rights to liberty and privacy, to which 78% (N = 108) of respondents agreed. Brooks-Gordon et al. (2021) agree that the law should not intervene in the private lives of citizens. Belinda Brooks-Gordon has a Doctor of Philosophy in Forensic Psychology. She is a Professor of Forensic Psychology and Public Policy Professor at Birkbeck, University of London in the United Kingdom (Brooks-Gordon, 2024).

Other authors and approaches are less optimistic about discrimination’s ability to improve safety. In “Very Inconvenient Truths: Sex Buyers, Sexual Coercion, and Prostitution-Harm-Denial,” Farley (2016) argues that there is no evidence that legalizing or decriminalizing prostitution would make sex work safer. Melissa Farley holds a Doctor of Philosophy in Counseling Psychology. She also founded The Prostitution Research and Education, a nonprofit organization that conducts research, offers education, and provides consultation in San Francisco, California (Farley, 2019). Her argument is based on an article by Cho et al. (2013), where legalizing sex work increased human trafficking. Some ten years later, only 13% of survey respondents (N = 20) aligned with Cho et al. (2013) findings.

Solutions

Albright and D’Adamo (2017), Anderson (2021), Brooks-Gordon et al. (2021), Vuolajärvi (2022), and Farley (2016) all advocate for some form of sex work decriminalization, as well as 77% of survey respondents. Farley’s argument differs from other scholars by advocating for the complete abolition of sex work, specifying the decriminalization for only those individuals forced into sex work (2016). While 16% of respondents support abolition and 17% report that only those individuals forced into sex work should qualify for decriminalization, only 5% of respondents agree with both of Farley’s arguments.

The discourse surrounding sex work remains deeply polarized by both scholars and public attitudes. As highlighted, the ongoing debate encompasses various legal approaches—criminalization, decriminalization, legalization, and abolition—each presenting distinct implications for the safety and rights of sex workers. Advocates for decriminalization argue that criminalization fosters an environment of fear and distrust, leading to heightened risks for sex workers and perpetuating systemic inequalities. In contrast, abolitionists view any form of legalized sex work as inherently exploitative, calling for total abolition to protect vulnerable populations. Future research exploring how attitudes differ across various cultural and socioeconomic contexts and how exposure to public discourse would be valuable.

The revised survey is published, yet inactive to avoid collecting additional responses at https://iu.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV6F0Xr5JS4Ip6ZM2

References

Albright, E., & D’Adamo, K. (2017). Decreasing human trafficking through sex work decriminalization. Journal of Ethics, 19(1), 122-126. https://doi.org/10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.1.sect2-1701

Anderson, L. S. (2021). Ending the war against sex work: Why it’s time to decriminalize prostitution. University of Maryland Journal of Race, Religion, Gender, and Class, 21(72). https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/rrgc/vol21/iss1/5

Brooks-Gordon, B. (2024). Dr Belinda Brooks-Gordon – Academic, University Reader, Asst Dean for Science. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-belinda-brooks-gordon-16760210b/?originalSubdomain=uk

Brooks-Gordon, B., Morris, M., & Sanders, T. (2021). Harm reduction and decriminalization of sex work. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 18(4), 809–818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-021-00636-0

Cho, S.-Y., Dreher, A., & Neumayer, E. (2013). Does legalized prostitution increase human trafficking? World Development, 41, 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.06.005

Farley, M. (2016). Very inconvenient truths: Sex buyers, sexual coercion, and prostitution-harm-denial. Logos: A Journal of Modern Society & Culture. https://logosjournal.com/article/very-inconvenient-truths-sex-buyers-sexual-coercion-and-prostitution-harm-denial/

Farley, M. (2019). Melissa Farley CV 10-19 [Curriculum vitae]. Unpublished document. https://prostitutionresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Melissa-Farley-CV-10-19.pdf

Gale Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection. (2023). Prostitution and sex work. Cengage. https://www.gale.com/c/in-context-opposing-viewpoints

London School of Economics and Political Science. (n.d.). Dr Niina Vuolajärvi. https://www.lse.ac.uk/european-institute/people/vuolajarvi-niina/home.aspx

Stetson University College of Law (n.d.). Linda Anderson.https://www.stetson.edu/law/faculty/home/linda-anderson.php

Vuolajärvi, N. (2022). Criminalising the sex buyer: Experiences from the Nordic region. London School of Economics Women, Peace and Security Policy Brief Series. https://www.lse.ac.uk/women-peace-security/assets/documents/2022/W922-0152-WPS-Policy-Paper-6-singles.pdf