Background

Sex work has a long history and takes different forms, but the associated precarity and danger, particularly where poorer women and minorities are concerned, is undeniable. There is growing evidence that decriminalisation reduces harm, and, indeed, it is the policy approach favoured by sex worker groups. Despite this, many feminists instead seek to “end demand” for paid sex, recommending legal penalties for sex buyers, with the aim of abolishing sex work altogether.

Method

This paper takes a comparative approach, examining why “end demand” is applied to sex work but not to care work. Abolition is typically justified both in terms of reducing harm to sex workers and to women more generally, with sex work’s very existence being thought to perpetuate the notion that all women are “sex objects.” Women are, however, not only exposed to harm within care work but are also commonly stereotyped as care givers, and in a way that has similarly been argued to contribute to gender inequality.

Results

By comparing sex work with care work, this paper reveals the logical inconsistency in the “end demand” approach; unlike with sex work, there is little push to criminalise those who purchase care or other such domestic labour services. By revealing the moral nature of abolitionist arguments, and the disrespectful way in which sex workers are characterised within radical feminist literature, it argues that, rather than reducing harm, the “end demand” approach perpetuates harm, conspiring in the notion that “immodest” women are the cause of social ills.

Conclusions

Reducing the harm that sex workers—and women more generally—face requires feminists to challenge “the cult of female modesty”, rather than to be complicit in it.

中文翻译：

---

去罪化如何减少性工作内外的危害：作为女权主义形式的“女性谦虚崇拜”的性工作废止主义

背景

性工作历史悠久，形式多样，但相关的不稳定和危险，尤其是在贫困妇女和少数族裔方面，是不可否认的。越来越多的证据表明，去罪化减少了伤害，事实上，这是性工作者团体所青睐的政策方法。尽管如此，许多女权主义者反而寻求“终止对有偿性行为的需求”，建议对性购买者进行法律处罚，目的是完全废除性工作。

方法

本文采用比较方法，研究为什么“最终需求”适用于性工作而不适用于护理工作。在减少对性工作者和更普遍的女性的伤害方面，废除死刑通常是合理的，性工作的存在被认为使所有女性都是“性对象”的观念永久化。然而，女性不仅在护理工作中受到伤害，而且通常被定型为护理者，并且同样被认为会导致性别不平等。

结果

本文通过比较性工作与护理工作，揭示了“最终需求”方法的逻辑不一致；与性工作不同，几乎没有推动将购买护理或其他此类家政服务的人定为刑事犯罪。通过揭示废奴论点的道德本质，以及激进女权主义文学中性工作者的不尊重方式，它认为，“最终需求”的方法不是减少伤害，而是使伤害永久化，在“不谦虚”的概念中合谋妇女是社会弊病的根源。

结论

减少性工作者——以及更普遍的女性——面临的伤害需要女权主义者挑战“对女性谦虚的崇拜”，而不是成为其中的同谋。