Live webchat with Amnesty International Tuesday 4th Feb, 11-12pm

[KatieMumsnet]

Following the leaking of an Amnesty International policy document 'Decriminalisation of Sex Work: Policy Background', which argues that men who buy sex are ‘exercising their autonomy’ and should be allowed to do so ‘free from government interference’ there has been considerable discussion on the site and requests for a webchat.

Today, Kate Allen, Director of Amnesty International UK will be here between 11-12pm to answer your questions.

Please do join us live on Tuesday or ask your question on this thread in advance. Just a quick reminder that it’s one question per person; take a look at our webchat guidelines, here.

Best

MNHQ

Kate, would you be able to answer the 'can consent be bought?' question more clearly, because I can't tell from your post what your answer to that question is.

Many thanks.

:( Belle

@TunipTheUnconquerable

Why is prostitution taking place in an imperfect context different from slavery taking place in an imperfect context, sale of blood and organs, paid surrogacy, sale of children? Or are you going to consider campaigning for those to be legalized worldwide as well?

Hi TunipTheUnconquerable,

We campaign against slavery, against forced organ removal, and we obviously would oppose the sale of children. What we are talking about here is the many millions of women and men across the world who are working as sex workers. For us, the issue is how do we protect the human rights of those people? We're dealing with the reality of the imperfect world we live in. Your list is one that of course we would apply the protection of human rights to. And of course, slavery and the sale of organs are and should be illegal.

To quote you, Kate '. For sex workers in many parts of the world we hear that because they are criminalised their ability to have justice is compromised '
Have you spoken with any advocates of the Nordic model, as you don't seem to understand that it doesn't criminalise prostituted women, but rather the men paying to put them at risk of pregnancy, STDs and PTSD.
Are you equating pimps, punters and the women at risk from the practice of prostitution? There are already laws and policies (such as the Merseyside model of policing) which recognise the inequality in the transaction which protect the women involved.
It is reading as disingenuous that you don't seem to acknowledge these laws and policies. It seems as though you're only willing to discuss decriminalisation of punters, which serves the interests of exploitative men.

Why is prostitution taking place in an imperfect context different from slavery taking place in an imperfect context, sale of blood and organs, paid surrogacy, sale of children?
Or are you going to consider campaigning for those to be legalized worldwide as well?

^this^

and maybe the death penalty too

if we could just make people a bit more comfortable before or during their executions, you know, harm reduction, your new thing

you should probably just stop being Amnesty entirely

^and this^

sonjdol only if you erase the voices of the lesbians who have already posted, and only if you magically can know via the interwebs whether the posters here are cis, trans or neither, without them stating, and only if you are so bigoted to assume everyone is cis by default, unless they state otherwise.

tl;dr if you really want to derail this conversation, try harder.

'And of course, slavery and the sale of organs are and should be illegal.'

But not men buying sex?

Why?

How is that different?

I believe you know that was the question being asked, and you have refused to answer it.

Do you campaign against slavery and organ removal because it's not gendered?

This just sounds like plain old fashioned "there are always going to be some women and girls who end up having men pay to fuck them, let's be really really humane and leave them there, allow the men to pay to fuck them, and salve our conscious by not locking those women up and chucking them the odd condom. Gee shucks, what an imperfect place the world is! especially if you are female ".

Regarding answering a question from twitter, fair enough, but I noticed it was asked here as well, very pertinently, by Belle

You know, there are a lot of lesbians paying for sex, a lot of lesbians are sex workers. Not all lesbians have the same opinion on sex work. Get over it.

Many people can live perfectly well with only one kidney, so if they choose to sell one is that ok? Especially as you do say your are opposed to forced organ removal. Or would the sale of men's body parts from poor countries still be profoundly unethical? Sale of vulnerable womens bodies is fine though?

@LRDtheFeministDragon

'Our consultation is about the best way to protect those whose restricted choices have left them working in the sex industry, so that they are not ignored by the authorities and their human rights are able to be protected.'

What led you to the conclusion the best way was this?

What prevented you from tackling those authorities?

Hi LRD

What I meant was that our consultation was about finding the best way to protect. We haven't decided our policy and we are genuinely consulting. It's controversial issue and raises many strong feelings both with our members and others we're consulting. It's going to be difficult to pull this together globally, but I'm proud of Amnesty tackling such a controversial issue. We shouldn't shy away from it and our democratic decision making processes have seen us tackle many controversial issue over many years. At the heart of this is how can Amnesty best help protect the human rights of some very vulnerable people.

Kate, can you please explain what human rights violations sex workers face right now and why decriminalization would help?

Thank you Kate for reacting to the concerns being expressed here by taking the time to come and represent Amnesty – very much appreciated.

Like many others here, I’ve been a proud member of Amnesty since setting up a group 25 years ago when I was at school. More recently I’ve been delighted to encourage my 11-year-old to get involved in his school Amnesty group, and in the Christmas greetings campaign. For me, however, this issue is a deal breaker though and I feel desperately sad that I may have to explain to my son that I feel I can no longer remain a member.

Like many others, I’m horrified at what Amnesty is proposing, for so many reasons. I’ve read the draft proposal, and the minutes of the meeting at which the proposal/consultation system is discussed, and one key question for me is which organisations representing sex workers you have worked with on drafting the proposal? And have you also worked with similar organisations in developing countries? I work in international development and feel very much that this proposal reads as if it has been written without a sense of the realities of poverty and lack of choice faced by women in many of the countries in which you work, and the appalling extent to which this is gendered. I would fully support Amnesty’s work to address the structural issues that lead this to be the case, but I feel that this proposal is simply endorsing the hideous exploitation that many women are subject to, and massively glossing over the issue of (lack of) consent in kind of context that I’ve seen all too often in my own experiences at work. I would also fully support Amnesty if it decided to opt for the Nordic model.

Thank you

Re-posting Flora's point as a question:

Kate, why are you now saying "Amnesty isn't saying that there is a right to buy sex."

• but, in contrast, the documentation clearly says:

"As noted within Amnesty International’s policy on sex work, the organization is opposed to criminalization of all activities related to the purchase and sale of sex. Sexual desire and activity are a fundamental human need. To criminalize those who are unable or unwilling to fulfill that need through more traditionally recognized means and thus purchase sex, may amount to a violation of the right to privacy and undermine the rights to free expression and health"

?

Has something changed? Has Amnesty changed its mind? Or is it not being quite straight?

I feel that you are really picking and choosing your questions here by focusing on being anti-rape (unproblematic); anti-trafficking (unproblematic); LGB rights (unproblematic)

Kate, please answer the difficult questions which are about sex work as a key part of women's oppression, and the difficulties of framing any sort of policy about these based on a simplistic notion of "consent" which has not been fully interrogated; also please answer the question about why the document is about punters but you are pretending it is all about sex workers

Kate, you've only got 15 minutes to stop flanneling and turn this webchat around. Please give a yes/no answer to Beachcomber's question and also explain why owning slaves in an "imperfect context" is bad and buying sex in an "imperfect context" is OK.

Sorry, to repeat my question since you've not answered it:

What prevented you from tackling those authorities?

Why are the authorities you mention untouchable when the issue is prostitution, but not when the issue is the slavery or organ selling?

Forgive me, but I cannot believe you imagine it's necessary at this stage to remind anyone 'it's a controversial issue and raises many strong feelings'.

Kate why is AIUK making submissions to the NIA opposing their proposed bill if you do not have a position on prostitution?

@enlightenmequick

The policy states that this is an 'imperfect context', implying that you recognise it's not right. I'm assuming that you are implying it's not right for the women who have to prostitute themselves.

This would have made perfect sense, if you would have then gone on to support a women's right not to be bought for sex, but for some inexplicable reason, you've gone for the angle of the privileged man in this situation having the right to do buy sex in this 'imperfect context'.

And I know that you know he is the privileged in this situation, otherwise why else throw in the 'disabled' element to self justify.

I want to know, if you have given up fighting the 'bad guys since 1961'?

Hi enlightenmequick,

What I was saying is that in an imperfect world, women's choices can often be limited. Living in poverty with few options can lead to women engaging in sex work. In that situation, we at Amnesty are trying to find the best way to protect the human rights of those women.

Nothing to add to the discussion, except to say that I quite often buy Christmas presents/cards from the AI shop.

I wont be any more.

Kate, can you please explain what human rights violation pimps and punters face right now and how improving their situation would help the prostitutes?

Kate, you're pretending not to understand my question. This feels a bit like talking to a politician who has to support a policy that has already been decided, rather than an open discussion with the leader of a human rights organisation about a policy which has yet to be made.

My point in bringing up those other types of human rights abuses, against which Amnesty quite rightly stands (and we are all grateful to you and respect you for doing so) was that they are all things which, like prostitution, involve abusing people but have so far been impossible to wholly stamp out, in which some people 'choose' to take part because they are forced by poverty into doing so, and which it might be argued by some, could be made safer and less abusive if they were legal and hence did not happen underground.
So why is prostitution different?

Hi enlightenmequick,

What I was saying is that in an imperfect world, women's choices can often be limited. Living in poverty with few options can lead to women engaging in sex work. In that situation, we at Amnesty are trying to find the best way to protect the human rights of those men women.

Fixed it for you