Sex workers' rights

In most countries, even those where sex work is legal, sex workers of all kind feel that they are stigmatized and marginalized and that this prevents them from seeking legal redress for discrimination (e.g., racial discrimination by a strip club owner, dismissal from a teaching position because of involvement in the sex industry), non-payment by a client, assault, or rape. Activists also believe that clients of sex workers may also be stigmatized and marginalized, in some cases even more so than sex workers themselves. For instance, in Sweden, Norway, and Iceland, it is illegal to buy sexual acts, but not to sell them (the buyer is said to have committed a crime, but not the prostitute).[4]

During the 1970s and 1980s, the main topics in the feminist discourse on women's sexuality were pornography, prostitution, and human trafficking. This led to the birth of the mobilization for sex worker rights in America. Carol Leigh is credited with coining the term "sex work" in the early 1980s and it was later popularized by a book published in 1989 called Sex Work.[5] Around this time, pornography, in particular, was a prominent debate among feminists campaigning for women's rights. The feminists involved in these debates held opposing views on how to eliminate sexual violence against women, and those involved were either classified as "liberal feminists" or "radical feminists". A third group of feminists is described as "pro-sex" or "sex positive feminism", and this view is considered the true feminist defense of pornography.[6]

The argument of the radical side rests upon the premise that pornography depicts women as subordinates and perpetrates violence against women.[7] Some of the main anti-porn feminists involved in the debates included Page Mellish, Andrea Dworkin, and Catharine MacKinnon. Dworkin insisted that the oppression of women occurs through sexual subordination and that for gender equality to exist, subordination must be eliminated. Thus, she states that pornography and prostitution are incompatible with gender equality.[7] Similarly, MacKinnon states that pornography is an act of sexual violence.[8] On the grounds that pornography violated women's civil rights, she and Dworkin proposed a law named the "Anti-Pornography Civil Rights Ordinance" that allowed women to seek reparations for damages done by pornography through civil courts. Likewise, Page Mellish, the founder of Feminists Fighting Pornography (FFP), believed that issues facing feminists were rooted in pornography. Mellish allied with conservatives in 1992 to fight for the passing of the "Pornography Victims' Compensation Act", which was modeled after Dworkin and MacKinnon's ordinance.[9]

Contrarily, liberal feminists believe that capitalism allows women to freely make whatever choices they desire. As such, some women freely choose to participate in pornography, as they do in other forms of labour. The main thing that these feminists fight for is anti-censorship, regardless of whether they personally agree with pornography or not.[6] On this side of the debate are feminists such as Gayle Rubin and Lynn Chancer. Rubin argues that anti-pornography laws could negatively harm sexual minorities such as gays/lesbians, sex workers, and feminists because they would create new problems and modes of abuse resulting from the anti-pornography side's use of a limited amount of porn that demonstrates the most extreme cases of violence such as sadomasochism.[10][11] Likewise, Chancer argues that it is possible for such imagery to be able to circulate consensually and lawfully while genuine feelings of pleasure are being experienced without women feeling subordinated.[12] She also states that some of these feminists believe that pornography is negatively affecting women by leading to violence against women when in actuality it is not. Thus, she concludes that radical feminists are looking at pornography as a quick fix to a much larger societal problem.[13]

Sex-positive feminists believe that no form of sexual expression should be vilified, except that which is not consensual.[14] One of the main advocates of this feminist perspective is Carol Queen. She argues that radical feminists probably generalize too widely as far as women are concerned, and do not take into consideration more complicated circumstances such as sadomasochism and prostitution. Elisa Glick also states that configurations of power within relationships do not prevent women from exercising it and that they can be used to enable women to exercise it.[15]

There is debate on whether the consumption of porn among men is good for their well-being, though in a study of over 300 men aged 18 to 73 97% report that they have watched porn, with 94% reporting having done so in the last 6 months and 82% reporting doing so in a manner they would consider "regularly". Men of all ages report an overall positive experience with porn, though younger men express greater negative than older men- which researchers speculate is because porn skews their perceptions of sex.[16]

Pornography debates provided leeway for the emergence of the "Sex Wars" debates, a title assigned by feminist scholars. These debates began in the 1980s and centered upon ways that women were depicted in heterosexual sexual relations. The main premise of the anti-pornography movement rests upon the argument that pornography is degrading and violent towards women. These feminists also believe that pornography encourages men to behave violently towards women.[7] However, liberal feminists argued that this argument does not take into account the pleasure that women can experience, stating that these arguments could backfire against women and subject them to a greater degree of subordination.[10]

Thus, the debates started to become centralized on the role of dominance within heterosexual relationships and how this dominance is transferred to other areas of women's lives. These theories of male sexuality and female objectification and sexuality are controversial because they framed later debates about human trafficking, in which coerced workers are distinguished from voluntary workers.[17]

The human trafficking debate, a prominent discourse in the 21st century, has materialized as a result of the movement. Current debates center on whether the best way to protect women would be through abolition, criminalization, decriminalization, or legalization.

Sex worker advocates who are fighting for legalization or decriminalization of prostitution contend that criminalizing consensual sex acts among adults creates a black market which worsens the problem of forced human trafficking rather than reducing it. They decry the paternalistic attitude of what they disparagingly call "rescue missions", law enforcement raids that regard all sex workers as in need of "saving" fail to distinguish the minority of sex workers who are coerced from the vast majority who engage in sex work voluntarily.[18] Furthermore, liberal feminists such as Ronald Weitzer and Gayle Rubin, argue that the definition of sex work as inherently violent has created a “moral panic” that influences political discourse.[11][19] They contend that this "panic" has led to the construction of a trafficking victim who may be a woman migrating for work. These feminists argue that this can backfire because it does not protect those women who voluntarily enter into sex work.[18]

Opponents of the sex workers' rights movement, such as Melissa Farley and Janice Raymond, argue that prostitution should be abolished because legalization can increase incidences of human trafficking. The New UN Trafficking Protocol by Raymond argues that many victims are trafficked to countries in which sex work is legalized or decriminalized, and because they are trafficked under the guise of migrants they are not protected. Raymond also argues that it is impossible to separate the exploitation experienced by local prostitutes from the exploitative experiences of trafficked prostitutes, as they are very similar. Thus, to end sex slavery, the report declares that everyone involved in sex work needs to be criminalized so that the industry can be abolished.[20] Similarly, Farley argues that engagement in voluntary sex work is a decision made by women in the absence of alternative choices,[21] and that it therefore cannot accurately be described as a voluntary and freely made choice.

Early reformers identified the key problem with prostitution as male lust that lured innocent women into a depraved life as prostitutes.[22] Thus, abolitionist proponents believe that prostitution is an exploitative system that is harmful to the women involved.[23] Therefore, these activists believe that to prevent violence against women, the customers, pimps, and panderers should be punished so that the entire institution can be demolished.[24] Because this policy approach is built upon the idea that women are helpless victims, opponents of this view believe that it is paternalistic and not empowering to women.[22]

A study by Melissa Farley, a well-known supporter of the abolition of prostitution, and colleagues, suggests that violence is an intrinsic part of prostitution in which the chances of experiencing violence increases along with the number of years involved in prostitution. This study also concludes that prostitution tends to be multi-traumatic in all forms.[25] Farley and colleagues also used the Netherlands as an example of a country to support the idea that legalized prostitution can still inflict harm on those involved. They stated that over 90% of the sex workers tend to show symptoms of PTSD. Therefore, these proponents advocate for abolitionism and criminalization as a method of protecting sex workers.[25]

Criminalization proponents believe that the way to protect women from interpersonal violence is to punish both sex workers and customers for partaking in the buying and selling of sex.[22]

Many proponents of abolitionism or criminalization of prostitution commonly use reasons based on studies done on the effects of prostitution in countries where it is legalized or decriminalized.[26]

• Prostitution is a gift to pimps, traffickers, and the sex industry.
• Prostitution promotes sex trafficking.
• Prostitution expands the sex industry instead of controlling it.
• Prostitution increases clandestine, illegal, and street prostitution because many women do not participate in health checks or registration and do not want to be controlled by businessmen.
• Prostitution increases child prostitution.
• Prostitution doesn't protect women in prostitution.
• Prostitution makes it socially acceptable for men to buy sex, and women are viewed as sexual commodities that men are encouraged to partake in.
• Prostitution does not promote women's health because the condom-use policy is not strictly enforced.
• Prostitution does not enhance women's choice.

Legalization or decriminalization proponents, on the other hand, believe that the selling and buying of sex exchange will continue no matter what. Therefore, the only way to effectively prevent violence is to acknowledge this and for government to build policies and laws that deal with the issue through regulation of the business.[22] Legalization/Decriminalization proponents believe that a system that prohibits prostitution creates an oppressive environment for prostitutes.[27] Proponents of this view also recommend that policies are built that places restrictions on trafficking and exploitation of sex workers.[28]

The legalization of sex work often entails additional restrictions and requirements placed on sex workers as well as registering with official government offices. Additionally, many activists favor decriminalization over legalization. Decriminalization involves a focus on laws which protect the rights of sex workers, such as those against coercion into or to stay in sex work, while all consensual sexual contact between adult sex workers and adult clients would not be criminalized.[22]

Ronald Weitzer, a well-known proponent for the legalization/decriminalization of prostitution, stated that the use of nonscientific evidence about prostitution has contributed to a "moral panic" because opponents commonly use the argument that prostitution is inherently violent and unable to be regulated. However, he also claims that other governments have been able to reject this notion and find ways to regulate it and uses Nevada as an example.[19]

Below are some of the main premises that the pro-legalization and pro-decriminalization of prostitution movement rests upon.[29]

• Prostitution is a transaction where no one is harmed, and the persons involved are consenting adults.
• Prostitution is a free choice.
• Sex work is no more moral or immoral than other jobs.
• Sex trafficking and coercion into the industry can be effectively reduced if sex work is legalized or decriminalized.
• Decriminalization or legalization can protect sex workers from violence most effectively, such as through onsite security at venues such as brothels and systems such as panic buttons, as well as the ability for sex workers to report abuse or crimes to the police without the fear of prosecution for committing illegal activity.
• The spread of diseases can be hindered through the legalization or decriminalization of prostitution, such as through regular mandated health checks and required condom use.
• The rates of rape could decrease if prostitution were legalized or decriminalized.
• Sex work could become a legal business, and human rights and worker's rights could be enforced by effective regulation, such as fair pay.
• Prostitution is a career option in which the free market is being taken advantage of and women's claims over their own bodies.
• The criminalization of sex workers only exacerbates problems that they are already facing. Therefore, the decriminalization or legalization can be a starting point to addressing these issues.[29]

Decriminalization is supported by academics, human rights organizations, such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union, UN agencies, such as UNAIDS, WHO, and UNDP, LGBT organizations such as ILGA and Lambda Legal, and anti-trafficking organizations such as the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women, La Strada International, and the Freedom Network USA.[30]

In both Canada and the UK, dancers in strip clubs are independent contractors who face significant problems that they are unable to rectify because of their inability to challenge employers through organized action.[31][32][33]

In the UK, a study was conducted which inquired about dancers’ experiences to get a better understanding to determine whether or not it could be costly for women to work some nights. It stated that often when the club offered promotions with gimmicks, dancers would be required to work without payment. Furthermore, dancers may be required to promote events without pay as part of the house rules. If they tried to complain, the club owners would threaten to dismiss them. Thus, the study suggests that strip club workers in the UK operate under vulnerable conditions without the capacity to organize for better working conditions. Moreover, the study states that dancers are also required to pay their “house moms” and the DJs, as well as being pressured to buy drinks for their customers and other dancers, which hampers their profit-making ability.[31]

The fees of dancers’ house fees can be large and sometimes they are not waived or lowered when business is slow. Also, clubs may continue to hire women even during bad economic downturns. Therefore, dancers feel that their earning potential is lowered.[31]

In addition to house fees and entry fees, many dancers are not paid for their stage shows because they are considered a part of self-advertisement. This is also considered another rule that comes along with their job description. In the UK, the club generally takes thirty percent commission.[31]

The final way clubs make money is through fines and tips. This study found that there could be a fine for something such as chewing gum or having gum in a bag that ranges from twenty to thirty pounds. The most common fines were chewing gum, using cellular phones on the floor, and tardiness. It goes on to say that some dancers may have to pay to take time off. Dancers also tip people that work in the club such as waitresses and doormen in order to get them to direct customers to them. Other reasons that motivate dancers to tip include tipping security so that the dancers will not be fined and tipping DJs to be called during good song and opportune times.[31]

In the Canadian city of Toronto, workers must be in possession of an adult entertainer license that is only provided following a criminal record check and the submission of a form. Applicants are initially charged about C$$400 and are required to pay an annual C$270 renewal fee. Municipal bylaws govern the standards that workers must abide by to maintain their license.[33]

A survey undertaken by the Toronto city council in 2012 was to inform a reconsideration of the regulations around licensing for strip club-based sex workers. The most significant aspect was a reappraisal of the “no touching” rule so that it specified areas of the body to prevent people from being fined in the event of acceptable casual physical contact. Of those sex workers who responded to the survey, 67 percent stated that they had been sexually assaulted or touched without their consent, while they further documented the responses from their employers: 2 percent called the police, 34 percent asked the customer to leave, 22 percent ignored the incident, 4 percent blamed the stripper and 14 percent dismissed the incidents as part of the job.[32][33]

The Association of Women Prostitutes of Argentina (AMMAR) was started by Elena Reynaga, who now heads the South American sex workers' network RedTraSex.[34] AMMAR leader Sandra Cabrera was killed for her activism in 2004.[35]

On March 10, 2014, the All India Network of Sex Workers, an umbrella group of sex worker organizations, campaigned for pension rights. Representative of 90 sex worker organisations across 16 Indian states, the Network presented a letter explaining that sex workers in India are not treated equally in social security terms, stating: "Sex workers, including their family members, can't access various social entitlements which are offered to citizens in general. We consider sex work like any other occupation belonging to the unorganised sector and we should be brought under the universal pension scheme." A spokesperson for the Network also informed the media that sex workers in India retire "by the age of 40-45 years", an earlier age than the broader population.[36]

A study by Janice Raymond states that there can be many detrimental consequences to legalizing and decriminalizing prostitution. One consequence mentioned was that prostitution can be seen as a suitable and normal option for the poor. Therefore, poor women can be easily exploited when there is a lack of sexual services which does not lead to their empowerment.[37] Melissa Farley supported this idea with an analysis stating that most women do not rationally decide to enter prostitution; rather, the decision is made as a survival choice and that there are certain circumstances can drive women into the field of prostitution, leaving them with a choice that is more along the lines of voluntary slavery. Thus, it is merely used as a surviving strategy.[21]

Furthermore, Raymond states that businesses in the sex industry are able to offer services to any men which has led to more gender inequality because women have to accept that prostitution is a new norm. She supported this by saying that even disabled men are able to receive sexual services, and their caregivers (mostly women) are required to take them to these establishments and assist them in engaging in sexual acts. Another consequence Raymond mentioned was that child prostitution has increased in the Netherlands. She suggests this is because the Netherlands has created a prostitution-promoting environment through laws concerning children that make it easier for abusers to use children without penalty. She also adds that the distinction between voluntary and forced prostitution could be detrimental because it can be argued that the thought of someone being forced into prostitution can be exciting for some men because it may be a part of clients' fantasies.[37] Finally, another study states that the legalization or decriminalization can be detrimental because studies that surveyed sex workers where it is legal concluded that violence is accepted as part of the job with the universal experience of molestation and abuse.[21]

A decision by the House and the Senate in Hawaii is expected in May 2014 after police agreed in March 2014 not to oppose the revision of a law that was implemented in the 1970s, allowing undercover police officers to engage in sexual relations with sex workers during the course of investigations. Following initial protest from supporters of the legislation, all objections were retracted on March 25, 2014. A Honolulu police spokeswoman informed TIME magazine that, at the time of the court's decision, no reports had been made regarding the abuse of the exemption by police, while a Hawaiian senator stated to the media: "I suppose that in retrospect, the police probably feel somewhat embarrassed about this whole situation." However, the Pacifica Alliance to Stop Slavery and other advocates affirmed their knowledge of police brutality in this area and explained that the fear of retribution is the main deterrent for sex workers who seek to report offending officers. At a Hawaiian Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, also in March 2014, an attorney testified that his client was raped three times by Hawaiian police before prostitution was cited as the reason for her subsequent arrest.[38]

Barbara Brents and Kathryn Hausbeck state in their study that the legalization of prostitution in Nevada's brothels allows for improved regulation and protection for both businesses and workers.[22] Academic Ronald Weitzer supports this idea by citing the impact of the numerous safety measures that ensure the safety of the workers.[39]

Brents and Hausbeck's case study of Nevada's brothels entailed examples of how they believe protection mechanisms were designed to account for the entire process of each individual job—that is the time that a sex worker is with a customer. They started by saying that the negotiation process for sex workers in Nevada requires the use of an intercom during the process so that workers will not betray the business owners and so that owners can know if the customers are putting the workers at risk. After the price is negotiated, the money is paid and taken out of the room by the sex worker. At that point, the sex workers have the opportunity to let security guards know if there is anything unsafe or uncomfortable about the situation so that security can be alerted. Another protection mechanism requires security to interrupt the workers after the allotted period of time to demand that the customers either leave or renegotiate the price, so that sex workers are not coerced or forced into providing additional services without a fee. Finally, the study concludes that sex workers are offered protection from one another in brothels because of strictly enforced rules and the relationships that brothels have been able to build with local law enforcement officials.[22] According to some legalization supporters, this protection creates an environment that can be empowering for women to work in.[39]

Additionally, proponents argue that workers must also comply with health regulations and engage in preventative practices. They state that this compliance leads to a system that becomes mutually advantageous for brothels and sex workers, because a perception of safety by workers is profitable for the brothel.[22] In brothels in Nevada, it is a requirement for sex workers to be tested and verified as healthy. Afterwards, they are required to be checked periodically for certain STIs. Condom usage is also mandatory and this is advertised by the brothels so that customers know beforehand. Finally, sex workers are able to examine the customers before any services are given to make sure there are no signs of visible STIs. If there are any suspicions, the worker is allowed to refund the customer and refuse service.[22]

In countries where sex work is either criminalized or illegal, or both, sex workers face many potential threats of violence. One major threat of violence is the risk that they may contract a sexually transmitted infection (STI) due to their labor and context-dependent barriers that can be either structural (government) or individual (fear) in nature.[40] Since street-based violence can be commonplace, this further increases their susceptibility to contracting a disease due to factors such as coercion or rape, as they cannot demand that a condom is used or to refuse service. In addition, the World Health Organization states that sex workers have been known to be refused health services when seeking out disease prevention and treatment because of the nature of their occupation.[41] Furthermore, sex workers are also afraid to seek out health services for problems because of structural barriers that prevent them from knowing about and utilizing services that could teach them better prevention methods.[42]

A particular example of the disease threats sex workers are faced with can be demonstrated via a study conducted in Cambodia where the rate of HIV has increased. This report studied the prevalence of HIV among a group of indirect sex workers in Cambodia called "beer promotion girls", women employed by distributors to promote and sell beers. The study found that they have the highest rate of HIV because they often sell sex as a means of supplementing their salary. This report also found that among indirect sex workers the condom usage rate is lower because they may be getting paid more for sex without condoms. It concluded by explaining how disease prevention campaigns often target direct sex workers, such as those who work in a brothel, and neglect the women in other areas of sex work who are also at risk of contracting STIs.[43] Thus, advocates of the legalization/decriminalization of prostitution believe policies need to be designed to target any sex worker who may be in a vulnerable position.[44]

Trans women who are sex workers are at particular risk for HIV. The seroprevalence of HIV among trans women sex workers internationally has been estimated at 27.3 percent.[45] Furthermore, sex work is prevalent amongst transgender people, particularly young trans women.[46]

Likewise, the World Health Organization report says that criminalization creates an environment where women are less likely to report crimes against them, and accept the possibility of violence such as rape, murder, beatings, and kidnapping as a part of the job description. The report also states that sex workers are even at risk of being harassed, humiliated, and coerced into sex with local law enforcement.[41] Although these are some of the common threats that both decriminalizing/legalizing and criminalizing/decriminalizing prostitution hope to address and reduce, another study concludes that the rates of victimization of prostitutes are not nearly as high as some studies claim.[47]

On April 11, 2018, the United States Congress passed the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act, commonly known as FOSTA-SESTA, which imposes severe penalties on online platforms that facilitate sex work. The act resulted in the closure of the classified advertising website Backpage and led to the arrest of its founders. The effectiveness of the act has come into question and there have been allegations that it has endangered sex workers and has been ineffective in catching and stopping sex traffickers.[48]

Some sex workers are subjected to psychological manipulation by their pimps using a mix of violence and tenderness. Sex workers in these relationships can develop stockholm syndrome toward their abusers and refuse to testify against them. New York County District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. said that such sex workers "are often emotionally and economically dependent upon their abusers, and remain silent as their worlds grow smaller and more dangerous".[49]

Scarlet Alliance is the peak body for sex worker organizations in Australia and campaigns for the full decriminalization of sex work, in addition to providing HIV/AIDS outreach and education to sex workers.[64] The country has been credited with better sex worker occupational health and safety, high condom use, and the lowest STI and HIV rates around the world. Furthermore, the now-defunct Prostitutes Collective of Victoria (PCV), founded in Melbourne, Victoria, was the first sex workers’ organization in the world to receive government funding (the organization was renamed "Resourcing Health Education for the Sex Industry (RhED)" and became part of the Inner South Community Health Service, but, as of 2013, is a different kind of organization).

SWEAT (Sex Workers Education and Advocacy Taskforce) is an advocacy organization located in Cape Town, South Africa, intending to provide education and public health services to sex workers. They also lobby for the decriminalization of sex work, and have recently begun a research program in 2003, to influence future policy pertaining to sex workers.[65]

The Asia Pacific Network of Sex Workers (APNSW) was formed in 1994 to advance the rights of sex workers in Asia, and to provide direct support to Asian sex workers, particularly concerning human rights issues and HIV support services.[66] Australian-born sex worker activist Andrew Hunter was instrumental in the development of APNSW, as well as a contributor to the growth of the Global Network of Sex Work Projects (NSWP), and his significant history of activism is internationally recognized.[67]

TAMPEP is organization that was founded in 1993. It aims to help migrant sex workers in more than twenty-five European nations especially focusing on the public health needs of those workers in Central and Eastern Europe. It also examines the legislative framework that sex work takes place within to suggest better policies that would protect sex workers. Some of the outreach methods used to assist sex workers include outreach and education and cultural and peer mediators. Some of the results of research carried out include identification of migrant sex workers and barriers to protection of their rights and the creation of networks between sex workers, organizations, and medical care.[68][69]

The Sex Professionals of Canada (SPOC) is a national, voluntary, sex worker-run organization that is funded entirely by donations. Founded in 1983, the organization seeks to decriminalize all forms of sex work in Canada through advocacy and education.[70][71]

The Network of Sex Workers in Latin America and the Caribbean (RedTraSex) was organized in 1997 in fifteen countries to fight for the rights of sex workers. So far, the organization has influenced policy in certain countries and has interacted with the president Rafael Correa of Ecuador and Luis Ignacio Lula de Silva in Brazil. One achievement made in Latin America has been the sex worker identification card that has been issued in Bolivia. Furthermore, more sex workers have been included in HIV and health services education.[72][73]

Global Network of Sex Work Projects (NSWP) is an organization that was founded in 1990 by sex workers from different nations at the 2nd International Conference for NGOs working on AIDS in Paris, France. The organization has received financial support from bodies such as the Open Society Foundations,[74] and states that it "conducts a mix of pro-active and re-active policy advocacy to support human rights and evidence-based approaches to female, male, and transgendered sex workers and strengthening sex worker communities", while "organising at an international (including regional) level brings local and national level experiences to bear in international debates".[75][76]

Global Network of Sex Work Projects (NSWP) is largely responsible for the language shift—most notably, the use of the term "sex worker" instead of "prostitute"—that corresponds with a genuine recognition of sex workers' human rights. The organization's advocacy work has included HIV/AIDS, addressing sex worker discrimination,[77] and participating in research about the profession. NSWP created the publication, Research for Sex Work, for activists, health workers, and NGOs.[78]

During the 2012 International AIDS Conference, held in Kolkata, India, sex worker activists from different countries formed the Sex Worker Freedom Festival (SWFF) as an alternative event for sex workers and allies. The week-long festival included activity in the Sonagachi red-light area[79] and represented a protest against the exclusion of sex workers. The event also sought to ensure that the perspectives of sex workers were heard in meetings held in Washington D.C., US. A report, entitled "Solidarity Is Not A Crime", was published by NSWP in April 2014 and is described by the organization as "a snapshot of curated content outlining a significant and historical moment in the Sex Worker Rights Movement".[80]

The World Health Organization has released a report focusing on the violence that sex workers face and their vulnerability to HIV/AIDS. It included currently used intervention strategies as well as policy recommendations from the WHO Sex Work Toolkit.[41] Furthermore, another report addressing HIV prevention in middle to low-income countries was released with policy guidelines based on research conducted by the organization which recommended that sex work be decriminalized and called for the elimination of unjust application of non-criminal laws and regulations against sex workers.[81]

UNAIDS has written a report with policy suggestions in Asia and the Pacific that includes case studies to support ways to improve access to health services in Asia and the Pacific. It also addresses some of the factors that hinder sex workers from accessing health services. Furthermore, the UN released a development report titled Sex Work and the Law in Asia and the Pacific discussing the policies surrounding sex work in Asian and Pacific countries, the effects these laws have on sex workers, and policy recommendations. Some of the policy recommendations for governments included decriminalizing sex work and activities associated with it, providing sex workers with work-related protections, and supporting sex workers' access to health services.[82]

They have also released a 2011-2015 strategy report titled Getting to Zero that aims for the vision of "Zero new HIV infections. Zero discrimination. Zero AIDS-related deaths". The report states that its goals include reducing HIV transmission by half, getting universal access to antiretroviral therapy for those living with HIV, and reducing the number of countries with punitive laws around HIV transmission, sex work, drug use, or homosexual activity by half all by 2015.[83]

Similarly, the ILO has released reports suggesting policies that could be put into place that would address the vulnerabilities that sex workers encounter due to the nature of their jobs. Most of the reports deal with ways to decrease the number of workers that contract HIV/AIDS so that the disease is not spread to the general population. It also supports the "Getting to Zero" mission, and has found different ways to implement the primary policy initiative, Recommendation 200. This recommendation states that "Measures be taken in and through the workplace to facilitate access to HIV prevention, treatment, care, and support services for workers, their families, and dependents". The publication discusses some of the different ways that they have implemented programs that target both sex workers and their clients in different countries worldwide.[84]

Another report released by the ILO examines sex work in Cambodia by evaluating direct and indirect sex work in various settings and case studies with sex workers to conclude with policy suggestions that can be used to decrease the rate of HIV/AIDS transmission among sex workers, their clients, and to the general population also. Some of the key recommendations from this report suggest addressing violence and abuse that is work-related, expanding unions to include indirect sex workers, bringing a workplace perspective to prevention care and health strategies, and coordinating health and safety interventions within the workplace. Under each category more specific initiatives that can be implemented were also included.[85]

This day began when over 25,000 sex workers gathered in India for a festival organized by a Calcutta-based group called Durbar Mahila Samanwaya Committee (Unstoppable Women's Synthesis Committee), despite protests pressuring the government to revoke the permit for the parade in 2001.[86]

This day began June 2, 1975, in Lyon, France, when a group of sex workers met in a church to express their anger about exploitative living conditions and the criminalization they face because of their work.[86]

In 2009, the Chinese Grassroots Women's Rights Center designated this day to fight the discrimination that faces Chinese sex workers.[86]

In 2003, Dr. Anne Sprinkle founded the Sex Workers Outreach Project USA and held a vigil on this day for the victims of the Green River Killer, and this day has been commemorated ever since to remember the victims of violent crimes and fight discrimination of crimes related to sex work.[86]