Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Social & Legal Studies
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Doezema, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Now You See Her, Now You Don’t: Sex Workers at the UN Trafficking Protocol Negotiation

Jo Doezema

Sussex University, UK

In December 2000, over 80 countries signed the ‘Protocol to Suppress, Prevent and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children’ (The Trafficking Protocol) in Palermo, Italy. The UN Trafficking Protocol was the target of heavy feminist lobbying during the two years in which the negotiations took place. The lobby efforts were split into two ‘camps’, deeply divided in their attitudes towards prostitution. One lobby group framed prostitution as legitimate labour. The other considered all prostitution to be a violation of women’s human rights. Not only feminist NGO networks were deeply divided over the issue of prostitution. Many state delegations used the negotiations as an opportunity to denounce the evils of prostitution, while others (fewer in number) argued that focusing on prostitution detracted from the efforts to come to an agreement on trafficking. These differences were most ferociously fought out during debates on the proposed definition of trafficking, with the pivotal term ‘consent’. This article is an examination of the role played by sex workers in these debates, and of ‘sex work’ in competing definitions of trafficking in women.

Key Words: myth • sex work • trafficking in women • transnational feminism • UN Trafficking Protocol

Social & Legal Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1, 61-89 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0964663905049526
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?