Conclusion

Though the model of state regulation of brothels has certainly improved since the 19th century, especially with regards to health and safety for sex workers, legalization can still be understood primarily as the state's tolerance and containment of sex work. In Paris, the model was to place sex work outside legal bounds so that the state could control it as they saw fit. In the modern day, only brothel work is legalized so as to restrict where sex workers are living and practicing. Often legalization permits the state to introduce regulations that suppress the industry and exploit its workers. [1]  

Additionally, legalization does not eradicate stigma. Even in locations with legalized brothels such as Nevada, Amsterdam, and Tuxtla, neither the state nor the other citizens believe that women who sell sex cannot be rational, ordinary, pragmatic, or autonomous. [2] Though many citizens want to visit these establishments, they also want to be sheltered from brothels and their employees. The general public does not want to discuss the existence of sex work. There is a strong tendency to discredit the experiences of sex-workers, which reflects their continued experience of oppression and stigma.  

Though working in a legal brothel ensures a more protected legal status and a certain level of health and safety than illegal street sex work, sex workers’ right activists advocate for the state to completely exit the business. Ultimately, where legalization fails is the promotion of a society that respects and supports the rights of sex workers, while simultaneously not providing for all that sex workers need to remain safe and autonomous.

[1] Mattson, Greggor. 2016. The Cultural Politics of European Prostitution Reform: Governing Loose Women. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.

[2] Augustin, Laura. 2013. Prostitution Laws and the Death of Whores. New York: Jacobinin.