Contemporary Nevada, Amsterdam, and Tuxtla
Nevada
Since Nevada legalized brothels in 1971, no other state has seriously considered legalization. Lawmakers fear the consequence of being associated with condoning prostitution, as Americans, tend to have negative views of all types of prostitution. While the number of people who condemn legalization seems to be decreasing over time, in 2006, 42% of Americans said that prostitution can never be justified. [1] Liberal and conservative politicians alike consistently oppose legalization and prevent it from entering policy discussions.
National decriminalization would depend on the public perception of brothels improving, as oppositional forces, including the American government, condemn the legalized status of brothels in Nevada, claiming that they promote sex trafficking. [2] These perceptions illustrate that despite the health and safety advances that stem from legalization, brothels and its sex workers continue to experience stigma.
Despite the mainstreaming of pornography and stripping in the U.S., states have intensified the criminalization of prostitution over the past decade. Almost every state prohibits solicitation for prostitution, pimping, procuring, operating a brothel, and running any business that sells sex. Throughout U.S. history, prostitutes have always been arrested in greater numbers than their customers have, despite the fact that customers outnumber prostitutes. While Nevada is the only state which permits counties to license and regulate brothels, some jurisdictions in the U.S., similar to Britain and many other nations, have adopted de facto decriminalization of indoor prostitution by ignoring places such as escorts and massage parlors. Research suggests that police arrests sometimes involve questionable practices, such as allowing or encouraging sex workers to perform sexual acts prior to making an arrest. [3]
Amsterdam
As a result of the legalized nature of brothels in Amsterdam, the state is permitted to introduce regulations that can unfairly exploit the industry and its workers. Because of Amsterdam’s widely recognized Red Lights District, elites in Amsterdam fear that the city has become a hub for vice. A city counselor once complained that “Amsterdam has a reputation that you can do everything here.” [4] A 2007 poll found that 68% of Amsterdam residents agreed with a policy of decreasing the city’s image as a place where deviant behavior is accepted, and, similarly, 78% felt that the city should actively fight criminal involvement in the prostitution sector. [5] As a result, in the case of Amsterdam, it is evident that not only do brothels carry a stigma, the city itself is stigmatized as well.
Because of the stigma associated with brothels and prostitution, banks refuse to lend money to owners of sex agencies and sex workers, as they claim it is difficult to determine whether or not the business is financially “clean.” [6] They also claim that American banks will refuse to associate with them if they financially participate in the sex industry. One brothel owner admits that despite criminalization, “banks still criminalize us…They say I cannot get a credit card because I’m in the adult entertainment industry. Yet I’ve been a bank customer for 29 years!” This furthers the findings of a 2006 survey of 49 brothel proprietors, who “[had] the impression that the authorities [had] a negative image of the industry” as evident in the pressure they applied to legal businesses through licenses, fees, and arguments about regular employment. [7]
The premier Dutch prostitutes’ rights organization, Red Thread, continues to advocate for fewer restrictions on and further guarantees of civil and labor rights. Despite the rights that legal brothels have, they are still stigmatized due to their historical lack of legal status. In the case of Amsterdam, the financial stigma faced by brothel owners parallels the stigma experienced by the brothel sex workers. [8]
Tuxtla, Mexico
In Amsterdam, Tuxtla, and Nevada, sex work is considered “normal, but also immoral,” as brothel workers and owners fail to claim their legal rights because of the persisting stigma associated with their work and the persisting wish of governments and various institutions to remain distant from them. [9] As the treatment of brothels becomes more professional and business-like, as they are consulted by government agencies and policy discussions, organized opposition remains strong and dynamic, only furthering their stigma and limiting the agency of their workers.
[1] Weitzer. 61.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid. 48.
[4] Ibid. 105.
[5] ibid.
[6] Ibid. 163.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid. 161.
[9] Ibid. 201.