Sex, Slavery and the Trafficked Woman

Myths and Misconceptions about Trafficking and its Victims

Ramona Vijeyarasa

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN: 9781472446091
• eBook ISBN: 9781317056829
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Sex, Slavery and the Trafficked Woman is a go-to text for readers who seek a comprehensive overview of the meaning of 'human trafficking' and current debates and perspectives on the issue. It presents a more nuanced understanding of human trafficking and its victims by examining - and challenging - the conventional assumptions that sit at the heart of mainstream approaches to the topic.

A pioneering study, the arguments made in this book are largely drawn from the author's fieldwork in Ukraine, Vietnam and Ghana. The author demonstrates to readers how a law enforcement and criminal justice-oriented approach to trafficking has developed at the expense of a migration and human rights perspective. She highlights the importance of viewing trafficking within a broad spectrum of migratory movement. The author contests the coerced, female victim archetype as stereotypical and challenges the reader to understand trafficking in an alternative manner, introducing the counterintuitive concept of the 'voluntary victim'.

Overall, this text provides readers of migration and development, gender studies, women's rights and international law a comprehensive and multidisciplinary analysis of the concept of trafficking.

Part I Setting the Scene: Trafficking Myths and Misconceptions in Context

Chapter 1 Introduction to Trafficking and the Mainstream Trafficking Framework

DOI: 10.4324/9781315608501-1

Over the last few decades, we have witnessed the rise of a global movement – fragmented though its members may be – working to end human trafficking. Governments worldwide increasingly recognise their responsibility to prevent human trafficking from taking place from across or within their borders, to prosecute traffickers and to protect victims. There is also substantially greater recognition, although notably slow, that human trafficking is a complex and multi-faceted phenomenon that takes many forms, including and beyond sexual exploitation of women and girls.

However, misconceptions remain about the most dominant forms of human trafficking and the most dominant characteristics of its victims, including among governments, policy makers, UN experts and within academic circles. Victims of human trafficking are frequently, and erroneously, viewed as uneducated and poor, naive and susceptible to deception. With the quintessential victims presented as young women and girls, recruited or abducted by male traffickers, the language of vulnerabilities and an emphasis on sexual exploitation remain widespread.

While the manifestation of such imagery in films, on television and in magazines can be dismissed as merely fictional, the persistence of these stereotypes among governments, academics and activists has a significant bearing on anti-trafficking efforts. A fight against ‘modern-day slavery’ has been declared in policies, programmes and literature. Unsubstantiated portrayals of trafficking form the foundations for significant policy dialogues on the subject, with these stereotypes systemically amplified through repetition. The effect of this reverberation is that these assumptions now sit at the heart of mainstream approaches to trafficking.

This book is a comprehensive effort to dispel some of the most dominant myths and misconceptions about human trafficking, providing evidenced-based examples to challenge those factors that are assumed to be its causes. The terms myths and misconceptions have been chosen not only to highlight the deeply ingrained imagery, particularly slavery imagery, that has helped to fuel these inaccurate portrayals but also to emphasise how even minor errors or non-deliberate misuse of data can reinforce and perpetuate unfounded stereotypes. As will be seen, not only are there numerous areas of contention in this field, but even significant deficiencies in definitions and approaches about which there is relative consensus.

Human Trafficking: Concepts and Realities

Defining Human Trafficking

While the international community long ago came to an agreement that human trafficking involves egregious violations of human rights, it is arguable that a consensus on the definition of trafficking has not yet been reached. Many, however, describe 2000 as a defining moment. Prior to this, various legal instruments (particularly ILO conventions) and resolutions existed to govern the issues of forced and child labour, slavery and practices similar to slavery, including white slavery and commercial sexual exploitation of children and adults. The term ‘trafficking’, although mentioned, was not yet defined.

In 2000, many in the global community gathered in Palermo, Italy, to discuss and debate growing confusion within this field. Clarity was needed on the overlaps and distinctions between prostitution and trafficking and between trafficking and migrant smuggling, as well as on the relative weight to be accorded to crimes of a sexual and non-sexual nature. This moment was preceded by a resolution introduced by the United States on trafficking in women and children at the April 1998 session of the UN Commission for Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. The resolution called for the development of a protocol on trafficking in women and children under a proposed UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime [Transnational Organised Crime Convention]. The draft protocol itself was introduced by the United States and Argentina at the first negotiation session for the Convention in January 1999.

In the lead-up to Palermo, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) lobbied member states on the draft language of the protocol. Abolitionist feminists (who promote the simultaneous criminalisation of both prostitution and trafficking) and pro-sex work feminists (who distinguish voluntary sex work from the involuntariness of trafficking) were unsurprisingly divided.¹ The UN, particularly the UN Office for Drugs and Crime (UNODC 2008), was at the centre of discussions in Palermo, along with the inter-governmental organisation, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM). The outcome of these discussions was the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons. The Protocol supplements the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime and was signed by over 80 countries in December 2000 [hereafter, Trafficking Protocol].

¹ Throughout this book, I use the terms ‘prostitute’ and ‘sex worker’ interchangeably to remain true to the original passage and the preferred term of the author(s) being discussed or cited. My preferred terminology is ‘sex work’ as a reflection that women voluntarily involved in sex work seek recognition of this work as a legitimate livelihood choice.

The Trafficking Protocol defines trafficking as:

… the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs; … (Article 3(a), Trafficking Protocol)

The Trafficking Protocol sits alongside the Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air [Smuggling Protocol] and a third Protocol against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, their Parts and Components and Ammunition. The Smuggling Protocol defines human smuggling as:

… the procurement, in order to obtain, directly or indirectly, a financial or other material benefit, of the illegal entry of a person into a State Party of which the person is not a national or a permanent resident. (Article 3(a), Smuggling Protocol)

The Trafficking Protocol’s definition revolves around three separate elements: first, the action (‘recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons’); second, the means; and finally, the purpose of exploitation. For a given situation to be deemed one of trafficking, all three elements (action, means and purpose) must be present, with the exception of cases involving children (those under 18 years of age). In these instances, no means need to be identified (Article 3(a)). That is, the movement of any persons under the age of 18 for the purpose of exploitation is defined as a case of trafficking, regardless of the presence of any consent.

Unsurprisingly given its annexation to a convention focus on organised crime, the Trafficking Protocol adopts a criminal justice perspective oriented towards the prosecution of the alleged trafficker. It therefore focuses on both the actions of the trafficker(s) (actus rea) and their mental intent, or the purpose of the crime (mens rea). After its enactment, this criminal-law oriented definition found its way, in various forms, into national legislation and policy instruments and is cited in most, if not all, literature as the definition of human trafficking.

Where and How Did Trafficking Discourse Go Wrong?

Over the years, the most shocking and stereotypical aspects of human trafficking have attracted widespread interest in the mass media which is dotted with such portrayals. In the film Human Trafficking (2005), a single mother in Prague is seduced by a handsome man, a Ukrainian girl is duped by a model agency and an American tourist is kidnapped in the Philippines. In Lilya 4-Ever (2002), young, desperate, naive and unsuspecting Lilya from the former Soviet Republic is tricked by her boyfriend into accepting a false job offer in Sweden.

The mass media’s focus on ‘sexual victimhood’ has led to ‘[s]alacious and controversial statements about trafficking, which often seem intended more to titillate’ than inform (Uy, 2011: 209). These statements serve to reinforce the gender stereotype that women need constant male or state (police) protection and that women’s independent mobility should be prevented. It therefore tends to have a two-pronged focus: fighting criminals and saving the victims (Pajnik, 2010: 59). Such an approach to trafficking neglects more multifaceted economic and social circumstances and fails to capture the complexity of the decisions of potential migrants that might lead to a situation of exploitation, not to mention their agency. Male vulnerability is also obscured (for more, see Jones, 2010: 1145).

The media’s vested interested in trafficking – a topic that can be assumed to increase readership – is at least clear. However, it is particularly surprising that media outlets at times credit themselves as key players in the actual ‘fight’ against trafficking. The United States of America’s Cable News Network, CNN, for example, has run the CNN Freedom Project since 2011, an initiative that uses celebrities to highlight the work of activists – ‘CNN heroes’ – fighting ‘modern day slavery’. At one point, the news source claimed that ‘nearly 2,000 people have come out of slavery, either directly or indirectly as a result of the hundreds of stories broadcast on air and published online’ (CNN Freedom Project, 2011). The complex relationship between poverty and trafficking and the legal nuances that distinguish trafficking from slavery are ignored in the narratives presented by such outlets as CNN.

Academic Dina Francesca Haynes denounces the ‘celebritization’ of human trafficking and reproaches not only the media but particularly those law and policy makers who in some instances use anti-trafficking efforts to ‘indulge their desire to interact with celebrities’ (2014: 38). Haynes highlights the main drawbacks of celebrity engagement with a legal/policy issue of this kind, including celebrities lack of accountability; their unrefined, reductive and at times uninformed narratives; the possibility that celebrity engagement in fact reduces the will of otherwise interested individuals to engage on an issue once it becomes a ‘sexy’ topic; and the tendency to defer attention away from those solutions that may have been identified by those most affected, the victims themselves. Haynes specifically points out the lack of celebrity interest when human trafficking is framed as a question of the exploitation of migrant labour, uninteresting when compared to more horrifying or more voyeuristic issues like ‘sex trafficking’, ‘sexual abuse’ and the ‘rescue myth’ (2014: 29).

While such clichés and sensationalism may be expected in fictional portrayals and, to some extent, in for-profit media, they are also present in academic literature. Benjamin Skinner, author of A Crime so Monstrous (2008), is an influential voice who has bridged journalism, politics as well as academia, including as a Fellow at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy of the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. Skinner has repeatedly contended that ‘there are more slaves today than at any point in human history’ (2008a, 2008b, 2010), without offering any data to substantiate his claim about the scope of trafficking or slavery. He applauds the efforts of US President Clinton, among others, in the ‘modern American war on slavery’ (2008a: xvii). While conceding the limitations of the scope of his research, Skinner describes how he ‘visited twelve countries and recorded interviews with over a hundred slaves, slave dealers and survivors’ (2008: xvii).

As a result of the work of authors like Skinner, there has been a domino effect in the adoption of the language of enslavement in trafficking discourse. I have elsewhere undertaken an analysis of the problem of conflating slavery and trafficking (see Vijeyarasa and Bello y Villarino, 2012). An extensive analysis is beyond the scope of this book but a number of examples are worth noting. Jeana Fowler and her co-authors who estimate – using an uncited source – that approximately 800,000–900,000 people are currently living as modern day slaves, argue:

… in nearly every country of the world, this modern-day slavery epidemic is present in some way due to unscrupulous criminals who are benefiting from a lucrative, but illegal, enterprise while stripping away the rights of innocent victims. (Fowler, Che and Fowler, 2010: 1346)

An academic in the field of social work, David Androff, discussing this ‘modern-day slavery’, contends, ‘[m]uch of slavery, from ancient to modern times, has involved the forced transportation of people across political boundaries’ (2011: 210). He continues by explaining what I see as a misuse of both the terms slavery and trafficking by saying:

[M]any prefer the term ‘slavery’ to ‘trafficking’ as the former serves to both connect the current problem to the historical context of forced labor and to highlight the brutal reality and human suffering. The term ‘trafficking’ can reflect a sanitized version of the problem. (Androff, 2011: 212)

The interchangeable use of the language of ‘slavery’ and trafficking heightens public intolerance for such exploitation, a response that might not exist if we refer instead to the case of a smuggled migrant who falsified his or her visa papers and later found themselves in a situation of labour exploitation. Pursuit of economic opportunities or a better life and even partially reasoned decision-making by the victims barely rate a mention in such enslavement discourse. It is difficult to imagine anyone not supporting a more vigorous fight against the crimes described given the type of imagery used by these authors. Indeed, given the prevalence of such powerful imagery, my stance in questioning these portrayals and searching for a more accurate one might seem inappropriate to some readers.

Such sensationalism and stereotypes extend to the policies and reports of a number of governments. Among them, the US Government plays a particularly influential and, at times, highly damaging role in trafficking debates. Its annual Department of State Trafficking in Persons (TIP) report is a frequently cited source, relied upon for its ranking of foreign states on the basis of their efforts to prevent and respond to trafficking (ranking them as Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 2 Watch List or Tier 3). Described by some as a ‘moral crusade’ (Agustín, 2009), the report provides no explanation as to how national data have been compiled and co...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half-Title Page
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of Figures, Maps and Tables
• Acknowledgements
• Preface
• Series Preface
• PART I: SETTING THE SCENE: TRAFFICKING MYTHS AND MISCONCEPTIONS IN CONTEXT
• PART II: DISPELLING THE MYTHS AND MISCONCEPTIONS
• PART III: AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO TRAFFICKING
• Annex 1: Questionnaire
• Annex 2: Overview of data collected from Ukraine, Vietnam and Ghana
• Index