1996- Third Wave's Biggest Fight
1996- Third Wave's Biggest Fight
Third-wave feminism had become a defining movement over for those growing up from the early 1980s over to the middle of the 1990s now. Through their combined efforts over with the rising SATMIN+ movement that began picking up at the same time, they were able to work together to accomplish goals they desired. From fully enshrining abortion into the constitution to civil rights protection for the SATMIN+ folk, it was effort that was rewarded early thanks to good leaders. However, a bulk of the work would be done away from the political halls and into neighborhoods. Outreach programs and centers were being set-up, a haven for those neglected and a beacon of information for people such as parents who have SATMIN+ childen and have little clue on what to do there. This network of caregivers, allies and the like kept growing, all the while that other pushes were being done, such as the focus onto women of color and others that were left behind by the "second wave".
In fact, for many, it would seemed that the movement was slowing down. Granted, groups were still working to hold powerful men accountable and tackle the structural misogyny in the workplace along within the spheres of culture. And it would be a long series of battles that would come with the changing of generations, but improvements were being made bit by bit in what to add or have. As many of them, some were still going into politics and exploiting the rapidly changing political landscape to make their voices be head and to push for change. However, while there was a slow down of sorts, there were still some battles that would be held in the public and would garner quite a bit of controversy to say the least.
And it would be this one that would be one more grand battle for third wave feminism: prostitution.
Prosecution, Prostitution & Pornography
Tackling the subject over of prohibition over on prostitution would end up starting over with pornography humorously enough. Pornography's legality had been tackled a few times over, but each time, it would be under the First Amendment's protection and thus it would be the end of such. There did remain some concern over on the matter, mainly with the so-called "Miller test" used to try and guage this, the test being the result of the case Miller v. California. However, the real test would come over in the early 1990s when a case would be brought up over the case of obscenity... but here, it would be over an issue over same-sex porn. Unsurprisingly, the case would make its way over to the Supreme Court and it would start gathering a fair bit of attention. For some, there was the concern here over that the case could end up threatening the porn industry and so a coalition began forming in the event of potential problems against this. That said, the case was still rather open and shut, primarily because of the rather nebulous issue on what defined something as "obscene". While the "Miller test" did help out to some degree, the concern over of political bodies being able to declare something as obscene to try and censor it was a legitinate concern, especially since it was such a difficulty to properly define, at least in legal declaration. The Court though was still willing to stick to precedent. [1]
However, beyond the traditional charges over on obscenity came the accusations over on pornography being a form of prostitution, something that was tried previously back in the case of People v. Freeman, where the Californian Supreme Court argued the differences and did not make its way over to the Supreme Court. This time though, the issue was pushed and the Supreme Court would have to make a decision. However, the Jordan Court would be prudent on the issue, siding with the Californian Supreme Court and thus making it so pornography could not be charged under prostitution rules. Post-court statements were what got people's attention as some were saying that if this is how things would go, why not just go and decriminalize prostitution then? It was a rhetorical question that was asked by some, but more than several people would look it at seriously? [1]
After all... why not decriminalize prostitution?
Sex work laws were gradually changing in different parts of the world with one of the most fascinating and recent examples happening over in Australia. . Over in the May of 1990, a Australian Institute of Criminology report recommended that prostitution not be a criminal offence, since the laws were ineffective and endangered sex workers. And then in 1995, the NSW Wood Royal Commission into Police Corruption recommended sex work be decriminalised to curb corruption and abuse of power. [2] These papers would become prominent among the third wave feminists movement because it helped reinforced their statements regarding sex work. Making it illegal was not gonna stop people from doing it and those involve would just be in further danger. They even brought up how Prohibition helped increase the power of the mob through bootlegging and the failure of the War on Drugs as examples of how the policy would fail.
As such, they would begin pushing for what they saw as their toughest fight.
Practicality and Morality
The discussions over prostitution was somewhat talked about since the Court case and thus that was latched onto with on how to approach this. Naturally, it would be a movement that received a fair bit of pushback and criticism. The primary argument used against the legalization or decriminalization of prostitution was questions on the morality and ethics of such a notion. For many people, it was a matter of morality and dignity and that by keeping it illegal, it maintained a sort of sanctity to societal values. Of course, such arguments would be difficult since they were based on the ties to a value system so the arguments the third wavers had to use would be different. Rather than approach it from a libertine stance, they went for the down-to-earth and practical sense: that these laws failed to work as intended. Several people and organizations were caught off-guard by this as they did not expect for the third-wavers to use this argument. They cited the Australian reports among others to back their opinions along with other examples such as the historical failues on prohibition in other aspects, such as alcohol and the War on Drugs. The message here was shifted in that prostitution was not necessarily a pleasant thing, but that keeping it illegal does not benefit anyone, especially the women who are involved since by all measures, they would be punished the most. Others, especially TERFs and similar individuals, would try and argue on the grounds of harming women and reducing them to mere objects. To go and decriminalize or legalize it would be condoning such atrocities. These were countered by arguments regarding that leaving it illegal just makes matters worse since it just forces the practices underground and the women themselves are in danger of having charges committed against them for something that they have no control over. At the same time, this would also be complicated by the aspect of same-sex prostitution among these arguments.
The question was not over the morality of prostitution, but rather practicality on keeping it illegal as such. They weren't saying prostitution was a good thing, but the current way of dealing with it was just not working. Yes, women are robbed of their dignity by being forced by criminals, povery or circumstances into the practice, but if that was the case, why then prosecute them? It was just like the failures in trying to prosecute drug users in the failed War on Drugs. As such, the more and more the debate became less on legalizing or decriminalizing it necessarily and more on how to then change the laws for the actual sake of the problem.
Sex and Society
Additionally, as more and more information was gathered, the more difficult things became. Just were wondering if legalization would just increase demand for it while others note that criminalizing it doesn't actually decrease demand either and instead drives people into the black market for it. At the same time, when testimonies from some of these women or even men came out, alot of it pointed out to an aspect that has not been considered as much, namely that the societal view may have been the problem. That prostitutes would have to deal with police harassment, violence from clients and discrimination in the form of various fronts such as eviction and the like. So then, they confronted each side with the challenge then of what should be done. Keeping it illegal, at least as is now, would worsen said harassment, violence and discrimination, and for what? If they as the prostitutes were truly victims as many of them were calling them out to be, then why were they treated so harshly then? It pointed out an unsavory truth to the various critiques: namely the stigma toward prostitutes, representing what many believed to be a shameful aspect, but moreso that they would rather hide or cover up such "unpleasantries" rather than deal with the actual problems underlying them.
If these laws in prohibiting prostitution failed to actually make a dent, make the lives of the prostitutes even worse and more undignifying and overall failing in the various goals, then what were they actually meant to do? What morality could be there in supporting regulations that knowingly does harm and serves no good? It painted the ugly pictue that for some, it was just a matter of religious or moral grandstanding, one that looked shallow and hollow in the face of the chaotic aspects of reality and how much it failed in execution and practicality. It reflected this sense of shame associated with sexual behaviors yet through this propagation of shame, alot has been done in harming, through negligance and propagation of violence.
In an attempt to put out an end to this, the Askew Administration would get inspiration from an unsuspecting source, the Nordic region of Europe. A chance meeting with a Swedish diplomat had him learn of some plans they were considering and wanted to try out here: a form of neo-abolition or partial decriminalization. Namely, to decriminalize the act of prostitution itself... but actually buying sex would be illegal, alongside the other interconnected aspects such as brothels and pimping. This would provide a level of protection over prostitutes regarding their circumstances, but maintain a level of sanctity and dignity for morality. It was the bare minimum and a rather novel approach, but it would be the closest thing that could be done now. And what was introduced was the "Adult Neo-Abolition Act" of 1996. Managing to pass on closer lines than expected, it would still be signed. Prostitution was technically decriminalized, but only really making it
Shockwaves
It ultimately reflected that society was still needing to confront and deal with various aspects of the perspectives of sex. At the same time, it was still a milestone that shown the movement still had some steam left, even if not as prevelent and even many of those with conservative hardline stances noted that many of the points raised were valid, even if they disagreed on approach. It also led to a look into other potential troubling spots. For some, it led to various states looking into their own regulations and finishing certain procedures, such as finishing the banning of child marriages in the United States (namely from some states who's older laws were overlooked and quickly fixed upon realizing they weren't removed) as part of the need of addressing such moral concerns. Other things were the notice of certain movements overall, one was the "pious progressive" movement, an ideological movement focused on combining religion with progressive politics and championed by younger priests and members of the clergy, who see it as a chance to reinvigorate faith in he younger generations, addressing the shortcomings of the old ways.
"Pious progressivism" would already make some successful inroads over with the SATMIN+ community, especially in the establishment of havens for runaway youth. As one of the "pious progressive" preacher put it: "Jesus was a great friend to many of the downtrodden and neglected. He accepted all people with respect and dignity, regardless of who they were. And frankly speaking, many within the religious community have failed to show that level of compassion and understanding toward those who were born different." These words would prove to be quite impactful over the next few years. Another surprising impact would be in the connection to prostitutes and the idea of how sex work should be viewed. One notable example was from Nevada, the only state where prostitution was legal in some form or fashion and one of them was interviewed, noting her complaints and issues in the line of work and what they go through, though things changed when the cameraman couldn't help but comment on maybe if they could unionize, that it would help out. The ideas of prostitutes unionizing seemed like a rather novel joke, but for more than a few prominent thinkers and influencers in the movement, it was possibly a more solid solution than expected.
The Askew Administration didn't take many if any hits from this, with many attributing to Askew's own squeakly clean reputation. The tired President himself noted that he went with the choice he felt could help people here, but much more of it would have to come from the ground-up. The presidential candidates didn't deviate much from the baseline of it, noting that the idea of the "Adult Neo-Abolition Act" was certainly better than anything else and noted that many of the points raised by the third-wavers could not be dismissed. While they didn't talk much further on the issue, there was the potential hope down the line of further issues along with the reflection of some societal change. For now though, it was something of a victory.
-----------------------------------------------------------
[1]- Information and phrasing from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_in_the_United_States
[2]- Information and phrasing from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Australia#Post_1970s
