Amnesty
International claims to be a human rights organization. Lately, however,
Amnesty seems to exclude women from those who count as humans. Instead,
Amnesty endorses guidelines that restrict women’s human rights.
Amnesty International is currently discussing its policy on prostitution.
The proposed new policy is a document*
which is entirely based on old myths. The very same myths that the pro-prostitution
lobby in many countries no longer succeed in implementing, as they have
been contradicted by both research and experience during the last 10-20
years.
The document contains a number of the pro-prostitution lobby’s usual
arguments:
•
They put buyers on par with sellers, as if there was no power structure
between men and women in prostituion, as in society at large.
• They criticize laws against
prostitution without distinguishing laws that criminalize only the buyer/perpetrator,
only the prostituted, or both at the same time.
• They make a sharp distinction
between what they call "sex work" and trafficking, and claim
that Amnesty International is obviously against trafficking – thus
ignoring that all prostitution share the same basis, as well as the broad
research now showing how trafficking is increasing in countries where
prostitution is legalized as "sex work".
• They claim that it is not prostitution,
but society’s negative attitude towards "sex work" that
creates health risks in prostitution, despite the fact that health risks
– including violence – is an integral part of prostitution
as such.
• They reveal their derogatory
view on people with disabilities, and make the experiences of womens with
disabilites invisible, by claiming that people with disabilites need "sex
workers" because they otherwise cannot "get" sex.
• They compare views on prostitution
with views on homosexuality, as if the daily and global sexual exploitatiton
of mostly women and girls had anything to do with the sexual orientation
of the exploited.
• They refer to consent; "sex
work" being good because it’s a matter of consenting adults,
ignoring among other things the fact that the majority of everyone entering
prostitution have earlier experience of sexual abuse, as children or adolescents.
The most common age to enter prostitution is 14 years – so this
"consent" is basically about adult men and sexual abused children/teenagers.
• They accuse the majority of
people in Sweden to be moralists, by claiming that laws against prostitution
are based on puritanism and prejudice. (The Swedish Sex Purchase Act is
supported by a large majority of the population.)
The reality of prostitution directly opposes these claims. The vast majority
of all prostitution consists of men buying women and girls for their sexual
use. It is, in fact, prostitution that comes from an old, puritanical
sexual tradition, where the wife, as well as "the whore",
was supposed to be at the disposal of the heterosexual male. Prostitution
is based on the sexuality of the buyer. The prerequisite of all prostitution
is the expectation that the one being prostituted does not
want to "have sex", and is instead bought – that’s
why the "sex trade" exists.
Aside from this incomprehensible attitude towards prostitution, it turns
out that Amnesty International has bowed down to the most patriarchal
countries in the world when it comes to abortion. Thus, since 2007, Amnesty
International supports women’s right to abortion only after rape
or incest or if the woman’s life is in danger. Amnesty International
has adopted this abortion policy despite having access to both new and
old research proving that the amount of abortions do not decrease by prohibition
– it only makes more women die in illegal abortions instead. According
to the Chair of the Swedish Amnesty, Sofia Haldt, the reason behind this
policy is that the organization has to "compromise" –
failing to mention that this "compromising" is being made
in a time when women’s right to abortion is threatened in several
countries time and time again.
Consequently Amnesty International is supporting limitations of the human
rights of half the population – women. Without changing this course
of development soon, Amnesty International can no longer be considered
a human rights organization – because then it’s no longer
campaigning for the human rights of all
people.
Who benefits from this?
If Amnesty International wants to keep its credibility
as a human rights organization, it must immediately stop compromising
women’s rights.
P.S.
We encourage Amnesty International to read Kvinnofronten’s collection
of argument "Speaking of Prostitution" before adopting any new
prostitution policy:
www.kvinnofronten.nu/eng/speaking-of-prostitution.htm
Sweden in February, 2014
Kvinnofronten
The Women’s front in Sweden
 Click
here or on the icon
to save
this Open letter as a pdf-file. |
