Good morning. My name is Rhéa Jean. I am a Ph.D. student in Philosophy at Sherbrooke University. My thesis is on ethical issues relating to prostitution. I am not an expert in human trafficking, but Dian and I both worked on research into the sex trafficking of women in Quebec. I will speak mostly about prostitution generally, and link it to human trafficking. Diane will speak more about the latter.
My position, called the abolitionist position, is held by all members of the CLES, the Concertation des luttes contre l’exploitation sexuelle. The organization, which was founded in May 2005, is a coalition of women's groups and academics. It strives to make people aware of the problem of sexual exploitation, including prostitution and trafficking in women for sexual purposes.
Like the members of the CLES, I consider that trafficking in women for prostitution is directly related to the fact that our society trivializes prostitution. In my view, a client who pays for the services of a trafficked woman is essentially doing the same thing as another who pays for the services of a local woman. The same mechanism is involved and both are equally reprehensible. Why? Because by paying for sexual services, people forget that the others they are dealing with have their own subjectivity, their own lives, their emotions, etc. By paying, they believe that they can demand sex, and that it is part of a contract. They don't realize that prostitution affects the lives of these women, men, young people or children.
One of the great advances of feminism was to make people aware that one could not demand sex under any circumstances. Let us take as example the act that governs sexual harassment. It made people aware of the fact that sex ought not to be part of work. I ask you the following question: In considering prostitution as a job, as some people and some groups do, are we not destroying the progress we have made and rendering legitimate the idea that sex can be part of work, a job?
Feminism made another advance possible, and that was the criminalization of spousal rape. The act made society aware of the fact that sexuality could not be demanded, even in a spousal context. In my view, criminalizing the purchase of sexual services—and I wish to specify that I am not talking about the sale of such services—is similar in principle to the two advances made by feminism. These were to make people aware of the fact that sexuality is too important, intimate and personal to be able to demand it, buy it, turn it into a job or make it part of a contract.
I believe that some serious thinking is needed, not only about trafficking in women, but also about prostitution. I believe that we need to evaluate prostitution in terms of ethics, examine what it presupposes in terms of power relationships between individuals, economic disparities and inequality between the sexes. Prostitution needs to be challenged in order to develop sexual ethics as well as work ethics. Can sex be part of work without the workers becoming alienated from it? Can work be part of sex without the sexuality of individuals being alienated? My answer to both of these questions is no.
Sweden has refused to consider prostitution a job. Indeed, for many citizens of that socially advanced country, opposition to prostitution constituted a normal step along the way in the battle against sexual exploitation. By doing so, Sweden succeeded in considerably reducing the amount of trafficking in women. I believe that Canada should follow Sweden's example and combat sexual exploitation rather than attempt to manage it.
I now give the floor to Diane Matte.