In Debating Sex Work, Lori Watson and Jessica Flanigan present opposing view regarding criminalization or decriminalization of prostitution or sex work. Watson endorses the Nordic model and believes that prostitution is oppressive to women, whereas Flanigan is in favor of complete decriminalization and believes that legalization is a form of liberation. The authors take turn explaining and supporting their viewpoints.

Watson begins by describing the Nordic model (first put into law in Sweden in 1999). In short, The Nordic model makes it legal to sell sex, but illegal to buy. Buyers of sex can face penalties ranging from fines up to six months incarceration. Watson opposes the term sex work in favor of using the word prostitution as she believes that sex work is not like other forms of work which she discusses in depth during the debate. Watson also states that the Nordic model focuses on a sex-equality model, not on morality overall, but on morality of equal citizenship. Watson argues that prostitution is based on inequality and violates basic human rights. Watson focuses on the notion of gender discrimination against women (as most sellers of sex are women and most buyers are men) in combination with political, economic and sociocultural factors limiting women’s choices. For example, women are more likely to live in poverty than men, have less political power, influence and leadership and are more likely to be victims of sexual violence. Watson also discusses four commonly held viewpoints by those who believe in decriminalization of the buying and selling of sex. These are; that the Nordic model is paternalistic, that women engage in prostitution based on free will, that they benefit from prostitution and finally that there is nothing wrong with selling sex.

Watson then turns her attention to explaining the reasoning behind why she believes that sex work cannot be understood as another form of work. In doing so Watson states that sex work cannot guarantee basic human rights and sex workers are not employees but rather independent contractors, making formal contracts difficult to draw out and maintain, especially in cases of refusing to service some clients. Watson also highlights the difficulty of maintaining occupational health and safety regulations in terms of infections, pregnancy and sexual violence. Watson ends by summarizing the notion that sex work violates basic human rights, is not like other forms of work and that the best way to end exploitation is to target demand, maintaining that the Nordic model that focuses on sex equality best does so.

Flanigan responds to Watson’s assertions by maintaining a defense of decriminalization. In doing so, Flanigan states that criminalization violates the rights of sex workers, sex work is in fact like other types of work, decriminalization can balance worker well-being and criminalization is inegalitarian towards both sex workers and clients. In developing her arguments, Flanigan makes a case for decriminalization as she maintains that sex workers have a right to choose their occupation and what to do with their bodies. It should be noted that Flanigan believes that consent is imperative in sex work and that any form of non-consensual sexual activity should be prohibited. 

Flanigan compares sex work to other forms of similar work such as pornography and stripping and responds to claims that the Nordic model promotes health and well-being by stating that the opposite is true, and that decriminalization actually is more likely to protect sex workers. Flanigan also spends time discussing decriminalization is more favorable that regulating sex work and ways in which worker safety and risk of violence is not necessarily more prominent in sex work than other occupations. When arguing that criminalization of sex work violates basic liberties, Flanigan is also of the position that if a person has the right to sell sex another person should also have the right to buy sex. An interesting point that Flanigan considers then, but that is rather contentious is the rights of those who buy sex. Flanigan’s assertion about equality is extended to the client as well as she states that criminalization subjects marginalized men to criminal penalties even as they may not have any other options for sexual partners.

Flanigan ends by summarizing the notion that prohibition is not the answer to deal with issues within sex work and that it violates basic liberties, limits economic freedom, is paternalistic and that it is difficult to distinguish sex work from other types of work. Flanigan states that the criminalization of sex work results in black markets that are even more unsafe for women and that sex work is not forced labor as long as it is consensual. At the same time, Flanigan understands that sex work might not be preferable for women, but that women in all occupational professions are likely to be unsatisfied with their occupations overall. 

Both Watson and Flanigan eloquently present their point of view favoring the Nordic model and decriminalization respectively. The reader is likely to agree with one of the authors more than the other, as did I, when reading the book. Debating Sex Work is also likely to evoke strong feelings from the reader, but an open-minded discussion is important to have. Both authors highlight the notion that sex work is a complicated issue when it comes to concepts of equity, liberty, and freedom,  and that there are many additional factors and standpoints to consider. 

Hennie Weiss has a master’s degree in Sociology from CSUS and is currently pursuing a master’s degree in Social Work from CSUS. Her academic interests also include women’s studies and feminism.