On most days of the year, the Georgia capitol building is swarming with activity. On February 1st, however, there is a sense of urgency and purpose not often seen among the usual visitors to the political center of the city. Community leaders, activists, students, and others are there to remind their legislators that throughout the state of Georgia, minors of both sexes are sexually exploited. Approximately 7200 Georgia men pay pimps to participate in sex acts with these youth, who are coerced and manipulated into performing. [1] In 2005, Atlanta was named by the FBI as among fourteen U.S. cities with the highest incidences of sex trafficking, and the latest research from the Governor’s office of families and children suggests that in Georgia alone, between 220 and 500 girls are commercially exploited each month. [2]

Amy Walters of Street Grace describes the the goal of Lobby Day as having always been a “…grassroots mobilization of the community to express our voices on behalf of those that do not have a voice.” Volunteers on behalf of Street G.R.A.C.E, Wellspring Living, and A future Not a Past have been consistently peaceful, polite, and persistent over the years. Last year, lobbyists visited the offices of their representatives and senators, leaving behind a symbolic white rose and a note to remind them that hundreds of victims suffer the consequences of being commercially exploited every month. In years past, volunteers have either informed their legislators of the reality that Atlanta is a center of sex trafficking, both of U.S. citizens and of people trafficked into the country, or asked them to support bills like S.B 304 and S.B 69. This year, volunteers will thank their legislators for working hard to protect Atlanta’s children from victimization.

A Future Not A Past representatives expect between 600 and 1,000 Georgians to participate in Lobby day. They will join Attorney General Sam Olens, Senator Renee Unterman, Representative Edward Lindsey, and Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, all of whom are scheduled to speak on behalf of CSEC victims in Georgia. Atlanta musician Janie Chu will perform her single “Dear John”, as well as other songs from her sophomore release, on the capitol steps before Lobby Day begins.

“This is probably the easiest way to make a difference,” Walters explains. “Showing up really matters and this is your chance to be a voice for those who don’t have a voice. We have people coming from all over the state…Let’s pack out the north steps of the capitol.”

Click here to register for LOBBY DAY 2012.

__
[1] Georgia Demand Study, 2009. The Shapiro Group. http://bit.ly/xejRol
[2] Georgia Governor’s Office. http://1.usa.gov/op1S7d

The hotline, inherited from Princess Night (a ministry of Atlanta Dream Center), went live on December 19, 2011 as a non-vanity number: 404-941-6024. Because many victims call from phones that do not have lettered keypads (like hotel room phones and some payphones) and it may be safer for them to dial an inconspicuous number on a cell phone that lists call records, a non-vanity number was chosen as the best option.

An Out of Darkness representative explained that the organization plans to work alongside agencies like Polaris Project and Seattle Against Slavery to track call volume, demographics, and the locations of phone calls; however, rescue takes precedent over information gathering. The hotline is connected to four homes, three of which are dedicated to women exiting commercial sexual exploitation. Out of Darkness expects to add three more homes by February.

Currently, Out of Darkness is in its early stages. Its greatest needs from the community reflect the needs of the entire effort to end trafficking throughout the nation: donations and volunteers. The faith-based organization hopes to use donations to upgrade its free phone service to a more efficient commercial phone service and increase its office space to accommodate a growing corps of volunteers and interns. Volunteers – particularly male volunteers – from all geographical regions in Georgia are needed to participate in as many rescues as possible.

On January 27 and 28, Out of Darkness will host a volunteer training for those wanting to get involved. To learn more about Out of Darkness and find out how to volunteer, visit their website by clicking HERE.

Disclaimer: The following post will require that you be willing to engage in adult content, film theory, and iPhone apps.

The slippage of meaning in words is part of what makes it fun to talk.  Think Shakespeare and his irascible puns; think Conan and Colbert and their commentary; think Derrida and differance.  Okay, maybe don’t think about linguistic theory.  Think about sex.  And porn.  And erotica.  And titillation.  Yes, when they are in italics that means the word itself, the letters in a row—not what you’re picturing in your head.

Despite their slipperiness, I’d like to say a few words about how important it is to try to hang on to the distinguishing feature of words: that they really do help us get a grip on reality.  And keeping a grip on reality is really important if you want to have anything to do with it.

The Playboy Club---cultural examination or tantalizing temptation?

This fall, NBC premiered a new show called The Playboy Club; lots of people are petitioning that NBC refrain from displaying pornography on mainstream network television.  Not a new idea, this petitioning of a network or corporation to refrain from selling or distributing material considered detrimental to society.  It’s at the very heart of American democracy that a lot of names on a piece of paper with lots of words on it has the power to effect change.

But—and here’s the key—the words need to have meaning.  They have to make mutual sense among the parties involved.  And herein is the problem with the above petition, and many others like it, which have identified a perceived threat to society’s health and tried to do something.  Using words to describe, to literally “write in the air,” something that they don’t mean…well, it means nothing.

Okay, so that was a bit of pedantic explanation.  Let’s break it down a bit.

1. The Playboy Club is not porn. It is a drama with lots of sexual content, but it is not porn. Porn is (and I consult the most reliable source on the planet, my iPhone dictionary app): obscene writing, drawings, photographs, or the like, especially those having little or no artistic merit.  And, although I don’t intend to entertain a debate about what qualifies as artistic merit, I can answer the follow-up in line, “What is obscene?” Well, again according to my iPhone, something obscene is causing uncontrolled sexual desire.  It is important to understand and uphold the distinguishing power of words.  One word (porn) indicates content that is designed to arouse and satisfy nothing but sexual desire.  Therefore, it doesn’t apply to a television “drama about a time and place that challenged the existing social mores and transformed American culture forever…[where] all that glitters is not gold.”

2. Furthermore, The Playboy Club is not endorsing porn.  Pornography is primarily a private indulgence—-hidden from view.  The show is examining the life and culture of [un]fulfilled sexual fantasies, which takes place in a specific place: a club.  A club is usually full of people.

Ok, so now that The Playboy Club is off the hook as far as being explicitly “pornography,” is it innocent of all the damaging effects to society of which it stands accused?

The Jefferson Memorial----temple to words of liberty and great (ironic) example of "aura"

3. No, The Playboy Club is not innocent of all charges.  By airing a show full of erotic and provocative dialog and imagery, it is tempting the audience to involve in sexual fantasy—and once involved, the viewer will want to realize (fulfill) the fantasy.  Since I spared you linguistic theory earlier, allow me to walk you through some basic film theory:

• The very act of watching television creates a sense of “aura”–the type of glorification associated with heroes and idols and temples–around the content.  The figures are forever out of reach, ensconced in a beautiful shroud.
• Human beings are physiologically and psychologically wired to want (1) to bring things closer and (2) to reproduce them—even more so now than in any previous era because of the ethos of immediacy and replication in which we now live and move and have our being.  See re-tweets, web cams, and FaceTime as exhibits A, B, and C in the affirmative evidence.
• Our natural response, therefore, to something interesting that we see on television is “to pry [the] object from its shell, to destroy its aura [as] the mark of the ‘universal equality of things.’”  So says, Walter Benjamin, who theorized about this stuff back in 1936 when Hollywood glamour was at its height.

4.  Therefore, The Playboy Club does represent a risk for society’s detriment.  We’ve just looked at how we want to actualize what we see onscreen.  Why are there so many annoying commercials for cleaning products?  We see the product, want the product, buy the product, and the producers make more commercials so that we will again see the product, want the product, buy the product, and so forth.  Our first-world wealth and American independence empowers us to feel entitled in just that way.  And the same principle that sells Lysol plays out with dramas that have lots of sexual content.  The more we offer onscreen, the more people want it.

5. But, people are stupid and selfish.  When they want something, they don’t often check to make sure that it has integrity.  Men that want to be surrounded by beautiful women who will do any sexual act they please don’t usually stop to make sure that those women are there by choice.  They don’t often think about the repercussions for their personal relationships.  Women that want to be sexy and beautiful and petted by wealthy men don’t usually stop to make sure that the man will follow through on his promises, that he won’t beat her, and that she can leave when she wants.  And they, too, may never consider the repercussions for their personal relationships.

So, The Playboy Club may not be porn and it may not endorse porn, but its existence as a network television show will surely create a situation in which people will be set up to privately indulge their fantasies.  And the track record of humanity’s stupid and selfish traits indicates that such an indulgence will probably put many, many people at risk for exploitation, victimization, and personal injury–on both sides of the “fourth wall” that we like to think separates us from role playing and reality.  (This is not the show’s intention—otherwise, why would the same producer who brought us Law and Order: SVU be willing to back it?)

iPhone---is it a good things to have the whole world in our hands?

While the Playboy revolution of the 60s was important for pushing people to recognize themselves as sexual beings (versus the domestic automatons of the 50s), the shame that continues to surround the culture of sex keeps even 2011 sexuality hidden. And that hiddenness that covers the natural human insistence that our dreams come close and replay on loop, that hiddenness more than anything, is what empowers exploitation. The ideas presented within the show can cultivate desires, desires that can be difficult to meet without entering the shady side of the sexual world because of the hiddenness that surrounds the culture of sex. Example: a lonely man sees the provocatively clad women willing to fulfill the fantasies of the men around them, and thinks “that looks great, why can’t I have that?” So that man then goes online in search of someone to fulfill his own desires. He sees an ad, replies, and just a short while later finds himself in a hotel room with a 16 year old girl who has been threatened beyond imagining to force her to perform whatever this man wants, because he has paid for her. Desires are cultivated that can almost only be fulfilled through the exploitation of others. This is the danger.

It’s not the content itself of The Playboy Club and shows like it that’s the threat; it’s our human propensity to reach out and grab hold of it, regardless of the effects of that action. The petition should not be about the “pornography” of The Playboy Club.  It should address the aura of the TV—the way we respond by extending our reach, ripping it out of the cultural conversation, and trying to replicate it in reality, as if we could hold the whole world in our hands.

A new film has hit the theaters of America, forcing the issue of human trafficking into the forefront of people’s lives. The Whistleblower is based on the true story of Kathy Bolkavac, who, during the late 1990’s to early 2000’s, worked as a UN Peacekeeper in Bosnia. While there, she uncovered an underlying scourge of human trafficking, specifically sex trafficking, taking place in the country. Kathy learns during her investigations that members of the UN, from fellow peacekeepers to police and high officials, not only take part in abusing the victims, but often directly facilitate their abuse. From driving vans of women across the borders to avoid security, to taking bribes for their cooperation, Kathy discovers that the employees of the UN are deeply ingrained in this industry. As usual, some artistic interpretation was taken with the film, which is explained in the opening scene.

Starring Rachel Weisz and including renowned actors Vanessa Redgrave and David Strathairn, The Whistleblower is a tale that deserves to be told, even if it has been somewhat “hollywoodized” to make it palatable for the audience. Even so, it does not back off from showing some of the more horrific experiences that the women go through. Shot in intentionally dark tones with a gritty atmosphere, the film mixes artistic representations with the occasional blatant exhibition, which at times go a little too far.  The representations and “almost but not quite” scenes were so well done that further demonstration wasn’t needed and only served to cheapen the overall effect, leaving one puzzled at their purpose. Here is an example of what I mean.

At one point in the film, Kathy is investigating a bar for sex trafficking after she has just been introduced to the subject. In her investigation, she spots a wall of what could be considered “trophy” photos. We are shown close ups of Polaroids featuring nude victims being groped and abused, one by one, and these pictures return several times throughout the film. This is what I would consider to be a blatant exhibition of the victimization and torture that the movie didn’t need. Even if it is “just a movie,” these types of scenes still require actresses and actors to “pretend” to participate in such activities. It then begs the question whether or not “pretending” to be tortured and to torture is any better than reality.

Right after this moment in the film, Kathy investigates a back room where the girls were kept. The camera slides over a floor ingrained with dirt, closes in on a bowl that was used as a toilet, sweeps over a mattress covered in used condoms. A moment later we see a few thick chains lying on a block of cement. These all clearly indicate how the women were being treated and the horrors they had to go through without actually showing their exploitation. Occasionally film makers forget that “less is more” and that sometimes, by keeping something in check, by giving the audiences enough to arrive at the right conclusion without explicitly spelling it out, they can achieve a much higher impact.

You are shown almost all areas of sex trafficking in The Whistleblower, from how a woman can be pulled in, to how johns and pimps respond to the victims. In a way it humanizes what the movie Taken glamorized by delving into the darker shadows of this industry. It takes a stance between mainstream and niche- there are enough elements of action and suspense to keep up the pace and allow a general audience to engage with the story. However, the subject and intensity of the film could be more tolerable to those already involved in the anti-trafficking movement and aware of its severe nature. In other words, this would be a good film to show to those who are interested in learning more about human trafficking, but not necessarily to those who have never heard about the issue before due to the heavy atmosphere and realistic aspects of the film.

The entire movie is a conversation piece which encourages the desire to learn more. It can be a great tool for those in the anti-trafficking movement to use if they are looking for a more lifelike portrayal than Taken offers, as long as you give a warning to your audience beforehand about some of the more intense content of the film. One possible negative is that The Whistleblower is still focused overseas, which could further ingrain in people’s minds that this is an issue “over there,” when human trafficking is happening in their own backyard. It is also focused solely on sex trafficking, and does not address other forms that human trafficking can take. However, it can be used as an effective device to generate awareness, especially if you hold a conversation with your friends, family, and other fellow movie-watchers afterwards, explaining the context and tying it into the reality of trafficking in the United States, and trafficking as a whole. If you can handle the language and nudity and the intense atmosphere of the movie, then The Whistleblower is definitely a must-see.

One more side note, some of the dialogue is difficult to hear and understand, so you will need to keep your ears perked.

Read More about the Signs of Sex Trafficking

Read More about the Signs of Labor Trafficking

Read More about Human Trafficking in Atlanta

Nicole of Radiant Cosmetics

Steen & Jessica of COLORS

We’ve heard it before: You can stand up and make a difference in the fight to end forced labor and prostitution, no matter who you are. Heck, we’ve said it! And we believe it.

Businesses can do it, too. Here, three entrepreneurs share the stories of how they use their businesses to raise awareness and funds for domestic and international victims of sex trafficking. Nicole Marett of Radiant Cosmetics and Steen Jones and Jessica Stewart of COLORS discuss how they got involved, how their businesses partner with nonprofit organizations, the unique challenges they’ve faced, and what drives them to overcome them.

Tell me about your business: how it started, what you do, where it’s going.

 RADIANT: I’ve always been enamored with makeup and grew up dreaming of becoming a beauty editor at a fashion magazine. I eventually moved to New York to pursue my dream and found myself very unfulfilled in what I had always wanted to do. I felt called to live overseas doing mission work with an organization called The World Race. I got to work with women who had been trafficked or were trapped in the commercial sex trade, and I felt alive. I was filled with an overwhelming sense that something had to be done. I was given a new dream: to run a makeup company that partners with human trafficking organizations financially as well as gets people involved in their own communities, especially in the United States.

Radiant Cosmetics launched at the beginning of August, so we’re going a lot of places. The whole mission behind the makeup is to end human trafficking, and we are committed to doing whatever it takes. We have several projects in the works to further incorporate raising awareness such as art shows, awareness walks, fair trade events and conferences. But we also desire to infiltrate the beauty industry and further mesh that with the world of human trafficking. We have a great project in the works with a trafficking organization in India that will launch after the holidays and it stands for all the wonderful work others are doing to end this injustice as well as our desire and love for makeup.

COLORS: COLORS’ mission is to empower the weak while practicing fair trade ideals. COLORS unofficially began in 2007 as a fundraiser called “Scarf Some Sweets” to raise money for Steen’s sister Amanda, who did outreach and missions through Youth With a Mission and Destiny Rescue. We are a social business that provides impoverished people across the world an opportunity to provide for themselves by teaching them creative skills, and also by providing an outlet to sell their hand-made goods. At the same time, we give consumers an opportunity to purchase environmentally friendly products that make a difference in another human beings life.

We are currently partnering with Destiny Rescue (DR) in Chang Rai, Thailand to provide girls rescued out of sex trafficking the opportunity to learn to crochet and provide for themselves and their families. We traveled to DR’s Thailand base at the end of January and taught four girls how to crochet, which was our dream come true! This is more than a business for us. It is a ministry. In the future, we hope to increase the amount of girls we teach as well as the skills we teach them.

You both partner with nonprofit organizations that work to rescue victims of sex trafficking,  Free the Captives and Destiny Rescue. Can you each tell me about the organizations you work with, your relationships with them and why you chose to work with them?

RADIANT: Free The Captives is an incredible organization that Radiant stands behind 100%. While my experience with human trafficking came from living overseas, I really wanted it to be an issue women could relate to. So many people don’t know we still have slavery in our world, so I wanted to start with highlighting the United States, more specifically my own state. Free The Captives is based in Houston, TX. Houston is a huge hub for trafficking and it’s not a far removed issue; it’s happening in our own communities. That was the first factor in choosing to partner with them.

Free The Captives kind of fell into my lap. I had been researching and contacting other organizations and not having much luck. I randomly emailed the founder of Free The Captives and spoke with her over the phone, and her vision for her organization and what a partnership could look like really resonated with what I envisioned. After driving to Houston and seeing all the work that Free The Captives does, I knew I wanted to work with that organization. Our relationship is still forming; we are looking for unique ways to partner together apart from our financial partnership.

COLORS: Destiny Rescue actively seeks out and rescues children from sexually exploitive situations and then restores, protects, and empowers them. The average ages of the girls range from 12 to 18 years old. Destiny Rescue also has an incredible preventative program for “at risk” children at every base. They currently have bases in India, Cambodia, Mozambique, and Thailand. However, we only partner with the base in Chiang Rai, Thailand at this time. Since we traveled there in January, the number of girls at the Chiang Rai base has gone from 40 to over 80 girls.

They are very earnest in seeking out new trades and skills for the girls to learn in order for them to earn a healthy living for themselves and their families. We chose this organization because of our previous encounters with them through friends and family. Steen’s sister did outreach and missions with Destiny Rescue, and family friend Jessica Kist works for the organization. During our January trip, we built lasting relationships with the founders and staff. They were very gracious and we worked extremely well together. 

How exactly does your business work with the organization you partner with?

RADIANT: The biggest way we partner together is financially. After being overseas and wanting to help all these women I realized financially many of these organizations couldn’t support them all. I also wanted to reallocate how women spend their money to find ways they could tangibly get involved and help others. As of now we give 20% of our profits directly to Free The Captives. We hope to be able to eventually increase our efforts as we grow.

Another crucial piece of partnering together is getting Radiant customers involved in working together as well. We update each other on events that Radiant is holding or Free The Captives has coming up and share that with our customers and supporters. We hope to in the future collaborate more and are excited to see how that plays out.

COLORS: We donated our time in January, travelling to Thailand to teach the girls how to crochet. We now act as a wholesaler, buying the products from the girls and selling them here in the States. We are a social business, so while not technically a non-profit, our profits are reinvested into the business with the purpose of expanding our reach and affecting the lives of more people. Our goal is to hold additional fundraisers throughout the year to help provide for any additional needs for Destiny Rescue.

Each of your businesses was founded as a response to the issue of human trafficking. How did you initially learn about the issue?

RADIANT: I had never even heard of human trafficking prior to applying for The World Race. I read a blog that someone on the trip in Thailand had written discussing the issue. I didn’t think much about it again until I moved overseas. I began to read various books and articles on the issue and was dumbfounded on how widespread human trafficking was. I was astounded to find that the United States and other first world countries were not immune; in fact they had large numbers of trafficked people as well. Eventually I got to experience it firsthand in Thailand and that’s when the issue became very personal. I had seen the faces of those who had been physically, emotionally and spiritually affected by trafficking. I know their names and that is something I simply can’t ignore.

COLORS: In preparing for past Scarf Some Sweets, we would gather and organize information about the issue of trafficking in order to inform the event attendees of what Steen’s sister was doing in Thailand and other locations. It quickly became our passion to spread awareness and make a difference in these girls’ lives.

What gave you the idea to use your business to make a difference?

RADIANT: I can’t take any credit in the idea itself. God gave me the vision for it all and I simply acted as a vehicle. Something that solidified the idea to carry out the business happened on one of my last nights in Thailand. I met a woman who had these really cool star tattoos on her fingers and I commented that I liked them. She responded by asking if my friends and I wanted some. Confused, we saw her pull out a small bottle of liquid eyeliner. For the next hour she drew stars on our fingers with that eyeliner. She didn’t speak a ton of English but I remember just laughing together a lot. In that moment, something as simple as makeup transcended any language barrier, and it’s truly something that I believe can have a huge impact.

COLORS: Our friend, Jessica Kist, who had lived in Thailand for a year, came to us (within a week of being home) with the idea of partnering with Destiny Rescue to teach the girls our trade. She thought it was a skill they would pick up quickly and enjoy, and boy did they blow us out of the water! We realized that even if the girls did not partner with us forever, they still had gained a skill that could benefit them for the rest of their lives.  They could provide for their families while remaining safe.

Some of our readers may be interested in using their business or starting a new one to promote restoration among victims or raise awareness about commercial exploitation. Do you have any tangible advice for them?

RADIANT: Do it! I think using your own skills or passions is one of the best ways to get involved. I believe in the work that non-profits do and I am behind them completely. However, non-profits are not the only ones who should be giving back. The business world is a huge sphere of influence and we should be using it any and every way that we can. Women are going to continue to buy makeup, so why not let them also give back through that purchase? I love hearing about all the amazing businesses that are starting to step up to fill that need. 

As far as advice, make sure this is something you’re really passionate about. Starting Radiant, I couldn’t have continued to press in when things were tough and I was concerned about finances if at the end of the day I wasn’t truly passionate about seeing the end of trafficking.   

COLORS: There are so many amazing organizations that are already working to rescue victims and have a significant presence in the States and other countries. We would encourage you to find an organization that matches your ideals and passions, and work to help provide for their needs, monetary or otherwise.

What was start-up like for Radiant Cosmetics and for COLORS? Did you encounter any significant challenges?

RADIANT: Starting Radiant was an adventure, to say the least. I assumed that I would pursue this vision later in life, when I actually had some knowledge on how to run a business. But I was deeply affected by my time overseas and knew I had to do something and do it now, so I went for it.  I don’t have a business degree and seeing as I was a journalism major, it’s safe to assume I don’t have a knack for numbers. Specifically, finances and all the business jargon have been incredibly challenging for me. I felt very lost, inadequate and overwhelmed. However, I had so many people willing to help and I’ve learned so much through all the struggles.

The makeup side was by far the fun part of starting Radiant. Being someone who has always loved makeup, I was in heaven getting to create it all and test it. I remember testing a million color ideas for eye shadows and just having what seemed like every inch of my skin covered in pretty colored products. Honestly, the whole experience, the good and the bad, has been very rewarding. I continue to be in awe of how many people have gotten behind the cause and have been willing to help me and this vision get off the ground from big things like building a brand to small things such as helping me fill out boring but important paperwork.

 COLORS: Our business started very quickly; we were presented with the idea in September and left for Thailand in January. Be that as it may, every day and every experience is a learning process. The biggest challenge has been maintaining the momentum we experience in the winter, selling our scarves at “Scarf Some Sweets” and bringing that into the spring and summer months. We are still trying to determine what products to offer during these months that are comparable to our aesthetics.

You’ve worked directly with victims and survivors of sex trafficking. What, if anything, would you like to tell readers about your experiences or about trafficking in general?

RADIANT: The experiences I have had with women who’ve been victims of sex trafficking have been life changing. I would encourage others to get involved, reach out and see for themselves. Human trafficking is something we’re still learning about and understanding and I really feel like the first step is recognizing that it does happen and to educate ourselves. But take the next step and find a way to get involved physically, whether that be volunteering with an organization, becoming a mentor for women rescued from these situations or even going overseas. The more we begin to interact, the more we can give these women a voice.

COLORS: It is easy to distance yourself from the horrors that occur to people you have never met. When you see their faces and know their names, it is impossible to ignore. The several girls we interacted with while we were there changed our lives. When we hear of “trafficking survivors”, we see the faces of Nadidat, Min, Mor, and Kwan. For us, having those faces helps us to continue and never give up.

What draws you to the issue of trafficking? Why are you so deeply involved?

RADIANT: I think being a woman and knowing that the majority of trafficked people are women and children draws me to the issue of trafficking. I’ve always felt passionate about women’s issues and to help give a voice to those women is imperative. As I mentioned before, I know some of these women’s names. I can see their faces. How can I ignore that? How can I choose to turn a blind eye to the fact that I’ve seen their bruises and heard their stories? These women could just have easily been me, or my sister, or friends. 

 COLORS: Freedom is humanity’s most basic right and we’re blessed enough to experience that every day. Having their freedom stolen and being mentally, emotionally, and physically abused is an abomination for any child to have to experience. Children require the most basic of food, love, and safety, and Destiny Rescue provides all of those things. For Steen, having a little girl the age of 6 and a little boy the age of 8 brings these issues closer to home and reinforces her drive to help protect the unprotected.

Did I leave anything out that you’d like to add?

COLORS: Making a difference in the lives of these victims does not require starting a business. There are so many ways to volunteer your talents and time. This movement is on the path to changing the world and freeing hundreds of thousands of people. A little help from each and every person will go a long way.
—

Click HERE to visit the Radiant Cosmetics website.

Click HERE to visit the COLORS website.

To visit Free the Captives, the organization that Radiant Cosmetics works alongside, click here.

To visit Destiny Rescue, the organization that COLORS works alongside, click here.

Recently the news has highlighted the protestations of foreign students against a Pennsylvania packing plant run by Exel that was contracted by the Hershey’s company. The complaint? They claim that Exel exploited and entrapped them. These students were participating in a Student Exchange Program that allowed them to come work in the U.S. for the summer to earn money and to engage with the culture. Each student paid somewhere between $3,000 to $6,000 to participate in the program and fill out the accompanying paperwork and obtain the necessary visas and passports. Upon arrival, the students were given seemingly unexpected factory work with long hours of back-breaking lifting, and monotonous packing of Hershey’s brand candy. Instead of having the cultural exchanges they were expecting, they were cooped up in a factory. They were required to live in “company housing,” the cost of which was deducted from their paychecks automatically, and appeared to be higher than what the surrounding families and workers in the housing that weren’t participating in the program were paying. After all the housing and fees were deducted from the students’ paychecks, they were often left with around $140 a week of pay for a 40 hour work week- not even enough to pay off the fees they had accrued to participate in the program. When they brought their complaints to people in charge, they were allegedly met with threats of deportation, which would further diminish their abilities to pay off the fees and possibly threaten their chances of ever returning to the U.S. These students hailed from Romania to China and everywhere in between. This situation could possibly be an instance of labor trafficking.

Here are some of the definitions of labor trafficking that are accepted by U.S. state and federal governments. First we have the broad, overall definition by Hilary Axam, Director of the Human Trafficking Unit/Civil Rights Division. Here, labor trafficking is described as “compelling or coercing a person’s labor, services, or commercial sex acts, or commercial exploitation of a minor.” According to the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons in the U.S., underneath this broad definition are four or so specific sections that labor trafficking is separated into: forced labor, bonded labor, involuntary domestic servitude, and forced child labor.  Forced labor, also described as involuntary servitude, occurs when a person is compelled or “forced” into work by an employer. Someone is particularly made vulnerable by such instances as “high rates of unemployment, poverty, crime, discrimination, corruption, political conflict, or cultural acceptance of the practice.” Immigrants, says the Office, are often more susceptible to such situations, though it can occur to someone in their own country. Bonded labor transpires when the force or coercion takes the form of a debt or bond that the employer uses as a means of coercing the employee to work. The Office further explains, “Workers around the world fall victim to debt bondage when traffickers or recruiters unlawfully exploit an initial debt the worker assumed as part of the terms of employment.” For example, when a worker takes on debt to participate in a job opportunity, and the employer then forces them to work for low pay and/or in horrible working conditions, and the employee can’t leave because they have to pay off the debt they incurred.

Next comes involuntary domestic servitude. This type of labor trafficking occurs most often when the workplace is informal, connected to off-duty living quarters, and the work isn’t shared with other employees. “Such an environment, which often socially isolates domestic workers, is conducive to nonconsensual exploitation since authorities cannot inspect private property as easily as they can inspect formal workplaces,” says the Office. Here a person may be forced to work by their employer through threats or violence, and unable to escape the situation due to their isolation. Finally there is forced child labor. Forced child labor is basically when any of the above situations of labor trafficking occurs to a child. The Office says a child in such an instance may be “in the custody of a non-family member who has the child perform work that financially benefits someone outside the child’s family and does not offer the child the option of leaving.”

Now that we have labor trafficking defined, how can the connection between labor trafficking and the situation with the students mentioned above be made? If the information we have been provided thus far about the students’ circumstances is in fact true, then the connection can easily be seen with this situation and that of bonded labor. The students incurred debts to partake in this opportunity, creating a type of debt or “bond.” Then, upon arrival into the U.S., the amount of pay they were being given was not enough to cover the cost of this debt. When they complained, they were threatened with deportation, which can be seen as a form of psychological coercion. Getting deported would leave them completely unable to pay the debts they had incurred to partake of this “opportunity,” making it a choice between staying and having the chance to pay off part of their debts at least a little, or leaving and not getting to pay their debts off at all. That is hardly a choice.

This situation was happening in Pennsylvania, surrounded by other workers and people who had no idea what was happening. Once others were made aware of the situation, they banded together to protest the circumstances of these students. If people had been more aware of the signs of labor trafficking from the start, these students may have never found themselves in such a situation, or at least may have obtained help from the very beginning. A similar circumstance could be occurring in your own town, or even in your work place, and you can help if you know the signs. Here are some of the indications of labor trafficking that you can keep an eye out for:

1. The employee is living with the employer.
2. The employee is unable to easily or freely leave their place of employment, and/or their place of residence.
3. The employee is being paid unlivable wages, or isn’t being paid at all.
4. The employee is unable to contact friends or family easily or freely, or is unable to have contact with anyone other than the employer.
5. The employer controls most or all of the employee’s living activities, such as what and when they can eat, when they can take bathroom breaks, where and when they sleep, and so forth.

Keep in mind that these are most likely indicators when they are happening in the extreme or outside of the workplace. Many employers have regulations on calling friends and family, or bathroom breaks, inside the office. This does not mean they are exploiting someone. It’s when these signs occur at unusual times or unexpected places that they most often become indicators of labor trafficking.

Have any comments on the blog? Join in the conversation by leaving your thoughts in the comments section below, or by emailing them to blog@meetjustice.org.

Information found on the possible student exploitation:

Jobs with Justice Description

MSNBC Article

New York Time Article (Opening blog image obtained from this article)

Video of Protest

Hershey’s Response on Facebook

Second Image obtained from Little Hands Blog

Last week we discussed some of the main points people make when arguing for the legalization of prostitution. As promised, here are the counter-points to these arguments, and a discussion on the effects of “romantic” love.

Counter-Point 1: Sex work enslaves women

Many in the anti-prostitution argument state that even when prostitution is a “choice,” it’s not really a choice when it’s basically having to choose from several terrible options, or seen as their only option, when facing poverty. Swedish Special Adviser Gunilla S. Ekberg explains:

“The prostitution lobby wants us to believe that prostitution is female sexual liberation and a way for women to give full expression to their deepest sexual fantasies. These ideas are based on an uncritical acceptance of the old libertarian concept of individual free choice and completely lack a critique of society and an analysis of male power. What they also care to ignore is that the concept of free will requires the existence of several possible options to choose from and the control of the person in making a choice.”

In other words, how can prostitution be considered a choice when it’s often prostitution or homelessness and poverty? Cecilia Hoffman, Secretary of the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, further explains that choosing prostitution is simply giving in to the patriarchal conditioning our society has undergone. “…The institution of prostitution is one of, if not the most blatant form of subordination of women’s bodies and personhood to men’s interests,” says Hoffman.

Counter-Point 2: Legalizing Prostitution would have no impact on the spread of sexually transmitted disease

The often spouted “fact” that legalizing prostitution would eradicate or at least greatly limit the spread of STD’s is refuted almost as often as it is supported. The testing process for say, HIV, can take at least 4 to 6 weeks to test positive; all the while the prostitute being tested is continuing to have sex. At least, so says Jeffery J. Barrows, DO:

“Even if a prostitute is being tested every week for HIV, she will test negative for at least the first 4-6 weeks and possibly the first 12 weeks after being infected. If we assume that he or she takes only 4 weeks to become positive, because there is an additional lag time of 1-2 weeks to get the results back, there will be at best a window period of 6 weeks for a prostitute. The average prostitute services between 10-15 clients per day. This means that while the test is becoming positive and the results are becoming known, that prostitute may expose up to 630 clients to HIV. This is under the best of circumstances with testing every week and a four-week window period.”

And, he continues, this assumes that the prostitute will actually stop working once a positive test has been reached. Furthermore, even if condom policies with legalized prostitution were in place, how exactly would they be enforced? The nonprofit organization Prostitution Research & Education explains that even in places that had condom policies, men would often pay more to not have to use a condom, and rarely did a men expect a condom to be worn for oral sex. Some women even face abuse by men and the people they report to for trying to enforce the use of a condom. Together, these conditions seem to refute the argument that legalizing prostitution would limit the spread of STD’s.

Counter-Point 3: Legalizing Prostitution would not eliminate sex trafficking, but encourage it

Areas where prostitution has been completely legalized seem to have only seen an increase in sex trafficking and other related crimes. Instead of cutting down on the industry, it seems to allow it to proliferate and expand, as it become more difficult to discern between legal and illegal operations, say those against legalization.

Nicholas D. Kristof, longtime journalist for the New York Times, explains that in places like India, where sex trafficking exists, legalizing prostitution fails to eradicate it:

“Traditionally, the red light districts of Bombay and Calcutta have both been enormous, and Calcutta has DMSC [a prostitution union in Calcutta] while Bombay has in recent years seen more raids and harassment of brothels. The upshot is that Shonagachi [a red light district in Calcutta] is as big as ever and seems to have as much trafficking and more HIV than ever, while Bombay’s red light district has shrunk dramatically. There still are some brothels in Bombay’s red light district, but only a fraction of the number there used to be.”

He continues by discussing the argument that pro-legalizers make, that raids and the shutdown of brothels, etc. will only push sex trafficking deeper underground, making it harder for police and NGO’s to find. His answer: if NGO’s have a hard time finding them, then so do customers.

“Romantic” love: Beneficial, or Poisonous?

You may remember from last week that this whole discussion was launched by Chester Brown, author of “Paying For It,” a graphic novel relating his experiences as a man who regularly purchases sex. The reason he began doing this, Brown explains, was to escape the poisonous atmosphere of what many term romantic love: “It brings people more misery than happiness, in a nutshell,” says Brown. When asked about how most studies seem to show that men are more miserable when they aren’t in a relationship, Brown responds, “I think in large part that’s because of romantic love. They have this ideal in the mind and they’re failing to bring that into their life. If they didn’t want romantic love they then wouldn’t be miserable. It’s the ideal that’s the problem.” While his conclusion and solution may be problematic to some, Brown’s overall conclusion may actually be accurate.

Romantic love, as many think of it today, is that heart-pattering, breath-taking feeling when you are around your special someone. They make you feel alive, like you are the happiest person in the world. And when it ends, you move on to find the next person who makes you feel this way. This can be problematic, especially if this feeling ends after marriage, and even more so if this trend continues into a third, fourth, or fifth marriage. It can leave a person feeling unsatisfied and continuously seeking for that feeling to last forever. Psychotherapist Dr. Jeffrey Title states:

“When you ‘fall’ out of romantic love, your faith having failed you, all too often you feel as if there’s nothing left in the relationship. And tragically, for many there is nothing left — no foundation based on the real qualities that go into making up a loving, long–lasting, intimate relationship. When the rosy hue fades, those of you who adhere to this myth of eternal romantic love have nothing to replace it with, nothing substantial that can help you rekindle the original passion and excitement.”

Building relationships solely on this feeling of love creates false expectations built on nothing. The term “castle in the air” comes to mind, as this is exactly what people are doing; they are building castles on nothing more substantial than air. This can only lead to dissatisfaction and unhappiness as one continuously tries to fulfill unrealistic expectations.

But there is another option other than the poisonous “romantic” love and the complete abandonment of love for “unattached” sex. Dr. Gary Chapman, long time marriage counselor and author of The Five Love Languages , explains in his book that there are actually two types of romantic love, the “in love experience,” which is what most people feel when they first enter a relationship, and the “emotional need,” the actual need that most people have to be loved by others. Thanks to things like movies and magazines, these two different types of love have become a single, intertwined ideal that is often unachievable. “The ‘in love experience’ temporarily meets one’s emotional need for love…Our emotions soar with the thought that another person sees us as number one, that he or she is willing to devote time and energies exclusively to our relationship…In time, however, we come down from that natural high back into the real world,” he continues. And once we come off that high, that’s when it becomes an intentional choice to fulfill one another’s emotional need for love. However, most people confuse the “in love experience” as the only form of love, and once it fades, usually after two years or so, they feel the need to try to find it again, often in a new person.

Therefore, Chester Brown is partially correct in saying that romantic love is poisonous, as what many consider to be romantic love is in fact harmful to an individual. However, the fulfillment of each person’s emotional need for love, and the desire and choice to fulfill that need in another, appears to be more of a medicine than a poison.

Overall, I am not here to say whether or not seeking love from a prostitute versus a romantic relationship is better or worse. I am not saying whether or not legalizing prostitution should happen. That is for each person to decide. However, these two articles have given you at least a brief overview of the different sides of the argument, and the facts that they present. What are your conclusions?

Sex Trafficking is society’s problem. We all bear the burden of exploitation. We pay for the medical services that victims receive, if they’re lucky, after brutal violence leaves them in need of urgent care. Children who are the product of commercial rape or rape by pimps are often repeatedly cycled through foster systems. Traffickers are left untouched by the law while their stable of victims, many of them underage, are shuffled through the court system, sometimes multiple times, with the state footing the bill for their booking, holding, and legal fees.

Not only is trafficking our burden – it’s our great shame. Commercial Sexual Exploitation is one of many proverbial elephants in the room in the U.S – and it’s getting more and more difficult to ignore how entangled it is with our own society’s norms.

There are several universal factors that go into the existence of trafficking in different countries (for a list of risk factors, click here). One common thread: perpetrators around the world rely not only on the control they exert over their victims, but also depend on society to ignore it and even facilitate it. In order to effectively stop trafficking as a society, we must recognize the role that our own cultural influences and norms play in perpetuating it.

The average Joe or Jane can play a very active role in perpetuating sex trafficking…

In 2010, Detective Richard Randolph broke up a sex trafficking ring in a hotel on Fulton Industrial Boulevard. The pimp, David L. Walker forced young girls and women alike into prostitution through violence, coercion, and fraud.  At the Building Bridges Summit earlier this month, Detective Randolph described one young girl who was locked in a dog cage after attempting to escape and beaten so badly that her eyes were swollen shut by the time agents reached her. However, Walker is not the only one guilty of the crimes committed against this young woman and others; Randolph went on to explain that part of Walker’s success is attributed to the participation of the hotel manager.

The hotel manager had set aside the fifth and sixth floors of the hotel for Walker, ensuring that families visiting Six Flags could stay on the first floor, where they’d be less likely to encounter the victims or see and hear the violence that took place against them. The manager was paid a fee for each client that visited the hotel, and he even warned Walker that police were on their way up to his room.

In the Depaul College of Law Report, “From Victims to Victimizers: Interviews with 25 Ex-Pimps”, pimps report having paid taxi drivers, lawyers, hotel clerks, and convention information center employees for their assistance. 60% of pimps interviewed in the report even admitted to paying off law enforcement agents. Sadly, many of these individuals may not know that what they are contributing to is not voluntary prostitution, but instead the systematic exploitation of children, women, and men.

…but that role can also be very passive.

In 2010, Youth Radio uncovered a startlingly passive perspective among citizens of Oakland, California as they witnessed trafficking in their own streets:

“The guys who work at one of the many taco trucks on International Boulevard say that every day, pimps use their parking lot to drop off girls and hang out. They say it’s common to see pimps beating girls.”

What makes us stand by, as a society that upholds freedom and justice and watch it happen?

The Bystander Effect

After Catherine “Kitty” Genovese was violently attacked, assaulted, and finally murdered over the course of 30 minutes while several witnesses looked on without intervening on her behalf, social psychologists Darley and Latane prompted a hard look at what’s now known as the “Bystander Effect”. The Bystander Effect points to a direct correlation between the amount of people witnessing an emergency to the probability that an individual will take action to resolve it: the more people, the less responsibility a person naturally feels to take action.

Click here for a concise definition of the Bystander Effect as well as a video to illustrate.

However, other factors also play into a lack of action, including the idea that society is powerless to stop global or even local social injustice. Confronting the gross violation of civil rights is a daunting challenge- but it’s been done before. Many might argue that similar confrontations are taking place in parts of America today.

Society’s role in perpetuating conditions of exploitation is not easily defined.

In fact, sometimes it boils down to commonly accepted norms. Traffickers use many myths about victims and even johns to justify exploitation. As well as the bystander effect and myth of helplessness mentioned above, widely accepted notions about of both male and female gender expectations also work to their advantage.

Harmful societal expectations of female sexuality might seem like they’re hard to miss, but they pervade music, media, and advertising in both subtle ways and not-so-subtle ways, for instance in song lyrics that make no bones about placing women into exploitative circumstances:

“This girl’s 17 now I’m a pedophile
Now she’s showin’ me her **** I think this girl’s gone wild…
Turn off the lights and now I’m gonna film it
Turn on the night vision like she’s Paris Hilton…”

We not only accept such attitudes about women; we set it to rhythm and dance to it.

Adult females are not the only ones on which society imposes external expectations of sexuality. This past summer, Abercrombie and Fitch representatives found themselves reeling after some seriously negative PR. The company released a line of push-up triangle bikinis that they marketed to girls as young as 7 years old. After the public backlash, they announced that the line was probably best suited for preteens, instead.

 

Click the picture to enlarge.

 

The consequences of hypersexualizing children, particularly female children, do not automatically lead to victimization by pimps, nor are lyrics in songs or images in advertising to blame for the sexual exploitation of adults. However, the American Psychological Association released a recent report on the sexualization of young girls and its consequences. According to the Task Force,

 ”…girls internalize and reproduce… this objectified perspective through ‘self-objectification’…[which] involves adopting a third-person perspective on the physical self and constantly assessing one’s own body in an effort to conform to the culture’s standards of attractiveness. Self-objectification in a culture in which a woman is a “good object” when she meets the salient cultural standard of “sexy” leads girls to evaluate and control their own bodies more in terms of their sexual desirability to others than in terms of their own desires, health, wellness, achievements, or competence. (American Psychological Association Task Force)

In plainer words, society not only sees girls as (future) means of sexual gratification, but also teaches girls to see themselves as such instruments.

One person whose arguments for prostitution have recently come to our attention is Chester Brown. The creator of the graphic novel “Paying For It,” illustrating his life as someone who regularly pays women for sex, he struck a particular cord with Meet Justice considering our own current graphic novel project, Traffick, inc. Chester Brown, in his interviews, has stated that paying women for sex allowed him to escape a poisonous ideal of romance, and as a result, live his life as a happier man. His voice is just one of many of those who argue that prostitution in the U.S. and around the world should be made completely legal, with the same worker’s benefits for sex workers that any other worker receives. In the process, many argue, this would give women full freedom, limit the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, and nearly eliminate sex trafficking.

But is this actually the case? In this beginning of a two part series, I will attempt to give as objective view as possible of the most relevant and respectable comments and research that has been done on legalizing prostitution. Since most sex workers tend to be female, I will mostly focus on women within this discussion. However, many of the points presented can also be applied to men in the sex industry.  I will not share my own views, but allow you to come to your own conclusions based on the evidence provided. This first article focuses only on the Pros or “Points” that those for legalization provide. Next week we will delve into the Cons, or “Counter-Points” that are given by those against legalization. The discussion will end with a look at Romantic Love vs. Unattached “Love,” and try to discern which appears the most beneficial for society and for individuals. Materials are represented as I could find them and from the initial source when possible- if there are any relevant and reputable studies that I missed, please share them in the comments or send them to blog@meetjustice.org.

Point 1: Legalizing sex work enables the fulfillment of women’s full rights

If it is a woman’s right to have an abortion in our country because it is “her body,” then why can’t she choose to have sex with someone paying her? Author Wendy McElroy states this point plainly in her article, “’Solutions’ to Prostitution”:

“Prostitution is not merely an exchange of sexual favors; it is a financial exchange. At this point, individualist feminists rise to defend the free market as well as a woman’s self-ownership. This is expressed by the question: ‘Prostitution is a combination of sex and the free market. Which one are you against?’”

Basically, not allowing women to sell their bodies for sex is to limit their rights and liberties. Paul Armentano of The Future for Freedom Foundation further explains this by pointing out that prostitution is merely the selling and purchasing of a labor service. Since individuals own their bodies, Armentano argues, then they have the right to decide how to use them.

Point 2: Legalizing sex work would limit the spread of sexually transmitted disease

In legalizing prostitution, there would be certain medical standards that would have to be met. This would include healthcare for sex workers, regular checks for sexually transmitted diseases, and required use of condoms. Paul Armentano further explains in his article:

“According to current evidence, roughly half of the street prostitutes in Washington, D.C., and New York City are HIV-positive. In Newark, New Jersey, the estimate is that close to 60% of all prostitutes carry the AIDS virus. Yet, in the relatively “free market” of Nevada, where prostitution is legal, not one (as of 1989) of the state-licensed prostitutes has ever tested positive for AIDS…. The reason is economic: the bordellos compete with each other, and the suppliers have strong incentives to ensure that the “service” that their customers receive is safe.”

Purchasing sex seems to be fairly prevalent in our society (Paul Armentano suggests roughly one in six men in America have done so). Therefore, it would seem logical that keeping the women disease-free would further limit the spread of these diseases as a whole.

Point 3: Legalizing sex work would limit or eliminate sex trafficking

Many argue that legalizing prostitution gets it off the streets and into the light. Bringing it into the view of the public sector, and having strict regulations, would eliminate the usefulness and ability of sex trafficking. Also, they argue, legalizing prostitution allows women who have been abused during their sex work to come forward to the police without fear of being arrested or ignored. Marjan Wijers, LLM, author and Chair of the European Commission’s Expert Group on Trafficking in Human Beings, explains:

“Criminalizing the sex industry creates ideal conditions for rampant exploitation and abuse of sex workers…[I]t is believed that trafficking in women, coercion and exploitation can only be stopped if the existence of prostitution is recognized and the legal and social rights of prostitutes are guaranteed.”

In other words, since prostitution is going to occur with or without legality, keeping it illegal only harbors harmful circumstances such as sex trafficking and violence. However, making it legal would flush out the illegal activity of sex trafficking, especially since, when given the choice between the two, people are generally more inclined to take the legal path to achieve the same end. At least, so states The Bureau of the Dutch National Rapporteur on Trafficking in Human Beings, in its Mar. 2005 report.

Thus ends the first of this two part series addressing the point, counter-point discussions involving legalizing prostitution. So far, the case has been made that legalizing would enable the fulfillment of women’s full rights, it would limit the spread of STDs, and it would help eradicate sex trafficking. What do you think about the points made so far? Please leave any input in the comments section found below. Be sure to check out Part Two next week, where we will address the counter-points to these positions.

Click here to view or download the notes in PDF format.