The Nordic Model

            The issue of prostitution here in Canada has been a hot debate on Parliament Hill for the past few years. Everything from legalizing prostitution to increasing penalties has been thrown around the table and has ultimately resulted in the passing of Bill C-36. Bill C-36 was enacted into Canadian legislation in 2014 with the intent of combating the high rates of sex work happening on Canadian streets. However, the Conservatives “tough on crime” ideologies overlooked how much of this Bill would add to the dangers of street work. Furthermore, it ignored the fundamental issues that underlie what contributes to the prevalence of prostitution.

            On the other side of Bill-C-36, which aims to penalize “Johns” instead of the individual sex workers themselves, some countries have gone to the other side of the spectrum and have legalized sex work. In this sense, sex workers become tax-paying individuals, and prostitution becomes a job like any other. However, there are many flaws to this approach, all which have resulted in increased rates of prostitution among the countries that have adopted the legalization of prostitution. One of the central reasons that this approach is so flawed, is that “legalized prostitution cannot exist alongside the true equality of women. The idea that one group of women should be available for men’s sexual access is founded on structural inequality by gender, class and race” (feministcurrent.com). Legalizing sex work opens up the idea that women’s bodies can be sold and later discarded when the “product” is no longer useful. With this in mind, another fault of legalizing prostitution is that there is no aid for women who want to leave the streets, because “normal” jobs do not usually require therapy when leaving. Furthermore, sexual assaults while on the job are treated as “occupational hazards,” and are dealt with much like a common worksite injuries, and are not looked at inherent violence against women.

            Back in Canada, where we have taken the criminalization approach to prostitution, Bill C-36 was enacted with the intent of mimicking “Nordic Law.” This model has resulted in “crime statistics (showing) that trafficking has decreased since the Nordic model was enacted in Sweden” (feministcurrent.com). However, as Shawna mentioned today in her lecture, the reason that this model has not, and will not, work as well here in North America is due to the vast difference in equality of the sexes which is not nearly as prominent in Sweden. Furthermore, Bill C-36 could be considered as having a disparate impact, due to the fact that while it was intended to be race/class/gender neutral, it has had a stronger impact on minority groups (Aboriginal women, lower SES people, etc.), who are policed more and therefore “caught” more.

            In the most simplistic sense, sex trafficking and sex work continues to happen simply because there is a demand for it. The Nordic Model attempts to decrease this demand, not only by teaching Johns about the exploitation of women, but also aiding women in leaving the lifestyle without pressuring them, and letting them know about supports that are in place for them when they are ready to do so. Unfortunately, Canada will not be ready for this model until the systematic degradation of women’s bodies and the inequality of women in society has been eliminated.