Gracie Miller's post on Sex Tourism

I was surprised to come across the section in the article that talked about how sex tourism in the 1960’s and 1970’s was a time when the women’s movement brought greater legitimacy to sex work.  I am glad that movements during this time gained more rights for sex workers including unionization and access to healthcare and law service support.  While this is only in the Netherlands, it seems that their attitude of legalization instead of criminalization allows for regulation, which is a needed part of every industry.  The truth is that sex tourism is not going away, and it seems to me that the regulation and taxation in the Netherland’s is the smart way to go.  Likewise I found it interesting that Amsterdam is the seventh most popular city in Europe (at the publication of this article) mostly due to the culture and availability of experiences that are either illegal or taboo in other parts of the world.  And while the politicians do not publicly attribute tourism income to sex work or drugs, they keep it legal and regulated, because they know that these industries are the main attraction that keep the money coming in.  Yet it is disturbing to note that even with all of the leaps Amsterdam has made in regulating the sex industry, there is still a massive amount of illegal sex work, most of it having to do with illegal immigrants.  Yet I would say that this is not a sex work problem, it is more of an immigration issue, the effect of which is illegal sex work.  I was surprised to read that no windows of male prostitutes exist in the red light district, that at one time there were such windows but that the crowds of women around them were considered a public disturbance, so the windows were done away with.  As the article points out, and I agree, it is a comment on societal behavioural norms, when the exact same behaviour for men and women is demonized on one side but encouraged on the other.  The notion of “the other” is prominent in the sex trade in the Netherlands.  Whether it is immigrants, drug addicts, or transsexuals, the ability for Dutch citizens to characterize sex workers as “other” and therefore undeserving of decent human treatment is perhaps the most disturbing, yet least surprising aspect of this section of the article. 

            At first glance the difference between the Cuban and Dutch sex trade is apparent in the kind of trade that goes on, while the Dutch sex trade seems more physical, the Cuban sex trade seems emotional and longer lasting.  I was surprised to learn that Cuba had eradicated prostitution as part of its socialist social reforms, but with a surge in foreign tourists and an apparent need for prostitutes the industry has resurfaced.  It was also interesting and enlightening to have the article compare the salary for one night of sex in Havana at 40 dollars, which is double the monthly salary of a Cuban university professor.  It is obvious that with the attraction of money like that, that the sex industry re-materialized in Havana.  Lastly the idea of the “other” is prominent again in this section of the article, but instead of a reason for exclusion, it is the attraction.  In Havana the prostitutes provide the fantasy for their clients, of a radicalized other, their fantasy of stereotype, where the uninhibited other race girl fulfils their desires.  While on contrast to the Dutch notion of the “other,” it is not surprising that this notion is a driving force behind the sex industry in both parts of the world examined in this article.  It seems that though sex tourism is desired, its categorization as a realm of “other” in global society provides the separation needed for the industry to survive and thrive.