Aug 18, 2015 3 min read

It may be “the world’s oldest profession,” but prostitution has, for the most part, been condemned by religious and secular authorities throughout its long existence. The whole notion of buying and selling sex has correctly been viewed as ugly, exploitative and abhorrent.

However, as with the buying and selling of drugs, this argument has been countered by those who said if consenting adults want to have sex for money, what role should the state play in this exchange? It is a “victimless crime.”

This conviction seems to have partially guided the reasoning of Amnesty International, a justly esteemed human rights organization, in its recommendation earlier this month that prostitution – or “sex work,” in Amnesty International’s terminology – be decriminalized throughout the world. Like those who contend legalizing the deadliest drugs would push the addicted toward treatment and reduce crimes associated with drug trafficking, Amnesty International is arguing removing criminal penalties from the buying and selling of sex would allow its practitioners to receive health care, leave the profession without fear of reprisal and freely report abuse.

It would also, in a cringe-inducing aside, allow those buying sex to “develop a stronger sense of self in relationship with sex workers, improving their life enjoyment and dignity.”

Ugh.

While Amnesty International is right more often than not on a host of issues throughout its 54-year existence, on this one it is wrong. Decriminalizing sex work would more likely empower pimps, increase human trafficking and do nothing to stop the exploitation of desperately vulnerable individuals who sell their bodies.

What Amnesty International is advocating was already attempted in a couple of countries, with less than superlative results. Both Germany and the Netherlands decriminalized sex work early in the last decade, but neither country saw a drop in human trafficking – in fact, the numbers increased. So did violence directed at prostitutes. Amnesty International also puts too much stock in the idea those who engage in prostitution are adults making a rational decision about how to earn money. More often than not, they are in dire straits, and, frequently, not adults at all but children.

Cindy McCain, the wife of U.S. Sen. John McCain, wrote in The Washington Post “sex traffickers and brothel owners could operate with immunity for what they say is consensual sex work,” under Amnesty International’s proposal, and “decriminalizing sex work would put those in the sex industry, and vulnerable populations around the world, in greater danger by giving no authority to go after those who exploit others for personal profit, all under the guise of protecting those in harm’s way.”

What appears to be a more productive and effective approach was adopted in Scandinavia, where Sweden, Norway and Iceland maintained sanctions against those who are buying sex, engaging in human trafficking, operating brothels or pimping. But these countries eased criminal penalties against prostitutes, who are the most victimized figures within this nexus.

The world’s oldest profession is unlikely to ever be eradicated, but it can be curbed and contained. Amnesty International’s proposal, however, is not the way to do it.