Indoor Sex Work, Safer Sex Work

March 26, 2012 the Ontario Court of Appeals (OCA) ruled that the criminal code provision restricting “common bawdy houses” be struck down so that sex workers could work indoors and in groups to increase safety.This has promoted a lot of conversation in the media around whether working indoors increases safety for sex workers. The answer in the word? Yes.

It is actually quite logical that indoor sex work would be safer. Street level sex work means that those involved have no protection from, first and foremost, being outside. That means that outdoor sex work does not offer protection from the weather or access to food or washrooms that are a key part in increasing health, wellness and safety in a work environment. As well, street level sex work offers no protection from the dangers of street life, such as the violence, assaults, robbery and drug use that can occur on the streets. Negotiation for outdoor sex workers is also limited by being outdoors as it involves discussing services and fees quickly in strangers’ cars, on street corners or dark alleys which decreases a worker's ability to refuse unwanted services, to discuss condom use and screen dates.

Working indoors, however, means that sex workers have increased control over their environment. Indoor workers may know who is in the building; they know if there are other people who can offer support if they have an emergency and don't worry that there might be someone hiding in the shadows. Indoor workers will also have control over what is in the building; they will know that there aren't any weapons in the building or if there are silent panic alarms. Indoor sex workers will also know where there are exits, phones or other safety measures and have an increased chance of having safety procedures, such as time calls and screening practices in place. Because indoor sex workers are often more connected to each other and resources, they may have more access to harm reduction support such as safer sex supplies and bad date reports as well.

Opponents of the OCA’s ruling state that the law is there to deter people from involving themselves in sex work. With or without the law, sex work exists as the law does not deter those already involved. So for those invovled, safety is a human right, and that being involved in sex work does not mean that right can be taken away.

Opponents of ruling also worry that the change in law would create red light districts and decrease the value of neighbourhoods in which sex work is occurring. The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of sex work already occurs inside through escort agencies, online websites, in or out calls etc. There is the false impression that the OCA ruling means that indoor sex work is about to begin- it is already occurring. The ruling is not about changing where indoor sex work occurs; it is simply about making sex workers safer and not criminalizing those involved in the process.

There is also the argument that allowing sex workers to work indoors opens the door to legal exploitation. It is true that violence, abuse, exploitation and other negative issues can occur in indoor sex work. It is also true that indoor sex work can be more hidden and as a result, harder for agencies to offer support if exploitation is occurring. That doesn’t, however, change the fact that those who are working in street level sex work are vulnerable and the opportunity to work indoorsto increase their safety should not be criminalized. It is also true that decreasing criminalization of sex workers removes barriers for workers to come forward to report violence or exploitation that they would not otherwise do if they fear persecution.

Is indoor sex work safer? The answer in a word: yes. Indoor sex work is safer sex work, period.