CarnalNation

On April 13, 1946, the French parliament passed the Marthe Richard Act, which effectively closed more than 1,400 formerly legal brothels throughout the nation with a single wave of the legislative wand. Since then, the legality of prostitution itself has remained ambiguous, hingeing on the non-public nature of the transaction. However, a 2003 law, the Domestic Security Act, expanded the definition of the 'crime' of soliciting sex for money by including passive solicitation (le racolage passif), which could be broadly defined by police and applied to such activities as loitering or even failing to discourage solicitation. The crime is punishable by imprisonment for up to 2 months and a fine of up to 3,750 Euros (approx. U.S. $5,000); sex work clients face no penalities under the law. While that law has yet to be challenged in the courts, the French government is taking up the issues surrounding sex work, including whether or not to repeal the Marthe Richard Act and allow brothels once again to operate openly.

Clipped from: www.agoravox.fr by clp.ly

 A recent survey found that 59 percent of French citizens favor re-opening brothels. A majority of men polled (70%) support the move compared with only 49 percent of women. Politicians and sex work advocates point to these statistics as evidence that the French people are concerned about the current situation that many sex workers face, including health and safety risks, the dangers of human trafficking, the lack of social and legal support, and the persistence of the role of criminal syndicates in sex work. A legislative working group led by center-right member of parliament Chantal Brunel is studying various ways of improving the current state of affairs for sex workers, including an examination of the ostensibly supportive climates in Spain, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Germany where sex work is open and legal.

Clipped from: www.leparisien.fr by clp.ly

Madame Brunel categorically supports re-opening brothels. In an interview with Le Parisien magazine, she said, "The idea is not to return to the situation before 1946. I propose the study of the creation of places where the purchase of sexual services is possible under conditions of medical, financial, and legal protection." In response to questions about sex work as an affront to the dignity of women, Brunel responds rather pragmatically. "Very few women do [sex work] voluntarily, but we must not close our eyes to it," she says. "Prostitution has always existed and always will. While we await an ideal world, we must put into place a system that protects prostitutes as best as possible." Brunel concludes that by re-opening brothels that women will be safer and healthier, but she cautions that such a legal move will require much study.

While most sex-work advocacy groups in France believe that something must be done to ameliorate the ambiguous situation of sex workers, many disagree that the answer is re-opening brothels. The reasons for not supporting the repeal of the Marthe Richard Act are primarily financial and health related. Some sex work advocates say that brothels end up costing sex workers more of their hard-earned money through procurement fees and higher rents. Others suggest that the atmosphere in a brothel is generally unhealthy for those who work there because of the prevalence of drugs and alcohol as well as the lack of sanitary conditions. Many also believe that sex workers should have the option of operating independently. Most of these groups also decry what they see as a lack of representation in the government study group. However, as Brunel points out, the 1946 and 2003 laws "removed prostitution from the hearts of the cities and forced it to hide in the woods, on the web, and in other places where it easy to destroy a human being." Her mission is to put an end to the exploitation of sex workers. How and when—not to mention, if—an end to such exploitation will happen will depend on the findings of a controversial—if well-meaning—government panel.