âIt is true,â he said, âthat you cannot commit a crime and that the right arm of the law cannot lay its finger on you irrespective of the degree of your criminality. Anything you do is a lie and nothing that happens to you is true.â
I nodded my agreement comfortably.
âFor that reason alone,â said the Sergeant, âwe can take you and hang the life out of you and you are not hanged at all and there is no entry to be made in the death papers. The particular death you die is not even a death (which is an inferior phenomenon at the best) only an insanitary abstraction in the backyard, a piece of negative nullity neutralised and rendered void by asphyxiation and the fracture of the spinal string. If it is not a lie to say that you have been given the final hammer behind the barrack, equally it is true to say that nothing has happened to you.â
âYou mean that because I have no name I cannot die and that you cannot be held answerable for death even if you kill me?â
âThat is about the size of it,â said the Sergeant.
âFlann OâBrien, The Third Policeman
âA priest-ridden Godforsaken race,â James Joyce called his fellow Irish. Till about twenty years ago this was true. Ireland now is a society (Quebec in the 60s was another) thatâs whirled through an extremely swift process of secularization. Damped down in part by the church-abuse scandals, weekly attendance at Mass has dropped precipitately (from close to 90% of professing Catholics twenty years ago to barely 20% now). Thatâs only the tip of the altar â even if many of the signs of this seismic shift might be taken for granted elsewhere in Europe. Divorce, long banned in the Constitution, became legal in 1995. You can now buy condoms without a prescription. Even the Archbishop of Dublin grudgingly acknowledges that the countryâs secularization turned out to be âin great partâ a benefit, like the earth revolving around the sun, which was a risky thing when first tried but seems not to have done too much damage.
As with Quebec, the status of homosexuality has served as bellwether of these changes. The State decriminalized same-sex sex in 1993, outlawed discrimination in 1998, and, three years ago, permitted civil partnerships for lesbian and gay couples. Dublin is now a gay tourist destination.
Militant secularists tend to see superstitionâs recession and libertyâs advance as simultaneous and inseparable. Indeed, when the patriarchal conception of personhood that dominated Irish politics for decades gave way to a modern ideal of equal citizenship, it was (to paraphrase the Archbishop) in great part good. You couldnât ask for a worse symbol of the old, medieval-minded Ireland than the infamous Magdalene Laundries. Perhaps the non-Irish donât know much about these; they were an appalling survival of slavery into modern times. From the 1920s on, the Church imprisoned thousands of âfallenâ women â women who had sex outside marriage, or even their young children â forcing them to labor unpaid, as penance, in profit-making laundries. Many were stripped even of their identities, given a new name when they arrived at their religious jails. Many spent their lives in confinement. The government was complicit in the horrors (police often dragged girls back if they managed to escape); it allowed them in subservience to a Church that claimed large elements of State-like power. The public remained largely unaware till 1993, when one convent sold land on which a disbanded laundry had stood. 155 unmarked graves of women were discovered on the grounds.
All that is over, surely â the last laundry closed in 1996. The secular State assures that no woman or man will go nameless, that equality brings freedom. True? The gays are doing great in Ireland, after all. And yet ⊠other kinds of sex are less lucky.
What happens during secularization? The truth is: Parts of paternalism always survive. Power is polymorphously perverse and adaptable. The secular State can all too readily assume a pastoral mantle, in the presumption that some people are unready for citizenship and need surveillance and protection.
I sometimes call this the ideology of damaged citizenship â or better, perhaps, since not all the victims are citizens, âdamaged belonging.â Elements of it underlie citizenship discourses almost everywhere, since equality is always partly fictive. But I believe theyâre particularly insidious where rapid changes in belief give politics a new foundation thatâs insecure, untrusted, wobbly. Identifying some members of the community as damaged serves a dual purpose. It justifies the Stateâs power to control and intervene. And it defines certain people who resist that power as not fully members of the polity, not qualified to speak at all. It also allows religious claims and repressions to renew themselves in sheepâs clothing, in a safely secular guise. The new regime draws on the old one for support.
âDamaged belongingâ is the model whenever politics starts to revolve around, not peopleâs claims for participation, but the Stateâs claims on their behalf. Sometimes these are people who genuinely need protection, like kids, though (since they arenât allowed to speak for themselves or describe the hazards they face) the threats conjured against them often run from exaggerated to imaginary: pedophiles rather than poverty, prostitution rather than family violence. Sometimes the furor demands the State defend a purely theoretical person, the fetus. (Barney Frankâs line remains the best ever on abortion politics in the United States: âRepublicans believe that life begins at conception, and ends at birth.â) Only a month ago did Ireland â extraordinarily regressive on abortion for all its liberalism in some other areas â pass a law saying that saving a motherâs life could be prioritized over preserving a fetusâs viability.
Sometimes, on the other hand, real citizens need protection from damaged citizens, or people altogether outside the citizenship pale. The poor or, that reliable staple of current European rhetoric, the migrant become the terrors.
So many of these stories come together in ⊠the sex worker. Sex workers number among the demanding, undeserving poor. Theyâre migrants not neighbors, people from Out There coming to claim our benefits and corrupt our shores. On the other hand, they recruit our children into prostitution. And of course, having done that, they want the State to kill their fetuses for them. (A UK abolitionist site, despite couching itself as feminist, condemns ârisk of pregnancy [and] high abortion rateâ among the âhazards of prostitution.â)Â
Last November, Irelandâs government, under pressure from anti-prostitution campaigners, announced a review of the countryâs laws on sex work. (Ireland effectively decriminalized buying and selling sex in the 1980s, but soliciting and brothel-keeping remain illegal, accompanied by the usual sweeping laws against loitering.) The ultimate aim was to impose the so-called âSwedish model,â which criminalizes the purchaser of sex. The campaign to put the screws on the government offers interesting insight into how religious forces ensure their influence in the supposedly secular State. Ruhama was one of the main players. What a nice womany group, down to its ecumenical-lefty name (Hebrew for ârenewing lifeâ)! It says on its website that it
regards prostitution as violence against women and violations of womenâs human rights. âProstitution and the accompanying evil of trafficking for prostitution, is incompatible with the dignity and worth of every human beingâ â UN Convention 1949. We see prostitution and the social and cultural attitudes which sustain it as being deeply rooted in gender inequality and social marginalisation.
This defense of âgender equalityâ is nice. But coming from Ruhama? Weird.
In fact, Ruhama is a project of the Catholic Church, not previously noted for its attachment to the idea. When it was founded in 1993, its registered office (legal headquarters, that is) was the Provincialate of the Good Shepherd Sisters in Dublin. In 1995, it changed digs (moving as often as Simon Dedalus!) to the Dublin address of the Sisters of Our Lady of Charity. In 1998 it moved again, relocating with the Sisters of Mercy. And in 2002 it found its final resting place, at least till today, at All Hallows College, a private Catholic school (directed by the Vincentians, a collection of orders that counts the Sisters of Charity in its family). They must feel nervous, typing UN language into their computers in these sacral locations; isnât there some anti-Antichrist software on hand? But âBehold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you.â Thatâs Luke 10:19.
Ruhamaâs board today includes two Sisters of Our Lady of Charity, and one of the Good Shepherd Sisters.  Here, though, is a list of some of its board members from the past:
Sr. Angela Fahy (Sisters of Our Lady of Charity), 1993-2000
Sr. Evelyn Fergus (Good Shepherd Sisters), 1993-1996
Sr. Jennifer McAleer (Good Shepherd Sisters), 1993-1995
Sr. Noreen OâShea (Good Shepherd Sisters), 1993-1998, 2003-2008
Sr. Helena Farrell (Sisters of Our Lady of Charity), 1995-2000
Sr. Johanna Horgan (Good Shepherd Sisters), 1995-2005
Sr. Aileen DâAlton (Good Shepherd Sisters), 1996-2000
Sr. Margaret Burke (Sisters of Our Lady of Charity) 1996-2006
Sr. Ann Marie Ryan (Sisters of Our Lady of Charity), 2000-2004
Sr. Clare Kenny (Good Shepherd Sisters), 2008-2009
Itâs like Sister Act! Ruhama, as a service organization, also gets tons of Irish government money, some of which it then uses to lobby the Irish government for anti-prostitution laws. The whole thing illustrates the easy way that religious mandates can be repackaged, to mesh with and support State power.
But itâs more than that. Both of these religious orders ran Magdalene Laundries for decades. Their hands are stained with the sweat of the women who worked there, and the blood of the women who died there. These God-fearing enforcers are the âfallenâ people, and not even their own slave laundries could wash them clean. The ordersâ offers of compensation to the survivors of abuse have been risibly inadequate, and theyâve continued to rake in money from the properties where the horrors happened. (In land sales in 2006 alone, the Sisters of Mercy âreceived âŹ32m for a 16-acre tract in Killarney. And the Sisters of Our Lady of Charity sold the site adjoining its Magdalene Laundry in High Park Dublin for âŹ55m.â) Now, with consummate sliminess, they are using a feminist-sounding front to campaign against sex work, on the grounds that itâs â get this â âslavery.â Or as they put it: Ruhamaâs âview is that trafficking for sexual exploitation,â into which they lump all prostitution, âis a contemporary form of slavery, with a distinctly gendered bias.â Really! (On its off days when itâs not oppressing sex workers, the Holy See doesnât even like the word âgender.â) Ambrose Bierce called hypocrisy âprejudice with a halo,â and you can see why.
The Joint Oireachtas (Parliament) Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality held hearings on the prostitution laws in early 2013. These were a stacked, tilted joke. The official record shows that only one speaker from the Sex Workers Alliance Ireland was allowed to testify. There were twenty-three witnesses from member groups in the Ruhama- inspired, anti-sex-work Turn Off the Red Light campaign, including two from Ruhama alone. That isnât democracy, itâs a sing-along; you might as well listen to the Vienna Boysâ Choir. But then, as Flann OâBrien told his readers years ago, ââThe majority of the members of the Irish parliament are professional politicians, in the sense that otherwise they would not be given jobs minding mice at crossroads.â
One academic delicately complimented Turn Off the Red Light for âa brilliantly run campaignâ which ârested on a shaky foundation, that of limited comprehensive knowledge about the actual nature ⊠of prostitution in Ireland.â No surprises, then: in June, the legislators recommended the Swedish model, criminalizing all purchase of sexual services. They unanimously added other, still more draconian proposals. People who provide accommodation to sex workers would be criminalized â meaning that indoor sex work (by far the safest kind) will be illegal, and sex workers can be driven from their homes.  The GardaĂ (police) would be able to disconnect any phone suspected of being used by a sex worker: an effort, as activists note, to
cut off sex workersâ access to communication by phone â which would affect them in all aspects of their life, not merely their sex work activityâŠ. Denying sex workers the right to use telephones could also have adverse effects for their safety, by making it impossible for them to use âugly mugsâ schemes that alert them to dangerous clients, or preventing them calling for help if attacked.
And, incredibly, âthe accessing of web sites â whether located in the State or abroad â that advertise prostitution in the State should be treated in the same way as accessing sites that advertise or distribute child pornography.â This is absurd on innumerable grounds, but itâs also horrible. Even a sex worker who checks ads (say, to see what the competition are doing) could be arrested.
Outreach health and social service workers who engage with sex workers through these sites, as well as sex industry researchers, would also be affected. It goes without saying that this proposal would require a significant expansion of the apparatus already in place to monitor Irish internet usage.
This is damaged belonging with a vengeance. In the name of protecting sex workers, theyâre cut off from phones and from the Internet; not just buying their services but contacting them virtually becomes criminal; the law treats and insults them as exploited children, âfallenâ and powerless, and all in the name of protection. Down that road lie the Magdalene Laundries that Ruhamaâs founders used to run.
Already, even before a lawâs been passed, the deprivation of basic rights is starting. As I noted in a previous post, police in Ireland have rarely if ever used the ASBO (Anti-Social Behaviour Order), a tool of repression common in the UK, one that allows jailing suspects even for acts that are not illegal. But not long after the Oireachtas report, the GardaĂ in Limerick sought ASBOs against eight alleged sex workers, mostly Romanian, to strip them of freedom of movement in the cityâs center. Years in prison just for showing their faces on certain streets! Once youâve become a non-person, as Flann OâBrienâs policeman explained, the lawâs letter doesnât matter because you have no name. Anything can be done to you.
The great blog on sex workersâ rights El estante de la Citi has recently posted an analysis of Irelandâs anti-sex-work panic that appeared in the underground magazine Rabble. I recommend the blog. Itâs in Spanish, and in fact also offers a Spanish translation of the same piece, and as soon as I opened it Google Translate kicked in on my browser, to turn it back into English â this is globalization in action. Thus I discovered that Google translates âlas LavanderĂas de las Magdalenasâ (Magdalene Laundries) as âCupcake Scrub.â (Itâs probably a tribute to the Spanish-speaking worldâs own secularization process that âMagdalenasâ first reminds an electronic brain of not the saint, but the sweet.) But this made me remember some of the awful names of anti-sex work purges that police have mounted in the past. New York had âOperation Flush the Johnsâ this year. Rio de Janeiro, where police crack down lethally on sex workers all the time, has seen Operation Shame, Operation Sodom, Operation Princess, and Operation Come Here Dollbaby. Who is to say that Operation Cupcake Scrub isnât part of Irelandâs repressive future?
I want to close simply by quoting some of the Rabble article:
The Magdalene Laundries existed to control womenâs lives, and made money, but rescuing modern Irelandâs fallen women is worth quite a bit too. You could never be certain of their motivations but you can certainly speculate as to why some organisations are involved in this. Laura Lee [a sex worker activist] says of the motivations: âTheir agenda seems to be nothing more than continued funding. Government funding and salaries. It suits them to portray the sex industry in a very bad light. The rescue industry is worth big money. Theyâre all saying weâre pimped and trafficked âeven if weâre jumping up and down saying no weâre not.â When actual sex workers are telling a different story to TORL [Turn Off the Red Light], you could be forgiven for asking the awkward question, âWho might know the most about being a sex worker?â âŠ
Rachel, a Romanian escort working in Dublin for the past number of years questioned [the claims that Ruhama and TORL make], and the absence of sex workers own voices in the debate. ⊠âThey say they want to fight against human trafficking but all the escorts I know work of their own free will. I remember the raid last year, 200-ish accommodations were searched by the police and they didnât find one single escort who was trafficked or working against her will.â
But despite the good intentions of those who are genuinely behind TORL it doesnât take away from the fact that criminalising buyers makes things more dangerous for sex workers. The fear of the potential consequences of criminalisation are pretty evident for Rachel: âIf condoms will be used as a proof of sex with a client (if it is criminalised) then sex workers might stop using them.â The repercussions of this type of fear for the health of the women and their clients is obvious.
Donât patronize me: Nassau County District Attorney Kathleen Rice shows results of âOperation Flush the Johnsâ in Mineola, NY, 2013
Criminalisation pushes the industry further underground and creates more pimps. It also gives the Gardai more control over these womenâs lives. And it means that two women who are both sex workers and share an apartment for safety and security might be convicted of brothel-keeping. ⊠Sure, just bring back the Good Shepherd Sisters, Ireland still needs to be saved. You canât be having filthy, dirty, sinful, sex for money. No, you should be out cleaning jaxes for minimum wage. If you canât pay your ESB bill or put food on the table for your kids? Well so be it. Better than being a whore and all that.
Correction: The first version of this blog post incorrectly attributed the Rabble article to activist anthropologist Laura Agustin â mainly because the post that followed it in El estante de la Citi actually was an article by Agustin, and my eyes blurred from having too many browser windows open. My apologies. Be sure, though, to check out Agustinâs blog at The Naked Anthropologist, for plenty of excellent insights on trafficking, sex work, and morality policing that are indisputably hers.Â
![](http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=paper-bird.net&blog=25649757&post=4958&subd=scottlong1980&ref=&feed=1)