[SWAF-Potluck] I apologize...

[Andy Sorfleet]

Sex workers, however, have no say or control over what conclusions
researchers draw from the data and get published -- data made up most
often of confidential, anecdotal evidence. Often sex workers (and
their communities) are not even informed of the conclusions; or where
those conclusions are being presented. Most often, the researchers
lack the sex work experience and context to even understand the
implications of what their conclusions recommend. I offer this
example:

At the 2012 International AIDS Conference in Washington DC, Kathleen
Deering presented "Mapping spatial barriers and facilitators to HIV
testing by work environments among sex workers in Vancouver, Canada,"
in a session called, "Supporting Better Sex Work Programs." The
research data determined that the closer an HIV-testing site was to
where the sex workers worked, the more likely the sex workers were to
use the testing site. The conclusions that were drawn from that data
recommended, therefore, to have testing sites in sex workers'
workplaces.

"Our results highlight the importance of physical availability of HIV
testing sites within sex work environments to facilitate use of HIV
prevention and care among SWs." (University of British Columbia,
Medicine, Division of AIDS, Vancouver, Centre for Excellence in
HIV/AIDS.)

What Kathleen Deering didn't understand -- but all the sex workers in
the conference room did (and said so!) -- was that putting HIV testing
directly in the workplace would result in coercive STI and HIV
testing, and a complete lack of confidentiality. In other words, it
would be impossible for a sex workers to refuse to be tested at work
and expect to continue to be employed there. And, it would be
impossible for a sex worker to test positive and not have his or her
colleagues cognizant of the test results.

There are very important public health issues facing sex workers
globally today -- even beyond the question of mandatory or coercive
testing in the workplace. They include but are not limited to
Presumptive Periodic Treatment (PPT) for STIs, Pre-Exposure
Prophylaxis (PreP), and Treatment as Prevention (TasP).

In fact, Kathleen Deering's research was, "part of a
government-sponsored pilot initiative of 'treatment as prevention,'
recent efforts have been made to improve access to HIV prevention and
care, including HIV testing, to vulnerable sub-populations in
Vancouver."

Even when research methodology is scientifically sound, and the data
is collected in an ethical manner, the research data is still
non-representational. In other words, sex workers don't hold a stake
in the conclusions. This is because they haven't put their names on it
-- unlike negotiating and voting for a contract. There is no
representation when "291 sex workers" give confidential interviews and
their blood. There is representation, however, when 291 sex-worker
members of a professional association vote to endorse a contract,
policy or manifesto.

In March, 2013, Dr. Kate Shannon gave a presentation at St. Paul's
Hospital titled, "Evidence-Based HIV/STI Prevention, Public Policy and
Sex Work." Dr. Shannon is Director of the Gender & Sexual Health
Initiative, BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS where Kathleen
Deering works. Dr. Shannon's presentation to those doctors and
students advocated for sex-work public policy to be based on [her]
research, which she listed.

In her Open Letter circulated to academics for endorsement, Dr.
Shannon again calls for "evidence-based" sex-work public policy. This
time, she presents her conclusion that sex workers have unprotected
sex because they are forced to jump into cars without screening
clients, out of fear of police enforcing the communicating law. I
wonder, did the sex workers who gave those confidential interviews
know that they would be used for this purpose?

 Evidence [mis]represented in the conclusions drawn by Kathleen
Deering, et al, could be used to create public health policy which
placed HIV testing in sex workers' workplaces. And, sex workers could
have no say about it. The researchers however would be guaranteed
continued access to STI testing data on sex workers for many years.
Sex workers who put their trust in research and researchers to
represent their workplace interests are extremely vulnerable to having
their interests side-lined or mispresented -- or even misunderstood.

Personally, I can't imagine how I would feel if I used my entré into
sex-workers' workplaces and communities to recruit research subjects,
and in the end the research was used to justify a policy that
infringed upon sex workers' health and privacy rights.

Working sex workers must not just passively rely on others to hold
their stakes for them. Fortunately, I think sex workers are smarter
than that.They will -- one way or another -- associate in order to
represent their collective interests.

In solidarity,
Andrew

On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Bowen, Raven <raven1 at mail.ubc.ca> wrote:
> To resist outsider representation, some sex workers are research
> participants and advisors; some set policy, create and enforce guidelines to
> establish how researchers can ethically engage with organizations and
> industry professionals; and some become researchers to create a sea change
> from the inside.
> Raven
>
> On Apr 3, 2014 2:42 PM, Esther Shannon <emls at shaw.ca> wrote:
> Apology much appreciated, Andrew.
>
> Esther
>
> On 2014-04-03, at 10:24 AM, Andy Sorfleet <a.sorfleet at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I want to say I am sorry for responding in haste to posts from several
>> list subscribers (Raven, Susan, Esther) yesterday. I realize now that
>> I am somewhat emotional about this issue and I was obviously having
>> difficulty expressing myself. I should have taken more time to
>> consider my words.
>>
>> We could argue endlessly about the merits of the conclusions drawn by
>> researchers. I know that I cannot make definitive statements about
>> data which I have not had access to. And, perhaps such a debate was
>> not appropriate for this forum which is about sex workers and friends
>> and eating!
>>
>> One point I will not compromise, however, is that statements that
>> suggest sex workers make poor decisions regarding clients and unsafe
>> sex -- regardless if they are true or not -- promote a very
>> well-entrenched stigma. And I find myself extremely insulted when
>> research makes such claims.
>>
>> I worked as a male prostitute for over a decade during the AIDS crisis
>> -- over three of those years included work on the street. HIV research
>> through that time consistently scapegoated male prostitutes for the
>> spread of AIDS into the heterosexual family. When you make claims that
>> sex workers fail to negotiate safe sex, you are saying that we don't
>> care for our clients. We don't care for ourselves, and we don't care
>> about our community.
>>
>> I think it is important and healthy for sex workers to discuss such
>> issues among themselves. However, when you distribute this letter with
>> such a statement, you are asking powerful people to endorse that
>> statement and present it to the highest authority.
>>
>> Powerful public statements which suggest that sex workers exercise
>> poor judgement, call into question sex workers judgement and ability
>> to negotiate. This undermines sex workers' attempts to define and
>> direct their own industry and working conditions. Instead, the
>> government will look to researchers to determine workplace
>> regulations.
>>
>> Sex workers do not need researchers to represent their interests. And,
>> it is not in sex workers' best interest to allow others to represent
>> them. Sex workers can and will represent their interests for
>> themselves. This is the only way that we can fight the age-old stigmas
>> associated with prostitution -- including that we are vectors of
>> disease.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Andrew
>> _______________________________________________
>> SWAF-Potluck mailing list
>> SWAF-Potluck at lists.resist.ca
>> https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swaf-potluck
>
> _______________________________________________
> SWAF-Potluck mailing list
> SWAF-Potluck at lists.resist.ca
> https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swaf-potluck