Slave Next Door (25 page)

that rather the pressure of the New York State Assembly was responsi-

ble for the disparity. “We advocated for comparable penalties for labor

and sex trafficking. We wanted to see [the traffickers] punished at the

same level.”118 Says Norma Ramos of CATW, “The truth is, we fought

as hard for labor as for sex trafficking, but the legislators kept saying,

‘You’re never going to get that.’”119 Still, the influence of the antiprosti-

tution group was strongly felt throughout the campaign for the passage

of this law. It’s a chicken-egg question: Would the legislators—and the

governor—have been so disposed toward a sex-weighted law had the

pressure from this group not been so great?

Mark Lagon, Miller’s replacement as ambassador at large and direc-

tor of the TIP office, sees New York’s law as superior to any other state

antitrafficking statutes passed thus far. It is, he states,

without a doubt, the model that I look to. It finds a way of dealing with all

aspects of human trafficking, and in particular on the sex trafficking front,

not being flummoxed by the limits of federalism for dealing with prostitu-

tion. We know—reasonable people know—left and right, pragmatists and

Bales_Ch04 2/23/09 11:45 AM Page 114

1 1 4 / S L AV E S I N T H E L A N D O F T H E F R E E

moralists know—that the sex industry and legal prostitution breed an

enabling environment—a legitimate cover in which sex trafficking can

occur. And [the New York State law] finds a way to . . . look at the ways

that victims are enticed into sex trafficking. . . . It’s a model law for other

states and . . . for other countries.120

The emphasis on sex trafficking is interesting considering that New

York State has seen not only clear examples of agricultural and domes-

tic servitude but such highly visible cases as New York City’s deaf

Mexicans and the dozens of Peruvians trafficked into labor on Long

Island. And now, according to one high-ranking government official

who asked to remain anonymous, “The abolitionists are trying to make

the New York State law the model for the rest of the country.”

At the heart of the debate is whether a woman can freely and truly

choose to become a prostitute and should be allowed to continue under

meaningful protections, or whether all the pressures that drive her into

prostitution should be considered coercion and call for serious correc-

tive legal action. Both sides point to the overarching conditions of

poverty, sexism, discrimination, violence against women, and lack of

education as factors that push a woman toward prostitution. The fight

over this issue is bitter and has been for over twenty years. The aboli-

tionists have said that their opponents represent “pimps and procur-

ers,” whereas their opponents paint the abolitionists as dogmatic and

ideologically rigid propagandists who are willing to ignore the immedi-

ate health and safety needs of “sex workers.” The advocates who see

the legalization or criminalization of prostitution as distracting from the

larger issue of slavery in all its forms, including forced prostitution, are

often caught in the middle. On all sides, the pain and degradation suf-

fered by sexually exploited women drive the intensity of the debate.

Both groups project anger and urgency, and the gulf between them is

wide and perhaps unbridgeable. On at least one point, however, there is

consensus. For those women—and children—who have been kid-

napped, sold, and/or forced into the control of pimps or brothels, no

one questions the absence of free choice. No one disputes the scope, or

the barbaric nature, of true sex slavery.

M O V I N G F O R WA R D

As for the service providers, victim advocates, philosophers, religious

leaders, and partisan intellectuals, they must all recognize that too often

the very trafficking victims they purport to be “saving” are neglected

Bales_Ch04 2/23/09 11:45 AM Page 115

S U P P LY A N D D E M A N D / 1 1 5

when energy goes to dissension and political maneuvering. Any case or

argument can be better made through objective analysis and viable

research than through vilification and fear-mongering. Ultimately, there

must be a common goal and a single, unified effort to reach it.

Otherwise, we will continue to show a failure rate that is as tragic as it

is embarrassing.

Yet the likelihood of détente seems remote at best. Feelings are strong

and often bitter and the players intractable. When asked whether she

envisioned a coming together of the factions or an increased polariza-

tion, CATW’s Dorchen Leidholdt replied, “I don’t think it could get any

more polarized. . . . We can’t gloss over differences that may result in the

denial of services to victims or legislation that provides a loophole to

traffickers. So, honestly—do I think that the people who think the sex

industry is beneficial to women . . . and that prostitution is a job like

any other are going to sit down with organizations like the Coalition

Against Trafficking in Women and break bread and join in a common

effort for legislation any time soon? No. I don’t see it as happening. . . .

These are very different, almost antithetical perspectives, and I don’t

think they could be—or should be—resolved any time soon.”121

Ann Jordan has a different perspective:

I would like to believe that people of goodwill can unite around efforts to

stop the use of unfree labor in prostitution, homes, construction, agricul-

ture or any other site; to prevent the use of minors in the worst forms of

child labor, particularly prostitution and pornography; to prosecute all

acts of violence against sex workers; and to develop further research and

funding to support evidence-based programs to help youth stay out of sex

work and provide sex workers with training for other types of work.

Collaboration breaks down, however, around the question of whether

adults have the right to choose to engage in sex work (and to expect their

rights to be protected at work) or whether sex workers are, by definition,

victims who do not have the right or ability to choose, from among good

or bad options, the type of work they will do. The “anti–right to choose”

advocates believe that no woman freely consents to sell sex. They insist

that criminalizing prostitution and clients is the means to stop women

from selling sex and to stop trafficking into the sex sector. The pro-rights

advocates note that all human beings have the same rights, including the

right to make choices that others might not like. Even the International

Labour Organization recognizes the reality that some “adult individuals”

may “freely choose sex work” and calls for the application of human

rights protections: “the policy concerns should focus on improving their

working conditions and social protection and on ensuring that they are

entitled to the same labour rights and benefits as other workers.” It may

Bales_Ch04 2/23/09 11:45 AM Page 116

1 1 6 / S L AV E S I N T H E L A N D O F T H E F R E E

be that the only way to move forward, despite our differences, is for policy

makers and advocates to agree that policies and programs must be based

upon objective, apolitical, peer-reviewed, evidence-based research and

not on anyone’s opinions or anecdotes.122

The Los Angeles–based NGO Coalition to Abolish Slavery and

Trafficking (CAST) recently put out a position paper that takes a broad

view: “We are at a pivotal point in this still early stage of America’s

modern abolitionist movement. What is needed now, more than ever, is

a holistic, human rights-based framework, to guide our next steps to

ensure that
all
victims—including those forced into commercial or non-

commercial sex, sweatshops, agriculture, domestic servitude, hotels or

restaurants, construction, even boys’ choirs—have access to assistance

that is equitable, non-paternalistic, survivor-centered, and client-

driven.”123 Heather Moore, CAST’s social services director, adds, “We

need an approach that’s reasonable, and responsible—an approach

based on integrity.”124 Amen.

Bales_Ch05 2/23/09 11:01 AM Page 117

5

N E W B U S I N E S S M O D E L S

I T S O U N D S L I K E A J O K E

What do acrobats, naked gardeners, hair braiding, boy’s choirs, deaf

Mexicans, and the shirt on your back all have in common? In a word:

slavery. While most slaves in America today fall into three categories—

agricultural labor, forced prostitution, and domestic servitude—there is

no lack of ingenuity on the part of traffickers in exploiting their victims.

Slave traffickers are imaginative and innovative businessmen. Where an

opportunity exists for exploitation, however strange or unlikely, there’s

a good chance there is a hidden slave.

Ashley’s Salon

Ashley’s Hair Braiding Salon looked like any one of hundreds of similar

establishments across America. Located on Central Avenue in East

Orange, New Jersey, it offered hair care at a reasonable price, primarily

serving the needs of African American women. Service was good, and

the braiders were authentic West Africans with the lovely French accents

of their native Togo. The irony was that they had made their own middle

passage into slavery.

In late 2007, federal agents arrested the two men and a woman who

ran Ashley’s Salon and another braiding shop in Newark. All were

charged with harboring illegal aliens, and the woman was charged with

smuggling illegal aliens for financial gain. Immigration and Customs

Enforcement (ICE) agents stated that at least twenty young women had

been smuggled into the country and put to work with no pay. The

scheme rested on fraud linked to existing U.S. visa procedures. Some

Togolese citizens had participated in the U.S. Diversity Immigrant Visa

Program. This congressionally mandated program makes available fifty

thousand permanent resident visas each year, drawn by a random selec-

tion from applications, submitted by people from countries with low

1 1 7

Bales_Ch05 2/23/09 11:01 AM Page 118

1 1 8 / S L AV E S I N T H E L A N D O F T H E F R E E

rates of immigration to the United States who meet strict eligibility

requirements. After arriving as part of this program and becoming a

permanent resident or citizen of the United States, a person is allowed

to apply for admission for his or her close relatives as well. So far, so

good, but some of the Togolese lottery winners began to have surpris-

ingly large families, made up primarily of young women.

After posing as relatives of visa recipients, the young women were

excited about a chance to build a new life in America, but the reality

was not what they had expected. On arrival their passports were taken,

and they were put to work for up to fourteen hours a day, six or seven

days a week. They were not paid. Once freed, the women told officers

that if they complained or did not follow the rules they were beaten.

The special agent in charge of the investigation, Tom Manifese,

explained, “This is a case of modern-day slavery. These women were

promised a better life in the U.S. but instead ended up becoming victims

of human trafficking.”1 All twenty young women were taken into care

and provided with emergency housing and counseling. Meanwhile, the

son of the woman who had enslaved them offered the classic rationali-

zation for human trafficking when interviewed by reporters. “They got

everything they needed and it was better than Africa,” he said.

“Everybody was treated well. We helped them.”2 How strange that this

young man, himself an African American, would so closely follow the

logic of Thomas R. Dew, key southern apologist for American slavery

before the Civil War: “The condition of the negro slave in the South is

far better than that of the native African.”3

Viva Las Vegas!

There’s a moment in the lives of most Americans, possibly a moment of

maturity, that comes when, while watching performing animals in a

circus, one suddenly thinks, “They’re fun to watch, but I wonder if
they

are having fun?” Interestingly, the same thought rarely occurs to us

when it comes to the
human
circus performers; after all, they chose this

glamorous if grueling profession, right? So it is not surprising that

people in and around Las Vegas were shocked to discover that a locally

based troupe of Chinese acrobats was, in fact, enslaved.

The break in this case came when one of the enslaved women, who

also served as interpreter for the troupe, escaped and went to the police.

She told them that she and others were being held against their will in a

suburban home in Las Vegas. After a short investigation federal agents

Bales_Ch05 2/23/09 11:01 AM Page 119

N E W B U S I N E S S M O D E L S / 1 1 9

raided the house and arrested three men. The ringleader seemed to be

You Zhi Li, aged thirty-eight. Immediately after the raid, agents inter-

viewed fourteen people, five of them juveniles. Talented acrobats, they