Prostitution is a human rights problem. Many institutions and structures often tried to sectionalize this issue as merely a women’s rights issue. While it is evident that the profession is made of 75% of women workers worldwide, it is not simply a women’s rights issue (Jonsson). Families of these often-impoverished women are affected. Stigma of this profession can affect the treatment of these women’s children. The view of this issue affects the society culturally on many levels, which is why it cannot be merely a women’s rights issue. There is also limited understanding of this issue from an intellectual standpoint. Traditionally, prostitution was either a legal or medical problem; in reality, it is an entanglement of these and more. Often, women choose this profession with the desire to become financially stable. Instead they come out criminalized and negatively viewed by their society. This can be traced back through notable societies with prostitution as a legalized profession. Even with this evidence, there is still uncertainty of the usage of the profession, largely due to the association to sex trafficking. And the countries that have legalized prostitution, often mistakenly end up harming the worker rather than protecting them. Within the European Union, different countries have different statutes for legalization. But Germany and The Netherlands are usually the nation states that have the most societal pressure from others. If Germany and the Netherlands strive towards decriminalization of prostitution, sex workers will become financially stable and destigmatized, in turn bettering the nations’ economy overall. 

When researching the history of prostitution, it is obvious that the service was always subjected to scrutiny. Throughout history, different societies used the service for a variety of different reasons. However, there is one period that has direct influence on the European countries being examined: Early Renaissance Venice between 1360s to the 1460s. In this sense, it can be the origin of the two conflicting views towards prostitution. The first stating that during this time, prostitution “was regarded as morally reprehensible, and that prostitutes were defined as fallen women who needed to be contained, controlled, and distinguished from respectable women by particular signs (Clarke).” This could be proven through the strength of the Catholic Church’s influence in the Middle Ages. But this could also be the first modern viewpoint of stigmatization of prostitution from a Westernized viewpoint. The second view, can be classified as the first modern viewpoint of acceptance of prostitution. It was a widespread phenomenon that was pursued by women that were not even deemed skillful in the field (Clarke). The reasoning behind this, from a historical interpretation was mainly economical; prostitution gave women a higher income than other forms of work available to them (Clarke). In observing the activity in during this period, prostitution was officially legalized in Venice in 1358, after frequent wars left the city with less money than before. This service was then used “for commercial purposes, suggesting that the government viewed prostitution primarily as an incentive to encourage foreign merchants to keep frequenting the city.” (Clarke) It must be noted that despite this law, prostitution was confined to a relatively small area within the city by 1416. This was because of the social attributes assigned to the prostitutes, and many Venetian authorities did not want these women intermingling with higher social aristocrats (Clarke). Then again, this was still only kept in place through theory, rather than regulation. In 1423, the lack of regulations forced the Venetian judicial body, the Quarantia (Council of Forty), to create a new set of regulations on the service (Clarke). The regulations were created to clarify the limits sex-workers could roam in, the areas they could be and when they could work regarding the brothel that employed them (the Castelletto) (Clarke). It was also suggested by the Catholic Church to marry a sex worker to make her an honest woman. However, once she was married it was forbidden for her to continue to work within the Castelletto (Clarke). This history on the manner prostitution was dealt with in Venice is important, since various characteristics can be seen in the two countries being observed. Both Germany and The Netherlands have prostitution legalized to some extent. But like Venice, the way it is legalized is often misunderstood and causes conflict for many of the sex workers within the business. 

In the 21st century, the way prostitution is viewed is different but similar than the way it was viewed within the Middle Ages. Differing cultural and economic views put various countries and civil groups at odds. In 2015, Amnesty International joined the United Nations, the World Health Organization and other global groups in protest for legalization of the sex industry (Purtil). The purpose of legalization would, in theory allow sex workers to freely work under the safety of their government. It was also stated within the draft that Amnesty International created to support prostitution that many individuals engage in the service “due to marginalization and limited choices” and there should be efforts to combat against the need for this service. However, despite the push towards legalization, there is still evident confusion in the methods being produced. Many critics argue that within Germany, the creation of brothels increased the potential of trafficking victims (Purtil). This also creates opposition between feminist groups, with a massive amount becoming divided on the idea of legalization because of the way it functions in different countries. Within Germany, Alice Schwarzer who is known as a radical feminist, fiercely opposes the legalization of prostitution. She believed that modern slavery and sex work were “inextricably entangled” and could not be separated (“A Giant Teutonic Brothel.”). While in The Netherlands, a woman who was supporting the opening of a legalized brothel (known as My Red Light) stated the opposite opinion (Williams).  The major argument against the legalization of prostitution was its close association to human trafficking. But there are two other types of human trafficking: forced labor and debt bondage (City and County of San Francisco). The definition for human trafficking is “The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. (City and County of San Francisco)” The significant difference between prostitution and human trafficking is the use of forced labor for exploitation. If prostitution was legalized, in theory, records would be available to verify the prostitute’s willingness to perform. She would also have a set of worker’s rights to keep her protected. But, legalization often does the opposite, which leads to further confusion. 

So, what exactly is legalization of prostitution? Often the word legalization is used without any clear foundation on what it technically means within the sense of prostitution. In theory, when an action or service is legalized, the state should not be able to criminalize the worker involved unless that worker commits a punishable offense. Legalization of prostitution is often the opposite. Starting back in the Middle Ages, prostitution is often loosely regulated if the service is legalized. Within the 21st Century, this idea has now manifested in various European countries, which cause adverse confusion and differences in legalization depending upon the cultural responses towards the role of the women. For example, in Sweden prostitution is criminalized; anyone caught buying sex therefore would be dealt with in the terms of a federal offense (Jonsson). The purpose of this method was to dissuade the usage of human trafficking within the nation. In the United Kingdom, it is legal to sell sex but it is illegal to keep a brothel. This is meant to control the area that prostitution is allowed and dissuade human trafficking (Jonsson). Lastly, The Netherlands and Germany have both legalized the use of brothels and street-walking (Jonsson). This was not done to reduce human trafficking; both countries had separate approaches and rulings towards legalization. Although only a few were mentioned, other European countries have legalized certain aspects of prostitution as well. Since legalization is completed inside a subjective manner (i.e. with consideration towards the closeness of prostitution to human trafficking), it often leads to some gray spots. These gray spots lead to many critics observing that prostitution does more harm than good, due to the inadequacy of the legalization. This is seen within Australia, which is not a European country but did legalize specific aspects of prostitution. Legalization of prostitution was intended for economic exchange (Sullivan). As stated in the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, “legalization, however, brought with it new problems (Sullivan).” Originally the government within Victoria, Australia tried to control expansion of brothels and create legislation that would protect sex workers. Yet, brothels expanded massively, partially because of the failure of the Prostitution Control Board (PCB), which was supposed to monitor the licenses that were used to legitimize brothels (Sullivan). Multi-ownership of various brothels was seen. The laws that were set up also prevent women from creating their own brothels, therefore forcing them to continue working for corporate brothels. Despite this, legalization often is used as the leading argument to normalize and empower marginalized women.

In theory, legalization of prostitution is beneficial. It allows the governing state to place restrictions on prostitution in efforts to protect the workers. But these laws do not protect the prostitute herself. These laws create adverse stigma against female sex workers rather than protect them. Within a study done across Sweden, The Netherlands, Germany and five other European nations, it was seen that nations with full criminalization of prostitution were less tolerant of prostitution as a service (Jonsson). Meaning Swedes had a more negative opinion on the purchase of sex (Jonsson). Criminalization of the sex workers then prohibits her from receiving a better job (TED). This then creates a cycle which further promotes illegal exploitation of the prostitute and with no legal protection to aid her (TED). But this stigmatization is also evident within the other countries with varying prostitution laws as well. Within the United Kingdom, brothel keeping is illegal while the purchase of sex from a single sex worker is legal (Jonsson). This creates negative attitudes towards brothels or groups of sex workers working together. Brothel keeping is also defined as two or more prostitutes working together (TED). In this sense, sex workers within these nations are not allowed to work with one another, which increases the likelihood of exploitation from customers or law enforcement (TED). This stigma also dissuades sex workers from receiving proper health, regardless if its medical or social. Fear enables these women to continue in their job without proper protection. These leads to a rise of physical and mental problems within sex workers although these laws should legitimize their service (Baker). 

Legalization allows governing states to control specific aspects of prostitution while the other areas are criminalized. Regardless if the method was intended or not, it occurs within different nations and harms prostitutes all over. It is evident that even with the four types of legalized prostitution, none of these fully protect a sex worker regardless of where she is working (TED). Instead of legalization, decriminalization should be put into effect. Decriminalization, unlike legalization, is an objective approach to prostitution (TED). This means the removal of laws that would harm the prostitute rather than creating laws that create negative emotion responses (TED). Decriminalization would allow sex workers to receive workers’ rights and enable them to receive full protection under their nation’s law. It would also allow them to work collectively together and feel safe rather than isolated. Decriminalization is in effect within New Zealand and with the new laws created, 96% of street-workers felt protected (TED). But the most notable difference between New Zealand and other sets of legislation was prostitutes worked with the government to create new laws (TED). This change also shifted the balance of power from the law enforcement to sex workers in two distinct ways. The first removes the risk of arrest, enabling her to feel safer. The second is the provision of rights (Armstrong).  However, working with a specific set of prostitutes is easier said than done. For this to be acceptable, the nation must have a specific cultural view of the position of the woman within its society. Depending upon its cultural sense, decriminalization would be able to take place. But it would not occur the same way as it did within New Zealand. Regardless, it is possible for The Netherlands and Germany to begin the approach towards decriminalization in manners that suit their cultural views of women. 
