Rakesh Shukla

Barred minds and bar girls

In a temporary reprieve, the ordinance banning dance bars in Maharashtra has been returned by the governor. However, with an all-party consensus including socialist-feminist Mrinal Gore, the ban is bound to translate into law in the forthcoming assembly session.

The media is replete with reports that the crackdown on dance bars in Maharashtra has led to minor girls being trafficked into Delhi. By all accounts, the bar 'girls' in Maharashtra are in fact adult women. In fact, last year the Bhartiya Bargirls Union, the first-ever trade union of bargirls, was formed. In August, they held a demonstration culminating in Mumbai's Azad Maidan demanding better working conditions and had posters like "Bar bala bhi veer bala hai" (the bar girl is also a brave girl). They do not appear to have been "trafficked" through coercion into the profession. Nor do they look too keen to be "rehabilitated" into lowly-paid sewing work. Like it or not, bar girls clearly want to continue in the profession.

Women in prostitution have also found strength in numbers, the most well-known union being the Durbar Mahila Samanvay Committee in Kolkata with about 60,000 members. In Maharashtra there is VAMP, the Veshya Aids Mukabla Parishad. These groups work towards less exploitative working conditions and effective access to health services. In a country, where many wives cannot ensure condom use by their husbands, it is a remarkable that many of these groups have successfully enforced mandatory condom use by client-customers.

The vital issue of ensuring less exploitative conditions for bar girls and sex workers gets bogged down due to their alleged links with trafficking. In the public consciousness, sex workers and bar girls get equated to trafficking. Yet a recent study on bar girls by Mumbai's SNDT University and the Forum against Oppression of Women did not "see any case of trafficking as is being talked about in the media and by the proponents of the ban".

The law relating to prostitution/sex work — the earlier Suppression of Immoral Traffic Act (SITA), which has now been rechristened the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act — both make the same mistake. The legislation deals with acts like keeping a brothel/soliciting in a public place. It neither has a definition of trafficking nor any provision pertaining to it. Yet so deeply is the association of prostitution with trafficking, that the law with regard to prostitution is called Prevention of "immoral traffic".

However, the provision merely reflects the second association which blocks any discussion about steps to improve the work environment of categories like that of bar girls and sex workers. In every meeting that sex workers have had with other sections in society, the discussion gets stuck on the issue of "consent". Sex workers keep trying to take the discussion forward. However, other participants steadfastly refuse to move beyond, "Are sex workers not forced into prostitution?" The questions are posited as if everyone else in any other job or profession has exercised a wonderful free choice. Persons come into sex work through a variety of ways and for differing reasons, just like they do in other professions. Yes, some are forced into it and may wish to continue while others may want to leave. Caste, class, other factors are ignored and the discussion revolves around "consent".

Trafficking is abominable. However, trafficking means the use of threats, force, coercion, fraud or deception on the person involved. No organisation working towards the de-criminalisation of sex work or the rights of bar girls to continue their profession, is in favour of trafficking. Similarly, no organisation is advocating entry of minors into these professions. There is a consensus that there should be no minors in the industry. The difference, perhaps, lies in the way to go about prevention. The age-old methods of raid and rescue have not worked in preventing the entry of minors. The alternative strategy of working through gharwalis or 'madams' is being tried out by some organisations with moderate success. There are still minors in the profession but the numbers appear to be significantly lower. The strategy needs to be given a fair chance. Madams, of course, are exploitative. Some treat their 'girls' badly, pay less and provide no protection against cruel clients.

All the more reason to move away from the association of sex work and bar girls with trafficking.

— The writer is a Supreme Court advocate