Social Constructions of Sex Trafficking and Needs for a Critical Intersectional and Trauma-Informed Approach: A Critical Review

ABSTRACT

What is known about human trafficking, particularly for the purpose of sexual exploitation, has long been shaped by social constructions, including of gender, such as in mainstream and social media, which have directly impacted how sex trafficking, victims, and survivors are presently understood, as well as past and current efforts to prevent and address it. Much of what is known about sex trafficking has been presented through a white, western, and positivist lens, with little consideration of race, culture, and other intersectional factors, or how structural oppression, and the trauma that results from these factors can impact risks for sexual violence and trafficking. As such, existing gaps in reliable sources of knowledge on sex trafficking are explored and discussed, prioritizing a critical intersectional and trauma-informed approach and intersectional considerations for knowledge building, prevention, intervention, and advocacy through research, practice, education, and policy development.

KEYWORDS:

• Antiracism
• intersectionality
• media
• prostitution
• sex trafficking
• sexual violence
• social constructions

Introduction

Human trafficking, particularly for the purpose of sexual exploitation, is a violation of human rights both nationally and internationally, which has been identified as an urgent global public health issue that impacts nearly every nation across the world (The International Labor Organization [ILO], 2022; U.S. Department of State, 2021). Still, it is noteworthy that until 2000 when the United Nations (UN) provided a definition of human trafficking, no universal legal definition of the phenomenon had existed (Davidson, 2010). The UN (2000) definition involves “recruitment, transportation, transfer, [harboring] or receipt of persons,” using threats, force, “or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power,” or the exchange of payment or advantages for consent and eventual exploitation (p. 2). In this context, exploitation is understood as forced or coerced prostitution or other manipulation or abuse, involving “forced [labor]or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs” (Davidson, 2010, p. 2). Several researchers have found fault with this definition, citing that it does not permit a clear understanding of the lives and choices of individuals who are trafficked, as instead, this definition insists that sex trafficking falls under illegal immigration and suggests that victims are forced into their work (Davidson, 2010). Yet, after the UN encouraged awareness of the multifarious methods of trafficking, the media directed its focus on sex trafficking in particular; as evident in publications, film, and artistic representations (Alvarez & Alessi, 2012)

More than 40.3 million individuals are impacted by human trafficking across the world (ILO, 2022; Zimmerman & Kiss, 2017), with women and girls accounting for roughly 99% of the commercial sex industry and 58% of the victims of all other forms of trafficking (e.g., for labor; ILO, 2022). It is similarly noteworthy that stereotypes of women, particularly women of color, and relevant human rights issues (e.g., sexual violence and sex trafficking) have been socially constructed, including in mainstream and social media throughout history (Duncan & DeHart, 2019; L. B. Gerassi & Nichols, 2021; Rosenthal & Lobel, 2016).

Historic constructions of women, and particularly of women of color, their role in addressing perceived moral wrongs associated with prostitution and longstanding constructions of the nature of prostitution also continue to influence attitudes toward women’s movements that seek to address sex trafficking today (Duncan & DeHart, 2019). Thus, historical paradigms and media depictions of victims and survivors continue to shape the knowledge-building process as it relates to sexual violence as well as to human trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation (Duncan & DeHart, 2019; Rosenthal & Lobel, 2016) and related stigma (Vatne Bintliff et al., 2018).

In particular, much of what we know about sex trafficking has been presented through a western and white-washed perspective that reflects early understandings of women and sex work, with little consideration for race, age, ability, or intersectional characteristics and risk factors owing to structural oppression (Baker, 2015; Cook et al., 2022; L. Gerassi, 2015; L. B. Gerassi & Nichols, 2021; Rosenthal & Lobel, 2016). Similarly, as Baker (2015) has pointed out, “most public policy on trafficking focuses on criminal justice causes and solutions to trafficking and does not address broader structural causes like poverty, gender inequalities, or racism,” (p. 198). As such, existing gaps in traditional sources of knowledge surrounding the topic of sex trafficking will be discussed for the purpose of exploring intersectional and anti-racist considerations for knowledge building, advocacy, prevention, and intervention. Accordingly, implications for research, practice, policy, and education will also be discussed.

Conceptual framing

An integrative intersectional and trauma-informed framework will be used to explore how sex work and trafficking has been conceptualized socially and in mainstream media along with how this has impacted the ways sex trafficking has been understood, prevented, and addressed at multiple levels. Using this integrative framework, it is critical that sex trafficking not only be understood as organized crime but that human trafficking is primarily understood as a human rights violation that disproportionately impacts people who are subjected to varying forms of structural oppression (Cardoso Squeff & da Rosa, 2013). Further, sex trafficking violates basic universal human rights, such as to freedom and as such, to the autonomy of one’s own body (Cardoso Squeff & da Rosa, 2013). The concepts of intersectionality and trauma are discussed below, and used to explore historical and current perceptions and conceptualizations of victims and survivors of sex trafficking, and how this has impacted prevention and intervention. Understanding the historical context from this integrative lens is essential to understanding the multi-level and complex aspects of the longstanding and widespread issue of sex trafficking, how it has been understood, and what is still needed to prevent and address it.

Intersectionality theory

Intersectionality theory maintains that multiple social constructs and stereotypes directly relate to the interconnection of diverse identities, involving race, ethnicity, gender, age, and other characteristics like socioeconomic status and ability (Crenshaw, 1991; Rosenthal & Lobel, 2016). Owing to the ways the multi-level effects of racism, sexism, classism, and other forms of prejudice differ according to varying identities, an intersectional framework is needed to explore these differences (Collins, 2019; Crenshaw, 1991; L. Gerassi, 2015; L. B. Gerassi & Nichols, 2021). As such, intersectionality can be understood as a critical social theory to better understand and actively attend to complex and pervasive social problems like sex trafficking, what is needed to holistically address it, as well as how social action can advance critical analysis (Collins, 2019).

When applying a critical intersectional lens, a focus is placed on understanding links between intersecting social systems in society and how this impacts individuals, such as survivors of sex trafficking (L. Gerassi, 2015; L. B. Gerassi & Nichols, 2021) and how intersectional advocacy can in turn also inform our current understandings of sex trafficking (Collins, 2019). As Collins (2019) has emphasized, when applying intersectionality as a critical social theory to better understand complex and socially taboo widespread problems like sex trafficking, an essential component of social theory that should be prioritized is the “practices of theorizing that produce those ideas,” or “how its ideas are created and used” (p. 3). This involves extensive and critical self-reflection and further direct work with diverse at-risk individuals and survivors, to better understand and address the multi-layered and complex problem of sex trafficking, and how a critical understanding of it and corresponding social action are “interrelated” (Collins, 2019, p. 4). In doing so, an understanding of the ways social theories can result in multi-level harm are necessary, as social theories are generally constructed and applied to support or change longstanding socially constructed paradigms as well as current practices (Collins, 2019).

Further, as L. Gerassi (2015) has noted, using an intersectional lens involves an understanding of the “devaluation of women of color specifically as victimization by sexual exploitation” owing to greater risks for being perceived “as embodying perversions of desire and to be treated systemically as a lower class of individuals than their white counterparts,” (p. 5). Thus, intersectionality supports an antiracist approach to understanding and addressing problems, through questioning and informing work to address structural inequities, or namely, what is wrong with historical and current policies, rather than questioning, for example, what is wrong with people (Collins, 2019; Kendi, 2019). A central focus is placed on ways to address structural forms of intersectional prejudice that stems from structural discrimination and oppression, which through advocacy and multi-level work, can be changed (Collins, 2019; Kendi, 2019).

Contemporary trauma theory

Survivors of sex trafficking and those at an increased risk of being trafficked for sex often experience multi-level and intersectional oppression as well as related violence and trauma (Castañer et al., 2021; Cheek, 2022). Contemporary trauma theory is a framework for understanding how traumatic events (or events which disrupt a general sense of balance while there are perceived or actual limited to no supports for addressing such an event) can impact multi-level functioning, within the context of psychological or physical injury being a reasonable response to and needs for help and recovery (Goodwin & Tiderington, 2022). In lieu of blaming victims or survivors for their circumstances and/or the trauma that results from it, a trauma-informed approach involves underscoring pressing needs for a multi-level understanding (Goodwin & Tiderington, 2022). As Heffernan and Blythe (2014) have discussed, trauma that follows the sexual abuse survivors are subjected to is important to acknowledge, and sex trafficking is recognized as a traumatic experience when incorporating a trauma-informed framework, or namely “a philosophy or cultural point of view integrating awareness and understanding of trauma” (p. 170). Thus, an emphasis on acknowledging and understanding the trauma that results from sex trafficking, efforts to increase awareness that sex trafficking can be traumatic and an exploration of existing and needed strategies to address such trauma are necessary to enhance the agency and wellbeing of survivors and at-risk individuals as well as resilience (Galán et al., 2022; Hand, 2021; Hopper, 2018).

Using an integrative intersectional and trauma-informed framework involves not only an emphasis on multiple forms of oppression that increase risks for sex trafficking, but also exploring historical trauma, or the ways oppression and violence can continue to impact people who have experienced intersectional oppression, such as women of color (Galán et al., 2022). An intersectional and trauma-informed understanding of sex trafficking also prioritizes understanding and attending to needs for resources to mitigate and address the trauma that often results from sex trafficking and multilayered, intersectional forms of oppression in moving forward (Galán et al., 2022).

It is important to note the distinctions between prostitution and sex trafficking in this paper as well. Prostitution is generally understood to involve willing participants, who exchange sexual activity for payment, owing to inequality, trauma, and/or their own volition (Dovydaitis, 2010). Prostitution may or may not be legal, depending on location, and it may or may not involve a pimp. Meanwhile, human trafficking involves coercion or force by a pimp or trafficker. And human trafficking is illegal. Still, generally, the key distinction between prostitution and trafficking can be difficult to understand, and is an issue of consent versus coercion or force (Dovydaitis, 2010).

One reason that distinctions between the two can be difficult to ascertain is because both prostitution and sex trafficking are understood to be exploitative (Dovydaitis, 2010; Vanwesenbeeck, 2019). Further, two main positions prevail on prostitution vs. trafficking among academics and in practice, which also impacts how prostitution and sex trafficking are understood (Vanwesenbeeck, 2019). The first position holds that legalized prostitution legitimizes gender inequality and exploitation, while the second position posits that prostitution should be recognized as legitimate work, albeit stemming from inequality and involving exploitation (Vanwesenbeeck, 2019). In this paper, both social constructions of women who have been trafficked for sex and social constructions of women who have engaged in sex work are discussed, in recognition that some people who have engaged in prostitution have been coerced, forced and/or have had limited agency, and thus, can be considered as victims or survivors of sex trafficking (Dovydaitis, 2010; Vanwesenbeeck, 2019). Still, in this manuscript, it is also important to recognize that there are individuals who engage in prostitution as willing agents, who are not unable to make their own choices. In other words, not all prostitution is a form of trafficking.

Methodology

This critical trauma-informed intersectional review of existing scholarly literature will examine the following: (a) What is known about how women, particularly those who have been trafficked for sex, have been depicted throughout history, and how (if at all) may these existing social constructions impact how sex trafficking is understood, prevented, and addressed? (b) How (if at all) may an understanding of race, intersecting identities, and trauma, be used to address how victims and survivors are understood? Academic search complete, Lexus Nexus and PubMed were searched using the Boolean MeSH terms “sex*,” “prostitute,” “traffick*,” “media,” “slavery,” “women,” “commodities,” “gender,” “ad,” “image,” “misogyny,” and “stereotype” within Academic Search Complete and Lexis Nexus databases. This search was limited to the English language having, with the Boolean MeSH terms being present in the title and abstract. References were also manually searched in relevant peer-reviewed literature on sex trafficking, social and media-based representations, and on potential impacts on prevention and intervention, to identify scholarly articles for this critical trauma-informed intersectional review.

Historical overview of social constructions and paradigms surrounding sex trafficking

Knowledge on how prostitutes have been socially constructed can be traced back to Biblical times. Glancy and Moore (2011) have explained that ancient prostitutes were either πόρνη, described as roughly” brothel worker,” “brothel slave,” or “streetwalker,” or ἑταίρα, meaning “courtesans” (p. 551). Historians believe the latter of the two, ἑταίρα, or the courtesan, was symbolic, and by the late 1300s, the courtesan had emerged as a well-known clever character in the Athenian comic theater. As Glancy and Moore (2011) have illuminated, the courtesan was routinely cared for and provided gifts by an adult male, in exchange for “exclusive sexual access,” (p. 553).

Courtesans were depicted as infiltrating upper social status groups, while sex slaves were associated with markedly low social status; they did not invoke the same sentiment or love (Glancy & Moore, 2011). Unlike courtesans, sex slaves were not perceived as quick witted, charming, or as prized, but were generally despised. Instead of enjoying a few faithful relationships, sex slaves were depicted as having sex with numerous strangers (Glancy & Moore, 2011). Women were depicted as depraved, uninhibited, and sexually available (Rosenthal & Lobel, 2016).

Between 1500 and 1800 in Southeast Asia, similarly, women of low socioeconomic status who were slaves of ex-slaves were noted as sources of domestic and sex work, and owing to intersectional systematic oppression, were not afforded the respect associated with women in higher socioeconomic classes (Andaya, 1998). Southeast Asian sex slaves were thus, socially constructed as promiscuous and undeserving of help, not unlike the same jezebel stereotype referenced above, later assigned to Black individuals who were enslaved in the US. This led to a widespread Western perception of Asian women as promiscuous and morally loose, along with the belief that sexual violence was acceptable; a belief the western settlers continued to capitalize on (Andaya, 1998). Thus, as in the US, within Western and certain Asian civilizations, the sex trade has long been linked with racialized beginnings. In Africa, North and South America and Southeast Asia, sex trafficking trends can be traced to the emergence of patriarchy, foreign influence, capitalism and subsequent imbalances of power, internalized discrimination and trauma (Andaya, 1998).

In exploring historical social constructions, Burt (2012) has noted that images are a powerful means of influence, capable of evoking strong emotions. In particular, since people of color are more often trafficked for sex than white women and girls (Gallagher-Cohoon, 2014), it is critically important to make note of images of women and sex trafficking survivors throughout history. It is also important to consider potential motives for these images in relation to power, privilege, sexism, racism, and lasting intersectional, race-based, and sexual trauma.

Initial advertisement images were plain-dealing; dating back to the 1700 and early 1800s, and typically made use of conventionalized woodcuts of items sold, such as of a hat or cane (Burt, 2012). The first product advertisement featuring a woman as its founder was of Lydia E. Pinkham Medicine Company in 1879; her picture can still be found on her vegetable compound product today (Burt, 2012). Pinkham is presented as a bun adorned, middle-aged white woman in a black dress; a reflection of proper women of her time, directly linked with race, gender, and socioeconomic status. Her image connects the family-oriented “True Woman” stereotype from the Victorian era with the autonomous, politically opinionated “New Woman” stereotype that followed increased independence for women after the US civil war, with women working, voting, and becoming more educated (Burt, 2012). This “New Woman” stereotype was similar to the sapphire archetype historically, erroneously and harmfully attributed to Black women, as angry, opinionated, masculine and hostile (Rosenthal & Lobel, 2016).

As Cutter (1992) has reported, the 1800s were marked by “images of femininity” that had become rigid, as “changing economic conditions created a cult-like worship of ‘True Womanhood’ and entrapped women in the domestic sphere … to dispense love and morality,” (p. 383). Yet when after the civil war, the True Woman paradigm shifted to the New Woman as women more frequently became laborers. During this time, Mary Wilkins Freeman began writing about beliefs that led to and were reinforced by images of femininity, delineating two stereotypical representations; those of the “Domestic Saint” and the “New Woman” (Cutter, 1992). Representations of the Domestic Saint (or True Woman) could be found in the early and middle 1800s; suggesting women should be highly moral, passive, and domestically inclined, with a sole purpose toward servitude (Cutter, 1992). This image was not unlike the mammy stereotype attributed to Black women, who as Rosenthal and Lobel (2016) have noted, was depicted as “strong and content in caregiving for many children, in the service of White slave owners or White employers,” (p. 4). Like the mammy stereotype, the “True Woman” was socially instructive and effective in maintaining established roles in the US (Cutter, 1992), including by perpetuating multi-level discrimination and thus, intersectional and socially accepted multi-level oppression and violence that facilitates the acceptance of sex trafficking.

Roles of men and women were understood as opposites, dominant constructions of males aligned with wage earners and dominant images of females were tied to subservience and domesticity. Daughters were owned by fathers and wives by spouses; both were encouraged to revere men for their heroism while remaining pious and submissive caregivers (Ball, 2012). And as socially prescriptive images of women emerged as pious saint-like figures, those who were trafficked for sex were depicted as fallen angels, or as the image and embodiment of moral failing (Ball, 2012). As “ideal” women were depicted and perceived as morally upright, deserving of help, and yet capable of falling, men, were blamed for deceiving women and causing them to fall, or fail. Women were positioned and socially understood as innocent and unequal to men, and as such, as naïve victims of seductive men, while also without agency for legal recourse, or unable to legally sue for sexual coercion or other forms of sexual violence, to include trafficking, or for the trauma that resulted. Yet, their fathers were able to do so through property law (Ball, 2012). Today, men still account for the majority of decision makers who enact policies that impact sex trafficking survivors and the rights of women and girls, who have been identified as most at-risk for sexual violence, and thus, for sex trafficking, and sexual trauma, owing to longstanding imbalances in power and inequity (Bouché & Wittmer, 2015).

“White slavery”

Sex trafficking has since become an epidemic, and it is noteworthy that white slavery emerged just as Black slavery was abolished (Leppänen, 2007). Following the US Civil War, the construction of sex work as “white slavery” became widely accepted, which abolitionists sought to purge (Ball, 2012). Historians have noted that the white slavery paradigm also turned attention away from the enslavement of people from Africa, directing social and institutional concentration on the trafficking of white (and non-immigrant or refugee) women and resulting trauma (Gallagher-Cohoon, 2014).

The International Abolitionist Federation in 1875 was led by Josephine Butler, a popular feminist of her time (Alvarez & Alessi, 2012). Along with other abolitionists, Butler played a key role in constructing the “white slave” during the repeal of the Prostitution and the Contagious Disease Act, which required sex workers to submit to medical screenings for venereal diseases (Leppänen, 2007). Repealers took issue with women being forced into sex work in foreign lands and demanded to raise the age of consent from 13 to 16 as reports emerged that minor females from low socioeconomic backgrounds were being used for sex (Leppänen, 2007). When the age of consent was not raised, repealers turned to the media for help, and the term “white slave” was coined, suggesting white females were at the mercy of nonwhite men. While the term “white slave” was new, the notion was not, as a vast collection of literature featured representations of white women under the control of foreign men (Leppänen, 2007).

White slaves were typically non-immigrant or refugee, white country girls (Gallagher-Cohoon, 2014), underscoring a focus on whiteness, female gender, purity, and youth and with this, a decentralized focus on BIPOC victims and survivors or transgender survivors or older victims, or on the trauma that resulted from systematic oppression and sexual violence. And this focus has not changed substantially over time, in consideration of “perfect victim” narratives (Bows, 2018; Bows & Westmarland, 2015; Hand, 2020; Hand et al., 2022). Rather, the stereotype of the perfect white female victim has continued to harm individuals of color, especially Black women and girls (Butler, 2015; Cook et al., 2022), as well as transgender individuals, older adults, and individuals with disabilities in particular (Bows, 2018; Bows & Westmarland, 2015; Cook-Daniels & Munson, 2010; Hand et al., 2022). Further, abolitionist campaigns were attached to social purification agendas, influenced by positivism and beliefs that male sexual desire stemmed from unnatural urban settings, which, along with solidifying class and race-based prejudice, paved the way for sex trafficking and prevented progress (Ball, 2012).

More recent constructions on contemporary women’s movements: 1970s to the present day

Sex trafficking remained a prioritized issue within the women’s movement, resulting in its inclusion within the mission of the 1970s violence against women movement (Alvarez & Alessi, 2012). Josephine Butler’s work continued to influence second-wave feminist perspectives on the commercial use of sex, as prostitution was regarded a byproduct of social norms which disempowered women and a means of sexual abuse. With this, sex trafficking was also included in women’s movement initiatives. Still, by linking human trafficking only with sex work, early abolitionist campaigns dismissed alternative forms of labor and sex trafficking, such as mail order brides, which along with forced marriage, remain largely dismissed today (Alvarez & Alessi, 2012). Alvarez and Alessi (2012) argue that from this perspective, people who are trafficked in what are considered “Third World” nations are perceived as needing to be saved by their cultures, the very sources of their exploitation. Such perspectives are reflective of racism, ethnocentrism, and classism rooted in early binary constructions of sex work, sexual violence, and trafficking that have largely ignored or dismissed risk factors linked with racism, ageism, ableism, and gender-based discrimination. This has further silenced and limited resources for the most at-risk individuals as well as resources for addressing the trauma that has reasonably resulted from sex trafficking and multi-level intersectional discrimination (Counts, 2014).

Anti-trafficking campaigns have commonly focused on women and girls in the sex industry, underscoring consent or its absence and violence as key characteristics of human trafficking (Davidson, 2010), while maintaining a primary focus on “perfect victims,” who are understood as young, female, and unwitting victims, with any disabilities impacting risks for trafficking being unidentified or addressed (Bows, 2018; Bows & Westmarland, 2015; Hand et al., 2022). As such, not only have intersecting forms of discrimination been largely dismissed in prevention and intervention initiatives in the US, to be identified and helped, migrant sex workers are charged with establishing that they did not initially agree to work as prostitutes and that they have endured a great deal of physical agony (Davidson, 2010).

Still Carson (2011) has suggested that portraying sex trafficking survivors as nothing beyond sex workers of their own accord may perpetuate problems, particularly relating to callous disregard within the sex industry. Further, a primary emphasis on misogyny may gloss over the exploitation of males and transgender individuals, older adults, individuals with disabilities and people of color (Bows & Westmarland 20,215; Bows, 2018; Carson, 2011; Hand et al., 2022), and the potential for women to become perpetrators, reconciling women with inculpable past stereotypes (Carson, 2011).

Because the public is rarely introduced to other forms of human trafficking in the media, Alvarez and Alessi (2012) suggest the use of a framework that acknowledges all means of human trafficking and transcends nineteenth century abolitionist aims which fail to acknowledge global labor trafficking, the trafficking of males, and the possibility of trafficking occurring without the need to cross international borders. Alvarez and Alessi (2012) have suggested that the root causes of trafficking must be addressed, such as “poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, poor standards of health, and political unrest,” (p. 149) rather than reducing it to a moral wrong; the causes of trafficking should not be dismissed in this knowledge-building process. Gulati (2011) has echoed this sentiment, asserting “the media indirectly has had an important role in anti-trafficking policy by limiting how competing views on the causes of the problem are discussed and the range of recommended policy alternatives considered,” (p. 364). To explore media portrayals of human trafficking, Gulati conducted a content analysis of human trafficking reporting in the New York Times and Washington Post between 1980 and 2006, focused on reasons for reporting, areas covered, problems described and the reporter’s use of sources. Their analysis of 605 articles revealed a longstanding focus on prevailing perspectives on trafficking while evading policy criticisms, drawing heavily from government spokespersons and members of law enforcement as primary sources of information (Gulati, 2011).

One US government initiative to identify traffickers and help those who were trafficked has involved paying Ketchum, an international public relations corporation, to diffuse information on trafficking through roughly 200 million media networks, via television, periodicals, and radio stations (Schaeffer-Grabiel, 2010). Ketchum’s primary internet-based campaign featured a young pretty Latin woman looking down with her hands cuffed and folded. As Schaeffer-Grabiel (2010) have explained, beneath this image was captioned “the next prostitute, stripper, illegal immigrant, runaway youth, domestic servant, or migrant worker you encounter or take into custody may be a victim of human trafficking,” (p. 157).

Several other related ads feature similar images of bound Latin, Asian, and Caucasian women in shadowy spaces, seemingly in captivity (Schaeffer-Grabiel, 2010). Although the issue of sex trafficking is worthy of investigation and advocacy, Schaeffer-Grabiel (2010) has posited that the widespread use and frequency of media campaigns targeting this problem has directed attention away from the role of the US in perpetuating modern day slavery through unfair labor conditions and the criminalization of immigrants without documentation.

Further, Schaeffer-Grabiel (2010) have suggested that a longstanding racialized focus on sexual violence as an issue primarily impacting individuals from non-Western nations has remained a vital component to inciting xenophobic attitudes and anti-immigration sponsorship. Consequently, the media’s focus on sex trafficking has resulted in the increase of border patrol and the acceptance of national anti-immigration policies (Schaeffer-Grabiel, 2010).

Moreover, as outlined above, intersectional risk factors for people of color, transgender individuals, older adults, and individuals with disabilities have remained largely dismissed in sexual violence prevention and intervention initiatives (Bows & Westmarland 20,215; Bows, 2018; Hand et al., 2022), including on those specifically focused on preventing and addressing sex trafficking (Cheek, 2022; Spore et al., 2022). Older adults remain especially ignored and dismissed as potential victims of sex trafficking in research, policy, and practice, for example, owing to longstanding misunderstandings of the nature of sexual violence and risk factors for it, including owing to their absence in prevention and intervention campaigns (Spore et al., 2022). Many of these hidden survivors still live with unaddressed trauma, which has been identified as a preventable and widespread yet largely unaddressed global public health crisis that requires multi-level interventions that transcend a criminal justice approach to this complex, taboo, multi-dimensional, and widespread social problem (Castañer et al., 2021; HealTrafficking.org, 2023).

Discussion

The development of knowledge on prostitution and sex trafficking is still heavily influenced by social and media-based constructions. Though peer reviewed articles which focus on women in the media have begun to emerge, they often emphasize effects of the media’s portrayal of women on body image. To date, scholarly articles focused on the media’s construction of women as sexual commodities and how this influences attitudes toward sex trafficking are still emerging, along with research on related trauma.

Using the search terms “sex*,” “prostitute,” “traffick*,” “media,” “slavery,” “women,” “commodities,” “gender,” “ad,” “image,” “misogyny,” “stereotype”, and additional related terms (eventually including “sex work,” “perfect victim,” “social construction*”) renders a majority of articles with a primary focus on the problem of sex trafficking being sensationalized and strategic, within Academic Search Complete and Lexis Nexus databases. Using the search terms described above, this review resulted in over 27,000 potentially relevant cases in Academic Search Complete alone.

Thus, to answer the research questions for this review (relating to how women, particularly who have been trafficked for sex, have been depicted, how such social constructions may impact how sex trafficking is understood, prevented, and addressed, and how layering race, intersecting identities, and trauma, may possibly used to address how victims and survivors are understood), an iterative approach to reviewing the articles was used. Following this iterative search process, beginning with a Population, Exposure, Outcomes (PEO) search framework, 148 potentially relevant articles were fully read, comprised of peer-reviewed articles and organizational reports. Four key themes were identified throughout this review.

As demonstrated in the above narrative, these include gendered and racialized social constructions (e.g., the pious wives vs promiscuous concubines, prostitutes, and sex slaves, often from other cultures) and binary moralized paradigms, “perfect” victims (e.g., saints versus fallen angels). Another identified theme was coerced or forced victims versus willing agents (e.g., this changed over the years, although men were routinely depicted as unable to control their desires, linked with unnatural foreign or urban settings). Further, a final identified theme was: greater power imbalances linked with greater exploitation (e.g., relating to race and class, such as in the case of brothel workers).

Still, several scholars have suggested that sex trafficking is overemphasized and that this redirects attention from other forms of trafficking supported by the western world, especially from within the US, to maintain historically rooted, whitewashed and morally focused constructs of women. The growing prevalence of these articles alongside continued needs for more critical, trauma-informed, and intersectional awareness of sex trafficking cannot be ignored. Members of the general public have been largely unaware of sex trafficking and of other forms of trafficking, and of the intersectional risk factors involved, owing to structural oppression, or of the ways this need for greater awareness perpetuates these intersectional risk factors.

As such, further studies are needed to raise awareness of this issue in the US, underscoring diverse BIPOC and LGBTQ+ survivor narratives that explore intersectional risks, owing to intersectional forms of oppression. In particular, gender-based prejudice, ageism, ableism should be critically considered and addressed in research, as transgender individuals, older adults, and individuals with disabilities are especially underrepresented in sexual violence research, as well as in efforts toward prevention and intervention (Bows, 2018; Bows & Westmarland, 2015; Cook-Daniels & Munson, 2010; Hand & Ihara, 2023; Hand et al., 2022).

Meanwhile, a content analysis of what is known on reporting and knowledge building in this area suggests the topic of sex trafficking is overrepresented in comparison with other forms of trafficking. Still, exact statistics of the prevalence of human trafficking remain unachievable due to the nature of human trafficking, as first and foremost, victims are difficult to identify. It is also not yet known whether the number of newspaper reports accurately or inaccurately represent the prevalence of sex trafficking in comparison with other forms of exploitation.

What is known is that prevalence estimates widely vary, as do claims of whether sex trafficking or labor trafficking is more prevalent on a global scale, even within academic literature and government reports. Notwithstanding, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2018) has recently shared that trafficking for sex is reported the most often across the globe, according to data gathered from 142 nations or 94% of the overall population. However, the UNODC (2018) has pointed out that while this is true for overall global estimates, in some areas of the world, labor trafficking is more prevalent, such as in Africa, as opposed to North and South America, where trafficking for sex is most common or in South Asia, where both trafficking for labor and for sex appear to be nearly equally common (UNODC, 2018).

Thus, while some government-influenced campaigns have capitalized on moral opposition to sex trafficking to influence immigration policy and increase border control, which indeed may be fueled by a longstanding fear of “the other,” it could be argued that sex trafficking is also a longstanding social problem that women, men, transgender individuals, and children are subjected to; or namely, a gross violation of human rights that cannot simply be reduced to a socially constructed problem, disproportionately impacting women and resulting in trauma.

As such, continued information and advocacy are needed, and media-based and social constructions should be based directly on survivor accounts, practice knowledge and trauma-informed antiracist, multicultural research that underscores intersectional factors relating to lived experiences with sex trafficking and the role of structural oppression. Such research should prioritize sampling for diversity, particularly with regard to race, displaced status (e.g., centering on the direct perspectives of immigrants and refugees), dis/ability, age, and gender, with a particular emphasis on the needs of at-risk transgender individuals and transgender survivors, older adults, and individuals with disabilities. Further efforts are also needed to underscore more diverse understandings of risks for and impacts of sex trafficking to promote research, policy, and practice that is directly informed by diverse at-risk individuals and survivors. As such, an intersectional approach to sex trafficking research should strive not only to ensure an intersectional focus on sampling but also on advancing the ways intersectional knowledge on sex trafficking is produced, prioritizing more direct and diverse accounts of survivors (Collins, 2019).

To effectively achieve this, a more trauma-informed and responsive approach to research is also needed, accounting for the reasonable risks for trauma that are linked with intersectional forms of systematic oppression that perpetuate risks for sex trafficking. In using a trauma-informed approach, research participants should be provided adequate trigger warnings, as well as much choice and voice as possible in the research process, such as through more participatory action-based research approaches. Training is also strongly recommended for researchers on how to address trauma that may reasonably emerge during interviews and discussions with survivors of sex trafficking as well as individuals who are at a disproportionate risk for sexual violence and trafficking owing to structural oppression (Counts, 2014).

Moreover, further evidence-based efforts are needed to increase awareness of all forms of human trafficking, including of sex and labor as well as for organs. Such efforts should focus on addressing a pervasive master versus slave paradigm at the societal level that has long been linked with racism, sexism, classism, ableism, ability, power, and privilege. Further, until greater awareness is raised on the problem of human trafficking in all of its forms, the exploration of viable solutions to prevention should also be prioritized. Such solutions should be culturally appropriate and should consider intersectional risk factors and experiences linked with structural oppression, as informed by diverse BIPOC survivors, with considerations for both urban and rural contexts and healthcare training needs surrounding related psychological trauma. Whiteness, youth, female gender, or the absence of disabilities should not be assumed to be the default or norm in such research, policies, training, and practice. More work is expressly needed to avoid perpetuating a longstanding form of racism as well as intersectional discrimination. Thus, both prevention efforts should involve considerations for structural influences impacting the problem of sex trafficking that are rooted in racism and other forms of prejudice.

While oversimplification is a risk when focusing on the sex of victims and perpetrators, it is noteworthy that trafficking for sex disproportionately impacts women, while trafficking for labor disproportionately impacts men (UNODC, 2018). Women and girls account for roughly 94% of people who are trafficked for sex (UNODC, 2018), and women and girls of color are at an even greater risk for sex trafficking (Gallagher-Cohoon, 2014); Still, as discussed, researchers have called for more attention and resources to be directed on a form of trafficking that impacts substantially more men than women than on sex trafficking, despite diverse large-scale data showing that sex trafficking is more prevalent across the globe, accounting for over 60% of all forms of trafficking (UNODC, 2018, 2021). Moreover, transgender or otherwise non-binary gender related needs are largely missing from current anti-trafficking discussions and research, despite trans individuals facing uniquely high risks for violence and exploitation (Franco et al., 2022), which scholarly criticisms have long and largely ignored and obscured. This underscores the pressing needs discussed above for further qualitative and participatory action-based research with transgender individuals, to ensure their direct influence on the ways sex trafficking is conceptualized, understood, and addressed. This would reflect a truly intersectional and trauma-informed approach that together prioritize greater voice and agency of individuals who are disproportionately at risk for violence in general, including for sex trafficking (Collins, 2019).

The role of race, class, gender, ability, age, and privilege cannot be dismissed. For example, scholarly literature in Western nations made up of primarily White citizens have focused more on sexual exploitation, while scholarly literature focused on African nations, made up of mostly Black and Brown people, have disproportionately underscored issues with labor trafficking. As such, it could be argued that the needs of BIPOC individuals have long been largely dismissed in favor of prioritizing trafficking trends that have been more often identified in research within predominantly white, privileged countries over the actual antitrafficking needs of developing countries. For example, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) was passed by US Congress to hold other nations accountable to minimum standards for efforts to end human trafficking that were established by the US (U.S. Department of State, 2021) rather than these standards being directly informed by the unique needs and abilities of other nations that are expected to meet these standards (Nederstigt & Almeida, 2007).

Conclusion

Further efforts are needed to increase awareness of all forms of trafficking, not only globally, but also within the US and at state and local levels. Such awareness raising efforts should represent diverse survivors, focused on the lived experiences of survivors from multiple backgrounds, prioritizing BIPOC and LGBTQ+ personal accounts as well as narratives of survivors of a diverse age and disability range. And rather than framing sex trafficking as an individual-level concern, the focus of future research, policy, and practice initiatives should be placed on how intersectional demographic information and characteristics are impacted and thus risks are raised owing to intersectional systems of oppression at organizational and societal levels (Vollinger, 2020). Thus, an intersectional approach should be used, critiquing and underscoring structural factors that have resulted in multi-level discrimination and how this has long impacted antitrafficking research, practice, and policies at multiple levels, particularly with regard to current antitrafficking discourse, as well as prevention and intervention.

Further, a trauma-informed approach should be prioritized in acknowledgment of multiple manifestations of trauma depending on various cultural experiences and risk factors for violence and oppression. Trauma should also be understood as a normal response to multi-level intersectional oppression and sex trafficking using an intersectional framework/

This work cannot adequately be accomplished without the direct and ongoing input from survivors. Still, prior to engaging survivors, researchers and practitioners should complete ongoing trainings on intersectional and historical trauma as well as on strategies for mitigating continued harm.

In conclusion, intersectional, justice-driven transdisciplinary collaborative efforts toward prevention and intervention are needed to challenge intersectional discrimination while advancing trauma-informed approaches to meeting the reasonable and complex needs of survivors and individuals who are at-risk of being trafficked. Within this context, the needs of at-risk individuals and survivors of color, members of the LGBTQ+ community (particularly transgender individuals), older adults, and individuals with disabilities should be prioritized, as they remain largely absent in current prevention and intervention initiatives.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).