Risk and Reward in Managua’s Commercial Sex Market: The Importance of Workplace

Abstract

This article focuses on the capabilities of women in sex work—a sector in which a substantial number of women in developing countries find themselves. Sex workers confront important unfreedoms—violence and disease—on a daily basis. How well sex workers can manage these threats has implications not only for the workers themselves but also their families and communities, and thus is an important concern in development policy. Using original data from Managua, Nicaragua, I show how workplace conditions determine women’s autonomy to manage risks of disease and violence, including their capacity to negotiate appropriate risk compensation. I present a model of a segmented labor market, and describe how women’s autonomy in choosing a particular segment is constrained by access to networks and human capital. Next, I estimate the compensation to different risks by market segment. I find that sex workers in higher‐end segments are less likely than women in other segments to take risks to their health or safety, and more able to charge a high‐risk premium when they do. In addition, women who enjoy more autonomy in decision‐making take risks less often than those whose decisions are constrained either by a manager or by low earnings. These findings indicate the need to consider differences in workplace conditions in designing policy to expand the capabilities of women in sex work.

Key words:

• Nicaragua
• Risk
• Sex work
• Gender
• Bargaining power

Acknowledgement

This article was written based on work for Ms Willman’s doctoral degree from The New School University, Milano School for Urban Policy, during 2004–2008. The author wishes to thank TESIS Managua and Puntos de Encuentro Managua for institutional and research support, and Alec Gershberg, Edwin Melendez, Lisa Servon and Jennifer Olmsted for guidance on the research design and analysis.

Notes

1 The term ‘sex sector’ originated in a 1998 study by the International Labour Office (see note 2) and refers to an integrated economic sector centered on commercial sex (Lim, 1998).

2 One often‐cited 1998 study by the International Labour Office on Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and Philippines estimated that the sex sector comprised between 2% and 14% of Gross Domestic Product and employed between 0.25% and 1.5% of women in those countries (Lim, 1998).

3 The term ‘sex work’ was coined by sex worker Carol Leigh (1997) and is commonly used by the sex worker movement to refer to various forms of sexual labor, including but not limited to physical sexual contact.

4 Without discounting the existence of male and transgender sex workers, this study focused on female sex workers. Random sampling of known sites of prostitution encountered only three (male to female) transgender sex workers and no male workers. This and information from qualitative interviews suggest that a study including the experiences of male and transgender workers would require more targeted methodology, because male prostitution tends to be much less visible and less accessible to researchers and outreach efforts.

5 Even if women are not subject to arrest, they are certainly subject to harassment from police while working in prostitution. However, I find no evidence that the degree of harassment differs between clandestine (illegal brothels) and open sites.

6 TESIS provides education and legal services through outreach teams that visit 14 sites of prostitution on a weekly basis. Over the past several years, TESIS has supported the organization of a group of 14 sex worker leaders (promotoras) who serve as the on‐site liaisons between TESIS and women in different areas. The outreach team and the sex worker leaders were indispensable partners and resources throughout the research.

7 The survey research was approved by the Institutional Review Board of The New School on 8 June 2006 (No. 59‐2006). Approval was conditioned on all respondents being 18 years or older. In order to interview minors, permission from parents or guardians would have been required, making this an unpractical option.

8 Street‐based workers exhibit more diversity in terms of personal characteristics (e.g. age and education level) and time spent in sex work as well as outcomes, including their earnings and the number of days worked. See Table 1 for an overview.

9 For example, bars may house a set of rooms at the back where sex is sold.

10 The attractiveness variable is based on the interviewer’s rating of the sex worker at the time of the survey.

11 Cedulas are national identity cards, required for voting and often for employment. The fact that upscale establishments require these reveals a preference for women of higher social standing, as many poor women are unlikely to have identity cards.

12 The economy of the area is structured around the payday schedule for formal employment. Worker wages support a myriad of informal businesses, from food stands to brothels, and there is a structured system of credit designed to facilitate this. One of the brothel owners I met was also an informal creditor, using earnings from sex worker payments (for use of the rooms in her building) to make loans to the women at the site, or other informal laborers. Most of the loans were small, perhaps C$500 (US$28) at the most, and destined generally for clothing or small home improvements. I also often observed food vendors providing food on credit, noting the name and location of the debtor in a small notebook for future payment.

13 It is possible that this high figure reflects a cultural taboo against oral sex, often associated with disease.

14 There was a significant premium of 110% for anal sex in the overall sample, but no significant premium for unprotected anal sex. Oral sex showed the opposite trend; there was no significant premium for oral sex overall (see Table 4), as it is often not charged as a separate activity. However there was a reported premium for unprotected oral sex of 44%. The number of women who reported performing oral sex at all was small (n = 19), leaving too little variance for analysis by segment.