Sex Work, Hate Crime and the Criminal law
| Author | Jane Scouler,Rosie Campbell,Teela Sanders |
| DOI | 10.1177/00220183221086679 |
| Published date | 01 April 2022 |
| Date | 01 April 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Sex Work, Hate Crime
and the Criminal law
Teela Sanders
University of Leicester, UK
Jane Scouler
University of Strathclyde, UK
Rosie Campbell
University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, England
Abstract
It has been well established at a global level that sex workers are often victims of direct vio-
lence in the course of their work, targeted by their ‘perceived vulnerability’as a marginalised
group. In one police force in England (Merseyside) since 2006 they have addressed this victim-
isation through adopting a ‘hate crime’approach to policing crimes against sex workers. The
aims of this paper are first, to review the implementation of the hate crime model applied to
crimes against sex workers; second, to explore how police forces are adopting the policy
across the UK, and the operational barriers to doing so; and third to explore the legal, theor-
etical and critical issues raised by treating crimes against sex workers as a type of hate crime
through policing models. The conclusion weighs up some of the challenges to expanding the
current law to include sex workers as a target group for increased protection, assessing
that a fully funded policing approach may well be sufficient alongside law reform around
decriminalisation of sex work. This article will draw on data from police forces in England.
We acknowledge that much more work is needed to establish the sex work community’s
views on the value, if any, of the hate crime approach.
Keywords
hate crime, Merseyside, policing, sex work, violence, vulnerability
Introduction
In this paper, we adopt both theoretical and empirical approaches in examining the challenges that arise
from applying the concept of hate crime to sex work, as well as the practicalities of implementing a hate-
Corresponding author:
Teela Sanders, Professor of Criminology, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK.
Email: teela.sanders@leicester.ac.uk
Article
The Journal of Criminal Law
2022, Vol. 86(2) 109–125
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00220183221086679
journals.sagepub.com/home/clj
crime approach at an operational policing level. Given their exclusive nature, hate crimes appear to create
a victim hierarchy, separating those who (apparently) deserve our protection –namely those with pro-
tected characteristics such as people with disabilities or those who experience transphobia–from those
who are ‘undeserving’, such as sex workers or those who choose to identify with a subculture such as
‘goths’. There is a challenge in distinguishing between (i) hate as a motivator for violence against
others, and (ii) hate as ‘othering’and therefore producing a context of vulnerability which provides
the opportunity for violence against those ‘others’. Additionally, given its exclusive nature, hate
crimes appear to create a victim hierarchy, separating those (apparently) deserving and undeserving
of our protection.
The individual nature of hate crime means there is little to no room afforded for intersectionality
–despite the importance of adopting such a lens to truly understanding marginalisation and victim-
isation. Certain writers
1
are enthusiastic about the symbolic power of hate crime laws to indicate
the seriousness of offences against certain groups, and a commitment to protecting them. Others
are highly critical of the credibility of the concept and see hate crime as an expansion of an oppres-
sive and violent system that is fundamentally and inherently unable to protect exactly those whom
it claims to.
2
In this paper we grapple with these divergent views, and dovetail this with some prac-
tical insights and historical learning from Merseyside police force (and more recently
Cambridgeshire and North Yorkshire), to see how hate crime approaches to crimes against sex
workers have been implemented. In doing so we look at the both the advantages and direct chal-
lenges to using this approach from a policing perspective. We strongly recognise that sex workers,
who in our research comprised only those working on the street, represent a more diverse group
and need to be consulted further on their thoughts about this approach, both symbolically and
practically.
A Note on Methods and Data
Data in this paper is drawn from two different empirical projects. The first was carried out in the
summer of 2020, based on interviews with police officers (n =13) across the police forces of
Merseyside, Cambridgeshire and North Yorkshire. These interviews were focused on the adoption,
implementation and ongoing development of the hate crime approach in these areas. The second
project, draws on data from sex workers in a study on their experiences of hate crime in 2010 in
Merseyside. This data is useful as it puts the progress of the hate crime model into perspective.
Both projects received ethical approval from several university ethics boards and NHS ethical
approval. Before we discuss some of the empirical findings we set out a selection of the theoretical
understandings around hate crime as a concept, as an operational tool and as a concept used to under-
stand and respond to the experiences of sex workers.
1. N Chakraborti, ‘Crimes Against the “Other”: Conceptual, Operational, and Empirical Challenges for Hate Studies’(2010) 8(9)
Journal of Hate Studies 9–28; J Garland and N. Chakraborti, ‘Divided by a common concept? Assessing the implications of dif-
ferent conceptualizations of hate crime in the European Union’(2012) 9(1) European Journal of Criminology 38–51; G Mason,
‘The symbolic purpose of hate crime law: Ideal victims and emotion’(2014) 18(1) Theoretical Criminology 75–92; and H
Mason-Bish, ‘Examining the Boundaries of Hate Crime Policy: Considering Age and Gender’(2011) 24(3) Criminal Justice
Policy Review 297–316.
2. N. Hammond, ‘Illusions of Safety: Policing Hate Crimes Won’t Make Us Safer’(2013) The Bilerico Project [online], 9 June,
available at: t_make.php>; H. Hurd,
‘Why Liberals Should Hate “Hate Crime Legislation”’ (2001) 20(2) Law and Philosophy 215–232; D. Meyer, ‘Resisting
Hate Crime Discourse: Queer and Intersectional Challenges to Neoliberal Hate Crime Laws’(2014) 22 Critical Criminology
113–125; and Y. Nair, ‘Counterpoint: Loving Hate: Why Hate Crimes Legislation is a Bad Idea’(2009) The Bilerico Project
[online], 8 February, available at: .
110 The Journal of Criminal Law 86(2)
To continue reading
Request your trial