Jyoti Sanghera, Centre for Feminist Legal Research and Global Alliance against Traffic in Women

A ban on freedom of expression and the destruction of historical artefacts is easily and readily associated with the Taliban in Afghanistan, given recent developments and news reports about the demolition of the Buddhist statutes in Bamiyan. However, this disturbing tendency — the resort to "the ban" as a way of thwarting forms of expression which are not found to be "correct" or acceptable by the influential moral majority — has been increasingly gaining ground in India. Over the few past decades, beginning with the stifling of dissent under the emergency provisions imposed by Indira Gandhi, we have witnessed moves to ban books (Salman Rushdie’s), films (Fire, Water, etc.), plays, cricket games and currently satellite television programming. Among these, the razing of the Babri Masjid in 1992 stands out perhaps as the most unfortunate and shameful example of religious bigotry in contemporary India. If anything, this past century through its world wars, Nazi and other fascist pogroms, acts of genocide and widespread destruction of cultural and historical artefacts has taught us that one of the non-negotiables and most treasured pillars of an egalitarian worldview must be a commitment to democratic norms and principles, that it is essential for a society to not only tolerate but to nurture diverse forms of expression and a plurality of ideas in order to grow healthy and strong.

The past decades have also witnessed some incredible forms of resistance. Progressives of varying shades, including feminists, civil libertarians, environmentalists and women’s groups, as well as common people have come together in innumerable struggles to oppose the use of coercive practices, the threat of authority and other undemocratic measures to quash basic rights and freedoms regardless of caste, class, creed, colour, affiliation or gender. The "ban" is viewed by all who cherish democratic norms as not only undesirable but as a tool of a fundamentalist and fascistic imposition.

What then do we make of the recent unfortunate moment on the part of some renowned women’s groups and activists to ban a celebratory event, the sex workers’ Millennium Milan Mela? This mela (large gathering) was sponsored by the Durbar Mahila Samanwaya Committee (DMSC) and was scheduled to be held in Calcutta from March 3 to 6, 2001, at the Salt Lake Stadium. Several well-known women’s rights activists, including the Delhi-based Rammi Chhabra, Mira Shiva of VHAI in Delhi, representatives from Sanlap in Calcutta and others who had been participating in a meeting in Calcutta on violence against women, released a press release and handed a petition to the governor of West Bengal. Their single-point agenda was to press upon the authorities in Calcutta to "ban" the Millennium Milan Mela organised by the sex workers. The irony of this undemocratic move was all the more striking since it came only a few days prior to March 8, International Women’s Day, when women across the world celebrate their struggles for a life of dignity, equality and self-pride through the acclaimed slogan "We Want Bread and Roses."

The resort to this coercive and undemocratic practice meant that in less than 36 hours before the mela was to open, and even fewer hours before thousands of sex workers were due to arrive from various parts of the country as well as from abroad, the DMSC was served with a notice which denied them permission for the event. This ban shocked many allies, friends and funders of DMSC; that it should come at the behest of some women’s groups was even more startling.

It is known that there is an array of ideological standpoints within feminism and that debates and disagreements are common. Accepting and encouraging space for diverse opinions can only serve to enrich feminist engagements and discourse around difficult and challenging issues. The sex workers of DMSC, however, were not bewildered and thwarted by the denial of permission for the mela. They are used to the highhandedness of the State and the self-righteousness which stems from either moral high ground or political correctness. Being more practical, they immediately got into a damage control mode and fanned out to all possible centres of state and administrative power, arguing, cajoling and pleading. By the close of the evening on March 2, the DMSC sex workers and non-sex worker staff members had managed to have the ban revoked.

The mela opened on the morning of March 3 to a spray of Holi (an Indian festival) colours, the release of pigeons signifying peace and a colourful repertoire of songs and dances performed by Komol Gandhar, the cultural wing of DMSC. At the opening ceremony, March 3 was formally declared as the International Day for Sex Workers’ Rights. The mela also marked the formation of the regional network of sex workers in South Asia.

The Millennium Milan Mela sought to celebrate the struggle of sex workers for their rights, their small and big victories and their solidarity with women’s movements, both nationally and internationally. The mela also sought to bring together on a common platform a whole range of disadvantaged and stigmatised groups, including poor women, indigenous and marginalised folk artists, gays, lesbians, transsexuals and transgendered (hijra) people. Hence, the sex workers’ Millennium Mela, on account of its unprecedented scope, magnitude and inclusion, was undoubtedly the first of its kind globally, and Calcutta as a city, as well as its citizens, ought to have brimmed with pride for hosting such a stellar international event which went to the very heart of discrimination and disadvantage and challenged it. The mela was organised around an innovative mix of panel discussions, debates, workshops, song and mimes, theatre, puppet shows and folk songs, all of which consistently depicted the violations and wrongs faced by sex workers and the other stigmatised groups as well as their joie de vivre. Through its spirit of inclusion and absence of judgement, the mela revealed glimpses of a world which could be unconditionally welcoming of diversity and democratic to the core.

There were at least three aspects of the mela which marked it as uniquely unparalleled. First, the manner in which the human rights language was grounded and centred in concrete demands, strategies and programmes. This was captured through the main theme of the mela: "Only Rights Can Stop the Wrongs." The sex workers demanded the right to freedom from discrimination, freedom of movement, freedom of expression, the right to a livelihood, the right to association and the right to self-determination. The constant refrain which ran through this unprecedented gathering was that sex workers are a part of society and not an aberration, that sex work exists because there is a high demand for the range of personalised services covered under this category and that not only do sex workers not do any harm but, in reality, benefit large and growing sections of society. Hence, the sex workers argue that the stigma slapped upon them is completely unjustified. They assert forcefully, "We don’t want mere tolerance. We want acceptance!"

The second aspect which marked the mela as unique was that for the first time large numbers of people from mainstream society mingled in an open and unrestrained manner with sex workers and their communities in a public space which was not defined by the activity of sex work. Protagonists from the two worlds engaged and conversed as equals with the sex workers in this instance certainly appearing to have more agency and knowledge. The audience, in large part men, listened and absorbed the discussions with respectful attention. During the four days of the mela when thousands of visitors thronged to the grounds every day, not a single unsavoury or untoward incident was reported. The visitors eagerly devoured information on the history of the sex workers’ movement displayed through exhibits in one of the pavilions and watched with serious engagement as sex worker peer educators walked them through an audio-visual display of the need for a change in behaviour and condom-use in this day and age of HIV/AIDS. There was no evidence of the prurient, vulgar or harassing behaviour which women customarily encounter in melas and other public spaces.

And lastly, the mela was unique in its exemplary and unprecedented inclusion of all sexually stigmatised and marginalised communities. Representatives of transgendered, transsexual, gay and lesbian groups reiterated the pressing need to forge alliances in the struggle for their rights and, in so doing, engender a new politics of sexual justice based upon unconditional inclusion. This signified a qualitative leap in both feminist and progressive politics, discourse and activism. The mela also provided a perfectly safe public space for talking about sex and sexual behaviours in an affirming and positive way. It was a rare treat to be party to engaged conversations on pleasurable sexual practices rather than focusing exclusively on sexual wrongs, such as rape, the sexual abuse of children and sexual exploitation.

The demand for rights by sex workers was articulated in terms of entitlement as citizens and human beings and not as a grant of charity. "We are not beggars," the sex workers declared. Outraged at being labelled under the category of "beggars" in the latest census drive, the sex workers repeatedly reiterated that they earn their livelihoods by providing much-needed services, and hence, they are providers and wage earners, not beggars.

The opponents of the sex workers’ Millennium Milan Mela, the "ban-seekers," argued that this event would promote sex tourism and the sex trade in the city. They believe that, in the name of HIV/AIDS prevention, financial and other technical support and services were being extended by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to sex workers. By bettering the health of the sex workers, these measures, according to the logic of these advocates, created a more enabling environment for women in the sex industry to perform better, and therefore, programmes for HIV/AIDS prevention were actually reinforcing violence against women since prostitution per se, according to them, was tantamount to sexual exploitation. It was their strong opinion that funds allocated for HIV/AIDS prevention should be channelled for rescuing and rehabilitating women of the sex industry and that prostitution should be abolished. Ostensibly, this viewpoint does not recognise any form of consensual sex work and, furthermore, regards all sex workers as merely victims of forced prostitution or trafficking. Apparently, these advocates, it seems, are not aware of the fact that even in countries where prostitution is totally "banned" it never gets abolished; it merely goes underground and consequently thrives even more lucratively. As a result, sex workers in such a situation are far more vulnerable to abuse and violence on account of their invisibility and inaccessibility.

Conflating the DMSC sex workers’ demand for decriminalisation with legalisation, the group seeking a ban on the mela argued that the legalisation of prostitution would provide a tremendous fillip to the sex trade as well as to the trafficking of young girls into the sex industry. The sex workers countered by arguing that, in the 50 years since independence when prostitution has not been legal, has the trafficking of minors been arrested or the size of the industry reduced? On the contrary, these very proponents of the ban have argued that the trafficking of girls is on the rise and the sex industry is burgeoning. "Does it not defeat their own logic then?" asserted Mala, a DMSC activist.

Clarifying their position, the sex workers said that what they were demanding was not legalisation but decriminalisation of their profession, together with human rights. Prostitution as an activity per se needed to be decriminalised, i.e., removed from the penal code, while all criminal activity, including debt bondage, abduction, forced labour, forced confinement, rape and other forms of violence and exploitation found to be existing in this profession, as in every other profession, needed to be covered by already existing laws. However, it is clear that mere decriminalisation would not be adequate as sex workers need some affirmative measures in the economic and social spheres to redress the historical disadvantages they have suffered. In addition, special rights, including the right to a family, the right to work and the right to organise on the basis of work, may require special recognition and promotion.

Each day of the mela ended with resounding reverberations of taliyaan (clapping) to celebrate the struggles, strengths and solidarity of sex workers and their allies. The mela was not unwieldy; the crowds not unrestrained or uncouth; and the sex workers not unruly. On the contrary, it was a uniquely civilised and respectful space of genuine celebration. And yet it was perceived as a major threat which ostensibly destabilised "acceptable" and "respectable" norms and values, so much so that our very own "sisters" turned Talibanish and sought to ban innocent taalis (clapping) of sheer joy and celebration. Just as well that sex workers are forging a strong movement: they have a long and hard struggle ahead of them.