ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: This special section of Sexuality Research and Social Policy, edited by Belinda Brooks-Gordon, Max Morris and Teela Sanders, has its origins in a colloquium sponsored by the University of Cambridge Socio-Legal Group in 2020. The goal was to promote the exchange of ideas between a variety of disciplinary research fields and applied perspectives on harm reduction and the decriminalization of sex work. The colloquium took place during the emergence of the coronavirus pandemic in February 2020. METHODS: We explore the impact of Covid-19 on understandings of sex work, outline the basic underpinning legal philosophical question, explore the intersectional politics of decriminalization, summarize contemporary international health and human rights campaigns, explore contemporary public opinion trends on the issue, and illustrate the universal principles. Finally, we summarize the special section papers (N=12). RESULTS: The Covid pandemic provided a lens through which to analyse the changes that have occurred in sex work and sex work research in the past decade and it also exacerbated intersecting inequalities, accelerated many social shifts already in motion whilst changing the course of others. In combination the papers in this special issue examine sex work policy and research across 12 countries in four continents to provide and important space for international and cross-cultural comparison. CONCLUSIONS: We present the timely contributions of diverse authors and comment on the significance of their research projects which support a decriminalization policy agenda for the benefit of academics, policymakers and practitioners to improve public health strategies and international responses. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The research here amplifies the focus on harm reduction and strengthens the case for public policy that decriminalizes commercial sex between consenting adults as the best strategy to reduce harm.
ABSTRACT
This paper draws on an autoethnographic 'digital diary' which the author began after testing positive for HIV in July 2016, until May 2021, to critically assess (mis)representations of both the AIDS and COVID-19 pandemics in the media. Drawing on insights from art, literature, queer theory and social anthropology, the paper focuses on dominant moral and political discourses to show how narratives of blame, shame and guilt about viral transmission contribute to the stigmatisation of 'at risk' groups. Concepts of biopower and normative judgement are used to reflect on discourses which construct those who 'test positive' for HIV or SARS-CoV-2 as 'reckless', 'risky' or 'irresponsible' subjects. The paper also analyses notes on recent media appearances made by the author to discuss their participation in the PARTNER study, which showed that HIV antiretroviral therapy eliminates the possibility of HIV transmission, including reports in The Guardian, on BBC News, on Sky News, on Channel 5 News, and in the Metro. As the former had reported that the 'Covid-19 crisis raises hopes of end to UK transmission of HIV', portrayals of the two pandemics are compared to explore tensions between public health and individual responsibility as normative priorities.