ABSTRACT
Thus far it has been assumed that the terms ‘sex tourism’ and ‘prostitute’ or ‘sex worker’ are self-evident, but it has also been shown that many different situations and interpretations exist. Hence, is there a single definition of these terms that encompasses all of these situations? It has also been argued that tourism presents an opportunity for people, male and female, to exploit their marginal status and their economic power to cross the line between the licit and illicit boundaries between the socially sanctioned and the ‘socially suspect’. This blurring of the boundary needs to be examined more closely. The blurring or crossing of any boundary is not a neutral act. Nor are boundaries without importance. Simmel (1971: 353) notes: ‘The boundary, above and below, is our means for finding direction in the infinite space of our worlds.’ Thus, the redrawing of boundaries means a redrawing of the frameworks of personal and societal knowledge and values. Boundaries are points of disjuncture and flux, and thus perversely, the existence of a boundary may actually act to ease the transmission of discourse just as, according to Porter (1997) they act as funnels for flows of trade, HIV and sex trafficking. The crossing of such boundaries has the potential for the socially condemned, the apparent deviant, to enter the discourse of that which is normally socially sanctioned. The wider society must decide the basis upon which any penetration of the boundary with the ‘illegitimate’ is to be judged. The presence of, and interaction with, the illicit margin must be either denied or recognised. Various options exist. Either the illegitimate continues to be condemned, and those who interact with it are also subject to condemnation. Or, as is often the case with prostitution, the relationship between licit and illicit is left ambiguous, a grey area of hypocrisy, and as such subject to injustice. The ambiguity arises because of a wish to avoid punishment of the transgressor in the form of the client – a position that can only be possessed by one with power within the social framework, and whose transgression is thereby subject to varying degrees of toleration. Third, societal change may force a growing recognition of the injustices to which subordinate groups are subjected, and thus legal, political and social changes occur within which the mainstream society recognises those injustices and the conditions which created them. What causes this to occur? For any system both or either internal and external factors may force change.
