“Receiving credit for an image we created is a given, not compensation, and credit is not a substitute for payment.” – Tony Wu, Photographer
Credit is also not a substitute for asking for permission to use an image. Unfortunately, there have been several cases of photos from this or my other blogs being used elsewhere without my express permission. All photos published on this blog or on my Facebook pages or Twitter account are my own unless credited otherwise. Upon request, I may grant permission to use them but ask for credit to be given as ‘Matthias Lehmann/Matt Lemon Photography’. Once you publish my photos or videos on your blog or website, I expect you to share the link with me. Especially if you wish to use any of my photos in commercial or print publications, you must contact me prior to doing so. Before contacting me, I recommend reading Tony Wu’sReasons Why Professional Photographers Cannot Work for Free.
All permissions are given for non-profit use only. I retain all rights of my photography and videography work. Unless credited otherwise, all other photos on this blog are licensed under aCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. The above also applies for any use of text from this blog, should you wish to use any part or entire entries elsewhere: if a text is marked as not falling under the Creative Commons License, anyone wishing to republish it is expected to request permission from the respective copyright holders. If they cannot reach them, please contact me to facilitate communication with them.
Tweet not included in original text. See note below.
Roughly 32,800 prostitutes registered with authorities at the end of 2018
At the end of 2018, roughly 32,800 prostitutes* were validly registered with the authorities in accordance with the Prostitutes Protection Law (ProstSchG). As the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis) further reports, 1,600 prostitution businesses had been granted permits or provisional permits under the law, which entered into force on July 1, 2017. These results are partly based on administrative structures that are still being set up. This limits the data’s informational value.
Nearly one fifth of all registered prostitutes possess German citizenship
Of the 32,800 registered prostitutes, 25,000 (76%) were 21 to 44 years old. 5,700 (17%) were aged 45 or older, and 2,000 (6%) were between 18 and 20 years old. 6,200 prostitutes (19%) possessed German citizenship. The three most common foreign nationalities of the prostitutes were Romanian with 11,400 (35% of all registered prostitutes), Bulgarian with 3,200 (10%) and Hungarian with 2,400 (7%).
By the end of 2018, 1,600 prostitution businesses were in operation with permits or provisional permits under the ProstSchG. 1,530 (96%) of the registered prostitution businesses were prostitution sites (Prostitutionsstätten, e.g. brothels). Prostitution agencies, vehicles and events accounted for a combined number of 70 permits (4%).
Notes on the data’s informational value – Administrative structures partly still being set up
The data under the ProstSchG is based on information of the relevant authorities and related administrative procedures. Under the law, prostitutes are subject to mandatory registration and prostitution businesses to statutory permission requirements. This statistic was first compiled in 2017. However, in some counties or municipalities, it was not yet possible to register as being engaged in prostitution or obtain a permit for a prostitution business on the reference day of December 31, 2017. Thus, 7,000 prostitutes nationwide had validly registered with the authorities by the end of 2017. The number of prostitution businesses holding a permit was 1,350. The reporting year 2018 marked the first year during which administrative procedures of all federal states were recorded. Nevertheless, at the end of 2018, the statistic is partly based on administrative structures that are still being set up. This limits the data’s informational value. Since the statistic represents administrative procedures pursuant to the ProstSchG, even subsequent data collections cannot include any information about businesses or prostitutes operating without registrations.
Translation byMatthias Lehmann, co-founder of SWAT – Sex Workers + Allies Translate.
“The aim of SWAT is not only to provide sex workers and allies with a network to enable sex work knowledge sharing across as cultural and language barriers, but also to reward contributors for their work whenever possible.”
Please click here for information about SWAT in 18 languages. Please contact SWAT via email if you would like to contribute your skills. You are also invited to join the SWAT Facebook group.
Every effort has been made to translate this press release verbatim. Therefore, the above text uses the term “prostitute” instead of “sex worker.” The tweet by the German AIDS Service Organisation (Deutsche Aidshilfe) did not appear in the original text. It refers to a report from May 2019 [German version] by the Ministry for Regional Identity, Communities and Local Government, Building and Gender Equality of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state, where less than a quarter of the estimated number of sex workers have registered.
According to the report, “It is to be feared that many prostitutes have retreated into the dark field of prostitution, where they are difficult to reach for authorities and counseling institutions. … There are reasonable doubts as to whether the law, in practice, can ever live up to its original idea of protection.” In its conclusion, the state’s government admit, “There is now a greater risk of slipping into poverty or illegality, losing a job and/or having personal data protection issues. The goal of protecting all sex workers from exploitative structures was not achieved by the introduction of the ProstSchG.”
Haga clic aquí para una traducción al español de este artículo.
ProstSchG well on its way to achieve Conservatives’ goals
A flurry of recent media reports have suggested the Prostitutes Protection Act (herafter ProstSchG) had failed to achieve its stated goals and would not sufficiently protect people engaged in prostitution.
The ProstSchG is well on its way to achieve all of the federal government’s desired goals and effects, especially those of the conservative parties [Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Christian Social Union (CSU) in Bavaria, together known as die Union]. It may have taken a while, but now, around two years after the ProstSchG went into effect on July 1, 2017, it has become increasingly apparent that the law’s consequences, which we expected and predicted, have materialized up and down the country.
As interior minister Horst Seehofer (CSU) aptly noted on June 6, 2019, when speaking about the legislative process in Germany:
“The law is called the Data Exchange Act. Introduced completely quietly. Quietly, probably because it’s complicated, so it didn’t attract as much attention. Over the last 15 months, I’ve made the experience that you have to make laws complicated, then [laughs] they don’t attract so much attention. We’re not doing anything illegal, we’re doing what’s necessary. But even necessary things are often illegitimately called into question.”
While the subject here was the Data Exchange Act, the same tactic was already employed when the ProstSchG was adopted.
Almost as an aside, the law undermined Germany’s Basic Law [Grundgesetz, GG]. Article 13 GG, which grants the inviolability of one’s home? No longer applies to sex workers. Occupational freedom? That, too, is being undermined through the registration procedures forced upon sex workers. Naturally, the law does not spell that out. That would have been too simple, and then there might have been louder protests against it. (See also: “Prostitutes Protection Law violates fundamental rights”; click here to read the article with Google Translate.)
Instead, the plan was hatched to call the measure “Law on the Regulation of Prostitution and the Protection of Persons Working in Prostitution”, in short, Prostitutes Protection Act. Such things always earn wide acceptance in the society. There is a widespread misconception, however, that the “protection of persons working in prostitution” is meant to do just that: provide sex workers with protection. On the contrary, if one scrutinises the law, one quickly realises that the law aims to protect people from themselves and from prostitution, just like sunscreen does not protect the sun but those using it from the effects of sunlight exposure.
In the context of the ProstSchG, the above-cited quote by Horst Seehofer fits yet again, as the ProstSchG, in a roundabout way, is also supposed to help curb migration. It was clear from the outset that the law would be particularly problematic for people from countries where prostitution is illegal, such as Bulgaria or Romania. If they register as sex workers in Germany, they risk receiving mail in their countries of origin, despite the promised option to have any related mail delivered to a different mailing address. (See for instance, “Prostitutes Protection Act: Between Aspiration and Reality” by the German AIDS Service Organisation; click here to read the article with Google Translate.)
Tax offices flout this provision knowingly and deliberately, and in doing so, they greatly endanger the lives of sex workers in their countries of origin. Protection? Nil. Did lawmakers heed the advice of experts? They did indeed, though not in the way those experts intended. Instead, their expertise and reasoning were turned on their head, making it easy to create regulations that would hit sex workers as hard as possible. Without further ado, the list of measures fundamentally rejected by the called-upon experts was converted into the government’s wish list.
[Irony on] Sex workers require anonymity to protect themselves? Let’s do the opposite and write mandatory registrations into the law. [Irony off]
ProstSchG is intended to deter, not protect
The entire construct of the ProstSchG is intended to deter people from entering prostitution and render sex work impossible in most places. Mandatory registrations at public authorities are nothing short of forced outings in front of strangers. In some places, for instance in the city of Gießen, the government even tasked private organisations with carrying out this measure. (See also: “Sex worker files suit at administrative court against implementation of Prostitutes Protection Act through the city of Gießen”; click here to read the article with Google Translate.)
Such practices reinforce the stigma sex workers are exposed to on a daily basis. Politicians cannot pretend they were unaware that many sex workers would opt to circumvent the mandatory registration procedure and instead, out of necessity, work underground and, thus, illegally. All experts, including representatives of trade associations and counselling centres as well as sex workers themselves, had explicitly warned them this would happen and called for other, better measures, e.g. expanding the offer of counselling centres, funds for job retraining for people in sex work, the full decriminalisation of sex work, the abolition of all measures fuelling the stigma attached to sex work, and many others.
With those measures, however, the federal government would not have achieved their actual goal to quietly abolish prostitution under the guise of helping people in prostitution.
Two years after the adoption of the new law, news articles about the demise of brothels and vacancies in prostitution businesses appear almost on a daily basis, as officially registered sex workers are few and far between. The majority of good and safe work places are fast disappearing, be it due to requirements set out in the ProstSchG or the law’s effects, e.g. sex workers being unable or unwilling to obtain a “Whore ID” in order to avoid being outed. In addition, the ProstSchG dictates that sex workers are no longer permitted to stay overnight at brothels, walk-in brothels (Laufhäuser) and other prostitution businesses. This requires sex workers to earn more money to cover the added daily expenses for a separate bedroom [offered by some prostitution businesses] or hotel room. As a result, many decide to work illegally, either independently or in unlicensed prostitution businesses.
Many sex workers have disappeared from the public sphere for fear of attracting attention and facing an inspection. Consequently, sex workers spent less time on solicitation via internet or phone, which puts them at greater risk as they can no longer screen their clients to the extent necessary.
Sex workers, who were previously able to share apartments where they could both live and work, are now forced to work alone. This results in higher costs (for rent, utilities, advertising, etc., which they were able to share) that most cannot afford on their own. And the protection through their colleagues is, of course, also gone. Where previously sex workers could provide protection to one another, those working in apartments are now forced to work alone. The result: over the last two years, the large majority of those work places has also disappeared.
Even the counselling centres are hit hard by the ProstSchG, jeopardising years of their work and efforts to build trusting relationships with sex workers. In 2018, Madonna e.V.[a member of the Global Network of Sex Work Projects (NSWP)and the only sex worker self-help project in North Rhine-Westphalia] received significantly less funding from the provincial government. Funding for the widely acclaimed Lola app [offering advice for sex workers in Bulgarian, English, German, Romanian and Turkish] was also reduced. Needless to say, the aforementioned evaluation report conveniently omitted this. (Honi soit qui mal y pense.) Urgently needed counselling positions had to be cut, as funds are no longer sufficient. This is especially worrisome considering that independent and anonymous counselling for people engaging in sex work is immensely important.
Whoever still believes that the Prostitutes Protection Act was intended to protect sex workers also believes that woodchucks chuck wood.
Translation byMatthias Lehmann, co-founder of SWAT – Sex Workers + Allies Translate.
“The aim of SWAT is not only to provide sex workers and allies with a network to enable sex work knowledge sharing across as cultural and language barriers, but also to reward contributors for their work whenever possible.”
Please clickherefor information about SWAT in 18 languages. Pleasecontact SWAT via emailif you would like to contribute your skills. You are also invited to join the SWAT Facebook group.
El acoso sexual ocurre en la prostitución como ocurre en cualquier otro trabajo. Se necesitan soluciones que no penalicen a todos los clientes.
“¡Si alguien te agarra, quítale la mano inmediatamente y deja claro que no debe tocarte sin pagar!”. Ese fue uno de los primeros consejos que recibí de una compañera trabajadora sexual. Era en 2011, cuando comencé a hacer negocios en Café Pssst !, un bar con habitaciones en la parte trasera. Tanteaba clientes potenciales mientras coqueteaba con ellos; hombres de la clase del que le ponía la mano en el trasero o en el pecho a una mujer, pero que al final no iba a las habitaciones de atrás con ella. Tenían que ir al banco primero para retirar efectivo, decían, y luego simplemente no regresaban, como era de esperar.
En términos generales, nuestros clientes saben muy bien cómo comportarse y nos tratan con respeto; después de todo, son hijos, parejas o padres, no monstruos sin empatía. Sin embargo, al igual que en la gastronomía, el riesgo de encontrarse con un cliente ocasional que te agarre sin tu consentimiento es relativamente alto. O que robe tu tiempo, es decir, tu dinero.
En la mayoría de los burdeles, las prostitutas nos advertimos mutuamente sobre tales clientes transgresores. Intercambiamos información sobre qué observar o qué tipo de clientes es mejor rechazar, si ya te has hartado de su actitud. En algunos de los portales de internet, nos advertimos unas a otras de los clientes que actuaron de forma violenta o inapropiada.
Las redes de trabajadoras sexuales en países de habla inglesa manejan sus propias bases de datos, los llamados “esquemas de Ugly Mugs”, para librar a las compañeras trabajadoras sexuales de tener la misma mala experiencia con un cliente que tuvieron otras, desde transgresiones hasta violencia. Para el área de habla alemana, obtuvimos un “Client-Knigge” [manual de etiqueta] en el que los clientes pueden leer en frío lo que es y lo que no es aceptable.
A pesar de toda la competencia, las putas generalmente nos apoyamos mutuamente cuando se trata de compartir la mejor forma de lidiar con esas raras “ovejas negras”. Proyectos del movimiento por los derechos de las trabajadoras sexuales (como Hydra, Trans*Sexworks o profiS by move e.V.) empoderan a las trabajadoras sexuales para que se levanten contra la violencia y procesen mejor sus experiencias.
Expectativas de rol contradictorias
Aunque es obvio, permítanme aclarar una cosa: ¡un solo cliente transgresivo o violento ya es demasiado! Encuentros con esos clientes son los que ocupan nuestras mentes por un período de tiempo más largo. Para digerirlos, reflexionamos sobre esas experiencias una y otra vez.
Los estereotipos dominantes sobre las prostitutas, que también influyen en nuestro propio pensamiento, dificultan el trazar una línea cuando se trata de transgresiones o conductas violentas: algunos dicen que como “mujeres caídas” no tenemos que culpar a nadie más que a nosotras mismas y debemos considerar esas experiencias como riesgo laboral.
También están aquellos que creen que las prostitutas no pueden ser violadas, ya que aparentemente estamos listas para acostarnos con cualquier persona en cualquier momento. Otros a su vez creen exactamente lo contrario: que cualquier sexo con clientes es violación.
Incluso si no necesitas procesar ninguna grosería, estas expectativas de rol contradictorias pueden desestabilizarte sutilmente sobre qué punto de vista adoptar. Y, sin embargo, no somos “mujeres caídas” ni somos incapaces de expresar o negar el consentimiento, ni todos nuestros clientes son agresores.
La variedad de violencia perpetrada por los clientes es amplia y diversa. En el peor de los casos, incluye asesinatos, y los asesinos en serie — no solo en EE. UU.— la mayoría de las veces eligen prostitutas como sus víctimas, ya que razonablemente pueden esperar que las investigaciones policiales sobre asesinatos de trabajadoras sexuales se lleven a cabo con menos rigor. Además, debido al estigma asociado al trabajo sexual y el miedo a la policía, las trabajadoras sexuales apenas denuncian incidentes. No lo hacen en Alemania, y ciertamente tampoco en países que penalizan a los clientes.
La policía no es inocente
Y, sin embargo, informes recientes de compañeras trabajadoras sexuales de Francia [e Irlanda] han demostrado que desde que se adoptó la penalización de clientes, son especialmente los clientes respetuosos los que se mantienen alejados, mientras que los brutales aceptan fácilmente el pequeño riesgo de ser atrapados. A su vez, la disminución de clientes significa que les guste o no, las trabajadoras sexuales tienen que aceptar clientes significativamente más violentos si quieren evitar caer en la pobreza, ya que las alternativas de trabajo adecuadas son pocas y distantes.
No debería ser una sorpresa que la combinación de diferentes formas de discriminación —tener una identidad trans *, un conocimiento pobre del idioma alemán, ser negra o de color, ser romaní o de otro origen étnico— también aumente el nivel de violencia que experimentan las personas en el trabajo sexual.
Además de la violencia de los clientes, uno no debe ignorar la enorme cantidad de violencia perpetrada por los agentes de policía en todo el mundo. Muy a menudo, los perpetradores se esconden entre las mismas personas de quienes los políticos y los activistas contra la prostitución esperan que nos protejan. En Alemania, los casos de sexo extorsionado (“hazme una mamada y luego te dejaré ir”) quizás no sean tan altos como en otros lugares, pero la policía alemana tampoco es inocente. Compañeras trabajadoras sexuales han informado sobre violencia psicológica, por ejemplo, mediante salidas forzadas del coche durante los controles de licencia de conducir, comentarios sexualizados durante las redadas, ficciones de hacerse pasar por clientes, o preguntas transgresoras y condescendientes cuando se intenta presentar una denuncia.
La exclusión social, especialmente los intentos de librar a las ciudades del trabajo sexual callejero, ha llevado a la adopción de leyes cuyo único propósito es desplazar o encarcelar a las prostitutas. Cuando se prohibe iniciar contacto con clientes potenciales , como sucedió en el barrio St. Georg de Hamburgo; cuando las trabajadoras sexuales regresan a las zonas fuera de límite [Sperrbezirke] para ganar dinero suficiente para pagar las multas que se les imponen y son atrapadas repetidamente hasta que la falta administrativa inicial se convierte en un delito penal; cuando una docena de trabajadoras sexuales van a parar a la cárcel como resultado de todo eso, entonces considero que existe una privación de la libertad de las prostitutas por parte de las autoridades legislativas y ejecutivas.
Indiscriminadamente encasilladas como víctimas
Nuestras fronteras merecen el mismo respeto que las de los demás. Llegar a darse cuenta de algo tan obvio puede ser difícil a veces en una sociedad que nos segrega y nos encasilla de forma indiscriminada como víctimas.
A las trabajadoras sexuales se nos está robando la oportunidad de dirigir un debate público diferenciado sobre la violencia en la prostitución. ¿Cómo tratar el hecho de que eliges esta ocupación después de una cuidadosa consideración, sabiendo mucho acerca de los posibles peligros? ¿A quién tomas como un modelo a seguir? ¿Cómo lidias con la violencia, sin infravalorarla y sin generalizarla?
Se necesitan soluciones que no penalicen a todos los clientes. Existe una falta de comprensión de que, ante todo, son los prejuicios sociales sobre la prostitución los que nos dificultan protegernos a nosotras mismas. Eso es porque esos prejuicios bajan el umbral para usar la violencia contra nosotras: entre los clientes, entre la policía, entre todos. Desearía que se escuchara a las trabajadoras sexuales y que se nos consultara acerca de qué medidas consideramos útiles para prevenir la violencia y cuáles no recomendamos.
Incluso si ello puede ser incómodo para muchas personas: las campañas públicamente visibles que representan a nuestros clientes y a nosotras mismas como personas respetables serían más efectivas que los registros forzosos.2 Porque el problema no somos nosotras, sino los prejuicios que tenéis contra nosotras.
1 La autora es trabajadora sexual y escribió aquí bajo su seudónimo.
2 La “Ley de Protección de Prostitutas”, que entró en vigencia en Alemania el 1 de julio de 2017, introdujo el registro obligatorio de trabajadoras sexuales, así como sesiones obligatorias de consejería en salud y la posibilidad de emitir órdenes administrativas contra ellas. Para más información, remítase al Informe del Comité Internacional sobre los Derechos del Trabajador Sexual en Europa (ICRSE), titulado “Protección profesada, disposiciones sin sentido – Descripción general de la Ley alemana de protección de las prostitutas (Prostituiertenschutzgesetz – ProstSchG)”. Los lectores interesados también pueden referirse al Informe Comunitario de ICRSE “Explotación: disposiciones laborales injustas y condiciones de trabajo precarias en la industria del sexo”.
Muchas gracias a Citerea Anadiomena para la traducción en español.Publicado con el permiso de usar. Visita el blog El Estante De LaCitipara obtener más textos en español. Traducción original del alemán al inglés por Matthias Lehmann, cofundador de SWAT – Trabajadores sexuales y sus amigos traducen, editar, y diseño.
“El objetivo de SWAT no es solo proporcionar a las trabajadoras sexuales y aliados una red para permitir el intercambio de conocimientos sobre trabajo sexual a través de barreras culturales y de idioma, sino también recompensar a los contribuyentes por su trabajo siempre que sea posible.”
Haga clic aquípara obtener información sobre SWAT en 18 idiomas. Póngase en contacto con SWAT por correo electrónico si desea contribuir con sus habilidades. También le invitamos a unirte al grupo SWAT de Facebook.
El traductor desea agradecer a Marleen Laverte por sus comentarios sobre el primer borrador de esta traducción. Se han hecho todos los esfuerzos para traducir este artículo palabra por palabra. La foto y el video de arriba, así como la segunda nota al pie no aparecieron en el artículo original.
El original en alemán de este artículo se publicó por primera vez como“Sexuelle Gewalt und Prostitution: Das Problem ist euer Bild von uns” por die tageszeitung (20 de noviembre de 2017). Tenga en cuenta que el copyright de este artículo corresponde a Die Tageszeitung y no está licenciado bajo una licencia de Creative Commons.
The translator would like to thank Marleen Laverte for her comments on the first draft of this translation. Every effort has been made to translate this article verbatim. The photo and video above as well as the second footnote did not appear in the original article.
Sexual harassment happens in prostitution as it does in any other job. Solutions are needed that do not criminalise all clients.
“If somebody grabs at you, take his hand away immediately and make it clear that he mustn’t touch you without paying!” That was one of the first tips I got from a fellow sex worker. Back then, in 2011, when I began doing business at Café Pssst!, a bar with back rooms. I sounded out potential clients while flirting with them – the kind who put their hand on a woman’s ass or breast but eventually would not go to one of the back rooms with them. They had to go to the bank first to withdraw cash, they would say, and then simply did not return, as expected.
Generally speaking, our clients know very well how to behave and treat us respectfully – after all, they are sons, partners or fathers, not monsters devoid of empathy. As in the gastronomy, however, the risk of encountering the occasional client who will grab at you without your consent is relatively high. Or steal your time, i.e. money.
In most brothels, prostitutes warn each other of such transgressive clients. We swap information about what to watch out for or what kind of clients to better reject, if you had enough of their attitude. At some of the online portals, we warn each other of clients who acted violently or inappropriately.
Sex worker networks in English-speaking countries run their own databases, so-calledUgly Mugs schemes, to save fellow sex workers from having the same bad experience with a client that they made,from transgressions to violence. For the German-speaking area, we got a“Client-Knigge”[etiquette manual] where clients can read in cold print what is and is not acceptable.
Despite all competition, whores generally support one another when it comes to sharing how to best deal with those rare “black sheep”. Peer projects of the sex workers’ rights movement – likeHydra,Trans*SexworksorprofiS by move e.V. – empower sex workers to stand up against violence and process their experiences better.
Contradictory role expectations
Although it is obvious, let me make one thing clear: each transgressive or violent client is one too many! Encounters with those clients are the ones that occupy our minds for a longer period of time. To digest them, we reflect on those experiences time and time again.
The dominant stereotypes about prostitutes, which also influence our own thinking, make it difficult where to draw the line when it comes to transgressions or violent behaviour: some say that as “fallen women” we have no one but ourselves to blame and consider those experiences as occupational hazard.
Then there are also those who believe thatprostitutes cannot berapedsince we are apparently ready to go to bed with anyone at any time. Others again believe the exact opposite: that any and all sex with clients is rape.
Even if you do not need to process any rudeness, these contradictory role expectations can subtly unsettle you about which point of view to adopt. And yet, we are neither “fallen” nor incapable of expressing or withholding consent, nor are all our clients perpetrators.
The range of violence perpetrated by clients is wide and diverse. At worst, it includes murder, and serial killers – not just in the US – more often than not choose prostitutes as their victims since they can reasonably expect that police investigations into murders of sex workers will be conducted less rigorously. Besides, due to the stigma attached to sex work and fear of the police, sex workers hardly report incidents. Not in Germany, and certainly not in countries that criminalise clients.
The police are not innocent
And yet, recent reports by fellow sex workers from France [and Ireland] have shown that ever since the criminalisation of clients was adopted, it is especially the respectful clients who stay away, whereas the brutal ones readily accept the small risk of getting caught. In turn, the decrease of clients means that whether they like it or not, sex workers have to accept significantly more violent clients if they want to avoid falling into poverty as adequate job alternatives are few and far between.
It should not come as a surprise that the combination of different forms of discrimination – having a trans* identity, poor knowledge of the German language, being Black or of colour, being of Romni or another ethnic background – increases the level of violence people experience in sex work, too.
Besides violence by clients, one must not ignore the enormous amount of violence perpetrated by police officers around the world. More often than not, perpetrators hide among the very people of whom politicians and anti-prostitution activists expect to protect us. In Germany, cases of extorted sex (“give me a blow job then I’ll let you go”) are perhaps not as high as elsewhere but the German police is not innocent either. Fellow sex workers have reported of psychological violence, e.g. through forced outing during driver’s license checks, sexualised remarks during raids, pretending to be clients, or being asked transgressive and patronising questions when trying to file a complaint.
Social exclusion, especially the attempts to rid cities of street-based sex work, has led to the adoption of laws whose sole purpose is to displace or jail prostitutes. When initiating contact with potential clients gets outlawed, as has happenedin Hamburg’s St. Georg Quarter; when sex workers return to off-limit zones [Sperrbezirke] in order to make enough money to pay fines levied against them and are repeatedly caught until the initial administrative offence is converted into a criminal offence; when a dozen sex workers sits in jail as a result of all that – then I consider that a deprivation of prostitutes’ liberty by legislative and executive authorities
Sweepingly pigeonholed as victims
Our boundaries deserve the same respect as everyone else’s. Arriving at this self-evident realisation can be hard sometimes in a society that segregates and sweepingly pigeonholes us as victims.
Sex workers are robbed of the opportunity to lead a differentiated public debate about violence in prostitution. How do you deal with the fact that you chose this occupation after careful consideration, knowing full well about the potential dangers? Who do you take as a role model? How do you deal with violence, without playing it down and without generalising it?
Solutions are needed that do not criminalise all clients. There is a lack of understanding that first and foremost, it is social prejudices about prostitution that render it difficult for us to protect ourselves. That is because they lower the threshold to use violence against us – among clients, among the police, among everyone. I wished that sex workers would be listened to, and that we would be consulted about which measures we consider useful to prevent violence, and which we do not recommend.
Even if may be uncomfortable for many people: publicly visible campaigns representing our clients and us as respectable people would be more effective than forced registrations.2 Because we are not the problem but the prejudices you have against us.
1 The author is a sex worker and wrote here under her pseudonym.
2 The “Prostitutes Protection Act”, which came into effect on July 1, 2017, introduced the mandatory registration of sex workers as well as mandatory health counselling sessions and the possibility of issuing administrative orders against them. For further information, please refer to the Briefing Paper by the International Committee on the Rights of Sex Workers in Europe (ICRSE), titled “Professed Protection, Pointless Provisions – Overview of the German Prostitutes Protection Act (Prostituiertenschutzgesetz – ProstSchG)”. Interested readers may also refer to ICRSE’s Community Report “Exploitation: Unfair labour arrangements and precarious working conditions in the sex industry”.
Translation byMatthias Lehmann, co-founder of SWAT – Sex Workers + Allies Translate.
“The aim of SWAT is not only to provide sex workers and allies with a network to enable sex work knowledge sharing across as cultural and language barriers, but also to reward contributors for their work whenever possible.”
Please clickherefor information about SWAT in 18 languages. Pleasecontact SWAT via emailif you would like to contribute your skills. You are also invited to join the SWAT Facebook group.
The translator would like to thank Marleen Laverte for her comments on the first draft of this translation. Every effort has been made to translate this article verbatim. The photo and video above as well as the second footnote did not appear in the original article.
Anlässlich des Internationalen Hurentags, der an jedem 2. Juni der Besetzung der Saint-Nizier-Kirche im franzöischen Lyon im Jahr 1975 durch 100 Sexarbeiterinnen feierlich gedenkt, präsentiert das Internationale Komitee für die Rechte von Sexarbeiter*innen in Europa (ICRSE) ein Briefing Paper mit dem Titel „Vorgeblicher Schutz, Vergebliche Maßnahmen: Überblick über das Prostituiertenschutzgesetz (ProstSchg)“.
Das Briefing Paper wurde vom ICRSE in Zusammenarbeit mit Hydra e.V. und dem Berufsverband erotische und sexuelle Dienstleistungen (BesD) e.V. mit dem Ziel entwickelt, sowohl politischen Entscheidungsträger*innen als auch Sexarbeiter*innen und ihren Unterstützer*innen eine Analyse des neuen deutschen „Prostituiertenschutzgesetzes“ und dessen erwarteten Auswirkungen auf Sexarbeiter*innen anzubieten, sowie Empfehlungen der Gemeinschaft von Sexarbeiter*innen zu unterbreiten.
Wie darin erklärt, hegt das ICRSE ernsthafte Bedenken hinsichtlich der Art und Weise, mit der das „Prostituiertenschutzgesetz“ die Grundrechte von Sexarbeiter*innen untergräbt. So beschränken die Anmeldepflicht und die Möglichkeiten, Anordnungen gegenüber Sexarbeiter*innen zu erlassen, das Recht auf freie Berufswahl, und die weitreichenden Überwachungsmöglichkeiten, die das ProstSchG den Behörden gegenüber Sexarbeiter*innen einräumt, verletzen das Grundrecht auf Unverletzlichkeit der Wohnung. Besonders schwer wiegt die Speicherung persönlicher Daten in Verbindung mit Informationen zum Sexualleben einer Person, denn sie verletzt das Grundrecht auf informationelle Selbstbestimmung und die Richtlinie des Europäischen Parlaments zum „Schutz natürlicher Personen bei der Verarbeitung personenbezogener Daten“. In Anbetracht der Tatsache, dass ein absolut sicherer Datenschutz unmöglich gewährleistet werden kann, ist die zukünftige Datenerhebung damit höchst problematisch.
Fazit
Das „Prostituiertenschutzgesetz“ ist in der Form, in der es am 1. Juli 2017 in Kraft treten wird, nur vorgeblich ein Gesetz zum Schutz von Sexarbeiter*innen und die darin enthaltenen Maßnahmen sind vergeblich, um Sexarbeiter*innen auf der einen Seite und Betroffene von Menschenhandel auf der anderen nachhaltig zu unterstützen. Stattdessen werden insbesondere in Wohnungen gemeinsam arbeitende Sexarbeiter*innen sowie migrantische, transidente, und anderweitig spezifisch vulnerable Sexarbeiter*innen von diesem Gesetz in die Illegalität gedrängt. Wo Schutz draufsteht, ist daher in großen Teilen schlicht ein Gesetz zur Verdrängung der Sexarbeit enthalten.
Wir laden Sexarbeiter*innen und politische Entscheidungsträger*innen dazu ein, das Briefing Paper aufmerksam zu lesen und die Empfehlungen der Gemeinschaft von Sexarbeiter*innen zu beachten.
Download
Bitte hierklicken, um die deutsche Version herunterzuladen.
Bitte hier klicken, um die englische Version herunterzuladen.
To mark the International Sex Workers’ Day, celebrated each year on June 2nd to commemorate the occupation of the Saint-Nizier Church in Lyon, France, by 100 sex workers in 1975, ICRSE launches a briefing paper titled “Professed Protection, Pointless Provisions – Overview of the German Prostitutes Protection Act (Prostituiertenschutzgesetz – ProstSchG)”.
The briefing paper was developed by ICRSE in collaboration with Hydra e.V. and the Professional Association Erotic and Sexual Services (Berufsverband erotische und sexuelle Dienstleistungen,BesD e.V.). It aims to offer policy makers, sex workers, and sex workers’ allies an analysis of Germany’s new “Prostitutes Protection Act” and its expected impact on sex workers, and outline recommendations from the sex worker community.
As noted therein, ICRSE has serious concerns about the ways the “Prostitutes Protection Act” will significantly undermine many of sex workers’ fundamental rights. The mandatory registration of sex workers and the possibility of issuing administrative orders against them limit their right to freedom of vocational choice, and the extensive means of surveillance that the “Prostitutes Protection Act” affords the authorities infringes the constitutional right of the inviolability of the home. The recording of personal data in connection with information about persons’ sexual life is a particularly serious issue as it violates the fundamental right to informational self-determination and the directive of the European Parliament on “the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data”. Given the impossibility of providing absolute data protection, the upcoming collection of this personal information is highly problematic.
Conclusion
The “Prostitutes Protection Act”, in the form that it will come into effect on July 1, 2017, only pretends to be a law for the protection of sex workers. The regulations provided therein fail to support both sex workers and trafficked persons. Instead, the law will force sex workers into illegality, especially those working together at apartments as well as migrant, trans, and otherwise particularly vulnerable individuals in sex work. What is labelled as protection is in large parts simply a law aimed at repressing sex work.
We invite sex workers and policy makers to read the briefing paper and take note of the recommendations from the sex workers’ community.
Download
Click here for the English version. Click herefor the German version.
En el día de hoy, la ministra de Salud de Rhin Norte-Westfalia, Barbara Steffens, y la presidenta de la Mesa Redonda sobre la Prostitución de Rhin Norte-Westfalia, Claudia Zimmermann-Schwartz, dieron una conferencia de prensa acerca de la planeada Ley de Protección de Prostitutas, de la que dijeron que llevará aún más a las trabajadoras sexuales a la ilegalidad, en lugar de protegerlas. Como parte del comunicado de prensa, se presentaron las declaraciones de dos trabajadoras sexuales que participaron en la Mesa Redonda. Lo que sigue es la declaración ampliada de una de ellas, traducida del original en alemán publicado por Voice4Sexworkers. Hacer clic, por favor, aquí para ver el comunicado de prensa emitido por el Ministerio de Salud, Igualdad, Servicios Sociales y Personas Mayores en Rhin Norte-Westfalia. Este recurso está en alemán.
Declaración de Melanie, participante en la Mesa Redonda sobre Prostitución
Soy madre soltera de dos hijos y he estado trabajando como trabajadora sexual durante los pasados diez años. Nunca he conseguido ganarme totalmente la vida con el trabajo sexual, pero no quise volver a recibir ayuda social o vivienda protegida. Por esta razón, los ingresos adicionales provenientes del trabajo sexual han sido siempre bien recibidos y me han permitido proporcionar a mis niños vidas normales libres de exclusiòn social.
El principio más importante —y esto es exactamente en lo que no se basa el proyecto de ley sobre nosotras— es que la prostitución tiene que ser despenalizada antes de ponerse a regularla. Esto significa que el trabajo sexual no debe ser regido por el código penal. El año pasado, Amnistía Internacional llegó a la misma conclusión tras llevar a cabo durante dos años un amplio estudio en el que entrevistaron a trabajadoras sexuales, en particular en los países en los que el trabajo sexual está intensamente regulado o incluso prohibido. Un informe de la ONU de 2012, basado en la investigación llevada a cabo en 48 países, encontró también que los sistemas de licencias o registros demostraban ser ineficaces o beneficiaban solo a un pequeño número de trabajadoras sexuales. En las jurisdicciones que han introducido estos sistemas, la vasta mayoría de las trabajadoras sexuales operaba fuera de ellos. Comparaciones con países como Alemania revelaron que las situaciones de trabajo y de vida de las trabajadoras sexuales mejoran cuando el trabajo sexual es legalizado. Pero los resultados más positivos se han conseguido en Nueva Zelanda, donde el paso final hacia la despenalización se dio hace casi 13 años.Read the rest of this page »
Today, North-Rhine Westphalian Health Minister Barbara Steffens and Claudia Zimmermann-Schwartz, Chairwoman of the Roundtable Prostitution in North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW), held a press conference about the planned Prostitutes Protection Law (ProstSchG), which they argued would further drive sex workers into illegality instead of protecting them. As part of the press release, statements from two sex workers who participated in the Roundtable were presented.The following is an expanded statement from one of them, translated from the German original published by Voice4Sexworkers. Please clickhereto view the press release by the Ministry of Health, Equalities, Care and Ageing (MGEPA) in NRW. This resource is in German.
Statement by Melanie, Participant at Roundtable Prostitution
I’m a single mother of two and I’ve been working as a sex worker for the past ten years. I’ve never been able to earn my entire livelihood through sex work but I didn’t want to fall back on receiving welfare or housing benefits. That’s why the additional income from sex work has always been welcome and has enabled me to afford my children normal lives free from social exclusion.
The most important principle – and that’s exactly what the draft bill before us is not based on – is that prostitution has to be decriminalised first before one sets out to regulate it. This means that sex work must not be governed by criminal law. Last year, Amnesty International arrived at the same conclusion after conducting a comprehensive 2-year study in which they interviewed sex workers, particularly in countries were sex work is heavily regulated or even forbidden. A UN report from 2012, based on research in 48 countries, also found that licensing or registration systems proved to be ineffective or benefited only a small number of sex workers. In jurisdictions that have introduced these systems, the vast majority of sex workers operated outside of them. Comparisons with countries like Germany revealed that the working and living situations of sex workers improve when sex work is legalised. But the most positive results have been accomplished in New Zealand, where the final step towards decriminalisation was taken almost 13 years ago.
The authors of this Prostitutes Protection Law did not muster that same courage. Under the guise of wanting to protect us, they drafted a bill that is entirely “exit-oriented” but mentions nothing about how to earn a living or receive benefits for one’s livelihood. The Hartz IV welfare benefits are insufficient even now, and it is for that very reason that many of us choose to engage in sex work. If one were really interested in helping us, other alternatives and practical assistance were required instead of fobbing us off with minimal basic coverage. Notably, in urban areas where the unemployment rate is high, this minimal basic coverage does not provide for sustainable future prospects.
Instead of the current plan of sinking an initial 76.2 million euros followed by 85 million euros annually into this bureaucratic monster, these funds could be used for more meaningful projects, such as counselling centres, self-help organisations, interim payments, and support for qualification measures to enable occupational reorientation. A social welfare fund for sex workers would also be a blessing, since a considerable percentage of us cannot even afford the minimum contribution towards our health insurance.
Instead of offering us the assistance we have suggested time and time again, the new law would impose insurmountable obstacles on us. Our survey among sex workers from December 2015 has also shown what they really wish for and need: effective protection from discrimination, protection against dismissal from a primary job due to engaging in sex work on the side, protection against extortionate rent, more counselling centres (particularly of the kind that don’t just offer help on how to exit, but also how to safely enter sex work), and better protection of their anonymity, especially when dealing with authorities. The ProstSchG fails to provide any of that and instead amounts to the exact opposite, since it even goes as far as to cancel out the Basic Law. If this new law came into effect, the police would be allowed to enter any private home without a court order. A simple allegation that prostitution was taking place in any given apartment would suffice as justification.
Registration
In our survey, around one third of all respondents stated they had already had negative experiences with authorities. An equally large share stated they had never outed themselves to authorities out of fear or shame. Together, they represent far more than half of all respondents. Having to explain oneself and provide intimate details to a stranger would only exacerbate this trend.
In addition, it is incomprehensible why it should be necessary to provide all our work locations or have to register anew to work in additional cities or states. These measures are simply meant to enable authorities to create movement profiles that would reveal a lot but contribute nothing to our protection.
Licensing
Instead of supporting people engaged in sex work to self-organise and create individual work places, the employment situation of independent sexual service providers would be made worse. It’s not enough that the law in its current form would effectively give big operators supervisory powers over sex workers, since operators would have to record their registration details, length of stay and other specifics to pass on to authorities. The law would also strengthen the overall position of those operators by rendering it virtually impossible for sex workers to work alone or with colleagues in apartments. As a result, it would push them into the hands of the very operators who are such thorns in the sides of so many municipal politicians – just their sight, of course, not their taxes. This law pretends to protect us from heteronomy but it would cause the exact opposite: it would deprive most of us of the opportunity to self-determined and independent work.
The authors also further the “laissez fairy tale” of prostitution businesses not being subject to strict regulations and the poor police having no way of controlling anything. Nothing could be further from reality. Rather, it is an attempt to win approval for the draft bill from the public instead of explaining to them why an annual 85 million euros should be forked out for measures that will not help sex workers or those municipalities already short on funds.
Stigma
The draft bill consistently lacks the principle of impartiality. It is blatantly apparent that the authors were unable to discard the stigma attached to sex work, against which (incidentally), no steps have ever been taken since the current prostitution law came into force.
Instead, the measures planned under the Prostitutes Protection Law aggravate and intensify the very stigma which sex workers around the world cite consistently as the the main obstacle in their daily lives. The wording of the draft bill and the claims made in the substantiation for the law exacerbate the pre-existing prejudices and clichés. If sex work is mentioned in the same breath as criminal activities and sexual exploitation, that is the image that manifests in people’s heads.
Those who dismiss the few sex workers who dare to stand up for their rights as “privileged” should rather become aware of their own complicity in the stigmatisation of sex work. Instead of drafting laws that will curtail the options of all sex workers, the focus should be to add to options available to them. Those who would be affected the most by this law are the very people who already have too few options to begin with, namely migrants and trans* people, and who are often subject to multiple discriminations on a daily basis.
Conclusion
My participation in the “Roundtable on Prostitution in North Rhine-Westphalia” was the first time I experienced people talking with me. Usually, people only talk about me, even when I’m present. The Roundtable proved that it is entirely possible to sit down with the actual experts – us (!) – and find solutions. If one doesn’t talk with sex workers one ends up with the very result the ProstSchG represents: an impractical and discriminatory special law, which excludes us from equal participation in economic life and renders us socially vulnerable.
Original by Voice4Sexworkers. Translation by Matthias Lehmann. Proofreading by Christy Swain and Gabriel Pettyjohn. Published with kind permission.
The plans for the “Prostitutes Protection Law” have reached a cul-de-sac, explains Criminal Law Professor Dr. Monika Frommel. Rather than patronising sex workers with criminal and police laws, they should be protected from exploitative brothel operators by using the trade law.
By Prof. emer. Dr. Monika Frommel
Please note that the copyright for this article lies with Dr. Monika Frommel and is not licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Why do politicians fail yet again [1] to adequately regulate prostitution during this legislative period? The goal of a reform should be to control brothel operators as effectively as possible. But instead, a draft bill has been created that will achieve the opposite: the strict and bureaucratic monitoring of sex workers. Brothel operators, on the other hand, have little to be afraid of.
Instead of “protection” from exploitation, the draft bill, modified several times and unlikely to draw a consensus, includes the duty to register and undergo health checks for those individually engaging in this line of work (it was once called “Bockschein”). [A1] Health authorities are supposed to be responsible for those health checks but they can neither provide comprehensive advice nor offer affordable HIV prevention. If one dictates mandatory health checks carrying potential sanctions anyway, one creates an entirely useless Normenfalle [lit. trap of norms; numerous regulations that are impossible to abide by at all times, which in turn renders them permanently criticisable and sanctionable; translator’s note]. The new provisions concerning police powers are unreasonable anyway. What’s missing is the tailwind for an adequate reform. Headwind there is plenty, however, for example from the fringes of the women’s movement, once interested in emancipation [but now arguing that] buying sex should be banned, clients of “forced prostitutes” should be punished, 90 percent of prostitutes were victims of human trafficking, and prostitution constituted an attack on “women’s dignity” – hard to believe that women who regard themselves as emancipated engage in such proxy battles. [A2] So far, they haven’t gotten their way, but they’ve nevertheless caused damage.
“Economically weak independent entrepreneurs exist not only in this line of work”
It’s simply absurd to prosecute exploitation – as hitherto – via the bizarre detour of making claims about human trafficking, a criminal offence whose legal definition has up until recently been regularly expanded at the instigation of the EU. Everybody involved has known for years that this leads nowhere and cannot lead anywhere. So why then repeat in the future what had not been thought through in the past already but was only ideologically motivated? The ideology is known: human trafficking is always forced labour, prostitution is almost always forced prostitution (apart from a few exotics). How do politicians for women’s affairs get to this simple equation? Many people work under economic constraints. (Apart from extreme exceptions) Brothel operators and third parties force nobody into prostitution. Economically weak independent entrepreneurs exist not only in this line of work. From that perspective, providing sexual services is a job like any other. A “Prostitutes Protection Law” could make sense. What doesn’t make sense is to speak about “coercion” and “voluntariness” exclusively in the context of prostitution but not in other lines of work, where poorly qualified workers are also being exploited. Not the work itself is harmful but the unchecked economical necessity to serve too many clients in order to be able to afford too high rental fees and extra costs. What is now planned complicates the work of those engaged in sex work without providing any benefits for them.
If legislators were interested in a rational, long-term solution and not in phoney, moralising debates, what would be the goal of an effective regulation under the trade law? Technically, brothels would be classified as commercial enterprises requiring permissions from licensing authorities. This would depend on the constantly verifiable compliance with minimum requirements. Experienced authorities could respond flexibly whenever operators would fall short of the specified minimum standards. Those who work there (independently) could examine the files at the trade office and check if the fees deducted for operational costs are in fact realistic, just as tenants have the right to control such matters and have tenants associations who support them in that. Why shouldn’t that be possible at brothels?
“The planned Prostitutes Protection Law relies too heavily on the police”
Only if the trade supervisory board cooperated with those working there would there be a chance to recognise if and where exploitation occurs – which is actually liable to prosecution in accordance with §180a StGB [German Criminal Code; tn] (Exploitation of Prostitutes); but if the responsible trade supervisory board isn’t furnished with the relevant powers, it cannot be proven. Instead of the currently empty threat of criminal proceedings, several more flexible legal instruments could be used. If operators would not fulfil their requirements, one could bar them and their representatives (or straw men) from any further activity in this industry.
Therefore, trade supervision would be the solution, but faced with diffuse resistance [2], the Ministry of Women’s Affairs could not prevail, and it hadn’t planned anyway to discuss the subject earnestly. Viewed in this light, nobody’s surprised that the Prostitutes Protection Law, planned in 2014, continues to rely all too heavily on the police and for that reason has ended in a cul-de-sac. Under the terms of this law, sex workers would have to register with authorities, otherwise they would commit an administrative offence. They would also have to regularly repeat this procedure, and every time they would work at a new location, which is frequently the case, they would have to register anew. In addition, they would always have to carry with them a certificate documenting their timely attendance of mandatory health checks (at the health authorities). What kind of protection is that supposed to achieve?
About Dr. Monika Frommel
Dr. Monika Frommel is an emeritus criminal law professor. She studied Law at the University of Tübingen and at the Ludwig Maximilians University Munich, where she obtained her doctorate in 1979 and received her habilitation in 1986. Until 2011, she was the director of the Institute of Sanction Law and Criminology at University of Kiel. Since 1990, she is a co-editor of the legal journal Neue Kriminalpolitik. Her current research interests include criminology from a feminist perspective, in particular the reform of sexual criminal law, and ethics in reproductive medicine.
Photo: Usage Worldwide
Footnotes
[1] In 2014, there still seemed to be hope. See Monika Frommel „Gelingt es in dieser Legislaturperiode, die Prostitution angemessen zu regulieren?“ in: Kritische Justiz 1/2015, pp. 96–109.
[2] This resistance has persisted since 2002. In 2014, even state governments ruled by coalitions of Social Democrats and Greens clearly signalled that they were not ready to agree to controls by the trade supervisory board.
[A1] Bockschein was a colloquial term for a public health certificate, which sex workers had to produce until 2000. The name derives from the Bock, the gynaecological examination chair.
[A2] Since one reader felt it was unclear whether Dr. Frommel was arguing that buying sex should be banned or quoting prostitution abolitionists, the insertion “[but now arguing that]” was made here.
Translation byMatthias Lehmann. Research Project Germany. I would like to thank Dr. Frommel for her permission to translate and publish her article. Every effort has been made to translate this article verbatim. As a result, the wording may appear unusual on some occasions. The photo above did not appear in the original article. Photo: “Cul-de-sac” By StockSnap CC0 Public Domain. Footnote A1 was added for further clarification.
The German original of this article was first published as“Prostitution: Gewerberecht statt Gängelung” at NovoArgumente (January 25th, 2016). Please note that the copyright for this article lies with Dr. Monika Frommel and is not licensed under a Creative Commons License.
“I thought it was all different!”– Video highlights from a symposium about the German Prostitution Act in December 2013, where Dr. Frommel was among the panellists
Credit is also not a substitute for asking for permission to use an image. Unfortunately, there have been several cases of photos from this or my other blogs being used elsewhere without my express permission. All photos published on this blog or on my Facebook pages or Twitter account are my own unless credited otherwise. Upon request, I may grant permission to use them but ask for credit to be given as ‘Matthias Lehmann/Matt Lemon Photography’. Once you publish my photos or videos on your blog or website, I expect you to share the link with me. Especially if you wish to use any of my photos in commercial or print publications, you must contact me prior to doing so. Before contacting me, I recommend reading Tony Wu’s Reasons Why Professional Photographers Cannot Work for Free. 
![ICRSE ProstSchG Briefing Paper Cover [German]](https://researchprojectgermany.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/icrse-prostschg-briefing-paper-cover-german.jpg?w=198&h=278)
![ICRSE ProstSchG Briefing Paper Quotes [German]](https://researchprojectgermany.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/icrse-prostschg-briefing-paper-quotes-german.jpg?w=590)
![ICRSE ProstSchG Briefing Paper Cover [English]](https://researchprojectgermany.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/icrse-prostschg-briefing-paper-cover-english.jpg?w=197&h=277)
![ICRSE ProstSchG Briefing Paper Quotes [English]](https://researchprojectgermany.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/icrse-prostschg-briefing-paper-quotes-english.jpg?w=590)
Research Project Germany 