http://www. theguardian.com/uk/2009/oct/20/trafficking-numbers-women-exaggerated
This article is very enlightening. It shows how studies are blown out of proportion when people have a "moral agenda".
It began with finding 71 trafficked sex workers, then to allow for margin of error: "At the very least, they guessed, there could be another 71 trafficked women who had been missed by police, which would double the total, to 142. At the most, they suggested, the true total might be 20 times higher, at 1,420."
By the end of the article, people have extrapolated this to 25,000 and even said that "Politicians and religious groups still repeat the media story that 40,000 prostitutes were trafficked into Germany for the 2006 world cup ? long after leaked police documents revealed there was no truth at all in the tale. The Daily Mirror's baseless claim of 25,000 trafficking victims is still being quoted, recently, for example, by the Salvation Army in written evidence to the home affairs select committee, in which they added : "Other studies done by media have suggested much higher numbers.""
Now, trafficking is very serious business. The problem with this, however, is threefold. Firstly: the government then started looking for large groups of organised criminals, trafficking these "thousands" of women, instead of the small scale reality that needed examining, slipping through the net. Secondly: it perpetuates stereotypes that none of us have CHOSEN this profession in an informed, consensual way, but have either been forced or are desperate etc. Sometimes that is true and is awful. However, to perpetuate this negative stereotype only induces more whorephobia, as people struggle to accept sex work as a valid career choice. Thirdly: it is reported in the wholly heteronormative gender binary. Perhaps they weren't looking for male sex workers. Perhaps they hadn't even considered them. But to use "women" and "sex workers" interchangeably denies the large portion of sex workers that are male.
Your thoughts? (Please read the whole article. It is most excellent, particularly if you are a number cruncher!)