Row over brothels splits French public

Press, 14 April 1979, Page 16

Row over brothels splits French public

A politician, three prostitutes, a priest, and a policeman sat side by side in a French television studio talking about liberty. Watched by millions of viewers they debated — with rising anger as the evening wore an — the controversial proposal of the politician, Gauilist Deputy Joel Le Tac, to reopen France’s brothels, which were closed down 33 years ago. The way the battle-lines were drawn came as a surprise. It was the Catholic priest, Fere Talvas, and two prostitutes, referred to simply as Manouchka and Clara, against Le Tac and Doris, the third prostitute. If prostitution is the world’s oldest profession, what the French viewers heard was one of the world’s oldest arguments. Should a man be free to pay for sex and a woman be free to walk the streets offering it? Does society have a duty, or even a right, to clear its cities of the public spectacle of prostitution? Should a streetwalker be protected from the pimp who takes her money? Or should both be freed from the harassment of the law that forbids him to live off her earnings?

And is a prostitute ever free? Or is she, as Pere

Talvas eloquently insisted, a victim of society, forced into a way of life where the chances of escape dwindle frighteningly as time goes by? The policeman, Commissaire Jacques Arnal, former head of the French vice squad, adopted a neutral stance, saying that he merely carried out the law, leaving it to others above his head to judge its merits.

Joel Le Tac, who had a distinguished war record in the Free French forces and the Resistance, is the deputy for the Montmartre and Pigalle district of Paris, one of France’s most celebrated red light areas. “It is not a question of restoring houses where women would be oppressed,” he said. “My aim is to limit the space at present given over to the exercise. And this shcmld be done in total liberty. It has become a regrettable necessity. I believe the German system is the best.”

The German system, which the French are now examining closely, is the chain of brothels called Eros-Centres in which the women rent a room as if it was a private apartment and have control of their own money and freedom to come and go as they wish. One of the dis-

ciplines to which they are subjected is constant medical surveillance. Le Tac has found widespread support from public opinion. But municipal authorities are reacting unfavourably to the suggestion that they should become procurers. Jean-Jacques Lebel, a young writer taking part in the studio debate, reproached Le Tac for having declared publicly that he did not think it mattered whether prostitutes were for or against being housed in brothels rather than ranging freely in the streets. The indications are that by a very large majority they are against.

Clara, who took little part in the debate, recalled briefly her days in a brothel: “It was impossible to choose one’s clients. It was all too horrible. I am against that kind of slavery.” Manouchka agreed with her: “I won’t tolerate that soft of life. It’s the street for me. Because there I can be free. I can do exactly as I like. I get up late if I want to. There’s no question of compulsory housework or organised visits to the hairdresser.” But Doris was a firm supporter of Le Tac. She is much younger than the other two, with long blond hair and a round baby-doll face. She had lived in a

German Eros-Centre after working the streets and a spell in a massage parlour, and she found German brothel conditions just about perfect. “I was completely free,” she said. “I could sleep late, or work or not as I liked. There is a canteen, and a kitchen on every floor. If you want drinks in your room you just lift the phone. You pay the rent of the room, bath-

By

ROBIN SMYTH,

“Observer,” London

room, and telephone included, each day — it comes to about 130 Marks (about $7O). You have your own safe and can go to the bank when you like. There is no one to ask how much you earn and then demand their cut.”

For all the Lolita innocence of her features, Doris is an efficient, determined young woman who speaks with the smooth detachment of an air hostess describing the safety equipment.

She was soon involved in a heated altercation with Manouchka. “Do you think I enjoy being shut up? I like liberty as much as anyone,” Doris said. “I don’t say Eros-Centres are paradise, but I’ve known

other houses and they didn’t approach the German standard. In Germany, you are wonderfully protected. There are alarm bells everywhere around the room and if a client turns nasty he’s seized before he can lay a finger on you.” The sunglasses of the two older women seemed to grow a shade darker when they were questioned about pimps. One

could not help feeling that there might be two men among the millions watching the screen who were taking a close interest in their answers. Manouchka said defensively: “It’s a little delicate. At first I did work for someone. I gave a part of my earnings — I can’t remember how much. That was four years ago or more —■ an old story. Then I got free. How? Because I had the good fortune to meet someone who was intelligent and understanding. That’s why.”

“I work alone and for myself,” murmured Clara. “I have won my liberty.” But then she rounded on the police commissioner: “We prostitutes don’t have the right to a love life of

our own, do we Monsieur le Commissaire? We can’t take a little fancy to a man without him being arrested. Are we animals, Monsieur le Commissaire?” “Steady on — no-one is saying that,” answered the police officer. “It’s just that there happens to be a law relating to immoral earnings dating from 1960 which permits widespread arrests. Perhaps it’s tough, but you have to go further up the hierarchy than me to see if something can be done to change it.”

The writer, Lebel, challenged Le Tac to put the question of a return to brothels to a referendum: “You’ll have to resort to police sweeps to round up the women and force them into these houses. But there is a democracy in this country and people should be able to choose their mode of life.”

“No, this is a problem for the whole of society — it concerns the entire population,” replied Le Tac. “Prostitution is illegal. And something has got to be done to prevent it spilling over as it does at present. But there’s going to be no compulsion. Any woman can leave if she wants.”

The evening was wear-

ing on when the priest spoke. Pere Talvas runs a mission for aiding and reclaiming streetwalkers. “Have those who want these brothels asked themselves who is going to be put inside them?” he said. “Are they objects or human beings? Where do these women come from? Most of them are people who have had no luck in their past lives. They have been victims of housing and work conditions.”

Looking at Le Tac, he added: “I don’t think that it is your daughters, Monsieur, whom you propose to shut up in these houses? No, it is young women who have had a bad start. And what do you want to do with them? You want to throw them as victims to men — and what men. “As for you, Monsieur, and those who think like you, your motive is a profound contempt for women. Unemployed women will be drawn to these houses, and pimping will be worse, not better. What you propose is contrary to human dignity and the rights of man. But we live in a world of pornography where everything is for sale. Personal integrity doesn’t interest you, does it? Your viewpoint is exclusively commerical . . .”

The two older women seemed to be listening to this with sympathy. But Doris shrugged with impatience when the priest added: “No-one is a prostitute of their own free will. There is always somebody behind them, pushing them. These people are so trapped.”

Matiouchka said that she was 28 when she began walking the streets. She was married and separated. The only work she could find was badly paid and hard on her health. She became a cabaret hostess and from there it was an easy drop to spending the rest of the night with a client.

Did she like what she was doing? “No, certainly not. But it’s a good way of setting me up again in life. When I’m secure I shall leave. It’s not true that prostitutes like it. We do it for the money. I would have left before now. But with the basic wage what it is I can’t think of it . . .”

Doris again was different:'Tm all right I have no intention of leaving the profession. I don’t say I’m happy. No. But I have a personal reason for not leaving — that’s a personal matter.”

Clara looked fixedly at the floor and said nothing. And everyone seemed to have forgoten her.