When I sat down to write my post for today, I was planning to use the example of the Lingerie Bowl, a women vs. women (scantily clad, of course) football match that will air on pay-per-view during half-time of the Superbowl, to discuss the way that sex—particularly female sex—sells in American culture. But as I perused The New York Times, I changed my mind. Nicholas D. Kristof’s Op-Ed “Girls for Sale” helped me put my criticism of the sale of female homoeroticism to a predominately male audience in context. While I think that the cultural criticism I originally intended to write might have been useful for interrogating gender and sexual norms in the U.S. context, I think that centering my discussion on a group of women whom aren’t starving (unless perhaps by choice, which is an issue that certainly deserves attention) and probably get paid thousands of dollars to model was neither the most compelling nor the most politically useful dialogue regarding the exploitation of female sexuality.

As Kristof’s article reminded me, thousands of women—many of them mere youth—are trafficked around the world each year, bought and sold as sexual slaves. As Cynthia Enloe’s extensive research on the subject reveals, these brothels aren’t unique to Cambodia. They also exist around U.S. military bases in Japan and South Korea, as well as in a host of other countries.

If you, like former Texas gubernatorial candidate Clayton Williams, think, “If it’s inevitable, just relax and enjoy it,” think again. Women such as the ones that Kristof and Enloe discuss aren’t simply paid to have sex. Many of them are kidnapped, taken to brothels, and pimped to have sex with anyone their owners tell them to.

Rarely do the women get paid for their services, and even when they do, the amount is meager compared to what their owners get paid, particularly considering their predicament. Many of the women contract HIV from their clients and die of AIDS before they even reach their twenties. Some of them might consider escaping, but they are almost certain to be brutally tortured or beaten since they are not permitted to go anywhere alone. In fact, many women are so frightened of the consequences of questioning or criticizing their predicament that they remain silent, perhaps hoping for a miracle.

But, as Kristof implies, that miracle doesn’t usually arrive. Seeking help from local authorities is generally futile. They too are bribed by the brothel owners to remain complicit in an economic structure that keeps brothel towns booming off of the bodies of these women (and men, in some cases).

What can be done then? These brothels won’t go away overnight, and drastic change is unlikely to come from within. If change is to occur, there must be pressure from the outside. And the lack of dialogue regarding the persistence of sex trafficking and slavery in the mainstream media and Western activist circles  must be the first thing to go.

While it seems promising that this issue received coverage in The New York Times, the fact that it was discussed in an Op-Ed rather than a news report is unsettling. Not only do I suspect that fewer people read the editorial section than the front page, but the lack of coverage in other sections or at other times suggests that the issue probably received exposure only as a result of Kristof’s initiative.  Although the narrative that Kristof tells about Cambodian sex slaves may not seem newsworthy since it doesn’t discuss any new developments, the lack of developments is precisely the problem.

We might be able to wait until the sexual trafficking problem gets worse if it doesn’t directly affect our daily lives. But should the trafficked women and men have to wait until things get much worse for someone to speak up? Can they even afford to wait? In many cases, things probably cannot get much worse. Continuing and expanding this dialogue on sex trafficking is essential, then, to facilitate concrete change. Hopefully, in the process, we can find a means to secure a second chance at life for thousands of enslaved men and women around the world and problematize the treatment of female sexuality as a commodity in many cultures.

Laura Nathan-Garner