Abstract
BackgroundDefinitions of child sexual exploitation vary. Sexual exploitation violates children’s rights and exposes them to mental and physical harm. There exist differences in views of behaviour that is considered exploitative, including transactional sex. This paper explores community perspectives on the extent to which transactional sex is considered exploitative.MethodsIn 2014, we conducted 19 focus group discussions and 44 in-depth interviews with young people and adults in two communities in Uganda. Participants were presented with vignettes describing sexual encounters between adolescent girls and young women and men to explore under what conditions participants considered the scenario to be exploitative and why. Interviews were conducted in Luganda using a semi-structured tool, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Analysis was thematic and complemented by constant comparison and deviant case analysis techniques.ResultsDefinitions by multilateral, bilateral, and non-governmental organisations of the sexual exploitation of children shared similarities with community conceptualisations of wrong or unfair sex. Although in community conceptualisations there was no consensus on what constituted sexual exploitation, transactional sex was condemned to the extent to which it involved sex with a minor or misled a naïve or immature girl; involved lack of consent, particularly in relationships characterised by power differentials; or worsened the pre-existing status of the girl. Also relevant was the extent to which a man’s intentions were considered inappropriate; the adolescent girl or young woman was considered vulnerable; and the adolescent girl or young woman was considered responsible for ‘her situation’.ConclusionsExisting social norms that condemn sex with a minor or sex that involves deception, sexual coercion or misleading an immature girl, present opportunities to mobilise communities to protect adolescent girls and young women at risk. Any intervention must, however, be designed with full cognisance of the social and structural drivers that underlie transactional sex and limit adolescent girls’ and young women’s opportunities to provide for themselves without recourse to sexual relationships with men. Interventions must also be designed to recognise that girls in transactional sex relationships may not consider themselves as exploited, thus requiring engagement with them based on their own concerns, aspirations, and expectations.
Highlights
Feminist theoretical framework Drawing from data from Central Uganda, as part of Learning Initiative on Norms Exploitation and Abuse (LINEA), the aim of this paper is to explore the extent to which local people consider transactional sex to be exploitative and the degree to which this emic conceptualisation of exploitation aligns with the etic definitions outlined in this introduction
While many out-ofschool adolescent girls and young women had a source of income, for most this was insufficient to meet all of their needs
In general, and across participant groups, transactional sex was condemned on the extent to which it involved sex with a minor or misled a naïve or immature girl; involved lack of consent or the inability to refuse, in relationships characterised by power differentials; worsened the pre-existing status of the girl, or a man’s intention for the relationship was considered inappropriate; the adolescent girl or young woman was considered vulnerable; and the extent to which adolescent girls and young women were considered responsible for ‘their situation’
Summary
Sexual exploitation of children is evidenced when sexual acts are exchanged for goods and services such as housing, food, clothing, drugs or alcohol, protection, better grades in school, or even emotional attention [1, 5] In all cases, those exploiting the child or young person are able to do so based on power differentials derived from age, gender, intellect, physical strength and/or command of resources. Sexually exploitative relationships (and other forms of non-sexual exploitation) can be voluntary, non-coerced, and even mutually beneficial and yet may be subject to the moral criticism that they are exploitative [6, 7] These definitions of sexual exploitation have been defined by multilateral, bilateral and non-governmental organisations and are used to guide their work in many and varied populations and contexts around the world. They represent etic, or ‘outsider’, definitions of sexual exploitation which may not necessarily reflect the emic, or ‘insider’, views and conceptualisations of sexual exploitation in any particular community [8]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call