Elastic Victimhood: The State, NGOs, and Negotiating the Parameters of Anti-trafficking

  • Sallie YeaEmail author


This chapter critically traces the evolution and parameters of the Singapore government’s current approach to human trafficking and migrant worker non-governmental organisation (NGO) responses to this, which in turn have shaped their own work on the issue. The government’s approach is characterised in this discussion by what I label ‘pretence politics’, meaning that the logic underlying anti-trafficking activities and responses is one of managing competing interests, rather than attending to the substantive goal of reducing the extent of human trafficking and/or attending to the needs of exploited migrants themselves. A key element of pretence politics is performance, in which the contradictions of competing moral and political impulses and interests are managed—if not necessarily resolved—through public staging of anti-trafficking. I identify the dual impulses of widening and narrowing victimhood—or ‘elastic victimhood’—as competing characterisations of trafficking in the city-state put forward by NGOs and the state respectively.


  1. Anderson, B., & Andrijasevic, R. (2008). Sex, slaves and citizens: The politics of anti-trafficking. Soundings, 40, 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Butler, J. (2004). Precarious life: The powers of mourning and violence. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  3. Casper and Moore. (2009). Missing bodies: The politics of visibility. New York, NY and London: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Chapkis, W. (2003). Trafficking, migration and the law: Protecting innocents, punishing immigrants. Gender and Society, 17(6), 923–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clarke, L. (2013). Behind closed doors: Trafficking for domestic servitude in Singapore. The Equal Rights Review, 10, 33–58.Google Scholar
  6. Coe, N., & Kelly, P. (2000). Distance and discourse in the local labour market: The case of Singapore. Area, 32(4), 413–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coe, N., & Kelly, P. (2002). Languages of labour: Representational strategies in Singapore’s labour control regime. Political Geography, 21(3), 341–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Corbridge, S. (2005). Seeing the state: Governance and governmentality in India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crawley, H. (2010). ‘No one gives you a chance to say what you are thinking’: Finding space for children’s agency in the U.K. asylum system. Area, 42(2), 162–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crimewatch Singapore. (2013). Episode 6, Part 1. Trafficking in persons. Retrieved August 18, 2015, from
  11. de Luca, K. M. (2012). Image politics: The new rhetoric of environmental activism. New York: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  12. Doezema, J. (2000). Loose women or lost women? The re-emergence of the Myth of White Slavery in contemporary discourses of trafficking in women. Gender Issues, 18, 23–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feingold, D. (2010). Trafficking in numbers: The social construction of human trafficking data. In P. Andreas & K. M. Greenhill (Eds.), Sex, drugs, and body counts: The politics of numbers in global crime and conflict (pp. 46–74). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings. London: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  15. HOME. (2013). The invisible help: Trafficking into domestic servitude in Singapore. Singapore: HOME. Retrieved August 15, 2016, from
  16. Hua, J., & Nigorizawa, H. (2010). US sex trafficking, women’s human rights and the politics of representation. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 12(3–4), 401–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Human Rights Watch. (2005). Maid to order: Ending abuses against migrant domestic workers in Singapore. Human Rights Watch [online]. 10 (17). Retrieved from
  18. Hyndman, J. (2010). The question of ‘the political’ in critical geopolitics: Querying the ‘child soldier’ in the ‘war on terror’. Political Geography, 29(5), 247–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hyndman, J., & Mountz, A. (2007). Refuge or refusal. In D. Gregory & A. Pred (Eds.), Violent geographies: Fear, terror and political violence (pp. 76–92). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Legg, S. (2005). Foucault’s population geographies: Classifications, biopolitics and governmental spaces. Population, Space and Place, 11(3), 137–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lindquist, J., & Piper, N. (2007). From HIV prevention to counter-trafficking: Discursive shifts and institutional continuities in Southeast Asia. In M. Lee (Ed.), Human trafficking (pp. 139–158). Devon: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  22. Lyons, L. (2005). Transient workers count too? The intersection of citizenship and gender in Singapore’s civil society. University of Wollongong Research Papers online. Retrieved from
  23. Lyons, L., & Ford, M. (2010). “Where are your victims?” How sexual health advocacy came to be counter-trafficking in Indonesia’s Riau Islands. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 12(2), 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mountz, A. (2003). Human smuggling, the transnational imaginary, and everyday geographies of the nation-state. Antipode, 35(3), 622–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pecoud, A. (2015). Depoliticising migration. In Depoliticising migration: Global governance and international migration narratives (pp. 95–123). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  26. Shah, S. P. (2006). Producing the spectacle in Kamathipura: The politics of red-light visibility in Mumbai. Cultural Dynamics, 18(3), 269–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shamir, H. (2012). A labour paradigm for human trafficking. UCLA Law Review, 60, 76–137.Google Scholar
  28. Srikantiah, J. (2007). Perfect victims and real survivors. Immigration and Nationality Law Review, 28, 741–798.Google Scholar
  29. TWC2. (2006). Debts, deductions and delays: Wage issues faced by foreign domestic workers in Singapore. Singapore: TWC2. Retrieved from
  30. TWC2, & HOME. (2011). Made to work: Attitudes towards granting regular days off for migrant domestic workers in Singapore. HOME: Singapore.Google Scholar
  31. UNODC. (2000). Protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children. Vienna: UNODC.Google Scholar
  32. Vance, C. S. (2011). States of contradiction: Twelve ways to pretend to do nothing about trafficking while pretending to. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 78(3), 938–948.Google Scholar
  33. Weitzer, R. (2007). The social construction of sex trafficking: Ideology and institutionalization of a moral crusade. Politics and Society, 35(3), 447–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wong, D. (2005). The rumour of trafficking. IIAS Newsletter, 42(11).Google Scholar
  35. Yea, S. (2014). Social visits and special passes: Exploitation of migrant women in Singapore’s sex and nightlife entertainment sector in Singapore. Singapore: FMM.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social InquiryLa Trobe UniversityAlbury-WodongaAustralia

Personalised recommendations