日日春協會從2000年起推動性交易除罪化及合法化的修法運動，在多年的努力下終於在2009 年將《社會秩序維護法》第80條「罰娼條款」推進修法議程。本研究係針對日日春及筆者個人在性交易修法的社會探究(social inquiry)歷程，以「行動研究」為方法進行反映性研究。日日春及筆者個人作為修法行動者，在2009～2011 年修法的緣起和轉折中，針對官方不想根本改革，只圖在回應社會多方爭議中，策略性地修出一個民意支持的版本，日日春是如何行動。
而日日春倉促迎上修法，從最初想取得「娼嫖不罰」的修法戰果；重新面對修法結果，必須以增強群眾自主力量改變原來的權力關係；欲在運動過程揭露性交易的根本利害結構，讓人民明辨問題後改變觀念為前提；當自身組織能量不足及基層實力不夠，上述三重目標不能同時兼顧時，孰重孰輕。行動者卡在固守理念立場，實際的工作方法卻難以突破前進。過程中，團隊進行行動反映，重新辨識日日春欲爭取的合法化，是「有條件」的合法化，在經過性交易的田野調查後，重新提出對其利害結構的框架分析(frame analysis)，確認以發展底層性工作者個體戶的集結組織，並同步去污名為爭取合法化修法的前提，據此重新擬訂修法的行動目標和策略。本研究的探究在於回觀面對，行動者在過程中面對運動到底要什麼、能要什麼、不能要什麼，行動策略的變與不變的複雜辯證中的行動選擇，檢驗其行動後果。

COSWAS has been campaigning for the decriminalization and legalization of the sex industry since the year 2000. After nearly a decade of campaigning, Article 80 of the “Public Order Maintenance Act”, which penalizes sex sellers, was amended in 2009. Based on “Action Research”, this paper examines the campaign process as a form of social inquiry. COSWAS and the author have been actively pushing for legal reform in favor of the sex workers, and challenging the government for the superficiality of its response right up to 2011. However, the Taiwan government has never intended to make any fundamental changes to the existing law; it just wants to be seen to respond to the debates by implementing a legal version that can by and large, satisfy popular opinion. This paper critically examines the actions and strategies of COSWAS and its failure and success.
COSWAS’ haste in rising to the legal challenge has resulted in grave implications. It had to back down on its demand of decriminalizing the sex sellers and buyers. COSWAS’ own weakness in organizing and its constituency not being ready to take on the herculean task are two of the reasons. The grassroots that COSWAS is organizing was not yet ready for such fundamental legal reforms. Thus, meaningful and successful legal reforms have to be built upon the strengthened subjectivity and agency of its constituency before the existing power relations can be subverted. The movement needs to confront the fundamental conflicts of interests within the sex industry. People’s ability in understanding and assessing the problem has to be enhanced before ideas and opinions can be changed and actions taken. When the campaign goals cannot be reached simultaneously, COSWAS had to resolve the dilemma and tension between holding onto its ideological position and breaking through the stalemate. This calls for critical self-examination. The team finally recognizes that its goal of legalizing the sex trade can only be achieved, if certain conditions are met. Based on rigorous fieldwork, COSWAS has come to the conclusion that for any effective legalization to take place, the campaign must be supported by organized grassroots sex workers in tandem with their de-stigmatization. Hence, COSWAS had to change its action goals and strategies during the campaign.
This paper highlights the following: the activists’ capacity and willingness to face up to the real needs of the movement and the movements’ strengths and weaknesses; what the movement can (or not) demand and what it should change (or not) at a given time, as well as the movement’s action choice and the consequences of its action.