Sometimes, feminist perspectives can be acquired at some of the most unlikely places and in some of the most unlikely situations. For me, a rich perspective on the sex work industry was acquired at a casino in Atlantic City a few days ago, with an escort with whom I spoke regarding her life, choices and challenges.
I was on vacation in Atlantic City - a two-week break from my year-long deployment in Iraq. At about 3 a.m., I ran into and eventually had drinks with a woman who I eventually brought up to my room, thinking this was going to be a mere casual hook-up, things that people do on vacation and in bars. Come to find out, before I initiated sex, and we were flirting, she told me that she is an escort and spends time with men for money. In short, it was the beginning of a business for pleasure transaction.
Though my mind was fogged with alcohol, red flags went up - firstly because I'd felt horrible that I'd taken an hour of this woman's time already, just talking to her, with the full intentions of having sex had she not been a sex worker. Secondly, I had never been in a situation like this before, and didn't know exactly what to do to tell her I had to intentions of buying her body for my own pleasure.
Having already wasted an hour of her time, with her assuming I knew she was an escort (a term she says she prefers), I made a deal: while I was most certainly sexually attracted to her, my values wouldn't allow me to actually pay to have sex with her. I would, however, pay for her time to listen to her story and learn something from a group of people I've spent to much learning about, yet never had never actually sat down and spoken with.
So there we sat, in my hotel room, and over Jack Daniels, talked about her life, choices and perspectives. She is new to the escort industry, she said - and became an escort after much careful consideration - mostly for the stigma that comes with sex work, but also consideration for the dangers she faced, and the way society and the government look upon her.
The series of events that propelled her into the escort industry started at 19, when she got pregnant with an abusive boyfriend - one who constantly physically and emotionally abusived her. Like many, she'd thought the birth of their child would change that, it did not. At 21, she made the decision to leave him, not only physically and emotionally, but to protect herself and their child, changed her address and became anonymous, thereby also not being able to claim child support.
She'd been going to school at the time for nursing, with the dreams of one day providing comfort for the sick, healing the wounded, and making the world better by taking care of others. But a sour economy, along with having to support a child, drove her to drop out of school. After having explored other options, she thought long and hard over entering the sex work industry and eventually did so.
"Men shouldn't feel bad about buying my time," she said. "They're helping me out, and it's my body, so it's my choice." But however much customers are helping her out financially, there is still stigma that comes with prostitution, she said.
"You're the first man to ever actually sit down and listen to me. My customers see me for my body - and what they can get out of it," she said, adding that she finds it problematic when society expects women to provide men pleasure, yet automatically write women off as "whores" when they actually make money and benefit from providing such pleasure.
But it isn't just society in general that looks down upon sex workers, she said. While most customers will either jump at the chance of paying her for sex, or chastising her for her profession, governments are also a part of the challenge she faces.
"One of the reasons I think the government have a problem with prostitutes is that no one dares advocating for legal prostitution, and if it's illlegal, they can't tax us, so they make criminals out of us," she said. "What we need is a movement to change people's minds, not of just prostitution but everything in general. People don't think enough for themselves."
Although the money provides her with the financial stability to support her son, she said she'd eventually like to go back to school, and continue to pursuit her dream of being a nurse. As for now, her nights are spent with strangers - mostly married men, in hotel rooms, providing them with pleasure.
At the end of our conversation, I gave her a hug and asked permission to write about her. She agreed and we exchanged contact information, so that when my vacation is over, I can do a more in depth interview and write about her.
Through this all, the one thing I've learned is that it is easy for the privileged to assume many things we don't know about sex workers. When we bring up the term, there are many images and stereotypes we tend to think of - but in reality, each sex worker is a human being, each different, and each with a different story. The woman with whom I spoke, at 22, is first off an intelligent and charming human being. Her profession comes second.
Yet, time and time again, we categorize sex workers - putting them all in the same group - and worst, many of us, feminists to be sure, write off prostitutes as contributing to patriarchy and the objectification of women. This, while true in our world of theories, does not reflect a reality of women's lives and the paths that took them from being human beings with thoughts and dreams, to being sex workers. By no means am I advocating that each sex worker is a victim of abuse, but I am saying that our conversations about the legality of sex work, and the security and benefits we need to provide sex workers, need to include women who are in the profession.
Instead, the voices in the sex work debate are of the Christian-right, who automatically write off any woman with her own sexuality as dirty, governments who speak of prostitution as a moral and health issue, yet do little to provide sex workers with the health benefits they need, and those of us who are against the objectification of women, and while claiming to be feminists, are so loud and bold with slut slamming these women that we never stop to hear their voices and stories.
In the end, the sex work debate is immaterial because unless we take care of other problems and challenges - violence against women, healthcare for all people, and providing young women and men with the access to education they need, we are failing to provide women with the variety of choices they deserve in enhancing their own lives, and as a result, we have no rights to make a stand on the sex work industry, other than supporting them with the choices they make.
By the way, I am currently in Orlando for my last week of vacation. If there are awesome feminists in the UCF/Orlando area, I'd love to be shown around or have a drink. Let me know!
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: My experience with a prostitute - a feminist perspective.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16004
Wow. Just wow.
"in reality, each sex worker is a human being, each different, and each with a different story. The woman with whom I spoke, at 22, is first off an intelligent and charming human being. Her profession comes second."
I'm sorry, but this statement reminded me of when Bill OReily was surprised at the "civilized" people in Harlem.
And who is this "we" you are talking about who assumes sex workers are not intelligent? ("Yet, time and time again, we categorize sex workers ")
Marc I often appreciate your posts but this one comes off as exoticizing, condescending, and self-congratulatory ("You're the first man to ever actually sit down and listen to me. ")
You also assume that speaking with one woman is giving you insight into an entire group of people ("I would, however, pay for her time to listen to her story and learn something from a **group of people** I've spent to much learning about, yet never had never actually sat down and spoken with."
And this: "I am saying that our conversations about the legality of sex work, and the security and benefits we need to provide sex workers, need to include women who are in the profession"
is just common sense, and *not* new to feminism, especially sex worker oriented feminists.
I think you need to reevaluate how you are thinking and writing about sex workers. you might want to check out some sex worker blogs and you'll see that they don't need you to speak for them. they are already out there speaking for themselves.
Not to mention how, whenever sex workers bring their perspective to this website (and some of Marc's posts in particular), they are silenced.
I found this entire post extremely distasteful for exactly the reasons you mentioned. If she prefers the term "escort," why did Marc write "prostitute" in the headline?
All the points Marc made have been made by the sex workers rights movement time and time again. I just find it appalling that Marc seems to think he's uncovered something extraordinary here.
Yeah, I agree this definitely isn't breaking new ground here. I have to ask why Marc even posted this, did you want some kind of congratulatory back pat or handshake for uncovering the obvious?
Ladies, be patient, he would love for *all* of you to get a drink with him show him around the Orlando area.
"he would love for *ALL* of you to get a drink with him and show him the Orlando area"
That is so disgustingly unnecessary and sexist. Because obviously, as a guy, he wants as many women to "show him around" as he can possibly find.
Are you kidding me?
Yes, actually, I *was* kidding you. Somehow, as someone who has experienced sexual exploitation myself, I thought that my joke about this superficial treatment of sex work would not be treated so harshly.
I obviously don't know Marc at all, and hope that he wasn't too personally offended by what was obviously an off-the-cuff joke by a total stranger who felt uncomfortable with his essay-- but usually respects his work here.
By the way, lest I be accused of parading myself as a victim for mentioning my involvement with sexual exploitation, here is a piece I have written on the topic of sex trafficking. Perhaps this will give you a better idea of the kind of standards I think writing on sex work should be held to.
http://aletheia-in-the-shortwave.blogspot.com/2009/06/sex-tourism-in-thailand.html
oh good, the old male-feminists-are-just-trying-to-get-laid meme.
way to get right to the heart of the merits of his post.
Well, it is pretty damned obvious what Marc's intentions are - just read his own words "By the way, I am currently in Orlando for my last week of vacation. If there are awesome feminists in the UCF/Orlando area, I'd love to be shown around or have a drink. Let me know!" - that seems pretty unambiguous to me!
So I guess Marc is officially a NICE GUY tm now?
http://aletheia-in-the-shortwave.blogspot.com/2009/06/sex-tourism-in-thailand.html
http://aletheia-in-the-shortwave.blogspot.com/2009/06/sex-tourism-in-thailand.html
Marc didn't actually request female company. He requested feminist company. If a feministing regular came to my area, I would (in principle) want to have a drink with that person (if I weren't a surly, misanthropic hermit, that is).
Read between the lines.
It's pretty obvious that Marc - as usual - wants a cookie and a pat on the head for being Mr Feminist Man - and, home from a long tour of duty, he wants something else too....
And you know what that is.
I'm sure if a man contacted him to take him out for that drink, Marc would suddenly come down with a case of the flu, or be "busy".
But if that "awesome feminist" was an attractive woman - you can bet he'd drop everything and rush right down to the bar!
that was pretty cold- I didn't like the post either. I think he's pretty much a douche. But you've started putting words in his mouth, and thats just not cool. That kind of comment is why a lot of people don't like feminists.
I agree.
I generally refrain from conducting arguments with people previously banned from feministing, but your characterizations here are particularly disgusting.
Marc has specifically made invitations to hang out with other feminist men on this blog, including me. Given that context, I see absolutely zero reason to interpret his statement as you did. Absent that context, your interpretation is still pretty sexit. Rather, it appears you are working pretty hard to discredit marc's work for reasons other than the merits. That's a pretty anti-feminist course of behavior, and it isn't ok here.
You're sure of that, huh? Well if you're sure, that settles it.
Yeah, sorry Mr. Butler, you took me a little too seriously.
To a misogynist, I'm sure this was all quite startling and new.
To me that sounds like an euphenism, and I suppose Marc does not prefer euphenisms.
It's not a euphemism. It's her preferred descriptor. In research, we talk a lot about the power of researchers in defining the group. I see the same thing in blogging. She identified herself as escort. It's disrespectful and an indicative of troubling power dynamics to call her a "prostitute". Not all sex workers have problems with the word prostitute, but some do, and they should be called what they identify themselves as.
I respectfully disagree. Escort means a paid date. Since that's not illegal and prostitution is in most of the US, it's natural that many sex workers call themselves escorts, but it really is a euphemism.
It's so much more than a euphemism. Someone has already posted a link to SWOP's How to be an Ally to Sex Workers. I recommend reading that. It explains why the label is such a big deal.
Queer is just a euphemism for homosexual, but I am highly skeptical of anyone who calls me a homosexual because they haven't examined (or have an choose to ignore) the power dynamics and history of that word.
Prostitute is frequently used as a label imposed upon a group of people, while escort is a term used by a group of people to identify themselves. Hands down, if this woman doesn't like being called a prostitute and prefers to be called an escort, then calling her a prostitute isn't really helping her to get her voice heard.
I just have a really hard time accepting that anything is "just" a label or "just" a euphemism. Words have power. And it's important to let people define themselves whenever possible.
I'll read that link, thank you.
I didn't want to be the first one to say it but I found this statement nauseating:
"You're the first man to ever actually sit down and listen to me. "
And yeah... I don't even know what else to say. There's so much good writing about sex workers out there and this is not it. I kind of wonder if the Feministing editors bumped this to the main page so we would tear it apart.
yeah, he probabably should have written in a more creative, nuanced quote for her. Because if her statements don't add up to the best sex worker writings you've ever seen, then her statements are suddenly invalid(?) The best way for marc to show respect for her would have been by making up a better quote and speaking for her(?) Or maybe not sharing his real experience at all until he meets a sex worker that gives him better quotes(?)
Is the statement a little cheesy, yeah probably, but its believable and I don't think Marc's inclusion of it here is self-congratulatory. In a lot of encounters outside of feminist spheres and spaces, women feel the need to say things like "you're the first man" who behaves like they care. Its happened to me and its happened to most feminist men at some point. It is an unfortunate part of patriarchal deferance and its just another in a long littany of reminders to feminist men why patriarchy needs to be broken down.
I'm sorry that her statement was nauseating for you, but I'll take marc's word that she said it. He is, after all, the expert in his own experience.
You make a fair point, but I guess its more how he frames the whole interaction. Vast numbers of women have said that very same sentence after a new guy shows her the slightest shred of kindness. Her situation is not unique to sex workers- at all. And yet it is framed in the article as something to describe the plight of sex workers. I'm not doubting that she said that.. but the situation kinda reaks of some damsel in distress bs.
Marc actually posted this first on facebook, and I can imagine his friend list is not as universally feminist as this blog. Many of the statements which seem so obvious to us are surprising to the rest of the population.
Even as a feminist, I still find myself judging other people, among them sex workers. In my mind I know I shouldn't think any less of someone who chooses to sell her body, but I still have this gut feeling of uneasiness. I realize it is my problem and I have to come to terms with it.
I appreciate Marc for writing this and sharing his experience.
*gasp*!
Marc's Facebook friends aren't feminists?! I'm completely shocked.
Oh. Well that must mean that *all* of your facebook friends ARE feminists. What a lofty accomplishment. Congratulations!
How could you possibly read that comment as me saying that all my Facebook friends are feminists?
Who the hell are you to tell whether my friends on Facebook are feminists or not? That most of them are classmates from Women's Studies programs, and those I've been involved in feminist activism doesn't make them feminists at all.
Drop the attitude and better-than-thou belief. You're not.
If you want to talk feminism in terms of theoy, fine. But at the moment, you're neither doing that or contributing anything positive.
Marc, if you want to read my comments as being "better-than-thou" that's fine but I think you should seriously think about why those of us who are criticizing you are doing so. You wrote a post with an overwhelmingly self-congratulatory tone and I cannot bring myself to congratulate you on it. I don't give a fuck who your Facebook friends are.
Marc, if you want to read my comments as being "better-than-thou" that's fine but I think you should seriously think about why those of us who are criticizing you are doing so. You wrote a post with an overwhelmingly self-congratulatory tone and I cannot bring myself to congratulate you on it. I don't give a fuck who your Facebook friends are.
Great. So our conversation ends, because obviously, you've not contributed to, nor have you added anything, toward the discussion. If you want to see my post as self-congratulatory, fine - but at least offer your own perspective. You've not done that.
So, while I was opened to your criticism, I no longer am - as it seems you're more interested in attacking posts, rather than moving beyond that and hashing out feminist ideas pertaining to sex work.
Since my problem is mostly with your tone and writing style your correct to state I don't have anything to offer you. I think life experiences are valid to an extent. But it definitely helps to have some knowledge with which to frame that life experience and you do not have it. Read the blogs that that holmes linked and then I'll have a discussion with you.
You need to visit the Tone Arguments postings. Tone Arguments are a form of silencing.
YOU replied that you didn't feel the way in which this post was written was entirely effective and you're criticizing me for doing the same thing?
"While the message of the post "Sex Workers Are People, Too" isn't something that should be ridiculed, I feel like it's almost cartoony the way things are being discussed in it."
YOU said that. That is a comment on the TONE of the writing even though you didn't use the word "tone".
But I didn't tell him to shut the fuck up like you keep doing. I told him right out that what he did was a good thing, but that the way it was done wasn't the best because it seemed a lot like a book a fucking read. It was also a comment on how it was a piece of American literature which may have been retooled.
And while you've not told him directly to shut the fuck up, it's pretty clear that's you're intention.
Marc and I also have a pretty decent history, too, so I feel more comfortable commenting these things to him.
If you wrote this, I wouldn't have said anything.
Quite frankly because of the quick-to-scream debate style you love so much, I would have skipped the entire posts because the threads would turned into a clusterfuck of scream and unproductiveness.
Is that honest enough for you, or are you going to twist my words again?
Leave him alone, the post seems more like it was about a personal revelation than anything else. It's a bit unnecessary to trash the entire thing, when in truth all he is saying is society's perspective on prostitution is wrong. The general message is positive.
No, the general message is not positive. It is in fact, incredibly dated.
That prostitutes are human? I didn't know that it was impossible to have a good and dated message simultaneously!
If you're trying to read more into it than that, you clearly are completely forgetting Marc's intention, which was good. Go ahead and nit-pick and get angry over absolutely nothing, but there are so many better things to be spending your time on. Say, that choking Tila Tequila post?
I'm out. Peace.
I'm really confused. Are you actually criticizing me for commenting on other posts on Feministing? And I'm not missing Marc's point. I'm saying that it's trite. Let's not forget that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I'm not sure I understand this comment, "dated" is not the opposite of "positive"
And given how many feminists on this very website often pull the, "Sex workers are just hurting women and kissing up to the patriarchy" line, and given the rude blanket-statement comments I've seen on some of the blogs linked by holmes in another comment, as dated as you may find it, a lot of people haven't heard it.
Agreed that there are plenty of people on Feministing with misinformed views about sex work. But again, like holmes pointed out there are much more nuanced writings about sex work out there and it would be remiss not to point that out. This isn't even a good introduction to positive views on sex work. Marc is free to post on the Community site but he should be prepared for criticisms.
And I don't think that just because there are a lot of commenters with uniformed views about sex work we should pander to the lowest common denominator.
allieb87 already knew all about sex workers, and therefore everyone should have, and Marc's new understanding doesn't teach her anything new, so it's pointless. What's not to understand?
BTW, a few years ago I picked up a woman in a Minneapolis snowstorm. I thought she was waiting for a bus, she thought I was looking for company. When I realized she was a prostitute, I didn't feel bad about wasting her time or ask about her life, I started sweating blood and driving faster (she did actually want a ride home, after I declined to pay her for sex). I've got nothing against sex workers, but the unexpected proximity was terrifying. Pretty fucking "othering," right? And while I'm more sheltered than average, I'm willing to bet a hell of a lot of people would have reacted the same way.
So Marc's reaction seems pretty decent to me, even if it doesn't break any new ground for allieb87.
Sex workers terrify you?
Maybe I've led a much rougher life than you but the last thing I feel around sex workers is terror.
And, maybe because I'm pretty observant, but I can usually tell if they are "on the stroll" or not - and if they approach me but I'm not looking to purchase their services, I'll just say a polite "no thanks - not today!" and go on about my business.
I've never felt terrified of sex workers though - I really don't get that at all!
I think it's unwittingly being thought of as a John/Jane and having an unexpected expectation put upon you. Not them being a sex worker, but you now giving the unintended expectation that you wanted to solicit the services of a sex worker.
I would be put off and apologize if that happened to me. "I'm sorry, that's not what I had meant. Would you like me to drop you off somewhere? Sorry for miscommunicating." would probably be my response -- though I would be instantly put off which would come through as terror.
Yup.
I find it amusing that you're jumping on Marc for generalizing about an entire group of people after talking to one member...and then you link to a few people of the same group, which you seem to think is infinitely more superior than the woman Marc spoke to. Who's generalizing now? Additionally, who's being condescending now? I don't think he was at all, by the way.
You know what I think? I think you have a problem with Marc and his feminist experiences, because he's a man. I seriously doubt you would say these same things to a woman who had a conversation with an escort.
If you had gone and actually read any of the links provided, you would see that they each have blog rolls and other links. i am not going to provide a comprehensive guide to sex worker blogs. deepthroated.wordpress.com is a collaborative blog by many sex worker activists and i believe harlot's parlour is also collaborative. I never said these blogs were superior to the escort Marc spoke with. I said they were blogs written by sex workers that would provide him with knowledge and perspective that would behoove him to read.
part of my problem does come from Marc being a man, which I explained in a comment below. But most of the problem is in what I have already outlined. I would still be pretty appalled at a woman who thought it a blog-worthy revelation that sex workers are humans.
glad to be amusing to you :)
I think the issue here is not the things that the escort said, but how he approached the interaction. Not every member of a minority group in search of rights has to be someone with a perfect story. Not every escort has to be a highly educated articulate activist for us to like her. But to act like you have some special insight into the world of sex work because you talked to a 22 year old escort who even says that she's new to this field.. well then I think you'd be mistaken. All you have is an insight into the perspectives of someone young, new, and perhaps lacking in a network of support. Thats a valid thing to bring to the conversation. But he didn't take any time to look at the larger context- the broader picture.
BTW, if this post was not on a feminist website, I might go easier on him. But as a feminist, on this website (and maybe one or two others like feministe), there is ample access to learning about the larger context of the issues.
I think Marc is - as usual - looking for a cookie and a pat on the head for being a "male feminist".
Sometimes, I really doubt the veracity of his stories - he always comes out like a superhero ["Feminist Man"] and all other men are presented as sexist pieces of shit.
Sounds a little self serving to me
And his date trolling at the end of the post "By the way, I am currently in Orlando for my last week of vacation. If there are awesome feminists in the UCF/Orlando area, I'd love to be shown around or have a drink. Let me know!" pretty much confirms that!
And, as you said, his snobbish comment about him thinking sex workers are stupid (and him hiding his own personal biased opinion behind "we"] also leads me to suspect that Marc is not sincere about his professed feminist beliefs at all.
Marc wouldn't be the first guy to claim to be a male feminist to get laid - but it's kinda sad to see it written out like that for all of cyberspace to see!
You obviously just have a huge problem with Marc himself. You don't like him and are just attacking him and adding nothing to this conversation.
Gregory is just upset for all the times I've attacked the pornography industry and men's use of pornography. It's okay, though.I am actually quite amused by his attacks.
I still think your denouncement of Swimsuit Issue was pompous and silly.
Pointless derail! Move along, nothing to see here...
I'm a long time lurker and new poster. I have generally loved every piece of writing I have ever read on this blog and have usually enjoyed the comments but this discussion is bringing out the worst in so many posters here. A great deal of people here are acting like childish passive aggressive brats.
Any credibility Marc had after I got done reading his post is now absolutely non-existent. I thought it was pretty unfair for some people to put some words in his mouth as it's been noted above me - but I also think that men need to make extra efforts to avoid back-patting and cookie-begging; I think we should avoid even the appearance of this behavior.
Furthermore I found it highly offensive that he would violate the wishes of the worker he interviewed. She very clearly made her preference known and you very clearly violated that. That, and many other aspects of this article was undeniably distasteful.
Whatever his intentions in writing this and whatever his intentions in inviting other feminists to socialize with him, this is not a well-written article. Sorry, nice try, but try harder next time.
Also, I'm not a grammarian or a spelling bee champion but it would be nice if I didn't have to break my poor brain reading poorly edited articles.
It is undeniable that men enjoy privilege and we need to realize that our privilege is blinding - we need to second guess ourselves and ask for others' opinions before posting stuff like this, lest we perpetuate unhelpful or regressive attitudes and ideas. Feminism is a subject that deserves our utmost attention to detail and thoughtful consideration. I am seeing a lack of this in the article and in many of the comments.
Will I appreciate the idea of your post, (which is Oscar worthy. A hooker with a heart of gold? Never heard that ol' trope before), the fact that sex workers are people too, and not just slutty caricatures, is not an entirely stunning revelation to us.
And yet it would be to most people.
I didn't find this piece offensive at all. For some reason, though, I assumed it was written by a woman. I wonder if the "offensiveness" you all find in it lies in the gender of the author.
I have nothing negative to say about this work as a blog post. I think context is important, folks.
A post about somebody picking up an escort in the lobby of an Atlantic City casino and you assumed it was written by a woman?
I'm far from an expert on the escort business, but from what I understand the great bulk of the customers are male.
And if an escort was working the bars in AC looking for customers I would suspect she'd be focusing on the men.
So it was pretty obvious that Marc identifies as male, simply because of the facts of the situation.
Wow you are systematically being condescending to everyone who doesn't agree or doesn't have the vast knowledge and understanding of sex workers as you do. Just because someone feels a different way encountering a sex worker, or hasn't learn as much does NOT make their opinion invalid, nor does it make yours precedent. No legitimate argument will occur as long as you keep going around tearing apart peoples posts and apparently, Marc's character. You are really coming across as insecure and self righteous.
Can anyone link to the blogs written by sex workers, please? I'm really interested in reading them.
http://ex-courtesan.blogspot.com/
http://sarahsummers.blogspot.com/
http://niadarkandlovely.blogspot.com/
http://www.texasgoldengirl.com/afterhours/
http://www.redlightdistrictchicago.com/
http://www.sexwork101.com/
http://edgylittledogooder.blogspot.com/
http://renegadeevolution.blogspot.com/
http://deepthroated.wordpress.com/
http://www.harlots-parlour.com/
http://www.beingamberrhea.com/ (i think amber is an ally)
http://www.wakingvixen.com/blog/
:)
Thanks!
You do realize that the perspective of sex workers who have internet access is not representative of the majority of sex work? Most so-called sex workers are actually sex slaves and you won't get to hear their voices. I'm actually a little tired of seeing the first-world, high-end, escort experience held up for non-sex workers to learn what a sex worker's life is like. Hey Marc, when you're back in Iraq, hit the brothels and find out if those women were trafficked. If they are non-Iraqi, they probably are. If they are Iraqi, they are still probably trafficked, but if they are not, ask if they will ever have enough money left after their pimp gets at it to get back to nursing school. Now there's a story waiting to be heard.
i'm confused as to whether or not you are actually replying to me - someone asked for blogs written by sex workers. and i provided some that i knew about. of course i'm aware of trafficking, etc. but i gave those blogs because *someone asked for them*
THANK YOU!!!!
There is a difference between consensual sex work and sex trafficking/slavery. This was a post about sex work in the US. And quite frankly, there aren't a whole lot of reliable studies about how "most" sex workers fit in the socio-economic spectrum. Having the internet does not make one "high-end." Something like 77% of Americans have access to the internet.
http://www.childrenofthenight.org/
Trafficking is actually a HUGE problem in the US (I consider child prostitution a form of trafficking). Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I've read that most people in the US are of the ages 12-14 when they start prostituting.
http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/sex_traff_us.pdf
I also feel compelled to comment and say that I didn't find this post to be offensive. I read it as Marc writing about a particular experience that helped him examine his own feminist ideas about the sex industry. Even if it's not "ground breaking" to the readers of this blog, it's an instance of someone learning something new for themselves by taking the time to listen to others, and I think that can be instructive.
Can anyone link to the sex workers' blogs, please?
While I absolutely agree with the responses above (voluptuous, et al), I'm wondering if we can also see this as a sort of feminist awakening for Marc; something akin to a reality check he needed about his prejudice on the subject. Is that giving too much benefit of the doubt? I'd like to think Feministing is a place where we can ask the "dumb questions" and get honest answers.
Sorry, I can't give Marc the benefit of the doubt. Like holmes pointed out, this is an exceedingly self-congratulatory post. I really don't think he learned much of anything.
"Dumb questions" are usually linked to the Feminism 101 blog. And the blogs holmes has linked are way better resources for learning about sex work than this is.
So everyone who hops on here needs a degree in everything remotely related to feminism, race, gender, and intersectionality? Learning about shit that happens in the world and trying to change your perspective and examining your prejudices isn't part of reading this blog? Also, shutting someone's honest query down by jamming the Feminism 101 link down their throat is getting OLD.
Well my degree is in Spanish Literature. All those feminist elements in Don Quixote probably do give me an unfair advantage now that you mention it...
All I can say to you is that I hope that anyone interested in Feminism would take the time to educate themselves. And the Feminism 101 blog happens to be an excellent resource.
Ugh. I know I said I was gone, but really.
Now who's being self-congratulatory? You clearly see yourself as superior to him and his comments. What if Feministing happens to be a forum that allows for this kind of education? Instead of it being a place where the only people allowed are those that know everything? Because, you know, a bunch of people getting together and patting each other on the backs for how much they all know and complaining about the ignorance of the outside world really gets SO MUCH accomplished.
I thought that this kind of education is one of the most important aspects to this blog - one of the only ways we can make a difference - TEACHING people.
You slamming someone for anything remotely close to ignorance is completely counter-productive to our cause, and honestly shouldn't be welcome here in my opinion.
"You clearly see yourself as superior to him and his comments."
Oh, do I? Wow, thanks for giving me so much insight into my own thought processes.
I don't need a pat on the back and I don't particularly want one. I do want to have thoughtful discussions and I recognize that we need to have some sort of baseline for that. So I'm superior because I expect people who comment on a feminist blog to know something about feminism?
From the Feminisim 101 Blog:
"Discussions on feminist forums are often disrupted, frequently but not always deliberately, by commentors who post often-seen questions/assertions which end up turning the discussion into arguing about their question/assertion instead of the original issue that was being discussed. This blog aims to provide factual information, for both feminists and those questioning feminism, about those typically disruptive questions/assertions."
There are blogs and books dedicated entirely to education and Feministing is not one of them. I encourage everyone to learn as much about feminist theory as possible but I do not think it's my responsibility to educate every misinformed commenter of Feministing.
Of course, I would hope you wouldn't!! But for god's sake, how is his post being completely ignorant of feminism? He's talking about the need for the removal of a stigma against SEX WORKERS? How the hell is that being completely ignorant of feminism - that seems like something that plenty of bona-fide educated feminists tend to brush off!
Really, now your argument is making no sense - the entire basis of his post is in favor of equality, no matter HOW you think it's worded!
Oh Jesus Christ.
Sure, Marc is arguing in favor of equality but he's doing so in a trite and self-congratulatory way. Just because you disagree with my argument does not mean it doesn't make sense. I don't even disagree with Marc per se, I just think this a poorly written post.
also: http://nataliedoesnewyork.blogspot.com/
It's worth pointing out that because Marc was paying for her time, he was still a client to her, which means she may have withheld or enhanced certain viewpoints or life details because she thought it was what he wanted to hear. I'm not saying she's a liar, or that prostitutes can't be/aren't be honest with some of their clients, only that the money in this situation—even though it was given with good intentions—shapes the interaction. Again, I'm not saying sex workers are liars or can't be trusted to speak about their lives, because I believe wholeheartedly that they are the ONLY authority on their lives. But I can guarantee this woman would speak to a fellow escort much differently than she's speak to a customer, regardless of how new to the business she is.
Other resources:
http://spreadmagazine.org/blog/
http://www.sexwork101.com/
I agree with you. Regardless of the situation, there is still a power dynamic that was played out - and I actually did wonder that.
I am actually not sure how to approach the sex work debate - or whether we ought to do it at all, as it seems the majority of other issues are the reason sex work exists in the first place.
Either way, I am actually doing a follow-up interview with her, in which rather than writing about her, I'll just let her speak in her own words without the filter of my own biases/interpretations. Hopefully, that'll balance the power dymanic.
Marc, I don't know what your background is, but part of my work is research design including the design of interview instruments and questions to lessen the inherent bias. While your interview with her will still hold some inherent biases from each of you, if you have a set of questions you would like to ask her and are unsure as to any survey bias issues that may arise, please feel free to let me know and I would be happy to help. Even with that said, data obtained in an interview is rarely unbiased - as long as you recognize the potential on both the interviewer and respondent sides you can still learn some interesting things.
On topic for the post, I do think that the wording of the initial blog post, specifically the choice of 'we' as a descriptor of what was essentially a personal experience and revelation, is standing between the OP and some of the other commenters. I would hope that we all agree that all women are individuals and fully cognizant human beings and I appreciate that this particular interaction shed light on the OP's personal scripts. When something like that happens, it is easy to want to generalize it and share it with others, but sometimes it is difficult to get the tone you are hoping for in your post.
I would actually love to hear this story told from the side of the escort to see how she viewed her interactions with the OP. Of course, I know that isn't possible, but it would be interesting to see how she saw the evening.
Thanks for the advice - to be sure, this was not treated as research and design, but rather, giving women voices.
I do still remember feminist research methods from college - and will try to utilize it as best possible in future interviews with this woman. ;)
Thanks again for pointing out something that most surely needs to be said.
Oh argh. Marc I know you are getting piled on but "giving women voices"?! We have them already, thanks. This is an approach particularly popular when it comes to female sex workers—they can't speak for themselves so I'm speaking for them!—so being careful with language actually matters a great deal. Sex workers already have an abundance of non-sex workers willing to speak "for" them and it often does a tremendous amount of harm.
Carol Gilligan's In a Different Voice strongly emphasized that women had a different voice that was not being heard. Their experiences were not being represented in academic text, literature, moral philosophy, all that good stuff.
I think most would agree that what Marc is doing is listening and repeating what the sex worker said. So he is more adding his voice to hers.
Should be be slammed for saying he is giving women a voice? A parade of feminists have claimed the same thing and been lauded for it.
I would hardly say I was slamming him--I was asking him to pay attention to his words, which I think were just chosen carelessly, but this is a particularly sensitive area so it's worth being careful if you actually care, right? Marginalized populations get a lot of privileged people speaking for them, and that's problematic, even when someone is trying to be an ally. True allies want to pay attention and learn and make sure they're doing right by the people they want to help, and Marc seems sincere, which is why I'm pointing out his severely unfortunate choice of words. I get what he was trying to say but I'm taking issue with how it came out, which was nails on a chalkboard to me. There's a difference between my promoting the voice of another person and presuming that I AM their voice.
By the way, here are some general cliff's notes:
http://redlightchicago.wordpress.com/how-to-be-an-ally-to-sex-workers/ which include the following:
"Remember it’s important that sex workers be allowed to speak for themselves and for allies to not speak for sex workers but to speak with sex workers." Clear enough?
And here's a very apropos post about feminist men trying to speak for sex workers: http://www.wakingvixen.com/blog/2009/08/23/feminist-men-and-words-that-wound/
'giving women voices'
Marc, this is a very problematic statement. By stating that you intend to 'give women voices' you are taking it from a realm where she is an actor into a realm of paternalism where she is being allowed to speak or helped to speak instead of being listened to. You can listen to her speak, but you can't give her a voice.
Whether you intend this as research or not, when you are interviewing someone with the intention of gathering and disseminating information, you have to be very careful to hear your own bias in your questions and to avoid leading or impossible questions. Be very aware of the power dynamics and the implications behind your phrasing. Good luck.
Just a bit of advice - from a writer's perspective.
One, it would help that, when expressing your personal biases, do not use the word "We"
When YOU think something - like YOUR opinion that sex workers are stupid - own up to YOUR views, don't hide them behind "WE".
Also (writer to writer and man to man here) don't make it so damned obvious that you're looking to get some dates out of this whole male feminist gimmick that you're working!
I'd avoid lines like this at the end of your posts "By the way, I am currently in Orlando for my last week of vacation. If there are awesome feminists in the UCF/Orlando area, I'd love to be shown around or have a drink. Let me know!" - if you want a date, get women to email you individually, and, if you and the person are compatible and in the same geographic area, ask her out as an individual.
The whole global date troll thing looks really cheesy and lame - and will not get you the results you want.
Gregory - perhaps you ought to just go back to watching the porn you so love and always try to defend, rather than giving people feminist writing advice, or dating advice for that matter. Don't get so wrapped up around how other people interact.
The day I take feminist advice from you is the day I take advice from Dr. Laura.
You wouldn't recognize feminism even of Gloria Steinem walked up and slapped you in the face. Now, that's a funny image.
I would suggest that he say something like "I have had this attitude in the past and have encountered other self-proclaimed feminists who did as well" in addition to focusing on "I" statements. I think the use of "we" was inappropriate, but it's certainly not as if sex workers receive universal support from the feminist community at large.
I don't think sex work is ever going away. I don't really think it needs to at all actually. And as such we do need to learn about it, and make sure that everyone involved is safe and consenting. Other than that, its all about examining individual feelings on the issues.
Yeah, Marc was a customer and - just like in any other service business "the customer is always right"
She told Marc what she thought he wanted to hear - and, as we see, her instincts were correct!
I agree with the previous posters- I didn't find it offensive either. I am not sure why people got offended when he wrote, "You're the first man to ever actually sit down and listen to me." It fit in with the point he was trying to make and if she in fact did say it, then, um... *scratches head*
I liked it. Thanks for sharing. =)
I think that some people are reading "You're the first man to sit down and actually listen to me" as "You're the first man - be it a boyfriend, father, teacher, brother, friend, etc - in my ENTIRE LIFE to sit down and actually listen to me" rather than "You're the first CLIENT to actually listen to me." The first reading does evoke the stereotype that all women go into sex work because they have "daddy issues."
But I read it as the latter. Marc, can you clarify?
I actually meant it as "the first client."But the greater point I wanted to make with the statement is that the power of having one's voice heard equals the power of creating "truth,"in a epistemological sense.
As such, I wrote it to make a greater point: that when the voices of sex workers aren't heard - that when we privileged feminists speak of and attack sex work without hearing their voices (and one can even argue that the voices of feminist sex workers are privileged, as opposed to those who do not voice themselves), we aren't really doing anything to help feminism, or those women.
In all, I wrote the post because it changed my perspective of sex work - and the sex debate overall.
Hold on a second, Marc. You are saying that because I am a feminist, I am a "privileged" former sex worker and should not be speaking "on behalf" of non-feminist sex workers? My education has not been a *privilege* to me. It has been a LIFELINE. Without it, I would probably be DEAD.
Marc, thank you for the post. I don't find it self-congratulatory, I find it true and honest. In saying that you're the only one to sit down with her, I don't see it as a statement that is self-righteous, but rather a comment on the treatment of prostitutes or escorts as inhuman, even by their customers.
I think that this post helps to bring attention to an issue that really can slip under the feminist radar. It has been written off more than once.
And everyone getting angry over the use of "we" in his statements: yes, it is a blanket statement, but a fairly accurate one if you ask me. Would you prefer a list of names with the dates on which they stated what Marc is referencing? Come on, you're all being ridiculously nit-picky.
I agree that this post is neither offensive nor ground breaking. I think Marc still has a lot of learning to do, but tearing apart his post in such a mean way is not going to help.
Totally agree.
What surprises me most about the negative reactions is that many deviate from the standard feminist protocol in dealing with "personal experience" statements: in the presence of good faith, we don't presume expertise over the experience of the person sharing.
Marc was sharing an experience that the vast majority of us will never have and framing it in a feminist context. I don't understand why so much effort has been expended to suggest his experience was invalid. He had an experience. He didn't claim expertise in matters of sex work. He didn't claim perfection in understanding another. He shared how it affected his worldview. This happens dozens of times a week on this blog. It is part of amassing a feminist dialogue. Many people have had their attitudes adjusted from this post. Others haven't. That is how it works here on the feministing community.
Marc has been really open about his experiences with a feminist learning curve and contrite when he speaks in error. He has navigated a great deal more of that learning curve than perhaps most of us here and has demonstrated extremely good faith at ever turn. I wish I felt like most critiques of marc's posts were made in good faith, but I don't feel that way.
Wow, why is everyone so up in arms about this post? I thought it was great, and I thought it did tell this woman's story respectfully.
Also, I think we can agree that most people on Feministing know that escorts, prostitutes and strippers are all human beings, have any of you ever been outside the house? Have you heard Family Guy's MULTIPLE jokes about hookers being dead inside, and thus okay to kill? Heard a misogynistic gamer (differentiating there because I know many gamers, like myself, are not like this) talk about how fun it is to kill hookers in Grand Theft Auto? Or talked to an ignorant guy, who thinks women IN GENERAL are worthless?
There's still a LOT of stigma attached to sex work. I know, that's not news. But I don't think anyone could deny that the majority of the population sees prostitution as very taboo. I'm not saying it's wrong, and I'm not saying it's scarce, but honestly it isn't talked about a lot in middle America, except in terms of being immoral or sinful.
This post didn't break any new ground, but it did tell another story about a woman. Primarily a woman, a human being. It's important for more stories like this to be told, so that more people can be enlightened to the shocking truth that prostitutes are, gasp!, men and women just like you or I.
All:
I was the under the impression that I am sharing something I learned about my own prejudices when it comes to sex workerrs and the assumptions that we have - in no way was I trying to speak for all sex workers/escorts/prostitutes, nor was I trying to get a pat in the back.
Just as within a lot of conciousness raising circles, my own personal lived experiences allow me to look at feminist issues from a different perspective, and I was merely raising that issue to share. If you were offended, I apologize, and in the future, will be more careful at what I choose to share and not share.
As for the snarky comment about my asking for someone to show me around the Orlando area - it was meant for all readers of Feministing - not just women. In the future, I'd appreciate acutally giving feedback rather than attacking me like that.
So, honestly, Marc - you weren't looking for a date?
Really?
You just wanted "somebody" to show you around the Orlando area?
And it wouldn't matter if it was a man?
Really?
Sorry dude, but I'm not buying it!
Seriously, how many times to you have to post that you think he was looking for dates? Honestly, are you that wrapped up in someone else that you have to post the SAME thing SEVERAL times??
Are you saying that the feminists in this community wouldn't be able to smell bullshit if it were coming at them? Seriously - stop trying to protect women for dates!
I'm not gonna lie, my first thought about your post was that you were reaching, and that it was self congragulatory. But, I do agree with Alessa,et al, that it doesn't mean that your perspective is insignificant. I honestly thought that the sex workers aren't what we think" tome was well known. However, I forgot that, well, not everyone has been enlightened about sex workers. I was looking at things from my own perspective, without actually taking into consideration, that you probably educated several people about this subject.
Marc,
Feministing is not renowned for its openmindedness. You have discovered that if a point of view is disliked, the poster is shot down in flames.
A-Freaking-MEN!
I like the links and often times the original posts but we (I do mean we) are a bunch of wolves when it comes to stuff like this.
I am also always surprised at when the commentators get involved and when they don't. I understand that they can't police everything on the community but they brought this to the front page and as of 5:00 PM Hawaii Time they haven't stepped in, even with a "NO PERSONAL ATTACKS, PLEASE" for Marc.
Marc, thanks for having the courage to post something that you probably knew would get some of the community's man-hating hackles up. And I do mean man-hating. If you were a women this conversation would have been much different!
"I'd felt horrible that I'd taken an hour of this woman's time already... with her assuming I knew she was an escort..."
I take serious issue with this statement. Why exactly do you think you wasted her time? You did not have any reason to think that she was a prostitute, and for her to say she thought you knew is , quite frankly ridiculous. Was she wearing a sign? Honestly this sounds like a line to me. Then she made you feel guilty for taking up her time? No, what happened is this. She invested an hour in a potential customer with out telling said customer she was selling something. She took a business risk and a dishonest one at that. In all reality she wasted an hour of your time. Before people start screaming that I'm anti-sex I should say that I don't have a problem with people who sell sex. What I do have a problem with is liars and deceivers.
What would you do if you were in her shoes? She obviously doesn't want to subject herself to the dangers of looking for Johns on the street, so she shoots for the possibly safer hotel bar. She can't very well walk up to a man and say "I'm willing to have sex with you for money, you down?" She could be arrested, publicly humiliated, etc.
It seems much safer to test the guy out for a while in a public place, see if he gives off the "I like killing prostitutes" vibe before agreeing to go to bed with him. She'd count as a liar and a deceiver if she'd had sex with him first THEN demanded money. As it is, she was just being safe.
Seriously? She went back to the room with him, they were about to initiate sex, then she drops the bombshell "You'll need to pay for this." You call that safe? Dropping that line alone in a room with a man she just met? Does she have a death wish?! I can imagine all sorts of terrible things that could have happened to her if the man wasn't as nice as she thought he was.
Is it a good idea to test out a potential customer in a safe public place? Hell yes. Anything less would be down right irresponsible for her own personal safety. Don't you think it might be even safer to tell her customer that he is in fact a customer while they are still in public where he will be less likely to smash her face in, or maybe rape her?
But, oh, the twist. She found a decent man and she actually managed to make him feel guilty for 'wasting' her time. This is an incredibly dangerous and dishonest tactic she is using to get business.
Seriously - let's drop the "women are deceivers"" attitude, and rather than attacking her, let's focus on actually talking the issues that surround sex work, and the larger reasons behind sex work.
She was not deceiving me or anyone else. At the point of finding out, I was free to do whatever I wanted - to include telling her off and go on with my night.
So, no, she didn't deceive anyone. It was a matter of me deciding this was a good opportunity to learn something and at the same time, ensuring that she was properly compensated for her time.
I am not an expert with how this is all supposed to work - but let's not make her out to be the bad person in all of this.
I am not saying that all women or all sex workers or all anything are deceivers. I am just saying that the particular woman you met deceived you. She led you to believe you were going to have a casual night of sex. Then once you are about to have sex she informs you that the sex would cost you. That is deceit and an all around Assholeish thing to do. Not to mention incredibly dangerous for her. Not every man is as understanding and non violent as you are. I'm sure you know that there are many people in the world who think nothing of violence against sex workers.
Upon discovering her intent you were totally free to go off and do whatever you wanted to do. I am not arguing against that. I just think it is utterly ridiculous that for some reason you felt guilty for taking up her time. You had no reason to feel guilty. Let me repeat that. YOU HAD NO REASON TO FEEL GUILTY.
Maybe I am taking this personally. See, when I read about other peoples experiences I try to imagine that happening to me to better understand it. So the thought of meeting a guy at a bar, going up to his room thinking I was about to hook up with him, and then being told right before sex that he is a prostitute and I’d have to pay for it pisses me off. (Maybe he should have mentioned that sooner?) And then to be put on a guilt trip for wasting his time? I’d be pissed beyond words.
And to put my self in her shoes. Well, then I would have chosen my line of work. I would not be a poor victim. I would have chosen to do these things that I know full well are illegal. And as a result of being illegal that I would have to be extra careful not to get arrested for publicly announcing that I sell sex. ( That "I thought you knew" line is bull.) Still, I wouldn’t be any less of an asshole to suddenly drop on someone right before sex, “oh by the way this will cost you.” Something would need to be said before leaving the safe public place. Ugh. Even thinking of trying to deceive another person like that makes me mad. I take a do unto others yada yada approach to life. Sorry I don't know the exact quote. What can I say, I'm an atheist ;)
I've known too many people who have lied/deceived me and then later managed to make ME feel guilty about it. So yeah, I am definitely taking this personally. I'm trying not to project too much. But damn, that woman sounds too much like people I have known.
Would it be safer to tell the John before she enters his hotel room? Maybe. But I don't have that experience, and neither do you, so we can't really make the call beyond a shadow of a doubt.
She didn't "make him feel guilty." I am sure that escorts are occasionally turned down, and thus do end up wasting time getting to know a guy only to be told "Oh, no, I don't want to pay for it." This isn't her first rodeo.
Actually, I want to point out that Marc states, "Come to find out, before I initiated sex, and we were flirting, she told me that she is an escort and spends time with men for money." Her going back to the room with him does not necessarily mean that she wanted or was obligated to have sex with him. He had not initiated sex when he found she was an escort. I don't see the deceit.
Yeah, this sentence made me uncomfortable, too. It's like he felt responsible for her decision to talk to him instead of being pissed off for being misled about her state of interest in him. It's not taking her seriously on a different level, and in a way, the general attitude feminists have with respect to sex workers - poor misled victims that have to be saved even if they don't want to. Not that different from conservative rhethoric, though probably less hypocritical.
Although - I keep forgetting that prostitution is illegal in the US. Well, in that case, she was obviously being prudent by not revealing her intentions earlier, and there's no reason for him to be pissed off about her misleading him.
It's just another case in which problematic legislation lead to two people investing in something they later realised the other wasn't interested in.
You know, I totally didn't catch that angle.
But, upon reflection, you do have a point.
She didn't drop any hints that she was a sex worker seeing a customer, made Marc think he was getting a one night stand and then blindsided him with the fact that he was going to have to pay for her companionship when they got up to the room (AND guilt tripped him into paying for the hour of conversation at the bar!).
That's very unprofessional on her part.
Yes, sex work is not legal and there is a high risk of arrest - but there are ways around that, ways that she could have sought out customers without tricking them like that.
That's not only an unethical business practice, but is very physically dangerous for her - because some men (especially the macho asshole types who feel ashamed to have to "pay for it") who might become abusive, and even murderous, upon being targeted with that bait-and-switch.
Marc,
The reason I and others reacted they way we did is because your post stated things sex workers themselves have been saying for years. And I do think it's good that you have realized these things yourself, but the way the post was framed didn't seem to focus on your own *personal* enlightenment but instead on some sort of instructive rhetoric where you drew assumptions about how your readers are "stereotyping" sex workers right along with you. Instead of focusing on yourself, your personal issues, and your obvious biases, you chose to formulate a post which was self-righteous and ignorant of the work that has already been done by sex workers.
You need to understand that as a male, and as a non-sex worker, the only thing you can ever be is an ally. And just like everyone needs to do in order to be a good ally, you need to go educate yourself on some sex worker blogs. Again, I will reiterate - sex workers don't need you to speak for them. They are speaking for themselves all over the blogosphere. (Not to mention publications, academic and mainstream)
Uugghh... I hate that view that men can only ever be allies. It completely disregards the fact that they too suffer from sexism. As a woman I know the suffering that we go through solely based on gender is much more necessary to change, but disregarding the problems of every group doesn't help that at all.
I know a lot of people will disagree with me on that, but I had to say it.
Alessa,
I don't want to derail but I do want to clarify - I think men can only be allies to *female sex workers*. As far as feminism goes, I know it's kind of contended but I absolutely believe men can be feminists. When I said Marc can only ever be an ally, I meant in this context, to female sex workers.
Oh okay. Sorry then :)
:)
I am greatly amused at the way people are taking this post.
Frankly the elements of "no duh" associated with what Marc has written do not give me the impression of being self-congratulatory so much as an attempt to soften what he's saying to his audience...
The fact that people on here are acting like people on Feministing are universally supportive of sex workers really makes me choke on my coffee. It's a minority of posters on here who are truly venomous about sex workers but combined with a larger minority who lean toward judgement give me an overall feeling of disapproval and hostility toward posts in favour of legalisation or decriminalisation of prostitution.
Yes, it's a given that sex workers are individual people with their own life and hugely varied intelligence and experiences. But it's a valid point when many feminists write off anyone from models to strippers to madams as contributing to patriachy/mindless victims.
The fact that people on here are acting like people on Feministing are universally supportive of sex workers really makes me choke on my coffee.
Yeah, when I first read this post, I thought that any uproar that it caused was going to be from people who were downright offended at the idea that we should consider sex workers in a way that didn't involve blanket-type statements about contributing to objectification and blah blah blah. I distinctly remember someone here stating that sex workers have the option of starving instead of working, with the clear implication that the commenter would prefer they starved than "uphold the patriarchy."
Not so much a reply to the above comment anymore, but more in general - having read Marc's posts before, it was pretty clear to me that this was the sharing of a personal revelation that he had. He's always struck me as not-very-sex-pos, and seeing him considering the escort as he did in this post was a bit of a surprise for me.
"The fact that people on here are acting like people on Feministing are universally supportive of sex workers really makes me choke on my coffee."
Exactly! Most of the commenters on here are saying this post isn't anything new and acting as if the Feministing community embraces sex workers already with open arms. No it doesn't! In fact, this is the first sex-work post I've seen where the comments haven't spiraled into anti-sex-work rhetoric.
Except that my off-the-cuff joke, which I mistakenly made without feeling the need to announce my "cred" as a former sex worker, was called "disgusting."
From my own anecdotal evidence, many sex workers end up in the profession due to their own childhood sexual abuse and/or dysfunctional home life. Many have also been or currently are drug addicts seeking ways to pay for their habit. I wouldn't be surprised if mental illness factors in too, especially when people often self-medicate with drugs when they would be better served by psychiatric medication.
I talked to one sex worker once some years ago whose justification for staying in the profession was two-fold: the pay was good and she also believed she was performing a needed service to provide a sexual outlet to lonely men. As for the latter revelation, I'm still not sure how to respond to it, though I am not about to pass judgment either way.
Well, those are perfectly valid reasons - sex work (particularly the higher end escort work) does pay a hell of a lot more than most pink collar jobs and indeed there are a lot of lonely men who need a sex partner and for a variety of reasons cannot find a woman who would have sex with them for free.
I'm still a little confused about why Marc didn't pay to have sex with her. Does it take the thrill of the chase away knowing that the sex is a business deal? What was the big turn off?
Would you pay to have sex with a stranger, when you had been flirting all night, thought it was mutual, then found out that it was just a business deal?
I'm not sure whether you're being sarcastic, just trying to prove a point, or if it's a genuine question...
While that makes sense, it seems that the girl liked him enough to sit and tell him her life story, albeit for money, but she could've said "No thanks, don't want to waste any more time on you."
Now he has to justify not buying sex?
to be honest I did think it was a little funny that he was happy to have sex with her, and happy to give her money, but not the two together. Hey, he's entitled to his particular values. I just thought it was amusing.
Ummm...coercion? I can't speak for Marc, but I don't particularly want to have sex with someone who isn't really interested in having sex with me. Is this really such a rare opinion that it's confusing or amusing to contemplate? If someone in interested in having sex with someone else, they must *of course* be interested in it even their potential partner is not attracted to them but only to their wallet?
**Sigh**
1. I sometimes wonder if Feministing was ready for the "reply" feature.
2. I honestly attribute a lot of the hostile comments on here to Marc being a man. While we can all agree on here that feminism has nothing to do with man-hating, there are a great deal of commenters in the Feministing community who view feminism as women-only territory and seem hostile to any male voice on the subject, which drives me nuts. It's high time people accept male feminist voices on feminist matters, both pertaining to men and women, just as we accept female feminist voices commenting on gender/sexuality matters relating to both sexes.
3. Marc: thanks for posting, and I'm glad to see you posted it on FB as well. All around a good message to send out. Nonetheless, you might have given second though to how the "have a drink" line would come across. Women are used to that equating "do me in my hotel room." (I'm not saying all women make that assumption, but many may have had that experience.) How did your FB audience receive this, just curious?
Given that my Facebook audience knows me personally, it was received quite differently than here. In fact, I've been able to talk to a few close friends about it and deconstruct feminism's viewpoints of sex workers. I think the reason for a lot of hostility is that a lot of intentions and meanings are misinterpreted on the Internet. But that's the nature of the Internet.
Agreed. I'm glad you brought up point #2. While I would say it is important for men's input in feminism to be evaluated at a higher standard of scrutiny for bad faith or privilege than women's input, Marc has done an excellent job of avoiding those pitfalls on feministing historically and in this post in particular.
Yet his post has been received with the usual memes used to discredit male feminist participation, including:
he is trying to use feminism to have sex with the women here.
he is trying to use feminism to get congratulated.
he is trying to use feminism to speak for women and silence them.
None of which is even remotely close to the case here. Moreover, Marc wrote a post earlier this year condemning male feminists that behaved that way.
"Yet his post has been received with the usual memes used to discredit male feminist participation, including:
he is trying to use feminism to have sex with the women here.
he is trying to use feminism to get congratulated.
he is trying to use feminism to speak for women and silence them."
Well, "memes" or not, all three of those bullet points accurately characterize Marc's post!
On point 2: Word. I give Marc a lot of credit for continuing to contribute to a forum where he receives an uneven amount of criticism and harshness.
On point 3: in Marc's defense, several other members of the Feministing community have made "I'm new to the area/in town for a few days - any groups/events close by?" type posts. I think networking is a really fantastic benefit to the site, and it shouldn't be limited to only female members. HOWEVER, TaraK. you are spot on with your observation that male-to-female "let's meet for drinks" frequently suggests more than just drinks. I don't see anything nefarious in Marc's invite, but may be he may want to reconsider phrasing.
Marc,
We may not always see eye-to-eye, and I've not yet been able to read your entire entry, but I want you to know that I do have a tremendous amount of respect for your ability to be out there with your experiences and how you think through them.
I'll be able to read this later tonight when I'm home, but I wanted to inject this because there's been a lot of hating on you up thread and I think that you deserve something a bit more positive.
I'll probably disagree with you on some points, or have questions -- I usually do. But, we've always been able to cordial and civil with each other and I respect you greatly for it.
-Gular
Co-sign.
Marc, there's just no winning with this crowd.
the hell does that mean?
On the off chance that that's not a rhetorical question: http://community.feministing.com/2009/09/bumper-sticker.html#comments
While I have read the writings of several sex workers, I have never had an in-person conversation with someone who identified themselves to me as such. If I did have the opportunity to speak with someone in The Industry about their work, I would be pretty stoked: face-to-face conversations can so much more powerful than reading books and blog posts. I don't think there is anything wrong with Marc regarding his experience as significant and wanting to share it in this manner. I would react in the same way.
It's fascinating to me that a lot of the vitriol in this conversation has emerged between various posters. In some cases, it has stopped being about Marc's post and is now between Person A and Person B (eg whose tone of voice is most judgmental/egregious/clueless.) It's surprising because Feministing tends to feature more civilized discourse than the average internet forum (see the exchange between holmes and Alyssa: honest question, clarification and an honest-to-science smiley face. It doesn't get much more civilized than this.) I guess if heat signifies anything, it's the massive lack of consensus about sex work. Many people feel very strongly about SOMETHING, we just don't all agree what that something is.
I'm completely done with this post after this comment goes up so anyone who responds to tell me how superior I think I am shouldn't expect a reply.
This is a general reply to the commenters who have said that Marc has received negative feedback because he's a man. I know those posts weren't necessarily directed at me specifically but since I've been vocal about my dislike for this post I feel that I should be clear that I take issue with the fact that Marc is uniformed and not that he is a man. I don't think that he is "using feminism to get congratulated." I just think that this post is less about self-discovery and more about Marc feeling good about himself. I found it to be insincere and ill-informed. Criticize me all you like for that. Seriously. I have to be able to take it if I'm going to dish it out, right?
There are a lot well-written, extremely informative posts on Feministing Community that are largely ignored. All I'm saying is that our energies and attentions are better directed toward discussing posts with more merit.
Argh... *uninformed not uniformed. That was a pretty funny typo tho...
Suggesting that marc's earnest offer for drinks was an effort to seduce women is a dismissive argument that pretty clearly stems from his gender. That's important to recognize.
In addition, you've claimed he lacks sincerity. His body of contributions here at feministing plus his activist experience directly contradict this. Questioning the good faith of qualified male feminists is a typical meme used to dismiss male feminists. I think you have done that here.
"There are a lot well-written, extremely informative posts on Feministing Community that are largely ignored. All I'm saying is that our energies and attentions are better directed toward discussing posts with more merit."
There are also a plethora of poorly written personal experience posts by women describing early developments in their feminist perspectives. And we place a pretty high value on these posts and perspectives here and I have never seen one dismissed because others on this blog can claim more expertise. Marc is relatively informed on this topic and certainly very informed on this experience.
Yet marc's point here is not at issue. You are questioning his sincerity, his qualifications and his motivations, to say that his post isn't worthy of our time. This post is far from perfect. But you are dismissing it--and telling the rest of us to dismiss it too--not on its merits but for a list of things typically used to dismiss male feminist voices.
I've offered to get together with you in working for feminist issues in Virginia. I must want to jump your bone!
Anyhow, thanks, Dangerfield, for being a great ally.
It's too nice a day for me to be stuck on the phone with the DMV and occassionally posting of Feministing. I am headin' out to the bar. ;)
have fun!
I know I said I was done but I said nothing about Marc's offer for drinks.
You are very correct. I apologize for associating other's hostile arguements towards this post with yours.
Marc and a lot of other people are missing the point that escorts can simultaneously be both 1) doing the right thing for themselves and their situation and 2) contributing to the objectification of women and the continuation of the patriarchy. Prostitutes simultaneously need 1) legal services and sexual health services and 2) other career options. It's possible for a feminist to simultaneously 1) support sex workers and their right to be treated with respect and 2) denounce the cultural forces which make sex work a viable option for women overwhelmingly more so than men. This is Advanced Patriarchy Blaming rather than Feminism 101, but you can sign up without a professor's signature.
this.
Sex against ones will:rape
Sex one engages in because they view it as one of few options: a sad choice that happens in the world, and we should try to work against.
Please stop confusing the two. Both are bad. But they are not the same and it really pisses me off when they are conflated.
How was what FrumiousB said confusing the two?
Sorry. I meant to reply to EGhead. Gah stupid reply system.
EGhead identified herself as a former sex worker; she also said she was raped. I don't think you, or anyone else, get to tell a woman who was raped that she wasn't.
Which you already know, I assume.
It seems like an awfully privileged thing to say involuntary sex isn't rape because the woman involved is a sex worker.
So if a woman consents to sex because she's afraid she'll just be raped anyway if she says no, and hopes this way will be a little less physically/psychologically damaging, it's not rape?
And if she consents to sex with a professor/boss/stepdad because he threatens to fail/fire/evict her if she doesn't, it's not rape?
And when Thomas Jefferson owned Sally Hemings' children as his slaves, and he agreed to set them free only on the condition that she go to the US with him and be his "mistress", that wasn't rape?
Rape is sex without consent. Consent requires that it not be given under duress. I think we must disagree about the definition of duress.
BTW, I'm not saying, "all sex workers are rape victims!!!!" I just don't hate that some people think it's not "real rape" if we're "only" coerced into sex, rather than being dragged kicking and screaming into an alleyway. I'm pretty sure that def'n of "real rape" rules out a very large minority, if not a majority, of rape cases right there.
But then what is duress and what isnt?
Bodily harm is a clear sign of rape. But what if it is just I am tired and dont want to get in an argument with my partner over having sex tonight? Is that rape?
Rape is hard to define when one starts asking was is freely given consent. But for my personal definition economic hardship leading to sex is not rape. I mostly posted my comment because I hate it when people start acting like getting money for sex is *always* rape. We all do shit we dont like and that sometimes involves sex we dont like.
Thank you. Sex work *does* affect women who are not sex workers and we should be able to talk about that. (I'm frequently told that the majority of sex worker clients are married. We can talk about how clients' female partners are affected without attacking sex workers.)
Sex work is asymmetrical in ways that *do* reinforce patriarchy. It's overwhelmingly about women sexually servicing men. (Even most male sex workers service male clients.)
Talking about these things is *not* an attack on individual sex workers who may be doing what they need to do to support themselves and their families.
Marc, I often disagree with you, but this was a great post, and I'm happy that you have begun to broaden your thoughts re: sex workers.
As for some of the criticism:
-not that i think the post was self-congratulatory, but even if it was, I don't really have an issue with that. If someone grows a bit in life, and wants to post about how happy they are that they are now a better/more whole/more enlightened person, i'm totally ok with that, and it's weird that that's such a no-no here.
-i should truly post a whole diary on this, but again, though that's not what Marc was trying to do, what would be wrong with Marc wanting to get to know and possibly hook up with a feminist in the Orlando area while he was there? admittedly, the place for that was not at the end of this type of post (if that had been his goal), but feminist men specifically wanting to hook up with feminist women because they are attracted to feminist women . . . not a bad thing as far as i'm concerned, and i find the denigration of feminist men who would like to search for that to again be kind of weird.
let me put it out there. i am not a feminist (who happens to be male) so that i can hook up with women, or otherwise. however, i am definitely attracted to women who identify as feminists, as we share a core something, and i would love, as i continue in my life, to make out/hook up/have sexual experiences with feminist women. and i don't think that desire is at odds with my feminism.
please ignore if you feel this is a threadjack.
btw, that was supposed to read "I am not a feminist (who happens to be male) so that i can hook up with women, feminist or otherwise."
I hate to contradict what seems to be a majority of comments about how this is "nothing new" and the tone used, but this actually is new to me. And I found it helpful.
As a newly proclaimed feminist (I realize I have been my whole life, I only recently came to terms with the term), this is an area of interest that I have not heard much about. While perhaps this article is condescending and self-centered to those who read many of these types of articles, to someone like me, it is a good initial insight into the issue. Also, thank you to the posting of other links to blogs about this.
It sounds like this was originally intended for viewers that aren't quite so in the know as feminists and/or sex worker advocates. So it's doing some real good elsewhere. That being said there was this sort of "What an AMAZING discovery!" vibe to it that really doesn't belong anywhere other than a feminism 101 site. Not that big a deal, though.
And I've heard feminists say some awful things. Racist, homophobic, misanthropic. They weren't the majority by any means but it happened. But I have never, not even (to play on the stereotype) on Radical Feminism boards, heard feminist theory attacking sex workers themselves or even a specific do so. Plenty of attacks and criticisms on the industry itself and the people who patronize it. I won't say that it never happens or that people don't make asses out of themselves on the subject, even in communities like this. But I definitely have never equated feminism with anti-sex worker attitudes.
THANK YOU for finally saying that!
I think what got me was the "we feminists" part of the post. Who are the "we, feminists?" Male feminists? Female? White? Privileged? I have never heard my feminist friends/co-conspiritors in any way degrade women who are in prostitution, but rather the "industry and the people who patronize it."
Anyone speaking about an issue that is seeped in oppression and who happens to be on the privileged half needs to be aware of their privilege and their assumption of their audience. I am not sure that Mark was speaking too much to "feminists" but rather "male allies" who are still working through their male privilege and sexism. Or, if he was speaking to all feminists, he needs to rethink and check himself and his privilege. Or, "we as people" might have been a better phrase if thinking about those who consider themselves feminists (men and women alike) but who still hold the victim-blaming belief (not to say that women in prostitution don't have a certain type of agency or that they cannot "choose" that profession for lack of better options) that women in prostitution are to blame for the industry. It is important to have those moments of realization that our long-held belief (and perhaps the beliefs of those around us) is completely false and based on prejudiced assumptions. However, it is also important that we do not think we are gracing a whole community whose lives are dedicated to this work with some new piece of information or thought.
It is very interesting how many people feel so sorry for Mark and how he has been "attacked" and how quick we are to support male allies who make a grave mistake or act in a patronizing manner. It is important for all of us who actually care about this to critique each other!
Mark, please check yourself. Since you clearly care about feminist work, I think that instead of relying on posts to validate what you said and make sure you feel good about saying it, you need to look back at what you wrote and do better next time. Anyone who cares about dismantling oppression needs to thoroughly examine how their own words are contributing to the oppression that they so badly want to dismantle. Otherwise, why work so hard?
Also something to note: "we feminists" clearly did not include sex workers.
(This is what really frustrates me when people go "well, Feministing is a 101 blog, so you can't expect people to completely understand intersectionality and different oppressions yadda yadda" - because there are people on these boards who suffer from those different oppressions and the lack of understanding makes them invisible, marginalises them, silences them and ultimately drives them away. Just look at what we do to trans regulars.)
So this website should be off-limits to those new to feminism?
IMO, Feministing is a pretty beginner friendly website. Its not 101, but very beneficial for those relatively new to feminism that aren't yet knowledgeable about all of the debates within the community. Including sex work.
Just the idea of getting into a sex work discussion makes me feel emotionally drained, but I'll throw in my 2 cents. From what you (the author) have said, this woman entered the business as a last option. This seems to be the case with the majority of sex workers, as it was for me when mental illness briefly drove me to dabble in it. When someone has sex because she doesn't have any other option, we call that rape. I don't say this to chastise the author-- or anyone-- but, as I said, to throw my tiny opinion into the echoing chasm that is any thread on sex work.
Also, for what it's worth, I don't blame women such as myself for perpetuating 'patriarchy' or any of that shit, because I don't blame victims. Women who do really choose sex work, however, are absolutely perpetuating an institution that enabled my rape, and I firmly believe this. I think pro-sex work individuals need to step outside of their own views, which are most often race- class- or neurotypically- privileged, and consider the rest of us for a minute.
Done. I swear.