Sex In The Public Square - sex work - Comments

Government funding for poor research?

Elizabeth — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:16:32 -0700

Another issue, aside from the poor quality of the research and the over-reaching of the write-up is that in this case the sponsor of the research, The Poppy Project, gets its funding from the Office of Criminal Justice. If government funds are going to pay for research then the public ought to be assured that the research is carefully reviewed for ethics and methodology before it is conducted.

Laura Agustin, thank you for dropping by!

Elizabeth — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 16:02:22 -0700

These issues are such important ones, and ones that are so often oversimplified or distorted, as you point out, by policy makers as well as by the press and by the rescue industry. It is so important that people keep writing and speaking about the real complexity of migration and labor. Your book, Sex at the Margins, is a thoughtful and careful exploration of these issues and I'm so glad to know now about your web site. Thank you for dropping by!

Border Thinking on migration, culture, economy and sex

Laura Agustin — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 18:18:51 -0700

Those interested in these issues might like to visit my website devoted to going into them in detail and trying to dispel notions propagated by the media and the Rescue Industry.

Laura Agustin's Border Thinking at

http://www.nodo50.org/Laura_Agustin

Another Week?

Chris — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:46:46 -0700

Wow, Ren. I didn't realize. You're kicking some serious ass over there. My compliments. They really should incorporate you as a regular.

Glad y'all are enjoying my

Ren The Barbarian — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:03:25 -0700

Glad y'all are enjoying my stint...I still have a whole 'nother week to go...

I would argue

Lou FCD — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 07:16:19 -0700

I wouldn't even phrase it that way, Elizabeth. Why not use the same terminology as any other professional service industry?

Do doctors "sell medical services" or "sell health"?

No. They "provide medical services for a fee".

Accountants provide financial services for a fee. Doctors provide medical services for a fee. Sex workers provide sexual services for a fee.

Chris, thank you for posting

Elizabeth — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 06:31:00 -0700

Chris, thank you for posting that. Following is the comment I just left on the "ranting about terminology" thread of Ren's over at Feministe!

Ren, thanks: The "selling her body" thing has been one of the things about the prohibitionist discourse that makes it so problematic. Nobody can argue that selling bodies is good. But you are right that selling bodies is not what prostitution is about. Following is

Jesurgislac asks about using "sell the sexual use of their bodies" and I would say even that isn't quite it. Selling sex, or selling sexual services much more accurately describes prostitution. To say "selling the sexual use of" makes it sound like the prostitute simply lies down and lets the client do what he (or she) wants. I don't know many prostitutes who would say that describes what they do. They actually work much harder than that, and to say "selling the sexual use of their bodies" may not dehumanize them in the way that "selling their bodies" does, but it certainly undermines any understanding of the amount of labor that goes into the doing of prostitution.

I have always advocated for language that is as accurate and descriptive as possible. To describe the prostitution transaction, I can't think of much that is more clear than "selling sex" .

Evidence Based Policy

Lou FCD — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 10:16:21 -0700

Michael,

Thank you for both the original post and the subsequent information. I have in the past attempted to tackle this very issue, but unraveling the massive conflation of the separate topics drove me to frustration.

Evidence has never been a basis for policy under this administration, in any area. It is imperative for both the United States and the world at large that an about-face be made immediately.

Responses

Michael — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 08:35:59 -0700

The NYT published two letters in response, from Equality Now , and Professor Ronald Weitzer illustrating two very different points of view. Hopefuly evidence based policy rather than rhetoric and ideology will prevail.

thanks Lorna

Amanda — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 15:07:13 -0700

The only way I'd see it as making my life "easier" is because I've always been out to friends and family. I had to hide my former sex work for the past 4 years in a relationship. It felt unnatural to me. Basic honesty is easy for me (this doesn't mean I divulge a lot of detail, though).

But, your last question is a good one.

Amanda, I admire your

Lorna — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 06:59:42 -0700

Amanda, I admire your motivation to "help break down stigma" and agree with Elizabeth that sharing our private persona(s) is certainly one means of normalizing any life style which the general population may consider to be alternative or marginalized. I suspect, however, it will take significant time for society to evolve sufficiently for the majority to accept sex work as an occupation which does not necessitate the "saving" of the worker. Given how difficult and controversial the process of legalizing sex work is in North America, it may, as has already been suggested, take a generation for change in attitudes to become evident.

As far as fear of making a target of yourself goes, I suspect there will always be those who target anyone they percieve as different or threatening to the status quo. This is only my two cents, but with your reservations around becoming a target and the implication from your comment that you would like to make your life "easier" I believe you are probably not at a stage where sharing your private persona will improve the quality of your life.

being out in the public eye

Amanda — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:01:04 -0700

I am considering outing myself as a current sex worker. I'm certainly debating the wisdom in this. A large part of my motivations is to help break down stigma and just make life easier on myself. A lot of my reservation is the fear of making a target of myself.

Certainly I'd love to hear from this group.

Social responsibility

Lorna — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:23:15 -0700

I am probably a bit late in responding to Michael's post, but better late than never! I admire Ellie's openness to being open about her current career choice, but agree with Michael about the value of a balance between transparency and privacy.

In an ideal world each of us would be accepted for our inner person and how that inner person treats those around them. I'm thinking along the lines of "treat other people the way you would like to be treated". The problem with this philosophy is only some people subscribe to it. The rest, unfortunately, appear to believe they know best and the rest of us must be brought over to their way of thinking. I continue to wonder why many within our society have such difficulty accepting there are many different and acceptable ways to live our lives.

We don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world where people can be victimized personally and professionally for their choice of partner, sexual expression and/or orientation, skin colour or .... The moment we take the risk of sharing information about ourselves which does not conform to our society's average values, we may have closed some door or future opportunity.

I recognise and believe one door closes and another opens, but why close any we don't have to close? I remember being in a group of teachers and one woman, who was straight, told another, who was in a same sex relationship, she had the responsibility to advocate on behalf of all who are gay/lesbian/bi and transgender. The recipient of this directive works within a school board where a gay teacher had already been victimized and her career almost ruined; where all teachers had been asked/directed to self identify by their employer.

I believe each of us has a responsibility to advocate for equality and respect for difference and diversity within our society. It should not be purely the responsibility of those who may be most vulnerable after disclosure of their life style.

As far as what we choose to share about our private persona vs. public persona I believe it all comes down to we're entitled to our privacy. But, we continue to have a responsibility to lead by example. Just as we cannot allow racist or any type of hateful comment or "joke" to slide in a conversation neither can we allow our friends, colleagues or acquaintences to believe it is acceptable to denigrate another human being due to their sexual orientation, preference, expression, career choice.... We all have responsibility towards creating social change.

Judith Levine is a hero of mine

Elizabeth — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:22:06 -0700

Thanks for mentioning her book. I think we reviewed it somewhere on the site, or have at least mentioned it before in several posts. Sanity.

"Saving" sex and teens

Leon Symone — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:48:35 -0700

I saw this report a few days and I, too, questioned the underlying message and what it truly meant for teens, sex workers, and sex in general. Elizabeth, you brought up some excellent points!

Another book that I would recommend is Judith Levine's "Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting our Children from Sex". She argues that much of our strategies for preventing such misunderstood plights like teen pregnancies, online predators, and sexual trafficking are actually far more damaging to children than one would expect. She has a great section about teenage runaways who turn to prostitution for survival and youth groups that believe in realistic solutions instead of ideological ones.

Groups such as those held in District 202 in Minneapolis do not treat child/teen prostitutes/runaways as victims that need to be "saved." Instead, they provide counseling, condoms, and an environment where these kids can go for shelter, food, or support.

I also agree with Gemini Girl in terms of what survival prostitution actually means. It certainly reflects a society that is unable to provide essential needs to its fellow citizens. We often leave children out of that loop. But, if these kids have to make very adult choices about their situation, then it only seems reasonable to treat them as such, allow their choices some validation, and let them live their lives knowing that they are respected as human beings. You can't put an age or a price on that!