Sex In The Public Square - blogging - Comments

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" .

Sex worker blog authority

Elizabeth — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 07:21:20 -0800

Gracie, thanks so much for linking to that post. I've been thinking a lot these days about what it means to have "authority" outside the mainstream media or academic circles, and it's an interesting puzzle, but I think by focusing on the intended community of readers, as you do, and by focusing on tools like Technorati, as you do, you're hitting the proverbial nail on the head.

Scholars often judge the authority of a piece of research by how often it is cited by other researchers. This can be in a very very small field, so it isn't about raw numbers, really. Tools like Alexa and Technorati do essentially the same kind of thing for bloggers: show how many times a piece is accessed, or how many links refer back to it. Again, the smallness of the interested community doesn't necessarily diminish the authority of the piece.

Those are not perfect indicators of course (lots of people might link to a very superficial piece just because it's amusing, for example) and this also makes me think about the responsibility we have as interested writers/thinkers/bloggers/sex workers/etc. to be out there reading and commenting on each others'work. I know how easy it can be for me to forget that part as I focus on my own writing or other work, but those discussions are another way for readers to judge the authority of an original piece. It's sort of akin to the kind of question/answer sessions after a research presentation, or the letters in response to a research article.

Thanks for raising these issues. They're really important as we keep expanding the space -- online and off -- for discussion of sex-related issues! The workers at Bound, Not Gagged have done a great job at expanding that space, and I'm glad you drew more attention to Amanda's post. Just the kind of thing that helps to build recognizable authority!