I have no respect for the passion for equality, which seems to me merely idealizing envy. – Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr
Among the few facts about sex work that everyone agrees upon is that there is a “whorearchy”, a sort of class system among sex workers. Now, nobody agrees on anything about that system, only that it exists. Many strippers, dominatrices, porn actresses, etc insist not only that they aren’t whores, but that they’re better than we are; those whose professions have separated enough from ours that they aren’t even considered sex workers any more (such as actresses and especially masseuses) can be very pompous about it. Prostitutes, on the other hand, sometimes see themselves as better, smarter, more discreet, etc than strippers or porn starlets; sugar babies and other halfway whores deny that they’re sex workers at all; and some unusually self-deluded escorts will even try to draw imaginary lines separating themselves from other hookers. “Authorities” in criminalization and legalization regimes devote great effort to erecting arbitrary barriers between “tolerable” and “intolerable” varieties of harlotry, and sometimes to cementing the strata in place; cops and prosecutors delight in tricking “legal” sex workers into breaking their ridiculous rules (or falsely claiming that they did) in order to have an excuse for victimizing them; and sex worker advocates expend considerable efforts in hand-wringing and lamentation over “classism”.
To a degree, these activists are right; a whore is a whore is a whore, and legal, moral or procedural lines serve only to break people into smaller groups which are more easily dominated by the power-hungry. If you accept money from someone that he gives due to sexual interest in you, then you are a whore and everything else is just semantics. When politicians, pundits or rulers use some arbitrary determinant like penetration, duration, location or motivation to bless some harlots while damning others, what they’re actually doing is reducing the size of the group who might oppose them and winning supporters from among those granted legitimacy. This is why I’m harshly unsympathetic to those who vehemently maintain that their species of sex work or sensual therapy is absolutely not prostitution: all they’re doing is throwing other women under the bus, and if we had all stuck together from the beginning of second-wave feminism half a century ago, prostitution would’ve been decriminalized long ago and many women who are now dead or damaged might still be alive and healthy.
At the same time, it’s madness to pretend that at the present level of human evolution there can ever be such a thing as a classless society. Human beings, like other social animals, naturally form cliques, packs and tribes, and such groups inevitably develop hierarchies. Some people are natural leaders and others natural followers, even outside of a formal structure; the Founding Fathers intended the US to be classless, but look what’s happened to it. Nor are Marxists and Occupiers correct in their insistence that it’s always the rich who control everything; at our present stage of history money is indeed the single most powerful force, but it hasn’t always been that way and won’t always be in the future. And those who rail about “the 1%” forget that there are lots of ways to get into that fraction: birth, popularity, talent, intelligence, ambition, luck, sex appeal, and even plain animal cunning are all paths to riches and power, so pretending that there is still some elite caste inevitably born to the purple is disingenuous in the extreme. Even those who are uninterested in influence over others sometimes find themselves in a position of leadership or control; some people have superior organizational skills, determination or intelligence which allows them to build infrastructures in which others freely choose to participate in exchange for money or whatever other return the organizer needs. Such a person suddenly finds himself a manager or director of a company, co-op or club whom others turn to for guidance, even though his only motivation at the start was to make things easier, better or more comfortable for himself and his immediate dependents.
This is why I tend to tune out when sex worker activists start blathering about “privilege” as though it were some specific quality like height, skin color, IQ or income. There is no single quality in the modern world which confers “privilege” as birth once could, not even money or education. I’m not denying that some people are underprivileged and others start out with greater advantages, but this is inevitable in a world where everyone is different; even in a hypothetical post-scarcity economy of the future where teaching machines gave everyone a university degree at the age of five, there would still be a plethora of areas in which some had advantages over others. Furthermore, early advantages no more ensure success than early disadvantages guarantee failure, and in fact a growing number of psychologists point out that too much privilege often makes a child (and the adult he becomes) fragile, maladjusted and less likely to succeed than one who has to struggle to achieve his goals. It is as pointless to feel guilty about one’s natural advantages as it is to resent those with other advantages one lacks.
What it all boils down to is this: people are drawn to different kinds of work and have different aptitudes and comfort levels. Some women like one kind of sex work, some another; some prefer doing lots of low-dollar calls and others a few high-dollar ones. Some fall into management roles without trying, while others avoid such roles at all costs. Many if not most sex workers drift or migrate from one kind of work to another, in and out of sex work or from one kind of sex work to another, as their circumstances and needs change; a woman who was safely “legal” yesterday may be “illegal” tomorrow. This is why it is absolutely imperative that we not allow outsiders to divide us by drawing lines in the sand and turning those on one side of the line against those on the other. We need to stop obsessing about the whorearchy and pretending it can or should be eradicated, but we also need to oppose those who wish to calcify it in order to employ it as a tool of control.
One Year Ago Today
“Clueless Wonders” introduces my readers to the vice cops of Syracuse, New York, who are so aggressively ignorant and unselfconsciously stupid that they actually boast about it.
It’s kind of strange that you embrace the “whore” label while so many others in your profession – across the spectrum that is – seem to have a problem with that label. It’s almost as if many are actually ashamed of what they are doing – and if that’s the case, maybe they shouldn’t be doing it.
Because, I really don’t see how an army of whores is going to change the legal status of prostitution when a good portion of them think what they are doing is wrong to begin with. You often compare this struggle to the one concerning gay rights but gay rights only started to be “won” when gays ran out of the closet beaming with pride.
It doesn’t sound like the whorearchy is ready to do that. And another thing – the capitalistic nature of the business tends to feed into an “every girl for herself” type mentality. Or so it would seem to me.
That’s exactly my point; by drawing their arbitrary lines the “authorities” set one kind of sex worker against another. In the US it’s porn stars and strippers vs. hookers, in Nevada it’s brothel whores vs. escorts, in some places it’s streetwalkers vs. “indoor workers”, etc. All of the distinctions are artificial, and only serve to break up dissent (divide and conquer).
As for your later statement, I disagree; other countries have whores’ unions. The difference is that in those places, just being a whore isn’t illegal, whereas in the US it is. I’m not entirely sure that a zealous prosecutor in New Orleans couldn’t still make life difficult for me for breaking their asinine laws six years ago.
Hi Maggie, I agree with your article on all notions, when it comes to the perceived superiority of some versus the others. What you are referring here are legal aspects of the marketing. An escort IS legally speaking serving different boundaries than someone who sells sex. Of course we all know that this is just semantics and escorts also have sex with their clients. (ja ja) but speaking in legal determinations she does not “sell sex”. That makes a different code of conduct, because it serves as legal protection agains the peruse of making selling sex illegal. AN escort sells time and can`t be legally sued for selling sex. So – again – legally speaking – those terms make sense for protection. Semantically speaking that an escort IS a whore and a whore is a whore as well, I agree with you. But for tax purposes I don`t 😉
Say there Nina, have you witnessed in a court of law how someone defending her/his self in a prostitution case has successfully used the said legal definitions of an escort as you described to be acquitted of prostitution charges?
depends on the court and on the exact accusations. If it is about taxes, which it is most often, then yes – distinctions do matter. If this is in a country where prostitution is illegal and you get caught !! doing something illegal, then it is a different matter. I assume it all depends on how you get caught. I have heard of cases being dismissed for several reasons.
I don’t like the word “whore” but I think that’s a silly aversion to the sound of the word and the etymology of it. Kind of like how some folks don’t like the word “moist” though I rather enjoy it.
I’m not ruling out that it could be dislike for the connotations, but that will take further introspection.
yes …..By banning together…….freedom of choice , and persute of happyness
then we do much better.
Maggie, I just wondering if in countries where prostitution is legal or decriminalized if the sex workers in those countries have these class distinctions? Do strippers see themselves as being better than escorts there?
I can’t answer that one, but perhaps one of my sex worker readers in such a country can: Australia? New Zealand? Germany? Any opinion on this?
Oh for sure. I’ve even heard one high class call girl in Australia refer to other girls as “slutty” lol.
Status heirachies exist everywhere and in everything, nothing to do with criminalization.
On another point, I always laugh when I go to Australian hotels, because there is invariably an advert for massage service on the table, along with a warning about “sexual harassment”. At such times I ask myself why any man travelling alone would want to have just a back rub. Weird.
Yes, such hierarchies exist, at least in the brain of people. I am sick an tired of it. Most of the time it is escorts that have no clue of the business looking down on others. Because once you start to interact with others in the buz, you realize it is indeed all just semantics. In Europe the streetworkers are the ones , who are seen as lowest in the so called hierarchy of values, and the expensive prostitutes are the “highest”. Of course, as you say, the distinction is never easy, since transgressions are made, too. A luxury escort can as well work at different circumstances for lower rates doing incalls, and as well advertise as travel luxury companion. But, generally speaking, hierarchies are noticed. What strikes me specially is that many look down on streetworkers as the “lowest” and most unbearable form of escorting. It strikes me because many streetworkers do not even offer real sex, they “fake” it, specially in Germany. The more a client pays, the more easy it seems to get unsafe sex practices as well, speaking of bareback and similarly related issues (CIM, anal intercourse, etc. and other high risk behaviours). So, I wonder what is more important? Health or Stigma :-). I sometimes shake my head in wonder…. (giggle)
Hello! I m from Germany where Sexwork became legalized in 2002, achieved under government of the coalition of the Social Democrats & the Greens, initiated by one single woman, a sexworker and brothel manager. Actually the new bill on prostitution under the conservative government is on its way and as far as I know together with new regulations. It seems to me like a roll back to older times or worse … One is new: penalisation of clients is also discussed. I m fighting against this on different levels, I m also speaking openly to the public, I m giving interviews. I m working incessantly building alliances and I try to influence media coverage that becomes influenced by conservative, christian fundamentalists and radical feminists. The current and progressive law is getting sandwiched from all sides. Of course together with false figures on trafficking, junk science; the same I mention in the U.K. and the U.S. The anti-prostitution campaign strategy is based on lies to fool the public.
I m blogging and writing with my escort-pseudonym in message boards for escorts and their clients since my start in the industry around 2004; to create awareness in sexworker related issues. I m discussing the foundation of a german sexworker union to effective lobbying since ages but the feedback was and still is quite low and also self-proclaimed sexwork activists discuss mostly reasons why not to move forward. I still act by myself as in former times, but I found more symbolic support by allies – clients, social workers who work in the field, and of course I m linked with many people from abroad. The reason why there is no initiative to build coalitions is caused by different motives. From my point of view Germany has historically a weak political culture and the interest and motivation to participate in societal issues is quite low (in contrast to France and the U.K., but also the history of civil right movement in the U.S.). Secondly the legalisation of prostitution was an achieved goal of the first whore generation and many sex workers think obviously there is no matter to fight for. Legalisation makes people lazier to fight for their rights. While criminalisation still exist sex workers become aware on that issue in moments of danger, violence, effects of stigma, social exclusion, a life in a lie and stay calm. Most sex workers are not connected to others while they discuss on message boards. Criminalisation in Germany means special regulations on the regional scale and local politics of the Länder prostitution is mostly forbidden in 90% in relation of the entire area of Germany. In larger towns and cities sexwork is still legal but varies because of existing restricted zones. I would also say that conservative governed states/Länder like Bavaria strictly ignore the current legislation on prostitution. And the third reason why building a sex worker coalition in Germany is so much difficult is because of competition, jealousy, eccentric and human weaknesses. I wrote a piece on “whorarchy” a while ago on my blog http://nuttenrepublik.wordpress.com/2010/03/15/the-good-sexworker/
Another interesting link to that issue I found on Furry Girls Blog feministn and I guess she is right http://www.feminisnt.com/2012/the-art-of-war-as-applied-to-sex-workers-rights-organizing/#comments
I love her reference to Sun Tzu, because fighting for our rights and effective lobbying needs a high level of skills in strategy-planning and creative strategic development. I would also recommend the teachings of ZEN. 😉
Hi there, Ariane! We’ve still got a few years yet to weather this whole anti-sex hysteria, but in the long run the control freaks are bound to lose unless all of Western culture comes tumbling down (which could, of course, happen as it did once before). Please keep me posted on events in Germany, so I can keep my readers informed!
Maggie, yes I ll do that. And btw thanks for your courage, it also encourages me moving forward.
You’re very welcome. I’d be much braver if showing my face would not result in inevitable harm to people I love.
Of course I know and thats why so many cant turn up with their face. I was in the same dilemma and considered this long and hard, together with my loved ones who give me any sufficient backing. At the end my desperation and anger triumphed.
Dear Ariane, if you don’t mind my asking does your above comment (“together with my loved ones, etc.”) mean you’re fully “out” to everyone?
Hi Laura, yes but I avoid using my civil name to protect my privacy.
First because of stigma my parents were horrified, because I was taking up a different career that makes them not very proud. For good reasons I decided to stop my unhappy academic career and I practiced so called respected professions for a while with no or very low income. To become self-employed fitted perfecty to me I found out. Its a long story and different motives how I came to this idea to work as a whore and a vital issue in relationships and friendships. Over the years i.e. parents and sisters found their ways to deal with it, with my promise in mind to take good care of myself. My proactive approach and political commitment around human rights issues did not happen over night but has accompanied me since my childhood. Sex education has been always an issue in my life since my youth. In my sexworker life different interests come together. I have always believed in my different professions either I do a good job and every reason to be proud of or I won’t do it and leave. There are lots of sex workers out there who drop their masks to fight for their rights. A small group or some individuals is required to speak openly to the public and to enter constructive negotiations backed by a coalition of the silent majority of sex workers, allies and clients. Its not necessary to demand outings and forced outings should be avoided. In case of public activism you should know that not so many clients feel attracted to active sex workers but only a few who can manage different activities of the whole human package he he … because playful illusions and the projection surface of a callgirl disappears and usually don’t function together with stand up and feminism. Politics is unsexy even it is not playing a greater role during the concrete encounter.
First let me say I find your blog and its topics so refreshing. I read a lot of news (either because I’m use to it or I like it really don’t know anymore at this point) but it has become much to routine it’s good to break up the monotony of my day with your blog some days.
Now to piggy back off Krulac comments I must agree. In a world where people increasingly choose to define themselves by their labels/titles many whores seem to find themselve uncomfortable with theirs. Escort, Courtesan, Callgirl you can put whatever moniker on it you like however elegant or clever its all still the same whore occupation.
Was Trump’s wife an escort before she became what she is now?
There’s a rumor to that effect, but no proof. She was certainly a sex worker; she did nude modeling, including posing nude for lesbian shots. But we don’t know if she was ever an actual escort.
Another misrepresentation of the Occupy Movement. Of course the 1% isn’t a strictly hereditary class, and nobody claimed it was. It makes no difference if the exploiter has a trust fund or got his money by his talent and good looks. He still needs to go to jail and the system reformed. Of course not every rich person is responsible for the mess we are in, just those who had a hand in it. And not all rich people are criminals, and not all Occupiers are Marxists.
I totally agree that everyone who caused the mess needs to pay for it…including the politicians who forced banks to extend loans to people who couldn’t possibly pay them back, and those who voted to bail out businesses they deemed “too big to fail”. That’s not what I’m talking about here, though.
She’s spot on with the Occupier movement. I find they are useful idiots. They’re good at hassling the government and keeping big daddy busy tending to their idiotic demands – but they can’t articulate a single thing they want.
That will have to be done by others but I suppose that the “occupiers” will make good cannon fodder in the meantime.
So I’m not totally down on them.
A lot of critics of the Occupy movement keep pressing them to set out their “demands”, but from what I’ve seen and read, what they are pressing for is to bring about greater public awareness of the total corruption of the political and financial system and to encourage general opposition within the population.
Systemic change can never be as simple as “pass a law against X”, especially when the legal system itself is part of the problem.
The reason the Occupiers can’t articulate clear demands is because there aren’t any that they all agree on. The Occupy movement is just a loose agglomeration of people who are all angry about the current situation, but they all have wildly different ideas about the causes of the problems and the solutions (although some ideas are more popular than others). In this respect they are a lot like the Tea Party, which was never as monolithic or united in its views as the punditry seemed to believe.
I was at first disdainful of the Occupiers’ lack of a coherent platform, until I realized that a lot of the ’60s radicals didn’t have one either (in comparison to antiwar or civil rights protesters). But I eventually realized that doesn’t matter; their anger, their sheer numbers and their brutalization by police serve the vital function of calling a great deal of attention to problems the Occupiers themselves are unable to articulate, and that’s a good thing.
It would be a good thing if it were likely to get something helpful done about the problems. But it sounds to me more like we’re about to have another French or even Russian revolution. President Obama and his inner circle are certainly well-informed bad guys, but everyone else who is supporting the movement should read some history first.
“Revolution” was a pretty popular word in the 60s. Much more so than now. But here we still are.
Well, the Occupy movement has “raised my consciousness” in two ways — it made me see the necessity to be prepared to defend my home should the need arise; and it has seriously cooled down my enthusiasm for reining in police who beat or tase people when they shouldn’t, especially in situations similar to the Occupy gatherings. I would like not to need that sort of cops. But we do.
You approve of police who beat and tase people when they shouldn’t??
And what exactly have the Occupiers done that is so wrong that they need to be beaten and tased? I thought that the freedom of public protest was one of the cornerstones of US democracy and freedom. At least that’s what Americans are always telling everyone outside of the US.
As for defending your home, it is usually when there is no freedom to protest that you get violent revolution ala France, guillotines and all.
For starters … vandalism of public and private property along with harassment of innocent people going to work who have to transit close to an occupy site.
Yeah, the Occupiers are coming to invade your home. Because, you know, they don’t have anything else to do. {rolls eyes until sockets are sore}
I paid for sexual services for the first time only recently, so my research into the various types of services on offer is still fresh. In Minneapolis, there seems to be a growing number of “sensual massage” providers who do not offer genital touching. Coincidentally, due to some sexual issues I’m struggling with, that’s exactly what I was looking for.
Of the two service providers I’ve seen, I don’t think either of them looked down on what other people do, but they were doing what they did primarily because it was less illegal.
I enjoy your site Maggie. As a moderately passionate libertarian, I’m as irritated by the war on sex workers as I am by the war on drug users.
Reblogged this on Καιρός und kommentierte:
Please check out this post and my comments on here …
Yes, if you were born poor and are exceptionally lucky or exceptionally talented, you might enter the 1%. The same as a 125 lbs. woman who is exceptionally skilled or exceptionally lucky might beat up a 200 lbs. man.
I’m not going to look any more favorably on big men who beat up small women because, hey, being big male is no guarantee of winning that fight, and being small and female is no guarantee of losing it.
I don’t look favorably on anyone who uses superior power to subdue anyone weaker (physically, economically, intellectually etc) unless the weaker party is the aggressor…and in that case I still think the stronger party should do only as much “beating up” as necessary.
I can go with that. And if the big guy is the aggressor, I’ll cheer if the little guy kicks the big guy’s ass. I love a David v Goliath story as much as anybody. What makes it thrilling is that, ordinarily, Goliath wins.
I can’t buy lumping together all actions that fit that description. If you have a right (ownership of something, or whatever) in the first place, and the might to get it by bullying, then it’s not only right, it’s silly to refrain!
If you already own something, why would you need to engage in bullying or anything else to get it? You already have it. Now, you might have to get rough with somebody in order to keep it, but if the weaker guy is taking what’s yours, then the weaker guy is the aggressor, and you should (as Maggie put it) do only as much “beating up” as necessary.
all of life is about divide & conquer
Sorry I got in so late on this one.
I actually knew porn actresses who considered themselves much better than prostitutes, because as they saw it, they were paid not for sex, but for an erotic performance.
The way I saw it was this: in porn I was having sex with other people paid to have sex, and in prostitution I was having sex with people paying to have sex. Either way, I was being paid for sex.
Now sure, there are differences, As a whore you work a lot more, with much less talented people, and you still have to give them a good experience. In a lot of ways, it’s harder work.
But the fine distinctions of the whorearchy are endless. Sure, there’s the call girls are better than street walkers division, we’re all familiar with that. There’s also though, finer and finer divisions within segments. I had GFE girls look down on me for being PSE. I also met people who saw it the other way.
At the end of the day, you do what you’re capable of, and what you are comfortable with. And you be the judge.
[…] time to time. This is partly for the sake of variety and partly as a way of undermining the “whorearchy”, the class system which exists among sex workers; though I take a more pragmatic view than […]
[…] from time to time. This is partly for the sake of variety and partly as a way of undermining the “whorearchy”, the class system which exists among sex workers; though I take a more pragmatic view than some, […]
[…] We need all the sex workers (such as strippers, dominatrices and porn actresses) whose fields aren’t currently criminalized, and the sugar babies and other women who have informally or indirectly taken money for sex at […]
[…] We need all the sex workers (such as strippers, dominatrices and porn actresses) whose fields aren’t currently criminalized, and the sugar babies and other women who have informally or indirectly taken money for sex at […]
[…] to leave the Companion Guild in favor of independence. In this episode, we see an example of “whorearchy,” where Inara firmly stands behind the distinction that she is upper class and registered with […]
[…] of us who prefer to sell more mundane sexual services are clearly dysfunctional. In my essay “Whorearchy” I […]
Hey there,
I’ve followed you on Twitter for some time now. Been a big fan and was excited to see you’d done a post on the whorearchy. But I have to say I’m surprised at some of your conclusions.
Let me start by saying I’m a stripper. I’ve been working in the industry for about 6 years now and I do consider myself a sex worker. I do not look down on anyone in the industry, regardless of the specific acts/service they sell. If anything I sometimes find myself in awe of those who are in the perceived “lower” ranks of the whorearchy (hookers etc) because I doubt I’d be able to do what they do. I do believe a whorearchy in which some of us are perceived as less “dirty” or “slutty” than others does nothing but stratify and damage all of us. It divides.
However, I can’t get behind the idea that a “whore is a whore is a whore”. I’m surprised you feel comfortable defining others in that way. I’m surprised to hear you speak for others. Who am I to tell someone whether or not they are a sex worker? To me that distinction is largely a matter of intent, and choice. For instance, I personally identify as a sex worker, but my best friend, who is also a stripper, does not. And her reasons have nothing to do with feeling superior, or somehow more “pure” than those in other branches of the industry– she does not identify herself as a sex worker because she feels that doing so would be a form of appropriation. Since she does not perform sex acts* she feels claiming that title would be disrespectful to all those people who do perform sex acts as part of their job– those who put themselves in danger (legal and physical) daily to do so. It would be laying claim to something she has no right to, in her eyes, an appropriation. And she has too much respect for the people performing those jobs to do so.
Who the hell am I to tell her she’s wrong? I have no right to define her or her job. If she doesn’t identify as a sex worker that’s a valid argument in my book. So, I guess I’m curious: when you blanket everyone (even masseuses etc) with the term whore, do you acknowledge that you are applying your own interpretation of that word to a group as large and diverse as the number of interpretation s that exist? Do you recognize that there are those who may not identify that way, for reasons other than a desire to feel superior to others in the whorearchy? Are you leaving space in your argument for those who reject the whorearchy in favor of banding together, yet who don’t consider themselves sex workers? Is there room for them in the world view you’ve presented?
*Yes, we could debate the precise definition of what constitutes a sex act till the cows come home, but that’s not my point. My point is I would never feel comfortable labeling someone FOR them. Embracing the term whore, or slut or harlot or what have you has to be a personal choice. Because I do believes that what I do constitutes a sex act, I am comfortable defining myself as a sex worker. But I’m not the poster child for strippers everywhere, yanno?
I do want to acknowledge what I think was the intent of this article, which is Whorearchy=Bad and those who find ways to shame their peers in order to assuage their own are doing more damage than any of their opponents could. I agree with all of that. Just trying to raise what I think is an interesting and neccessary part of this conversation.
Best,
Lilah
That’s an interesting angle. For instance, I write erotic stories. Hey, I even finished one of them! So can I now call myself a sex worker? I mean, I give guys hard-ons, right? And one woman told me that one of my unfinished stories made her panties wet. Well there go!
But then I’m taking for myself a term which describes a lot of people who take risks I don’t take, and who engage in give-and-take interactions which are not a part of story-writing. So maybe calling myself a sex worker is a bit much on my part.
So yes, it’s an interesting angle you bring up.
Lilah, it may not matter that much how YOU or your friend define yourselves.
However, you need to know that law enforcement and society define you as … “a whore” and an illegal “sex worker”.
Law enforcement in particular. Since MANY strippers also DO provide some level of sexual service (“VIP”, “Champagne” rooms, etc) … law enforcement simply considers all of you “soon-to-be-busted whores”. And, during a raid of your joint – they’re not going to treat you any differently from any of the other girls – they are going to assume that all of you are guilty.
My experience in strip bars, even if the girls don’t offer outright copulation – they’ll openly admit that they’re grinding on my dick and trying to get me off. I never let that happen – because that would be a mess, and with me – it’s always a BIG mess, and one I can’t hide on my way to the parking lot when I go to my car to leave. It’s kind of silly to me that a girl who will grind me to the point of ejaculation doesn’t consider herself a “sex worker” – simply because she didn’t take my penis into one of her orifices.
Just me personally, but the distinction between a “stripper” and a “hooker” is about as significant as the difference between a maid that does windows and one that does not. They are still both maids. In my mind … a stripper and a hooker are both sex workers – it’s only the level of service they provide that differentiates them.
But really, it all comes down to NOT what you think you are – but what society and legal officials think you are. I think Maggie is trying to point that out – because YOU ARE in the legal crosshairs … same as the girls who provide full-service sex to their clients.
By the way …
Then you also believe that your friend – who does the exact same thing you do – is performing sex acts also … ergo, you DO believe she’s a sex worker. It’s fine that you don’t force her to call herself one. You cannot force anyone to adopt a “label” as their own if they’ll have none of it. However, I don’t think you can logically “parse” a difference that does not exist in your mind – simply with the notion that “well she’s not a sex worker because she THINKS she’s not one.
You’ve made so very many assumptions here about strippers. You’ve assumed that the friend I mention is willing to “grind in your dick” to the point of ejaculation. And that law enforcement defines all strippers as “illegal sex workers”. And a whole bunch of other assumptions too, all of which are predicated on very little fact.
My friend does not in fact grind on anyone’s dick. The technical rules at my club are “no touching the dancers”. The club allows individual dancers to decide how strictly they want to adhere to those rules, and so many of us do provide touch, and do “grind” in a customer’s lap (personally, I’ve never done so to the point of ejaculation). But there are those of us, my friend included, who barely even make physical contact with their clients. She will dance in front of, and very close to, a customer, but never on them. I have different boundaries, and they’re ALL okay and completely valid.
And so your assumptions about the way all strippers perform their jobs is super problematic.
Likewise, it is completely legal to strip in my state. I’m considered an independent contractor, I file taxes as such, and in no way would I ever be considered an “illegal” sex worker. I’ve had many interactions with police officers and have never, ever, had an issue.
But regardless of the many assumptions you’ve laid out, it sounds to me like you’re coming at this issue from a purely legal standpoint. Whereas I am speaking to the issue of Identity. Sex worker used as a legal job description/title and Sex worker applied as part of an identity are 2 different things entirely.
When I talk about appropriation– about my friend not wanting to claim a title for herself for which she has not suffered in the ways others on the “lower rungs” of the whorearchy (like prostitutes) have– I’m talking about Identity. Not legal precedent or labels. It’s why I specifically use the phrase “identify as a sex worker” rather than “am a sex worker” as often as possible.
The legal terms and stipulations around those terms might shift between states and court cases, but the identity is part of who I am. There are people who refuse to see Strippers as sex workers. There are those only classify a sex worker as someone who has sexual intercourse for profit. I think it’s evident from this conversation that the idea of what consitutes sex work has dozens of facets to it, and continues to be a complex, tangled, issue.
But when you say it doesn’t matter what I think I am, you’re invalidating quite a lot of my own agency, and my right to self-define. If you mean it doesn’t “matter” in the grand scheme of things because how I choose to define myself might not carry legal weight, that’s a different conversation entirely. When I talk about appropriation and identity I’m talking about the right of women to define themselves on their own terms. The idea that those choices don’t matter at all is not only untrue, but it is also one of the ways in which the patriarchy has traditionally disenfranchised women. Yes, I’m a feminist. Like you’re surprised. Telling us that the only identity that matters is the one assigned to use by the over culture is just one way to undermine our own agency– and, if I’m to be frank, it’s a load of bullshit. I’m pretty sure that’s not how you meant it. Still, it needed to be said.
As for your follow up comment, that if I define myself as a sex worker than I must also define my friend as one, regardless of her own feelings; again, I call bullshit. We engage with our jobs in entirely different ways for different reasons, and to say those things don’t matter is to reduce a complex subject down to an embarrassingly oversimplified idea. Though I personally find stripping to be quite empowering, and even a feminist act, you will never see me arguing with those who say that it is a disempowering, objectifying experience. Because for some people, it is. If you’re forced into it, or you choose the job because you feel you have no other viable financial option, it isnt an empowering choice at all. But it certainly is for me– someone who makes a consciously chooses to do this work for very specific reasons, and did so over multiple other options.
The law might view all strippers and Sex workers the same. We aren’t. I can’t define another sex workers job or identity for them, despite my beliefs about my own. I don’t have that right, and neither do you.
Sailor, you didn’t mention here whether you write that erotica for PAY. If you don’t, then perhaps the question of “sex worker or not” is inapplicable to you.
Now THAT is an interesting angle in its own right! So far, I haven’t been able to monetize any of my writing, erotic or otherwise. So if it’s pay which is the deciding factor, I can quit wondering: I’m not a sex worker, even a little bit.
I’m not sure, though, that pay is the deciding factor. Imagine a married couple who record themselves having sex, and then put it out on the Internet for free. They don’t make a penny but are turned on to know that people are watching them. But they’re doing the same thing porn performers do, so if Jenna Jameson is a sex worker, aren’t they? Whether or not they’re as GOOD as Jameson is a separate question, of course.
Or imagine a woman who feels sorry for poor men who can’t afford prostitutes, so she starts providing free GFE for as many as she can (not many, because she has to also work for a living). Is she a sex worker? I mean, she’s doing the work and having the sex, right? She just isn’t getting any money out of the deal.
I, perhaps wrongly then, assumed that Maggie is using the phrase “sex work” elliptically or synecdochally to mean “effort or action intentionally undertaken for economic profit from sex” rather than “effort or action undertaken for any reason involving sex”.
You’re not wrong. “Sex work”, as the phrase is defined by the activists who popularized it, means remunerative work, not a hobby or avocation. I do note, however, that in India and English-speaking Africa much of the press often uses “commercial sex work” to mean what the rest of the world means by simply “sex work”. One important reason for the distinction is that governments believe they have the right to regulate or even criminalize sexual behavior when money is involved, and that makes it a totally different thing from doing it for laughs or beliefs.
In many countries, this is a big difference. A man or woman can sex with any number of consenting adults and, as long as no money changes hands, it’s as legal as a presidential candidate saying, “God bless America.” Let any money change hands and welcome to jail.
Imagine if it were the other way around: stripping, phone sex, porn, blowjobs and fucking are perfectly legal but only if money changes hands. Just imagine all the swinging singles saying, “OK give me a couple of bucks so we don’t go to jail. Next time I’ll pay you.”
Which is why that would never happen: it’s too easy to dodge.
I don’t know though. To me it seems like saying that the exact same activity IS NOT sex work until you get paid, at which point it IS sex work… It almost seems like a buying into the idea that there is a real difference (as opposed to a nonsensical statutory difference). But for now, there really is a difference in what happens if you get caught doing one, as opposed to the other. Not that the one never gets caught up in the other, of course. Just ask all the non-prostitutes who have been questioned about their condoms.
“To me it seems like saying that the exact same activity IS NOT sex work until you get paid, at which point it IS sex work…”…
The current and varied (and absurd) legalities and statutes aside, with the significant modification, ” …the exact same activity IS NOT sex work *unless your purpose for doing it is to* get paid, at which point it IS sex work…”, does indeed seem to be the point from which Maggie premises.
Isn’t there a very real difference between engaging in sexual activities for the primary purpose of economic gain and engaging in sexual activities for other reasons? If not, would you see no essential difference in purpose between, say, making hamburgers for the purpose of selling and making hamburgers for the purpose of my family eating?
Sailor, mowing your own lawn doesn’t make you a “lawn worker”.
Now, there IS a scientific definition for “work” … something to do with force and motion … and you could also define work as anything that involves effort and a result – but we’re using the commonly accepted definition of “work” – which means you get paid, in something.
It’s not all that clear-cut, I’ll admit. For instance, a kid who works her Dad’s restaurant for no obvious pay … is probably still a “restaurant worker”. But then again – she shares in the successes of the business since she’s the boss’ daughter.
Candy Stripers at hospitals. Are they “medical workers”? I don’t think they get paid cash – but they do get paid in experience, which is something.
And then you have wives … are they sex workers? They provide a service in return for something they want … whether that’s companionship or commitment – or just to keep the guy who provides for them happy and motivated. It all clouds the fuck up real quick … I’ll admit.
And well, I have a headache and need to drop this line of thought before my head explodes. But rest easy … I don’t think your erotic writings qualify you as a sex worker.
Where the law is concerned, it does indeed seem to be the case that “for pay” and “not for pay” is where distinctions are drawn. I hesitated a bit on that, because there are things which are legal and yet are considered sex work: porn, stripping. But even those are legally different when one is paid for them. There are probably people who are too young to work in a strip club but who would face nothing worse than grounding if they did it for the neighbor kids just for kicks.
So yeah, sex work for free isn’t considered “work,” for all that it may well be “sex.” And so sex workers of the world, I can speak out for you, keep you in mind when voting, and even applaud you, but until I make some money, I cannot truly join you.
….or, Sailor, at least have ATTEMPTED to earn money — “intent to sell” without any remuneration actually having been achieved makes one a “for pay” as well as actually transacting a sale does. Even if no one buys a single hamburger from my hamburger stand, I’m nevertheless considered to be “working for pay.”
Excellent point! I have tried all of once to make money off of one of my erotic stories. I didn’t make a penny, but I did make an attempt. So I’ve at least knocked on the door of sex work, for all that the door wasn’t opened. Assuming, of course, that writing erotic stories could make me a sex worker, even if I made a fine living with it.
I’m not going to call myself one just yet.
Generally speaking, writing erotica is not considered sex work, just as directing or filming porn isn’t. Furry Girl had a good piece I agree with on what is & isn’t sex work.
I was thinking from the beginning that it would be a bit of a reach, for reason already given. I look forward to reading Furry Girl’s piece. She has the cutest grin…
An interesting read, and it confirms my initial thought:
So yeah: not a sex worker. If a movie were made from my story, with actors having sex on camera, then THEY would be sex workers, but I still wouldn’t be. Of course, if I could get myself cast as the lusty English teacher, THEN I could make legitimate claim to the term.
It’s interesting how this simple-sounding label requires so much thought.
Lawhead thinking seems to go this way:
Porn? A large-scale business that the authorites can milk for more than just tax.
Stripclubs? A large-scale business that the authorites can milk for more than tax.
Prostitutes? Aha. Private Individuals, using sex to get money. We can’t have that sort thing. It’s *too small for us to milk them easily*.
Hah! Let’s ban it, and use asset forfeiture to milk not only the proceeds, but everything they own. That will turn us a profit. And make the moralists happy and win us their votes, and the votes of the cops, who can abuse with impunity, and the votes of the sheeple that think cops are protecting them.
Sick. 😠
I am a sex worker, mostly retired. I have done web cam, modeling and prostitution along with other facets of the sex industry.
The word whore, for me,is far from an insult, as long as there has been desire, there have been women self sufficient enough to supply that demand and make a profit from it. This attitude is highly frowned upon,,and even legislated against in so many ways. Strong women, self determining women, are a threat to a male dominated society.
No, for me, whore, and calling myself whore, has been a declaration of autonomy, so much in this society frowns upon a woman having or even exercising autonomy. If the word whore bothers you, well, whatever, but to me, it speaks of freedom, power, and self determination.
[…] a sex worker is to direct contact with clients and cops, the more of a true whore they really are. Maggie McNeill and the Misandry Mermaid have discussed the negative effects that the divisive nature of the […]
[…] I don’t think I am any better than those that do use management, I don’t want to engage in the whorearchy – the classist, racist, and other “ist” systems in place that prevent sex workers from […]
[…] = bad, legal prostitution (i.e., at a Nevada brothel such as Sheri’s) = good. This example of whorearchy sets the tone for the […]
[…] client. Maggie McNeill, author of The Honest Courtesan, has written extensively about whorearchy (and all aspects of sex work), and I recommend her essays to anyone who would like to know more […]
[…] McNeil M. (2012, May 10). Whorearchy. Retrieved March 04, 2016, from https://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2012/05/10/whorearchy/ […]
[…] on the whorearchy, from Maggie McNeil. Even since 2012, when McNeil published this passage, the conversation regarding sex work […]
Reblogged this on A life in the shadows and commented:
I couldn’t have said it better myself. I applied for a job in a ‘high class’ sensual massage salon but I was rejected.
I was too open about my past and too naïve to think all sex workers consider themselves being in the same boat.
[…] are many other factors; class, education, ethnicity, nationality, it’s actually termed the whorearchy, if you want to look it up, that links to a great blog). Couple this with the stigma and alienation […]
[…] considering the whorearchy the word “hypocrisy” comes to mind – all our professions are thrown under the bus […]
[…] from her past in porn “reads like an altered form of whorearchy,” a term used to describe a problematic construct within the sex industry that attempts to organize different kinds of sex workers into a […]
[…] The whorearchy is entirely arbitrary. Maggie McNeill, an escort, author, and sex-work advocate, jokes that while all sex workers agree that the whorearchy exists, “nobody agrees on anything about […]
[…] The whorearchy is entirely arbitrary. Maggie McNeill, an escort, author, and sex-work advocate, jokes that while all sex workers agree that the whorearchy exists, “nobody agrees on […]