Sometimes, the Feministe moderation queue makes me want to scratch my own eyes out. That’s pretty much how it’s been for the past month — something about the aftermath of the election has made the assholes and idiots come out in full force. So I’ve been deleting a lot of comments lately. I deleted one yesterday on this post about the University of Michigan student who was arrested for prostitution after she reported that she had been assaulted — the deleted comment basically called her a WHORE several times (yes, in all caps!) and said she deserved to go to jail because she’s not a nice girl (nice girls have sex in exchange for diamond rings, remember, not cash). But commenter “Johnny” left another gem today that I can’t help but re-post, only because I just got compared to China.
Glad that censorship is a big part of being allowed to comment on this website. The moderator should be ashamed for taking down my earlier comment, maybe next week this will be China and they’ll tell you feminists how many kids you can or can’t have. Real classy. I stand by the statement that this girl was whoring herself out for tuition and deserves to be punished (as does the professor). If I’m selling crack on a corner and a customer punches me, he deserves to go to jail but so do I for selling the crack.
No, Johnny, “classy” is showing up on a feminist blog to call someone a WHORE, and then getting angry when your comments aren’t posted. So I’ll continue to delete them from the mod queue. Enjoy reading while our commenters mock you.
Love,
Jill “Red China” F.
What’s so bad about selling crack?
Wait, did he leave that WHORE comment twice??? Because I totally deleted that same comment this morning!
He definitely left it twice then. Too good.
Or, alternately, he left several different comments about WHORES. I think I’ve deleted three comments total from him so far.
Really I don’t know where people get off thinking that they can bare their inner idiot to the world and expect it to be acceptable. You have no right to free speech on any blog. Wanna spread your inner asshat to the world start your own damn blog, it’s free to do and leave the rest of thinking people in the world to have a safe space.
Oh noes, The Big Man is being CENSORED *gasp* by not being able to say everything he wants to, wherever he wants to, especially to us laydeez. How dare we SILENCE him?!
Oh, and Jill, since you’re Omnipotent Ruler Of The World, I guess setting limits on childbirth is the natural next step. =P
I love this place, and all of you! :) Keep on keepin’ on.
So do I get to start calling it my “Jill Manifesto”? I think that would be way easier to smuggle around distribute.
I love when people have NO IDEA what the true meanings of “censorship” and “free speech” are.
It’s hyterical.
AND I LOVE THAT I CANNOT SPELL.
I always knew the “F” stood for “Fchairmanmao,” Jill.
Nothing makes me happier than when someone goes off about FREE SPEECH FREE SPEECH on a moderated blog. This is not participatory democracy, it’s a private website ya witless gimp. The same rules do not apply here, nor should they. How about you go rail against the government for performing pre-emptive raids, and locking up hundreds of people for daring to protest the RNP? -THAT- is about censoring free speech. Oh yeah, trolling on a website not only is easier, but it doesn’t expose you to the world for the fucking hypocrite you are.
I, for one, welcome our Feminist Overlords.
I sent this email to some idiot who wouldn’t let up on my blog, and then got enraged when I deleted his messages.
“Hello, asshat. I am, under the first amendment, free to spew antisemitic garbage at work. My Jewish boss is also free to fire my butt.
To put it another way, you can talk all you want, I am free to ignore you. Get your own damn blog.”
Jill is the world’s most populous country?
Only an idiot would be surprised his comment using WHORE on a feminist site would be deleted.
Damnit, Tom, you beat me.
From under what rock did this troglodyte crawl?
Good grief. Jill, since you are the ultimate Feminist Overlord, please arrange for government-mandated sterilization of this guy and all of his relatives.
We need to tie off his genetics in a permanent way.
That is odd. I thought next week Feministe was going to be Canada and provide universal health care. Am I reading the calendar wrong or was there a misprint?
Jesus Christ what an absolute muppet.
Go Jill!
Caroline, you shouldn’t insult muppets so. ;) Unless you are like my husband who is creeped out by them…then wev…lolz
Good, somebody besides me who gets creeped out by muppets! ;)
In all seriousness, I’m with most everyone here–Trollboy can rant on his own post. Jill, methinks ya need online vermin repellant! Where DO these folk come from….and why are they not working???
Hey, Johnny, censorship is when someone uses their coercive power to prevent you from expressing yourself in an environment in which you have that right. Last time I checked Feministe was a privately owned and operated outfit, so they can delete whatever they want.
Seriously, aside from the sense of entitlement in cries of censorship like this, I just don’t get it. All you have to do is be moderately respectful and the women who run this blog will generally let you do what you will. I know I’ve said some pretty outrageous things that made it through mod, and I know Jill has let posts go through that she strongly disagreed with. If you’re out there, Johnny, grow the fuck up and learn how to comport yourself in public.
Ah yes, the old “you’re trampling over my rights because I somehow can’t adhere to perfectly reasonable codes of conduct! Fascists!!!!”
It’s tiny violin time!
How will you ever get the big Wagnerian sounds necessary for fascism from such a tiny violin?
While I’m anti-ALL CAPS, is it considered generally unacceptable to refer to a sex worker whose work fits the dictionary definition of “whore” (prostitute; person who accepts payment in exchange for sexual relations) as a whore? It’s probably a symptom of their class privilege, but the sex worker bloggers I’ve read seem to be happy to reclaim the word and describe themselves as whores. See, e.g., the wonderful Trixie who captions her site “The Wandering WebWhore.” I realize that Johnny was using the word as an insult, but I’m still interested in the etiquette of the terminology.
You dim witted, fucking nimrod. This blog is privately owned. Your right to “free speech” does not include going on someone’s private property and yelling “WHORE!”. Come to my private property, my house, and try yelling “whore”, and you’ll get your ass kicked off my property.
What this lady did didn’t hurt anyone. It was a consensual transaction between two adults, that had no effect on you whatsoever. The fact that what she did is technically illegal has no bearing on her getting her face slapped around. She wasn’t selling crack to 12 year olds, why the fuck are you even trying to draw a moral equivalency?
My guess is that you voted for George Dumbya Bush…not just once, but twice. The amount of blood on your hands, due to your voting choices, renders you incapable passing moral judgement on some anonymous law student. How many people died in Iraq because of your voting choices?
PG – as with all derogatory words, the general rule is that if it’s not about you, you don’t get to reclaim it. So if you’re a sex worker, feel free to reclaim anti sex-work slurs. Otherwise, do not use them; they’re derogatory.
People reclaiming slurs are not necessarily doing so because of privilege. In fact, if they’re actually in a position to do the reclaiming (see above) it is likely not an indication of their privilege, at least with regard to that particular part of their identity. But more to the point, if you’re not a sex-worker, I’m not sure why you would decide that the decisions a sex-worker makes about how to refer to herself is any of your business.
Butch Fatale,
But more to the point, if you’re not a sex-worker, I’m not sure why you would decide that the decisions a sex-worker makes about how to refer to herself is any of your business.
Um, because people who reclaim words for their group often encourage their allies to use those words in reference to them? Ex: Dan Savage’s encouraging his readers to address him with “Hey, Faggot”; lesbians’ titling books and organizations using the word “dykes.” There was some interesting litigation over Dykes on Bikes because U.S. law generally forbids trademarking a name that includes derogatory language, so the Dykes in question had to bring a ton of evidence that they didn’t consider it disparaging.
Also, this reclamation of the word “whore” seems like potentially privileged behavior because it’s simply not anything I’ve seen among sex workers who are on the street. Similarly, Dan Savage was OK with being called a faggot once he was a semi-celebrity in a liberal city, not when he was a scared, skinny teenager subject to getting beaten up. It seems rare to engage in word reclamation when your survival is at risk.
William and Peter–like your posts, that was cool. Thank you, guys! Very cool.
[...] a lot more hateful lately and some of this shit is just beyond the pale. I saw earlier today that Jill from Feministe noted Sometimes, the Feministe moderation queue makes me want to scratch my own eyes out. That’s [...]
Gad. This is the best thing I’ve heard since the time nearly twenty years ago when a user on my kid brother’s BBS (remember BBSing?) whined that he was being unfairly censored — because he had uploaded an illegal FA$TCA$H textfile (a chain-letter scam), and Kid Bro had deleted it. He actually said that it was unconstitutional for Kid Bro to censor private speech on a COMMON CARRIER like a BBS.
Er … sorry to break this to you, but a privately-run bulletin board system on my brother’s personal home computer is not a common carrier. And neither is a comments thread on an individual’s blog.
I’m always amused by how these idiots who think “free speech” covers their right to have their words published on someone else’s blog never seem to feel the same entitlement to walk into a newspaper office and insist they have their words published.
While I’m anti-ALL CAPS, is it considered generally unacceptable to refer to a sex worker whose work fits the dictionary definition of “whore” (prostitute; person who accepts payment in exchange for sexual relations) as a whore? It’s probably a symptom of their class privilege, but the sex worker bloggers I’ve read seem to be happy to reclaim the word and describe themselves as whores. See, e.g., the wonderful Trixie who captions her site “The Wandering WebWhore.” I realize that Johnny was using the word as an insult, but I’m still interested in the etiquette of the terminology.
What Butch Fatale said. See queer, dyke, fag, various racial epithets, and a few words considered sexist. If it isn’t your word? Don’t use it.
I’ll happily admit that reclaiming language used to insult, especially language used to insult in a contemporary setting rather than that which has been phased out by time, can be problematic. A reclaimed word can still be hurtful when used with intent to hurt; the aim of reclaiming is to reduce the sting in the short term, enable internalised stigma to be replaced with pride, and to ultimately remove the power of the word to hurt over time. But it’s a gradual process, not something that succeeds as soon as the attempt to reclaim begins. Ignoring that, and ignoring the rather obvious fact that context always matters, is disingenuous.
Also, this reclamation of the word “whore” seems like potentially privileged behavior because it’s simply not anything I’ve seen among sex workers who are on the street.
Really? I have. A lot.
Sorry to double post, but I missed a quote:
Um, because people who reclaim words for their group often encourage their allies to use those words in reference to them?
PG, the key word there is “allies”.
“PG, the key word there is “allies”.”
Seriously. It’s not “reclaiming” when a sexist man calls a woman a whore. It’s just a man being sexist and disgusting. I’m not sure how anyone could think that was “reclaiming”. Ugh.
Um, because people who reclaim words for their group often encourage their allies to use those words in reference to them?
I don’t recall the young law student encouraging anyone to call her “whore”.
I don’t mind calling myself a dyke. I don’t mind if my gay or lesbian friends call me a dyke. However, I do mind if a straight person calls me a dyke. It’s not their word to use.
Also, the point of this post isn’t about reclaiming words. It’s about asshats who post sexist clap trap and then get their panties in a wad when the clap trap gets eighty-sixed.
“Also, the point of this post isn’t about reclaiming words. It’s about asshats who post sexist clap trap and then get their panties in a wad when the clap trap gets eighty-sixed.”
I’m pretty sure you didn’t intend the irony here, eh? Clap trap? Really?
Lol!
To hexy, marilove and CLD:
I realize that Johnny was using the word as an insult, but I’m still interested in the etiquette of the terminology.
Please read all of my comments before erroneously assuming that I’m not fully aware that the person who was the subject of Jill’s post was not using the word as an ally.
CLD,
If a straight person shouldn’t use the word “dyke” even if she considers herself an LGBT ally, how is one supposed to refer to the Dykes on Bikes organization? This seems to be the precise concern of the trademark office: a legally trademarked phrase can’t be something that only the “in-group” is allowed to use, and so allowing trademark of a phrase that contains a term that you consider impermissible for straight people to use wouldn’t work.
Oh, straight folks can say “dyke” all they want. We just don’t have to take them seriously.
PG, seriously, this isn’t brain surgery.
Reclaiming otherwise insulting words can be powerful. But when those words are used as insults, they’re still insults. A good rule of thumb for etiquette: If you’re not sure it’s appropriate for you to be using a potentially insulting word, you’re probably better off just not using it.
If it’s the proper name of an organization, like Dykes on Bikes, you can probably use it. But if you’re talking to an individual member of Dykes on Bikes and you don’t know how she feels about a straight person (or anyone, for that matter) calling her a dyke, I would avoid it. Similarly, it’s probably ok to use the proper name of the NAACP, but I wouldn’t call one of their individual members “colored.” And you can say that someone writes for Bitch magazine, but I wouldn’t suggest calling her a bitch without some sort of context.
…is this really hard?
Weejit: you are aware that the phrase claptrap is has it’s roots in English theater, right? Its a reference to cheap trickery designed to trap claps from the audience. I’m not sure Johnny was using “WHORES” as an applause line (he might be Frank Miller in disguise, I don’t know) so perhaps claptrap wasn’t the most appropriate usage, but there isn’t any irony here to laugh at.
See, Jill just said “dyke”. We still love her. :)
Huh, I’ve always heard claptrap as reference to a “diseased” cootch ala WWII.
Jill,
But when those words are used as insults, they’re still insults.
Yes, when I said, in my *very first comment* on this thread, that “I realize that Johnny was using the word as an insult,” I thought I was communicating that I realize a word can be used as an insult even if some of the targets of that insult are reclaiming the word. Apologies if that didn’t get across, but I’m not sure how I could have said it more clearly.
Weejit: The term originated as a negative reference to the use of cheap special effects to garner applause in the theater thats been in use at least since the early 18th century. Merriam Webster defines it as “Pretentious nonsense” (as a noun) or “of a cheap showy nature” (as an adjective). Not saying you’re wrong, obviously you’ve heard the phrase used in a different context, but I don’t think the term was being used in the way you’ve encountered it.
Well think about this then ladies and gentlemen, have you ever seen Jill and China together at the same and at the same time?? They ARE the same person!!!!
That’s cool William. Learn something new everyday, even if it has to be at the expense of the foot in your mouth!
Weejit: hardly a foot in mouth moment. You’d heard a particular slang term used in one context and it turned out to have been rooted in another. I was just as ignorant of the alternative usage you were used to as you were of it’s theatrical beginnings. So maybe we shared the same foot ;)
PG: I’m afraid that if I re-read your comments whilst keeping in mind that you’re aware that the word has a different implication when used positively or as an insult, I become even less certain what your point was.
hexy,
The initial question was, “is it considered generally unacceptable to refer to a sex worker whose work fits the dictionary definition of ‘whore’ (prostitute; person who accepts payment in exchange for sexual relations) as a whore?”
This is a question about how far people think the reclamation project of “whore” for sex workers has gone. Is it at the point that “queer” is (where it is presumptively OK to use “queer” to cover a large category of folks who don’t adhere to hetero and gender stereotypes) or at the point where “n****r” is (where it never should be used by people outside the group, and even within the group is highly controversial)? Obviously, some people by their context will be using “queer” as an insult, but I’ve never had anyone take issue with my using the term — it’s *assumed* to be used in a neutral/positive way. In contrast, I’ve never seen any use in using the n-word to talk to someone of African origin and never have done so, and would expect it to be taken presumptively as an insult.
Does that make the point more clear?
PG, here’s a wild idea: why don’t you refer to people by name?
I don’t usually comment on this website, but it seems appropriate under current circumstances to point out that (1) your initial question was largely off-topic, and the fact that you felt it appropriate to ask in this forum is a demonstration of male privilege, (2) you don’t really seem interested in getting responses to your question- only in asserting that your ideas are correct.
I don’t understand why anyone anywhere is obsessing over whether or not they can say “queer” or “whore” or any other historically derogatory word without offending others. Knowing these terms *have been* used to hurt those in oppressed groups throughout history is enough for me to permanently discard them. And no, I don’t feel some gaping hole in my life after having done so. If I want to empower others or be empowered, I’ll engage in activism and forego the labels.
I don’t know, the words “idiot”, “witless gimp” and “dimwitted” used in some derogatory context makes me uncomfortable. Those words are also used as slurs against people too.
The guy’s mean and a misogynist to leave a comment like that. And the internet’s filled with them for sure unfortunately. And yes, when you ban or delete them, they cry about being censored or losing their free speech for exercising their right to call you a derogatory name. It’s hard to read the stuff every day and have to delete it or do moderation mode and it’s something a lot of women bloggers face unfortunately. I’d rather not have to put money into paying their salaries while I’m at it too. But I think it’s a great thing that discussions still take place on feminist blogs in spite of the crap.
Obviously, some people by their context will be using “queer” as an insult, but I’ve never had anyone take issue with my using the term — it’s *assumed* to be used in a neutral/positive way.
It’s not as universal as all that. There’s a huge generational divide, and I can say that I’ve *hardly ever* heard gay men of a certain age using the term in a reclaimed way. Gay, or LGBT. Period. It just doesn’t have that connotation for them, and probably is still associated with all its negative baggage.
I understood your question; to answer it, I think that the “general” thing is not such a sensible way of looking. Slurs of longstanding use in any community don’t have a single context or standard weight. Plus, their primary use as lexical shorthand for cultural distance means that they will always be read in at least two divergent ways: inside and outside. Queer’s not a bad example. For the older gay men I know, it’s best known as a slur in the mouths of violent hateful people; for the younger people I know–same bars, same blocks–it’s familiar as a community name.
Interestingly enough, “queer” also positions each subcultural subheading differently. “Queers” use it partly because “gay” is kinda male-homo-specific, and “queer” permits much more of the flexibility they need. “Gay” men may see slight compensatory utility in “queer”–and therefore no need to revive it–because they don’t need to join with the “queers.”
None of this is general; I’m really only talking about my own neighborhood. I can’t talk knowledgeably about the use and misuse of “whore,” but I suspect that it’s also complex.
piny,
Thanks, that was a very helpful response. Most of the LGBT, and all of the non-gender-normative, folks whom I know are 40 or younger, so you’re right that I have a generational bias in thinking of “queer” as a presumptively neutral term.
Similarly, I think there may be a class privilege among the sex workers I know who presumptively OK “whore” and take the “Yep, I’m a whore, so what?” attitude toward those who try to use it negatively against them. I see this as potentially privileged behavior because it’s more difficult to take that kind of So what? attitude if being labeled “whore” is a threat to one’s liberty (getting arrested for sex work) or even life (being in a particularly unsafe area of sex work such as street solicitation, where one is vulnerable to assault and murder and where law enforcement is often indifferent to these crimes).
AngryJules,
1) I’m a woman-born-woman, so I’m not clear on how I am exercising male privilege.
2) Why was my question off-topic? The topic of the post was how someone who would use the word “whore” in a clearly derogatory manner on a feminist blog obviously is not going to get his comments posted. I asked whether “whore” should continue to be deemed presumptively insulting or if it has become sufficiently reclaimed among sex workers that it is taken as an insult only when the person using it clearly has a negative attitude toward sex workers.
3) You never use the word “queer”? How do you describe people who don’t adhere to hetero and gender stereotypes? I like the word because it is useful for describing a large, heterogeneous set of people who nonetheless face a similar set of problems that the hetero- and gender-normative majority does not. (Though thanks to piny’s comment I will be more conscious about my generational assumptions in assuming “queer” will be taken neutrally.) See also “people of color” as useful descriptor for the large, heterogeneous set of people who nonetheless face a similar set of problems that the recognized-as-white majority does not. (But here too there probably is a generational issue.)
“1) I’m a woman-born-woman, so I’m not clear on how I am exercising male privilege.”
Ah, I stand corrected on that point then. I’m not the one who accused you of benefitting from male privilege, but I did refer to you using male pronouns when we had the joy of meeting on that previous thread.
That said, “woman-born woman”? Wow, PG, you amaze me. Transphobic language on a post that isn’t even about trans people? Not even in a tangential way? So, given your statement, I assume you think that you *would* have been accorded male privilege if you were a trans woman? I mean, if the “woman-born” thing is crucial to your disavowal of male privilege, why… You’re a bigoted asshole.
As for “whore.” Look, PG. I mean, I’m already shocked by your resolute way of demonstrating just how clearly you don’t, in fact, get it… At all. About a number of things. And this endearing way you have of derailing threads in order to demand that everyone stop and provide you with a 101 education right away, now. hexy and AngryJules have said pretty much everything there is to say about why it’s offensive coming from people who are not only not sex workers, but also not allies. You are an insulting git if you really stand by this claim that sex workers who use “whore” are class privileged. Again, generalizations about people’s lives… When you actually know very little about them.
hexy points out that she’s not sure of your actual point. This is how I feel about pretty much all of your comments thus far. (See “shoe-throwing” threads).
Kristin,
So, given your statement, I assume you think that you *would* have been accorded male privilege if you were a trans woman?
My closest female friend who was identified as male at birth does not regard “woman-born-woman” as transphobic language, so I use it; apologies to those who take the phrase differently. Some people think that people who were identified as male at birth have been accorded male privilege. I don’t know what AngryJules thinks about this, so I clarified that I have been identified as female my entire life. But yeah, keep calling names while knowing nothing about me and not making even a cursory effort to learn. You’re starting to win your effort to discourage me from commenting here.
Again, generalizations about people’s lives… When you actually know very little about them.
Funny you mention this. When my comment on the other thread gets out of mod, you might find it interesting reading. I’m talking about the sex workers whom I know. You, on the other hand, talk about me without knowing me at all.
“maybe next week this will be China”
Space-time : ur doin it rong
PG: Did you really just say: “I can’t be transphobic ’cause I have a trans friend!”
“Woman-born woman” is used, as far as I know, in order to exclude trans women from WBW spaces. It is used primarily by transphobic radical feminists when they attempt to defend such spaces. Next?
Well, no. She said that she uses a particular term because the reactions of her trans friend (and, okay, maybe she only has the one) indicated that it wasn’t that inappropriate. Then she apologized for using it, given that it is an offensive term to a lot of people.
(And it is, to lots of trans women and trans people; it’s one of those terms, like “longtime companion,” and, “confessed homosexual,” that arise when marginalization needs a new buffer, and it was authored by non-trans women who wanted to define their womanhood in opposition to trans women and thought SCAM was a little too Agnewesque even for them.)
And speaking of firebrakes that can be pretty directly transphobic in use, AngryJules hasn’t apologized for calling her a may-un because her handle–like “AngryJules”–is kinda butch.
I understand that a debate about the reclamation potential of “whore” is arguably a derail from a post about a feminist blogger & her news feed myrmidons being labeled WHORES, and maybe an irritating one, my own contribution notwithstanding. I don’t think PG was making comments about the right-to-womanhood of trans women, implicit or otherwise. I do understand why WBW is a fairly incendiary term.
You know, PG, I don’t think I’ve agreed with anything you’ve said in any thread I’ve seen you in here, nor is this even my blog, but reading this still makes me feel bad. I hope you’ll reconsider, and I hope some commenters here will start discerning the line between truth-speaking and a beatdown.
You are baiting PG all over this blog. Why? You’ve already written that she is a “self-superior fuck” who is “ramming [her] worldview down our throats,” so I doubt you’re doing it out of a desire to educate. Even granting that PG might be nothing but a troll, this feels excessive. I am but one lone asshole in the wilderness and all, but speaking as such, I’m a lot more interested to read the dialogue between piny and PG than I am to hear you roar. Also:
–that was not the claim. An supposition that privilege might be a possible factor in the comfort level with the word was made; that’s all. Breathe.
Kristin,
No, but you really did misquote me for the umpteenth time. If you wanted to paraphrase honestly instead of continuing your campaign of abusive name-calling, you would have said, “Did you really just say, Woman-born-woman can’t be a universally transphobic term because I have a trans friend who is OK with it?” And yes, that is what I said.
If WBW is a term used *only* to exclude trans women, you might want to inform one of the Feministe bloggers, or this blogger who is criticizing transphobic feminists, or any one of dozens of other people who have used the term apparently without realizing they must be transphobes for using it.
Okay. ilyka and piny:
You are right about the fact that I’m spreading bad feelings from another thread onto this one. ilyka, I don’t expect to be able to educate. I’m angry and expressing my anger. The “you’re being mean” rhetoric that I sometimes stumble upon around here–and elsewhere among liberals progressive types– brings out my inner sadist. As does the sense that I’m being preached at (all of this carried over from other thread, and I didn’t quite realize it at the time. I’ll cut it out.).
piny, I did not read what PG said in the same way that you did, but on looking back over it, I can see what you’re saying. I apologize for my heavy-handedness on that point, but I also hold that one friend isn’t a basis on which to generalize about what groups must think. Also, PG, I apologize for misreading what you meant in this case. Whenever people start speaking of a friend who is a member of an oppressed group, I tend to have a visceral reaction on account of having heard people say “I’m not racist! I have black friends!” a thousand times. Or, more recently from Sarah Palin: “One of my best friends in the world is gay…” That formulation struck me hard, and I admit that I did not read much further than that.
Finally, I am having trouble figuring out if some of the questions/concerns being raised (by PG) are happening in good faith. My apologies if they are. I am not entirely sure. I tend to bait people who are either resolutely clueless (as I started out on the other thread in question…and not by baiting PG) or trolls. I may have misread you as one of these, PG, so I’ll try to hold back. I’m using conditional language because I am really not sure.
And the other thing… I’m a little impatient with constant demands for 101-type education.
Similarly, I think there may be a class privilege among the sex workers I know who presumptively OK “whore” and take the “Yep, I’m a whore, so what?” attitude toward those who try to use it negatively against them.
The discussion of class privilege within the sex worker community is absolutely a valid one. However, it’s also used as a silencing tactic by those who are NOT part of that community, and who really have no right to be muscling into dialogues and insisting that they get to define who gets to speak and who doesn’t. The “you have a computer therefore you are clearly too privileged to be listened to on the internet” piece of illogical rubbish has been uttered enough times to earn a place on some bingo card or another, for all I know it may already be on one.
Long story short, it’s not your place to be making assertions about class divisions within a marginalised community that you aren’t part of. Do you see how that makes YOU come across as entitled and privileged? Sex workers and sex workers rights activists are well and truly aware of the various levels of privilege and exploitation within our circles, and to have people bringing them up as though they’re the first person to ever notice them… and, worse, to do so in a theoretical and academic tone… is downright insulting.
I’m talking about the sex workers whom I know.
No, you’re talking FOR the sex workers you know. I’d advise you to stop it.
What hexy said. That’s pretty much where I am on this.
I will cop to heavy-handedness on the transphobia issue (wrt what PG said), but here, I think hexy and some others upthread are absolutely right.