So everybody knows about this Eliot Spitzer bullshit by now. Of course, I have plenty to say about it.
There’s the obvious point that the problem in the Spitzer situation is not “OMG he paid for sex!!1!1″ but the utter hypocrisy of it, given his history of prosecuting prostitution cases. There’s also the fact that he’ll get off with a ruined political career (if even that), while the women whose services he paid for will possibly be arrested on felony charges, jailed, and for any who are not U.S. citizens, deported; and the real-life hardships of these women will go unacknowledged by the media except as objects to be used for moral grandstanding or sophomoric titillation.
But for now, I want to talk about language. Because, as I’ve mentioned before, words matter.
Yesterday on the way home from work, Rusty and I were discussing the terminology the mainstream media - hell, pretty much all media - uses when discussing sex work. In particular, we were dissecting the terms “high-class hooker” and “high-priced” hooker. Both of those terms carry a mountain of assumptions and implications.
“High-class hooker” automatically sets up the person in question as an exception. Jen said that she doesn’t think describing someone as high-class necessarily implies that everyone else is low-class, but rather “just average.” Well, of course it doesn’t imply that everyone else is low-class, but it does set up the need for a low-class corollary. And more importantly, it sets up a hierarchy of high, average, low - and who defines what constitutes criteria for each class? It’s a nasty, divisive, insidious tactic. It’s classic classism… because of course no one would ever want to be considered “low class.” (Queer Dewd has written about this phenomenon much more extensively/intelligently, so check her blog for more.)
Making a point to designate a particular sex worker as “high-class” serves to differentiate her from most people’s idea of what a prostitute is: a street worker. Street workers may in fact be the most visible element of prostitution - often because they are associated with other problems such as drug use, violence, and more - and the media certainly does nothing to dispel the popular impression of “prostitute” as analogous to “street prostitute.” However, street workers constitute only about 20% of all prostitutes. So yet again, the media reinforces a stereotype and popular assumption that is false.
Rusty said that while “high-class hooker” is total bullshit, he could see how someone could make a case for “high-priced hooker” being apt. I can see how someone could make a case for it - but the case would be faulty and laden with unquestioned societal assumptions.
First of all, the hooker herself is not for sale, as is implied by applying the adjective “high-priced” to her. Using the term “high-priced hooker” reinforces the rhetoric about sex workers “selling their bodies,” which is so often used by both conservatives and radical feminists. The fact that so many people simply accept this idea of sex workers selling their bodies is indicative of a deeper sexual more in our society: for a woman, having sex with a man constitutes a transfer of ownership. (Look at Purity Balls for a particularly creepy example of this belief in action.)
It’s bullshit, of course. A prostitute is no more selling her body than is a seamstress, a massage therapist, a professional athlete, a mechanic, a pianist… you get the point. A sex worker provides a service. (We do live in a service economy, after all.) Clients pay for that service. They do not own the worker. They do not, to use an analogy Ren has used, buy her like you’d buy a car and then drive her home and park her in their garage. That is ownership. Exchanging money for sexual services is nowhere close.
Finally, “high-priced hooker” carries the assumption that the worker in question is somehow over-charging, or charging more than most other workers. I don’t really know what’s going on with that assumption… should she charge less? Is she slightly more respectable because she charges more? But the bottom line is, it’s bullshit anyway, because nine times out of ten the people described as “high-priced hookers” aren’t charging rates out of the ordinary; they’re charging a competitive market rate. It makes me wonder, what the hell do people expect to pay?
More later, when I get time.
READ ME: Disclaimer
28 Responses to "Words matter, part 2,465,986"
re: high price vs. high class
If you want to break down the real meanings of the phrases, they work out to be about the same.
However, going on anecdotal evidence of how I’ve heard and read the phrases actually used, high class seems more loaded. This is because I don’t ever recall hearing the counterpart to “high class” which would be something like “low class.” I’ve certainly never heard “middle class” hooker.
Whereas with price, I don’t think to call something “high price” necessarily implies (again, in common usage, not necessarily in literal meaning) that everything else is “cut rate” or “low price” or whatever. I have often heard the phrase “cheap hooker” implying there’s a somewhat more normal baseline assumption when discussing money.
That’s not to imply there aren’t problems with the baseline assumptions, because there certainly are. I just think the everyday usage of these two phrases each have slightly different implications.
They certainly have slightly different implications, but the common thread is that all those implications rest on stereotypes, lack of understanding, and outright falsehoods.
shit, does this mean I have to toss “expensive mechanic” from my vocab?
I don’t like “class” used as a desciptor either, yet “price” seems different to me. I must ponder.
Ren -
Nah, that’s different, I believe… Rusty and I were having a conversation about this over IM, wherein I could not find the words to express what I meant.
Anyway, the overall point of my post is just that the media throws around a lot of words without thinking when it comes to sex work, and that language reinforces stereotypes and wrong assumptions.
Hmmmm … middle class hookers ha ha … I read your competitive market rate link:
“$100: Nothing. Nothing you actually want, anyway; $200: A blowjob from a bored Stanford girl; $500: An hour and a half GFE at her place; $1,000: Three or four hours with the same girl, but at your hotel, and time between positions for room service.”
Rates must be lower in the South … I know girls that will do full GFE for $100-$150 an hour, but they’re seen as “low class” (b/c they tend to “run a car wash,” i.e. see more guys for less money). All the girls I ever knew did GFE for $250-$300 an hour, $1,200 overnight.
I think that “high price” correlates with “high class” to some people b/c the high price girl can make $3,000 for one dinner date (where she may or may not even fuck, hell if I know, I’ve never known a girl who commanded that kind of money), whereas the low price, $100-an-hour girl would have to service 30 men to make that same money.
Hence, the perception that the high price girl is higher class is b/c she may be better looking, more educated, etc, and presumed to be free of disease b/c she only — safely and discreetly, of course — fucks one guy per week, vs. the girl who fucks 30 guys a week, gives BBBJTC every single time and is known to go bareback from time to time.
I know it sounds classist and I’ve said it before, but the girls who *look* or act “high class” (thin, fit, coiffured, articulate, porn star or businesswoman look, etc) can command higher rates than those who look/act “low class” — overweight, smoke, wear flip flops to appointments, etc. Of course it may all be illusion, but that’s how it works, in my experience. I think some girls raise their OWN rates to cater to a more “high class” clientele, like Mr. hypocrite Spitzer …
Now, the question — is a girl who charges fat money for her time to be considered “classist” or competitive? I think both. If she wanted to be around rednecks, she’d charge $100-$200 an hour. At $1,000 an hour, the only redneck she’d see would be one who just won the lottery, and she’d probably screen him out anyway after hearing him talk (most “middle class” girls I knew screened out guys with thick southern accents, even here in Atlanta!).
P.S. If you ask me, the mainstream media and mainstream publishing world is full of a bunch of clueless, out-of-touch, pseudo-intellectual snobs. It’s nothing to do with sex work, but case in point, the recently unmasked fake memoir of Margaret B. Jones/Margaret Seltzer, a wealthy, upper-class white woman who passed herself off as half Native American so she could publish a memoir about growing up on the mean streets of L.A. and running drugs for the Bloods. And the publishers BOUGHT IT. And PUBLISHED IT.
Stoooopid … Obviously, these people have never visited “the streets” except through their sociology books. (Or been any closer to a sex worker than through the Internet).
I sure as hell don’t think the girl who commands more money is classist - she’s being a smart capitalist! If she can make more money, she should go for it.
To me the term classist has more to do w/ people’s perceptions, that kind of thing.
And oh yeah, rates are definitely lower in the South… I mean just look at the housing market in San Franciso, even for houses built on top of sand and garbage!
Oh! And the Margaret Setlzer thing… good god. I read about that the other day and was just awestruck at the absurdity of it all.
I would only say the girl who charges big bucks may be considered classist — by some — b/c she is trying to price herself beyond the meager means of a “lower class” man, who may have coarser manners, etc. Just from experience, the guys who want to haggle rates down want more for less, and don’t treat you as well. And referrals I took from the girls who charge less, I was never happy with. “Well, ‘D’ does this and she only charges me ‘X’” Sheesh. Believe me, if I had stuck around, I would have gone up on my rates!!!
That sounds like sour grapes. If you can’t afford it, don’t try to pay for it! To my mind, a client “haggling” over the price seems extremely insulting. I’m insulted when people expect me to do web work for free or on a “discount”!
I’m with Rusty and Ren on this. I hear “high-priced lawyer” all the time in my gig, and it’s usually a compliment. “High class,” yeah, would suggest that other lawyers are slimy. Not that I totally disagree or anything :)
High-priced or high-end are ways to describe many professionals. Real estate is a good example, I hear that kind of distinction all the time. Brokers, hair stylists, restauranteurs, etc. Not an issue, IMO.
As for “classist,” even floating that argument is problematic. How many times have you heard a man in any kind of service biz called “classist” for charging high rates? Anyone? Still here, folks…. yup, as I thought, not many takers on that one. Even a whisper about dissuading women from valuing ourselves at levels we can effectively command in the market is pretty much an admission that we’re not allowed to play in the boy’s league. (Factoid: my hourly rate as a stripper was about twice my hourly rate as a lawyer).
As for “competitive,” on the contrary. Like in Econ 101, market entities cut prices to compete. Raising prices basically says you do not want to compete for market share, but would like to optimize revenues despite a potential loss in market share. Ultimately, smacking a $100K pricetag on an Accord isn’t going to turn it into a Porsche.
You’ll notice I never suggested someone was classist for charging high rates. Blanche Debris raised the question, and I said quite very that that’s NOT what I was suggesting at all, in fact quite the opposite. And you will notice I closed my post with: “It makes me wonder, what the hell do people expect to pay?”
My concern w/ “high priced” is that w/ lawyers, Realtors, etc. there is no rhetoric already in place that suggests they are “selling their bodies” or doing anything other than offering a valuable service. So yes, while based purely on linguistics I do not think the phrase is problematic, in the case of sex workers specifically I think it is, because these things don’t happen in a vacuum, as we well know.
Sorry, I don’t buy this. I don’t think that referring to someone as “high-end” means they’re “selling their bodies.”
Example: “High-end call girls might use bug- and camera-detection equipment to look for surveillance devices, said Jimmie Mesis, editor in chief of Professional Investigator Magazine.”
Here, “high-end” seems to imply better quality and service (like a “high-end retailer”). Let’s face it, there’s a difference between girls who command thousands of dollars a night and who will fly from one state to another versus my clients who trade sex for cocaine.
But maybe I’m just not seeing it.
Maybe the distinction depends on how it’s used? Sometimes you would call someone a high priced or high end prostitute to denote solely how much she charges, or that she provides better quality and service as Jen suggests. (Discretion and security being two important customer services in this industry.) And sometimes the terms would be used to imply she isn’t a streetwalker or disease-ridden ugly fat drug addict portrayed so often on COPS, etc. In the latter scenario, using high priced, high end or high class to distinguish that she’s not one of THOSE prostitutes is inherently problematic because in order to make the contrast you have to draw that image of the woman she’s not. But in the first scenario, that inherent contrast isn’t necessary to get the meaning across.
Or something. I dunno, it’s early.
My example for this was not “high-end.” It was “high-priced.” We can’t really have a discussion about this if we’re not going to discuss what I actually said.
I think you’re not seeing it. First of all the AJC article is all kinds of wrong, just further proving that the media knows jack shit about how sex workers work. Most sex workers use some kind of security-checking techniques - calling potential clients’ employers, Googling them, other ways of verifying their identity, in addition to other screening methods.
Of course there is! And part of the problem w/ media portrayal of sex workers - and popular imagination surrounding sex workers - is the failure to make any distinction among different types of workers. This is a trap radical feminists fall into all the time, e.g., pretending Melissa Farley’s “evidence” (which is questionable anyway based on her collection methods and leading questions) about brothel workers in Nevada applies to all sex workers, from street-based prostitutes to fetish models to internet porn performers.
Yep.
And “the woman she’s not,” as you point out, is an amalgamation of stereotypes, assumptions, and downright stupidity.
Okay, so someone sees what I’m getting at. I’m not as bad of a writer as I was starting to think, w/ the way I felt like people we’re hearing what I was trying to convey.
“You’ll notice I never suggested someone was classist for charging high rates”
I did notice that, and you’ll notice I never suggested it was you I was responding to on that.
And Jen — I think you are seeing it. I agree with you that neither high-end nor high-priced are problematic, in the way that “high-class” is. In any profession, that term is used to make a comparison to other professionals.
Terminology’s important, but the problem of what Sara terms the “disease-ridden ugly fat drug addict portrayed so often on COPS” isn’t seriously exacerbated by referring to certain sex workers as “high-end” or “high-priced.” Whatever terms we use, we all know that some sex workers, like some women and men in any profession that includes in its workers people who are poor, are indeed dealing with disease or addiction. And that others are not. The answer, IMO, isn’t trying to prove that these are stereotypes or assumptions, but in trying to figure out the best ways to offer support to those who fit negative stereotypes because of poverty and lack of a support structure and/or appropriate legal rights.
Fine, but my comment is the same - I do not think that saying someone is “high-priced” means that someone is selling their bodies. It just means they’re charging a higher price than the average market price for that service.
Well I thought saying someone was “high-whatever” was making the distinction.
Perhaps the better question to ask is, how would sex workers like people to make that distinction? What’s the appropriate terminology?
Yes! That is the better question to ask. And sex workers are the ones to answer. If any sex workers see the question here and feel like doing so, I’m sure they will.
That’s a good question, Jen. I don’t think you’d find most sex workers objecting to that distinction in higher numbers than other professionals. The guy who got me out of a traffic ticket 15 or so years ago would probably be less happy about “high-end” terminology (though more happy about “high-priced terminology) than his Skadden Arps counterpart. Someone at Supercuts woudl be less happy about it than someone doing hair at the Oscars. Similarly, a streetwalker would be less happy about the terminology than “Kristen” and someone stripping at a divey club would be less happy about it than someone at Club Paradise. But I don’t think there’s an industry-specific difference here.
I think the best answer always comes from the affected group. I cannot speak as a current sex worker (unless you buy the radfem notion that all married women are.. NOT), but if you’d asked me in 1999 or 2000 when I actually was, I’d have had no issues with “high end” or “high priced” as long as nobody was calling anyone “low end,” which would be problematic. Let’s face it, sex services at the high end are more pricy to the individual consumer than many other services from other trained professionals. Many high-end dancers are expert at identifying and avoiding customers who are still working on their first million (see me for the rulebook). I think if you were to query them as to whether it bothered them to be viewed as “charging more than most other workers,” you’d get a raised eyebrow and an invoice for the time it would take to respond.
With my girlfriend, of almost 10 years now, there are two things. One, she feels it’s very important to project an image that we are higher class than we actually are. We’re in horrible debt. So she wants to make as much money as possible. (I do too, need to pay my masters at Citicorp, Bank of America and Chase. I wonder how soon we’ll be bringing back chattel slavery in this country, since indentured servitude has made such a lively comeback. Of course, most of that money was spent on her independent call girl website and expensive advertising for same. She was making great money there for a while, but it left her hands as soon as she got it. The rest went into an overpriced luxury car, that we are very upside down in.)
She needs to look good, needs her make up, clothes and so on. She just needed a new computer. Then there’s her little girl, whose education we both agree is very important. So, money is very important to her, well to us. (Not that I get to spend much of it…)
Secondly, it is very important to her to be able to turn customers away. The more selective she can be about customers the better. That is where the class system comes in. It’s not how much money you make per week, its how many guys you have to tell that “I don’t do that and even if I did I wouldn’t do it for what you are offering.” for the same amount of money. Oh, and whether you have to tell them that in person or over the phone or by Email. The better the screening process, the happier we both are. Honestly, she’s not doing this for fun. I’m not naive, I figure sometimes she has fun with guys other than me, but that’s not always (probably not even often). Economic necessity drives her.
Most of my money goes toward paying debt, and a subsistence lifestyle that is worse than I had when I was in college, working part time. (Huge amounts of money every month, staggering amounts of money and even so every disaster brings more debt. I always think what unbelievable luxury we could be living in if we could keep that money every month… I have a good paying professional office job, too.) So, she hasn’t felt she can give up the life.
Ideally she’d like to retire.
Her low point recently was when she had to go back to “modeling” in a local “lingerie shop.” That was what she was doing when we met, but she went Internet only after a while. Unfortunately, in the case of Internet only you have to pay for hosting and you have to pay for advertising. You also need to pay someone who can take good pictures, because those are so important. They’ll make or break a Website or advertisement and amateur night photos won’t cut it even if the woman is as beautiful as my Baby. You need to update those frequently too, at least she says so and it makes sense to me.
See when you work in a “shop,” three things happen, you get to meet nice officers from the local PD trying to trap you, you get to meet cheap weirdos who wander in off the street expecting street girl prices and who get angry when you refuse them (hopefully your shop has some kind of security personnel… but not always), oh and you have to deal with having men reject you for “models” who are younger, or whiter or who don’t look as bored as you do. (It’s had to put up an enthusiastic front after 12 years in the business.)
So, Internet is ideal. (Well, ideal-ler) I don’t know why she hasn’t tried a call girl agency, but I know she’s been involved in some… is office politics the right word? with some of the local agencies, who I think don’t really like independent operators anyway. If she can’t quit, she’d like to go back to being an independent girl but it’s costly.
Is there an alternative? I try to think of one. Declare bankruptcy maybe, get rid of the car for the best price we can, try to slowly pay off our debts? We’ve had this argument before, and I always lose. She won’t do it if she sees a good living ahead of her, besides she wants to go back to school and her credit is completely destroyed (mine would be to if I declared bankruptcy).
I’m not entirely sure that this comment above isn’t fake, but I published it anyway. Y’all decide.
Hmmmm … I don’t think it’s fake. It’s random and rambly, but rings true on some level.
It reminds me of this couple I used to know, where the lady became a hooker at age 50 (total MILF who looked more like 38). She and her husband were *really* into “keeping up appearances.” They lived in a huge house in East Cobb with a pool and she drove a Mercedes. They were also broke beneath it, and had filed BK a few times. I did doubles with her a lot for awhile there and, when we’d get our cash, we’d often blow it ASAP. Toward the end there, they lost the car and the house.
It set of strange alarms for me, but I haven’t had any experience with talking to actual sex workers and their boyfriends so I don’t trust myself to spot a plant.
Set off, not set of. Sorry, too tired to notice typos.
The main thing to me was that the person calls himself “johnpaul” and the email address was “ronfan.” So that seems like a Ron Paul troll. I don’t know. It was written oddly.
I think the main problem is that there is too much information. I should’ve kept some of it out of the post. At the time, I remember trying to edit out anything in the post that would give too much information (for example, I didn’t give the specific type of car we drive). Looking at it now, I still think I said too much.
Honestly, the stuff about our personal life (debt) could happen to anyone no matter what their profession. I think it was a pretty bad idea to write about our personal debt problems, period. I also think I could’ve made my point without going into what my girlfriend does for a living.
So, pretending I’m just a student of sociology with no personal knowledge of the subject. I’ll say why I think “high priced” call girl is something that some women in the profession would see as an indicator of self-worth. A high price acts as a screener; it means that you can make the same amount of money while seeing a lot fewer customers, and it means you can be pickier about the customers you do see. If you charge, say $1000.00 per hour, you might be happy to see only 3 customers per month. Where as if you charge only $300, you might have to see 10 every month. If you have to see 10, you can’t be nearly as choosy about who you see as if you only see 3. Also, seeing more customers is more stressful in itself, even if they are generally likable people.
Also, if you charge a higher rate, there are other forms of screening you can afford such as buying your own advertising instead of working for an escort service, or getting a second phone that’s only for business calls. In other words who you deal with and what terms you deal with them. This stuff just falls under the “more money makes life better” principle.
Think of it this way, back when I had a lot of money saved, it felt good, psychologically to know that if my boss was unreasonable or cruel I could just quit and teach if I felt like it. Now it’s more like, “please sir, may I have another.”
P.S. Ron Paul? Ugh. I’d never vote for him. I don’t really want to get into politics, here just… ugh.
I have little experience with the dynamics of sex work, but johnpaul’s pricing and screening comments ring true with how I’ve managed my career in IT. I even have a parallel with having to fall back to “modeling in a lingerie shop” (that would be help desk work!)
“High priced” and “high class” have interesting connotations in the context of competitive advertising, right up there next to “boutique” and “high-end” and… so on. Is it classism? I think so, but I also think that classism is how capitalist market segmentation works.
The entry-level “luxury” Lexus, for example, started as a Toyota Camry but was marketed “up” all the same (and don’t *dare* suggest that the neighbor’s new Kia is comparable). Eventually, a third-party neighbor looks at their Lexus neighbor and their Kia neighbor and assigns a value to each, turns nose up at Kia neighbor and… well, there’s your class-construct reinforcement.
One could also argue that to the extent that the mainstream media and public buy into the classism and consequently frown upon your competition, they’re all suckers just as much as they’re perpetuating the classism. But that’s probably a bigger conversation.
I *do* suspect that if sex work became socially acceptable in the mainstream, terms like “high-class” would probably fade in favor of something less… I don’t know, classmongeringly (new word for the day!) obvious.
[...] in our own voices, unpolluted by editors who are “uncomfortable” with certain topics or downright ignorant, and reach people who otherwise might not be reached (and they will have a voice, as well!). [...]
Leave a comment