Published on: May 7, 2014 @ 13:38
There are too many little “misunderstandings” in the global sex work debate. Foremost of them being that actual sex workers have been formally included, when, in fact, they have not. Another common misunderstanding is usage of the term “prostitute”. I think most people agree that making up a lot of lies for gain is, indeed, prostituting oneself, and qualifies one for the title “prostituted woman” (assuming, of course, that one is not, in fact, a man). The misunderstanding creeps in when, once having qualified for the title “prostituted woman” by the above, perfectly valid means, some people assume that means one has some knowledge and experience of selling sexual services, when usually, if not always, that is far from the case.
I can understand why those who are not entirely happy with the poor fit between the facts and reality of sex work and their personal agenda in connection with it might feel strongly tempted to blur the lines and present anyone willing to prostitute their integrity as a “survivor” of the sale of sexual services, particularly if they can afford to hire a few, but that does not get us any nearer to the truth, now, does it?
For this reason, to avoid any misunderstanding, I will avoid the use of the confusing term “prostitute” in these pages. I am sure the English language is rich enough to provide other, more precise terms in which to describe tabloid Journalists, a fair few politicians and at least half (<such a nice, impartial word “half”) of the NGO sector