Banning books and the games the media the media play

This is an old story (six months old now) reported by 9 News, but I think that is still worthy of exploring.

The summary:

“In March, Queensland conservative campaigner Bernard Gaynor complained to Logan City Council that [the graphic novel] Gender Queer [by Maia Kobabe] was on its shelves.”

This lead the Australian Classification Board to conduct a review and they have…

“given the book an “unrestricted classification”, paired with “consumer advice” that it may not be suitable for younger readers.”

There’s a lot that could be explored here, from social “conservatism”, to the myriad issues that young people encounter exploring their sexuality, to literature and how our classification system works. All worthy topics. But I’d like to talk about something small in the way 9 News reported the story.

Firstly, the original article: Gender identity memoir removed from Queensland library shelf, referred to classification board on March 13th is a reasonable piece or reporting that seems to be mostly neutral about the subject and fairly represents the situation.

And credit to 9 News, they did a follow up piece Classification review rejects push to ban Gender Queer book on the 21st of July that is also fairly neutral and just reports the news.

What caught my attention is the difference between the visible title of the articles:

“Gender identity memoir removed from Queensland library shelf, referred to classification board”

and…

“Classification review rejects push to ban Gender Queer book”

and the URLs of the articles:

https://www.9news.com.au/national/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-a-memoir-book-under-review-classification-board-faces-potential-ban/

and…

https://www.9news.com.au/national/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-classified-as-m-mature-not-recommended-for-readers-under-15-years/

I’ll expand them to make it easier to read.

“Maia Kobabe Gender Queer a Memoir book under review classification board faces potential ban”

and…

“Maia Kobabe Gender Queer book classified as M mature not recommended for readers under 15 years”

Lets line up the titles with their URLs.

First article title visible to readers:

“Gender identity memoir removed from Queensland library shelf, referred to classification board”

versus URL visible to search engines:

“Maia Kobabe Gender Queer a Memoir book under review classification board faces potential ban”

Second article title visible to readers:

“Classification review rejects push to ban Gender Queer book”

versus URL visible to search engines:

“Maia Kobabe Gender Queer book classified as m mature not recommended for readers under 15 years

In both cases the URL uses significantly more “conservative” and inflammatory language.

The question of why is open to debate, but given that 9 News is chaired by a group including Peter Costello (former right wing politician, deputy leader of the Liberal Party (1994 to 2007) and Australian federal government treasurer (1996 to 2007)) the implication is that 9 News has a conservative bias that it wants to hide from the people reading its articles, but not from the search engines that feed us all our fire hose of media content.

In that landscape these sorts of small details matter.

While the inner workings of Google’s search algorithms are opaque to the likes of you and me, they are closely studied by the kinds of people who run media empires and like to influence the viewing public’s opinion on of matters of “morality”.

I don’t think that I need to break this down further, but I do think that it’s a timely reminder to us all to not trust any media source completely. We need to read widely and try to understand the inherent biases that media of all kinds (even my writings) bring to the stories that they choose to tell, how they tell them, and even how they attempt to influence how they are delivered and to whom.

John

We need to have a conversation about terminology

I recently happened across this article from Slate.com (here) that I was quoted in a while back and I thought upon reading it again that it was worth commenting on the reader’s word choice when referring to sex workers.

“Prostitute” is a loaded term.  And for people who work in my industry it has a lot of negative connotations.  It’s why most people who sells sexual services prefers the term “sex worker”.

It’s a much more clear definition. It’s work. And it involves sex. We are sex workers.

Culturally the term “prostitute” is linked to exploitation, implies a lack of autonomy (individually and financially) and even a lack of legitimacy.

The idea that someone “had to prostitute themselves” to survive, or succeed is an inherently negative statement. “had to”. Not “chose to”. Or “wanted to”. “Had to” is the way we would most likely hear that described.

And this is where people who oppose sex work will say “But what about all of the women who have no choice?” (they rarely acknowledge that men do sex work too). The answer is that those people are generally what we call “survival sex workers”. Forced by economic, personal, or social realities to do work that they may not choose to otherwise – and they are often punished legally and socially because of that.

As sex workers we support these people and their right to survive however they have to, but at the same time what we fight for is to see the work decriminalised so that they can seek any and all physical, legal, and medical help that they may need to do their work in safety and good health.

Every society has sex work. It is a reality of humanity – but how we look at sex work and especially the words we choose when we are talking about it go a long way to how sex workers are treated and perceived.

So while “prostitute” may be a linguistically valid word to describe what I do, it is not the right word for todays society. I am not a “prostitute” I am a “sex worker”, with all of the connotations that carries.

John

Sex worker, not prostitute – “progressive” media needs to do better

In the time that I have been a sex worker the everyday language used around people like me who sell sexual services (not our bodies – no one does that, it’s not a thing) has changed dramatically and for the better.

Many politicians now use the phrase “sex worker” instead of “prostitute”. The state of Victoria (Australia) changed their “Prostitution Control Act” (which regulates sex work in the state, requiring workers to register as sex workers) to the “Sex Work Act”. A small change that – while the act itself is still a problem – points to a government that at least sees which way the wind is blowing.

The media though is a different matter. Yes many media personalities understand and call us sex workers. The ones who don’t do so consistently and pointedly and I would expect little more from them.

Then there are media personalities who while ostensibly progressive will choose the words they use based on the subject. And that’s a real problem – not to mention poor journalism.

US right wing politicians are famous for getting caught with their pants down. Their hypocrisy is quite plain to see. But then media who would see themselves as progressive and when talking about us would generally call us sex workers will turn around and start calling us prostitutes instead.

Why? Because they know how people react to language and in their efforts to ridicule someone (who may deserve it) they throw us – sex workers – under the bus as well.

And not just sex workers – but clients as well.

It’s fine to call out politicians and anyone else who is being hypocritical about paying for sex, but you shouldn’t be adding to the stigma of being a client or worker when you do so.

I think that I have perhaps met two or three women in all my time as a straight male escort for women who are open about having paid for sex. The vast majority of women – even in a place like Australia and especially New South Wales, where sex work is decriminalised – still would never tell anyone that they have paid a sex worker.

Why? In part at least because media personalities who should know better help to perpetuate the stigma around selling and buying sex.

Politicians who “point with one hand and jerk off with the other” richly deserve to be pilloried. But for their hypocrisy – not because they pay for sex. That just hurts sex workers and clients who are so often dismissed by a society that doesn’t care to understand why some people choose to sell sex and others to buy it.

John.

The buzz about male sex workers for women

Buzzfeednews.com published an article today written by journalist Hallie Lieberman about male sex workers for women.

For anyone who hasn’t seen the article, you can find it here:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/hallielieberman/male-sex-workers-feminist-consent-boyfriend-experience

Hallie spent a long time talking to a number of male sex workers, including me, as well as our clients. I think that it is great that the subject is getting such mainstream exposure – especially in the US where attitudes to sex work are so conflicted.

So I would like to say a big hello to everyone who has come to my website from that article. It’s great to have you here and I hope you enjoy my website.

John.

Living our best lives

I have to admit that I live in a bit of a bubble. I don’t watch commercial television or listen to commercial radio. I don’t read newspapers (online, or paper).

I have terms like “Donald Trump”, “Scott Morrison” and “politics” blocked on Twitter.

I really don’t need the ongoing train wreck of Western politics in my face – even occasionally.

And then there’s commercial TV and radio – swamped by cheap to produce reality TV, “current affairs” programs that platform racists in the name of “balance” and ignore the very real problems in the world in favour of tabloid sensationalism.

I’m happy in my bubble honestly. I spend my work times with interesting people who on the whole care about the sort of things I care about – social justice, tolerance, freedom – people who understand that the world is bigger than them and requires an open mind.

As I write this, I am in Canberra. I stopped earlier at a self serve car wash to wash my car and (disappointingly) had to listen to a commercial radio station for the 15 minutes it took me to clean the car.

It reaffirmed to me that I haven’t been missing anything. From the inane banter about clothing to the news items delivered in the most effective way to make a listener feel stressed about things that don’t actually matter.

It was all just noise. Noise that, if you let it, will drown out the things in life that do matter. This is the very real problem with the “modern condition” living in a place like Sydney.

I heard recently of a man, who emigrated to Australia from India and settled in Sydney. He found employment and has been living like so many of us do – working to pay the rent and have some free time and money to enjoy himself.

His realisation though is profound: he has decided to return to the small town that his family comes from in India – because the quality of life there, while modest, is better for him than the kind of life that we live here in Sydney. In his home town he doesn’t have a lot of money, but he has time – time to spend with friends and family doing whatever they want to, or even nothing at all. He may not have great restaurants to go to like we do, but food is cheap and he and his family have time to cook and share good meals.

The list goes on, but I think that you can see the point I am making – we sacrifice a lot living in a place like Sydney. Our lives are driven by work. Our free time is seriously restricted by the daily requirement to earn money to pay rent.

A semi-rural lifestyle with limited money may not seem like the best life to you and me – we have grown up in a different way and have different expectations – but I think that it can still teach us something.

That lesson is: we shouldn’t see work and the assumption that we must all do it all the time as an inherently good thing. For most of us it is a necessary thing, but it tends to draw us away for the fundamentals of human nature – that is connections with the people around us, the sharing of simple pleasures, and time to just “be”, rather than “do”.

I think that this lesson is particularly relevant when considering my industry. Paying for the services of a male escort like myself absolutely costs money. But it’s trading money not for another “thing” in ones life, but for an experience. The older I get, the less interested I become in having things in my life and the more I value the experiences I have with other people.

Much like the gentleman from India, what I really want is to live a life full of people and new experiences with them. I think that, if anything, is the way to live a fulfilling life.

John.

We need your help

If you are reading this, then it’s likely that you have at least contemplated purchasing the services of a sex worker.

If you live in NSW in Australia, then you have nothing to worry about – today – if however you live in Victoria, then your right as an adult to buy sex is under threat. The Victorian Liberal party has recently announced that they have adopted the “client criminalisation” model for regulating sex work (they call it “Nordic model” so it sounds nicer) and will take that policy to the next election in Victoria.

I don’t want to rehash why this is bad for everyone (including sex workers) in this post.  If you are interested, then google “why the Nordic model does not work”.  Suffice to say Amnesty International, the WHO, and basically anyone who values evidence and harm reduction has condemned it. Sadly, it’s popular in certain feminist circles that want to abolish sex work, and unsurprisingly with conservative and right wing political parties.

What’s happening in Victoria is the thin edge of the wedge in this country in what has, since the US recently past their FOSTA/SESTA laws, become an undeclared war on sex work.  NSW (and New Zealand) with our full decriminalisation of sex work sit, like calm little eyes, in a growing global storm.

Sex workers are uniquely vulnerable as a group.  Publicly supporting us and our right to work safely is very difficult for anyone given the stigma that surrounds our industry, so we tend to have to fight our battles on our own.

I am writing this though to ask for your support because it’s no-longer just about us.  If you would like to be, or are a client of sex workers, then the zeitgeist is trying to turn you into a criminal.  If you can publicly support the message that sex work is work (not abuse, not trafficking) then I for one will be very grateful.

If you can sign the various petitions calling for the protection of sex workers, that will definitely help.

You could also consider making a donation to the sex worker organisations that fight to protect people like me.  They do hugely important work helping to protect the rights and safety of sex workers, talking to government and media, conducting research, and more – all of it on very minimal funding.  In Victoria you can donate to the Vixen Collective and in NSW it’s Scarlet Alliance.

Thank you for taking the time to read this and thank you too for any support you can give.

John

The joyful nude

It’s not that often that you come across an article that is genuinely positive about body image in a non-preachy, no agenda kind of way. But this one fits the bill.

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/health-and-wellbeing/can-spending-time-naked-really-improve-our-selfesteem-20170329-gv8yxx.html

It’s nice to see a journalist writing about personal experience and taking a risk themselves. And that’s not to disparage journalists – I know it’s a tough industry, especially these days – but I am still waiting for the journalist to write a piece about sex workers from a position of personal experience, and really own it – yes people pay for sex. Yes, it’s ok to like it, or not – whatever, this was my experience.

Anyway, back to the article – it’s great that someone is saying hey it’s ok to be nude, it’s good to get in touch with your self, experience some vulnerability, and grow a little as a person.

Everyone has issues with their body and self image – doesn’t matter what our age is, young, old, in-between – there will always be something that we can find to be unhappy with. But it doesn’t have to be a problem. We don’t need to be perfect to enjoy our bodies. And we certainly don’t need to be perfect to enjoy sex. Being more comfortable in ourselves though will definitely make the latter easier and better.

John.

A sex club just for women

I think that it is a sign of maturity in a society when it empowers women to be and do what they want to do – free from control or even the observation of men.

The normalisation of sex workers (male and female) for women is one example. It’s quite a big statement that women, who for so long have had their lives, finances, and their very bodies ruled by the whims of men are now able to choose to see a sex worker and not have to apologise to any one for it.

We are moving ahead. Becoming more tolerant of each other – not always and not everywhere – but we make progress.

Another small sign of this is the arrival of the Skirt Club in Sydney (http://skirtclub.co.uk/), a UK originated sex club exclusively for women. It has a modest global membership, but by all accounts it is well liked by the women who are members. I can imagine many men feeling threatened by the very existence of such a place, but to me it’s a delight.

You can read more about it here: http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/sex-and-relationships/australias-first-womenonly-sex-club-arrives-in-sydney-20160831-gr623w.html

I love the idea of women being in control of their lives and perhaps more importantly being able to choose exactly what it is that they want to do with their lives, without having to involve or answer to men, if they don’t want to. At the end of the day, it makes all of our lives, whether we are male or female richer.

So cheers Skirt Club, here’s hoping that your first party goes well!

John.

Harm reduction, not abolition – is the moral and humane thing to do

This article is a little different to my usual writing. I have been in an introspective and philosophical mood in recent times and when I heard the news that California had recently refused to implement new rules that would reduce adult films shot in that state to little more than this:naked-gun-safe-sex

I felt compelled to write about it. While it may not directly touch on what I do as a male escort, I hope that on reading it people will understand the broader point and how it relates to sex work – and in fact pretty much all of our lives.


The Californian Occupational Safety and Healthy Standards Board recently failed to pass new regulations that would force porn performers to use condoms, dental dams, and even goggles to protect them from the risk of sexually transmitted infections while making films and images about sex.

It was a win for that most elusive of beasts: common sense and incidentally for the concept of “harm reduction”. Even if only marginally (the board failed to achieve a four to one majority by just one vote).

The adult film industry in California already has a system for ensuring the health and safety of its performers. It is called PASS (Performer Availability Screening Service) and is administered by the Free Speech Coalition. It provides bi-weekly STI testing for performers, the results of which are held in a secure, private database, and allow producers and agents to see the availability of performers (but nothing detailed about their health information). It also provides performers with access to both testing, and – in the case of an infection being detected – support and treatment services.

It’s a good system. From what information I can find online, it works. Under that system there hasn’t been a case of HIV transmission on the set of an adult film in California in over 10 years (2004 was the last recorded time in California, which prompted the shift to bi-weekly testing with higher sensitivity testing methods).

There was an on-set transmission of HIV between to male performers in Nevada in 2014, however it appears that it happened under less stringent testing standards – which really just re-inforces the point. PASS works, less rigorous testing does not.

So what has all of this got to do with sex work and my blog? The short answer is: the PASS system is a good demonstration of sensible, tolerant attitudes toward dealing with a real risk (STI transmission between performers).

It accepts that there is a risk and that it needs to be taken seriously, and it sets out to minimise that risk without creating unintended adverse side effects. This is classic “harm reduction”. Continue reading

Amnesty International votes to adopt policy to protect rights of sex workers

Following on from yesterday’s post about the NSW inquiry we (my industry) had a very exciting piece of news last night.  Amnesty International has voted YES to accept a policy that it has developed to protect the human rights of sex workers.  You can read about it here:

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/08/global-movement-votes-to-adopt-policy-to-protect-human-rights-of-sex-workers/

This is a significant step forward for destigmatisation of our industry and the people who work in it.  It also paves the way for more sensible and informed conversations about the problems of our industry and how to fix them.

It is very timely given the inquiry happening here in NSW and will hopefully go some way to protecting the liberal, tolerant, and effective laws that we have in our state.

John