Are you working?

 

updated with slight ammendment. See the comment from @everydaysexism

Felicity* is young, female and lives and works in the city. A city with, like many of our modern cities a gay area, a pink triangle, a combination of cafes, pubs, clubs and gay friendly businesses  She makes sure her journeys never take her through this area, because one day something terrible happened.

She was walking down its main  road, minding her own business, not dressed like a gay, and certainly not walking like one, when someone came up to her and asked “Are you a lesbian?” She has to confess they were not threatening in demeanor, they asked in a polite enough tone, but the insinuation, the very suggestion that she somehow looked like one of them! Felicity felt insulted and degraded, she knew they did not wear jeans and a T Shirt, but somehow this person had still confused her with one . She called a radio show to make clear her anger, and everyone reacted with support, after all being confused with that sort of person, what greater insult is there?

Sounds over the top, or like Felicity needs a good kick up the arse? Change gay to sex worker and it is a daily occurrence. I heard the conversation this morning on an otherwise excellent discussion of the @everydaysexism project. The caller was adamant she did not dress like a filthy whore ™ and that even the simple question “Are you working?” was misogynistic and sexist. The founder of everyday sexism and Victoria Derbyshire did not challenge her, although time may have played a part here. Whatever their personal views the fact is again, this time on national radio the idea was gievn that it is insulting to be confused with a sex worker.

This is not an isolated incident, wherever there is a post that suggests decriminalization or even better support for sex workers then somewhere is the comments someone will  chip in that protecting sex workers is all very well, but it does nothing to protect them from being mistaken for one. The non sex worker equivalent of what about the menz.

There is an excellent post here on the harassment street sex workers have to endure in their workplace (and Felicity might not like it but it is a workplace)

“it’s not the clients who ask us to show them our tits, or who scream ‘HAHAHAHA HOW MUCH BABY HAHAHA’ (the number of WOMEN who do this is truly disgusting) or who yell out slurs like ‘slut’ and ‘whore’, or like one guy last night who BELLOWED in a voice I noted most for the undercurrent of pure fury: “GET A REAL JOB” as he sailed by in a car one of his maters drove. “

it’s certainly not the clients who ARRANGE with their FRIENDS in FACEBOOK events to drive past beats and throw eggs at the workers. I’m not even kidding. yes. facebook events. people plan to do this shit. they think it’s a great night out. we are so dehumanised, regarded so much as pig shit, that these assholes actually think it’s good, clean fun to arrange evenings-out of egg-throwing. if this doesn’t make you furious, I hate you.

Street harassment of course exists, but when the street is your workplace and you cannot turn to the police because you are the one who will be arrested it reaches a whole new level. Whorephobia means you are seen as fair game, the fact you are more likely to a trans* person or not white means other threats will be mingled in with the abuse. The fact that as a sex worker a rape or sexual assault is less likely to be taken seriously by the police, if you even feel comfortable or safe reporting it in the first place means you work with the threat of being assaulted, with the shouters at any moment turning violent. This is harassment  this is dangerous, being asked a simple question, not so much.

Our heroine Felicity felt offence merely because someone mistook her for something she was not. Her othering of sex workers and prejudices against their clients meant that she perceived being asked if she was working was a threat. After all, there is no way a nice woman could be mistaken for a sex worker is there?

In another wonderful post I would recommend any feminist read Born Whore says this:

When a guy slows his car and waves at you to get in, he is just a client and unless there is some other factor at play, a regular old client is of no danger to you. Thinking you might be a street sex worker and using the standard practices of street sex work transactions is not harassment nor an insult nor anti-feminist nor dangerous. You’re just accidentally part of a street economic exchange, because you walked into their workplace. Don’t sweat it. Yes some clients can turn out to be dangerous but you need to unlearn the idea that this is more likely from clients on the street than in your home or from cops.

If like Felicity you wander into an area where there are street workers then you may be asked for sex, this is not harassment, or sexism, or abuse. No more than going past a display of cheese in the supermarket and being asked by the promoter if you want to try a sample is. Do you rant on your blog, or on the radio about being mistaken for a filthy cheese eater? Do you ask for support and reassurance that you do not look like someone who eats cheese?

If someone asks if you are working, it is just that, a question, it is not a statement about your dress or behavior  If you believe it is then you need to look at your internalized prejudices. It is not an example of everyday sexism either, whatever radio shows or their hosts might think.

* This is off course pure fiction, no one is actually called Felicity, think of her as Jemima’s unenlightened younger sister.

28 thoughts on “Are you working?

  1. This is very hard for me to admit, but I know I’d be upset if I were asked that. Part of this is anxiety – I get upset if I get asked in shops if I work there because saying no is scary. But part of it is a horror of being mistaken for a se worker, and that… that’s just prejudice from me as to what a sex worker is and does and what behaviour they should expect. (Obvs this is assuming it’s asked in a non-threatening way and the potential client backs off at once when told no.)

    I’m sorry =[ Thank you for this post and for forcing me to confront, examine, and address my prejudice.

  2. I’d like to point out that this is an extremely misleading account of the radio show in question, which readers can listen to again here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01qqvp1 Whilst I completely understand anger and upset at the idea that somebody might be offended to be considered a sex worker, it was not clarified on the show that this was what the caller was offended by – the implication I believe was that she was offended by the aggressive sexual approach and the man’s assumption that he felt the right to make such an overt sexual overture to a stranger, intruding on her public space, merely because she was a woman. Secondly, you use the very misleading sentence “The caller was adamant she did not dress like a filthy whore ™” which is incredibly unfair, as the caller said no such phrase – she merely noted, at the beginning of the call and not in relation to sex workers or their clothing, that she happened to be wearing jeans an a fleece, and certainly she made no such critical comment about sex workers themselves at all- her criticism was very clearly directed at the man in question for intruding on her personal space. Thirdly, you falsely state “The founder of everyday sexism and Victoria Derbyshire agreed.” In fact, as listeners can hear by going back to the show using the link above, neither of us commented on this specific incident at all – the show moved on instead to several other callers giving their own accounts of things that happened to them and we did not come back to have any discussion of this specific incident at all, so in fact you have no idea how either of us may personally have reacted to it.

    Whilst in principle I completely support your argument that it could be offensive to sex workers for people to suggest they were offended to be confused with them, you have given a very exaggerated and falsified account here of what passed, and entirely fabricated two people’s verdicts on the incident which were absolutely not given and this is defamatory and unfair.

    • I think I make clear that the opening of my post is not a transcript of the radio show, but a rhetorical device. I listened and am afraid heard a very different call. Did you read either of the links, or yo be honest the whole of my post? Because it does not feel like it.

      The (real) caller cited being asked if she was working as an example of “everyday sexism” she did not say the man was aggressive and the question “Are you working?” is in and of itself neither sexual or agressive, you yourself admit you imply that it was such, rather than her saying so. By highlighting her clothing what else was she saying other than she didnt look like a sex worker? What other relevance does wearing jeans and a fleece have?

      Neither you nor VD challenged what she said, perhaps I should have given more weight to the demands of radio, having appeared on it myself I am aware things can go very quickly. whilst I still feel differently about the caller, and very strongly about the way being approached is seen as sexism I shall edit to make clear you did not agree,

      • By highlighting her clothing what else was she saying other than she didnt look like a sex worker? What other relevance does wearing jeans and a fleece have?

        I agree with Jemima, and particularly on this point. That’s clearly the implication of both what the caller said, and your comment. I honestly don’t see why a person would tell an anecdote while mentioning a bunch of detail that they considered to be irrelevant – so, what’s the relevance?

        For what it’s worth, Jemima doesn’t have it in for Everyday Sexism – pretty sure she tweeted how good it was as the programme was playing, so up until this anecdote she was agreeing with the radio segment!

      • I do think its a pity one fail, rather than being acknowledged is being minimized. My attention was caught because it showed how insidious the idea the that being mistaken for a sex worker is an insult it.

  3. There is no need to apologize, you made a good point, basically i think most people would benefit from not being approached by strangers, obviously it can br stressful, maybe i am not explaining myself well. :)

  4. I agree with your post absolutely. When I lived in St Petersburg, I briefly lived in a part of town where a lot of sex workers worked, and I was routinely asked if I was working (often in the middle of the day, when I was dressed casually and wrapped up warm against the cold. Sometimes also at night). I was never offended or scared by it, because none of the men who asked me ever behaved in a threatening or aggressive manner. That area was a bit rough generally, and I frequently saw gangs or intimidating men hanging around, who *did* make me feel uncomfortable and scared. None of them ever asked me if I was working. They were two distinct groups of men.

    I have never been asked the question in a jeering way as part of street harassment – I can imagine it happening though. I agree that the question alone is not offensive. It may sometimes be used deliberately to offend though, in the same way as “whore” is used as an insult to women who are not sex workers – which, again, reflects the rampant whorephobia in our society. I’m not saying that is what happened to the woman on the radio, it’s just a thought that popped into my head while writing this comment.

    • Same situation here, my walk home from town used to take in a street known for its working women so I got used the same question all the time. It did rather annoy me when I felt a moment’s thought would make it obvious I wasn’t working, e.g. I was walking quickly and carrying several bags from Tesco, but then I have the same reaction if I’m in a shop and someone asks me “Do you work here?” when I think it should be clear that I’m shopping.

      I lived in that area for two years and can honestly say I was never once actually harassed by anyone on the assumption I was working. I’m sure that’s not true for the women who actually were working there and unsurprisingly those who complained about them never seemed concerned about that.

      • I had the discussion about being approached generally being annoying/stressful/anxiety inducing with a friend. It is, and it is worth acknowledging. However being confused witha sex worker should be (with the removal of stigma and whorephobia) no more than being confused with a shop assistant.

  5. The stigmatisation of women in sex work by men and other women is unjustifiable, I agree. But that doesn’t mean that women should expect street harassment, that they have no reason to feel threatened by men propositioning them, or that they should accept it. That just trivialises street harassment and the fear and distress that it can cause. The street is not a workplace. It’s a public place where everyone has a right to be free from harassment, whether they’re in sex work or not.

    • Thanks for your comment, but for street workers the street is their workplace, to deny that is to deny facts and ignore the oppression of an extremely margenlized group. Being confused for a street worker is not harassment, the second link is perhaps a really useful one to read in terms of checking privilege on this issue.

    • Of course the street is a workplace, and not just for sex workers. Plenty of people work in the street and in other public places for that matter. There is no contradiction between “a public place” and “a workplace”.

  6. Am I the only one who finds the phrase ‘intruding on her public space’ in everyday sexism’s post to be contradictory and bizarre? The notion that we can privatize a part of the public arena, make it private and our own, and control the behaviour of others around us, also occupying their ‘public space’, is pernicious and dangerous.

  7. Saw this on the web today.

    Holly Hagan mistaken for prostitute in Amsterdam

    Holly Hagan got mistaken for a prostitute while filming ‘Geordie Shore’ in Amsterdam.
    The 18-year-old beauty was surprised when locals thought she was a lady of the night while out on the town dressed in next to nothing in the Dutch capital city for the new series of the MTV reality show – which also stars Sophie Kasaei, James Tindale and Dan Thomas-Tuck – but she was pleased they thought she was pretty.
    She said: ”They thought I was a prostitute walking around Amsterdam. I could see them pointing at me going, ‘She’s hot!’ ”

    http://www.virginmedia.com/tvradio/news/story/2013/02/15/holly-hagan-mistaken-for/

  8. As a man I always thought that working girls generally dressed to advertise, so that if you were in doubt the answer was always no. Which means that if a non-working woman gets this kind of question either she is really wearing the wrong clothes in the wrong place or, rather more likely, the man asking is an idiot. Of course I have never been in St Petersburg in mid-winter. Anyway, some further education in etiquette to avoid out-of-place questions sounds more like it would succeed than getting everybody used to being asked.

    • “Which means that if a non-working woman gets this kind of question either she is really wearing the wrong clothes in the wrong place”

      I really object to your use of the word “wrong” here. Please don’t pass judgement on what a woman chooses to wear or where she chooses to walk.

      Also, I think your assertion that sex workers “dress to advertise” is also based on stereotypes and damaging tropes.

      • Thanks for picking up on this, I missed it yesterday. To say that there is a right or wrong way for a woman to dress not only misses the point but is misogynistic.

  9. Everydaysexism’s concerns about Jemima’s post being misleading I feel are unfounded. I read her post having never heard of Everydaysexism, and having never really listened to Victoria Derbyshire’s show. Having read her blog post, I googlde ‘everydaysexism’ and ‘Derbyshire’ and found the show. That took two minutes to do. And even if not everyone is as scrupulous a researcher as I am (if not I ask why not) it is clear from the narrative style and tone of the article that Jemima was not mis-representing anything.

    • thank you, although i must make clear i have edited to change my opinion that by not challenging they agreed to simply say they did not challenge

      • Fair enough, Although I read this post before there were comments on it – and I have almost photographic memory. I just didn’t sense that you were advancing a particular understanding of the Derbyshire show to suit your own ends – I can quite see how you arrived an your initial 1st posting. You were obviously trying to give your own opinion and start a debate, and by the number of comments, it was a good piece!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s