Comments on: How Can You Tell If You’re a Prostitute?

By: Ali

Ali — Fri, 22 May 2009 15:39:23 +0000

pg, would you mind explaining how scenarios 3-5 obligate the woman to have sex? I’m not sure I understand your point/hypothesis.

3 and 5 seem like opposite sides of the same coin: the man gives something and the woman is expected to sleep with the man in return. But to me this just seems more like it’s just the man’s (and possibly the woman’s) expectation, and NOT a sign that the woman now has to sleep with the man. Even if they arranged it as an exchange of goods/services (“I will sleep with you if you buy me _____.” or “If I buy you _____, will you sleep with me?”) that says to me that they are both obligated to each other and not that the woman alone is obligated to sleep with the man.

As for 4, some (certainly not all) sex workers have a degree of latitude when it comes to picking up Johns. She may or may not be attracte to the guy, but she can reject a man who they suspect may be violent for example.

Maybe I just have problems with the way you use “obligation” here. I don’t believe anyone, including sex workers, is “obligated” to sleep with anyone else. Since sex involves the sex worker’s body and not just some object, they should always have the ability to opt out if the engagement is not going the way they expected it to in the beginning.

By: pg

pg — Fri, 22 May 2009 11:57:43 +0000

These are the different possible scenarios:
1. A woman goes out and meets a guy she likes, has drinks with him, and goes home with him if she feels like it
2. A man gives a woman gifts because he likes her
3. A woman goes out to find a guy to buy her drinks with the understanding she is obligated to have sex with him if she accepts the drinks
4. A woman goes out to find a guy that will pay her to have sex with him
5. A man gives a woman gifts so she will have sex with him

1 and 2 don’t involve an obligation to have sex with someone
3, 4, and 5 oblige the woman to have sex with the man, whether or not she is attracted to him

By: Duran

Duran — Tue, 19 May 2009 15:25:24 +0000

Oh, come on.

The line of legality is obvious and crystal clear. Most localities define prostitution something like this (from Washington’s RCW):

“A person is guilty of prostitution if such person engages or agrees or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee.”

Nobody would charge a girl for fucking a guy because he bought her a drink.

I agree that the social line is a little more blurry, as is what Zapata’s is trying to enforce, but whoever claimed that private property owners created sensible rules?

By: Fernando

Fernando — Tue, 19 May 2009 14:47:09 +0000

the difference is in the willingness to say something openly. We are constantly exchanging goods, but we don’t explicitly say it. If you say you’re becoming friends with someone for the benefits that person might bring to you, you’ll be labeled as cold. IMO leaving everything implicit is just our way of estabilishing trust, of saying that the relation goes beyond the exchange of benefits.

When we openly offer something for a price, we are forming a comercial relation, that is limited to that one specific exchange.

In the end of the day everything’s a trade, no that this is something bad at all.

By: Sushu

Sushu — Tue, 19 May 2009 04:23:16 +0000

The Chinese does say “prostitute”, but it also says “if you’re uncertain of your status/classification, please ask the security guards — they are very kind and friendly.”

So maybe there’s an official definition of “prostitute”? (Such as accepting $$ in excess of a certain amount?)

By: John

John — Tue, 19 May 2009 01:46:30 +0000

It could also be a discussion of the problems of context-less translation. I’m not a reader of Chinese, but doing a Google translation of “prostitute,” “whore,” or “harlot” from English to Chinese (simplified), you get 妓女. If you put in “call-girl” you get 应召女郎 (although this could have been translated incorrectly, too).

I’ll have to ask some of the Chinese students to provide their own translations to see if this isn’t an issue of bad translation. Also, to whom is this sign meant for? Is it written in English to deter English-reading prostitutes, or to let English patrons know that their establishment is a “nice place to go”? (I tend to lean toward the latter.)