The overbearing title of this thread was chosen deter certain readers because it turns out that even if you put someone on your ignore list, you can still read the titles of the threads they start. Seems like an oversight to me.
Consider the actual pithier title to be Behavioral Sexonomics.
This post isn’t meant to sway the closed-minded. It’s an appeal to those willing to listen to reason. It isn’t intended to offend anyone, but offense is always a risk whenever anyone speaks. Hopefully those who are offended won’t let it stop them from considering the argument I’m making.
Free thinkers take it as read that free expression is a necessary precondition for freedom of thought, because thought itself hinges on the unhindered flow of information between thinkers.
Any economist can tell you that the health of a marketplace depends on free and open availability of accurate information including price signals – the prices buyers and sellers can agree upon. This is true for any type of commodity, whether goods or services. Fine, most of you already know this; it’s basic stuff after all.
So the trillion dollar question is: why don’t more people practice it? Why the belief that price signals are bad mojo? Why the hew and haw whenever information is evaluated for accuracy? A misrepresented service might sell a few times, but trustworthy information will bring satisfied customers to a firm on a repeat basis. Why do sellers shoot themselves in the foot by pushing an image of their services that is only loosely related to what they’re selling? Why do their exponents try to help them do it?
Usually, because of a few misconceived notions about what constitutes dignity. Our culture raises people to be like the Court Sycophants of Ancient Greece (Hellas if you actually live there), never saying anything unless they have something nice to say. In an open marketplace, you may as well suck all the oxygen out of a room. Without comprehensive and dependable information, the market breaks down. It can no longer pair compatible buyers and sellers with any consistency because they don’t know what to expect from each other. All because of confusion about what is being sold.
This problem is augmented in the sex work industry. Women are routinely taught that their dignity is contingent on deference to their sexuality, and men are commonly taught to praise or ignore it, but never directly critique it. The magazine Cosmopolitan has made no small fortune by trying to help straight women guess what the typical straight man really wants. It’s often wildly inaccurate, but it still sells well in a culture where men keep their traps shut or tell women what they think they want to hear. So, like most pop psychologists, hard-working Cosmo writers play on insecurity and preconceptions to reaffirm what sounds comforting. You’re doing the right thing, and a bottle of X’s new perfume line is just the boost you need to help you do it better. Meanwhile, reality doesn’t intrude. Good for Cosmo. They see a market and tailor their product to sell well.
When the services being sold are sexual in nature, this leads to disaster. People indoctrinated by this way of thinking come to see women’s bodies as pieces of meat, not sovereign instruments of commerce. The meat must be praised and put on a pedestal. Any signal indicating the price buyers are willing to pay the woman to employ her body in the performance of services she offers is instead and quite irrationally seen as a signal about what she herself is worth as a human being. Yet most who see it that way would never suggest that what someone would pay an athlete or a soldier has bearing on that person’s value as a human being. Most would think it grammatically incorrect to say pay for an athlete or pay for a soldier, but don’t bat an eye at talking about paying for a woman.
Why are women who sell sex treated differently? The obvious reason is because sex is treated differently, as something more sacred than anything else. The less obvious reason is because well-meaning men (quite laudably) want to be gentlemen and follow the social mores that superficially and hypocritically disdain the commodification of sexual services while allowing and even encouraging markets for them to flourish. Sexuality is regarded as synonymous with women, not merely one aspect of women. Well-intentioned gentlemen walk on eggshells and place sex workers on a pedestal, while disdainful men put them in a gutter, instead of the other side of a mutually beneficial trade relationship. Meanwhile our culture propagates to women the sense that any information about dissatisfaction with them as partners of any kind or unwillingness regarding the costs of keeping their company is “negative” information that hurts their status. So many work harder on selling an image than a service, and service suffers as a direct result.
What’s the right way to show respect for a businessperson? Honest feedback. Sycophancy is an insult to all intelligence. It’s never a favor in any circumstances whether from a teacher to a pupil, a patriot to a homeland, or a courtier to his emperor. In business it’s even worse. It’s a harmful deception giving sellers bad information to act on.
The last ten or so years has seen the rise of businesses catering to other businesses that want to stage-manage their online images by steering prospective clients away from criticism and towards glowing praise. To a certain extent these image managers are a bad investment. But at least even some of them understand that the best way to do this is by getting a firm to solicit private feedback and for the firm to address the clients to their satisfaction so they go from critics to proponents. I used to work in a field that now calls itself business intelligence. It’s exactly what it sounds like. The best data for making decisions isn’t grown by an ad campaign; it’s gathered in the wild. Businesses that embrace feedback gain insight their competitors don’t, and that can be translated into a tangible market advantage. Now if you’re a businessperson, which do you want: unalloyed praise or more money?
The flip side is a willingness to listen to what the customers are saying. If a sex worker is offended when customers treat her services like they would any other commodity by offering honest, frank, unfiltered and even completely irreverent feedback about what those services are worth to them, she’s making a mistake they are not, the mistake of thinking of the worth of her services as the worth of herself, her subjectively perceived beauty as her humanity, and her image as her dignity.
A general entreat to no one in particular: This is only the internet. It’s a wonderful resource, but it isn’t the real world any more than the corkboard at the local bar is the real world. There’s some cool stuff here, some witty people, some people who make a career out of taking offense, and a wealth of useful information. It isn’t Ragnarok. No great cultural upheavals will start or end in these forums. We’re just on this board to meet fun people and get busy. So it is with heartfelt kindness that I gently recommend lightening up, Francis (and Francine). Group hug.