Does it not demean a woman, every bit as much as it does a man, to position her either as a victim of men’s appetites or as a fantasist of them? asks Howard Jacobson, who’s been dutifully ploughing through a series of memoirs by high-class hookers for the latest issue of Prospect. The books are cartoonish, he finds, but no less so than accounts that cast prostitutes as mere victims of rapacious male sexuality.
It’s time for a more grown-up debate about sexuality, both male and female, suggests Jacobson—one which acknowledges that there are many types of prostitute, just as there are many reasons for men to visit them. Do feel free to debate, in grown-up fashion, below.
Share
Comments
Print
Add Comment
My first visit to a prostitute resulted in being busted in a police sting. There is not likely to be another.
As a 19 year old army soldier, I found myself in Korea in the mid 50s. Korea was all blown to hell, all sand bags and barbed wire. One evening I went with a prostitute to her house. I liked her more than the $10 in MPC I paid for our time together. The following evening I found her in the village streets with another GI, who I instantly hated. I have never again gone to a prostitute, but, I have never forgotten her name or her face and wondered what life
probably brought to her.
This article, a fantastic example of wryness in service to insight, makes a mean argument. Indeed, the author–whose writing style shows the ease with which he can move beyond simple reportage–succeeds in tapping the source of a debate about men and sexuality without harming it. Too often, discussion about men and their sexual rights (yes, a strong word) ends up overly argumentative or just downright full of self-pity. Not so with Jacobson. He sees the tarnish on both sides of the male-female coin, and without doing injustice to women, he makes headway into the murky waters of male desire. He doesn’t solve anything, of course, since nothing like this can be so easily sorted out in prose. Still, Jacobson recognizes the strangeness that sexual desire may have as its source…and its outlet. One can hope this triggers discussion at the bars, coffee-shops, or dinner tables about what makes any of us itch in that way that often excites the baser side and drives many men into the (sometimes welcoming) arms of prostitutes. Most likely it won’t, but this short article can serve to spark questions.
Only the ending gave me pause when, by characterizing the male impulse to seek out prostitutes as a “miseryâ€, Jacobson appears to preempt neutral strangeness of sexuality that earlier parts of the article seemingly promote. I’m thinking here of “You can’t mess around with sex, in life or in literature. It is never not serious.â€, “Everything in sex matters, including the experience of its not mattering.â€, “We have to be careful, with sex, what we don’t believe.â€, and the entire paragraph following “The sexual instinct will not stay still for anybody.†This last one got me thinking about Lawrence, particularly parts of his novel, The Rainbow.
All in all, I thank the author for this piece and the editors of Prospect for its publication.
Without disagreeing with many of his general arguments, I think Jacobson is wilfully naive about the provenance of many of these hooker memoirs. Belle de Jour, most people now know, was written by fat fiftyish male professional ghostwriter, in his study in Chingford, and many of the other hooker memoirs are similarly dodged up. Given that Jacobson is a former English academic, dealing with such real accounts as Crusoe, Pamela et al, why does his critical apparatus about the pseudo-memoir fail him at this point? Because most of the records of hookers getting sexual pleasure come from the anonymous books, and without them his evidence for a wide spectrum of hooker experience is pretty thin. All in all I’ll trust Cynthia Payne’s judgement over Jacobson’s as to which of these books are the real deal.
The surprising thing about this nicely contemplative piece and the rabid frothings of less open-minded commenters is the assumption that non-paid sex is so much better than prostitution.
The physical and emotional abuse in relationships without payment dwarfs that in prostitution. The number of guys who will lie, trick or extort a woman into sex, or into situations which make rape simple and hard to prove, far outweighs the number who’ll pay cash.
Let’s stop focusing on payment, which neither confers nor eliminates respect, and focus on men’s honesty and women’s freedom to make up their own minds.
One day, whilst quietly sailing along the cycle track beside Hyde Park’s Rotten Row, two chaps were jogging up ahead. The nature of a well-oiled bicycle being that it makes hardly any sound, the giggly pair did not hear the advancing bike ; and so continued their intimate banter. Recognising the voice of one famously dishy TV
“gob-on-a-stick” ( his chum a politician ) I was amused to hear:
” Yeah, but even if you factor in dinner and flowers..it’s still cheaper than a hooker for the night ”
Without wishing to divert the debate, where Jacobson suggests that Prada call girls “grant men the freedom to be creatures of desire”, dare we ask yet if feeling like “creatures of desire” for both sexes has been compromised by modern harridan females wearing the trousers and calling the shots ?
( Remember the sub-head of Daisy Waugh’s novel, The New You Survival Kit, ” she’s got it all and now she wants a refund ” )
Now, self-appointed experts of the make-over industry are bullying males to be ” waxed and coiffed metrosexuals ” ( heaven forfend ) , when in fact all men need is not to box above their height, as it were, confidence, toothpaste, soap, and a glass or two of Margaux ..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/26/nsexes126.xml
For those who want to spout statistics about rape and coercion among hookers, do you suspect that the violence in the life of a crack dealer is the same as the violence in the life of a Segram’s salesman? Both are doing the same job, but one is illicit and one is respectable. By making and keeping prostitution illegal, you drive into the back lots and cheap motels where violence and abuse are commonplace and where its victims have little or no recourse. Who’s fault is it when a hooker is raped or harmed? First, it’s the fault of the perpetrator, of course. But secondary blame lies at your prudish feet.
You go, Paco!
The “physical and emotional abuse in relationships without payment” surely outdoes the scope of simple cash-in-hand sexual transactions, and is a very important issue no doubt in need of continuous observation.
But it also brings with itself a whole different set of sociological problems. At this point then, we would be veering away from what Jacobson has to say about prostitution and men. It’s a related but different topic. We would now have to talk generally about women and men, about dynamics of sex and relationships and–again–about men’s assumptive role as the amoral aggressor.
Granted. Men have always been the apes and a good number keep at that role. Many always will, and that needs changing. But when dealing with them, we’re once again in need of an investigation into sexuality…a frank and unbiased investigation at that. Without that, all we’re doing is writing the same comments on the wall: “A woman’s lust is a horizon-widening exploration; a man’s is a canker.”
I don’t think that serves any real purpose, nor is the thought close-minded. On the whole, this entire topic’s bound to topple into one about power and passivity, a wider and harder to navigate field than even the man-woman or man-prostitution areas.
And perhaps prostitution should be legalized. That would have to be accompanied by quality assurances and regulations drafted by cautious experts to guarantee that the same problems going on now simply wouldn’t continue with the state taking its own cut of the sexual transaction. That seems difficult.
“The second narrative tells of snazzy, Sex in the City hookerdom, fucking and shopping exactly in the spirit and prose of women’s blockbusters of 20 years ago, only now the fucking pays for the shopping.”
Sounds like some marriages.
Prostitutes is very old institute.In India even famous Vasyayana writer of Kamsutra[ manual of sex] mention prostitutes.My observation of India most prostitute are came from very poor family, some came by our nasty caste system.Yes some came by rape, by cheating.
Any how they are doing some kind social service.In India ratio between man and woman is vast because prejudice against girl, many girl destroy by sonography.How can man satify their urge of sex?Prostitutes help them
Our renowned socilogist V.S. Ketker wrote long ago that educated women now do business of prostitutes if they starte this business, they are more carful for their and their customers health, today so much dirty and unhumanly this business conducted that will be improve, this bisiness will be get prestige.
Vasyayana described in his world famous Kamsutra[ sex manual] that prostitute instituite was very respected in his time.
Hindu tredition from ancient time given prostitute very good respect, Hindu tredition call them AKHAND SUBHAGYVATI[means forever married never widow]Formarly in our marrage we respectfully call prostitute in marrage and she hand over new couple a gift. that we think good omen for loger and happy marrage for new copule.
As a women I agree – Go Paco!!! Less than 100 years ago women were not considered being capable of voting in general elections. Women have lust, but they also have a right to say no and to be listened to. Allow us to flirt, allow us to have one-night stands, allow us to feel sexy. And allow us to live in a world without sexual abuse, including “page 3 girls attitudes” (women as objects). How many women are being killed every day by their partners? How many men? It’s still a man’s world – but for how long
?
[...] this article on First Drafts, Prospect’s [...]