"So what's the big deal? Personally, I don't care if someone wants to create an online fantasy personna. I don't think it's necessarily bad or unhealthy to explore the different facets of our psyches by writing stories...But I do take exception when someone creates false credentials in order to dupe the gullible. I worked hard to get a doctorate in sex education and many of my colleagues, whether they have academic credentials or not, have dedicated years of their lives to learn about sexuality in order to provide good information."Glickman's comments section has exploded with fighting from sex workers and sex bloggers, including a few from famous escort/blogger Belle de Jour (outed last year as Dr. Brooke Magnanti):
"Why does any of this matter? Why is this not just ‘oh, someone's having a bit of fun?' Because “Alexa” referred men to sex workers, potentially putting them at risk. Because some sex workers were threatened with exposure – perhaps not by Alexa, but certainly due to the situation. Because there are already countless bullshit stories about sex work peddled to the media every day, and someone claiming experience they don't have Does Not Help. Because genuine sex educators fight to have their research taken seriously by prurient morons in mainstream media, and someone who tweets about “teaching your sons and daughters to suck ass and lick pussy” is absolutely not for real."Sexademic" Jessi Fischer -- who actually does have a master's degree from that SFSU program -- posted about Alexa, authenticity, and online anonymity back in late 2009. She now writes about Why the Alexa Di Carlo Thing Matters and posts several screengrabs of Alexa's now defunct blog to illustrate some of the falsehoods.
If someone was blogging about being disabled, and turned out to be able-bodied, there would be an uproar. If an anonymous blogger wrote about being a racial minority or queer, but wasn't, that would be clearly manipulative and unethical: that person would rightly be shunned. But somehow, because it's sex work, people still queue up to say “don't take it so seriously!” Fuck that – we are a targeted, criminalised, marginalised minority who have the right to tell our own stories, and the right to protect that right."
"The thing that sickens me is that we all gave him our pictures willingly. We believed that this person was our peer and our friend. One of us, so to speak, in our little private world away from "old adults". We believed this person was our age, a student like us, in similar situations like us, non threatening and most of us genuinely liked this person. I for one even had a crush on this person at one stage!! To think that the pretty young woman to whom I sent pictures of myself was actually a 40 year old man with nothing but sex on his mind actually hurts."Los Angeles blog Sex and the 405 presents a different view, calling this outing a "Dangerous Precedent":
"Well-meaning members of the sex-work and sex-positive communities came together to enable the exposure of a fraud who could very well be engaged in criminal conduct with minors. But here's an unpleasant thing to consider: what's to stop well-meaning members of another community from coming together to expose a sex-worker, who is, by many state laws, engaging in criminal activity (i.e., prostitution)? Supporting the exposure of anonymous bloggers online sets very a dangerous precedent. This concerns me. As does the idea that the sex-work activism community may be inadvertently silencing the voices of sex-workers who do no meet the criteria of responsible blogging."Sex educator Miss Maggie Mayhem and other blogs have cataloged some of the Alexa blowback by creating a BINGO card of common "this is no big deal" responses to the scandal.
I'm just tired of people posting or sending explicit photos and then being *shocked! shattered!* at the creeps that come streaming out of the woodwork.It's less the creeps that come streaming out of the woodwork than the helpful qualified non-threatening adults who offer some guidance when you're at a confusing place then turn out to be creeps running an elaborately orchestrated scam to get laid.
Yeaaaah... what helpful, qualified, non-threatening adult is going to ask you to send naked pictures of yourself engaged in sexual posing or activity?That's one of the reasons that a scammer sets up their authoritative voice, then asks marks to take the leap of faith.
Yeaaaah... what helpful, qualified, non-threatening adult is going to ask you to send naked pictures of yourself engaged in sexual posing or activity?You're not supposed to sexually exploit even stupid children. I know, I know, but I don't make the rules.
Here's where I'm coming from. Sex is, in the Christian view as I understand it*, something deeply spiritual, the deepest form of connection between two people. It's one of the most powerful ways that we learn about ourselves, about others as human persons, and even about God. So engaging in sexual activity outside the confines of a committed relationship** is, in essence, trading on falsehood, the lie that you can have true intimacy without commitment, cost, or consequence.Human beings are -- undeniably -- capable of combining penises and vaginas in a variety of permutations outside the context of a committed relationship. That is a fundamental feature of the human creature. To claim that those who do so are "trading on a falsehood" implies that they agree with you about the purpose, implication, and nature of sex. It's just as easy to say that monogamists are, in essence, trading on a falsehood, the lie that you can chain another person's soul to the ground with a tiny ring of metal, giving one's own petty jealousies and selfishness the weight of law.
And you don't see anything wrong with that? Because I do. I mean, I pretty much agree, but doesn't that bother you even a little?It would bother me if you were subjected to a classic flame-out pile-on and berated. That would bother me a lot, because even though I disagree with what you're saying you communicate your views clearly, effectively, and without attacks on others. If people find the ideas offensive, they do in the same way that some conservatives find the existence of "outed" gays offensive.
Again, I think what the guy did is reprehensible, I'm just having trouble figuring out why it's a different kind of reprehensible than the industry seems to take in stride.posted by verb at 8:53 AM on November 23, 2010
I think this basically boils down to the idea that there's a difference between "Deception" and "Disagreeing with my premises."
You say that you are all about pointing out the fact that different people have different premises, but you seem to be missing the implications of it in this story.
BECAUSE THE PEOPLE YOU ARE TRYING TO ARGUE WITH DO NOT THINK SEX IS A DIRTY HOLY SACRED WRONGFUL SHAME SO YOU MIGHT NOT GET WHY THEY DON'T THINK SEX WORK IS EQUAL TO BEING A SEXUAL PREDATORJust to make clear: Valkyryn's comments do not suggest that sex is dirty, wrongful, or shameful. The Christian view of sex that valkyryn outlines holds that sex is really, really awesome and important and that it's cheapened by treating it as a simple biological function or recreational activity.
"As far as Alexa goes, she seemed like a nice enough person on her twitter feed that genuinely cared about sex worker rights and I’d engaged in twitversations with her from time to time. People have been raising suspicions about her identity for awhile and when she approached SWOP-USA earlier this year about supporting her “Code of Ethics” for sex workers, several people raised concerns about not just the Code but Alexa herself. She was asked to meet with a rep from SWOP before we threw support for anything that she did, and she declined. So no, there was no disorganization on our part; people just thought she was shady. Look, I can understand if someone doesn’t want to hang out with other sex workers, but why go through such trouble to keep your identity hidden? It only makes people think you have something to hide."I dare you to read the bullet points on Alexa's "Code of Ethics" and not choke with laughter...or rage. This is serious chutzpah.
« Older Didn't Know What Love Was is video by Andreas Nils... | Jill Sylvia does amazing thing... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:05 PM on November 22, 2010 [4 favorites]