THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO VIEW SEX WORK: INTERSECTIONALLY
by Jess Umanoff
writer’s note: Due to the specificity of historical content, I am only addressing the experiences of Black women in the sex industry. This is not meant to exclude or dismiss the experiences of gender non- conforming sex workers of color, but rather, to discuss how intersectional oppression against cisgender Black women continues to affect the modern sex work industry, as well as academic discussions on sex work.
I have just completed the Brandeis University undergraduate course The Social Politics of Sexual Education. While the course was highly recommended to me by WGS students and faculty, I was disappointed by its many shortcomings. One of which was the absence of the sociological theory of intersectionality throughout much of the course; Specifically, intersectionality’s absence from the topic of sex work. Contrary to mainstream beliefs, academic discussions on sex work are not comprehensive if intersectionality is absent, as Black women’s involvEment within the American sex industry was integral to its inception. I will draw on the works of Professor Crenshaw, my dear friend Michaela McCormack, and a past research paper of my own to support my argument.
The Social Politics of Sexual Education centered its unit on sex work on two specific documentaries: Live Nude Girls Unite, a documentary about the first sex worker’s union formed in the U.S, and Prostitution, What’s The Harm, a documentary about sex workers in the U.K. After viewing each documentary, many students criticized the absence of sex workers of color. In addition, many students felt like the genuine concerns that certain sex workers expressed about their physical safety when working demonized sex work. While it is fair to criticize the documentary’s lack of representation, the risks that come with being a sex worker are valid and can be life threatening. The curriculum of the course is to blame, as there was no documentary or reading(s) about the origins of American sex work, which center the experiences of Black women and explain why violence is still present in the industry. The earliest forms of sex work in the United States trace back to the late nineteenth century, after the end of the civil war. Throughout the decades of plantation slavery, “enslaved Black women were seen as… machinery needed to birth the slave workforce and a means to satisfy male sexual desire” (Umanoff). Black women were regularly raped and abused, which dehumanized their existence. After the Civil War ended and The Emancipation Proclamation was published, the “complicated web of particular economic, social, and family difficulties left individual working-class [Black] women to choose prostitution as a survival strategy” (Zagarri). This made the sex market one of the most common options for employment that provided Black women wages and the ability to barter with their clients (Umanoff). This profound history should have been acknowledged in the sex work unit, as it is foundational to understanding both the intricacies of sex work and affects of intersectional oppression on sex workers.
It is no secret that academic spaces that do not acknowledge intersectionality are harmful. The majority of students enrolled in The Social Politics of Sexual Education were white liberals, and the discourse about sex work disregarded the sexism, racism, and misogyny that is embedded within it. Often times, white liberals and white feminists “apply an uncritical, immaterial lens to their perception of sex work as an industry, which fails to acknowledge the experiences of sex workers of color ” (McCormack). If the theory of intersectionality was applied to the sex work unit, the class discussions about the documentaries we watched would have been more critical of the dangers that certain sex workers face because of intersectional oppression instead of criticizing the documentaries for including such stories of intersectional oppression. Intersectionality must be included in this unit “in order to account for multiple identities when considering how the social world is constructed” (Crenshaw). In the sex industry, the ways in which “women of color are at the intersection of race and gender makes experiences of... violence… qualitatively different than that of white women” (Crenshaw). Sex workers of color continue to be fetishized by customers, receive less shifts than their white counterparts, and are at a greater risk for abuse or assault (McCormack). Ignoring the history of the industry and its lasting affects on the lives of Black sex workers fails to address the structural inequalities within the sex industry and American society.
There is no place for white feminism within conversations about sex work. White feminists want to portray sex work as an emblem of female empowerment, when that is not a universal experience for all who work in the industry. All sex workers should receive the upmost respect in society and feel safe within their profession. Only then can one feel empowered in themselves. As a society, we cannot work towards making sex work a safe and equitable profession until we address the pain and abuse women of color have and continue to endure in this business. By using the theory of intersectionality, we can shed light on this topic and make sure the experiences of women of color are at the forefront of the conversation.
Works Cited
Crenshaw, Kimberle. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review, vol. 43, no. 6, 1991, pp. 1241–1246., doi:10.2307/1229039.
Zagarri, PhD, gender and politics of the American Revolution, National History Education Clearinghouse R., 2020. Teachinghistory.Org. [online] Teachinghistory.org. (as cited in Umanoff, 2020)
Umanoff, Jessica. “Racism and Sexism: The Fabrics of Capitalist America.” Student research paper, pp. 2-3, 10-12
Interview with Michaela McCormack