WHOREPHOBIA WHOREPHOBIA

Throughout my profession in the sex industry, I have worked as an Only Fans model, cam girl, content creator, stripper, and even engaged in full-service sex work. In each of these aspects of sex work, I have encountered “Whorephobia”. This article seeks to help you better understand whorephobia and why we encounter it by deciphering what it is and examining the institutions that perpetuate it.

WHOREPHOBIA: WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

Whorephobia is a phrase that alludes to the negative falsehoods, discrimination, and marginalization sex workers receive. The basis of this negativity derives from an extensive disdain and detest of sex work and, therefore, sex workers. Contempt and ridicule for sex workers often overlap with negative attitudes toward other marginalized communities. No one intrinsically holds whorephobic thoughts. Rather, it results from the influence of Western society and the media. Like homophobia and transphobia, whorephobia is a deeply ingrained feature of both individuals and communities, leading to severe repercussions for sex workers. Whorephobia manifests in various forms such as censorship of sex workers' content, discrimination by merchants and banks, and biased opinions towards sex workers, such as "I would never date a girl with an OnlyFans” or “I would never date a stripper.” This phobia is rooted in the view that engaging in sex work is immoral, shameful, or demeaning. Whorephobia portrays sex workers as undeserving of respect, protection, or equal rights as other members of society. Those who participate in sex work often face stigma, discrimination, and violence, as well as legal and social barriers.

Internalized Whorephobia Within the Sex Worker Community

Before becoming sex workers, we were ordinary people or civilians. Unfortunately, many sex workers still carry sex-negative beliefs because societal norms have fed into whorephobia over time. Strippers, online content creators, and sugar babies perpetuate many of these stereotypes and internalized whorephobia.

Everyone’s Sex Work Boundaries Are Valid

Every single sex worker has boundaries regarding what sort of sex work they’re comfortable with. Cultural backgrounds, personal identity, and life experiences make our boundaries different. It’s ok to draw the line at penetrative sex. It’s ok to charge what you want for penetrative sex, whether it be $50 or $5,000 The choice is yours and yours alone. Just remember, even if you do not engage in full-service sex work you are not above those that do. And just because you charge more for fullservice sex work does not mean you are above someone who charges less. Shaming another sex worker for how they engage in the industry is no different than when others look down on any sort of sex work because “I could never do that. I have ethics and morals”.

As a stripper, it’s the norm to brag “OMG he tipped me $500 and I didn’t even have to touch him” or “I don’t even have to see a penis!”. Because other dancers or friends would respond to my bragging with approval (which reinforced that I should be proud) it just perpetuated negative stigmas within myself that I continued to carry on with others. It was almost like a bragging right “I’ve never done an extra before” or other women would say “girls who do extras just ruin the club”. These remarks are harmful because they feed into the notion that sex work is only acceptable as long you don’t have to “reduce yourself” to having sex with your client. Even remarks like “you have to charge more if you want to engage with sex with clients” are inherently whorephobic. It’s a way of saying “yes, I do sex work but I’m still virtuous and worthy of respect only if I’m not having sex with

I also do not believe that women engaging in full-service sex work, sometimes called “extras” within the strip club setting, hurts the club’s profits. Many strippers believe this and even I believed it for a long time. The thought process is “why would someone get a plain old lap dance from me when he can have full-on penetrative s free?”. It makes a lot of s me to Jane had consensual sex with John, for a price, of course. Now John is going to return week after week for Jane. John will most likely get bored of Jane, or maybe one week Jane won’t be there, or maybe John will bring his friends. Someday, John or his friend may ask for a dance or VIP room from me. My boundaries and Jane’s boundaries are different, but John is still paying the same amount of money. Most men go into the strip club believing they will ‘get lucky’. Jane is doing extras in a safe environment where there are bouncers, managers and other patrons to help her if needed. Some clubs have panic buttons for safety. If a sex worker goes to a hotel with a man after work, they are at risk for so much more than the average two people having consensual sex. I'm not telling strippers to have sex in clubs or do extras, and I'm not saying to engage in activities that go against your boundaries. What I am saying is no matter what club you work at, it's going to happen, whether it is in the club or outside of the club.

The majority of sexually explicit or pornographic content is legal. Thanks to the First Amendment, our right to communicate that legal content is protected, with the notable exceptions of “obscene” content and child pornography.

But though the content itself might be legal and its distribution constitutionally-protected things look quite different in the realm of private companies. Under U.S. law, internet platforms can censor content. Social media apps like Facebook and Instagram might ban nudity altogether. (According to Instagram, nude content that shows “sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks” and some “female” nipples would be inappropriate for a diverse audience. Photos of paintings and sculptures depicting nudity are presumably okay, but in practice, art might be censored anyway.)

Paige Collings notes that platforms’ moderation of sexual content renders them “the arbiters of how people create and engage with nude content both offline and in the digital space.” The consequences are stark, and they are felt most strongly by marginalized groups, including sex workers and queer communities.

A form of speech is more or less removed from the most popular internet spaces. Users are left without many meaningful options to engage in a critical form of content.

We at Woodhull Freedom Foundation agree wholeheartedly with Collings’ statement that “the system of content moderation is broken moderation policies are opaque, often arbitrary, and not applied evenly.” Censoring legal sexual content serves to sanitize our understanding of freedom of speech.