>I object to that interpretation. The intent was to make a disparaging
>remark about media pundits, NOT prostitutes. I might have carelessly used
>the "stock phrase" you refer to in this context, but as you may recall, I
>explictly voiced opinions defending sex workers' rights in several debates
>on that issue on PEN-L.
I don't believe that you had an _intent_ to disparage prostitutes. But the point is that calling someone (in this case media pundits) 'whore' doesn't have any intended rhetorical bite if 'whores' are not seen as degraded. So in this sense, regardless of your intent, prostitutes become rhetorical casualties here. And considering the fact that difficulties prostitutes face are not only legal + economic but also ideological license to dehumanize them, it is important for supporters of sex workers' rights _not_ to aggravate the ideological conditions.
Yoshie