>It seems to lump together people, a lot of whom really wouldn't want to be
>lumped together. (What exactly does a stripper have in common with a
>prostitute, other than nudity usually being part of the job?)
I think it's, uh, complicated -- and not it a facebook relationship status way :). rather, i don't think there's anything wrong per se with the word prostitute. i do think that, if people who work in the sex industry ask you to use the word sex worker, then you should probably at least listen to their reasons and be open to what they have to say. i mean, what does it hurt *you* to call people by the names they want to be called. this is particularly true if you're speaking to activists who work in the sex industry. because, seriously?, why the fuck would they be unaware that the category lumps a lot of different jobs together? given that, they would probably have already thought it through and your criticism comes off as disrespecting the work they do on the topic already.
but to complicate things: of course the problem then is the same one we have with other words: blacks v African Americans v Blacks, transman/transwoman v trans man/trans woman, trannies v transgenders, latino/a v hispanic. and that problem is: it depends on which person you ask, which political ideologies they affiliate with, etc.
but as to your question: they have in common fighting against the moralizing about sex that marginalizes their way of making a living. (For a discussion of that, see Agustin's chapter on the invention of the prostitute and "the rise of the social" (which, dayum, I'm hoping I can write about before this book is due back to interlibrary loan. they have me running two projects, back to back, both due last week. :)
BUT! consider one of the points raised by Agustin in the chapter, A World of Services and in a section called 'The Argument for Labour Rights and the Problem of Migration'.
Traditional legal proposals, Agustin points out, are systems for controlling prostitution and they do not recognize the work or the demands workers are actually making. Workers' rights organization in the sex industry have shifted the focus, raising awareness of and fomenting movements that demand that their work be recognized as an occupation with all the attendant rights associated with 'legitimate' work.
While women she interviewed generally supported such measures -- either by being actively involved, supportive of the work others were doing, or simply being aware but uninterested in getting involved. *However* migrants who didn't have the security of residency status and work permits often felt such projects were irrelevant to their lives.
She's emphasizing something that rights advocates sometimes fail to remember (and you see same dynamic in any activist outfit):
"Those who want to support migrants should not forget that most knew they would be traveling and earning money illegally, which neither calling them victims nor normalising sex work can overcome." (p. 73)
In other words, there are subtle status differences among sex workers that the typically more privileged activists can sometimes be unaware of. Building solidarity would require also working on the issues important to migrant sex workers without residency or work permits.
shag