1887
image of Discourses of discrimination against sex workers
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper explores how discourses of discrimination against sex workers are discursively reproduced or challenged in polylogal (multi-participant) interactions in digital environments such as YouTube. Drawing on stancetaking (Du Bois 2007) and the stance dimensions of evaluation and alignment (Kiesling 2018, 2021), we analyze how commenters’ stances towards sex work can be linked to — i.e., the discursive manifestation of discriminations against sex workers. Focusing on two threads of comments found under a YouTube video, we suggest that whorephobia operates along a scalar continuum, with aggression against sex work/ers ranging from explicitly negative stances to more subtle and banalized ones that may even go unnoticed. In our data, ( was traced in stances that indexed: (a) low evaluation of/low alignment with participants expressing sex-positive views or supporting that sex workers’ rights advocacy can be compatible with feminist agendas; and/or (b) high evaluation of/high alignment with participants who view sex work as inherently immoral or exploitative in line with Christian conservative or radical feminist discourses. We conclude that what makes particularly concerning is that it manifests through stances that, though not explicitly hostile, may still reinforce sex workers’ stigmatization and social exclusions, often in ways that may seem socially acceptable or well justified.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00127.sag
2025-03-06
2025-11-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Archakis, Argiris, and Villy Tsakona
    2024a “Antiracist and Racist Discourse as Antagonistic and Overlapping.” InExploring the Ambivalence of Liquid Racism: In between Antiracist and Racist Discourse, edited byArgiris Archakis and Villy Tsakona, –. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.341.01arc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.341.01arc [Google Scholar]
  2. (eds) 2024bExploring the Ambivalence of Liquid Racism: In between Antiracist and Racist Discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.341
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.341 [Google Scholar]
  3. Billig, Michael
    1995Banal Nationalism. Los Angeles: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bou-Franch, Patricia, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich
    2014a “Conflict Management in Massive Polylogues: A Case Study from YouTube.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2014b “Gender Ideology and Social Identity Processes in Online Language Aggression against Women.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict(): –. 10.1075/jlac.2.2.03bou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.2.2.03bou [Google Scholar]
  6. Bou-Franch, Patricia, Nuria Lorenzo-Dus, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich
    2012 “Social Interaction in YouTube Text-Based Polylogues: A Study of Coherence.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication(): –. 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2012.01579.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01579.x [Google Scholar]
  7. Brooks-Gordon, Belinda, Max Morris, and Teela Sanders
    2021 “Harm Reduction and Decriminalization of Sex Work: Introduction to the Special Section.” Sexuality Research & Social Policy: –. 10.1007/s13178‑021‑00636‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-021-00636-0 [Google Scholar]
  8. Du Bois, John
    2007 “Stance Triangle”. InStancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, edited byRobert Englebretson, –. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.164.07du
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.07du [Google Scholar]
  9. Englebretson, Robert
    2007 “Stancetaking in Discourse: An Introduction”. InStancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, edited byRobert Englebretson, –. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.164.02eng
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.02eng [Google Scholar]
  10. Georgalou, Mariza
    2015 “Small Stories of the Greek Crisis on Facebook.” Social Media + Society(): –. 10.1177/2056305115605859
    https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115605859 [Google Scholar]
  11. Gumperz, John
    1992 “Contextualization Revisited”. InThe Contextualization of Language, edited byPeter Auer and Aldo Di Luzio, –. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.22.04gum
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.22.04gum [Google Scholar]
  12. Harms, Meghan
    2020 “Not That Kind of Slut: Understanding Whorephobia in Sex-Positive Discourse”. Journal of Integrated Studies(). Retrieved fromhttps://jis.athabascau.ca/index.php/jis/article/view/299https://jis.athabascau.ca/index.php/jis/article/view/299
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Henham, Carolyn
    2021 “The Reduction of Visible Spaces of Sex Work in Europe.” Sexuality Research & Social Policy: –. 10.1007/s13178‑021‑00632‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-021-00632-4 [Google Scholar]
  14. Heritage, John
    2004 “Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk: Analysing Data”. InQualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, edited byDavid Silverman (2nd edn), –. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Jeong, Hyojin, and Younghan Cho
    2020 “Banal Misogyny”. InHate Speech in Asia and Europe: Beyond Hate and Fear, edited byMyungkoo Kang, Marie Orange-Rivé Lasan, Wooja Kim and Philippa Hall, –. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429264009‑5
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429264009-5 [Google Scholar]
  16. Kiesling, Scott F.
    2009 “Style as Stance: Stance as the Explanation for Patterns of Sociolinguistic Variation”. InStance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives, edited byAlexandra Jaffe, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331646.003.0008
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331646.003.0008 [Google Scholar]
  17. 2018 “Masculine Stances and the Linguistics of Affect: On Masculine Ease”. NORMA(): –. 10.1080/18902138.2018.1431756
    https://doi.org/10.1080/18902138.2018.1431756 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2021 “The ‘Gay Voice’ and ‘Brospeak’: Toward a Systematic Model of Stance”. InThe Oxford Handbook of Language and Sexuality, edited byKira Hall and Rusty Barrett. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Kiesling, Scott F., Umashanthi Pavalanathan, Jim Fitzpatrick, Xiaochuang Han, and Jacob Eisenstein
    2018 “Interactional Stancetaking in Online Forums.” Computational Linguistics(): –. 10.1162/coli_a_00334
    https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00334 [Google Scholar]
  20. Lange, Patricia G.
    2007 “Publicly Private and Privately Public: Social Networking on YouTube.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication: –. 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2007.00400.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00400.x [Google Scholar]
  21. Lee, Eun-Ju
    2007 “Deindividuation Effects on Group Polarization in Computer-Mediated Communication: The Role of Group Identification, Public-Self-Awareness, and Perceived Argument Quality.” Journal of Communication: –. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2007.00348.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00348.x [Google Scholar]
  22. Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria, Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, and Patricia Bou-Franch
    2011 “On-Line Polylogues and Impoliteness: The Case of Postings Sent in Response to the Obama Reggaeton YouTube Video.” Journal of Pragmatics(): –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.005 [Google Scholar]
  23. Mokhwelepa, Leshata Winter, Mxolisi Welcome Ngwenya, and Gsakani Olivia Sumbane
    2024 “Systematic Review on Public Health Problems and Barriers for Sex Workers.” Open Public Health Journal: e18749445264436. 10.2174/0118749445264436231119172400
    https://doi.org/10.2174/0118749445264436231119172400 [Google Scholar]
  24. Muntigl, Peter, and William Turnbull
    1998 “Conversational Structure and Facework in Arguing.” Journal of Pragmatics(): –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)00048‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00048-9 [Google Scholar]
  25. Murthy, Dhiraj, and Sanjay Sharma
    2018 “Visualizing YouTube’s Comment Space: Online Hostility as a Networked Phenomena.” New Media & Society(): –. 10.1177/1461444818792393
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818792393 [Google Scholar]
  26. O’Neill, Maggie, and Alison Jobe
    2022 “Sex Work, Criminalisation and Stigma: Towards a Feminist Criminological Imagination.” InCriminal Women: Gender Matters, edited bySharon Grace, Maggie O’Neill, Tammi Walker, Hannah King, Lucy Baldwin, Orla Lynch, Fiona Measham, Kate O’Brien and Vicky Seaman, –. Bristol, UK: Bristol University Press. 10.2307/j.ctv2bjgr7v.10
    https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2bjgr7v.10 [Google Scholar]
  27. Reicher, Steve, Russell Spears, and Tom Postmes
    1995 “A Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Phenomena.” European Review of Social Psychology: –. 10.1080/14792779443000049
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779443000049 [Google Scholar]
  28. Richter, Marlise, Zia Wasserman, and Ishtar Lakhani
    2020 “Targets of Hate, Shame or Exploitation?: The (Violent) Conundrum of Sex Work in Democratic South Africa.” International Journal of Critical Diversity Studies(): –. 10.13169/intecritdivestud.3.1.0009
    https://doi.org/10.13169/intecritdivestud.3.1.0009 [Google Scholar]
  29. Sagredos, Christos
    2019 “The Representation of Sex Work in the Greek Press: A Corpus-Assisted Critical Discourse Analysis.” Journal of Language and Sexuality(): –. 10.1075/jls.18012.sag
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.18012.sag [Google Scholar]
  30. Sagredos, Christos, and Evelin Nikolova
    2022 “‘Slut I hate you’: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Gendered Conflict on YouTube.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict(): –. 10.1075/jlac.00065.sag
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00065.sag [Google Scholar]
  31. Sanders, Teela
    2009 “Controlling the ‘Anti Sexual’ City: Sexual Citizenship and the Disciplining of Female Street Sex Workers.” Criminology & Criminal Justice(): –. 10.1177/1748895809343403
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895809343403 [Google Scholar]
  32. Stardust, Zahra, Carla Treloar, Elena Cama, and Jules Kim
    2021 “‘I wouldn’t Call the Cops if I was Being Bashed to Death’: Sex Work, Whore Stigma and the Criminal Legal System.” International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy(): –. 10.5204/ijcjsd.1894
    https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.1894 [Google Scholar]
  33. Vaahensalo, Elina
    2021 “Creating the Other in Online Interaction: Othering Online Discourse Theory.” InThe Emerald International Handbook of Technology-Facilitated Violence and Abuse, edited byJane Bailey, Asher Flynn and Nicola Henry, –. Leeds: Emerald Publishing Limited. 10.1108/978‑1‑83982‑848‑520211016
    https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83982-848-520211016 [Google Scholar]
  34. van Zoonen, Liesbet, Farida Vis, and Sabina Mihelj
    2011 “YouTube Interactions between Agonism, Antagonism and Dialogue: Video Responses to the Anti-Islam Film Fitna”. New Media & Society(): –. 10.1177/1461444811405020
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811405020 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00127.sag
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00127.sag
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error