Read Male Sex Work and Society Online
Authors: Unknown
Tags: #Psychology/Human Sexuality, #Social Science/Gay Studies, #SOC012000, #PSY016000
Male Sex Work and Society (13 page)
| Male Sex Work in Modern Times | |
KERWIN KAYE |
The history of male prostitution extends deep into the past, mirroring the historical depth of what was referred to (wrongly, and with negative implication) as “the world’s oldest profession”: female prostitution. But although records indeed indicate the existence of male prostitution in some of the most ancient societies, such a claim proves little and obscures much. In looking more closely at the topic, one is immediately confronted by the fuzziness of the terms: what is “male” and what is “prostitution”? How has what is known today as “male prostitution” come to be known as just that?
Perhaps the most widespread pattern of “male prostitution” practiced in Europe and the United States at the turn of the 19
th
century involved biological men who dressed similarly to female prostitutes. Commonly known in the United States as “fairies,” these individuals worked variously in all-fairy brothels and saloons, as solo offerings in brothels that were otherwise devoted to female workers, or on the streets in either semisegregated or “mixed sex” cruising zones. In some instances, the individuals may have tried to pass themselves off as biological women, although in most cases this seems not to have been true. Writing before the concept of “transsexuality” had arisen, early sexologists such as Magnus Hirschfeld and Havelock Ellis readily included this type of prostitution as an instance of “male prostitution” more generally. It is unclear how the subjects of these writings would have presented themselves, but most individuals who fit this description in the contemporary period identify as transsexual or simply as females, placing their work outside of the category of “male prostitution” per se (and indeed, most researchers today distinguish between “male prostitution” and “trans-prostitution”—or even between biological versus nonbiological forms of “female prostitution”—in a way that would be unfamiliar to 19
th
-century sexologists). These definitional uncertainties make it unclear whether what occurred in the late 1800s and early 1900s should be classified as “male prostitution,” and, if so, when exactly it ceased to be “male prostitution” and became something else.
th
century involved biological men who dressed similarly to female prostitutes. Commonly known in the United States as “fairies,” these individuals worked variously in all-fairy brothels and saloons, as solo offerings in brothels that were otherwise devoted to female workers, or on the streets in either semisegregated or “mixed sex” cruising zones. In some instances, the individuals may have tried to pass themselves off as biological women, although in most cases this seems not to have been true. Writing before the concept of “transsexuality” had arisen, early sexologists such as Magnus Hirschfeld and Havelock Ellis readily included this type of prostitution as an instance of “male prostitution” more generally. It is unclear how the subjects of these writings would have presented themselves, but most individuals who fit this description in the contemporary period identify as transsexual or simply as females, placing their work outside of the category of “male prostitution” per se (and indeed, most researchers today distinguish between “male prostitution” and “trans-prostitution”—or even between biological versus nonbiological forms of “female prostitution”—in a way that would be unfamiliar to 19
th
-century sexologists). These definitional uncertainties make it unclear whether what occurred in the late 1800s and early 1900s should be classified as “male prostitution,” and, if so, when exactly it ceased to be “male prostitution” and became something else.
Similar difficulties arise when considering the precise limits of a word such as “prostitution.” From the early 1700s well into the 20
th
century, a pattern of prostitution developed in which “normally identified” male soldiers engaged in paid sex for a queer-identified male clientele. Other “normally identified” working-class men also sold sex to “queer” men, but military men apparently had their own bars and “soldiers’ promenades” in which they worked. This means of supplementing the military’s meager wages gained such subcultural status that, within certain regiments, noncommissioned officers apparently began initiating new recruits into prostitution immediately on enlistment. Although some of what became known as “barracks prostitution” was constituted by clear sex for cash transactions, there was apparently an oversupply of workers throughout much of the history of this institution, leading many of the soldiers to seek longer-term relations with individual clients. Relations between soldiers and clients therefore often involved a good deal more emotional intimacy than was typical between female prostitutes and their clientele, and at least a few of these relationships developed into domestic arrangements in which the queer-identified person would cook, clean, and sew for his soldier partner during periods of leave. “The financial dependence of the beloved on the loving person often makes it look like prostitution, although no one thinks twice when in a heterosexual relationship a wealthy man spends a lot of money on a young woman he greatly loves, regardless of whether he marries her or not” (Hirschfeld, 2000, p. 805). Even in shorter-term arrangements, many material exchanges took the form of “gifts,” particularly with wealthier persons, making it possible that the participants did not identify their activities as “prostitution” per se. Although most of these relationships ended at the end of a soldier’s tour of duty, the stigmatization of such relationships makes them more susceptible to the label of “prostitution” in the eyes of outsiders. More generally, the attempt to decide whether or not these exchanges were truly instances of prostitution diverts attention away from their actual contours. A more fruitful approach follows from examining the ways in which participants may have used the term “prostitution” to set social and emotional limits around certain interactions while leaving others deliberately vague. Rather than seeing “prostitution” as a trans-historical category, common to all periods, one might begin to see the way in which the very definition of the term allows for some ambiguity, enabling it to be used by both outsiders and participants as a political tool.
th
century, a pattern of prostitution developed in which “normally identified” male soldiers engaged in paid sex for a queer-identified male clientele. Other “normally identified” working-class men also sold sex to “queer” men, but military men apparently had their own bars and “soldiers’ promenades” in which they worked. This means of supplementing the military’s meager wages gained such subcultural status that, within certain regiments, noncommissioned officers apparently began initiating new recruits into prostitution immediately on enlistment. Although some of what became known as “barracks prostitution” was constituted by clear sex for cash transactions, there was apparently an oversupply of workers throughout much of the history of this institution, leading many of the soldiers to seek longer-term relations with individual clients. Relations between soldiers and clients therefore often involved a good deal more emotional intimacy than was typical between female prostitutes and their clientele, and at least a few of these relationships developed into domestic arrangements in which the queer-identified person would cook, clean, and sew for his soldier partner during periods of leave. “The financial dependence of the beloved on the loving person often makes it look like prostitution, although no one thinks twice when in a heterosexual relationship a wealthy man spends a lot of money on a young woman he greatly loves, regardless of whether he marries her or not” (Hirschfeld, 2000, p. 805). Even in shorter-term arrangements, many material exchanges took the form of “gifts,” particularly with wealthier persons, making it possible that the participants did not identify their activities as “prostitution” per se. Although most of these relationships ended at the end of a soldier’s tour of duty, the stigmatization of such relationships makes them more susceptible to the label of “prostitution” in the eyes of outsiders. More generally, the attempt to decide whether or not these exchanges were truly instances of prostitution diverts attention away from their actual contours. A more fruitful approach follows from examining the ways in which participants may have used the term “prostitution” to set social and emotional limits around certain interactions while leaving others deliberately vague. Rather than seeing “prostitution” as a trans-historical category, common to all periods, one might begin to see the way in which the very definition of the term allows for some ambiguity, enabling it to be used by both outsiders and participants as a political tool.
FIGURE 2.1
Infamous 19
th
-century cross-dressing male sex workers, Ernest Boulton and Frederick William Park, aka “Stella” Boulton and “Franny” Park.
th
-century cross-dressing male sex workers, Ernest Boulton and Frederick William Park, aka “Stella” Boulton and “Franny” Park.
In the modern era (1600-present), the rise of “male prostitution” as a recognizable pattern of behavior has been associated with the rise of “homosexuality” as a sexual category and subject of study. Before the rise of homosexuality as a social-psychological category, even what would today be considered “obvious” examples of male prostitution were difficult to categorize. In one famous case from 1860, English police arrested two men—Ernest Boulton and Frederick William Park—because the men were dressed as women and the police were not sure what to make of the situation, despite the fact that the two carried letters that mentioned cash exchanges with various clients. By the turn of the 20
th
century, police had no such difficulty, having been familiarized through the writings of sexological specialists and through a series of scandals (e.g., the Cleveland Street Affair, the Oscar Wilde trial) that effectively publicized the “problems” associated with the new identities.
th
century, police had no such difficulty, having been familiarized through the writings of sexological specialists and through a series of scandals (e.g., the Cleveland Street Affair, the Oscar Wilde trial) that effectively publicized the “problems” associated with the new identities.
Male prostitutes came to the particular attention of the early sexologists because many of them seemed to lie on a border between “normal” sexuality and the new idea of “homosexuality” that they were formulating. By grouping sexual acts that had previously been considered deviant but malleable (much in the same way that one is not considered to have a gene for gambling today) into a category that was taken to be inherent and permanent, sexologists created a dilemma for themselves: What to make of all the men having sex with each other who did not seem to be “true homosexuals”? What exactly placed one within or outside of the category of homosexuality? If “innate sexual desire” was to be a key defining characteristic, were men who had sex for cash genuine “homosexuals” or merely “pseudohomosexuals” (another favorite term of the time)? Together with men who had sex only in the confines of all-male institutions (prisons, the military, maritime crews, boarding schools, etc.), male prostitutes became a hotly debated marker in the establishment of “homosexuality.” Although professional opinion tended toward the notion that most male prostitutes were not in fact homosexual, the issue again came to the fore in the 1970s with another challenge to the boundaries of homosexual identity. Early gay activists pointed to male prostitutes because of their borderline status, generally claiming that they were using prostitution as a means of having sex with men while not coming to terms with their “true homosexuality” (and thus effectively expanding the term’s applicability to numerous such “closet cases”). The medical profession sometimes went to unusual lengths when engaging in these debates. In 1974, for example, the sexologist Kurt Freund measured the erections of male prostitutes while showing them gay and straight pornography, concluding that most of the workers were basically heterosexual. Again, however, it is perhaps less helpful to ask whether these claims are true, but to notice the ways in which the category of homosexuality is constituted and deployed to various political effect. Who benefits from such categorizations, and what impact do they have on social life?
Male prostitution has been closely associated with another of the central controversies surrounding gay life, although its presence has been little commented on. Portrayals of gay men as child molesters have become particularly prominent during three waves of antigay bigotry: from 1937 to 1940 (when FBI director J. Edgar Hoover called for a “War on the Sex Criminal”), from 1949 to 1955 (the McCarthy period), and in the early 1970s (when singer and former beauty queen Anita Bryant led a movement to “Save Our Children” from “the homosexual menace”). Although the earliest of these three campaigns was not exclusively waged against gay men (the “sexual psychopath” that Hoover targeted was thought to threaten both girls and boys), all three of these campaigns essentially equated male homosexuality with the sexual abuse of children. Notably, however, when antigay campaigners cited actual instances of abuse, they frequently referred to cases in which teens had turned to prostitution with older men as a means of survival or simply to make additional cash. Notably, leaders of the earlier campaigns did not mention that the youths had been working as prostitutes. Such information would have disqualified them from the sympathy due to “victims” and would have instead suggested that they themselves were morally depraved and perhaps even “homosexual.” By the time of Anita Bryant, however, the youths’ involvement in prostitution was not covered up (though it was not much emphasized either). By the 1970s, such involvement did not automatically disqualify a youth from being a “child victim” as it had previously. Such children were considered to be
susceptible
to “recruitment,” but, as long as they were underage, they were not identified as confirmed “homosexuals.”
susceptible
to “recruitment,” but, as long as they were underage, they were not identified as confirmed “homosexuals.”
Like the two other forms of male prostitution that were predominant at the turn of the 20
th
century (transgender prostitution and soldier prostitution), the prostitution of male youths has an extensive past. There is powerful evidence that in 15
th
-century Florence, a significant percentage of adolescent-aged male youth (12 to 20 years old) developed long-term sexual relations with wealthy benefactors (who were most commonly in their 20s, but who might be older as well). These liaisons sometimes met with the support of their youth’s parents, as they too benefited financially from the arrangements. Be that as it may, the social practices and meanings associated with such intergenerational contacts had changed significantly by the end of the 19
th
century, and they would change even more until the practice was completely transformed and then virtually eliminated during the 20
th
. By the end of the 19
th
century, for example, the age of those involved had gone up slightly, generally following a parallel increase in the age of consent for girls. Another difference was that while youths in Renaissance Florence came from all classes, the young men involved at the end of the 19
th
century were overwhelmingly limited to the working class. During the 1889 Cleveland Street Affair, for example, in which a small handful of messenger boys (most aged 15 to 16) from the royal General Post Office were found to be moonlighting at a nearby gay brothel, the lead investigator wrote an internal memo stating that it was the duty of his office “to enforce the law and protect the children of
respectable
parents.” The inspector’s conditionality emphasizes the lack of attention more typically received by children of “unrespectable” (i.e., working-class) parents. By the final decades of the 19
th
century, this type of state scrutiny had effectively pushed even moderately esteemed youth out of the sex trade.
th
century (transgender prostitution and soldier prostitution), the prostitution of male youths has an extensive past. There is powerful evidence that in 15
th
-century Florence, a significant percentage of adolescent-aged male youth (12 to 20 years old) developed long-term sexual relations with wealthy benefactors (who were most commonly in their 20s, but who might be older as well). These liaisons sometimes met with the support of their youth’s parents, as they too benefited financially from the arrangements. Be that as it may, the social practices and meanings associated with such intergenerational contacts had changed significantly by the end of the 19
th
century, and they would change even more until the practice was completely transformed and then virtually eliminated during the 20
th
. By the end of the 19
th
century, for example, the age of those involved had gone up slightly, generally following a parallel increase in the age of consent for girls. Another difference was that while youths in Renaissance Florence came from all classes, the young men involved at the end of the 19
th
century were overwhelmingly limited to the working class. During the 1889 Cleveland Street Affair, for example, in which a small handful of messenger boys (most aged 15 to 16) from the royal General Post Office were found to be moonlighting at a nearby gay brothel, the lead investigator wrote an internal memo stating that it was the duty of his office “to enforce the law and protect the children of
respectable
parents.” The inspector’s conditionality emphasizes the lack of attention more typically received by children of “unrespectable” (i.e., working-class) parents. By the final decades of the 19
th
century, this type of state scrutiny had effectively pushed even moderately esteemed youth out of the sex trade.
But, given the widespread poverty associated with the increasing industrialization of the era, this limitation left a tremendously large number of “normally identified” male youths and young men who might still be available. Darkened movie theaters, many with private rooms and public lavatories, were the most notorious pickup areas, but prostitution might also happen in any of the gay cruising zones throughout the city: public gardens, certain bars, river walks, and so on. Indeed, pickups could happen practically anywhere, particularly as there was no particular “look” that identified who was and who was not willing to prostitute; many of the young poor and working class were willing to participate, and prostitution was in no way limited to an isolated subculture that might be deemed deviant. For example, one gay man sent telegrams to himself simply so as to contact random messenger boys, whom he then propositioned with general success. The practice of prostitution was extremely widespread and in fact constituted a primary means of sexual interaction for many gay men (particularly those in the middle class or above). Some gay men from privileged backgrounds eroticized the “genuine manliness” of working-class men. Anglo-Irish playwright Oscar Wilde, for example, said that he preferred to be with working-class youths (typically aged 16 to 20) because “their passion was all body and no soul”; “feasting with panthers,” he called it. Others, such as the early sexologist and gay rights activist Edward Carpenter, offered a less fetishized and more optimistic interpretation of such cross-class contact, arguing that “Eros is a great leveler.”
Other books
The Deavys by Foster, Alan Dean;
King of the Mound: My Summer With Satchel Paige by Wes Tooke
Circle Eight: Vaughn by Emma Lang
Love in the Air by Nan Ryan
A Curious Courting by Laura Matthews
Getting Old Is Criminal by Rita Lakin
Skin Deep by Marissa Doyle
After Dark by Gena Showalter
The Prize: Book One by Rob Buckman
The Kid Who Stole Christmas by Linda Stevens