Belle de Jour Revealed!
As you may have heard, a week before last, infamous blogger Belle de Jour (the woman behind the Diary of a London Call Girl blog and its related bestsellers) revealed her true identity. No, she’s not some horny housewife or a porn star in disguise; she’s supposedly a scientist by the name of Dr. Brooke Magnanti.
Dr. Brooke Magnanti, aka sex-blogger Belle de Jour (photo via dailymail.co.uk)
When I read the news, over at the U.K.’s Guardian, my first reaction was disbelief. Why would a scientist need to make money as a high-end prostitute? The article stated that she had run out of money while finishing her PhD thesis, and since she hadn’t yet obtained the degree, she was unable to find work in her field. Um, sure, but as most of us who’ve ever been students know, you’re going to have to settle for work that isn’t necessarily in your field, at least until graduation and maybe even for the six to 12 months thereafter. Who do you think waits your tables and calls you in the middle of dinner to ask some market research questions?
Online opportunity
The article notes that Magnanti was already a science blogger, which leads me to wonder why she didn’t try to write scientific articles for money. Degrees aren’t usually required for that type of work, and being in the process of obtaining a degree in the field could only be seen as a bonus, giving your writing credibility. Magnanti also says she attempted work as a computer programmer, but didn’t find it nearly as “interesting” as prostitution.
Was it more interesting, or did it just pay better? Magnanti claims she was paid £300 an hour (roughly $530 Canadian) for each of her trysts, which is certainly more than the average computer programmer makes. Then again, it all depends on how many real work hours she put in per week. Sex work isn’t the same as computer programming, which can be done for hours on end and may require plenty of overtime. Nor is it necessarily a steady job: Who can predict whether or not their clients will make repeat visits or even whether they will see you on a weekly basis? Is there enough work to go around? It’s a freelance type of job really, so money undoubtedly comes and goes.
Everybody (hearts) Angelina. Or maybe just her pouty lips?
I guess my real issue with this revelation is two-fold. The first part is where I ask myself, “Who the hell is worth £300 an hour in bed?” I have been trying to think of someone whom I’d pay that kind of money to fuck. We’ve all got celebrity crushes, after all, and if you could have your way with anyone in the world, maybe you’d pay for the privilege, right? Jude Law, Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Johnny Depp… take your pick! Or if you prefer the ladies, the celeb web would have us believe that not only every guy but every woman wants to go gay for Angelina Jolie. However you want to have your cake and eat it too, £300 is just a mere drop in the bucket for a night with your idol.
Free-market lovin’
Even so, when it comes down to reality, I can’t think of anyone whom I’d want to pay, at any price, for a night of passion. Call me old-fashioned, but I like my sex freely traded. I like to believe that sex is an expression of love, or at least genuine lust, between two people. When money enters the equation, the sexual thrill for me is gone. Sure, you may give it up for someone you don’t particularly like (much less love) for any number of reasons, but doing it for cash seems so seedy. And ultimately, it doesn’t matter what the price paid might be: Everybody fucking for money is dependent on some capitalist swine to pay her bills. Why consciously put yourself in the position where a man holds your purse strings?
As for the second part of the equation, well… I just don’t believe that mousy-looking soccer-mom-ish chick in the photo was ever a high-paid hooker. I believe that certain men will pay any amount for sex, but they’re going to want a looker. Brooke Magnanti is not, under any circumstances, a looker. In fact, she looks like someone’s regular ol’ mom, which probably means she looks like her clients’ wives, which is exactly the problem. Guys who pay for sex frequently already have wives, and they certainly don’t want to pay to fuck them! High-priced prostitution is supposed to be an escape, a fantasy; clients are looking for the exotic, the bold and the beautiful. Or at least someone who can sell them the belief that the woman they’re getting is a prime specimen. Even if you gussied her up with make-up, a hair cut, stilettos and a miniskirt, I’m still not buying what Magnanti’s selling.
What about you?
(Originally published at Hour.ca)
Comments
By Net on December 3rd, 2009 at 11:11 am
There’s a huge mis-conception out there that Scientist make a lot of money.
As artists, we complain about our funding cuts, but at least we can often do our work on a shoe string. Science doesn’t have that option, because lab equipment is expensive, and unfortunately, their funding cuts are as drastic, devastating, and frequent as ours.
Working on a Ph.D. is a full-to-overtime job. I totally understand the preference to want to make as much money by being charming, intelligent and having some sexy fun, and connecting with people in a tenth of the time it takes to make the same amount plugging code into a cold machine for endless hours on end. Writing copy, even scientific, often pays very little as I’ve heard you complain about lots before. The economics of pricing for escorting isn’t as much about “how much one is worth in bed” as it is about selecting your target demographic, and establishing a sense of safety. You get very different clients who’re working at 60$/hr than you would at 500$ and very generally, those able and willing to pay more, have more at stake, what they’re paying for is your discretion, and what you’re charging for is the security of knowing that your clients have as much, if not more to lose than you do if things do go terribly wrong. When you’re charging that much, you also have the freedom to pick and chose your clients. At that scale, you don’t ever have to sleep with anybody you don’t like.
I don’t think there’s anything seedy or immoral in sex work, both in the choice to do it as a profession, or to employ sex-workers to get your needs fulfilled. I believe strongly that continuing to call it “seedy” and look down on it in this way, is the root of the danger inherent in the work. If one feels prostitution is seedy, awful, dirty and wrong, then by extension, the women (and men) involved in it are dirty, stupid whores, and are really asking for, and deserve the rape, beatings, robbery, dismissal, and being left for dead in ditches that they’re often subject to. I passionately refuse to contribute to that kind of dehumanization of any woman, regardless of what she does for a living.
By Laura Roberts on December 3rd, 2009 at 11:41 am
Net: I don’t think there’s anything particularly immoral about sex work and don’t intend to put any judgments on sex workers generally, but I personally do find the idea seedy for myself. It’s not something I could seriously consider doing for a living, because it would make ME feel dirty. If others feel differently, more power to them! But I think the argument that feeling prostitution is seedy/awful/wrong necessarily leading to the belief that the women involved deserve to be raped or beaten is a slippery slope fallacy. I definitely do NOT believe that any human beings deserve ill treatment. Everyone has human rights, regardless of what they do for a living, and must equally be protected. No one “deserves” to be raped, beaten, or otherwise abused, period. Morality often masquerades as a reason to ignore the plight of the downtrodden, however, and that is definitely something to question and combat.
By Net on December 3rd, 2009 at 12:23 pm
I agree that harbouring negative feelings about the seediness of sex work is a slippery slope towards denigrating sex workers, but I don’t think it’s a fallacy.
To me, it’s not unlike the telling of a misogynistic, or racist joke. When a person says “I think sex work is seedy” — like when someone says “All women are bitches” and “Black people are lazy” (even as a punch-line in a joke) — one runs the risk of having the one misogynistic, hooker-raping, racist asshole in the room walk away feeling that their thoughts and actions are validated and reinforced. I think that’s dangerous, and to be avoided.
But most importantly, I think it’s important to explore and confront the things that make us feel icky and dirty, and hopefully rise above our hang-ups to make for a more open, understanding, and respectful world. My ideas of what it is to be sex-positive have a lot to do with respecting that whatever happens between consenting adults is a wonderful part of the amazing diversity and beauty that makes up human sexuality.
By Laura Roberts on December 3rd, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Net: I don’t think that the misogynistic, hooker-raping, racist assholes really need someone to validate them. They’ll be misogynists, rape hookers, and string up blacks whether or not someone is there to tell them not to; they’re bad people. Your argument is now veering towards the “video games make kids bring guns to school and shoot up the place” territory, which I disagree with entirely. Words may be powerful, but people still have to be responsible for their own actions, no?
I think that people have hang-ups for a reason, and not necessarily because they’re “just prudes” or “just whores” or whatever box you want to put them into. People are complex. I’ve explored my own feelings on these subjects; I’ve been doing this for a long time, and these comments are just a brief snapshot. My feelings change over time, too. In my opinion, sex positivity is not about the simple belief that anything between consenting adults is okay, but it’s about knowing your personal boundaries and the boundaries of those you’re intimate with, and refusing to overstep them. Human sexuality is very diverse, but not all aspects of it are positive, and not all desires should be embraced. Check out Susannah Breslin’s excellent “They Shoot Porn Stars, Don’t They?” for some examples: http://theyshootstars.com
By Net on December 4th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
I guess my point is, that if nobody thought sex work of any stripe (from High-End escorting to subsistence street walkers, from your Monday pin-ups & SG, to the examples of Porn Stars in Ms. Breslin’s feature) was seedy or degrading, then none of it would be. If everybody thought that it was a profession worthy of respect, then it would have the respect that the women involved deserve.
I think They Shoot Porn Stars, Don’t They? is a well written piece, but it says more about Susannah Breslin’s attitude about porn than it does about the industry, to me. The only lady she bothers quoting is one who feels degraded and does it for money. The spin factor here is high, and her disgust is pretty clear in her tone.
I think that “consent” is key to the “consenting adults” adage — it’s unfortunate that not everybody who consents to things does so with the emotional maturity to know, or handle what they’re getting into, or do so out of economic desperation rather than genuine interest. It gives those of us who find humiliation, fucking machines, anal and beatings arousing and sexy a bad rap. It makes it seem as though nobody would ever do these things except for money. Which is too bad, because, well. Between enthusiastically consenting adults, there’s a really good time to be had there.