A multimodal analysis of sex work discourses: Normativity and context
Presenter Title/Affiliation
King’s College London
Start Date
21-5-2021 2:00 PM
Event Name
Panel discussion
Panel Number
6
Panel Chair Name
William Leap
Zoom URL to Join
https://ciis.zoom.us/j/96687109619
Zoom Meeting ID
966 8710 9619
Abstract
Previous discourse analytical studies on the media representation of sex work have stressed the prevalence of stereotypical representations, which can be condensed in four key themes: (a) feminisation; i.e. the assumption that sex workers are women only and clients only men; (b) victimisation; i.e. the representation of sex workers as victims; (c) problematisation; i.e. the construction of sex work as a problem by means of associating it with other social problems and (d) foreignisation, i.e. highlighting sex workers’ different descent (Sagredos 2019). Meanwhile, agendas of mainstream pro-sex-work activism oppose such representations, arguing that they reproduce stereotypes of the ‘sex worker’ category and sustain (if not contribute to) discourses of discrimination. Adopting the critical perspective of queer linguistics, this study shows that both traditional sex-work discourses and pro-sex-work activist discourses share an identity-essentialising line of argumentation that may sustain heteronormative representations and gender binarisms. The sample linguistic and multimodal analysis undertaken highlights that the discursive construction of “descriptive/prescriptive normativities” (Motschenbacher 2018) vis-à-vis sex work is always influenced by contextual factors, underlining the key role of contexts (e.g. macro-level social context, meso-level context of discursive practice) in the discursive construction of certain identities and practices as more-or-less normal/normative.
Presenter Contact
chr.sagredos@gmail.com
A multimodal analysis of sex work discourses: Normativity and context
Previous discourse analytical studies on the media representation of sex work have stressed the prevalence of stereotypical representations, which can be condensed in four key themes: (a) feminisation; i.e. the assumption that sex workers are women only and clients only men; (b) victimisation; i.e. the representation of sex workers as victims; (c) problematisation; i.e. the construction of sex work as a problem by means of associating it with other social problems and (d) foreignisation, i.e. highlighting sex workers’ different descent (Sagredos 2019). Meanwhile, agendas of mainstream pro-sex-work activism oppose such representations, arguing that they reproduce stereotypes of the ‘sex worker’ category and sustain (if not contribute to) discourses of discrimination. Adopting the critical perspective of queer linguistics, this study shows that both traditional sex-work discourses and pro-sex-work activist discourses share an identity-essentialising line of argumentation that may sustain heteronormative representations and gender binarisms. The sample linguistic and multimodal analysis undertaken highlights that the discursive construction of “descriptive/prescriptive normativities” (Motschenbacher 2018) vis-à-vis sex work is always influenced by contextual factors, underlining the key role of contexts (e.g. macro-level social context, meso-level context of discursive practice) in the discursive construction of certain identities and practices as more-or-less normal/normative.
https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/lavlang/2021/friday/2
