The Difference Sameness Makes: Objectification, Sex Work, and Queerness

Hypatia 29 (4):840-856 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

With its implicit vilification of materiality, the notion of objectification has failed to produce a coherent and effective ethical analysis of heterosexual sex work. The concept of derivatization, grounded in an Irigarayan model of embodied intersubjectivity, is more effective. However, queer sex work poses new and different ethical challenges. This paper argues that although queer sex work can entail both objectification and derivatization, the former is not ethically objectionable, and the latter, although the cause for some justified ethical concern, must be analyzed within the context of structural sexual injustice

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,902

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-09-08

Downloads
97 (#216,101)

6 months
13 (#246,988)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ann Cahill
Elon College

Citations of this work

Disability, Epistemic Harms, and the Quality-Adjusted Life Year.Laura M. Cupples - 2020 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 13 (1):46-62.
Rejecting the Objectification Hypothesis.Daniel Statman - 2024 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 15 (1):113-130.
Feminist perspectives on sex markets.Laurie Shrage - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Volatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism.Elizabeth Grosz - 1994 - St. Leonards, NSW: Indiana University Press.
This Sex Which Is Not One.Luce Irigaray - 1977 - Cornell University Press.
An Ethics of Sexual Difference.Luce Irigaray - 1984 - Cornell University Press.

View all 33 references / Add more references