Identity management, negotiation and resistance among women in the sex trade in London, Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sex work, and ideas about women in the trade, have long been represented as tragic and/or threatening. However, such portrayals tell us very little about how women think about themselves and the kinds of work they do. The data for this paper come from an ethnographic, community-based study in London, Ontario, that involves women in street-based, indoor and transactional sex work. This discussion focuses on how women develop different individual identities, including the management of multiple selves, their sexual identities and what we have termed the 'good junkie' identity. We also examine how these women employ aspects of dominant representation of sex workers, namely the low status accorded to those in street-based work and the defamatory term 'whore' or 'ho', when negotiating the moral hierarchies that exist within various kinds of sex work (i.e., stripping, massage parlours) and making sense of their professional and personal lives. The work that goes into the creation and maintenance of the women's divergent identities sheds important light on this complicated and tremendously demanding, yet inadequately understood, aspect of life as women in the sex trade.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".