我们叫谁“恐怖”?:作为亲密干预对象的性工作者关系

IF 2.2 3区 社会学 Q1 Social Sciences Affilia-Feminist Inquiry in Social Work Pub Date : 2023-11-09 DOI:10.1177/08861099231209753
Corey Shdaimah, Todd D. Becker, Nancy D. Franke, Chrysanthi S. Leon
{"title":"我们叫谁“恐怖”?:作为亲密干预对象的性工作者关系","authors":"Corey Shdaimah, Todd D. Becker, Nancy D. Franke, Chrysanthi S. Leon","doi":"10.1177/08861099231209753","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Like other forms of problem-solving justice, prostitution diversion programs (PDPs) are designed to (re)shape thinking and behaviors. The authority to surveil and punish stems from criminalization of sex work, itself an act of control over women and their bodies. The court cues normative behaviors through rewards and punishments based on information gleaned through ongoing surveillance in and out of court. Using a critical feminist lens, we draw on ethnographic and interview data from studies of two court-affiliated PDPs to examine the regulation of women's bodies and intimate relationships. We found that criminal justice professionals explicitly viewed constant discussion and surveillance of all facets of PDP participants’ lives as a tool to cause participants to internalize particular understandings of normative relationships. Such normative understandings involve assumptions about which men are “creepy” that do not always reflect women's lived experiences and decontextualize relationships in ways that are incompatible with women's own assessments of these relationships. This analysis contributes to feminist social work by revealing the social control functions of such programs, which employ “creepy” intrusion to police the boundaries between unacceptable and normative behavior while simultaneously disregarding the systemic forces that shape women's choices and constructions of normativity.","PeriodicalId":47277,"journal":{"name":"Affilia-Feminist Inquiry in Social Work","volume":" 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who Do We Call “Creepy?”: Sex Workers’ Relationships as Targets of Intimate Intervention\",\"authors\":\"Corey Shdaimah, Todd D. Becker, Nancy D. Franke, Chrysanthi S. Leon\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08861099231209753\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Like other forms of problem-solving justice, prostitution diversion programs (PDPs) are designed to (re)shape thinking and behaviors. The authority to surveil and punish stems from criminalization of sex work, itself an act of control over women and their bodies. The court cues normative behaviors through rewards and punishments based on information gleaned through ongoing surveillance in and out of court. Using a critical feminist lens, we draw on ethnographic and interview data from studies of two court-affiliated PDPs to examine the regulation of women's bodies and intimate relationships. We found that criminal justice professionals explicitly viewed constant discussion and surveillance of all facets of PDP participants’ lives as a tool to cause participants to internalize particular understandings of normative relationships. Such normative understandings involve assumptions about which men are “creepy” that do not always reflect women's lived experiences and decontextualize relationships in ways that are incompatible with women's own assessments of these relationships. This analysis contributes to feminist social work by revealing the social control functions of such programs, which employ “creepy” intrusion to police the boundaries between unacceptable and normative behavior while simultaneously disregarding the systemic forces that shape women's choices and constructions of normativity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47277,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Affilia-Feminist Inquiry in Social Work\",\"volume\":\" 3\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Affilia-Feminist Inquiry in Social Work\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08861099231209753\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Affilia-Feminist Inquiry in Social Work","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08861099231209753","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与其他形式的解决问题的司法一样,卖淫转移计划(pdp)旨在(重新)塑造思维和行为。监督和惩罚的权力源于对性工作的刑事定罪,性工作本身就是一种对妇女及其身体的控制。法院通过奖励和惩罚来提示规范行为,这些奖励和惩罚是基于通过在法庭内外的持续监视收集到的信息。使用批判女权主义的镜头,我们从两个法院附属的pdp的研究中提取人种学和访谈数据,以检查女性身体和亲密关系的调节。我们发现,刑事司法专业人员明确地将PDP参与者生活的各个方面的持续讨论和监督视为一种工具,使参与者内化对规范关系的特定理解。这种规范性的理解涉及对男性“令人毛骨悚然”的假设,这并不总是反映女性的生活经历,并且以与女性自己对这些关系的评估不相容的方式将关系脱离背景。这一分析通过揭示这些项目的社会控制功能,对女权主义社会工作做出了贡献,这些项目使用“令人毛骨悚然”的入侵来监管不可接受和规范行为之间的界限,同时忽视了塑造女性选择和规范建构的系统力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Who Do We Call “Creepy?”: Sex Workers’ Relationships as Targets of Intimate Intervention
Like other forms of problem-solving justice, prostitution diversion programs (PDPs) are designed to (re)shape thinking and behaviors. The authority to surveil and punish stems from criminalization of sex work, itself an act of control over women and their bodies. The court cues normative behaviors through rewards and punishments based on information gleaned through ongoing surveillance in and out of court. Using a critical feminist lens, we draw on ethnographic and interview data from studies of two court-affiliated PDPs to examine the regulation of women's bodies and intimate relationships. We found that criminal justice professionals explicitly viewed constant discussion and surveillance of all facets of PDP participants’ lives as a tool to cause participants to internalize particular understandings of normative relationships. Such normative understandings involve assumptions about which men are “creepy” that do not always reflect women's lived experiences and decontextualize relationships in ways that are incompatible with women's own assessments of these relationships. This analysis contributes to feminist social work by revealing the social control functions of such programs, which employ “creepy” intrusion to police the boundaries between unacceptable and normative behavior while simultaneously disregarding the systemic forces that shape women's choices and constructions of normativity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work is dedicated to the discussion and development of feminist values, theories, and knowledge as they relate to social work and social welfare research, education, and practice. The intent of Affilia is to bring insight and knowledge to the task of eliminating discrimination and oppression, especially with respect to gender, race, ethnicity, class, age, disability, and sexual and affectional preference.
期刊最新文献
(In)Consistent Performance Feedback and the Locus of Search. Who Do We Call “Creepy?”: Sex Workers’ Relationships as Targets of Intimate Intervention Social Work in a Post-Dobbs World: The ‘Adoption Fallacy’, Decolonization, and Reproductive Justice Book Review: Working it: Sex workers on the work of sex by Bickers, M., Breshears, P., & Luna, J. The Imposition of a Coerced Autonomy: Suicidal “Bad Girls,” Human Service Professionals, and Gender Bias
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1