26

Masculinities and sex workers

John Scott

Introduction
Sex work is a highly gendered activity and is the archetypal form of female deviance. Mascu-
linity has been largely invisible in popular and scholarly accounts of sex work. Dennis’ (2008)
meta-analysis of contemporary research on the global sex trade found that men and boys are
rarely cited and that two-thirds of research conflated the term ‘prostitute’ with a feminine per-
sona. However, people of diverse gender are also involved in the sex industry. Indeed, only
recently has sex been considered work, having been known by the more familiar and deroga-
tory term ‘prostitution’ and having been historically subject to a range of social controls. This
chapter distinguishes sex work from human trafficking. While human trafficking is coercive
and a human rights abuse, sex work is understood here to involve consensual relations between
adult persons. The distinction is an important one to make, so that anti-trafficking resources
are not misapplied to sex workers. When sex work is conflated with trafficking, sex workers
can be driven underground and denied proper access to legal, social and health services.
Selling and purchasing sex are stigmatised activities in terms of social and sexual identities,
as reflected in the criminalisation of prostitution and activities associated with it throughout
much of the world. The recent preference to describe the sale of sexual services as work
reflects efforts by advocates to normalise the sex industry and to bridge the gulf that separates
commercial and intimate sexual relations. As discussed below, this gulf is not unique to the
global north but is evident in a wide range of cultural contexts.
Regardless of place and period, supply in sex industries has been largely female and demand
largely male. Although they are the largest group involved in prostitution, clients have tended
to remain invisible in public discourses surrounding prostitution. This noted, male, transsexual
and transgender sex workers service a predominantly male clientele. Because participants in
this exchange are of often of the same gender, male sex workers have been difficult to concep-
tualise in economic and gender theories of sexual exchange (Edlund & Korn, 2002). Sex work
has been variously approached as oppressive, with exploitation, subjugation and violence as
intrinsic aspects; as empowering, with human agency and the potential for mutual gain to both
parties; and as variable, acknowledging that sex work holds the potential for ‘a constellation of
occupational arrangements, power relations and worker experiences’ (Weitzer, 2009, p. 215).

272
 Masculinities and sex workers

Shifting conceptions of masculinity and sex work

The population of sex workers and their clients is largely unknown, due to the stigma
associated with sex work and its legal status. While it is a very small sector of the overall
market, heterosexual male sex services may be increasing in popularity due to greater social
and economic freedom for women and increasing objectification of male bodies and mas-
culinity (MacPhail, Scott & Minichiello, 2015). There is also evidence to suggest that
changing social mores, technological change, migration and economic restructuring (includ-
ing increased materialism and consumption) may give greater visibility to male sex workers,
if not increase supply and demand for male sex workers on a global scale (Kong, 2014;
Niccolai, 2014). Sex tourism for both men and women has been one aspect of this global
growth (Mitchell, 2010; Padila, 2007).
Despite this, numbers of male clients of sex workers worldwide remains relatively high.
Figures for female sex workers suggest that between 7–18% of men have bought sexual ser-
vices in the US (Weitzer, 2000), 16% in Australia (Rissel, Richters, Grulich, de Visser &
Smith, 2003), and between 4.3–25% of men in the United Kingdom (Brooks-Gordon,
2006). In the Global South, it is estimated that about 10% of men exchange money for sex
in any given year (Carael, Slaymaker, Lyerla & Sarkar, 2006).
The relative lack of attention to men involved in sex work might be explained by smaller
numbers of male sex workers, but male sex work has been consistently present in most soci-
eties, and, at particular historical junctures, numbers of male prostitutes have been relatively
high. Historical evidence indicates that in pre-modern times, same-sex commercial sexual
relations frequently occurred in major global metropolitan centres (Friedman, 2014). Else-
where in the world, different constructs of same-sex desire meant that male sex work was
largely invisible; however, this status was disrupted by social changes brought about by colo-
nialism and modernity (e.g., Kong, 2014). Evidence is only recently emerging that male sex
workers may form a majority of sex workers in some contexts outside of the Global North.
For example, male sex workers may comprise two-thirds of all sex workers in Pakistan (van
Winjingaarden & Iqbal, 2015, p. 147). Transsexual and transgender sex workers also repre-
sent a relatively small populations, despite transsexual and transgender people being dispro-
portionately represented in the sex industry owing to employment discrimination, familial
rejection and housing discrimination. In some cultural contexts, intersex, transsexual and
transgender sex workers may present a sizable portion of the overall sex market and experi-
ence relatively high demand in terms of local or tourist markets. Examples include the traves-
tis of Brazil, Thailand’s kathoey and India’s hijras (Ryan, 2006).
It is impossible to understand how sex work is structured and organised without appreci-
ating the social and political organisation of space as a gendered construct. Sex work was
made a social problem in modernity because new social controls emerged which restricted
the movement and visibility of gendered bodies within new spatial contexts. For example,
‘public’ spaces were increasingly masculinised, and open displays of sexual promiscuity were
highly restricted. During the modern period, female sex work came to be a metaphor for
urban disintegration and disorganisation. Early criminologists and sexologists came to repre-
sent female street prostitutes as masculine in manner and appearance. Gendered constructs of
space were therefore important to the way in which both female and male sex work were
presented and regulated as social problems in modernity. While female street workers were
considered a largely criminal population, male street workers were often presented as requir-
ing welfare or medical interventions (Scott, 2011). In this way, the regulation of prostitution
inverted common practices for managing gendered deviance.

273
John Scott

For example, masculine association with public space has been important in informing
understandings of male sex work. Early research predominantly adopted a dichotomous
understanding of the male sex worker. Male sex workers were assumed to be either homo-
sexual or heterosexual. Early researchers correlated non-masculine behaviour, appearance and
mannerisms with homosexuality and hyper-masculine characteristics with heterosexuality.
Notably, the hustler was presented as a heterosexual with a hyper-masculine appearance and
traits (Scott, 2003a). In this way, those who worked in public spaces were typically repre-
sented as masculine and heterosexual. In contrast, males who worked in private spaces were
represented as effeminate and homosexual (Scott, 2003a). Public sex workers were subject to
greater scrutiny because of their visibility and also because they were more readily institu-
tionalised as delinquents, providing ready access to researchers. This schema is also highly
problematic when considering the varied ways in which masculinities are enacted and
experienced globally. In most Latin American societies, the straight/gay dichotomy does not
speak to how men experience their sexuality. Rather, machismo and notions of sexual activ-
ity and passivity associated with it are important in structuring commercial sexual encounters
(see Minichiello, Dune, Disogra & Mariño, 2014).
Historically, research around female sex work has focused on the sex workers themselves
and has largely ignored clients. Feminist research has shifted the focus. There have been sev-
eral attempts to define and label men who hire female sex workers. Research has broadly
defined motivations for clients in terms of seeking intimacy, physical sensation and sexual
gratification, risk taking, sexual diversity or to exert power over women (Vanwesenbeeck,
de Graaf, Van Zessen & Straver, 1993). Research has also presented contradictory accounts
of female sex-work clients, with some research arguing that men who pay for sex are distinct
from other men, showing a tendency to more pathological or problematic behaviours, such
as violence (Farley et al., 2011). This is highlighted by a recent American study that explored
the oppressive side of sex work via a client base that appeared to be largely driven by sensa-
tion seeking and the desire to exert power over women. When compared to a sample of
men who did not hire FSW, those who did were found to have higher rates of criminal
activity, lower levels of empathy towards sex workers, an increased likelihood of rape and
a normalised attitude towards sex work (Farley et al., 2011). From this, the authors con-
cluded that sex work contributes to an increased likelihood of violence against women (see
also Monto & Hotaling, 2001).
Other research indicates that men who buy sex do not differ from other men in terms of
key demographic characteristics (Caldwell, 2014; Horswill & Weitzer, 2018). Research has
noted the transposition of traditional courtship behaviour to commercial sex encounters.
This, sometimes referred to as a ‘girlfriend experience’, highlights the potential for transac-
tions to extend beyond the physical to include the emotional as well (Earle & Sharp, 2008;
Sanders, 2008). In spite of how research may categorise men and their motivations, there are
arguments against the normalisation of sex work which caution against treating male sexual
drives as biological and not subject to socially mediating controls (Huysamen & Boonzaier,
2015; Monto, 2004).
In recent decades the proportion of young men involved in prostitution who also iden-
tify as gay has increased in societies of the Global North, especially where homosexuality
or sex work have been decriminalised (Ross, Crisp, Månsson & Hawkes, 2012). Elsewhere
in the world, male sex workers are more likely to be engaging in survival sex and to iden-
tify as straight (Oosthuizen, 2000; Mitchell, 2010; Phua, Ciambrone & Vazquez, 2009) or
a two tier structure exists between public/straight sex workers and private/gay escorts
(Ozbay, 2015). This is not universal, however, and in China most male sex workers

274
 Masculinities and sex workers

identify as gay (Kong, 2014). Shifting discourses concerning masculinity and a decline in
stigma surrounding prostitution have seen recent research present a more sympathetic view
of male sex work clients and sex workers (Horswill & Weitzer, 2018).
Research focused specifically on male escorts, a group often ignored in early research, has
allowed for economic disadvantage and social exploitation to be questioned as root causes of
male sex work, and an occupational perspective on male work has developed. Male sex
work is mostly considered as a rational, financially motivated career choice taken by adult
males (Minichiello, Scott & Callander, 2013). These developments have allowed for a move
away from pathological paradigms of male sex work and an occupational health and safety
approach to develop in understanding male sex work (Ross et al., 2012). However, these
shifts have not been universal. For example, in China homosexuality might be relatively
acceptable in discrete contexts, but commercial sex is frowned upon by the media and regu-
lated by authorities. Public sex workers, referred to as ‘money boys’, are considered
a criminal sub-population who require stricter government control. Even China’s gay com-
munity has reacted adversely to male sex work, considering it an ‘improper’ expression of
a gay identity because of its commercialism, which brings the gay community into disrepute
(Jeffreys, 2007; Kong, 2014). Similarly, research from southern and eastern Africa suggests
that men who have sex with men are likely to have female sex partners and engage in sex
work as a means of survival (see Boyce & Isaacs, 2014).

Postmodern understandings of masculinity and sex work

Stigma has been used by a number of researchers to show how male sex workers and sex-
work clients create strategies that distance the self from the deviant aspects of their career
and accomplish and preserve masculinities. Gaffney and Beverley (2001), for example, have
argued that male sex workers are less likely to take on submissive roles for their clients due
to hegemonic or misogynistic social constructs of masculinity. Salamon (1989) found that
negative portrayals of clients by prostitutes were strategies employed by sex workers to nego-
tiate their own perceived deviant status. Similarly, early research found masculinity informed
the types of services provided and the nature of the relationship with the client (e.g., Reiss,
1961). In terms of masculinity, Earle and Sharp (2008) found that paying for sex may
damage male self-esteem, especially with regard to hegemonic masculinity. The association
of male sex work with prostitution and homosexuality has produced a double stigma for
male sex workers and their clients to manage. The mixing of commercial and sexual relations
is also considered immoral in diverse cultural contexts (e.g., Kong, 2014; Niccolai, 2014).
Despite the residual stigma, however, there is much evidence to indicate that commercial
sex has been increasingly normalised in a number of global contexts, which is reflected in
drives to legalise or decriminalise sex work and related offences. This noted, commercial sex
remains highly stigmatised in many nations and regions throughout the world (see Aggleton
& Parker, 2015). In some cases, commercial sex may be tolerated while homosexuality is
criminalised (Ozbay, 2015).
The rise of online escorting has transformed the structure and organisation of sex work.
There is evidence that male sex workers may be more likely than their female or transgender
counterparts to work online, with the vast majority of male sex workers operating independ-
ently as online escorts (Cunningham & Kendall, 2011). The internet has brought what was
previously considered a deviant and solitary behaviour into a public forum, being utilised
widely by sex workers to promote to a wider socio-demographic audience and becoming
a new sex work venue with a less restricted reach than traditional methods of marketing

275
John Scott

(Holt & Blevins, 2007; Parsons, Koken & Bimbi, 2007). This noted, men traditionally have
been less likely to work for agencies or brothels and less reliant on third parties, for example
pimps. For sex work in wealthy nations of the Global North, there appears to be
a significant decrease in the number of street sex workers, which has coincided with the
expansion of new technologies such as the mobile phone and internet (MacPhail et al.,
2015). This noted, this shift has not been universal, and street workers remain a sizable
population in regions experiencing economic restructuring, high levels of internal migration
and economic disadvantage (e.g., Allman & Bozhinov, 2015; Koken, Bimbi, Parsons &
Halkitis, 2004; Uy, Parsons, Bimbi, Koken & Halkitis, 2004).
The internet has also driven the globalisation of male sex work, giving visibility to sex
work in varied geographic spaces. Dennis (2008) has argued that the core of research on sex
work has been dominated by the core states, these being the colonial powers of Western
Europe and auxiliaries, with the periphery of sub-Saharan Africa, east and southern Asia and
the Middle East largely ignored. Until very recently, for example, there were few accounts of
male sex work in Muslim majority nations (see Ozbay, 2015) or former Eastern-bloc states (see
Niccolai, 2014). Aggleton’s collection of essays, Men Who Sell Sex (1999), was the first attempt
to present a global account of male sex work. Recent collections which have adopted a global
perspective include Minichiello and Scott (2014) and Aggleton and Parker (2015).
Global perspectives on male sex work have drawn attention to how distinct local articula-
tions of masculinity inform the structure, organisation, understanding and experience of male
sex work. Mitchell (2010), for example, documents Brazil’s ‘Michês’ – straight street work-
ers – who service gay tourists through the lens of Latino masculinities. Michês are an aspir-
ational group who are engaged with consumerist society and are motivated to be socially
mobile. Moscheta, McNamee and Santos (2013) examine discursive strategies used to limit
stigma in Brazil. Many strategies draw on elements of masculinity and emphasise utilitarian
or commercial motivations for sex work. Hodge (2005) examined male sex work through
Cuba’s shift from a revolutionary to (post)socialist society. He shows how street workers
(who refer to themselves as ‘pingueros’) reproduce revolutionary nationalism and traditional
Cuban masculinities but are also a criminalised population, whose sexual and material desires
are linked to a global capitalist market. Alcano (2011) provides a vivid account of how mas-
culinity is uniquely constructed, enacted and reproduced in a Southeast Asian setting. While
research in southern and eastern Africa suggests that most male sex work is conducted for
‘survival’, research has also indicated that the motivation to provide sexual services can be
specifically for exploring same-sex desire and escaping family pressure to marry, given a lack
of legal opportunities to express sexuality (Boyce & Isaacs, 2014, 303).

Health and safety

Sex workers may suffer from a range of general health problems associated with poor eating
habits, lack of sleep, inadequate accommodation, substance abuse and physical and psycho-
logical stress. But such health issues are rarely the focus of research; most research is more
intent on protecting the general public from ‘risks’ embodied by sex workers, rather than
addressing risks to sex workers posed by the general public or employment conditions.
There is also little acknowledgement that sex workers might be endangered by public atti-
tudes or legal regulations which perpetuate homophobic or misogynistic behaviour by stig-
matising sex work and driving sex workers and their clients underground (Jamel, 2011).
Sex workers of diverse gender are subject to various forms of interpersonal violence from
male clients. Numerous studies of sex work have found that men and women working in

276
 Masculinities and sex workers

public spaces or in groups are more at risk for violence than those working in private spaces
(Hubbard, 1999; Niccolai, 2014). For example, between 1990 and 2003, 87 street workers
were murdered in the UK (Kinnell, 2008). This may be a result of an increased ability to
screen clients and the fact that workers were aware of possibility of dangers and took appro-
priate precautions. Also, a sense of camaraderie among male sex workers and their clients’
desire for anonymity may assist to prevent violence (Minichiello et al., 1999). Examples of
violence towards sex workers can include rape, robbery, police harassment, violence and,
most commonly, sexual assault (Liguori & Aggleton, 1999; Richter & Isaacs, 2015). In con-
trast to female sex workers, who are subject to misogynistic abuse, male sex workers can be
subject to victimisation by homophobes, including police (Minichiello et al., 2013). This
context may be created in part due to masculine notions of sexuality and dominant and mar-
ginalised forms of men’s sexualities. Research also suggests that violence may vary regionally
and be linked to specific localised constructs of masculinity (Richter & Isaacs, 2015). The
recent acknowledgement that many clients of male sex workers may identify as heterosexual
(Scott, 2003b) is highly significant in that stigma may prevent such men from reporting
experiences of interpersonal violence.
A public-health paradigm has driven much of the research on sex work, and this has dir-
ected its main focus on sex workers and their behaviour as opposed to clients. A recent con-
tent analysis of sex industry research indicated the threat of HIV/AIDS is emphasised in
a quarter of articles on female prostitution and almost 60% of articles on male prostitution
(Dennis, 2008). With higher rates of HIV and STIs among men who have sex with men,
much research has focused on describing the prevalence of HIV and STIs among male sex
workers and their clients as well as ways in which safer sex messages can be disseminated and
absorbed by these men. Morse, Simon, Osofsky, Balson and Gaumer (1991) suggested that
male sex workers act as ‘vectors of transmission’ of HIV into the heterosexual community
through clients who are married heterosexual men. Prevalence studies have shown that male
sex workers have higher rates of HIV and STIs than female sex workers. Katsulis and Durfee
(2012), in their research on Mexican sex workers, found male sex workers were still 10
times more likely than female sex workers to engage in sex without a condom during their
most recent encounter with a client. Phua et al. (2009) found that health-related behaviours
among online male sex workers are linked to masculinity, including the adoption or prefer-
ence for ‘active’ or ‘passive’ sex roles in the commercial encounter or a gay or straight iden-
tity. Portrayals of hypermasculinity and concern with STIs were negatively correlated. And,
although female sex workers were significantly more likely than males to have used
a condom with a client, they were significantly less likely than males to have used a condom
with their regular partner. Findings from this research, however, tend to be geographically
diverse and contradictory. Compared to the general population of men who have sex with
men, for example, male sex workers have been found to have comparable or slightly higher
rates of overall condom use (Bimbi & Parsons, 2005).
Nonetheless, male sex workers have been identified as at greater risk of HIV and STIs
because: fewer work in brothels, where they can be accessed by outreach workers; they are
a more transient population; the nature of their work is clandestine and opportunistic; many do
not identify as gay and, as such, may be dislocated from peer supports; and many do not identify
as sex workers because of the temporary nature of the work, or they receive payment in kind.
However, increased risk is likely related to structural factors, such as the criminalisation of sex
work or same-sex relations (Oosthuizen, 2000; Ross et al., 2012). It also seems that while
public-health strategies have been effective in many developed nations, male sex workers still
present as a high-risk group in developing nations (Meng et al., 2010; Okal et al., 2009). While

277
John Scott

epidemiological research has included many non-western sites, it has tended to ignore local cul-
tural contexts, reproducing paradigms from the Global North and paying little attention to how
local configurations of masculinity influencer risk behaviours.

Concluding comments
Despite playing a significant role in sex-work encounters, men and masculinity have been
largely absent in the research literature. Much research has been directed at solving ‘prob-
lems’ associated with sex work, these being defined largely in criminal and public health
terms. And while masculinity, in terms of violence and risk taking, is strongly implicated in
harms associated with sex work, the focus has mostly been on the practices of female sex
workers and not the group who dominate involvement in all varieties of sex work: male
clients. Men have also become increasingly visible as sex workers, with international research
suggesting that changing social mores, technological change, migration and economic
restructuring (including increased materialism and consumption) may give greater visibility to
male sex workers, if not increase supply and demand for male sex workers on a global scale
(Kong, 2014; Niccolai, 2014).

References
Aggleton, P. (Ed.). (1999). Men who sell sex: International perspectives on male prostitution and HIV/AIDS.
London: UCL Press.
Aggleton, P., & Parker, R. (Eds.). (2015). Men who sell sex: Global perspectives. London: Routledge.
Alcano, M. (2011). ‘Slaves of our own making’: The fabrication of masculine identities between Java and
Bali. Indonesia and the Malay World, 39(115), 373–389.
Allman, D., & Bozhinov, B. (2015). Sex work at the crossroads: Men who sell sex to men in Macedonia.
In P. Aggleton & R. Parker (Eds.), Men who sell sex: Global perspectives (pp. 66–73). London:
Routledge.
Bimbi, D. S., & Parsons, J. T. (2005). Barebacking among Internet based male sex workers. Journal of Gay
and Lesbian Psychotherapy, 9(3/4), 89–110.
Boyce, P., & Isaacs, G. (2014). Male sex work in Southern and Eastern Africa. In V. Minichiello &
J. Scott (Eds.), Male sex work and society (pp. 288–313). New York: Harrington Park Press.
Brooks-Gordon, B. (2006). The price of sex. New York: Taylor and Francis.
Caldwell, H. (2014). Long-term clients who access commercial sex services in Australia (MA thesis) University of
Sydney, Sydney. https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/8197.
Carael, M., Slaymaker, E., Lyerla, R., & Sarkar, S. (2006). Clients of sex workers in different regions of
the world: Hard to count. Sexually Transmitted Infections, 82(s3), iii26–iii33.
Cunningham, S, & Kendall, T. D. (2011). Prostitution 2.0: The changing face of sex work. Journal of
Urban Economics, 69(3), 273–287.
Dennis, J. (2008). Women are victims, men make choices: The invisibility of men and boys in the global
sex trade. Gender Issues, 25(1), 11–25.
Earle, S., & Sharp, K. (2008). Intimacy, pleasure and the men who pay for sex. In G. Letherby,
K. Williams, P. Birch & M. Cain (Eds.), Sex as crime? (pp. 63–79). London: Willan.
Edlund, L., & Korn, E. (2002). A theory of prostitution. Journal of Political Economy, 110(1), 181–214.
Farley, M., Schuckman, E., Golding, J. M., Houser, K., Jarrett, L., Qualliotine, P., & Decker, M. (2011).
Comparing sex buyers with men who don’t buy sex: ‘You can have a good time with the servitude’ vs. ‘You’re
supporting a system of degradation’. Paper presented at the Psychologists for Social Responsibility Annual
Meeting, Boston, MA.
Friedman, M. (2014). Male sex work from ancient times to the near present. In V. Minichiello & J. Scott
(Eds.), Male sex work and society (pp. 3–33). New York: Harrington Park Press.
Gaffney, J., & Beverley, K. (2001). Contextualizing the construction and social organization of the
commercial male sex industry in London at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Feminist
Review, 67(1), 133–141.

278
 Masculinities and sex workers

Hodge, D. (2005). Colonization of the Cuban body: Nationalism, economy, and masculinity of male sex work in
Havana (Doctoral dissertation). The City University of New York.
Holt, T., & Blevins, K. (2007). Examining sex work from the client’s perspective: Assessing Johns using
online data. Deviant Behavior, 28(4), 333–354.
Horswill, A., & Weitzer, R. (2018). Becoming the client: The socialization of novice buyers of sexual
services. Deviant Behavior, 39(2), 148–158.
Hubbard, P. (1999). Sex and the city: Geographies of prostitution in the urban west. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Huysamen, M., & Boonzaier, F. (2015). Men’s constructions of masculinity and male sexuality through
talk of buying sex. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 17(5), 541–554.
Jamel, J. (2011). An investigation of the incidence of client-perpetrated sexual violence against male sex
workers. International Journal of Sexual Health, 23(1), 63–78.
Jeffreys, E. (2007). Querying queer theory: Debating male-male prostitution in the Chinese media. Crit-
ical Asian Studies, 39(1), 151–175.
Katsulis, Y., & Durfee, A. (2012). Prevalence and correlates of sexual health among male and female sex
workers in Tijuana, Mexico. Global Public Health, 7(4), 367–383.
Kinnell, H. (2008). Violence and sex work in Britain. London: Willan.
Koken, J., Bimbi, D., Parsons, J., & Halkitis, P. (2004). The experience of stigma in the lives of male
Internet escorts. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 16(1), 13–32.
Kong, T. (2014). Male sex work in China. In V. Minichiello & J. Scott (Eds.), Male sex work and society
(pp. 314–341). New York: Harrington Park Press.
Liguori, L., & Aggleton, P. (1999). Aspects of male sex work in Mexico City. In P. Aggleton (Ed.), Men
who sell sex: International perspectives on male prostitution and HIV/AIDS (pp. 103–126). London: UCL
Press.
MacPhail, C., Scott, J., & Minichiello, V. (2015). Technology, normalisation and male sex work. Culture,
Health and Sexuality, 17(4), 483–495.
Meng, X., Anderson, A., Wang, L., Li, Z., Guo, W., Lee, Z., Jin, H., & Cai, Y. (2010). An exploratory
survey of money boys and HIV transmission risk in Jilin Province, PR China. AIDS Research and Ther-
apy, 7(1), 17.
Minichiello, V., Dune, T., Disogra, C., & Mariño, R. (2014). Male sex work from Latin American per-
spectives. In V. Minichiello & J. Scott (Eds.), Male sex work and society (pp. 362–397). New York: Har-
rington Park Press.
Minichiello, V., Mariño, R, Browne, J., Jamieson, M., Peterson, K., Reuter, B., & Robinson, K. (1999).
A profile of the clients of male sex workers in three Australian cities. Australian and New Zealand Journal
of Public Health, 23(5), 511–518.
Minichiello, V., & Scott, J. (Eds.). (2014). Male sex work and society. New York: Harrington Park Press.
Minichiello, V., Scott, J., & Callander, D. (2013). New pleasures and old dangers: Re-inventing male sex
work. Journal of Sex Research, 50(3/4), 263–275.
Mitchell, G. (2010). Fare tales and fairy tails: How gay sex tourism is shaping the Brazilian dream.
Wagadu, 8, 93–114.
Monto, M. A. (2004). Female prostitution, customers, and violence. Violence Against Women, 10(2), 160–188.
Monto, M. A., & Hotaling, N. (2001). Predictors of rape myth acceptance among male clients of female
street prostitutes. Violence Against Women, 7(3), 275–293.
Morse, E., Simon, P., Osofsky, H., Balson, P., & Gaumer, H. (1991). The male prostitute: A vector for
transmission of HIV infection into the heterosexual world. Social Science Medicine, 32(5), 535–539.
Moscheta, M., McNamee, S., & Santos, M. (2013). Sex trade among men: Negotiating sex, bodies and
identity categories. Psicologica and Sociedade, 25, 44–53.
Niccolai, L. (2014). Male sex work in post-soviet Russia. In V. Minichiello & J. Scott (Eds.), Male sex
work and society (pp. 343–361). New York: Harrington Park Press.
Okal, J., Luchters, S., Geibel, S., Chersich, M. F., Lango, D., & Temmerman, M. (2009). Social context,
sexual risk perceptions and stigma: HIV vulnerability among male sex workers in Mombasa, Kenya.
Culture, Health & Sexuality, 11(8), 811–826.
Oosthuizen, A. (2000). Male prostitution and HIV/AIDS in Durban (MA Thesis). Durban: University of
Natal.
Ozbay, C. (2015). ‘Straight’ rent boys and the gays who sell sex in Istanbul. In P. Aggleton & R. Parker
(Eds.), Men who sell sex: Global perspectives (pp. 74–87). London: Routledge.
Padila, M. (2007). ‘Western Union Daddies’ and their quest for authenticity: An ethnographic study of
the Dominican gay sex tourism industry. Journal of Homosexuality, 53(1), 241–275.

279
John Scott

Parsons, J., Koken, J., & Bimbi, D. (2007). Looking beyond HIV: Eliciting individual and community
needs of male internet escorts. Journal of Homosexuality, 53(1/2), 219–240.
Phua, V. C., Ciambrone, D., & Vazquez, O. (2009). Advertising health status in male sex workers’ online
ads. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 17(3), 251–258.
Reiss, A. J. (1961). The social integration of peers and queers. Social Problems, 9(2), 102–120.
Richter, M., & Isaacs, G. (2015). ‘Cape Town is free’: Reflections on male sex work in Cape Town,
South Africa. In P. Aggleton & R. Parker (Eds.), Men who sell sex: Global perspectives (pp. 120–130).
London: Routledge.
Rissel, C. E., Richters, J., Grulich, A. E., de Visser, R. O., & Smith, A. M. A. (2003). Sex in Australia:
Experiences of commercial sex in a representative sample of adults. Australian and New Zealand Journal
of Public Health, 27(2), 191–197.
Ross, M. W., Crisp, B. R., Månsson, S. A., & Hawkes, S. (2012). Occupational health and safety among
commercial sex workers. Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment Health, 38(2), 105–119.
Ryan, J. (2006). Transgender sex workers. In M. Ditmore (Ed.), Encyclopedia of prostitution and sex work,
vol. 2 (pp. 499–506). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Salamon, E. (1989). The homosexual escort agency: Deviance disavowal. British Journal of Sociology, 40(1),
1–21.
Sanders, T. (2008). Male sexual scripts. Sociology, 42(3), 400–417.
Scott, J. (2003a). A prostitute’s progress: Male prostitution in scientific discourse. Social Semiotics, 13(2),
179–201.
Scott, J. (2003b). Prostitution and public health in New South Wales. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 5(3),
277–293.
Scott, J. (2011). Governing prostitution: Differentiating the bad from the bad. Current Issues in Criminal
Justice, 23(1), 53–72.
Uy, J., Parsons, J., Bimbi, D., Koken, J., & Halkitis, P. (2004). Gay and bisexual male escorts who adver-
tise on the internet: Understanding reasons for and effects of involvement in commercial sex. Inter-
national Journal of Men’s Health, 3(1), 11–26.
van Winjingaarden, J., & Iqbal, Q. (2015). Male sex work in urban Pakistan: Experiences from Lahore
and Karachi. In P. Aggleton & R. Parker (Eds.), Men who sell sex: Global perspectives (pp. 146–158).
London: Routledge.
Vanwesenbeeck, I., de Graaf, R., Van Zessen, G., & Straver, C. J. (1993). Protection styles of prostitute
clients: Intentions, behavior and considerations in relation to AIDS. Journal of Sex Education Therapy,
19(2), 79–92.
Weitzer, R. (2000). Sex for sale: Prostitution, pornography, and the sex industry. New York: Routledge.
Weitzer, R. (2009). Sociology of sex work. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 213–234.

280