Recently in the media, on the news and in newspapers particularly the
New York Times, our society has forced a man into resignation because
of his involvement in a sex ring. Eliot Spitzer, the governor of New
York between January 1, 2007 through March 12, 2008, was creatively
being escorted by a person of the opposite sex, the media perceived
this act as Spitzer hiring a prostitute for sex. Interested in this
article and the topic, I began to relate the topic of prostitution
between Spitzer with a similar conversation I held with my father.
In the conversation I held with my father, we discussed the issues
revolving around escorts, both male and female. We covered the
differences in calling a man a prostitute to a woman, a prostitute.
"Calling a man a whore, doesn't make him any less of a person rather
than a woman a whore", quoted by my father. He also stated that the
differences between an escort with a prostitute "depends on the origin
of the person, and how they were raised." Realizing his perspective, I
began to notice the similar viewpoints relating to class on language
where Quinn displayed his living problems with a cock. As discovered
in class, the person would perceive the words by assuming
(something) depending on their experiences, for instances, a farmer
would automatically think that the 'cock' was a rooster compared to a
porn-addicted person would think that 'cock' being the actual human
body-part.
The connection between these two subjects, also, applies to the topic
of prostitution with Spitzer. In the general media, the authors and
anchors of the news also consider these terms. Most media use
particular words to indicate the social acceptance of the person,
usually depending on the audience of their viewers and readers, also
depending on many other issues. Though there are barely any casters
portraying their knowledge to the public by how they perceive the
morale of the topic, there are 'non-sided' casters, found on another
website in the Los Angeles Times, who depict both views, ones that are
positive and negative. In the video, the broadcaster takes interviews
from two very different perspectives, on the positive note, for the
escort, the interviewee and the broadcaster describe the women, Ashley
Alexandra Dupré, as a 'call girl', while others who take part in the
interview and in common media call her as a high priced prostitute.
Though these two labels are totally different in perspective, they
create the same meaning and are generalized to create assumption for
the audience. In the interviewee's statement, Jackie Marrucci states
that Dupré should be the victim and not the center of conversations
because Dupré is only a working person trying to make money to live
whereas Spitzer is on the other side of the rope and should be
punished for "causing it, [he] made the mess". In other cases, the
label of a high priced prostitute is given to Dupré for personal
interactions with her as well as to intrigue the audience. The issue
of personal relevance is rational, but the concept of drawing in a
crowd to add numbers to a radio station or a news station is uncouth,
especially to Dupré.
By Emily Chasan
http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN1443439520080314
Video on:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-callgirl15mar15,0,5...
