No abstract

Le pre´sent article adopte une perspective interdisciplinaire pour analyser le traitement, en droit et au cine´ma, des dominatrices professionnelles et des hommes soumis. Nous soutenons que les discours cine´matographiques et juridiques, bien que formellement distincts, sont de fait fonctionnellement semblables dans leurs faç ons de discipliner cet arrangement sexuel. L'analyse juridique de´construit la de´cision R. v. Bedford qui a effectivement criminaliseć ertaines formes de services professionnels a`caracte`re dominateur, en rapport avec des films populaires re´cents qui repre´sentent des dominatrices ainsi que les hommes dans leurs vies. Ce projet de de´construction de´montre que les domaines juridiques et cine´matographiques repre´sentent tous deux la domination fe´minine comme un moment de « proble`mes dans les genres » qu'il faut endiguer et dans la mesure du possible, rectifier par l'autorite´masculine. Nous postulons que cette analyse comparative offre une perspective microcosmique pour de´celer comment se maintiennent et s'imposent les prescriptions de dominance masculine et de soumission fe´minine en droit et au cine´ma, re´ve´lant ainsi un moment de convergence de l'ide´ologie sexuelle dans ses discours diffe´rents. En conclusion, nous proposons que de tels efforts de re´glementation des rapports de sexe trahissent ultimement et involontairement le de´sir de l'autre sexuel, tout en ouvrant des espaces pour permettre des identifications et des subjectivite´s contre-he´ge´moniques.This article takes an interdisciplinary perspective to examine the treatment of professional dominatrices (doms) and male submissives (subs) in law and film. I argue that while the cinematic and legal discourses are formally distinct, they are functionally similar in the ways they discipline this sexual arrangement. The legal analysis deconstructs the case of R. v. Bedford, which effectively criminalized some forms of professional dominant services, in relation to recent popular films that represent female doms and the men in their lives. This deconstructive project demonstrates that both legal and cinematic fields view female dominance as a moment of ''gender trouble'' that needs to be contained, and, if possible, rectified, by masculine authority. I posit that this comparative analysis offers a microcosmic perspective on how the gender prescription of male dominance and female submissiveness is sustained and imposed in law and film, representing a moment of converging sexual ideology in these disparate discourses. I conclude with a suggestion that such efforts of gender regulation CJWL/RFD

No abstract

Th is essay examines surveillant practices that subject sex trade clients ("clients") to socio-legal control. In particular, I employ the concepts of the gaze, voyeurism, and exhibitionism to unpack the surveillant dynamics, and consider how power and pleasure are harnessed, produced, and thwarted in the increasing scrutiny of the sex trade's demand side. I further examine my own research of the regulation of clients within this analytical framework. Following David Lyon's insights on the scopophilic dimensions of surveillance (2006), I argue that the instrumental goals of surveillance are interconnected with a voyeurism that gratifi es the pleasures of looking at, categorizing, defi ning and making sense of, clients. Yet, bearing in mind the multi-directionality of the gaze, I also analyze the controlled exhibition of sex work signifi ers, as information is not just gathered, but also displayed and performed.Keywords : sex work , prostitution , clients or "johns," surveillance , panoptic , synoptic , social control , voyeurism , exhibitionism , the gaze , criminal law and regulation , media studies Résumé Cet article examine les pratiques de surveillance qui assujettissent les clients de l'industrie du sexe (les « clients ») à un contrôle sociojuridique. En particulier, j' emplois les concepts du regard, du voyeurisme et de l'exhibitionnisme afi n de révéler les dynamiques de surveillance, et d' examiner comment le pouvoir et le plaisir sont canalisés, produits et entravés par l' examen de plus en plus minutieux de la demande dans le commerce du sexe. Dans ce cadre analytique, j'approfondie ma propre recherche sur la réglementation des clients. En m'appuyant sur les idées de David Lyon portant sur les dimensions scopophiliques de la surveillance (2006), je soutiens que les objectifs fondamentaux de la surveillance sont liés au voyeurisme, donnant ainsi plaisir à regarder, classer, définir et donner un sens aux clients. Toutefois, compte tenu du caractère multidirectionnel du regard, j'analyse égale-ment l'exhibition contrôlée des signifiants propres au travail du sexe, puisque l'information n' est pas seulement recueillie mais aussi exposée et représentée. Apparently, he has already staked out the place. As we walk, he jokes about the mazelike corridors so I don't feel bad about being lost. I smile in agreement, but when I realize why he's there, I have to stop myself from getting chatty. I did not receive research ethics approval to talk with him. I'm only allowed to observe. He's been designated a "john"-that is, someone who pays for sex-and he has been sent to rehab to learn the error of his libido. I'm here to study the court diversion program designed for him and other men who were caught attempting to buy sex from undercover police offi cers.Th e john school I am observing that day is run by current and retired male police offi cers. When I introduce myself, I am greeted warmly. Th ey consider me one of them. I guess they fi gure as a professor, but perhaps more important, as a woman, I will undou...

Historically, homosexuality and prostitution were both branded immoral vices that required criminalization, despite the fact that they were also considered ‘victimless crimes.’ Yet, in contemporary Canadian society, gays and lesbians have gained wide social acceptance and legal rights, while the sex trade has become more criminalized, stigmatized, and, for clients or third parties, vilified. This article explores the reasons for this divergence. First, drawing on radical queer critique, I problematize this framing, arguing that the equality and rights-based victories for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans community did not necessarily benefit all of its members. Building on this insight, I argue that those queers who are unable or uninterested in accessing the benefits ushered in by ‘gay rights’ have identities, proclivities, and vulnerabilities that overlap with those of sex workers and/or their clients. Part I of the article sets the socio-legal and political context, providing succinct overviews of key developments relating to gay and lesbian rights and of key developments relating to sex trade regulation, focusing primarily on the last fifty years. Part II analyses how gay/lesbian mainstream acceptance and the queer/sex trade marginalization occurred through overlapping discourses and laws related to privacy, bawdy houses/indecency, disease, spousal/marital relations, and children. I end with a consideration of the intersectionality between queerness and the sex trade, both in terms of subjectivities and non-normative sexual practices.