The Story
Sex Workers' Art Show Arouses Conflict
Dirty Martini of the Sex Workers' Art Show. Courtesy of sexworkersartshow.com
After weeks of conflict and controversy, officious statements and student activism, the Sex Workers' Art Show arrived to campus on Feb. 4. It came censored and covered up but performed two shows to full audiences, with around 400 students at each performance.
The performers, however, were not the first thing seen by arriving attendees. Outside the University Center was a little fenced-off area of grass that was patrolled by over eight Williamsburg police officers, where from four to six protesters sang and prayed for hours.
Michael Landis (’10), a member of Calvary Chapel, was one of the protesters. He said that the protestors were “protesting because of a love of Christ.” They were “not being judgmental, [but rather] came there in love.”
He also commented that the “show degrades people, families are destroyed by that sort of work, and that the show doesn’t encourage healthy behavior.” He respected the show’s right to be at the school under the First Amendment but wished the show were not there regardless.
Other students were there with different expectations. “I think the show itself is really great,” said Beth Beckman (’10), who served on the SWAS staff. “I think one of the main reasons for the protest surrounding it is that the protesters don’t know what the show is about. Protesters talk about the dehumanizing effect of sex work, but I think that’s really ironic, because this show is about seeing them as people.”
Four days before the performance, the cast was given a contract drafted by the Virginia Attorney General, according to Annie Oakley, the show’s organizer and master of ceremonies. They were told that if they did not sign, they would not be allowed to perform.
The contract stipulated that the volunteers had to scrupulously check IDs - which they did by writing gigantic A’s on the hands of those over 18 - and could not permit recording instruments inside the performance. According to Oakley, SWAS was not even allowed to record the show itself, even though they promised not to distribute any copies.
The Editors-in-Chief of the DoG Street Journal, the Flat Hat and the Virginia Informer all signed a joint press release protesting the ban of photography and called it “an unnecessary burden on the program in violation of the First Amendment.”
The show also had to agree to censor itself. Specifically, Oakley said, “they couldn’t have obscenity, as defined solely by William and Mary.” If, quoting the contract, the show “fail[ed] or neglect[ed] to comply with any provision of the Agreement or hereof, such failure shall be deemed a material breach of the Agreement and the College shall have the right, in its sole discretion…. to (a) terminate the Agreement and cancel or terminate the agreement, (b) refuse to allocate or disburse funds or schedule space to the relevant Sponsoring Organization(s) for the same or similar events… (c)in the case of a failure by the Sex Worker’s Art Show, (i) withhold payment of the Fee set forth in the Agreement.”
Essentially, Oakley said, “it was blackmail.”
The SWAS was also forbidden to display its merchandise table, which sells a variety of items, including G-rated shirts and books published on mainstream presses. They found this out only minutes before they were to set up. Oakley mentioned this nearly every time she was onstage, as merchandising is the main means the show uses to the money it needs to cover the show.
Several of the performers mentioned the controversy, or talked during the Q&A about how they had censored their acts.
Kirk Read, the first performer and author of How I Learned to Snap called the protesters outside “a wet dream” and said, “Mama loves a good prayer circle.”
His act involved stripping down from pants to white briefs to a jock strap then to lacy blue panties and finally to white cotton panties. His act ended with the entire audience chanting “white cotton panties!” as he stood, otherwise nude, on-stage. His act was not censored; however, the stress of the night did cause a brief wardrobe malfunction, which only revealed how tense the performers felt.
The World Famous Bob, the third performer, spoke for a while then performed her act, called “The Final Reveal.” Her performance was censored. She stripped down, from a black sparkly dress, while dancing. At the end, where normally she would have shown shaved and sequined genitalia to the audience, she instead revealed a black bar, a deliberate homage to the censorship.
Oakley also mentioned the censorship and the lack of a merchandise table repeatedly between the acts. She remarked that coming to the College “was the toughest and really kind of the only fight” in 11 years and on hundreds of college campuses. She remarked that here she and her performers faced the “most censoring, most degrading names and epithets.”
The Sex Workers' Art Show, the protest outside of it and all the controversy surrounding it have certainly brought the issue of free speech to the College. There has been talk of the ACLU becoming involved in some sort of reimbursement for money not made on merchandise.
Oakley also openly mocked Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell and at one point asked the audience to chant “Bob McDonnell loves naked ladies!” along with her.
Overall, opinions on the show and the controversy ranged. Sarah Klotz (’08), one of the on-campus organizers, said that the controversy showed society's internal fear of sexuality, further enforced by an unnecessary stigma put on sex workers.
"The controversy was a problem for all of us, and certainly negatively impacted the performers, but also allowed the public to be more educated about the show," Klotz said. "In my opinion, the many conversations now going on about the show, sex work, and free speech are a great benefit to the college and the state.”
She believes that “the show is important because it provides a one-of-a-kind educational opportunity for our campus community… It also deals with issues of particular significance for a liberal arts education and challenges us to think about dynamics of class, race, gender, and sexuality in a creative and interesting ways,” she said.
At the end of the performance, when most of the crowd had left, taking with them surveys and copies of the contract, the performers sat on stage and answered questions from the audience. These questions ranged from specific inquiries to individual performers about their experiences and acts, to more general questions about the show and its significance.
One question posed asked the performers what they thought of the show and why they thought it was important. Many performers talked about how they felt like they were making a difference in people’s lives, challenging stereotypes and presumptions.
The World Famous Bob, however, used the question to respond to the greater issue of the controversy and protests. She said, “I am glad people outside are praying for me. It’s very sweet. I pray every day. Ultimately, what matters to me is that we live in a country where I can say yes and other people can say no. I will do anything, onstage, offstage and backstage to keep it that way.”