Typically one has to do a full time job in order to survive or pay bills. That can be either sex work or scientist. Most sex workers in the last pan German sex worker study by RKI are full time workers. Most scientist have no sex work side job I assume, but can have sex work experience like ‘Dr. Belle de Jour’. Only some sex workers happen to be student sex worker i.e. fall into both categories and thus are privileged to contribute to this journal (selection).

But what is the difference in the business model from sex worker and scientist regarding knowledge creation and delivery (publication). Job of the sex worker is sex service delivery and a lot of knowledge is necessary and accumulated doing so. But the sex worker is not selected and paid for experience (regardless how necessary) but being sexy.

Other the scientist having sold his brain to deliver facts e.g. on sex workers. He/she typically is paid (minimal?) wages by public institutions like NGOs on short period or project contracts, whereas the sex worker has to sell every once a service may be possible/needed ((migratory) daily/hourly labourer), unless he/she is a lesser-independent subcontractor of an agency/brothel (often framed as being pimped and thus victimized/criminalised due to taboo of division of sexual labour).

The difference in these types of knowledge or even wisdom relate to the horizon or perspective. The type of knowledge by sex workers is good and needed for sex workers, while the other type of knowledge by scientists is fine for the funding institution or society at large (e.g. prostitution image campaign which of course benefits future sex worker generations). An emancipatory sex work research magazine should not only boost sex workers as contributors but also cover sex worker demanded knowledge with first priority. However that is typically sex biz business knowledge and to deliver this how-to wisdom may be criminalized as promoting prostitution.

So still the problem exist, how to get sex workers motivated to produce some form of knowledge, that at least to an abstract institution may be of interest? The scientist not only receives money, but non-monetary compensation. Every article delivered adds up to the reputation and typically academic jobs based thereupon traditionally have increasing income curves with age (career). The opposite is the case with sex workers. Every publication carries an outing risk, which requires deliberate stigma management and sex work income is typically retrogressive [Paul Cressey 1932].

So what we need is tandem sex worker/scientists couples and we need sex workers being invited and receiving (at least symbolic) funding for researching/publication i.e. contributing an article.

Therefore we do need more than just a call for papers as done here, but we need a social process within the sex work community (discourse): which topics shall be dealt with in the next issue and who can/should work on it and contribute… We need new sex work compatible sex work research structures in order to get our sex worker wisdom into our own publications and knowledge repositories. Our Facebook networking is a good platform to face these challenges.

(Collaborative sex work research databases are bit. ly/sexworkinternet … sexworker. at … saafe. info … tradeSecretsGuide.blogspot. de … blogs …).