Maclean’s does it again with insensitive hooker-versus-escorts story

The listicle by the usually hilarious Scott Feschuk, titled “Escort v. Hooker: How do they compare?” was posted on the magazine’s Web site early Monday morning, only to be taken down hours later—presumably after the publication realized it was a grossly unfunny piece of yuck, and other publications came out against it. The comparisons are so patently stupid we won’t repeat them (but if you want to see for yourself, there’s a screen grab here).

To Feschuk’s credit, he quickly apologized for the piece on Twitter after he was roundly accused of being both a misogynist and simply “not cool.” Apparently, he intended the piece to be a satirical response to the ways in which the Canadian media characterize “hookers” and “escorts”; however, the words on the screen had an entirely different effect.

As Kate Carraway at Eye points out, Feschuk’s post isn’t really the problem. The much larger issue is the way sex workers are routinely described in the mainstream media. The last word from her story:

Slut-shaming like this, no matter the good intentions of Feschuk or whoever, is always sexist, and is usually classist and racist. It’s not cool, and it’s not—or shouldn’t be—something we do, over and over, as Canadians who think of themselves as tolerant, inclusive, sensible. And it’s getting worse, not better.

• Canada’s sex (worker) problem [Eye Weekly]