ECONOMICS, SEXUALITY, AND MALE SEX WORK

Male sex work generates sales in excess of one billion dollars annually in the
United States. Recent sex scandals involving prominent leaders and govern-
ment shutdowns of escort websites have focused attention on this business, but
despite the attention that comes when these scandals break, we know very little
about how the market works. Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work is the
first economic analysis of male sex work. Competition, the role of information,
pricing strategies, and other economic features of male sex work are analyzed
using the most comprehensive data available. Sex work is also social behavior,
however, and this book shows how the social aspects of gay sexuality influence
the economic properties of the market. Concepts like desire, masculinity, and
sexual stereotypes affect how sex workers compete for clients, who practices
safer sex, and how sex workers present themselves to clients to differentiate
themselves from the competition.

Trevon D. Logan is Hazel C. Youngberg Trustees Distinguished Professor of

Economics at the Ohio State University and Research Associate at the National
Bureau of Economic Research. He has won the American Sociological
Association’s Section on Sociology of Sexuality’s Best Article Award. He is
a member of the Committee on the Status of Minority Groups in the
Economics Profession at the American Economic Association and a member
of the Executive Board of the North American Association of Sports
Economists. He is a former president of the National Economic Association,
was a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Scholar in Health Policy Research at
University of Michigan, and former chair of the Economic History Association
Committee on Data and Archives.
Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex
Work

TREVON D. LOGAN
The Ohio State University
 One Liberty Plaza, New York, NY 10006, USA

Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.

It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of
education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.

www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107569577
10.1017/9781316423899
© Trevon D. Logan 2017
This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 2017
Printed in the United States of America by Sheridan Books, Inc.
A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Logan, Trevon D. (Trevon D’Marcus), author.
Economics, sexuality, and male sex work / Trevon D. Logan,
The Ohio State University.
New York, NY : Cambridge University Press, 2017. | Includes
bibliographical references and index.
LCCN 2016032381 | ISBN 9781107128736
LCSH: Male prostitutes – United States. | Male prostitution –
United States – Economic aspects.
LCC HQ119.4.U6 L64 2016 | DDC 306.74/3–dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016032381
ISBN 978-1-107-12873-6 Hardback
ISBN 978-1-107-56957-7 Paperback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of
URLs for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in this publication
and does not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is, or will remain,
accurate or appropriate.
For Chuck, Aaron, and The6
 Contents

List of Figures page ix

List of Tables xi
Note to Readers xiii
Acknowledgments xv

Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work 1

PART I THE HISTORY AND ECONOMICS OF MALE SEX WORK

1 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online 19

2 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem
of Asymmetric Information 39
3 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male
Sex Work 75

PART II MALE SEX WORK AND SEXUALITY

4 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services 111

5 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 142
6 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work 171
7 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker? Commercial
and Noncommercial Gay Sexuality 204

Appendix 1 Data for the Analysis of Male Sex Work 227

Appendix 2 A Simple Signaling Model 233
Appendix 3 Measuring the Male Sex Worker Network 244
Appendix 4 Empirical Estimates of Escort Valuation 258

vii
viii Contents

Appendix 5 Empirical Estimates of Self-Presentation 264

Appendix 6 A Model of Sex Worker and Client Negotiation 268
Notes 279
References 295
Index 311
 Figures

1.1 Diagram of online escort advertisement page 30

1.2 Example of escort review 36
2.1 The value of pictures in escort advertisements 57
2.2 The premium of picture types 58
2.3 The premium of face pictures 59
2.4 The premium for the fraction of pictures that are face 60
pictures
2.5 The marginal value of face pictures 63
2.6 The premium to face pictures when beauty is also 65
measured
2.7 The face picture premium by city 70
2.8 The face picture premium for selected types of escorts 71
3.1 City characteristics and network centrality measures 95
3.2 Escort characteristics and the probability of traveling 97
3.3 City centrality measures and the probability of escort 98
travel
3.4 Escort characteristics and traveling distance 99
3.5 City centrality and the distance traveled by escorts 100
3.6 Escort travel, city properties, and escort wages 101
3.7 Escort and city centrality and escort wages 103
3.8 Destination city centrality and traveling escort wages 104
4.1 Age, weight, and escort prices 134
4.2 Body type and male escort prices 135
4.3 Sexual position and escort price differentials 136
4.4 Sexual position and race price differentials 138
5.1 Escort characteristics and proportion of frontal nudity 164
5.2 Escort characteristics and proportion of rear nudity 165
5.3 Race, sexual position and proportion of frontal nudity 166

ix
x Figures

5.4 Race, sexual position and proportion of rear nudity 167

6.1 Physical characteristics and probability of advertising 192
safer sex
6.2 Sexual behaviors and probability of advertising safer 193
sex
6.3 Sex worker valuations of sexual behaviors 196
6.4 Client valuations of sexual behaviors 197
6.5 Client valuation of sexual behaviors controlling for sex 199
worker characteristics
6.6 Sex worker safer sex behavior and advertised prices 200
7.1 Example of a Grindr profile 209
Appendix 2.1 Price premium of pictures by picture type 234
 Tables

1.1 Summary statistics for the escort advertisement data page 32

sample
1.2 Summary statistics for the client reviewed transactions 37
data sample
2.1 Summary statistics for the escort sample 56
2.2 Escort characteristics for selected cities 69
3.1 Geographic distribution of escorts – selected cities 85
3.2 Summary travel and network measures, individual 92
escorts
3.3 Correlation of escort-level network measures 92
3.4 Summary statistics – city level 93
3.5 Correlation of city-level network measures 93
3.6 Top fifteen US cities visited by male sex workers 96
Appendix 1.1 Comparison of male escort advertisement websites 232
Appendix 2.1 Information, reputation, and the price of male escort 236
services
Appendix 2.2 Quality of information and the price of male escort 237
services
Appendix 2.3 Is the data consistent with a beauty interpretation? 238
Appendix 2.4 Enforcement proxy and the value of the signal 239
Appendix 2.5 Robustness checks for information quality and the 240
price of male escort services
Appendix 2.6 Information and selection into posting escort prices 242
Appendix 2.7 Decomposition of picture premium for all picture 243
types
Appendix 3.1 Regression on travel indicator for escorts 247
Appendix 3.2 Regression of log average travel distance 249

xi
xii Tables

Appendix 3.3 Regression of log wage on travel and escort 250

characteristics
Appendix 3.4 Regression of escort wages on escort characteristics 253
and network centrality measures
Appendix 3.5 Log wage regressions for traveling escorts only 256
Appendix 3.6 Regression of city escort price dispersion on city 257
network measures
Appendix 4.1 Physical characteristics and male escort prices 261
Appendix 4.2 Sexual behaviors and male escort prices 262
Appendix 4.3 Race, sexual behavior, and male escort prices 263
Appendix 5.1 Descriptive statistics for self-presentation 264
Appendix 5.2 Regression estimates of self-presentation measures by 265
body type
Appendix 5.3 Regression estimates of self-presentations by sexual 265
position
Appendix 5.4 Regression estimates of self-presentations by race 265
Appendix 5.5 Regression estimates of self-presentations by race and 266
sexual positioning
Appendix 5.6 Selection regressions by body type 266
Appendix 5.7 Selection regressions by sexual position 267
Appendix 5.8 Selection regressions by race 267
Appendix 6.1 Physical predictors of advertised safer sex 270
Appendix 6.2 Sexual behavior predictors of advertised safer sex 270
Appendix 6.3 Race and sexual behavior predictors of advertised 271
safer sex
Appendix 6.4 Advertising and reputation-based predictors of 272
advertised safer sex
Appendix 6.5 Escort and client payoff functions, sexual behaviors 273
Appendix 6.6 Escort and client payoff functions, condom usage 274
Appendix 6.7 Client payoff functions with full escort characteristics 276
Appendix 6.8 Advertised safer sex and escort prices 277
 Note to Readers

Throughout this book, the terms “sex work,” “prostitution,” and “escort-
ing” are used largely interchangeably. In general, “sex work” is used most
often, as it references an occupation that involves being hired to provide
sexual services. Since this book deals with men who explicitly advertise as
being paid for their time, escorting is also used because the sex may or may
not be included in the transaction. Prostitution is usually reserved for
references to the larger market, which includes those coerced or forced
into sex work, and where “worker” would be inappropriate to describe all
participants.
Some chapters in this book are revised versions of coauthored work. For
editorial consistency, these chapters have been revised to read in the first
person and to integrate with the single-authored chapters of the book.
These chapters are identified as such in their first endnote, and when cited
should include the reference to the coauthored work.

xiii
 Acknowledgments

Authors accumulate many debts when they write books. I have certainly
accumulated more than most. This project owes a special debt to Manisha
Shah, who first encouraged me to work on the topic of male sex work when
I first approached her about data from the online market. My original plan
was that Manisha would work on male sex work on her own, but our
collaboration led me to consider the issues in this book. Manisha has
always been open and willing to share her expertise and keen criticism,
and I am very grateful for her enthusiastic support at times when I was not
sure if this project would come to fruition.
I have discussed nearly every idea in this book with Rodney Andrews,
and he continues to be one of the most thoughtful and open-minded
economists I know. I am also thankful that Rodney continues to push me
to reach for the highest levels of empirical scholarship, which included
collecting new data and pushing the analysis further than I had thought
possible to find information about the demand side of the market. Lisa
Cook told me that this project was well worth the professional risks and, as
in most things, she was spot-on. Tod Hamilton gave me extremely useful
advice in how to integrate the economic and sociological aspects, and in the
process forced me to rethink the interpretation of many of the results here.
This project spanned my time at three universities. At Ohio State, I have
greatly benefitted from conversations with Randy Olsen, Audrey Light,
Rick Steckel, Jim Peck, Bruce Weinberg, Paul Healy, Dan Levin, Joe
Kaboski, Howard Marvel, Elizabeth Cooksey, Korie Edwards, Townsand
Price-Spratlen, Masanori Hashimoto, John Kagel, Lung-Fei Lee, Lucia
Dunn, John Casterline, Steve Cosslett, Reanne Frank, Ruth Peterson, and
Patricia Reagan. I thank Deborah Moddelmog and members of the
Diversity and Identity Studies Collective for sharing their ideas on the
project when it was in its infancy. I have also benefitted from the support of

xv
xvi Acknowledgments

both the Initiative in Population Research (seed grant funding through

NIH grant R24-HD058484) and the Criminal Justice Research Center.
I am grateful to Christina Paxson for inviting me to visit the Center for
Health and Wellbeing at Princeton just at the time when I was considering
expanding the project beyond asymmetric information. While there,
I benefitted greatly from conversations with Anne Case, Angus Deaton,
and Gustavo Bobonis. The majority of this project took shape while I was
a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Scholar in Health Policy Research at
the University of Michigan. I thank Alan Cohen, Paula Lantz, Edward
Norton, and Catherine Player for their support. The constant interaction
with scholars across the social sciences changed my perspective not only
about male sex work, but in all of my projects. I thank Hans Noel, Fabio
Rojas, Monique Lyle, Graeme Boushey, Kevin Stange, Seth Freedman, and
Megan Andrew for their willingness to share their ideas and challenge my
own. I am especially grateful to Brendan Nyhan, Alice Goffman, and
Edward Walker for our book club, which kept this project on the front
burner. In addition, Martha Bailey, Paul Rhode, Warren Whatley, and Raj
Arunachalam provided additional feedback on various ideas developed in
Ann Arbor. The results of my time in Michigan would have been impos-
sible without Theresa Ramirez, who did everything that she could to ensure
that I could concentrate on my research.
A large number of scholars have provided feedback on various aspects of
this work, and it is a much better work for it. Franklin Wilson, Scott
Cunningham, Mustafa Emirbayer, Rene Almeling, Bryan Sykes, Evelyn
Patterson, Steven Goodreau, Jason Orne, Jennifer Johnson-Hanks, Ken
Wachter, Ron Lee, Claudia Goldin, John Wilmoth, Darrick Hamilton,
Rashawn Ray, William Darity, Larry Katz, Nzinga Broussard, Olugbenga
Ajilore, Victor Minichiello, John Scott, Christopher Carpenter, John
Murray, and Mike Hout each gave generously of their time to read and
react to ideas presented here. Seminar audiences at Princeton, Wisconsin,
Toledo, Berkeley, and Ohio State provided a great environment to develop
and extend the project. Bernardo Quieroz and his colleagues at Cedeplar
and Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais invited me to visit at a time that
allowed me to bring all of the parts together into a cohesive core.
This project allowed me to work with excellent research assistants. Colin
Odden and Michael Bommarito helped with data collection. Chih-Sheng
Hsieh, Leigh Fine, and Brian Soller each became collaborators on this
work, and I learned a great deal from them. Jaromir Kovarik introduced
me to the literature on networks and showed me its possibilities and
limitations in empirical economics. Glenn Rondo, Jr., Dez Taylor,
 Acknowledgments xvii

Dwayne Zimmerman, Gamal Brown, Rahmundo Imani, Aaron Thomas,

Hubert Hill, Anthony Lewis, Gary Dixon, James Mathis, Arnold
Smotherman, Ryan Fields, and Richard Clyburn read various chapters
and provided a fresh perspective on the broader implications of studying
commercial sex.
My work here took me away from other projects. I thank my coauthors
for their forbearance when this project delayed our work: Yang Chen,
Michael Sinkey, Kyle Kain, Stephen Bergman, Rodney Andrews, Lisa
Cook, Shari Eli, Paul Rhode, Jonathan Pritchett, John Parman, Joe
Kaboski, Brendan Nyhan, and Stacy Sneeringer. Janet Myers and
Michelle Chapman helped to ensure that all administrative matters were
handled. I am deeply indebted to Ana Ramirez, whose very dedicated work
has allowed me to fulfill my administrative duties while maintaining an
active research agenda.
Karen Maloney was excited about this project from the start and her
enthusiasm was contagious. I thank her for seeing the potential in this
project and guiding me through this process.
Lastly, I thank my family for their support. My parents, brothers, and
sisters-in-law – Thomas, Diana, Thomas, Jr., Travis, Pamela, and Camille,
respectively – kept me focused on the goal. It is in conversations with them
that I realized the ways that commercial sex was not only about commercial
sex but about much more fundamental aspects of human interaction.
My extended family has been a constant source of humor, fellowship,
and encouragement. Throughout, of course, I have had Morgan. I thank
him for his patience with my travel schedule and other commitments that
kept me away from home, and for caring absolutely nothing about this
project. Watching him live the canine lifestyle while I tried to figure out the
complexities of male sex work has convinced me that he has the better part
of the bargain.
 Introduction

Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work

In these days of “new media” it can be difficult to spot an interloper. He had

appeared at press conferences regularly for several months on daily press
credentials and was not a familiar face in the Washington press corps. But
that did not necessarily raise suspicions. Washington’s media has its share
of transient members. Weak questions to an embattled president, however,
have a way of raising eyebrows. The question he asked on January 26, 2005,
finally caused members of the press to turn a critical eye on one of their
own. Who was this guy? Was he planted by the Administration? As the
media began to dig, they found their surface pay dirt: Jeff Gannon, the
reporter, was a pseudonym for James Dale Guckert, and the media firm
employing him was entirely virtual. Talon News had no actual physical
presence and Guckert, the only employee, had no prior professional
journalistic experience. That such an inexperienced member of the press
was granted access provided fodder for a few days. Further investigation
eventually revealed a much more salacious fact: Guckert, in addition to
sitting in the White House Press Briefing Room, with its carefully
assembled seating chart, was a male sex worker who served an exclusively
male clientele. He openly advertised his services online, complete with
pictures and descriptions of the services he offered to interested clients. He
could be reached by email or phone, both of which he provided on the
Internet. Clients praised his work outside of the Press Room. Worth every
penny, they said.
Guckert was not the first male sex worker reported by the press to gain
access to the halls and people of power. Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) was
reprimanded by the House of Representatives in 1990 when it was revealed
that his lover, a reported sex worker, was operating as an escort service out
of Frank’s Massachusetts home. Lobbyist Craig Spence committed suicide
in 1989 after it was revealed that he used political connections to gain

1
2 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work

unauthorized access to the White House. He was accused of taking male

sex workers on unauthorized tours.
In each of these cases the media response was typical. The newsreels
spun with titillating pictures of men who sell sexual services to other men.
The clandestine encounters. Deception. Money. Power. Sex. Homosexuality.
The mix proves intoxicating, equal parts excitement, titillation, ridicule,
and amazement. Men selling sex to other men? Who could think of such
a thing?
Male sex work is hidden in plain view. In every instance the evidence of
male prostitution has been terribly easy to find. Law enforcement, in fact,
has an odd relationship with male sex work. Since most male sex work in
the United States now takes place through the Internet, it has received little
intrusion from legal authorities as it does not bring the same public
nuisances as street prostitution. The lack of law enforcement has allowed
male sex work to flourish online. In fact, one prominent website for male
escorts host an annual awards show, the Hookies. Men compete regionally
in hopes of making the national event, which is held in New York City each
spring and covered by mainstream media outlets such as the Village Voice.
There, male sex workers compete in categories including “Best New Escort”
or “Best Fetish Escort” and where the top title is “Escort of the Year.” It is so
popular that the Manhattan Digest devoted a column to the 2015 awards,
reviewing the nominees and giving editorial picks on who should win in
selected categories.1
The website that sponsored the awards, Rentboy.com, was reported to
have netted $10 million in sales revenue from 2010–15. Rentboy, like most
male escort websites, is not an intermediary. Rentboy.com earned revenue
from escorts, who paid a fee to host their ads on the website. Rentboy.com
did not receive a portion of transaction fees from escorts, as a pimp or
madam would. The website was decidedly hands off—they do not arrange
appointments and made no guarantees for services. In fact, Rentboy did
nothing more (or less) than provide a website where clients can browse
through advertisements and directly contact the escorts they would like to
meet. Escorts paid them for the service and along with advertisement
revenue from gay-oriented media, the website netted roughly $2 million
per year.
Rentboy was generous in sharing the spoils from male sex work. In 2015
they announced the Cash4Class Scholarship that would help male sex
workers enroll in and complete post-secondary education. Applicants
had to provide information on their involvement in sex work and submit
evidence of the necessary academic credentials. In addition, the application
 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work 3

required a brief essay, which would describe how the scholarship would
help the applicant achieve their career goals outside of sex work. The
scholarship competition was to be judged by a star of gay pornography,
who himself was not a sex worker. All of this announced publicly on
YouTube.2
Despite these public displays – the fact that prices for services were freely
visible, specific sexual services were searchable by potential clients, and
direct contact information for escorts was available, this receives little public
notice. Until it does. Federal authorities finally moved to close Rentboy.com
in August of 2015 – more than 15 years after the website first debuted.
Indeed, Rentboy had become the subject of a sting carried out by the
Department of Homeland Security because it was believed to be promoting
prostitution across state and national borders. If this was the case, it had been
involved in that business for well over a decade. In fact, Rentboy made no
attempt to hide itself or what its business practice was. They were frequently
reported on in the mainstream media, maintained a corporate office in
Union Square in New York City, filmed their own channel on YouTube
where they featured interviews with male sex workers who spoke about their
careers, and in the process became the highest-profile online prostitution
service in the last decade.
When word of the federal charges first hit, the news media, again, paid
special attention to male sex work. The stories were filled with awe that
men posted detailed profiles of themselves for others. Particular attention
was paid to explicit pictures, detailed descriptions of sexual behaviors, and
the fact that escort attributes could be sorted by clients looking for a man of
a particular height, build, or sexual proclivity. The media also noted the
ingenious business model, where escorts pay to have the website host their
ads (which in 2015 on Rentboy.com ranged from $59.95 to $299.95
depending on how prominently an escort wanted their advertisement
displayed), such that the website was not involved in any specific transac-
tions between escorts and clients. The legal disclaimer noted that men
could not use the website to exchange sex for money, but federal prosecu-
tors said this stipulation was openly violated by the website owners and
employees. The media had to both acknowledge their ignorance of the
practice and simultaneously admit its open availability and popularity
among men seeking commercial sex with other men.3 Again, male sex
work showed itself to be hidden in plain view.
Even after the demise of the Rentboy.com website, it continued to
receive media attention. In late 2016, the gay television network Logo set
to debut “Prince Charming,” a television show where gay men competed to
4 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work

win the affections of Robert Sepulveda, Jr., an interior designer. Even

before the show debuted, however, the media found that Sepulveda, the
star of the series, had been an escort, advertising several years earlier on
Rentboy.com under the name Vincent Romen. As with Guckert, the media
reported on Sepulveda’s clients’ reviews of his services and posted pictures
from his online advertisement. The press also ruminated on why a major
television outlet would cast a man with an easy-to-find, online history of
prostitution and bill him as one of the most eligible gay bachelors in
America.4
For the media, such immediate attention and eventual disinterest is par
for the course. Once the story stops being news the media must move on to
more promising stories. But men are still selling sex to other men. Despite
Rentboy’s end in operation in August 2015, Rentboy.com is not the only
website involved in male sex work, and clients could move to any number
of competitors to choose escorts. The escorts who posted advertisements on
Rentboy simply migrated elsewhere, if they had not already maintained
advertisements on competitor websites. Missing in all of the media accounts
of the websites and individual escorts is a basic understanding of male sex
work. We know that it is prostitution, but the details of the industry are left
to the public’s imagination. On the one hand, leaving the public to fill in the
blanks adds to the salacious appeal of male prostitution. On the other hand,
serious journalists would have precious few sources to turn to give them an
accurate account of the industry.
While the media’s high-gloss treatment of the inner workings of male
sex work may be understandable, the same treatment by social scientists is
not. Unlike the media, who place male sex work on the front page for its
novelty, scholars have cast male sex work to the lowest realm of academic
discourse – obscurity. Less than 10 percent of the scholarship on sex work
is concerned with male sex work.5 In general, male sex work is difficult to
classify since’ it is presumed that men in the market as sex workers operate
in a different manner than female sex workers. One common presumption
is that female sex workers are more likely to be exploited in sex work than
male sex workers. While male sex workers in the United States are much
more likely to be independent owner-operators, this argument neglects the
fact that as self-owned firms, male sex workers therefore make indepen-
dent, presumably economically informed choices that would be quite
amenable to economic analysis.
The obscurity of male sex work as an area of academic interest stems from
many sources. First, male sex work does not fit easily into the gendered lines
guiding the vast majority of sex work scholarship. Statements claiming
 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work 5

prostitution is the commodification of women’s bodies or inherently

exploitative ring hollow when both buyers and sellers are men. Male sex
work lacks the dynamic of explicit control of women by men, either as
brokers or as clients. Second, male sex work invites unpleasant discussions
of homosexual sex as opposed to sexuality. Even among the enlightened,
serious academic discourse on the particulars of homosexual sex is dis-
quieting and therefore discouraged. Also, the work on male sex work is
more concerned with the possibility of disease epidemics more common
among men who have sex with men as opposed to a full understanding of
the market. Third, most scholarship uses male sex work as a means to an
end, furthering developments in queer, masculinity, feminist, and other
humanistic theories. The idea of male sex work has received far more
attention than empirical analysis as a market. We know much less about
what male sex work is as opposed to what it represents. While theoretical
work is an indispensable part of our knowledge of the phenomenon, it has
not yielded the rich empirical knowledge about male sex work that would
move the scholarship to new areas of inquiry.
Male sex work is a market. There are buyers, sellers, supply, demand,
prices, and transactions. The main contribution of this book is to treat male
sex work as the market it is and use that market feature to its fullest
advantage. Perhaps the most surprising fact about this market is how
well developed it is in the United States. Unlike female sex workers, male
sex workers advertise publicly on the Internet. They display pictures of
themselves, describe the services they provide, post their contact informa-
tion, and list the price of their services. For one interested in the market
aspects of male sex work, such information is invaluable. Until now, this
information has not been exploited by social scientists looking for com-
prehensive information about this market.
The market for male escort services is large, with estimated annual reven-
ues in excess of $1 billion in the United States, which implies millions of
transactions per year.6 Unlike their female counterparts, the majority of
male sex workers work independently and online. There are few interme-
diaries in the male sex trade in the United States.7 Male sex workers are
independent owner-operators whose fees are not shared with others and
who compete with one another for clients. Even the most expensive
advertisement fee is recouped with one or two hourly appointments.
This is in stark contrast to female sex work, where fees for services are
usually set by and shared with pimps or madams. These intermediaries can
disrupt the market by rationing services, raising prices, and increasing
transaction costs. Despite the interesting market features of male sex work,
6 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work

which make it easier to apply the basic principles of supply and demand,
this market is seldom studied by economists.8
Our empirical knowledge of the market is remarkably thin, given its size
and complexity. There are studies exploring the experiences of small
groups of sex workers, including some recent studies of male sex workers
who advertise online. These studies shed light on individual motivations to
enter the market and the reasons for participating in the industry, but they
have not been able to describe the market in general. Many of the most
basic questions one would ask about male sex work are inherently about
the market for male sex work. How many male sex workers are there (how
large is this market)? Where are they located (what is the scope of this
market)? What are their ages and races (what are the characteristics of the
supply of male sex workers)? Who are the clients (where does the demand
come from)? How much money do male sex workers earn, and do sex
workers earn more for some services than others (what is the profit func-
tion)? Answers to our most basic questions require comprehensive evi-
dence about the market for male sex work.
This book provides an answer to those questions about the basics of the
market for male sex work. For the first time, the breadth of the online
market is used to answer many of the most pressing questions about what
the male sex work market is and how it operates. This book concentrates on
the online market, and there are undeniable tradeoffs in focusing on the
online market. For example, this book says little about either men with
temporary attachments to male sex work or men who participate in survival
sex. The focus here is on men involved in sex work as a professional
occupation. The disadvantage is that we cannot discuss the most vulnerable
men involved in male sex work. The advantages are that we concentrate on
those engaged with sex work as a profession and discuss the majority of
male sex work in the United States in a rigorous way.
To set the landscape, the first chapter gives a brief history of male sex work,
focusing on the class distinctions that have been regularly observed between
clients and sex workers. Male sex work has been regulated in a different way
than female sex work. This gives rise to several unique features for the
practice that remain to this day. For example, male sex workers do not use
pimps, madams, or other intermediaries as female sex workers often do. Also,
male sex workers are better integrated into gay male society. Some have
argued that they are a sexual archetype among gay men. Gay novels, film, and
other aspects of gay culture prominently feature male sex workers.
Since men who desire sex with men (the client base) are relatively few in
number, male sex workers need to advertise their services more openly
 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work 7

than female prostitutes. There are not enough clients to form street mar-
kets in most cities. Male sex workers therefore use gay-oriented media to
reach their clients. While the information once presented in the gay news-
paper classifieds (which included separate sections for callboys) is much
more limited than what is provided today, this historical pattern is the
paradigm that still guides the market. The market has been national since
at least the early 1970s – nationally distributed classified advertisements
have been used to solicit clients for more than forty years.
After reviewing the history, I move to a brief description of the data
sources used to analyze the market and answer the basic questions we
would ask about any market. The data described in the first chapter form
the backbone of the analysis that follows through the rest of the book.
The newspaper advertisements of the past have given way to the national
websites of the present. I detail the various sources that one can use to
analyze the market. In general, there are two types of information: online
advertisements and client reviews. Both are distinct sources of informa-
tion, but contain important pieces of overlap that allow us to confirm
trends observed in one data source by looking for evidence of those same
trends in the other. I describe the sources available for each type of
information and show why I concentrate on the specific online sources
I use. The advertisement and client reviews I use in this book come from
the largest and most popular sources for male sex workers – I show that
they represent the market better than other available sources.
The first chapter also gives answers to the most basic economic ques-
tions. How many male sex workers are advertising online? A few thousand.
What is their age, ethnic, and racial composition? They are quite diverse.
Male sex workers are of every race and ethnic origin and range in adver-
tised age from 18 years old to men in their 60s. The average man advertis-
ing is nearly 30 years old – this is not a market of very young men. What is
the average price of sex worker services? An hour of an escort’s time will cost
you more than $200.00, on average. (Readers less interested in the history
of sex work and the description of the data can skip this chapter.)
The rest of Part I consists of chapters that economically analyze the
market for male sex work in the United States. This market, however, is
illegal. That poses a very interesting question – given that the market is
illegal (irrespective of the taboos regarding male homosexuality), how can
it function so well? It is not as if clients can be assured that they will always
get what they want. There are no means to ensure services advertised will
actually be offered. Even more, this market does not use pimps, madams, or
other intermediaries or brokers that would negotiate transactions and
8 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work

could act to regulate and enforce quality standards. Also, unlike female sex
work, in male sex work the client is at relatively greater risk of being
violated by an escort. A search online will quickly yield news stories
documenting how some clients have been assaulted or even murdered
when they hired the wrong escort.
As discussed in Chapter 2, the market for male sex work is rife with
asymmetric information (the sex worker knows whether he is a thief, but
the client does not), and this would appear to be an insurmountable
problem (the client has no recourse if he is victimized, and should be
disinclined to hire an escort). Yet, the market exists and functions – how
does this happen? The problem for male sex work is that there is no formal
enforcement of contracts. I show how clients of male sex workers infor-
mally police the market in a way that makes signaling, where the escort
provides a specific type of information to establish that he is a “good guy,”
credible. Using the institutional knowledge embedded in client reviews of
male escort services, I identify the specific signal male sex workers use to
communicate quality to their clients: face pictures. I find that there is a
substantial return to the signal in this market. Sex workers who post
pictures of their faces earn substantially more than other sex workers,
and they earn more because they have provided a credible signal to their
clients that they are the “good guys” in the profession. The face picture is
like posting a bond, a credit report, or a detailed vehicle history – it makes
the client feel better about the transaction about to take place. This market
functions remarkably well as a result, despite its illegal and stigmatized
status.
Knowledge of some features of the market masks considerable variations
at the local level in both the number of sex workers and the price of male
escort services. It also obscures a fundamental aspect of any free market –
competition. Chapter 3 considers more sophisticated questions about male
sex workers. In particular, it looks at location patterns and how travel and
location are related to market forces. Male sex workers have always been
traveling salesmen, to a degree. They serve a variety of markets and travel at
the expense of their clients, but they also travel at their own expense, setting
up shop in specific locations for short periods of time to generate new
business.
This feature of the market raises a number of questions. Where are male
sex workers located? Where do they travel? Are their location and travel
patterns related to gay male location patterns or the competition a sex
worker faces in his home location? Does the price of male sex work service
vary by location, as the prices of other services do? How far do sex workers
 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work 9

travel when they travel, and what cities are popular destinations? I find that
many of the travel patterns are consistent with basic theories of market
competition – male sex worker location and travel are driven by competi-
tion between sex workers for clients.
Male sex workers respond to the market incentives to travel. Although
the home location of male sex workers is not strongly related to gay
location, male sex workers travel to locations with high demand for male
sex work services. This affects overall market prices because sex workers
who travel charge higher prices than those that do not. These links between
cities are not just related to travel, but to prices as well. The links between
cities form a network of cities that are key for male sex work. Overall, this
shows that the market is quite well developed and mature. Sex workers
respond to market forces of demand, and prices in the market are affected
by the demand-driven, competition-based travel of male sex workers.
The second section of the book (Part II) moves beyond traditional
economic analysis and considers the ways social constructions of gender
and sexuality influence how this market functions. This part of the book
has a different focus: to see how the application of gender and sexuality
theory alters the conclusions we draw from a traditional, neoclassical
economic approach to this market. I apply the theoretical work in gender,
sexuality, and masculinity, and integrate them into an economic analysis.
The result is a hypothesis-driven, scientific approach to male sex work that
is informed by economic and social theory.
The mutual exclusivity of the previous work creates a false barrier that
inhibits our ability to empirically investigate how market function is miti-
gated by social, gender, and sexual norms. I do not argue that all analysis of
male sex work can proceed in this fashion, but empirical analysis can be
enhanced by this integration. In a sex work market, theoretical assertions
are transformed into hypotheses about how social processes impact the
economic function of the market. While scholars of masculinity and sexu-
ality assert that many of the central tenets of sex work (desire, power, erotic
capital, sexual hierarchies, and the like) cannot be measured empirically,
they also make explicitly quantitative statements about gendered relations,
social constructions, and performance. For example, if some men are more
desired than others, we should see that difference reflected in a commercial
sex market. Desire would undeniably be related to demand in a sexual
market. Are these theoretical predictions consistent with the way the
market operates?
The application of social theory involves assumptions about relation-
ships between variables, hypotheses about the size and direction of effects,
10 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work

and descriptions of potential mechanisms that are not orthogonal to

economic analysis. If the evidence does not support the hypotheses, then
the theories should be reformulated or, perhaps, rejected. If the goal of
theory is to enhance our understanding of underlying social, economic,
and historical processes relating to the construction and function of gender
and sexuality in human societies, formal testing of the predictions of these
models in male sex work serves a useful purpose. This integrated approach
helps to resolve a tension in the theoretical approach to gender and
sexuality. In this section of the book I adopt an explicit quantitative
approach to the issues, a novel advance in a literature that usually relies
on qualitative empirical evidence.
In applying this social-economic integrated approach, I make two spe-
cific theoretical advances in the study of masculinity and sexuality. First,
I combine the relational, performance, and intersectional approaches to
masculinity and sexuality. While each has been used on its own to describe
gendered relations in sex work, they are rarely used in concert. In the
market for sex work that I study, they are inherently linked – masculinity is
not only in the interactions that men have with each other in this market, it
is also performed due to the fact that the interactions are based upon sex
work, the construction of erotic personas, and cultural cues about sex and
masculinity among gay men. The audience (clients) conditions the ways
that gender and sexuality are performed and presented by sex workers,
which itself can influence who interacts with whom and why. Furthermore,
each type of relation and performance is distinct, yielding specific predic-
tions about who performs what, and when. By using these theories in
concert, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding not only about
sex work, but also and more generally, how these theoretical concepts can
and do interact.
The thrust of this integrated approach is that men in this market rely
on relations through class, race, and within-gender gendered relations to
help them achieve their desired masculinity. Masculinity in this market is
not about men and women but about men and other men. When sexu-
ality is added to the mix there is an additional wrinkle: The classed, raced,
and within-gendered relations also define the masculinity that is desired.
The market and social theory interact – desire (which may be socially
constructed) is demand, and performance (the social interpretation of
types) is supply.
The traditional tools of economic analysis are not useful here because
socially constructed desire is beyond neoclassical economic theory. To the
economist, such preferences reflect “primitive” demand that we need not
 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work 11

account for. To the social theorist, however, it is exactly this construction

that is the most interesting, as it reflects the ways in which culturally
constructed social archetypes influence impersonal market processes.
With social theory we can identify where this demand comes from and
what it represents. Economically, I argue that this demand should manifest
itself in the prices that men who embody specific types of masculinity
charge in the market.
The second theoretical innovation is the extension of sexual field theory
to the study of male sex work. The theory has been developed for and
applies to the most prominent aspects of collective sexual life, which is
noncommercial. Social theorists have developed sexual field theory to
derive predictions about collective sexual life – who will mate with whom
and why, and what is considered desirable and attractive, for example.
Economists have consistently shown, however, that market forces operate
on what has been described as nonmarket behavior. I extend that approach
to male sex work. For example, the desirability of certain men over other
men would apply to both commercial and noncommercial sexual fields.
This is not to say that the demand is isomorphic between the two, but the
essentials of desirability would likely hold for both commercial and
noncommercial sexual desire. Similarly, the profit motives of a sex
worker should respond to the collective insofar as this is the customer
base of the sex worker – the nonmarket collective is, in a sense, a proxy for
the demand side of the market. I argue that the sexual field is not divorced
from the commercial sexual market, but rather intimately related to its
function.
To be clear, there is an unmistakable trade-off between sociological
nuance and economic analysis as done here. The goal is not to develop
an approach that speaks to the specific social world governing each indi-
vidual sex worker’s experience. Rather, it is to accept that sex workers must
consider the economic and social market when making choices about how
to sell their services. The social market contains the very clients sex workers
are trying to reach for economic gain. As with any marketing strategy, sex
workers must use cues from the broader social world about what is desired
and how best to package themselves to the broadest audience possible.
The question here is to see if those cues, which are derived from non-
commercial sexual behavior among gay men, inform the way that male sex
work is commercialized, commodified, and compensated.
Chapter 4 begins this section by considering the value of the sexual
services men offer in this market. I use hedonic pricing techniques stan-
dard in the economic analysis to estimate the value of male sex worker
12 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work

services and personal characteristics in this market. Reaching past simple

notions of supply and demand, I derive hypotheses of value from theories
of gender and sexuality. In particular, scholars have asserted that in
hegemonically masculine environments behaviors that are traditionally
“masculine” will be highly prized. Consistent with the theory of hegemonic
masculinity, I find that male sex workers who advertise behavior that is
characterized as more masculine charge higher prices for their services,
while sex workers who advertise less-masculine behavior charge signifi-
cantly less, a price differential on the order of 17 percent.
Even more, I test implications of intersectionality. Intersectionality the-
ory asserts that the hegemonic masculine ideal is highly variable by its
relationship to other characteristics. In other words, depending on other
characteristics of a male sex worker, such as race, height, weight, muscu-
larity, and the like, certain behaviors will be read as more hegemonically
masculine than others. Results show that race and sexual behavior inter-
actions exert a strong influence on the prices charged by male sex workers.
The differential between masculine and non-masculine behaviors varies
substantially by race in a manner consistent with American racial-sexual
stereotypes. Not only are all men not equal in this market, but certain men
are more able to meet the expectations of the masculine ideal than are
others, and they are rewarded for it.
In Chapter 5 I consider the photographs posted in sex worker advertise-
ments in a manner that departs from asymmetric information covered in
Part I. Rather than investigating signaling, a social approach to the photos
in advertisements allows us to analyze how escorts present themselves to
potential clients. As in any other business, firm advertisements tell us about
expectations of consumer demand in the market. This analysis provides
empirical support for the concept of presentation of self, feminist scholars’
ideas of the body as a site of performance, hegemonic masculinity, inter-
section theory, and the theory of erotic capital. Because male sex workers
can be assumed to present a persona that is likely to lead to the largest
financial gain – the attraction of a large number of clients – they will be very
sensitive to the norms and values that dictate how they should present
themselves. They will highlight the features of their product that will
command higher prices in the market. I find that sex workers of different
advertised types use very different pictures to advertise their services. The
bodies of sex workers are presented in distinct ways along racial, sexual,
and racial-sexual lines. Male sex workers display for their clients the
physical selves believed to be most germane to their sexual personas.
And, unlike the face pictures described earlier, these pictures are not related
 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work 13

to prices but do have a statistically significant relationship to the persona

advertised on the Internet.
These social distinctions have implications for sex worker and popula-
tion health. Chapter 6 analyzes advertised safer sex practices among male
sex workers. There are two related questions about sexual practices and
male sex work, one related to the supply of safer sex and the other to the
demand for it. The first question is whether there are differences among
escorts in their propensity to advertise condom or condomless sex to
clients. The second is whether there are market incentives to participate
in condomless sex or to provide condom sex in the market. This chapter
answers both questions.
I find that some sex workers are more likely to advertise condom (“safe”)
sex than others. Consistent with gay male sexual field theory, I find that
sexually dominant (penetrative) sex workers, Asian ethnicity, established
reputations, and age are strong positive predictors of the likelihood of
advertising condom sex. I also find that advertised condom sex comes with
a substantial price premium in the market – sex workers who advertise
condom sex earn 5 percent more than those who do not, a finding that is
both statistically and substantively significant. This finding runs counter to
estimates for female sex workers. Further, I find that the returns to safer sex
vary by race and sexual behaviors in ways that are consistent with social
theories about sexual desire but inconsistent with the economic theory of
compensating differentials, where sex workers would earn more for enga-
ging in riskier behavior. Using transaction-specific data I find that it is the
client who demands condomed sex with a male sex worker. What is most
intriguing about these results is that although they are inconsistent with
neoclassical economic theory, they are consistent with social theories of
masculinity, desire, and risk. This analysis shows the pitfalls of attempting
to analyze a market without consideration of its social context and the
stratification therein. The results suggest that sexual dynamics and racial-
sexual stereotypes among gay men may exacerbate and contribute to health
inequalities among gay men.
Another innovation from this integrated approach, which features
prominently in Part II, is an explicitly nuanced approach to race in gay
sexual interactions. Recent scholarship has called attention to the ways
that gay men exclude members of certain races from their social and/or
sexual activity. In online forums and in other spaces, gay men have set
clear criteria for the desired races of their partners. This has been identi-
fied as “sexual racism” in the literature, as the exclusion of men based
upon race is presumably based upon racialized assumptions of sexuality
14 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work

and desirability. What scholars have failed to note, however, is that the
inclusion of non-White men into gay sexual spaces primarily occurs on
terms dictated by the racial hierarchy as well. Rather than focusing on
exclusion, the analysis of male sex work allows us to investigate the
mechanisms behind inclusion in sexual spaces. Black men who conform
to racial-sexual stereotypes are the ones welcomed into gay sexual spaces,
while black men who defy those stereotypes are not. The notion that gay
interracial sexual intimacy fosters improved race relations is cast in doubt as
the racial stereotypes that underlie inclusion are shown to be based on racial
stereotypes of Black sexual performance and Black hypermasculinity.
In the Conclusion, I show that male sex work is a mirror of larger gay
society. I do so by way of quantitative analysis of the newest forms of gay
sexual organization. Online and social media are now used for noncom-
mercial sexual relationships as well. In recent years, gay men have created
a number of websites and smartphone applications to better facilitate non-
commercial sexual encounters with other men. The Conclusion features
a rigorous analysis of the way gay men use the same social cues for their
noncommercial sexual encounters.
There are differences between the ways noncommercial sex web
resources are organized, but one unique feature of the modern technology
is that it is very similar to the advertisements that are used by male sex
workers – the men in noncommercial web resources list their physical
descriptions (age, height, weight, race, relationship status, desired connec-
tions, etc.), a picture of themselves, and a brief description. I provide a
comparison of the two markets. Analysis of these profiles shows that men
in the noncommercial market are quite similar to those in the commercial
market in terms of age and physical features. One interesting exception is
that men in the noncommercial market are less racially diverse, which may
explain the premiums attached to certain men in the commercial sexual
market, as they may be under represented in the noncommercial market.
Analysis of the texts that accompany the profiles reveals that the men
show a strong desire to connect with men who show a picture of their face
in their profile. Men explicitly mention that they will not engage with men
who do not show their faces in their profile – some men who do not show
their own faces make this stipulation. Also, a sizable portion of the men in
the noncommercial market place a high premium on masculinity. Not only
do they stress their own masculinity, but they are also explicit about their
exclusive desire for sexual connections with other masculine men. The
“masculinity requirement” is endemic, and some profiles even mock the
preponderance of “masculinity” in other profiles. This analysis is
 Introduction: Economics, Sexuality, and Male Sex Work 15

suggestive evidence that the commercial and noncommercial markets dis-

play a high degree of similarity. Masculinity is the (sexual) ideal in the
commercial and noncommercial sexual market, and the men in the non-
commercial sexual market want to know who they are encountering just as
much as men in the commercial market do. I also find that the racial-sexual
stereotypes that featured prominently in the commercial sex market also
feature prominently in the noncommercial market. If anything, the racial-
sexual stereotyping is far more severe in the noncommercial market.
Far from being an obscure and unimportant part of prostitution, this book
shows that male sex work is important. By itself, male sex work presents us
with a market that is inherently different from its female counterpart, and
those differences reveal themselves in novel ways. This market functions
very differently from the one for female sex work, and for good reason.
When men are both the supply and demand of sexual services, the market is
inherently different. Moreover, the reasons for those differences are not only
economic but also social. To analyze the market in one form without the
other denies the interplay between the two.
The analysis of male sex work carries over to gay sexual organization in
general. The male sex work market draws its social cues from the ways that
gay men have organized their sexual spaces. Male sex work is a place where
traditional masculine norms are celebrated, where racial-sexual stereotypes
run amok, and where different men have substantially different power in
their ability to negotiate over sex. For the sex worker, this becomes a part of
the market they must master if they are to be successful in the trade, and the
evidence shows that they do take these social considerations into account.
The same dynamics are true, as best as we can tell, for gay men in general.
The image that results is counter to the popular conceptions of the gay
community as a place where gender binaries are relatively muted and
where racial, sexual, and gender diversity are celebrated. Indeed, the
norms are rigidly enforced and influence the way men present themselves
and interact with other men in sexual spaces. In the end, we find that male
sex work is not only a window, but also a mirror to contemporary social
organization in gay communities.
 PART I

T H E HI S T O R Y A N D EC ON O M I C S O F M A L E
SE X WOR K
 1

Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online

Male sex work as an occupation is as old as its female counterpart. There is

little evidence from the historical record that male sex work was not
present in any society where female sex work operated. Then and now,
the primary buyers and sellers of male sexual services have been men.
As such, male sex work has always carried the added stigma of homosexu-
ality, causing male sex to be socially distinct from the more widely prac-
ticed female sex work. In ancient Greek culture male prostitution went by
the name porneia. The term distinguished male sex work both from the
accepted paederastia, relationships that existed between old and young
men, porne (female prostitution), and hetaera, female mistresses.1 This
distinction was more than linguistic. There were social restrictions on what
a male sex worker could do and be even if he were no longer active in the
profession, which did not apply to those in paederastia.2 Greek law forbade
those who had been involved in porneia from addressing the Athenian
assembly. Even in a culture with relatively lax attitudes towards homo-
sexual sex, men providing sexual services to other men commercially were
not granted the full privileges of citizenship.3 Whether or not porneia was
a crime was beside the point, the very involvement in the market as a man
who sold sexual services to another man was enough to render one socially
cut off from political power.
Scholars have claimed that male sex work in ancient Greece operated to
exacerbate existing class inequalities. Young men of the upper classes could
avail themselves to a sexual and social mentor via paederastia, while young
men from less advantaged backgrounds participated in porneia and faced
the lifelong consequences of those choices. The actual practices between
the two differed primarily through the social expectations of the relation-
ship. While young men in paederastia could expect to be mentored by their
older patrons and exposed to the arts, politics, and social norms of the

19
20 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online

upper classes, young men in porneia could not. The explicit commercial
exchange inherent in porneia relegated it to an undesirable social exchange.
In the Roman Empire, men could legally engage in sexual acts with other
men in exchange for money as long as their participation was voluntary
and their services were not offered as servants.4 Male sex work could be
secured by anyone – unlike other services in the Roman Empire, one need
not be a citizen to be a buyer. Given the social class hierarchy, Roman
citizens were discouraged from offering a sexual service to slaves, foreign-
ers, or others of lower social standing. These social restrictions on male sex
work made the practice particularly unappealing for Roman citizens. This
meant that male sex workers largely came from the slave or foreigner
classes. By the fourth century BCE political acts which restricted the
number of slaves and foreigners reduced the supply of sex workers and
led to increasing prices for male sex work. Polybius noted that male sex
workers were regularly secured for a talent (more than several months of
wages for the average worker) and Cato complained that sex workers were
priced higher than farmland.5 With little in ways of counts of male sex
workers, however, it is difficult to know how much of the price increases
were driven by increased demand from Roman gentry as opposed to the
supply restrictions.
The large-scale acknowledgment of the practice in the Roman Empire
also comes from public policy. Beginning with Caligula (37 CE) and lasting
approximately until 500 CE, the Roman Empire taxed the earnings of all
sex workers and formal registration of the occupation was common.
Historians now believe that while these policies legitimized male sex
work, they also brought the profession to light and therefore discouraged
many men from entry. The private practice could be tolerated, but public
disclosure of the occupation was not. Archeological work has found evi-
dence of male brothels, however, suggesting that public meeting places for
male sex workers and their clients occurred with some regularity. The
brothels have been identified through markings and depiction of homo-
sexual sex in the building. The presence of male brothels in the Roman
Empire has been used as evidence of the relatively open attitudes towards
male homosexuality.6 In ancient Greece, young men would grow their hair
out and wait at male establishments such as barbershops for clients.7
As with Greek language, different terms were applied to male sex work-
ers in the Roman Empire. Male sex workers were referred to as exoleti,
while younger sex workers were known as pueri delicate and catamati.
Unlike its earlier Grecian form, male mentorship by elders did not include
sexual interaction. The lack of sex in mentoring relationships may be
 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online 21

related to the professionalization of sex work. Another factor would be the

growing Christianization of the Roman Empire, which led to decreasing
social acceptance of male sex work and homosexuality in general.8 By the
end of the sixth century a growing distinction related to homosexuality
caused even starker social distinctions between male and female sex work.
As early as 390, penalties were harsher for selling a male into prostitution,
and by 533 all homosexual acts, commercial, consensual, and coerced, were
punishable by death.9
The history of male sex work is not confined to the West, although there
are fewer historical sources specifically referencing the practice. In Japan,
for example, kabuki was a place for commercial sex between men. While
monks and Samurai warriors engaged in pederasty in a manner similar to
the practice in Greece, kabuki commercial sex was largely practiced
between social classes. This practice continued until the seventeenth cen-
tury, when sexual conduct between men of different social classes was
outlawed by the Tokugawa government.10
The existing literature on the history of male sex work does lead to some
general assumptions on the way the practice existed in historical settings.
The ancient practice of male sex work was socially and legally distinct
from older/younger sexual relations and from female sex work. A key
distinction in historical male sex work was the class difference or similar-
ity between buyers and sellers. Class differences were grounds to label the
practice as sex work, and this meant that the historical practice of sex
work was, in general, something that took place between classes. Male sex
work was a service procured by those of high social status and supplied by
those of low social status. Within the same social class, however, the
practice was generally taboo and discouraged. From the historical scholar-
ship, we find that the commercial aspects of the market were embedded in
social ideas about who could (and should) supply and demand sexual
services between men.
Male sex work has always had to contend with changing attitudes toward
homosexuality. In periods and places where homosexuality was socially
accepted, male prostitution was more likely to be professionalized along
with its female counterpart.11 When and where homosexuality became
taboo, male sex work and all homosexual practices were commonly
grouped together and sanctioned. Even in ancient times, the social accept-
ability of homosexuality had direct effects on the social acceptability of
male sex work. This is not to say that male sex work disappeared, but the
social recognition of male sex work appears to be related to the social
recognition of homosexuality. This is in stark contrast to female sex work,
22 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online

which was commonplace, and was always separated socially and legally
from heterosexual social relations such as marriage.
In medieval Europe, social sanctions on male homosexuality continued the
practice of the late Roman era, which grouped male sex work and homo-
sexuality together. In many instances, both were punishable by death. Indeed,
in order to be allowed entry the priesthood, a man could not be discovered to
have been involved sexually with another man.12 Despite these legal and
social sanctions, male sex work continued to be practiced. Historical records
now point to a renewed linguistic distinction between homosexuality in
general and male prostitution in particular in the Renaissance, where the
term bardassa came into use to describe men engaged in sex work.13
By the end of the seventeenth century male prostitution was institutio-
nalized in almost every major European city. This institutionalization
included public knowledge (for those desiring such information) of the
places where male sex work could be purchased and a language that
facilitated the commercial activity. In Victorian London, for example, the
Piccadilly Circus was well known as a place where one could purchase male
sex work services. Men would adopt styles that would advertise their
occupation, such as playing with one’s lapel or wearing distinctively colored
clothing. There is also some evidence that the urban male sex work of this
time had changed from passive young men seeking to sell their services to
dominant older men, to one where passive older men sought the sexual
services of dominant young men.14 Without comprehensive information,
however, it is difficult to draw general conclusions. While still a criminal act,
the prosecution of such crimes was relatively lax. When punishment was
meted out, it was rarely as draconian as in earlier periods, owning to the
relatively liberal attitudes toward homosexuality in European urban centers.
American male sex work predates the founding of the United States.
Although the colonies prosecuted men for sodomy, and in more than ten
cases executed men for the crime, some of these cases are known to have
involved elements of solicitation. In May of 1677, Nicholas Sension was
tried for the crime of sodomy. A deeper reading of the historical record
reveals that the crime was not simply one of homosexuality, but of solicita-
tion. In the court documents it was revealed that Sension had a long history
of propositioning young men in the surrounding community for sex.
Sension had been privately reprimanded for his activity at least twice
over more than 20 years of known attempts to have sex with other men
in return for compensation. In his sodomy trial it was revealed that he had,
in at least two instances, offered payment in exchange for sexual services.
Samuel Barboe testified that Sension offered him a bushel of corn if he
 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online 23

would disrobe for him, and Peter Buoll testified that Sension offered him
gunpowder in exchange for “one bloo at my breech.” Sension was con-
victed of sodomy, but his sentence did not meet with any jail time.15
Historians note that this trial, and its instances of sex for payment,
reflects the class distinctions in male sex work that were present in ancient
times. Sension was a prosperous landowner in Connecticut and most of the
men who accused him were of lower social class. Sension was first privately
sanctioned to stop propositioning young men, and was only publicly tried
when he attempted to sue his indentured servant for slander because that
servant, Daniel Saxton, wished to be released from service due to Sension’s
numerous sexual advances. Only after Sension took legal action against his
servant was he investigated and brought to colonial justice. As Saxton
defended himself against slander, he showed that Sension had a history
of sexual advances toward young men that involved payment. Given the
private investigations and warnings that had been issued in the past, it is
likely that Sension’s acts would have gone uninterrupted had he not sought
to silence Saxton.
In the nineteenth century, male sex work on both sides of the Atlantic
was institutionalized in large industrial cities. Part of this was due to ever-
increasing urban population and the greater personal freedom allowed in
urban areas, but there were also legal developments in Europe. In the early
nineteenth century, the Napoleonic Code ended legal sanctions against
sodomy. Given the fact that the First French Empire ruled a significant
portion of the continent, the decriminalization allowed the male sex trade
to flourish from Paris to Berlin. Male sex also flourished in American cities.
For example, in 1899 the New York City Vigilance League found that the
Bowery district contained more than five places where male prostitution
was well known. Reports at the time suggested that there were more than
100 male sex workers in New York City. Given the size of the city and the
generally hostile attitudes toward expressions of same-sex desire, this
number of male sex workers speaks to the prominence of male sex work
in urban areas at the time.16
This modern form of male sex work operated under different norms
than earlier variants. While it was still the case that clients were older than
providers, on average, the sexual roles assumed by each took on a different
routinized pattern. The class distinctions of the earlier era married to a new
form of industrial masculinity, which conferred upon young working-class
men an authentic masculinity that they traded for money. The higher-class
clients were more likely to assume a passive sexual role and the male sex
workers were prized for their masculine appearance and sexual conduct.
24 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online

Men in the military were particularly popular as sex workers if they acted as
“trade,” presumably heterosexual men who were temporarily engaging in
homosexual sex for compensation. Weeks (1989b) notes that military
members were also thought to be more trustworthy and ethical in their
dealings with clients.
Modern sex work was more intimately tied to increasing recognition of
sexuality and masculinity. While cities openly noted that the fairy – effeminate
man – was a commonly encountered urban inhabitant, male sex work
in urban centers was not focused on effeminate men. There were cross-
dressers and transgender sex workers, who sold either the illusion of
femininity or transgender sex work to male clients, but male sex workers
were primarily prized for their masculinity.17 The sexual identity of male
sex workers was less important than their ability to provide an authentic
masculinity to clients who desired the new industrial masculinity that was
developed during this time. With the primacy on masculinity, the earlier
notion of the young sex worker gave way to an older sex worker would
could more reasonably convey adult masculinity. Sex work moved from
being about youth to being about adult men engaged in a commercial
exchange for sex.
The dawn of the twentieth century presented a modern form of sex work
that bore striking similarities and differences with regard to ancient and
medieval practices.18 First, sex work then and now constituted an average
age difference between client and sex worker. Older men, who were more
likely to be able to afford such services, made up the largest proportion of the
client base. Young men, some of whom were in fragile economic circum-
stances, were likely to be service providers. Second, there were significant
class differences between sex workers and their clients. As Friedman (2014)
notes, this was different from the earlier class distinctions in male sex work,
in that the new class distinction was predicated on the authentic masculinity
afforded to working men in the modern era. Third, the change in the
relationship to one that was transaction-specific was due to the fact that
the circumstances surrounding sex work had changed. No longer was sex
work part of the mentored relationship between men that also included
some monetary and perhaps non-pecuniary compensation. Sex work by the
end of the nineteenth century was an occupation.
By the beginning of the Gay Rights movement in the twentieth century,
male sex workers had carved out a key niche in urban gay spaces. They had
become an archetype in gay culture and they played a key role in public
representations of gay people. Importantly, sex work became embedded
into gay communities in a different way than it was for heterosexuals. Part
 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online 25

of this is because the history of male sex work sought clear distinctions
between commercial and noncommercial relationships between men.
Without the sanctions of marriage and other traditional recognitions for
family forms, the sexual relationships between men have been placed in
a different sphere, putting them into closer social contact with male sex
work and male sex workers.19 For example, in the early and mid-twentieth
century United States, many gay establishments would be frequented by
male sex workers and men who desired noncommercial sexual encounters.
This is not necessarily because the two groups desired to be in close
contact, but because the limited number of social spaces safe for male
homosexuals left little room to demarcate spaces for subcultures.
This close social relationship has allowed male sex workers a prominent
position in social representations of male homosexuality. When anti-gay
political commentators made note of the alleged perversity of gay men, they
most commonly cited the cases of young men who entered into prostitution
relationships with older men as a rhetorical technique to label gay men as
pedophiles and gay relationships as inherent power imbalances between old
and young men. Young men became natural embodiments of “innocents”
who were “victimized” by older men who could entice them into sexual
exchanges that provided money that the young men needed to survive.
Ironically, these charges were coming at a time when young men as a
fraction of the male sex worker population were on the decline given the
changing nature of male sex work. Still, the age distinction between clients
and sex workers and the ingratiation of male sex work into urban gay spaces
proved to be problematic as gay men sought social acceptance for homo-
sexuality, while at the same time maintaining close contact with an arrange-
ment considered as vice even in its heterosexual form.
At the other end of the spectrum, gay men themselves had begun to
develop an archetype of the gay male hustler, a presumably heterosexual
man (but clearly an adult) who provided sexual services to other men. The
development of a unique gay masculinity in urban spaces borrowed from
the archetype of masculinity offered by male sex workers. Although the
growing acceptance of homosexuality in urban communities led some gay-
identified men to provide commercial sex services, the archetype of the
male hustler (and the industrial masculinity he offered) did not fit into the
anti-gay narrative, but rather molded into contemporary constructions of
urban gay masculinity.20 The male hustler was a man’s man – a masculine
man with few (if any) observable traits that would label him a homosexual.
In the scholarship on male prostitution in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, this
modern male hustler archetype featured prominently.21 This type of male
26 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online

sex worker was a “hoodlum” or “thug” who sought to use prostitution for
wage income, rejecting the formal labor market. The fact that these men
were presumably heterosexual added to their allure in a gay subculture that
socially celebrated nontraditional representations of masculinity, but still
held traditional male masculinity as a sexual ideal. In fact, the development
of modern male physique and bodybuilding industries has direct links to
male sex work. Men in the earliest era of bodybuilding would seek male
sponsors, an arrangement that would allow them to concentrate on weight
training. The early history of physique modeling is replete with men who
used their masculine and muscular appearance in exchange for remunera-
tion that freed them from the formal labor market.
The fusion of modern conceptions of masculinity, which imbued working-
class and lower-class presentations of aggressive men as inherently mascu-
line, did have effects on the ways that male sex work operated in modern
urban environments. Some male sex workers who adopted gay identities
found that clients demanded “trade” – men who did not identify as gay but
who participated in homosexual sex. Gay identified male sex workers
would be inclined to describe and present themselves as “trade” for their
clients. In a market where desire and demand are closely intertwined, male
sex work began to take on more performance elements than before. This
also meant, however, that the range of sexual practices expanded and could
not be presumed on the basis of one’s position as client or sex worker.
In the most popular depictions of male sex work in mass media, male
(homosexual) sex work has been depicted as a last resort for heterosexual
men. Although the films Sunset Boulevard (1950), Sweet Bird of Youth (1962),
Midnight Cowboy (1969), American Gigolo (1980), and Deuce Bigalow: Male
Gigolo (1999) as well as the television series Hung (2009) and Gigolos (2011–)
are the most popular media images of male sex workers, they actually present
the least-typical part of the market. Women are very rarely the clients of
male sex workers. In fact, the (heterosexual) male escort agent featured
on the reality television series Gigolos noted that the escorts he employs
cannot support themselves through work with female clients. Indeed, the
program, despite being billed as authentic, has had to remunerate female
participants, and some have never been clients of the featured escort
service. The popular image of a male sex worker as a gigolo stands in
contrast to the limited evidence that women have ever made up anything
more than a negligible fraction of the client base for male sex workers.
Gay films and art films of the same era depict male sex in a manner closer
to the most common experience, which is to say they depict male sex work
as homosexual activity. My Hustler (1965) contains two half-hour vignettes
 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online 27

of male sex workers. Both of the scenes are explicit in noting that male sex
work is the buying and selling of sexual services by and for men. The
documentary style of the film and its explicit homoerotic content were
some of the first homosexual representations of male sex work. In The Boys
in the Band (1972), a male sex worker is hired as a birthday gift, and the
price of his services is discussed in the production. As public and academic
discussion of homosexuality and prostitution moved to the mainstream, so
did the concept of the homosexual male sex worker. The later representa-
tions of male sex work in film also reflected a new gay sensibility about gay
life in the United States. For example, both My Own Private Idaho (1991)
and The Living End (1992) feature the reality of HIV/AIDS as part of the
lives of male sex workers. Later works focused on the professional lives of
male sex workers and their personal selves. Boy Culture (2006) featured an
openly gay male escort who was seeking to form a long-term, monogamous
relationship despite his involvement in the commercial sex industry.
These gay films better reflect the reality of modern male sex workers.
While the most popular representations suggest that gigolos are common,
they have never been a substantial fraction of the male sex worker market.
In historical times and at present, male sex work, in the vast majority of
cases, is a homosexual activity. Sex workers and clients are male and are
selling and purchasing homosexual sex. Earlier scholarship has always
noted this, but has tended to concentrate on sex work as a form of deviance
(not necessarily for its homosexual orientation but due to its taboo nature
and illegal status), or as a means to study psychological factors related to
entry into sex work. With the advent of HIV/AIDS in the 1980s, research
concentrated on male sex work as a vector of transmission of sexually
transmitted infections, where sex workers could spread disease.
While all of these scholarly goals are admirable, the reality of sex work as
a market has been obscured. Neither in the past nor now is male sex work
primarily about these factors. It is about the supply and demand for sexual
services from a man by another man. That fact is reflected in the ways in
which male sex work takes place – that is, how male sex workers secure
clients and how clients choose between sex workers. Given that the gay
male population is relatively small, sex work is better aided by technology
than female sex work, as cities would have relatively small “street tracks”
where male sex workers would congregate. Male sex workers needed to
reach their client base (homosexually identified men), and as of the mid-
twentieth century were using gay media to reach clients. Magazines and
newspapers of the time regularly featured the advertisements of male sex
workers in the back pages. There are examples of escort advertisements in
28 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online

the pages of the Bay Area Reporter, the San Francisco Bay Area’s local gay
newspaper. The use of gay media was common in early sex work adver-
tisements. It created the largest local market possible for male sex work
services while also keeping the activity relatively discreet – clients would
phone sex workers and arrange appointments. The earliest forms of com-
munication provided coarse information for clients. Escorts typically
listed a form of contact and a brief physical description, and, in many
cases, the sexual services they offered to clients.22 There was one national
magazine devoted to male sex worker advertisements, and it ceased
publication only when male sex workers had cheaper options to secure
clients.
The Internet changed the dynamics of male sex work entirely, in a
manner similar to the transformation of gay society in general. While not
fully supplanting the advertisements in local gay newspapers, the Internet
allowed for easier entry and exit from the market, and the “feedback”
features of the Internet allowed sex workers to establish reputations.
The Internet has become the primary medium through which male sex
workers secure clients. As the Internet has flourished, escorts have been
able to distinguish themselves by creating online personas that were not
possible in earlier modes of communication.23
The medium provided by the Internet allows the analysis of male sex
work, for the first time, to fully embrace its economic underpinnings. Male
sex work is not charity – it is a service provided by a seller to a buyer. For
most of its history, however, we had little information about what was
actually being provided and at what price the services were being sold. This
is in contrast to female prostitution, where prices from a variety of sources
have been known for some time.24 For historical periods, we have few
sources for pricing of male sex work. Even in contemporary settings, the
best estimates of the market price come from individual responses in work
devoted to the experiences of a small number of sex workers.
For economic analysis this poses several problems. First, price variation
in a market like male sex work could come from a variety of sources.
Smaller samples of sex workers are usually confined to small geographic
areas. Differences between sex workers, local market prices, and the sub-
stitutability of sex workers in markets can all play a role in the prices
observed. Economic analysis of a market requires extensive information
about the market. For nearly all economic analysis, this implies quantita-
tive data. Measures of prices, quantities, product quality, firm size, and
consumer characteristics are standard. Throughout this work, quantitative
data will be emphasized, and the sources of that data are described below.
 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online 29

Second, sex workers themselves may be more or less willing to divulge

their prices to surveyors. That is, the price information we have from
surveys may be driven by selection, where only certain sex workers provide
their prices. If this is related to other attributes (say, only sex workers who
are successful and popular are willing to divulge their prices), we will be
unable to describe the market in any detail. In other words, we would like
the same price information that a consumer of male sex services would see.
This would ensure that the analysis of the market is working from the same
base of information that clients use.
This book exploits two primary sources of data to empirically analyze
male sex work and its social and economic underpinnings. The first source
of data is advertisement data for male sex workers. This is drawn from the
largest and most comprehensive data on male sex workers in the United
States. The advertisement data has been the key source for analysis of the
market to-date. Since escorts post their prices publicly, the advertisement
data gives a direct measure of prices, which differs from the usual approach
of surveying or inferring prices.25 Inferring prices runs the risk of spurious
correlation – prices may or may not be related to the factors that are
assumed to be sources of price variation. The data used here comes from
the universe of male sex workers advertising on the chosen website in the
United States at the time of data collection. As such, these data represent
the entire population.
Relative to other data sources, online advertisement data has several
advantages. First, this data allows one to collect information on escorts’
attributes, prices, and information without regard to some of the selection
problems that one would encounter in a survey of escorts. For example,
escorts who charge very high (or very low) prices may not respond with
accurate prices in a survey. Another concern would be that escorts in
general would not report their typical price but, instead, the highest price
they had ever charged. This would result in an average price that would be
far above the prices actually charged. Second, escorts have one account
on the website and may list themselves in multiple cities that they serve.
Third, the escort characteristics are entered by escorts from dropdown
menus; this is particularly advantageous for features one would like to
control for in pricing models, such as body type or hair color, whereas free-
form responses may be difficult to evaluate consistently or may be missing
altogether. There are other sources that allow for free-form escort responses;
these sources are not as comprehensive as the one used here. Fourth, the
website is free for viewing by all: there is no charge or account required to
view any advertisements, photos, or reviews of escorts.
30 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online

Figure 1.1 Diagram of online escort advertisement

In particular, the advertisement data is a set of nearly 2,000 men from the
largest and most comprehensive website for male sex workers in the United
States. Beyond its geographic coverage, there is a rich amount of informa-
tion that can be exploited to uncover more about male sex workers than
before. Figure 1.1 shows a diagram of an escort advertisement. Escorts list
their age, height, weight, race, hair color, eye color, body type, and body
hair type. They give clients contact information and also their preferred
mode of contact (phone or e-mail), their availability to travel, and their
prices and availability for in-calls and out-calls. In-calls occur when a client
travels to the escort; out-calls when an escort travels to the client. Escorts
also provide clients with the range of services they offer in addition to
escort work such as modeling, erotic massage, and stripping. Escorts have
a simple table they can use to let clients know their weekly availability.
 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online 31

There is also the actual text of the advertisement itself, which allows escorts
to write about their services and quality. The largest piece of the advertise-
ment is made up of the escort’s pictures, which are uploaded by the escort.
These pictures may be of any feature of the escort that he chooses, and may
be clothed or nude.26
One unique feature of the advertisement data source is that it provides
two types of reputation measures that come from clients. These are proxies
for escort quality, which is an important component in any service such as
male sex work. These are survey reviews (similar to feedback on eBay.com)
and detailed reviews of escorts. The survey reviews ask the reviewer five
questions about the escort (four of which are “Yes/No”) and a rating on
a four-star scale.27 The detailed reviews, “text reviews,” are the detailed,
free-form client reviews described earlier. In addition to providing a review
of escort services, clients also give the date of their encounter with the
escort, the type of appointment made (in-call, out-call, or an extended
appointment such as an evening or weekend), and the price paid, which I
term the “spot price,” as it reflects the price paid in a specific transaction.28
As noted earlier, a key advantage of these reputation measures is that
escorts have no control over their reviews – all reviews of both types are
retained if the escort allows reviews, not a selected sample that is posted or
chosen by the escort. However, a key disadvantage to note is that anyone
can post a review, including an escort, though this sort of thing is likely to
make up only a small percentage of the reviews.
Table 1.1 shows the summary statistics for the escorts in the advertise-
ment data. First, the data contains nearly 2,000 male sex workers who
advertise online. This is a large number of sex workers, and at a minimum,
it establishes that the number of participants in the market is substantial.
Second, male sex work is well compensated. On average, escorts charge
more than $200 an hour. This is consistent with other estimates of escort
services, which are close to the $200-an-hour range.29 Escorts are reason-
ably fit – on average a male sex worker is 5 feet 10 inches tall and weigh
around 165 pounds. According to the National Center for Health Statistics,
the average man aged 20–74 in the United States is 5 feet 9.5 inches tall and
weighs 190 pounds, which implies that escorts are slightly taller and
thinner than the average adult male in the United States.
The average male sex worker is 28 years old. While 28 is certainly young,
it is a far departure from the young men described in historical accounts of
male sex work. The median age of male sex workers in the data is 26.30
Escorts are also racially diverse: while more than half of all escorts are
White, more than a fifth are Black and more than a tenth are Hispanic.
 Table 1.1 Summary statistics for the escort advertisement data sample

Variable Observations Mean Std. dev. Physical trait Observations Mean Std. dev. Behavior Observations Mean Std. dev.
Hair color
Price 1,476 216.88 64.46 Black 1,932 0.37 0.48 Top 1,932 0.16 0.37
Log of price 1,476 5.34 0.29 Blonde 1,932 0.13 0.34 Bottom 1,932 0.06 0.24
Weight 1,932 167.11 24.54 Brown 1,932 0.46 0.50 Versatile 1,932 0.21 0.40
Height 1,932 70.43 2.69 Gray 1,932 0.02 0.13 Safer 1,932 0.19 0.39
BMI 1,932 23.64 2.89 Auburn/red 1,932 0.01 0.11
Age 1,932 28.20 6.93 Other 1,932 0.01 0.10
Asian 1,932 0.01 0.12 Eye color
32

Black 1,932 0.22 0.41 Black 1,932 0.02 0.14

Hispanic 1,932 0.14 0.35 Blue 1,932 0.18 0.39
Multiracial 1,932 0.08 0.28 Brown 1,932 0.55 0.50
Other 1,932 0.01 0.10 Green 1,932 0.11 0.31
White 1,932 0.54 0.50 Hazel 1,932 0.14 0.35
Body hair
Hairy 1,932 0.04 0.20
Moderately hairy 1,932 0.30 0.46
Shaved 1,932 0.17 0.38
Smooth 1,932 0.49 0.50
Body build

(continued)
 Athletic/ 1,932 0.48 0.50
swimmer’s
build
Average 1,932 0.13 0.34
A few extra 1,932 0.01 0.08
33

pounds
Muscular 1,932 0.30 0.46
Thin/lean 1,932 0.08 0.27

Price is the out-call price posted by an escort in his advertisement.

See the data appendix for variable definitions.
34 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online

Escorts in the data are racially diverse – 54 percent are White, 22 percent
are Black, 14 percent are Hispanic, 8 percent are multiracial, and 1 percent
are Asian.
For physical traits, escorts are likely to have black (36 percent) or brown
(46 percent) hair (fewer than 15 percent are blond). More than half of all
escorts have brown eyes (55 percent), although significant fractions have
blue (18 percent) and hazel (14 percent) eyes. Nearly half of all escorts are
smooth (49 percent), and 17 percent shave their body hair, but more than
a third are hairy or moderately hairy (34 percent). Very few escorts are
overweight (1 percent), and relatively few are thin (8 percent); the majority
of escorts claim to have athletic (48 percent) or muscular (30 percent)
builds. For sexual behaviors, 16 percent of escorts offer penetration to
clients (this is known as being a “top”), while 6 percent offer to be
penetrated (and are known as “bottoms”), and 21 percent of escorts list
themselves as “versatile.”31 In addition, 19 percent of escorts advertise that
they exclusively practice safer sex. Overall, the summary statistics for the
men in the data are similar to the descriptive statistics noted by Cameron
et al. (1999) for male escorts in British newspapers in the 1990s and Pruitt’s
(2005) more recent sample of male escorts who advertise on the Internet.
Overall, this diversity points to there really being no “typical” male sex
worker. They come in a variety of ages, races, physical appearances, and
sexual behaviors. At one level, this is what we would expect from sex work.
Clients could have demand for a variety of men, and this demand should
lead a variety of men to supply sex work. At another level, this diversity
reflects the fact that earlier descriptions of male sex work that make appeals
to a monolithic experience are somewhat outdated to the extent that this
diversity in male sex worker supply requires a more careful description of
the men involved in sex work. Lastly, the compensation offered to male sex
workers shows it to be a lucrative profession. At $200 per hour, a male sex
worker who sees one client per day Monday to Friday would earn more
than $50,000 per year. This is more than the median household income in
the United States, and matches the median earnings of male college
graduates in the United States.
The second data source comes from transaction-specific data from client
reviews of escort services. The data come from the online reviews hosted by
Daddy’s Reviews (www.daddysreviews.com), the oldest and most popular
client-based forum for reviews and discussions of male sex workers. This
website has been in existence since 1998 and provides a rich structure for
clients to review male sex worker services. The website contains both
a forum (message board) for clients to discuss male sex workers and
 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online 35

a review feature where clients provide detailed reviews of their specific

encounters with male sex workers. The individual reviews of male sex
workers are the data used here. A key for this data is that all reviews of
male sex workers are held in a holding tank and individually verified by the
website administrator before they are posted. Male sex workers cannot
remove reviews, and reviews are flagged if they are suspicious (for example,
entered by a competing male sex worker or by the sex worker himself). As
described by Logan (2016), Logan and Shah (2013) and discussed earlier,
this website acts to police male sex workers, allowing clients to inform each
other about the quality of male sex workers – and this function minimizes
the opportunity for male sex workers to exploit clients. Logan and Shah
(2013) also note that it is extremely difficult for a male sex worker to create
new identities for himself, as clients track them over time using this source.
When a male sex worker changes his location, over time all of his previous
reviews are retained and linked to him, and the same is true if the male sex
worker changes his professional name. Male sex workers who have retired are
not removed from the website, but are listed as “retired.” Male sex workers
do have the ability to post comments on reviews. Male sex worker reviews can
be searched by individual male sex worker name or geographically.
For each male sex worker’s review page, the male sex worker’s contact
information is listed as well as all reviews, which are listed in reverse
chronological order (newest to oldest). Figure 1.2 shows an example of a
client review on the website. (Because client free-form reviews are sexually
explicit, that field is obscured in Figure 1.2.) Reviews were collected using
a script that pulled the information from the website into a database
organized by the fields in the advertisement. As the figure shows, reviews
detail the date and location of the transaction, the length of the appoint-
ment, the price paid, the client’s perception of features of the escort (height,
weight, age, etc.), and the sexual behaviors that took place in the given
transaction.
The reviews also allow for clients to enter free-form text that describes
their encounter in more detail. This field is read manually and coded for
sexual behaviors not categorized in the reviews. In addition, clients rate
the experience. At the end of the review, clients identify themselves with
a unique “handle” username. The total sample contains 6,269 transactions
for 1,418 male sex workers in the United States over a 6-year period.
Table 1.2 shows the summary statistics for the data. The majority of
transactions (60 percent) are hourly appointments, and another 25 percent
are less than 3 hours. Slightly more than a tenth of the appointments are of
long duration (more than 4 hours).
36 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online

Review #NN, MM/DD/YYYY

Name:
Location:
Email:
Phone:
Website:

Ethnicity: Age:
Height: Weight: Build:
Eyes: Hair:
Cock:
Smoking: Drinking: Tattoos:

Orientation: Calls:
Roles:
Masturbation: Anal: Oral: Kink:
Rates for time only (US$):

Date: MM/YYYY Type: Where: Rate:

Rating: Hire Again?
Where Found? Which:
Reviewed Before? Match Description? Lived up?

Experience:

Handle:
Submissions:

You:

Figure 1.2 Example of escort review

For the transactions, I find that the average price of an hourly session is
$227, consistent with other estimates of male sex worker services from escort
advertisements and the advertisement data. As a check against the adver-
tisement data, the basic features are quite comparable. In terms of escort
characteristics, the largest proportion of male sex workers in the transaction
data are White (49 percent), while a significant share are another race
 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online 37

Table 1.2 Summary statistics for the client reviewed transactions

data sample

Variable Observations Mean Std. dev.

Transaction measures
Hourly rate* 5,452 227.07 299.23
1-hour appt. 6,269 0.59 0.48
90-min. appt. 6,269 0.06 0.23
2-hour appt. 6,269 0.15 0.36
3-hour appt. 6,269 0.04 0.19
4-hour appt. 6,269 0.02 0.15
> 4-hour appt. 6,269 0.13 0.34
Variable Observations Mean Std. dev.
Escort characteristics
Asian 1,418 0.01 0.09
Black 1,418 0.12 0.15
White 1,418 0.49 0.50
Other race 1,418 0.30 0.49
Latino 1,418 0.09 0.28
Endowment (in.) 1,418 8.00 1.04
Circumcised 1,418 0.76 0.43
Age 20s 1,418 0.38 0.49
Age 30s 1,418 0.26 0.44
Age 40s 1,418 0.05 0.22
Age 50s 1,418 0.31 0.46
BMI 1,418 24.79 2.71
(BMI)^2 1,418 621.87 140.82
Height (cm) 1,418 179.81 6.58
Weight (kg) 1,418 80.35 10.74
Variable Observations Mean Std. dev.
Sexual behaviors
Versatile 6,269 0.40 0.46
Top 6,269 0.37 0.44
Bottom 6,269 0.17 0.25
No anal sex 6,269 0.03 0.17
Kissing 6,269 0.62 0.49
Masturbation, mutual 6,269 0.49 0.50
Masturbation, receives 6,269 0.03 0.18
Masturbation, provides 6,269 0.02 0.15
No masturbation 6,269 0.43 0.07
No condom 6,269 0.20 0.29

Note: Sexual behaviors are defined from the perspective of the escort.
*Hourly rate is defined for appointments lasting less than 4 hours.
“No condom” requires that the client noted penetration in the transaction.
38 Male Sex Work: Antiquity to Online

(30 percent). For age, nearly 40 percent of escorts are noted by clients to be in
their twenties, and more than a quarter in their thirties (26 percent).
The transaction data establishes that male sex work does involve sex.
In terms of sexual behaviors, 37 percent of transactions involved male sex
workers penetrating clients, 17 percent involved clients penetrating sex
workers, and 40 percent involved both client and male sex worker penetra-
tion. Only a small fraction of transactions, fewer than 5 percent, involved
no penetration.
Other sexual details show that male sex work involves more than just
sexual services, but extends to other intimate behavior. More than half
(62 percent) of transactions involved kissing and more than half (54 percent)
involved masturbation. In addition, 80 percent of transactions involved
sex with condoms, which suggests that male sex work is nearly as likely to
involve condoms as noncommercial gay sex.32 Overall, the summary
statistics for the male subjects (age, race, height, weight, etc.) are similar
to the descriptive statistics noted by Cameron et al. (1999), Pruitt (2005),
Logan (2010), and Logan (2016) in analysis of male sex worker adver-
tisements. The behaviors described in the transactions are also consistent
with the patterns seen in small-sample surveys of clients, such as those in
Grov et al. (2013).
These two data sources give us information on both the supply and
demand for male sex work services. The advertisements give us a rich set of
information akin to that used in most market studies. From all compar-
isons, the data appears to be consistent with data from smaller samples, but
is more diverse than the smaller samples in that it is national in scope and
contains a more diverse range of men – racially, physically, and sexually.
In addition, the availability of price information is particularly important
as these two data sources are the largest available sources of information on
the prices of male sex work in the United States. Since both data sources
also contain additional personal and geographic measures, there are a
number of additional items in advertisements and transactions that allow
us to test whether there are significant price differentials that are driven by
economic or social phenomena. Obtaining prices and detailed information
for such a large illegal market is rare, and the recent criminal prosecution of
male sex worker websites decreases the likelihood that this sort of analysis
can be consistently performed into the future. Nevertheless, the remaining
chapters of this book will investigate the present (and, perhaps, future)
status of male sex work in the United States.
 2

Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

of Asymmetric Information

Male sex work presents a number of challenges for traditional market

analysis. Despite its appearing online in a manner similar to that of other
products in the age of the Internet, an economic approach to male sex
work must begin with by considering several preliminaries that we usually
neglect in economic analysis because we can safely assume them away. For
example, in a traditional market we are not usually worried about whether
prices in the market accurately reflect equilibrium prices – the point where
producer supply and consumer demand intersect. When we observe a price
in an online marketplace we take that to mean that the firm is choosing the
price to maximize profit, and implicitly assume that the maximization
takes into account consumer demand for the good.
If the prices in the market do not reflect underlying economic princi-
ples, it is difficult to know how this market operates, or if it operates at all.
A traditional supply-and-demand approach would be inappropriate if
observed prices had little relationship to economic primitives. The illicit
nature of the transactions in male sex work make it difficult to argue that
the market “gets prices right” simply because they are publically posted
online. After all, in what other illegal market are the prices of goods
and services openly displayed? The basic tenets of market analysis require
that we first confirm that the prices in the market reflect underlying
fundamentals about consumer and producer behavior. The first question
to answer is the most basic: Does this market work? (And if so, how does
it work?)
To answer this question, we must step back and think more abstractly
about what a sex worker transaction is. At its most basic level, sex work is
a contract. Whether purchasing gasoline, a candy bar, or a home, transac-
tions are contracts. A good or service is sold at a specific price offered by
a seller to a buyer at a specific place and time. The contract does not have to

39
40 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

be formal or written, and the law acknowledges that most contracts are
informal ones whose terms are implied by the context of the transaction
itself. Payment terms are stipulated and our legal system enforces these
contracts if they are disputed. This helps both buyers and sellers – if the
good or service is not delivered as advertised, or if payment is not received,
either party can turn to the courts to have the contract enforced.
If a consumer were purchasing shoes from an online retailer, for exam-
ple, the customer would be confident that the product he or she ordered
would be the product they would receive. If this turned out not to be the
case, they could resort to a payment service, the vendor, or even the courts
if they were duped and either sold a different product or received nothing.
In other words, they would buy with confidence – if not confidence in the
seller, than certainly confidence in a system that would enforce or void
their contract, depending on the situation. The same applies for the seller.
For that reason, analysis of the market would proceed with an under-
standing that both buyers and sellers are acting with full faith that their
transactions will be completed. The analysis of markets usually presumes
that contracts will be enforced.
In an illegal market such as male sex work this presumption does not
hold. Courts will not aid those seeking to enforce contracts for illegal acts.
This poses a problem for market analysis of male sex work because we
cannot assume that buyers and sellers are acting with any confidence that
their transactions will be enforced. We therefore lose confidence that what
we observe from the illegal market is what actually occurs. In other words,
we need to first check that the prices we observe from these online sources
are plausibly related to actual transactions.
In addition to formal enforcement, information is also critically impor-
tant in markets. Economists have long recognized that information
exchanged between buyers and sellers helps to ensure that more transac-
tions will take place. Even with contract enforcement, it is still possible that
information will improve market function, lead to more transactions, and
increase consumer welfare. In the classic example, if a seller offers a used
car for a certain price, any reasonable buyer would have to fear that the
car may be worth (much) less than the advertised price. Unless the seller
can provide additional information about the car’s quality or offer a
guarantee, it is unlikely that a buyer will be found at the price advertised.
In this case, the seller has more information than the buyer, and a smart
buyer will realize this and naturally fear that he or she can be duped by the
seller. This case of asymmetric information can stop transactions before
they start. In the most extreme case, no buyer will be found.1
 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem 41

Even when there is contract enforcement, buyers and sellers would rather
not use them. Contract enforcement is costly in both time and money, and
buyers will rightly be wary of sellers whom they do not trust. The seller must
therefore provide a great deal of information to the buyer in order for the
transaction to take place. As such, information helps to make transactions
possible because they build trust between a buyer and seller. The market can
and does take information into account, and the more objective the infor-
mation the better. One reason this information can be taken into account is
because it, too, is an implicit part of the transaction.
Male sex work does not necessarily have this market structure. While the
information structure of the online market is quite rich, the transactions
themselves are completely illegal. This is the reason the Department of
Homeland Security moved to close Rentboy.com in 2015 – the federal
government argued that the website was facilitating prostitution through
the website, even though the website did not profit from transactions.
Every transaction that takes place within male sex work is done with full
knowledge that any agreements between sex worker and client cannot be
enforced. For economic analysis, this creates a serious problem. Formal
enforcement is often seen as the cornerstone of contracts. While informa-
tion can overcome the problems of asymmetric information, this assumes
that the information provided is credible and verifiable, which is made
more likely when contracts can be enforced.2 At a minimum, if the informa-
tion were false economists assume that there would be a means of redress for
fraud. While the use of formal institutions such as courts is rare relative to
the volume of transactions, the standard argument is that the presence of
formal institutions gives contracts their authority and information its
credibility. In Schelling’s classic terminology, “the power to sue and be
sued” gives parties the ability to make credible exchanges of information
and enforceable commitments, a prerequisite to most transactions.3
Without any means of redress, the information that buyers and sellers
share would have little value. Since there would be no punishment for
misrepresentation, a reasonable consumer would heavily discount all pro-
mises made by sellers. With no recourse for fraud, gross misrepresentation,
or failure to provide the service, the market might not exist at all – no buyer
would trust any of the information provided by a seller, and honest sellers
would not be able to distinguish themselves from fraudulent ones. This
implies that what we see online is an illusion with little connection to the
actual practice of male sex work.
This is not to say that economists are naïve and always assume that
formal enforcement is necessary or available. There are many transactions
42 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

that take place without formal enforcement, and some that do not require
the presence of formal enforcement. Numerous studies have documented
how informal networks, long-term relationships, and reputations over-
come problems of asymmetric information. Indeed, researchers have
developed large literatures that look at limited contractibility and situa-
tions where formal enforcement is costly, as a way to consider the addi-
tional mechanisms that must be in place if existing institutions are lacking
or unable to settle disputes.4 The literature has not developed an empirical
answer to whether the value of information without formal enforcement
approaches its value when formal enforcement is present, however.
This question matters a great deal for the study of the market for male
sex work. Without an answer to this question it is not clear that this market
behaves in a way that can be described by traditional economic theory.
There is information transmitted in the market, but the question is whether
(and how) it is valued. In most illegal markets this is not a problem because
the good exchanged (say, narcotics) is done in a face-to-face process.
Reputations, networks, and relationships are key in most illegal markets,
and prices are private and negotiated directly between buyer and seller.
In the modern world for male sex work, however, this is not so. Male
escorts are not hired off of the street. Rather, they are selected online in
a highly impersonal process. There are few escort agencies that could act
to vouch for a sex worker – the websites simply host advertisements.
Reputations established online could be entirely false. Men enter the
market regularly, and new entrants need to be able to establish themselves
in the industry like any other service provider, but there are few ways to
do this in an illegal market. Most important, every client knows this to be
the case.
The question, “Does this market work?” is therefore actually two related
questions: Are formal enforcement mechanisms necessary in order for the
information that male sex workers and clients share to have value? And if
not, what is the value of information in this environment without formal
enforcement? These questions are refinements of the basic question asked
before, and get to the heart of the issue – in order to study the market for
male sex work in a traditional way, we first need to know whether the
market functions like a traditional market. In traditional markets, infor-
mation has value, and if the information in this market has no value, then it
is unlikely that the prices and quantities correspond to what we would
assume in traditional supply and demand analysis.
The problem is most illegal markets have coarse information environ-
ments. Take the example of illegal narcotics. It is rare that someone looking
 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem 43

to purchase drugs can choose between several sellers the way that someone
shopping for a book would. Most illegal markets are also highly secretive
and heavily dependent on personal connections. Unlike regulated busi-
nesses, illegal markets work by word of mouth and knowledge of the goods
and services being provided is not usually in plain view. In these markets,
reputations and networks operate to ensure that transactions take place.
Given the types of networks, it is challenging to obtain information on
prices, quantities, and consumer and producer behavior, making empirical
answers to these questions especially difficult. The online market for male
sex work must overcome the problems posed by asymmetric information
but in an impersonal manner for an illegal service, a very tall order.
So, then, how does this market work? Does it get prices right? In this
chapter, I show how the male sex work market leverages high technology
and a rich information structure to make this market work. I begin by
documenting the ways in which the clients of male sex workers informally
police the market: by informing other clients of deceptive sex workers and
by reviewing sex workers on independent, client-owned websites. The
informal policing in the market is critically important and allows this
market to function. In economic terms, the policing raises the cost of
misrepresentation for would-be fraudulent escorts and simultaneously
rewards the truthful self-disclosure of honest escorts. This acts to encou-
rage credible escorts to enter or remain in the market and to prevent
fraudulent escorts from entering or persisting in the market. In an illegal
market such as male sex work this policing works as one of the only means
of enforcement, and it is entirely informal.
I exploit this institutional knowledge further to identify the specific
information clients treat as a signal of escort quality. Both clients and
escorts explicitly mention face pictures in discussions of escort credibility
and misrepresentation. Using narrative evidence from qualitative studies,
news reports, and online forums, I show that clients look for face pictures
in an escort’s advertisement as a sign that the escort is trustworthy. Being
mentioned as the signal of escort trustworthiness is one thing, though, and
whether the market values that information is another. If this market is well
functioning, the signal of quality should have value.
The market values face pictures, and escorts who post face pictures are
able to earn 11 percent more than escorts who do not, on average. In dollar
terms, this would be in excess of an additional $10,000 per year in earnings.
Spot prices – specific transaction prices recorded by clients – independently
confirm the estimates from advertised prices. This is important because
spot prices are prices we know that clients actually paid, which could be
44 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

different from the prices that have been advertised. Consistent with the
institutional analysis, I find that escorts who post pictures of their faces
receive a sizable price premium: twice the premium to that on pictures in
general. Indeed, the premium that accrues to pictures is actually com-
pletely attributable to face pictures.
This finding is robust with regard to a number of considerations. First,
it holds when looking at escorts who have no reputation measures in their
advertisements. This implies that new entrants to the market understand
the value of face pictures, and price their services accordingly. Second, the
premium holds when looking at spot prices only. This means that the
premium is not an artifact of escorts with face pictures simply posting
higher prices than others – clients actually do pay more for the services of
escorts who post their face pictures. Third, I find that the premium is not
driven by beauty. It could certainly be the case that only attractive escorts
show pictures of their faces, and this would mean that the value of face
pictures is not about information in an abstract sense but about the
physical features revealed in face pictures. I find that the premium remains
even when controlling for the physical beauty of the male escort.
Male sex workers and their clients successfully overcome the problem of
asymmetric information in an illegal market. I show how this market
functions without formal enforcement, describing how clients police the
market and identify the specific information consumers take as the signal
of quality in this market. Interestingly, the per-picture price premium I
estimate, 1.7 percent, is similar to the per-picture premium observed for
used automobiles on eBay.com.5 Irrespective of the reputational concerns
of escorts, I document how client policing can increase the costs of doing
business for low-quality escorts. Increasing their cost is one of the primary
ways of minimizing their numbers. While previous empirical work looks at
how information technology improves market function, I provide the first
evidence that an illegal online market is quite responsive to information,
even when it cannot be verified or where misrepresentations cannot be
punished.6
The market for male sex work provides a case where the richness of the
information environment overcomes some of the problems of asymmetric
information. The illegality of the market and the near-impossibility of
guaranteeing truthful disclosure imply that the market should disappear
or be a market where information has dubious value. However, I find that
clients informally police the market, successfully punishing misrepresenta-
tion and rewarding credible escorts. This enables male escorts to signal
their quality and allows prices in the market to respond accordingly.
 The Online Market for Male Escort Services 45

Despite its being an illegal market, male sex work exploits high technology
to ensure that the market functions well. The answer to the question, “Does
this market work?” is, despite obstacles generally presented by illegal
markets, “Yes.”

THE ONLINE MARKET FOR MALE ESCORT SERVICES

The male sex work market now largely takes place online.7 Although
female sex work has recently begun to appear online in Internet forums
such as Craigslist.com, male escorts have had access to large and profitable
websites devoted to the male sex trade for well over 15 years.8 Unlike escort
agencies and other online, two-party transactions such as eBay.com pur-
chases, the websites themselves do not derive any profits from the transac-
tions escorts conduct with clients; they simply allow escorts to post their
advertisements and contact information. The websites charge a set fee to
escorts for hosting an advertisement and act as a clearinghouse where escorts
advertise their services and clients choose between escorts. Consequently,
these sites do not screen clients for escorts or vice versa, make no claims or
guarantees about the quality of the escorts, and offer no recourse to clients in
cases of poor escort performance or fraud.
The large number of male escorts and their ability to price directly
without intermediaries create a market setting similar to others that are
compatible with competitive market assumptions.9 Competitive markets
generally rest on relatively simple criteria: many buyers and sellers, free
entry and exit of sellers, the same good or service is sold by all sellers, and
buyers and sellers have the same information. Under these conditions we
expect markets to function well. Since this market is an illegal market,
however, there is a potential for escorts to mislead clients and engage in
fraud. In particular, an escort’s ability to post unreliable information and to
misrepresent himself should lead to adverse selection in the market.
The adverse selection here would be one where fraudulent male escorts
would be the predominant actors in the market.
While escort claims are verifiable ex post, there are no formal institu-
tional penalties for ex ante misrepresentation. Similarly, it is unclear how
much weight a reputation in an illegal online market carries, and whether
any client would respond to claims of high-quality service. Without formal
enforcement and with the stakes particularly high (especially for men who
are married or not generally assumed to partake in homosexual behavior),
it is unclear whether a rich information environment alone can prevent the
adverse selection described above. Previous research based on newspaper
46 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

advertisements for male escorts found no differences in pricing due to

information.10 Since the market has moved online, however, there are
more service providers and more likely clients than before. The open
question is whether the rich information environment offered by the
Internet increases opportunities for escorts to disclose information about
themselves, which could signal their trustworthiness, and whether the
pricing of male escort services is related to this information.
The market for escort services is one of the few instances where illegal
behavior is openly advertised. While this is extremely rare for illegal
markets, there are reasons why escorts publicly announce their prices for
services. First, and somewhat counterintuitively, is that it minimizes the
legal risks of sex work. In most police stings for solicitation, the sex worker
and the client must agree to both a price and sexual conduct. In order to be
prosecuted for prostitution the illegal contract must specify, verbally or
otherwise, the terms of the transaction. By posting prices and sexual
behaviors online, clients and escorts obviate the need to discuss payment,
prices, and sexual behaviors at the same time. In fact, escorts are wary of
clients who discuss prices, as this is taken as evidence that they could be
police officers.11 In fact, how-to guides for clients and escorts advise both to
keep contractual discussions to a minimum:
Understand, though, that they might not be able to fully describe over the phone
what they do because they don’t want to get busted . . . Most escorts will not discuss
specific sexual acts for sale. Such is illegal and their services are for time and
companionship only. Money is exchanged for time only, the decision to have sex
would be a mutual and consensual decision two adults make. Upon meeting the
escort, you may be asked certain questions about any possible affiliation with law
enforcement.12

Second, escorts compete with one another on these websites. While

clients calling a traditional escort agency can be steered to a particular
sex worker, clients of male escorts can freely choose between hundreds of
options. This is close to the assumption of a market with many sellers.
In such a market, clients may be unwilling to engage escorts who do not
post their prices or who appear to be less forthcoming about the services
they offer, especially if their competitors are forthcoming. Some qualitative
interviews with escorts have revealed that escorts post prices as a way to
ensure that clients who contact them can afford their services.13
Third, by setting their prices publicly, escorts avoid the time otherwise
spent haggling with clients over prices, a staple of street prostitution.14
Escorts assume that any client contacting them knows their price and will
pay the posted rate for services, just as any other business owner would
 The Online Market for Male Escort Services 47

expect customers to pay the advertised rate. While the online advertise-
ment sites are clear that money is not exchanged for sex and is only
compensation for an escort’s time, the value of that time is not subject to
negotiation, either. Despite this publicly posted information about illegal
activity, police raids of online male escorts are surprisingly rare.
There are several sources that describe the generic male escort
encounter.15 Clients contact escorts directly and arrange for appointments
either at the home of the escort (an “incall”) or at the home or hotel of
the client (an “outcall”). In the most basic form of an outcall, a client will
search escort advertisements and choose an escort. If an appointment is
immediately desired, such as the same day, the client will usually phone the
escort. Appointments for future dates may be arranged by e-mail, although
some escorts prefer to make all appointments by phone. Escorts generally
encourage clients to describe the length of the desired appointment and to
note any circumstances of which the escort should be aware (e.g., manner
of dress required by client and clients who may be disabled). Escort and
client then discuss the time and location of the appointment. Once the
escort arrives at the location, he meets the client and the two may have
a brief discussion to reaffirm the earlier phone conversation. Payment is
almost never discussed face-to-face. Money is usually exchanged after the
appointment ends, but clients are encouraged to place the money in plain
view, such as on a dresser or desk, either before the escort arrives or at the
beginning of the appointment.
Interestingly, one reason the street market may be preferred to the
online market, from a client perspective, is that misrepresentation would
be rare. On the street, a client can see the available sex workers and choose
one after negotiation. The problem is that the client can only choose from
the escorts available at the time he is looking – he cannot schedule a future
meeting nor can he see all of the available sex workers. Itiel (1998) notes
that male escorts and clients have less leeway to informally penalize mis-
representation than street sex workers and their clients. While street sex
workers and clients can freely disengage from a transaction for whatever
reason by simply walking away, the clandestine nature of an “incall” or
“outcall” makes it difficult for either party to escape penalty free if there has
been any misrepresentation. For example, once the escort has arrived at the
hotel door or home of a client, it may be difficult to induce him to leave
without payment of some sort. Also, once the misrepresentation is revealed,
the client (and potentially the escort) is already exposed: the escort knows
the client’s location, almost certainly some form of contact information,
and the client may be open to blackmail and harassment depending on
48 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

his circumstances. Moreover, clients cannot appeal to an intermediary’s

reputation to minimize their exposure. There is no pimp, madam, or escort
agency acting as a guarantor. The very nature of the male sex market alters
the usual interpretation of the risks involved in sex work. While male escorts
are seen as a “safer bet” than male street sex workers, the overall structure in
the market is one in which the client is at risk of harm.16
Unlike female sex workers, who are at greater risk of being violated by
clients, male sex workers are more prone to violate their clients. Clients are at
risk in a number of ways, and the harm from hiring an unsavory escort can
have serious consequences. First, escorts may simply rob clients; a traditional
scam is to request payment up front and then feign an excuse to leave, never
to return. Another common ploy is to steal the client’s wallet in the course of
an appointment. In online forums, by far the most frequent complaint from
clients is that escorts take payment but do not deliver services.
Second, an escort may blackmail a client or expose his client’s sexual
behaviors. As noted earlier, clients and escorts usually communicate by
way of telephone or e-mail before the appointment. Most escorts refuse
calls from clients who have a “blocked” phone number, and this exposes
clients to a risk of blackmail because escorts can trace the client’s phone
number. Escorts could threaten to “out” a client, to inform his family of his
sexual practices, to contact his employer, or even to contact legal autho-
rities, since the client has solicited prostitution. The case of Ted Haggard
(the former president of the National Association of Evangelicals, who
became embroiled in a sex scandal involving a male escort in 2006) is one
in which the escort kept voicemail messages from the client and later
released them to the press. The additional social stigma attached to being
exposed as a homosexual, particularly for men who hold positions of power
in conservative religious or political organizations, can be career ending.
Several prominent political careers have been damaged by allegations of
involvement with male sex workers.17 In addition to the well-publicized
national cases, local politicians have also been exposed. In 2003, Utah State
Representative Brent Parker (R) resigned when accused of soliciting an
undercover police officer. In 2006, Tom Malin lost a Democratic primary
bid for the Texas State Legislature when it was revealed that he had
formerly been an escort.
Finally, since escorts are relatively young and virile men, physical vio-
lence is not uncommon. While escorts usually have someone they will keep
abreast of the location and contact information for every appointment
in case of an emergency, clients are less likely to let others know of
their whereabouts, leaving themselves particularly vulnerable.18 In online
 Evidence from the Demand Side of the Male Escort Market 49

forums, clients themselves mention instances in which escorts either attacked

them or threatened them with bodily harm. Clients describe being punched,
kicked, threatened or attacked with knives, guns, and other deadly weapons.
For example, one client noted “The time an escort grabbed me by the throat
and slammed me up against wall rifling my pockets for my wallet. Then
punched me a couple of times for not bringing my ATM and credit card.”19
Moreover, these crimes are likely to be unreported, since the client would be
forced to reveal how he came to know the escort in question.
Unlike the markets for other services, where clients may not choose to
pursue legal redress for small matters, clients of male escorts do not have
the option of seeking redress for any grievance, regardless of size. While
one may be compensated in-kind for poor service at a restaurant, for
example, there is no evidence of similar arrangements in the male escort
market, even for relatively petty grievances. Escorts are not known to offer
compensation or in kind services to dissatisfied clients.
The dangers that clients face increase their incentive to police the
market. Without some form of policing, the market would be difficult for
clients to navigate. Even with policing by clients, there are limits to how
effectively an illegal market can be policed. Even in well-functioning online
markets there are fraudulent sellers, and online services spend a great deal
of time screening sellers. In the next section, I show exactly how clients
informally police the market to minimize the probability that they will hire
an unscrupulous escort.

EVIDENCE FROM THE DEMAND SIDE OF THE MALE

ESCORT MARKET

Informal Enforcement in the Male Escort Market

Why would clients be driven to police the market for male escort services?
While policing helps the market to function, it comes at a cost to individual
clients that benefits not only themselves but also clients who do not police
the market. The precise motivations behind client policing are difficult to
ascertain. The clients active in policing are providing a service to the
market that enhances its ability to operate. It may be due to egalitarian
feelings, a desire to protect others, or knowledge that their activities are
critical to a market they are eager to be active in.
When a firm discloses information it is inherently making a promise to
the consumer. Theoretically, in order for the signals that escorts send to be
informative, there must be a reasonable basis for the client to trust the
50 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

accuracy of the signal.20 Most economic models of signaling assume

that signaling is truthful and that misrepresentation does not exist. In
these types of models, when an escort signals, his sending a signal acts as
a commitment device.21
The key issue when misrepresentation is forbidden is whether to disclose
information at all, since the information must be truthful. This issue is
pertinent for firms that would expose themselves to significant liability if
they were to knowingly mislead consumers. In an illegal market, however,
such guarantees cannot be made and informal policing may be the only
option. Clients may police the market because they have little choice if they
would like to minimize the probability of dealing with a deceptive escort.
Since the websites that host advertisements for male escorts derive no income
from clients and maximize profits by hosting the largest number of adver-
tisements, they pay little attention to clients’ complaints about deceptive
escorts who advertise on the websites. Interestingly, one client framed the
situation in the classic used-car reference familiar to most economists:
That site is an advertising site, not an agency. If the used car you buy turns out to be
a lemon, do you take it up with the paper that ran the classified ad for it? Could you
imagine what managing that he said/he said would be like?

Just as the purchaser of a car advertised in the newspaper does not hold the
newspaper responsible for the car being a lemon, clients of escorts cannot
hold the website responsible for hosting advertisements of escorts who
turn out to be fraudulent, dangerous, or deceptive.22
In this market, clients police escorts in two ways: through posts to
independent, client-owned forums and through detailed reviews of escort
services on the escort websites, which are linked to the respective escort’s
advertisement. The primary functions of client-based forums are informa-
tion gathering by potential clients and posting of detailed reviews of escort
services. In the forums, clients ask other clients for leads to good escorts in
an area with which they are not familiar and clients post unsolicited
information about escorts.23 This information is available to all interested
users. The following exchange is typical. “CLIENT #1: I’ve been drooling
over an ad in Chicago who had been listed on XXX as “XXX.” Anybody
know more? CLIENT#2 (Response): I can add some information on this
guy. I actually can’t remember the name he used, but I do remember the
photos. He quoted me $300 and listed himself as a dominant top. He
showed up at my hotel on time and when I opened the door I didn’t think
his face looked the same as the face pic on the ad. I don’t think the other
pics on his current ad are him though. So in a nutshell, buyer beware.”
 Evidence from the Demand Side of the Male Escort Market 51

These forums can be used to highlight a number of dangers regarding

escorts. Escorts can create deceptive advertisements on escort websites, use
multiple aliases, and even steal from their clients. The forum acts to ensure
that these rogue escorts are exposed to clients. The following is an example
of such a warning. “[Link to escort advertisement] I hope this link works
and I want to let everyone to know to STAY AWAY!!!! He stole $500 from
my house and is in partnership with John, Johnny, Joe . . . [he] also goes by
Jake, Michael and many other names . . . .”
The reviews on the website offer a different type of assessment. The
reviews of these escorts act as public goods, much more so than the forums.
The reviews describe a specific transaction with an escort. The reviews
contain a great deal of information that is free form. The reviews are
searchable by city or escort, allowing any client to obtain information
about an escort without having to ask.
Additionally, clients can also write reviews of escort services on escort
websites. These reviews allow for free form opinions of the escort’s services
and are directly linked to, and a product of, the advertisement website.
They usually contain a great deal of information about the escort and his
behavior during a particular appointment – clients give information on
how the appointment was made, specific information regarding the escort
during the appointment, such as escort hygiene, physical appearance,
conversational ability, the escort’s manner of dress, sexual activities pro-
vided, and the price charged. While the escort websites do give escorts the
option of allowing themselves to be reviewed by clients (nearly 95 percent
in the data allow it), escorts have no control over the reviews and all reviews
are posted if the escort allows reviews. This all-or-nothing nature of
reviews is a key advantage of these reputation measures, in that escorts
have no control over their reviews: all reviews for the escort are retained on
the website, not a selected sample posted or chosen by the escort.
The market policing by clients allows for the stock of information to be
large: clients who would never meet exchange information about escorts,
and clients who never review escorts can access a large amount of informa-
tion about escorts. While the cost per client to share information is
relatively high, given the amount of time it would take to write a detailed
review, the returns to the accumulated knowledge are also high. These
policing measures also allow disclosure to be credible. Theoretically, the
policing and reviews raise the cost of deception for the untrustworthy
escort, creating a wedge where the honest escort can credibly signal and
receive a premium for doing so. A deceptive escort would need to create a
totally new advertisement with new pictures and new contact information
52 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

to continue to operate in the market once he had been discovered as being

deceptive. These new identities are not without cost. This means the cost of
being a deceptive escort is greater than that of being a truthful escort. This
cost differential is a necessary condition for signaling to be informative –
and the cost differential could only exist if clients police the market.

Identifying the Signal

Due to the inherent dangers in male sex work and the unique situation
where male sex workers have to provide information to their clients with
regard to their honesty and safety, the information flow is from escorts to
clients. Clients choose escorts from many available options, and clients
reveal that they choose escorts based on both physical characteristics and
cues as to who will not pose a threat to their security and privacy. High-
quality escorts will show up on time, match their advertised description,
provide the agreed upon services at the advertised price, be discreet, and
generally act in a manner respectful of the client’s privacy and safety.
What information do clients consider when they hire a male escort?
What type of information is more likely to be observed, given a particular
type? Using the same client-based forums that serve as policing, I identify
the types of information that escorts and clients take as important in male
escort advertisements. Clients reveal that they pay particular attention to
the presence of face pictures (ideally multiple face pictures) in an escort’s
advertisement as a signal of truthfulness. Clients explicitly and implicitly
note that face pictures are more likely to be observed when the escort is
high quality.
I’ve been tempted [to hire an escort with no face pictures] but have always ended
up feeling let down by anyone without a face-shot so I’ve stayed away.
As far as pics that are probably not real, same deal, do not hire. No one has just
a professional modeling pic or two and no other pics. They need to have more than
one face pic in their ads.

Even in their advertisements, escorts note that face pictures are what
clients take into account. Escorts agree that face pictures transmit informa-
tion about quality in their advertisements to clients and in their advice to
other escorts.
Don’t get fooled by escorts using headless picture, they are often fake! Choose the
certified one! A real man!

Indeed, escorts who do not have face pictures in their advertisements

apologize for the lack of them.
 Conceptual and Empirical Framework 53

Good looking all-American . . . clean-cut type . . . Sorry no face pic but you won’t
be disappointed!!

The qualitative evidence suggests that escorts and clients treat face pictures
as particularly valuable information and a signal that the escort is unlikely
to misrepresent himself.
There are several reasons why face pictures would be a signal of quality.
Face pictures give a key measure of immediate representativeness: upon
meeting the escort, the client would know whether the escort was “as
advertised.” This would allow a client to minimize any potential losses,
since misrepresentation would be obvious. Escorts who do show their face
convey that they have less to hide. They are willing to be publicly identified,
making it less likely they will violate the client or expose him to blackmail
or harassment, since they could be readily recognized by third parties.
Posting a face picture is similar to posting a bond – it decreases the
probability that an escort would misrepresent himself, and therefore act
as advertisements for quality.24 Showing face pictures not only acts as
a signal of quality, but could also be interpreted by clients as commitment
device (a special case of disclosure). A deceptive escort, once discovered,
cannot costlessly reinvent himself. Also, clients can use face pictures as
a search characteristic when looking for male escort services. Escorts who
do not show their faces may not want to be identified because of their
occupation and/or because they are not high quality. Not signaling is one
way of ensuring anonymity, which makes it easier to deceive clients.

CONCEPTUAL AND EMPIRICAL FRAMEWORK

The key issue is whether or not there is a response by the clients to the
signal. There are two possibilities: either the market responds to the signal
offered by escorts or it does not. Theoretically, this would be a separating or
pooled equilibrium. In the pooled equilibrium, the signal does not lead to
wage differences – all escorts would be paid the same, whether they signal
or not. In the separating equilibrium, there is separation between types,
where the signalers receive a higher wage than non-signalers. In this case
the signal is informative as it leads clients to believe that the escort is more
likely to be a high-quality escort.
In an illegal market such as male sex work, it is difficult to specify which
equilibrium would hold. Most signaling models implicitly assume that
some type of formal enforcement or institution guarantees truthful disclo-
sure. For example, in the simplest version of the classic signaling model in
54 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

Spence (1973), workers obtain otherwise useless education to signal their

ability to employers. If schools could not certify that an agent had actually
obtained the years of schooling she claimed (for example, by printing
fraudulent degrees or transcripts), anyone could act as if they had the
highest level of education possible. Such fraud would obviously decrease
the value of the signal and, in the extreme, the signal would have no value.
There are several reasons we might expect a pooled equilibrium for male
sex work. First, the degree of uncertainty could be large, which can cause
clients to react to signals weakly, if at all. The information being provided
comes from websites advertising sex work services, after all. Second, the
cost differential for signaling by type may be particularly small in this
market. Although clients act to police the market, this may not result in a
substantial cost differential between those that would signal and those that
would not. If deceptive escorts could easily produce fake face pictures,
clients would have no ability to discern quality from the signal itself. Any
client without direct experience with a given escort would be fundamen-
tally uninformed (or less than fully informed) as to the escort’s true quality,
since deception is a distinct possibility. Since the cost of signaling against
type for the deceptive escort may not be much higher than that of the
genuinely high-quality escort, it is difficult to argue on theoretical grounds
that clients would trust the veracity of the signal.25 By the same token, it is
not clear that reputation would solve the problem, since those describing the
reputation of the escort may have ulterior motives. For example, positive
reviews may be left by the escort or his associates, and negative reviews by
competitors.
I therefore test for whether information – in particular, the signal of face
pictures – leads to wage difference (separation) in this market. If there is
separation, then the market partially overcomes the problem of asym-
metric information. Most important, it would do so without formal
enforcement.26 While, theoretically, the question is whether or not the
signal has value, an additional empirical question looks at how much value
the signal has relative to the value of a signal in a market where formal
enforcement is present – whether legal and illegal markets value informa-
tion to the same degree.
The key empirical question is the value of the signal. The task is to test
whether the expected value (average price, w) of male sex workers who use
face pictures, the signal (s) identified earlier, is greater than the average
price of those who do not, holding other escort characteristics (x) constant

Eðwjx; s > 0Þ > Eðwjx; s ¼ 0Þ ð1Þ

 Data from the Online Male Escort Market 55

Following empirical studies of information in markets, I use a regression of

the escort’s price (which is also the wage he earns for his services) on the
information he provides in his advertisement. I take the usual interpreta-
tion that the coefficients reflect a consumer’s willingness to pay for each
characteristic, and therefore reflect the characteristic’s value. While there
have been criticisms of this interpretation due to restrictive assumptions,
Bajari and Benkard (2005) show that the interpretation holds and that the
price function is identified under very general conditions that apply to this
case.27 If the market separates based on the signal identified, then face
pictures will have value in terms of escort prices. I therefore regress the
escort’s hourly price on the signal in the advertisements (Signal), reputa-
tion and reviews (R), personal characteristics (Z), and identifiers for loca-
tion/market (X).28

lnðPi Þ ¼ ϕ þ γSignali þ φRi þ δZi þ λXi þ εi ð2Þ

In contrast to other studies that analyze the total amount of information

in the market, I disaggregate the information in order to estimate the value
of particular types of information. While pictures may have value, pictures
were not the signal that clients looked for from escorts. I therefore estimate
the value of pictures in general and specific types of pictures, namely face
pictures. Based on the institutional analysis presented earlier, I hypothesize
that face pictures are the key type of information that leads to separation in
the market for male sex work, which is a clue to see whether this market
functions well by overcoming the problems of asymmetric information.
If the market takes face pictures as a signal of escort quality, we would
expect γ to be positive. If not, then participants do not respond to the signal
either because it is not believed or because it is a noisy signal of quality to
which market prices do not respond.

DATA FROM THE ONLINE MALE ESCORT MARKET

Since the issue is type of picture listed, I recorded not only the number of
pictures, but also the type of pictures in each advertisement. In particu-
lar, I look at three categories of pictures – pictures that show an escort’s
face in a distinguishable way (which may or may not include nudity),
pictures that show a nude body only (either from the front or the back,
but with no face shown), and pictures that show neither nudity nor an
escort’s face (pictures of torsos, biceps, legs, feet, etc.). While nudity is
allowed, escorts may not post pictures that display sex acts and may not
56 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

Table 2.1 Summary statistics for the escort sample

Whole sample No face pictures Face pictures

Variable Mean Std. dev. Mean Std. dev. Mean Std. dev.
Price 216.88 64.46 187.09 64.54 231.59 59.15
Log of price 5.34 0.29 5.18 0.31 5.41 0.25
Spot price 217.86 64.49 188.52 64.52 232.30 59.40
Number of pictures 6.14 2.84 5.17 2.81 6.61 2.73
Body-only pictures 2.08 2.07 3.16 2.39 1.55 1.66
Face pictures 2.90 2.96 0.00 0.00 4.32 2.63
Survey reviews 3.18 6.72 3.25 7.43 3.15 6.34
Text reviews 0.35 1.03 0.36 1.16 0.35 0.96
Fraction Good Survey 0.88 0.27 0.86 0.31 0.89 0.25
Fraction Good Text 0.88 0.30 0.89 0.29 0.87 0.31

Notes:
Fraction Good Survey and Fraction Good Text are defined over escorts with survey or text reviews,
respectively.
Price is the outcall price posted by an escort in his advertisement.
If an escort has both a spot price and a posted price, or no posted price and a spot price, the spot
price replaces the posted price.

display pictures that include persons other than the escort. Uploaded
pictures are placed in an online holding tank until cleared by the web-
site’s management. Every advertisement must be accompanied by at least
one picture.
Table 2.1 shows the summary statistics for the escorts in the data. In terms
of information, escorts post an average of six pictures in their advertisements
and have three survey reviews, and one escort in three has a text review.
Two-thirds of escorts post at least one face picture and, on average, escorts
post three pictures containing their face and two containing their nude body
with no face shown. There are some differences when looking at the sum-
mary statistics for escorts sorted by whether they post face pictures. For
example, the average escort who shows pictures of his face posts nearly seven
pictures, four of which are of his face. The average escort who does not
show pictures of his face posts five pictures, three of which are of his nude
body. Escorts who post face pictures charge approximately $230 an hour,
while escorts who do not post face picture charge approximately $190 an
hour. Below, I check to see if these differences in prices hold after controlling
for various individual, reputation, and geographic differences that have the
potential to explain the price difference between sex workers who post face
pictures and those who do not.
 Face Value 57

2.5

Naive Specification
2 Naive Specification +
+ Survey Reviews
Naive Specification Survey Reviews +
Text Reviews
Percent Premium

1.5

0.5

Figure 2.1 The value of pictures in escort advertisements

FACE VALUE
Figure 2.1 reports the results from various ordinary least squares (OLS)
regression specifications, where I regress the escort’s log hourly price on
the number of pictures and a large number of controls such as escort
characteristics and location.29 This is a naïve specification, since it treats
all pictures equally and considers only the quantity of pictures. The first
estimate shows that the number of pictures in an escort’s advertisement is
strongly related to the escort’s price, controlling for individual character-
istics and market location. Each additional picture increases an escort’s
price by 1.7 percent. The magnitude of the premium for pictures is close to
the premium noted by Lewis (2009) for used cars on eBay.com (which is
between 1.66 and 1.82 percent), one of the few estimates for the value of
information in legal markets. I find that information has value in this illegal
market just as it does in legal markets where enforcement is formal.30
The second estimate is the value of pictures when I add the more coarse
measure of reputation: survey reviews. By themselves, survey reviews do not
exert a significant effect on prices, but the effect of pictures on prices remains
the same even when this measure of quality is included. Recall that these
reviews were just star ratings of escorts and asked a simple set of questions
about performance. They did not reference a specific transaction nor do they
allow clients to offer further details. For the third estimate, I add the more
detailed and informative measure of reputation: free form text reviews. Text
58 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

Has Body Only Pictures?

Has Face Pictures?

Log of No. of Text Reviews

Log of No. of Reviews

Number of Pictures

−10 −5 0 5 10 15 20
Percent Premium

Figure 2.2 The premium of picture types

reviews are strongly and positively related to prices, but the effect is quite
small, less than one-half of one percent. Consistent with other results in the
literature, reputation affects prices in the male escort market.31
Figure 2.2 shows a set of results for a different specification, where the
number of pictures is included as well as a dichotomous measure for the
presence of face pictures in an advertisement. The institutional evidence
presented earlier suggests that face pictures are the key measure of truthful-
ness in the market, and we therefore expect their presence to be positively
related to escort prices if they are a signal of quality. The effect of face pictures
on prices is quite large. Escorts who post pictures of their faces have prices
that are more than 20 percent higher than those that do not, even after
controlling for both measures of reputation and a host of individual escort
and market characteristics.32 Additionally, including a measure of whether
face pictures are present significantly reduces the relationship between total
pictures and the escort’s price – the coefficient on number of pictures is
reduced by more than 50 percent once the indicator for face pictures is
included (see Figure 2.1). I also include a dichotomous measure of having
a nude body picture with no face shown. The effect of having nude, headless
photos actually reduces the price by more than 5 percent. If an escort sees an
average of twenty clients per month, the difference would amount to roughly
$10,000 per year in additional earnings for the escorts who post face pictures.
While Figure 2.2 examines the role of information at the extensive
margin, Figure 2.3 presents the results from the preferred specifications,
in which I use the number of face and body pictures in the specification.
 Face Value 59

4.5

With
4 Body Only
With Pictures
With Body Only +
Body Only Pictures Survey Reviews
3.5 With +
Pictures +
Body Only Survey Reviews
+ Text Reviews
Pictures +
Survey Reviews +
3 Text Reviews Escort Characteristics
Percent Premium

2.5

1.5

0.5

Figure 2.3 The premium of face pictures

I investigate the premium to each additional face picture and body picture
to see how much of the total premium to pictures in Figure 2.1 can be
attributed to each type of picture an escort will display.
In Figure 2.3 I use the number of face and body-only pictures as the
measures of information. This specification is similar to the naïve specifi-
cation for all pictures, where now I can estimate, directly, the value of face
pictures. The first estimate shows that the premium to each face picture is
large – each additional face picture increases the price charged by an escort
by roughly 3 percent, nearly twice the premium of total pictures reported
earlier. Put another way, one standard deviation in the number of face
pictures increases escort prices by 0.3 of standard deviations, a large effect
on prices for sex workers. In the second estimate I add body-only pictures and
find that they are not significantly related to prices. For the third and fourth
estimates I add the two measures of reputation and find that they behave
similarly to the results in Figure 2.1, where survey reviews are not related to
prices and where text reviews are strongly related to escort prices. Finally,
I control for a host of escort- and market-specific characteristics and the result
holds – the premium to face pictures is much larger than the premium to
pictures overall, and body-only pictures are not significantly related to prices.
In Figure 2.3 the results come from a specification where I allow picture
types to enter directly, but this can be problematic since escorts who convey
different information may also use different numbers of pictures. As the
summary results (Table 2.1) showed, escorts who post face pictures also post
60 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

3.5
With
Body Only
Pictures
3 +
With
Body Only Survey Reviews
Pictures +
With
2.5 + Text Reviews
Body Only
Survey Reviews +
With Pictures
+ Escort Characteristics
Body Only +
Percent Premium

2 Pictures Survey Reviews Text Reviews

1.5

0.5

Figure 2.4 The premium for the fraction of pictures that are face pictures

more pictures overall. To see if this drives the relationship between prices
and face pictures, in Figure 2.4 I report the results where I use a specification
that controls for the total number of pictures in an advertisement to focus on
the composition of the information, the fraction of pictures that are face
pictures, rather than the quantity of information. To ease interpretation, the
results are presented in terms of the premium for a 10 percent increase in the
fraction of face pictures in an escort’s advertisement, such as having three of
ten pictures being face pictures as opposed to two of ten pictures being face
pictures. For the first estimate I include only the number of pictures and the
share of pictures that are face pictures. Consistent with the results in
Figure 2.3, the fraction of face pictures is strongly related to escort prices.
One standard deviation in the fraction of face pictures increases escort prices
by 0.12 of a standard deviation. I then add the fraction of pictures that are
body-only pictures and find that they are negatively related to prices, but
their effect on prices (in absolute value) is much smaller than the effect of
face pictures. As earlier, I then add measures of reputation, and the effect of
a larger fraction of pictures being face pictures is still positive and of similar
size to the most basic results.33 (The inclusion of the additional reputation
measures does lessen the magnitude of the effect of body-only pictures, and
they cease to be statistically significant.34) The effect of face pictures is robust
to the inclusion of reputational measures, which suggests that face pictures
are a different signal of quality and not a direct substitute for the information
contained in reviews.
 Ruling Out Alternative Explanations for the Value of Face Pictures 61

Taken together, Figures 2.1–2.4 establish that information and reputation

are important in the market for male sex work and that each is priced in
a different manner. While the amount of information matters (each picture
increases prices by roughly 1.5 percent), the quality of the information
matters more (each face picture increases prices by 3 percent). In fact, the
entire premium to information in the market is driven by face pictures.35
Also, reputation matters in the market, but only in the form of free form text
reviews, which contain more information about an escort’s quality and
behavior than do survey reviews. This implies that the information regarding
reputation also varies depending upon how it is delivered.
What, exactly, do face pictures and the text reviews signal? While they
both appear to signal quality, it is likely that they each signal a different
component of quality. The first and most important would be “basic
quality.” Basic quality includes the escort’s truthfulness and the client’s
safety, and is the most fundamental aspect of quality. Escorts who are high
in basic quality will show up on time, match their advertised description,
provide the agreed upon services at the advertised price, be discreet, and
generally act in a manner respectful of the client’s privacy and safety. This
is the type of quality likely signaled with face pictures. A second aspect of
quality is something I define as skill at providing services, or “service
quality.” Service quality refers to how well the escort performs services
relative to others. Given that the two types of quality are different and serve
different functions, it is not surprising that they have similar (but empiri-
cally distinct) effects on prices.
The results support the idea that the information environment afforded
by the Internet allows male sex workers to signal their type successfully via
face pictures and receive a premium for doing so. It also supports the
hypothesis that face pictures are a specific signal of quality in this market.
The results also support the idea that reputations are best established with
evidence of the type of experience clients could expect from an escort.
More importantly, the results suggest that the value of information con-
veyed in an illegal market is similar to the value of information provided in
a legal market.

RULING OUT ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS

FOR THE VALUE OF FACE PICTURES
The previous section presented evidence in support the interpretation of
face pictures as a signal of basic quality. However, that interpretation is
subject to several criticisms, given the cross-sectional nature of the data.
62 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

First, though the price responds positively to the presence of face pictures,
the value of face pictures should be finite – if every face picture increased
prices that would be implausible. Below I show that the marginal value of
face pictures decreases as a function of the number of face pictures. This is
what we would expect – while showing the first few face pictures is a signal
of basic quality, sending several would not increase the signal itself. Second,
it is possible that clients respond to empty signals of quality. In other
words, price differences do not reflect signaling as much as a client’s
wishful belief that face pictures convey credibility. I explore this possibility
below and find it to be inconsistent with the evidence. Third, the results
could be driven by a beauty premium as opposed to a signal of quality.
Naturally, physical attractiveness would be related to prices and would be
displayed via face pictures. I provide suggestive evidence that beauty is not
the driving force behind the face picture premium. Lastly, I construct
a counterfactual and show that where client policing is stymied, the value
of the signal decreases substantially. This is confirmatory evidence that
information only has value when the signal is rendered credible by client
policing.

Marginal Face Value

Since the interpretation of the price effect of face pictures hinges on face
pictures being a signal of quality, it is critical to estimate the marginal
value of face pictures. The marginal value of face pictures should be a
decreasing function of the number of face pictures. Once a threshold of
credibility is attained, additional pictures should not convey additional
quality. If this were not so, escorts could be rewarded for infinite numbers
of face pictures. This would imply that the signal had infinitely positive
value, and that would certainly be difficult to justify if the signal is one of
basic quality. In the review of client forums, clients note that they look for
multiple pictures of an escort’s face, but there should be a limit to their
value after some reasonable number of pictures establishes that the escort
in question is not deceptive.
To estimate the marginal value of face pictures, I estimate a polynomial
function of the value of face pictures.36 I plot the marginal value as a
function of the number of face pictures in Figure 2.5. As the figure shows,
the marginal value of face pictures decreases sharply, approaching zero at the
seventh picture. These marginal values are consistent with the interpreta-
tion of the results for face pictures being a signal of basic quality. The
average value of face pictures is large, but the marginal value of the eighth
 Ruling Out Alternative Explanations for the Value of Face Pictures 63

8.75%

7.50%

6.25%
Marginal Value (%)

5.00%

3.75%

2.50%

1.25%

0.00%

–1.25%

–2.50%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Number of Face Pictures
Marginal Value 95% Confidence Interval Series3

Figure 2.5 The marginal value of face pictures

additional face picture is indistinguishable from zero. While the signal

has value, excessive signaling is not rewarded in this market.37

True Quality
It could be that clients are responding to empty signals of quality.
Uninformed clients could certainly be duped into believing claims that
are not supported. Jin and Kato (2006), for example, conducted an experi-
ment on eBay.com auctions for baseball cards and found that while
advertised quality was positively related to price, actual quality was not.
They conclude that sellers in online markets target uninformed buyers, and
that eBay.com’s system of universal ratings and anonymous identities
allows this situation to persist. In essence, clients could respond to signals
that turn out not to truly be signals related to quality. Lewis (2009)
contends that Jin and Kato’s result may be due to the fact that the stakes
are relatively low in the auctions that they study, where the baseball cards
in question are not very expensive. It is certainly true that the stakes for
misrepresentation are high in the market for male sex work, both in dollar
value and the potential negative outcomes from misrepresentation.
Furthermore, while buyers in online markets such as eBay.com have some
form of formal protection from fraud, the clients of a male escort do not have
any formal or implied guarantees against fraud: it is not possible for them to
64 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

be lulled into a false sense of security by an escort’s guarantee. The active

policing documented earlier shows that clients are not easily or consistently
fooled. As such, while some portion of these results could be explained by the
presence of uninformed consumers who are targeted by escorts who use
fraudulent face pictures, that portion is likely to be small. Also, nearly every
escort advertises that he is of the best quality. Certainly, no escort claims to
provide average or mediocre services. While the signal of quality is not used
by every escort, claims of quality are made by every escort.

Beauty
One concern with the interpretation of the results is that the face picture
premium could be due to a beauty premium and not signaling. Many
papers document the premium to beauty in the labor market, and it
would be reasonable to conjecture that the premium may be even higher
among sex workers.38 In this sample of sex workers it could certainly be the
case that more attractive escorts are more likely to display pictures of their
faces and, conditional on displaying any face picture, display more face
pictures. It is doubtful, however, that all attractive escorts show their faces
since men may not want long-lived evidence of their careers in commercial
sex on the Internet.39
I tackle the issue of beauty directly by obtaining beauty measures for the
escorts in the data. I first address the issue that more attractive sex workers
may display more face pictures, conditional on displaying any picture.
I then discuss the potential selection issue that more-attractive sex workers
might be more likely to display face pictures in general. To do so the beauty
of the male escorts was rated independently by a group of men. Beauty was
scored from 1 to 5, with 1 being the least attractive, and 5 being the most
attractive. These types of rating systems are standard for measures of
physical attractiveness. Both openly gay and closeted men were requested
to serve as enumerators, since heterosexually identified men likely make up
a non-negligible portion of the client base.40 Nearly 90 percent of the
escorts who show their face pictures in the data were given beauty scores;
the mean beauty score is 3 and the standard deviation 1.2.41
In Figure 2.6 I present results of the value of face pictures where I also
include estimates of escort beauty. Since subjective ratings of beauty and
other personal characteristics may differ across enumerators, giving rise to
a spurious correlation, the estimates include enumerator-fixed effects in all
specifications. The first bar shows the estimate of the premium to face
pictures for comparison, but in this instance only includes the escorts for
 Ruling Out Alternative Explanations for the Value of Face Pictures 65

1.8 With
With Above/ With
With Below Average Above/
Beauty Beauty
1.6 Beauty Below Average
Measures Measures Beauty
+ +
1.4 Escort Characteristics Escort Characteristics
Percent Premium

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

Figure 2.6 The premium to face pictures when beauty is also measured

whom I have beauty scores.42 Conditional on posting face pictures, the

premium for each additional face picture is 1.5 percent, which is similar to
the previous estimates. In the second estimate I include the measure of
beauty, and find that while positively correlated with log hourly price, the
coefficient is not statistically significant and the effect on the value of face
pictures is nonexistent. The main face picture result remains statistically
significant and has a magnitude of 1.5 percent. Therefore, even after con-
trolling for escort beauty, the main result remains consistent and statistically
significant. I then include all the various control measures, such as race,
height, weight, body type, and eye color, and the beauty coefficient, though
smaller and still positive, is not statistically significant, and the inclusion of
beauty and these individual measures (which could be correlated with
beauty) does not significantly change the face picture premium.
Perhaps it is not beauty differences between a “2” and a “5” that matter,
however. It could be a case of simply being or not being attractive. The next
estimate in Figure 2.6 explores whether returns to beauty may be nonlinear
by including a dichotomous indicator for above-average beauty (beauty
score equals 4 or 5) and below-average beauty (beauty score equals 1 or 2).
Again, neither of the beauty measures is statistically significant, although the
point estimates show that above-average beauty is rewarded and below-
average beauty is not. Last, I include the above- and below-average beauty
measures along with the various control measures for escort characteristics.
66 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

Even with all of these controls, the face premium coefficient is still 1.5 percent
and statistically significant. It appears that the inclusion of beauty and face
pictures has no significant effect on the relationship between face pictures
and escort prices.
This relative lack of a relationship between escort beauty and prices is
consistent with the literature on the variety of beauty standards in gay and
heterosexual communities. For example, Carpenter (2003) has shown
differential partnership and attractiveness patterns between gay men and
heterosexuals by measures of physical well-being such as body mass index
(BMI). Also, there could be premiums in the market for men who would
otherwise be considered unattractive if they had other attributes that were
valued by the market, such as expertise in specific sexual conduct.43 Overall,
the results show that the beauty premium in the market is small – part of this,
however, could be due to the fact that the online market involves some self-
selection into online male sex work.
Recall that the results in Figure 2.6 show estimates of the effect of face
pictures on prices for the men who show their faces in their advertise-
ments. Therefore, there might be selection by beauty into posting – i.e.,
more beautiful men might be more likely to post face pictures. Ultimately,
I cannot rule out this explanation definitively, but I can use the results of
Figure 2.6, and the other coefficients in the specifications, to roughly
calculate how much beauty could explain the difference between men
who do and do not show their face pictures. To estimate the maximum
of the proportion of the results that could be due to beauty, assume that all
men who do not post their face picture are rated a beauty that is strictly less
than the lowest rated beauty (that men who do not show their faces have
a beauty rating of, say, zero, where the lowest beauty rating allowed is one)
and that men who do post their faces are rated as the highest beauty score
(every man who shows a face picture is a “5”). Even under this implausible
assumption, the differences in the beauty premium between the two groups
(4.5 percent) could explain, at best, less than one-quarter of the face picture
premium (which is 20 percent). Put another way, even the least attractive
man is still much better off showing a picture of his face than not, as the “no
picture” penalty is more than four times as large as the “unattractive”
penalty. This implies that beauty can explain, at best, a small fraction of
the estimated face picture premium.
In the data there are also the physical characteristics of the escorts. If
more beautiful escorts select into providing face pictures and have different
physical characteristics, then a comparison of the distribution of charac-
teristics of escorts who do and do not show face pictures would reveal such
 Ruling Out Alternative Explanations for the Value of Face Pictures 67

differences. Overall, the results show that along nearly every dimension of
physical characteristics, the escorts who provide face pictures are statisti-
cally similar to those who do not. Out of more than twenty physical
characteristics (e.g., hair color, eye color, body type), there are only three
instances where escorts who show their face pictures are significantly
different from those that do not: escorts who show their face pictures are
more likely to be blond (14 percent versus 10 percent) and have an
“athletic/swimmer’s” build (50 percent versus 42 percent); escorts who
do not show their faces are more likely to be muscular, however (34 percent
versus 28 percent).44
This issue is also addressed indirectly by considering second-order
implications of the interpretation of the face picture premium. Consider
that text reviews reveal information about the quality of the escort, but not
the escort’s beauty. If the premium to face pictures is due to beauty, then
the interaction of face pictures with text reviews should be positive: beauty
would be a complement to quality as described in the text reviews. If face
pictures are a measure of quality, however, the interaction of face pictures
and text reviews should be negative, as face pictures are substitutes for
client descriptions of quality. In essence, this is a test of how the interaction
of basic quality and service quality operate. The two should have a negative
interaction if face pictures are indeed a signal of quality – but a positive
interaction if face pictures are about beauty as opposed to quality. When I
include the interaction of face pictures and text reviews in the specification,
the interaction is negative in both instances (−0.009 [0.004] and −0.028
[0.031] for number and fraction, respectively). The results do not change
when I interact the number or fraction of face pictures with the number
of positive text reviews (−0.004 [0.002], −0.009 [0.013] for number and
fraction, respectively). I take this as suggestive evidence that face pictures
convey similar information about quality text reviews, and therefore are
substitutes for quality measures.
If face pictures only conveyed beauty, then the marginal value of addi-
tional face pictures would be zero. Otherwise, additional pictures would
have value, although, as I argued earlier, that value would decrease with the
number of pictures as credibility is established. The results indicate that, on
average, additional face pictures come with a 1.5 percent price premium,
similar to the estimate in Figure 2.6. The premium I find applies to
additional face pictures – two escorts of the same beauty would be paid
differently if one supplied one face picture and the other supplied five. This
is more consistent with the notion that face pictures establish quality rather
than beauty, which can be ascertained from a single picture. Given the
68 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

evidence presented above, I believe it is unlikely that the majority of the

face picture premium is driven by beauty, although this cannot be estab-
lished conclusively.

A Counterfactual – Signaling without Informal Enforcement

A key to the interpretation of face pictures as a signal of quality is the
belief that informal policing by clients causes the signal that escorts send
to be credible. Without the informal enforcement, the value of the signal
would certainly be suspect. Additionally, informal policing would have
little effect on beauty premiums or true quality in the market, since
policing would not be related to escort beauty itself or the claims that
escorts make about the quality of their services. Unfortunately, the value
of informal enforcement is difficult to test directly. The data does give us
one unique instance where I can observe the value of the signal when
informal enforcement is lacking. As noted earlier, in the advertisement
data escorts can choose whether or not they will allow themselves to be
reviewed on the website. Disallowing reviews is all-or-nothing: escorts do
not have the option of deleting or selectively posting reviews of either
type. An escort who disallows reviews cannot establish a reputation in the
data source. The vast majority of escorts (nearly 95 percent) allow them-
selves to be reviewed. In general the issue is moot since there is little
variation.45 There is one exception: the escorts in Las Vegas allow them-
selves to be reviewed only 40 percent of the time. Las Vegas is unique –
there is no other city where fewer than 90 percent of the escorts disallow
reviews. Of all escorts who disallow reviews, more than 35 percent are
located in Las Vegas. It is doubtful that this is a state effect, since escorts in
other Nevada cities allow reviews more than 90 percent of the time. While
the exact cause of this curiosity is unknown,46 I am able to test for the value
of the signal in a location with little client policing. As described earlier,
client policing allows signaling to be credible, so without client policing, the
value of the signal should be negligible.
For comparison, Table 2.2 shows summary statistics for escorts based in
Las Vegas and escorts based in five other randomly selected cities with
similar numbers of escorts. As the table shows, the cities are all similar in
terms of rates and escort attributes such as height and weight. Similarly,
escorts in Las Vegas post the same average number of face pictures as those
in other cities. In general, the Las Vegas market looks similar to the other
markets shown in Table 2.2 and to the overall market, except for the fact
that only 40 percent of Las Vegas escorts allow reviews.
 Ruling Out Alternative Explanations for the Value of Face Pictures 69

Table 2.2 Escort characteristics for selected cities

Summary statistics by city

Las Vegas Chicago Atlanta Houston Dallas Boston
Observations 65 78 76 65 92 54
Review allowed? 0.40 0.96 0.93 0.98 0.95 0.96
(0.49) (0.20) (0.26) (0.12) (0.22) (0.19)
Price 227.36 231.79 232.74 209.9 207.12 232.13
(66.95) (57.20) (86.38) (57.93) (62.65) (51.74)
No. of pictures 6.44 6.38 6.52 6.18 6.46 6.24
(2.75) (2.57) (2.82) (2.69) (2.77) (2.97)
No. of face pictures 2.80 2.73 3.43 2.41 2.15 2.79
(2.81) (2.77) (3.04) (3.09) (2.52) (3.42)
Age (years) 28.75 27.48 27.33 26.35 29.31 26.7
(6.97) (6.02) (6.19) (6.29) (6.91) (5.88)
Height (inches) 70.88 70.62 70.56 70.06 70.44 69.76
(2.70) (2.95) (2.59) (2.49) (2.67) (2.80)
Weight (pounds) 172.23 166.59 166.46 168.02 169.41 165.43
(25.02) (30.16) (21.77) (23.48) (24.47) (31.31)

Standard deviations in parentheses.

In Figure 2.7 I show estimates for the value of face pictures, where I
replicate the regressions presented earlier for each city separately. In every
other city I find a large and significant premium to face pictures that
matches the population estimates discussed earlier. Both the dichotomous
and continuous measures of face pictures yield estimates close to the
overall values for each city – except Las Vegas.
While the value of signaling is reasonably stable across markets, the results
for Las Vegas are striking. In the Las Vegas market there is no premium to
posting face pictures in an advertisement. This is not merely an artifact of
statistical significance, the point estimates for the value of face pictures in Las
Vegas (−0.09 for the dichotomous measure, 0.007 for the continuous mea-
sure) are much lower than for every other city in Figure 2.7. In the one
location where client policing is stymied by escorts who do not allow client
reviews, the credibility of the signal is in doubt and market prices do not
respond to the signal. There appear to be spillovers, as well – even among
escorts who allow reviews in Las Vegas, the value of face pictures is not
statistically significant.47 This result conforms to the interpretation of the
premium to face pictures in the market. It would be cavalier, however, to
suggest that these results for Las Vegas are definitive. Since there is no other
location in the data with the same information differences, it is not possible
70 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

4.5

3.5
Percent Premium

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
Las Vegas Chicago Atlanta Houston Dallas Boston

Figure 2.7 The face picture premium by city

to distinguish this effect from a location effect. While there is evidence that
clients are aware of the increased probability of encountering low-quality
escorts, it is unclear whether the escorts in Las Vegas are aware of the low
value of information in their market. These results are inconsistent with
either a beauty or true quality interpretation, unless one is willing to argue
that escorts in Las Vegas are markedly less attractive than other escorts or
are of uniformly different quality than escorts in other cities.

ROBUSTNESS

Prices
Thus far, all of the prices used are the prices in an escort’s advertisement.
Though the qualitative evidence suggests that the prices posted are the
prices paid, it could be that escorts are more willing to price discriminate
once they are alone with clients. If this is the case, the empirical strategy will
yield biased estimates of the value of the signal. Fortunately, I have spot
prices, specific transaction prices recorded by clients from the most recent
text reviews of escorts, which I can compare to the prices that escorts post
in their advertisements. Additionally, there are a small number of escorts
who do not post their price, but have a spot price. As these are prices
actually paid by clients in specific appointments, I can check the results
with these prices.
 Robustness 71

Only Using
3.5 Escorts with No
Reputation Measures
Replacing Advertised
3 Prices with Spot
Prices where Available
2.5
Percent Premium

Only Using Spot

1.5 Prices

0.5

Figure 2.8 The face picture premium for selected types of escorts

Spot prices are well correlated with posted prices (the correlation is 0.89).
Even so, I check the results with spot prices in two ways. First, I replace
existing prices with spot prices where available. These results are reported in
Figure 2.8. Even when actual prices paid replace advertised prices, this does
not alter the results. As a more stringent test, I use only spot prices. Using
only spot prices as the dependent variable reduces the size of the sample, but
I still find that each face picture yields a premium of nearly 1.5 percent.
The premium to each face picture is slightly smaller and may be due to the
fact that the variation in the number of face pictures is much smaller for men
with text reviews.
Another potential concern with the results is that they could be
driven jointly by reputation and information. Although I have included
measures of reputation in all of the specifications, it could be that men
supply higher-quality information once their reputation is established,
rather than the reverse. If the market is dominated by clients returning
to the same escorts with whom they have had a good first encounter,
that will drive the results.
I test for this reverse determination by looking at escorts who have no
reputation to speak of; they have neither survey reviews nor text reviews.
These could be new escorts in the market or old escorts who are
abandoning an older profile. On the one hand, escorts with no reputa-
tion are unknown and could be more likely to signal against type.
On the other hand, the only information a client can use to determine
72 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

the quality of these escorts is the information conveyed in their adver-

tisement, so the signal may be particularly valuable for these escorts.
In either case, those with no reputation can only disclose their type
through the information in their advertisement – they have no reputa-
tion to exploit.
In Figure 2.8 I show the value of face pictures from the same type of
regression for all escorts, where I regress price on the usual set of covariates
for escorts with no reputation. The results show that face pictures matter
more for escorts with no reputation. The premium to the presence of face
pictures is more than 3 percent. This premium is slightly higher than the
premium estimated for escorts overall. Therefore, it seems that when
escorts do not have an established reputation, signaling may be even
more important.

Selection
Escorts do not have to post their prices in their advertisements, although
well over 85 percent of the men in the data do. For example, an escort can
list that he provides a given service (incall or outcall), but may not post the
price for that service. The results could overstate the effects of information
if there is selection into posting prices that varies with the information
content of the advertisement, which could lead to selection in either
direction. It could be that escorts who post more pictures or more face
pictures are more likely to post their prices since they have signaled their
quality.
These types of arguments could be extended to the reservation wages of
escorts who do or do not provide a certain set of information to the market,
which itself could alter the estimate of the returns to signaling quality in the
market. To test whether the number or type of pictures has any impact on
the decision to post prices, I estimated a model where the outcome is
whether the escort posts prices. If there is a difference in the likelihood of
posting prices based on the presence of face pictures then this would need
to be taken into account. The results of these regressions show that the
number of pictures, the presence of face and body pictures, and the number
of face and body pictures do not significantly predict the decision to post
prices or not. This holds when I consider a number of alternative specifica-
tions and when I include or exclude additional controls. I take this as
evidence that the decision to post prices is not influenced by the other
information in the advertisement itself.
 Conclusion 73

CONCLUSION
Male sex workers are unique in illegal markets: they price indepen-
dently and without intermediaries, they use a rich information envir-
onment to solicit clients, and their large number creates a competitive
setting where we expect markets to function as if the assumptions of
neoclassical economic theory held. Unfortunately, two of those assump-
tions are that the underlying transaction is legal and that buyers and sellers
have similar information. Since formal institutional enforcement is non-
existent, the market could be plagued with adverse selection. Before mov-
ing to more systematic analysis of the market, it is important to establish
that this market functions well and reacts to information in a manner that
suggests that it gets prices right. The illegal nature of online male sex work
makes it theoretically unlikely that this market would be well functioning,
however. Unlike street sex work, online sex work does not involve a face-
to-face negotiation where reputations and personal interactions allow the
market to work. Buyers are, in essence, purchasing on faith. This faith
would be in short supply if all that clients had to go on were the “word” of
a sex worker with whom they had never dealt with. To overcome this
problem, buyers have developed a unique solution where they require a
specific type of information, face pictures, from male sex workers, which
they interpret as a signal of escort trustworthiness.
I find that escorts do convey a great deal of information through their
advertisements and that the market rewards this information. Empirically,
the reward to face pictures is substantial; it is the driving force behind the
premium to information in this market. Not only do I find a sizable
information premium in this market, but the magnitude is similar to the
premium seen in legal markets. Sex workers who signal their credibility via
face pictures earn roughly $10,000 more per year than those who do not.
Overall, the result is consistent with a market that functions well despite its
illegal nature.
It is important to note some caveats to these results. First, although it
would be tempting to argue that the results show that informal institutions
such as client-policing are close substitutes for formal institutions such as
courts, it could well be true that the premium to information I observe is due
entirely to the complementary effects of informal institutions. Even in
markets with formal contracts and enforcement, the types of forums created
by the clients of male sex workers are common (e.g., AngiesList.com).
As I documented, client communication dramatically raises the costs of
deception because detection is likely. A dishonest escort may swindle
74 Face Value: How Male Sex Workers Overcome the Problem

one or two clients, but the possibility of doing so frequently is unlikely.

Informal policing is critical to this market. Indeed, without the extensive
policing by clients it would have been impossible to identify the signal used
by escorts.
Second, although the market does respond positively to information
here, it is not necessarily true that the response is of the correct size. For
example, the face pictures may be a weak signal to which the market over-
responds because there is little additional information to go on. In such
a case, the returns to showing a face picture would be larger than the actual
value of information it provides. For example, while showing a face picture
may increase the likelihood of encountering a high quality escort, it may
not increase the likelihood enough to justify the significant price premium.
While the theoretical predictions held that the market would not respond
to information, client demand could be such that the market responds too
much to the relatively sparse information contained in face pictures.
The relationship between formal and informal institutions is inher-
ently complex. I can say little about their interaction, since formal
institutions play no role here. More empirical research is needed on the
interaction of formal and informal institutions to estimate the degree of
substitutability or complementarity between the two. While the results do
not address how much the premium to signaling would change if there
were formal enforcement in this market, this market shows that rich
information environments alone allow escorts and clients to overcome
the problems of asymmetric information.
The male sex market functions well despite its illegal nature. While it is
easy to see that face-to-face interactions would minimize fraudulent activity,
the analysis of the market for male sex work shows that even in online
settings illegal markets can function well. The information that one would
naturally seek out in face-to-face transactions is substituted with face pic-
tures in the online market for male sex work. The fact that near-anonymous
encounters between sex workers and clients takes place in a market where
signals of both basic and service quality are well-correlated with prices
suggests that the market for male sex work is, in fact, well developed.
 3

Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network

of Male Sex Work1

INTRODUCTION
Prices in a market are only a piece in economic analysis. Economists are
primarily interested in overall market structure – the ways that firms in a
market interact with one another and how that interaction influences the
way the market functions. Interaction in a market for sex workers is,
essentially, the way that sex workers compete with one another for clients.
Competition is key to consumer welfare – without firm competition,
monopolistic or oligopolistic prices would be seen in the market. These
prices would be higher than those seen in direct competition, and con-
sumer welfare would suffer as a result. The open question is how compe-
tition in the market for male sex work influences the prices in the market.
Prices are key for analyzing how competitive the market is, which is
related to how much consumer and producer surplus exists. Now that
the primitives of market prices have been confirmed to reflect market
fundamentals such as the quality of escort services, the effects of compe-
tition can be explored.
The basic structure of online male escorting sets it apart from the most
common type of sex work practiced. Escorts craft advertisements of their
services and directly compete with other escorts on websites. This is rare for
a service such as sex work, where usually a client can only choose between
the sex workers who are actively seeking clients at the same time that a client
is searching for sex workers. For example, given the use of the Internet, it is
not possible for a male sex worker to appear on the market only at times
of day when demand is high or low – his advertisement is visible at all times.2
Sex workers are constantly in competition with every other advertisement in

75
76 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

their local area – they cannot choose times where the supply is low or
demand is high in order to gain an advantage in the market.
This is a very different structure from street-based sex work, in which
initial transactions among sex workers and clients (i.e., solicitations) occur
in a public setting. Increasing access to and use of the Internet has provided
clients with unique opportunities to secure meetings with sex workers
outside of public scrutiny for both male and female sex workers. Street-
based work is likely the most widespread form of prostitution across the
globe and is also the most widely studied form of prostitution among health
scholars and social scientists.3 Findings from a recent study in the United
States suggest that online solicitation of female prostitutes is displacing
street-based prostitution among certain population subgroups, particularly
highly educated female sex workers. Through the analysis of FBI crime
statistics, researchers have found evidence of a decreasing prevalence of
street-based sex work among younger women (under age 40), which has
been attributed to the increasing Internet-savvy client base for sex work.4
There are a number of additional differences between online and street-
based sex work.5 The first difference is the scheduling of appointments for
sex work as opposed to immediate transactions with clients. Sex workers
who solicit clients online have greater control over the pace of their work and
its parameters – they can arrange schedules to avoid fatigue, ensure timely
appointments, and discuss the terms of the transaction in advance in a way
that avoids the rush or pressure of immediate negotiations. This does include
the potential downside of clients changing their minds or of finding another
sex worker more amenable to their demands between the time of arrange-
ment for a meeting and the time of the actual transaction. Movement to
online simultaneously brings more potential clients to the market and
increases the scope of market competition among sex workers for clients.
Another significant difference between Internet escorts and street work-
ers is that the former are far more likely than the latter to travel long
distances to different cities to meet clients. This is for several reasons. First,
it is easier for clients to search for sex workers both inside and outside of
their local market. If a client desires a particular sex worker, they can offer
to compensate the sex worker to travel to them. Second, the Internet allows
sex workers to advertise their services in several different markets – noting
one as the “home” location and other areas as “travel” destinations. In
other words, the online market expands the number of potential client/
escort interactions and the scope of competition. Third, the Internet offers
sex workers the ability to change their availability and willingness to serve
other local areas quickly and at little cost. This not only allows escorts to
 Introduction 77

change locations as they travel, but also to “test” locations to see if placing
advertisements in a given area will be met with client demand in that area.
This type of traveling creates a unique type of competitive structure in
the market for male sex work. While street-based and online sex workers
compete against local competitors in a spot market, in the online-market
sex workers also compete against those in other locations who can enter
their market and serve clients. This makes the study of competition among
male sex workers one in which traveling adds to the industrial organization
of the market. Certain types of escorts may be more prone to travel and,
conditional on their traveling, more prone to travel farther distances based
on the services provided. The extent to which male sex workers serve
multiple markets, how far these markets are from each other, and whether
serving multiple markets is related to prices – all of these are unknown.
While researchers have investigated the travel patterns of clients of male
sex workers, there is very little research on the travel patterns of male sex
workers themselves.6
Since male sex work does not use intermediaries such as pimps, each sex
worker is an independent firm that competes against a number of different
firms – other sex workers – for clients. In traditional analysis, the location
of firms is quite important: firms should place themselves nearest to their
consumers. When analyzing male sex work, the unique feature is that the
firm is mobile and so is the competition. Economists usually study firm
location as a one-time decision, and for good reason. Firms locating in an
establishment do not move often. Sex workers, however, are inherently
mobile, and therefore travel is critical in the study of competition in this
market.
In the current online structure, sex workers cannot list different prices in
different cities. For example, while escort prices may be higher in New York
City, an escort serving New York City, a high-priced city, and Philadelphia,
which has lower average prices, can only list one price, which applies to
both markets. That is, sex workers cannot price-discriminate based on the
markets they are serving. This means that the prices and propensity for
travel among escorts in one city can influence the prices of male sex
workers who do not travel and those who, if they travel, serve different
markets than others who travel to different sets of cities. This effect would
be a price spillover effect of sex worker travel – the prices of sex workers
who do not travel could be influenced by the prices of those who do travel.
The extent to which traveling has an effect on prices also shows how mature
the market is – price differences between locations would tend to diminish
as the market became more integrated. In a completely integrated market,
78 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

the geographic price differences would disappear and the law of one price
would hold.
Travel patterns also have implications for the sexual networks of male
sex workers and clients.7 There are two effects of sexual networks. First, the
travel of sex workers and clients has the potential to be a key factor in
disease transmission.8 Second, sexual networks (serving cities with higher
or lower prevalence rates for sexually transmitted infections – STIs) may
influence the prices that sex workers charge if city-level risk factors affect
prices.9 The ways in which escort travel influences the density of the sexual
networks is important in both economical and epidemiological terms.
Differences in travel propensities by sexual behavior have particularly
significant implications for sexual disease transmission. If male sex work-
ers who participate in higher or lower risk behavior are more or less likely
to travel, such differences could help us determine the transmission pro-
pensities for STI epidemics. For example, the relative risk of contracting
HIV for receptive versus penetrative anal sex is 7.69, which suggests that
penetrative (“top”) male sex workers could act as prominent vectors of
transmission if they are more likely to travel, as their partners (receptive
partners – “bottoms”) would be significantly more likely to contract HIV
for a given sexual event.10 We do not know if travel propensity or the
distance between travel locations is related to characteristics, sexual beha-
viors, or prices.
Furthermore, travel among sex workers creates a network of cities that
are more or less linked to other cities due to the travel propensities of
escorts and the similarity of travel destinations. The centrality of cities has
implications for the prices that sex workers charge, for the potential spread
of disease, and for the identification of cities in which efforts would be
more effective in reaching a large number of sex workers through inter-
ventions. At a basic level, the identification of key cities tells us a great deal
about the market for male sex work – where sex work is prominent and
where there are more service providers. For example, cities that are popular
travel destinations for sex workers may be cities where a larger number of
sex workers can be reached, and the potential impact on other sex workers
could be large.
Traveling is therefore a key component to male sex work. Economically,
travel may have direct and indirect effects on the prices observed in the
market. To the extent that travel reflects geographic variations in demand,
travel may also provide clues to which markets are most lucrative for sex
workers. Similarly, the effects that this travel has on the prices in the market
are important for understanding market structure. As a result, traveling
 Introduction 79

may create economic and sexual links between cities. Describing those
links is critical to understanding how this market works at a national level.
In order to shed more light on this side of male sex work, this chapter
examines the travel patterns and economic returns to travel among
Internet-based male escorts. This chapter not only provides a description
of male escort travel patterns, but also identifies the conditions under
which male sex workers are most likely to travel (and thus to serve as
potential vectors for STI transmission across cities and to influence the
prices of multiple markets) and which travel patterns are most economic-
ally rewarding for the escort himself. In this chapter, the online advertise-
ments of male sex workers are combined with city-level measures to derive
network measures for the centrality of cities in the market for male sex
work in the United States. A central city is a city that is not only popular
among sex workers as a home location, but also one to which sex workers
who live in other areas are likely to travel.
I begin by noting the traveling frequency of male escorts, which is
substantial. In fact, the majority of escorts serve multiple markets. I then
find that escort home location is only weakly correlated with the gay male
population distribution, which implies that male escorts either see a large
number of heterosexually identified clients or that escorts travel to loca-
tions with more demand for male sex work services. Building upon this
groundwork, the chapter then proceeds with a detailed exploration of male
sex worker travel, its network effects, and the price implications of travel.
First, analysis of the travel patterns of male sex workers in the United
States is used to estimate the degree to which propensities to serve multiple
markets are correlated with advertised personal characteristics and sexual
behaviors. The question here is whether particular types of escorts are
more likely to serve multiple markets. Second, analysis of what factors
specific to particular metropolitan areas lead them to be popular travel
destinations for escorts is explored. The question here is whether there are
particular city characteristics that make particular cities popular destina-
tions for traveling male sex workers, and whether those characteristics are
proxies for client demand. Third, I estimate the relationship between the
frequency of travel among other male escorts to the home city and male sex
workers’ travel patterns. This is an attempt to see if a given sex worker’s
traveling behavior is influenced by the traveling behavior of competitors in
the home market. Fourth, I estimate the economic returns to travel among
the escorts and the price spillover effects of male sex worker travel.
The impact of sex worker location and travel patterns is shown to have
a large impact on the way that this market works. First, sex worker sexual
80 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

behaviors are related to the likelihood of traveling. Male sex workers who
advertise submissive sexual services are more likely to travel than others,
for example. Second, sex workers in cities with large gay populations are
less likely to travel. This suggests that cities with larger gay populations
have sex workers who are less likely to leave the area in search of work,
likely because there is higher demand for their services since they are
located in cities with substantial gay populations. Third, sex workers who
live in cities popular as travel destinations for other sex workers (whether
that city has a large gay population or not) are less likely to travel. This
implies that cities where the sex work market is thick are cities where sex
workers set up and from which they do not travel. Fourth, sex workers who
serve multiple markets charge higher prices than others, rates are higher in
cities that are central to the network created by sex worker travel (central
cities in the network have higher prices overall than other cities), and the
spillover effects on the prices of non-traveling male sex workers are
significant.11 The market prices of traveled-to and traveled-from cities
are brought closer together through the competition that traveling escorts
create by serving areas with high demand.
Taken together, these results imply that the movement of sex workers
does impact the market for male sex work in a meaningful way. The move-
ment of sex workers acts to increase prices in the market. This is because
sex workers who are likely to travel, travel to cities where prices are higher.
This then causes the average price of their home cities to be higher as well.
The traveling of sex workers also shows that overall market prices are
partially driven by the high demand for male sex work in cities with large
gay populations. Indeed, one of the key findings here is that sex worker
home locations are not well correlated with the gay population distribu-
tion, but sex worker movement is correlated with gay population density.
Consistent with the travel patterns, the key cities in the sex worker network
are cities with large gay populations. Because of this, the connectedness of
a city in the network is related to the prices in the male sex work market.
The competition between male sex workers is more complex than the spot
market faced by street sex workers, and the market is more integrated and
sophisticated as a result.

(GAY) LOCATION, TRAVEL, AND MALE SEX WORK

Given the use of online markets for male sex work and the disappearance of
street-sex work, there are new incentives and economic opportunities for
sex workers and clients. In the past, male sex work was highly concentrated
 (Gay) Location, Travel, and Male Sex Work 81

in cities with large gay populations, where male sex workers could easily
secure clients from the local area. If a client lived in a smaller city it may have
proved difficult to secure the services of a sex worker. Searches of national
print advertisements in earlier periods from the Advocate Classifieds show
that few escorts were located in cities outside of the twenty largest in the
United States as of 1990. Contrast that with today, where literally dozens of
cities are served by at least ten male escorts. From Missoula, Montana to
Sioux City, Iowa, clients can find sex workers who serve their local area.
The question for the market is the relationship between the size of the
gay population and the concentration of male sex workers. It is important
to note that the relationship between the size of the gay population and the
concentration of male sex workers hinges on identification of the gay
population itself. Since the work of Hooker (1956, 1957), psychologists
have noted that there is little to distinguish the homosexual and hetero-
sexual, other than self-identification. Men who partake in homosexual acts
are not distinguishable from the general male population.12 While early
studies of male sex work focused on particular cities with large gay popula-
tions, later qualitative research revealed that a significant portion of the
clientele of male escorts is heterosexually identified.13 Indeed, the “breast-
plate of righteousness” that Humphries (1970) saw in heterosexually iden-
tified men who took part in homosexual behavior has recently resurfaced
in the public lexicon as prominent men, many of whom have been active in
anti-gay organizations, have been embroiled in controversies regarding
their sexual orientation.14 In the market for male sex work, such behavior
may be common – male escorts regularly note that a significant percentage
of their clientele is heterosexually identified, and many such clients are
married to women. Since these men are hidden from the most common
analysis of sexual minorities, the open question is how their presence in the
market influences market function and composition.
This is not to say that there are not social distinctions based upon public
affirmation of homosexual orientation. There are now a number of studies
by demographers and economists that look at the population trends of the
gay-identified population. The empirical studies show that openly gay and
lesbian individuals do appear to be different on a range of outcomes, from
earnings, to partnership status, to general socioeconomic position.15 It is
still difficult to identify all sexual minorities in the data, but it is now possible
to identify same-sex couples.16 Those population trends have been used to
note that the geographic distribution of male same-sex couples is different
from that of the general population in the United States.17 Two factors that
seem to be related to gay location patterns are city amenities and the ability
82 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

to congregate and socialize with a critical mass of other gay people, although
alternative explanations that emphasize economic factors have been
offered by Collins (2004). Whatever the reason for these location differ-
ences, this research poses interesting questions into the demography and
geography of male sex work, as we know very little about the population
size, demographic characteristics, and geographic distribution of male
sex workers in the United States.
Given that heterosexually identified men may have much to lose if
their same-sex sexual behavior is exposed, it could be the case that male
escorts are more prone to locate in places where there are fewer oppor-
tunities for men interested in sexual encounters with other men to meet
one another. Self-identified heterosexual men are unlikely to frequent
gay bars, coffeehouses, or community groups where they would be more
likely to encounter gay men for socialization or sex. This would suggest
that male escort location might differ from that of the gay-identified
population. Conversely, researchers note that gay communities do not
attach the same level of stigma to sex work as do heterosexuals, and if gay
communities are seen as safer havens for sex workers we would expect
their geographic distribution to closely mirror that of the openly gay
population.18
Research has shown that the geographic distribution of male same-sex
couples is different from that of the general US population, and studies of
male sex work in the United States focus on cities with large gay
populations.19 If male sex workers can be thought of as independent busi-
nesses, they would need to take the market into account when deciding where
to set up shop. For example, locating in a place where there are relatively
few men seeking sexual services for hire would make little sense. It would
be more profitable to locate in an area where there are more clients. On the
other hand, every other sex worker is making a similar decision. This could
lead to a situation where cities with high demand have a large number of
sex workers to serve the market. Assuming that clients do not choose to
move based on the number of sex workers in the local market, we would
expect sex workers to locate optimally – cities with more client demand
would have larger numbers of sex workers, but some sex workers would
locate in less-popular markets because their services would be dearer to
consumers. In the long run, the market would reach an equilibrium and
sex workers would have a price that would correspond to the local demand,
but since sex workers move in response to local demand (places with too
many sex workers would have lower prices than places with too few), in the
end there could be few differences in local prices for sex work.
 (Gay) Location, Travel, and Male Sex Work 83

To see how this would work, imagine a sex worker in a given area where
there is a fixed number of clients and a fixed number of sex workers. Given
this supply of sex workers and number of clients, the market would set the
price of sex work at a given level. It could be the case that another sex
worker in a different city would move to that city if the prices were higher
there. This would serve to increase the number of sex workers, which
would increase the supply and, all else being equal, would result in lower
prices in the market. Now, if the sex worker were to see that another city
had higher prices (because of a local undersupply of sex workers), he would
move to that location if the moving cost were sufficiently low. The move-
ment of sex workers would continue until the prices of sex work were no
different in one location than in another – that is, there would be no
incentive for sex workers to move due to price differences.
Theoretically, the movement of sex workers would correspond to the
size of the client base. The location model of Hotelling (1929) predicts
that, since the proposed client base is not uniformly distributed, distribu-
tion of service providers would be non-uniform; sex workers would need
to be located close to the largest mass of potential clients. Tests of this
theory for male sex workers are lacking. The unanswered question is
whether the openly gay population constitutes the vast majority of the
client base, or whether the number of heterosexually identified clients of
male sex workers influences location patterns. If heterosexually identified
clients are a significant portion of the customer base and if their location
patterns are different from those of gay men, male sex workers’ location
patterns could also differ from those of the gay male population to the
extent that the patterns would be related to the non-gay clients they
serve. Given that heterosexually identified men may have much to lose
if their same-sex sexual behavior were to be exposed, it could be the case
that male sex workers are more prone to locate in places where there are
fewer opportunities for men interested in sexual encounters with other
men. Conversely, researchers note that gay communities in the United
States do not attach the same level of stigma to sex work as heterosexuals,
and if gay communities are seen as safer havens for sex workers we would
expect male sex workers’ geographic distribution to closely mirror that of the
openly gay population.20 Therefore, the first area of interest is the home
location of male sex workers.
Empirically, we would need to account for the city’s gay population in
order to analyze the issue. Unfortunately, data limitations make generating
reliable estimates of gay population difficult. The most widely used esti-
mate for a gay population is the Gay Concentration Index (GCI). Since
84 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

1990, the US Census has included an “unmarried partner” category on the

household roster. By examining the genders of primary respondents and
their unmarried partners, households that are headed by two male partners
can be identified. The proportion of two-male-headed households is tra-
ditionally used to estimate the concentration of gay men within cities.21
I estimate the GCI for each city in the advertisement data. For each city,
I divide the number of households that are headed by two unmarried men
by the number of two-person headed households (both married or unmar-
ried) within the city. The resulting number represents the proportion of two-
person-headed households within the city that are headed by two unmarried
men. That number is then divided by the proportion of two-person-headed
households that are headed by two unmarried men across the entire United
States. The resulting measure, which can be used to measure each city’s gay
concentration, equals 1 if the city’s Gay Concentration Index is equal to the
national average, is greater than 1 if the GCI is above the national average,
and is less than 1 if the GCI is below the national average.22 This proxy for
the city’s gay population can therefore be used to investigate the location of
male sex workers and the relationship of their location to gay population
distribution.

SEX WORKER HOME LOCATION AND GAY

CONCENTRATION
What is the relationship between the size of the gay population and the
concentration of male sex workers? Table 3.1 shows the geographic dis-
tribution of male escorts who advertise online, where I count the actual
number of escorts by the home location given in their advertisements.23
The size of the escort population varies considerably – there are more
than 300 escorts in only one city, New York City, which has long been
known in the media to have the largest male escort market.24 Atlanta, Los
Angeles, Miami, and San Francisco each has more than 100 escorts, but
most cities have considerably fewer. I also include the rank and size of the
populations of each Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) as well as the Gay
Concentration Index (GCI) to compare the location of escorts with gay
male location patterns. To provide a broader picture of the distribution of
male sex workers, I list randomly selected cities.
In terms of location patterns, there is a striking trend – the number of
gay escorts more closely follows the size of an MSA than it follows gay
location patterns. For example, Detroit is the eleventh-largest MSA in the
United States, and its gay concentration is 42nd, but there are 51 percent
 Sex Worker Home Location and Gay Concentration 85

Table 3.1 Geographic distribution of escorts – selected cities

MSA Gay concentration

City Rank Population Rank Index Number of escorts
New York City, NY 1 18,815,988 13 1.49 309
Los Angeles, CA 2 12,875,587 6 2.11 126
Chicago, IL 3 9,524,673 18 1.31 93
Miami, FL 7 5,413,212 14 1.46 119
Washington, DC 8 5,306,565 2 2.68 99
Atlanta, GA 9 5,278,904 7 1.96 108
Boston, MA 10 4,482,857 9 1.67 53
Detroit, MI 11 4,467,592 42 0.6 50
San Francisco, CA 12 4,203,898 1 4.95 124
Seattle, WA 15 3,309,347 5 2.21 33
Minneapolis, MN 16 3,208,212 10 1.61 33
St. Louis, MO 18 2,808,611 37 0.69 18
Tampa, FL 19 2,723,949 24 1.05 47
Denver, CO 21 2,464,866 12 1.53 41
Portland, OR 23 2,175,113 15 1.45 15
Sacramento, CA 26 2,091,120 8 1.71 17
Kansas City, MO 29 1,985,429 25 1.04 9
Columbus, OH 32 1,754,337 27 0.99 30
Indianapolis, IN 33 1,695,037 19 1.12 19
Charlotte, NC 35 1,651,568 45 0.49 19
Austin, TX 37 1,598,161 3 2.44 26
Nashville, TN 39 1,521,437 32 0.85 14
Oklahoma City, OK 44 1,192,989 34 0.83 3
Buffalo, NY 46 1,128,183 49 0.35 5
Rochester, NY 50 1,030,495 29 0.89 4
Albany, NY 57 853,358 31 0.85 5
Correlation of number of escorts with Gay Concentration Index: 0.39
Correlation of per capita escorts with Gay Concentration Index: 0.69
Correlation of number of escorts with MSA population: 0.92

Counts of number of unique escort advertisements. Gay concentration is the fraction of the
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) identified as same-sex male partners in the 1990 Census
divided by the national average. See Black, Sanders, and Taylor (2007) for further details. MSA
population counts from the Census Bureau. Cities with MSA rank >12 were selected at random
from the fifty cities listed in Black, Sanders, and Taylor (2007). The correlations in the lower panel
are for all fifty cities listed in Black, Sanders, and Taylor (2007).

more escorts in Detroit than in Seattle, a city with the fifth-highest GCI. A
similar finding pertains to other cities such as Chicago and St. Louis.
Indeed, the correlation of the number of escorts with MSA population is
quite strong (r = 0.92), but the correlation with the GCI is much weaker
86 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

(r = 0.39). Also, the correlation of per capita escorts with the GCI (r = 0.69)
is weaker than the correlation of escorts with MSA.
This result is consistent with the claims that the market for male sex work
is national in scope and that it is not driven exclusively by gay-identified
participants. If escort services were primarily demanded by self-identified
gay men, we would expect the geographic distribution of male escorts to
mirror the geographic distribution of self-identified gay men – male escorts
would locate in places that have a higher concentration of those potential
customers. The results in Table 3.1 imply that male escorts tend to concen-
trate in cities with substantial populations, as opposed to cities with sub-
stantial gay populations. This result holds even when considering mid-sized
and smaller cities – it is not driven by cities that have large populations and
large gay populations, such as Los Angeles. Overall, the evidence is consis-
tent with the hypothesis that male escorts serve a market that includes
a substantial number of heterosexually identified men.
Such analysis, however, is limited. The online market for male sex work
is not a spot market and home locations paint an incomplete picture of the
market and the locations for male sex work. Since sex workers may serve
multiple markets it is possible that the results in Table 3.1, which only
apply to home locations, do not describe the entire market and the provi-
sion of services more generally. Given the ease of traveling, a full study of
the market, which allows for and investigates the likelihood of travel, is
needed.

ESCORT TRAVEL AS AN ECONOMIC DECISION

Treating escort travel formally requires that one accept the proposition that
escorts would be motivated by pecuniary benefits to travel. This is not to say
that other factors could not enter into the decision, but in the case of sex
work the economic benefits of travel would be most important when the
traveling involved would be for the purposes of sex work. A formal approach
would begin with the framework of economic models of migration.25
The models begin with the idea that migration (as an economic decision)
is related to the cost and benefits of migrating. A standard migration model
considers the wage that a potential migrant would earn in the current and
potential new destination. For male sex workers, this must be modified to
reflect the price they charge for their services. An additional factor is that
escorts cannot discriminate in their pricing by charging different prices in
different markets. This is consistent with the data, in which escorts can only
post one advertised price that is seen by all online clients, irrespective of the
 The Male Sex Worker Travel Network 87

client’s location. The key is the expected wage due to traveling. When sex
workers travel to another city, they increase the supply of sex workers in that
location, and therefore drive down prices unless demand is perfectly elastic.
This implies that the city to which an escort travels has demand that is
sufficiently inelastic to cause a wage gap that would still induce them to
travel, thus allowing them to charge higher prices overall.
Travel could also be a signal of desirability among clients. To the extent
that an escort serves multiple markets, it could be taken as a positive signal of
demand for their services or a negative signal that they are very active in the
sex work market. This would naturally vary at the individual client level, but
how this would aggregate to the market price that a sex worker could charge
as a function of travel is unknown. Ultimately, this is an empirical question.
This simple conceptual framework has several implications. First, the
wages in the city traveled to must be greater (in expectation) than the wages
in the current city.26 Considering the simple dynamics of supply and
demand for escorts, the cities traveled to must be cities where the existing
supply of escorts would be sufficiently low relative to demand so that the
wages of escorts in those cities would be bid up. This implies that cities that
are traveled to will be cities that, on average, have higher wages for male sex
workers. In other words, popular cities for travel are hypothesized to be
relatively high-wage cities for escorts and, given their higher wages, would
make the escorts who travel to those cities higher-priced in their home
locations.
Second, the potential for high wages in popular cities (cities escorts are
likely to travel to) will cause escorts whose home location is that city to be
less likely to travel to other cities. Indeed, to the extent that the wage in
popular cities is related to that city’s popularity, escorts with those loca-
tions as a home base will be less likely to travel to other cities, as they have
fewer economic incentives to do so. Third, we would also predict that the
wages of escorts in cities that are popular travel destinations earn higher
wages on average, since their locations are in cities with relatively higher
demand (or less supply). Fourth, those escorts who serve multiple locations
will have higher wages, on average, than those who serve only one location.
Indeed, the fact that these escorts travel implies that the wage differential
they see is large enough to induce them to serve multiple locations.27

THE MALE SEX WORKER TRAVEL NETWORK

While the migration framework derives implications for an individual sex
worker’s travel, it does not speak to the network that is formed when some
88 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

cities are more popular than other locations. This network would imply
that some cities would have stronger links than others since they would
“share” more sex workers. For example, cities that are well connected by
travel may be more uniform in their pricing than cities that share fewer
escorts. In other words, cities that are popular, and the escorts who service
those cities, would be more likely to have similar prices than an escort
picked at random from a city that was not well linked to other cities.
Consideration of the network created by sex worker movement requires
some new measures that go beyond prices. Below, I define the key network
measures that I incorporate into the empirical analysis to better describe
the network created by escort travel.
A network perspective is useful for measuring dimensions of male escort
travel patterns as it provides a formal means for measuring influential
properties of both city- and individual-level characteristics that are theo-
retically linked to an escort’s likelihood of travel and their economic
returns to travel. For instance, the Hotelling model predicts that sex work-
ers would need to be located close to the largest mass of potential clients.
Thus, I hypothesize that escorts are less likely to travel to other cities to
meet clients when they are situated within cities that have high demand for
the services of male sex workers. The question is, how to measure such
a characteristic.
A city’s degree, which is the number of escorts who are residing or
willing to travel to the particular city to meet clients, is indicative of its
overall supply of male sex work, both home-based and traveling to that
location. It should be the case that escorts who live in cities with high
degrees are less likely to travel to other cities for work, as demand for their
services is already high, as noted earlier. It should also be the case that
travel is associated with higher prices. However, not all travel is equally
rewarding. More specifically, escorts who travel to cities where demand for
their services is high will experience greater returns to their work than men
who travel to less-popular cities. In essence, a network approach captures
the features of the extent of network travel in an empirically compact way.

MEASURES OF NETWORK CENTRALITY

In order to measure features of both city and escorts’ positions within the
travel network, I used the escort advertisement data and the locations
noted in the advertisements to link escorts to cities and cities to escorts.
In the network literature this is referred to as a two-mode (i.e., affiliation)
travel network.
 Measures of Network Centrality 89

The two-mode travel network consists of escorts who are tied to particular
cities through their residence or willingness to travel to the particular city.
For instance, one-mode networks are frequently employed in the study of
cash transfers between individuals and organizations or in the transfer of
information and resources. Conversely, two-mode networks consist of ties
between opposing node sets.28 Within this network, a tie exists between an
escort and a city if the escort indicates in his advertisement that he is residing
in or traveling to that city. Importantly, escorts are only directly tied to cities,
and vice versa. This type of network allows for two different notions of
centrality, where “centrality” is the network terminology for what we would
consider “popularity.” An escort can be central to the network and a city can
be central to the network. Escorts are central if they travel to several cities.
Conversely, cities are central if they are visited by several escorts.
In particular, there are three measures of network centrality. The first
measure is degree centrality. An escort’s degree centrality is measured by
the number of cities he travels to, normalized by the number of cities in the
total network. A city’s degree centrality is measured by the number of
escorts who reside or travel to that particular city, normalized by the total
number of escorts in the data.
The second measure of centrality reflects the fact that being tied to
other escorts who are themselves tied to several other escorts through
their links implies that popularity should incorporate the popularity of
those to whom (escorts) or to which (cities) you are linked. Consider two
cities that are visited by the same number of escorts. One city should be
more central than the other if it is visited by escorts who travel to more
places. Similarly, an escort is central if he travels to many cities. However,
an escort who is relatively inactive in traveling (say, serving only two
cities) could also be important if he should build ties between two or more
cities that otherwise would not be connected. This second measure,
eigenvector centrality, simultaneously captures the extents to which escorts
travel to cities that are popular work and travel destinations among other
escorts and the extent to which cities are visited by escorts who travel to
other popular cities.29
The third measure of centrality is betweenness. Escorts and cities may
also be central if it is possible to connect two cities (through an escort) or
two escorts (through a city). In other words, a city can be thought of as
central if it is the easiest path through which two escorts can be connected
(relative to other cities) and an escort can be central is he is the easiest path
through which two cities are connected. This means that a city or escort lies
on several of the shortest paths that link other cities and escorts.
90 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

Another interesting feature to explore in the male sex worker travel

network is the diversity of cities’ links with escorts. Escorts who travel to a
city may be from the same city or from different cities. The former case
may imply a special relationship between two cities (e.g., geographical
proximity), while the latter case generally implies that the visited city is
attractive to escorts. When considering travel it is important to distinguish
between these two effects. We can evaluate how diverse a city’s links are by
the measure of their entropy, that is, the geographic diversity of the escorts
who travel to that particular city. Here, the diversity of city links with
escorts is hypothesized to be highly correlated with the economic condition
of the male sex worker market. A city with higher diversity should sustain
higher service rates.

MEASURING THE EFFECTS OF TRAVEL IN MALE

SEX WORK
I use two dependent variables related to traveling patterns and one
dependent variable for price to estimate the empirical relationships
described above. The two dependent variables for traveling are extensive
travel and intensive travel. Extensive travel is a binary variable indicating
whether the escort is traveling to other cities to meet clients to provide his
services (0 = no, 1 = yes). Intensive travel measures the mean travel
distance (in miles) between the geographic central point of the city of
an escort’s home location and the center of the city or cities that he visits.
Because this value is highly skewed by escorts with cities far apart from
one another, I take the log of the distance to measure distance traveled.
It is important to note that the cities are standardized in the data – escorts
choose the location from a drop-down menu that best corresponds to
their location and travel destinations. This produces a range of distances
in a tractable way as opposed to having an escort list a city or area of a city
that would be difficult to identify. The third dependent variable is the
wage, which is the escort’s outcall price. The outcall price represents the
hourly rate (in US dollars) that the escort charges his clients for an hour
of his services. As noted earlier, the escort can only post one outcall price
in his advertisement.

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
As described earlier, escorts are also able to list a number of personal
characteristics through drop-down menus in their advertisements. These
 Empirical Results 91

might affect the prices charged in a number of ways. Here, these character-
istics are used as controls so that the effect of networks on travel is
estimated while including the effects that these characteristics may have.
In particular, escort race, height, weight, body type, the escort’s advertised
sexual behaviors, and whether the escort provides massage services in
addition to escorting.
City-specific factors related to male sex work would be those related to
local demand, the local sexually transmitted infection (STI) rate, and other
factors that could influence both ease of access and the escort’s ability to
provide services. As discussed above, the GCI gives a proxy for demand.
For the local disease environment, accurate reporting is difficult, but the
reporting for specific diseases is done at the city level. When looking at
disease environments, however, it is important to note that STI prevalence
itself works through sexual networks. Epidemiologists have noted that
syphilis and HIV occur at greater proportions than other STIs among
men who have sex with men. As such, syphilis and HIV have been used
to measure the underlying STI prevalence of men who have sex with men.
Since the two are strongly correlated, I chose the HIV rate as a proxy for the
underlying STI environment. Calculation of the HIV rate is the number of
HIV-positive individuals in an MSA per 1,000 people in the population.
This is calculated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(http://www.cdc.gov).
Lastly, cities may have properties that would structurally make them
easier to serve as central locations. For example, a city that serves as a hub
for a major airline, by definition, is easier to reach, as there will be a large
number of direct flights to that location. I use information provided by
2012 US Bureau of Transportation Statistics to define a city to be an air
traffic hub if its largest airport serves at least 0.25 percent of all enplaned
passengers in the United States. This is the measure of the degree to which
a city serves as a traveling pass-through, which implies a relatively large
stream of potential clients for that location, as hub cities are popular
business travel destinations as well.

EMPIRICAL RESULTS

Summary Statistics
Table 3.2 provides the summary measures of travel for the network at the
escort level. Slightly more than half of the escorts in the data, 55.6 percent,
serve multiple markets, which suggests that travel is an important element
92 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

Table 3.2 Summary travel and network measures, individual

escorts

Variable Mean Standard deviation

Escort travels? 0.556 0.497
Log travel distance 5.466 1.227
Escort degree 0.009 0.005
Escort eigen centrality 0.011 0.012
Escort betweenness 0.001 0.001

Note: Total sample size is 2,022 for traveling and distance. Sample size for
network measures is 1,926.

Table 3.3 Correlation of escort-level network measures

Escort degree Eigen centrality Betweenness centrality

Escort degree 1.000
Eigen centrality 0.359 1.000
Betweenness centrality 0.653 0.451 1.000

N = 1,926

in online male sex work. Conditional on traveling, the average distance

traveled is approximately 240 miles. This implies that escorts are not
merely serving other nearby cities, but are traveling relatively long dis-
tances when they serve other markets. Given the distance traveled, on
average, it would seem likely that the choices of destinations would not
simply be matters of convenience but explicit choices about which markets
to serve.
Table 3.3 shows the correlations between three measures of network
centrality for escorts. The correlations between them are relatively slight,
except the correlation between degree and betweenness centralities. Recall
that degree centrality measures the number of cities that an escort visits
while eigen centrality measures the popularity of those with which an
escort is connected. The low correlation between the two implies that the
propensity of escorts to travel (which is high, given that roughly half serve
multiple markets) is only weakly related to the popularity of the links
formed by that travel. This is intuitive: since most escorts travel, only a
small fraction could reasonably be expected to be key in terms of popular-
ity. The correlation of betweenness centrality and degree centrality is greater,
and reflects the fact that the more connections an escort has, the more likely
 Empirical Results 93

Table 3.4 Summary statistics – city level

Variable Mean Standard deviation

Airline hub? 0.359 0.481
Gay Concentration Index 1.019 0.336
HIV rate 13.163 8.163
City degree 0.015 0.028
City eigen centrality 0.018 0.059
City betweenness 0.015 0.038
City diversity 1.146 0.832

Note: 131 cities are used in calculations

Table 3.5 Correlation of city-level network measures

City Eigen City betweenness

City degree centrality centrality City diversity
City degree 1.000
City eigen centrality 0.918 1.000
City betweenness centrality 0.983 0.930 1.000
City diversity 0.716 0.548 0.682 1.000

he is to be a conduit that connects those in the network. The correlations

also imply that the measures of connectivity provide different informa-
tion about the travel network, and each piece of information may play
a different role in the market to the extent that escorts play different roles
in the travel network under different definitions of centrality.
The summary statistics at the city level are given in Table 3.4. Around
a third of the cities in the data, 35.9 percent, serve as air traffic hubs. The
average city in the data has a Gay Concentration Index of 1, which should
be the case as the GCI measures the number of same-sex male households
relative to the national average. On average, each city has an HIV rate of
13.2 per 1,000 people in the population. There is wide variation in the
measures of GCI and HIV rate, however.30
Table 3.5 shows the correlations between the centrality measures at the
city level. Unlike the escort-level measures of centrality, the city measures
of centrality are well correlated with each other. The high correlations
(between 0.92 to 0.98) among network centralities at the city level suggest
that central cities are consistently identified by different network measures.
This is intuitive – a city that is well-traveled-to by escorts is highly likely to
94 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

be a popular city and a city that would be linked to other popular cities.
Also, a city’s popularity would make it a pathway through which two cities
would be linked.31 Figure 3.1 shows maps of US cities in the male sex
worker travel network. In each panel, the relative size of a city represents
the corresponding network centrality or characteristics. The figure shows
that the major cities in the East and West Coasts, plus Chicago, are central
cities in the travel network for all measures of centrality. Detailed informa-
tion of the top fifteen cities with the highest degree of centrality is provided
in Table 3.6. The table shows that nearly all of the popular cities have many
sex workers, once travelers are accounted for. In addition, every city in
Table 3.6 has a GCI greater than 1, which shows that the city has more gay
households than the national average.32 In general, all of the cities have
relatively high HIV rates as well. The national HIV rate is 4.2 per 1,000 per-
sons, and all of the cities in Table 3.6 have higher HIV rates.

THE TRAVEL OF MALE SEX WORKERS

The Likelihood of Sex Worker Travel

To describe the relationship between the extensive measure of travel, which
is whether an escort travels or not, and personal characteristics, local
market competition, and network measures of centrality, I use regression
analysis. In particular, the regression analyzes the decision to travel as
a function of the escort’s individual characteristics and the network mea-
sures of their home location.33 Since the city-level measures of centrality
are well correlated with each other, I estimate the relationship between the
city centrality measures in separate regressions.
Figure 3.2 reports results without the city-level measures of centrality as
a benchmark. From the results, we see that Asian sex workers are less likely
to travel than their White counterparts (the excluded race). Indeed, Asians
are 10 percent less likely to serve multiple markets. Those with athletic and
muscular bodies are 12 percent more likely to travel than thin sex workers
(the reference group). Both top and bottom sex workers are more likely to
travel, but bottom sex workers are much more likely to travel than tops.34
While top escorts are 8 percent more likely to travel, bottom escorts are
20 percent more likely to travel. Indeed, in nearly all specifications, the
coefficient on bottom sex workers is more than twice the size as that for top
sex workers.
The greater likelihood of traveling for bottom sex workers has implica-
tions for the spread of STIs. The traditional view among public health
Figure 3.1 City characteristics and network centrality measures
 Table 3.6 Top fifteen US cities visited by male sex workers

City Links Average degree Eigen centrality Betweenness centrality Airline hub Gay Concentration Index HIV rate
New York, NY 374 0.203 0.571 0.297 Yes 1.308 29.2
Los Angeles, CA 252 0.137 0.231 0.175 Yes 1.512 13.0
Miami, FL 197 0.107 0.160 0.139 Yes 1.742 41.9
San Francisco, CA 175 0.095 0.123 0.112 Yes 2.414 16.5
Washington, DC 155 0.084 0.168 0.093 Yes 1.404 31.8
Chicago, IL 147 0.080 0.009 0.120 Yes 1.130 12.0
Atlanta, GA 141 0.076 0.058 0.114 Yes 1.590 20.0
96

Orlando, FL 124 0.067 0.048 0.076 Yes 1.121 26.0

Dallas, TX 118 0.064 0.051 0.080 Yes 1.295 16.0
Houston, TX 107 0.058 0.044 0.072 Yes 1.224 19.7
Las Vegas, NV 100 0.054 0.058 0.049 Yes 1.445 14.5
Boston, MA 90 0.049 0.088 0.046 Yes 1.147 8.0
Philadelphia, PA 80 0.043 0.082 0.036 Yes 1.060 23.1
Riverside, CA 77 0.042 0.055 0.022 No 1.282 7.6
San Diego, CA 74 0.040 0.047 0.022 Yes 1.411 13.1

Note: “Links” includes escorts listing the city as a location they serve.
Gay Concentration Index defined from 2010 Census.
HIV rate defined per 1,000 individuals.
 The Travel of Male Sex Workers 97

0.25

0.2

0.15
Probability of Traveling

0.1

0.05

–0.05

–0.1

–0.15
Asian Athletic Body Buff Body Top Bottom Versatile Gay Airline Hub
Concentration
Index

Figure 3.2 Escort characteristics and the probability of traveling

researchers is that sex workers can act as a vector of infection because they
could potentially spread diseases to their clients. In the case of male sex
work a key element in such an argument would hinge on whether sex
workers, should they be infected, would participate in sex acts that would
place their clients at greater risk of disease transmission. Those who are
receptive in intercourse face a higher likelihood of being infected with STIs
from their sexual partners, but this also implies that clients seeing those sex
workers would be less likely to be infected. At a basic level, this travel
pattern implies that traveling sex workers would be less likely to spread
disease, as those who are bottoms are more likely to travel.
In all specifications, the Gay Concentration Index is negatively related to
the likelihood that an escort serves multiple locations. A one-standard-
deviation increase in the GCI decreases the probability of traveling by more
than 3 percent. This is consistent with the idea that cities that have large gay
populations have a larger client base for escorts located there, leaving the
sex workers who live there less likely to travel to other cities to provide
services. The city HIV rate does not have a significant effect on the like-
lihood of traveling. The indicator for city air traffic hub has a negative effect
for traveling, but it is not statistically significant once city network mea-
sures are included.
For the centrality measures, displayed in Figure 3.3, the results are
somewhat mixed. In the figure, the city centrality results are presented
98 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

–0.1
Probability of Escort Travel

–0.2

–0.3

–0.4

–0.5

–0.6
City Degree * City Eigen Centrality * City Betweenness City Diversity
Centrality *
* Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 3.3 City centrality measures and the probability of escort travel

from their separate specifications for comparison. City degree centrality is

not found to have a significant influence on a worker’s traveling decision.
The insignificance of city degree centrality is largely due to its correlation
with the Gay Concentration Index.35 This is intuitive to the extent that
cities with a high gay concentration would have relatively larger numbers
of gay men (potential clients) and therefore would be cities that would be
linked to more escorts, to the extent that escorts travel to those cities where
demand is relatively high. The city eigenvector and betweenness central-
ities do exert a significant and negative effect on the likelihood of traveling.
Recalling that city network centralities reflect cities’ popularity in this
travel network, they are also proxies for the demand for male work in a city,
so male sex workers who live in particular cities with high centralities will
have less incentive to travel. In other words, when a worker is located in
a city that is central to the network, that condition acts as a disincentive to
travel (to serve additional locations). The diversity of city link, measured by
entropy, is also found have no significant effect on traveling.
Overall, some personal characteristics are related to the likelihood of
traveling, and they run counter to the idea that sex workers would serve as
vectors of transmission of diseases. Also, the concentration of gay men in
a city is negatively related to the likelihood of travel. The network measures
suggest that cities central to the network created by gay travel are correlated
with lower travel propensities. That is, cities that are popular among sex
 The Travel of Male Sex Workers 99

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
Log Traveling Distance

0.3

0.2

0.1

–0.1

–0.2

–0.3

–0.4
Black Hispanic Athletic Body Buff Body Airline Hub

Figure 3.4 Escort characteristics and traveling distance

workers as travel destinations are also cities from which the resident sex
workers are unlikely to travel.

The Distance of Sex Worker Travel

Knowledge of the determinants of travel is only one aspect of understand-
ing the decision to serve multiple markets. There is also the question of
how far the markets are from each other. For example, the traveling and the
results of the previous section could be driven by escorts serving nearby
locations. Here, I replace the extensive measure of travel with the intensive
measure of travel, the log of the average distance traveled between the
home location and the cities visited.
In these results I exclude the sex workers who do not travel. As before,
I report results for the characteristics that excluded the city centrality
measures, and then compare the effects of the city centrality measures.
From the results in Figure 3.4, I find that Black and Hispanic workers travel
shorter distances than their White counterparts. Sex workers with athletic
and muscular body builds travel longer distances than thin workers.
No sexual behaviors have a significant relationship with traveling distance
(and they are excluded from the figure). While the behaviors did predict
travel, they do not predict the distance traveled.
Similarly, the Gay Concentration Index of the home location does not
have a significant effect on traveling distance of sex workers. The HIV rate
100 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2
Log Distance Traveled

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
City Degree * City Eigen Centrality City Betweenness City Diversity *
Centrality *
*Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 3.5 City centrality and the distance traveled by escorts

in the home location has no significant effects on male sex workers’ travel
distance, either. The most significant environmental influence is whether
or not the city is an air traffic hub. The positive coefficient for city hub
suggests that air traffic convenience significantly contributes to longer
traveling distance for workers in those cities. Given that the average sex
worker who travels goes a distance greater than 300 miles, the use of air
travel (and the ease of air travel when being located in a hub city) does have
a positive influence on the distance traveled.
All of the centrality measures have a positive effect on the distance
traveled. These are reported in Figure 3.5. Degree and betweenness cen-
tralities have statistically significant effects on travel distance. The implica-
tion is that traveling workers who live in central cities of the travel network
travel longer distances, on average, than workers who live in peripheral
cities. The city network diversity is also found to have a positive effect on
workers’ traveling distance. These results, when combined with the results
for the extensive measure of travel, suggest that sex workers in cities central
to the network are less likely to travel, but when they do travel, they travel
farther distances.
This is intuitive. Imagine two escorts who are similar in every aspect
except that one lives in a city that is a popular travel destination and the
other does not. The escort who does not live in a popular travel destination
is likely to travel to his nearest popular city. The escort who lives in
 The Travel of Male Sex Workers 101

a popular travel destination, is likely to travel a greater distance than the

other escort, who is closer to a popular destination but does not live in
a popular destination. That is, if living in a popular city and traveling to
another popular city, those escorts by definition will travel greater dis-
tances than those who are not in popular cities, as escorts whose home
location is not popular can select the nearest popular city to serve.

Travel and the Prices of Male Sex Work

While the previous results analyzed the determinants of travel, traveling
should be related to remuneration in some way if escorts are indeed acting
as business operators. As described earlier, the wages of escorts should be
related to the popularity of the cities they live in and their own propensity
to travel. Also, the cities that are popular should have higher wages for
escorts, which would reflect the fact that traveling by escorts is due to the
demand for escort services in those cities. When demand outstrips supply,
prices should be higher.
First, I analyze the relationship between the extensive measure of travel
and wage rates in Figure 3.6. I find that the effect of travel (extensively
measured) on the wage rate is significant and positive, which shows the
economic return to travel for male escorts. It is the case that traveling
escorts charge higher prices than escorts who do not travel. On average, sex

0.12

0.1

0.08
Log Escort Wages

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
Escort Travels * Gay Concentration Index HIV Rate * Airline Hub *
*Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 3.6 Escort travel, city properties, and escort wages

102 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

workers who travel charge 8 percent more than sex workers who do not
travel.
In some specifications, I interact the traveling indicator with other
measures to investigate the possibility that the returns to travel differ
by other characteristics.36 In that model, traveling sex workers charge
20 percent more than non-traveling sex workers. Part of this difference is
due to the existence of heterogeneity within the travel premium. For
example, Black and Asian escorts who travel do charge more than black
and Asian non-traveling escorts, but they charge 2 and 8 percent less,
respectively, than white escorts who travel. On the whole, traveling work-
ers of non-White races receive lower wages than Whites. The results show
that traveling indeed is one way in which a sex worker can earn more, but
even here some differences remain.
At the individual level, sex workers who are muscular charge 18 percent
more than thin escorts (the excluded group). No other personal character-
istic is shown to have a relationship to the wages of travelers. Regarding
environmental influences, city GCI does not have a significant effect on
rates charged. However, Figure 3.6 shows that city HIV rate shows a
significantly positive correlation with wage, which reflects the wage pre-
mium for job risk that varies across geographic areas. The results for HIV
rates are similar to the wage effects seen for female sex workers, whose
wages are positively correlated with STI prevalence.37 When the risk of
HIV infection is greater, the rates for sex work increase. This is consistent
with higher disease prevalence being an implicit part of sex worker com-
pensation and the disease risk in the market. A city’s traveling convenience,
captured by the airport hub indicator, also has a significantly positive effect
on wage.
Second, traveling should be related to the centrality measures of the
locations traveled to, if those centrality measures are related to the demand
for sex work services. These results look at how wages are affected by
individual and city network centralities. The results are reported in
Figure 3.7. It is important to note that both sex-worker- and city-specific
measures are used in these specifications to investigate the relationship
between a sex worker’s network position and wages in addition to the
relationship that being in a city of a given network level has with wages.
The city-level network measures have consistent correlations with the
rates charged by male sex workers. All three city network centralities
have significant positive effects on wages, which implies that male sex
workers charge more when they live in central cities of this travel network.
For example, a one-standard-deviation increase in city degree or city
 The Travel of Male Sex Workers 103

30

25

20
Log Escort Wages

15

10

0
City City Eigen City Beta City Escort Escort Escort Eigen
Degree * Centrality Centrality * Diversity * Degree Betweenness Centrality *
Centrality *
*Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 3.7 Escort and city centrality and escort wages

betweenness increases the wage rate by 2.3 and 1.79 percent, respectively.
The result implies that the position of the city of residence for a male sex
worker matters in terms of price. The more central a position a city has,
the higher the wage rate he charges. I note that this holds for sex workers
who travel and those who do not – as such, it is an effect of being in a
central location itself, and not of their own propensity to travel. This is
consistent with more popular cities being more expensive cities for sex
work. As such, these cities have higher wages than others for sex work.
Finally, I focus on male sex workers who travel. There, the centrality of
the cities they visit and its relationship to wages is presented.38 However,
after I control city network centralities, the effect of the airline hub seen in
Figure 3.6 becomes statistically insignificant. This suggests that the hub
acts as a proxy for network centrality, such that the inclusion of network
centrality reduces the effect of a hub. The interaction terms of travel
indicator with city GCI and HIV rate show that travelers from cities with
high HIV and GCI may ask for a lower wage rate, but the estimates are only
marginally significant.
I use the result to answer an additional question – travel to cities where
demand for services is high results in greater return than travel to less
popular cities. The return of traveling to popular cities is captured by
including average network centralities and characteristics of destination
cities in the wage equation for travelers. The results for destination-city
104 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

0.9

0.8

0.7
Log Escort Wages

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
Destination Destination Destination Destination
City Degree * City Eigen Centrality City Betweenness City Diversity *
Centrality *
*Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 3.8 Destination city centrality and traveling escort wages

network measures are reported in Figure 3.8. The results show that the GCI
and HIV rate of destination cities do not affect wage rate. However, all
three network centralities and network diversity of destination cities have
significant positive effects on the wage rate of travelers. For example, a
one-standard-deviation increase in the degree centrality and betweenness
centrality of the destination city increases wages by 2.5 and 2.3 percent,
respectively. The result provides empirical evidence to support the hypoth-
esis that escorts travel to cities with high demand for male escort services.
There is an additional implication of traveling that can be tested. Cities
that are popular destinations for escorts are cities where the average price
for escort services is higher than in other cities. Also, the previous results
have established that escorts are less likely to travel when their home
location is in a popular city. This implies that cities that are not popular
contain sex workers who travel (and therefore charge higher rates) and
those who do not (and so charge lower rates), while popular cities have
escorts who are less likely to travel. Taking both of these into account, there
is an implication that there will be less dispersion of prices in cities that are
popular, because escorts in those cities are less likely to travel. Using the
interquartile range of prices (the difference between the 25th and 75th
percentile of prices in a given city) for a city as the measure of price
dispersion, I find that network centralities and link diversity are negatively
 Conclusion 105

related to price dispersion. The more connected a city is by network, the

less dispersion there is in prices. This is consistent with the phenomenon of
price dispersion in a city decreasing with a city’s centrality – this means
that popular cities are high-price cities where a client is less likely to find
a low-priced escort. The lack of price dispersion would be consistent with
the law of one price, where the price of a good in a market is invariant if the
market is competitive. It is also a fact that price dispersion is negatively
related to the gay concentration, which implies that in cities with a larger
number of potential clients there is less price dispersion. This is consistent
with a competitive market in which sex workers lose their ability to price
discriminate. Clients in less-popular cities will be more likely to find
escorts at a variety of price points, owing to the presence there of both
stationary and traveling escorts.39

CONCLUSION
This chapter presented the first empirical analysis of male sex worker
competition in the form of travel. Serving multiple markets increases the
number of potential clients for a given sex worker, and as such this chapter
concentrated on travel patterns and their effects on prices in the market.
Even more, it adopted a network approach to assess the interlinks that
cities have due to the travel of male sex workers. The market for male sex
work involves a great deal of movement, and this movement is related to
market demand, as opposed to non-market factors. Male sex workers travel
to locations where demand is high (and prices are high). I also showed that
the movement of male sex workers, a measure of market competition and
incentives in the market, has an effect on the price of male sex worker
services. The first key finding is that male sex workers who advertise on the
Internet have a propensity to serve multiple markets. Traveling escorts are
more common than stationary ones. Overall, male sex workers are highly
mobile. This mobility causes market prices to be linked through the traveling
of male sex workers, since escort travel is related to market demand. The
market for male sex work is not a spot market, but rather a mature market
with key cities that nationalize the male sex worker market by serving as
hubs for male sex workers.
The relationship between the home locations of male sex workers is not
strongly related to the location patterns of gay men. It does not appear that
male sex workers are concentrated in areas that have relatively dense
populations of gay men. At a basic level, this suggest either that a signifi-
cant portion of the client base is not gay-identified or that the ease of
106 Market Movers: Travel, Cities, and the Network of Male Sex Work

traveling allows male escorts to locate at home bases that are not correlated
with gay location trends. Intuition would suggest that sex workers would
locate or serve the markets where there is significant demand, which would
presumably come from gay-identified men. Given the high degree of
traveling, however, the lack of a relationship between home location and
gay population distribution necessitates an analysis of the traveling deci-
sions of male escorts.
While overall location patterns were not related to gay population
density, male sex workers in cities with large gay concentrations are less
likely to travel than other escorts. Intuition suggests that the reason these
escorts do not travel is that their home location is one where demand is
reasonably high. This suggests that male sex workers in cities with large
gay populations would be less likely to form links between cities, as they
are less likely to travel. It is the escorts in low-gay-concentration cities
who travel to high-gay-concentration cities. It is these escorts that drive
the links between cities that create the network of male sex work in the
United States.
I also showed that travel was not equally likely among all types of escorts.
Certain personal characteristics of male sex workers are correlated with an
escort’s willingness to serve multiple locations. Escorts who advertise
submissive sexual services are more likely to travel. This traveling behavior
has implications for the sexual network inherent in male sex work, which
has been the largest area of research since it has implications for disease
transmission. As the likelihood of receiving the transmission of certain
STIs is more likely for submissive sexual partners, the results would imply
that submissive male sex workers who travel could simultaneously be more
likely to have an STI and less likely to transmit the STI to clients. This result
runs counter to the idea that sex workers could act as vectors of transmis-
sion of disease, as the sex workers traveling more are those who are less
likely to transmit disease.
Lastly, male sex workers who serve multiple markets charge higher
prices than others and rates are higher in cities that are central to the
network created by sex worker travel. This suggests that the returns to
travel are significant for escorts, that travel is related to demand, and that
the market prices overall are connected due to the fact that traveling escorts
serve high-priced cities. Sex worker movement is related to market incen-
tives in the form of higher prices. The popular cities appear to be those with
high demand for sex work services, and as such the incentive to travel to
these cities is that they are lucrative options for sex workers, as the wage
differential is significant.
 Conclusion 107

In all instances, the market is broadly consistent with relatively simple

models of economic agents responding to incentives provided by the
market. Male escorts travel to markets that are high-priced markets,
where the demand for their services is high. This leaves the market with
a relatively small number of popular cities that escorts travel to provide
services. For the escorts who live in these cities, the high wages they enjoy
give them fewer incentives to travel. Indeed, when they do travel they travel
farther distances as they must seek out more lucrative markets, which are at
a greater distance. Beyond this, the cities that are popular from centrality-
based measures of sex work are high-priced cities where there are fewer
low-priced sex workers working.
It appears that escorts make reasonable economic decisions about their
location patterns. They remain in and travel to cities that are high priced,
and these cities appear to be cities where demand for their services is high.
In particular, the results here suggest that the inclusion of network mea-
sures is important to understanding the economic incentives involved in
the returns to traveling and sex worker service provision. The market for
male sex work is not only a sexual network, but an economic one as well.
The connectedness of the market is evidence of the maturity of the male sex
work market. Sex workers appear to be aware of the geographic price
differences and they respond to them. While the price differential remains
between markets, the effects show a degree of market integration that has
never been empirically observed for male sex work before. While not
a national market with one price, which would occur in a fully integrated
market, this integration shows a level of market development and maturity
that cautions against treating male sex work as an economic anomaly or as
an institution with few market features.
 PART II

MALE SEX WORK A ND SEXUALITY

 4

Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

Sex work is about more than supply and demand. Economic forces are
obviously important in the market, and the economic gains that sex work-
ers see from their labor are likely the primary reason why the industry
continues to see men enter the profession. At the same time, the work of
sex work involves a very intimate aspect of human behavior. Purchasing
sex is similar to purchasing other goods, but also different. Any good or
service on the market contains social aspects of consumer demand. For
example, luxury items may be priced partially to establish their desirability
and exclusivity. Other products are produced and consumed to affirm
group affiliations, cultural identity, and other social factors.
When the product being offered is sex itself, there are obvious social
functions at play in the market. Sex combines notions of desire, attraction,
social acceptability, taboos, fantasy, deviance, power, and sexual stereo-
types. Each of these is a socially derived and constructed commodity that
becomes packaged in sex work transactions. These have to be packaged by
sex workers for sale to clients who will consume them only to the extent that
they understand them. Buyers and sellers are not operating in a vacuum, but
are instead making decisions that take place within an American gay sub-
culture that gives them guidelines on what the production function should
be. This implies that the social context of sex work is just as important as the
economic – the product being bought and sold has value only insofar as it
matches with what is socially believed to have value.
While social scientists have long had interest in prostitution as a form of
exchange (Simmel 1907 [1971]) or a place where cultural values and market
logic intersect, the specific ways in which this takes place for male sex work
remains under-researched in the social sciences.1 There is a wealth of
research on female prostitution, which uses the fact that female prostitution
places women on a market for consumption by men. The ways that women

111
112 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

present themselves and how they interact with clients has been informed by
gendered notions of power, sexuality, performance, and desire. This litera-
ture has produced novel insights into the ways that sex work is a uniquely
social-economic exchange.
For the study of male sex work, however, the male/female binary is not
a useful conceptual framework. Male sex workers are difficult to concep-
tualize in the economic, social, and gender theories of prostitution primar-
ily because the participants are of the same gender.2 For example, recent
economic theories of prostitution are based upon the idea that prostitution
is well paid (relative to unskilled labor) because female sex workers are
compensated for forgoing the marriage market and pursuing paternity.3
Several gender theories of prostitution see sex work as the commodifica-
tion of women’s bodies for consumption by men. Neither of these frame-
works is appropriate for the study of male sex work. The framework for the
social study of male sex work must begin from a different starting point.
There is a qualitative literature on male sex workers, which has informed
the theories of sexuality, sexual behaviors, and sex work.4 One important
limitation of the qualitative work is that it does not capture the degree to
which the market is affected by social ideals. Questions about the social
aspects of the market can only be answered through a market analysis. We
stand to increase the understanding of the ways that commerce, sexuality,
and masculinity interact by quantitatively analyzing the market for male
sex work as a market.
Similarly, the existing qualitative literature is primarily about male sex
workers who work the street. Little is known about male escorts who occupy
the highest position in the hierarchy of male prostitution, where the freedom
offered by escorting would have arguably larger effects on the social value of
male sex work.5 The literature on male escorts that does exist has aged poorly
due to technological progress (the Internet).6 Another factor is the increas-
ing social acceptance of homosexuality.7 The recent qualitative scholarship
on male escorts has found that the demographic and social characteristics
of male sex workers and the reasons for entry into commercial sex work
described in earlier postwar research do not apply today.8 For example,
rather than being young men experiencing homelessness, men struggling
with addiction, or men participating in survival sex, many modern male
sex workers have professionalized the industry. The chief medium through
which this takes place is the online market – the professional aspects of the
online market imply that the men in the online portion of the market
would be particularly attuned to the social context, giving us more reason
to expect social distinctions in value to play a role in the market.
 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services 113

Researchers have also noted the unique social and epidemiological position
of male sex workers.9 They serve numerous social groups – gay-identified
men, heterosexually identified men, as well as their own noncommercial
sexual partners. Male sex workers interact with groups of men that are
unlikely to interact with each other, and therefore can act as an interest-
ing social and sexual conduit between various groups.10 More important,
they must communicate to all of these groups simultaneously in a way
that takes advantage of the commonality of what is most desirable and
appropriate for a commercial sexual transaction between men. The social
context at work for online male sex work is inherently complex.
In contrast to male-female prostitution, we cannot easily assign sexual
positions or behaviors to participants based on sex or gender, and this
necessitates a discussion of the social value of sexual behaviors among the
participants that is not usually required in discussions of female sex work.
In particular, we stand to gain by analyzing how and whether men who
have sex with men reinforce and critique social constructions of masculi-
nity through their valuation of sexual behaviors. In modern treatments of
male homosexuality and masculinity, the masculinity prized (and there-
fore valued) by men in the market may conscribe to hegemonic, hetero-
sexually focused masculinity. This hegemonic masculinity is, essentially,
the ability of a sex worker to inhabit the social masculine ideal. Whether
this is valued in the market is especially interesting as gay men are
considered counter-hegemonic.11
Additionally, scholars have noted that sexual stereotypes interact with
racial stereotypes among gay men. This may give rise to unique values for
sexual practices among men of particular races. In a market for sex work, sex
workers would exploit these stereotypes in order to reap economic gain from
socially derived structures on sexual behavior. Put another way, some men,
by the nature of racial-sexual stereotypes, could be more valuable than others
when advertising the same sexual behaviors. This, too, is related to mascu-
linity insofar as men of certain racial groups are thought to be more
inherently masculine than others. Theoretically, this would allow us to see
how the intersection of identities further refines the construction of mascu-
linity and sexual desire among men who have sex with men.12
This chapter studies the relationship between escort prices, personal
characteristics, and sexual behaviors as a social and economic process.
This provides a key window into this relatively under investigated social
activity.13 The conceptual framework begins by considering how this type
of empirical analysis can shed light on social theories of sexuality, hege-
monic masculinity, and gay masculinity.14 I use the principles of economic
114 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

theory to motivate the methodological approach, but the motivation for the
analysis and the interpretation of findings is done in light of social theories
of gay male sexuality. Explicit in this framework is the idea that there are
economic gains to adhering to socially derived demand, which itself is
based upon the social construction of masculinity among gay men.15
This type of framework is possible because of the economic structure of
the market. Male escorts in the United States do not use intermediaries who
could potentially control the prices and earnings of male escorts or distribute
sex workers to clients in some deliberate way, and they set their prices
conditional on a perception of client demand. Since sex workers advertise
to a broad client base, this gives us the opportunity to see how male escorts
price their services conditional on their personal characteristics and sexual
behaviors. The values attached to those characteristics and behaviors lie at
the intersection of social value and market forces. The desire to earn as much
as possible would provide market incentives for male sex workers to align
their advertisement with the most dominant social cues to desired traits.
This approach allows me to answer heretofore open questions about
male sex workers and, in turn, social theories of male sexuality: How does
this market value physical characteristics (race, height, weight, etc.) and
sexual behaviors? For example, do the clients of male sex workers value
hegemonically masculine behaviors and appearance more than their
feminine counterparts in a way that we can reconcile with hegemonic
masculinity?16 Furthermore, what are the effects of interactions between
characteristics and sexual behaviors? Are men of particular races rewarded
more for downplaying or emphasizing certain sexual behaviors than for
others, as intersectional theory predicts?17 How does this square with
racial-sexual stereotypes in the gay community at large?
This chapter answers several of the pressing social questions in the
literature. The estimated values of sex worker physical characteristics and
sexual behaviors provide novel confirmation for social theories of gay male
sexuality and also suggest additional ways in which gay masculinity has
developed. In terms of physical characteristics, I find a small penalty for
being thin and a sizable penalty for being overweight, which is consistent
with studies of body image among gay men. For sexual behaviors, those
who are “tops” (the penetrative partner) receive a premium to sex work and
“bottoms” (the receptive partner) a penalty. The price differential between
“tops” and “bottoms” is 17 percent, a substantial difference. A “top” male
sex worker could earn nearly $10,000 more annually than a “bottom” sex
worker. This difference is consistent with gay men placing a sizable pre-
mium on traditionally masculine (dominant) sexual behaviors at the
 Social Science Theories of Male Sex Work 115

expense of others. Rather than a rejection of traditionally masculine norms,

men in this market replicate and reward them.
Surprisingly, race does not affect escort prices by itself. This stands in stark
contrast to studies that have documented dating premiums and penalties
with respect to race. The intersection of race and sexual behavior, however,
exerts a very strong influence on prices. Black, Hispanic and White “tops”
command a significant premium in the market while “tops” of other races,
including Asians, do not. We also find that Black and White “bottoms” incur
a significant price penalty while Hispanic and Asian “bottoms” do not. In
both instances, the premiums and penalties for sexual behaviors are greatest
for Blacks—the “top”/“bottom” price differential for Black escorts is more
than twice the differential for any other racial or ethnic group. This finding is
consistent with a particular form of sexualized race role-play practiced in gay
communities, which is predicated on a hypermasculine, sexually dominant
Black ideal.
The social interpretation of these economic values proves to be a power-
ful window into the way that sexuality and masculinity are defined in gay
communities. While the analysis here is restricted to sex work, the findings
are surprisingly consistent with studies of gay dating markets. This, in and
of itself, lends support to the idea that sex work markets may be key
institutions to study sexual-social values that cannot be estimated in dating
markets. I conclude by noting how research on masculinity and sexuality
should incorporate more fully the ways that race, physical characteristics,
and sexual behaviors play out in the construction of desire, the develop-
ment of sexual hierarchies, and the general ways in which sexuality con-
strains social interactions among gay men.

SOCIAL SCIENCE THEORIES OF MALE SEX WORK

Social and economic research on commercial sex work traditionally con-
centrates on women. While female sex work and the various ways it is
institutionalized have been studied, very few studies focus on the differ-
ences in the ways that male sex work is organized. This focus has led to
neglect of the heterogeneous social structures which give rise to the marked
diversity of forms of male sex work around the globe.18 In the research that
surveys male prostitution, both scientific and popular media have pointed
out several geographic and cultural distinctions in the practice and forms
of male sex work that make it difficult to generalize the phenomena over
space or time.19 As different cultures grapple with the realities of human
sexuality and embrace or repress the public expression of same-sex desire
116 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

and identification, the rules and social norms governing male sex work
change as well.
Theories of sexuality have paid particular attention to sexual minorities
and marginalized sexualities as these are key for the development of both
majority and minority sexualities and sexual identities.20 The usual theo-
retical tools of power and gender are altered when we consider male
prostitution, and this allows us to explore the dynamics within genders
in a novel way.21 For example, while female prostitution can be viewed as
men replicating their dominance as sexual dominance of women in an
exchange of sex for money, how this works between men is complicated by
the fact that inter-gender relations need not be the same as intra-gender
relations. We cannot use gender and its presentation to infer the sources of
power and the degree of exploitation in the relationship.
Research on political economy among sexual minorities largely deals
with the commoditization of gay desire.22 As the social acceptability of gay
relationships increases, gay consumers and their sexual norms become
tools of marketing. This commoditization must exploit existing social
norms about what is desired, and usually distinguishes itself from its
heterosexual counterpart. Put another way, when men are commodified
in contemporary society, there are explicit cues as to whether that commo-
dification is homosexual or heterosexual. Some contemporary commenta-
tors even go so far as to state that ambiguous presentations are deliberate
attempts to appeal to the largest market.
Commoditization is a market force with supply, demand, quantities, and
prices. We can investigate how men in the male sex work market construct
identities (commodify themselves) and are influenced by the social factors
which lead to market rewards. Not every aspect of desire is commodified,
however, and those that are commodified may come with different values
befitting different levels of desirability. Importantly, the theoretical predic-
tions about what is valued come from the noncommercial market, in
particular what is known in social science as the “sexual field.”
Borrowing from the conceptual framework in the physical sciences,
social scientists use field theory to study the relations between elements
in a given setting, a field. Field theory, in its broadest sense, attempts to
explain the regularities of social behavior not only as the product of
external (social) forces, but also internal forces (motivation). A key advan-
tage of field theory is that one can analyze similar behavior (relations
between elements) in different fields and draw very different theoretical
predictions about the meaning of that behavior. For example, a person’s
action of participating in vigorous physical activity could have very
 Social Science Theories of Male Sex Work 117

different motivations in one field than in another.23 This would hinge on

the motivations and the relationship between the activity and its purported
goal and how the activity allows an individual to relate to others. While
field theory in general does not hypothesize about mechanisms, it does
derive hypotheses about actions and motivations.
Field theory has not been extended to male sex work. Rather than deriving
an entirely new theory to describe actions and motivations in the male sex
work field, I use the existing theoretical work on gay sexual fields to derive
hypotheses. This serves two purposes. First, scholarship about sexual fields
commonly asserts that there is a marked distinction between the commercial
and noncommercial sexual fields. Seeing if the hypotheses derived about
the noncommercial sexual field hold for the commercial tells us how
distinct the two fields are or are not. The degree of overlap between the
two fields could be significant and would suggest that, in matters sexual,
the distinction could be minimal. Second, by openly positing an overlap
between the two fields, I explicitly entertain the possibility that the
commodification of gay desire draws primarily not from self-identified
gay desire, but from a broader range of men who have sexual desires for
other men.
In both the past and present, significant numbers of male escorts and
clients do not identify as homosexual.24 Allen (1980) describes studies of
male sex workers who find that fewer than 10 percent identify as homo-
sexual, and since the controversial work of Humphreys (1970), social
scientists have noted that men partaking in same-sex sexual behavior are
unlikely to be found in surveys unless they choose to publicly reveal their
sexual behaviors and desires.25 As such, the world of male sex work is one
of the few where men who adopt and refuse homosexual identity are in
intimate contact with one another, and it offers us the opportunity to ask
and answer many interesting questions about male sexual identity and
homosexual desire. For example, we learn what roles and behaviors escorts
must conform to in order to realize the largest economic gains from sex
work, and this market extends beyond men who self-identify as gay. The
value of these roles has the potential to inform our analysis of the con-
struction of masculinity at the intersection of heterosexual and homosex-
ual identities, since men participating in the market, both clients and
escorts, adopt disparate sexual identities. This implies that we can learn
more about desire that is not necessarily attached to the politics inherent in
a publicly expressed gay identity.
Given the wealth of theories of sexuality, I adopt a broad theoretical
view, drawing on the scholarship of social scientists looking at issues of
118 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

male sexuality and male sex work. I borrow from the literatures in demo-
graphy, economics and sociology, with additional insights from social
psychology and public health to derive predictions. The approach here is
not to be all-encompassing, but instead to outline the ways in which a
sociologically informed analysis of male sex work emphasizes different
dimensions of sex work and suggests alternative mechanisms underlying
the market behavior we observe.

Hegemonic Masculinity
Hegemonic masculinity is defined as “the configuration of gender practice
which embodies the currently accepted answer to the problem of legiti-
macy of patriarchy” (Connell 1995: 77). Hegemonic masculinity is about
relations between genders and within genders.26 In particular, hegemonic
masculinity is about the power relations between and within genders.
While changing over time, the root is a masculine “ideal” whose masculi-
nity is defined not only by the presence of socially constructed “masculine”
traits but the absence of socially constructed “feminine” traits. It is equally
important for a man to be a man as it is for a man not to be a woman. While
this seems somewhat unnecessary in a definition, it is important that
masculinity be defined as both possessing some traits and rejecting others.
It is the masculinity that epitomizes what a “man” is supposed to be and do.
It contains not only physical ideals, but attitudes, beliefs, personality traits,
and actions.
Hegemonically masculine practices ensure the dominant position of men
over women, and of particular men over other men. The practices can take
a number of forms, and research has usually stressed social traits such as
drive, ambition, independence, assertiveness, self-reliance, and aggressive-
ness, which legitimize the power of men over women. This can also include
the absence of other traits, such as empathy, communication, sensitivity,
cooperation, or displays of emotion. The absence of these traits is important
in the construction of the ideal because they come to define who is not
masculine. It is not only the presence of traits such as aggressiveness that
define the masculine ideal, but the absence of traits such as empathy.
Within genders, there is the subordination of certain masculinities and
the marginalization of others.27 Just as hegemonic masculinity acts to
ensure the dominance of men over women, it also works to establish the
dominance of some men over other men. For example, gay masculinities
are subordinated and marginalized so that patriarchy can be reproduced
through heterosexuality. Men who conform to a heterosexual masculine
 Social Science Theories of Male Sex Work 119

ideal dominate those who do not. Connell’s (1995) conception is that

hegemonic masculinity is never influenced by non-hegemonic elements –
elements of non-heterosexuality in hegemonic masculinity are seen as
contradictions or weakness.28 In other words, the masculinity that gay
men seek in sexual partners or in the public response to their own behavior
is inherently counterfeit under hegemonic norms.
Scholars have noted the limits of this conceptual binary between hege-
monic and non-hegemonic masculinity.29 Demetriou, Reeser, Levine, and
other scholars have suggested that rather than binary, hegemonic mascu-
linity should be viewed as a hybrid, made up of practices and elements of
both heterosexual and, for example, homosexual masculinities, giving
hegemonic masculinity the ability to change over time to meet historical
circumstances with a different set of practices. Masculinity is not a fixed
definition; at any point in time the definition is culturally malleable, and
over time it must change as the scope of human activity and relations
change. Similarly, all men learn culturally specific hegemonic masculine
norms because, irrespective of their future identities, these norms shape
gendered relations.
Allowing for this broader definition of hegemonic masculinity expands
the possibilities for gay and heterosexual masculinities to interact with each
other, for masculinities to adapt to developments in subordinate masculi-
nities, and increases the scope for empirical analysis. In the broader
definition, the practices of gay men, who are non-hegemonic by design,
act not only to reinforce the patriarchal goal of hegemonic masculinity, but
also help to define the hegemonic ideal itself.30 And the heterosexual
counterpart need not reject all aspects of gay masculinities. Partly, this
could be due to the fact that gay masculinities themselves are based on
hegemonic ideals, and hence stem from the same source. If gay men were
to reject all aspects of heterosexual masculinities it would threaten their
desire to be seen and related to as men in society. In earlier generations this
was the social category to which gay men were confined, the invert. Gay
liberation sought to broaden the social acceptability of gay men and
simultaneously allow them to construct masculinities that would reinforce
the maleness of gay men. This required not the rejection of hegemonic
masculinity inherent in the invert, but the development of a gay masculi-
nity that incorporated several elements from hegemonic masculinity.
Additionally, drawing from gay masculinities in the refinement of hege-
monic masculinity allows for finer distinctions between the two, which
may be increasingly necessary in societies that socially accept openly gay
individuals. Demetriou, for example, notes the recent construction of the
120 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

“metrosexual” as one example of gay masculinity influencing the construc-

tion of the hegemonic ideal. Grooming practices are now acceptable within
a heterosexual masculinity, but with clearly defined limits, and with the
goal of pursuing women for sexual conquests. The extent to which gay
masculinities contain elements of heterosexual masculinity could also
serve to reinforce the power and authority of heterosexual masculinities.
For example, if gay masculinities prize muscular physique it can serve to
reinforce the notion that muscularity is a defining hegemonic masculine
trait since even gay men recognizes the “inherent” masculinity of it.
This expansive definition allows some behaviors that may have been
rendered contradictions in the past to become part of hegemonic mascu-
linity in the present. The recent proliferation of men’s beauty products
would, under a binary framework, be labeled a contradiction. Under the
hegemonic ideal, masculinity rejects any preoccupation with the finer
details of physical appearance. (It is important to note that this is quite
different from preoccupation with physique.) When used as a means of
attracting women, however, the preoccupation with beauty regimens can
fall under hegemonic masculinity, but only to the extent to which it serves
the purpose of attracting women. To the extent that they would give some
men more sexual conquest with women than others, these practices
become a vehicle for establishing their masculinity both with women and
relative to other men: in essence, heterosexual hegemonic masculinity
explicitly borrowed from gay masculinities for the express purpose of the
sexual domination of women.
An additional advantage of the expansive definition is that a hybrid
approach opens the possibility of analyzing how gay men define, subordi-
nate, and marginalize masculinities among themselves. In the analysis of
sex work it is not male/female relations that are key, but relations among
men themselves. Gay men practice a given set of gay hegemonic masculine
norms that are used to define gay men’s relationships with each other—
these within gender relations are most interesting for the study of male sex
work, and they require an expansive definition of hegemonic masculinity
and a careful consideration of gay masculinity. Some gay masculinities can
be accepted as more legitimate constructions of hegemonic masculinity
than others, which allows gay men to create their own hierarchy of gay
masculinities. These masculinities are interesting in and of themselves
because they offer us the opportunity to regard what is considered hege-
momically masculine among men who are counter-hegemonic by nature
of their sexual orientation. In other words, it allows us to analyze what
makes a gay man a “masculine gay man” and what does not.
 Social Science Theories of Male Sex Work 121

Levine (1998), Donaldson (1993), and Connell (1992) note that gay men
reinforce hegemonic norms – modern masculine gay practices celebrate
and exemplify hegemonic ideals such as body building and concentration
on physical strength. This reification of masculine norms can create a
situation where some gay masculinities are themselves subordinate to
others. This is counter to scholars who assert that gay men have developed
entirely new norms of masculine behavior. Rather, gay masculinities that
are most valued are those that come closest to heterosexual hegemonic
masculinity. Donaldson (1993) raises the intriguing point that “it is not
‘gayness’ that is attractive to homosexual men, but ‘maleness.’ A man is
lusted after not because he is homosexual but because he’s a man. How
counter-hegemonic can this be?” (p. 649). This becomes a question not only
of masculinity but questions of practice, intention, and motivation as well.
While scholars of masculinity have asserted that gay men critique
hegemonic ideals through counter-hegemony, it could also be the case
that gay men overtly reinforce hegemonic ideals.31 This may be even more
likely sexually. Gay masculinities may be quite aligned with the hegemonic
masculinity that marginalizes them. Thinking back to the subject of fields,
hegemonic masculinity gives us concrete ideas as to why some men would
be motivated to behave as they do. For gay men, the practice of a gay
masculinity could be motivated by a number of non-mutually exclusive
desires. First, it could reflect the desire to conform, as much as possible,
with hegemonic masculinity. This would allow gay men to articulate a
masculinity that retains their maleness as opposed to feminizing gay men
due to their sexuality. This would confer some dominance over other men
(both homosexual and heterosexual), who do not have such traits.32
Second, it could reflect the desire to appeal sexually to other gay men,
who see the hegemonic ideal as the most sexually desirable. Third, it could
offer the most protection from heterosexual aggression, as conforming to
hegemonic ideals would give one greater ability to “pass” as heterosexual.
While there are studies that look at these types of values qualitatively and
quantitatively between genders, little quantitative work exists that looks at
differences within genders and the study of male sex work allows us to
consider these within-gender relations in detail.33

Gay Masculinity, Heterosexual Masculinity, and Male Sex Work

The question, however, is how masculinity (hegemonic, homosexual, or
heterosexual) should inform the analysis of male sex work. The key here is
to recognize that masculinity is a collection of traits and practices which sex
122 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

workers bring together in the market in the form of the persona that they
create for clients. Escorts are selling temporary encounters that fulfill client
fantasy and desire. As firms, sex workers must pay attention to client
demand, and in a gay sexual arena this implies careful attention to mascu-
linity at a number of levels.
One aspect is the basic element of attraction as broadly construed among
gay men. While masculinity practiced between heterosexual men can be
used to shield them from each other, create a distance, and offer an ordered
way of interacting with each other (leader and follower) without the
assumption of any sexual relationship, masculinity between homosexual
men also acts as a practice to attract sexual partners. The practices may take
their cues from the larger social construction of hegemonic masculinity,
but their purpose is different and related to the counter-hegemonic prac-
tice of sexual relations between men. Rather than marking a territory where
men define themselves relative to other men, gay masculinity is designed to
bring men together socially and sexually in a way outside of the confines
offered by the larger social construction.34
Gay masculinity serves a very different purpose within genders than
heterosexual masculinity. While gay masculinity may incorporate parts of
heterosexual masculinities, the sexual purpose is physical intimacy with
another man. The empirical question is the degree to which homosexual
men are complicit in hegemonic masculine norms – in Demetriou’s lan-
guage, the degree to which gay masculinities contain significant elements
of hegemonic masculinities that legitimize patriarchy, and which may in
turn influence hegemonic masculinity itself. Quantitative analysis of male
sex work allows us to see how men who have sex with men value hegemo-
nically masculine practices amongst themselves. In an explicitly sexual
arena, hegemonic masculinity would extend to physical appearance (mus-
cularity, body size, body hair, height) and sexual behaviors (sexual dom-
inance, sexual aggressiveness, penetrative sexual position). To the extent to
which homosexual men conform to and reinforce hegemonic masculine
norms, the value of masculine traits and practices should have a direct
effect on the desirability and value of a given escort. While the usual
function of such “manhood acts” serves to elicit deference from other
men and the reinforcement of hegemonic masculinity, in an explicitly
homosexual arena it may also elicit sexual desire, fantasy, sexual excite-
ment, and sexual objectification.35 In this instance, what the sexual field
would describe as desirable becomes demand from clients in the market.
This turns the traditional nature of dominance into a sexualized act.
While aggression between men would establish the masculinity of one man
 Social Science Theories of Male Sex Work 123

relative to another, in a homosexual space it could also be a source of sexual

power. Specifically, while hegemonic masculinity would presume that men
desire to dominate others and establish their position in the hierarchy of
men, it could act as a source of sexual desire for other men to the extent that
dominance is something they desire in a partner. Masculinity becomes
a source of overtly homosexual power.
The function of male sex work in gay communities may heighten the
appeal of hegemonic ideals. In a market for sex work, clients are explicitly
seeking sexual contact. Clients may choose escorts who would not be like
the men that they would interact with socially but do desire sexually,
which may act to increase the value of certain masculine characteristics
insofar as the hegemonic masculine archetype may be a driving force in
purely sexual desire.36 Is the lust of men in this market consistent with
hegemonic norms?
It is important to note that, although likely hegemonic, these mascu-
linities are gay masculinities to the degree to which they are practiced
among gay men themselves. The masculine presentations offered by the
sex workers are done so to secure male clients for sex. In a binary these
two masculinities would have little relation with one another, but in
a hybrid the gay masculinity would share several features with the hege-
monic. Although not directly tested since the entire market is sexual, the
related question is how gay masculinity reifies and sexualizes the traits of
hegemonic masculinity.37
This type of hybrid hegemonic masculinity would have additional
implications about gay male body image and the body’s use in the con-
struction of masculinity among gay men. Levine (1998) and Sadownick
(1996) see the gay liberation movement as a time when gay men began, en
masse, to idealize hypermasculinity, muscles, and a hirsute body, turning
on its head the “flight from masculinity” that Hooker (1957) observed for
earlier generations of gay men who sought overtly feminine presentations
of themselves to express their sexual orientation.38 The physical ideal of gay
masculinity is typified by muscular physique and other markers of hege-
monic masculinity such as height, body hair, Whiteness, youth, and mid-
dle-class socioeconomic status.39 This is not the rejection of hegemonic
masculinity, but acquiescence to it as a means of defining a gay masculinity
and sexual desire among gay men.
The gay masculine norm has a history that developed largely in urban
areas in the United States and became typified by the 1970s as the Gay
Clone. According to Levine’s (1998) classic study of the gay masculine
ideal, the currency that gay men began to use with one another was, in fact,
124 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

masculinity. This came in two related parts, the “butch clone” and the “hot
clone.” The butch clone was a masculine look while the hot clone was
a direct projection of explicitly male sexuality and eroticism. Physically,
this referred to muscular bodies, facial hair, and clothing that was related to
masculine, manual occupations such as construction worker. To convey
sexual prowess, men wore tight clothing, spoke in low, deep voices, and
maintained an aloof manner consistent with detached emotions.40 That is,
both the physical representation and the practices were important in the
development of gay masculinity. The construction of the clone, one exam-
ple of the unique interaction between hegemonic masculinity and gay
sexuality, allowed gay men to both parody and personify hegemonic
masculine norms physically, psychologically, and socially.
This turn of events has molded the gay body into a political representa-
tion of masculinity, in part subverting norms that question the compat-
ibility of masculinity and homosexuality, but at the same time reinforcing
a quasi-masculine ideal.41 The reinforcement has powerful effects – even
gay men believe that this or that is masculine, which serves to reinforce the
power of that masculine ideal in society in general. Gay men have shown
stronger tendencies to prefer particular body types than either lesbians
or heterosexuals, and this can lead to poor psychological and health out-
comes for gay men who do not conform to gay standards of beauty.42 The
development of rigid norms regarding the sexual desirability of specific
body parts was arguably related to the development of gay masculinity, and
that masculinity was further used to define some gay men relative to others
as more/less masculine. This helped not only to define the physical traits
that a masculine gay man was supposed to possess, but also what traits
would be seen as sexually desirable.43
In fact, attempts by some gay subcultures to subvert these beauty stan-
dards have been critiqued as being agents themselves of hegemonically
masculine agendas.44 For example, gay bear culture supplants (in some
formulations) muscles as a marker of masculinity, instead offering a
hirsute, affable masculinity that is more empathetic and emotional than
the stoic clone. Bear culture offers men who do not have muscular physi-
que access to a gay masculinity that retains the maleness through facial and
body hair as opposed to physique. Part of the reason for this was to reject
gay masculine ideals that prized a muscular physique, and offer an alter-
native construction of masculinity. Over time, however, this led to the
development of “muscle bears” (men who are both muscular and hirsute)
who are able to combine both constructions of masculinity and reinforce
the underlying hegemonic ideal.45
 Social Science Theories of Male Sex Work 125

In many ways, the rejection of large and thin men can be seen as the
rejection (subjugation) of feminizing features. For example, excess
weight in a man visually minimizes the relative size of male genitals,
produces larger (and, importantly, non-muscular) male breasts, and so
on. At low weights men will appear slight, waifish, and physically weak.
Also, given the social norms regarding female body size, thinness is seen
as adhering more to a feminized body image than a masculine one. These
act to emphasize feminizing traits that are actively discouraged in main-
stream gay culture.46 This suggests that in the market for male sex work,
clients would prize physical characteristics such as muscular physiques,
body hair, and height, as those would be markers of hegemonic mascu-
linity. It also suggests that excess weight and thinness would be penalized,
as these are feminizing features.
According to earlier scholarship on the construction of gay masculinities,
the body was explicitly objectified in casual sexual encounters. Personalizing
features such as hair color, eye color were not the chief determinants of
attraction. In fact, personalizing features were said to be relatively unim-
portant in the casual sexual arena. While personalized features play a role in
the development of romantic relationships, they are not the deciding factors
in sexual conquest and the search for casual partners. The most prized
features were those body parts most directly linked to maleness and homo-
sexual sex – penis size and musculature of the chest, arms, back, legs, and
buttocks.47
Both the theory of hegemonic masculinity and the closely related litera-
ture on the body in gay communities suggest that clients of male sex
workers are likely to prize “masculine” personas and body type. There
are several reasons for this. First, numerous scholars have asserted that gay
men’s relationships with effeminate behavior is complex – while celebrated
in many aspects of gay culture (camp, drag shows, diva worship, etc.), it is
particularly stigmatized in sexual relationships and as an object of lust.48
Feminized behavior is not as desirable, as it falls outside of the constructed
gay masculinity. For a culture that is defined by sexual orientation, one
must pay special attention to the sexual desirability of particular features.
While gay men may consume counter-hegemonic representations of mas-
culinity as art and entertainment, their sexual desires may align firmly to
the hegemonic ideal. If this is the case, it would be inexact to assert that gay
men are counter-hegemonic sexually.
Second, some have noted the ways in which the gay community has
commoditized the “authentic” masculinity of self-identified heterosexual
men who engage in sex with men, and this has given rise to the distinction
126 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

between “genuinely masculine gay men” and “posturing masculine gay

men” in gay communities.49 It is unclear how these types are related to the
social construction because the definition of “genuine” versus “posturing”
is entirely subjective. In popular gay media, this is usually linked to interest
in sports and other traditionally masculine recreation and a rejection of
camp, drag, and other traditionally gay recreation or interests such as
decorating, fashion, and entertaining.
This supposes that at the highest level of gay masculinities are men who
may or may not be gay but who participate in homosexual acts. This would
be consistent with two concepts. First, the desire for heterosexual men who
have sex with men to possess an “authentic” masculinity that homosexual
men, by nature of their sexual orientation, do not have access to. Second, it
reinforces the motivations of gay men to aspire as much as possible to the
hegemonic ideal, as that would have the most appeal among men who are
gay and therefore cannot access the heterosexual hegemonic ideal. In male
sex work, many men describe themselves as “straight” to the client base.
The construction of multiple masculinities among gay men and the
distinctions between the two are used to legitimate the power of “masculine”
gay men over “effeminate” gay men, a reproduction of patriarchy.50 Even
more, there are nuanced distinctions between varieties of gay masculinity –
and it could be the case that only those masculinities that allow homosexual
sex, and who in every other way conform to the hegemonic heterosexual
ideal, have the largest sexual desirability in gay spaces. We would expect
that men who are interacting primarily for sexual purposes would likely
place a premium on masculine sexual practices (penetrative sexual posi-
tion, aggressive sexual behavior, muscular physique, etc.), and to penalize
feminine practices (receptive sexual position, submissiveness, large body
size, thinness, etc.) to the degree to which both conform not only to
hegemonic masculinity, but also the construction of masculine gay iden-
tity among gay men.

Intersectionality and Male Sex Work

The theory of hegemonic masculinity has been critiqued for not consid-
ering the ways that gay men can conform to and inform hegemonic
masculinity. In fact, the very use of the term hegemon implies a sort of
overarching masculinity that is relatively invariant and does not interact
with other social processes. At its core, hegemonic masculinity does not
allow for other social constructions to create different types of hegemonic
masculinity that may have different import in gay sexual spaces.
The complex relationship with masculinity in both its physical and sexual
 Social Science Theories of Male Sex Work 127

manifestations has interesting theoretical interactions with other types of

characteristics.
Scholars of gender have long noted that the ways in which masculinity is
distributed among and within discrete racial and ethnic groups in society
must be explored. Racial and ethnic critiques of hegemonic masculinity (and
even the gay masculinity described above) state that it does not account for
other identities that have had limited access to hegemonic masculinity.
If hegemonic masculinity is restricted in Western society to White men of
particular educational and social standing, then many men will not be able to
attain the masculine ideal, irrespective of their sexual orientation. This also
raises the question of how those masculinities are constructed and sexually
desired by gay men. Allowing for racial and ethnic variation in the concept of
hegemonic masculinity allows for a fuller and more nuanced analysis of the
masculinity that would be valued in gay sexual interactions.
There is a burgeoning literature that looks at the racial variation in social
value among gay men and a literature that looks at how masculinity and its
representations are influenced by other social stereotypes.51 At heart, this
nuanced approach to hegemonic masculinity is not concerned with sexual
orientation per se, but with ways that racial ideals about masculinity are
reformulated by gay men. This requires an intersectional approach to the
topic of masculinity and its value. This is necessary for the analysis of male
sex work because of the racial diversity of male sex workers. To apply a
racially specific form of masculinity (gay or heterosexual) upon these men
would be a naïve approach. These questions add greater complexity to the
analysis of masculinity in male sex work, as they consider the interplay of
hegemonic masculinity with a number of social factors that have been
shown to influence sexual desire.
As the theory of intersectionality suggests, the interaction of these social
categories is neither cumulative nor additive, but rather independent.52
The intersection of hegemonic masculinity with racial/sexual stereotypes
can create multiple forms of sexual objectification for particular types of
gay men that are unique to them. For example, the value of a “top” is not
uniform across all tops (as hegemonic masculinity would predict). The
value of that particular sexual activity is both a function of its general value
as a component of hegemonic masculinity and a function of the type of
man presumed to be the most successful at the activity. It follows directly
that the value of a White “top” is not simply the addition of the value of
Whiteness and “topness,” but an independent effect for men in that
particular category, who in this instance embody the highest position in
the racial and sexual behavior hierarchies among gay men. Most important,
128 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

occupying this position need not bring the highest value – there may be
other men (not at the highest position of the racial hierarchy) who would
be more valued for the specific combination of those traits. Markets for sex
may reinforce these sexual stereotypes (what Cameron et al. [1999] term
“ethnico-sexual stereotypes”) in explicitly monetary terms.
Baldwin (1985) has noted that the American ideal of sexuality is rooted in
the American ideal of masculinity, which, he argues, necessitates an inher-
ently racial dimension. While white men were historically given the duty to
protect White women from Black sexuality, and this supposed threat legit-
imized the social control of White women by White men (and Whites over
Blacks), for the homosexual White man the sexuality of the Black man
becomes an object of desire because he is perceived to be sexually dominant
and unrestrained, although still under the social control of Whites due to his
race, turning the hegemonic ideal on its head.53 Levine (1998), Robinson
(2008), McBride (2005), Reid-Pharr (2001), and others have noted how
racial stereotypes interact with notions of masculinity to produce a desire
for hypermasculine Black men, particularly among White gay men.
This extends to the representation of Black bodies themselves and even
the degree to which Black men can access social categories of gay masculi-
nity. Dyer (1997) notes that the very social construction of “muscle man” is
largely confined to Whites, which suggests that the gay Clone/Muscle culture
discussed earlier is only accessed by White gay men. The avenues of mascu-
linity afforded to Black gay men are distinct from those available to White
gay men. While Black men are allowed to be muscular and are perceived as
masculine when adhering to larger social scripts of masculinity, their mas-
culinity must be presented differently than that of White gay men. Indeed,
the masculinity of Black men has a different social interpretation.
Levine (1998) notes that Black gay Clones are inherently different from
White ones, where Black clones were perceived as being more dangerous
than White men. To the extent that Black men had “currency” in gay clone
culture, it was due to their association with danger and explicitly rough
masculinity. White muscularity, according to Dyer, is related to White
supremacy and the product of careful management of their diet and
physique. Among Black men, this is stigmatized as being the by-product
of time spent in incarceration (a criminalization, where Black muscularity
is due to a “prison gym build”), playing sports, or attributed to “genetics”
or “natural ability” and therefore not due to mindful and purposeful
choices regarding diet and training. The leisure needed to partake in weight
training is attributed to affluence in Whites and deviance in Blacks.
Similarly, the mental acumen and diligence needed to maintain a strict
 Social Science Theories of Male Sex Work 129

physical and dietary regimen is attributed to discipline and intelligence in

Whites and genetic endowments in Blacks. To Dyer, this works to deprive
Black muscularity of the perception that it is due to achievement, which is
inherently granted to White muscularity. As such, the same embodiment
of hegemonic masculinity, and the gay modifications thereof, are con-
structed and interpreted along racial lines that limit the ways that Black
men can adopt gay masculinities.
The development of gay masculinities took place in gay neighborhoods
that developed after the Second World War.54 These spaces, then and now,
are overwhelmingly White. Nero (2005) notes that these locations are
places of explicit racial hostility and sexual hospitality to particular types
of gay men. While not specifically mentioning earlier ethnographic work,
Nero delineates the ways in which Blackness is made incompatible with
gayness by White gay men, largely due to Black gay men being savage and
violent.55 This is similar to the ways in which Black masculinity is con-
structed as being hyper-violent, dangerous, and beyond redemption to the
point of pathology.56 The construction of Black masculinity by White gay
men justifies the social exclusion of Black men from gay communities at
the time when explicitly gay masculinities were being defined. This social
exclusion of Black gay men did not extend to sexual relations, however.
In sexual relations the same constructions that rendered them socially
unacceptable also made them sexually desirable.
This hypermasculinity among Black men is a direct result of sexualized
racial fetishism in gay communities, concomitant with social exclusion.57
In social surveys of gay men, more than three-quarters of White gay men
believed that Black men were the most well-endowed sexual partners.
More than 80 percent of Black gay men have reported feeling sexually
objectified because of their race by White gay men. More than 60 percent of
White gay men believe that Black men are sexually dominant.58 This
objectification is not the generalized fetishism of a dark body, it is the
explicit fetishization of the supposed link between race and penis length
and girth. In fact, white gay men have adopted an acronym to describe the
genitals of black men: “BBC,” which stands for “big black cock.”59 The BBC
acronym is ubiquitous among gay men on dating sites, in pornography,
and in other gay sexual spaces. Its use extends beyond penis size itself to
encompass a number of sexual traits that would establish Black men as
prized sexual partners. It often includes specific mention of dominance,
aggressiveness, and the submission of the White partner. Its use is not in
reference to penis size, which may be a sign of masculinity in a general
sense, but in particular to Black penis size.
130 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

The stereotype of the sexually dominant Black men, rather than being an
agent of fear, is celebrated for his hypersexual behavior, appearance, and
conduct. As noted earlier, the general level of social interaction between
Black and White gay men is relatively low, and occurs chiefly over sex.60
Black men who demonstrate hypermasculine and sexually aggressive beha-
vior are offered entry into White gay spaces, but this entry is limited to
sexual liaisons. McBride (2005), for example, notes the limited range to
which Black men interact with Whites in gay pornography, where the vast
majority of Black performers are “tops” and adopt a “thug” persona. In
a strictly sexual space, Black men who adopt an aggressive persona and
who convincingly display sexual dominance may be particularly prized for
sexual encounters.
It is useful to note how this sexual hierarchy upends a traditional gender
interpretation. In a gender theory, the dominance of one over another
would, by definition, signal the power of the dominant group. In this sexual
space, however, the dominance of Black men is not general. While Black
men are seen as sexually aggressive men, they are still socially controlled.
The submission of White men to this dominance is entirely voluntary and
has as its purpose the sexual fulfillment of White men. Unlike the submission
of women, the submission of White men to Black sexual dominance does not
negate their higher social standing. In many respects, it reinforces racial
hierarchies by allowing White access to Black bodies for White sexual
fulfillment. The actual dominance or submission that takes place is still
done under a racial hierarchy in which Whites are in control of Black bodies
and where White sexual pleasure is prioritized over Black sexual pleasure.
This racially sexualized space is firmly within a racial hierarchy. Many
White scholars of gay sexual organization imply that sexual intimacy
between Black and White men fosters a sense of sexual kinship.61 These
sorts of claims are at odds with the lack of racial equality in White gay
sexuality. In such a racialized space, kinship, to the extent that it exists, is
not the same as equality. This sexualized space offers a clear form of racial
control and prescribed behavior that is predicted on stereotypical views of
Black male bodies, Black sexuality, and the perceived superiority of White
sexual partners. Indeed, many scholars of “sexual racism” in gay commu-
nities point to the explicit exclusion of non-White partners, but pay little
attention to the limits on how non-White men are included and the
limitations on that inclusion.62 The inclusion of non-White men in these
sexual spaces carries a different, but related, set of racial presumptions. For
example, the inherent limitations placed on Black masculinity in White gay
spaces requires that any arguments of egalitarian practice in interracial
 Social Science Theories of Male Sex Work 131

sexual spaces obviate the racial structures that oversee these interactions.
Inclusion is not the opposite of exclusion.
This racial control extends to those who would seek to defy the stereo-
type. Since White gay men desire Black men as sexually aggressive partners,
those Black men who defy such restrictions would not be desired. This, in
and of itself, suggests that there are limits to the sexual pleasure that Black
men can expect when operating within gay masculine norms. Such racial
stereotypes could also give rise to markedly lower values for men who defy
racial-sexual stereotypes, and become in this particular instance counter-
hegemonic. Robinson (2008) finds that Black men who do not conform to
the stereotype of the hypermasculine Black male are largely ignored and
devalued by White gay men, suggesting that the penalties for nonconfor-
mity may be particularly harsh. This again is counter to a traditional
interpretation of sexual dominance.
The reverse is true for Asians, whose passivity and docility are celebrated.
In racialized gay masculinity, Asian men lack the socially constructed
“maleness” conferred upon others. In terms of personality, Asian men are
perceived to be docile, compliant, and lacking in the hegemonic traits that
would confer “inherent maleness” to them.63 Robinson (2007, 2008), Phua
and Kaufman (2003), and Han (2006) describe the persistent stereotype that
Asian men should be passive, docile “bottoms.” More than half of White gay
men believe that Asian men are sexually submissive.64
Just as there are stereotypes about Black penis size and masculinity,
there exist stereotypes about Asian penis size and masculinity. The racial
stereotypes about the sexual submissiveness of Asian men are not inde-
pendent of the racial stereotypes about Asian penis size. In surveys, more
than 75 percent of White gay men believe that Asian men have small
penises.65 The fact that penis size is so related to race and sexual stereotypes
for Asian men, but in a different direction than for Black men, shows the way
that gay masculinity interacts with racially specific stereotypes and creates
distinct rules of masculinity for specific types of men.
Those Asian men who perform in a traditionally submissive role would
be seen as conforming to their racially based stereotypes. In this case, the
counter-hegemonic activity is for the Asian man to appear sexually
dominant or aggressive. As with Black men, this racial-sexual stereotype
allows the larger gay community to limit the socially acceptable sexual
expressions of Asian men. These authors and others have also noted that
Hispanics are celebrated as passionate, virile lovers. Indeed, more than
70 percent of White gay men agree that Hispanic men are passionate.
Although this can sometimes be conflated with sexual dominance, it is
132 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

difficult to discern. It is difficult to reformulate this racial-sexual stereo-

type into a specific hypothesis.
The intersection of race with sexual stereotypes shows that racial dom-
inance plays itself out in different ways for expectations of sexual dom-
inance and submissiveness. None of the sexual dominance or submission,
however, acts to upend the racial hierarchy. In this setting, non-White
bodies exist for the purpose of sexual pleasure for White gay men to the
degree to which they conform to racially specific norms of sexual behavior.
The sexual dominance of White men, the submissiveness of Asian men,
and the passion of Hispanic men are all socially controlled by Whites.
Some scholars would assert that the racial dynamics break the link between
sexual dominance and social dominance.
In a market for sex work, these social processes would play out in the
returns that sex workers would see for their services. While we may expect
White sex workers to be functions of hegemonic masculine norms, Black,
Asian, and Hispanic men may see very different realities owing to the
intersection of race with gay masculinities and hegemonic masculinities,
both of which place restrictions on non-White sexuality. This would be due
to the interaction of racial-sexual stereotypes and the fact that the demand
side of the market is dominated by White gay men, and specifically, given
the prices charged, White middle- and upper-class men who may or may
not identify as gay. While the theory posited above presumed that the
pleasure of White gay men was the driving force of the racial distinctions,
in the market for male sex work there is little doubt that the client’s
pleasure is directly related to compensation.
Given these racial-sexual stereotypes, it is necessary to consider how the
values of particular sexual behaviors differ by race. Phua and Kaufman
(2003) find that dating “preferences for minorities often are tinted with
stereotypical images: Asians as exotic, docile, loyal partners; Hispanics as
passionate, fiery lovers; and Blacks as ‘well-endowed,’ forbidden partners”
(p. 992). If the market for male sex work mirrors the gay community at
large, then we would expect Black men who advertise themselves to be
“tops” to command high prices in the market, and for Asian men who
advertise themselves as “bottoms” to command high prices as well, reflect-
ing the value of conforming to racial-sexual stereotypes.

EMPIRICAL STRATEGY
Previous quantitative work analyzing male escorts has not exploited the
prices of male escort services.66 I make use of the prices of male escort
 Empirical Results 133

services with a hedonic regression, a technique developed by Court (1939),

Griliches (1961), and Rosen (1974). The basic technique is to regress the
price of a particular good or service on its characteristics. For example, if
one were performing a hedonic regression of computers, one would
assemble data on the computers in the market and their characteristics,
such as processor speed, hard drive size, memory, graphics card, and
monitor size. A regression of computer prices on characteristics would
then give coefficients for each of the characteristics, which would tell us
how much computer prices increase or decrease, on average, for an
increase or decrease in hard drive size or monitor quality. This type of
regression is widely used in economics and is particularly useful for goods
that are inherently unique and/or bundled.
The estimated coefficients from hedonic regressions are commonly
interpreted as implicit prices, as they reflect the change in price that one
could expect, on average, for a change in that particular characteristic.67
It is common to refer to positive coefficients as a premium and negative
coefficients as a penalty. Using this insight, I regress the price of individual
escort i’s services (P) on the escort’s characteristics (Z), his sexual behaviors
(S), and identifiers for his location (X).
X
J 1 X
K 1
lnðPi Þ ¼ α þ βj Zij þ γk Sik þ δX þ εi ð1Þ
j k

The regression gives the implicit prices for each characteristic (each β)
and for each sexual behavior (each γ). I control for the escort’s location to
purge my estimates of geographic differences in prices.68 As I take the log
of price in this specification, my estimates are percentage price changes
for each characteristic. In describing the results, I emphasize the percen-
tage differences, but to increase the exposition I also give the dollar value
of the differentials based upon an average price of $200 per session. 69 It is
important to emphasize that these differentials are cumulative. For exam-
ple, a 10 percent ($20) price differential per session could lead to earnings
differences in excess of $5,000 per year.70

EMPIRICAL RESULTS

Physical Characteristics and Male Escort Prices

Given that clients in commercial sex markets generally tend to be older
White men, I would expect clients to prize youth and beauty, which is
134 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

–0.10%

–0.30%
Price Change (Percent)

–0.50%

–0.70%

–0.90%

–1.10%

–1.30%

–1.50%
Age Weight

Figure 4.1 Age, weight, and escort prices

consistent with female sex work.71 The theory of hegemonic masculinity

and the related literature on the gay body, however, also predict that
hegemonically masculine physical traits would be prized in the market.
Figure 4.1 shows the estimates of the value of age and weight on the
pricing of male escort services from hedonic regressions of escort prices
on these characteristics. There is a penalty for age, with each additional year
of age costing an escort 1 percent ($2) of his price. Similarly, there is a
penalty for weight, with each additional ten pounds resulting in more than a
1.5 percent ($3) price decrease.72
Figure 4.2 shows the results for body build, another characteristic that
appears to be important. Men with average body type face a price penalty
that exceeds 15 percent ($30), while men who have excess weight face a price
penalty of more than 30 percent ($60).73 Also, men who are thin face a price
penalty, although it is not as large as the penalty for those who are average or
overweight, being on the order of 5 percent ($10). This is consistent with
work that finds that the social penalty for additional weight among gay men
is large, theoretical work that describes the codes of body image in gay
communities, and the literature on the body, which suggests significant
penalties for weight among gay men, as both excess weight and thinness
have feminizing features.74 Men who have a muscular build, however, enjoy
a price premium of around 4 percent ($8). Indeed, only men who have
muscular builds enjoy a price premium relative to “athletic/swimmer’s
build,” the reference category. As muscularity is a physical signal of maleness
 Empirical Results 135

10.00%

5.00%

0.00%

–5.00%
Price Change (Percent)

–10.00%

–15.00%

–20.00%

–25.00%

–30.00%

–35.00%

–40.00%
Average Build A Few Extra Pounds Muscular Build Thin/Lean Build

Figure 4.2 Body type and male escort prices

and dominance and can be considered a proxy for strength and virility, the
premium attached to muscularity in this market is consistent with hegemo-
nic masculinity.
Surprisingly, race does not seem to play an independent role in escort
prices. There is no race that commands higher prices in the market than
any other. While some escorts of color have claimed in the media that they
are paid less than their White counterparts, I do not see this in the data.75
Body hair, a masculine trait, does not come with a premium in this market.
In general, this result goes against theories stipulating that there is a
hegemonic ideal with reference to body hair. On the other hand, gay
masculinities have been known to adhere to a manicured look for men,
consistent with what is seen for professional bodybuilders, who regularly
shave the majority of their body hair to accentuate the appearance of their
muscles.76 It appears that most personal characteristics other than weight
and body build are not very important in the male escort market, per se.
While this is somewhat inconsistent with the theory of hegemonic mascu-
linity, it is also the case that selection of men into sex work could drive the
lack of results to a certain extent. If the majority of men selecting into sex
work do so conditionally on appealing to hegemonic and/or gay masculine
norms, there may not be enough variation between them in certain char-
acteristics that would be statistically related to prices.
Importantly, the lack of any distinction due to other personal character-
istics is consistent with Levine’s (1998) notion that personal characteristics
136 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

are not important in the development of gay masculinities. For example,

neither hair color nor eye color is related to the price of escort services.
There has not been any evidence that particular hair or eye colors are
markers of hegemonic or gay masculinities. The desirability of a man as
a function of those personal characteristics is idiosyncratic (preferring light
or dark hair or eyes, for example), and would not lead to a strong statistical
relationship between those characteristics and prices in a market for sex
work. That is, the masculinity is sufficiently malleable to allow various hair
colors, eye colors, and other personal characteristics.

Sexual Behaviors and Male Escort Prices

In this section I show estimates of the value of advertised sexual behaviors
on male escort prices. Figure 4.3 shows the results for the value of sexual
positions. An important implication of hegemonic masculinity is the idea
that dominant sexual behaviors would be rewarded in the male escort
market. Consistent with hegemonic masculinity, the premium to being a
“top” is large, more than 9 percent ($18), and the penalty for being a
“bottom” is substantial – in some specifications it is nearly as large as the
premium to being a “top,” on the order of −9 percent ($18). The price
differential for men who are “tops” versus men who are bottoms – the “top”/
“bottom” differential – is substantial, ranging from 14.1 percent ($28) to
17.6 percent ($35), depending on how the model is specified.77

15.00%

10.00%
Price Difference (Percent)

5.00%

0.00%

–5.00%

–10.00%
Top Bottom

Figure 4.3 Sexual position and escort price differentials

 Empirical Results 137

Since there is little in the production function or inputs that would

necessitate a difference in prices, the marked price differences between
tops and bottoms is difficult to economically discern. These results can be
interpreted sociologically, however, as the premium attached to masculine
behavior in gay communities. The premium for “tops” is consistent with
the literature, which notes that gay men prize traditionally masculine
behaviors and sexual roles, and that the penetrative partner in sexual acts
is canonically considered more “masculine.” The fact that men who act in
the “dominant” sexual position charge higher prices for their services is
also consistent with the social acceptance of quasi-heteronormativity
within groups of men who have sex with men. As described earlier, gay
communities prize behavior that can be described as hegemonically mas-
culine, and this would extend to sexual acts themselves.78
There are other alternative explanations for the “top” premium that bear
mentioning. One possibility is that the premium may derive from the
biology of being a “top.” If “topping” requires ejaculation and “bottoming”
does not, this could limit the number of clients that “tops” could see in
a given period of time and could therefore drive the premium. Essentially,
there could be a “scarcity premium” for “top” services that would be
consistent with supply and demand. The search of escort advertisements,
however, revealed that “top” escorts who mention “bottoming” also men-
tion that they charge a significant premium for “bottoming” services.79
Similarly, a detailed analysis of client reviews and online forums did not
show that clients demand ejaculation more from “top” escorts than “bot-
toms.” I take this as evidence of the social penalty of “bottoming” and
premium of “topping.” While biology could certainly play a role, the social
position of “tops” appears to be the dominant force behind the “top”
premium observed in this market

The Intersection of Race and Sexual Behaviors

As I described earlier, the intersection of race and sexual behaviors could
shed quantitative light on many of the concepts at the intersection of
hegemonic masculinity and racial-sexual stereotypes. In particular, Black
men are expected to be dominant sexually and Asians, passive. I investigate
these intersections by looking at the interaction of race and sexual beha-
viors. Figure 4.4 shows estimates of the value of advertised sexual behaviors
for men by race, where each entry shows the implicit prices of the inter-
action of that race and sexual behavior (e.g., the premium or penalty to
being a White “top” or “versatile” White).
138 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%

0.00%
Price Difference (percent)

-5.00%

–10.00%

–15.00%

–20.00%

–25.00%

–30.00%

–35.00%

–40.00%
Black Top Black Bottom White Top White Bottom Hispanic Hispanic
Top Bottom

Figure 4.4 Sexual position and race price differentials

The results are striking. Black, Hispanic, and White men each receive a
substantial premium for being “tops,” but the largest premium is for Black
men (nearly 12 percent [$24]). The premium for Hispanics is greater than
9 percent ($18), while for Whites the premium is less than 7 percent ($14).
There is no statistically significant “top” premium for Asian escorts.80 The
penalty for being a “bottom” also varies by race – White “bottoms” face
a penalty of nearly 7 percent ($14), while Black “bottoms” face a penalty
that is nearly 30 percent ($60), the largest penalty seen in any of the results
in Figure 4.4. Also of note is the lack of a “bottom” penalty for Asians or
Hispanics.
The “top”/“bottom” price differential also varies by race. While the
differential for Whites and Hispanics is close to the overall “top”/“bot-
tom” differential (13.2 percent [$26] and 12.3 percent [$25], respectively,
while the estimates of Figure 4.3 put the differential between 14.1 and
17.6 percent), the differential for Blacks is more than twice the differential
for any other racial group, 36.5 percent ($73). These results are consistent
with the intersection theory outlined earlier, where Black men who conform
to stereotypes of hypermasculinity and sexual dominance are highly sought
after, and those who do not conform are severely penalized. These types of
stereotypes appear to carry over to the male escort market, and they influ-
ence the premiums and penalties for sexual behaviors. The predictions for
 Discussion and Conclusion 139

Asians, however, are not borne out in the data – I found no “top” premium
or “bottom” penalty for Asian escorts in the data.81

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This chapter sheds important quantitative light on questions pertaining to
male sex work, and in doing so we learn a great deal about gay male
sexuality in general. Drawing on the literature from a broader swath of
social science research, I highlighted some important questions about male
sex work that could be answered through quantitative methods. These
were not economic questions, but were related to how the social informs
the economic. I uncovered a number of facts that should stimulate further
research into male sex work and the related areas of gender, sexuality,
masculinity, race, and crime. In general, the results highlight the fact that
male sex work is markedly different, socially, from its female counterpart,
and also shows how some of the concepts of ethnographic, qualitative, and
theoretical work in social science can be subjected to quantitative empirical
approaches, including statistical tests of hypotheses.
Gender and sexuality, particularly cultural constructions of masculinity,
inform this market process a great deal. I found that personal character-
istics were largely unrelated to the prices of male escorts, except for those
pertaining to body build. I found that muscular men enjoy a premium in
the market, while overweight and thin men see a penalty, which is con-
sistent with hegemonic masculinity and the literature on the body and
sexuality. Conformity to hegemonic and gay masculine physical norms is
well-rewarded in the market.
I found that the premium to being a “top” was substantial, as was the
penalty for being a “bottom,” again consistent with the theory of hegemo-
nic masculinity and possibly an extension to the value that gay masculinity
places of sexual dominance. When interacting these behaviors with race,
I found that Black men were at the extremes – their premiums for “top”
and penalties for “bottom” behavior were the largest. This is consistent
with the intersection theory that gay communities prize Black men who
conform to racialized stereotypes of sexual behavior and penalize those
who do not. While the sexually dominant Black male is feared in hetero-
sexual communities, he is rewarded handsomely in gay communities.
The variation of the penalties and premiums also points to the possibility
that hegemonic masculinity is much more malleable than others have
suggested. The concept of gay masculinity must also grapple with the
140 Illicit Intersections: The Value of Sex Worker Services

matter of who is allowed to be masculine within a gay context and whether

or not that masculine presentation is controlled by another process, such
as racial stereotypes of sexual behavior. Here, I found that the racial
hierarchy exerts strong pressure on masculine sexual representations in
male sex work.
Given these results, the ways in which desire interacts with racial
stereotypes should be given focused and significant attention in masculi-
nity studies, particularly the ways that racial hierarchies influence the
construction of gay masculinity and its presentation. Theoretically, these
results should focus renewed attention on the complex construction of
masculinities among gay men, in which counter-hegemonic groups adopt
and reiterate hegemonic masculine norms among themselves, and expli-
citly reinforce hegemonic norms as a result. This is not only a reification of
hegemonic masculinity, but also an importation of racially restrictive codes
of sexual behavior. In particular, further work at the nexus of the construc-
tion of gay masculinity, its interaction with hegemonic masculinity, and
the interlocking forces of racial inequality would be a fruitful area of
research. While this appears in the market for sex workers, it could have
stronger or weaker effects among gay men more generally.
This chapter has made use of novel data to test theories of male sex work,
but several limitations should be noted. First, I have analyzed only the
largest website for escort advertisements, and it is not certain that the results
I present would hold for other website competitors. For example, if certain
types of escorts are more likely to congregate at different websites, I would
not be able to capture them here, and this would limit this survey’s ability to
describe the market in general. While the travel of male escorts certainly
links markets, it could be the case that the values here do not correspond to
the values recorded elsewhere, even by the same escort. Second, the infor-
mation in the advertisements is posted by the escorts and therefore con-
stitutes a self-report. While I have exploited independent data to confirm
the precision of the price measure, it is not possible to say with certainty that
there are not omitted confounders in the data. This is important, since the
conclusions here are about perceived market values of certain masculine
characteristics. Third, there may be omitted variables that would influence
the price of escort services that are not included in these data, such as
endowment, the escort’s education level, and expertise in specific sexual
conduct.
These limitations, however, should not be viewed as deficiencies, but
rather calls for future quantitative research on male sex work. For example,
future studies should look to analyze competing websites with a similar
 Discussion and Conclusion 141

methodology to confirm or dispute the results of this chapter. Similarly,

detailed analysis of client-operated websites that review escort services
could act as an independent check on the veracity of the information
posted in escort advertisements. Panel data on male escorts that would
allow us to track escorts over time to see how and whether their behaviors,
identities, advertisements, and personas change, would add an important
dimension to this literature. Unfortunately, the new policing of male escort
websites, which led to the closure of Rentboy.com in August 2015, make it
difficult to replicate the data collected and analyzed here. Also, with the
new policing by federal authorities, the remaining websites have made
pricing data more coarse or nonexistent, which makes it difficult to esti-
mate value.
The work also calls for new research on the interaction of race, sexuality,
and commerce, which can address issues unexplored here. For instance,
due to data limitations I cannot discuss the class dimensions that are
inherent in male sex work and feature prominently in hegemonic and
gay masculinities. An important question for intersectionality, in light of
the results presented here, is how race and sexual behavior interact with
class masculinities to yield premiums and penalties in this market. Further
developments along those lines would allow us to demonstrate whether
class distinctions also play a significant role. As this chapter has shown,
there is much to be gained from an integrated, interdisciplinary approach
to male sex work that seeks to use an economic approach to uncover the
economic premiums and penalties that stem from social behaviors.
The results here speak to the power of masculinity in the commerce of
male sex work, the values that men have in gay sexual markets, and the
strong links between gay and hegemonic masculinities.
 5

Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work1

How do male sex workers use social cues to present themselves to the
market? In street prostitution, the study would extend to the places where
sex workers congregate, how they distinguish themselves from others, and
how they signal to clients that they are available for hire. In the online
market for sex work, the presentations are inherently more technologically
advanced but must still communicate the same information to clients, and
perhaps more. This is even more important online since there is no
conversation to reassure clients that they will have a satisfactory experi-
ence. Also, a presentation online must be explicit enough to entice a client
but not so direct as to be off-putting. The advertising strategy in the online
market must be sophisticated, taking cues from social norms about how
gay sex is advertised and how to most effectively communicate one’s
desirability and specific sexual expertise. Online sex workers must com-
municate their ability to fulfill client demand without personal contact.
Given the need to communicate nonverbally through digital media, the
study of online sex work provides an opportunity to analyze how culture
and society regulate the presentation of sexual services. Sex work is, at
a minimum, a performed exchange.2 This performance goes beyond sim-
ple marketing of a known product, because sexual experiences are inher-
ently unique. The sale of male sexual services online requires that sex
workers construct images that should be studied in light of the ways
male sex workers develop an online persona to secure clients. In a strict
marketing sense, sex workers present themselves to clients and advertise
what they will do. But in sex work, sex workers are advertising a persona-
lized, experiential service. This includes not only sex acts, but sexual
persona, fantasies, and the ability to have an experience that can many
times be at odds with the reality of the sexual exchange. For example, a sex
worker who advertises himself to be a “boy next door” is fulfilling a very

142
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 143

different role than one who advertises himself to be a “bad boy” or some
other sexual archetype. Clients are seeking not simply money for sex in
a pure transaction, but an intimate experience with a particular man who is
desired both for who he is specifically and for what he represents generally
to a client. It is an odd combination of needing to be an individual (lest
a client hire another sex worker) but simultaneously a commodity (creat-
ing an image that clients will intuitively interpret correctly, sexually).
Both clients and sex workers adopt certain roles to fulfill client demand
for fantasy, intimacy, and other nonsexual services.3 These desires exert
pressures on the ways sex workers present their physical selves to clients.
Part of what is being exchanged is access to a sex worker’s physical body
and sexual performance, which includes a sexual persona. The body and its
presentation are part of the exchange, and therefore informed by societal
notions of desire, attractiveness, and sexual stratification. The issue here is
not how (or even if) the persona is related to prices, but what the crafting of
that persona represents in and of itself about client desires.
The social study of prostitution has a long tradition of analyzing these
effects, but the current literature suffers from two significant shortcomings.
First, most of the literature has focused on female sex workers.4 It is
unknown whether or how similar patterns of performance hold for gay
men in general or male sex workers in particular. When men are interact-
ing with men for commercial sex work, the forms of presentation and their
desired effects on the audience are very different. A female sex worker is
offering a different body under a different set of circumstances and to a
different audience than a male sex worker. For example, male sex work
allows us to consider how masculinity, broadly construed (other than those
of the normative heterosexual dyad), shapes the construction and presen-
tation of sexual selves in general, and in commercial sexual transactions in
particular. While this has been analyzed among gay men generally, the
social forces at play could differ from the sexual-social forces that would be
more prominent in sex work.
Second, and more important, the social theories pertinent to sex work
have been used in isolation. When studying the interactions of clients and
sex workers with respect to their social performance, theorists have not
considered how social theories may be used in concert with one another to
explain the regulation of the presentation of self. The study of sex work
draws upon a broad base of theories that highlight the ways in which
market forces interact with social norms regarding sexuality, producing
socio-economic presentations of sexuality, sexual behavior, and sexual
fantasy. The lines between the market and personal desire are blurred for
144 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

sex work. Sex workers must exploit entrenched social conventions about
sexuality and sexual behavior for profit. This means social stereotypes,
norms, and taboos regarding sexual behavior and desire are codified and
explicitly marketed for consumption.
For instance, Goffman’s (1959, 1963) concepts of stigma and the pre-
sentation of self have been applied to analyze the lives of sex workers. Sex
work is inherently stigmatized due to its illegal nature and the long-
standing cultural taboo against sex for compensation. In male sex work,
there are the additional stigmas of homosexuality and men providing and
receiving compensation for sexual behaviors. Sex workers must balance the
desire to advertise an intimate experience with an attractive partner against
the reality that some clients may be attracted or repelled by its clandestine
nature, the deviance assigned to sex work, and the social implications of
paying for sexual favors.
Queer theorists such as Butler (1990) and Connell (1992, 1995) offer
additional insights that can be integrated with Goffman’s theories to better
define sex work as a nexus where, in addition to stigma, gender relations
are made explicit on sex workers’ bodies. A sex workers’ sexual presenta-
tion must be seen and acknowledged as a sexual presentation by the
intended audience, and this acts to filter the salience of the presentation.
Put another way, clients must perceive that they are engaging with a sex
worker for sexual acts, and this is usually communicated implicitly. Gender
norms and stereotypes inform the ways in which sex workers present their
sexuality to the market. At the same time, sex workers have to be mindful of
the experiential nature of sex work – they are not just offering their physical
bodies but a persona and an interpersonal experience – the constructed
person that the client will interact with in the appointment.
One of the most basic market forces, product differentiation, requires
sex workers to tap into distinctions. Sex workers must offer a product
(themselves) that is unique and differentiated from others and at the same
time must share a range of attributes that would allow clients to categorize
the sex worker appropriately so that clients offer compensation consistent
with the product class. This is usually a neglected aspect of the sale of sexual
services. By uniting these theoretical approaches, I investigate which dis-
tinctions are most salient for sexual presentations between men.
Furthermore, theories of sexual fields show how features of collective
erotic life may lead sex workers to accentuate certain aspects of themselves
in their self-presentations.5 The collective (social) field gives us general
clues as to what behavior or sexual personalities are most desired and by
whom. While sexual field theory has sought to limit the prospects of
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 145

market behavior in the sexual field, in the case of sex work the market and
the field are inherently linked.6 Since sex workers are seeking the employ of
a client, they should be particularly sensitive to adhere to the broadest and
most general presentations that would enhance their appeal to a large client
base. At the same time, no sexual persona can be all-encompassing. Sex
workers must choose which features to accentuate and what archetypes
they will use to guide client perceptions.
To reach the largest market (client base), sex workers must engage with
the broader sexual field and take their marketing cues from nonmarket
sexual behavior. Whatever distinctions there are between the market and
nonmarket sexual fields, it is doubtful that they extend to what is erotic
and desired. For example, it is difficult to imagine the case where one type
of sexual presentation would be acceptable for sex work but unacceptable
for a private, nonmarket liaison.7 Indeed, it is the privacy that draws the
two together – a sexual presentation is inherently about private sexual
behavior. To the extent that clients desire an imagined, genuine sexual
connection, sex workers must promise and fulfill desires rooted in non-
market sexual desire.
Even more, sex work is not only a performance, but also relational.
Dominant narratives about race, gender and sexuality likely inform the
performances sex workers give and what specific relations are most fre-
quent in the market. Because of this, intersection theory, too, can provide
a framework for understanding sex work as an arena where racial stereo-
types are perpetuated through explicitly sexual interaction.8 The way sex
workers present themselves must take into account the ability of clients to
properly interpret the presentation as valid. For example, just as a thin sex
worker would be hard pressed to present himself as physical embodiment
of masculinity, an Asian sex worker may find it difficult to convince clients
of his sexual dominance, as it would run counter to prevailing racial
stereotypes about Asian sexual submissiveness.
The discussion above shows that a great deal of information must be
conveyed in an escort’s advertisement. It must communicate on a number
of levels, each of which is informed by societal notions of sex, sexuality,
masculinity, and sex work. Given the fact that sex workers are successful in
doing so, this raises the question of how sex workers do so. This, of course,
requires that we consider the ways that sex workers use societal cues in
presenting their sexual selves to clients. Does that presentation match with
what the theories above predict?
The study of sex work in this instance is a novel opportunity to bring
empirical analysis to the relationship between sexual, gender, and race
146 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

narratives in a specific social activity. Integration of the insights from these

multiple theoretical perspectives generates useful empirical predictions
and greatly enriches the sociological understanding of sex work and the
sexual spaces it informs and by which it is informed.9 Sex work is not only
an economic activity; it is also a social one. The sex worker is constructing
an image for clients, but is not alone in doing so. Being an image, it is a
particular form of social construction which, in order to be successful,
must be influenced by a large range of socially acceptable ideals about what
is being offered.
Because sex workers are likely compelled to present a self that leads to
the most financial return through the attraction of clients, they will be
attuned to the norms and values that dictate how they should present
themselves.10 Escorts face clear, market incentives that govern their phy-
sical presentations. At the same time, escorts’ personal attributes (e.g., body
type, race) and sexual proclivities constrain which stylized presentations of
self may be construed as both genuine and fitting for the escort, as assessed
by potential and actual clients. Presentations are inherently directed
toward a financial return, and as such reflect an escort’s attempt to max-
imize marketability, given the societal values and norms that apply in
sexualized spaces. Accordingly, the aspects of the self that online escorts
accentuate and de-emphasize for economic gain are fundamentally of
social origin and require sociological investigation and interpretation.
In this chapter, the focus shifts from being about the economic returns to
the presentations to being about the mechanisms by which those presenta-
tions are made and how they differ among sex workers depending upon
which social narratives they adopt about sexual persona. I combine rela-
tional (gender and economic exchange), performative, and intersectional
theories of sex work into a cohesive core that produces novel hypotheses
about how and why male sex workers may differ in their physical presenta-
tions to the market. I adopt an empirical approach to test hypotheses that
stem from integrating these theoretical perspectives. Specifically, I analyze
the posted photographs of male sex workers to assess how they present
their physical bodies to potential clients. In doing so, I closely align the
predictions about the presentation of physical bodies, which are generated
from multiple social theories in concert with one another.
This chapter provides a new means of linking performative, relational,
gender, and economic theories together, which then permits us to con-
ceptualize other social relations as affecting how male sex workers who
have sex with men present their bodies. Specifically, this integrated
theoretical approach illustrates the utility of simultaneously employing
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 147

Goffman’s (1959) concept of the presentation of self, Butler’s (1990, 1993)

idea of the body as a site of performance, Connell’s (1995) hegemonic
masculinity, Collins’ (2004) intersection theory, and Green’s (2008b,
2008c) field theory of erotic capital in understanding male sex work.11
By using the photographs male escorts provide to advertise for their
services, I am able to test features of these theories, and implications
that can only be derived from their interaction, by focusing on the
performativity and economic relations of sex work, eliminating many
of the exogenous factors (e.g., desire for romantic attachment, assortative
mating) that are potentially important in analyses of noncommercial
sexual relationships.
I hypothesize that male sex workers will largely adhere to dominant
narratives related to gender, race, and sexuality in their presentation of
self. For example, advertised dominance should display nudity in way that
conveys sexual dominance. The same would apply to submissive sexual
behavior. Statistical analysis of the data compiled from male escorts’ pictures
demonstrates that social and economic forces influence male escorts’ pre-
sentation of self.
I find that the escorts largely adhere to racial and gender stereotypes in
crafting their public erotic persona in an effort to secure clients. For
example, escorts who advertise dominant sexual behaviors have a larger
fraction of frontal nudity pictures, while those who advertise submissive
sexual behavior have a larger fraction of rear nudity pictures. Also, I find
that this dominant/submissive distinction is even larger when interacted
with race – black men who advertise dominance show the largest fraction
of frontal nudity pictures and the lowest fraction of rear nudity pictures.
This suggest that the confluence of racial sexual stereotypes and the mascu-
line ideals creates a situation where sex worker bodies are decomposed into
parts that much be accentuated to adhere to client notions of sex worker
behavior.
Perhaps most important is what is not found. There is no relationship
between this variation in presentation of erotic persona and prices in the
market. In other words, even though sex workers of different types present
themselves in different ways in the market, there are no economic returns to
doing so. This emphasizes the point that the pictures serve a social purpose
in tapping into social narratives about sexual behavior that must be dis-
cerned by clients to make the escort sexually credible, but which, by them-
selves, are not related to prices. The pictures assure clients that the escort can
perform the stated task, and they supplement the description by painting the
appropriate picture of the sexual persona claimed by the escort.
148 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

The synthesis of multiple theories applied to the arena of sex work

demonstrates the maintenance of gendered, racialized, and sexualized
hierarchies in the presentation of self among sex workers. The lack of
relation to prices shows this to be largely a social function. Further, the
findings demonstrate how dominant narratives about gender and race may
manifest themselves within the broader online community of men who
have sex with men (MSM), indicating how these narratives are taken up
and reinforced by gay men.

The Position of Online Male Escorts and Self-Presentation

Male sex workers’ online advertisements provide data on a group that
occupies a unique position at the nexus of masculinity, gay male sexuality,
and the commodification of the body. Given the interest in masculinity and
male sexuality, the analysis of male prostitution offers insights into theo-
retical areas that cannot be explored with female sex workers. The limited
existing research has identified notable differences between the working
conditions of male versus female prostitutes.
First, compared to their female counterparts, men’s involvement in
prostitution tends to be more transitory and sporadic.12 Additionally,
men tend to leave the profession earlier than women, although it is unclear
whether their departures are related to the fact that male sex workers are
much less likely to use brokers or other intermediaries who could increase
their tenure in the profession.13 Research also suggests men are less likely
to be dependent upon prostitution as a sole source of income or survival.
Male prostitutes also maintain greater autonomy in their general working
conditions, in large part because they exercise greater physical strength in
comparison to their clients than do women.14 Finally, some argue that men
derive more sexual gratification from their encounters with customers,
with males tending to reach orgasm with clients more often than their
female counterparts. Indeed, research on male escorts suggests for many
male escorts, prostitution represents another form of recreational sex that
just so happens to entail compensation.15
Research also highlights differences in the nature of sex work between
Internet male sex workers and street male sex workers, or men whose
initial transactions occur within public settings such as sidewalks, parks,
or truck stops.16 Mimiaga et al. (2008) report that while substance use
occurred in association with many Internet escorts’ sexual encounters with
clients, obtaining money for drugs and alcohol was not the primary
motivation for their involvement in prostitution. Mimiaga et al. also
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 149

found that street workers often used words such as “desperation” and
“survival” when describing their motivations for participating in sex work.
Conversely, Internet male sex workers often indicated that they engage in sex
work in order to pay for school or for supplemental income and that they
view prostitution as a form of casual sex that entails a financial reward. Given
these facts, it seems likely that online male sex workers would adhere to
noncommercial social cues in their sex work, as they see it largely as an
extension of their noncommercial sexual behavior.
Another advantage of studying male Internet sex work as compared to
other forms is that online advertisements allow sex workers to procure
stylized presentations of self that aim to entice a particular clientele. This is
a function of both the greater autonomy of male sex work and the compe-
tition created by the online sex work industry. Through the careful pre-
sentation of photographs, escorts present their bodies in ways that inform
potential clients of the type of sexual experience they are best equipped to
offer (exploiting their autonomy) and to differentiate themselves from
other escorts from whom clients could choose (product differentiation).
This differentiation stems from a source other than the face pictures that
male escorts use to overcome the problem of asymmetric information. The
use of face pictures is about the establishment of trust for the sex worker,
irrespective of the sexual conduct they offer. The pictures of their bodies that
sex workers use, however, are directly tied to the sexual persona they create.
It is in these photographs that they establish their legitimacy as being
authentic to the type of sexual behavior in which they are willing to engage.
Importantly, escorts may (purposefully or unwittingly) manipulate
stereotypes from both the gay community and the larger society in their
advertisements in order to more effectively entice clients with particular
sexual proclivities. Accordingly, online advertisements of male escorts
provide a unique opportunity for the sociological examination of how
structures of inequality inform the presentation of self. Indeed, in order
to seek the largest financial gain, escorts face clear incentives to fit them-
selves into sexual roles that are believable and widely popular. They have
clear incentives to turn themselves into a sexual archetype that is widely
acknowledged in the gay community. Put another way, escorts face clear
economic incentives to exploit, to the best of their ability, existing sexual
norms and stereotypes that best fit to their physical selves.
Online male sex workers enjoy a unique and arguably advantaged
position in the sex work industry. The advantages afford Internet male
sex workers more freedom to procure presentations of self that not only
entice a particular clientele, but also reflect their sexual proclivities. Despite
150 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

the centrality of advertising in online male sex work, to date no research

has employed sociological theories and quantitative analysis to explain
differences in presentations of self among online advertisements of male
sex workers. I synthesize a number of sociological theories to formulate
and test hypotheses regarding the stylized presentations of self among
male sex workers in an attempt to better understand how sex work
reflects larger social narratives about gender, race, masculinity, sexuality,
and intelligibility.

Theoretical Framework
I build on Goffman’s (1959) approach to the presentation of self in order to
identify the theoretical linkages between general interactional processes
and male sex workers’ self-presentations. Since I am using male sex work-
ers’ online advertisements to investigate how this population crafts a public
sexual persona while upholding larger social norms, Goffman’s (1959)
understanding of the presentation of self provides the theoretical founda-
tion on which I build the integrative approach. However, Goffman’s theory
does not speak to how the presentation of self is moderated by social
norms as they relate to stratification – the differentiation that would lead
to different perceptions among clients and among sex workers themselves.
This is of particular concern given the interest in how these advertisements
reflect larger social narratives related to race, gender, and sexuality. In other
words, while Goffman is the natural starting point for thinking about self-
presentation generally, insights from additional theoretical approaches are
needed to refine the hypotheses that develop. I first detail Goffman’s theory
and how male sex workers’ online advertisements act as a means of oper-
ationalizing the presentation of self. Following this, I provide an overview of
several other theories – sexual scripts, sexual capital, and theories related to
queer and racialized bodies – to argue that the presentation of self of this
population is moderated by additional social forces, thereby reflecting and
reinforcing social norms and inequalities.

Presentation of self. Goffman describes the presentation of self as akin to

a dramatic performance. Goffman’s (1959) dramaturgical theory is the
natural base for a theory of self-presentation because it affords a number
of “sensitizing concepts” that provide “a general sense of reference and
guidance in approaching empirical instances.”17 To that end, humans
endeavor to play various roles as well as possible, and engage in processes
of impression management so as to influence the impression that others
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 151

have of us. In this way, self-presentation is inherently contextualized. It may

be calculated or subconscious, practiced or spontaneous. Performances are
successful insofar as others accept the presentation that an individual puts
forth and act in accordance with it, which may or may not be part of
a performance on the recipient’s part. The effectiveness of one’s presentation
in turn is measured more by the resulting behaviors of others than by the
nature of the performance itself.
Male sex workers who post their pictures on a website to advertise their
services to clients are actively engaging in a carefully crafted presentation
of self. This is an online advertisement of sexual services. Through what
they choose to display in the photographs in their advertisements, men in
this market create narratives about themselves and their sexual proclivities
and expertise, all to the end of enhancing their desirability to the ultimate
end of securing a financial transaction. Because male sex workers are
selling a service, their clients must be sufficiently enticed by their presenta-
tion of self to motivate a transaction. Therefore, it is in sex workers’ best
interest to craft a presentation of self that will appeal to as many potential
clients as possible, thus leading to the greatest return.18
It is also critical that the presentation be read as authentic. Goods and
services can be deemed inappropriate and disregarded if they are not
imbued with qualities the seller or provider claims they embody.19 For
instance, a White escort would find great difficulties in securing a clien-
tele base if he were to attempt to appeal to clients who desire men of color
as sexual partners. A large escort will have difficulty appealing to client
demand for lithe physiques. Accordingly, sex workers must make their
performances intelligible to potential clients by expressing certain quali-
ties that they actually possess, or would be presumed to possess. Sex
workers thus consider the type of desirable experiences and services
they can reliably provide to their customers, and would appear authentic
to customers, when crafting their online persona. For the escort, this
process entails taking the role of potential clients, identifying their sexual
proclivities, and assessing which types performances would be deemed
intelligible (from the standpoint of the client), given demographic, bod-
ily, and behavioral characteristics. It is through this process that one
maximizes sexual desirability by developing a self-presentation that
accentuates the types of services one is best equipped to perform.
Since the focus is on images male sex workers post of themselves to
generate a particular reaction – that is, an exchange of sex for money – I
focus these men’s fronts, which Goffman defines as “the part of an indivi-
dual’s performance which regularly functions in a general and fixed
152 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

fashion to define the situation for those who observe the performance.”20
Goffman does make a distinction between what is being presented versus
the backstage, where confidants or insiders may be given a less polished,
less rehearsed – that is, more intimate and authentic – presentation of self.
This study’s design draws strength from its exclusive focus on the front as
opposed to the backstage. Advertisements are deliberate acts by the seller to
pique the interest of potential buyers unknown to the escort. As such, they
are inherently front, and indeed, may entice buyers by offering the possi-
bility of viewing the backstage. For example, Bernstein (2007) sees sex work
as a type of “bounded authenticity” (p. 6) wherein sex workers maintain
a façade of emotional investment for the client’s pleasure while also main-
taining the commercial, transactional nature of sex work.
The study of male sex workers provides a unique opportunity to
employ Goffman’s theory, as the preponderance of male sex workers
secure clients through independent efforts and without intermediaries
such as pimps or strip clubs.21 For example, other research has shown
that male escorts take great care to convey their honesty and scrupulous-
ness to clients, which is necessary as there is no intermediary who can
guarantee the veracity of the information conveyed.22 Because the
respondents maintain control over their fronts, it is assumed that they
will do their utmost to create whatever reality will be the most desirable to
clients, therefore making the most money.
While Goffman’s theory offers a number of sensitizing concepts that
inform the approach, it does not provide definitive concepts, which refer
“precisely to what is common to a class of objects, by the aid of a clear
definition in terms of attributes or fixed benchmarks.”23 Importantly,
individual sexual desire is socially constructed and shaped by larger struc-
tures of inequality as well as meanings of sexual behavior and personal
attributes that are shared by actors who are differentially situated within
sexual fields.24 Goffman’s concept tells us that the men in this market will
craft presentations to elicit an erotic response from clients, but how that
response would be elicited (what that performance would contain)
requires further development. Further theoretical analysis must distin-
guish what will be presented and why. Accordingly, I draw upon a
number of sociological theories in order to construct informed hypoth-
eses that point to what strategies male sex workers might use in selecting
their photographic images in their online presentations of self.

Sexual scripts. Sexual scripting theory provides insight into processes

involved in the ordering of events within individual sexual encounters.25
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 153

Building on Goffman’s theory of the presentation of self, which includes

dramaturgical theory and social learning theory, Gagnon and Simon note
that individuals enact social scripts throughout sexual situations. Among
other things, sexual scripts allow actors to demonstrate a learned compe-
tence regarding the meaning of internal states (i.e., sexual desire), provide
cultural templates for the sequencing of action in sexual exchanges,
and help individuals identify proper contexts for sexual practice and set
limits on sexual responses. Sexual scripts also allow for the disclosure and
expression of desired acts within sexualized encounters, which facilitate
sexual satisfaction and the realization of biological events (i.e., sexual
stimulation, orgasm) through the fulfillment of individualized desires.26
In the case male sex workers, the client/escort dialogue regarding inter-
personal scripts to be performed begins when a potential client first views
an escort’s advertisement. Escorts profess knowledge regarding the roles
and ordering of events of particular sexual scripts in part through expres-
sing certain aspects of their erotic personas in their advertisements. In an
escort advertisement, escorts note their prices or services, the sexual
services they provide, and further details about their persona through
text. Equally important, the advertisements are accompanied by pictures,
as many as 12 in the data source.
Photographs serve as concrete evidence that an escort is who he purports
to be. Such expressive actions are important precursors to exchange, as
they help persuade clients that the price of the exchange is appropriate and
ensure that both parties involved are aware of, and will subsequently agree
upon, the interpersonal script that is to be enacted in the sexual encounter.
They can also encourage a client to schedule an appointment, as they act as
a bond – a client can quickly ascertain whether an escort is “as advertised”
before becoming further entangled. Ultimately, the expression of one’s
erotic persona is an important mechanism through which escorts assure
clients that they will be able to enact the desired script that is most likely
necessary for customer satisfaction. The script that the men follow is
inherently one that is social, as they must appeal to a large group of men
from which their clients will be selected.
Importantly, the script used by male sex workers must simultaneously
serve two distinct purposes. It must give the client some insight into escort
personality and disposition while at the same time clearly communicating
about sexual expertise. The script must form a cohesive core where the
personality advertised (“laid back” or “aggressive” for example) matches
with the sexual behaviors that the escort has indicated that they provide.
Experiences assured to be “fun” may well be accompanied by different
154 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

pictures than those advertising “aggression,” and sex workers must navi-
gate how much play they will allow themselves between extremes. The
most important part of this is that, irrespective of the escort’s claim, the
clients reviewing the advertisement must immediately recognize it and
authenticate it.

Erotic capital. Emphasizing “erotic capital” provides additional motiva-

tion for strategically presenting one’s erotic persona in escort advertise-
ments. Green (2008b, 2008c) conceives of erotic capital as “the quality
and quantity of attributes that an individual possesses, which elicit an
erotic response in another” (2008b, p. 29). Green describes erotic capital
as consisting of a variety of eroticized personal features, including bodily
characteristics (e.g., breast size, height, hair color) and eroticized cultural
styles (e.g., the archetypal sexual fantasy centered on the Catholic school-
girl). Most important to the present analysis, erotic capital is expressed
through affective presentations that signal the embodiment of desirable
qualities, such as dominance, submissiveness, or sexual versatility. Building
on this notion, Hakim (2011) proposes that erotic capital consists of a
number of other elements, including social charm and physical beauty, as
well as sexuality itself, which comprises sexual competence, stamina, erotic
imagination, playfulness, and other personal characteristics that partners
find sexually satisfying.
Erotic capital is both inherent and constructed, and is limited by one’s
characteristics and social position. For example, if one is lithe, his or her
erotic capital would be constrained as it would be difficult to parlay that
physical presentation into one of dominance. The same may be true of a
man with a muscular physique. Similarly, a man with a large number of
tattoos may find it difficult to enact the schoolboy fantasy. That is, while
some men may have more erotic capital than others, one can enhance their
erotic capital by capitulating to the erotic norms that best emphasize their
own physical, psychological, and erotic selves.
Escorts must be acutely aware of both the erotic capital they possess and
the sexual scripts that their potential customers desire to perform. Even
more, escorts must be aware of how best to effectively transmit their erotic
capital through their presentations. The ultimate aim of their advertise-
ments is to formulate and convey an erotic persona that best highlights
their erotic capital in a way that convinces potential clients that they will be
able to perform interpersonal scripts in a desired manner. This implies that
escorts emphasize certain aspects of their personas that command the most
erotic capital among the generalized “other” that makes up their client
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 155

base. Thus, while an escort may actually possess erotic capital that is
desirable to a certain clientele (e.g., aptitude in fulfilling the bottom role),
he likely accentuates other, often opposing, forms of erotic capital if it will
result in a more profitable exchange or greater market share. In other
words, escorts will emphasize the sexual roles that they can authentically
convey and that have the most marketability and believability among a
naïve client base. This is at the heart of presentation – the muscular escort
may in fact be quite submissive, but that performance may not be perceived
as authentic. Escorts are advertising to the largest possible market.
As a result, larger social narratives about what is sexually desirable – or
sexually desired – should influence how these sex workers choose to craft
their erotic personas in an attempt to secure clientele.
A specifically gay embodiment of erotic capital is what Levine (1998)
referred to as “hotness” in gay sexual spaces.27 To be “hot” was to have an
overtly sexual persona that articulated the ability to be skilled in sexual
behaviors while at the same time being desired as a sexual object. The most
interesting aspect of “hotness” was that it was specified by and for gay men.
While erotic capital can be thought of as general, “hotness” is the capital
with specifically high returns among gay men. For obvious reasons, male
escorts need to communicate “hotness” to their clients, as it simultaneously
signals their ability to provide an exceptional sexual experience to clients
and their condition as the type of man whom clients would prefer to have
the experience with. Since both are important, the impression manage-
ment that escorts engage in must effectively communicate both aspects of
the experience to the client base.

Queer bodies. Green (2008c) notes that sexual field theory situates micro-
level processes within macro-level structural factors. In particular, Green
notes that power relations pertaining to gender and race shape the valua-
tion of certain forms of erotic capital across temporal and spatial contexts.
As an example, Green discusses Levine’s (1998) study of the “gay clone,”
a subculture where hypermasculine gay men were found sexually desirable.
Although Green mentions the role of hegemonic masculinity in determin-
ing what forms of erotic capital carry more value at any particular time and
place, a more comprehensive exploration of various forms of hegemony as
conceptualized by other theorists leads us to specific, testable hypotheses of
sexual fields in online male sex workers’ advertisements.
The body is a site of discipline on which society enforces norms regard-
ing what is acceptable and desirable.28 Society constantly acts on the body,
demarcating the borders of who is intelligible and how we should make
156 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

sense of particular bodies.29 The line between the body and the perfor-
mance of gender is blurred. Butler (1993) discusses how our embodiment,
our physical presence in our own bodies, is interpreted through a social
lens. How the body is conceived, made material within the context of the
social, is influenced by dominant ideas about gender – what bodies should
be and how they should look.
Gay male culture in particular places a high premium on the body.30
Although gay men interact with the cultural messages about the ideal
body in complex ways, the dominant narratives of the muscular, toned
physique as a signifier for masculinity and the slender, waifish “twink”
body as a signifier of youth and femininity are still held up as desirable.31
Kane states that these two types of body may constitute an orthodoxy
within the literature precisely because they conform to preexisting nar-
ratives about gay male bodies and masculinity. Bodies that more closely
resemble extreme poles of gender performance – the hypermasculine
gym body and the hyperfeminine twink body – may command the
most erotic capital within the gay sexual fields.32 These bodies also
inhabit idealized sexual performances – the muscular man as dominant
and the thin man as submissive.
The desirability of specific bodies varies with the context. While gay
men have shown consistent attraction to muscular physiques, this is not
a universal.33 The physical features of sexual partners, particularly those
for temporary and anonymous encounters, have usually been associated
with greater adherence to the polarity between muscular and thin.34
In contemporary gay social networks, partners have shown a rejection
of men who are not “height-weight proportionate,” a phrase that, while
appearing to encompass a broader number of men, is most exclusionary
of men perceived to be overweight.35 In general, large men are least likely
to be sexualized in gay culture.
The politics of gay male bodies are extended through the negotiation of
behavior within sexual exchanges. For example, gay sexual encounters
often entail a differentiation of roles, in which one serves as either the
“top,” or insertive partner during anal intercourse, or the “bottom,” the
receiving partner. Penetration is often connoted with masculinity, and
being penetrated is thought to be a loss of masculinity.36 This negotiation
of roles may manifest itself in the context of online male sex work. For
instance, because the twink body is associated with boyishness and effemi-
nacy, male sex workers advertising themselves as bottoms may use online
advertising to emphasize parts of their body, such as their waist and
buttocks, that are more closely associated with femininity.37 Conversely,
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 157

because the mesomorphic, muscular ideal is closely tied to masculinity,

sex workers exemplifying this body type may be more likely to display
their genitalia.38 Because these men are trading on their bodies and sexu-
ality rather than qualities that may be desirable in a long-term romantic
partner, sex workers may rely on masculine narratives to determine which
position they should occupy during the physical act of sex with (paying)
clients. Clients, too, may actively seek out sex workers who adhere to gender
norms they find sexually desirable.

Racialized presentations of sexual selves. Green’s approach to sexuality

points out that erotic capital is unequally distributed among actors who
are embedded in particular sexual fields, which represent mutually con-
stitutive “socially stratified, institutionalized [matrices] of relations”
within which actors navigate, and onto which individual and collective
sexual desires are transposed.39 Sexual fields, as well as the structure of
social relations among actors within them, facilitate sexuality in part by
helping actors assign meaning and value to specific presentation styles
and personal attributes that constitute one’s erotic capital. In turn, struc-
tural features of sexual fields largely determine the hegemonic “currency”
of erotic capital that characterizes a particular sexual field. Individual self-
presentations of our respondents are in large part an effort to express that
they embody specific currency of erotic capital that dominates sexual
fields in which they navigate.
Green (2008c) suggests that sexual actors encounter fields of relations
that are constituted by “positions anchored to histories of marginality and
racialization.”40 Sexual fields are thus largely informed by, although not
entirely isomorphic with, stratification systems of other fields. Following
Green and others, it is important to acknowledge the potential for racia-
lized stratification systems of other fields to permeate constitutive elements
of the sexual fields in which sex workers are embedded. In other words,
racial stratification within nonsexual fields shapes structures of desire of
sexual fields, which in turn inform the ways our respondents construct
their erotic personas.
Long before the development of the Internet, Baldwin (1985) noted the
strict sexual codes for the Black body in gay masculinities. To him, a Black
man became the physical embodiment of a hypermasculinity that is inher-
ently relational as it truly reflected the insecurity of White men. The social
expectation that Black men enact and embody this hypermasculinity is
filtered through a gay masculinity that seeks to sexualize the image and
attach a phallic orientation to it. The penis – a representation of masculinity,
158 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

is enhanced if it is Black due to stereotypes of both Black penis size and Black
masculinity. This becomes the dominant, sexualized “big black cock” that is
prized in both the commercial and noncommercial markets. This practice
explicitly eroticizes Black men and their bodies, and has long been a feature
of White urban gay sexual behavior. For example, Levine (1998) notes that
Black men were seen as exotic sexual partners and the masculinity of the
White man securing a Black dominant sexual partner was enhanced because
he (the White partner) was able to secure a Black man. As noted by Baldwin,
this allows the Black man to become a conduit through which White gay
men attain greater masculine credentials. In essence, the White gay man who
can be a successful sexual partner with a dominant Black gay man has
revealed a type of sexual stamina and prowess relative to other White gay
men. Escorts would be certain to pay attention to these cues as they would be
a source of desirability among clients, and to accentuate these features.
As being the top is considered to be the more masculine or dominant
role, and as Black masculinity is commonly conceived of as overly aggres-
sive and hypermasculine, it would follow that Black escorts would likely
engage in a presentation of self that reflects stereotypes emphasizing
masculine characteristics.41 As noted earlier, the racialized sexual stereo-
types practiced among White gay men have rendered the Black male body
a collection of pieces that symbolize masculinity. In particular, White gay
men have fetishized Black male genitalia for its alleged size. The “big black
cock” is desired as the epitome of masculinity, and in this setting for use by
other men for their sexual pleasure. For a Black man with outward mascu-
line presentation, adopting a persona that assumes that they possess a “big
black cock” would be one with significant rewards. If this is true, than
a Black escort advertising as such must make this known to clients through
his advertisement. The advertisements therefore combine the notion of
intelligibility (they must provide the client with evidence that the body
presented is a body that can be interpreted as such) with the very real need
that escorts face to adhere to dominant social narratives regarding racia-
lized sexuality (which places social restrictions on whose body can be
rendered intelligible).
At the same time, Black men will also be especially likely to de-emphasize
cues that express submissiveness in their self-presentations. That is, displays
that would run counter to this narrative of dominance and large penis size
are likely to be unintelligible if not properly distinctive. There is also the
converse, however. Black men who may not wish to adhere to the dominant
narrative (in both senses of the term) will need to provide a greater degree of
assurance to potential clients that they can fulfill the submissive role, given
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 159

that they may be more likely expected by clients to fulfill the sexually
dominant role. In this way, escorts act to reaffirm and also distance them-
selves from particular narratives in ways that would lead to discernible
differences in presentation.
Another example of this would be Asians, who are presumed to be
docile and submissive. A related stereotype is that Asian men are not well
endowed. These stereotypes are the opposite of those for Black men, and
the result is a social emasculation of Asian men in gay sexual sociality.42
This renders Asian bodies as less masculine than others, and may cause
Asian escorts to emphasize their femininity as opposed to their mascu-
linity to adhere to these norms. The stereotype of Asian men as having
small penises would need to be actively counteracted by Asian escorts
who promise clients an above average endowment. Acting against these
dominant narratives would require effort to assert a counterintuitive
sexual persona.
The dual needs for definition and differentiation are key. Escorts must
first define themselves relative to the dominant narrative given their own
physical selves. While escorts adhering to dominant narratives would
theoretically predominate, those of a given type who are seeking a non-
dominant narrative would need to be particularly sensitive in how they
present themselves. For a given sex worker, the differences in presentation
would need to be substantial enough to be discernable by clients.
In the data used here, escorts record their own race. This is important, as
the presentation that an escort will employ should be internally consistent
with their self-identified (presented) race, as opposed to another form of
racial classification. Escorts may endogenously choose a racial classifica-
tion that would suit to best advantage their sexual presentation and vice
versa. In other words, the objective for the escort is to present a cohesive
sexual presentation that is consistent with the racial classification he would
adopt in an attempt to be intelligible and desirable to potential clients.

Hypotheses for the Self-Presentation of Male Sex Workers

The analysis of advertisement pictures allows for specific predictions
regarding the particular selves male sex workers choose to present to
potential clientele. These sex workers’ presentations of self are largely
influenced by preexisting social norms. The presentation of (sexual) self
that escorts partake in their profiles serves two primary functions. First, it
enables these men to express their mastery of certain sexual scripts that
clients desire to perform in their sexual encounters with escorts.43 Second,
escorts’ presentations of self also enable the men to express components of
160 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

their erotic personas, which the men must situate within larger structures of
masculinity, race, gender, and sexuality.
Male escorts’ online advertisements, then, provide a unique opportunity
to study the presentation of self as it relates to larger sexual scripts of
desirability and intelligibility. Goffman’s theory suggests that the escorts
will present themselves in a manner to elicit an erotic response from
potential clients. This takes place within a script, where the escort’s adver-
tisement and the pictures displayed therein form the beginning of the
script that will result in an exchange of money for sexual services.
In crafting these personas, sex workers use and display their erotic capital
to their best advantage, which is informed by narratives of desire and
sexual hierarchy in the noncommercial sexual field. Doing so requires
that they take into account specific narratives of the body and racial-
sexual stereotypes that act as a constraint on the amount and type of erotic
capital they possess and how they present their bodies to the market.
In general, these men’s advertisements will adhere to dominant concep-
tualizations related to race, masculinity, and sexuality. The combination of
the aforementioned theories leads to predictions that the presentation of
self of male sex workers’ bodies through their posted photographs will
conform to particular stereotypes.
Based on the literature, body type plays an important part in the sex
workers’ presentations of self. Waifish, “twink” bodies connote a feminized
erotic persona within gay popular narratives, which in turn is strongly
associated with fulfilling the receptive role during anal intercourse. I thus
hypothesize that men with thin or lean body types will display a greater
portion of pictures that display their buttocks, compared to men with more
muscular body types. I also hypothesize that thin men will display a smaller
portion of pictures featuring their bare fronts or the penis. Conversely,
toned, muscular bodies are more likely signify hypermasculinity. Men with
muscular bodies will likely desire to express masculine erotic personas,
which entail fulfilling the penetrative role during anal intercourse.
Accordingly, I hypothesize that men with muscular physiques will display
greater proportions of pictures featuring the penis and smaller proportions
of pictures featuring the buttocks.
Sexual scripting theory points to the importance of the ordering of sexual
encounters, much of which takes place prior to actual sexual exchanges.
I propose that expressing knowledge of roles within sexual scripts prior to
the sexual exchange helps escorts convince clients that they will be able to
execute the scripts that they desire to enact. Accordingly, I hypothesize
that men who advertise as tops or bottoms emphasize different features of
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 161

themselves so as to express intimate knowledge of their role within enact-

ments of sexual scripts. Accordingly, I hypothesize men who advertise as
bottoms will display greater proportions of pictures featuring their buttocks
and smaller proportions of their bare fronts. Conversely, I hypothesize that
men who advertise as tops, or the penetrative partner during intercourse,
will display a greater proportion of pictures that display their penis than of
pictures displaying their buttocks.
Finally, following insights from Green’s theory of sexual fields, I gen-
erate hypotheses regarding differential patterns of self-presentation on the
basis of race and sexual positioning. First, expecting that Black men
advertising as tops bank on hypermasculine conceptions Black male sexu-
ality within popular narratives, I hypothesize that the positive association
between top positioning and the proportion of pictures featuring the penis
would be accentuated among Black escorts. At the same time, I expect
Black tops to be especially careful to deemphasize submissiveness in their
advertisements. Thus, I hypothesize that that the negative association
between top-positioning and proportion of pictures displaying the but-
tocks to be accentuated among Black escorts. Conversely, we expect that
Black men who advertise as bottoms would have to exert extra effort to
assure potential clients that they can fulfill the bottom role because of racial
stereotypes surrounding African American male sexuality. I therefore
hypothesize that the positive association between bottom positioning and
the proportion of pictures featuring the buttocks would be accentuated
among Black escorts, and the negative association between the proportion
of pictures featuring the penis and bottom positioning would be stronger
among Black escorts.
For Asian men, we would predict that the sexual script would work in
the opposite direction than for Black men. Asian men would be more likely
to emphasize pictures of the buttocks to adhere to the dominant narrative,
and these men would de-emphasize frontal nudity. Those Asian men
defying the stereotype would need to show an abundance of frontal nudity
pictures in order to counteract the narrative of Asian submissiveness.

Data and Methods

Male escorts’ online advertisements
In addition to written information provided in the advertisements, men
could provide up to twelve pictures of themselves, for which they may
display any feature of their bodies, including the penis and buttocks. I
constructed the dependent variables from visual inspection of these pictures.
162 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

In addition, comparisons of the website from which the data were collected
to other large websites for male sex workers suggest the chosen site provides
sufficient coverage of the online escort market in addition to racial and
sexual behavior variation necessary to empirically ascertain the role of
pictures in escort advertisements.44

Dependent variables. The hypotheses are concerned with the association

between body type, race, sexual positioning, and eroticized presentations
of self. I examine two particular dimensions of eroticized presentations in
advertisements, namely one that emphasizes dominance and another that
emphasizes submissiveness. An escort wishing to emphasize sexual dom-
inance within male-to-male sexual encounters will feature a greater pro-
portion of pictures that display his penis. The dependent variable is the
proportion of pictures, since the proportion controls for differences in the
number of pictures that an individual escort may display.45 Importantly,
some pictures feature both the penis and buttocks. Pictures featuring both
the penis and buttocks were counted in both categories, meaning the two
categories are not mutually exclusive.46
It is important to stress that the pictures analyzed here are not in them-
selves related to the prices that escorts charge for services. For this reason,
I do not use escorts’ prices in the analysis. While face pictures are related to
prices, all other picture types are not.47 This does not mean that there are not
economic incentives involved, just that a direct link to prices is not evident.
Indeed, given that picture composition of frontal and rear nudity is not
related to prices, we might expect for there to be little variation in the type of
nudity shown. While the underlying sexual behavior advertised has been
shown to be related to prices, here the concern is with the performance and
presentation of those advertised roles. The presentations that I analyze here
are about how the escorts fulfill the expectations of the market, and how that
differs based on their self-descriptions.
The key independent variables include race, sexual position, and body
type. I include five binary variables that indicate whether the respondent
is White, Black/African American, Hispanic, Multiracial, or Asian.48 Body
type is measured by four binary variables indicating Average, A few extra
pounds, Muscular/buff, or Thin/lean.49 Finally, I measure sexual position-
ing with three indicators for the escorts’ advertised sexual behavior. First
I include two variables that signify whether the escort indicated that they
serve as a top (i.e., the penetrative partner in anal sex) or bottom (i.e., the
receptive partner in anal sex). Men who indicated that they are both a top
and bottom were coded as versatile. In addition, versatile and top, as well
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 163

as versatile and bottom, are not mutually exclusive categories, meaning

escorts may be both versatile and top, or versatile and bottom.50 Such
men would have values of 1 for both versatile and top or versatile and
bottom.

Empirical strategy. I use ordinary least-squares (OLS) regression to test

the hypotheses. The modeling strategy analyzes the relationship between
body size, race, sexual position, and race and sexual position and the
proportion of pictures featuring the penis and the proportion of pictures
featuring the buttocks. Specifically, I estimate the regression

Tij
¼ α þ βXi þ εi ð1Þ
Ni

where i indexes an escort, T is the number of pictures of type j, N is the total

number of pictures, X is the vector of independent variables described
above, and ε is a well-behaved error term.
I first test hypotheses regarding the association between presentation
and body types. Next, I test the association between sexual positioning
and the composition of pictures. Finally I test whether race moderates the
association between race and sexual positioning in the composition of
pictures for escorts.

Results
The empirical model features two outcomes – the fraction of pictures that
show frontal or rear nudity. Since the showing of either type would,
theoretically, be driven by different goals of self-presentation, I describe
the results by type. I first present the results in which the proportion of
pictures featuring the penis serves as the outcome and consider the
relationship between frontal nudity and discrete characteristics. I then
describe the results in which the proportion of pictures featuring the
buttocks is the dependent variable for discrete characteristics. Finally,
I consider the implications for the interaction between race and sexual
behavior with self-presentation.51

Body Type, Sexual Position, and Self-Presentation

Figure 5.1 shows the estimates of the fraction of pictures showing frontal
nudity by personal characteristic. The results show that men who advertise
as having average build display a greater proportion of pictures featuring the
164 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

0.06

0.05

0.04

0.03
Proportion Frontal Nudity

0.02

0.01

–0.01

–0.02

–0.03

–0.04
Average A Few Extra Muscular Thin/Lean Top * Bottom * Versatile
Build * Pounds Build Build

* Denotes Statistically Significant (p < 0.10)

Figure 5.1 Escort characteristics and proportion of frontal nudity

penis than those advertising as having an athletic/swimmer’s build, which

is the excluded category. The result is quite large – men with average builds
will show 50 percent more pictures of frontal nudity than men on average.
No significant difference between the proportion of pictures featuring the
penis were found between athletic/swimmer’s build and those advertising
as “a few extra pounds,” thin/lean build, or muscular build.
Figure 5.1 also presents the results from statistical models testing
hypotheses regarding sexual positioning and dimensions of
eroticized presentation styles. These results indicate advertising as tops
(i.e., men who are the penetrative partner during anal intercourse) is
positively associated with the proportion of pictures that display the
penis. The result is nearly as large as the result for average body size,
where men advertising as tops will show 50 percent more frontal nudity
pictures than other men. Bottoms (i.e. men who are the receptive partner
during anal intercourse), on the other hand, display a statistically
significantly smaller proportion of pictures that feature the penis. This
result is also large: men advertising as bottoms will display 40 percent
fewer pictures of genitalia than other men. These results provide support
for our hypotheses regarding top and bottom positioning and eroticized
presentations of self that accentuate sexual dominance. While men
advertising dominant or submissive sexual behaviors present their frontal
nudity to different degrees, men advertising versatile sexual behaviors
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 165

0.25

0.2

0.15
Proportion Rear Nudity

0.1

0.05

–0.05

–0.1
Average A Few Extra Muscular Thin/Lean Top * Bottom * Versatile *
Build Pounds Build Build *
* Denotes Statistically Significant (p < 0.10)

Figure 5.2 Escort characteristics and proportion of rear nudity

(able to provide either dominant or submissive sexual behaviors) do not

appear to show any statistically different effects.
Figure 5.2 shows the results for the fraction of pictures that feature the
buttocks. In support of the hypothesis regarding the association between
“twinkish,” thin builds and escorts’ presentation styles, results show that
compared to those with athletic/lean builds, men with thin/lean builds
display greater proportions of pictures that feature their buttocks. Men
who are thin/lean will show 30 percent more pictures of their buttocks than
other men. Figure 5.2 also indicates that advertising as bottom or versatile
is positively associated with the proportions of pictures that display the
buttocks.52 In fact, a bottom shows twice the number of pictures of the
buttocks as other escorts, while a versatile escort shows roughly 10 percent
more pictures of the buttocks. Formal statistical tests reveal significant
differences between the proportion for bottom and versatile escorts –
although both show more pictures of the buttocks, bottoms show them more
systematically.53 The results for tops are exactly the opposite. Advertising as
a top is negatively associated the proportion of pictures featuring the but-
tocks. Tops show roughly 50 percent fewer pictures of the buttocks than
other escorts. The results in Figure 5.2 support the hypotheses regarding the
association between sexual positioning and eroticized presentations of self
that express submissiveness in male-to-male sexual encounters.
166 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

0.06

0.04

0.02
Proportion Frontal Nudity

–0.02

–0.04

–0.06

–0.08
Black White Asian Hispanic Multirace Black White Asian Hispanic Multirace
Top * Top * Top Top Top Bottom Bottom Bottom Bottom Bottom
* Denotes Statistically Significant (p < 0.10)

Figure 5.3 Race, sexual position and proportion of frontal nudity

In addition to the body type and sexual position, I also tested for the
relationship with race and the fraction of pictures of either type. The results
show that there is no statistically significant relationship between race itself
and the fraction of pictures portraying one’s frontal genitalia. In other
specifications I find that there is no statistically significant relationship
between race and the fraction of pictures displaying the buttocks.
The results imply that race alone does not significantly influence the sexual
presentation of escorts. As with the effect of race on prices discussed
earlier, there is no independent effect of race itself on the presentations
that escorts use in the market.54

Race and Sexual Position Interactions with Self-Presentations I test for

interactions between race and sexual positioning in Figures 5.3 and 5.4.
In both instances, the “Other” racial/ethnic category serves as the reference
category. In support of the hypothesis regarding Black men who advertise
as tops and the expression of sexual dominance, results in Figure 5.3
indicate that black tops present greater proportions of pictures that feature
their penis than men who indicated they belong to the “Other” racial
category. Additionally, White tops display greater proportions of pictures
that feature their penis. In fact, both Black and White tops show more than
50 percent more pictures of their penis than other escorts. Thus, while
I find support for the hypothesis that Black escorts who advertise as tops
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 167

0.6

0.5

0.4
Proportion Rear Nudity

0.3

0.2

0.1

–0.1

–0.2
Black White Asian Hispanic Multirace Black White Asian Hispanic Multirace
Top * Top * Top Top * Top Bottom * Bottom * Bottom * Bottom * Bottom
* Denotes Statistically Significant (p < 0.10)

Figure 5.4 Race, sexual position and proportion of rear nudity

would show higher proportions of pictures that feature the penis, I also find
these men show roughly the same fraction of pictures of the penis as White
men who advertise as tops. Formally, there is no statistically significant
different between Black and White tops in the proportion of frontal nudity
pictures. For bottoms, there is no racial variation in the propensity to
display frontal nudity.
Figure 5.4 shows the results where I test whether race modifies the
association between sexual positioning and the proportion of pictures
that display the buttocks. Results indicate that Black, Hispanic, and
White tops display lower proportions of pictures that feature the buttocks
than men who indicate they belong to the “Other” racial category.55 Black
and Hispanic tops show 50 percent fewer pictures of their buttocks than
“Other” men, while White tops show 30 percent fewer pictures of their
buttocks. Formal statistical tests for differences in the relationship for
white, Black, and Hispanic tops failed to reject the hypothesis that they
are equivalent to each other, indicating that these three groups are not
statistically different from one another in their propensity to show fewer
pictures of the buttocks. In addition, Black, White, Asian, and Hispanic
bottoms present greater portions of pictures that feature the buttocks
than men of “Other” races.56 For men who advertise versatility, the only
group showing any relationship between frontal or rear nudity were
Black versatile men, who were more likely to show pictures of their
168 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

buttocks.57 For all other versatile categories there was no racial variation
in the propensity to show frontal or rear nudity.
The results for Black bottoms are substantively significant. Black bot-
toms show nearly three times as many pictures of their buttocks as other
escorts. Asian and Hispanic bottoms show slightly more than twice as
many rear nude photos, and White bottoms display about twice as many
rear nude photos as other escorts. Comparing the relationship among
bottoms by race, formal statistical tests revealed that the relationship for
Black bottoms is significantly different from the relationship for White,
Asian, and Hispanic bottoms.58 This implies that Black bottoms are the
most likely to show pictures of their buttocks, even relative to other
bottoms of different races. In addition, the slope for White bottoms is
significantly different from the slope for Hispanic bottoms, which shows
that both Hispanic and Black bottoms are more likely to show rear nudity
in their advertisements than White bottoms.59. Together, these results
support the hypotheses regarding race and sexual positioning and eroti-
cized presentations that accentuate and deemphasize sexual dominance
and submissiveness. Comparatively, men of different races do display
different personas to the market and present themselves differently based
on their sexual position as well as race and body type.

Conclusion
This chapter advances the current understanding of male sex workers by
incorporating Goffman’s insights into the presentation of self with those
from theories of race and gender, queer theory, and theories of sexual fields
and sexual scripts. These conceptualizations point to the importance of
incorporating multiple sociological theories in a study of male sex workers’
erotic personas. In their attempt to convert sexual capital into financial
capital, male sex workers present their bodies in such a way as to conform
to dominant narratives about masculinity, race, gay male sexuality, and
desirability.60 In this way, the self-presentation of these men tends to
uphold social norms, particularly those related to gender, race, and beauty.
The manner in which male sex workers craft and present their bodies
reflects on dominant sexual narratives within the gay community and
larger society.
This analysis tested theoretically informed hypotheses regarding the asso-
ciation between race, sexual positioning, body type, and male escorts’ sty-
lized presentations of self in their online advertisements. I find support for
the majority of our hypotheses. Male escorts who describe their own bodies
 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work 169

as thin or slender are more likely to show pictures of their buttocks, which
corresponds with the stereotype of the slender, effeminate gay male. Men
who advertise as tops display greater proportions of pictures that display
their penis and fewer pictures that display their buttocks. Conversely,
I found that bottoms display greater proportions of pictures featuring the
buttocks and smaller proportions of pictures that feature their penis.
With regard to race, Black tops were more likely to show pictures of their
genitalia in their advertisements when compared to Hispanic, Asian tops,
as well as men who advertise as other race/ethnicities, indicating the
centrality of the phallus in the construction of an aggressive, racialized
masculinity that is typically associated with the insertive position. Black
bottoms also displayed greater proportions of pictures that displayed their
buttocks. This result is consistent with Black men who defy the racial
sexual stereotype seeing a need to provide further evidence than other
bottoms about their ability to provide such services.
Perhaps even more interesting, this finding for Black men extended to
those who advertised versatility. While Black versatile escorts did not show
additional frontal nudity pictures, they did show additional pictures of the
buttocks. These findings indicate that, at least to some degree, male sex
workers are aware of – and re-enact – dominant cultural narratives related
to race, masculinity, and gay male sexuality, which include a cultural
terrain in which they are associated with hypermasculinity.
The predictions for Asian escorts were not borne out in the data. One
reason for this could be the fact that relatively few Asian men advertise
dominant sexual behavior. Indeed, there are twice as many Asian men who
advertise as bottoms than as tops. This is somewhat unsatisfying, however,
in that ten times as many Black men advertise as dominant as opposed to
submissive. At the same time, the very small number of Asian escorts
makes it difficult to estimate statistically significant differences.
Beyond the findings specific to sex workers, this chapter demonstrates
the utility of integrating insights from multiple theoretical approaches in
the study of male sex workers. Intersection theory, the sociology of the
body, field theory, and script theory all have important contributions to
make to the study of the presentation of self. I expand on Goffman’s
argument, using other, more contemporary sociological theories, such as
queer theory and intersection theory, to demonstrate the importance of
dominant cultural narratives in constructing a front within the context of
male sex work.
One consequence of the stratification of sexual fields is that particular
bodies command more erotic attention than do others in gay male
170 Show, Tell, and Sell: Self-Presentation in Male Sex Work

communities, but this depends on not only the body but also on how that
body is positioned. Equipped with particular body types, the male sex
workers maximize their desirability to the largest number of potential clients
by carefully crafting their online presentations of self. Importantly, I argue
that the men in this market rely on cultural narratives from the larger gay
community to construct erotic personas that will result in the greatest
financial return. This return is only indirect, however, which shows the
importance of a broader set of theoretical models to predict the role that
composition of pictures would play in this market. As is the case for all
sexual arenas, exactly what constitutes a desirable body in gay sexual society
is intimately linked to larger systems of gender and racial stratification.
Gender and racial structures of inequality are thus central in how these
men present themselves to their potential clients.
 6

Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

INTRODUCTION
Prostitution is a dangerous business. In addition to the constant threat of
arrest and physical violence, sex workers also face the risk of contracting
sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Given the large number of sexual
partners that a sex worker may have in a given period of time, research in
public health has long considered sex workers a potential vector of trans-
mission of STIs. Missing from this analysis is the idea that sex workers
become infected from their clients as well. A key question is the relation-
ship between the market rewards for risky sexual behavior and their health
implications. If sex workers are better paid to participate in riskier sexual
behavior, interventions aimed at STI reductions would need to recognize
this economic reality, as the short-term monetary benefits to taking on
increased risk of STIs may outweigh the long-term benefits of improved
sexual health, depending on the underlying risk, the risk preferences of the
sex worker, and the potential loss of clients due to sexual behavior change.
Researchers have found a substantial premium to condomless sex
among female sex workers in developing countries.1 The intuition is that
the premium is due to the increased risk faced by female sex workers for
condomless sex. These findings are consistent with the market providing
a monetary incentive for female sex workers to partake in riskier sexual
behavior with clients. Little is known, however, about the market returns to
safer sex among male sex workers. This gap in the literature is significant
for several reasons. First, the range of STIs that a male sex worker is likely
to be exposed to can differ significantly from that for a female sex worker.
Men who have sex with men continue to make up the largest segment of
the HIV-positive population in the United States, and baseline rates of STI

171
172 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

prevalence are significantly higher in the gay community. Estimates sug-

gest that one in five gay men is HIV positive and that as many as 40 percent
of HIV-positive gay men do not know their HIV status.2
Second, there is evidence that gay men have substantial attachment to the
commercial sex industry. Survey evidence suggests that nearly half of self-
identified gay and bisexual men in the United States have been involved in
the sex work industry, either as clients or sex workers, at some point in their
lives.3 Third, researchers have also found that male sex workers have higher
rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including HIV, than men who
have sex with men (MSM) in general.4 Fourth, dynamic models of gay sexual
networks suggest that the majority of STI transmissions occur outside of
main partnerships and involve men who are undiagnosed and untreated for
their STIs.5 Taken together, these factors show that understanding the
dynamics of the market for commercial sex is key for policies that seek to
understand gay sexual networks and to reduce the spread of STIs among gay
men more generally.
Despite the prominence of commercial sex in the sexual lives of gay men
and the greater likelihood of STI transmission in this population, the
underlying economic analysis of risk in gay commercial sex is remarkably
thin.6 While there is quantitative work that looks at female sex workers and
limited work that looks at male sex work in developing countries, there is
very little work that looks at the economic incentives behind sexual beha-
vior among male sex workers.7 Beyond this, there is very little evidence
from the demand side of the market: very few studies of sex work docu-
ment any aspects of the demand for sex work services. Sexual behaviors
and risk in male sex work involve a decision about the perceived economic
returns to specific sexual behaviors and the negotiations that clients and
escorts engage in regarding sexual conduct and risk management strate-
gies. To focus only on sex workers would paint an incomplete picture of the
inherent interaction in sexual conduct in a commercial sex exchange.
In general, gay men have more sexual partners, are more likely to have
STIs, and are more likely to negotiate their sexual behaviors in distinct
ways.8 For example, gay men are more likely to use smartphone and online
applications to meet sexual partners, and while this is increasing among
heterosexuals, it is still more common among gay men.9 Male sex workers
have been identified as men who inform their clients’ sexual practices,
which opens the possibility not only for STI transmission but for education
and change in sexual behavior among clients.10 If male sex workers have
the potential to influence client behavior, the positive spillovers from sex
worker interventions would be pronounced if clients would be receptive to
 Introduction 173

it.11 Naturally, this depends on the extent to which clients show a strong
demand for riskier sexual behavior. Behavior change or inertia among sex
workers and clients could have significant costs, since treatment for STIs,
especially HIV, are non-negligible.12
The focus on STIs such as HIV must be undertaken with care, however.
The social dynamics of HIV have changed considerably in recent years.
Since the debut of antiretroviral treatments in the late 1990s, images of
HIV and AIDS in the United States have changed from being images of
profound, acute illness to images of a chronic condition that is well
managed by medication. The changes with respect to sexual behavior in
response to these treatments can lead to higher rates of STI transmission.13
Rates of unprotected sex and of HIV infection and other STIs among gay
men in the United States have begun to increase after years of decline.14
The number of new HIV/AIDS cases among men who have sex with men
increased by 11 percent between 2001 and 2005, and new HIV diagnoses
have remained at a constant rate since 2005, even with the increased use of
pre-exposure prophylaxis.15 Irrespective of its cause, the controversy over
the increasing normalization of unprotected sex among gay men has ignited
a discussion over contemporary gay sex practices that has not been seen
since the early days of the AIDS epidemic.16 What is not known is how this
plays out among male sex workers and their clients.
The market for male sex work presents a unique opportunity to consider
the dynamics of these changes in a conceptually compact way. We can
move from abstract discussions of supply, demand, values and risk to
testable implications about the values of sexual behaviors in a way that is
not possible with the majority of sexual interactions between men.
The theory of compensating differentials hinges on the idea that workers
who undertake dangerous or undesirable tasks are appropriately incenti-
vized to do so.17 This would imply that clients have to compensate sex
workers for taking on the increased risk of STIs that comes with condom-
less (unprotected) sex.18 We do not know if such a premium exists for male
sex workers, nor do we know, if so, how large the premium is.
The social world of male sex work plays an important role in how this
risk plays out in the market. Not all clients of male sex workers are gay-
identified.19 Heterosexually identified clients participating in the market
have the option of free, anonymous sex with other men in public places,
and openly gay clients could find sex partners through gay establishments
or their social networks.20 Today, both types of clients can find sexual
partners online and through smartphone applications. These options,
however, involve their own risks – especially the possibility of unsuccessful
174 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

negotiation over sexual behaviors, given the rise in unprotected sex among
gay men and the inherent dangers of anonymous public and online
encounters.21 If clients use the commercial sex market to ease the negotia-
tion for safer sex, then sex workers would be rewarded with higher wages
for condom sex as it removes the need to negotiate over safer sex with
a noncommercial sex partner. Put another way, the client’s outside option
involves a negotiation about safer sex that may not lead to a satisfactory
conclusion, so the client is willing to compensate the sex worker for
explicitly agreeing to safer sex. The client is paying, in essence, for con-
tractual safer sex practices. Whether there are premiums or penalties for
condomless sex depends critically on what it represents, and that depends
on client demand, the clients’ outside option, and the reasons for engaging
with sex workers.
This chapter considers two related issues. First, I analyze the role of
attraction and desirability in the propensity to advertise safer sex in online
sex work advertisements among male sex workers. I find that young
escorts, sexually dominant escorts (“tops”), Asians, escorts with established
positive reputations, and escorts willing to service a wide variety of clients
are strong predictors of the likelihood of advertising safer sex services.
I also find that Asians who advertise passive sexual roles are more likely to
advertise safer sex. These findings are consistent with sexual field theory
and the concept of erotic capital – those most esteemed in the sexual field
have greater freedom to limit the terms of their sexual conduct – they are,
in essence, trading on their desirability to increase the terms of their
control over the sexual encounter and the range of behaviors they are
willing to partake in. Other predictions, such as those about dominant
Black escorts using their erotic capital to increase the likelihood of adver-
tising condomed sex, are not borne out in the data. In general, the degree to
which escorts supply condomed sex is related to their sexual persona in
other dimensions.
As noted above, client demand is critical to uncovering the source of
premiums or penalties in the market for male sex work. To uncover the
returns to riskier sexual practices, I exploit a novel source of information
about the male sex worker market to estimate the values of sexual beha-
viors in the market for male sex work. Using data from over 6,000 client
reviews of male escort services, I estimate the value of sexual behaviors for
both clients and sex workers. My empirical strategy mirrors the most
recent empirical approach applied to female sex workers by using sex
worker fixed effects to estimate payoff functions (to the sex worker) for sex
work.22 One key innovation is that I also estimate models with client-fixed
 Introduction 175

effects to estimate the values that clients place on sexual behaviors in the
market. To my knowledge, this is the first study to estimate client values
(demand) of male sex worker services, either male or female.
I find that clients and sex workers place different values on sexual
behaviors and for sex with condoms. While both clients and sex workers
value sex worker penetration of the client (“topping”) equally, clients place
a much higher value on mutual penetration (“versatility”) than sex work-
ers. I find that sex workers do not charge more or less for the use of
condoms in sex with clients. Clients, however, show a substantial will-
ingness to pay for sex with condoms. Estimates suggest that client valua-
tions for sex with a condom are roughly 15 percent more than the average
rate of an hourly session ($35). This is exactly the opposite of what has been
found for female sex workers. In decomposing the penalty attached to
condomless sex, I find that clients compensate sex workers for sex with
condoms when they engage in mutual penetration – client valuations are
not statistically significant when either the escort or the client is the
sole penetrant. Furthermore, the result holds when controlling for a host
of sex worker characteristics, which suggest that client willingness to pay
for sex with a condom is not a function of the particular attributes of the
sex worker involved but rather a general feature of the market. This is
consistent with client demand for condomed sex being different from sex
worker supply of condomed sex, which was shown to vary significantly by
sex worker.
These results are further supported through additional analysis, which
finds that advertised safer sex is positively correlated with wages. Sex
workers who advertise safer sex earn 5 percent more than those who do
not, on average. I find that the evidence is inconsistent with compensat-
ing differentials from economic theory. Sex workers who advertise sexual
behaviors more prone to escort STI infection are paid less than those that
do not – penetrative sex workers who advertise safety enjoy a premium of
more than 13 percent. To the extent that there are differences in STI
prevalence among sexual minorities by race, those from groups with
higher rates of infection should be compensated less for undertaking
riskier sexual activity. I find that there is indeed a racial and sexual
behavior gradient to this premium; Black and White sex workers who
advertise safer sex enjoy substantial premiums of 9 and 6 percent,
respectively. These premiums are also inconsistent with compensating
differentials.
This chapter shows that economic and social forces combine in the area
of sexual practices among sex workers. In doing so, there are several
176 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

innovations that advance the ways in which sex work can inform larger
debates about sexual health. First, the study adopts a novel approach to
empirical analysis of commercial sex by using online reviews to estimate
the values of sexual behaviors. The extensive online reviews allow me to
produce client and sex worker fixed-effects estimates of the value of sex
worker services. Doing so allows me to properly distinguish the values
that clients and sex workers place on sexual behaviors, respectively. Such
analysis would be much more difficult, and conclusions more tenuous, if
we used information such as advertisement data. While Logan (2010) has
investigated the returns to sexual behaviors and Pruitt (2005) the socio-
economic status of escorts, no study exists that looks at the market value of
sexual behaviors using transaction-level data for male sex work in the
United States. Second, the results show that, contrary to female sex work
clients, the clients of male sex workers place a premium on condomed sex.
While the positive correlation between prices and condom use is consistent
with findings reported using cross-sections of male escort advertisements,
the results here reveal that the client valuation of safer sex is the key source
of the premium. Third, the results here allow us to begin to consider the
ways that interventions with male sex workers may yield changes in sex
worker behavior that can lead to declines in STIs among men who have sex
with men. Indeed, the results here suggest that sex workers could well be
induced to provide safer sex irrespective of their own risk preferences,
since it is clients who place a value on sex with condoms.

SOCIETY, THE SEX WORK ECONOMY,

AND SEXUAL BEHAVIOR
Before considering the particulars of sex work, the context of male-male
sexual behavior needs to be delineated. There is now a large literature that
looks at the causes and consequences of sexual risk taking among gay men
and how they negotiate over safer sex practices, but many implications
remain unexplored.23 Earlier work looked at the ways HIV changed the
sexual scripts of casual and relationship sex that gay men follow, but more
recent scholarship notes how technology and the social organization of gay
life in urban centers encourages gay men to compartmentalize their sexual
sociality.24 There are relationships, which may or may not be monoga-
mous, there are casual encounters with the same person, and there are
casual encounters that are not repeated. Each of these relationship types
comes with a different set of expectations regarding behaviors, commu-
nication, and disclosure of STI status.25
 Society, the Sex Work Economy, and Sexual Behavior 177

While the period of the mid-1980s to late 1990s saw gay men moving
largely in lock-step to normalize safer sex practices in response to the HIV
epidemic, the rise of unprotected sex (“barebacking”) has been well docu-
mented over the last decade.26 Some have argued that the rise in unpro-
tected sex is the result of “condom fatigue,” a revolt against the institutional
drumbeat of safer sex messages that public health services routinely target
at gay men.27 In this view, the public health messages act as a form of social
control that implicitly reinforces negative stereotypes of gay sexual beha-
vior as uncontrolled and dangerous and simultaneously reinforces hetero-
sexual norms of mating and dating by encouraging gay men to minimize
the number of partners and limit their sexual behaviors. Recently, some
activists have called for “counter-public health” in response to these public
health messages, and some have suggested that gay men re-organize their
sexual behaviors in ways that accommodate unprotected sex, such as
engaging in unprotected sex with men of similar HIV status.28 The recent
dialogue over pre-exposure prophylaxis has highlighted this as men using
the treatment have not seroconverted but alter their condom use in light of
significantly decreased likelihood of HIV transmission.29
Others have argued that as the risks of HIV infection declined with new
treatments the “cost” of unprotected sex declined – not only are those who
are HIV positive better able to partake in sexual activity (and due to the
new treatments, highly unlikely to transmit the disease if they adhere to
a treatment regimen), but those who are HIV negative may no longer fear
infection.30 Indeed, to the extent that the preventative prescription medi-
cation is itself a HIV medication, gay sexual behavior may place less value
on consistent condom use. Some have noted that HIV-positive gay men
have created their own subcultures and HIV negative men may long for the
intimacy that HIV-positive men have created for themselves to overcome
the stigma associated with their HIV status.31 Irrespective of its cause, the
controversy over unprotected sex has ignited a discussion over the morality
and reality of gay sex and the sexual organization of the gay community
that has not been seen since the early days of the HIV epidemic.32
At the same time that breakthroughs in HIV treatment hit the market,
the concurrent explosion in the availability of Internet service produced
a virtual world where men could connect with other men for sex in more
convenient ways than ever before.33 Sex work is a part of this online
landscape, but the largest segments involve men meeting other men for
casual sexual encounters. An open question is whether the Internet
brought more men into gay sexual networks or influenced the sexual
behavior of gay men generally, but it is beyond question that the sexual
178 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

organization of gay communities changed substantially due to these

technological innovations.34 It is now easier than ever for men to contact
other men for casual or anonymous sexual encounters, yet at the same
time it is more difficult to negotiate safer sexual activity, in light of new
treatments, the difficulty in beginning a conversation about HIV status
and safer sex practices, and the reality of clandestine encounters that may
not encourage STI reduction best practices.

EROTIC CAPITAL AND THE ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE

FOR SAFER SEX
Against this change in gay sexual sociality, there exist dominant structures
that sexually empower some men more than others. When men have more
desirability in the sexual market, they may be better able to control the
terms of their interactions with others over sex. Public health research has
regularly shown that gay men with poor self-image and self-esteem are
more likely to engage in higher-risk sexual behavior.35 The same could be
true among sex workers, to the extent that some sex workers will be more
desired than others. The question is how desirability among sex workers is
related to sexual behaviors.
Qualitative research on male sex workers has informed our theories of
sexuality, sexual behaviors, and sex work.36 These studies have addressed
the sexual behaviors of escorts and their reasons for entering the profes-
sion. Little systemic data has been exploited, however, to look at potential
variations in the propensity to advertise safer sex by male escorts or the
nature of client and male escort negotiation. Just as escorts themselves have
different reasons for entering the profession, they may apply different
rationales to partake in different types of sex in the market.
Social scientists have documented the importance of self-labels for men
who have sex with men, which are strongly related to their actual sexual
practices.37 Escorts regularly use sexual behavior labels to advertise their
services to clients. This is a form of advertising – using the labels that apply
to noncommercial sex work to define themselves in a way that will be
discernable to clients. Little is known, however, about whether such self-
labels or other characteristics are related to advertised safer sex among
male sex workers. For example, men who advertise sexual behavior that
increases the client’s risk of HIV infection (such as a “top” – penetrative sex
on the part of the escort) may be prone to advertise safer sex as a way of
allaying clients’ fears about STI transmission. Conversely, sex workers
who advertise behavior that increases their own risk of STI infection
 Erotic Capital and the Ability to Negotiate for Safer Sex 179

(a “bottom” – receptive sex) may advertise safer sex for their own protec-
tion. Similarly, researchers have found that safer sex practices among gay
men vary by race, with Black men more likely to partake in safer sex than
White men, but we do not know if this extends to commercial sexual
encounters.38
Beyond the gains of applying statistical analysis to this issue, the deter-
minants of safer sex advertisements among sex workers speak directly to
theoretical insights about gay sexuality and sexual organization. Green
(2008b) has recently developed a sexual field theory to describe the ways
that gay men navigate and compartmentalize their sexual networks in
modern society. As noted by Martin (2003), field theory emphasizes the
regular interactions between people in different social positions. Building
on the work of Goffman (1959) with regard to situational negotiation and
Bourdieu’s (1977, 1980) model of routine practice, Green’s theory out-
lines how erotic schema become structured practice in gay communities.
Green’s sexual field theory explicitly considers how the interactions
between men having sex with men are regulated in explicitly sexual
spaces, as opposed to more general social situations. In other words, his
work takes as given the fact that gay men organize their sexual spaces
differently from other social spaces, which gives rise to a unique “erotic
field” that governs the interactions between these men. Such a theory is
useful for thinking about gay sexual relationships, given the different
norms in gay sexual behavior that have been well documented by social
scientists.39
Green’s theory is a nuanced approach the issue of how eroticism is
socially organized, structured, and constructed by gay men. The key insight
is that modernity gives rise to specialized, focused erotic spaces that can be
disconnected from other aspects of gay social life, but where the partici-
pant’s behavior is structured by the social elements they are disconnected
from in these erotic spheres. Gay men seeking sexual contact, as opposed to
romantic relationships or friendships, must still adhere to social norms
regarding racial, gender, and sexual hierarchies – although these hierar-
chies themselves may be different in erotic fields. That is, social structures
give structure to these uniquely sexual spaces, but the structure itself may
change, privileging a different set of men in sexual spaces since these spaces
are compartmentalized and held distinct from the larger social environ-
ment. For example, the type of man that is privileged for a sexual encounter
may or may not be the type of man that is privileged for romantic relation-
ships, friendships, professional networks, or other social interactions. This
theory is therefore quite well suited to addressing the questions of sexual
180 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

negotiations because it considers how the social structures create sexual-

social structures, and in looking at male sex work we can test the hypoth-
eses that derive from the theory.
Rather than being open or freeing, Green sees the sexual field as one with
clearly defined roles, hierarchies, and ritualized practices that apply to this
specific sexual field. These sexual structures must then be navigated by men
partaking in gay sexual behavior. A key strength of Green’s approach is that
it is explicitly intersectional – he carefully considers how the intersections
of race, class, gender, and sexuality give rise to the unique structures that
gay men of particular types must navigate in sexual spaces. The purpose
here is not to restate Green’s theory, but to use its conceptual framework to
think about how this theory can be used to develop hypotheses about who
provides safer sex in the male escort market, since male sex workers are
working in a sexual arena that will adhere to the larger social structures in
which gay men negotiate sexual behavior. Also, the hierarchies that exist in
the larger gay social structure would likely carry over to the practice of sex
work, giving some male sex workers greater control (less client negotia-
bility) over their sex worker practices than others.
The key conceptual framework in Green’s sexual fields theory is the
notion of erotic capital. Erotic capital is similar to other types of human
capital – it is a personal attribute that one can make investments in and that
may increase or decrease over time. Like education in the labor market,
erotic capital gives those well-endowed with it a higher standing in the
sexual hierarchy – they are more esteemed, have greater partner choice,
and generally have more control over the terms of their sexual liaisons.
In short, erotic capital translates into power in the sexual fields that gay
men navigate. When considering commercial sexual encounters, this
power translates into greater authority over the terms of sexual conduct.
Escorts with larger amounts of erotic capital would have greater leeway to
place restrictions on their sexual behaviors as they would face relatively
fewer sanctions for doing so. In essence, men can exchange their erotic
capital for restrictions on sexual behaviors. This power is highly variable,
however, and depends on the specific type of erotic capital and the sexual
field in which the man is operating.
There are two important features of erotic capital that distinguish it from
other types of human capital and are key when thinking about the pre-
dictors of advertised safer sex among male sex workers. Consideration of
each feature leads to hypotheses about who would be more likely to
advertise safer sex services. Green claims that erotic capital (1) gives rise
to structures in the way that gay men navigate their sexual landscape and
 Structural Hypotheses 181

(2) is simultaneously dependent on historical processes that overlay race,

class, and gender in gay sexual spaces. These two features are related – the
structures that develop are themselves functions of the historical processes
that give rise to differences in erotic capital. In the following paragraphs,
I begin with the hypotheses that derive from the structure and then discuss
the hypotheses that derive from the intersectional historical processes.

STRUCTURAL HYPOTHESES
The first distinguishing feature of erotic capital is that it structures the
sexual interactions of gay men. While historical dimensions tell us who
may have higher amounts of erotic capital, the structure that it gives rise to
tells us which roles gay men must play to realize the full potential of the
their erotic capital. A first layer of this structure is the well-known hier-
archy of sexual roles among gay men, where men who are penetrative sex
partners (“tops”) enjoy larger amounts of erotic capital than men who are
receptive sex partners (“bottoms”). This goes hand-in-hand with the reifi-
cation of traditional gender norms among gay men, and also the particular
penalties for sexual behavior that is considered feminine.40 The historical
gender norms give us a structure where men who are penetrative sexual
partners are looked upon to be initiators of sexual contact, to control the
terms of sexual liaisons, and to have greater choice in terms of the sexual
conduct in which they will participate (for example, penetrative sex part-
ners have greater leeway in whether they will kiss or perform receptive oral
sex). We would therefore expect men who are penetrative partners to be
more likely to advertise safer sex services – they have greater amounts of
erotic capital than other men, giving them more leeway to control the
terms of their sexual conduct.
The same reasoning applies to age and sexual experience. Gay men have
well-known and well-researched tendencies to value youth and younger
physical appearance in sexual partners.41 For example, cohabiting male
same-sex couples have larger differences in partner ages than any other
type of pairing.42 Younger escorts would therefore be more desirable –
have larger amounts of erotic capital – and would be better able to control
the terms of their commercial sex encounters. In some ways, this hypoth-
esis turns on its head the idea that young sex workers are more easily
exploited than older sex workers, but this is exactly due to their greater
amount of erotic capital in the sexual field.
Similarly, men with greater attachment to the escort industry – which
could be measured by positive reputation, length of time in the industry, or
182 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

popularity – would likely have greater amounts of erotic capital. Gay men
are known to have different norms about promiscuity (they are less likely
to shun those with large numbers of sexual partners), and others have
argued that gay sex workers are better integrated into the larger gay
community than their heterosexual counterparts.43 In a sexual field such
as male sex work, which I assert is not distinct from the larger sexual field
among gay men, experience and success in the profession would lead to large
amounts of erotic capital – popular and well-established escorts would have
greater choice over the terms of their sexual conduct. In some ways, this
would be similar to returns to seniority in the labor market – those with
more experience exploit their expertise to avoid conduct in which they
would rather not participate.
In sum, the structural aspects of erotic capital predict that men who are
penetrative sex partners (“tops”), young men, and men with greater experi-
ence and success in the industry would have larger amounts of erotic capital.
Theoretically, larger amounts of erotic capital translate into power – these
men are more desired and, even as sex workers, can make further demands
of their clients than others. We would therefore predict that this power
would translate into greater control over sexual behaviors and an increased
likelihood of requiring and requesting certain behaviors from their clients,
including safer sex.

INTERSECTIONAL HYPOTHESES
The second distinguishing feature of the theory is that erotic capital is
situated in historical processes that interlace race, class, and gender norms.
Keeping with the human capital analogy, this feature is similar to the idea
that historical processes such as discrimination and segregation give rise to
differences in human capital that persist, but with erotic capital these
historical forces are rooted in explicitly sexual dimensions. The intersection
of hegemonic masculinity with racial sexual stereotypes can create multiple
forms of sexual objectification for particular types of gay men.44 For exam-
ple, the erotic capital of a “top” is not uniform across all tops – the value of
a White “top” is not simply the addition of the value of “Whiteness” and
“topness,” but an independent effect for men in that particular category, who
in this instance embody the highest position in the racial and sexual behavior
hierarchies among gay men. For these reasons Green takes an explicitly
intersectional approach to the development of his theory, and it is in con-
sideration of the intersections that we develop an even finer set of hypotheses
about which escorts will be more likely to advertise safer sex.
 Intersectional Hypotheses 183

One key area where erotic capital predicts differences in the propensity
to advertise safer sex would be race. Race is a type of erotic capital that is
shaped by the historical processes that are key to Green’s theory. Scholars
have long noted in discussions of American gay sexuality the unique role
that race plays.45 Recent scholarship looks at the racial variation in social
value among gay men, but contemplation of Green’s theory extends this to
the sexual area as well.46 As Logan (2010) has recently argued, sexual
networks among gay men eroticize Black bodies for their stereotypical
aggressiveness and dominance. High amounts of erotic capital for Black
men are restricted to those who display sexual dominance and aggressive-
ness. Robinson (2008), for example, finds that Black men who do not
conform to the stereotype of the hypermasculine Black male are largely
ignored and devalued by White gay men for sexual partnerships.
Asian men are also eroticized for their “exotic” features in the sexual
field, and in particular fields would presumably have large amounts of
erotic capital that could be exploited. Unlike Black men, Asian men are
endowed with large amounts of erotic capital when they present them-
selves as submissive men. Robinson (2008), Phua and Kaufman (2003), and
Han (2006a, 2006b) describe the persistent stereotype that Asian men
should be passive, docile “bottoms.” The historical stereotype of Asian
men as docile works against the structural norm that encourages gay men
to present themselves in as masculine a manner as possible, empowering
submissive Asian men. This gives Asian men who are docile or submissive
greater amounts of erotic capital than other Asian men, and they would be
able to exploit that power to control the terms of their sexual relationships.
It is in consideration of these structures that the hypotheses become
clearer, and where the intersectionist approach is most useful – while race
may be eroticized, it is only eroticized in certain dimensions, consistent
with the theory’s claim that erotic capital is highly variable. It is not that all
Black men have large amounts of erotic capital, but Black men who con-
form to the stereotype of being aggressive, penetrative sex partners. Phua
and Kaufman (2003) note that these stereotypes view Black men as sexually
aggressive (and therefore likely to have large amounts of erotic capital only
when they are penetrative partners); Asian men as docile (and therefore
endowed with larger amounts of erotic capital when they are receptive
partners); and Hispanic men as “passionate” lovers. It is unclear how the
Hispanic stereotype relates to sexual behaviors – it could well be that
Hispanic men are rewarded for either type of sexual behavior, or for
being willing to move between the two depending on the desires of their
client. The ambiguity of “passionate” makes it difficult to derive specific
184 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

hypotheses about which types of Hispanic men would have larger amounts
of erotic capital.
The hierarchies that develop in these sexual fields, which give certain
men more erotic capital than others, can appear counterintuitive until one
adopts an intersectional approach to gay sexual organization. This inter-
sectional approach is a key strength of Green’s sexual field theory. In an
explicitly sexual area, men can exploit their erotic capital to its fullest
extent. For example, theories of race and sexuality have long noted that
Black men occupy a unique space in the gay sexual landscape.47 While not
sought out for companionship or dating, they are esteemed sexually when
they are perceived as or perform as dominant sexual partners.48 Similarly,
men who are sexually aggressive and dominant occupy the highest rung of
the sexual behavior hierarchy.49

HYPOTHESES FROM SEXUAL FIELD THEORY ABOUT

ADVERTISED SAFER SEX
Sexual field theory and the related concept of erotic capital predict that
younger men, penetrative sex partners (“tops”), men with greater attach-
ment to the escort market, Black men who are dominant (“tops”), Asian
men who are submissive (“bottoms”), and Hispanic men who are “passio-
nate” would be more likely to advertise safer sex, as their higher amounts of
erotic capital would give them greater control over the terms of their
commercial sexual interactions.

MICROECONOMIC APPROACHES TO NEGOTIATIONS

Sexual Negotiations – Safer Sex as a Game between

Clients and Escorts
While the social theory above describes the ways that sex workers may use
the power from social structures to better control the terms of negotiating
their sexual practices with clients, they must still negotiate with specific
clients for transactions. While social theory allows us to derive predictions
about advertised sexual behavior from social narratives about who would
be most desired, in practice we should consider the reality of sexual
negotiations between clients and sex workers. Indeed, clients may seek
out sex workers with advertised safer sex and then proceed to negotiate
with these sex workers. Similarly, sex workers may not list safer sex practices
as a means of eliciting negotiations in order for greater remuneration from
 Microeconomic Approaches to Negotiations 185

clients. A more detailed and economically oriented approach is required

when investigating the actual transactions.
This microeconomic approach to the topic brings a number of additional
insights but simultaneously requires a different style of analysis. Sex workers
and their clients are engaged in economic transactions that take place in
specific social contexts. These contexts are usually straightforward – men
desire women and compensate them for sexual activity. For most pros-
titution services these basic dynamics are sufficient to describe the gen-
eral nature of the profession.50 The unique social stigmas attached to
homosexuality, however, yield different conclusions. Not only are male
sex workers more integrated into gay communities, they also serve
a clientele with a number of different sexual identities.51 Add to this the
STI risk differences for homosexual and heterosexual sex and we are left
with divergent ideas about the ways that risks are mechanized in this
market.52

Theorizing Client Demand – Client Willingness to Pay

for Risky Sex
If the clients in the market desire unsafe sex, and if that sex is inherently
riskier for the escort than the alternative (which is inherently true), then
clients must compensate sex workers for that additional risk. More gen-
erally, the presence of one STI can increase the likelihood of being infected
with another, which could potentially compound the compensating differ-
ential. For example, even if a sex worker were HIV positive, unprotected
sex comes at the risk of re-infection with a different strain of the virus or
another STI, which could threaten the effectiveness of their current treat-
ment regimen. In short, irrespective of the escort’s STI status, unprotected
sex is unambiguously riskier. The existing studies have shown that the
premium for unprotected sex work is quite high, which is consistent with
the concept of a compensating differential. One drawback of the existing
scholarship is that it only applies to female sex workers.
The concept of compensating differentials gives us additional hypoth-
eses with respect to male sex work, which should be tested. The compen-
sating differential should vary with the risks involved. In male homosexual
sex, the risk of STI transmission varies considerably by sexual role, and it
follows that the compensating differential should as well. Among men who
have sex with men it has been well established that particular types of
sexual conduct are riskier than others.53 For example, the relative risk of
contracting HIV for receptive versus penetrative anal sex is 7.69, which
186 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

implies that the compensating differential should be higher for escorts

engaged in receptive anal sex.54
It could also be the case that compensating differentials could vary by
race. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
African American males are a disproportionately large share of the HIV
population and are nearly twice as likely to contract HIV as their White
counterparts, despite higher rates of safer sex activity.55 Some estimates
have suggested that as much as 46 percent of the Black gay population is
infected with HIV, more than twice the rate for White men (21 percent) or
Hispanics (17 percent).56 As there is well-documented segregation in gay
sexual networks, White and Hispanic men would face lower baseline risks
of STI infection. Since Whites and Hispanics face a lower probability of
having STIs, they would have to be compensated more for partaking in
riskier sexual activity.57

Theorizing Client Demand – Client Willingness to Pay

for Safer Sex
Even among men who are homosexually identified, negotiating safer sex
practices can be difficult.58 Increasing numbers of gay men are having
unprotected sex (barebacking) with men whose HIV status has been dis-
closed to them. Sociologists and social psychologists have often described
the increasing phenomenon of unprotected sex among openly gay men as
a form of resistance to safer sex messages in the age of HIV.59 Eaton et al.
(2010), for example, describe a recent survey of gay men and find that more
than 50 percent of the White respondents reported that they did not use
a condom in their last sexual encounter (compared to fewer than 20 percent
for African Americans), although the vast majority (more than 75 percent)
of respondents claimed to know the HIV status of their last sexual partner.
This implies a growing normalization of sex without condoms among gay
men, and a growing number of men who engaging in sex with men whose
HIV status is unknown to them.
While public health researchers have noted the phenomena of bare-
backing and serosorting and their potential impact on HIV transmission,
the possibility of having unprotected sex with someone whose status is
uncertain is problematic at the individual level.60 The average man sur-
veyed in Eaton et al. (2010) had not had an HIV test in the past year.
Although men claimed to know the HIV status of their partners, it is unlikely
that the current status of their partners was known with a large degree of
certainty since most men did not know their own HIV status. Further,
 Data and Empirical Strategy 187

Wolitski et al. (1998), Marks et al. (1994), Simon Rosser et al. (2008), and
Horvath et al. (2008) have shown that up to one-third of HIV-positive men
have unprotected sex without disclosing their status to their partners. This
poses risks to both homosexually and heterosexually identified men who
navigate these sexual networks. In essence, casual sexual encounters in the
contemporary gay community appear to require explicit discussions of
condom usage that may have been less likely only a decade earlier.
There is some evidence that male sex workers are more likely to practice
safer sex in their commercial sexual encounters, but this evidence is
limited. Prestage et al. (2007) found that men who were paid for sex were
less likely to engage in unprotected sex in their paid sexual encounters (less
than 20 percent of the time) as opposed to their casual sexual encounters
(more than 60 percent of the time). This implies that, for risk-averse gay
men, the market for male sex work may allow them to see the type of sexual
partner they would prefer, not only in terms of physical appearance, but
also in terms of sexual behaviors, given the relative prominence of unpro-
tected sex among gay men. To state it another way, irrespective of sexual
identity, we cannot say with certainty that condomless sex will be preferred
in the market. There is suggestive evidence that men may use the market as
a means to overcome the difficulty in negotiating safer sex practices with
other men.

DISTINCTIONS
The distinction here lies in the desire of the clients. If there is a compensat-
ing differential, then the outside option for the client is protected sex and
he uses the sex worker market to avail himself of opportunities to partake
in unprotected sex. Given that this is risky for the sex worker, the client
must compensate the sex worker for that risk. An additional implication is
that the size of the incentive would have to be conditioned on the type of
sexual behavior desired by the client (receptive versus penetrative) and the
type of escort in question (perhaps in terms of race). If clients are willing to
pay for safer sex, the outside option of the client is unprotected sex and he
uses the sex worker market to solicit and partake in protected sex or to ease
the negotiation for safer sex.61

DATA AND EMPIRICAL STRATEGY

The few existing large-scale studies of the male sex worker market have
used cross-section data and hedonic regression.62 This data is limited,
188 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

however, because it is based on advertisements for male sex worker ser-

vices, contains no information from the demand side of the market, and is
not transaction-specific. Transaction-level data gives us a finer description
of the specific sexual conduct and interactions of male sex workers and
clients. The few transaction-based studies of male sex workers have used
diaries with limited recall times and small sample sizes, limiting their scope
and their results’ capacity for generalized application.63
Recent research in female sex work in developing countries has used
the method of sex worker fixed-effects to identify the sex worker payoff
function.64 This is an improvement over cross-sectional analysis of the
market since we can now estimate the value of services while controlling
for individual-level heterogeneity, which can seriously bias cross-
sectional estimates. Analysis of the demand side of the market has been
more generally lacking in studies of sex work. Evidence from the demand
side is particularly important for male sex work, as different sex acts
imply vastly different probabilities for disease transmission among gay
men.65 It is therefore important to estimate client values of sexual beha-
viors, as knowledge of the price sensitivity of male sex workers and clients
is key for developing interventions for behavior change.

DATA
The data come from the online reviews hosted by Daddy’s Reviews (www
.daddysreviews.com), the oldest and most popular client-based forum for
reviews and discussions of male sex workers. This website has been in
existence since 1998 and provides a rich structure for clients to review male
sex worker services. The website contains both a forum (message board)
for clients to discuss male sex workers and a review feature where clients
provide detailed reviews of their specific encounters with male sex workers.
The individual reviews of male sex workers are the data used here. A key
for this data is that all reviews of male sex workers are held in a holding
tank and individually verified by the website administrator before they are
posted. Male sex workers cannot remove reviews, and reviews are flagged if
they are suspicious (for example, if they appear they may have been entered
by a competing sex worker). As described by Logan and Shah (2013) and
discussed earlier, this website acts to police male sex workers, allowing
clients to inform each other about the quality of male sex workers. This
function minimizes the opportunity that male sex workers have to exploit
clients. Logan and Shah (2013) also note that it is extremely difficult for an
escort to create new identities for himself as clients track them over time
 Empirical Strategy – Advertising Safer Sex 189

using this source. If an escort changes his location, over time all of his
previous reviews are retained and linked to him, and the same holds if the
escort changes his professional name. Male sex workers who have retired
are not removed from the website, but they are listed as retired. Male sex
workers do have the ability to post comments on reviews. Escort reviews
can be searched by individual sex worker name or by geographical location.
For each review page, the contact information is listed as well as all
reviews, which are listed in reverse chronological order (newest to
oldest).66 Reviews were collected using a script that pulled the informa-
tion from the website into a database organized by the fields in the
advertisement. Reviews detail the date and location of the transaction,
the length of the appointment, the price paid, the client’s perception of
features of the escort (height, weight, age, etc.), and the sexual behaviors
that took place in the given transaction. The reviews also allow clients to
enter free form text that describes their encounter in more detail. This
field is read manually and coded for sexual behaviors not categorized in
the reviews. In addition, clients also rate the experience. At the end of the
review, clients identify themselves with a unique “handle” username.

EMPIRICAL STRATEGY – ADVERTISING SAFER SEX

The advertisement of safer sex is a dichotomous indicator – either the
escort notes in the text of his advertisement that he practices safer sex or he
does not. Since I am interested in differences in the probability of advertis-
ing safer as opposed to odds ratios, I use a statistical model that estimates
the probability associated with advertising safer sex. I estimate a probit
model where the outcome is the escort’s advertisement of safety to analyze
the predictors of advertised safer sex. Specifically, the model is

PrðSafe ¼ 1jX ¼ xÞ ¼ Φðx0 βÞ ð1Þ

where Ф is the cumulative distribution function (cdf) of the normal dis-

tribution, Safe is the indicator for advertising safer sex (1 if advertised,
0 otherwise) and X is a vector of covariates that may potentially be related to
the decision to advertise safer sex.67 The model is estimated using maximum
likelihood.68 The model is nonlinear, and raw coefficient estimates of β must
be transformed for interpretation. For ease of interpretation all coefficients
are reported at the margin – that is, they give the change in the probability
(percentage points) of advertising safer sex for a unit change in the corre-
sponding variable.69
190 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

EMPIRICAL STRATEGY – CLIENT AND SEX WORKER

NEGOTIATIONS
We would like to estimate the client and sex worker payoff functions. Any
transaction agreed to by the client and the sex worker must hold where the
wage offered by the client is agreeable to the sex worker. Using this fact, we
can map out sex worker and client payoff functions, the returns they receive
to successful negotiations.
Transaction data gives us the equilibrium price for a specific transaction
in addition to the characteristics of that transaction (the specific sexual
conduct, location, etc.). Simply regressing prices on quantities will not
uncover either the supply or the demand function. We can, however,
exploit the transaction-level nature of the data by noting that both clients
and sex workers are uniquely identified in the data. Since clients in the data
potentially review several sex workers, and since sex workers are reviewed
by several clients, we can estimate the payoff functions by using client- and
sex worker-fixed effects. To use fixed effects there must be a sizeable
number of multiple reviews for sex workers and multiple reviews posted
by clients. Without this it is not possible to exploit the within-person
variation that is critical for fixed-effects estimates. As would be expected
when using data that reviews sex worker services, sex workers have more
reviews per sex worker than clients have reviews per client. In the data,
72 percent of the escorts have more than two reviews and 34 percent have
more than four reviews. For clients, 39 percent have posted more than two
reviews and 14 percent have posted four or more reviews in the data.70
The standard approach in recent studies of sex workers is to use sex
worker-fixed effects to identify the sex worker’s payoff (supply) function.
For example, Gertler, Shah, and Bertozzi (2005) survey sex workers and
obtain information about their last three transactions. We usually know
little, however, about the demand for sex services. The data here allows us
to estimate the client’s payoff function as well. Indeed, because we have
detailed information on the characteristics of the sex workers and the
sexual behaviors that took place in a given transaction, the payoff function
for the client can identify not only the values of sexual behaviors but also
the values of sex worker characteristics. In contrast, the sex worker payoff
function can only identify the values of sexual behaviors, as client char-
acteristics are not available. Caution should be used in interpreting the sex
worker payoff function – if sexual behaviors are correlated with client
characteristics it will not be possible to distinguish between the two in
the data.
 Results – The Propensity to Offer Safer Sex 191

The transaction-level data fits nicely to the assumption of revealed

preference; identification of the escort and client payoff functions is
straightforward since within-client (i) variation for escorts (j) (the clients’
payoff function) and within-escort variation for sexual conduct with clients
(the escorts’ payoff function) can be estimated from the same data. Since
sex workers are independent owner-operators, they are treated as firms.
This would not be possible if there were intermediaries or other types of
distortions in the market. Specifically, I estimate
X X
PijClient ¼ λ þ β Z þ
m m m
δS
k k k
þ ϕi þ ε
X
PijEscort ¼ ρ þ ηS
k k k
þ θj þ ε;

where Z is sex worker characteristics, S is sexual behaviors, ϕ is a client-

fixed effect, and θ is a sex worker-fixed effect.71 The fixed effects in the
client (escort) equation control for the bias in both unobserved client
(escort) heterogeneity and escort (client) selection based on unobserved
client (escort) characteristics. Key for this analysis is the use of client-fixed
effects controls for a client’s propensity to describe (or not describe)
specific sexual behaviors in their reviews of escort services.
One critique of the estimates is that they require within-person variation
and are only identified for the “changers” who exhibit within-person
variation. While fixed effects estimates do control for individual hetero-
geneity, they require that we assume that those who change are equivalent
to those who do not, for generalization purposes. In this case, the value of
sexual behavior to the sex worker or client is only identified by those sex
workers or clients who engage in different types of sex. Clients or sex
workers who always or never partake in a given sexual behavior cannot be
used to identify the value of that behavior. These may be the sex workers
are clients most susceptible to behavior change as they already show
a propensity to engage in a variety of types of sex.

RESULTS – THE PROPENSITY TO OFFER SAFER SEX

I begin by considering the physical predictors of advertised safer sex: age
and body size. Figure 6.1 shows estimates for the physical predictors of
advertised safer sex. Age is negatively related to the probability of advertis-
ing safer sex. For example, a 20-year-old escort would be at least 3 percen-
tage points more likely to advertise safer sex than a 30-year-old escort.
The other physical measures considered, height and weight, are not related
192 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

0.001

0.0005

0
Probability of Advertising Safer Sex

–0.0005

–0.001

–0.0015

–0.002

–0.0025

–0.003

–0.0035

–0.004
Age * Height Weight
* Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 6.1 Physical characteristics and probability of advertising safer sex

to the advertisement of safer sex services.72 This result for age is consistent
with erotic capital theory, where younger escorts have larger amounts of
erotic capital, and therefore greater control over the terms of their com-
mercial sexual encounters, making them more likely to advertise con-
domed sex with clients.
Figure 6.2 presents estimates of the sexual behavior predictors of
advertised safer sex. Being a penetrative escort (“tops”) increases the
probability that one will advertise safer sex by more than 8.5 percentage
points, being a versatile escort increases the probability by more than
10 percentage points, and being a bottom is not significantly related to
advertised safer sex. The distinct categories of versatility, as gay men com-
monly use expressions such as “versatile top” to denote a versatile sexual
performer who prefers to be the penetrative partner and “versatile bottom”
to denote a versatile sexual performer who prefers to be the receptive
partner, were added to see whether there might be a further distinction in
the propensity to advertise condomed sex.73 While being a generic versatile
performer increases the probability one will advertise safer sex by more than
10 percentage points, being a versatile top decreases the probability by more
than 8 percentage points. Being a versatile bottom is not significantly related
to advertised safer sex. Overall, the results are consistent with erotic capital
theory. Men who are perceived to have larger amounts of erotic capital in
structural aspects (younger men and penetrative sexual position) are more
likely to advertise safer sex.
 Results – The Propensity to Offer Safer Sex 193

0.25

0.2
Probability of Advertising Safer Sex

0.15

0.1

0.05

–0.05

–0.1
Top * Bottom Versatile * Versatile Top * Versatile Bottom No Attitude *
* Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 6.2 Sexual behaviors and probability of advertising safer sex

Figure 6.2 also adds a proxy for sexual adventurousness – whether the
escorts claims to have “no attitude.” A “no attitude” designation is used in
the escort market to inform clients that the escort is willing to engage with
clients irrespective of age, race, and physical appearance. This proxy of
sexual adventurousness would, in theory, be related to larger amounts of
erotic capital. The estimates predict that being a “no attitude” escort
increases the probability that one will advertise safer sex by more than
20 percentage points. This result, too, is consistent with erotic capital
theory. Escorts who serve a larger clientele would be more likely to have
experience and sexual maturity, giving them larger amounts of erotic
capital to exploit in their commercial sexual negotiations. This is also an
example of the unique intersectional fields approach. Men who are adven-
turous are actually able to exercise greater control over certain aspects of
their sexual behavior, capitalizing on their sexual adventurousness and
expertise.
I also considered race and the interaction of race and sexual behavior on
advertised safer sex. The results are interesting with respect to race. Being
an Asian increases the probability of advertising safer sex by 15 percentage
points. There are no other racial distinctions in the likelihood of advertis-
ing safer sex. Formal tests of the hypothesis that all other (non-Asian)
racial effects are equal to each other cannot be rejected. From race alone, it
appears that Asians are an outlier in terms of being more likely to advertise
safer sex to clients.
194 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

When I consider race and sexual behavior interactions, I find that

multiracial (16.7 percentage points) and White (7.4 percentage points)
“top” escorts are more likely to advertise safer sex. Interestingly, there are
no Asians in the data who advertise themselves as being exclusively pene-
trative, and it could be the case that the Asian racial likelihood to advertise
safer sex is due to the fact that all of the Asian escorts in the data who
specify a sexual position are bottoms. Consistent with erotic capital theory,
being an Asian bottom significantly increases the likelihood of advertising
safer sex by more than 45 percentage points (47.9). Black (11.6 percentage
points), Hispanic (25.1 percentage points), and White (6.6 percentage
points) versatile escorts are more likely to advertise safer sex as well.
In all, the results establish that there is substantial variation in the prob-
ability of advertising safer sex, by sexual behavior. While the predictions
for Asians are borne out in the data (and are further supported by the fact
that no Asians advertise themselves as exclusively penetrative), those for
Blacks are not. The Hispanics’ results are mixed: versatile Hispanic escorts
are more likely to advertise safer sex, but it is unclear if this corresponds to
the erotic capital that derives from them adopting a “passionate” persona
in the sexual field. As noted earlier, “passionate” erotic persona is ambig-
uous in terms of sexual behaviors.
Interestingly, the erotic capital that Black “tops” possess is not trans-
lated into greater control over the terms of their sexual behaviors with
regard to condom usage. This stands in contrast to the higher wages they
demand in the market. Thus, Black men participating in the market, even
when they possess the masculine traits that would give them erotic
capital, are unable to translate this into greater control of sexual beha-
viors. In terms of intersectionality, this result is consistent with the idea
that while “top” (masculine) behavior does allow one greater control of
the terms of his sexual conduct, it is limited when interacted with racial
hierarchies. That is, Black male sexual autonomy violates the racial
structure of the market, where Black male bodies exist primarily for
White male pleasure.
It could certainly be the case that other advertising features are related to
other features of advertising behavior. If these are correlated with sexual
behavior (for example, a Black top may show fewer pictures, and pictures
may be related to propensity to advertise condomed sex), then the results
described above would be due to differences in advertising and not neces-
sarily elements of erotic capital. I therefore considered the effects of other
advertising features on the propensity to advertise safer sex. Recall that
erotic capital theory predicts that escort popularity and reputation will lead
 Results – Client and Sex Worker Negotiations 195

to larger amounts of erotic capital. Popular and well-regarded escorts will

be more likely to advertise safer sex. Earlier we saw that adventurousness
was related to advertising safer sex, but adventurousness may be a poor
proxy for popularity or expertise. Fortunately, the data gives us several
proxies for popularity and reputation that are less tied to sexual dexterity
and more closely aligned with popularity as a sexual performer. Escorts
provide pictures in their advertisements, and more attractive escorts may be
more likely to provide more pictures and to have larger amounts of erotic
capital. Additionally, the website used for analysis allows clients to review
escorts in two ways. The first review method is a short review (I term this
a “survey review”), which is similar to feedback on ebay.com. Clients simply
rate escorts on a four-star scale. The data records both the number of
reviews and the fraction of total reviews that are four-star. There are also
text reviews, where clients enter detailed, free form reviews of their specific
experiences with the escort. Since the text reviews are more detailed, they
give a better measure of an escort’s quality than survey reviews.
The results show that survey reviews are unrelated to the probability of
advertising safer sex. While the number of text reviews of client services
(which could serve as a proxy for the number of clients for a given escort) are
negatively related to the propensity to advertise safer sex (−10.4 percentage
points), the number of positive text reviews of escorts (which could be
a proxy for quality of escort services) is positively related to advertising
safer sex (10.8 percentage points). Indeed, the two effects are nearly
identical. This suggests that the more negative reviews an escort collects,
the less likely he is to advertise safer sex services. For example, if two
escorts both had ten reviews, and one escort had all positive reviews
whereas the other had five positive and five negative reviews, the escort
with the negative reviews would be 50 percent less likely to advertise
safer sex than the other. This is consistent with erotic capital theory –
well regarded and popular escorts are more likely to advertise safer sex.
This result holds even when controlling for sexual adventurousness
itself.74

RESULTS – CLIENT AND SEX WORKER NEGOTIATIONS

Constrained Client and Sex Worker Estimates

Figures 6.3 and 6.4 show estimates of client and sex worker payoff func-
tions where the two functions are constrained to contain the same infor-
mation. Specifically, the estimates do not include sex worker characteristics
196 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

in the client payoff specification, leading to a set of payoff functions of the

following form:
X
PijClient ¼ λ þ δ S þ ϕi þ ε
k k k
X
PijEscort ¼ ρ þ η S þ θj þ ε
k k k

This specification allows us to consider the differences between the value of

sex worker services where the only difference is the client- and sex worker-
fixed effects. These specifications are similar to those of studies of female sex
work that use fixed effects to estimate the payoff functions but where the
attributes of the client are unknown. The guiding assumption in these
models is that sex worker behavior is not a function of client characteristics.
In the data used here, I will relax this assumption for estimates of the client
payoff function.
Figures 6.3 and 6.4 show the results for a limited set of sexual behaviors.75
The first set of results reveal that clients and escorts place similar values
on escort penetration of clients (“topping”) – both escort and client
specifications suggest that escort penetration is valued at roughly $35,
a premium of around 15 percent. The results also show that clients place
a high value on versatility (mutual penetration). The client value of
versatility is nearly the same as the premium for escort penetration
(around $35). Escorts, however, do not place such a high value on

50

40

30

20
Valuation in Dollars

10

–10

–20

–30

–40

–50

–60
Escort Versatile Escort No Kissing Masturba- Masturba- Masturba-
Topping Bottoms Condom tion, Mutual tion, Escort tion, Escort
Client * for Client * Gives Receives
* Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 6.3 Sex worker valuations of sexual behaviors

 Results – Client and Sex Worker Negotiations 197

80

60

40
Valuations in Dollars

20

–20

–40
Escort Versatile * Escort No Kissing Masturba- Masturba- Masturba-
Topping Bottoms Condom * tion, Mutual tion, Escort tion, Escort
Client * for Client Gives Receives *
* Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 6.4 Client valuations of sexual behaviors

versatility – the point estimate is less than half as large as the client
valuation and is not statistically significant. For client penetration (“bot-
toming”), neither escorts nor clients place a high value on the behavior,
and the point estimate for escorts is actually negative, but not statistically
significant. It is important to note that escort penetration comes with
significantly lower probabilities of the escort contracting an STI, and the
high (low) value placed on escort (client) penetration is not consistent
with a compensating differential because it is the less (more) risky activity
for the escort in terms of contracting an STI.76
The results also show that neither escorts nor clients place a large value
on kissing, and the point estimate for clients is much smaller than for
escorts. Escorts place a large and negative value ($50) on mutual masturba-
tion; a penalty of more than a 20 percent is attached to the behavior. Clients
place a negative value on mutual masturbation as well, but the point
estimate ($13) is not as large as that for escorts and is not statistically
significant. The results also show that clients do place a large and positive
value ($74) on masturbating the escort. Indeed, masturbating the escort
comes with a price premium of roughly 30 percent. Escorts also place
a positive value on receiving masturbation, but the estimate is not as large
($20) and is not statistically significant.
The main implications for negotiation had to do with condomless sex.
Figures 6.3 and 6.4 show the value of condomless sex for sex workers and
198 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

clients, respectively. Condomless sex is only defined over the set of trans-
actions that include penetration of some type. Clients place a penalty on
condomless sex. The penalty is rather large ($30), nearly as large as the
values attached to escort penetration and versatility. Curiously, escorts do
not attach a premium to condomless sex. This result is inconsistent with
the substantial premium to condomless sex estimated in payoff functions
for female sex workers.77 Within these specifications I also decomposed
condomless sex into its three possible iterations.78 As discussed earlier, the
compensating differential to condomless sex should vary by the type of
sexual activity. For an escort, being penetrated by a client is much riskier
than penetrating a client. The results show that the penalty to condomless
sex from clients is concentrated in mutual penetration. The penalty to
condomless mutual penetration is sizable ($48), roughly 20 percent.
The results show that clients place a premium on penetrating the escort
($18), but it is not precisely estimated. The results with respect to condom
usage do not change when other sexual activity such as masturbation and
kissing are included in the specification.

Client Estimates with Full Sex Worker Characteristics

As discussed earlier, one key advantage of the data used here is that the
client payoff function can be estimated with respect to a host of sex
worker characteristics. Previous research has found that sex worker
characteristics are related to the prices that they advertise for their
services, but it is not known how or whether clients value these
characteristics.79 Similarly, escorts of certain types are more likely to
advertise safer sex than are others. It is difficult to know from the results
in Figure 6.4 whether part of the results are due to clients’ selecting
escorts for condomed or condomless sex. Escort characteristics may be
correlated with sexual behaviors or the sex worker’s bargaining power, or
both. Figure 6.5 shows results of the specification that includes sex worker
characteristics Z:
X X
PijClient ¼ λ þ β Z þ
m m m
δS
k k k
þ ϕi þ ε

In general, the results show that escort race is not related to client
valuations, consistent with results from analysis of escort advertisements.
Contrary to escort advertisement pricing functions, the results here show
that age and physical size (BMI) are not related to client payoffs, either.
 Results – Client and Sex Worker Negotiations 199

100

80

60

40
Valuation in Dollars

20

–20

–40

–60

–80
Escort No Masturba- Masturba- Masturba- Kissing No No No
Endowment Condom * tion, tion, Escort tion, Condom Condom Condom x
(in.) * Mutual Receives * Escort x Escort x Escort Versatile *
Gives Topping Bottoms
*Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 6.5 Client valuation of sexual behaviors, controlling for sex worker
characteristics

The escort’s endowment, however, is strongly related to client valuations.

This may be one reason why masturbation is highly valued by clients.
Client valuation of escort penetration and mutual penetration is not
robust to the inclusion of individual escort characteristics. The point
estimates are reduced substantially and are no longer statistically signifi-
cant. This suggests that some of the premiums attached to sexual beha-
vior in Figure 6.4 are correlated with sex worker characteristics, which
would likely include beauty and other individual-specific characteristics.
The penalty attached to condomless sex, however, is robust to the inclu-
sion of sex worker characteristics. In fact, the result for condomless
sex is robust to the inclusion of other sexual behaviors such as masturba-
tion. The client’s high valuation of masturbating an escort is also robust
to the inclusion of sex worker characteristics. Figure 6.5 shows that the
decomposition of condomless sex into its three components reveals
values similar to those estimated in Figure 6.4 and is robust to the
inclusion of sex worker characteristics. The penalty to condomless sex
is concentrated in mutual penetration. Overall, the results imply that
individual sex worker characteristics do influence client willingness to
pay for most sexual behaviors, but do not influence client willingness to
pay for safer sex.
200 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%
Percent Differential in Price

0.00%

–5.00%

–10.00%

–15.00%

–20.00%

–25.00%

–30.00%
Safer Black White Asian Hispanic Multirace Other Safe Safe Safe
Sex * Safe * Safe * Safe Safe Safe Race Top * Bottom Versatile
Safe
*Denotes Statistical Significance (p < 0.10)

Figure 6.6 Sex worker safer sex behavior and advertised prices

Additional Evidence on Value from Escort Advertisements

Turning to the market returns to safer sex, Figure 6.6 provides estimates of
the hedonic regression of escort price on advertised safer sex. Prices and
advertised safer sex are positively correlated, with a price premium for
safety greater than 5 percent. This result is also inconsistent with the notion
of a compensating differential for riskier behavior for unsafe sex. Men who
advertise safer sex could earn more than $2,500 more per year than men
who do not.
The basic result for safety is intriguing, but as described earlier the theory
of compensating differentials implies that the result should vary by race and
sexual behavior. To investigate these issues I decompose the safe effects by
race and sexual position. The aim here is not to see if there is an independent
effect for race and sexual behavior interactions with safer sex advertisements
net of advertising itself, but to decompose the safety effect by regressing the
prices on permutations by race and sexual behavior.
The results show the interaction of safer sex advertising with every race to
decompose the safe effect by race. Interestingly, the premium to safer sex
does not apply evenly to male escorts of all races. The results show that only
Black and White men enjoy a premium to safety, which is larger for Black
men (9 percent) than for White men (5.5 percent). The additional premium
to Black safety is certainly inconsistent with the notion of compensating
 Conclusion 201

differentials – openly gay Black men have higher baseline rates of HIV
infection, which would imply that their compensating differential would
be lower than that of other racial groups. According to the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), African American males are
a disproportionately large share of the HIV population, and are nearly
twice as likely to contract HIV as their White counterparts. Some esti-
mates have suggested that as much as 46 percent of the Black gay male
population is infected with HIV, more than twice the rate for White men
(21 percent) or Hispanics (17 percent).80 The result is consistent with the
social theory, however, in that clients may use the sex work market to
engage in safer sex with Black men. In the social theory, clients compen-
sate Black men for removing the need to negotiate for safer sex. Indeed,
given the higher rates of HIV prevalence among Black men, clients would
likely compensate Black men more for easing this negotiation as it secures
the client’s sense of safety.
Figure 6.6 also decomposes the safe effect of sexual behaviors by
interacting safer sex advertising with sexual behaviors. The results show
that there is substantial variation in the return to safer sex advertisements
by sexual behavior. Men who advertise as “safe tops” enjoy a premium
that is substantial, more than 13 percent. The transmission probabilities
by sexual behavior would suggest that it is “bottoms” who should enjoy
the price premium, as the risk of disease transmission is much higher for
the receptive partner. In the theory of compensating differentials, clients
would have to compensate “bottom” escorts for the increased risk of STIs
that comes with the receptive sexual position. While these results are
inconsistent with compensating differentials, they are consistent with the
social theory. If clients have demand for sex that could increase their risk
of STI exposure, they would be willing to compensate escorts for provid-
ing that sexual conduct as safely as possible. This implies that it would be
penetrative (“top”) escorts who would enjoy a premium to advertising
safer sex. The results are consistent with such an interpretation.

CONCLUSION
It has been difficult to distinguish between the social and sexual structures
that mediate the sexual interactions between men who have sex with men.
Researchers have long noted that gay men form distinctions between
their social and sexual interactions, and the confluence of both in the
existing scholarship about gay sexual-socialization has limited our ability
to speak to either issue with its proper import.81 The inability to draw
202 Service Fees: Masculinity, Safer Sex, and Male Sex Work

clear distinctions has limited the development of theoretical and empiri-

cal approaches to the sexual sociality of gay men. This is problematic for
researchers and health policy makers. The changing sexual landscape of
the gay community is not only of interest to those whose scholarship
considers social organization, modernity, and social change, but also to
those to seek to design health policy that promotes STI prevention among
gay men.
The sophisticated social structures that give rise to sexual negotiations
between gay men have been discussed in the literature, but the nuances of
these structures have resisted detailed, rigorous analysis. This chapter
attempted to break through this roadblock by combining new field theo-
retical approaches to gay sexuality with a specific sexualized social setting
that allows us to test the hypotheses about gay sexual organization. Green’s
sexual field theory yields unique predictions about which men have greater
amounts of erotic capital in gay sexual spaces, giving them greater control
over the terms of their sexual encounters. How this translates into actual
sexual behaviors is unknown. Both the emergence of HIV more than two
decades ago and the recent antiretroviral treatments have altered the ways
in which gay men have organized and navigated their sexual landscape.
I used data from the market for male sex work to test these predictions,
drawing on the fact that male sex work is a unique sexual field that allows
us to look at the sexual organizations that Green’s theory speaks to. This
chapter offered a unique quantitative test of field theory by exploiting
a particular space that conforms to the field being theorized – allowing
us to test the effects of the field in terms of personal interaction.
Green’s theory yielded both structural and intersectional hypotheses
about which men would have larger amounts of erotic capital in gay
sexual spaces. Structurally, gay men who are dominant, young, and
sexually experienced are endowed with larger amounts of erotic capital.
Intersectionally, submissive Asian and dominant Black men would have
larger amounts of erotic capital. The quantitative results confirmed that
young, dominant, popular and Asian submissive escorts were more likely
to restrict the terms of their sexual behavior. The data did not support the
hypotheses regarding dominant Black men. Similarly, the data showed
that sexual versatility was positively correlated with greater control over
the terms of sexual relations, which was not a prediction of the theory, but
could be considered consistent with the theory if versatility is considered
a type of sexual maturity that would be related to erotic capital.
The results here also show that the nature of safer sex negotiations in the
male sex work market are very different from the nature of negotiations
 Conclusion 203

seen in female sex work. Rather than a compensating differential for

condomless sex, clients pay less for condomless sex. Furthermore, decom-
position of the price penalty for condomless sex reveals that the penalty is
concentrated in mutual penetration. While inconsistent with the theory of
compensating differentials, the result is consistent with theories that pos-
tulate that men use the male sex work market as a means of ensuring that
they will be able to successfully negotiate for safer sex with escorts. If the
clients’ outside option is unsafe sex with other men, clients in the com-
mercial sex market may attach a premium to condomed sex. The results
here show that clients are willing to pay for safer sex with escorts.
The estimates here should stimulate further research into the dynamics
of male sex work and gay sexual health in general. As is generally true of
research in this area, there are significant trade-offs. Despite the advantages
of this analysis, there are several limits to the approach adopted here. While
I can investigate the values of sexual behaviors, it is important to note that
the fixed effects estimates may not be generalizable to the entire population
of sex workers and clients. This data only allows us to consider successful
negotiations between clients and sex workers – extending these findings to
the entire population would require a number of assumptions that will be
difficult to justify without more basic research into the male sex work
market.
While the mechanisms behind the valuations cannot be investigated
here, the valuations do produce interesting findings that should spur
further research into the sexual behaviors of male sex workers and their
clients, and stimulate further discussion about the social and health impli-
cations of sexual negotiations among gay men. For example, policies may
target sex workers by informing them of the premium attached to safer sex
in the market. If this would encourage a larger fraction of male sex workers
to engage in condomed sex, the rate of STI transmissions in this population
could slow substantially. Even more, if sex workers can influence their
clients’ noncommercial sexual behaviors, the positive externalities from
these interventions could be considerable.
 7

Conclusion

Every Man a Sex Worker? Commercial and Noncommercial

Gay Sexuality

INTRODUCTION
Sex work does not take place in a vacuum, divorced from the world around
it. The key components of sex work, desire and sexual attraction, feature in
dating and marriage markets. It is therefore intuitive to think that sex work
would draw from the same social cues as those in dating, marriage, and
other intimate relationships. Economists have traditionally seen links
between the commercial and noncommercial sexual markets and com-
monly view them as being driven by the same forces of supply and demand.
In a marriage market, for example, those with abilities in high demand will
have more choices of partners and, theoretically, better outcomes such as
relationship stability. In fact, recent economic theories have posited that
female sex workers earn high wages due to the marital stigma attached to
sex work.1 Just as in the marriage market, scholars have documented
beauty premiums in markets for sex work and the fact that more attractive
sex workers are better able to control the terms of their work.2 This is
intuitive, as one basis for self-arranged marriage markets is attraction –
those who are more attractive will have the most options in the dating
market and, presumably, better working conditions and compensation in
the sex work market. This is not to say that economists view them as equal
or that preferences are isomorphic between the two, but that features of the
noncommercial market would be similar in the commercial market.
This idea of symmetry between commercial and noncommercial mar-
kets has not been accepted across the social sciences. In sociological field
theory, for example, scholars have asserted that the fields of commercial
and noncommercial sex work are distinct enough that the actors in them
are motivated by a different set of intentions. Economically, this would

204
 Introduction 205

imply different preferences and therefore utility functions in both markets.

This is certainly true to some extent. The features one would look for in
a temporary commercial sexual transaction would be different from those
sought in long-term relationships or even casual encounters. At the same
time, the sharp disconnect between the two stands at odds with some of the
basic features of both markets – to the extent that sex is an important aspect
of a romantic relationship, some attractions in the sex work market would
likely be similar to those in the noncommercial market. As a lever to find
what is sexually appealing, markets for sex provide valuable information
about one important input into romantic partnerships – sexual attraction.
When considering the gay sexual landscape, making a distinction
between the two markets may be even more inappropriate. Histories of
gay sexual organization have long held that casual sexual encounters are a
non-negligible part of gay sexual relations.3 Gay sexual networks are more
connected than heterosexual sexual networks, they feature more casual
encounters, and gay men attach less of a social stigma to those encounters.4
Indeed, in gay cinema, literature, and media these casual sexual encounters
are celebrated and seen as source of distinction between gay and hetero-
sexual sexual relations. In the early years of the gay rights movement, this
distinction was both a cause for celebration (showing the possibilities of
more relaxed sexual norms) and consternation (for fear that gays would be
stigmatized due to their sexual norms) among gay political leaders. Indeed,
the early years of the AIDS epidemic revealed the high level of connected-
ness of gay sexual networks and the political problems this caused in
mobilizing responses to sexually transmitted diseases.5
Casual sexual encounters between men and, more importantly, the cul-
tural institutions that allow them to flourish, share several features that are
similar to those of commercial sex work. First, both markets feature men
engaged in temporary sexual encounters. By social convention, a casual
sexual interaction between two men is explicitly meant to be of short
duration. The most important aspect is that both parties are assumed to
know of the temporary nature of the encounter – there is no expectation of
continued contact or communication beyond the sexual encounter. While
noncommercial encounters feature the possibility of a long-term relation-
ship, as structured and defined a “hookup” is, by definition, temporary.
While this has increasingly become standard among younger heterosexuals
as well, it is a long-standing norm among urban gay men.6
Second, these temporary encounters allow men to engage in the fantasy,
role-playing, and self-presentations that are seen in the commercial mar-
ket. Given that there is little to no substitution between the sexual and
206 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

nonsexual features of a long-term partner (intelligence, common nonsex-

ual interest, family background, etc. are not being considered along with
sexual desirability in a casual encounter), the casual sex market would
feature sexual encounters that could share in the excitement, immediacy,
and clandestine features of commercial sex work. They offer the distinct
possibility for men to have very specific sexual desires fulfilled. In a casual
sexual encounter men can adopt sexual personas, sexual behaviors, and
proclivities that they may not practice with a long-term partner or even
display in other settings. For example, men can be more restrictive about
the physical features and other characteristics that they desire in their
casual encounters, can try new sexual roles or behaviors, and can encoun-
ter men they would not consider as dating partners.7
Third, these temporary encounters are now facilitated by the same
technology as undergirds modern male sex work. Gay men in the United
States use smartphone applications and the Internet to secure these tem-
porary sexual encounters. This is not to say that gay bars and other social
settings do not perform the same function, but the new mediums for sexual
connections are quite explicit in their purpose – they are designed to allow
gay men to meet each other for sexual encounters. The advantage of the
smartphone applications is that they minimize the chance that parties will
misunderstand the nature of the encounter. This form of interaction is
incredibly popular – Grindr, arguably the most widely used smartphone
application for this purpose, has reported more than 2.5 million users in
the United States, and the average Grindr user spends one hour per day
logged into the service. It is safe to say that this application has wide use
among gay men in the United States, particularly those in urban areas.8
For all of these reasons, the noncommercial market for casual sexual
encounters, the hookup, may share many similar features with commercial
sexual markets for gay men. Due to this similarity, I consider several of the
findings that applied to male sex work and investigate the extent to which
they hold in the noncommercial sexual market. If the two markets are
indeed distinct, as argued by field theorists, then the findings seen for sex
work would not be found for the noncommercial market. If there is
significant overlap, it is likely that the preferences seen in commercial sex
work apply to noncommercial casual sex, or at least that it is not possible to
distinguish empirically between the preferences.
To conclude this study of sex work, I investigate the degree of similarity
and difference between the commercial and noncommercial sexual mar-
kets for gay men. First, I analyze the role of face pictures in the gay
smartphone application Grindr, one of the most popular among men
 Introduction 207

seeking temporary sexual encounters. I find that men consistently note that
they require face pictures to enter into and/or continue discussions with
other men. In fact, the request for face pictures is quite ubiquitous on the
application. Given the strong demand for face pictures among men in the
smartphone application, the potential returns to face pictures may be
similar. Further analyses of the context in which face pictures are men-
tioned reveals that they appear to serve a similar purpose in the two
markets – they are similar to the bond-posting feature noted earlier in
the analysis of sex worker face pictures and they also serve as a marker that
a man is not in the closet regarding his sexuality.
Second, I analyze the supply and demand for masculinity in the Grindr
noncommercial sexual market. Similar to the market for male sex work,
men on Grindr place a high premium on masculinity. Indeed, masculinity
is the most commonly mentioned personality description on the applica-
tion. Masculinity is mentioned more than humor, sexual position, or other
factors that may be pertinent to a casual sexual encounter. Similarly, men
are most apt to describe themselves as masculine in describing their own
personality, which suggests that men note it as a key personality trait
worth mentioning to attract potential partners. One of the next most
popular features is muscularity, a physical analog to masculinity.9 Similar
to the return to masculine sexual behavior among sex workers, the
market for temporary sexual encounters places a high premium on self-
described masculine behavior. Masculinity is in high supply and high
demand in the noncommercial market.
Third, I consider the way that bodies are disciplined and stigmatized in
the noncommercial market. I do so in two ways. First, I look at the presence
of body type preferences among men seeking encounters on Grindr. I find
that men have strong preferences for men who are “physically fit” or are
“height-weight proportionate,” and very few men express desire for men
who are large. Indeed, men express an extreme distaste for men who are
large, and the expression “no fats” is reasonably common among men in
the data. To the extent that this conforms to the way the body is disciplined
among sex workers (which influences the ways that sex workers present
themselves and the wages seen by sex workers of particular body types),
similar features are seen in the noncommercial world. Second, I look at the
way racialized bodies are discussed and desired in the noncommercial
market using both Grindr and Craigslist, an online forum that contains
advertisements for men seeking “casual encounters” with other men. I find
that the market is highly racialized in two specific but related ways. Men
express a strong preference for White partners on the Grindr smartphone
208 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

application. On Craigslist, men are very likely to mention Black men only
when large penis size is also mentioned. When Black men are mentioned
in Craigslist advertisements, large penis size is mentioned more than
85 percent of the time. In fact, there is an expression for this, the acronym
“BBC,” for “big black cock,” which was described earlier with respect to the
racialized masculinity of gay men. This expression is especially prominent
on Craigslist, but not as popular on Grindr. Just as the interaction of race
and sexual position worked in the market for male sex work, effectively
giving men of different races who present the same masculine behaviors
different wages and creating racial differences in how the same men
presented their bodies to the market, men in the noncommercial sexual
market express a strong demand for specific sexual performances from
men by race. This is particularly true for Black men.
The evidence presented here suggests that the market for male sex work
and the noncommercial market for hookups share much in common.
At one level, this is quite intuitive – most of the theories applied to the
study of male sex work are not specific to male sex work but were devel-
oped to describe gay social-sexual behavior. At another level, however, the
results point to the thin line that exists between the commercial and
noncommercial aspects of sexuality and the marketing of gay masculinity
among gay men. Men in both markets desire to see the faces of the men
they are interacting with, both place a premium on masculinity, both adopt
discipline to the bodies they see as desirable, and both practice a racialized
type of sexual performance that is based, at least in part, upon racial-sexual
stereotypes. This is not to say that gay dating markets are similar to sex
work markets, but rather that gay casual sexual markets share a number of
common features, whether commercial or noncommercial. Male sex work
is one area that provides empirical insight into much larger social forces
that govern gay male sexual behavior and the development and refinement
of gay masculinities in the new millennium.

THE NONCOMMERCIAL MARKET FOR CASUAL GAY SEX

I use two data sources to investigate the casual sexual market among gay
men: a large sample of both the individual accounts on the Grindr smart-
phone application and advertisements for “men for men casual encoun-
ters” on Craigslist. Both of these sources are used for noncommercial social
networking with an explicit sexual nature to the contacts being sought. The
Grindr application began in early 2009, and as of 2015 claimed for than
2.5 million members in the United States.10 In the New York metropolitan
 The Noncommercial Market for Casual Gay Sex 209

area alone there are more than 400,000 unique Grindr accounts, and metro
areas such as Chicago (200,000+), Philadelphia (125,000+), and Detroit
(100,000+) have significant numbers of accounts. Despite a number of
competitors and similar applications in the market, Grindr remains one of
the most popular social smartphone application among gay men seeking
social connections with one another.
The application is specifically developed for men seeking social connec-
tions with other men. The application is free for download and use – the
developers derive income from the advertisements that appear at the bottom
of the screen in the application. Figure 7.1 displays a prototypical profile on
the application as of the time of data collection. As Figure 7.1 shows, profiles
feature a description of the man and his characteristics – age, height, weight,
body type, race, relationship status, gay sub-communities he self-identifies as

NAME

Online/Offline
Distance Away
Age
Height
Weight
Race/Ethnicity
Relationship Status

Looking For
(Chat, Dates, Friends, Networking,
)

Title of Profile

Text of Profile

Favorite Block Report

Figure 7.1 Example of a Grindr profile

210 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

being a member of, and what types of connections he is seeking from other
men. Beneath that, a man has the option of including more detail about
himself and what he desires in a partner. As with escort advertisements, these
are free form responses. This sample consists of 5,000 Grindr profiles that
were collected from 2011 to 2013 from a stratified sample of cities.11
The sexual nature of these types of applications has been an active area of
study among public health researchers. Public health officials have only
begun to investigate the ways in which these smartphone applications are
changing gay sexual networks, and there is less work that analyzes the social
organization of these applications, although research is accelerating.12
One area of agreement is their widespread use. Nearly two-thirds of gay
men in urban areas report using smartphone applications to find sexual
partners in a 12-month period.13 The fact that they are used for sexual
encounters has been documented. For example, gay men who use the
smartphone applications frequently are more likely to contract gonorrhea
and chlamydia than gay men who do not use the smartphone applications,
and other studies have found that men who use smartphone applications
were generally more sexually active and more likely to have contracted STIs,
but no more or less likely to participate in condomless sex.14 Other studies
have found that men who intensively use smartphone applications are
younger, less likely to be HIV positive and to have more sexual partners in
the previous year than other gay men.15
A summary look at the men in this sample of Grindr profiles reveals that,
overall, the sample is similar to the characteristics of men advertising
sexual services for pay. On average, men on Grindr are similarly aged
(29.7 years old, on average) and have physical characteristics such as height
(5 feet, 10 inches tall) and weight (173.7 pounds) that are similar to those of
sex workers. One difference between the two samples is that men on Grindr
are less racially diverse than men in the sex work market. The great
majority of men on Grindr are White (69 percent, versus 54 percent of
escorts), and there is much less representation of Blacks (9 percent, versus
22 percent of escorts), but more of Asians (5 percent, versus 1 percent for
escorts) on Grindr than among sex workers. Both samples have similar
numbers of Hispanics (17 percent, versus 14 percent for escorts).
The application works by identifying the location of each user and listing
those closest to the user, in order of proximity. This is restricted to users
who are either currently using the application or those who were recently
using the application. That is, the application is specifically designed to give
users a current snapshot of men currently online to better facilitate
immediate meetings. Users have the option of contacting specific profiles
 The Noncommercial Market for Casual Gay Sex 211

through a within-application messaging system. Within this messaging

feature, members can exchange messages and pictures with one another
as well as send details of their location. Members also have the option of
blocking the profiles of others or reporting harassing behavior to central
administrators.
There are several features of the profiles on Grindr that are similar to the
advertisements used by male sex workers. First, men list their physical
characteristics in a way that is similar to the way they are presented among
sex workers. Second, men have the option of creating free form profiles
where they can discuss aspects of their personality and what they are
seeking from their encounters. Third, the photos that men use in their
profiles are self-presentations similar to the ones used by male sex workers.
These profiles are concise when compared to the more verbose profiles that
one would see on a dating service such as Match.com or dating websites
where parties list more about their background, personal histories, and
other aspects that would be important in a dating market. The profiles on
Grindr are not designed to elicit detailed information, as opposed to a basic
impression of someone.
There are also important differences between the Grindr profiles and the
advertisements of male sex workers. For example, Grindr profiles are
restricted to one photo, which is displayed with a profile. Although men
can send photos to other men in private messages within the application,
the public only sees one photo. Compared to male sex workers, this greatly
restricts the possibility of variation in self-presentation. Also, nudity is not
allowed in profile pictures, which limits the overt sexual presentation that
men may wish to use in their profiles. Another important distinction is that
non-response is more likely in Grindr profiles than among the men in sex
worker advertisements. There are a non-negligible number of profiles that
contain no information at all. The most commonly missing values are for
age and body type, although race is also missing from many profiles.
Similarly, while the male sex worker data requires the posting of at least
one photo in an advertisement, Grindr does not. This means there is a set
of profiles that have no pictures at all. More than 10 percent of profiles in
our Grindr sample had no photo attached.
Given these distinctions, it is not possible to analyze the Grindr profiles
as if they were sex worker advertisements. While that may have certain
conceptual advantages, it is also flawed to the extent that the commercial
sex worker market comes with a different set of expectations for adver-
tisements. The distinctions are significant enough to make it impossible
to treat the sources as if they were the same. At the same time, certain
212 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

similarities are apparent and can be exploited. In particular, I analyze the

self-reported characteristics of Grindr profiles in a manner similar to
those for sex workers, the role of pictures as men describe them in their
profiles, mentions of masculinity in profiles, and restrictions on dating as
recorded in the text of Grindr profiles.
The Craigslist data source is a sample of advertisements from the online
service craigslist.org, which hosts a section in the personals for “casual
encounters” and which is further restricted to “men seeking men.” The
advertisements in this forum are specifically those of men seeking short-
duration meetings with other men. In these advertisements, men respond
to an anonymized email service for further contact. These advertisements
bear little resemblance to the profiles on Grindr and the male sex worker
advertisements, but they serve as an additional data source with which to
investigate the noncommercial sexual market. Since there is no instance in
which men are required or compelled to list any specific information, only
the text of these advertisements can be analyzed for content. The Craigslist
sample consists of 2,000 advertisements for “casual encounters” from the
same cities as the Grindr sample.16

FACE PICTURES IN NONCOMMERCIAL ADVERTISEMENTS

The role of face pictures among sex workers was a source of significant
price differences. This occurred because clients who policed the market
rewarded self-disclosure among sex workers. Face pictures were seen as
a mark of trustworthiness and prices reflected this. Although beauty may
also be involved in the premium, clients and sex workers also noted the
significant role that face pictures played as a sign of quality of the escort.
Face pictures contained information about the truthfulness of the escort,
distinct from information with respect to sexual behavior. In the sex work
market, face pictures allowed clients to overcome the problem of asym-
metric information.
Among the men on Grindr, face pictures play a similar role. Rather than
being a signaling device, however, face pictures serve as a screening device
used by men in the application.17 Theoretically, screening is the analogous
activity to signaling. While sex workers actively signal with face pictures,
the same outcome with respect to face pictures would occur if clients could
be explicit about their desire to see face pictures on the same websites
escorts use to advertise. As noted earlier, the websites for clients to review
sex worker services are independent of the websites, which stymied any
attempts that clients could have to screen sex workers.
 Face Pictures in Noncommercial Advertisements 213

In the Grindr application, screening is possible because the demand side

of the market can explicitly articulate their requirements. While sex work-
ers show pictures of their face to earn client trust, men in the Grindr
application use face pictures as first condition of contact. That is, they
require a man contacting them to display a picture of his face should he
wish to initiate contact or as a condition to respond to contact. A man who
chooses not to display a picture of his face is doing so with full under-
standing that a significant number of men using the application will not be
interested in contacting him or being contacted by him.
In a search of the text of profiles, men are explicit in noting that they
require face pictures in order to respond to a request for contact. For
example, men explicitly mention “Please have a face pic if you want to
chat with me” or “No face pic = no chat” or “If your profile is a headless pic,
I won’t respond.” Some men describe the consequences of not having a face
picture, with phrases such as “messages from people without a face pic are
deleted without reading.” These types of notices in profiles are quite typical
in reference to face pictures. Men are explicitly restricting their contacts to
men who show their face pictures in their profiles. Somewhat surprisingly,
this occurs among men who themselves do not show face pictures in their
own profiles – more than 5 percent of the men requesting face pictures do
not provide them in their own advertisements.
Another type of profile picture restriction allows for men to not have
face pictures in their profiles but requires the sending of a face picture if
further contact is desired. These stipulations commonly feature expres-
sions such as “No pic no reply. Please send a face pic.” “Send a face pic in
your first message.” That is, this type of restriction allows for the discretion
that some men may require when using a forum like Grindr (which is
unrestricted – anyone with a smartphone may download the application
and begin using it, and the only restriction is geographic proximity), but it
requires a face picture before further contact.
Among all of the profiles in the sample from Grindr, more than one-
third mention a face picture restriction such as the two described above.
When restricting only to those profiles that are complete, the percentage
rises to over 40 percent. That is, men in the Grindr data are very specific
that face pictures are required for their noncommercial encounters. Men
who do not provide face pictures will have a much smaller pool of men to
choose from, given the widespread use of this screening device. Just as
face pictures were related to better remuneration in the male sex work
market, face pictures here allow men to have a larger number of potential
contacts.
214 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

The face picture requirement sets a bar that men seeking noncommer-
cial sexual contact must meet. From the text of the profiles, one cannot
discern the purpose of this requirement, but further discussion in the
profiles does point to some clues. Some men mention that face pictures
are a screen for a man’s acceptance of his sexuality. For example, profiles
mention, “If you can’t show me your face, we can’t meet,” or “If you’re
ashamed to be here, don’t bother.” While one cannot properly categorize
all of these statements, they do appear to fall within the general category of
saying that, to some men on Grindr, face pictures are a signal of a man’s
openness with respect to his sexuality. This would seem to be particularly
compelling for those who require a face picture in the profile, as it is always
possible to send pictures privately between individual account holders.
Another common mention of face pictures is the indication that other
pictures render men “headless torsos,” and thus lacking in authenticity.
Here, the role of the face picture is to explicitly imbue the contact with
individuality, something that may be difficult to establish with pictures of
other body parts alone. Men commonly decry the number of “headless
torsos” or landscape photos in the profile pictures of others. The responses
here are more in keeping with the idea that the casual encounters sought do
entail a level of intimacy that requires the exchange of face pictures. Men
with “headless torsos” are taken to be indistinguishable from each other.
In matters of intimacy, faces are seen as a key to the inherent interpersonal
exchange, even in temporary sexual encounters. Men are explicit about
wanting to know whom they are corresponding with, and this, to many
men on Grindr, requires that a face picture be shown.
Interestingly, beauty is rarely mentioned as a reason for requiring face
pictures. Fewer than 5 percent of the mentions for face pictures make any
mention of beauty. Given that these encounters are noncommercial, it would
seem obvious that both parties would seek partners by mutual selection and
that beauty would be of primary importance. In the case of face pictures,
however, this is not the case. While that does not imply that face pictures do
not also serve this purpose, the lack of explicit mention of beauty suggests
that, as a screening device, face pictures serve a different purpose.
As discussed in earlier chapters, the role of face pictures among sex
workers is related to market function and the problems of asymmetric
information. Face pictures appear to play a similar role among men in the
noncommercial market. In commercial interactions, face pictures signal
quality. In the noncommercial market they are a screen for self-acceptance,
authenticity, and trustworthiness. In both the commercial and noncommer-
cial markets, it appears that face pictures are also evidence of individuality.
 Masculinity in Noncommercial Sex 215

Neither a client nor a man on Grindr is seeking men who cannot be easily
distinguished as being genuine. Even in the noncommercial market, the role
of face pictures is to screen/signal a behavior or personality that is not related
to the content of the face picture itself, but rather to features of one’s behavior
and personality that are related to credibility and authenticity.

MASCULINITY IN NONCOMMERCIAL SEX

Among sex workers, masculinity was rewarded by clients. In the analysis of
sex workers this was restricted to their sexual behaviors. Among the
profiles on Grindr, there is less discussion of sexual behaviors in profiles
but more explicit discussion of masculinity. While client demand for
masculinity in sex workers was deduced from the correlation of prices
with masculine behaviors such as sexual position, in Grindr profiles men
are more explicit about their desires for masculine partners. One additional
advantage of the Grindr profiles is that the participating men discuss their
own, self-reported masculinity in their profiles. As such, the analysis of
profiles in the Grindr application allows us to investigate both the supply
and demand for masculinity in the noncommercial sexual market.
Importantly, this is self-described masculinity, although it undoubtedly
speaks to specific notions that would be assumed to be common among the
men using the application. For the purposes of analysis, the key is that the
term is explicitly used by men as both a description of themselves (supply)
and as a quality sought in partners (demand).
Analysis of the text in Grindr profiles reveals that masculinity is in very
high demand. Of the men who list text in their profiles, more than 20 percent
make explicit reference to desiring masculine partners. A sizable portion of
men who describe their desire for masculinity desire it exclusively, as “masc
only” or “only interested in masc guys” are commonly used among men who
state masculinity preferences. No other trait is so frequently mentioned in
the Grindr profiles. To be clear – the most-discussed trait for men in Grindr
is masculinity. While other traits such as intelligence are occasionally noted,
masculinity is the most sought after characteristic in this market. Consistent
with the findings from the male sex market, masculinity is the most desired
trait among men in the Grindr application. Mentions of masculinity are
more than twice as likely as those of any other characteristic mentioned in
the smartphone application.
Masculinity is also the most-supplied characteristic among men on the
Grindr application. When describing themselves, men are more likely to
describe themselves as masculine than as possessing any other trait. Features
216 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

that refer to human capital, sociality, personality, humor, and the like are
much less frequently mentioned. Indeed, masculinity is mentioned more
frequently than sexual conduct in self-descriptions. Masculinity is men-
tioned 1.5 more times than any other trait in men’s self-descriptions. With
the supply of masculinity so high, there is the common expression “masc4-
masc,” which denotes men who are self-described as masculine who are
seeking connections with other masculine men.18
Masculinity is mentioned in several different ways in Grindr profiles. In
addition to explicit use of the term, profiles commonly use phrases such as
“real men” or “manly” when describing partners. Others are more explicit,
requiring that those who seek to contact them “act like men” or “be a real
dude” if they expect a response. In the Grindr application, masculinity
must be presented or self-professed in some discernable way in order for
a participant to meet the masculinity standard that is established in the
application. It is difficult to gauge how this masculinity can be assessed,
given the limited information allowed in a profile – but the masculinity
requirement from others may be one reason for masculinity’s being the
most common attribute that men apply to themselves.
Masculinity is mentioned so frequently that a non-negligible number of
profiles actually mock the ubiquitous mention of it in profiles. For example,
profiles declare “not into that masc shit” or “I’m prolly not masc enough
for you” or “Oh my God! I’m so totally masc! Way too masc for you! Totes
masc” and similar send-ups of the frequency to which men declare their
own masculinity and declare it as a search characteristic. While this sort of
profile is relatively rare, it speaks to the fact that the online profiles have
evolved to the point where the discussion of masculinity can now be
a target of parody. This, of course, requires that the audience (the other
users of the application) understand the frame of reference and note that
this is, in fact, a parody of this specific constriction and use of masculinity.
This speaks to the fact that Grindr has become a place where gay men, in
seeking to connect to other gay men, enforce a rigid code of masculine
behavior. Those who present as masculine will likely have more choices
than those who do not. Similarly, men see fit to describe themselves as
masculine as a means of piquing the interest of other men. While one may
think that a gay sexual place would be one where gender norms are not as
rigid as in a heterosexual setting, the ubiquitous mentions of masculinity
serve clear notice that masculine presentation and self-definition are highly
prized in the noncommercial sexual market.
In stark contrast, there are very few mentions of men seeking feminine
men for encounters (fewer than 1 percent of Grindr profiles make positive
 Discipline of the Body in Noncommercial Sex Work 217

mention of feminine men). In fact, men are much more likely to note that
they are not interested in being contacted by feminine men. Men use
phrases such as “masc only” or “no fems” to note that they are only seeking
connections with non-feminine men. This extends to a branding of fem-
inine men as women and even explicit homophobia, with phrases such as
“real men only” or “no sissies” or “no queens” in their profiles. Others are
more explicit in desiring men who “act like men” without further defini-
tion. When femininity is mentioned in profiles, it is placed in a negative
connotation more than 90 percent of the time, consistent with strong
distaste for feminine behavior among gay sexual partners.
In terms of sexual behavior, men who openly describe submissive sexual
behavior are much more likely to couch it in terms of masculinity. For
example, men who are bottoms are much more likely to refer to themselves
as “masculine bottoms” than men are to refer to themselves as “masculine
tops.” Men who are bottoms are more than twice as likely to include the
modifier “masculine” than men who are tops. This is consistent with
bottom sexual activity being taken to be inherently more feminized than
top sexual behavior. Just as escorts had to present themselves to the market
in a way assured clients they were as described, bottom men in the Grindr
community feel the need to attach a description of their masculinity to
sexual behaviors that would be taken as feminine.
The noncommercial market appears to value masculinity to an extent
similar to that seen in the commercial market. Masculinity is the single most
discussed trait in the application. Men are both claiming to be masculine and
desiring connections with masculine partners. At the same time, this is not
only a desire for masculinity, but masculinity presented as a strict require-
ment, with the explicit notice that femininity is not desired. Overall, the form
and function of masculinity in the noncommercial market is quite similar to
the way masculinity functions in the market for sex work. It is a highly
desired trait, and men who profess masculine personas will have more
options among potential partners than will other men.

DISCIPLINE OF THE BODY IN NONCOMMERCIAL

SEX WORK

Body Size
In the market for male sex work, bodies were presented in specific ways to
conform to standards of beauty. In analyzing sex worker presentations,
the assumption was that sex workers would choose presentations that
218 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

conformed to the ways gay men have sexualized male bodies and that also
highlighted features that, conditional on given characteristics, would place
a man higher in the hierarchy. Gay men have a well-documented desire for
bodies that conform to socially accepted norms for masculine bodies.
In particular, gay masculinities prize muscularity and penalize men who
are larger, but there is little work that analyzes the way this is represented in
smartphone applications. Does the noncommercial market exhibit the
same values?
Unfortunately, given the limited number of photos in a profile on
Grindr, I am unable to explore variations in the ways that men present
themselves in the noncommercial market. I can, however, analyze what
they do say about what they desire in terms of physical attractiveness. Men
describe both their own physical features and also note the physical
features they would like to see in others. As with masculinity, men reveal
a great deal about what they desire in the noncommercial market, and also
what they do not desire in their sexual partners, in their profiles.
In terms of the body, muscularity reigns supreme. Muscularity is the
most commonly described physical attribute among men in the Grindr
application. Men are more prone to describe themselves as muscular or fit
than by any other descriptor of physical features. Men also demand
muscularity, but one issue is that there are other terms for the body that
are more ambiguous. In particular, the demand for “fit” or “height-weight
proportionate” partners is the greatest and most commonly noted on the
application. There are also several mentions of being familiar with gyms as
a desirable trait, with expressions such as “know your way around a gym”
and “works out regularly” relatively common in profiles. The desire to have
a casual sexual encounter with a man based on his gym-going behavior is
interesting in and of itself, insofar as a man may present the desired
physique without belonging to a gym and a regular gym-goer may not
have a particular physique, depending on the type of training he practices.
There are two ways of reading such demands. First, it could be directly
related to the bodies being desired – athletic bodies would require regular
training. Second, gym-going is also a type of masculine behavior that could
be correlated with physique, but is not necessarily causal. For example,
Levine (1998) describes the different types of gyms that gay men frequent –
some of which are more conditioned for cardiovascular training as
opposed to muscular development and intensive weightlifting.
As with desirable traits, men also reveal what they do not wish to find in
their casual encounters. There is a strong distaste for overweight men, but
not for thin men. Some men are quite explicit in noting that “no fats”
 Discipline of the Body in Noncommercial Sex Work 219

should contact them for private messaging. Another very common

description is that men must be “height-weight proportionate,” and this
has been seen by scholars as more punitive to large men than to small men.
Also, Robinson (2016) notes that such terms allow for muscular men (who
will, for example, have high BMIs), since the body is regulated by
a symmetry of appearance. In general, there is a strong distaste for large
men. In more than 95 percent of the references to weight, men are explicit
that they do not want a partner who is overweight.19
This policing of the body is quite similar to what was observed among
sex workers. There is strong demand for body types that are consistent with
traditional masculine norms. Muscularity and the presentation of a physi-
cally fit physique are important in the noncommercial market. Men who
are fit or height-weight proportionate will have more options in the non-
commercial market than will others. Men who are muscular, however, will
have the most desired physical physique in the noncommercial market.
At a general level, the body types seen as most desired in the noncommer-
cial market are the same as those desired in the commercial market.

Race and the Body

Earlier, the commercial sex market was shown to be a place where racial
and sexual stereotypes operated in concert with one another. Men who
conformed to racial sexual stereotypes were rewarded. Also, men were
expected to present themselves in ways that conformed to those stereo-
types. Overall, the findings with respect to masculinity and sexual behavior
were consistently mediated by race and racial-sexual stereotypes.
In the noncommercial market, men are explicit about their racial pre-
ferences in a way that we cannot determine from the commercial sex
market. In the Grindr application, the most popular race for a sexual
partner is White. Profiles explicitly note that men are “mostly into White
guys” or “prefer White guys” when noting race. Roughly 75 percent of all
racial preferences noted in the application are for Whites, while in fewer
than 25 percent of instances where a racial preference is given, the race
other than White. There are men who also mention that they have “no
racial hangups” or are “open to all races,” but the number of men placing
racial exclusions is 1.5 times the number of men mentioning racial open-
ness. In terms of a racial hierarchy, it appears that White will have a larger
range of potential partners from which to choose.
As with masculinity and body size, men are also explicit about what
races they do not prefer on the Grindr application. Men frequently
220 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

mention “no Asians” or “no Blacks” in their profiles, evidence of strong

racial exclusion. Racial exclusion, however, is less than half as likely as
racial preference in profiles. Although racial exclusion has received more
popular press and scholarly attention, it is actually much less common than
men stating the race of men they desire. This is not to say that all men can
be assumed to have these racial views and to recognize a resulting hierarchy
of partners. Also, since the men with open racial preferences are open to all,
even where there are men who do not have strict racial preferences, White
men will find the largest number of potential partners.
One curiosity among men on the Grindr application is that they show
some degree of racial self-exclusion. For example, among Black men
stating racial preferences, more than a third (34 percent) note that they
prefer White or Hispanic partners. The number is slightly higher among
Asians (39 percent), who also note that they prefer White partners.
Hispanics are less likely to note racial preferences overall, but among
those who do they are similarly likely to restrict the race of their partners
(37 percent). As such, the racial exclusion practiced in the market is not
simply the racial preferences of White men, but the racial preferences of
Asian and Black men as well. The preference for Whiteness is less intense
among other races, but it is still prominent among all races.20
While the evidence from Grindr points to a racial hierarchy, the
analysis of male sex work showed that there were more specific interac-
tions of race and sexual behavior that were rewarded in the market.
In particular, the literature on race, gay masculinities, and the gay body
identified Black male penis size as one component of a racialized Black
male sexuality that restricted attention to specific aspects of Black male
sexual behavior.21 With the Grindr profiles it is not possible to investigate
this issue due to the paucity of explicit mentions in the profiles that speak
to racial-sexual stereotypes, given the strong racial preferences in the
application. However, I can use online advertisements from Craigslist to
investigate the interactions of race and sexual behavior stereotypes.
Unlike Grindr, where men post a profile to pique the interest of other
men, the Craigslist forum is one where men are more specific about the
sexual behaviors and type of men they are seeking. Put another way, the
Grindr profiles are general appeals while the Craigslist profiles are more
specific about what men desire.
One unique feature of the Craigslist advertisements is the degree to which
penis size is mentioned in reference to Black men. In a text search of the
posts in the profile, Black men were almost exclusively desired for their
stereotypically large penises. In fact, the shorthand for this on the website is
 Male Sex Work and Gay Male Society 221

“BBC,” the acronym for “big black cock” that is used in pornography and
other sexualized media.22 In contrast to the discussion of any other racial
group, Black men were described by penis size more than 85 percent of
the time (88 percent). No other racial group had penis size (or any other
anatomical description) noted nearly as frequently – in fact, there was no
other racial group with any discussion of penis size nearly as common as
for Black men. This is consistent with the concept of restrictive codes of
sexual behavior among Black men in White gay masculinities. While the
Grindr application shows that Black men are largely excluded from
sexual-social interaction, the Craigslist listings show that where Black
men are included it is when they conform to the racial stereotype of
sexual domination and hypermasculinity in the form of a large (Black)
penis. As noted earlier, while many scholars and the popular press have
focused on exclusion, the racial stereotypes that govern the inclusion of
Black men in gay sexual sociality are quite problematic on their own.
Among sex workers, Black men conforming to the stereotype were well-
rewarded, and the results from Craigslist show that sexual domination is
the most sought-after trait for Black men.
This discussion of Black male penis size also contained restrictions on
sexual conduct. In discussions of profiles where Black men were desired,
they were sought as “top” partners at a ratio of more than 5 to 1. There was
no other racial-sexual position combination that approached even a 2-to-1
ratio among all possible combinations in Craigslist. As with sex workers,
Black men who conform to the sexual stereotype of sexual aggression and
large penis size will have more potential partners than Black men who do
not. As with the commercial market, the noncommercial market places
strong restrictions on the sexual expressions of Black men, and reifies
racial-sexual stereotypes of Black bodies. The racial-sexual nexus for
Black men that is so common in sex work is not unique to male sex
work, but rather is a continuation of what is seen in the noncommercial
sexual market.

MALE SEX WORK AND GAY MALE SOCIETY

Male sex work is both an economic and social practice. As an economic
practice, there are specific institutions that underscore its function. It is,
after all, a market that must get prices right and provide a consumers with
a service (which much be priced lower than or equal to its value –
consumer surplus) and producers with profit (which must be priced
higher than or equal to the their cost of production – producer surplus).
222 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

This book investigated two aspects of the economic aspects of the market:
(1) the ways in which the market overcomes the problems of asymmetric
information and (2) the price effects of sex worker movement, which is
a unique form of competition in the sex work market.
We saw that the community of clients worked to police the market and
enforce an interesting type of market discipline through the use of face
pictures. Clients are exposed to a number of threats from escorts because
the market is illegal. While this includes their physical well-being, an
arguably larger threat is simply that they might be scammed by escorts
who dupe clients into issuing payments without rendering services. Since
the market is illegal there is no way that clients can make any appeals to
traditional means of enforcing contracts, and they therefore come together
to collectively agree that face pictures are the marker of escort responsi-
bility and escort trustworthiness. Escorts who post pictures of their faces in
their advertisements are rewarded with higher prices in the market.
We saw that the price effect of face pictures is not driven by factors such
as beauty or empty claims of quality. In fact, face pictures had no value in
cities where clients were not able to effectively police the market. The male
sex worker market solves the tricky issue of asymmetric information by
forming a collective of clients who demand a consistent signal of quality
that successfully causes more trustworthy escorts to signal their quality and
at the same time discourages less scrupulous escorts from doing so. This is
one way in which the market works to get the prices right.
In the noncommercial sex landscape of smartphone applications, face
pictures played a similar role. There, the asymmetric information problem
is the same, and rather than having face pictures work as a signal, men use
them as a screen. The screen has the same effect as the signal – men who
show pictures of their face will have a larger range of choices for casual
sexual encounters than those who do not. Men are also specific in noting
what face pictures signify to them – that the man who presents the picture
is secure enough in his sexuality to be willing to show his face. This is
arguably related to trustworthiness, but primarily related to a man’s self-
acceptance of his sexuality. While there are no prices here to show the
magnitude of the effect, the fact that the discussion is so prominent on the
smartphone applications shows that face pictures are also important in
the noncommercial sex world of smartphone applications.
Male sex workers’ practice of working in multiple markets creates some
price effects that are driven by client demand. We saw that male escorts are
quite likely to travel – more than half serve multiple locations. While the
home locations of male escorts were not related to gay location patterns,
 Male Sex Work and Gay Male Society 223

the travel locations were related to gay location patterns and likely reflect
higher demand in cities with significant gay male populations. The men
who live in cities with large numbers of gay men charge more for their
escort services than do others, and the price difference is one factor that
may lead male sex workers to travel to those cities to provide sex worker
services. In doing so, these men raise the prices in their home markets as
well because the technology in the market does not allow sex workers to
price discriminate. This traveling behavior therefore creates a nationally
linked network of male sex work that is driven by the prices in the cities
with high demand for male sex worker services. This national linking of the
market shows it to be highly developed and, unlike street prostitution
markets, deeply connected. As a basic measure of market maturity, the
connectedness of the market shows male sex work to be well developed,
particularly for an illegal market.
Male sex work is not divorced from the larger forces that shape gay
masculinity and gay sexuality. In turning to the social aspects of male sex
work, I focused on three issues: (1) the ways that social forces worked in the
prices of male sex worker services, (2) the ways that the social discipline of
the body in gay communities worked to influence the ways that escorts
presented their bodies in the market, and (3) the role that client and sex
worker negotiation impacted the role of condomed sex in the market. Each
of these social explorations was concerned with both gay masculinities and
the related intersections those masculinities have with race. As we saw,
these influences had a dominating influence on the way that the market for
male sex work operated.
Since men in the market are selling sex to other men, the ways the
market values that sex are key windows into gay sexual organization. We
saw that gay men prize masculinity in various forms. Dominating sexual
behaviors were rewarded in the market. Even more, it was not simply
masculinity that mattered: who was offering the masculinity mattered as
well. Gay masculinities are deeply intertwined with racially restrictive
codes about who is more masculine, who has more legitimate claims on
authentic masculinity, and how that masculinity is embodied (which also
implies who will be punished more severely for not conforming to that
ideal). We saw that Black gay men were rewarded to conforming to racially
stereotypically Black hypermasculine behavior – much more than the
general premium for sexually dominant sexual behaviors. Along the
same lines, Black men offering submissive sexual services were the most
punished in the market for not conforming to their racial stereotype of
sexual domination.
224 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

This carries over to the noncommercial sexual market. The men in the
noncommercial market place a very distinct value on masculinity, to the
point that the masculinity requirement has become a subject of parody.
They are most likely to describe themselves as masculine and also to
couch presumably non-masculine sexual behaviors in masculine terms.
For example, being sexually submissive is commonly accompanied by the
modifier “masculine.” Femininity was expressly disdained and routinely
discouraged. Also, we saw that the expectation of Black domination is
ubiquitous in the noncommercial market. Black men in noncommercial
gay sexual space are expected to provide sexually dominant behavior to
men in their sexual encounters. While others have noted the general
exclusion of particular races in smartphone application profiles, we saw
that the inclusion of men could be just as problematic since it is situated
on a racially informed expectation of bodies, sexual behaviors, and
masculinity.
Gay masculinity also has a direct impact on the body and on which
bodies are deemed desirable. Among sex workers, we saw that men took
these cues and used them in constructing their erotic personas. Men were
not likely to act against the gay masculine requirements that certain types
of men (muscular men or Black men, for example) were more likely to
provide sexually dominant or submissive sexual services. This informed
the very way that the men presented their bodies to the market. Men whose
physical body size was unlikely to be seen as masculine in gay masculinities
emphasized feminizing features of their bodies such as the buttocks.
The reverse was true for men whose physical descriptions fit with tradi-
tional gay masculinities – they were more likely to show frontal nudity. For
men who defied those conventions there was evidence that they provided
even more pictures of frontal or rear nudity to assure clients that their
counterintuitive descriptions of their behavior were matched by their phy-
sical selves. Perhaps most interesting, these presentations were not related
to prices – they served the market function of advertising, but were not
themselves related to the prices of escort services.
Among men in the noncommercial market, the same type of body
discipline was seen. Men showed a strong distaste for large men and
feminine men and preferred muscular men. Along the same lines, men in
the noncommercial market expected Black men to possess oversized
genitals. When men discussed desiring Black sexual partners they were
specific that they desired “big Black cock” and sexual domination, which
shows that the presentations among Black male sex workers were
expected of Black men in general. The presentations that men need to
 Male Sex Work and Gay Male Society 225

craft in gay sexual spaces did not appear to differ dramatically between
the commercial and noncommercial markets.
Lastly, we saw that escorts used gay masculinity to their advantage to
control the terms of their sexual conduct with clients. Sex workers who
adhere to gay masculine norms are more likely to advertise condomed
sex. We also saw that the growth of condomless sex among gay men in the
noncommercial market had a peculiar effect on the male sex work
market. Rather than rewarding men for condomless sex, as expected in
the theory of compensating differentials, the market rewards condomed
sex. This is likely due to the fact that condomless sex is much easier to
secure in the noncommercial market, and therefore clients use the sex
work market to secure condomed sex, and they reward escorts hand-
somely for providing the service. In turn, this alters the way that sex work
is viewed from a public health perspective – rather than being a source of
disease transmission, the male sex work market works to provide and
reward sex workers for safer sexual behaviors. Sex workers actually earn
less if they provide condomless sex.
The social and economic forces of sex work offer an interesting and
slightly disheartening window into contemporary gay sexual organization.
Social constructions of gay masculinity play a strong role in both the male
sex worker market and casual sex among gay men. In both instances, men
market, supply, and demand sex in relatively strict adherence to gay
masculine norms. This masculinity, and a desire to conform to a gay
construction of masculinity that features few departures from its hetero-
sexual counterpart, forms part of a hierarchy where masculinity is not
critiqued among gay men, but is morphed into an ideal that has a direct
influence on desirability. Behavior must be modified to fit into this mascu-
line ideal in ways that seem odd, such as men needing to adopt modifiers to
their “non-masculine” sexual behaviors in such a way that all behaviors
become masculine. This gay masculinity also places severe restrictions on
the body, accepting and rejecting men for how they adhere to a body norm
that idealizes muscularity and rejects feminizing features such as thinness
or large body size.
This gay masculinity also contains a significant number of racial
restrictions that place significant limits on the sexual representations
available to Black men, specifically. Black men in gay masculinities
embody a hypermasculinity that is overtly physical. Black men must
supply domination, sexual hyperactivity, and oversized genitals in this
gay masculinity. Indeed, the full range of sexual exploration is, more or
less, not allowed for them. It is unclear whether this applies fully to other
226 Conclusion: Every Man a Sex Worker?

racial-sexual stereotypes, but the evidence here suggest that Black men
occupy a highly racialized existence in gay masculinities, which reduces
them to specific sexual behaviors and physical representations.
The picture of gay sexual organization that emerges suggests that gay
men are tied to masculinities in a way that restricts the sexual liberation
that was a hallmark of, and one cause for, gay political organization. There
is very little in the way of gay masculinity that appears to free gay men from
the social restrictions on heterosexual men. While gay masculinities allow
for same-sex attraction and sexual desire, they are deeply intertwined with
an anti-feminism, which causes gay men to be particularly self-conscious
about the way their sexuality is presented to other gay men. The deification
of the masculine ideal is, in some respects, an attempt to approach the
heterosexual ideal as closely as possible, with the only exception being
same-sex physical attraction. As argued by earlier generations of scholars
of sexuality and masculinity, gay masculinities have not freed gay men to
any large extent relative to their heterosexual counterparts. Indeed, they
are restricted in largely the same way with respect to presentation, expecta-
tions, and body discipline.
To the extent that the features of commercial sex work feature promi-
nently in the casual encounters of gay men, gay masculinities have caused
gay men to market their sexual attraction as transactions in a way that blurs
the lines between the commercial and noncommercial. Perhaps the eco-
nomic forces themselves, hinging upon utility maximization, profit max-
imization, and rational decision making, tie into masculine norms about
behavior in capitalist systems that gay men have placed in both their
market and their nonmarket sexual behavior. Feminist economists have
noted that the conceptual frameworks of neoclassical economic framework
are gendered in ways that prize a masculine approach to distribution, trade,
and welfare. While a treatise on the possibility that market forces them-
selves are masculine traits that gay men would emulate in their sexual
behavior is beyond the scope here, those market forces are not restricted to
the men seeking prostitution services. Given this possibility, the question
that remains is whether the commercial male sex market, with its ingenious
solution to asymmetric information, tightly connected network, rewards
for masculine behavior, discipline on the body and self-presentation, and
complicated negotiations over sexual practices, is a window into gay
sexual sociality or a mirror that reflects the rigid social forces at play in
gay masculinities.
 Appendix 1

Data for the Analysis of Male Sex Work

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF MALE SEX WORKER

ADVERTISEMENT DATA
The data is the universe of men advertising on the site in the United States at
the time of data collection, and, by agreement, the website name is not
disclosed. Since the data is the entire population, I collected the data by
searching through every geographic listing in the United States during the
period of data collection. Each escort has a page specific to him that I used to
gather the information. The website generates income from escorts only;
clients do not pay to access any ads and no portion of the site is restricted
from the public. All information collected was publicly and freely available on
the website at the time of collection. There are other websites available for
clients of male sex workers. A comparison of the website with two competi-
tors, which establishes that the data source is the most comprehensive website
in terms of coverage of the male escort market, is shown in Appendix 1.3.
I am able to identify each escort uniquely using the following informa-
tion (see Figure 1.2 for an example of an escort advertisement):
User ID: Each escort account on the site has a unique user ID. This
allowed me to check against the possibility of double-counting escorts
who may change location over the data collection period.
User Name: Each escort has a user name that is displayed next to the ID
number at the top of the ad.
The measures used are described below:
Services Provided: Under this heading each escort has the option
of noting the following services, which are recorded:
Incall: Escort responds “yes” or “no.”
Outcall: Escort responds “yes” or “no.”

227
228 Appendix 1

Incall Price: The price (by the hour) that incall services are provided at
if incalls provided.
Outcall Price: The price (by the hour) that outcall services are
provided at if outcalls provided.
Contact Information: Under this heading each escort has the option of
noting the following:
Phone: Phone number with area code (I record if a number is
listed Yes/No)
Cellular: Cellular number with area code (I record if a number is listed
Yes/No)
Pager: Pager number with area code (I record if a number is listed
Yes/No)
Prefers Phone Contact: Listed if escort prefers for clients to
contact him by phone (Yes/No).
Prefers E-Mail Contact: Listed if escort prefers for clients to contact
him by e-mail (Yes/No).
Location: The location listed under the heading is the primary location;
the locations with suitcase icons next to them are cities the escort is
willing to travel to. In some instances, exact dates are listed under
specific travel cities, and this means that an escort is traveling to that
city on those dates and will serve clients in those cities on those dates.
I record all of these locations.
Age: Age is recorded in years.
Height: Height is reported in feet and inches; I record height in
inches. For BMI the inches are converted to centimeters.
Weight: Weight is listed in 20-pound intervals beginning at 130 pounds
and ending at 200 pounds (e.g., 150–170 lb.). I took the midpoint of
the range given by an escort. If the escort’s text ad listed a weight,
I recorded that exact weight in place of the midpoint range. For
calculation of BMI the weight is converted to kilograms.
Race: White, Black/African American, Asian, Hispanic, Multiracial,
Other
Hair Color: Black, Blond, Brown, Grey, Red
Eye Color: Black, Blue, Brown, Green, Hazel
Body Type: Athletic/Swimmer’s Build, Average, A few extra pounds,
Muscular/buff, Thin/lean
Body Hair: Hairy, Moderately hairy, Shaved, Smooth

For the text of escort ads, I record the mention of the following: (Note:
Since the ads were read as opposed to scripts, I do not record the instance
 Appendix 1 229

of the word but its meaning, which can be inferred from the context of the
advertisement.)

Top: The escort stated that he is a top (the penetrative partner in

anal sex).
Bottom: The escort stated that he is a bottom (the receptive partner in
anal sex).
Versatile: The escort indicated that he is versatile (both top and bottom).
No Attitude: The escort noted that he has “no attitude”/is willing to see
clients without regard to race, body type, physical appearance,
disability, etc.
Safe: The escort noted that he is disease and drug free/only participates
in safer sex.

Note: In American gay society, men may not only be tops, bottoms, or
versatile, but also “versatile tops” and “versatile bottoms.” The meaning of
such terms is the distinction between one man who would rarely or never
partake in an activity (a “top” would never perform as a “bottom” and vice
versa), and a man who occasionally partakes in an activity (a “versatile top”
would occasionally perform as a “bottom” and vice versa). These terms are
well established in gay society.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CLIENT REVIEW DATA

Below, all variables from the data are defined. (Yes/No indicates a dichot-
omous variable. See Figure 1.3 for an example of an escort advertisement.)

Review Number: The chronological review number at the top of the

review
Review Date: This is the date when the review was posted to the website
after being verified by the webmaster.
Escort Name: The name of the MSW being reviewed. Note that for
MSWs who change their names, their old reviews are retained but
listed under their most recent name. For uniformity, the most recent
escort name being used is the name in the data.
Escort E-Mail: If the MSW has an e-mail address (Yes/No)
Escort Phone: If the MSW has a phone number (Yes/No)
Escort Website: If the MSW has a website or advertisement on a male
escort website (Yes/No)
Escort Permanent Location: This is the MSW’s home location at
the time of the review.
230 Appendix 1

Ethnicity/Race: This is the client’s perception of the MSW’s race/ethnicity.

From this, racial measures for White, Black, Asian, Hispanic, and
“other race” are created.
Age: Age is noted in decades (e.g., 30s).
Height: Reported in feet and inches. Height is also transformed to
centimeters in the data for the calculation of BMI.
Weight: Weight is noted in 10-pound intervals (e.g., 190–200 lb.). The
mid-point of the interval is converted to kilograms for the calculation
of BMI.
Build: Client’s perception of the body build of the MSW.
Eye Color: MSW’s eye color is recorded.
Hair: Both hair color and hair style are noted in separate fields.
Cock Size: Penis size refers to erect member and is noted in 1-inch
intervals (e.g., 9–10). The measure is converted to a midpoint of the
range in inches for use in the regressions.
Cock Size Description: This is two fields. The first describes circumcision
status (Yes/No). The second field records descriptors noted by clients as
a text field (e.g., thick).
Smoking: If the MSW smoked during/immediately before or after the
appointment (Yes/No)
Drinking: If the MSW drank alcohol during/immediately before or
after the appointment (Yes/No)
Tattoos: If the MSW has tattoos (Yes/No)
Orientation: This is the client’s perception of the MSW’s sexual
orientation (”Straight,” “Gay,” “Bi”)
Calls: Whether the MSW performs in (client goes to MSW) or out
(MSW goes to client) services, or both
Roles: Roles can include escort, masseur, stripper, etc. This refers to the role
or roles that were being performed during that particular appointment.
Masturbation: Records whether the MSW was masturbated by the client,
masturbated the client, or both
Anal: Records whether the MSW penetrated the client, was penetrated
by the client, or both
Oral: Records whether the MSW performed fellatio on client, had
fellatio performed by the client, or both
Kink: Whether the MSW participated in any kinky activity such as
bondage, domination, leather, etc. Due to the difficulty of knowing
the specific type of sexual activity that the measure refers to, this is not
incorporated into the empirical model.
Date of Appointment: Month and year of the transaction being reviewed
 Appendix 1 231

Type of Appointment: Appointment length in time

Location of Appointment: The city and state where the transaction took
place
Rate: Rate paid by the client for this specific transaction
Rating: The client chooses between Highly Recommended, Recommended,
and Not Recommended.
Hire Again: The client enters yes/no as to whether they would use
this escort in the future.
Where Found: How the client found the MSW; could be listed as the data
source itself (daddysreviews.com), another website, advertisement, or
MSW’s personal webpage.
Match Description: The client notes if the MSW appeared as advertised
(Yes/No).
Lived Up: The client notes if the experience was as expected (Yes/No).
Experience: This is where the client records the activities of a specific
encounter, allowing us to encode the sexual behaviors (including safer
sex practices, oral sex, anilingus, masturbation, etc.) and sexual positions
of both clients and MSWs. The experience measures are text-analyzed
for the mention of specific sexual conduct words (e.g., “suck,”
“pounded,” etc.), and variables are created where the mention of that
word was included in the experience measure, and further refined to
refer to specific conduct (anal sex, oral sex, etc.). Since the true meaning
of the terms used can only be inferred from the context, the experience
measures were read and coded separately by two analysts (the author
and a research assistant) and cross-checked for consistency, which noted
the meaning of the word (e.g., transaction contained anilingus by client
on escort, transaction contained penetration by escort on client).
Handle: This serves as the unique identifier for the client.
Submissions: The number of other reviews the client had performed at
the time of the current review.
About Client: The client enters a brief self-description. Age, height,
weight, race, and will be recorded as separate categories if noted
by the client (see Figure 1.3 for an example).

COMPARISON OF MALE ESCORT ADVERTISEMENT DATA

It is important to establish that the data source provides sufficient coverage
of the online escort market. Appendix Table 1.1 compares escorts on the
chosen website with two of the most prominent competitor websites for
a random sample of smaller cities. As described earlier, I can uniquely
232 Appendix 1

Appendix Table 1.1 Comparison of male escort advertisement websites

Number of escorts:
City Data Comp 1 Comp 2 Data / Comp 1 Comp 1 / Data
Albany, NY 5 0 3 — —
Austin, TX 26 3 15 2/3 2/26
Buffalo, NY 5 0 0 — —
Charlotte, NC 19 3 4 2/3 2/19
Columbus, OH 30 3 13 3/3 3/30
Denver, CO 41 5 19 5/5 5/41
Detroit, MI 73 10 14 9/10 9/73
Indianapolis, IN 19 0 5 — —
Kansas City, MO 9 1 7 0/1 0/9
Minneapolis, MN 33 2 15 2/2 2/33
Nashville, TN 14 1 8 1/1 1/14
Oklahoma City, OK 3 1 0 1/1 1/3
Portland, OR 15 1 12 1/1 1/15
Rochester, NY 4 0 0 — —
Sacramento, CA 17 7 5 5/7 5/17
St. Louis, MO 18 3 6 2/3 2/18
Seattle, WA 33 14 23 11/14 11/33
Tampa, FL 47 15 22 11/15 11/47
Total 411 69 171 55/69 55/378

Notes: Comp 1 = Rentboy.com, Comp 2 = MaleEscortReview.com

Counts of number of escorts by home base (from advertisement data) or number of advertise-
ments (Comp 1 & 2)

identify the men in the chosen website and their home locations. This is
impossible with the competitors, and potential double-counting by city on
competitor webites would have biased upward the number of escorts listed
on competing websites. Even with this bias, the chosen website’s coverage
of the male escort market is greater than those of its two competitors.
The last two columns of Appendix Table 1.1 show the number of escorts on
the chosen site that I could locate on the most prominent competitor’s
site, and vice versa. I found that the majority of escorts who advertise on
competing websites also advertised on the chosen website, but only a small
fraction of escorts in my chosen website could be identified on the compe-
titors’ websites.
 Appendix 2

A Simple Signaling Model

A SIMPLE SIGNALING MODEL

I describe a simple signaling model in the spirit of Spence (1973, 2002). To
increase the exposition, I use the simple two-type model where escorts are
of two quality types and attempt to signal to a potential client, but also note
below how this model is consistent with a disclosure model. I construct
a simple one-shot model, but the central result holds in repeated signaling
games, since signaling and reputation act as substitutes for one another in
repeated games.1
To begin, assume that escorts are either high- or low-quality escorts,
which are noted as θH and θL, respectively. In the population of escorts,
some fraction λ are type H, and (1-λ) are type L. The cost (c) of signaling (s)
is a function of the type of escort and the signal itself c(s, θ), which by
assumption has the traditional properties of a signal: the high-quality
escort can signal more easily than the low-quality, and the single crossing
property holds, such that cs(s, θ) > 0, css(s, θ) > 0, cθ(s, θ) < 0, and csθ(s, θ) < 0.2
Escorts can either signal/disclose (s > 0) or not signal/disclose (s = 0). As
noted earlier, if one signals and is exposed as a low type, he must incur the
costs of creating an entirely new identity, which are non-negligible costs
in both time and money. The policing described earlier implies that there
is a high probability of being detected. This increased probability of
detection increases the cost of signaling for the low type, justifying the
assumption.
While policing raises the probability of detection, policing in the market
will not lead every high-quality escort to show his face, nor will it lead every
low-quality escort to hide his. Disclosure is not always truthful in this
market, as the client forums attest. There are several reasons why a high-
quality escort may choose not to show his face in escort advertisements.
Since sex work is illegal, disclosure could draw unwanted attention to the
escort. If an escort plans to escort for only a certain length of time, or if

233
234 Appendix 2

40%

30%
Percent Change in Price

20%

10%

0%

–10%

–20%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Number of Pictures

Face Pictures Body Pictures Non-Face, Non-Nude Pictures

95% C.I. 95% C.I. 95% C.I.

Appendix 2.1 Price premium of pictures by picture type

escorting is not his full-time occupation, he may not want long-lived, easily
identifiable evidence of his previous occupation to hound him. News
stories abound of men who had been sex workers, and for whom the
discovery of their previous life of prostitution had serious consequences.3
Exposure as a male sex worker could bring into question one’s sexual
orientation, which could bring about further negative consequences.
There is evidence of wage discrimination against gay and lesbian people,
and when compounded with a history of sex work this could be even more
pronounced. To capture this fact, assume that the cost function contains
a random element ε that is unrelated to type:

cðs; θ; εÞ ¼ cðs; θÞ þ ε where ε  N ð0; σ 2 Þ ðA1Þ

This new term in the cost function still allows all of the conditions to
hold as before, but now in any perfect Bayesian equilibrium the client
would have to take into account that a certain fraction (1 – α) of signalers
would be low quality, and a certain fraction of non-signalers (1 – β) would
be high quality. The variance of the random term will cause the client to
revise his expectations of α and β (∂α/∂σ2 < 0 and ∂β/∂σ2 < 0). Another way
of modeling this feature would be to have two dichotomous nodes: one for
escort type as either high/low quality (q 2 {H, L}) and another for
 Appendix 2 235

disclosure/signaling (s 2 {Y, N}), which can be yes or no. The key point is
that in either model, disclosure/signaling does not fully reveal type, and the
model hinges on how well disclosure/signaling and quality are believed to
be correlated, in the view of the client.
I assume that an escort’s utility is a function of the earnings he receives
from escorting (w), less the cost of signaling u(w, s|θ) = w − c(s, θ).4 In any
pure strategy, perfect Bayesian equilibrium, the client must assign a wage
that is equal to the escort’s expected productivity, and the wage of the
high-quality escort is greater than the wage of the low-quality escort,
w(θH) > w(θL). As described earlier, if a client observes the signal (the
escort discloses), then with probability α he will expect the worker to be of
type H. If no signal is observed (the escort does not disclose), the client
will expect the worker to be of type H with probability (1−β). This gives
the belief structure for the client:

μðθjs > 0Þ ¼ αθH þ ð1  αÞθL ; μðθjs ¼ 0Þ ¼ βθL þ ð1  βÞθH :

ðA2Þ

The wages offered by the client are therefore a function of the signal

wjs > 0 ! αwðθH Þ þ ð1  αÞwðθL Þ;

wjs ¼ 0 ! βwðθL Þ þ ð1  βÞwðθH Þ: ðA3Þ

This wage offer is consistent with the escort’s strategy when two conditions
hold. First, for the high-quality type, the utility of disclosure/signaling must
exceed the wage offered when no signal is observed:

wjs > 0; θH ! ½αwðθH Þ þ ð1  αÞwðθL Þ  cðs > 0; θH ; εÞ > βwðθL Þ

þð1  βÞwðθH Þ: ðA4Þ

If this does not hold, then high-quality types would have no incentive to
disclose/signal. Second, for low-quality types, the utility of signaling must
be less than the wage offered when not signaling,

wjs > 0; θL ! ½αwðθH Þ þ ð1  αÞwðθL Þ  cðs > 0; θL ; εÞ < βwðθL Þ

þð1  βÞwðθH Þ; ðA5Þ

or else the low-quality type would always signal. The model is informative,
but ultimately the issue of whether the signal leads to different prices in the
market is an empirical question.
236 Appendix 2

The results from the estimates in Chapter 2 can be used to estimate the
cost of signaling for each type of sex worker. Recall from the model
presented above that for both high and low types, the utility of signaling
must exceed the wage offered when no signal is observed (Equations A4
and A5). Rearranging terms in equations (A4) and (A5) and simplifying
the expression yields

ðwjs > 0Þ  ðwjs ¼ 0Þ > cðs > 0; θH ; εÞ ðA6Þ

ðwjs > 0Þ  ðwjs ¼ 0Þ < cðs > 0; θL ; εÞ: ðA7Þ

We know the value of the difference between the signal and no signal,
(w | s > 0) − (w | s = 0), is a 20 percent difference in hourly price. Taking $200
as the average hourly price of escort services in the data, the difference is
roughly $40. This implies that $40 is greater than the cost of signaling for the
high type and lower than the cost of signaling for the low type in this market.
This amount seems reasonable, as the price of posting a new advertisement is
roughly $80 for the least expensive type of advertisement on the website
analyzed here, which is greater than the amount identified here.

Appendix Table 2.1 Information, reputation, and the price of male escort services

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Number of pictures 0.0168*** 0.0165*** 0.0156*** 0.00777*** 0.00969***
[0.0024] [0.0029] [0.0029] [0.0021] [0.0022]
Log of no. of reviews 0.00352 −0.0111 −0.00943 −0.00762
[0.010] [0.010] [0.0096] [0.0098]
Log of no. of text reviews 0.0881*** 0.0925*** 0.0918***
[0.014] [0.012] [0.012]
Has face pictures? 0.195*** 0.180***
[0.046] [0.048]
Has body-only pictures? −0.0632***
[0.014]
Additional Controls X X X X X
Observations 1475 1475 1475 1475 1475
R-squared 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.31 0.32

Robust standard errors in brackets are clustered at the state level (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Notes: Each Column is an OLS regression where the dependent variable is the log of the price.
Each column includes controls for race, age, height, weight, state, top, bottom, versatile, whether
the escort was available all day, body type, body hair, whether the escort advertised safer sex, eye
color, review allowed, and whether the escort preferred phone contact.
See the Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
 Appendix 2 237

Appendix Table 2.2 Quality of information and the price of male escort services

Panel A: Number of types of pictures

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
No. of face pictures 0.0317*** 0.0305*** 0.0293*** 0.0286*** 0.0283***
[0.0060] [0.0055] [0.0058] [0.0057] [0.0056]
No. of body only pictures −0.00468 −0.00617 −0.0069 −0.00493
[0.0039] [0.0042] [0.0042] [0.0037]
Log of no. of reviews 0.0146 −0.0037 −0.0104
[0.0089] [0.010] [0.0096]
Log of no. of Text 0.103*** 0.0913***
reviews [0.018] [0.014]
Additional controls X
Observations 1475 1475 1475 1475 1475
R-squared 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.24 0.29

Robust standard errors in brackets are clustered at the state level (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).

Panel B: Composition of pictures

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Number of pictures 0.0139*** 0.0140*** 0.0126*** 0.0114*** 0.00987***
[0.0021] [0.0021] [0.0026] [0.0026] [0.0022]
Fraction face pictures 0.241*** 0.191*** 0.190*** 0.194*** 0.216***
[0.050] [0.057] [0.058] [0.058] [0.056]
Fraction body-only −0.0806** −0.0821** −0.0768** −0.0318
pictures [0.034] [0.035] [0.034] [0.031]
Log of no. of reviews 0.0133 −0.00338 −0.0234**
[0.0091] [0.010] [0.0099]
Log of no. of text reviews 0.0961*** 0.0575***
[0.017] [0.018]
Fraction 4-star reviews 0.0396
[0.026]
Fraction positive text 0.0424
reviews [0.030]
Additional controls X
Observations 1475 1475 1475 1475 1475
R-squared 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.32

Robust standard errors in brackets are clustered at the state level (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Notes: Each Column is an OLS regression where the dependent variable is the log of the price.
Each column includes controls for state. Column 5 includes controls for race, age, height, weight,
top, bottom, versatile, whether the escort was available all day, body type, body hair, if the escort
advertised safer sex, eye color, review allowed, and whether the escort preferred phone contact.
See Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
238 Appendix 2

Appendix Table 2.3 Is the data consistent with a beauty interpretation?

Panel A: Beauty and face pictures

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

No. of face pictures 0.0149*** 0.0153*** 0.0132*** 0.0153*** 0.0131***
[0.0034] [0.0034] [0.0038] [0.0035] [0.0039]
Beauty 0.0089 0.007
[0.0063] [0.0063]
Above-average beauty 0.0076 −0.0006
[0.0249] [0.0247]
Below-average beauty −0.0155 −0.0195
[0.0253] [0.0251]
Additional Controls X X
Observations 849 849 849 849 849
R-squared 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.14

Panel B: The interaction of escort reputation and information

(1) (2) (3) (4)

No. of face pictures* text reviews −0.00922**

[0.0035]
No. of face pictures* positive text −0.00373**
reviews [0.0015]
Fraction face* text reviews −0.0278
[0.031]
Fraction face* positive text reviews −0.0092
[0.013]
Additional controls X X X X
Observations 1475 1475 1475 1475
R-squared 0.29 0.29 0.32 0.32

Robust standard errors in brackets are clustered at the state level (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Notes: Each Column is an OLS regression where the dependent variable is the log of the price.
Beauty is measured on a 1-to-5 scale with 5 being the most beautiful. Above-average beauty is a
beauty measure greater than 3, and below-average beauty is a beauty measure less than 3.
In panel A, each column includes fixed effects for each beauty enumerator.
In panel B, columns 1 and 2 also include the number of face pictures and number of body pictures.
In panel B, columns 3 and 4 also include the number of pictures and fraction of face and body
pictures.
Columns 3 and 5 in Panel A and all columns of Panel B include controls for race, age, height,
weight, state, top, bottom, versatile, whether the escort was available all day, body type, body hair,
whether the escort advertised safer sex, eye color, review allowed, whether the escort preferred
phone contact, number of survey reviews, number of text reviews, and the fraction of highly rated
survey and text reviews, respectively. See the Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
 Appendix 2 239

Appendix Table 2.4 Enforcement proxy and the value of the signal

Panel A: Estimates of the value of any face or body pictures in escort advertisements
Las Vegas Chicago Atlanta Houston Dallas Boston
Has face pictures? −0.086 0.257*** 0.221** 0.350*** 0.347*** 0.253**
[0.097] [0.056] [0.090] [0.080] [0.049] [0.093]
Has body pictures? −0.141 −0.114* −0.0706 −0.0834 −0.0407 −0.0314
[0.092] [0.060] [0.097] [0.093] [0.069] [0.091]
R-squared 0.4 0.39 0.16 0.53 0.6 0.35

Panel B: Estimates of the value of face and body pictures in escort advertisements
Las Vegas Chicago Atlanta Houston Dallas Boston

No. of face pictures 0.00742 0.0300*** 0.0285* 0.0355** 0.0449*** 0.0279*

[0.017] [0.011] [0.016] [0.015] [0.011] [0.014]
No. of body-only 0.00208 0.00228 −0.0262 −0.0105 −0.00726 0.00243
pictures [0.024] [0.015] [0.022] [0.021] [0.013] [0.021]
R-squared 0.33 0.18 0.19 0.27 0.48 0.22

Robust standard errors in brackets (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1)
Panels A and B include the following additional variables in the regressions: number of survey
reviews, number of text reviews, fraction of survey and text reviews that are positive, age, height,
weight, and race. Panel A includes the total number of pictures. See Appendix 1 for variable
definitions.
 Appendix Table 2.5 Robustness checks for information quality and the price of male escort services

Spot prices Spot prices only Escorts with no reputation

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
Number of pictures 0.00901*** 0.00970*** 0.00724 0.00976 0.00695 0.00927*
[0.0023] [0.0021] [0.0079] [0.0076] [0.0047] [0.0046]
Has face pictures? 0.177*** 0.168*** 0.188***
[0.048] [0.061] [0.059]
Has body-only pictures? −0.0587*** −0.0293 −0.0431**
240

[0.014] [0.035] [0.020]

No. of face pictures 0.0266*** 0.0142* 0.0318***
[0.0054] [0.0074] [0.0084]
No. of body-only pictures −0.00469 −0.0041 −0.00995
[0.0038] [0.013] [0.0078]
Fraction face pictures 0.213*** 0.089 0.234***
[0.056] [0.064] [0.084]
Fraction body-only pictures −0.0272 −0.11 −0.0158
[0.032] [0.092] [0.053]
Log of no. of reviews −0.00909 −0.0115 −0.0099 −0.0405 −0.0333 −0.0358
[0.0100] [0.0098] [0.0098] [0.025] [0.031] [0.031]

(continued)
 Log of no. of text reviews 0.0941*** 0.0934*** 0.0917*** 0.0811** 0.0662 0.0614
[0.013] [0.017] [0.016] [0.032] [0.042] [0.039]
Additional controls X X X X X X X X X
Observations 1533 1533 1533 243 243 243 610 610 610
241

R-squared 0.32 0.28 0.31 0.51 0.46 0.48 0.32 0.3 0.32

Robust standard errors in brackets are clustered at the state level (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Notes: Each column is an OLS regression. In columns 1–3 the dependent variable is the log of the spot price. If an escort has both a spot price and a posted price, or
no posted price and a spot price, the spot price replaces the posted or missing price. Dependent variable in columns 4–6 the dependent variable is the log of the spot
price only. The dependent variable in columns 7–9 is the log of the price (for escorts with no reviews only). Each column includes controls for race, age, height,
weight, state, top, bottom, versatile, whether the escort was available all day, body type, body hair, whether the escort advertised safer sex, eye color, review allowed,
and whether the escort preferred phone contact. See Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
 Appendix Table 2.6 Information and selection into posting escort prices

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

Number of pictures 0.00245 0.0024 0.00286 0.00304
[0.0036] [0.0034] [0.0031] [0.0031]
Has face pictures? 0.00112 −0.00181 0.00007
[0.017] [0.018] [0.019]
Has body-only pictures? −0.012 −0.0154
[0.022] [0.021]
No. of face pictures 0.00448 0.0058 0.00634
[0.0030] [0.0038] [0.0040]
No. of body-only pictures 0.00473 0.00372
242

[0.0054] [0.0054]
Additional controls X X
Observations 1932 1932 1932 1932 1932 1932 1932
Pseudo R-squared 0.0517 0.0517 0.052 0.055 0.0528 0.0535 0.0566

Robust standard errors in brackets are clustered at the state level (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Notes: Each column reports results of a probit regression where the dependent variable is: Does Escort Post Prices? (Mean of dependent variable = 0.85, Standard
Error of dependent variable = 0.36)
The coefficients reported are the marginal effects of the probit regressions. For continuous variables (such as “Number of pictures”), the effect is evaluated at the
mean. For dichotomous variables (such “Has face pictures?”), the effects calculate the change in probability from moving from 0 to 1.
Each column includes controls for state. Columns 4 and 7 include controls for race, age, height, weight, top, bottom, versatile, whether the escort was available all
day, body type, body hair, review allowed, whether the escort advertised safer sex, eye color, and whether the escort preferred phone contact.
See Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
 Appendix 2 243

Appendix Table 2.7 Decomposition of picture premium for all picture types

(1) (2) (3) (4)

No. of face pictures 0.0295*** 0.0303*** 0.0288*** 0.111***
[0.0057] [0.0056] [0.0058] [0.033]
(No. of face pictures)^2 −0.0170***
[0.0059]
(No. of face pictures)^3 0.000837***
[0.00029]
No. of body-only pictures −0.0041 −0.00382 −0.00522 −0.0258*
[0.0034] [0.0035] [0.0038] [0.015]
(No. of body-only pictures)^2 0.00658
[0.0049]
(No. of body-only pictures)^3 −0.000433
[0.00038]
No. of non-face, non-nude 0.00379 0.00161 −0.0139
pictures [0.0037] [0.0035] [0.021]
(No. of non-face, non-nude 0.00551
pictures)^2 [0.0059]
(No. of non-face, non-nude −0.00027
pictures)^3 [0.00037]
Log of no. of reviews −0.01 −0.0078
[0.010] [0.0098]
Log of no. of text reviews 0.0935*** 0.0946***
[0.014] [0.014]
Additional controls X X X X
Observations 1475 1475 1475 1475
R-squared 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.31

Robust standard errors in brackets are clustered at the state level (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Notes: Each column is an OLS regression where the dependent variable is the log of the price.
Each column includes controls for race, age, height, weight, state, top, bottom, versatile, whether
the escort allowed himself to be reviewed, body type, body hair, whether the escort advertised safer
sex, eye color, and whether the escort preferred phone contact.
 Appendix 3

Measuring the Male Sex Worker Network

CENTRALITY MEASURES
This travel network, W, may be represented by a triplet (Z1, Z2, E), where
Z1 represents a group of escorts with size equal to n1, Z2 indicates a group
of n2 cities, and E represents a collection of edges w(i,j). The value of w(i,j)
equals 1 if escort i is willing to travel to city j, and 0 if otherwise. Importantly,
I maintain the duality of the travel network data by measuring the centrality
of one node set (e.g., escorts) as a function of its ties to the other node set
(e.g., cities). Accordingly, I do not project the network into two one-mode
networks consisting of only cities or escorts, as the centrality of one node set
must be defined in reference to the other node set.5 The centrality of actors in
one node set will quantify the importance of the collection of actors belong-
ing to the opposing node set. I use the resulting network to construct three
measures that capture different aspects of centrality that are of theoretical
interest in the analysis of the travel network of male sex workers.
Degree centrality reflects the duality of escort and city centrality
and is measured as
X
wði; kÞ
k2z2
d1i ¼
n2
X
wði; kÞ
k2z1
d2i ¼ :
n1

The degree of an escort i (d1i) is equal to the number of cities that he travels
to, normalized by the number of cities in the network, while the degree of
a city i (d2i) equals the number of escorts who travel to city i, normalized by

244
 Appendix 3 245

the number of escorts in the travel network. As previously mentioned, a

city’s degree centrality is representative of the overall demand for male sex
work. However, a major criticism for the degree centrality is that it treats all
escort-city ties equally.
The eigenvector centrality overcomes this criticism of degree centrality.6
Bonacich (1972) points out that in certain situations, being tied to other
actors who are themselves tied to several other actors entails numerous
social advantages. Traveling to cities that are frequently traveled to by other
escorts could entail greater financial rewards if escorts travel to these cities
precisely because demand for sexual services in those cities is higher than
in cities that are less frequently visited. The eigenvector centrality of escort
i in node set Z1 is expressed as a function of the centralities of the cities to
which he travels:

1X n2
CeZ1 ðiÞ ¼ C Z2 ðkÞwði; kÞ;
λ k¼1 e

where CeZ2 ðkÞwði; kÞ is the centrality score of city k in node set w, λ is the
largest eigenvalue of the n × m incidence matrix representing the escort/
city travel network, and w(i,k) =1 if escort i travels to city k and 0 if
otherwise. Higher values on the index indicate that escorts travel to
popular destination cities

1X n1
CeZ2 ðiÞ ¼ C Z1 ðkÞwði; kÞ;
λ k¼1 e

where λ is the largest eigenvalue from either ww’ or w’w, where w is the
n1 × n2 incidence matrix of the escort/city network. As shown explicitly
above, the eigenvector centralities incorporate the duality between escort
and city centralities. As noted by Mariolis (1975), Mintz and Schwartz
(1985), and Bonacich (1991), among others, the measure of eigenvector
centrality has an inevitably high correlation with the sheer number of
connections (i.e., degree centralities) for nodes in both types. It is recom-
mended to remove the size effect from the eigenvector centrality if the size
of links does not reflect the position of the node, but just some arbitrary
rules, as in the case of interlocking directorates. In this analysis, the size of
links for both escorts and cities are indicative of their positions in the
network, so I do not adjust the eigenvector centrality for its size effect.
Third, escorts and cities may also be central if they lie on several of the
shortest paths that link other cities and escorts. A node’s betweenness
246 Appendix 3

centrality is measured by first estimating the number of geodesic paths that

include the node, inversely weighted by the number of equally short paths
between the same two nodes. In the case of two-mode betweenness cen-
trality, paths can originate and end at nodes from either node set. To
measure node betweenness centrality for cities and escorts in our network,
I first measure
X σ i ðj; kÞ
bi ¼ ;
j≠k≠i
σðj; kÞ

where σ(j,k) represents the total number of geodesics that link node j and node
k, where j and k may be either escorts or cities. Among escorts, the value of bi
is divided by the theoretical maximum betweenness 2(n1 − 1)(n2 − 1), given
n1 > n2. Conversely, the betweenness of cities is divided by its maximum
betweenness, 12 n2 ðn2  1Þ þ 12 ðn1  1Þðn1  2Þ þ ðn1  1Þðn2  1Þ, given
n2 ≤ n1. Duality in betweenness centrality is implicit because escorts are
always on geodesics between cities, and cities are always on geodesics of
escorts.
Diversity is captured by Shannon entropy. Let p(ij) denote the propor-
tion of city i’s links with the escorts from city j, where i,j=1, . . ., n2.
Xn2
Shannon entropy for city i is calculated by  j≠i pij logðpij Þ. It equals
zero if all escorts who travel to the city are from a same place. A higher
Shannon entropy implies that the city is visited by escorts from different
locations more evenly, increasing the diversity of a city’s links. The highest
value for the diversity measure is ln(n2), and it is achieved when a city is
visited by an equal number of escorts from all other cities. Eagle, Macy, and
Claxton (2010) use national communication network data in the United
Kingdom to show that the diversity of individuals’ relationships is corre-
lated with economic development of communities. Along the same lines,
the diversity of traveling escorts to a given city could reflect the market’s
maturity as a site for male sex work.

REGRESSION MODELS
The extensive travel regression model takes the form:

Extensive Travelig
¼ α þ βXi þ γGCIg þ δHIVRateg þ ηHubg þ λNetworkMeasureg þ ϵ ig ;
 Appendix 3 247

where i stands for individual I, g stands for city g, and X contains personal
characteristics. All standard errors are clustered at the escort’s home city
to construct the t-statistics for parameters. To test if there exists a city-
wise heteroskedasticity on the error term, I implement Levene test and
Brown and Forsythe test of groupwise heteroskedasticity and reject the
hypothesis of homogeneity of the error term variance across male sex
workers’ home cities.
The regression for the distance traveled by sex workers was conditional
on travel and took this form:

Travel Distanceig
¼ α þ βXi þ γGCIg þ δHIVRateg þ ηHubg þ λNetworkMeasureg þ ϵ ig :

The model used to describe the relationship between rates of services

and explanatory variables are of the form

Service Rateig
¼ α þ βXig þ ρExtensive Travelig þ ξðExtensive Travelig  Xig Þ þ γGCIg
þ τNetwork Measureig þ λNetwork Measureg þ δHIVRateg þ ηHubg þ ϵ ig :

Appendix Table 3.1 Regression on travel indicator for escorts

Age −0.000824 −0.00083 −0.000786 −0.000811 −0.000779

(−0.35) (−0.35) (−0.33) (−0.34) (−0.33)
Height −0.00111 −0.000981 −0.00103 −0.000943 −0.00095
(−0.52) (−0.46) (−0.48) (−0.44) (−0.45)
Weight 0.000491 0.000499 0.000496 0.000488 0.000459
(0.27) (0.27) (0.27) (0.26) (0.25)
Black −0.0112 −0.00944 −0.00973 −0.00857 −0.00779
(−0.36) (−0.30) (−0.31) (−0.27) (−0.25)
Asian −0.128* −0.115+ −0.114+ −0.115+ −0.123*
(−2.07) (−1.94) (−1.90) (−1.91) (−2.01)
Hispanic 0.0141 0.0191 0.0184 0.0195 0.0178
(0.35) (0.46) (0.44) (0.47) (0.44)
Multiracial −0.0252 −0.0206 −0.0209 −0.0207 −0.0238
(−0.67) (−0.53) (−0.53) (−0.53) (−0.62)
Other race −0.0322 −0.0263 −0.0263 −0.0249 −0.0279
(−0.58) (−0.45) (−0.45) (−0.43) (−0.48)

(continued)
248 Appendix 3

Appendix Table 3.1 (continued)

Athletic body 0.126* 0.125* 0.125* 0.125* 0.126*

(2.44) (2.39) (2.38) (2.38) (2.41)
Average body 0.0727 0.0659 0.0658 0.0655 0.0684
(1.14) (1.02) (1.02) (1.01) (1.06)
Large body 0.0139 0.0117 0.0114 0.0121 0.0133
(0.09) (0.08) (0.07) (0.08) (0.09)
Buff body 0.140* 0.140* 0.141* 0.140* 0.141*
(2.38) (2.38) (2.39) (2.38) (2.37)
Top 0.0859* 0.0884* 0.0879* 0.0888* 0.0877*
(2.02) (2.04) (2.01) (2.05) (2.05)
Bottom 0.207*** 0.205*** 0.205*** 0.205*** 0.204***
(4.93) (4.82) (4.79) (4.82) (4.77)
Versatile 0.0757* 0.0757* 0.0768* 0.0764* 0.0761*
(2.11) (2.15) (2.18) (2.17) (2.15)
Massage 0.0425 0.0463 0.0466 0.047 0.0448
(1.22) (1.32) (1.32) (1.34) (1.28)
GCI −0.124*** −0.114*** −0.128*** −0.118*** −0.108**
(−4.28) (−4.02) (−4.62) (−4.18) (−3.36)
HIV rate −0.000423 0.00123 0.00111 0.00138 0.000652
(−0.25) −0.72 −0.81 −0.88 −0.41
Airline hub −0.110* −0.0836+ −0.0941* −0.0821+ −0.0818
(−2.41) (−1.74) (−2.01) (−1.72) (−1.55)
City degree −0.540+
(−1.69)
City eigen centrality −0.163*
(−2.33)
City betweenness −0.391*
(−2.16)
City diversity −0.0373
(−1.18)
Constant 0.892** 0.842* 0.860** 0.833* 0.884**
(2.81) (2.55) (2.64) (2.52) (2.76)
Observations 1797 1797 1797 1797 1792
R-squared 0.038 0.041 0.04 0.041 0.039

Note: t-statistics in parentheses. + p < .10, *p <.05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Standard errors are clustered on home cities.
 Appendix 3 249

Appendix Table 3.2 Regression of log average travel distance

Age −0.0119 −0.0121 −0.0121 −0.0121 −0.0127+

(−1.58) (−1.61) (−1.62) (−1.63) (−1.67)
Height −0.00138 −0.00178 −0.00161 −0.00181 −0.00163
(−0.20) (−0.25) (−0.23) (−0.26) (−0.23)
Weight 0.00329 0.0029 0.00316 0.00282 0.00314
(0.58) (0.50) (0.55) (0.49) (0.55)
Black −0.203* −0.210* −0.206* −0.212* −0.227*
(−2.27) (−2.35) (−2.30) (−2.38) (−2.57)
Asian −0.178 −0.229 −0.204 −0.231 −0.22
(−0.39) (−0.50) (−0.45) (−0.51) (−0.49)
Hispanic −0.266* −0.288* −0.276* −0.290* −0.273*
(−2.43) (−2.59) (−2.49) (−2.63) (−2.44)
Multiracial −0.000933 −0.0197 −0.0107 −0.0205 −0.0383
(−0.01) (−0.16) (−0.09) (−0.17) (−0.32)
Other race 0.0923 0.0782 0.0847 0.0728 0.0714
(0.65) (0.55) (0.59) (0.52) (0.51)
Athletic body 0.210+ 0.224+ 0.218+ 0.225+ 0.208+
(1.79) (1.95) (1.87) (1.97) (1.90)
Average body 0.0383 0.0711 0.054 0.0751 0.0918
(0.26) (0.49) (0.37) (0.52) (0.65)
Large body −0.105 −0.108 −0.106 −0.108 −0.119
(−0.25) (−0.25) (−0.25) (−0.25) (−0.28)
Buff body 0.394* 0.408* 0.401* 0.411* 0.401*
(2.11) (2.20) (2.16) (2.21) (2.19)
Top −0.145 −0.158 −0.151 −0.161 −0.158
(−0.87) (−0.95) (−0.90) (−0.96) (−0.95)
Bottom 0.0403 0.0409 0.0414 0.041 0.0539
(0.24) (0.24) (0.24) (0.24) (0.31)
Versatile 0.138 0.135 0.134 0.133 0.145
(0.89) (0.86) (0.86) (0.85) (0.91)
Massage 0.0398 0.0259 0.0327 0.0223 0.024
(0.50) (0.32) (0.40) (0.27) (0.30)
GCI 0.177 0.133 0.178 0.142 0.0687
(1.29) (0.95) (1.32) (1.05) (0.49)
HIV rate −0.00252 −0.00693 −0.00457 −0.00745 −0.00949
(−0.43) (−1.12) (−0.72) (−1.21) (−1.60)
Airline hub 0.560*** 0.488** 0.539** 0.482** 0.394*
(3.51) (2.91) (3.30) (2.89) (2.37)
City degree 1.626+
−1.73

(continued)
250 Appendix 3

Appendix Table 3.2 (continued)

City eigen centrality 0.247

(1.08)
City betweenness 1.214+
(1.79)
City diversity 0.247*
(2.64)
Constant 4.990*** 5.173*** 5.068*** 5.196*** 4.925***
(4.48) (4.53) (4.47) (4.57) (4.46)
Observations 1027 1027 1027 1027 1023
R-squared 0.059 0.063 0.06 0.064 0.069

Note: t-statistics in parentheses. + p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Standard errors are clustered on home cities.
Only escorts who serve multiple locations used in regressions.

Appendix Table 3.3 Regression of log wage on travel and escort characteristics

Age −0.0106*** −0.0106*** −0.0105*** −0.0107*** −0.0106***

(−7.34) (−7.32) (−7.30) (−7.39) (−7.29)
Height 0.00264 0.00247 0.00243 0.00236 0.00176
(1.49) (1.39) (1.37) (1.33) (0.99)
Weight −0.00104 −0.000892 −0.000913 −0.000959 −0.000661
(−0.71) (−0.61) (−0.62) (−0.66) (−0.45)
Black −0.00892 −0.00814 0.00311 −0.0125 0.00114
(−0.33) (−0.30) −0.08 (−0.47) −0.03
Asian −0.0577 −0.0581 −0.0226 −0.0629 −0.0347
(−0.95) (−0.95) (−0.30) (−1.03) (−0.45)
Hispanic −0.0244 −0.0221 −0.0602 −0.0258 −0.0745+
(−0.87) (−0.78) (−1.45) (−0.92) (−1.78)
Multiracial 0.0119 0.0119 0.0331 0.00906 0.0311
(0.38) (0.37) (0.74) (0.29) (0.69)
Other race 0.140*** 0.136** 0.224*** 0.137*** 0.210***
−3.39 (3.29) −3.93 −3.33 (3.67)
Athletic body 0.0856** 0.0745+ 0.0870** 0.0841** 0.0721+
(2.67) (1.75) (2.71) (2.63) (1.69)
Average body −0.0318 −0.0257 −0.0338 −0.0312 −0.0204
(−0.78) (−0.47) (−0.83) (−0.77) (−0.38)

(continued)
 Appendix 3 251

Appendix Table 3.3 (continued)

Large body −0.228* −0.392** −0.214* −0.229* −0.406**

(−2.17) (−2.81) (−2.03) (−2.18) (−2.91)
Buff body 0.209*** 0.198*** 0.210*** 0.209*** 0.194***
(5.40) (4.06) (5.43) (5.40) (3.96)
Top 0.02 0.0187 0.0192 0.0812 0.0692
(0.54) (0.48) (0.50) (1.23) (1.04)
Bottom −0.0644 −0.0625 −0.0643 −0.134+ −0.139+
(−1.46) (−1.42) (−1.46) (−1.70) (−1.76)
Versatile 0.0444 0.0432 0.0462 0.0117 0.00958
(1.55) (1.51) (1.61) (0.25) (0.20)
Massage −0.130*** −0.130*** −0.129*** −0.187*** −0.190***
(−5.39) (−5.40) (−5.34) (−5.23) (−5.28)
Travel 0.0834*** 0.0647 0.0933*** 0.0608** 0.216*
(4.58) (1.15) (3.80) (2.81) (2.41)
GCI 0.032 0.0325 0.0324 0.0309 0.0710*
(1.22) (1.24) (1.24) (1.19) (2.01)
HIVrate 0.00581*** 0.00586*** 0.00585*** 0.00585*** 0.00807***
(6.02) (6.06) (6.06) (6.04) (5.57)
Airline hub 0.1000** 0.0988** 0.103** 0.102** 0.112***
(3.13) (3.09) (3.22) (3.18) (3.47)
Travel * athletic 0.0228 0.0232
body (0.36) (0.37)
Travel * average −0.0105 −0.0234
body (−0.14) (−0.30)
Travel blarge Body 0.357+ 0.398*
(1.78) (1.98)
Travel * buff body 0.0204 0.0245
(0.31) (0.38)
Travel * Black −0.0209 −0.0232
(−0.40) (−0.44)
Travel * Asian −0.0909 −0.0849
(−0.74) (−0.69)
Travel * Hispanic 0.0633 0.0884
(1.15) (1.60)
Travel * multiracial −0.0406 −0.0426
(−0.65) (−0.68)
Travel * other race −0.175* −0.159+
(−2.15) (−1.94)
Travel * top −0.0964 −0.0838
(−1.19) (−1.03)

(continued)
252 Appendix 3

Appendix Table 3.3 (continued)

Travel * bottom 0.106 0.115

(1.12) (1.21)
Travel * versatile 0.0526 0.0507
(0.89) (0.85)
Travel * massage 0.105* 0.112*
(2.21) (2.32)
Travel * GCI −0.0761
(−1.53)
Travel * HIV rate −0.00360+
(−1.85)
Constant 4.815*** 4.844*** 4.830*** 4.874*** 4.857***
(17.62) (17.59) (17.66) (17.79) (17.53)
Observations 1283 1283 1283 1283 1283
R-squared 0.192 0.194 0.197 0.197 0.209

Note: t-statistics in parentheses. + p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Standard errors are clustered on home cities.
Only escorts who post prices are used in each regression.
 Appendix Table 3.4 Regression of escort wages on escort characteristics and network centrality measures

Age −0.0105*** −0.0105*** −0.0104*** −0.0104*** −0.0104*** −0.0105***

(−7.30) (−7.29) (−7.39) (−7.39) (−7.37) (−7.41)
Height 0.0026 0.00267 0.00242 0.0024 0.00252 0.00229
(1.47) (1.51) (1.39) (1.39) (1.45) (1.32)
Weight −0.00103 −0.0011 −0.00123 −0.0012 −0.00121 −0.00118
(−0.71) (−0.76) (−0.87) (−0.84) (−0.85) (−0.83)
Black −0.00652 −0.00654 −0.0106 −0.0115 −0.0101 −0.015
(−0.24) (−0.24) (−0.40) (−0.44) (−0.38) (−0.57)
Asian −0.0535 −0.0525 −0.0799 −0.0766 −0.079 −0.0734
(−0.88) (−0.87) (−1.34) (−1.28) (−1.32) (−1.23)
253

Hispanic −0.0213 −0.0176 −0.0322 −0.0316 −0.0303 −0.027

(−0.76) (−0.63) (−1.17) (−1.15) (−1.10) (−0.98)
Multiracial 0.0113 0.0123 0.0103 0.0109 0.00976 0.0104
(0.36) (0.39) (0.33) (0.35) (0.31) (0.34)
Other race 0.139*** 0.137*** 0.115** 0.115** 0.116** 0.114**
(3.39) (3.35) (2.86) (2.85) (2.88) (2.84)
Athletic body 0.0846** 0.0844** 0.0887** 0.0888** 0.0893** 0.0877**
(2.64) (2.64) (2.84) (2.84) (2.85) (2.80)
Average body −0.0333 −0.0306 −0.00732 −0.00741 −0.00711 −0.00958
(−0.82) (−0.76) (−0.18) (−0.19) (−0.18) (−0.24)
Large body −0.231* −0.251* −0.228* −0.228* −0.229* −0.225*
(−2.20) (−2.39) (−2.22) (−2.22) (−2.23) (−2.19)

(continued)
 Appendix Table 3.4 (continued)

Buff body 0.208*** 0.205*** 0.211*** 0.211*** 0.210*** 0.212***

(5.39) (5.33) (5.59) (5.58) (5.56) (5.60)
Top 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
(0.53) (0.42) (0.35) (0.36) (0.39) (0.34)
Bottom −0.0656 −0.0689 −0.0619 −0.0626 −0.0629 −0.0622
(−1.49) (−1.57) (−1.44) (−1.46) (−1.46) (−1.43)
Versatile 0.0434 0.0448 0.0413 0.0404 0.0404 0.0402
(1.52) (1.57) (1.48) (1.44) (1.44) (1.44)
Massage −0.129*** −0.131*** −0.148*** −0.148*** −0.148*** −0.148***
(−5.38) (−5.47) (−6.25) (−6.26) (−6.24) (−6.26)
Travel 0.0429 0.0541** 0.0623** 0.0604** 0.0584** 0.0533**
(1.36) (2.64) (3.16) (3.06) (2.94) (2.81)
254

GCI 0.0319 0.0329 0.0212 0.029 0.0401 0.0136

(1.22) (1.26) (0.82) (1.13) (1.57) (0.52)
HIVrate 0.00572*** 0.00566*** 0.00154 0.00174 0.00196+ 0.00157
(5.91) (5.87) (1.39) (1.58) (1.79) (1.44)
Airline hub 0.0978** 0.0934** 0.039 0.0434 0.0564+ 0.0182
(3.06) (2.93) (1.20) (1.34) (1.78) (0.53)
Escort degree 4.82
(1.58)
Escort betweenness 25.51**
(3.05)
Escort eigen centrality 3.551** 3.832*** 3.964*** 4.565***
(3.09) (3.36) (3.31) (4.85)

(continued)
 City degree 0.818**
(3.25)
City betweenness 0.473**
(2.93)
City eigen centrality 0.204*
(2.51)
City diversity 0.0703***
255

(3.59)
Constant 4.802*** 4.820*** 4.922*** 4.918*** 4.886*** 4.864***
(17.57) (17.69) (18.40) (18.36) (18.26) (18.19)
Observations 1283 1283 1283 1283 1283 1279
R-squared 0.194 0.198 0.231 0.23 0.229 0.232

Note: t-statistics in parentheses. + p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Standard errors are clustered on home cities.
Only escorts who post prices are used in each regression.
256 Appendix 3

Appendix Table 3.5 Log wage regressions for traveling escorts only

Age −0.00779*** −0.00804*** −0.00777*** −0.00778*** −0.00773***

(−4.39) (−4.60) (−4.41) (−4.41) (−4.37)
Height 0.00127 0.00114 0.00133 0.00139 0.00137
(0.59) (0.54) (0.63) (0.65) (0.64)
Weight 0.000259 0.000197 0.000275 0.000287 0.000256
(0.15) (0.11) (0.16) (0.16) (0.15)
Black 0.00745 0.00234 0.00972 0.00929 0.00954
(0.24) (0.08) (0.31) (0.30) (0.30)
Asian −0.113 −0.117 −0.102 −0.101 −0.103
(−1.28) (−1.34) (−1.16) (−1.15) (−1.16)
Hispanic 0.019 0.0223 0.0236 0.0249 0.0225
(0.56) (0.67) (0.70) (0.73) (0.66)
Multiracial 0.0121 0.00904 0.008 0.00776 0.00837
(0.31) (0.23) (0.20) (0.20) (0.21)
Other race 0.0351 0.0224 0.0313 0.0314 0.0353
(0.69) (0.45) (0.62) (0.62) (0.70)
Athletic body 0.0621 0.0577 0.0613 0.06 0.0613
(1.41) (1.33) (1.40) (1.37) (1.40)
Average body −0.0564 −0.0396 −0.0503 −0.0523 −0.0513
(−1.02) (−0.73) (−0.91) (−0.95) (−0.93)
Large body 0.0315 0.0222 0.0288 0.0253 0.035
(0.22) (0.16) (0.20) (0.18) (0.24)
Buff body 0.183*** 0.176*** 0.182*** 0.181*** 0.183***
(3.53) (3.45) (3.54) (3.52) (3.55)
Top −0.0174 −0.0156 −0.0134 −0.0145 −0.0139
(−0.41) (−0.37) (−0.31) (−0.34) (−0.33)
Bottom 0.0266 0.0335 0.0285 0.0276 0.0283
(0.55) (0.70) (0.59) (0.57) (0.58)
Versatile 0.0173 0.00999 0.0148 0.0145 0.0164
(0.54) (0.32) (0.47) (0.46) (0.52)
Massage −0.0963*** −0.0960*** −0.0989*** −0.0982*** −0.0999***
(−3.31) (−3.35) (−3.42) (−3.40) (−3.45)
Travel 0.0202 0.0472 0.0221 0.0243 0.0203
(0.59) (1.37) (0.65) (0.71) (0.59)
GCI 0.00405** 0.00469*** 0.00483*** 0.00489*** 0.00470***
(3.14) (3.67) (3.69) (3.73) (3.59)
HIV rate 0.0715** 0.0679+ 0.0698+ 0.0703+ 0.0713*
(1.97) (1.90) (1.93) (1.95) (1.97)
Airline hub 0.0654+ −0.0148 0.0153 0.0252 0.0461
(1.72) (−0.36) (0.37) (0.63) (1.19)
Destination 0.0000115 −0.00242 −0.00214 −0.00218 −0.00177
HIV rate (0.01) (−1.58) (−1.33) (−1.36) (−1.11)

(continued)
 Appendix 3 257

Appendix Table 3.5 (continued)

Destination 0.0839***
diversity (4.51)
Destination 0.889**
degree (3.08)
Destination 0.594**
betweenness (3.11)
Destination 0.270**
eigen (2.68)
centrality
Constant 4.982*** 4.959*** 5.005*** 4.990*** 4.980***
(15.10) (15.26) (15.27) (15.23) (15.17)
Observations 640 640 640 640 640
R-squared 0.154 0.181 0.167 0.168 0.164

Note: t-statistics in parentheses. + p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Standard errors are clustered on home cities.
Only escorts who post prices and travel are used in each regression.

Appendix Table 3.6 Regression of city escort price dispersion on city network
measures

GCI −0.0407 −0.0262 −0.0345 −0.0322 0.00147

(−0.48) (−0.29) (−0.39) (−0.37) (0.02)
HIV rate −0.00298 −0.00239 −0.00269 −0.00236 −0.00162
(−0.89) (−0.66) (−0.75) (−0.66) (−0.48)
Airline hub −0.00513 0.00383 −0.000919 0.00093 0.0422
(−0.09) (0.06) (−0.02) (0.02) (0.67)
City degree −0.426
(−0.41)
City betweenness −0.156
(−0.22)
City eigen centrality −0.203
(−0.51)
City diversity −0.07
(−1.56)
Constant 0.473*** 0.455*** 0.464*** 0.458*** 0.489***
(5.38) (4.62) (4.80) (4.94) (5.58)
Observations 74 74 74 74 74
R-squared 0.022 0.024 0.022 0.025 0.055

Note: t-statistics in parentheses. + p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
City price dispersion is measured as the interquartile range of prices in the city.
 Appendix 4

Empirical Estimates of Escort Valuation

IS THE PREMIUM TO DOMINANCE DRIVEN BY BIOLOGY?

I elaborate here on the biological interpretation for the top premium, which
is a potential explanation for the premium tops seen in the market. The
biological interpretation says that the premium for tops is driven by the fact
that top escorts are expected to ejaculate as part of their services. If this is
true, it may not be possible for top escorts to see as many clients in a given
period of time as could a bottom escort. The scarcity of sperm, then, could
drive the higher prices observed for top escorts. This would be a plausible
explanation and would therefore imply that biological, as opposed to social,
factors lay behind the premium. I found that, although intuitive and plau-
sible, one must make a number of additional assumptions before such an
interpretation can be accepted. I attempted to find evidence consistent with
the assumptions of such an interpretation. Unfortunately, the evidence,
which I detail below, moved in the opposite direction.
1. First, the “biological interpretation” (BI) requires that clients compen-
sate escorts for the scarcity of their sperm. This implies that escorts’
sperm is dear to the clients (otherwise a client would not compensate
an escort for it). In some sense, one could argue that bottoms would be
more pressured to ejaculate to show their top clients they were having
a pleasurable experience. Similarly, bottom clients may be more self-
ishly concerned with their own pleasure (ejaculation) from a top escort.
For the BI to hold, we would need evidence from clients that they desire
escort sperm when the escort is a top (and that they require ejaculations
of tops more so than bottoms or escorts who engage in oral sex
only). I searched client review websites and found a discussion of the
necessity of escort ejaculation on the website Daddy’s Reviews
(http://www.message-forum.net/index.php). In discussion on the
forum, clients repeatedly mentioned they had a strong desire for the

258
 Appendix 4 259

escort to ejaculate, and this desire was not expressed as being more for
either top or bottom escorts. The forum reveals that nearly all clients felt
a satisfactory experience included an escort ejaculating, regardless of
sexual position. From the client forum, it seems that tops and bottoms
would have the same limits in terms of bodily function. If clients desire
that escorts show they are having a satisfying sexual experience (which
could be related to a client feeling wanted or desired by an escort), then
both top and bottom escorts would be required to ejaculate.
2. Second, key for the BI is the idea that it is easier to serve as a bottom
than as a top. I investigated the medical literature and found that
bottoming comes with its own costs, which can impede the ability of
a bottom to service large numbers of clients in a day. Many client
reviews mention escort hygiene as being very important (bad hygiene
is a frequent complaint of clients about escorts). Given the hygiene
requirements of receptive anal intercourse, bottoms would need sig-
nificant amounts of preparation time to see multiple clients in any set
period of time. As the health literature notes, some of this preparation
can be harmful to escorts and can lead to inability to perform. For
example, repeatedly giving oneself an enema (anal douching) can lead
to sore and painful rectums and anal canals, which can leave escorts
unable to participate in receptive anal sex and increase their disease
risk. In addition, there is risk of anal tearing and other health pro-
blems from repeated and successive anal intercourse, and the hygiene
requirements (e.g., repeated anal cleanses) are well known and could
certainly limit the ability of bottom male sex workers to service
clients. Indeed, I found several instances of client reviews of bottom
escorts who could not perform due to anal tearing caused by anal sex
with other clients. It is unlikely that top escorts face similar problems
that would limit their ability to perform over long periods of time.
The following client review provides an example of a bottom escort
who was unable to perform due to receptive anal sex several weeks
prior (taken from http://www.daddysreviews.com/finder.php?
loc=B-13-150-10&who=bryan_wilder_atlanta):
In the bedroom, because I am normally a top . . . knowing that Bryan was not
going to be able to bottom for me . . . we just spent a lot of time doing oral and
mutual masturbation. Although Bryan could not bottom for me (he had some
anal tearing from a particular large and rough client several weeks back, and it
should have healed nicely now . . . guys . . . treat Bryan nicely please!) . . .
3. Implicit in the BI is an assumption that escorts desire to earn a fixed
amount of income – say, a target salary. The question becomes what
260 Appendix 4

the optimal strategy would be for the average escort, given such an
earnings target. If there are limitations to being a top, consistent with
the BI, and additional clients could be secured if escorts were willing
to bottom, it would stand to reason that escorts would advertise as
tops, with a discount for bottom activity. This would allow escorts to
see more clients and earn more income (reach a higher earnings
target). If the premium were due to sperm scarcity, it would seem to
imply that top escorts would offer a discount if asked by a client to
bottom, because bottoming, in the BI, is less taxing than topping and
does not require the compensated activity of ejaculation. Evidence
from escort advertisements suggest that top escorts charge higher fees
for their bottoming, which is exactly the opposite of what we would
expect if the top premium were driven by sperm scarcity or if only top
escorts were expected to ejaculate. In the instances I located of top
escorts mentioning bottoming in their advertisements (and this is
rare, as escorts who both top and bottom would list themselves as
versatile), they mention that they either do not do it at all or charge
higher rates for bottoming. I think the evidence for a “top as bottom
premium” is inconsistent with the idea that biological limitations are
driving the top premium observed in the data. Here are a few exam-
ples taken from the escort website Rentboy.com:
Only will bottom for 400.00 flat fee. Please don’t ask for a discount on
it. [Escort’s posted rate is $250 to be a top.]
I’m 27 yrs old, 177 lbs, 5′/10″ tall, all non-negotiable top only!! No amount
of $$ can [expletive for receptive sex] me! Don’t ask!!
Top guy here. Please let me know if you would like me to bottom. Advance
notice required and an extra $150.
While the BI is intriguing and I have carefully considered it, I believe it
requires much more information about what clients demand from escorts
and whether their expectations with regard to ejaculation differ by sexual
behavior. I could not find evidence that sexual fatigue varies by escort sexual
position; in particular, I found evidence that clients require ejaculation of all
escorts for a satisfactory experience. I also believe that bottoming is quite
taxing as well, and it is difficult to argue, a priori, that topping is more taxing
than bottoming. Indeed, escorts who are normally tops ask to be notified if
a client would like them to bottom, presumably because of the required
preparations. I conclude that the BI is inconsistent with the suggestive
evidence. Perhaps with better data, particularly as it pertains to client
demand for escort ejaculation and whether that demand differs by the sexual
role played by the escort, this issue can be fully addressed in future work.
 Appendix 4 261

REGRESSION ESTIMATES OF ESCORT VALUATION

Appendix Table 4.1 Physical characteristics and male escort prices

I II III
Age and Body Type Race Hair Color
Age −0.00975*** Black 0.0433 Blond hair 0.000365
[0.00119] [0.0658] [0.0248]
Height −0.00224 Hispanic 0.045 Brown hair −0.0186
[0.00331] [0.0668] [0.0167]
Weight −0.00114*** Multiracial 0.0882 Gray hair −0.0475
[0.000394] [0.0687] [0.292]
Other −0.0337 Other color hair 0.118
[0.101] [0.0852]
White 0.0277 Red/auburn hair 0.0857
[0.0646] [0.0719]
Observations 1476 1476 1476
R-squared 0.044 0.004 0.004

IV V VI
Eye Color Body Build Body Hair

Blue eyes −0.072 Average build −0.147*** Moderately hairy −0.163

[0.0556] [0.0230] [0.292]
Brown eyes −0.0682 A few extra −0.300*** Shaved −0.113
[0.0535] pounds [0.0869] [0.290]
Green eyes −0.05 Muscular build 0.0319* Smooth −0.11
[0.0573] [0.0173] [0.290]
Hazel eyes −0.0679 Thin/lean build −0.0479*
[0.0561] [0.0288]
Observations 1476 1476 1476
R-squared 0.002 0.045 0.019

Robust standard errors are listed under coefficients in brackets (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Each category is a separate regression in which the log of escort prices is the dependent variable.
Each regression includes controls for city location and an intercept.
For II: The omitted race category is Asian. For III: The omitted hair color is black.
For IV: The omitted eye color is black.
For V: The omitted body build is athletic/swimmer’s build.
For VI: The omitted body hair is hairy.
All tests of statistical significance are two-tailed.
See the Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
262 Appendix 4

Appendix Table 4.2 Sexual behaviors and male escort prices

I II III IV V
Top 0.0803*** 0.0968*** 0.0938*** 0.0936*** 0.0890***
[0.0202] [0.0224] [0.0224] [0.0224] [0.0247]
Bottom −0.0596** −0.0773** −0.0788** −0.0798** −0.0865**
[0.0302] [0.0355] [0.0355] [0.0355] [0.0385]
Versatile 0.00536 0.0142 0.0089 0.0074 0.00806
[0.0186] [0.0214] [0.0215] [0.0216] [0.0216]
Versatile top −0.0881* −0.0833 −0.0816 −0.0824
[0.0515] [0.0515] [0.0515] [0.0516]
Versatile bottom 0.0589 0.0654 0.0675 0.0674
[0.0673] [0.0672] [0.0673] [0.0673]
Safer sex 0.0510*** 0.0488** 0.0420*
[0.0192] [0.0195] [0.0227]
No attitude 0.0147 0.015
[0.0224] [0.0224]
Safe top 0.0221
[0.0490]
Safe bottom 0.0352
[0.0771]
Observations 1476 1476 1476 1476 1476
R-squared 0.015 0.017 0.022 0.022 0.023

Robust standard errors in brackets (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Dependent variable is the log of the escort’s price in all regressions.
Each regression includes controls for age, city location, and an intercept.
All tests of statistical significance are two-tailed.
See Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
 Appendix 4 263

Appendix Table 4.3 Race, sexual behavior, and male escort prices

I II III
Sexual behavior
Race Top Bottom Versatile
Black 0.110*** −0.286*** 0.036
[0.0321] [0.110] [0.0476]
White 0.0655** −0.0667* −0.01
[0.0297] [0.0348] [0.0234]
Asian 0.311 −0.0729 0.00786
[0.291] [0.206] [0.131]
Hispanic 0.0930* −0.0258 0.0251
[0.0537] [0.0882] [0.0400]
Multirace 0.0645 0.112 −0.00291
[0.0556] [0.131] [0.0591]
Other race 0.0662 −0.332 −0.25
[0.206] [0.206] [0.207]
Observations 1476 1476 1476
R-squared 0.013 0.009 0.002

Standard errors in brackets (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1)
Each column is a separate regression where the log of the price is the dependent variable.
Each entry is the coefficient on the interaction of the row and column. For example, the “Black top”
coefficient is the coefficient of the Black*top interaction term in the regression. All regressions
include controls for race, city, sexual behaviors, other personal characteristics, and an intercept.
All tests of statistical significance are two-tailed.
See Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
 Appendix 5

Empirical Estimates of Self-Presentation

Appendix Table 5.1 Descriptive statistics for self-presentation

Mean SD Min Max

Pictures
Number of pictures 6.136 (2.84) 1 12
Proportion of pictures featuring the penis 0.073 (0.14) 0 1
Proportion of pictures featuring the buttocks 0.147 (0.19) 0 1
Sexual behavior
Top 0.16 0 1
Bottom 0.06 0 1
Versatile 0.21 0 1
Race
Asian 0.01 0 1
Black 0.22 0 1
Hispanic 0.14 0 1
Multiracial 0.08 0 1
Other 0.01 0 1
White 0.54 0 1
Race*sexual behavior
Black top 0.055 0 1
White top 0.069 0 1
Asian top 0.001 0 1
Hispanic top 0.02 0 1
Multirace top 0.015 0 1
Black bottom 0.004 0 1
White bottom 0.047 0 1
Asian bottom 0.002 0 1
Hispanic bottom 0.007 0 1
Multirace bottom 0.003 0 1
Black versatile 0.026 0 1
White versatile 0.124 0 1
Asian versatile 0.003 0 1
Hispanic versatile 0.036 0 1
Multirace versatile 0.015 0 1

N = 1,932

264
 Appendix 5 265

Appendix Table 5.2 Regression estimates of self-presentation measures

by body type

Proportion of pictures featuring Proportion of pictures featuring

the penis the buttocks
Average build 0.035 *** (0.01) 0.003 (0.01)
A few extra pounds 0.052 (0.04) −0.047 (0.05)
Muscular build −0.004 (0.01) −0.006 (0.01)
Thin/lean build −0.008 (0.01) 0.035 ** (0.02)
Constant 0.07 *** (0.01) 0.145 *** (0.01)

Note: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05; N = 1,932
Omitted category: Athletic/swimmer’s build

Appendix Table 5.3 Regression estimates of self-presentations by sexual positioning

Proportion of pictures featuring Proportion of pictures featuring

the penis the buttocks
Top 0.032 *** (0.01) −0.064 *** (0.01)
Bottom −0.028 ** (0.01) 0.19 *** (0.02)
Versatile −0.006 (0.01) 0.021 ** (0.01)
Constant 0.071 *** (0.00) 0.141 *** (0.01)

Note: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05; N = 1,932

Appendix Table 5.4 Regression estimates of self-presentations by race

Proportion of pictures featuring Proportion of pictures featuring

the penis the buttocks
Black 0.059 (0.03) 0.013 (0.04)
White 0.002 (0.03) 0.022 (0.04)
Asian −0.009 (0.04) 0.106 (0.06)
Hispanic 0.007 (0.03) 0.036 (0.04)
Multirace 0.019 (0.03) 0.011 (0.05)
Constant 0.056 (0.03) 0.124 ** (0.04)

Note: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05; N = 1,932
Omitted category: Other race
266 Appendix 5

Appendix Table 5.5 Regression estimates of self-presentations by race and sexual

positioning

Proportion of pictures Proportion of pictures

featuring the penis featuring the buttocks
Top (penetrative partner)
Black top 0.043 *** (0.02) −0.085 *** (0.02)
White top 0.043 *** (0.01) −0.047 *** (0.02)
Asian top −0.071 (0.14) −0.141 (0.18)
Hispanic top −0.021 (0.02) −0.09 *** (0.03)
Multirace top 0.02 (0.03) −0.043 (0.03)
Bottom (receiving partner)
Black bottom −0.036 (0.05) 0.47 *** (0.06)
White bottom −0.025 (0.02) 0.149 *** (0.02)
Asian bottom 0.041 (0.09) 0.222 ** (0.11)
Hispanic bottom −0.032 (0.04) 0.297 *** (0.05)
Multirace bottom −0.044 (0.06) 0.116 (0.07)
Versatile (receiving and penetrative partner)
Black versatile 0.012 (0.02) 0.044 * (0.03)
White versatile −0.012 (0.01) 0.017 (0.01)
Asian versatile −0.051 (0.07) −0.04 (0.08)
Hispanic versatile 0.015 (0.02) 0.033 (0.02)
Multirace versatile −0.037 (0.03) −0.012 (0.03)
Constant 0.071 *** (0.00) 0.141 *** (0.01)

Note: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05; N = 1,932

Appendix Table 5.6 Selection regressions by body type

Number of pictures in Proportion of pictures featuring

advertisement the face
Average build −1.033 *** (0.20) 0.364 *** (0.01)
A few extra pounds −1.318 (0.76) 0.086 * (0.04)
Muscular build 0.243 (0.15) −0.034 *** (0.01)
Thin/lean build −0.454 (0.24) 0.033 ** (0.01)
Constant 6.247 *** (0.09) 0.072 *** (0.01)

Note: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05; N = 1,932
Omitted category: Athletic/swimmer’s build
 Appendix 5 267

Appendix Table 5.7 Selection regressions by sexual positioning

Number of pictures in Proportion of pictures featuring

advertisement the face
Top 0.058 (0.18) −0.012 (0.01)
Bottom −0.507 (0.27) −0.005 (0.01)
Versatile 0.534 *** (0.16) −0.006 (0.01)
Constant 6.048 *** (0.08) 0.074 *** (0.00)

Note: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05; N = 1,932

Appendix Table 5.8 Selection regressions by race

Number of pictures in Proportion of pictures featuring

advertisement the face
Black −0.515 (0.65) 0.046 (0.03)
White −0.175 (0.66) 0.05 (0.03)
Asian 0.023 (0.84) 0.02 (0.05)
Hispanic −0.135 (0.66) 0.051 (0.04)
Multirace −0.487 (0.67) 0.032 (0.04)
Constant 6.4 *** (0.63) 0.023 (0.03)

Note: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05; N = 1,932
Omitted category: Other race
 Appendix 6

A Model of Sex Worker and Client Negotiation

I consider the negotiations that sex workers and clients engage in with the
bargaining structure offered by Gertler, Shah, and Bertozzi (2005). Let V be
the value (willingness to pay) of a particular sexual contact to a client with a
specific sex worker. Let B be the value (willingness to pay) to engage in a
specific type of sexual conduct. For example, if a client prefers to have
unprotected sex, B > 0, while if a client prefers to have sex with a condom,
B < 0. For convenience, let P be the price of the transaction. The client’s payoff,
then, is V − B − P.
For the sex worker, consider W, which is their next best alternative (another
customer, or the participation constraint), and γ, which is the disutility from
having a specific type of sex with a particular client (exposing themselves to
disease, etc.). If the sex worker would prefer to have sex with the client, γ < 0,
while if they would not, γ > 0. The sex worker’s payoff is therefore P − W − γ.
Sex workers and clients may have different amounts of bargaining power
in any specific transaction. Sex workers may be able to use certain features
such as beauty, sexual expertise, reputation, or other features to improve
their bargaining position. One important feature of this approach is that it
allows one to conceptualize erotic capital into the negotiation model.
An escort with a greater amount of erotic capital is likely to have more
bargaining power in the negotiation with a client than would an escort with
less erotic capital. Let α be the client’s power in the transaction and 1 − α be
the sex worker’s power in the transaction, such that α is decreasing in the
erotic capital of the escort (note that this implies 1 − α increases with erotic
capital). Within this framework the equilibrium price will solve

maxP ðV  B  PÞα ðP  W  γÞ1α :

Any transaction agreed to by the client and the sex worker must hold with
P 2 [W + γ, V − B]. Using this, one can map out sex worker and client
payoff functions:

268
 Appendix 6 269

P Client ¼ ð1  αÞðV  BÞ
P Escort ¼ αðW þ γÞ:
It is important to note that this model allows for clients and sex workers
to place a greater (or lower) value on particular types of sex. For example,
I do not assume that sex workers prefer to have condomed sex and clients
prefer to have condomless sex. For concreteness, consider the case where
a condom is used in a given transaction. If a condom is used, then it holds
that either β < γ or −γ > β. That is, either the client’s willingness to pay not
to use a condom is less than the minimum compensation offered to an
escort to take the increased risk of disease transmission (β < γ), or the
escort’s willingness to pay not to use a condom (γ is negative) is greater
than the client’s willingness to pay (−γ > β).
If a condom is not used in a transaction, it must hold that either β > γ or
γ < −β. That is, either the client’s willingness to pay to use a condom (β is
negative) is larger than the compensation needed to induce the sex worker
to take the increase risk of disease transmission (γ < −β), or the client is
willing to pay more for not using a condom than the sex worker’s mini-
mum compensation to take the increased risk of STI infection (β > γ).
Since the compensating differential requires that the escort be compen-
sated for increased risk of STI infection, it would not hold that γ < 0, since
the sex worker would not have to be compensated for the increased risk of
unprotected sexual activity, and therefore β > 0 or γ > 0. If β < 0, then the
client uses the sex worker market to ensure that he can have the type of sex
he prefers. (This precludes the possibility that γ < 0, since if a condom is
used in a transaction, the client’s willingness to pay to not use a condom is
positive.) A key question is the average value of β for clients and γ for sex
workers with respect to specific sexual behaviors such as condom usage.
For example, if sex workers gain utility from not using condoms in their
commercial sex transactions (which is the same as condoms yielding
disutility), then it may be difficult to get sex workers to change their sexual
risk behavior. Knowledge of the demand side of the market, however,
could be used to encourage condom usage even if sex workers were not
inclined to, if the clients’ valuation of sexual behaviors were known. For
example, if clients actually prefer to have safer sex with escorts and are
willing to compensate sex workers for condom usage, then this could be
used to encourage male sex workers to practice safer sex for the monetary
gain involved.
270 Appendix 6

Appendix Table 6.1 Physical predictors of advertised safer sex

I II III IV
Age −0.00303** −0.00357** −0.00351** −0.00339**
[0.00133] [0.00148] [0.00147] [0.00148]
Height −0.00271
[0.00407]
Weight 0.000437
[0.000477]
BMI 0.00266 −0.02189
[0.00338] [0.02802]
BMI2 0.00049
[0.00055]
Observations 1932 1932 1932 1932

Robust standard errors are listed under coefficients in brackets (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Each column reports results of a probit regression where the dependent variable is “Is the Escort
Safe?” (Mean of dependent variable = 0.19, Standard Error of dependent variable = 0.39).
The coefficients reported are the marginal effects of the probit regressions. For continuous
variables (such as “Age”), the effect is evaluated at the mean.
All tests of statistical significance are two-tailed.
See Appendix 1 for variable definitions.

Appendix Table 6.2 Sexual behavior predictors of advertised safer sex

I II III
Top 0.0657** 0.0941*** 0.0894***
[0.0263] [0.0307] [0.0305]
Bottom 0.0234 0.0516 0.0351
[0.0382] [0.0502] [0.0484]
Versatile 0.104*** 0.134*** 0.109***
[0.0243] [0.0289] [0.0283]
Versatile top −0.0943** −0.0807**
[0.0370] [0.0393]
Versatile bottom −0.0689 −0.0434
[0.0561] [0.0626]
No attitude 0.208***
[0.0316]
Observations 1932 1932 1932

Robust standard errors are listed under coefficients in brackets (***p <.01, **p <.05, *p <.1).
Each column reports results of a probit regression where the dependent variable is “Is the Escort
Safe?” (Mean of dependent variable = 0.19, Standard Error of dependent variable = 0.39).
The coefficients reported are the marginal effects of the probit regressions. For dichotomous
variables such as “Top”), the effects calculate the change in probability from moving from 0 to 1.
All tests of statistical significance are two-tailed.
See Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
 Appendix 6 271

Appendix Table 6.3 Race and sexual behavior predictors of advertised safer sex

Race And
Race only “Top” “Bottom” “Versatile”
I II III IV
Black −0.043 −0.0109 0.0626 0.116*
[0.034] [0.039] [0.15] [0.066]
Hispanic 0.0233 0.111 0.12 0.251***
[0.040] [0.075] [0.13] [0.060]
Asian 0.151* – 0.479* 0.239
[0.09] – [0.27] [0.22]
Multirace −0.042 0.167* −0.0211 0.00358
[0.083] [0.090] [0.15] [0.075]
White 0.00202 0.0740* 0.00126 0.0663**
[0.033] [0.039] [0.042] [0.030]
Observations 1932 1931 1932 1932

Robust standard errors are listed under coefficients in brackets (***p <.01, **p <.05, *p <.1).
Each column reports results of a probit regression where the dependent variable is: Is the Escort
Safe? (Mean of dependent variable = 0.19, Standard Error of dependent variable = 0.39).
“Other race” is the omitted racial category in all regressions.
“Asian top” is excluded from the regression in Column II, due to lack of variation.
The coefficients reported are the marginal effects of the probit regressions. For dichotomous
variables such as “Race”) the effects calculate the change in probability from moving from 0 to 1.
Each entry in Columns II–IV is the coefficent on the interaction of the row and column.
For example, the “Black top” coefficient is the coefficient of the Black*top interaction.
Asians are excluded from the regression in Column II because “Asian top” perfectly predicts the
dependent variable.
All tests of statistical significance are two-tailed.
See Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
272 Appendix 6

Appendix Table 6.4 Advertising and reputation-based predictors of advertised

safer sex

I II III IV
Number of survey reviews 0.00207 −0.0180 −0.0168 −0.0143
[0.00127] [0.0148] [0.0149] [0.0149]
Number of pictures 0.00538* 0.00514 0.00209 0.00114
[0.00322] [0.00324] [0.00323] [0.00328]
Number of text reviews −0.0897* −0.102** −0.104**
[0.0484] [0.0485] [0.0496]
Number of 4-star survey reviews 0.0205 0.0185 0.0151
[0.0151] [0.0152] [0.0153]
Positive text reviews 0.0965* 0.112** 0.108**
[0.0503] [0.0506] [0.0535]
No attitude 0.221*** 0.220***
[0.0322] [0.0322]
Fraction 4-star 0.0330
[0.0212]
Fraction positive text 0.0146
[0.0371]
Observations 1932 1932 1932 1932

Robust standard errors are listed under coefficients in brackets (***p <.01, **p <.05, *p <.1).
Each column reports results of a probit regression where the dependent variable is “Is the Escort
Safe?” (Mean of dependent variable = 0.19, Standard Error of dependent variable = 0.39.)
The coefficients reported are the marginal effects of the probit regressions. For continuous
variables (such as “Text reviews”), the effect is evaluated at the mean. For dichotomous variables
(such as “No attitude”), the effects calculate the change in probability from moving from 0 to 1.
All tests of statistical significance are two-tailed.
See Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
 Appendix Table 6.5 Escort and client payoff functions, sexual behaviors

I II III IV
Escort Client Escort Client Escort Client Escort Client
Topping 34.78* 38.64* 33.47* 40.79** 39.26** 42.49** 38.54** 37.03*
[17.9] [19.9] [18.3] [20.6] [18.3] [20.6] [18.3] [20.8]
Versatile 15.9 34.15* 14.02 37.17* 26.12 41.67** 25.8 38.59*
[17.8] [19.4] [18.6] [20.8] [18.8] [20.9] [18.8] [21.0]
Bottom −2.53 12.89 −4.308 15.54 7.312 20.56 7.018 17.33
[27.9] [27.6] [28.4] [28.3] [28.5] [28.5] [28.5] [28.5]
Kissing 5.97 −7.63 18.04 −0.0172 18.83 3.033
[16.8] [18.6] [17.1] [19.3] [17.1] [19.3]
273

Masturbation, mutual −51.97*** −28.48 −49.28*** −13.84

[13.1] [18.1] [13.8] [21.7]
Masturbation, gives 7.671 −3.381
[34.5] [35.2]
Masturbation, receives 20.54 74.77**
[29.7] [35.1]
Observations 4865 4871 4865 4871 4865 4871 4865 4871
R-squared 0.47 0.93 0.47 0.93 0.47 0.93 0.47 0.93

Notes: Standard errors are clustered at the state-year level and reported in brackets (***p <.01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Each column is a regression that uses the standardized hourly rate as the dependent variable.
Column headings signify whether escort- or client-fixed effects were used in the specification.
Sexual behaviors are defined from the perspective of the escort.
 Appendix Table 6.6 Escort and client payoff functions, condom usage

I II III IV
Escort Client Escort Client Escort Client Escort Client
Topping 34.82* 37.33* 33.48* 43.15** 38.56** 36.23* 37.10* 41.44*
[17.9] [19.9] [18.6] [20.4] [18.4] [20.7] [19.0] [21.2]
Versatile 15.93 33.77* 16.51 43.44** 25.81 38.84* 26.14 48.32**
[17.8] [19.4] [18.4] [19.9] [18.8] [20.9] [19.3] [21.4]
Bottom −2.575 12.62 0.0355 9.506 6.996 17.62 9.199 14.6
[27.9] [27.5] [29.3] [29.6] [28.5] [28.5] [29.8] [30.4]
No Condom −1.684 −29.58** −0.905 −29.37**
274

[13.3] [14.5] [13.3] [14.5]

No-condom * topping 5.986 −27.78 6.608 −24.79
[22.6] [24.4] [22.6] [24.4]
No-condom * bottom −14.02 18.47 −11.87 17.21
[46.9] [53.8] [46.9] [53.8]
No-condom * versatile −2.81 −48.20** −1.559 −48.21**
[21.1] [22.7] [21.1] [22.7]
Kissing 18.81 1.455 18.75 2.166
[17.1] [19.3] [17.1] [19.3]
Masturbation, mutual −49.28*** −13.76 −49.16*** −14.68
[13.8] [21.6] [13.8] [21.6]

(continued)
 Masturbation, gives 7.629 −2.626 7.885 −4.135
[34.5] [35.1] [34.6] [35.2]
Masturbation, receives 20.48 73.98** 20.94 72.05**
[29.7] [35.0] [29.8] [35.1]
275

Observations 4865 4871 4865 4871 4865 4871 4865 4871

R-squared 0.47 0.93 0.47 0.93 0.47 0.93 0.47 0.93

Notes: Standard errors are clustered at the state-year level and reported in brackets (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Each column is a regression that uses the standardized hourly rate as the dependent variable.
Column headings signify whether escort- or client-fixed effects were used in the specification.
Sexual behaviors are defined from the perspective of the escort.
276 Appendix 6

Appendix Table 6.7 Client payoff functions with full escort characteristics

I II III IV V VI
White −19.93 −20.28 −23.83 −22.98 −23.27 −23.31
[31.5] [31.6] [31.6] [31.5] [31.5] [31.5]
Black −15.97 −16.91 −18.37 −25.85 −26.13 −25.63
[54.0] [54.1] [54.0] [53.9] [54.0] [54.0]
Latino 28.74 27.95 32.6 30.99 31.51 28.91
[38.0] [38.1] [38.1] [37.9] [38.0] [38.0]
Age 20s 26.96 29.9 39.93 28.02 29.78 26.1
[71.8] [72.0] [72.0] [71.9] [72.0] [72.0]
Age 30s 54.61 55.41 63.51 50.7 53.12 47.71
[72.1] [72.2] [72.2] [72.0] [72.2] [72.3]
Age 40s 3.957 5.204 16.05 1.427 4.334 0.84
[75.6] [75.8] [75.8] [75.7] [75.9] [76.0]
BMI −4.151 −4.808 −5.326 −1.765 −1.384 −1.295
[16.8] [16.9] [16.9] [16.9] [16.9] [17.0]
(BMI)^2 0.0386 0.0552 0.0676 −0.0198 −0.0284 −0.0375
[0.34] [0.34] [0.34] [0.35] [0.35] [0.35]
Endowment (in.) 17.75** 16.24** 15.68* 16.94** 16.99** 17.37**
[7.91] [8.24] [8.23] [8.22] [8.23] [8.24]
Circumcized 7.529 7.915 8.39 9.934 9.87 8.99
[20.0] [20.1] [20.0] [20.0] [20.0] [20.0]
Topping 19.56 19.67 14.88 17.29 22.49
[26.3] [26.2] [26.3] [26.7] [27.3]
Versatile 16.18 17.6 21.48 25.11 36.61
[24.8] [24.8] [25.0] [25.9] [26.7]
Bottom 3.464 4.428 8.951 11.96 6.048
[34.5] [34.4] [34.7] [35.2] [38.3]
No condom −37.11** −36.40** −37.11**
[17.2] [17.1] [17.2]
Masturbation, −31.77 −29.94 −32.2
mutual [29.2] [29.4] [29.4]
Masturbation, 79.61* 77.53* 74.83*
receives [42.7] [42.9] [43.0]
Masturbation, gives −35.64 −36.45 −39.16
[49.3] [49.4] [49.4]
Kissing −12.57 −11.52
[24.1] [24.1]
No-condom * −24.04
topping [28.9]
No-condom * 19.74
bottom [62.6]

(continued)
 Appendix 6 277

Appendix Table 6.7 (continued)

I II III IV V VI
No-condom * −59.44**
versatile [25.8]
Observations 3735 3735 3735 3735 3735 3735
R-squared 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94

Notes: Standard errors are clustered at the state-year level and reported in brackets (***p < .01,
**p < .05, *p < .1).
Each column is a regression that uses the standardized hourly rate as the dependent variable.
Each regression includes client-fixed effects.
Sexual behaviors are defined from the perspective of the escort.

Appendix Table 6.8 Advertised safer sex and escort prices

I II III
Safer sex 0.0545***
[0.0192]
Black safe 0.0865**
[0.0425]
White safe 0.0539**
[0.0249]
Asian safe −0.134
[0.110]
Hispanic safe 0.0433
[0.0438]
Multirace safe 0.0917
[0.0589]
Other race safe −0.240
[0.206]
Safe top 0.124***
[0.0397]
Safe bottom −0.00636
[0.0677]
Safe versatile 0.0175
[0.0344]
Constant 5.327*** 5.327*** 5.332***
[0.00844] [0.00844] [0.00793]
N 1476 1476 1476
R-sqaured 0.005 0.009 0.007

Robust standard errors are listed under coefficients in brackets (***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1).
Each column is a separate regression in which the log of escort prices is the dependent variable.
All tests of statistical significance are two-tailed.
See the Appendix 1 for variable definitions.
 Notes

INTRODUCTION
1. http://www.manhattandigest.com/2015/03/08/the-2015-hookies-march-20th-who
-should-win-and-why/, accessed October 25, 2015.
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBkpU33QEMw, accessed October 26, 2015.
3. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/08/a-web-site-for-gay-escorts-gets
-busted-by-homeland-security/402343/, http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news
/rentboy-com-ceo-six-employees-arrested-prostitution-charges-n415796, http://www
.wsj.com/articles/gay-activists-protest-rentboy-raid-1441327676, accessed October 25,
2015.
4. http://www.nextmagazine.com/content/logos-prince-charming-found-rentboy,
accessed August 27, 2016. http://boston.edgemedianetwork.com/entertainment/tele
vision///203029/, accessed August 27, 2016.
5. Dennis (2008). See Minichiello and Scott (2014) for a collection that shows the broad
sweep and interdisciplinary nature of contemporary scholarship on male sex work.
6. Steele and Kennedy (2006); Pompeo (2009).
7. West (1993); Itiel (1998); Aggleton (1999); Kaye (2003); Friedman (2003); Halkitis
et al. (2004); Parsons, Koken, and Bimbi (2007); Minichiello, Scott, and Callander
(2013).
8. There are few works in the economics literature on male sex work. Theoretical
approaches which focus on female sex workers have been offered by Edlund and
Korn (2002) and Giusta, Tommaso, and Strom (2008), and some theoretical predic-
tions for male sex workers have been tested empirically as in Arunachalam and Shah
(2008), Logan (2010), and Edlund, Engelberg, and Parsons (2009). The literature on
male sex work in the historical, sociological, and public health literatures is many
times larger and includes Boyer (1989), Dorias (2005), Ginsberg (1967), Hoffman
(1972), Kaye (2003), Luckenbill (1986), McNamara (1994), Pettiway (1996), and
Salamon (1989). The use of the term “gay” to describe participants in the market is
controversial. Some scholars avoid the use of the term “gay” to describe this market
since many participants do not self-identify as gay men. Others use the terms since
the sexual behaviors are inherently homosexual. As this book seeks to link the

279
280 Notes to pages 19–31

cultural cues from self-identified gay men to the social function of the male sex work
market, the terms are use somewhat interchangeably. See Scott (2003) for more on
the semiotics of male prostitution.

1 MALE SEX WORK: ANTIQUITY TO ONLINE

1. Dover (1989).
2. Dover (1989).
3. Martin (1996) and Friedman (2014).
4. Duncan-Jones (1982).
5. Boswell (2005).
6. Boswell (2005) and Friedman (2014).
7. Evans (1979).
8. Boswell (2005).
9. Friedman (2014).
10. Schalow (1989).
11. Boswell (2005).
12. Boswell (2005).
13. Friedman (2014) also notes that this term implied that the male sex worker
was sexually submissive.
14. Weeks (1989b).
15. Katz (1976, 1983).
16. Katz (1976, 1983).
17. Chauncey (1994).
18. Friedman (2003).
19. Sadownick (1996).
20. Sadownick (1996).
21. Delany (1999) and Friedman (2003).
22. Even in the earlier era of newspapers, escorts were distinct from erotic massage
therapists, who offered only masturbation services to clients. Escorts were listed
under their own section in most gay newspapers and their services were noted to
include a broader range of sexual services.
23. Tyler (2014).
24. Edlund and Korn (2002).
25. Moffatt and Peters (2004).
26. While nudity is allowed, escorts may not post pictures that display sex acts and may
not display pictures that include persons other than the escort. Uploaded pictures
are placed in an online holding tank until cleared by the website’s management.
Every advertisement must be accompanied by at least one picture.
27. The questions are: Did he show up? Did he match his description? Did he
provide desired services? Would you recommend him? How hot was he?
28. Approximately 17% of escorts with posted prices have a spot price and 12.6% of
escorts for the entire sample have a spot price. Note that 76.4% of escorts have
a posted price and 79.5% of escorts have some price measure (either spot, posted, or
both).
29. Steele and Kennedy (2006), Pompeo (2009).
 Notes to pages 31–49 281

30. As the ages in advertisements are reported ages, they may be skewed younger than
the actual ages of escorts. In either case, male sex workers are certainly not the
“youths” described elsewhere.
31. “Versatile” escorts many times denote themselves as “versatile tops” or “versatile
bottoms,” terms which denote a preference for one activity, but a willingness to
participate in the other. We code both “versatile tops” and “versatile bottoms” as
“versatile.” See the data appendix for further details.
32. Parsons et al. (2013) find that among young men, 82 percent used condoms with
their most recent sexual partner.

2 FACE VALUE: HOW MALE SEX WORKERS OVERCOME

THE PROBLEM OF ASYMMETRIC INFORMATION
1. Dynamically, sellers of high-quality vehicles will leave the market, and only poor-
quality cars will remain. This leads to lower and lower average car quality in the
market, and in the end the market entirely disappears.
2. Akerlof (1970); Spence (1973).
3. Schelling (1960).
4. Hart (1995); Tirole (1999); Greif (1993).
5. Lewis (2009).
6. Brown and Goolsbee (2002); Jensen (2007); Lewis (2009); Goyal (2008);
Bajari and Hortacsu (2004); Bakos (2001); Cunningham and Kendall (2011).
7. Steele and Kennedy (2006); Pompeo (2009).
8. Murphy and Venkatesh (2006); Lambert (2007); Friedman (2003); Parsons,
Koken, and Bimbi (2007); Halkitis et al. (2004).
9. Critical competitive market assumptions include these: (1) the market contains
a significant number of producers, such that no individual producer has market
power (all firms are price takers); (2) the firms sell a homogeneous product; (3) free
entry and exit is available to firms; (4) the market is subject to no government
regulation, rationing, or price floors or ceilings; and (5) market participants behave
rationally, where consumers seek to maximize utility and firms to maximize profit.
10. Cameron, Collins, and Thew (1999).
11. Friedman (2003).
12. From Rentboy.com “First Time Hiring an Escort?” Accessed April 28, 2008.
13. This roundtable interview with escorts was accessed at http://www.rentboy
.com on April 28, 2008.
14. West (1993); Gertler, Shah, and Bertozzi (2005).
15. Itiel (1998); Hart (1998).
16. As a linguistic (perhaps semiotic) sign of the risk borne by the client, male escorts
are also known as “hustlers,” a term also used for drug dealers, hoodlums, and
thieves (see Scott (2003), Sadownick (1996), Itiel (1998), Friedman (2003), and
Dorias (2005)).
17. Steele and Kennedy (2006).
18. Itiel (1998); Friedman (2003).
19. Unless otherwise noted, all further quotes from forums come from the online
forum hosted by http://www.daddysreviews.com.
282 Notes to pages 50–64

20. Spence (2002); Lewis (2009).

21. Jovanovic (1982).
22. The most popular client-based site has been in existence since the early 1990s.
23. Not all exchanges are negative. Indeed, many clients give glowing recom-
mendations to escorts.
24. Laband (1986); Milgrom and Roberts (1986); Pope and Sydnor (2008); Duarte,
Siegel, and Young (2009).
25. Cho and Kreps (1987).
26. One might expect, however, that in any market with some form of commu-
nication, that information would be of some value. I noted earlier that face
pictures could be interpreted by clients as a commitment device, a type of
disclosure, but this would imply that the posting of face pictures determines
the commitment, and our institutional analysis revealed that escorts signal
against type in both directions. Testing for signaling behavior is also more
robust – it is the weaker condition, since signaling is inherently inefficient.
27. Bajari and Benkard (2005) show that the interpretation is still valid even if
there is imperfect competition or a small number of products, and prove that
even with unobserved product characteristics the price function is identified.
28. I use the hourly outcall price as the dependent variable. Results are unchanged
when using the incall price (see the Appendix results). Individual characteristics
include race, weight, height, age, and sexual behaviors advertised. See the data
Appendix for complete variable definitions. I control for the escort’s location, not
only because price may vary with geography, but also because specific locations
may have more or fewer competitors, as noted in the chapter on geographic
mobility. I also use state fixed effects in the regressions and cluster the errors at
the state level. Results were similar (but standard errors smaller) when I included
city-specific effects and/or clustered the standard errors at the city level.
29. The full set of results on which the figures are based are contained in the Appendix.
30. Lewis (2009) describes the lengths taken by eBay to eliminate fraud in their
used car sales, including prosecution.
31. In the specifications, the log of the number of text reviews is used to give an
elasticity interpretation to the results. Since the number of escorts with text
reviews is quite small (see Table 2.1, the average escort has 0.3 reviews), the
effect on prices is actually quite small, but still statistically significant.
32. Since the specification is semi logarithmic, the percentage change is approximated
by exp(γ)−1 (Halvorsen and Palmquist 1980).
33. Specifications that used the fraction of reviews that were negative were
negatively related to escort prices, but were not statistically significant.
34. See Appendix Table 2.3.
35. Note that the omitted category is non-face, non-nude pictures. This omitted
category is not related to escort prices. See the Appendix for specifications that
include all three picture types.
36. The results for a third-degree polynomial specification in the Appendix.
37. The results of the polynomial specification for all picture types is given in
Appendix Table 2.7.
38. See Daniel Hamermesh’s website for a summary of findings from a number of
studies.
 Notes to pages 64–80 283

39. It is also important to note that not all high-quality escorts will use the signal.
As with any information displayed on the Internet, face pictures would be
a permanent sign of an escort’s involvement in male sex work.
40. Friedman (2003); Sadownick (1996); Wright (2008).
41. There is substantial baseline variation in escort beauty, even among those
who show their faces.
42. The baseline specification with escort beauty that does not include face
pictures shows a marginally significant beauty coefficient of 0.0073 (.004).
43. Itiel (1998); Cameron, Collins, and Thew (1999); Friedman (2003).
44. I also estimate a regression where I control for the presence of face pictures with
a dichotomous indicator (whether there were face pictures or not) and also estimate the
value of marginal pictures. This is similar to the marginal estimates presented in
Figure 2.5. In this specification the premium to posting face pictures (the coefficient
on the dichotomous indicator) is 15.3 percent. This implies that the beauty calculation
described earlier (4.5 percent) explains less than 30 percent of the face picture premium,
even when excluding the marginal value of face pictures from the face picture premium.
45. In the regressions, I control for whether the escort allows himself to be reviewed.
46. For examples of the narrative evidence that led us to consider the Las Vegas market,
see the Appendix. I conjecture that the disproportionate number of tourists in the
Las Vegas market leads escorts to place little value in their reputations, or they may
feel uniquely prone to poor reviews due to cultural misunderstandings with clients.
47. The coefficient on face pictures among the men who allow reviews in Las Vegas is
−0.0037 (.40).

3 MARKET MOVERS: TRAVEL, CITIES, AND THE NETWORK

OF MALE SEX WORK
1. This chapter is a revised version of Hsieh and Logan (2014).
2. There are websites that allow sex workers to note that they are “available now” for
immediate appointments, but a preliminary look at the use of this feature shows
that the number listing themselves as being immediately available is quite small.
Indeed, sex workers commonly note that they prefer text and phone calls for
appointments to be scheduled.
3. Harcourt and Donovan (2005); Weitzer (2009).
4. Cunningham and Kendall (2009).
5. See Harcourt and Donovan (2005) and Weitzer (2009) for reviews.
6. Aggleton (1999); Padilla (2007).
7. Clients may also be key for STI transmission dynamics. See Hsieh, Kovarik, and
Logan (2014).
8. Previous research has shown, through qualitative techniques, the ways in which
male sex workers inform and influence their clients’ sexual practices: Bimbi and
Parsons (2005); Parsons et al. (2007); Estcourt et al. (2000); Minichiello et al. (2014).
9. De Graaf et al. (1994); Marlowe (1997); Varghese et al. (2002).
10. Varghese et al. (2002).
11. See Davis (2006), Houde (2012), and Chisholm and Norman (2012) for examples of
spatial competition analysis.
284 Notes to pages 81–93

12. Humphries (1970).

13. MacNamara (1994).
14. Frankel (2007); MacDonald (2007).
15. Berg and Lien (2002); Carpenter (2004); Jepsen and Jepsen (2002); Carpenter and
Gates (2008); Hewitt (1995); Black, Sanders, and Taylor (2007).
16. Black, Gates, Sanders, and Taylor (2000, 2002); Berg and Lien (2006); Cameron
et al. (2009).
17. Black, Gates, Sanders, and Taylor (2000, 2002); Black, Sanders, and Taylor (2007).
18. Sadownick (1996); Koken, Bimbi, and Parsons (2009).
19. Black, Sanders, and Taylor (2007); Black, Gates, Sanders, and Taylor (2000,
2002); Luckenbill (1986); MacNamara (1994); Pleak and Meyer-Bahlburg
(1990); Timpson et al. (2007).
20. Sadownick (1996); Koken, Bimbi, and Parsons (2009); Koken et al. (2005).
21. Black, Sanders, and Taylor (2007).
22. Analysis using the 2010 Census did not change the results. Annual estimates using
the American Community Survey were less reliable as the smaller sample sizes
make it difficult to estimate the Gay Concentration Index (GCI) with any reason-
able precision.
23. Table 3.1 is a replication from Logan (2010), which estimated the GCI from 1990
Census data as given in Black, Sanders, and Taylor (2007). The data used here give
similar results when using the 2010 Census data to construct the GCI.
24. Pompeo (2009).
25. Sjaasted (1962); Harris and Todaro (1970); Schwartz (1976); Greenwood (1997).
Formally, consider the value of temporary migration, which would be the dis-
counted cumulative difference in expected utility between the new and current
location, less the cost of traveling to the new city.
ðT
V ð0Þ ¼ ½E½Wa ðtÞ  Wh ðtÞert dt  Cð0Þ
0

Where Wa is the wage in the new (away) location and Wh is the wage in the present
(home) location, r is the discount rate, t is time, and C is the cost of travel. When
V > 0, there would be economic gains to migration.
26. In the model this would imply that Wa > Wh.
27. What is not known here is whether the higher prices cause traveling, since they
could see lower demand in their home location.
28. These networks are frequently studied in the context of interlocking directorates in
organization studies (Mintz and Schwartz, 1985; Robins and Alexander, 2004).
An important distinction between two- and one-mode networks is that in the former,
a member of a particular node set (e.g., escorts) can only be indirectly tied to
a member of its own node set through a shared tie to the other node set (e.g., cities).
29. Bonacich (1991); Borgatti and Everett (1997); Faust (1997).
30. I do not have information of GCI and HIV for all cities in the data. In fact, cities
with missing GCI or HIV rate usually are smaller cities and have few escorts
traveling from or traveling to. Therefore, I drop observations in cities with missing
GCI or HIV rates in the empirical specifications. The number of cities drops from
131 to 82 and the number of escorts drops from 1,926 to 1,797.
 Notes to pages 94–115 285

31. In two-mode network studies, similar high correlations among event centralities
can be seen in Faust (1997) and Valente et al. (2008).
32. To account for changes in the gay population over time, the GCI in Table 3.6 was
calculated from 2010 Census data.
33. In each regression I use a linear probability model for ease of interpretation of the
coefficients, but results with probit models were similar.
34. Those not noting a sexual position are the reference group.
35. This is confirmed in an unreported regression.
36. The full results are reported in the Appendix.
37. Arunachalam and Shah (2013).
38. Unlike the regression models for extensive and intensive measures of travel, I do
not reject the null hypothesis of equal error variance across cities in wage regres-
sions. Following Lee (2007), the t statistics are not clustered.
39. The full results are reported in the Appendix.

4 ILLICIT INTERSECTIONS: THE VALUE OF SEX WORKER

SERVICES
1. Pruitt (2005); Bimbi (2007); Weitzer (2009); Zelizer (1994).
2. Marlowe (1997); Edlund and Korn (2002); Bernstein (2005, 2007); Giusta, Di
Tommaso, and Strom (2008).
3. Edlund and Korn (2002).
4. Parsons, Bimbi and Halkitis (2001); Uy et al. (2004); Bimbi and Parsons (2005).
5. Luckenbill (1986); Cameron et al. (1999); Uy et al. (2004); Koken et al. (2005),
Pruitt (2005); Parsons, Koken, and Bimbi (2007).
6. Loftus (2001); Scott (2003).
7. These older works would include Pettiway (1996), McNamara (1994), Hoffman
(1972), Ginsburg (1967), Salamon (1989), and Boyer (1989).
8. Joffee and Dockrell (1995); Calhoun and Weaver (1996); Uy et al. (2004); Pruitt
(2005).
9. Cohan et al. (2004).
10. Parker (2006).
11. Connell (1987, 1995).
12. Collins (1999, 2000); Reid-Pharr (2001); Han (2006b).
13. Minichiello, Scott, and Callander (2013); Bimbi (2007); Weitzer (2009).
14. Dowsett (1993).
15. I am not claiming that all men participating in the market are gay-identified.
I am claiming, however, that the construction of gay masculinities would be
more prominent in the market than its heterosexual counterpart. As argued
later, this depends on the degree to which gay masculinities and heterosexual
masculinities are different. If there are few germane differences then, for the
case of male sex work, the two are interchangeable.
16. Connell (1987, 1995); Connell and Messerschmidt (2005).
17. Collins (1999, 2000).
18. West (1993); Bernstein (2007).
286 Notes to pages 115–125

19. Itiel (1998); Steele and Kennedy (2006); Pompeo (2009); Smith and Grov
(2011); West (1993); Aggleton (1999); Kaye (2001).
20. Weinberg and Williams (1974); Stein (1989); Sedgwick (1990); Epstein (2006).
21. Marlowe (1997).
22. D’Emilio (1997); Cantu (2002).
23. This is a necessarily cursory introduction to field theory. See Martin (2003)
and Fligstein and McAdam (2012).
24. Chauncey (1994); Dorais (2005); Bimbi (2007).
25. Black et al. (2000); Black, Sanders, and Taylor (2007); Cameron et al. (2009).
26. Sociologists have noted conflicts within masculinities before the theory of
hegemonic masculinity developed (Hooker [1957]; Weinberg and Williams
[1974]; Levine [1998]).
27. Bird (1996); Schrock and Schwalbe (2009); Reeser (2010).
28. Demetriou (2001).
29. Levine (1998); Donaldson (1993); Dowsett (1993); Demetriou (2001); Anderson
(2002); Connell and Messerschmidt (2005); Reeser (2010).
30. Connell and Messerschmidt (2005) express doubts about this hybrid, but do
concede that hegemonic masculinity could be informed by and inform gay
masculinities.
31. Connell (1992); Reeser (2010).
32. This allows for the distinction between a sexuality-based masculinity and a practice/
trait-based masculinity. As such, heterosexual masculinities may be further refined
among heterosexual men in a similar manner to that of homosexual men.
33. Almeling (2007); Arunachalam and Shah (2008); Koken, Bimbi, and Parsons (2009).
34. Alvarez (2008).
35. Bird (1996); Schrock and Schwalbe (2009).
36. See Weinberg and Williams (1974), Cameron et al. (1999), and Pruitt (2005).
The advertisements of male escorts commonly note the “rugged” quality or “manli-
ness” of the escort and the “refinement” of their “generous gentlemen” clients.
37. An additional contribution is the fact that quantitative analysis of masculinity
has largely concerned opinions about masculine traits as opposed to values/
effects of practices.
38. See Hacker (1957) for a contemporaneous discussion of the development of post
war masculinity.
39. Atkins (1998); Green (2008b).
40. Levine (1998) notes that this does not imply that there were not deep emotional
connections between men who adopted a gay clone persona. The image of emo-
tional detachment was not the reality for the men in Levine’s ethnography.
41. Connell (1992); Atkins (1998).
42. Herzog et al. (1991); Bresen et al. (1996); Atkins (1998); Carpenter (2003); Green
(2008b).
43. Levine (1998); Lanzieri and Hildebrtandt (2011); Tiggerman, Martins, and
Kirkbride (2007).
44. Hennen (2005); Whitesel (2014).
45. The hierarchical relationship between these alternative gay masculinities is an
active area of research.
46. Atkins (1998); Hennen (2005); Whitesel (2014).
 Notes to pages 125–133 287

47. Levine (1998).

48. Levine (1998); Nardi (2000); Ward (2000); Clarkson (2006).
49. Ward (2008); Connell (1992); Clarkson (2006); Pascoe (2007).
50. Levine (1998); Clarkson (2006).
51. Nagel (2000); Han (2006b); Robinson (2007).
52. Collins (1999, 2000); Reeser (2010).
53. Baldwin (1985); Reeser (2010).
54. Levine (1998); D’Emilio (1983).
55. There is a well-developed literature that shows the ways that homosexuality may be
incompatible with Blackness, but for the analysis of male sex work it is particularly
important to note the ways that Blackness would be incompatible with homosexu-
ality since the market is inherently sexual as opposed to racial.
56. This is quite different from the emasculated Black gay man described in Collins
(2005). It is interesting to note that Collins describes the emasculated and femin-
ized gay man while Black gay scholars such as Nero describe the savage Black man
as inconsistent with homosexuality. One source of the distinction could be that
Collins focuses on the social representations of Black gay men while Nero analyzes
them within a more deliberately sexual context.
57. For Black exclusion from dating pools, see Robnett, Feliciano, and Rafalow (2013).
58. http://www.gmfa.org.uk/Sites/fsmagazine/pages/fs148-dear-white-gay-men
59. “Cock” is very rarely used as a euphemism for penis in African American verna-
cular. As such, it is likely that the terminology developed and is used by White men,
as “cock” is a common euphemism among Whites.
60. Levine (1998) notes that Black men were largely excluded from the gay clique, the
key socializing institution in White gay enclaves. Numerous studies have docu-
mented the exclusion of Black gay men from social establishments such as gay bars.
61. Orne (2016); Robinson (2015a).
62. See Feliciano, Robnett, and Komaie (2009) and Wilson et al. (2009) for recent work
that concentrates on exclusion by Whites.
63. Han (2006a).
64. http://www.gmfa.org.uk/Sites/fsmagazine/pages/fs148-dear-white-gay-men
65. http://www.gmfa.org.uk/Sites/fsmagazine/pages/fs148-dear-white-gay-men
66. Cameron et al. (1999); Pruitt (2005).
67. Economists have noted problems with some of the assumptions underlying the
hedonic empirical approach. For example, Rosen (1974) assumed that the market
for the good or service in question was perfectly competitive and that the range of
products would be approximately continuous. Many markets are not perfectly
competitive, and even fewer have a continuum of goods (which requires a large
variety of products of the same type in the market). Rosen also assumed that all
product attributes would be observed by market participants, and this is also not
true for some goods, particularly services such as escort services. For these reasons,
some have objected to the hedonic approach and its interpretation (Brown and
Rosen 1982; Epple 1987; Bartik 1987). Fortunately, recent advances in applied
econometrics have shown that the hedonic approach we use is able to uncover
the implicit prices of characteristics in markets that are not perfectly competitive,
where there is not a continuum of goods, and where all product characteristics are
not observed (Bajari and Benkard 2005). In short, we can estimate the implicit
288 Notes to pages 133–144

prices in this market without making the rigid market assumptions that have been
problematic in the literature.
68. I control for the escort’s location not only because price may vary with geography,
but also because specific locations may have more or fewer competitors (peers),
which can exert an independent effect on prices in a particular market.
69. There are several ways to establish the validity of the prices used. Errors or selection
could bias the results I report. First, I note that the correlation of advertised prices
with actual transaction prices is quite high (r=0.89). Of greater concern is selection.
Not all escorts post prices, although the vast majority of escorts (more than
85 percent) do. It could certainly be the case that escort characteristics are related
to the likelihood of posting prices. If this is so, the relationship between prices and
characteristics could be biased, as characteristics would predict whether an escort
would choose to post prices. To address this potential selection issue, I estimated
a model where the dependent variable was whether or not an escort posted a price.
The results of the selection regressions are reported in the Appendix. I found no
relationship between the information in an escort’s advertisement (race, sexual
position, body size, etc.) and the decision to post prices. Given these results, I am
confident that the price measure is an accurate measure of the prices actually paid
in transactions.
70. This calculation assumes that escorts see 25 clients per month.
71. Friedman (2003); Bernstein (2007).
72. These results are robust to the inclusion of age-squared and for substituting height
and weight with body mass index (BMI).
73. Since the specification is semi logarithmic, the percentage change of a dichotomous
indicator is approximated by exp(γ)−1, where γ is the coefficient in the regression
(Halvorsen and Palmquist 1980).
74. Carpenter (2003); Atkins (1998).
75. Pompeo (2009).
76. Alvarez (2008).
77. See the Appendix for the complete set of models estimated. The price
differential is calculated as exp(Top)–exp(Bottom).
78. Clarkson (2006).
79. See the Supplementary Material for a fuller delineation of the biological hypothesis
and the evidence gathered to consider its implications.
80. See the Appendix for the full set of results.
81. This could be due in part to the fact that there are relatively few Asian escorts in the
data. Only 1 percent of the escorts are Asian.

5 SHOW, TELL, AND SELL: SELF-PRESENTATION

IN MALE SEX WORK
1. This is a revised version of Fine, Logan, and Soller (2014).
2. Simmel ([1907] 1971).
3. Hoang (2010); Price-Glynn (2010); Thompson, Harred, and Burks (2002).
4. Bernstein (2007).
5. Green (2008c).
 Notes to pages 145–159 289

6. Martin and George (2006).

7. This is not to say that men would want those sexual aspects made public for their
romantic partners. The point here is that the desirability of certain sexual behaviors
and sexual personas would extend to the commercial market.
8. Collins (2004).
9. For example, see Price-Glynn (2010) and Thompson, Harred, and Burks (2002).
10. Logan (2010); Bernstein (2007).
11. See Hakim (2011) for a general introduction to erotic capital.
12. Weitzer (2005).
13. Koken, Bimbi, and Parsons (2009).
14. West (1993), Logan (2010).
15. Boyer (1989), Prestage (1994).
16. Weitzer (2009).
17. Blumer (1954, p. 7).
18. Niche markets of sex workers do exist, e.g., sadomasochist sex workers or sex
workers of an older age (Cameron et al. 1999), who arguably narrow their
client base. There is no suggestion that male sex workers all conform identically
to provide nearly identical, broadly aimed advertisements. Instead, I argue that
these MSM sex workers largely do rely on overarching racial, gender, and
sexual stereotypes in constructing their advertisements, even while seeking to
fill niches related to sexual desire.
19. Douglas and Isherwood (2002).
20. Goffman (1959, p. 22).
21. Logan (2010).
22. Logan and Shah (2013).
23. Blumer (1954, p. 7).
24. Green (2008c).
25. Gagnon and Simon (1973).
26. MacNeil and Byers (2005).
27. See Humphreys (1971) for an earlier discussion of the development of gay
masculinity.
28. Foucault (1978); Martin (1998).
29. Butler (2004); Fausto-Sterling (2000).
30. Drummond (2010); Robinson (2015a); Varangis et al. (2012).
31. Kane (2009).
32. Green (2008c).
33. Varangis et al. (2012).
34. Levine (1998).
35. Robinson (2015a); Whitesel (2014).
36. Logan (2010).
37. Hennen (2005); Baker (2003).
38. Kane (2009).
39. Green (2008c, p. 28).
40. Green (2008c, p. 25).
41. Collins (2004)
42. Han (2006a, 2006b).
43. Gagnon and Simon (1973).
290 Notes to pages 162–172

44. Logan (2010); Logan and Shah (2013).

45. For completeness, Appendix tables show regressions where the number of pictures
in an advertisement is the dependent variable. I also show results where the
dependent variable is the fraction of the pictures that display the face.
46. All results we present also hold when I estimate the models with the number of
pictures of a particular type as the dependent variable as opposed to the share of all
pictures of a particular type as the dependent variable.
47. For completeness, I report results with face pictures in the Appendix.
48. “Other race” is the reference category.
49. “Athletic/Swimmer’s build” is the reference category.
50. Some within the MSM/gay community use terms such as “versatile top” and
“versatile bottom” to indicate their sexual position preferences, meaning that the
category of “versatile” is not mutually exclusive from the categories of “top” or
“bottom.” For instance, a “versatile top” may be willing to be either the insertive or
receiving partner during anal sex, but typically prefers to be the insertive.
51. The full specifications are given in the Appendix.
52. Bottom (b = 0.190, p < 0.001), Versatile (b = 0.021, p < 0.01).
53. The Wald test shows (F[1,1928] = 66.46, p < 0.001).
54. The results of this specification are reported in the Appendix.
55. Black (b = −0.085, p < 0.001), Hispanic (b = −0.090, p < 0.001), and White (b =
−0.047, p < 0.001).
56. Black (b = 0.470, p < 0.001), White (b = 0.149, p < 0.001), Asian (b = 0.222, p < 0.01),
and Hispanic (b = 0.291, p < 0.001).
57. These results are reported in the Appendix (b = 0.044, p < 0.05).
58. White (F[1,1916] = 22.80, p < 0.001), Asian (F[1,1916] = 3.86, p < 0.05), and
Hispanic (F[1,1916] = 4.41, p < 0.05) bottoms.
59. F[1,1916] = 7.36, p < 0.01.
60. Green (2008b).

6 SERVICE FEES: MASCULINITY, SAFER SEX,

AND MALE SEX WORK
1. Gertler, Shah, and Bertozzi (2005); Rao et al. (2003); Robinson and Yeh (2011);
Arunachalam and Shah (2008, 2013).
2. Eaton et al. (2007); Eaton, Kalichman, and Cherry (2010).
3. Koken et al. (2005).
4. Halkitis et al. (2004).
5. Goodreau et al. (2011).
6. Weitzer (2009).
7. Lillard (1998); Rao et al. (2003); Gertler, Shah, and Bertozzi (2005); Levitt and
Vankatesh (2007); Robinson and Yeh (2011, 2012); Arunachalam and Shah (2008);
Galarraga et al. (2011); Shah (2013); Cheng and Weng (2012).
8. De Graaf et al. (1994); Marlowe (1997); Varghese et al. (2002); Eaton, Kalichman,
and Cherry (2010); Green (2008a).
9. Robinson (2015a).
 Notes to pages 172–176 291

10. Parsons et al. (2004); Uy et al. (2004); Bimbi (2007); Bimbi and Parsons (2005);
Browne and Minichiello (1996); Coutinho et al. (1988); Joffee and Dockrell (1995);
Connell (2002).
11. Reisner et al. (2008).
12. For example, AIDS\Drug Assistance Programs (ADAP) cost more than $1.2 billion
annually. While ADAP programs only cover those within a range of the federal
poverty level (from 200 to 400 percent, depending on the state of residence), nearly
three-quarters (72 percent) of those in ADAP programs are uninsured and not
eligible for Medicare or Medicaid. It is important to emphasize that the implica-
tions extend beyond HIV. For example, gay men are more likely to have HPV
infections, which are spread by skin-to-skin contact, and rates of anal cancer are
higher for gay men as a result (Epstein 2010). Furthermore, recent research has
linked HPV to oral cancers, which implies that STIs among gay men could be
linked to other health conditions (Spinelli 2011). Up to 60 percent of oral and
pharynx cancers are linked to HPV, and those with more than six oral sex partners
face an eight-fold increase in their risk of oral cancer due to HPV exposure.
13. Lakdawalla, Sood, and Goldman (2006), Kremer (1996). Some have argued that gay
men have adopted HIV/AIDS optimism, where the negative health implications of
HIV have decreased to an extent that they now routinely partake in unprotected sex
(Klausner, Kim, and Kent [2002]; CDC [2010a]; Van de Ven et al. [2002]; Stolte et al.
[2004]; Adam et al. [2005]). Others have argued that as the risks of HIV infection
declined with new treatments, the cost of unprotected sex declined – those who are
HIV positive are better able to partake in sexual activity (and due to the new
treatments are less likely to transmit the disease with low viral loads), but those
who are HIV negative may no longer fear infection (Van de Ven et al. [2002]; Stolte
et al. [2004]). Recent advances in the use of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has
been correlated with decreased likelihood of HIV transmission but increased inci-
dence of other STIs. One factor related to this trend is the decline in condom usage
(Volk et al. 2015).
14. Shoptaw et al. (2005); Colfax and Shoptaw (2005); Mattison et al. (2001);
Volk et al. (2015).
15. CDC (2010a).
16. Shernoff (2006); Shilts (1987).
17. Rosen (1986).
18. Rao et al. (2003); Gertler, Shah, and Bertozzi (2005); Robinson and Yeh (2011); De
la Torre et al. (2010).
19. Logan (2010); Grov et al. (2013).
20. Humphreys (1970); Frankel (2007); MacDonald (2007); Francis and Mialon
(2010); Reidy and Goodreau (2010).
21. Dean (2009); CDC (2010a, 2010b); Adam et al. (2005); Van de Ven et al.
(2002); Stolte et al. (2004); Hall et al. (2008).
22. Gertler, Shah, and Bertozzi (2005); Robinson and Yeh (2011).
23. Shernoff (2006); Horvath, Oakes, and Simon Rosser (2008); Marks et al. (1994).
24. Simon and Gagnon (1973); Nardi (2000); Sadownick (1996).
25. This is not to say that it is new. Similar distinctions were documented in Levine
(1998).
292 Notes to pages 177–189

26. Shernoff (2006); CDC (2010b).

27. Dean (2009); CDC (2010b); Adam et al. (2005).
28. Eaton et al. (2007); Cairns (2006).
29. Volk et al. (2015).
30. Van de Ven et al. (2002); Stolte et al. (2004).
31. Dean (2009); Shernoff (2006); CDC (2010b).
32. Shilts (1987).
33. Benotsch, Kalichman, and Cage (2002); Shernoff (2006).
34. Benotsch, Kalichman, and Cage (2002).
35. Klein, Ellifson, and Sterk (2010); Martin and Knox (1997).
36. Uy et al. (2004); Bimbi and Parsons (2005); Parsons, Bimbi, and Halkitis (2001);
Weitzer (2009).
37. Hart et al. (2003); Moskowitz et al. (2008).
38. Eaton, Kalichman, and Cherry (2010).
39. Laumann et al. (2004); Weinberg and Williams (1974).
40. Connell (1992); Logan (2010).
41. Atkins (1998); Bresen et al. (1996); Herzog et al. (1991).
42. Heterosexual or lesbian – Schwartz and Graf (2010); Black, Sanders, and
Taylor (2007); Carpenter and Gates (2008).
43. Koken, Bimbi, and Parsons (2009).
44. Logan (2010); Fields et al. (2011).
45. Reid-Pharr (2001); McBride (2005); Nagel (2000); Boykin (1996).
46. Nagel (2000); Robinson (2008).
47. Luna (1989); Cochran and Mays (1994); Nagel (2000); Ford et al. (2007); Fields et al.
(2011).
48. Ellington and Schroeder (2004); Robinson (2008); Fields et al. (2011).
49. Logan (2010).
50. Edlund and Korn (2002).
51. Reay (2010); Koken, Bimbi, and Parsons (2009).
52. Logan (2011).
53. Mastro and de Vincenzi (1996).
54. Varghese et al. (2002).
55. Fields et al. (2011).
56. Sifikas et al. (2005).
57. Eaton et al. (2010).
58. Mancilla and Troshinsky (2003).
59. Crossley (2004); Shernoff (2006); Dean (2009).
60. Troung et al. (2006); Cairns (2006); Eaton et al. (2007).
61. In the Appendix I adopt a simple model of sex worker-client negotiations to
formally capture these distinctions.
62. Logan (2011, 2010); Logan and Shah (2013).
63. Williams et al. (2003, 2006); Timpson et al. (2007); Escourt et al. (2000).
64. Rao et al. (2003); Gertler et al. (2005); Robinson and Yeh (2011).
65. Varghese et al. (2002).
66. See Figure 1.3 for an example of a client review of escort services. Client
free-form reviews are sexually explicit. For this reason the field is obscured in
Figure 1.3.
 Notes to pages 189–210 293

67. Logistic models were also estimated and gave qualitatively similar results.
X
n
68. The log likelihood function is lnLðβÞ ¼ ðyi lnΦðx 0 i βÞ þ ð1  yi Þlnð1  Φðx 0 i βÞÞÞ.
i¼1
69. For dichotomous indicators, the marginal effect reported is for moving from 0 to 1.
For further details on calculation of marginal effects see Ruud (2000).
70. There are fewer than 25 repeat transactions (multiple transactions involving
the same client and escort) in the data.
71. In all specifications, standard errors are clustered at the state-year level.
72. Results are similar when Body Mass Index (BMI) is used in place of height and
weight. Results are reported in the Appendix.
73. Hart et al. (2003); Moskowitz et al. (2008).
74. The results of the specification are in the Appendix.
75. Sexual behaviors are described from the perspective of the sex worker. For example,
“Topping” means that the escort penetrates the client.
76. Varghese et al. (2002).
77. Rao et al. (2003); Gertler, Shah, and Bertozzi (2005); Robinson and Yeh (2011).
78. These results are in the Appendix.
79. Logan (2010).
80. Sifikas et al. (2005).
81. Green (2008a).

7 CONCLUSION
1. Edlund and Korn (2002).
2. Arunachalam and Shah (2012).
3. Levine (1998).
4. Doherty et al. (2005); Laumann et al. (2004).
5. Shilts (1987).
6. Levine (1998).
7. Phua and Kaufman (2003); Kaufman and Phua (2003); Robinson (2015 in
press).
8. Grosskopf et al. (2014).
9. Lanzieri and Hildebrandt (2011); Tiggerman et al. (2007).
10. Grindr (2013).
11. The method of sampling used the smartphone application and, at various times
of day, opened the application and captured the profiles that were displayed.
The specific metropolitan areas included were Detroit, Los Angeles, Boston,
New York City, Chicago, Las Vegas, Columbus, Washington DC, San Francisco,
Denver, and Dallas. Duplicates were eliminated through successive searches in the
same location via the picture used in the profile. The sampling continued until
5,000 unique profiles were collected.
12. See Robinson (2016) for a recent example, but this study uses a website as
opposed to a smartphone application.
13. Phillips et al. (2014).
14. Beymer et al. (2014). There were no differences in the likelihood of HIV or
syphilis infections between men who used smartphone applications and those
294 Notes to pages 210–245

who did not. Lehmiller and Loerger (2014) find that adjusting for time of
sexual activity (to control for age differences among users and non-users),
smartphone app users have more sexual partners.
15. Phillips et al. (2014).
16. The data collection method was similar to that of the Grindr. At the time of Grindr
data collection, the same city Craigslist profiles were searched and recorded. Only
the first page of advertisements was recorded for each city for each day in order to
minimize the appearance of ads that would be re-posts of older advertisements.
17. Mowlabocus (2010).
18. In noting mentions of masculinity, “masc4masc” is taken as supply and demand for
masculinity.
19. See Robinson (2016) for theoretical framework for how the gay body is disciplined
in cyberspace.
20. See Wilson et al. (2009) and Paul et al. (2008) for more on racial-sexual stereotypes
among men using Internet and smartphone applications to find partners. It could
be the case that the racial preferences among non-Whites, and even the Whites on
Grindr, are driven partially by selection. Given that Grindr is Whiter than the
general population, non-White men using the smartphone application may be
doing so due to their racial preferences and White men due to the likelihood of
finding White partners through the application. Put another way, it is not possible
to extend the racial preferences beyond what is reported to a great extent, since the
preferences seen could be endogenous to the racial composition.
21. Perhaps due to the strength of the relationship for Blacks, the mentions of Asian
and Hispanics in the Craigslist advertisements were far less frequent.
22. One interesting aspect of the development of “BBC” as an acronym is the fact that
“cock” is rarely used as a euphemism for penis in African American vernacular or
literature. This dramatically increases the likelihood that “BBC” is used primarily
for interracial sexual behaviors, as the terminology itself is not organic to African
American people.

APPENDIX 1 DATA FOR THE ANALYSIS OF MALE SEX WORK

1. Kaya (2009) shows that the degree of substitutability will depend on the agent’s
desire for a smooth payoff stream. There is a test for substitution in the section on
beauty.
2. I stress here that the costs of signaling may be both material and psychic. For
example, if escorts have negative attitudes towards gays or would be subjecting
themselves to negative outcomes if the public knew they participated in gay sex, it
would be more costly (psychically) for them to signal to clients.
3. Steele and Kennedy (2006).
4. Since I deal only with men who are escorts, and are not concerned with selection into
male escort work, I normalize the standard reservation wage to zero.
5. Bonacich (1991); Faust (1997).
6. Bonacich (1972, 1991).
 References

Adam, B.D., W. Husbands, J. Murray, and J. Maxwell (2005) “AIDS Optimism,

Condom Fatigue, or Self-Esteem? Explaining Unsafe Sex among Gay and Bisexual
Men.” Journal of Sex Research 42 (3): 238–248.
Aggleton, P., ed. (1999) Men Who Sell Sex: International Perspectives on Male
Prostitution and HIV/AIDS. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Akerlof, G.A. (1970) “The Market for Lemons: Quality Uncertainty and the Market
Mechanism.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 84(3): 488–500.
Allen, D.M. (1980) “Young Male Prostitutes: A Psychosocial Study.” Archives of Sexual
Behavior 9: 399–426.
Almeling, R. (2007) “Selling Genes, Selling Gender: Egg Agencies, Sperm Banks, and
the Medical Market in Genetic Material.” American Sociological Review 72: 319–340.
Alvarez, E. (2008) Muscle Boys: Gay Gym Culture. New York: Routledge.
Anderson, E. (2002) “Openly Gay Athletes: Contesting Hegemonic Masculinity in
a Homophobic Environment.” Gender and Society 16: 860–877.
Arunachalam, R., and M. Shah (2008) “Prostitutes and Brides?” American Economic
Review Papers and Proceedings 98: 516–522.
Arunachalam, R., and M. Shah (2012) “The Prostitutes Allure: The Return to Beauty
in Commercial Sex Work.” The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy 12:
Article 60.
Arunachalam, R., and M. Shah (2013) “Compensated for Life: Sex Work and Disease
Risk.” Journal of Human Resources 48: 345–369.
Atkins, D., ed. (1998) Looking Queer: Body Image and Identity in Lesbian, Gay, and
Transgender Communities. New York: Routledge.
Bajari, P., and C.L. Benkard (2005) “Demand Estimation with Heterogeneous Consumers
and Unobserved Product Characteristics: A Hedonic Approach.” Journal of Political
Economy 113: 1239–1276.
Bajari, P., and A. Hortacsu (2004) “Economic Insights from Internet Auctions.” Journal
of Economic Literature 42(2): 457–486.
Baker, P. (2003) “No Effeminates, Please: A Corpus-Based Analysis of Masculinity via
Personal Adverts in Gay News / Times 1973–2000.” Sociological Review Monograph
2003: 243–260.
Bakos, Y. (2001) “The Emerging Landscape for Retail E-Commerce.” Journal of
Economic Perspectives 15(1): 69–80.

295
296 References

Baldwin, J. (1985) The Price of the Ticket: Collected Nonfiction 1948–1985. New York:
St. Martin’s.
Bartik, T.J. (1987) “The Estimation of Demand Parameters in Hedonic Price Models.”
Journal of Political Economy 95: 81–88.
Benotsch, E.G., S. Kalichman, and M. Cage (2002) “Men Who Have Met Sex Partners
via the Internet: Prevalence, Predictors, and Implications for HIV Prevention.”
Archives of Sexual Behavior 31:177–183.
Berg, N., and D. Lien (2002) “Measuring the Effect of Sexual Orientation on Income:
Evidence of Discrimination?” Contemporary Economic Policy 20: 394–414.
Berg, N., and D. Lien (2006) “Same-Sex Sexual Behavior: US Frequency Estimates from
Survey Data with Simultaneous Misreporting and Non-Response.” Applied Economics
38: 759–769.
Bernstein, E. (2005) “Desire, Demand, and the Commerce of Sex,” in E. Bernstein and
L. Schaffner, eds., Regulating Sex: The Politics of Intimacy and Identity. New York:
Routledge, pp. 101–125.
Bernstein, E. (2007) Temporarily Yours: Sexual Commerce in Post-Industrial Culture.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Beymer, M.R., R.E. Weiss, R.K. Bolan, E.T. Rudy, L.B. Bourque, J.P. Rodriguez, and D.E.
Morisky (2014) “Sex on Demand: Geosocial Networking Phone Apps and Risk of
Sexually Transmitted Infections among a Cross-Sectional Sample of Men Who Have
Sex with Men in Los Angeles County.” Sexually Transmitted Infections 90: 567–572.
Bimbi, D.S. (2007) “Male Prostitution: Pathology, Paradigms and Progress in
Research.” Journal of Homosexuality 53: 7–35.
Bimbi, D.S., and J. T. Parsons (2005) “Barebacking among Internet Based Male Sex
Workers.” Journal of Gay and Lesbian Psychotherapy 9: 89–110.
Bird, S.R. (1996) “Welcome to the Men’s Club: Homosociality and the Maintenance of
Hegemonic Masculinity.” Gender and Society 10: 120–132.
Black, D., G. Gates, S. Sanders, and L. Taylor (2000) “Demographics of the Gay and
Lesbian Population in the United States: Evidence from Available Systematic
Sources.” Demography 37: 139–154.
Black, D., G. Gates, S. Sanders, and L. Taylor (2002) “Why Do Gay Men Live in San
Francisco?” Journal of Urban Economics 51: 54–76.
Black, D., S. Sanders, and L. Taylor (2007) “The Economics of Lesbian and Gay
Families.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 21: 53–70.
Blumer, H. (1954) “What Is Wrong with Social Theory?” American Sociological Review
19: 3–10.
Bonacich, P. (1972) “Factoring and Weighting Approaches to Clique Identification.”
Journal of Mathematical Sociology 2: 113–120.
Bonacich, P. (1991) “Simultaneous Group and Individual Centralities.” Social Networks
13(2): 155–168.
Borgatti, S.P., and M.G. Everett (1997) “Network Analysis of 2-Mode Data.” Social
Networks 19(3): 243–269.
Boswell, J. (2005) Christianity, Homosexuality, and Social Tolerance. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1980) The Logic of Practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
 References 297

Boykin, K. (1996) One More River to Cross: Black and Gay in America New York:
Anchor/Doubleday.
Boyer, D. (1989) “Male Prostitution and Homosexual Identity.” Journal of Homosexuality
17: 151–184.
Bresen, S.E., H.A. Hayden, D.E. Wilfley, and C.M. Grilo (1996). “The Influence of Sexual
Orientation on Body Dissatisfaction in Adult Men and Women.” International Journal
of Eating Disorders 20: 135–141.
Brown, J.R., and A. Goolsbee (2002) “Does the Internet Make Markets More Competitive?
Evidence from the Life Insurance Industry.” Journal of Political Economy 110(3):
481–507.
Brown, J., and J. Morgan (2006) “Reputation in Online Auctions: The Market for
Trust.” California Management Review 49(1): 61–81.
Brown, J.N., and H.S. Rosen (1982) “On the Estimation of Structural Hedonic Price
Models.” Econometrica 50: 765–768.
Browne, J., and V. Minichiello (1996) “Research Directions in Male Sex Work.” Journal
of Homosexuality 31: 29–56.
Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge.
Butler, J. (1993) Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex.” New York:
Routledge.
Butler, J. (2004) “Undiagnosing Gender,” pages 75–101 in Undoing Gender. New York:
Routledge.
Cairns, G. (2006) “New Direction in HIV Prevention: Serosorting and Universal
Testing.” IAPAC Monthly 12: 42–45.
Calhoun, T.C., and G. Weaver (1996) “Rational Decision-Making among Male Street
Prostitutes.” Deviant Behavior 17: 209–227.
Cameron, S., Alan Collins, and Neill Thew (1999) “Prostitution Services: An
Exploratory Empirical Analysis” Applied Economics 31: 1523–1529.
Cameron, S., A. Collins, S. Drinkwater, F. Hickson, D. Reid, J. Roberts, M. Stephens,
and P. Weatherburn (2009) “Surveys and Data Sources on Gay Men’s Lifestyles and
Socio-Sexual Behavior: Some Key Concerns and Issues.” Sexuality and Culture 13:
135–151.
Cantu, L. (2002) “A Place Called Home: A Queer Political Economy,” in C. Williams
and S. Stein, eds., Sexuality and Gender. New York: Blackwell.
Carpenter, C. (2003) “Sexual Orientation and Body Weight: Evidence from Multiple
Surveys.” Gender Issues 21: 60–74.
Carpenter, C. (2004) “New Evidence on Gay and Lesbian Household Incomes.”
Contemporary Economic Policy 22: 78–94.
Carpenter, C., and G. Gates (2008) “Gay and Lesbian Partnership: Evidence from
California.” Demography 45: 573–590.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2010a) “HIV/AIDS and Men Who
Have Sex with Men.” Retrieved April 15, 2011 (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/
index.htm).
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2010b) “Prevention Challenges.”
Retrieved on April 15, 2011 (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/challenges\_part
ner.htm).
Chang, H.H., and Y. Weng (2012) “What Is More Important for Prostitute Price?
Physical Appearance or Risky Sex Behavior?” Economics Letters 117: 480–483.
298 References

Chauncey, G. (1994) Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture, and the Making of the Gay
Male World 1890–1940. New York: Basic Books.
Chisholm, D.C., and G. Norman (2012) “Spatial Competition and Market Share:
An Application to Motion Pictures.” Journal of Cultural Economics 36(3): 207–225.
Cho, I.-K., and D.M. Kreps (1987) “Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria.” Quarterly
Journal of Economics 102(2): 179–221.
Clarkson, J. (2006) “‘Everyday Joe’ versus ‘Pissy, Bitchy, Queens’: Gay Masculinity on
StraightActing.com.” Journal of Men’s Studies 14: 191–208.
Cochran, S.D., and V.M. Mays (1994) “Depressive distress among homosexually active
African American men and women.” Am. J. Psychiatry. 151: 524–529.
Cohan, D.L., J. Breyer, C. Cobaugh, C. Cloniger, A. Herlyn, A. Lutnick, and D. Wilson.
(2004) “Social Context and the Health of Sex Workers in San Francisco.” Paper
presented at the 2004 International Conference on AIDS.
Colfax, G., and S. Shoptaw (2005) “The Methamphetamine Epidemic: Implications for
HIV Prevention and Treatment.” Current HIV/AIDS Reports 2(4): 194–199.
Collins, A. (2004) “Sexual Dissidence, Enterprise, and Assimilation: Bedfellows in
Urban Regeneration.” Urban Studies 41: 1789–1806.
Collins, P.H. (1999) Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics
of Empowerment. New York: HarperCollins.
Collins, P.H. (2000) “Gender, Black Feminism, and Black Political Economy.” Annals of
the American Academy of Political and Social Science 568: 41–53.
Collins, P.H. (2005) Black Sexual Politics: African Americans, Gender, and the New
Racism. New York: Routledge.
Connell, J.A. (2002) “Male Sex Work: Occupational Health and Safety.” Paper pre-
sented at the 2002 International Conference on AIDS.
Connell, R.W. (1987) Gender and Power: Society, the Person, and Sexual Politics.
Sydney, Australia: Allen and Unwin.
Connell, R.W. (1992) “A Very Straight Gay: Masculinity, Homosexual Experience, and
the Dynamics of Gender.” American Sociological Review 57: 737–751.
Connell, R.W. (1995) Masculinities. Sydney, Australia: Allen and Unwin.
Connell, R.W., and J.W. Messerschmidt (2005) “Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking
the Concept.” Gender and Society 19: 829–859.
Court, A.T. (1939) “Hedonic Price Indexes with Automotive Examples,” in General
Motors Corporation, The Dynamics of Automobile Demand. New York, pp. 99–119.
Coutinho, R., R. van Andel, and T. Rijsdijk (1988) “Role of Male Prostitutes in Spread of
Sexually Transmitted Diseases and Human Immunodeficiency Virus.” Genitourinary
Medicine 64: 207–208.
Crossley, M.L. (2004) “Making Sense of ‘Barebacking’: Gay Men’s Narratives, Unsafe
Sex, and the ‘Resistance Habitus.’” British Journal of Social Psychology 43: 225–244.
Cunningham, S., and T.D. Kendall (2009) “Prostitution 2.0: The Changing Face of Sex
Work.” Journal of Urban Economics 69: 273–287.
Cunningham, S., and T. Kendall (2011) “Behaving Better: How Reputational
Mechanisms Change the Behavior of Prostitutes.” Working paper, Baylor University.
Davis, P. (2006) “Spatial Competition in Retail Markets: Movie Theaters.” The Rand
Journal of Economics, 37(4): 964–982.
Dean, T. (2009) Unlimited Intimacy: Reflections on the Subculture of Barebacking.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 100–113.
 References 299

De Graaf, R., I. Vanwesenbeeck, G. van Zessen, C.J. Straver, and J.H. Visser (1994) “Male
Prostitutes and Safer Sex: Different Settings, Different Risks.” AIDS Care 6: 277–288.
Delaney, S. (1999) Times Square Red/Times Square Blue. New York: New York
University Press.
De la Torre, A., A. Havenner, K. Adams, and J. Ng (2010) “Premium Sex: Factors
Influencing the Negotiated Price of Unprotected Sex by Female Sex Workers in
Mexico.” Journal of Applied Economics 13(1): 67–90.
Della Giusta, M., M. L. Di Tommaso, and S. Strom (2008) “Who’s Watching? The Market
for Prostitution Services.” Journal of Population Economics 22(2): 501–516.
Demetriou, D.Z. (2001) “Connell’s Concept of Hegemonic Masculinity: A Critique.”
Theory and Society 30: 337–361.
D’Emilio, J. (1983). Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual
Minority in the United States 1940–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
D’Emilio, J. (1997) “Capitalism and Gay Identity,” in R. Lancaster and M. diLeonardo,
eds., The Gender/Sexuality Reader. New York: Routledge, pp. 100–113.
Dennis, J. (2008) “Women Are Victims, Men Make Choices: The Invisibility of Men
and Boys in the Global Sex Trade.” Gender Issues 25: 11–25.
Doherty I.A., N.S. Padian, C. Marlow, and S.O. Aral (2005) “Determinants and
Consequences of Sexual Networks as They Affect the Spread of Sexually Transmitted
Infections.” Journal of Infectious Diseases 191: Suppl 1: S42–54.
Donaldson, M. (1993) “What Is Hegemonic Masculinity?” Theory and Society 22:
643–657.
Dorais, M. (2005) Rent Boys: The World of Male Sex Workers. London: McGill-Queens
University Press.
Douglas, M., and B. Isherwood (2002) The World of Goods: Towards an Anthropology of
Consumption. New York: Routledge.
Dover, K.J. (1989) Greek Homosexuality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Dowsett, G.W. (1993) “I’ll Show You Mine, if You’ll Show Me Yours: Gay Men,
Masculinity Research, Men’s Studies, and Sex.” Theory and Society 22: 697–709.
Drummond, M.J.N. (2010) “Younger and Older Gay Men’s Bodies.” Gay and Lesbian
Issues and Psychology Review 6: 31–41.
Duarte, J., S. Siegel, and L. Young (2009) “Trust and Credit.” Working paper, University
of Washington.
Duncan-Jones, R. (1982) The Economy of the Roman Empire. London: Cambridge
University Press.
Dyer, R. (1997) White: Essays on Race and Culture. New York: Routledge.
Eagle, N., M. Macy, and R. Claxton (2010) “Network Diversity and Economic
Development.” Science, 328(5981): 1029–1031.
Eaton, L.A., S.C. Kalichman, D.N. Cain, C. Cherry, H.L. Stearns, C.M. Amaral, J.A.
Flanagan, and H.L. Pope (2007) “Serosorting Sexual Partners and Risk for HIV
among Men Who Have Sex with Men.” American Journal of Preventative Medicine
33: 479–485.
Eaton, L.A., S.C. Kalichman, and C. Cherry (2010) “Sexual Partner Selection and HIV
Risk Reduction among Black and White Men Who Have Sex with Men.” American
Journal of Public Health 100: 503–509.
Edlund, L., J. Engelberg, and C. Parsons (2009) “The Wages of Sin.” Columbia
University Economics Discussion Paper No. 809–16.
300 References

Edlund, L., and E. Korn (2002) “A Theory of Prostitution” Journal of Political Economy
110: 181–214.
Ellington, S. and K. Schroeder (1994) “Race and the Construction of Same-Sex Sexual
Markets in Four Chicago Neighborhoods,” in E. Laumann, J. Gagnon, R. Michaels,
and S. Michaels (eds.) The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the
United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 93–123.
Epple, D. (1987) “Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Estimating Demand and Supply
Functions for Differentiated Products.” Journal of Political Economy 95: 59–80.
Epstein, S. (2006) “The New Attack on Sexuality Research: Morality and the Politics of
Knowledge Production.” Sexuality Research and Social Policy 3: 1–12.
Epstein, S. (2010) “The Great Undiscussable: Anal Cancer, HPV, and Gay Men’s
Health,” in K. Wailoo, J. Livingston, S. Epstein, and R. Aronowitz, eds., Three
Shots at Prevention: The HPV Vaccine and the Politics of Medicine’s Simple
Solutions. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 61–90.
Estcourt, C.S., C. Marks, R. Rohrsheim, A.M. Johnson, B. Donovan, and A. Mindel
(2000) “HIV, Sexually Transmitted Infections, and Risk Behaviours in Male
Commercial Sex Workers in Sydney.” Sexually Transmitted Infections 76: 294–298.
Evans, H. (1979) The Oldest Profession. Newton Abbot, England: David and Charles Press.
Faust, K. (1997) “Centrality in Affiliation Networks.” Social Networks 19: 157–191.
Fausto-Sterling, A. (2000) Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of
Sexuality. New York: Basic Books.
Feliciano, C., B. Robnett, and G. Komaie (2009). Gendered Racial Exclusion among
White Internet Daters.” Social Science Research 38: 39–54.
Fields, E.L., L.M. Bogart, K.C. Smith, D.J. Malebranche, J. Ellen, and M.A. Schuster
(2011) “Young Black Males’ Conflict Between Masculinity and Homosexuality:
Implications for HIV Risk.” Working paper, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of
Public Health.
Fine, L.E., T.D. Logan, and B.J. Soller (2014) “Displaying Your Best Assets: The
Presentation of (Sexual) Self in Male Sex Work.” Working paper, The Ohio State
University.
Fligstein, N., and D. McAdam (2012) A Theory of Fields. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Ford, C.L., Whetten, K.D., Hall, S.A., Kaufman, J.S., and Thrasher, A.D. (2007) Black
Sexuality, Social Construction, and Research Targeting “the Down Low” (“the DL”).
Annals of Epidemiology, 17, 209–216.
Foucault, M. (1978) The History of Sexuality: Volume 1: An Introduction, Pantheon,
New York.
Francis, A., and H. Mialon (2010) “Tolerance and HIV.” Journal of Health Economics
29(2): 250–267.
Frankel, T. (2007) “In Forest Park, the Roots of Sen. Craig’s Misadventure.” St. Louis
Post-Dispatch, August 31, 2007.
Friedman, M. (2003) Strapped for Cash: A History of American Hustler Culture. Los
Angeles: Alyson.
Friedman, M. (2014) “Male Sex Work from Ancient Times to the Near Present,” in
V. Minichiello and J. Scott, eds., Male Sex Work and Society. New York: Harrington
Park Press, pp. 3–33.
 References 301

Gagnon, J.H., and W. Simon (1973) Sexual Conduct: The Social Sources of Human
Sexuality. Chicago: Aldine.
Galarraga, O., S. Sosa-Rubi, C. Infante, P. Gertler, and S. Bertozzi (2011) “Willingness
to Accept Conditional Economic Incentives to Reduce HIV Risks among Men Who
Have Sex with Men in Mexico City.” Working paper, Brown University.
Gertler, P., M. Shah, and S. M. Bertozzi (2005) “Risky Business: The Market for
Unprotected Commercial Sex.” Journal of Political Economy 113: 518–550.
Ginsburg, K. (1967) “The ‘Meat Rack’: A Study of the Male Homosexual Prostitute.”
American Journal of Psychotherapy 21: 170–185.
Giusta, Marina Della, Maria Laura Di Tommaso, and Steinar Strom (2008). “Who’s
Watching? The Market for Prostitution Services.” Journal of Population Economics
22(2): 501–516.
Goffman, E. (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor.
Goffman, E. (1963) Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. New York:
Simon and Schuster.
Goodreau, S.M., N. Carnegie, E. Vittinghoff, and S. Buchbinder (2011) “The HIV
Transmission Network among Men Who Have Sex with Men in the United States:
New Insights from Dynamic Demographic Network Models.” Working paper,
University of Washington.
Goyal, A. (2008) “Information Technology and Rural Market Performance in Central
India.” Working paper, World Bank Research Development Group.
Green, A.I. (2008a) “Erotic Habitus: Toward a Sociology of Desire.” Theory and Society
37: 597–626.
Green, A.I. (2008b) “Health and Sexual Status in an Urban Gay Enclave: An Application
of the Stress Process Model.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 49: 436–451.
Green, A.I. (2008c) “The Social Organization of Desire: The Sexual Fields Approach.”
Sociological Theory 26: 25–50.
Greenwood, M.J. (1997) “Internal Migration in Developed Countries.” Handbook of
Population and Family Economics 1: 647–720.
Greif, A. (1993) “Contract Enforceability and Economic Institutions in Early Trade:
The Maghribi Traders’ Coalition.” American Economic Review 83(3): 525–548.
Griliches, Z. (1961) “Hedonic Price Indexes for Automobiles: An Econometric Analysis
of Quality Change,” in The Price Statistics of the Federal Government. New York:
National Bureau of Economic Research, pp. 173–196.
Grindr (2013) Advertising Kit. Accessed 10/20/2015 http://www.grindr.com/down
load/Grindr-Ad-Kit.pdf
Grosskopf N.A., M.T. LeVasseur, and D.B. Glaser (2014) “Use of the Internet and
Mobile-Based ‘Apps’ for Sex-Seeking among Men Who Have Sex with Men in
New York City.” American Journal of Men’s Health 8: 510–520.
Grov, C., M. Wolf, M.D. Smith, J. Koken, and J. Parsons (2014) “Male Clients of Male
Escorts: Satisfaction, Sexual Behavior, and Demographic Characteristics.” Journal of
Sex Research, 51: 827–837.
Hacker, H.M. (1957) “The New Burdens of Masculinity.” Marriage and Family Living
19: 227–233.
Hakim, C. (2011) Erotic Capital: The Power of Attraction in the Boardroom and the
Bedroom. New York: Basic Books.
302 References

Halkitis, P.N., J.M. Uy, J.T. Parsons, D.S. Bimbi, and J.A. Koken (2004) “Gay and
Bisexual Male Escorts Who Advertise on the Internet: Understanding Reasons for
and Effects of Involvement in Commercial Sex.” International Journal of Men’s
Health 3: 11–26.
Hall, H.I., R. Song, P. Rhodes, J. Prejean, Q. An, L.M. Lee, J. Karon, R. Brookmeyer,
E.H. Kaplan, M.T. McKenna, and R.S. Janssen, HIV Incidence Surveillance Group.
(2008) “Estimation of HIV Incidence in the United States.” Journal of the American
Medical Association 300: 520–529.
Halvorsen, R., and R. Palmquist (1980) “The Interpretation of Dummy Variables in
Semilogarithmic Equations.” American Economic Review 70: 474–475.
Han, C. (2006a) “Being an Oriental, I Could Never Be Completely a Man: Gay Asian
Men and the Intersection of Race, Gender, Sexuality, and Class.” Race, Gender and
Class 3/4: 82–97.
Han, C. (2006b) “Geisha of a Different Kind: Gay Asian Men and the Gendering of
Sexual Identity.” Sexuality and Culture 10: 3–28.
Harcourt, C., and B. Donovan (2005) “The Many Faces of Sex Work.” Sexually
Transmitted Infections 81(3): 201–206.
Harris, J.R., and M.P. Todaro (1970) “Migration, Unemployment, and Development:
A Two-Sector Analysis.” American Economic Review 60(1): 126–142.
Hart, J. (1998) Gay Sex: A Manual for Men Who Love Men, 2nd ed. New York: Alyson.
Hart, O. (1995) Firms, Contracts and Financial Structure. London: Oxford.
Hart, T.A., R.J. Wolitski, D.W. Purcell, C. Greene, and P. Halkitis (2003) “Sexual
Behavior among HIV-positive Men Who Have Sex with Men: What’s in a Label?”
Journal of Sex Research 40: 179–188.
Hennen, P. (2005) “Bear Bodies, Bear Masculinity: Recuperation, Resistance, or Retreat?”
Gender and Society 19: 25–43.
Herzog, D.B., K.L. Newman, and M. Warshaw (1991) “Body Image Satisfaction in
Homosexual and Heterosexual Males.” International Journal of Eating Disorders 11:
356–396.
Hewitt, C. (1995) “The Socioeconomic Position of Gay Men: A Review of the
Evidence.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology 54: 461–479.
Hoang, K.K. (2010) “Economies of Emotion, Fantasy, and Desire: Emotional Labor in
Ho Chi Minh City’s Sex Industry.” Sexualities 13: 255–272.
Hoffman, M. (1972) “The Male Prostitute.” Sexual Behavior 2: 16–21.
Hooker, E. (1956) “A Preliminary Analysis of Group Behavior of Homosexuals.”
Journal of Psychology 42: 217–223.
Hooker, E. (1957) “The Adjustment of the Male Overt Homosexual,” Journal of
Protective Techniques 21: 18–31.
Horvath, K.J., J.M. Oakes, and B.R. Simon Rosser (2008) “ Sexual Negotiation and HIV
Serodisclosure among Men Who Have Sex with Men with Their Online and Offline
Partners.” Journal of Urban Health 85: 744–758.
Hotelling, H. (1929) “Stability in Competition.” The Economic Journal, 39: 41–57.
Houde, J.F. (2012) “Spatial Differentiation and Vertical Mergers in Retail Markets for
Gasoline.” American Economic Review 102(5): 2147–2182.
Hsieh, C.S., J. Kovarik, and T. Logan (2014) “How Central Are Clients in Sexual
Networks Created by Commercial Sex?” Scientific Reports 7: 7540.
 References 303

Hsieh, C.S., and T.D. Logan (2014) “Men on the Move: The Traveling Patterns of Male
Sex Workers in the US.” Working paper, The Ohio State University.
Humphreys, L. (1970) Tearoom Trade: Impersonal Sex in Public Places. Hawthorne,
NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Humphreys, L. (1971) “New Styles of Homosexual Manliness.” Transaction 8: 38.
Itiel, J. (1998) A Consumer’s Guide to Male Hustlers. New York: Harrington Park Press.
Jensen, R. (2007) “The Digital Provide: Information (Technology), Market Performance
and Welfare in the South Indian Fisheries Sector.” Quarterly Journal of Economics
122(3): 879–924.
Jepsen, L., and C. Jepsen (2002) “An Empirical Analysis of the Matching Patterns of
Same-Sex and Opposite-Sex Couples.” Demography 39: 435–454.
Jin, G.Z., and A. Kato (2006) “Price, Quality, and Reputation: Evidence from an Online
Field Experiment.” RAND Journal of Economics 37(4): 983–1005.
Joffee, H., and J.E. Dockrell (1995) “Safer Sex: Lessons from the Male Sex Industry.”
Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 5: 333–346.
Jovanovic, B. (1982) “Truthful Disclosure of Information.” Bell Journal of Economics
13(1): 36–44.
Kane, G. (2009) “Unmasking the Gay Male Body Ideal: A Critical Analysis of the
Dominant Research of Gay Men’s Body Issues.” Gay and Lesbian Issues and
Psychology Review 5: 20–33.
Katz, N. (1976). Gay American History. New York: Thomas Crowell Company.
Katz, N. (1983). Gay/Lesbian Almanac. New York: Harper & Row.
Kaufman, G., and V.C. Phua (2003) “Is Ageism Alive in Date Selection among Men?
Age Requests among Gay and Straight Men in Internet Personal Ads.” The Journal of
Men’s Studies 11: 225–235.
Kaya, A. (2009) “Repeated Signaling Games.” Games and Economic Behavior 66(2):
841–854.
Kaye, K. (2001) “Male Prostitution in the Twentieth Century: Pseudohomosexuals,
Hoodlums, Homosexuals, and Exploited Teens.” Journal of Homosexuality 46(1/2):
1–77.
Klausner, J.D., A. Kim, and C. Kent (2002) “Are HIV Drug Advertisements Contributing
to Increases in Risk Behavior among Men in San Francisco, 2001?” AIDS 16(17):
2349–2350.
Klein, H., K.W. Elifson, and C.E. Sterk (2010) “Self-Esteem and HIV Risk Practices
among Young Adult ‘Ecstacy’ Users.” Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 42: 447–456.
Koken, J.A., D.S. Bimbi, and J. Parsons (2009) “Male and Female Escorts: A
Comparative Analysis,” in R. Weitzer, ed., Sex for Sale: Prostitution, Pornography,
and the Sex Industry, 2nd. ed. New York: Routledge, pp. 205–232.
Koken, J.A., J.T. Parsons, J. Severino, and D.S. Bimbi (2005) “Exploring Commercial Sex
Encounters in an Urban Community Sample of Gay and Bisexual Men: A Preliminary
Report.” Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 17: 197–213.
Kremer, M. (1996) “Integrating Behavioral Choice into Epidemiological Models of
AIDS.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 111(2): 549–573.
Laband, D.N. (1986) “Advertising as Information: An Empirical Note.” Review of
Economics and Statistics 68(3): 517–521.
Lakdawalla, D., N. Sood, and D. Goldman (2006) “HIV Breakthroughs and Risky
Sexual Behavior.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 121(3): 1063–1102.
304 References

Lambert, B. (2007) “As Prostitutes Turn to Craigslist, Law Takes Notice.” New York
Times, September 5, 2007.
Lanzieri, N., and T. Hildebrandt (2011) “Using Hegemonic Masculinity to Explain Gay
Male Attraction to Muscular and Athletic Men.” Journal of Homosexuality 58: 275–293.
Laumann, E.O., S. Ellington, J. Mahay, A. Paik, and Y. Youm, eds. (2004) The Sexual
Organization of the City. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lee, L.F. (2007) Identification and Estimation of Econometric Models with Group
Interactions, Contextual Factors and Fixed Effects. Journal of Econometrics 140(2):
333–374.
Lehmiller, J.J., and M. Ioerger (2014) “Social Networking Smartphone Applications and
Sexual Health Outcomes among Men Who Have Sex with Men.” PLoS One 9(1):
e86603.
Levine, M.P. (1998) Gay Macho: The Life and Death of the Homosexual Clone.
New York: New York University Press.
Levitt, S., and S. Venkatesh (2007) “An Empirical Analysis of Street-Level Prostitution.”
Working paper, University of Chicago.
Lewis, G. (2009) “Asymmetric Information, Adverse Selection and Online Disclosure:
The Case of eBay Motors.” Working paper, Harvard University.
Lillard, L.A. (1998) “The Market for Sex: Street Prostitution in Los Angeles.” Paper
presented at the 1999 Population Association of America Annual Meetings.
Loftus, J. (2001) “America’s Liberalization in Attitudes toward Homosexuality.”
American Sociological Review 66: 762–782.
Logan, T.D. (2010) “Personal Characteristics, Sexual Behaviors, and Male Sex Work:
A Quantitative Approach.” American Sociological Review 75(5): 679–704.
Logan, T.D. (2011) “Negotiating Intimacy: Gay Men, Safer Sex, and the Sexual Field.”
Working paper, The Ohio State University.
Logan, T.D. (2016) “The Economics of Male Sex Work” in The Oxford Handbook of the
Economics of Prostitution, ed. Scott Cunningham and Manisha Shah. New York:
Oxford University Press, pp. 255–281.
Logan, T.D., and M. Shah (2013) “Face Value: Information and Signaling in an Illegal
Market.” Southern Economic Journal 79: 529–564.
Luckenbill, D.F. (1986) “Deviant Career Mobility: The Case of Male Prostitutes.” Social
Problems 33: 283–296.
Luna, A. (1989) “Gay Racism” in Men’s Lives, ed. M.S. Kimmel and M.A. Messner.
New York: Macmillan.
MacDonald, L. (2007) “America’s Toe-Tapping Menace.” New York Times, September 2,
2007.
MacNeil, S., and E.S. Byers (2005) “Dyadic Assessment of Sexual Self-Disclosure and
Sexual Satisfaction in Heterosexual Dating Couples.” Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships 22: 169–181.
Mancilla, M. and L. Troshinsky (2003) Love in the Time of HIV. New York: Guilford
Press.
Mariolis, P. (1975) “Interlocking Directorates and Control of Corporations-Theory of
Bank Control.” Social Science Quarterly 56(3): 425–439.
Marks, G., M.S. Ruiz, J.L. Richardson, D. Reed, H.R. Mason, M. Sotelo, and P.A. Turner
(1994) “Anal Intercourse and Disclosure of HIV Infection among Seropositive Gay
and Bisexual Men.” Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome 7: 866–869.
 References 305

Marlowe, J. (1997) “It’s Different for Boys,” in J. Nagle, ed., Whores and Other
Feminists. New York: Routledge, pp. 141–144.
Martin, J.I., and J. Knox (1997) “Self-Esteem Instability and Its Implications for HIV
Prevention among Gay Men.” Health Social Work 22: 264–273.
Martin, J.L. (2003) “What Is Field Theory?” American Journal of Sociology 109: 1–49.
Martin, J.L., and M. George (2006) “Theories of Sexual Stratification: Toward an
Analytics of the Sexual Field and a Theory of Sexual Capital.” Sociological Theory
24: 107–132.
Martin, K.A. (1998) “Becoming a Gendered Body: Practices of Preschools.” American
Sociological Review 63:494–511.
Martin, T. (1996) Ancient Greece. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Mastro, T., and I. de Vincenzi (1996) “Probabilities of Sexual HIV-1 Transmission.”
AIDS 10 (Supplement A): S75–S82.
Mattison, A., M. Ross, T. Wolfson, D. Franklin, and HNRC Group (2001) “Circuit Party
Attendance, Club Drug Use, and Unsafe Sex in Gay Men.” Journal of Substance
Abuse 13 (1–2): 119–126.
McBride, D. (2005) Why I Hate Abercrombie and Fitch: Essays on Race and Sexuality.
New York: New York University Press.
McNamara, R. (1994) The Times Square Hustler: Male Prostitution in New York City.
Westwood, CT: Praeger.
Milgrom, P., and J. Roberts (1986) “Price and Advertising Signals of Product Quality.”
Journal of Political Economy 94(4): 796–821.
Mimiaga, M.J., S.L. Reisner, J.P. Tinsley, K.H. Mayer, and S.A. Safren (2008) “Street
Workers and Internet Escorts: Contextual and Psychosocial Factors Surrounding
HIV Risk Behavior among Men Who Engage in Sex Work with Other Men.” Journal
of Urban Health 86: 54–66.
Minichiello, V., and J. Scott, eds. (2014) Male Sex Work and Society. New York:
Harrington Park Press.
Minichiello, V., J. Scott, and D. Callander (2013) “New Pleasures and Old Dangers:
Reinventing Male Sex Work.” Journal of Sex Research 50: 263–275.
Mintz, P., and M. Schwartz (1985) The Power Structure of American Business. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Moffatt, P.G., and S.A. Peters (2004) “Pricing Personal Services: An Empirical Study of
Earnings in the UK Prostitution Industry.” Scottish Journal of Political Economy
51(5): 675–690.
Moskowitz, D.A., Rieger, G. and M.E. Roloff (2008) “Tops, Bottoms and Versatiles.”
Sexual and Relationship Therapy 23: 191–202.
Mowlabocus, S. (2010) “Look at Me! Images, Validation, and Cultural Currency on
Gaydar,” in C. Pullen and M. Cooper, eds., LGBT Identity and Online Media.
Abingdon, England: Routledge, pp. 201–214.
Murphy, A.K., and S. Venkatesh (2006) “Vice Careers: The Changing Contours of Sex
Work in New York City.” Qualitative Sociology 29 (2): 129–154.
Nagel, J. (2000) “Ethnicity and Sexuality.” Annual Review of Sociology 26: 107–133.
Nardi, P., ed. (2000) Gay Masculinities. London: Sage.
Nero, C.I. (2005) “Why Are the Gay Ghettos White?” in E.P. Johnson and M.G.
Henderson, eds., Black Queer Studies: A Critical Anthology. Durham, NC: Duke
University Press, pp. 228–245.
306 References

Orne, J. (2016) Boystown. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Padilla, M. (2007) Caribbean Pleasure Industry: Tourism, Sexuality, and AIDS in the
Dominican Republic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Parker, M. (2006) “Core Groups and the Transmission of HIV: Learning from Male Sex
Workers.” Journal of Biosocial Science 38: 117–131.
Parsons, J.T., D.S. Bimbi, and P.N. Halkitis (2001) “Sexual Compulsivity among Gay/
Bisexual Male Escorts Who Advertise on the Internet.” Journal of Sexual Addiction
and Compulsivity 8: 113–123.
Parsons, J.T., J.A. Koken, and D.S. Bimbi (2007) “Looking beyond HIV: Eliciting
Individual and Community Needs of Male Internet Escorts.” Journal of
Homosexuality 53: 219–240.
Parsons, J.T., Koken, J.A., and Bimbi, D.S. (2004) “The Use of the Internet by Gay and
Bisexual Male Escorts: Sex Workers as Sex Educators.” AIDS Care 16: 1021–1035.
Parsons, J.T., C. Lelutiu-Weinberger, M. Botsko, and S.A. Golub (2013) “Predictors of
Day-Level Sexual Risk for Young Gay and Bisexual Men.” AIDS Behavior 17:
1465–1477.
Pascoe, C.J. (2007) Dude, You’re a Fag: Masculinity and Sexuality in High School.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Paul, J.P., G. Ayala, and P.R. Johnson (2008) “Internet Sex Ads for MSM and Partner
Selection Criteria: The Potency of Race/Ethnicity Online.” Journal of Sex Research 47:
528–538.
Pettiway, L.E. (1996) Honey, Honey, Miss Thang: Being Black, Gay and on the Streets.
Philadeplphia: Temple University Press.
Phillips, G., M. Magnus, I. Kuo, A. Rawls, J. Peterson, Y. Jia, J. Opoku, and A.E.
Greenberg (2014) “Use of Geosocial Networking (GSN) Mobile Phone
Applications to Find Men for Sex by Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM) in
Washington, DC.” AIDS Behavior 18: 1630–1637.
Phua, V.C., and G. Kaufman (2003) “The Crossroads of Race and Sexuality: Date
Selection among Men in Internet ‘Personal’ Ads.” Journal of Family Issues 24: 981–994.
Pleak, R.R., and H.F.L. Meyer-Bahlburg (1990) “Sexual Behavior and AIDS Knowledge
in Young Male Prostitutes in Manhattan.” Journal of Sex Research, 27(4): 557–587.
Pompeo, J. (2009) “The Hipster Rent Boys of New York.” New York Observer January 27.
Pope, D.G., and J.R. Sydnor (2008) “What’s in a Picture? Evidence of Discrimination
from Prosper.com.” Wharton Operations and Information Management Working
paper No. 2008–7.
Prestage, G. (1994) “Male and Transsexual Prostitution,” pages 174–190 in R. Perkins,
G. Prestage, R. Sharp, and F. Lovejoy eds., Sex Work and Sex Workers in Australia.
Sydney: University of New South Wales Press Ltd.
Prestage, G., L. Mao, F. Jin, A Grulich, J. Kaldor, and S. Kippax (2007) “Sex Work and
Risk Behavior among HIV-Negative Gay Men.” AIDS Care 19: 931–934.
Price-Glynn, K. (2010) Strip Club: Gender, Power, and Sex Work. New York: New York
University Press.
Pruitt, M. (2005) “Online Boys: Male for Male Internet Escorts.” Sociological Focus 38:
189–203.
Rao, V., I. Gupta, M. Lokshin, and S. Jana (2003) “Sex Workers and the Cost of Safe Sex:
The Compensating Differential for Condom Use in Calcutta.” Journal of Development
Economics 71: 585–603.
 References 307

Reay, B. (2010) New York Hustlers: Masculinity and Sex in Modern America. New York:
Manchester University Press.
Reeser, T.W. (2010) Masculinities in Theory. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
Reid-Pharr, R.F. (2001) Black Gay Man: Essays. New York: New York University Press.
Reidy, W.J., and S.M. Goodreau (2010) “The Role of Commercial Sex Venues in the
HIV Epidemic among Men Who Have Sex with Men in King County, WA.”
Epidemiology 21(3): 349–359.
Reisner, S.L., M. J. Mimiaga, K. H. Mayer, J. P. Tinsley, and S. A. Safren (2008) “Tricks
of the Trade: Sexual Health Behaviors, the Context of HIV Risk, and Potential
Prevention Intervention Strategies for Male Sex Workers” Journal of LGBT Health
Research 4: 195–209.
Richards, T.J., R.N. Acharya, and A. Kagan (2008) Spatial Competition and Market
Power in Banking. Journal of Economics and Business, 60, 436–454.
Robins, G. and Alexander, M. (2004) “Small Worlds Among Interlocking Directors:
Network Structure and Distance in Bipartite Graphs” Computational & Mathematical
Organization Theory 10: 69–94.
Robinson, B.A. (2015) “‘Personal Preference’ as the New Racism: Gay Desire and Racial
Cleansing in Cyberspace.” Sociology of Race and Ethnicity 1: 317–330.
Robinson, B.A. (2016) “The Quantifiable-Body Discourse: ‘Height-Weight
Proportionality’ and Gay Men’s Bodies in Cyberspace.” Social Currents 3: 172–185.
Robinson, J., and E. Yeh (2011) “Transactional Sex as a Response to Risk in Western
Kenya.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 3: 35–64.
Robinson, J., and E. Yeh (2012) “Risk-Coping through Sexual Networks: Evidence from
Client Transfers in Kenya.” Journal of Human Resources 47(1): 107–145.
Robinson, R.K. (2007) “Uncovering Covering.” Northwestern University Law Review
101: 1809–1850.
Robinson, R.K. (2008). “Black ‘Tops’ and Asian ‘Bottoms’: The Impact of Race and
Gender on Coupling in Queer Communities.” Working paper, UCLA.
Robnett, B., C. Feliciano, and M. Rafalow (2013) “Racial-Ethnic Exclusion among Gay,
Lesbian and Heterosexual White Online Daters.” Working paper, University of
California, Irvine.
Rosen, S. (1974) “Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure
Competition.” Journal of Political Economy 82: 34–55.
Rosen, S. (1986) “The Theory of Equalizing Differences,” pages 641–692 in O. Ashenfelter
and R. Layard, eds., Handbook of Labor Economics, vol. 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Ruud, P. (2000) An Introduction to Classical Econometric Theory. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Sadownick, D. (1996) Sex between Men: An Intimate History of the Sex Lives of Gay Men
Postwar to Present. New York: HarperCollins.
Salamon, E.D. (1989) “The Homosexual Escort Agency: Deviance Disavowal.” The
British Journal of Sociology 40: 1–21.
Schalow, P.G. (1989) “Male Love in Early Modern Japan: A Literary Depiction of the
‘Youth,’” in M. Duberman, M. Vicinus, and G. Chauncey, Jr., eds., Hidden from
History. New York: New American Library, pp. 118–128.
Schelling, T.C. (1960) The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
Schrock, D., and M. Schwalbe (2009) “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts.” Annual
Review of Sociology 35: 277–295.
308 References

Schwartz, A. (1976) “Migration, Age, and Education.” Journal of Political Economy,

84(4): 701–720.
Schwartz, C. R., and N. Graf (2010) “Can Differences in Partner Availability Explain
Differences in Interracial/Ethnic Matching Between Same- and Different-Sex
Couples?” Center for Demography and Ecology Working Paper No. 2010-07.
Scott, J. (2003) “A Prostitute’s Progress: Male Prostitution in Scientific Discourse.”
Social Semiotics 13: 179–199.
Sedgewick, E.K. (1990) The Epistemology of the Closet. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Shah, M. (2013) “Do Sex Workers Respond to Disease? Evidence from the Male Market
for Sex.” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 103(3): 445–450.
Shernoff, M. (2006) Without Condoms: Unprotected Sex, Gay Men and Barebacking.
New York: Routledge.
Shilts, R. (1987) And the Band Played On: Politics, People, and the AIDS Epidemic.
New York: St. Martins.
Shoptaw, S., C. Reback, J. Peck, A. Yang, E. Rotheram-Fuller, S. Larkins, R. Veniegas,
T. Freese, and C. Hucks-Ortiz (2005) “Behavioral Treatment Approaches for
Methamphetamine Dependence and HIV-Related Sexual Risk Behavior among
Urban Gay and Bisexual Men.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence 17(2): 125–134.
Sifikas, F., C.P. Flynn, L. Metsch, M. LaLota, C. Murrill, B.A. Koblin, T. Bingham,
W. McFarland, S. Behel, A. Lansky, B. Byers, D. MacKellar, A. Drake, and
K. Gallagher (2005) “HIV Prevalence, Unrecognized Infection, and HIV Testing
among Men Who Have Sex with Men – Five US Cities, June 2004 – April 2005.”
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 54: 597–601.
Simmel, G. (1907) “Prostitution,” in D.N. Levine, ed., On Individuality and Social
Forms. Chicago: University of Chicago Press [1971], pp. 121–126.
Simon Rosser, B.R., K.J. Horvath, L.A. Hatfield, J.L. Peterson, S. Jacoby, and S. Stately
(2008) “Predictors of HIV Disclosure to Secondary Partners and Sexual Risk
Behavior among a High-Risk Sample of HIV-Positive MSM.” AIDS Care 20:
925–930.
Sjaastad, L.A. (1962) “The Costs and Returns of Human Migration.” The Journal of
Political Economy 70(5): 80–93.
Smith, M.D., and C. Grov (2011) In the Company of Men: Inside the Lives of Male
Prostitutes. Santa Barbara, CA: Praegar.
Spence, M. (1973) “Job Market Signaling.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 87(3):
355–374.
Spence, M. (2002) “Signaling in Retrospect and the Informational Structure of
Markets.” American Economic Review 92(3): 434–459.
Spinelli, F. (2011) “Oral Sex and Cancer.” The Advocate May 2011: 46.
Steele, B.C., and S. Kennedy (2006) “Hustle and Grow.” The Advocate, April 11, 2006.
Stein, A. (1989) “Three Models of Sexuality: Drives, Identities, and Practices.”
Sociological Theory 7: 1–13.
Stolte, I., N. Dukers, R. Geskus, R. Coutinho, and J. Wit (2004) “Homosexual Men
Change to Risky Sex When Perceiving Less Threat of HIV/AIDS since Availability of
Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy: A Longitudinal Study.” AIDS 18(2): 303–309.
Thompson, W.E., J.L. Harred, and B.E. Burks (2002) “Managing the Stigma of Topless
Dancing: A Decade Later.” Deviant Behavior 24: 551–570.
 References 309

Tiggerman, M., Y. Martins, and A. Kirkbride (2007) “Oh to Be Lean and Muscular: Body
Image Ideals in Gay and Heterosexual Men.” Psychology of Men and Masculinity 8:
15–24.
Timpson, S.C., Ross, M.W., Williams, M.L., and Atkinson, J. (2007) “Characteristics,
Drug Use, and Sex Partners of a Sample of Male Sex Workers.” American Journal of
Drug and Alcohol Abuse 33: 63–69.
Tirole, J. (1999) “Incomplete Contracts: Where Do We Stand?” Econometrica 67(4):
741–781.
Truong, H.M., T. Kellogg, J.D. Klausner, M.H. Katz, J. Dilley, K. Knapper, S. Chen,
R. Prabhu, R.M. Grant, B. Louie, and W. McFarland (2006) “Increases in Sexually
Transmitted Infections and Sexual Risk Behavior without a Concurrent Increase in
HIV Incidence in San Francisco: A Suggestion of Serosorting?” Sexually Transmitted
Infections 82: 461–466.
Tyler, A. (2014) “Advertising Male Sexual Services,” in V. Minichiello and J. Scott, eds.,
Male Sex Work and Society. New York: Harrington Park Press.
U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics (2012) The Transportation Statistics Annual
Report. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
U.S. Census Bureau (2010) Census of Population 2010. Washington, DC: Government
Printing Office.
Uy, J.M., J.T. Parsons, D.S. Bimbi, J.A. Koken, and P.N. Halkitis (2004) “Gay and Bisexual
Male Escorts Who Advertise on the Internet: Understanding Reasons for and Effects
of Involvement in Commercial Sex.” International Journal of Men’s Health 3: 11–26.
Valente, T.W., K. Coronges, C. Lakon, and E. Costenbader (2008) “How Correlated Are
Network Centrality Measures?” Connections, 28 (1): 16–26.
Van de Ven, P., P. Rawstorne, T. Nakamura, J. Crawford, and S. Kippax (2002) “HIV
Treatments Optimism Is Associated with Unprotected Anal Intercourse with
Regular and with Casual Partners and Australian Gay and Homosexually Active
Men.” International Journal of STD and AIDS 13(3): 181–183.
Varangis, E., N. Lanzieri, T. Hildebrandt, and M. Feldman (2012) “Gay Male Attraction
to Muscular Men: Does Dating Context Matter?” Body Image 9: 270–278.
Varghese, B., J.E. Maher, T.A. Peterman, B.M. Branson, and R.W. Steketee (2002)
“Reducing the Risk of Sexual HIV Transmission: Quantifying the Per-Act Risk for
HIV on the Basis of Choice of Partner, Sex Act, and Condom Use.” Sexually
Transmitted Diseases 29: 38–43.
Volk, J.E., J.L. Marcus, T. Phengrasamy, D. Blechinger, D.P. Nguyen, C. Follansbee,
and C.B. Hare (2015) “No New HIV Infections with Increasing Use of HIV
Preexposure Prophylaxis in a Clinical Practice Setting.” Clinical Infectious Diseases
61: 1601–1603.
Ward, J. (2000) “Queer Sexism: Rethinking Gay Men and Masculinity,” in P. Nardi, ed.,
Gay Masculinities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ward, J. (2008) “Dude-Sex: White Masculinities and ‘Authentic’ Heterosexuality
among Dudes Who Have Sex with Dudes.” Sexualities 11: 414–434.
Weeks, J. (1989a) “Inverts, Perverts, and Mary-Annes,” in M. Duberman, M. Vicinus,
and G. Chauncey, Jr., eds., Hidden from History. New York: New American Library,
pp. 195–211.
Weeks, J. (1989b) Sex, Politics, and Society: The Regulation of Sexuality since 1800.
New York: Longman.
310 References

Weinberg, M.S., and C.J. Williams (1974) Male Homosexuals: Their Problems and
Adaptations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Weitzer, R. (2005). “New Directions in Research in Prostitution.” Crime, Law and
Social Change 43: 211–235.
Weitzer, R. (2009) “Sociology of Sex Work.” Annual Review of Sociology 35: 213–234.
West, D.J. (1993) Male Prostitution. New York: Haworth Press.
Whitesel, J. (2014) Fat Gay Men: Girth, Mirth, and the Politics of Stigma. New York:
New York University Press.
Williams, M.L., A.M. Bowen, S.C. Timpson, M.W. Ross, and J.S. Atkinson (2006) “HIV
Prevention and Street-Based Male Sex Workers: An Evaluation of Brief
Interventions.” AIDS Education and Prevention 18: 204–215.
Williams, M.L., S. Timpson, A. Klovdal, A.M. Bowen, M.W. Ross, and K.B. Keel (2003)
“HIV Risk among a Sample of Drug Using Male Sex Workers.” AIDS 17: 1402–1404.
Wilson, P.A., P. Valera, A. Ventuneac, I. Balan, M. Rowe, and A. Carballo-Dieguez
(2009) “Race-Based Sexual Stereotyping and Sexual Partnering among Men Who
Use the Internet to Identify Other Men for Bareback Sex.” Journal of Sex Research 46:
399–413.
Wolitski, R.J., C.A. Rietmeijer, G.M. Goldbaum, and R.M. Wilson (1998) “HIV
Serostatus Disclosure among Gay and Bisexual Men in Four American Cities:
General Patterns and Relation to Sexual Practices.” AIDS Care 10: 599–610.
Wright, K. (2008) Drifting toward Love: Black, Brown, Gay, and Coming of Age on the
Streets of New York. New York: Beacon Press.
Zelizer, V.A. (1994) The Social Meaning of Money. New York: Basic Books.
 Index

adverse selection, in male sex market, 73–74 aggression

advertisements for sex work black masculinity and, 130, 182–184
casual sex market and, 208–212 in gay masculinity, 121–126
data analysis of, 161–163, 227–229 air traffic statistics, travel by male sex workers
dependent variables in, 162–163 and, 90–91
erotic capital in, 154–155 anti-gay organizations, sexual orientation of
face value analysis, 57–61 men in, 80–84
Goffman’s presentation of self theory and, applied econometrics, hedonic regression and,
150–152 287n.67
Grindr profiles compared with, 211 arrest, male sex work and risk of, 171–176
hegemonic masculinity in, 286n.36 Asian sex workers
history of male sex work and, 27–38 erotic capital of, 182–184
informal enforcement of escort market and, on Grindr, 210
49–52 pricing premiums and penalties and, 115,
negotiation for safe sex practices and, 137–139
178–181 probability of safe sex advertising by,
online market for male sex workers, 45–49, 191–195
231–232 safe sex practices and, 174–176
probability of safe sex offers in, 191–195 self-representation by, 157–161, 168–170
racialized self-representation in, 157–159 sexualized racism and, 131–132
safe sex practices in, 174–176, 189, 268–277 asymmetric information, face value of pictures
self-presentation in, 142–148, 150–161, and, 57–61
168–170 authenticity, Goffman’s presentation of self
sexual scripting and, 152–154 theory and, 150–152
signaling in, 53–55 autonomy, for male sex workers, 148–150
traveling of escorts and, 76–80
value of evidence from, 200–201 Bajari, P., 53–55
Advocate Classifieds, 80–84 Baldwin, J., 128–129, 157–159
age of escorts Barboe, Samuel, 22–23
differences with client age, historical trends bardassa (Italian term for male sex work), 22
in, 24–38 barebacking, increase in practice of, 186–187
erotic capital and, 181–182 basic quality, face value of pictures and, 61
Grindr app users, 210 Bay Area Reporter, 28
pricing and, 133–136 BBC (big black cock) acronym
probability of safe sex advertising and, non-commercial sex and, 207–208, 224–226
191–195 racialized self-representation and, 157–159

311
312 Index

BBC (big black cock) acronym (cont.) fetishization of black body parts and,
references in non-commercial market to, 129–131, 157–159
219–221 gay clone culture and, 123–126, 155–157
white gay adoption of, 129–131 headless torsos on Grindr, 214
bear culture, gay masculinity and, 123–126 hegemonic masculinity and, 123
beauty standards non-commercial market discipline of,
absence on Grindr face pictures of, 214–215 207–208, 217–221, 224–226
data consistency for, 238 online sex workers presentations of, 148–150
in face pictures, 64–68 photographic data analysis of
gay masculinity and, 123–126 advertisements, 163–166
behavioral theory, socioeconomic forces in in photography for advertisements, 162–163
male sex work and, 9–15 pricing and, 133–136
Benkard, C. L., 53–55 probability of safe sex advertising and,
Bernstein, E., 152 191–195
Bertozzi, S. M., 190–191, 268–277 race and, 219–221
betweenness selection regressions by, 266
distance of travel and, 99–101 self-presentation of sex workers and,
travel networks for sex workers and, 88–90, 142–148, 159–161, 168–170, 223
92–93 social construction of, 113–115, 139–141, 223
binary perspective valuation of, 198–199, 224
in advertisements for sex work, 162–163 bond-posting, face picture as, 7–9, 52–53,
hegemonic masculinity and, 118–121, 123 152–154, 207
biological interpretations of male sex work, “bottom” sex workers
258–263 advertisements indicating, 162–166
blackmail risk, in male sex work, 48 Asian male stereotypes and, 131–132
black masculinity body politics and, 155–157
historical evolution of, 129–131, 223 branding of, on Grindr smart phone app, 217
non-commercial sex market and, 219–221 client value of, 195–198
racialized self-presentation and, 157–159 erotic capital of, 181–184
black sex workers health risks for, 258–263
erotic capital of, 182–184 negotiation for safe sex practices by, 178–181
gay masculinity and, 129–131 pricing penalties for, 114–115, 136–137,
on Grindr, 210, 219–221, 224 139–141, 200–201
HIV/AIDs prevalence in, 185–186, probability of safe sex advertising by, 191–195
200–201 race and pricing for, 115, 137–139
masculinity and, 128–129, 223 self-representation of body image and,
negotiation for safe sex practices by, 168–170
178–181 “bounded authenticity,” Goffman’s
non-commercial sex and, 207–208, 219–221 presentation of self and, 152
pricing premiums and penalties and, 115, Bourdieu, Pierre, 179–181
137–139 Boy Culture (film), 27
probability of safe sex advertising by, The Boys in the Band, 26–27
191–195 Buoll, Peter, 22–23
race-sexual position intersectionality in “butch clone” gay masculinity, 123–126
advertisements by, 166–168 Butler, Judith, 144, 146–147, 155–157
safe sex practices pricing and, 200–201 buyer-seller relationship, in male sex work,
self-presentation by, 146–148 39–45
body image/body build. See also physical traits
black bodies and, 128–129, 219–221 Caligula, 20–21
body size, 217–219 Carpenter, C., 64–68
as erotic capital, 154–155 Cash4Class Scholarship, 3
 Index 313

casual sex. See also non-commercial sex client reviews

absence of personalizing features in, 125 data for, 229–231
commercial vs. non-commercial sex and, informal enforcement of escort market
204–208 through, 49–52, 68–70, 73–74
gay masculinity and, 224–226 male sex work and, 7, 31–35
non-commercial market for, 208–212 payoff functions in safe sex negotiations,
online male sex work and, 176–178 190–191, 273
catamati, Greek male sex workers as, 20–21 probability of safe sex advertising and,
Cato, 20 191–195
Christianity, history of make sex work and, safe sex negotiations data in, 188–189
20–21 sexual behavior preferences in, 136–137
city characteristics signaling models and, 53–55
air traffic statistics, 90–91 client risks
gay population concentration and, 80–84 health risks of male sex work and, 171–176,
geographic distribution of escorts and, 187
84–86 informal enforcement in male escort market,
independent variables in, 90–91 49–52, 222
measures of centrality and, 88–90, 93–94, online market male sex market, 45–49
244–246 Collins, P. H., 81–82, 287n.56
premiums for face pictures and, 68–70 commercial sex work
price effects of multiple markets and, economics of, 204–208
222–223 quantitative research on, 115–118
top U.S. cities for male sex workers, 93–94 safe sex practices in, 186–187
travel networks for sex workers and, 87–89 commodification of gay desire, 115–118
wage differences for male sex workers in online male sex market, 148–150
and, 87 self-presentation of sex workers and,
class 142–148
in history of male sex work, 19–38 compensating differentials theory
masculinity and, 24–26, 141 risks of male sex work and, 173–174
socioeconomic forces in male sex work and, safe sex practices pricing and, 200–201,
9–15 224–226
client characteristics competitive market assumptions
heterosexual identification and, 80–84 hedonic regression and, 287n.67
racial preferences in non-commercial sex for male sex market, 75–80
market and, 219–221 online market for male sex workers, 45–49
safe sex practices in advertisements and, traveling of escorts and, 76–80
174–176 condomless sex
self-presentation of sex workers and, casual sex market and, 210
142–148, 150–152 client willingness to pay for risky sex and,
client/escort negotiations 185–186
client willingness to pay for risky sex, constrained estimates of safe sex
185–186 negotiations and, 195–198
client willingness to pay for safer sex, increase in, 176–178, 186–187
186–187 premium on, 171–176, 201–203, 224–226
constrained estimates of, 195–198 condom use
model for, 268–277 payoff functions in safe sex negotiations,
payoff functions in safe sex negotiations, 274–275
190–191, 273 premium on, 176, 224–226
safe sex negotiations and, 184–185, Connell, R. W., 118–119, 121, 144, 146–147
195–201, 223 constrained estimates, safe sex negotiations,
sexual scripting and, 152–154 195–198
314 Index

consumer welfare, competition in male sex Demetriou, D. Z., 119–120, 121–126

market and, 75–80 Department of Homeland Security, 41
contract, male sex work as, 39–45 desirability, negotiation for safe sex practices
cost increases, illegal market of male sex work and, 178–181
and, 39–45 deviance, male sex work characterized as,
counter-hegemony 26–31
gay masculinity and, 121, 123–126 digital media, self-presentation by sex workers
masculinity as attraction and, 121–126 on, 142–148
sexualized racism and, 130–131 disallowance of reviews, informal enforcement
Court, A. T., 132–133 through, 53–55, 68–70
craigslist.org disease transmission, travel of sex workers
casual sex market on, 208–212 linked to, 77–78, 90–91
data collection methods for, 294n.16 distance measurements, travel by sex workers
racial-sexual stereotypes on, 219–221 and, 90, 99–101
sexualized racism on, 207–208 dominance
cross-dressing, history of male sex work and, in advertisements for sex work, 162–163
24–38 black masculinity and trope of, 129–131,
cross-sectional analysis, safe sex negotiations 182–184
and limits of, 187–189 pricing linked to, 136–137
cultural values racialized self-representation and narrative
commercial vs. non-commercial sex and, of, 157–159
205–206 safe sex practices in advertisements for,
hegemonic masculinity and, 119 174–176
self-presentation of male sex worker and, self-presentation of sex workers and images
144, 168–170 of, 146–148
sex market and, 111–115 as sexualized act, 121–126
sexual scripting and, 152–154 Donaldson, M., 121
dramaturgical theory, self-presentation in male
Daddy’s Reviews website, 31–35, 188–189, sex work and, 150–152
258–263 Dyer, R., 128–129
data sources for male sex work, 7
advertisement data, 227–229 Eaton, L. A., 186–187
client review data, 229–231 economics
online escort market data, 231–232 commercial vs. non-commercial sex,
safe sex negotiations and, 187–189 204–208
dating websites, casual sex market and, 211 health risks of commercial sex work and,
degree centrality, travel by sex workers and, 171–176
88–90, 92–93, 244–246 history of male sex work and, 24–38
demand side of male escort market, 49–53 location of male sex workers and, 81–82
client willingness to pay for risky sex, of male sex work, 1–15, 39–45, 111–115,
185–186 221–226
client willingness to pay for safer sex, 186–187 microeconomics of safe sex negotiations,
Grindr smartphone app and, 207 184–201
location factors in, 83–84 norms of sexuality and, 9
masculinity demand on Grindr smartphone self-presentation of sex workers and,
app and, 215–217 146–148
safe sex practices in advertisements and, sexual behavior/sexual position and role of,
174–176, 187–189 176–178
travel by sex workers and variation in, sexualized racism and, 131–132
76–80, 86–87 signaling models, 49–52
wage differences linked to, 87 of travel by male escorts, 86–87
 Index 315

effeminate men safe sex negotiations in, 187–189

gay masculinity and attitudes toward, 123–126 social science theories of, 115–118
history of male sex work and, 24–38 socioeconomic aspects of, 111–115
eigen centrality, travel by sex workers and, working conditions in, 148–150
92–93, 244–246 femininity
ejaculation by sex workers, premium pricing disdain of, on Grindr smart phone app,
and, 258–263 216–217, 224
emasculated black gay man, black masculinity early gay culture’s embrace of, 123
and, 287n.56 gay clone culture and, 155–157, 159–161
emotional detachment, gay masculinity linked gay masculinity and rejection of, 123–126
to, 123–126 fetishization, of black masculinity, 129–131,
equilibrium pricing, payoff functions in safe 157–159
sex negotiations, 190–191 field theory. See sexual field theory
erotic capital theory film images of male sex work, 26–31
intersectionality theory and, 182–184 fixed-effects analysis
negotiation for safe sex practices and, constrained estimates of safe sex
178–181 negotiations, 195–198
probability of safe sex advertising and, payoff functions in safe sex negotiations,
191–195 190–191
self-presentation by sex workers and, safe sex negotiations and, 187–189, 201–203
154–155 formal enforcement, market effects of, 73–74
structural aspects of, 181–182 Frank, Barney, 1–2, 48–49
Europe, history of male sex work in, 22 fraud, online market for male sex workers,
exoleti, male sex work history in Greece and, 45–49
20–21 Friedman, M., 24
extensive travel measures, travel by sex workers frontal nudity
linked to, 90 in advertisement photos, 168–170
in dominance advertisements, 159–161
face pictures. See also photography in sex Goffman’s presentation of self theory and,
worker advertisements 150–152
alternative factors in value of, 61–70 race-sexual position intersectionality and,
asymmetric information in, 57–61 166–168
beauty premium and, 64–68 self-presentation by male sex workers and,
body image/body build vs., 148–150 146–148, 163–166
categories of, 55–56
on Grindr smartphone app, 206–207 Gagnon, John H., 152–154
marginal face value, 62–63 gay Clone/Muscle culture
in non-commercial advertisements, historical emergence of, 123–126
212–215, 222 race and, 128–129
premiums by city for, 69–70 self-presentation in male sex work and,
premiums by types of escorts, 70–74 155–157
signaling and, 52–53, 222 Gay Concentration Index (GCI)
true quality in, 63–64 city level statistics, 93–94
value of, 57–70 geographic distribution of male sex workers
FBI crime statistics, trends in sex work based and, 84–86
on, 76 independent variables in travel by sex
female sex work workers and, 90–91
online market for, 45, 76 likelihood estimates of travel and, 94–99
performance persona in, 143 gay liberation
power and gender theories and, 115–118 commercial vs. non-commercial sex and,
premium for condomless sex in, 171–176 205–206
316 Index

gay liberation (cont.) sociocultural aspects of male sex work and,

hegemonic masculinity and, 119 115–118
history of male sex work and, 24–26 Gertler, P., 190–191, 268–277
hypermasculinity and, 123 gigolos, male sexworker as, 26–31
gay masculinity Goffman, Erving, 144, 146–147, 150–161,
Asian men and, 131–132 168–170, 179–181
black hypermasculinity and, 128–129, Greece, history of male sex work in,
157–159, 224–226 19–38
commercial vs. non-commercial gay Green, Adam Isaiah, 146–147, 154–159,
sexuality and, 204–208, 224 179–181, 182–184, 201–203
erotic capital and, 181–182 Griliches, Z., 132–133
genuine vs. posturing behavior and, 123–126 Grindr smartphone app, 205–206
hegemonic masculinity and, 118–121 application profile example for, 210
historical evolution of, 123–126, 129–131 body size revealed on, 217–219
male sex work and, 121–126, 223 casual sex market on, 208–212
non-commercial sex and, 207–208, 215–217 face pictures on, 206–207, 212–215
in online male sex market, 148–150 masculinity demand on, 215–217
pricing and, 135–136 racial-sexual stereotypes on, 294n.20
racial and ethnic critiques of, 127 sexualized racism on, 219, 207–208
social constructions of, 113–115, 139–141, Guckert, James Dale, 1–2
224–226 gym going behavior, Grindr smartphone app
gay population demographics and desirability of, 217–219
HIV/AIDS prevalence and, 171–176
home location of escorts based on, Haggard, Ted, 48
84–86 Hakim, Catherine, 154–155
online male sex work and, 176–178 Han, C., 131–132, 182–184
self-identification in, 81–82 hedonic regression
travel by male sex workers and location of, pricing of male sex work and, 132–133
80–84 safe sex practices pricing and, 200–201
unprotected sex increase in, 186–187 hegemonic masculinity
gay social organization defined, 118–121
contemporary trends in, 224–226 erotic capital and, 155–157
exclusion of black men from, 287n.60 gay clone culture and, 123–126
gender theory heterosexual identification and, 113–115
embodiment in, 155–157 intersectionality in male sex work and,
erotic capital and, 181–182 126–132, 139–141
gay masculinity and, 224–226 male sex work and, 121–126
hegemonic masculinity in, 118–121 pricing and, 133–136
male sex work and limits of, 111–115, racial and ethnic critiques of, 127
139–141 sexual behavior and, 11–12, 114–115,
self-presentation of male sex workers and, 136–137
144, 146–148 sexualized racism and, 131–132, 182–184
sexualized racism and, 130–131 height-weight proportionate trait, Grindr
social constructions of sex work and, 9–11 smartphone app and desirability of,
social science theories of sex work and, 217–219
115–118 heterosexual identification
socioeconomic aspects of female sex work by clientele of male escorts, 80–84
and, 111–115 gay masculinity and, 224–226
geographic factors hegemonic masculinity and, 113–115,
distribution of male sex workers and gay 118–121
population location, 80–84 male sex work and, 121–126
 Index 317

hierarchies hygiene concerns in male sex work, 258–263

erotic capital and, 182–184 hypermasculinity
sexualized racism and, 130–131 black masculinity as, 129–131, 137–139,
hirsuteness 182–184, 223
gay masculinity and, 123–126 gay clone subculture and, 155–157
pricing and, 133–136 gay liberation movement and, 123
Hispanic sex workers racialized self-presentation and, 157–159
on Grindr, 210
pricing premiums and penalties and, 115, identity
137–139 hegemonic masculinity and, 127
probability of safe sex advertising by, self-presentation by sex workers and,
191–195 142–148
self-presentation by, 166–168 sexual and racial stereotypes and
stereotypes about, 131–132 intersection of, 113–115
STI risk in, 185–186 illegal market structure
history of male sex work, 19–38 asymmetric information in, 39–45
HIV/AIDS face value analysis, 57–61
advances in management of, 173 online market for male sex workers, 45–49
among Grindr app users, 210 incalls, online market for male sex workers, 45,
city level statistical comparisons, 93–94 282n.28
condomless sex and evolution of, 176–178 informal enforcement
decline in testing for, 186–187 client reviews as, 188–189
in gay male population, 171–176 in male escort market, 49–52
gay networking during epidemic of, 205–206 signaling mechanisms and, 53–55, 68–70,
prevalence in male sex workers of, 27, 90–91 73–74, 239
safe sex practices pricing and, 200–201 information
travel of sex workers linked to transmission face value of pictures and, 57–61
of, 77–78 pricing and quality of, 70–74, 242
home location of escorts qualitative research on, 237
gay population concentration and, 84–86 reputation and price of male escort services,
likelihood estimates of travel and, 94–99 236
travel by sex workers and, 76–80 robustness of, 240–241
wage potential and, 87 role in illegal market structure, 39–45, 73–74
homosexuality self-presentation of sex workers and,
commercial sex work and, 171–176 145–146
cultural differences in, 115–118 true quality components and, 63–64
history of male sex work and, 21–38 institutionalization of male sex work, history
masculinity as attraction in, 121–126 of, 23–24
public affirmation of, 81–82 intensive travel measures
social constructions of, 113–115 distance of sex worker travel, 99–101
Hooker, E., 80–84, 123 travel by sex workers linked to, 90
Hookies awards, 2 inter-city links, travel networks for sex workers
hook-ups. See casual sex; non-commercial sex and, 88–90, 105–107
“hot clone” gay masculinity, 123–126 intermediaries, absence in male sex work of,
Hotelling location model, geographic 5–6, 76–80, 148–150
distribution of male sex workers and, internet. See online male sex market
83–84 casual sexual encounters and, 205–206
“hotness,” erotic capital as, 154–155 racial-sexual stereotypes in sex market on,
Humpheys, L., 80–84, 117–118 294n.20
hybridity, in hegemonic masculinity, intersectionality theory
118–121, 123 erotic capital and, 182–184
318 Index

intersectionality theory (cont.) history of, 27–38

hegemonic masculinity and, 127–128 informal enforcement in, 49–52, 239
in male sex work, 126–132 likelihood estimates of travel for, 94–99
probability of safe sex advertising and, online market for, 45–49
191–195 roles and behaviors adopted in, 117–118
race and sexual behavior, 115, 132, 137–141 self-presentation by workers in, 142–148
self-presentation of sex workers and, traveling distance measurements, 99–101
145–148 traveling within, 76–80
travel networks for, 88–90, 91–92
Japan, history of make sex work in, 21 male hustler image, history of male sex work
Jin, Ginger Z., 63–64 and, 24–26
maleness, gay masculinity and, 121
kabuki commercial sex (Japan), 21 male sex work
Kane, Graeme, 155–157 economics of, 1–15, 39–45, 111–115,
Kato, Andrew, 63–64 221–226
Kaufman, G., 131–132, 182–184 gay male society and, 221–226
kinship, sexualized racism and hierarchy of, history of, 6–7, 19–38
130–131 homosexuality and history of, 21–38
intersectionality in, 126–132
largeness, gay masculinity and rejection of, market approaches to, 5–6
123–126 masculinity in research on, 121–126
Las Vegas escort business, partial disallowance obscurity of, 1–15
of reviews in, 68–70 risks of, 171–176
law enforcement, male sex work and, 1–2 social science theories of, 115–118
legalization of male sex work, market effects of, socioeconomic forces in, 9–15
73–74 Malin, Tom, 48–49
Levine, M. P., 135, 154, 155, 119, 121, 123–126, Manhattan Digest, 2
128–129, 287n.60 “manhood acts,” hegemonic masculinity
Lewis, Gregory, 63–64 and, 123
The Living End (film), 27 marginal face value, 62–63
location factors in male sex work market structure for male sex work, 1–15,
gay population locations and travel by 27–38
escorts, 80–84 asymmetric information and, 39–45
independent variables in, 90–91 commercial vs. non-commercial sex and,
price effects of multiple markets and, 204–208
222–223 competition in, 75–80
Logan, T. D., 35, 38, 176, 182–184 conceptual and empirical framework, 53–55
lust, hegemonic masculinity and, 123 demand side of, 49–53
face value analysis in, 57–61
male beauty products, hegemonic masculinity gay population size as factor in, 80–84
and, 119–120 health risks and, 171–176
male escort services hedonic regression and, 287–288n.67
characteristics in selected cities, 68–70 information environment and, 73–74
client reviews of, 188–189 online market, 45–49
client willingness to pay for risky sex, safe sex practices and, 200–201
185–186 self-presentation by sex workers and, 142–148
demand side of, 49–53 social acceptability of gay culture and,
disallowance of reviews as enforcement in, 115–118
68–70 social norms and, 9
economics of travel for, 86–87 social value and, 111–115
erotic capital in, 181–182 travel by sex workers and, 76–80
 Index 319

Marks, G., 186–187 muscularity

marriage market, economic analysis of, black masculinity and, 128–129
204–208 in gay clone culture, 155–157
Martin, J. I., 179–181 gay masculinity and, 123–126
“masc4masc” expression, masculinity demand Grindr smartphone app and importance of,
on Grindr smartphone app and, 215–217 207, 217–219
masculinity. See also hegemonic masculinity pricing and, 133–136
economic forces in male sex work and, 9–15, My Hustler (film), 26–27
223 My Own Private Idaho (film), 27
gay clone culture and, 155–157
Grindr smartphone app and importance of, Napoleonic code, history of male sex work and,
207 23–24
history of male sex work and, 24–38 national scope of male sex market, geographic
male sex work and, 121–126 distribution of workers in, 84–86
in non-commercial sex, 207–208, 215–217 Nero, C. I., 129, 287n.56
in online male sex market, 148–150 networking
racial and ethnic differences concerning, casual sex market and, 208–212
127, 128–129, 139–141 city-level measures of, 93–94
self-presentation of male sex worker and commercial vs. non-commercial sex and,
images of, 142–148 205–206
social constructions of, 9–11, 113–115 measures of centrality in, 88–90, 92–93
mass media, history of male sex work imagery sexualized racism and, 182–184
in, 26–31 travel by sex workers and, 77–78, 87–89
McBride, D., 130 niche markets in sex work, 289n.18
measures of centrality “no attitude” designation, probability of safe
distance of travel and, 99–101 sex advertising and, 191–195
escort wages and, 101–105 non-commercial sex market. See also casual sex
likelihood estimates of travel and, 94–99 body size and, 217–219
travel networks for sex workers and, 88–90, casual sex market and, 208–212
92–94, 244–246 discipline of body in, 207–208, 217–221,
media coverage, of male sex work, 1–15 224–226
medieval Europe, homosexuality and male sex economics of, 204–208
work in, 22 face pictures in advertisements for, 212–215,
mentoring relationships, professionalization of 222
sex work and, 20–21 masculinity in, 207–208, 215–217, 224
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) online male sex market as extension of,
Gay Concentration Index correlation with, 148–150
84–86 quantitative research on, 115–118
HIV/AIDS prevalence and, 90–91 race in, 207–208, 219–221, 224
metrosexuality, 119–120 socioeconomic forces in male sex work and,
microeconomics, of safe sex negotiations, 9–15
184–201 non-market sexual behavior, 145
migration, value of, for male sex workers, norms of sexuality
284n.24 desirability of body parts and, 123–126
Mimiaga, Matthew J., 148–150 erotic capital and, 181–182
mobility of male sex workers, in online market, gay masculinity and, 121, 123–126
76–80 hegemonic masculinity and, 119
multiple markets heterosexual identification and,
price effects on sex work and, 222–223 113–115
travel by male sex workers for, 76–80 homosexual complicity in, 121–126
multiple masculinities, construction of, 126 market forces and, 9
320 Index

norms of sexuality (cont.) condom use and, 274–275

negotiation for safe sex practices and, constrained estimates of, 195–198
179–181 escort characteristics and, 276–277
self-presentation of male sex worker and, penalty pricing
142–148, 150–159 for “bottom” sex workers, 114–115,
null hypothesis, travel measures of sex workers 136–137, 139–141
and, 285n.38 for condomless sex, 195–198
sexualized racism and, 115, 137–139
objectification penetrative sex
of black masculinity, 129–131 advertisements offering, 164
intersectionality theory and, 182–184 client value of, 195–198
online male sex market client willingness to pay for risky sex and,
adverse selection in, 73–74 185–186
advertisement data for, 7, 161–163 erotic capital and advertisement of, 181–182
asymmetric information in, 39–45 health risks of, 258–263
casual sexual encounters and, 205–206 in male sex transactions, 36–38
competition in, 75–80 masculinity associated with, 181
data collected from, 55–56, 231–232 negotiation for safe sex practices in
fetishization of black masculinity in, advertisements of, 178–181
129–131, 157–159 probability of safe sex advertising and,
financial incentives for, 148–150 191–195
location and travel as factors in, 80–84 performance persona
for male escort services, 45–49 erotic capital and, 154–155
market forces in, 139–141 Goffman’s presentation of self theory and,
nexus of masculinity, gay sexuality and 150–152
commodification in, 148–150 sexual scripting and, 152–154
probability of safe sex advertising and, sex workers’ development of, 142–148
191–195 personality traits
qualitative research on information in, 237 client valuation of sexual behavior and,
reputation and price information on, 236 198–199
risks of sex work and, 173–174 as erotic capital, 154–155
scheduling preferences in, 76 on Grindr profiles, 211
self-presentation in, 142–148, 159–161 hegemonic masculinity and, 118
socioeconomic perspectives on, 113, photography in sex worker advertisements. See
176–178 also face pictures
traveling of escorts in, 76–80 body type and sexual position in, 163–166
ordinary least squares (OLS) regression client reviews of, 50
advertisement data analysis and, 163 data analysis of, 161–163, 243
face value analysis, 57–61 dependent variables in, 162–163
outcalls, online market for male sex workers, in Grindr profiles, 211
45–49, 282n.28 physical traits displayed in, 146–148
outing threats, in male sex work, 48 premium of face pictures and, 57–61
self-presentation in, 12–13, 148–150, 152,
paederastia relationships, history of male sex 163–166, 264
work and, 19–38 sexual scripts and, 152–154
Parker, Brent, 48–49 Phua, V. C., 131–132, 182–184
patriarchy, hegemonic masculinity and, physical traits. See also thinness; specific traits,
118–121 e.g., muscular physique
payment terms, for male sex work, 39–45 Asian male stereotypes of, 131–132
payoff functions in safe sex negotiations beauty premium and, 64–68
analysis of, 190–191, 273 body size, 217–219
 Index 321

client valuation of sexual behavior and, for condomless sex, 171–176

198–199 face value of pictures and, 57–61, 243
as erotic capital, 154–155 race and, 115
erotic capital and, 181–182 sexual behavior and, 114–115, 136–137
in escort advertisements, 31–35 for “top” workers, 114–115, 136–137,
fetishization of black masculinity and, 139–141, 258–263
129–131, 157–159 presentation of self theory, 150–159
gay clone culture and, 123–126 pricing
on Grindr profiles, 207, 211 alternative factors in face value and, 61–70
hegemonic masculinity and, 119–120, asymmetric information and, 39–45, 222,
121–126 242
photographic data analysis of beauty premium in face pictures, 64–68, 238
advertisements, 162–166 competition in male sex market and, 75–80
pricing and, 133–136, 261 constrained estimates of safe sex practices
probability of safe sex advertising and, and, 195–198
191–195, 270 data limitations concerning, 139–141
selection regressions by, 266 face value of pictures in, 57–61
self-presentation of sex workers and role of, intersectionality of race and sexual behavior
142–148, 168–170, 264 in, 137–139
socioeconomics of, 113–115, 139–141 location of male sex workers linked to, 83–84
travel by male sex workers and role of, for male sex work, 36–38
90–91, 105–107 marginal face value, 62–63
wages and distance in escort travel and, online market for male sex workers, 45–49,
101–105 236
pictures of male escorts payoff functions in safe sex negotiations,
Goffman’s presentation of self theory and, 190–191
150–152 physical traits and, 133–136, 261
self-presentation in, 146–148 qualitative research on, 237, 242
political economy theories, commodification quality components and, 61
of gay desire and, 115–118 quantitative research on, 132–133
Polybius, 20, 28 race and, 115, 263
pooled equilibrium, market structure for male robustness of, 70–74, 240–241
sex work, 53–55 safe sex practices and, 200–201, 277
population demographics selection effects in, 72
geographic distribution of male sex workers sexual behavior and, 262, 136–137
and, 80–84 socioeconomics of, 113–115, 223
socioeconomic forces in male sex work and, of “top” and “bottom” sex work, 114–115
9–15 travel by sex workers linked to, 76–80,
porneia, history of male sex work and, 19–38 86–87, 90, 101–105
pornography, sexualized racism in, 130 “prison gym build,” black body image and,
power 128–129
erotic capital and, 181–182 probit model of safe sex advertisements, 189
hegemonic masculinity and, 118–121, 123 product differentiation, self-presentation of sex
social science theories of sex work and, workers and, 144–145
115–118 promiscuity, erotic capital and norms of,
preexposure prophylaxis 181–182
health risks of male sex work and, 176–178 prostitution
HIV/AIDS transmission and use of, 173 differences in male vs. female work in,
premium pricing 148–150
beauty premiums, 64–68 as exchange, 111–115
city characteristics, 69–70 risks of, 171–176
322 Index

Pruitt, M., 176 sexual behavior/sexual position and, 115,

public health research 132, 137–139, 166–168, 263, 266, 271
on casual sex market, 208–212 sexualized racism and, 129–131
health risks of male sex work and, socioeconomic forces in male sex work and,
176–178 9–15
history of male sex work in, 20–21 stereotypes in sex work of, 113–115
pueri delicate, Greek male sex workers as, “top” sex workers and, 127–128
20–21 unprotected sex increase and, 186–187
purchasing on faith, in online sex market, wages and distance in escort travel and,
73–74 101–105
rear nudity, in advertisement photos, 155–157,
qualitative research 162–170
information and pricing of male escort Reeser, T. W., 119
services, 237 regression analysis
male sex work and limits of, 111–115 likelihood of sex travel and, 94–99, 247–257
negotiation for safe sex practices and, self-presentation in male sex work, 265–266
178–181 relational aspects of sex work, 145–148,
quality components 176–178
beauty as complement to, 64–68 commercial vs. non-commercial sex and,
face value of pictures and, 61 204–208
true quality components, 63–64 Rentboy.com, 1–15, 141
quantitative research Department of Homeland Security, 41
hegemonic masculinity and, 121–126 reputation, measures of
on male sex work, 115–118, 139–141 online male sex market, 236
pricing of male sex work and, 132–133 pricing and, 70–74
queer theory, self-presentation of male sex safe sex advertisements and, 272
worker and, 144, 168–170 risks in male sex work
blackmail risk, 48
race. See also sexualized racism client willingness to pay for risky sex,
in advertisements for sex work, 162–166 185–186
Asian male stereotypes and, 131–132 health risks, 171–176
client willingness to pay for risky sex and, negotiation for safe sex practices in
185–186 advertisements and, 178–181
diversity in male sex work and, 31–35 socioeconomic perspectives on, 176–178
escort characteristics and travel distance violence risks, 171–176
and, 99–101 Robinson, B. A., 131–132, 182–184, 217–219
gay masculinity and, 129–131 role-playing, Goffman’s presentation of self
hegemonic masculinity and, 128–129 theory and, 150–152
hierarchy of, in male sex work, 130–131 Rome Empire, male sex work in, 19–38
negotiation for safe sex practices based on, Rosen, S., 132–133
178–181
in non-commercial sex market, 207–208, Sadownick, D., 123
219–221 safe sex practices
pricing premiums and penalties and, 115, advertisements for sex work and, 174–176,
133–136, 263 189, 268–277
probability of safe sex advertising and, client-escort gamesmanship concerning,
191–195 184–185, 223, 224–226, 268–277
safe sex practices pricing and, 200–201, 271 client willingness to pay for safer sex,
selection regressions by, 267 186–187
self-presentation of sex workers and, erotic capital and negotiation for, 178–181,
146–148, 157–161, 166–170, 265 182–184
 Index 323

intersectionality theory and, 182–184 Sension, Nicholas, 22–23

microeconomics of negotiations for, sensitizing concepts, Goffman’s presentation of
184–201 self theory and, 150–152
payoff functions in transactions involving, serosorting, increase in practice of, 186–187
190–191, 273 service quality, pricing and, 61
pricing and, 200–201, 277 sexual adventurousness, probability of safe sex
probability of advertising for, 191–195 advertising and, 191–195
reputation-based predictors, 272 sexual behavior/sexual position. See also
researchers, 201–203 “bottom” sex workers; “top” sex workers
sexual behavior predictors, 191–195, advertising data analysis including, 162–166
270–271 body politics and, 155–157
sexual field theory and, 184 branding of, on Grindr smart phone app,
sex worker traits and valuation of, 198–199, 217
270 casual sexual encounters and, 205–206
socioeconomic forces in male sex work and, client reviews of, 188–189
9–15 constrained estimates of safe sex
same sex couples, identification in population negotiations, 195–198
studies of, 81–82 health risks linked to, 171–176
sampling techniques, Grindr profile data, hegemonic masculinity and, 11–12, 127–128
293n.11 of heterosexually identified clientele, 80–84
scams by male sex workers, 48 in male sex work, 36–38
scheduling of sex work negotiation for safe sex practices and,
cell phone use for, 283n.2 178–181
online vs. street-based comparisons of, 76 non-market behaviors, 145
screening on smartphone apps, face pictures as payoff functions in safe sex negotiations, 273
tool for, 212–215 pricing and, 262, 136–137
self-identification of homosexuality race intersectionality with, 115, 132,
gay masculinity and, 123–126 137–139, 166–168, 219–221, 263, 266, 271
gay population demographics and, 81–82 safe sex advertising predictors and, 191–195,
negotiation for safe sex practices and, 270–271
178–181 selection regressions by, 267
social science research and, 117–118 self-presentations including, 265
self-presentation in male sex work social constructions of, 113–115, 176–178,
body type and, 265 224–226
descriptive statistics, 264 travel by male sex workers and, 77–78, 90–91
erotic capital in, 154–155 sexual field theory
“gay clone” subculture and, 155–157 commercial vs. non-commercial sex and,
Goffman’s presentation of self theory and, 204–205
150–152 intersectionality in, 182–184
in Grindr profiles, 211 negotiation for safe sex practices and,
nexus of masculinity, gay sexuality and 178–181
commodification in, 148–150 racialized self-presentation and, 157–159
online sex workers presentations, 148–150 research on male sex work using, 11,
overview of, 142–148, 223 115–118
predictions concerning, 159–161 safe sex advertisements and, 184
racialized presentations, 157–159, 265 self-presentation of sex workers and,
sexual positioning and, 265 144–145, 159–161, 168–170
sexual scripting theory and, 152–154 socioeconomic forces in male sex work and,
stigmatization in non-commercial and, 9–15
207–208 sexual gratification, male sex workers’ experi-
theoretical framework for, 150–159, 168–170 ence with, 148–150
324 Index

sexuality Simon, William, 152–154

commercial vs. non-commercial gay smartphone technology
sexuality and, 204–208 casual sexual encounters and, 205–206,
cultural differences in, 115–118 208–212
history of male sex work and, 24–38 online sex market and use of, 283n.1
self-presentation of sex workers and, racial-sexual stereotypes in sex market
146–148 using, 294n.20
socioeconomic forces in male sex work and, social acceptability of gay culture
9–15 hegemonic masculinity and, 119–120
sexualized racism market responses to, 115–118
Asian masculinity and, 131–132 social context of sex work, 9–11
black masculinity and, 129–131 economic gains of sex workers, 111–115
gay masculinity and, 224–226 Gay Rights movement and, 24–26
Hispanic sex workers and, 131–132 hegemonic masculinity and, 118–121
intersectionality theory and, 182–184 market forces and, 221–226
in non-commercial sex market, 207–208, risks of sex work and, 173–174
219–221 self-presentation of sex workers and, 142–148
pricing and, 115, 137–141 sexual behavior and, 176–178
safe sex practices pricing and, 200–201 sexualized racism and, 131–132
self-presentation in male sex work and, social groups, clients of male sex workers from,
157–159 113
sexually transmitted infections (STIs) social learning theory, self-presentation in
among Grindr app users, 210 male sex work and, 152–154
client willingness to pay for risky sex and, social science theories
185–186 of male sex work, 115–118, 139–141
likelihood estimates of travel and, 94–99 safe sex negotiations between client and
male sex work and risk of, 171–176 escort and, 184–185, 201–203
travel by sex workers and prevalence of, Spence, Craig, 48–49
77–78, 90–91, 105–107 Spence, Michael, 53–55
sexual networks, travel by sex workers and, spillover effects in pricing, travel by sex work-
77–78 ers and, 77–78
sexual orientation, biological markers for, spot price
80–84 for male sex work, 31
sexual scripting theory robustness of, 70–74
health risks of sex work and, 176–178 stereotypes
self-presentation in male sex work, 152–154, of Asian males, 131–132
159–161, 168–170 of black masculinity, 129–131
sex worker labor force, male sex workers por- erotic capital and, 182–184
tion of, 5–6 ethnic-sexual stereotypes, 127–128
Shah, M., 31–35, 188–189, 190–191, 268–277 fetishization of black masculinity and,
signaling models 129–131, 157–159
alternative factors in face value and, 61–70 hegemonic masculinity and, 127
conceptual and empirical framework for, non-commercial sex and use of, 219–221
53–55 self-presentation of sex workers and,
identification of, 52–53 146–148, 149–150, 159–161
informal enforcement in male escort market, sexual and racial intersectionality of,
49–52, 239 113–115
lack of informal enforcement and, 68–70 stigma, self-presentation of male sex worker
price robustness and, 70–74, 240–241 and concepts of, 144
simple example of, 233–236 street-based sex work
travel by sex workers linked to, 86–87 market structure for, 76
 Index 325

online sex work compared with, 148–150 self-representation of body image and,
qualitative research on, 112 155–157, 159–161, 168–170
scheduling of, 76 transaction data on male sex work, 27–38
traveling for, 76–80 asymmetric information and, 39–45
submissiveness payoff functions in safe sex negotiations,
in advertisements for sex work, 162–163 190–191
Asian sexualized racism and trope of, safe sex negotiations and, 184–185,
131–132 187–189
branding of, on Grindr smart phone app, transgender sex workers, history of male sex
217 work and, 24–38
erotic capital of, 182–184 travel by male sex workers
pricing linked to, 136–137 city-level networking measures, 93–94
racialized self-representation and, 157–159 distance measurements, 90, 99–101
self-presentation of sex workers and images economics of, 86–87, 105–107
of, 146–148, 159–161 independent variables in, 90–91
sexualized racism and, 130 likelihood estimates of, 94–99
supply of male sex workers location factors in, 80–84
Grindr smartphone app and, 207 market forces and, 75–80, 105–107
location factors in, 83–84 measures of network centrality and, 88–90,
masculinity demand on Grindr smartphone 92–93, 244–246
app and, 215–217 measuring effects of, 90
wage differences linked to, 87 networks for, 87–89
syphilis, male sex workers and prevalence of, pricing and, 76–80, 86–87, 90, 101–105
90–91 regression analysis of, 247–257
value of temporary migration and, 284n.25
taxation on sex work earnings, history of, “twink” bodies, 155–157, 159–161, 163–166
20–21 two-mode travel network, travel by sex work-
television images of male sex work, 26–31 ers and, 87–89
temporary migration, value of, 284n.25
theft by sex workers, 48 United States, history of male sex work in,
thinness 22–23
feminized persona and, 159–161 unprotected sex
in gay clone culture, 155–157 increase in, 176–178, 186–187
gay masculinity and rejection of, 123–126 premium on, 171–176
pricing and, 133–136 unprotected sex work, client willingness to pay
“top” sex workers for risky sex and, 185–186
advertisements indicating, 162–166 urbanization, history of male sex work and,
biological interpretation of, 258–263 24–38
branding of, on Grindr smart phone
app, 217 value, theory of
erotic capital of, 181–182 economic gains of sex workers, 111–115
hegemonic masculinity and, 127–128 face value analysis, 57–61
negotiation for safe sex practices by, hegemonic masculinity and, 121–126
178–181 illegal market and asymmetric information
premiums in pricing of, 114–115, 136–137, and, 39–45
139–141 male sex market and, 223
probability of safe sex advertising by, 191–195 safe sex practices pricing and, 200–201
race and pricing for, 115, 137–139 sexual and racial stereotypes and, 113–115
racialized self-representation and, 157–159 signaling mechanisms and, 53–55
safe sex practices in advertisements for, socioeconomic forces in male sex work and,
174–176 9–15
326 Index

versatile coding non-commercial sex market and preference

advertisements indicating, 162–163 for, 208–212, 219–221
client value of, 195–198 prevalence in casual sex market of, 208–212
probability of safe sex advertising and, pricing premiums and penalties and,
191–195 137–139
self-presentation of sex workers and, 168–170 probability of safe sex advertising by,
Victorian era, history of male sex work in, 22 191–195
Village Voice, 2 safe sex practices pricing and, 200–201
violence, male sex work and risk of, 171–176 sexualized racism and dominance of,
131–132
wage factors, travel by male sex workers and, STI risk in, 185–186
86–87, 101–105, 247–257 “top” sex workers and, 127–128
weight of escorts unprotected sex increase among, 186–187
Grindr smartphone app and importance of, within-gender relations, socioeconomic forces
217–219 in male sex work and, 9–15
pricing and, 133–136 Wolitski, R. J., 186–187
white sex workers women
gay Clone/Muscle culture and, 128–129 black sexuality and, 128–129
negotiation for safe sex practices by, hegemonic masculinity and power over,
178–181 119–120