Bought Sex?

July 20, 2011
Posted by Jay Livingston

Did you buy sex last year?

You probably said no, even if you’re a man. But wait. First look at “The John Next Door” an article currently up at Newsweek (subhead: “The men who buy sex are your neighbors and colleagues”). It features a study by Melissa Farley called “Comparing Sex Buyers With Men Who Don’t Buy Sex”
No one even knows what proportion of the male population does it; estimates range from 16 percent to 80 percent.
Actually, a considerably lower estimate comes from the GSS.
PAIDSEX Had sex for pay last year: If you had other partners, please indicate all categories that apply to them. d. Person you paid or paid you for sex.
Here are the results since the GSS started asking this question..
(Click in the graph for a larger view.)
Not 16-80%, but somewhere around 5%.

Not to get too Clintonian, but it seems to depend on what the meaning of “sex” is. The GSS respondents probably thought that paying for sex meant paying someone to have sex. Farley’s definition was somewhat broader.
Buying sex is so pervasive that Farley’s team had a shockingly difficult time locating men who really don’t do it. The use of pornography, phone sex, lap dances, and other services has become so widespread that the researchers were forced to loosen their definition in order to assemble a 100-person control group.
So if you bought a copy of Playboy, you paid for sex. And if you looked at it twice last month, you are disqualified from the control of “men who don’t buy sex.”
“We had big, big trouble finding nonusers,” Farley says. “We finally had to settle on a definition of non-sex-buyers as men who have not been to a strip club more than two times in the past year, have not purchased a lap dance, have not used pornography more than one time in the last month, and have not purchased phone sex or the services of a sex worker, escort, erotic masseuse, or prostitute.”
I don’t have Farley’s data. If the control group of nonusers was 100, I assume that the user group n was the same – not really large enough for estimating the prevalence of the different forms of buying sex. How many had paid a prostitute, how many had looked at porn twice in a month? Some people probably think that there’s a meaningful distinction between those two. The implication of much of the Newsweek article is that they are all “sex buyers” and that they therefore share the same ugly attitudes towards women.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Couldn't this be better estimated using supply-side data? Find out how many sex workers there are (easiest in a jurisdiction with legalized prostitution), interview sex workers to determine the number of unique clients served in a given time period, and estimate away. No?

Jay Livingston said...

The problem might be getting a representative sample of prostitutes. Those who work in a legalized jurisdiction will not be representative, so the same would be true of their clients. So you would get a different estimate but not necessarily a better one.