2nd and 3rd wave feminism on sex work
Feb 1 2008 11:48
Alright all, I was wondering if any of you lot could point me in the direction of any 2nd and 3rd wave feminist articles, books etc on sex work. Basically, I'm looking for the stuff that either says:
a) sex work is bad because parading your body around for money is the most degrading form of work possible
b) sex work is good because its women breaking from their role of passive recipient of sexual desire
Also, if any of you guys could point me in the direction of any half-decent analyses of sex work, that'd be good too..
Cheers m'dears! 
Feb 1 2008 12:47
#2
also - by second wave are you including todays radfems, and by third wave are you referring to the post modern 'sex positive' fems? thats the usual way to classify but definitions differ..
Feb 1 2008 13:26
#3
Ed wrote:
Alright all, I was wondering if any of you lot could point me in the direction of any 2nd and 3rd wave feminist articles, books etc on sex work. Basically, I'm looking for the stuff that either says:
a) sex work is bad because parading your body around for money is the most degrading form of work possible
b) sex work is good because its women breaking from their role of passive recipient of sexual desireAlso, if any of you guys could point me in the direction of any half-decent analyses of sex work, that'd be good too..
Cheers m'dears! :)
I see what you are doing there, setting youself up for a critical approach to both and a restatement of the need for a dialetical approach to the issue of sex work. Nice.
if you wanna be really cool you could bring up Suicide Girls, how it plays on it being about expression, community and empowerment (ie being a narcisitic gimp) as opposed to being about the girls selling an objectified image of themselves in order to make money and then amazingly has actual ownership of the images and tunrs a massive profit for it's owners. It's soo fucking clever and insidious I only wish I'd came up with it.
Feb 1 2008 13:32
#4
i know someone who is doing some serious long-term research about labour organising, feminism and sex work. PM me if you want her details.
Feb 1 2008 14:24
#5
Ugh, that old false dichotomy that sex work is either all 'good' or all 'bad' which different groups of feminists have been promoting since the 1980s. And they're still slugging it out. The idea that there can be degrees of exploitation based on how much control the sex worker has over where, when, how they work and how much they get for it (as with any other kind of work) rarely seems to enter the discussion, even after over 25 years...The wierd thing is that the anti-sex work people who otherwise think of themselves as progressive or left-wing - or even 'feminist' - deny the possibility of sex workers being able to effectively organise themselves, something which most would never dream of saying about any other kind of worker!
I haven't managed to get hold of a copy yet, but from the reviews and articles I've read the most sensible recent book seems to be: "Sex at the Margins: Migration, Labour Markets and the Rescue Industry" by Laura Agustin. I don't know if she's a 2nd or 3rd or 10th wave feminist but it sounds at least like she's trying to look at things from the workers' point of view and isn't basing her writing on some pre-determined theoretical or emotional construct.
Feb 1 2008 15:54
#6
eyrie wrote:
at least like she's trying to look at things from the workers' point of view and isn't basing her writing on some pre-determined theoretical or emotional construct.
I'll have to read that. There is a shameful lack of writing from workers' perspectives. Aside from women's studies majors who are stripping to get info for their thesis or something.
Feb 1 2008 16:37
#7
arf wrote:
it would help if you give me an idea what its for - do you want personal testimonies from sex workers or stuff from activists and/or theorists?
Both really, but I'd probably err more to the side of sex workers' testimonies. But anything you've got would be great.. As for what my project is aiming at, revol got it pretty much spot on..
wee paddy no mates wrote:
I see what you are doing there, setting youself up for a critical approach to both and a restatement of the need for a dialetical approach to the issue of sex work.
My aim is to compare statistical data of wages, h&s incidents etc at legal sex work (only legal coz such stats don't exist for illegal work afaik) with other largely female, non-union workforces (i.e. cleaners, er, other ones too..). I'm also intending on carrying out interviews with sex workers about their jobs, how they got into it and why (as opposed to something else) etc. Was also gonna try and talk to some people from the GMB sex workers' union to see if they have any info too.
So yeah, basically that, but for 8,000 words
arf wrote:
by second wave are you including todays radfems, and by third wave are you referring to the post modern 'sex positive' fems?
Yeah, I am. Anything from them would be great, cheers.
Also, revol, good idea on the Suicide Girls front. Do you reckon you could go into more detail about how the site works? I didn't realise the girls got paid for having their pictures up..
Feb 1 2008 16:45
#8
Ed ask Z she was taught by someone whose whole thing was about sex workers in soho and she set up a clinic for them or something so she could research them better....
Feb 1 2008 16:54
#9
Quote:
Also, revol, good idea on the Suicide Girls front. Do you reckon you could go into more detail about how the site works? I didn't realise the girls got paid for having their pictures up..
nah that's the point the girls don't get paid cos "like it's no about selling yourself, it's about empowerment and community and stuff blah blah blah" which plays on the fact that the woman aren't selling themselves yet behind it all the Suicide Girls company keep ownership on the photos and can sell them at will and are themselves making a fortune of them. Apparently they fucked over a few of the old skool suicide girls like Apnea who thought they were being treated like shit and sold off batches of photosets of hers in one of those web auctions, so now her pictures appear in amongst hardcore porn with all sorts of crazy shit titles ie This cock crazy slut etc etc
Here's a not at all gratuitous pciture of Apnea to illustrate.
Feb 2 2008 01:22
#10
If you PM me I can possibly put you in touch with current or former Lusty Lady workers. I am also in touch with their current union worksite organizer . I'm sure they would want more info on the project. But we can talk about that off the forum.
Feb 2 2008 02:38
#11
eyrie wrote:
Ugh, that old false dichotomy that sex work is either all 'good' or all 'bad' which different groups of feminists have been promoting since the 1980s.
I´m very very very anti the anti-porn/sex-work brigade in feminsm. But I´ve never come across anyone in feminism saying that sex work is all ´good´. It quite clearly isn´t and seriously leaves a load of people fucked up mentally.
If there is any one who says within feminism that sex work is all ´good´ could you plase direct me towards them cos its an argument I´ve never heard.
(Apart from that I like your post, agree with most of it and might go did up the book you recomend at some point.)
Feb 2 2008 02:54
#12
georgestapleton wrote:
eyrie wrote:
Ugh, that old false dichotomy that sex work is either all 'good' or all 'bad' which different groups of feminists have been promoting since the 1980s.I´m very very very anti the anti-porn/sex-work brigade in feminsm. But I´ve never come across anyone in feminism saying that sex work is all ´good´. It quite clearly isn´t and seriously leaves a load of people fucked up mentally.
If there is any one who says within feminism that sex work is all ´good´ could you plase direct me towards them cos its an argument I´ve never heard.
(Apart from that I like your post, agree with most of it and might go did up the book you recomend at some point.)
I completely agree. Most of the people I know who do sex worker organizing are also very involved with providing social services and resources to people in the industry. I know a group which does immigrant rights and constitutional rights trainings, provides job training for people trying to move out of the industry and resources for people in need of substance abuse help. But, at they same time, the are also involved with organizing sex workers to exert power in their industry and to make changes at their workplaces. Anyone who has worked in the sex industry knows how exploitive it can be. But it is also important to empower people, to help them feel good about themselves and the work that they do in order to build power as workers.
So, most people I know who do organizing in the sex industry understand the balance between the long term goal of empowering workers to force change in their industry and providing direct services for people who are highly exploited.
Feb 2 2008 19:15
#13
j.rogue wrote:
There is a shameful lack of writing from workers' perspectives. Aside from women's studies majors who are stripping to get info for their thesis or something.
innit.
re suidide girls - this article covers part of what happened there, found the link on the f word.
http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/other_stories/documents/05016155.asp
some quoted below:
Quote:
It’s not surprising that in the tattooed and pierced world of SuicideGirl erotica, some tempers would flare, some feathers would ruffle, some sexpots would get sullen. That’s all part of the growling appeal of the alterna-porn Web site, which features DIY provocateurs posing in hair-dyed, body-modified, mostly nude glory, and which has created an online community for these "real" girls and the Web surfers who love them (at $9 a month).But few could have predicted that almost 40 of the close to 1000 SuicideGirls would stage a Web-out and stalk off the Web site amid claims that despite all its go-girl messaging, SuicideGirls.com is run by people who don’t care much about female empowerment.
"What’s going on right now is a slap in the face to feminism," says Jennifer Caravella, a/k/a Sicily, a thin, raven-haired woman with nipple piercings and big eyes. "If SuicideGirls portrayed themselves as Hustler, or Playboy, that would be fine, whatever — people have the right to make their own choices. But don’t pretend to be alternative and punk rock. There’s nothing punk rock about that Web site."
Quote:
"When I joined, it seemed like this community of girls, where girls could express their sexuality," says 28-year-old Caravella, one of the women who left the site over the last month. "I really thought it was a new feminist outlet, where girls could look up to SuicideGirls. I really thought I was a part of something that was almost revolutionary."
Quote:
"Dia," a famous — and fuming — former SuicideGirl, was one of the first to bail almost three years ago. (Dia, who’s now a businesswoman in California, prefers to go by her screen name, as did several of the women interviewed for this article.) In photographs that remain archived at the site, Dia’s dark hair, red lips, and theatrical costumes evoke the smoky sexuality of Juliette Lewis, Kathleen Hanna, or Fairuza Balk.The recent wave of SuicideGirl defections has reignited Dia’s anti-SG passion. Like many of the women who have shared their stories in the blogosphere, Dia describes a prickly relationship with SG president Suhl. This man, she says, is the SuicideGirls puppeteer; he is "verbally abusive" to his models and wields more control than Missy does. "It’s exploitational to women, and abusive," she says, "because it lures women in with a marketing scheme that purports feminism, when in actuality the sole owner of the company is an active misogynist."
A March 2003 story in Oregon’s Willamette Week describes Suhl as a Canadian-born, neoconservative Hampshire College dropout who rarely meets SG members and is estranged from his family — but who is "friendly and casual" in person.
Quote:
If nothing else, Suhl is a tough businessman. SG models get $300 per photo set, plus additional money if they go on tour, shoot videos, or pose in photos with another girl. Meanwhile, they’re free to model elsewhere, unless it conflicts with SG interests. But Suhl has no qualms about stopping payment on checks for photo sets (as he allegedly did to "Apnea," a 20-year-old Houston college student who left SuicideGirls about a month ago when she found that she could make more money modeling for several different companies than she could abiding by the SG exclusivity rules), or unleashing lawyers on former models who go to other sites (23-year-old "Dusty" got a cease-and-desist letter just this week).Of course, it makes sense that a company would protect its interests and guard against competition. But disgruntled models say that what goes down at SuicideGirls amounts to more than ruthless management.
Caravella, on the phone from San Francisco, joins the chorus of former SGs who blame the wave of sour defections on Suhl, saying he wavered on the question of paying royalties for DVD sales, ridicules women in front of other people, and uses Missy as a pro-woman front.
But why are Sicily, Dia, and other women on the warpath — why not just leave, quietly?
"I just feel like people should know what they’re paying for," Sicily says. "You’re giving money to a man who treats women like shit."
time to eat but i will try and post up some links to info later. im still not entirely certain what youre looking for though.
Feb 2 2008 19:38
#14
If you are interested, I might be able to put you in touch with some ex-SG models, or some who entertained the notion, but had massive criticisms. Or at least point you towards some folks. Revol is spot-on about that site, I could rant about it for hours. Those girls get paid like $40/shoot when most photographers pay like $400! All because you are part of a "community." Ugh, don't get me started. I'll have to check out that F Word article.
I also have never had a conversation with anyone who was like "SEX WORK RULZ!!!11" aside from liking their job for various reasons. Even those folks recognize the way the industry is fucked up, they just often tend to be reacting to the anti-sex work/er feminists who tend to be patronizing at best, and harmful at worst.
edit- looking at the above post, there is a claim that they get $300 per set, but I have never heard that number. Generally a shoot takes about three-ish hours and usually is like 2 or 3 sets, if I remember correctly. Anyone who pays less than $100/hr is ripping you off, especially if they have exclusive rights over your shoot (like you can't use them for your portfolio or sell to others). My math may be off or old, but I know a lot of folks who are very familiar with SG and I never heard of $300/set. Maybe because they were remote models and paid for their own photos, therefore having some rights over them, but still. No one I know in Portland (I think they're based there) makes that, that I know anyways.
Feb 2 2008 20:29
#15
Feb 4 2008 16:15
#16
"a) sex work is bad because parading your body around for money is the most degrading form of work possible"
Thats not really a feminist pov, youd find that quite widespread among anti feminists. The second wave/ radical feminist perspective on prostitution is all about exploitation, abuse, oppression, male supremacy, white supremacy, imperialism, consumerism and entitlement, poverty, etc. They (we) have a similar analysis of the general repression of female sexuality. One of the main differences between the radfem/2ndWave analysis and the SexPos/3rdWave analysis is that for the former, prostitution is seen as another way in which female sexuality is repressed and male sexuality is allowed to dominate. The latter are more likely to say, some prostitutes just love to fuck and whats wrong with making money for doing something you love? The latter (sex positive feminists) tend to be more libertarian, so maybe thats why that is more supported by people here.
I suppose the most obvious place to recommend for essays on prostitution is the Andrea Dworkin online library. If you can respect the fact that Dworkin was once a prostitute and devoted her life to writing and other activism against prostitution and violence against women, and treat her writing and analysis of the situation with the same respect youd show pro-sex-work sex workers right to determine their own position - so no calling her crazy or making it about how jealous she is cos she was so fat and ugly who would want to fuck her anyways? Which is all stuff ive heard way too many times. Theres plenty of other ex prostitutes out there writing and speaking out, or working in non profits against prostitution and traffiking, or to support prostitutes in various other ways. What you have to do is learn to hear their voices as valid, as much as you consider those who are in favour of the sex industry valid. And that means that when they talk about the degradation of being a prostitute, you dont roll your eyes and think, oh shes so repressed. You need to respect that after all their time as a prostitute they are much better placed than you to decide how degrading and dehumanising it was for them and the others they have been close to.
Anyway its only one link because i dont know whether to take you seriously or not, which is mrope about this place than it is about you. If you want to look for resources there are plenty about a google away.
Feb 4 2008 16:27
#17
someone elswhere recommended this
http://www.livenudegirlsunite.com/story.html
its available on karagarga, if you can get someone to seed. id like to see it too.
Feb 4 2008 17:19
#18
arf wrote:
"a) sex work is bad because parading your body around for money is the most degrading form of work possible"Thats not really a feminist pov, youd find that quite widespread among anti feminists.
I have met many, many 2nd wave/ radfems who believe this.
arf wrote:
The second wave/ radical feminist perspective on prostitution is all about exploitation, abuse, oppression, male supremacy, white supremacy, imperialism, consumerism and entitlement, poverty, etc.
Almost every single 3rd wave/ pro-sex worker feminist I have met also have a radical analysis of all the above issues. It is not the sole domain of 2nd wavers. 3rd wavers read too.
arf wrote:
One of the main differences between the radfem/2ndWave analysis and the SexPos/3rdWave analysis is that for the former, prostitution is seen as another way in which female sexuality is repressed and male sexuality is allowed to dominate. The latter are more likely to say, some prostitutes just love to fuck and whats wrong with making money for doing something you love?
I think this is a dishonest way of representing the differences between these two positions. Not only is there a lot of variety in both camps, to basically claim that a common 3rd wave line is "hookers like fucking" is oversimplifying at best, and misleading at worst. It has been said, sure, but not by the majority of 3rd wavers I know. I think it is more sensationalized than it is common. My personal response to the 2nd wave line is that it is a job, not my sexuality.
arf wrote:
If you can respect the fact that Dworkin was once a prostitute and devoted her life to writing and other activism against prostitution and violence against women, and treat her writing and analysis of the situation with the same respect youd show pro-sex-work sex workers right to determine their own position - so no calling her crazy or making it about how jealous she is cos she was so fat and ugly who would want to fuck her anyways? Which is all stuff ive heard way too many times.
I also take issue with attempts to discredit women by calling them fat, ugly or crazy.
arf wrote:
Theres plenty of other ex prostitutes out there writing and speaking out, or working in non profits against prostitution and traffiking, or to support prostitutes in various other ways.
See, there is some of that variety I was referencing. Some 2nd wavers are pro-sex worker while being critical of the industry, which is a more 3rd wave-y position in my mind.
arf wrote:
What you have to do is learn to hear their voices as valid, as much as you consider those who are in favour of the sex industry valid.
I don't think anyone is disputing the validity of ex-sex workers speaking out against the industry. Critics of the 2nd wave position tend to focus on the NON-sex workers who try to "save" sex workers without seeing them as anything more than victims, implicit in their own oppression. Also, "in favor of the sex industry"? More misrepresentation. Sure there are capitalists in the 3rd wave scene, but all the ones I know are anti-capitalist and aren't like "Woohoo! We sure do looooooove the industry! Yay for pimps and porn magnates!" Though, as you said, everyone's experience in the industry is different.
It seems to me your post is implying that 2nd wavers are opposed to the exploitation of women and 3rd wavers are fine with it. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt and deciding you are misunderstanding the 3rd wave position rather than being deliberately misleading.
Feb 4 2008 18:30
#19
Quote:
I think this is a dishonest way of representing the differences between these two positions. Not only is there a lot of variety in both camps, to basically claim that a common 3rd wave line is "hookers like fucking" is oversimplifying at best, and misleading at worst. It has been said, sure, but not by the majority of 3rd wavers I know. I think it is more sensationalized than it is common. My personal response to the 2nd wave line is that it is a job, not my sexuality.
Most of the sex positive fems i know are pretty much coming from a libertarian pov. Lots of stuff about personal choice and agency and moaning about vanilla straights. Anti censorship but only if you believe the same stuff they do. The not so occasional dig at "victim feminists" and some blatant victim blaming. "Hookers like fucking" is something i've come across over and over, except not often with that term. Most of the sex-positive feminists Ive known are not in fact sex workers, some are sex consumers. Its not true of every sex pos feminist ever, just of most of the ones ive come across. Sorry but it is. I know we mix in totally different crowds and maybe thats why we're in disagreement here.
Quote:
My personal response to the 2nd wave line is that it is a job, not my sexuality
ive not ever heard a 2nd waver or radfem claim that sex work is a form of sexuality. A good amount of the radfems im closest to have done sex work in one form or another. This is the sort of thing that winds me up, this assumption that no radfems have any personal experience of sex work, and the assumption that all sex pos fems do. Thats bollocks. And the other one, that radfems are all academics, which is bollocks. I think i should also say that for some of the radfem ex sex workers i know, it wasnt 'just a job', it was their life for a period of time, it was an extension of abuse they had already gone through.
On 2nd/3rd wave - this i think is very american, because feminists in most other countries dont seem to be so inclined to define as waves, not from what ive seen anyway. 3rd wave is is not well defined. Some consider all women of colour feminists or womanists to be third wave. Some consider it to be generational, and about young women. I know more than a few radical feminists who consider themselves 3rd wave because of their age. But the most common use of it seems to be to seperate the womens liberationists and second wave feminists who were defining patriarchy/male supremacy and womens oppression under it, from the liberals and libertarians who were more inclined to meritocratic thinking and expressing individuality through consumerism. Thats why i tried to clarify earlier what Ed means by third wave and second wave, because there are different definitions.
Quote:
Critics of the 2nd wave position tend to focus on the NON-sex workers who try to "save" sex workers without seeing them as anything more than victims, implicit in their own oppression.
Thats not exactly true. For a start - many women dont want to go public about their time in sex work. I think probably it would be better to assume nothing, given that. When 'critics' attack/focus on women who take an anti position, theyre probably not very informed as to whether the person theyre 'focusing' on has in fact done any sex work or not. In my experience they dont take the time to find out, or listen at all. When someone does come out, and ive seen it happen time and time again, they get labelled as disturbed, or fucked up, or damaged, or wallowing in victimhood, or theyre told that that is just their individual experience, or the subject is changed or allowed to peter out. Time and time again ive seen women try and give testimony and theyve been shouted down or ignored.
Quote:
I don't think anyone is disputing the validity of ex-sex workers speaking out against the industry.
Really? I think maybe you just havent noticed it. Revol even just provided us with an example.
Quote:
It seems to me your post is implying that 2nd wavers are opposed to the exploitation of women and 3rd wavers are fine with it. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt and deciding you are misunderstanding the 3rd wave position rather than being deliberately misleading.
Well i hope ive clarified a bit on the 2nd wave/3rd wave level. I dont think thats gonna make you any happier with what ive said though.
I didnt say 3rd wavers are fine with the exploitation of women. I am saying that sex positive fems (and ed seems to be assuming thats the same thing as 3rd wave, which is pretty common) dont even necessarily recognise that women are being exploited. FFS some of them have even made arguments that patriarchy doesnt exist.
Feb 4 2008 18:53
#20
I agree that 2nd wave/ 3rd wave is an inaccurate dichotomy, but seeing as to how aside from that point your post is nothing at all like anything I have ever experienced in the ten years I have been doing feminist organizing, I am going to have to chalk it up to differences between the UK and USA, and feel lucky.
Feb 4 2008 19:03
#21
There are a lot of blogs by sex workers.
Also, when I saw Patrick Califia speak, he had a really intense critique of 2nd wave feminism, but I'm not sure if he goes into it in any of his books.
Feb 4 2008 22:49
#22
Quote:
What you have to do is learn to hear their voices as valid, as much as you consider those who are in favour of the sex industry valid. And that means that when they talk about the degradation of being a prostitute, you dont roll your eyes and think, oh shes so repressed. You need to respect that after all their time as a prostitute they are much better placed than you to decide how degrading and dehumanising it was for them and the others they have been close to.
I really don't think this is a problem on here.
Feb 5 2008 15:24
#23
Revol, your posts (and all posts around it) were deleted by me. Don't post irrelevent shit to serious discussions.
Arf and j. rogue, cheers for the insights (esp. the link to the article on Suicide Girls!). Arf, I was wondering if you could point me in the direction of those feminists who say 'hookers just like fucking' (just so you know, I don't like them either, I just need it for bibliography/referencing. If I'm being honest though, I think I take a line closer to j. rogue than you though).. Just a few names of writers and/or articles would be great.. cheers
Hopefully, when I've done all the research and written it up I'll post it up here. If I think it's any good that is, it could be a load of old shite that I rush to finish in the last couple of days.. in fact, that is very likely but I might post it up anyway
Feb 5 2008 20:32
#24
Professional hater Janice Raymond's argument for the criminalization of a class of women here
A response here. Not the best, but has some good info.
Another here
Lots of info here about radfem types colluding with state, anti-women and christian organizations to promote the criminalization and by extension incarceration of sex workers.
Feb 5 2008 21:58
#25
j.rogue wrote:
Professional hater Janice Raymond's argument for the criminalization of a class of women here
Quote:
CATW favors decriminalization of the women in prostitution. No woman should be punished for her own exploitation. But States should never decriminalize pimps, buyers, procurers, brothels or other sex establishments.
Am I missing something? 
Feb 5 2008 22:08
#26
madashell wrote:
j.rogue wrote:
Professional hater Janice Raymond's argument for the criminalization of a class of women hereQuote:
CATW favors decriminalization of the women in prostitution. No woman should be punished for her own exploitation. But States should never decriminalize pimps, buyers, procurers, brothels or other sex establishments.Am I missing something?
how about trying some joined up thinking on this.
Feb 5 2008 22:14
#27
madashell wrote:
j.rogue wrote:
Professional hater Janice Raymond's argument for the criminalization of a class of women hereQuote:
CATW favors decriminalization of the women in prostitution. No woman should be punished for her own exploitation. But States should never decriminalize pimps, buyers, procurers, brothels or other sex establishments.Am I missing something?
They are one of many organizations, and are not exactly crusading for the rights of prostitutes. It is easy to say you support decriminalization of workers, but what are they doing? Are they in any coalitions?
Feb 5 2008 22:14
#28
revol68 wrote:
how about trying some joined up thinking on this.
I don't know what that means.
Feb 5 2008 22:38
#29
j.rogue wrote:
revol68 wrote:
how about trying some joined up thinking on this.I don't know what that means.
It means he's acting like an obnoxious pillock, again.
Feb 5 2008 22:43
#30
j.rogue wrote:
They are one of many organizations, and are not exactly crusading for the rights of prostitutes. It is easy to say you support decriminalization of workers, but what are they doing? Are they in any coalitions?
The central argument of the article is bollocks, but (unless I've got it arse about tit) she's saying that she's against the harrassment and arrest of sex workers, but in favour of the arrest of pimps, johns, etc. Which isn't the most practical of solutions, but hardly an "argument for the criminalisation of an entire class of women".
i can give you lots of stuff, it would help if you give me an idea what its for - do you want personal testimonies from sex workers or stuff from activists and/or theorists?
ps yeh there are those who fit both but i mean are you looking for the more personal accounts or the political stuff?
you know what i mean!