The term "John" - Do you find it offensive?

[mod 135639]

The recent news stories about our efforts to raise money for the Red Cross's Haiti earthquake relief fund referred to the men as "Johns" and this is so common that I never really thought much of it (and I am sure Kennith who wrote the story did not either).

 

I did receive a PM however from a member of the site who mentioned that he did not like the term John as he believed it was a term that one should be offended by (A negative term).... I believed it was a term used to identify a person's who's true identity was unknown (such as a John Doe)... so to be sure I took the time tonight to do some research and this is what I found (If anyone is interested... I found it interesting).

 

JOHN (English Given Name meaning "The lord is gracious" - The name John is speculated to derive, via Latin and Greek, from the Hebrew name Yochanan (יוחנן) meaning "Yahweh is gracious" and used in biblical reference to "John the Baptist")

 

Because of the biblical reference "John" was a very common name (Still is today) and because of it's popularity is why the men who see escorts in North America today are known as "Johns".

 

When the ladies asked the guys what his name was in a panic he would usually say "John" or "John Smith" as to not say his real name in order to keep his real identity private. John was such a common place name that it was the logical name to say when giving yourself a fictitious name.

 

It was such a popular name given that the ladies (and the police) adapted it as a nickname for men who see prostitutes as a joke name "Let me guess, his name was John?".

 

The term in reference to men who see prostitutes appears to have started in the early 1900's as the terms being used at the time were not very nice (Popular terms were "Tricks" and "kerb crawlers").

 

The North american name that is now common place is "John" and the British version is "Punter". Both being much better than "Trick" and especially "kerb crawlers" (I have never head the kerb crawlers term before until today).

 

In north America we refer to a generic or typical male who's identity is unknown as John Q. Public or John Smith and a dead person with no identity as John Doe (All relating back to John being such a common place name).

 

The first known use of the name as a alias was in 1659, in England and The Oxford English Dictionary states that John Doe is "the name given to the fictitious lessee of the plaintiff, in the mixed action of ejectment".

 

So... the use of "John" as a name given to a fictitious person dates back to the 1600's... I find it all very interesting.

 

I don't see any reason for anyone to take offense to the term. I know everyone on cerb likes to be considered Hobbyists (some prefer other terms as well).

 

I am just curious who else is offended by this term and if knowing this info above makes it any less offensive?

[harmony-bc 319]

I know that as a woman that this poll was not directed towards me, but I just had to pick love machine, hahaha.

 

I think there are many offensive terms to call someone, but I have never thought John was an insulting name, unless your name is John and you are trying to keep the fact that you frequent escorts a secret, hahaha. I think trick, ho, whore, etc are offensive to even hear.

 

When referring to myself and my special short term romances, I prefer, personal entertainer ;) actually I don't care, but I prefer to call my customers, suitor, caller, special friend, or client.

[Guest s******ecan****]

Thanks for the history lesson Mod that was interesting, I always wondered where the term came from. Personally I don't take offense but I like to think of myself as a client or gentlemen (ie SP or lady).

[Seymour 3970]

Thanks mod for putting this out there. The term is a label, just like there are terms for the ladies that participate in this type of activity. I would say that with CERB culture it makes it easier to shed those labels and see people as people.

 

In the non CERB world I'm always meeting new people in my daily travels. Different people, different backgrounds, different beliefs - no place really for stereotyping or labels. Which is what I try to bring to CERB.

 

Can't really afford to get hung up in a name. Mainstream has to sensationalize stuff to sell newspapers and boost ratings - and we know, sex sells.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

Thanks for the reasearch and posting the results mod.

 

Yes, I did take offence to the term "John" as I didn't know the origin of the word. I very much prefer to consider myself as friends to the ladies that I see and really care so much about each and every of them and do what I can to make sure they are having a good time while they are guests. I am hoping that they have a good time and enjoy my company as much as I do theirs. So, the term Johns offended me (I thought it refers to someone or something nasty). But now, after your findings as what the origin of the word is, I am less offended (though I am still strongly against the use of stereotypical labels on people). As they say learning never ends.

 

I have a feeling though that I may be in a minority on this, as it seems I am easily offended. I am also offended by the use of foul language and have in my life cut off associations with people using the vulgar words in my presence (not even at me). So, I am following the poll results closely to see to what extend I am alone in this or there are many others who feel this way too.

[spud271 47779]

I actually do find the term degrading, not really offensive. We are hobbyiest, and most true hobbyiest are respectful to the women they spend time with. In my mind at least, the term "John" brings to mind someone driving around and picking up women on the side of the road, and that is not what being a hobbyiest is about. Sharing a glass of wine, having a great conversation with a beautiful woman, that is what makes a hobbyiest. We are definitely not "John's".

[wildstallion 1819]

I would rather be called "John" in the paper than them use my own name.

[drlove 37202]

I prefer the term hobbyist or client. The term 'john' conjurs up too many stereotypes, stigmas, and prejudices which are so prevelant among the general public outside the adult entertainment community.

 

My experiences have all been upscale encounters with very well educated, classy and desirable women who I've had the pleasure of spending some quality time with. It's a world away from the ill conceived notions that those with no connection to this subculture have about the industry.

[Jabba 18389]

Do I find the term offensive?...somewhat. The word "John" is used as a personalized (and stigmatized) label. In that context, it becomes an insult. But, like most folks, I need a point of reference and I guess this is the best we can do.

I find the word "prostitute" to be more offensive because it is often used in the pejorative sense. It carries a deeper meaning than just indicating someone involved in the sex trade. It casts moral aspersions. It depersonalizes and instantly smears someone in the industry. "Sex trade worker" is at least a more direct and descriptive term.

[PistolPete 61421]

Jabba you make great points, society has kept the version of "John" (As Mod pointed out in his history- thanks Mod) so it has been a "point for reference" for many years.

 

I'm not insulted by "John" but if we are to use here, the text might be better used -Hobbiest is good but I prefer "gentlemen". Really like "Love Machine" LOL

 

Jabba point is also excellent that media continues to use "Hooker" or "Prostitute" Now that terminology is very offensive as far I'm concerned.

 

Thanks Ladies and Gentlemen!

[buggernot 588]

I got no problem with it. I'd rather be called a john than a hobbiest, I find that term quite silly and lacking creativity.

[BownChickaBown 4829]

John, Jack, Hobbyist, Arsehole, whatever...

 

I only ask that you just don't call me Late for Supper. :butt:

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

... I'd rather be a John than a Dick.

[Ice-T 157]

John is better than "trick". The headline refered to this site as "hooker site".

 

Doesn't bother me, I've been called worse.

[Guest Ou**or**n]

Very interesting history on the term but I admit I didn't like it in the article and I still don't like it any better.

 

Inside the community we call ourselves 'hobbyists' but I prefer that stay an inside term as I agree with buggernot that it can come across a little silly. Although I must admit internally it is a fairly good term.

 

I just prefer the simple term 'client'. The term John to my mind implies that the act is illegal (John School) when in fact here in Canada the buying of sex for money is perfectly legal and the only illegal things are acts around it.

[Lowdark 5613]

Thanks for the background MOD. The problem is that John Q Public has no idea of the story behind the term and therefore the word conjures up a considerable stigma. You use the word John and people think of dirty, lecherous predator types skulking for women. It's not as insulting as people thinking that SPs are disease ridden, drug addicts selling themselves to feed their various habits when CERB members can tell you that many are classy, dignified women. Could the author not have used terms like "patron", "client" or gentlemen?" The article was apparently suppossed to shed a postive light on CERB's contributions, so using words like John and Hooker, with negative connatations, were contrary to the article's purpose. I've been called far worse, but not by people who are suppossed to be educated.

[redmachine 1916]

I don't like the use of the term, in a word association game I would associate the word john with the word whore.

 

There is a huge difference between the words whore,escort,service provider,experience provider,or courtesan.

 

Just like I believe there is a huge difference between the words John,client,gentlemen............ect.

 

I would never refer to any lady I met as a whore and if a lady I had seen refered to me as a john I would just move on.............to sensitive?..........probably.

[in_the_band 100]

Quite frankly I don't like any of the traditional terms bandied about in the media for either the guys or girls in this business. At least hobbiest gives a vibe of positive fun. But I like gentleman best. At heart we are gentlemen who like to take good care of our ladies.

Posted via Mobile Device

[mod 135639]

"Gentlemen" and "Clients" are much more suitable terms if you were going to choose a polite word that should not offend anyone. I have seen the media use "clients" in the past as a way to describe the gentlemen who use her service.

 

Oddly enough the over in England it seams that they embrace the name "Punter" from what I can tell. I know some people here in North America have tried to make the term John more acceptable as well with websites such as forums with the name "John" in the URL (Not sure if any of them still exist as this could explain why they were no popular)

 

This is all good feedback. I never really thought anyone would be overly offended by the term... It's good to know that some are.

 

I think the term "hobbiest" is kind of an odd choice as well but it's pretty hard to make that word sound bad. ;)

[slurp 7020]

I don't care what they call me as long as they don't catch me!

[Guest S**a*Q]

I'm put off by the term "john" but I think that's because I associate that word to what society views as dirty in the line of business we are in. I honestly prefer "client" or "customer", coming from a retail background like I do, I think it fits better. :) It sounds more professional as well and more respectable.

 

*On the retail background note.. I can attest that I am not a big box retailer. LMAO! ;)