I have recently been asked to contribute to a community of weblogs called “Prose Before Hos” I’ve known two of the guys that launched the site for many years and consider them good friends. Recently a…dispute…has been erupting between PBH and another tight community of online writers. You can read the full backstory here, here, and here. The nut of the argument comes down the appropriateness of the PBH logo and some of the website content. It has been erupting into more and more frequent arguments online between these communities and the debate between the sides is beginning to deteriorate into name-calling and poor taste insults. Neither side has been exempt from inflaming the argument.
An issue like this does bely a deeper undercurrent of appropriateness and validity in content about what circulates online, and what is considered to be of good taste. Until now I personally have not weighed in on the issue. Until I became a PBH contributor, this was something between PBH and another community, but being a new voice, and possibly bringing a new perspective I felt that it was appropriate for me to express some feelings on the issue. I also feel a deeper need to support my friends, but this support is never blind.
I will do my best to approach this issue within a framework, and address counterpoints. I will also do my best to keep my personal gender out of it too, but everyone comes with a personal bias about anything, we all just do our best to stay reasonable, this is my attempt.
Overall the issue stems from the sexism seen in the weblog community name “Prose Before Hos” and the graphical logo that comes with the site.
The most severe criticisms have come from feminist blogs and their followers. And the most staunch support for the name and logo comes, obviously, from the creators. I’m going to break the analysis of this into three rough parts, a treatment on the site name, the logo, and finally direct criticism of both. I’m also going to lay out my personal opinions of the matter next so no one feels…mislead, about my following writing.
My Take:
On the surface, my immediate gut response over the issue is to protect the name and logo. I feel that although there is some validity in claiming sexism on the logo and name it is not extreme enough for a real call of removal. Accusations of direct misogyny are over-reaching, and I find it unnecessary for a web community to devote it’s time and effort to the suppression of another, or at the bare minimum active efforts of discrediting where able. I also don’t think that the transgressions of the offended necessarily create a more valid reason to keep the name and logo.
I also feel, that while not creating a “clean” argument for both the logo and name neither are on the fringe of what is considered acceptable by societal standards. Some sexism can be inferred by the logo, and altrusitically sexism should not spread. But it’s important to remember that what counts as sexism is subjective, sexism is rampant enough in American society that although not appropriate, one must pick and choose their battles. It is also significant to determine if the image and title, are invasive, aggressive, and/or threatening, if they are none of those, both the logo and name (no matter how sexist it may be) are protected, and the PBH community has a right to continue their use. Hence the debate.
I also think that while I have a natural inclination to one side, I can see both perspectives of the issue. I will do my best to address what I am aware of as arguments, and counterpoints. But I stress that I’m writing from personal experience, and only with the abilities that I have. I expect to make some mistakes, neglect talking points, and otherwise not get it 100% right. I state this to avoid accusations that I’m cultivating a specific view in neglect of another, rather, I make mistakes, and I’m not going to get a touchy subject like this entirely right to everyone’s satisfaction, I just hope that I am not undermined by honest mistakes.
The Name:
When I read or hear “Prose Before Hos” two thoughts immediately come to mind, one is an acknowledgement of the play on words happening (referring to the term “Bros Before Hos”), and the other is the questioning of what writing has to do with “Hos”. Since I was not privy to mindset of those that created the term I can only write about my take with any authority. My first response is not to assume that the title is a clever and thought provoking “wink” at systemic societal gender problems. I think it’s a lame pun. I also think that alone, puns are pretty neutral. but let’s break this thing down further.
There is a developed resentment to the use of the term “Ho” within the title, carrying the implication that the use of the term carries an intentional degrading of women, and places men in superiority by implications of where the initial term came from. I just got back from a quick web search on the term ho, here’s wikipedia, google search, and google image results. There are some offensive results but in my internet rovings, still mild. Urban Dictionary comes up as the first hit, and I’d argue that this website is worth much more debate about it’s usefulness and contributions to sexism than any blog. Not to suprising, the letters HO are also often part of larger words, and the searches reflect that. What I find interesting though, is the utter lack of vulgar material that my searches found, with one exception in hoslap.com, which has entered a merger with another site. I checked out the wikipedia page that whore sends you to, and like most wikipedia, it’s pretty good, even attempting to discuss the issue in regards to feminism and prostitution the discussion page is solid as well.
In my back and forth diatribes amongst friends, and other folks, I’ve never personally used ho or even whore as gender specific, although the term spawns from a working caste of women. In my day to day life the word is used and defined as anyone that plies their sexual wares for personal gain. Not necessarily for money. Or it’s a term used to criticize someone for essentially brown nosing.
“Mike is really whoring him self out to upper management to get that promotion.”
“Dude, if you weren’t being such a ho about getting it, I’d lend you my car.”
I think though, that it is undisputed that the term is a negative one, and within many contextual situations can be wielded an insult. But the issue is still whether, the title of the PBH community is sexist. For if the term was simply insulting, there would be no need for real debate, it would end at a difference of opinions. But the baggage of insult and implication of prostitution carries much greater connotation with the word.
My assessment, is that while the site creators have no direct intent to insult or degrade women with the use of the term, (drawing from similar experiences as myself of the term being more gender neutral) it still validly upsets and insults. Ho is indeed a loaded word, and there is a responsibility that comes with the decision to place “ho” in a title that people will be offended, and rightly so. But I don’t think that the use of the word “ho” alone is enough to validate for a boycott of PBH, or claims of misogyny.
The rest of the phrasing derives from “Bros before hos”. To me, and people my age, this is a quip of solidarity. And one that although spoken of in terms of gender, and crude language, is universal. The phrase covers over the root idea, that one should not reject long term friendship and loyalties for a quick fling. I have heard used a female retort of “Chicks above pricks” and other variations. Still sexist, still insulting, but carries the same underlying emphasis of loyalty to those that a person already knows. The terms do carry a competitive, and immature view of burgeoning relationships, or casual sex, but when making a critical view of the phrase, one must look at the intended meaning. And for a short, “social parable” it fits. And it works. And it is a phrase that has pervaded culture to the point of desensitization. This doesn’t validate it, but it explains why it’s being used.
Switching “Bros” for “Prose” capitalizes on a familiar phrase, while eliciting feelings associated with loyalty, competition, and shades of defiance. It’s a touchy term , and it’s being taken on full force with PBH. Prose is pretty simple to grasp, it’s writing; and it often carries a connotation of intellectually driven writing. Under this style of review of the phrase, it seems to me that “Prose Before Hos” carries a deeper meaning of thus:
“Intellectual writing is here valued greater than selfish actions of gain.”
There is a problem with such a conclusion though, look at how much writing was needed to come to this point, and defend it. This is the greatest drawback and failure of the site name. To understand why it was chosen, and how it’s not offensive, means one must sit and take the time to learn contextual background of the specific intent. This is a great and unrealistic burden to place on a casual reader of the site.
Is “Prose Before Hos” offensive?
well, probably. It’s obviously been generating fervor, and insult is always left for the receiver of communication to define. Is it sexist? Not really. I can see where that comes from, but an accusation of sexism, or greater misogyny comes with it the debate about why, within that debate comes explanation. It’s also not a phrase that is being wielded in an intrusive manner. It’s not forcing pop-up ads onto your computer, or overriding you web-browser. And if it is a little sexist, it’s not outside societal norms, nor is it pushing a philosophy onto anyone. It’s a site that posts unto itself.
The title of the site is still a success though, the name alone has generated stimulated and intellectual debate. People are impassioned and care. That alone is the heart of the site, and this debate proves the embodiment of that spirit.
Part 2: The graphical logo
(x-posted)
 What is PBH? Part 1 |  What is in a name? (part II) | Kenyan Tourism Part 2 | What is PBH? Part 2 |
Explore the PBH Network! More funny, faster.
Pingback: What is in a name? (part II) | Prose Before Hos