Posted on 05/29/2007 8:40:44 AM PDT by Slings and Arrows
When I was in college I was a professional musician. I didn’t write many songs but I used to try occasionally to write very stupid country songs hoping I would eventually write one dumb enough for Garth Brooks to record. I even had an idea for one called “When Porn Stars Get Offended.” (The punch line was: “When porn stars get offended, that’s when I’ll quit loving you”).
But, now, there is little hope my porn star song will ever become a country hit; this because political correctness now dictates that we avoid offending porn stars and prostitutes by helping to dispel myths about their private and professional lives.
In fact, one show dispelling such myths was recently defended by William and Mary President Gene Nichol. President Gene thought the show must be defended on First Amendment grounds regardless of its tendency to offend groups including, but not limited to, Christians. A cross in the campus chapel, however, had to go because it might be deemed offensive to non-Christians.
Believe it or not, the same show that Nichol defended may be coming to a local college or university near you – and it may or may not be funded by your tax dollars. Regardless, it seeks to dispel the “myth” that people who work in the sex industry are “anything short of artists, innovators, and geniuses.” Dubbed the “Sex Worker’s Art Show” it was performed at the following colleges and universities in the month of February of 2007 alone:
Northern Arizona University, College of Santa Fe, Virginia Commonwealth University, College of William and Mary, University of Pennsylvania, Haverford College, Bard College, Wesleyan, The University of Massachusetts - Amhurst, Hampshire College, Sarah Lawrence College, Case Western Reserve University, Kenyon College, and Earlham College.
These shows are intended to offer a diverse perspective on sex work by touching on themes such as prostitute’s rights. The cast of performers includes Miss Dirty Martini (see http://www.sexworkersartshow.com – especially the “performer bio” link) who recently made a cameo in the movie Shortbus, which is probably the best mode of transportation available for those who see the intellectual merits of the diversity movement in higher education. If this is all getting to be too much to believe, please resort to Google to find Miss Dirty Martini’s personal website. There is plenty of supporting documentation there.
Another of the stars of the “Sex Workers Art Show” is named C. Snatch Z. The show describes her as a woman who “strides the world with her dildo harness controlling the human catharsis like a dictator, destroying herself like a revolutionist.” If you have no idea what that means or – like the author of this column – you have no idea what any of this has to do with getting a college education, please Google her name for more information.
Another star, Kirk Read, spent two years performing a tour of 120 cities intent on spreading the gospel of “sexed-up heavy metal queer teenagers.” He has been a long time counselor at the St. James Infirmary, which is San Francisco’s free health clinic for sex workers. St. James offers “free, confidential, compassionate, non-judgmental, drop-in care.” Describing himself as both a “southern gentleman” and a “witch” he works as an apprentice to an organic gourmet chef. But before you let him handle your food, you had better do a Google search to see where his hands have been lately.
Let’s not forget the immensely talented Reginald Lamar. He (I trust he’s not a she) is the former singer of the rock band (not banned) called “The Mutilated Mannequins.” Fusing punk rock with gospel music is one of his talents. He also likes to deeply probe (no jokes, please) issues of race, class, and sex prejudices and taboos.” Before you invite him (her? it?) to your college, Google can help you more deeply probe the issue of his (?) true gender identity.
Last year, when the sex workers art show made a stop at Bucknell University, a “sex worker” rubbed lubricant all over his genitalia. This was done in front of college students, many of whom were merely teenagers. After sponsoring the intellectually slippery event, the Women’s and Gender Studies Department had the audacity to refuse to sponsor a lecture by conservative author Christina Sommers on the grounds that her work lacked intellectual merit.
When I think about certain feminist groups (like the feminists at Bucknell) and certain university presidents (I will not mention a single name: Gene Nichol, Gene Nichol, Gene Nichol) I often think that our universities are being run by a bunch of intellectual whores.
But, fortunately, since I attended the “Sex Worker’s Art Show” I realize that calling someone a “whore” might not constitute defamation of character. It might just be another reason to celebrate diversity.
And it’s not as bad as Sodom and Gomorrah yet.
Wesleyan? Earlham College?
That rumble you just felt beneath your feet was caused by John Wesley and George Fox rolling in their graves.
If this guy could figure out a way to get paid, he must be a genius.
I wonder.....does the IRS accept “Prostitute” as a job?.....or “Porn Filmmaker”?.......
I didn’t write many songs but I used to try occasionally to write very stupid country songs hoping I would eventually write one dumb enough for Garth Brooks to record.
_____________________________________________________
LOL.....gee I loathed GB in the day.
I know that guy’s...........face.............
In places where it's legal, I suppose they'd have to. I'm sure they don't turn down the money.
Austin doesn't surprise me, but I don't really see this show playing at Texas Tech or Texas A&M, do you? ;^)
I don't think Texas Tech or Texas A&M would go for this stuff. Just reading that article made me want to puke.
I stopped reading here.
The show describes her as a woman who “strides the world with her dildo harness controlling the human catharsis like a dictator
That was a very good place to stop... trust me.
Interesting note, Ron Jeremy has a master’s degree in special education.
The only reason such irrational displays are presented at universities is because of the irrational opinions against such sex workers.
The great illusion about prostitution is that prostitutes are mostly poor, uneducated alcoholic druggies who are destroying their lives as near slaves in skid row. And law enforcement does its level best to continue to create and maintain this illusion.
When a reasonably good looking prostitute or sex worker is arrested, she has her hair ruffled up (looking for drugs), along with other intrusive examinations, then is required to scrub her face with harsh soap and cold water. Then, while looking as disheveled as possible, is photographed under florescent light, guaranteeing an ugly a portrait as possible. The picture is then released to the press.
The truth is that most prostitutes are *never* arrested, are middle class and live in the suburbs, often are married and live with their family. But how can this be?
Easy. Society totally ignored what prostitution amounts to: two legal and normal acts, that when combined together become illegal.
There are no penalties whatsoever against people having injudicious sex with multiple partners. Nor are there any penalties for exchanging money with others for services, no matter how frivolous, rendered.
So out of the vast number of people who exchange sex for some remittance, only those who insist on cash, immediately before or afterwards, are prostitutes.
So what is the reality? Prostitutes and prostitution are not in and of themselves a problem, it is the *other* illegal acts surrounding these frequently arrested prostitutes that is the problem. And yes, these other crimes DO need to be addressed, but as what they are, not under the faux-morality of attacking prostitution.
Now there are some people who do not act hypocritically in opposing prostitution. They believe that sex outside of marriage should be forbidden, that sex is for reproduction only, and that the law should be used to enforce these standards.
But theirs is not a popular belief. So how should the rest of us regard prostitution? Much like any service that needs regulation to insure that it is not a detriment to society.
We regulate gaming. That is, gambling. We regulate alcohol, tobacco, prescription drugs, gun, and automobile sales. So why not develop standards for legal prostitution that helps keep out the criminal aspects of the market?
Prostitutes could be licensed, urine tested for alcohol and drugs, medically screened on a regular basis, taxed, kept to a zoned area, and even kept under police surveillance. This being for the prostitutes typically thought of as prostitutes.
The middle class prostitutes would continue doing business as they do today, perhaps not ever thinking that they were engaged in prostitution.
Married people do not "exchange sex for some remittance". They make a vow to share their lives, their bodies, their property and their futures - good or bad - with each other.
Marriage represents a totality of which sex forms a part. The attempt to equate marriage with prostitution is an attack upon marriage and the dignity of the human being.
Prostitutes - real prostitutes - sell quick sexual gratification for money or drugs. Married people have devoted and dedicated themselves to another human being. Any attempt to equate the two is insanely reductive.
The show describes her as a woman who “strides the world with her dildo harness controlling the human catharsis like a dictator
Make a good tag line, though.
Protitutes aren’t paid to have sex. They’re paid to leave afterward. - Rodney Dangerfield(?)
The main reason I stopped reading at that statement is it reminds me of cankles the wanna be dictator too much.
Your full of crap. Legalization/decriminalization quickly leads to displacement of “locals” with trafficked women and children (slavery/debt bondage) in order to increase competitive advantage and profitability.
This is well documented in numerous European counties and Australia. See the Coalition Against Trafficking website for footnoted documentation. Here’s a sample.
Legalization/decriminalization of prostitution and the sex industry promotes sex trafficking.
Legalized or decriminalized prostitution industries are one of the root causes of sex trafficking. One argument for legalizing prostitution in the Netherlands was that legalization would help to end the exploitation of desperate immigrant women who had been trafficked there for prostitution. However, one report found that 80% of women in the brothels of the Netherlands were trafficked from other countries (Budapest Group, 1999)(1). In 1994, the International Organization of Migration (IOM) stated that in the Netherlands alone, “nearly 70 % of trafficked women were from CEEC [Central and Eastern European Countries]” (IOM, 1995, p. 4).
The government of the Netherlands presents itself as a champion of anti-trafficking policies and programs, yet it has removed every legal impediment to pimping, procuring and brothels. In the year 2000, the Dutch Ministry of Justice argued in favor of a legal quota of foreign “sex workers,” because the Dutch prostitution market demanded a variety of “bodies” (Dutting, 2001, p. 16). Also in 2000, the Dutch government sought and received a judgment from the European Court recognizing prostitution as an economic activity, thereby enabling women from the European Union and former Soviet bloc countries to obtain working permits as “sex workers” in the Dutch sex industry if they could prove that they are self employed. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Europe report that traffickers use the work permits to bring foreign women into the Dutch prostitution industry, masking the fact that women have been trafficked, by coaching them to describe themselves as independent “migrant sex workers” (Personal Communication, Representative of the International Human Rights Network, 1999).
In the year since lifting the ban on brothels in the Netherlands, eight Dutch victim support organizations reported an increase in the number of victims of trafficking, and twelve victim support organization reported that the number of victims from other countries has not diminished (Bureau NRM, 2002, p. 75). Forty-three of the 348 municipalities (12%) in the Netherlands choose to follow a no-brothel policy, but the Minister of Justice has indicated that the complete banning of prostitution within any municipality could conflict with the federally guaranteed “right to free choice of work” (Bureau NRM, 2002, p.19).
The first steps toward legalization of prostitution in Germany occurred in the 1980s. By 1993, it was widely recognized that 75% of the women in Germany’s prostitution industry were foreigners from Uruguay, Argentina, Paraguay and other countries in South America (Altink, 1993, p. 33). After the fall of the Berlin wall, 80% of the estimated 10,000 women trafficked into Germany were from Central and Eastern Europe and CIS countries (IOM. 1998a , p. 17). In 2002, prostitution in Germany was established as a legitimate job after years of being legalized in tolerance zones. Promotion of prostitution, pimping and brothels are now legal in Germany.
The sheer volume of foreign women in the German prostitution industry suggests that these women were trafficked into Germany, a process euphemistically described as facilitated migration. It is almost impossible for poor women to facilitate their own migration, underwrite the costs of travel and travel documents, and set themselves up in “business” without intervention.
In 1984, a Labor government in the Australian State of Victoria introduced legislation to legalize prostitution in brothels. Subsequent Australian governments expanded legalization culminating in the Prostitution Control Act of 1994. Noting the link between legalization of prostitution and trafficking in Australia, the US Department of State observed: “Trafficking in East Asian women for the sex trade is a growing problem…lax laws – including legalized prostitution in parts of the country – make [anti-trafficking] enforcement difficult at the working level” (U.S. Department of State, 2000, p. 6F).
His point was that there are lots of folks who have consensual sex with multiple partners, and who are not married, and yet who are not arrested as prostitutes.
There's some validity to that argument; however, his main point seems to be that all such behavior -- whether voluntary or paid -- is somehow OK, it just needs to be regulated to ensure that people don't contract diseases, and such.
The fallacy of the argument, however, is to assume that there's nothing intrinsically wrong with such behavior. But the statistics, if nothing else, show otherwise.
I did not know any good could come out of marriage. I fell on the bad side. That is why it is best to take your chances and not get married. That way you will never be trapped. In short Marriage Sucks.
I think you slipped somewhere in there. You meant to hit an 'l' and somehow typed a 'p.'
You’re a complete idiot. Nobody with functional intelligence above the level of 2nd grade falls for that kind of twaddle.
They only real problem with the legal prostitution in Western Europe is the mafia importing essentially slave girls from other countries to forcibly work in brothels. Without having to worry about regular working girls the police can devote their resources towards actual abuse in the trade.
My, if you put a pix of Rosie O’Donnell beside Jeremy’s pix, they’d pass for twins.
I KNOW my second grader has a better grasp of the moral issues.
Pimping is illegal in Germany.
Brothel arrangements are that the prostitute rents a room at a brothel for a set price and then keeps all of her income (minus taxes). They are not tied to the brothel in any way.
Cities have the power to declare prostitution-free zones. Streetwalking is also illegal in some cities.
The sheer volume of foreign women in the German prostitution industry suggests that these women were trafficked into Germany
Trafficking/slavery (as opposed to legal foreign workers) does exist, often linked to organized crime, as prostitution often is in the US. The German version of the FBI (BKA) expends a lot of resources cracking down on it. Of course they don't have to expend resources cracking down on the hundreds of thousands of legal prostitutes in the country either.
Again, while what you point out is peripheral to prostitution, it is easy to overlap the two and say they are the same issue.
Comparatively, the issue of illegal immigration to the US could be compared with slavery, as illegals are often forced to work with less rights, legal protections and remuneration than citizens. But that is different from their being illegal—it is the result of the government allowing, or even encouraging them to be exploited by unethical businessmen.
But it is not fair to say that illegal immigration *causes* slavery. Nor can it be said that legal prostitution *causes* human trafficking. When such trafficking exists, it is because those governments allow, encourage or tolerate it.
Many of the immigrant prostitutes in the US right now are brought in as part of human trafficking.
But the acid test is how many of the *legal* prostitutes in Nevada are such trafficked illegals?
I would hazard to guess that few or none. Because unlike those other countries, Nevada very thoroughly polices its prostitutes. To work as a prostitute there, you must be thoroughly documented, taxed, medically screened, and accorded all the other worker protections accorded by law.
So the problem is not prostitution, it is government.
Let’s legalize, crack, pot, meth, incest, child molestation, and rape. It’s only the criminal element that makes them bad.
Prostitution rends the fabric of society, your opinion notwithstanding. That’s why.
Prostitution has always been present in human history and it has ALWAYS involved the exploitation of women BY men through violence, power, drugs, etc.
There is no getting away from the fact that bad men will exploit the weak and vulnerable in order to feed their vices. Legalizing it doesn’t change human nature it merely legitimizes it’s worst features.
You apparently don’t have the moral and intellectual depth to discern this. Your belief that sexual relations are always a commercial transaction one way or another demonstrates this.
You are simply wrong in your understanding of human nature and your prescription for change will increase misery, not reduce it.
Fraternal twins. Ron's prettier.
You are out of date. Germany legalized it 6 years ago.
Google it. There is even a 2005 story about the German govt denying unemployment benefits to women who refuse to take job offers from brothels.
Yikes!
You're right. When I think pimping I think coercive pimping. That's still illegal. In the current situation the prostitute doesn't have to take abuse or exploitation from any pimp, as she has legal recourse, where prostitutes in the US don't. The pimp basically becomes the same thing as an agent as used by actors, singers, etc.
There is even a 2005 story about the German govt denying unemployment benefits to women who refuse to take job offers from brothels.
Urban legends. Quickly retracted paperwork mixups. One was from an escort service that falsely wrote the job description, making the government think they were passing on a waitress job. It is against policy.
Legalize rape? So you’re equating a forced, violent crime that has a clear victim with a consensual transaction between two adults?
BTW, most US prostitutes don’t report the instances when they are raped because of the illegality of their trade.
And Rosie's moustache is thicker.
You might want to look into the mirror as to why "Marriage Sucks," Mr. Jack Daniels.
You say that with the same conviction that Andrea Dworkin who said "All heterosexual sex is rape".
Exploitation of people by other people covers the gamut from slavery to employment. In most of human history, women have been little more than chattel. Their entire lives were exploited, and their sexuality is only part of that.
Only in modern times, and in some places, do women have the opportunity to *not* be exploited from cradle to grave, so only now, when even the *law* must say that their sexuality is their own, and not the property of others, do they even have a chance to be a prostitute on their own.
"You apparently don’t have the moral and intellectual depth to discern this. Your belief that sexual relations are always a commercial transaction one way or another demonstrates this."
I do indeed have the moral and intellectual depth to discern this. But it seems that *you* might not. That is, if you persist in thinking that *you* should have some say, through force of law, as to what women can do with their sexuality.
And, I might add, that I *never* said that "sexual relations are always a commercial transaction one way or another", or anything to that effect. That is a construction of your mind, most likely based on the idea that a middle class woman, perhaps married and living in the suburbs would *not* have sex with strangers for money. Ever.
The vast majority of married sexual relationships are monogamous, and no prostitution in any sense of the word is involved. But that is not the *only* form of marriage out there.
Would it surprise you that many pornographic movie actors are married, and *not* to people they have sex with on camera? And they make a middle class amount of income, so why wouldn't they live in the middle class suburbs?
But they are a tiny minority, compared to the hidden middle class sex workers. And that doesn't include the "swingers" who don't have sex for money, just for fun.
I bet you wouldn't even guess that retirement communities and nursing homes often have members who prostitute themselves to other members.
"You are simply wrong in your understanding of human nature and your prescription for change will increase misery, not reduce it."
And you are quite wrong in thinking you understand human nature, and especially that you think that you have enough moral superiority to determine what others do with their lives.
Right now, by keeping prostitution illegal, prostitution is not controlled, in fact, it runs rampant. Serious crimes feed off of that illegality, not prostitution itself, because when legalized under tightly controlled circumstances, like Nevada, other crimes are kept at arms length.
The same argument was made about gambling, that permitting it around the country would destroy us. For many decades this idea was promulgated, and advocates of legal gambling were shouted down by those who said they didn't "understand human nature."
This is not to say that gambling or prostitution is harmless. Yet for the vast majority of people who gamble, or involve themselves in prostitution in Nevada, it is a not a life-shattering trauma.
I'm not the problem. My you are judgemental. Accusing someone because of a screen name. Are you Baptist?
You got lucky. Finding the right girl is pure luck plain and simple. You have got to have a golden horseshoe up your rear end.
If you choose wrong, which is very easy, the consequences are very bad.
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. So it is best to take your chances and NOT marry so one will not end up like me.
Congratulations!
Exploitation of people by other people covers the gamut from slavery to employment. In most of human history, women have been little more than chattel. Their entire lives were exploited, and their sexuality is only part of that.
And here you want to legalize making their sexuality for sale... About as dehumanizing as you can get. I don't see where you get off justifying codified legal dehumanizing with cultural historical wrongs. Wrong is wrong, period.
Only in modern times, and in some places, do women have the opportunity to *not* be exploited from cradle to grave, so only now, when even the *law* must say that their sexuality is their own, and not the property of others, do they even have a chance to be a prostitute on their own.
Oh, geeze, what a ridiculous concept. "You don't own yourself unless you can prostitute yourself..." And then you proceed to pretend there's actually some positive side to prostitution for society?
"You apparently don’t have the moral and intellectual depth to discern this. Your belief that sexual relations are always a commercial transaction one way or another demonstrates this."
I do indeed have the moral and intellectual depth to discern this. But it seems that *you* might not. That is, if you persist in thinking that *you* should have some say, through force of law, as to what women can do with their sexuality.
Oh... So, male prostitution should be illegal, but we single out women for this privelege? What a pile of dung! You set yourself up as some kind of superior moral and intellectual authority, claiming yourself to be better than the person who rightfully recognized your own severely lacking skills in this area... And then you invoke a premise so absurd it wouldn't be accepted by a 2nd grader.
And, I might add, that I *never* said that "sexual relations are always a commercial transaction one way or another", or anything to that effect. That is a construction of your mind, most likely based on the idea that a middle class woman, perhaps married and living in the suburbs would *not* have sex with strangers for money. Ever.
Well, I can respond, since your comments were to someone unknown to you, but since I tend to agree with them, I'm certainly willing to take on the argument. The vast majority of middle class, married women do NOT have sex for money. And the vast majority of prostitutes are NOT well off people in the suburbs. But your point was to obscure the whole issue in the first place with irrelevancies. It is not actually relevant WHERE prostitutes live or whether they are married or not. What is, is that our society is worthy of continuing, and that the downward spiral of morality in law and deed by our country WILL end this society and all the reconized advances in liberty, freedom, and equality under law that it achieved in the past. Adding "legalized prostitution" doesn't exactly raise the status of our nation... but degrades it.
The vast majority of married sexual relationships are monogamous, and no prostitution in any sense of the word is involved. But that is not the *only* form of marriage out there.
It is the only VALID form of marriage out there. There are lots of substandard substitutes, but there is nothing to be gained and much to be lost by redefining a high standard to the point of being deviancy.
Would it surprise you that many pornographic movie actors are married, and *not* to people they have sex with on camera? And they make a middle class amount of income, so why wouldn't they live in the middle class suburbs?
I guess the question is... "Why would I care?". Certainly these people are not anyone to pattern my life after, and certainly cannot in any way point to ANYTHING they have done in their lives to elevate themselves, their corner of the world, nor the lives of ANYONE, ANYWHERE. Just on this basis alone, they are a waste of humanity. I'm not suggesting making it illegal, but your attempt to paint them as "normal" borders on the obscene.
But they are a tiny minority, compared to the hidden middle class sex workers. And that doesn't include the "swingers" who don't have sex for money, just for fun. I bet you wouldn't even guess that retirement communities and nursing homes often have members who prostitute themselves to other members. "You are simply wrong in your understanding of human nature and your prescription for change will increase misery, not reduce it." And you are quite wrong in thinking you understand human nature, and especially that you think that you have enough moral superiority to determine what others do with their lives.
You say that with the same certainty with which Andrea Dworkin called all sex "rape". Oh, and with no more intellectual validity than her proclamation, either.
Right now, by keeping prostitution illegal, prostitution is not controlled, in fact, it runs rampant. Serious crimes feed off of that illegality, not prostitution itself, because when legalized under tightly controlled circumstances, like Nevada, other crimes are kept at arms length.
So, Nevada is known as a bastion of peace and law-abiding with astoundingly low crime rates? Maybe you should investigate the REALITY around you before you attempt to make arguments that on their face refute themselves. Nevada may have legal prostitution, but illegal prostitution in Nevada happens to be as much of a problem as it is anywhere else. I wonder how this fits within your assininely stupid statement?
The same argument was made about gambling, that permitting it around the country would destroy us. For many decades this idea was promulgated, and advocates of legal gambling were shouted down by those who said they didn't "understand human nature."
The evidence continues to mount that the arguments were as right then as now, gambling is destroying us from within, and that the supposed 'benefits' of gambling DO NOT EXIST.
This is not to say that gambling or prostitution is harmless. Yet for the vast majority of people who gamble, or involve themselves in prostitution in Nevada, it is a not a life-shattering trauma.
It isn't? I've never met anyone who used to be a prostitute...legal or not, who could not say that it was not life-shattering. Evidence says as it did long ago, that there is nothing whatsoever to be gained by approval of prostitution, and much to be lost.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.