Our democracy is but a name. We vote? What does that mean? It means that we choose between two bodies of real, though not avowed, autocrats. We choose between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. – Helen Keller
Americans labor under the peculiar delusion that the two official chapters of the Official Big Government Party really are different from one another; this delusion is made possible by the fact that few Americans trouble themselves to learn about the world outside the United States, where most countries have half a dozen political parties which are often very different indeed. Because of this widespread delusion one will often see partisans ranting and raving about the horrible things the other party is doing, while ignoring the fact that their own party is doing almost exactly the same thing (albeit with some slightly different spin). One particularly egregious current example is that media feminists are engaging in histrionics about those EEEEEEEEEVIL Republicans trying to restrict abortion rights…while conveniently ignoring the fact that the Democrats (usually the party more likely to kiss feminists’ arses) are quietly working to restrict women’s other sexual rights. In one recent example, busybodies from BOTH parties in the lower house of the Kansas legislature joined in almost-unanimously (106-16) passing a bill which would have almost certainly put over 2000 strippers out of work.
Fortunately, the Republican leadership of the upper house recognized the bill as an attempt to destroy women’s livelihoods by regulating sexually oriented businesses out of existence and have tabled it (apparently on a permanent basis). So as in the Harry Reid case, Republicans stood up for women’s right to choose sex work while Democrats went the other way. Please don’t interpret this as a hurrah for Republicans on my part; next month it’ll be the opposite way. I’m just pointing out how often politicians change hats, and why American political parties are no more different from one another than two teams of kids formed from among a group of friends for some sport. No, The Honest Courtesan’s hurrah for the day goes to the editor of The Topeka Capital-Journal who had the balls to brand the legislators who passed the bill as moral busybodies and to refer to the bill itself as a “waste of time”:
Republican leaders in the Kansas Senate see no reason to spend time working on a bill that probably would regulate adult entertainment clubs and stores out of business. Neither do we. A similar bill was introduced and subsequently rejected last year. There’s no reason to waste more time on the issue this year, especially given other important issues — including budget deficits — facing legislators.
Supporters of the bill — known as the “community defense act” — contend adult entertainment businesses, strip clubs if you will, are host sites for illegal activities ranging from drug sales and prostitution to sex slavery. We don’t know how much, if any, marijuana or cocaine is being sold at strip clubs across Kansas, but we’re pretty sure that putting the clubs out of business entirely wouldn’t eliminate one dealer or inconvenience one user. Anyone who wants to buy illegal drugs doesn’t have to go anywhere near an adult club to find them. As far as the adult clubs in Kansas being hot beds of prostitution and sex slavery, we know of no one who has ever produced specific cases or statistics to back up such claims…
No, the real issue here is that the adult clubs offend the morals of some among us. We understand that, and know their moral outrage is sincere. However, legislation that would force all to adhere to the morals of some is bad legislation. Granted, no one wants a strip club next to their home, their church or their children’s school. But those are zoning issues that can be handled by local governments without state interference. The “community defense act” would prohibit full nudity at adult entertainment clubs, force them to close between midnight and 6 a.m., require performers to stay at least 6 feet from the customers and forbid contact between performers and customers. It also would require new clubs, adult bookstores, video stores, theaters, modeling studios and sexual device shops to be more than 1,000 feet from any church, library, park, school or day care center.
Proponents say the bill, which originated in the House and was passed along to the Senate, is not an attempt to legislate morality or regulate sexually oriented businesses out of existence. It is exactly that, and no more time should be spent on it. The clubs, book stores and shops will close their doors when they aren’t generating enough traffic to make a profit. But as long as communities are supporting them financially, the Legislature should stay out of their business and find other things to do…
Given the wide-eyed eagerness with which the mainstream American media swallows any and every claim about “sex slavery”, an editorial like this is good to see. Such journalistic integrity won’t stop the moral panic alone, but if enough members of the Fourth Estate speak up sooner or later some politicians are bound to start listening, even if only because they see the writing on the wall and want to be the ones who can say “I told you so” when this witch-hunt collapses as all of them eventually do.
It also would require new clubs, adult bookstores, video stores, theaters, modeling studios and sexual device shops to be more than 1,000 feet from any church, library, park, school or day care center.
OK, I get the church thing. We don’t want strippers bursting into flames when they cross the threshold. That would seriously fuck with their hair.
But daycare centers? Why the fuck should strippers have to drive halfway across town to drop their kids off?
And libraries? Strippers don’t read? What are they supposed to do in the bath after work?
The park? Strippers can’t eat lunch out of doors?
And schools? Please. The kids would learn more from your average showgirl than the wanker cunts who drug them with Ritalin if they can’t sit in a chair and listen to droning bullshit for six hours a day.
I think all these rules should apply to politicians, myself. No parks, no libraries, no schools, no daycare centers and for the love of god – no churches.
They’d burst into flames, too.
I swear too much. Raised in mining camps with three brothers.
I’ll clean it up!
No need, Sugar; it’s fine as it is. 🙂
This reminds me of when I lived in a medium-sized city back in the 90s. There was one strip-club in town. It wasn’t near any school or park or library where kids congregate. And that was the purpose of the location chosen by the owner of the place–he didn’t want any trouble from parents, he just wanted to run a business catering to (male) adults. Frankly, I think most strip-clubs in low-population areas choose to be out-of-the-way purposefully, so why is state regulation necessary again?
I remember two incidences in relation to that club. One was that a stripper had been killed by her boyfriend. My first reaction, and probably others’ reaction, is that if she hadn’t been working in the strip-club, it wouldn’t have happened to her, or that the club itself was to blame. But then I thought, the only one to blame here is boyfriend. For whatever reason he killed her, does working as a stripper warrant that killing? And if he didn’t like her working as a stripper, he could’ve simply ended the relationship. I mean, he knew what kind of work she did.
The other incident is that I was riding in a cab to college when a girl got in. She was a friendly, confident person, and I liked talking to her. She also knew the cab-driver by name, so she was a regular customer of his. It turns out her destination was that strip-club, and she worked there. It was quite an eye-opening experience for me to actually TALK to a stripper. She was so confident, I might have gone to work at the club myself if I hadn’t been over-weight. She certainly did NOT fit the definition of a broken-up addict or victim in any way.
I’d say that, in my experience – and call me a Brit or an European if you want – there is rarely a political party that distinguished itself on the question of women’s rights, and especially so for women of the whorish persuasion. And the ones I saw trying to get votes by trying to endorse women issues tended to be, again in my experience, really only after a few more votes rather than being wholeheartedly for women’s rights, and especially rights of women of the whorish persuasion. So, in my opinion, singling one party or the other for one thing or another that may sound pro-women’s rights is not as effective as chastising them all until they all start caring, and trying to distinguish themselves on other issues.
Full disclosure: I could never, ever, ever vote Tory (in UK) or Republican (in US). Even if they changed their attitude towards women. Or men. Or whatever. 😉
Vlad, I’m not American either, but by God that would be a tough call for me. I am socially progressive, but fiscally conservative. I hate the Republicans for their nanny state interference in the personal lives of autonomous citizens. OTOH, I hate the Democrats for thinking the answer is always More Government! When everyone works for the police state, who is left to police?
*Shiver*
I lived in China for a year. Police states are not nice.
Interesting view of Republicans. Nanny state, in my view, is rarely associated with them. I’d say they are quite the contrary. Otherwise, I do share the view on Democrats, even if I do believe that in quite a few cases more government may indeed be a good thing. May be because I am more of a Scandinavian in this respect (even though I am not myself one). But I can surely agree with the “socially progressive, fiscally conservative” line. At least now I have grown older. It is very, very true that we grow more conservative (in the dictionary, not necessarily political sense of the word) the older we get. 😉
But again, how is it you see Republicans as associated with nanny state and against individual freedoms? The more I think about it the less it computes. 🙂
There is only one political party in the U.S., and it wants big big BIG government. The soi-disant “conservatives” mostly try to control people’s minds and the soi-disant “liberals” mostly try to control their bodies, but the key word in both cases is CONTROL. Restrict the proles’ reading matter, entertainment, sex, speech, beliefs, money, property and weaponry and you own them, and it doesn’t matter which order that control over those things is established. 🙁
Vlad, I kind of think this is the point Maggie is trying to make with this post. Yes, Republicans accuse Democrats of being the “nanny state”, but Republicans just want to nanny in different ways.
Republicans like to nanny morality. They want to legislate who you can fuck, who you can marry, what you can smoke, what drugs you can take to get high (Shiraz is my personal favourite, but if everyone took that drug, there would not be enough left for me!) and how rich you have to be to get the full protection of the state (answer: pretty damn rich).
Sometimes Government IS the answer. It’s insane not to have a national healthcare sytem in place. Republicans cry “death panels” but death panels already exist: they are the insurance adjusters who decide what kind of treatment you will get based on profitability.
Every time a new rule or regulation is introduced, a position is created to POLICE that rule. Sooner or later, you will find yourself living in a police state, where all that exists are rules and outlaws.
/headache/
I’m glad I’m not American and do not have to make this choice. As the late Sam Kinison said, chosing a politician is like picking out a dildo. It’s not a matter of whether you’re gonna get fucked, it’s just a matter of how big it’s gonna be.
Ah, yes. In that sense I do agree with you (and Maggie) completely. It’s just that over here nanny *state* is more associated with the left.
@ Susan It was quite an eye-opening experience for me to actually TALK to a stripper.
Is that because you didn’t know they could talk, or you just assumed they had nothing to say? Wait… it was because she was a useful tool for you on your journey of learning about how other people are…gosh! People!
Strippers are so nice that way. They take time out of their day to educate clueless overweight white girls. Did you pay her? If you used up her time in any way, you should pay for that.
And not a broken up addict? Will wonders never cease? You would have been gob-smacked by my roomate during final year. Theoretical Physics! And she worked at the Fabulous Forum! And she did math! And she could talk! Double hard thinky!
/sarcasm/
Oops! I mean, I totally love you Susan. Just kidding! LOL
Down, girl; different Susan! This one has always vocally defended sex worker rights on here and on Bound, Not Gagged. 😉
(For the record, the other Susan also supports decriminalization).
Oh no! There’s no hovercard!
/facepalm/
Sorry Susan. I was being overly snippy, because I thought you were a different Susan.
I was referring to where I lived in the early 90s. At that time, for me to even consider doing any kind of sex work was beyond the pale, and that was even before I even heard of the term “sex worker”.
Totally different time and place from today. There was no such thing as blogs and craigslist and backpage. In fact, I don’t even think there were call-girls living in that small city, but I could be mistaken.
Feel free to take that down, Maggie. I really did think this was MY Susan. It’s unneccesarily harsh for poor other Susan.
Why don’t you rewrite it as you please and I’ll edit it for you. Just email me the changes. 🙂
If this keeps up I see a sex work revolution coming on. Why? Be careful what you wish for. If they were successful in regulating these adult businesses basically out of existence, fives times more are going to pop up as illegal businesses. It’s already happening (and I wish to heck I could find the article, I’ll toss the link in when I do) in some places that have attempted to ‘clean up’ the neighborhood. Warehouses have been set up to look just like any other warehouse on the outside yet on the inside it’s a free for all strip joint – no alcohol regulation, no ‘standing x amount of inches/feet’ from a customer, and sadly no security nor drunk check when a patron decides to drive home after having too much to drink.
If people weren’t stupid or assholes we wouldn’t need regulations or rules. Places could exist without security if people could learn just how to BEHAVE. Sadly it isn’t so.
If you don’t give people options they will make their own.
Oddly enough, the church I go to is looking for a permanent home. Right now we are just renting space. One of my suggestions was that locating next to a bar could have some major benefits by providing lots of parking space on Sunday mornings. I would be fine with being next door to a Gentleman’s Club, it could be some good marketing for the church. But I’m a Unitarian-Universalist, so what do I know about religion?
Matt,
Tim Wilson has a musical treatment of this approach.
My first thought was that I don’t know how anyone could make the leap in logic to claim that exotic dance clubs lead to “sex slavery.”
WTF?
And then I remember growing up and having to put up with people claiming that “satanic” messages were being put into rock music by ELO — yes, the Electric Light Orchestra — among other rock bands. In retrospect, how many of us were damaged by listening to the likes of Zeppelin, ELO, Sabbath or Judas Priest? Not the kids I knew — some of whom are now doctors or CEOs. And yet back in the day, this was a Serious Issue, hotly discussed in legislatures, schools, and churches.
Same old America. Same old Joe Friday/Tipper Gore mentality.
I heard a lot about the terrible effects playing Dungeons & Dragons would have on me. Well, I’ve been gaming, off and on, for decades, and except for that one job interview back in my teens D&D has had no negative effects on me at all.
And NOBODY took this bait. 🙁
Always nice to run into another D&D fan, Sailor. 😈😁
😉
As a resident of Kansas, I’m actually shocked that this bill didn’t pass. An identical one passed last year in Missouri and is now law and has forced several strip clubs out of business. Some of us may be a little backwards here, but we do have some pretty good strip clubs and adult bookstores.
I think a big problem with American democracy is that it’s based on geographic boundaries instead of ideological ones, where you can have 30% of the voters having libertarian views but they are pressured to compromise and vote Democrat. I’m advocating for a voting system like the one in Italy where even a group with 10% support can get a few seats in Congress.
Look at what I said earlier about getting rid of winner-take-all.
Except now I can’t find where I said it. I wonder if maybe I only MEANT to say it?