One law for the lion and ox is oppression. – William Blake
In Greek mythology, Procrustes was a bandit who played a sadistic game with his victims. He would invite them to lie upon his bed; those who were shorter than the bed were stretched via a rack until they fit, and he chopped off the lower legs of taller men so they, too would fit. The expression “Procrustean bed” therefore refers to an arbitrarily-determined, ruthlessly-enforced “one size fits all” legal standard, such as that which the State of Massachusetts hopes to impose upon its citizens. In the minds of these Procrustean legislators, everyone involved in prostitution in any way is either a criminal or a victim, and anyone who cannot be defined as one will automatically be defined as the other. Regular reader Jason called my attention to this story from NPR affiliate WBUR in Boston:
The Massachusetts House is considering a bill that would change the way the state prosecutes criminals in the sex trade. The proposal would define the people who manage prostitutes, or “pimps,” as “human traffickers.” It would also impose much stiffer penalties on pimps and the johns who pay for sex. Some say the law would help put an end to trafficking by making it easier to prosecute those who benefit from prostitution. But others say it would do little to curb the sex trade…
Defining anyone involved in transactional sex as a “criminal” is nothing new, but traditionally prostitute, management and client were all considered so. Unfortunately, the injection of trafficking mythology into the mixture in order to pander to the current witch hunt requires that the state produce victims other than the amorphous “public decency” or the faceless “state”. A “human trafficker” requires a human to “traffick”, so the law amputates prostitutes’ legal “legs” (i.e. the presumption of adult self-determination), reducing us to victims unable to walk into or out of prostitution on our own. And if all whores are victims, all those who assist us in our work must therefore be victimizers. This Procrustean law defines anyone who “manages” a prostitute (of course, “manage” is not specifically defined) as a “pimp” and all pimps as “human traffickers”, thus stretching escort service owners, drivers, boyfriends and husbands into international gangsters.
As is typical for stories about politically popular but legally abhorrent “feel good” legislation, the article next attempts to distract the reader’s attention from the real issues by telling the horror story of its poster child:
Tanee Hobson, 21, is among the bill’s supporters. As a teen, Hobson felt unwanted and ugly, and she had little support from her family. At 14, she ran away from home. Soon after, she started dating and living with a man…[who later] pushed her into prostitution…One she got into “the life,” it was hard to get out, Hobson says. She needed the money, she couldn’t go home, and she was addicted to the self-esteem boosts she got every time someone paid to have sex with her. She makes it clear: people don’t sell themselves unless they’re desperate. “I don’t think anyone wakes up one day saying, ‘I want to sell my body for money,’” Hobson said. “Things have to be going on in your mind, you had to be going through some things to make you want to go to that part where you think your body isn’t worth it.”
In other words, if a 21-year-old former teen runaway who has been brainwashed by prohibitionists says “people don’t sell themselves unless they’re desperate”, that automatically trumps what many thousands of adult women, both anecdotally and in studies, have said. The Procrustean Prohibitionists have chosen Tanee Hobson as the bed by which we are all to be measured, and because she did not voluntarily choose sex work, the legs of every voluntary adult whore have to be hacked off to her level of self-determination. The rest of the paragraph is no better; performing a sexual service is described by the tired and stupid metaphor “selling one’s body”, as though someone else’s soul was going to inhabit it after the “sale”. The language is of course intended to make the reader think of slavery, and the phrase “she was addicted to the self-esteem boosts she got every time someone paid to have sex with her” is intended to call attention away from something wholly positive (increased self esteem) by evoking the old stereotype of the drug-addict streetwalker. So is everything which increases self-esteem now to be an “addiction”, or is self-esteem only a bad thing when sex is involved?
The downward spiral next brings this article into the usual propaganda; we are told that the DA, Daniel Conley,
…regrets that his staff used to arrest and charge young women for prostitution while pimps and johns went free. He is also troubled by the fact that in the United States, on average, girls get into prostitution between the ages of 12 and 14…this harsh reality is one of the reasons Conley decided prosecutors should change the way they approach prostitution. “I concluded that the best way to deal with this problem is to treat the prostitutes, especially the young ones, as victims,” Conley said. “It’s classified by our office as human trafficking, instead of just prostitution, because the phrase prostitution or the concentration on the prostitute emphasizes their criminal behavior. So we strive, in most cases, to take the young woman out of the harmful situation and focus our prosecutorial energies on the pimp, the human trafficker”…Currently, pimps could face three months to two years in prison or a few hundred dollars in fines. Under the new trafficking law, they could be sentenced to 20 years for selling adults in the sex industry and sentenced to life for exploiting children…if the bill passes, a john could face a maximum of two-and-a-half years, or 10 years for underage prostitution. The law would also allow courts to seize the money pimps make and give it to their victims. And it would create a task force to study trafficking and come up with strategies to end it.
As we know, the average age at which a prostitute enters the trade is 24, not 14. This lie is intended to inflame “think of the children!” hysteria and call attention away from the fact that Conley supports a law which could send a man to prison for two decades for marrying the “wrong kind” of woman or even just driving a hooker to a call, and just for a little Swedish spice he wants adult men sent to jail for over two years for consensual sexual relations with an adult woman. The law would also drive escort services out of business because none could dare risk having their companies and bank accounts seized in response to a complaint from a disgruntled employee; this would force some escorts who prefer to work with agencies to instead work independently even if they don’t want to. But of course, the new law would also provide plenty of money for political whores to look for a “solution” to a virtually-nonexistent problem.
The one saving grace of the article is that, though its author lacks the intellectual honesty (or perhaps editorial permission) to interview sex worker rights advocates who might present a true opposing view, it at least pays lip service to fairness by interviewing Cherie Jimenez, the director of a Boston harm reduction project which, though it considers prostitution harmful, also recognizes that it is usually a free choice:
Jimenez…said many people end up in the sex trade because they’re poor and have no other options…[she] says defining everyone who engages in prostitution as a trafficking victim is problematic, because it sensationalizes the sex trade and disempowers the people in it… “When you look at in the context of, oh, these sorry victims, or passive victims…or you have to be enslaved…it’s not like that. You know, I’ve met young women that are very edgy. It’s not that they’re passive. They have incredible strength and resilience…”
But despite this, the article ends on a chilling note from the Massachusetts Attorney General, Martha Coakley; she calls the demonization of clients and employees of prostitutes “fair” and justifies the continued criminalization of so-called “victims” allowed by the new law: “Keep in mind, the act itself is criminal, so we’re not excusing that criminal behavior,” she said…[but] prosecutors would probably only enforce penalties against people who refuse to accept this kind of help to get out of prostitution.” This so-called “help” means that in order to have even a chance at avoiding prosecution, arrested “victims” would be forced into re-education camps or the modern equivalents of Magdalene laundries. Apparently, Coakley isn’t against coercion and enslavement as long as the state does it and it doesn’t result in increased self esteem for anybody.
The one and only good thing about this new law: the courts and cops don’t get to keep the money they seize.
I suspect that the biggest part of “accepting help” that will be required of prostitutes wishing to avoid prosecution will be to state on the record that she was coerced and she’s so glad that dirty pimp is out of her life.
So the age at which girls enter prostitution has gone from fourteen or fifteen to an even younger twelve to fourteen. Will it become five before people realize that the number is a fabrication?
If the prostitute is entirely independent, does all her own bookkeeping, answers her own phone, does her own driving, does not have security, is unmarried, has no boyfriend or girlfriend, no children, etc., can she be arrested for trafficking herself?
Most of the money collected by charities is supposed to go to the cause,but we all know how that works. And ALL the money collected by state lotteries was supposed to go to “education”.
The “accepting help” is spelled out in the article; the woman will have to submit to a state-approved brainwashing program, sort of like a “john school” in reverse. Many of these programs are Christian, which is an inbuilt conflict of interest right there. And as reported in my column of April 29th, under such regimes arrested prostitutes, especially underage ones, are heavily pressured to “give up pimps” they never had in order to escape prosecution, which could lead to fingers pointed at boyfriends, roommates or even cab drivers. Those who refuse might be “diagnosed” as suffering from “Stockholm Syndrome” and committed for “treatment”. Nor are whores the only targets, as you’ll see in tomorrow’s column.
I’d bet there is a carve out in the seize for “investigation costs” or “court costs” or something that would allow them to keep the money from the schools as it is in Missouri and Indiana.
Radley Balko did an article on “The Forfeiture Racket” a few months ago.
I have many, many times wondered how long it is going to take until we see the trafficking oneself paradox ….
very insightful point Sailor.
Thank you. As for when, my guess is that it will be within a year (before or after) a teenager is caught masturbating and charged with child molestation. I only wish I were joking.
“Keep in mind, the act itself is criminal, so we’re not excusing that criminal behavior,” she said…[but] prosecutors would probably only enforce penalties against people who refuse to accept this kind of help to get out of prostitution.”
America – land of the free???
Not any more, I’m afraid; in the last decade the US has achieved the state I’ve been predicting since high school, what I call “universal criminality”. There are now so many vague, contradictory and unconstitutionally-broad statutes on the books that, by the estimate of noted criminal defense attorney Harvey Silverglate, the average American citizen commits three felonies every day without even being aware of it. 🙁
Ha. I’ve predicted the same thing from around that same age. I’m totally behind on my reading here but this is definitely among your best columns. I would love love love to see this published in a major publication. It’s more than good enough although based on the “wrong” politics 🙂
At the risk of being accused of vanity, I must say I was rather pleased with it myself. **blush**
It’s not vanity.
May I borrow the term “political whore” sometime, perhaps for a phrase such as “prostitution of the Constitution by political whores”? LOL
Please do! Did you ever read this column?
That’s fantastic and totally true.
Politicians hate whores because a) our choice in profession is basically telling the government to fuck off and b) it’s human nature to lash out at others for what one sees in the mirror.
This is very much in line with the Prohibitionist mindset ala’ “the war on drugs” the bill of rights means nothing and prosecutors routinely lie & fabricate “evidence” in order to obtain their sacred conviction.
The supreme court eviscerated the fourth amendment recently in a marijuana case ruling that police may enter a Home without a warrant if they “smell” marijuana. Another “drug war” exception to the constitution. How many cops will now smell marijuana every time they knock on a door.
Just watch the drug war because every tactic they use in those efforts will ultimately show up for other offenses. It’s all part of the Prohibitionist mindset. And of course, what about the children?
Thanks for the hat tip!
Although I’m only a recent regular reader. 🙂
I appreciate all my regular readers, recent or not. 🙂
I think already Massachusetts considers sex workers and johns to be sexual offenders. This puts the “offenders” on a public list available to any one. Any employer or landlord can have you fired for this horrible crime. You must report to the police every time you move, etc.
This is what makes me hate Christians so much.
“Let copulation thrive!” King Lear
Dear Gawaine Ross, please note that not ALL Christians are doing what you’re talking about and are also against it. 1 of the many reasons I came here was to show that there ARE Christians FOR decriminalization of prostitution. I’m 1 of them. I’ve been against this ###*** of putting the people you’re describing on public lists for years. To be honest, at least some believers (like me) get tired of the blanket statements that ALL the Christians are doing this list stuff and also REVEL in it plus are using as much of our time as possible ordering around everyone we can in regards to their sex lives, etc. There’s at least a few that aren’t doing this ###*** and instead are doing what they’re supposed to like helping people truly in need, etc. Thanks for listening.
Laura, I want to say that I’m one non-Christian who understands that there are self-professed Christians who don’t fit the war-mongering cliché which, unfortunately, the vast majority of so-called “Christians” do. In other words, there are actual followers of Jesus out there, and it sounds like you’re one of them.
It’s pretty horrifying what’s being done in Jesus’ name. The Bible contains the verse “Jesus wept.” If in fact Jesus is sitting at the right hand of God at this moment, I feel certain that weeping wouldn’t be enough; he must be sobbing constantly at the state of the world, and especially at the hypocrisy of his phony followers.
BTW, when I say I’m non-Christian, I don’t mean I think that Jesus was misguided. I think his message, centering around the Golden Rule, was right on target. I just don’t think that Jesus was or is the only way to enlightenment.
Dear Laura,
I know you are right, but my anger at the fundies spills over into rhetoric and polemic. I see THEM as the enemy but then I remember conservative Quakers, and how can you hate a Quaker?
I live in Massachusetts, a Catholic state that seems exceptionally punitive to me. It makes me think the conservative agenda is all about punishment.
Goddess help us.
I would point out that Christians at least have a body of teachings that warn against just this kind of self-rightious asshattery (“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” springs to mind). The Liberal Intellectual Radical Progressives who imagine that they are in a position to morally lead the world have no such limiting teachings and a thus prone to the most horrible kind of well-intentioned viciousness. Witness that the Swedes, some of the nicest people on earth, who came close to making Socialism work than anybody else, have been suffering from an episodic eugenics/euthanasia scandal in their public hospitals for decades now. Every time they think they have it under control they find that yet another self-appointed God-with-an-MD has been sterilizing/euthanizing people based on their genetics.
BTW, I’m an agnostic.
And then, of course, there’s the Swedish Model…
Except that none of the bullshit you’re bitching about has dick to do with liberals. I could just as easily make a case that this is what the wages of conservatism gets you, and that would be bullshit too.
BTW, don’t you think that maybe “Liberal Intellectual Radical Progressives” is kind of gilding the lily? Did you have that on the clipboard? I don’t think I’d want to type “Conservative Reactionary Anti-Intellectual Atavists” more than once.
Dear Sailor B, there HAVE been liberals for eugenics, OK? Margaret Sanger said that liberal leaders (including black liberal leaders) were needed to PUSH eugenics while appearing to be on the surface AGAINST it. I’m pretty sure you’ve heard the term “limousine liberal”? There’s some fit in that category, unfortunately. I think it’s wonderful that CSP is talking about this evil going on in Sweden. Is it any different from the ###*** that have had people sterilized in the US? ###*** the eugenics loving FILTH. I also know there’s liberals against these evils (like YOU and at least a few others) so I say give credit where it’s due.
To Sailor B, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limousine_liberal
Eugenics was very popular back in the day, and many who considered themselves ahead of everybody else supported it, and so did a lot who saw it as the way to preserve the traditional social position of the already powerful. That Sanger wanted progressives to push it is hardly surprising; I’m sure she wanted churches, atheists, liberals, and conservatives to all push it. Hell, I’d sure like to have all those groups pushing space-based solar power.
“Limousine liberal” is a bullshit term which basically means “if you’re not desperately poor yourself you’re not allowed to be on the side of the poor in any way, nor can you criticize any rich person for anything ever.”
And of course if you are desperately poor it’s kind of hard to get your message out. Ergo: if you can afford to promote your views, you shouldn’t; if you should, you can’t.
So you can take your limousine and wreck it.
I was watching a program today talking about the Texas prison system being built up at a cost of 2 billion dollars in response to a serial killer that after killing three teens was released on parole, and then killed at least five adults.
The Wharf laws as they were named called for tougher restrictions on parole releases, and the state dumped the 2 billion into building the largest prison system in the free world it stated.
In closing it said that America has now passed Russia, and is the World Leader in Rates of Incarceration.
Remember, prison is a business, with private interests and profits involved.
Lock em up, and keep em their earning prisons money, and private contractors such as commissary providers make a killing.
Then, the double whammy is that once an offender is released, it is legal to discriminate against him for the rest of his or her life with regard to employment and housing.
They are often trapped into commiting further crimes, winding up right back in a prison cell, earning money for those that profit in the Incarceration Racket.
Sad, Sad, Sad.
Thank you Maggie, and Jason…. Great article.
Further, I personally think that the build up had nothing to do with the protection of the public, but actually just allowed them a good excuse to have plenty of room to profit from inmates such as prostitutes and potsmokers, as Brandy Devereoux has written, what did Texas spend last year housing convicted prostitutes? Was it two million?
I know their marijuana incarcerations are equally ridiculous.
Good thing they had enough room to keep all of those gooses laying golden eggs for their jailers safely locked away from society….
2.3 million JUST IN HARRIS COUNTY. I believe it was 8 million statewide just to house the ladies incarcerated. This doesn’t include what the cost was to get them there, i.e. arrested, judged, convicted etc.
http://tcaa.brandysbedroom.com/?p=580
It’s $22.6 million per year for the whole state.
This is an issue that directly affects too many surviving family/friends of murder victims (MVS). We’re outraged that the perpetrators in our cases GET parole AT ANY TIME because so many are in prison for NON-VIOLENT crimes. It’s a huge problem affecting not only us but all other family/friends of those who have been victimized by the truly violent criminals. There’s also the people who have had the violent crimes done to them who have to deal with their attackers getting parole. Personally, I’ve yet to run across an MVS who wants the murderer in their case free (I’m 100% with them on this). I’ve only read about 1 and haven’t forgotten that because it was so shocking to me. Anyway, people need to realize that they CAN HELP KEEP violent criminals in prison with parole protest petitions. They do work and thank God for them. I could scream my head off 24 hours a day about those who talk endlessly about how bad violent crime is, they’re getting parole, etc., etc., but DO NOTHING about it. I’ve mentioned petitions to some of these people and they don’t say a word about even trying to do them. When I say mention I don’t order them around or are harsh, I just point out calmly (which is hard to do at times to be honest) that the petitions do work, take very little time and also mention 1 website that’s a wonderful source of information proving that they can and do work. The truth is people who say how bad it is and do nothing ARE part of the whole problem. Are there other components to this whole thing? Of course! There’s the whole evil “Drug War” as an example of 1 of these components. Also, the truth is in many cases until a violent crime happens to them or someone they care about, it doesn’t mean a fraction as much to them as it should. I literally used to believe that murder would never touch my family. The arrogance of that is very sick and sad to me and always will be. However, at least I literally got shocked OUT OF THAT once it DID happen. That was needed. Anyway, please realize that this problem CAN be fought with the petitions and they really do take very little time to do, can be found quickly with Internet searches, etc. The Internet has helped greatly with petitions because it speeds up the process of finding them plus signing them, etc. Other ways people can help is to write letters, etc., to support legislation that keeps truly violent criminals in prison. If people are interested in getting involved in helping those who are in prison that truly didn’t commit the violent crimes, there’s great organizations like the Innocence Project that have e-mail lists you can get on for free and get their petitions. It’s an outrage that anyone has been wrongly imprisoned and this group is 1 of the most well-known in helping right these outrages and if they end up not righting them then at least they TRIED which is a huge deal. Thanks for listening.
Dear Kelly, I’m pretty sure that was the Kenneth McDuff case that was being talked about. What you’re saying was on the news matches this case. What really gets me is why don’t they talk about the ###*** in the system that caused this ###*** to EVER be free to begin with? Yes, some reforms came from this case (thank God), but they literally didn’t help the family/friends of the people he killed when he was released. Their family members/friends are gone and they had nothing to do with it. This reminds me of the Catholic Church apologies 100’s of years after the people involved have died, etc. Kind of too late, isn’t it? Interesting that McDuff was freed years after the GREAT Drug War started in the US. God help us. There was another serial killer in Texas besides McDuff that was freed and also killed again. Isn’t the system GREAT in this way? My sarcasm helps me to cope when reading about/writing about these things. It would be wonderful to hear some talk about Drug War and other ###*** that lead to McDuff and others like him being freed to begin with.
When decriminalizing marijuana for recreational use was put to a referendum in California last year, a lot of the money to defeat it came from the prison guards. They were afraid that if the state of California quit locking up non-violent pot smokers, the guards would lose their jobs in huge numbers.
As for prisons, they should never ever be private, never ever be run for profit, never ever pay their own way. Prisons should be run at a loss by the government and paid for with taxes. Locking people up should NEVER be profitable.
I agree, and in fact I’d make a similar argument about prosecuting attorneys: ALL government-employed attorneys should rotate through both the prosecutor’s and defender’s offices, and when being considered for promotion or whatever their ENTIRE record, both successful prosecutions and successful defenses, should be considered. Nobody should profit politically from locking people up, either.
Wow. I wish I’d thought of that. Yes, I’d try to institute it through executive order if I were a governor, and I’d introduce it as a bill if I were a legislator.
On a lighter note, nerds will love this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrBYof1Y5d0
I know, because I’m a nerd and I loved it.
Sailor B, overall, I love nerd people (especially the sexy nerd men like you). Men who are some kind of artist and/or hugely interested in any of the arts are wonderful to me and always have been. I love the NON-mercenary groupie women (and the few men groupies) and understand 100% their motivations for all they do.
[smooch]
Kelly,
America passed Russia & China many, many, years ago. We have 25% of the world’s prisoners and less than 5% of the world’s population. The primary cause is the punitive drug laws along with the criminalization of many other victimless activities. Our law & order politicians have caused this situation and we are bankrupting the country with prisons. Gives new meaning to the phrase “American Exceptionalism”, doesn’t it?
Dear Jack,
“An unjust law is no law.”
-St. Augustine of Hippo
Never was a wise saying forgotten so quickly!
Augustine said a number of wise things, two of which have appeared as epigrams to this column: “Suppress prostitution, and capricious lusts will overthrow society” and “The weakness of little children’s limbs is innocent, not their souls.”
Indeed it does my friend. Indeed it does.
A few tables for you:
I’m not saying we don’t incarcerate far too many people. We do. But the graphs you are showing do not, for me, make much of a case, as they are based on data I simply do not trust. In Cuba, for example, the number of people imprisoned per 100,000 population is 100,000. Period. The same is true for any totalitarian regime, and always has been. So any data from totalitarian regimes that says otherwise is false. And yet it gets included in the graph, because the graph is not about examining the truth, it is about illustrating a point.
I notice something from my (shallow) knowledge of the history of White Slavery hysterias; when such a hysteria is running amok, there is usually a kernel of fact at base. There is white slavery going on SOMEWHERE, just not in the country that is getting hysterical about it. For example, when the late Victorian hysteria was at its peak in the United States, there were well documented sales of Caucasian Russian women to the Arab states of the middle east.
One hesitates to say that these hysterias are ALWAYS intended to distract attention from where there really is a problem by making a great fuss about somewhere the problem ISN’T, but one begins to wonder. The intellectualoids who seem to be driving this current hysteria (at least in part) have a vested interest in people not noticing the Multiculturalism is swill. They really can’t afford to have the Masses notice that the Islamic nations of the world are re-instituting the practice of chattel slavery as fast as they think they can get away with it. So, rather than let the growing concern for the re-emergence of slave raids in sub-saharan Africa gain momentum, they drum up fears of non-existant slavery in the United States.
The Liberal Intellectual Radical Progressives who I suspect of doing this absolutely cannot afford to have people realize that it is not only POSSIBLE to make judgements between cultures, it is a moral necessity. If that idea ever catches hold, their treasured international progressivism flounders, simply because so many of the people they publicly embrace are obvious barbarians, swine and monsters. Arafat. Che.
That only applies to the first chart, C.S.P; the countries in the third chart are all Western (with a couple of marginal cases like Turkey) and the second uses only US data.
As for cultural relativism, though, I have a one-word answer for people who start opining that “it’s not possible to make judgments between cultures”; that answer is “Yanomamo“.
For me it comes down to this; if one culture is debating whether to recognize homosexual marriages and another is debating whether to burn homosexuals alive or throw them off the minarets of the local mosque, I know which one is better. And I also know that anyone who does not have a firm opinion is an imbecile. They don’t have to have MY opinion, but they do have to have AN opinion. If you can’t distinguish between South korea, which is flawed, and North Korea, which is a horror show, you aren’t morally superior, you’re a twit.
I have more respect for people who are flat out wrong, but have convictions, than for idiots who want to make no value judgements and insist this is a sign of sophistication.
Absolutely. It reminds me of a scriptural passage I recently used as an epigram: “So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.” – Revelation 3:16.
I hear this complaint fairly often: liberals are always saying that every culture and, more than that, every tradition within every culture is has exact moral equivalence and that it is just plain bigoted to make any distinctions. But the funny thing is, I seldom if ever actually hear liberals themselves saying any such thing.
It seems to me that this is something that “everybody knows” is true about liberals because it’s been reaped so many times by people who are not liberals. But liberals don’t know that it’s true, because it’s not.
Sort of like the way “everybody knows” that conservatives are all racist. Except of course that this isn’t true either.
Now, you might be able to find somebody, somewhere, who has said such a thing about everybody is morally exactly the same. That somebody might even qualify, if we don’t argue to much about who is and is not a True Scotsman, as a liberal. But then I could find some flaming racist bigot jerk who qualifies as a conservative (he said he’s against high taxes!). Such extreme casting is not useful.
Down, boy; it seems to me that C.S.P. is speaking of a particular group (reread his post) who is driving the “trafficking” hysteria rather than broadly-defined “liberals”. Let’s not pretend there are no such things as cultural relativists, because I’ve interacted with them online and I’m sure you have as well.
I’m going to be out of town for the weekend. I’ll check again when I get back. I’ll have had time to cool off and reconsider by then.
When you do, consider this; I grew up in academia. There is a particularly virulent brand of Progressivism/Radicalism loose in higher education that really does preach cultural relativism. Further it is out of academia (the Women’s Studies circuit, to be specific) that I first started to encounter talk/writing about “human trafficing” in the United States …. just as news of undeniable evidence of a resurgence of chattel slavery was beginning to be reported from Africa, the Middle East, and the hinterlands of the former USSR.
By all means look it up yourself. I would try to provide cites, but I am dealing with a seriously ill SO and simply don’t have the mental energy.
I find it damming that American feminists are somehow MUCH more concerned with the minor slights suffered by over-educated white women of the upper-middle class than by the spread of disgusting anti-felmal practices such as honor killings. I consider this highjacking of the slavery issue to be AT BEST another case of “if it isn’t happening to Vassar Grads it can’t be important”.
Now you’re touching I consider to be one of the biggest problems in American feminism: its takeover, as with First Wave feminism before it, by middle-class white women who converted the movement from one which sought to correct social wrongs against women into one intended to advance the personal agendas of privileged middle-class white women.
Which is a problem, and has as much to do with radicalliberalprogressiveblahblahblah as a poll tax.
My ride is late. So I’m still here. They say it’ll be any minute now.
Dear CSP, I hope your SO gets well. It’s a very hard thing to deal with and I wish both of you the best.
Yeah, I hope she gets better too. I kind of feel like a jerk for not saying that sooner.
I guess Laura really is my better half.
No kidding prisons are run as a private enterprise. Guess who is one of the biggest owners of prisons? Dick Cheney!
Cultural relativism is necessary, and no, I’m not university educated.
Let’s take Amazon River basin Indians. (By the way, Native Americans prefer to be called Indians.) Some of these cultures are very warlike, in some rape is a common and accepted thing, and they still rely on shamans to cure the ill. Can we assume we are morally superior? We, who have the highest rate of executions in the world both in number and per capita? That’s saying something, considering China.
People who morally judge individuals are on a moral high horse. Cultures that do it are even worse.
Morality is relative. This is plainly evident just by looking at the age of consent in various countries and in various states of the US. In Mass. the age of consent is 18. In many other states it is 16. Which ones are morally superior?
According to wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment, China executes way more people than the U.S. does, both on an absolute and a relative scale.
I’m sorry. I was thinking of total number of prisoners.
A certain degree of cultural relativism is indeed necessary, but NOT on issues related to individual rights. I fully accept that issues like sexual morality, acceptable dress in public, etc etc are 100% relative, but it is NEVER, EVER right for ANY culture not at an absolute subsistence level to suppress the right of the individual to be individual, no matter what its excuse. A society has the right to say “you can’t do that in public”, but when consenting adults are punished for behavior which affect only them and nobody else, I will ALWAYS call such oppression “evil” no matter what culture it appears in nor what the excuse the perpetrators of such oppression come up with. We are not ants; the group exists to support the individuals in it, not vice-versa.
Dear Gawaine, haven’t there been at least a few in the US who have deserved the death penalty? I could name some. 1 thing that can’t be denied about DP: once the person gets the DP there’s NO chance they’ll harm anyone again.
My view on the death penalty (“DP”) is that sure, many deserve to die, but I don’t want to be responsible for a cold-blooded killing (we’re talking about someone who’s in custody and isn’t going anywhere). If the “law” kills a criminal, and I do not protest, then my hands are covered with blood. I therefore choose not to support the death penalty.
I’m sure there are people in prison who deserve to be executed. Probably a few who deserve to be waterboarded and then burned at the stake, castrated, ect. but we don’t* do that. The reason we don’t do that isn’t because they don’t deserve it, but because we are not (supposed to be) as barbaric as they are.
* Yeah, I know.
Dear Laura,
Yes. There is a good two word argument for the death penalty: Timothy McVeigh.
The problem with the death penalty is it tends to extend to crimes that have nothing to do with murder. This may not happen all at once, but it certainly happened in GB, where up until 1800 or so stealing a loaf of bread deserved the death penalty.
The other problem is guilt. A good number of people in prison are wrongfully convicted. Confessions can be coerced without torture out of semi-intelligent or very frightened individuals. We have the DNA science to establish guilt, but the Supreme Court ruled about 18 months ago that prisoners do not have the right to request DNA testing.
As for serial killers and serial rapists, I am in favor of dropping them off alone on a remote island and leaving them there with no further assistance. I’m also in favor of allowing people in prison to commit suicide (with a judge’s consent to make sure the guards haven’t coerced the prisoner), just as I think suicide is a right for all. A right, but not necessarily a good or wise choice.
There is a good two word argument for the death penalty: Timothy McVeigh.
Big whoop. We got vengeance on him, which satisfies the blood-lust of much of the American population. On the other hand, had he suffered life in prison, he might have decided to open up and reveal more about his crimes, his fellow conspirators, etc. Now that chance is lost.
I still fail to see the point.
I try to be a good person, not vindictive, etc. But I have to admit that after 9-11-01, I found myself wishing that McVeigh had gotten one more delay in execution, so that he could see that he’d been topped.
But my own feelings about what “serves him right” are no stronger an argument than anybody else’s. Again, the DP isn’t about what kind of person the prisoner is, it’s about what kind of people we are.
In Cuba, for example, the number of people imprisoned per 100,000 population is 100,000. Period..
Interesting rhetorical point, and I’m well aware of how repressive the government in Cuba is, but I’d much rather live as a citizen under Castro than in an actual prison in the U.S.
… the Islamic nations of the world are re-instituting the practice of chattel slavery…
If you are an American, I suggest that you focus your energies not on removing the mote from Islamic eyes, but on removing the beam from Americans’. One nation leads the world in running around the globe murdering people, and that nation is the United States. I think most people would choose enslavement over annihilation.
…obvious barbarians, swine and monsters. Arafat…
I won’t even MENTION the country adjacent to Arafat which was born in theft of indigenous land and continues to expand its boundaries by means that could label its leaders “barbarians, swine, and monsters.” And they’ve got nuclear weapons, too!
Maggie, if this is getting too OT, you’ll let us know…
As long as the two of you continued to conduct yourselves like the educated gentlemen I know you are, I don’t mind at all if a thread drifts. Too-rigid control is the enemy of organic thought and serendipity. 🙂
Hello CPS,
You’ve read the graph incorrectly. For Cuba it is 100 people out of every 100,000.
A good way to check facts like this is
http://www.nationmaster.org
Sorry, I meant JDL.
The 100,000 out of 100,000 comes from C.S.P.’s post above, in which he’s making the point that, in effect, everyone is in prison in a totalitarian country. Neither he nor I believe that the graphs Maggie posted make any such assertion (but of course, they’re addressing the number of people formally in prison).
Gawaine, I think C.S.P.’s point was that in a totalitarian regime, everyone is imprisoned even if they’re not actually behind bars.
It needs to be said that there ARE people who DO literally work within the prisons, what’s known as Victims Assistance offices, parole boards, etc. that DO work for and truly care for the victims of violent crimes and their family/friends. These people are to be commended because they’re working within a system that too many who do work in it are reveling in Drug War, being cruel to the prisoners and love putting away people for drugs, prostitution, etc. I know of at least 1 of these people who works within the system in Texas who has worked tirelessly for years to truly help the REAL victims and their family/friends. Thanks for listening.
[…] instead, I’ll offer the testimony of Maggie McNeill, a retired call girl. In her blog, The Honest Courtesan,” Maggie critiques Coakley’s bill using the colorful myth of the Procrustean Bed, … an […]
Maggie-
As I readily admit, I am not one of your more “educated” readers. Yet, I am passionate to learn, and voice my opinions.
I am grateful though to you for articulating, and providing information, and allowing others a forum to bring their opinions, and information as well.
I appreciate the tables that you present, because you helped me to understand even further, what I had already been thinking about regarding American Incarceration.
Having been incarcerated unfairly, behind police brutality, it was impossible for me to even have my injuries photographed by my public defenders office until 11 days after the incident, many huge bruises had healed to smaller, less dramatic yellowish spots by then. No victims rights advocates or any type of advocate was made available to me. Medical providers were hostile and inflammatory toward me, although the hospital I was taken to ran immediate MRI’s and found that I obtained herniated discs during the beating, I was not given any pain medication, or any medication at all for fifty days following the arrest. So naturally, the topic of incarcerations and the dirty motivations of unfair incarcerations are of great interest to me.
I guess what I am trying to say, is that as a sex worker, I appreciate that their is a voice out there, articulating many of my own thoughts and feelings. Sharing your education, and research skills through this blog.
Whether or not us readers always agree, or whether we don’t. I agree with the poster above that says you don’t have to have my opinion, just AN opinion.
Thank you for providing a place for these opinions to be shared and debated.
It is most helpful speaking for myself at least. In general, I find that your postings are very in tune with my thoughts and feelings. Just coming from a sex workers point of view.
Never apologize for lacking a formal education, Kelly; some of the wisest, most intelligent and even erudite people I’ve ever met were entirely self-educated, and some of the most foolish, stupid and ignorant hold PhDs (Melissa Farley and friends come to mind). A degree proves nothing other than the recipient’s ability to follow through with a long-term project, and though that’s commendable it is nowhere close to the greatest of human virtues.
As for the rest, you are very welcome. 🙂
Dear Kelly, I’m very sorry for the HELL you were put through. To be honest, it’s no surprise to hear you had NO victim advocate, assistance, etc. This happens way too much of the time. I have a strong feeling it’s possible 1 reason you weren’t offered help is because you were the victim of police brutality. This kind of ###*** does go on way too much. What’s ironic is there really ARE some who HAVE been helped by Victims Assistance programs, etc. I’ve talked to some of these people online. Others, like me, our experiences with Victims Assistance were outright horrible or not there at ALL like in your case. There’s so many things wrong. The good people in VA programs don’t have enough funding to do good, but they do what they can at least. The ideal is for all to get offered help and to have the help given be good and fairly administered. This is something those who LOVE what’s called the “NIMBY” (not in MY back yard) mentality and also think no one should pay any taxes should realize: if you don’t want ANY taxes then accept that if YOU are a violent crime victim there won’t be any VA program to help you. I’ve yet to hear 1 of these NIMBY people say anything like this. God help us. They also scream about violent criminals getting parole, etc., but don’t want that prison near them (i.e., in or near their back yard). Instead they should go where all the poor people are, etc. (eyeroll). I’ve also yet to hear 1 say they do any activism work to at least try to stop what they’re screaming about. Again, I’m very sorry for what you went through.
This is all underscored by sex-negative feminism.
Sex is basically bad, except for what feminists determine it’s good for.
Try explaining that to feminists.
Feminism has covered a lot of ground over the years and is by no means monolithic. The ones you speak of are blind to the differences between the way men’s brains work and women’s brains work. There is a lot of research being done on this. I use http://www.livescience.com as a source.
[…] Maggie McNeill, bringing the facts, as […]
Making the data fit your preconceived notions and linking this to Procrustes was described by the psychiatrist Richard Asher. He was also Jane’s father.
Trafficking problems seem to stem from a unilateral mentality that what is good for one country isn’t for another. Above all, trafficking is the abuse of someone else’s children that isn’t anticipated for one’s own. Hence, the golden rule has yet to be impressed upon trafficking criminals as the best method of avoiding what most don’t see as a threat, but who impose it on others.
Breaking through that mentality is what causes the altruism of zero tolerance just as it did during the Puritan witch hunt when the minister’s wife was accused, which brought it to a halt immediately.
[…] but the only way for a sex worker to actually “escape” is to pretend to be “trafficked” and finger some supposed “pimp” to be sacrificed in her place (and possibly to submit to “rehabilitation” as well). But even here, the back-and-forth can […]
[…] irons should be let out on their own recognizance? What do you say about someone who embraces trafficking hysteria and makes such appalling arguments for the destruction of civil liberties that she is routinely […]