Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. – Aldous Huxley
On several occasions I’ve described prohibitionism using the metaphor of a dam built to hold back liberty. But in Western countries where most people look dimly upon restriction of basic freedoms (such as the right to choose one’s own sex partners, the right to engage in business and the right to bodily autonomy), governments must invent excuses with which to rationalize the prohibition; the dam must therefore also hold back the truth, which would erode prohibitionist lies and with them the support for anti-whore tyranny. But truth, like water, tends to seek its own level, and no matter how solid the wall it eventually begins to seep out. Take this October 28th article from the Evening Standard, which reports that a recent London study has found exactly what any prostitute could’ve told them they’d find:
Most foreign prostitutes in London are not trafficked and choose to sell sex because it earns more money than other jobs, a study has found. The majority of sex workers questioned believe that working conditions were better than in other occupations and gave them more free time. Other perceived advantages cited in the government-funded study include “the possibility of meeting interesting people”, travelling and the ability to help their families. But six per cent of women questioned in the study, which was conducted among “off-street” prostitutes in central London, had been “deceived and forced” into selling sex without any control over their work. Several of these are said to have voluntarily continued prostitution after being freed by police from their oppressors. Other negative factors cited in the study include the stigma of working in prostitution, which forced them to lead a “double life”, and the risk of robbery, violence and sexually transmitted diseases. The most contentious finding, which is likely to anger anti-trafficking campaigners, is that few prostitutes working in the capital are forced to sell sex.
The study, carried out by Dr Nick Mai of London Metropolitan University and funded by the Government’s Economic and Social Research Council, states: “The large majority of migrant workers in the UK sex industry are not forced or trafficked. Working in the sex industry is often a way for migrants to avoid the unrewarding and sometimes exploitative conditions they meet in non-sexual jobs.” The research also covered men and nine transgendered people selling sex in London. The women worked as escorts or strippers and the men were largely escorts.
And while the prohibitionists are continuing their campaign to destroy an effective and inexpensive method of sex work advertisement in Backpage, that website’s owners, Village Voice Media, have not remained silent; here’s the latest salvo in their war on prohibitionism, a November 3rd article explaining the methodology and results of the John Jay Study whose findings I first mentioned in “A Narrow View”:
[Meredith] Dank and [Ric] Curtis…interview[ed]…249 underage prostitutes. From that data, they were able to put a number on the total population of New York’s teen sex workers: 3,946…Curtis and Dank’s findings thoroughly obliterated the long-held core assumptions about underage prostitution:
• Nearly half the kids — about 45 percent — were boys.
• Only 10 percent were involved with a “market facilitator” (e.g., a pimp).
• About 45 percent got into the “business” through friends.
• More than 90 percent were U.S.- born (56 percent were New York City natives).
• On average, they started hooking at age 15…
• Nearly all of the youths — 95 percent — said they exchanged sex for money because it was the surest way to support themselves.In other words, the typical kid who is commercially exploited for sex in New York City is not a tween girl, has not been sold into sexual slavery, and is not held captive by a pimp. Nearly all the boys and girls involved in the city’s sex trade are going it alone. [Curtis and Dank] were amazed by what their research had revealed. But they were completely unprepared for the way law-enforcement officials and child-advocacy groups reacted to John Jay’s groundbreaking study. “I remember going to a meeting in Manhattan where they had a lot of prosecutors there whose job was to prosecute pimps,” Curtis recalls. “They were sort of complaining about the fact that their offices were very well staffed but their workload was — not very daunting, let’s say. They had a couple cases, and at every meeting you go to, they’d pull out the cherry-picked case of this pimp they had busted, and they’d tell the same story at every meeting. They too were bothered by the fact that they couldn’t find any pimps, any girls. So I come along and say, ‘I found 300 kids’ — they’re all perky — but then I say, ‘I’m sorry, but only 10 percent had pimps.’ It was like a fart in church. Because basically I was saying their office was a waste of time and money.”
There’s a lot more, and I think you’ll find it worth your time to read (and comment), including the story of how authorities in Atlanta rejected a scientific study patterned after the John Jay one in favor of the Schapiro Group’s wild and wholly fictional propaganda.
Of course, it would be easier to defeat trafficking hysteria if more American prostitutes would simply speak up about the lies the way sex professionals do in most countries. A few years ago MTV, always looking for a fad it can exploit, started “MTV EXIT” (a sloppy acronym for “End Exploitation and Trafficking”); it’s a typical ignorant anti-sex worker charity spreading the same inane lies and misinformation as all of these groups do, except that it spreads its propaganda to young people through the medium of concerts. In Southeast Asia, it has since 2009 conspired with USAID to impose American ideas of morality, to harass, persecute and destroy the livelihoods of sex workers, to expose them to torture and rape, and to traffic them into virtual slavery in the garment industry…all with the approval of the U.S. State Department. This report from the Sex Worker’s Rights Advocacy Network (SWAN) is two years old, but since MTV’s vile promotion of human rights abuses is still going on, it is still topical:
Cambodian sex work activists are outraged at the way MTV is advocating for fight against trafficking at the expense of safety and rights of local sex workers…In April 2008, the government of Cambodia passed an anti-trafficking bill which outlawed prostitution and classified all sex workers as a victim of trafficking. This bill was sponsored by USAID. The government’s motivation behind the bill was to avoid being considered a tier 3 trafficking country, which would bar it from receiving millions of dollars in financial aid from the US government. Women accused of being prostitutes are illegally detained and sent to ‘rehabilitation’ centres where [they are subject to] gross human rights violations…such as…deprivation of medical care, rape, torture and starvation. Detainees…are ‘taught’ to sew and become sweatshop/garment factory workers, where 72 hour work-weeks are the norm and salaries are equivalent to 36 USD a month. Through its association with USAID, MTV EXIT has placed itself in the middle of a battle…for the right to work and…will be seen by audiences as reinforcing the Cambodian government’s anti-trafficking law and agenda….
Here’s a video they made in answer to MTV’s anti-whore propaganda; can you imagine this many American hookers making this kind of effort? If Cambodian sex workers can unite against oppression, why can’t we? Despite our vastly greater numbers, sex work activism here is marginal at best; I daresay few Americans realize that the sex worker rights movement even exists. And it’s our own fault; we’re just too damned afraid to speak up for our own, too afraid of government-inflicted violence, too afraid of social and legal persecution, and too brainwashed by false notions of “sisterhood” to fight the twisted lies spread by neofeminists. And if that doesn’t change, and soon, all of the scholarly studies and investigative reporting in the world won’t help us.
One Year Ago Today
“Ripper” is a different sort of fictional interlude, one told from the point of view of a future fanatic who longs for the “good old days” of commercial sex prohibition…and decides to take matters into his own hands.
The difficult thing about this situation is that the conflict is between an irrational and narcissistic faith-based system (i.e. christian fundamentalist (extremist?) ‘morality’) and the reality of hard data. The two are fundamentally incompatible. As long as there are groups out there that decry a given behavior as morally reprehensible according the their faith-based system, they’re going to continue to try to tell others what to do and limit what otherwise should be treated as freedoms regardless of what the data demonstrates.
Why is this paradigm so unfortunately highly prevalent in what is supposed to be a ‘free’ country? It needs to be changed, but how? Clearly data doesn’t do it, but teaching tolerance does. The moralists may have their point of view, but they have no right to tell others how to live their lives when individual behavior influences none other than those who choose to participate.
But perhaps that argument too is incompatible given that the faithful often believe in predetermination and a lack of personal choice, particularly where ‘sinning’ is concerned.
“If it was God’s Will…”
It’s not just a “faith based” thing. I really don’t know that many neo-feminists who really consider themselves to be religious. I think people choose religious folk as a cheap target but in reality, outside the Bible Belt – their influence is nill. If they had any influence then you could bet that abortion would be illegal everywhere. The reason it’s not – is because neofeminism and liberalism have the upper hand.
Don’t get me wrong here – there’s plenty of problems with religious aggravation for sure but it’s idiots like me in the Bible Belt who deal with that stuff. I just lost a great opportunity to finally elevate my property values and move out to the country because the preachers shot down the idea for a casino nearby. I mean – it wasn’t just a casino either – this place would have been like an adult Disneyworld – a whole gambling and entertainment complex that would have brought MILLIONS into this community.
We must have put 200 folks into that council meeting to argue for it – but we were drowned out by over 600 church goers. And, as luck would have it – most of our side got there “on time” and had to stand outside because the churches knew to get there early for the seats. Damn shame.
Anyways – it’s not all bad. The “Personhood” proposition FAILED in Mississippi last week. Even my Mom voted against that and I almost had to change my underwear when she told me that! LOL. All of the churches were behind that thing – but the people easily voted that one down.
I mostly agree with you, but also feel that religion (or at least the residue of religion) governs much more policy than just inside the bible belt. Why can’t I buy liquor in Colorado in a grocery store? Recently laws were changed to allow liquor stores to be open on Sundays. Some of the first to emigrate to North America were Puritans – I’d argue Americans are so hung up about sex largely because of the population’s religious history; the neofeminist movement is neo. Why is it that sex-related anything is so often described as ‘dirty.’ Even, perhaps more than occasionally, my mind?
,
Faith is definitely not strictly a religious thing, but also a belief system that is not data-driven. Strikingly policy is not either.
Those are residual laws left in place from a time when religious factions did have control of things.
Secular governments are just as bad – in many cases much worse. The secular government of Norway forbids the sale of alcohol on some days also and prohibits the sale of it anywhere after 6pm I believe. These laws have nothing to do with religion – they have to do with a lot of excuses generated by a “nanny state” where the socialists know better than the people. You see, if the people are allowed unabated access to alcohol – they commit crimes and kill themselves.
You are correct that religious factions are dangerous to liberty – but you have to realize, that where their political influence has been eliminated – other secular factions immediately arise to curtail liberty.
>These laws have nothing to do with religion – they have to do with a lot of excuses generated by a “nanny state” where the socialists know better than the people.
Some of the first big movements to restrain drinking and prostitution happened during the industrial revolution, and it wasn’t socialists. Capitalist factory owners wanted sober workers, and cheap labor as women worked for them rather than for themselves.
The driving force behind the 19th century “social purity” movement was neither capitalism nor socialism, but a combination of degraded first-wave feminists, evangelical Christians and “scientific” social reformers. Since those in power (no matter what political colors they wrap themselves in) like the masses controlled they jumped on the bandwagon, and though factory owners certainly benefited they were not the driving force, which was the masses of humanity who fear freedom and want to be led. As Eric Hoffer wrote:
“They came here and did not consult sex workers”
That old Cambodian lady really said it all. That video was AMAZING!
Wonder if MTV will descend upon the University of Pennsylvania next? Since it appears that Sandusky may have been selling little boys to big athletic donors.
We need a campaign here … one that says the following things …
1. Outlawing an activity or substance simply gives rise to violent cartels to answer the demand.
2. If you want to fight pedophilia – know that you aren’t going to do that by going after 25 year old, college educated escorts.
3. Then the typical “myths” about prostitution need to be attacked…
– STD’s
– It’s the sale of a service – not the sale of a body.
– There are no “victims”. Damage to families is no greater than that from gambling or alcoholism – both legal activities.
– It’s better than an “affair”
– Sex Workers ARE, very often – the “girl” next door.
– The real facts behind “trafficking”
Put all the sex workers in the ad in Mardi Gras masks –
“I’d love to remove this mask and show you my face, I’m very proud of it – but you see, the government spends “X” millions of dollars a year trying to hunt me down and send me to prison.”
I don’t know – but we are losing this battle and something needs to be done. I know that the younger women aren’t flocking to the banner of neofeminism these days – but this trafficking meme … I think a lot of people of both sexes are buying into it.
They are, but it will eventually collapse of its own momentum as moral panics inevitably do. They’re scary while they’re in progress, but they can’t really be “fought” in any meaningful way; all we can do is to resist them, and constantly keep repeating the truth, until they reach critical mass and implode just as the witch hysteria did, and the Red Scares, and the Satanic Panic, and the white slavery hysteria, and the “yellow peril” panic…
This illustrates the true nature of the “anti-trafficking” industry; if they were genuinely against trafficking, they would be *happy* that it is so rare.
Many normal people support sex workers’ rights or at least are not opposed; the main exception are those that have fallen for the trafficking craze.
Maggie, I just now got around to skimming through the John Jay study. Fascinating reading, that, and it supports a wide variety of your general points. I did notice one point of seeming disagreement on which I hope you will comment.
(From Page 79): “Almost all of the youth (91%) said that they dealt mainly with male customers, but 11% of the girls and 40% of the boys said that they had served a female client (including 14 boys that said that they exclusively served female clients).”
The authors then suggest that these numbers are overinflated, due to a reluctance on the part of the boys to admit to any gay activity. Still, you’ve claimed in the past that male-prostitute-serving-female-clients is a complete impossibility; this section would at least call that into question. Would you suggest that these 14 boys are simply lying? Are the 40% that claim at least one female client also lying? Is the fact that these boys are underage a confounding factor (ie, there may be females who are willing to pay for sex with underage boys but not female willing to pay for sex with men)?
Thanks again for your excellent work on your issue.
I’ve said that for a male prostitute to make a living serving only female clients is an impossibility, except for a very small, savvy few in the very largest cities. I have no doubt that in New York, some of these boys have seen women from time to time, but 14 of them seeing only female clients is bullshit. I think the researchers’ conclusion is spot on: these are heterosexual boys who are deeply ashamed to be performing homosexual acts even to survive, so they pretend that their clientele is female in order to paint themselves as manly young studs rather than paid catamites. If the boys claimed to be hired by couples rather than lone women their stories would be much more believable, but as it stands I suspect the true number who have seen at least one woman is similar to that of the girls, about 11%.
In my years of working, I never saw a lone female customer. Couples, yes, sure. But never a woman on her own. I would get occasional calls from women, but they never actually booked and showed up.
Perhaps if the female customers are out there, they gravitate to the GFE end of the business. (Although I’d doubt that. Seems to me that that kind of thing would sit worse with most women.)
Also, even in most big cities, the lesbian world, even compared to the gay male world, is pretty small and interlinked. It wouldn’t be that hard, if say a woman was traveling and wanted some company, to know someone who knows someone there, and could set up a meeting.
I’d guess that these young men, are, indeed, lying.
I saw lone female customers exactly twice, and no agency I know of (including mine) ever got a serious call from a lone woman seeking a man. I’m sure they exist, but they’re just not common enough to make a living from. I understand why some sex worker rights advocates like to pretend female customers are common enough to be considered, but I think that’s a mistake because they’re so rare that bringing them up as anything other than an exception almost constitutes a lie.
Hi Maggie, would like to know whether you think the following situation is male hetero prostution… I live in a country where statistically there’s a very high ratio of females to males. The gender gap is especially pronounced in the over 50s – men die from various causes much earlier – but younger women constantly complain about a lack of suitable partners i.e. the dating pool is thinned out even more by drunks, lazy bums and other undesirables. This dramatically changes the sexual “balance of power” and any guy who takes reasonable care of himself can get sex or a relationship of some sort without much trouble. Foreign guys are particularly prized by local ladies as they have a reputation for avoiding the bad habits of their local bros. The situation also lowers the standard of what women are willing to accept, and one hears of local men getting free rent and board because the woman is desperate to at least have one piece of the limited pickings. Is this a form of prostitution? It is by no means universal – there is also a lot of female prostitution, as well as various forms of coupling where the man is the main financial contributor – but it is common enough. I’ve neard explanations that in this part of the world the massive shortage of men following various wars increased the “relative value” of males and over the subsequent generations women have shouldered an unfair share of all the burdens – earning money, housework, raising kids – with men getting almost a free ride.
Yes, I’d certainly call that a form of long-term prostitution. Of course, once again the exception proves the rule; those semi-gigolos can only make a living in long-term arrangements, not by one-hour dates for direct cash payments as whores can.
Yes, they mostly seem to be long-term arrangements. A whore I used to visit told me how she was in exactly that kind of relationship with an unemployed guy who lived off her food and shelter. I guess in some jurisdictions that would be considered “living off avails,” but I got the strong impression he wasn’t a pimp, in fact he may not even have known or cared where she went to work every day. More like a fully grown dependent child.
As far as short timers go, I have heard of a subculture of young guys trying to sponge off richer women for dinner and drinks. There’s even a slang term in the local langugae for this kind of male I don’t know what their success rate is though, as my experience with local ladies is they expect the guy to do most of the paying on dates. Maybe that’s just me – I’m quite well off and generous.
Maggie
This is a bit off topic… but you might want read Obamas address to the Australian parliament. There line there that made cringe a bit
http://tinyurl.com/7e78u6o
This part of Obamas speech
“It’s why a soldier in a watch tower along the DMZ defends a free people in the South, and why a man from the North risks his life to escape across the border. Why soldiers in blue helmets keep the peace in a new nation. And why women of courage go into the brothels to save young girls from modern-day slavery, which must come to an end.”
I’m not surprised; he has to genuflect to the hysteria his government supports. One of Obama’s foreign policy problems is that he’s wholly tone-deaf, and tends to forget things like the “special relationship” between the U.S. and Britain, the stature of the only two American presidents to speak at the Brandenburg Gate and the fact that brothels are legal in Australia. 🙁
I’ve mentioned before the anger that greets anybody pointing out that teen violence is down, teen drug overdoses are down, teen pregnancy is down. People will insist that this must be wrong, she saw a pregnant teen with her own eyes (nobody’s claiming that they don’t exist at all), that statistics are always crap anyway, that the messenger is a poopyhead (the popular words for today seem to be “naive” and “narcissist,” but really, they’re just saying that he’s wrong because he’s a poopyhead, and a poopyhead is always wrong).
I suspect that some of this is what is going on here. Yes, most of it is probably a fear that if there aren’t 300,000 enslaved child prostitutes in the US, the money to fight this gargantuan problem will disappear, but the intense desire, even need to believe the worst about young people probably plays a role as well.
When a friend of mine who is still a working escort debunked the moronic “vodka-soaked tampon” story on an escort board with several links, including this one from Snopes and this Mythbusters-type treatment, she was still pooh-poohed by men who insisted A) that they knew better than her about the insertability of soaked tampons, and B) that “teenagers will try anything”. 🙁
OMG, Maggie! Thanks for this SO much. You see, I’m attending a rainbow party tonight, and I completely forgot that I need to leave early so I can drop by the liquor store on my way to… to wherever it is that tweens and teens gather to do these things that everybody knows about but nobody can ever, EVER find.
Now if I can just remember where I left my box of Kotex…
More seriously, and to show where the teeny tiny germ of truth in that is, I’d like to point out that Krystal Cole the Neurosoup girl has taken DMT anally. But that’s because if you take it orally the mono-amine oxidase (MAO) in the stomach breaks it down and it won’t do anything for you. She didn’t want to inject or take it with an MAO inhibitor (they interact with almost every medication and many foods), and smoking it was painful. So up the back door it went.
But teens wanting to get drunk off vodka will simply drink it.
Here is the weekly anti-porn/anti-trafficking article from TGMP
http://tinyurl.com/bp9cty9
Did you see the recent piece in “Lancet” about medical students working as escorts to fund their studies? I found the lead story, featuring a male escort with a veritable harem of female clients, quite ridiculous though, and a deliberate ploy by the author to try and make the piece more palatable to the readership. What do you think?
I saw an article about it (subarticle “Gorged With Meaning“). And yes, the idea that a male escort would have a harem of female clients is not only absurd, it’s insulting to any woman whose brain hasn’t been rotted by neofeminism.
If you email me at this address, I could get you a pdf of the original article if you like.
Here you are (It was BMJ actually):
Confessions of a student prostitute
Publication date: 27 Mar 2012
A student needed to find a way to fund his medical degree. Did he make the right choice?
“D” moved to the United Kingdom for his medical studies and had to pay tuition fees at an international rate. Not long into his course, he faced the prospect of dropping out of medical school because he could not afford the fees; subsequently, he began working as an escort, organising his dates and booking his clients via the internet.
He went on his first “date” 15 months ago, with a middle aged businesswoman seeking a pleasant, “no strings attached” evening with a young attractive man—a desire, she explained later, resulting from her busy work life, which left her with little time to develop personal or sexual relationships with men. When completing the online booking for this date, D was also given the choice of selecting an “evening of unlimited fun.” This option came with extra pay, but D did not take up the option that time. He has since been on more than 50 dates and currently goes on an average of three dates a month. He still sees his first customer and has had many “evenings of unlimited fun.”
D has been able to expand his client base and currently sees about 13 wealthy women. After he saw some women more regularly, a few started to have strong feelings for him and believed that they were in some sort of relationship. He has since promised at least four of these women that he has given up his sex work, although they are unaware that he continues to have other clients. Although some clients have openly stated that they would rather start afresh with him, D thinks this is unlikely because he only dates them for the money; he strings the women along and tells them what he thinks they want to hear.
D currently lives in a rent free flat, has his own car, and is comfortable financially—as a direct result of the funds provided by these women. By now, his initial reason for entering the escort trade—to fund his medical degree—must have been met.
According to UK laws, although the exchange of sexual services for money (prostitution) is legal, soliciting and controlling prostitution for gain (pimping) are illegal.[1] D believes that what he does is legal; he does not exchange sexual services in public (although one can argue that the internet is a public domain), does not work in a brothel or for a pimp, and has not been forced or threatened into prostitution since it is his personal choice.[2] Therefore, he is not breaking any UK laws and is safe from legal persecution. However, D could be disciplined by the General Medical Council, or his medical school, if it can be shown that his job as a prostitute will have a detrimental effect on patient care—which D does not think it will.
Moral and social ramifications
Two important aspects of D’s story are the moral and social ramifications of such a story becoming known to his family, friends, and future patients. One could argue that initially D did not contravene his moral or ethical responsibilities because he worked as a prostitute not necessarily for personal gain but because he had to fund his medical degree. However, as a medical professional with the responsibility of dealing with patients and their clinical, emotional, and psychological concerns, patients tend to expect a clean “moral slate” from a person in a position of such trust.[3]
I discussed D’s situation with fellow medical students, whose opinions and feedback were varied. Younger students responded with admiration, respect, and even envy (especially the male students), with most stating that they would also love the opportunity to be an escort, albeit not always for the money. The impression from these responses was that most of the younger students thought that escort work was fun and an easy way to make money while at the same time “hanging with desperate older ladies in high society restaurants.”
Feedback from older students, primarily postgraduate students, tended to be more of condemnation and disgust. The general opinion was that a potential medical doctor’s morality should not be compromised. Many of these students pointed out that, as medicine was their second degree, they had also experienced financial difficulties (although not to the same extent) and yet did not “sell their soul” by resorting to prostitution. Older students seemed unwilling to believe that certain situations would drive a student into the escort or prostitution business.
The feedback seemed odd, because the age gap between the older and younger students surveyed was not large enough to explain why opinions were so different. The differences in opinion could have been attributable to the naivety of the younger students or the “worldliness” of the graduate students, rather than to the differences in cultural or generational beliefs between the two student groups.
Despite these differing responses, I was repeatedly asked about D’s passion for medical school. The general consensus among the students was that if D’s passion for becoming a doctor was great enough to justify the personal conflicts associated with commercial sexual work, he was not doing anything wrong, provided that he fulfilled all the legal criteria for being a sex worker.
If D’s secret sex work became public knowledge, it could well affect his medical career. D’s particular case raises uncertainty about whether it is acceptable for any medical student experiencing similar financial difficulties to enter the commercial sex industry. Where should we draw the line? And can he still successfully justify prostitution as a means to an end? The distinction between being an escort and working as a prostitute is a fine one—15 months ago, D was just a young medical student who took up escort work as a way to finance his university tuition fees. But today D is prostituting himself.
Many students, including myself, believe that if studies are not grossly affected by how they are funded (loans and bursaries are rarely enough), and what we do to make money is within legal and moral boundaries, then it doesn’t matter how we make a living. Morally, D’s situation is open to debate. What is certain is that opinion will always be divided over whether prostitution can ever be regarded as an acceptable way to make a living.
Competing interests: None declared.
From the Student BMJ.
References
Sexual Offences Act 2003. HMSO, 2003.
Policing and Crime Act 2009. HMSO, 2009.
American Academy of Paediatrics. Committee on Bioethics. Appropriate boundaries in the paediatrician-family-patient relationship. Pediatrics 1999;104:334-6.
This rings true though:
“After he saw some women more regularly, a few started to have strong feelings for him and believed that they were in some sort of relationship. He has since promised at least four of these women that he has given up his sex work, although they are unaware that he continues to have other clients.”
He moved to the UK from somewhere else, and then started doing sex work? HE’S TRAFFICKED!!! Quick, get Kristof to rescue him, whether he likes it or not!
While reading this, I kept waiting for the author to say, “One thing I have to tell you, though: D is actually a woman, and the customers are older men. Does this change your opinions of D and ‘his’ choices?”
I lost the document where I had stored the information on how to make those links that are just basically text that links. I think I’ve found it again, but I’m not sure. Let’s try this: a space sports video.
Right on, babe. I’ve worked many different jobs, and prostitution is the most honest and independent and enjoyable one I’ve ever had. I never felt more like a whore than when I worked for a big crooked corporation, helping them find legal loopholes for “legitimate” fraud.
The real issue of the anti-sex-work crusaders is their idiotic puritanical belief that women shouldn’t be financially independent and, more importantly, that we shouldn’t enjoy sex. Fuck them.
If online adult ads disappear, I’ll just hang around upscale hotel bars, and pass out business cards in the financial district downtown. But nothing will ever stop me from enjoying myself, or from profiting from it. NOTHING.
[…] part implies he’s unaware that pimps are a rarity and underage runaways are much more likely to choose to “[sell] their bodies” than be […]