Our sympathy is cold to the relation of distant misery. – Edward Gibbon
When I first published “Welcome To Our World” one year ago today, I had no idea I would run into so many examples of rhetoric startlingly similar to that used against prostitutes. The original column discussed attacks on porn and surrogate motherhood, but since then I’ve discovered articles about undercover cops raping activists, a retarded adult being forbidden to have sex, Gail Dines’ inane anti-porn agenda, nursing mothers sharing milk, a neofeminist who wants fraternities banned, anti-beggar laws in Lithuania and many more. Today we’ll look at three more; the first is a New York Times article from December 23rd:
When Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced this month that the United States would use diplomacy to encourage respect for gay rights around the world, my heart leapt. I knew her words — “gay people are born into, and belong to, every society in the world”— to be true, but in my country they are too often ignored. The right to marry whom we love is far from our minds. Across Africa, the “gay rights” we are fighting for are more stark — the right to life itself. Here, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people suffer brutal attacks, yet cannot report them to the police for fear of additional violence, humiliation, rape or imprisonment at the hands of the authorities. We are expelled from school and denied health care…If your boss finds out (or suspects) you are gay, you can be fired immediately. People are outed in the media — or if they have gay friends, they are assumed to be “gay by association”…
Many Africans believe that homosexuality is an import from the West, and ironically they invoke religious beliefs and colonial-era laws that are foreign to our continent to persecute us…Thanks to the absurd ideas peddled by American fundamentalists, we are constantly forced to respond to the myth…that homosexuality leads to pedophilia…In Uganda, American evangelical Christians even held workshops and met with key officials to preach their message of hate shortly before a bill to impose the death penalty for homosexual conduct was introduced in…2009…the bill was shelved…but the current parliament has revived it and could send it to the floor for a vote at any time…Ghana, Nigeria and Cameroon [have] all …recently stepped up enforcement of anti-gay laws or moved to pass new legislation…Not all Ugandans are homophobic. Some say there are more pressing issues to worry about…and believe we should have the same rights as anyone else. But they are not in power and cannot control the majority who want to hurt us…
I think the parallel is screamingly obvious, but I feel compelled to point out the bitter irony of the U.S. State Department “encouraging respect” for homosexuals around the world while simultaneously encouraging persecution of sex workers, who are also “born into, and belong to, every society in the world.” Obviously Clinton’s little sign there doesn’t apply to us.
The second item is a Julian Sanchez article published at Cato on January 3rd:
I’ve yet to encounter a technically clueful person who believes the Stop Online Piracy Act will actually do anything to meaningfully reduce—let alone “stop”—online piracy, and so I haven’t bothered writing much about the absurd numbers the bill’s supporters routinely bandy about…But then I saw the very astute David Carr’s otherwise excellent column on SOPA’s pitfalls, which took those inflated numbers more or less as gospel…The movie and music recording industry have gotten away with using statistics that don’t stand up to the most minimal scrutiny, over and over, for years, to hoodwink both Congress and the general public…
The bogus numbers Carr cites…actually represent a substantial retreat from even more ludicrous statistics the copyright industries long peddled…Intellectual property infringement was supposedly costing the U.S. economy $200–250 billion per year, and had killed 750,000 American jobs…The $200–250 billion number…originated in a 1991 sidebar in Forbes, but it was not a measurement of the cost of “piracy” to the U.S. economy. It was an unsourced estimate of the total size of the global market in counterfeit goods. Beyond the obvious fact that these numbers are decades old, counterfeiting of physical goods imported in bulk and sold by domestic retail distributors is, rather obviously, a totally different phenomenon…from the problem of illicit individual consumer downloads of movies, music, and software. The 750,000 jobs number had originated in a 1986 speech…by the secretary of commerce estimating that counterfeiting could cost the United States “anywhere from 130,000 to 750,000″ jobs. Nobody in the Commerce Department was able to identify where those figures had come from…in 2010, the Government Accountability Office released a report noting that these figures “cannot be substantiated or traced back to an underlying data source or methodology.” Now, if a single journalist could discover as much with a few days work, minimal due diligence should have enabled highly paid lobbyists to arrive at the same conclusion. The only way to explain the longevity of these figures, if we charitably rule out deliberate deception, is to infer that the people repeating them simply did not care whether what they were saying was true…
Sanchez goes on to break down the newer figures, and shows that the actual losses from online piracy to all Hollywood studios combined is about “$446 million—which, by coincidence, is roughly the amount grossed globally by Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel.” The article is well worth reading in its entirety for anyone who cares about internet freedom, but the portion I’ve excerpted here is sufficient to demonstrate that SOPA’s proponents obtain their “statistics” in pretty much the same way as the prohibitionists obtain theirs.
The last one for today appeared in Sexuality Policy Watch on January 8th. It describes an insidious new Brazilian law which requires pregnant women to register, ostensibly to “help” them but in reality to monitor them; it also defines a fetus as a “person”.
[On December 26th]…the Ministry of Health…[enacted] Provisional Measure 557…without discussing it with women’s health organizations. MP 557 instituted the National System of Registration, Tracking and Follow-up of Pregnant and Puerperal Women…[which] “aims to ensure better access, coverage and quality of maternal health care, notably for pregnant women at risk”…As soon as that information fell in the hands of social networks, MP was bombarded, even by the courts. “That MP is really absurd, a fallacy on the part of the federal government, as it does not achieve the purposes for which it was created,” denounced Beatriz Galli [an attorney, women’s rights activist and member of the Bioethics and Biolaw commissions of Brazil’s Bar Association]…“It demonstrates the lack of commitment to issues to which Brazil already …[agreed in] international human rights treaties. It…has several legal inconsistencies and even unconstitutional articles”…[Galli stated that the act is not empowered to accomplish its stated purpose, the reduction of maternal mortality, and is in actuality designed to define] “the woman…as a vessel for the development of a new human being. It violates women’s autonomy and dignity, denying them the recognition of freedom of choice…it reduces women to incubators…[it] violates the woman’s private life by creating a compulsory register to control and monitor her reproductive life…[MP 557] aims to create a register of pregnant women, violating the private life and confidentiality of medical information included in patient’s charts and records at a political time when several clandestine abortion clinics are…being closed…Brazilian legislation criminalizes the practice of abortion and is used to close clinics and prosecute hundreds of women…[and now] the State proposes a register for monitoring and tracking pregnant women.”
[Galli also stated that] “According to MP 557, the woman will have the legal ‘obligation’ to have all the children she [conceives], as she will be monitored by the State for this purpose. Thus, it violates the right to equality prescribed in the Federal Constitution, because only women become pregnant…[it] is a huge setback to women’s reproductive right policies in Brazil…Conservative sectors, both within and outside the government, are trying to establish a new legal order which does not consider women as subjects of constitutional and human rights.”
I’m sure every well-informed whore understands the inevitable results of forcing women to “register” for their own “protection”, and that the Brazilian women affected by this law would recognize our position if it were presented to them. That’s why I’m actually very pleased to see so many stories like this; the more people are crushed under the wheels of government, the more their personal lives are invaded by official busybodies, and the more they suffer from bogus statistics and lies spread by charlatans hoping to advance their own agendas, the more they will recognize – and sympathize with – the abuses habitually heaped upon prostitutes.
Registeries are good for: bridal showers, weddings, baby showers, graduations, anniversaries, etc.
Registeries are NOT good for: people, behaviors, personhood statuses, etc.
I kept saying that as women were agitating more and more for the vote that anti-prostitution laws came into effect. I’m not calling it a cause, but rather a correalation. I know many men are stupid and opposed to it too. However, women are more opposed on average. I and a few other men on this site have said why. American women prefer more govrernment for safety, security and provision than men do. Most American women also don’t like the strikebreakers, the sex workers especially the whores, on men’s attention and men’s greater ability to walk away long term relationships such as marriage and even short term relationships. Heterosexual and Bisesexual Women will believe any horrible idea as a result. I’m not exactly sure why lesbians would be opposed. It seems this way in most if not all other countries too.
I just read an article written by Thomas DiLorenzo about why he doesn’t like Rick Santorum, and why he like Ron Paul concerning both are vying for the nomination of the Republican party. Paul he says would decriminalize narcotics especially marijuana and prostitution in federal law. Santorum reads things in the U.S. Constitution that don’t exist. I wouldn’t be surprised if you are a regular reader of Lew Rockwell’s website at http://www.lewrockwell.com
DiLorenzo states that prostitutes were following General George Washington’s Army also working as nurses and chefs during the American War for Independence or American Revolutionary War if you prefer to call it that. He states that the first state to outlaw prostitution was Massacheusetts in the Mann Act of 1917. Here’s the link
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo226.html
Got it fixed for you, Doc; don’t worry, we all have days like that. 😉
Thankyou. I hope all of you like reading the article,”Ayatollah Santorum the Sanctimonius(ASS) by Thomas DiLorenzo on 20 January 2012 Friday at the Lew Rockwell site, a libertarian site. http://www.lewrockwell.com
I’m sure Krulac a U.S. Navy Iraq War veteran will like this article as much as me an U.S. Army Iraq War and Afghanistan War veteran. I guess you could say American whores were among the first civilian “contractors” working for the U.S. military. The whores should be lauded for doing their patriotic duty and fufilling the three roles of cooking, nursing and whoring starting in the American Revolutionary War, 1775-83. DiLorenzo seems to have similar opinions to me, Gorbachev and Peter Andrew Nolan concerning giving women the right to vote and anti-prostitution laws coming into effect more stongly and rapidly around the same time frame as well as a higher percentage of women being opposed to prostitution. I don’t think DiLorenzo explicitly states that a higher percentage of women are opposed to prostitution than men, but it sure seems implied to me.
It seems as though women nursing men other than their family members was regarded as shameful for a long time. .It only started to really change under Clarissa Harlowe “Clara” Barton in the American Civil War, 1861-64. I remember many being shocked at the prospect of women tending to men’s wounds and illness on Ken Burn’s television documentary series, “The Civil War”. Clara Barton had high standards at the begining, but at the end had lower expectations usually asked in exasperation, “When can you start?” because of the mounting and horrifically high casualties. I don’t think female nursing of wounded and sick men was fully regarded as respected until the Second World War. I guess nurses if they were helping men as well as actresses were regarded as fellow travellers of whores if not whores themselves for a long time.
This leads to Santorum trying to rewrite American history and the American Constitution to something it never was, isn’t and never should or will be. Do we really need to shred it and make a mockery of it anymore? Santorum’s attacks on Ron Paul were unjustified as Paul seems to know and understand American history and the U.S. constitution better than him. I guess I won’t be voting for him and will be voting for Ron Paul in the Republican party Primary election for the U.S. President. .
Maggie,
you might want to listen to this one from GWW.
How can anyone seriously maintain that a fetus is equivalent to a person?
Well, the anti-abortion folks point out (rightfully) that we don’t allow invalids and the catastrophically-retarded to be executed, so their beliefs don’t arise from a vacuum. The problem is that in the US, the abortion “debate” is viewed by both “sides” as a black-and-white, all-or-nothing issue which must be “won” without compromise.
I explained my position on the subject in “My Body, My Choice“, and I’m reminding my readers that I do NOT allow debate on the subject here (primarily because it’s never a real “debate”). Once in a while I may refer to the subject in a column and readers are welcome to respond to that (as you did here, Gumdeo), but that does NOT mean the floor is open for general discussion of the subject.
Hiltery Clinton is one of the biggest lying psychopaths on the planet. Ms “we had to run for cover while being fired at by snipers” while the video showed she was being given a bouquet of flowers at a rather leisurely pace.
But. True to form. She didn’t lie about this. She just remembered.
And don’t worry. Her sign does not apply to us men either. After all Hitlery was the woman who said “the biggest victims of war have always been women because they have had to survive without their fathers, their husbands, or their sons.”
Maggie wrote:
which requires pregnant women to register, ostensibly to “help” them but in reality to monitor them;
If I remember correctly, Frederick the Great required Prussian women to report the onset of their period to local authorities. I don’t recall what the rationale was.
I don’t know if you saw this story, but I think that this is an illustration of what lies at the heart of the matter.
She looked at her options and chose what was most important to her. She could have chosen the other way. Either way, it was an adult choice and the only wrong choice would have been to contravene her own decision in the matter.
Exactly right; the choice was hers to make, and because she followed her own heart and judgment and did what she thought was right, it was right. May the Great Mother speed her journey.
If I remember correctly, Frederick the Great required Prussian women to report the onset of their period to local authorities. I don’t recall what the rationale was.
I’m going to take a stab and guess, empire-building.
This would be absolutely correct. However, you need to understand that unlike most countries in which it can be said they are countries with militaries, Prussia was a military with a country. It was done to shame the women into being as pregnant as often as possible because the state of Prussia wanted future soldiers and breeders of soldiers. Prussians were very much like the ancient Spartans(under King Leonidas at the battle of Thermopylae). The reason for this is that Prussia didn’t have much in the way of resources or services that other countries wanted. It also was at its begining in danger of being swallowed by it’s neighbors. Their leaders in order to survive arrived at a novel idea. Every man would be drafted and made into a soldier for a period of service. The Prussians were the most fearsome soldiers man for man on the battlefields of the 18th century. Other armies’ soldiers could only fire 3 shots a minute from their firearms. The Prussians could fire 6 a minute. They were also reported to be the best at hand to hand fighting too. When the Prussians weren’t fighting to defend and expand their domain, their King let other nations hire his soldiers out as mercenaries as long as he didn’t believe it affected his nation negatively for a hefty sum of money which he would be sure to recieve.
Nicolae Ceausescu of Romania banned condoms …
He wanted to increase the Romanian population from 23 million to 30 million.
He even had women under the age of 45 rounded up in their workplace every three to six months and carried off to clinics to be examined for signs of pregnancy – often in the presence of government officials – who were referred to popularly as “The Menstrual Police”.
He almost immediately doubled the birthrate but his healthcare system wasn’t anywhere near ready to deal with the increased load – and mortality rates skyrocketed.
It’s an interesting story and one that a Romanian hooker relayed to me on a visit to Europe recently. Her belief was that, the reason there is such a glut of Romanian hookers in the world is due to the fact that Ceausescu “de-personalized” the sex act with his reproductive laws. These de-personalized views of sex were passed on to Romanian girls today (even though Ceausescu was executed long ago). So, for her – she believed Romanian women looked upon sex as not a big deal at all – and were extremely happy to be able to use it as a means for making a living.
In Freakonomics, Steve Levitt presented strong evidence that Ceaușescu’s policy led directly to his downfall, because the driving force of the revolution were the huge numbers of young people who wouldn’t have been born had he not banned abortion. Similarly, he pointed out that the catastrophic drop in US crime rates from the early ’90s to today can be directly tied to the fact that the women most likely to have abortions are also those most likely to have children who grow up to be criminals – young, poor, unmarried, disadvantaged urban women with little education. Since Roe vs. Wade allowed them to abort unwanted children, those children did not grow up to be criminals and the crimes they would’ve committed in their peak years – late teens and early 20s – never happened. Of course, the control freaks are covering their ears and going “Hmmmhmmm hmmm, I can’t hear you, blah blah blah” at this extremely strong evidence that it wasn’t busybody police-state laws like gun control, police militarization and locking up a large portion of the population that reduced crime, but rather a REDUCTION in nanny-state interference by allowing women to control their own reproductive decisions.
GROSS Exaggeration. There were THREE (One, Two, Three) “Evangelical Christians” speaking at a workshop and this story would have you believe they were lobbying for a “death penalty” for homosexuals – which they were not. These three WERE and ARE complete idiots – but I think the NYT’s attempt to paint all Christians as “homophobes” who would march homosexuals off into the ovens is inexcusable. Lame Stream Media at work again here – this is a valid story and needs no additional “coloring” but the NYT has an agenda – so off we go!
I’m not an Evangelical Christian – though my Mother’s side of the family was. I’m going to make a statement here – that I’ll probably get killed for – but it’s absolute fact.
Evangelical Christians have actually proven to be one of the most moderate and politically moveable factions in the Western World.
Just in the last 200 years or so …
Evangelical Christians have abandoned their notions of criminalizing adultery.
They’ve abandoned their notions of criminalizing sodomy.
They have abandoned their notions of alcohol prohibition.
They have abandoned their objections to interracial marriage.
They have allowed blacks and other minorities into their ministerial ranks.
They were INSTRUMENTAL in the Abolitionist movement prior to, and during the American Civil War.
In fact, most of the founding fathers (and mothers) of the United States were evangelical Christians.
Now – do they do stupid things to this day? Oh yeah – but I think their history proves they will bend to reality. Can the same be said of Mohammedanism?
No – it absolutely cannot.
Well, you do have to remember that due to science and the fact that the evangelical movement has reacted against it (especially since the 1970s), what constitutes an “evangelical” now is a horse of a different color from what constituted an “evangelical” 200 years ago or even 100 years ago.
As for Islam, you’re comparing apples to oranges; it’s 600 years younger than Christianity. If you want to understand Islam, think of what Christianity was like in the 15th century. Those of even older faiths (such as Buddhism or Judaism) would do well to consider the same principle when looking at Christianity; at 2000 years, it’s just entering middle-age as religions go. It’ll settle down when it gets closer to the 3000 mark.
A goodly number of America’s Founders and Framers were Deists. That’s what they called themselves and that’s what others called them.
And as Maggie points out: an “Evangelical Christian” of 1776 is not at all the same as an “Evangelical Christian” of 2012. And that goes double if not triple for “Fundamentalist Christian.” Not the same then as now.
And the Ugandan bill did allow for the execution of homosexuals, and there were American hard-right Christians supporting it. I know it’s popular to get onto the “lame-stream media”* but facts are facts, and there they are.
I’ve been following this for about a year now. Laura and I have watched an entire documentary, and It’s come op on shows I’ve watched and I’ve read several articles online. No, not every Christian on Earth, or even in the US, supports it. In fact, most would not and do not. But some do.
* I will likely drop to me knees and give thanks to God when that phrase goes out of style.
A birthday that is 600 years to the right of Jesus is NO excuse for how the Muslims treat their women.
The differences between Christianity and Islam have less to do with their age and more to do with the fact that there was an Age of Reason that occurred (partially because Evangelicals allowed it) – but the Muslims chose to ignore it.
This is a damned dirty world – a target rich environment I’d say. As such – we need to prioritize our fire here. I would say these Evangelicals can be brought around to our way of thinking – or at least a “laissez-faire” position.
But … let me tell you … I don’t know of any modern evangelicals who’d bury a woman up to her neck and stone her for prostitution or adultery. I don’t know of any serious evangelical who even questions the notion of providing education to little girls and I have never seen an evangelical torture or maim a little girl simply for attending a school.
Not now, no. But only 300 years ago they were burning women alive for looking funny, being uppity, being too beautiful or (surprise) whoring.
Evangelicals didn’t “allow” the Age of Reason; it happened because they didn’t realize what it would portend, and modern evangelicals fight many of its contributions. I’m all for religious freedom, but only if it’s for EVERYBODY. And religious freedom doesn’t mean the freedom to persecute others, or even to collectively advocate oppressive laws.
I wasn’t here 300 years ago for that – I would like to think it would have pissed me off just as much as seeing an eleven year old girl beaten for attempting to entering a schoolhouse in Afghanistan. The first time I saw that – I puked – and then I cried – because I knew I would never get my hands on the men who did it.
Big, bad men … who believe they have God on their side – and that God says it’s okay to beat the hell out of a little girl. Or worse … you know, if you execute a “virgin” – she will still go to Paradise. The proper procedure, is to RAPE her first – take her forcefully (more than once if possible) – and then put a bullet in her head – that way she is damned to perdition.
This is what is happening today Maggie.
Krulac, please don’t think me insensitive; you know I’m not. If I were Wonder Woman I’d be so busy running around using my magic lasso to stop that kind of crap, that I’d never get any sleep. But I’m not Wonder Woman, and you’re not Superman; the plain, sad truth is that there is nothing we can do for those girls until their culture grows up. It’s just as impossible to force a culture to mature more quickly as it is to force a teenager to to so; it has to happen in its own time, and it cannot be compelled from without; it has to happen naturally from within. The only culture we can help to grow is the one we’re a part of, and even that can only be accomplished by words and example over many years. As Ludwig von Mises pointed out, “In the long run the ideas of the majority, however detrimental they may be, will carry on. The future of mankind depends on the ability of the elite to influence public opinion in the right direction.” And since the world belongs to everybody, not just the “elite”, it’s probably for the best that there really aren’t any magic lassos.
You ARE Wonder Woman 🙂
So your solution is to use physical force on the people who beat up the girl? You want to do to them what they did to the girl? Doesn’t that put you on their level? FYI, there’s other solutions out there and they’re NON-VIOLENT. There’s groups that are working to help these girls and women. I could post links to them if that’s wanted. I noticed 1 where you “sponsor” the women and girls. This is similar to “sponsorship” for kids and that can and does work. There’s also groups fighting what are called “honor killings” (what it looks like you’re talking about with the rape thing). Thank God for these groups! They know that reacting with violence is a short-term solution that doesn’t last in the long run and it can also start an evil, vicious cycle of revenge for 1 act, then revenge for the next act, etc.
Laura;
You’re right, of course: the solutions which work are the non-violent ones. Even when nations go to war, all the war really accomplishes is forcing one side or the other to accept a peace under terms they’d rather not. After all the bombing and stabbing and shooting and and and, everybody (except the poor fighters who had to do the actual killing and dying, and the poor civilians wiped out in the process) gather around a table and talk out a solution.
But that doesn’t change the fact that the most immediate, visceral reaction when hearing or reading about this sort of thing is a desire to pound the ones who did it. You know that when we watch the news and hear about certain things, I have the feeling that I’d like to beat somebody bloody. It’s only natural to feel that.
And then when my breathing returns to normal I realize that I can’t go invade a country all by myself and start beating people up. For one thing it just isn’t practical: even if I could get myself over there, and find the right guys, and somehow be sure that I had the right guys (just any Afghan won’t do), and even if I was sure I could take them (maybe one at a time, maybe by surprise, maybe I am bigger and better, but maybe I’m not), it wouldn’t solve the problem or protect the next little girl. And then there is the whole thing about not becoming the thing I hate.
The real solutions are going to be a lot more complex than me (or Krulac) living out some The Punisher fantasy. But please, allow us the fantasy if it makes us feel a little better.
It really gets tiring hearing this so much. The truth is there’s reformers in Islam INCLUDING MEN. There’s whole GROUPS of Muslims working for reform that INCLUDE MEN. There’s MALE CLERICS in Islam who speak out against genital mutilation of women. Saudi Arabian women are going to be voting soon (the right to vote was given to them by the Saudi Arabian king who’s a MAN). I’m pretty sure this happened in 2010, but I’d have to check the articles I’ve found on it to be sure. There’s also been progress made in the fight to allow Muslim women to drive. Please realize that there ARE Evangelicals that hate prostitution for themselves (I hate it for myself and feel the exact same way about it as using drugs for anything EXCEPT true health problems) but want it decriminalized. Marla on here is also a Christian who wants it decriminalized. It isn’t as bad with us believers as it’s always made out to be and that gets tiring also. You can hate something yourself but still be for others to have the right to do it. Is there still work to be done in reforming Islam? YES! But, could we PLEASE give credit where it’s due to those already doing the work, those who have done work and have made progress and keep on working? As far as some “Christians” go the truth is there ARE some in the US and all over the world that are FOR the stuff in the Old Testament “Law”, OK? They’re FOR literally physically punishing people for adultery and for the death penalty for using drugs and other non-violent crimes. I put “Christians” in quotes because I’m personally convinced (and am not alone in this) that they’re the FAKES that Jesus warned us about. An example of this are the “Christians” in Uganda that Sailor Barsoom talked about above. Not all Muslims ignored the Age of Reason because if they had there wouldn’t have been ANY reform in Islam since then.
Senseless murders happen here too. The assassinations of Drs. Tiller and Gunn, the bombing of the federal building in OKC; these weren’t crimes committed by foreigners, or Muslims, or three hundred years ago.
As for getting countries like Pakistan or Afghanistan to grow up: no, we can’t force it to happen any faster. We can, however, make it happen more slowly, by giving money and weapons to authoritarian regimes. And we’ve been doing a lot of that since about the 1950s.
If you want to help the little girls in those countries, write you congressman and tell him to stop making these theocratic governments so powerful that the citizens who WANT to join the 20th Century (never mind the 21st) don’t dare rise up against them.
Hi Maggie,
check out this article. This is the world men live in in the UK. A woman glasses a man (smashes a beer glass in his face) and she is somehow not guilty because she was “harassed” at work. This despite the man she glassed is NOT the alleged “harasser”.
Yep…western women are just charming, eh?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2087404/Judge-refuses-jail-woman-plumber-glassed-nightclubber-smiled-sexually-harassed-training.html
Or try this one….23 women and one men involved in child pornography but the man is the only one jailed and most of the article talks about the man and what he did. This stuff can’t be made up.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-202_162-20122076.html?tag=facebook
[…] photo…maggiemcneill.wordpress.com […]