O God, protect me from my friends, that they have not power over me.
Thou hast giv’n me power to protect myself from thy bitterest enemies. – William Blake
As I pointed out in “So Close and Yet So Far”, “the allies of sex workers [often] make arguments that, though well-meant and partially correct, contain some glaring flaw that spreads disinformation, undermines the work of other advocates or, in the worst cases, actually cedes ground to the enemy.” But every once in a while one of these allies says something so wrong, so completely off-base, offensive and counterproductive, that I just want to slap her and suggest she join the prohibitionists because at least that way, her statements would be properly seen as attacks. Allow me to illustrate: someone “tweeted” a link to this article just a little while after I read the news that the ACLU was joining with the EFF to challenge one narrow section of California’s odious Proposition 35, and given its headline (“ACLU supports decriminalizing prostitution”) I dared to hope for a few seconds that the venerable civil rights organization was at long last perhaps going to start caring more about the persecution of over 450,000 women and almost 30 million men than about straining after gnats or encouraging the petty bean-counting of upper-middle-class white women. Silly me.
If one consenting adult pays another consenting adult for sex, “it’s not the government’s business,” said Barbara Keshen, an attorney for the New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union. But the government doesn’t see it that way. Known as the world’s oldest profession, prostitution remains illegal in 49 states, with Nevada the exception…
It’s all downhill from that first sentence, which is instantly followed by a statement which relies on a confirmation bias to make decriminalization seem like a weird idea, and the listed “exception” actually isn’t one! American prostitution law is not remotely representative of the Western world; imagine the difference in the reader’s mind had this sentence expressed the truth: “Though many activities around it are restricted or criminalized in different countries, prostitution itself is legal in every populous Western nation, with the United States the only exception”. Furthermore, the Nevada system is not even close to decriminalization; in fact, it’s the most narrow and restrictive legalization system in the world, so close to criminalization it can barely be differentiated from it, and not one single sex worker rights group supports it. But the reporter is a typical member of a profession now dominated by credulous halfwits, so her ignorance is no surprise; I expect better from a civil rights lawyer.
…”I think it’s unfortunate that some women are forced into the situation of prostitution by economic and other situations,” Keshen said. “But making them criminals is not the right answer”…The ACLU…opposes any state regulation of prostitution…[between] consenting adults. “Prostitution laws violate the right of individual privacy, because there are penal sanctions for private sexual contact between consenting adults, whether it’s for recreation or money…it’s not the government’s business unless someone gets hurt.” Keshen said the ACLU also backs decriminalizing prostitution because “the laws represent a direct form of discrimination against women…generally the women are stigmatized and penalized, while generally the male customers are not.”
That first sentence was my first sign that Keshen is nothing more than an exceptional parrot with a law degree; it is patently obvious that she has a neofeminist view of sex work and imagines that everyone who does it is “forced” (she states this explicitly at the end of the article). It’s also clear that she has no real personal commitment to the concept of decriminalization, because once she gets beyond the boilerplate “privacy” rationale she has no freaking idea of what else to say, and even spouts a typical argument used by Swedish model proponents! The next part of the article quotes the typical pompous ignoramuses with titles, vomiting out the usual filthy anti-whore slander:
…Portsmouth Deputy Police Chief Corey MacDonald said…prostitution often goes hand-in-hand with illicit drug use and other crimes, while traveling prostitutes tend to have security guards who can pose a threat to local officers. That sentiment is shared by…Rockingham County Attorney [James Reams]…”Classically, people involved with prostitution are also involved with drugs, guns and other crime”…Reams [also] said…the state of Nevada “banished” legalized prostitution to rural areas, at so-called ranches, which have been studied over the years. “Former prostitutes have said it’s akin to slavery,” he said. “They all complain about the way they were treated, and I think that’s pretty troubling”…
FYI: I’ve never heard of a single touring escort who travels with “security guards”; how could she possibly afford it? MacDonald is the typical semi-literate cop who gets his information from other cops, but Reams has no excuse; if he’s intellectually able to comprehend the studies of Nevada brothels he’s also capable of understanding that legalization is nothing like decriminalization and of reading methodologically-sound studies that refute his “whore as criminal” mythology. But since that would mean thinking critically about the status quo, it ain’t gonna happen. In fact, he purposefully mentions the buzzword “slavery”, so you just know what’s coming next:
…state Rep. Laura Pantelakos said she understands why some would want to decriminalize prostitution between consenting adults, but said…”it runs into a very slippery slope, which is why I think it should be kept illegal. I would be afraid of the consequences.” One of the consequences, she said, is the risk that minors would be sold for sex. Even if there was a house of ill repute around the corner and they were all 21, I think you would end up with minors in there,” she said. “The thought of a 14-year-old being forced into prostitution makes me sick to my stomach.”
Because obviously, bars have a huge problem with underage bartenders and waitresses. Pantelakos could study the statistics from New Zealand and New South Wales if she really wanted to, but that would require bucking the currently-popular moral panic so she would rather shout “THINK OF THE CHILDREN!” instead. She and Reams are specimens of the lowest order of moral development on Earth, the professional politician, so it isn’t surprising they prefer to lie and/or deceive themselves about sex work. But Keshen has no such excuse, so her concluding statement is far more painful to the informed reader, and far more damaging to the cause she supposedly espouses, than any of the prohibitionist dogma chanted by the “authorities”:
…”For me, the right answer is a good education from the start, a stable family from the start,” she said. “People don’t choose to become prostitutes.”
This moronic assertion makes it abundantly clear that Keshen has never as much as read a blog like this one, much less taken the time to read a study or {gasp!} actually talk to any sex workers, else she would know that lots of us are as educated as she is (or more so), most of us come from families as stable as anyone else’s, and the great majority of us do indeed choose our profession. If she really wants to help, she needs to educate herself before she does any more damage to our cause; if we get many more “allies” like her, Farley and company will just be able to go on vacation and leave the work of harming sex workers to them.
Thank you so much for the work you do, Maggie. Your articles are ALWAYS well-written, well-researched, full of insight and information, and I really look forward to whatever you put out.
I like parrots. 😀
You should email this lady a link to today’s column.
I agree krulac. Any good argument must at least know the other side. I know Maggie does.
I’m not sure that would be helpful. Give someone a counterargument matched with a rather nasty personal assessment, and they’re likely to feel that accepting the argument implies accepting the assessment, and then reject both.
It might be *satisfying*, though.
Do police have a mental image of sex workers as some kind of giant, violent cartel system, such as in drug trafficking? I mean, that’s crazy. Should I update my will before I attend sex work activism donation committee meetings?
Indeed, just as all other forms of employment must be abolished, lest they lead to widespread child slavery in the respective fields. Oh wait.
I have a lot more respect for people with horrible opinions when they’re at least coherent about it.
Child labor? Well, if we want to get “technical” on that how’s about Uncle Sam’s recruitment of disenfrancised 17 year olds into military service (with parent’s permission of course)?
Now I know that the military has a formal policy to keep these kids out of the combat zone – but I know a few who managed to “skirt” around that ruling. I’ll also assure you that in the mid-80’s we had PLENTY of 17 year old kids on my submarine when we were doing deadly duels with Soviet Subs, getting our asses stuck on the bottom, catching fire and flooding.
My GOD man! What 17 year old would volunteer to be a bullet catcher? Why, that poor kid must have a ridiculously sad tale of woe!
What’s the difference between an underaged soldier and an underaged hooker? One is penetrated by a lethal high-velocity mechanical projectile. The other a non-lethal, low velocity (at least in my case), organic one!
What’s even more, is that people tend to valorize these 17-year-olds skirting the law in this way, saying things like, “He’s such an enthusiastic patriot that he just couldn’t wait to actually be of legal age to join up!”
Regarding the rest of the story: really, THESE are supposed to be allies? Ha! And the whole touring escort comment just shows Reams struggles with basic arithmetic. Oh, unless he’s one of those people who thinks sex workers are multi-millionaire slaves. And yeah, dude, the prostitutes complain about the Nevada system and it is disturbing for the very reason he named, though he can’t understand it: being banished to the outskirts of society usually sucks. Hard. Yes, that needs to change, not the existence of the industry itself.
And again, folks like Pantelakos love equating adults with children. Decriminalizing prostitution between consenting adults no more leads to child prostitution than allowing two adults to marry of their own free will leads to child brides. People like her so easily betray their opinions of adult women when they say things like that, “You’re no better than a child.”
Keshen sounds like a twat, full stop.
Merde, sorry. Forgot to close the tag at the bottom. I was on full “enrampagement” in that post.
Are you talking about this comment? It’s not just “arithmatic” she has a problem with …
There’s some logical flaws too.
I know for a fact that SOME touring escorts will bring along a guy to watch their backs. It may be a husband, boyfriend, or just a friend, or … a client of hers that has some time off from his day job that she “barters” for pay.
Think Maggie once wrote that her hubby drove a car to a call for her where some bondage would be going on – and he even called her cell at the end of the call to make sure she was okay.
These people aren’t “security guards” but are more like “buddies” who can get involved if something goes wrong. The primary reason they’re there at all is because the activity itself is illegal and the cops don’t give a shit about the personal safety of a call girl – so she has to take precautions to protect her safety into her own hands.
Second – they’re not there to protect the girl from the police – so she’s assininely wrong when she says they can “pose a threat to local officers”. They might help in “screening” clients to weed out LE – but they aren’t a threat physically – or in any other way – to police.
Exactly.
And as far as “pose a threat to local officers” as Radley Balko points out repeatedly, family dogs, no matter how friendly, pose the same threat. So it’s no wonder a full-grown human being would be seen as a threat to them, even when they aren’t.
Amen!!! A minor who is aged 17 can’t even operate a trash compactor here in Illinois and many other states, but with his parents’ permission he can join the military, carry a loaded gun, and potentially be harmed. My Uncle was in the Illinois National Guard in the 1960s and was at the 1968 Chicago Democratic Convention. He was at this riot and others getting shot at and having many more things thrown at him and being struck with hands and feet even more so.
Alas, the NZ Prime Minister has the disease now too:
http://www.3news.co.nz/Debate-over-Auckland-super-brothel-today/tabid/1607/articleID/276308/Default.aspx
Most people wouldn’t work at whatever job they do, and why should anyone be shocked that most prostitutes feel the same way as other people about their jobs is beyond me.
Except that there ARE girls who’ve been in the business literally decades. Hell, I know one here on the coast who’s 50 years old (looks 35) and has been doing this forever practically. She’s married and raised kids. She charges $700 for two hours and that’s not low rate – that’s an “upscale” rate. She doesn’t have to do this anymore.
Is it a stretch to believe that she may like what she’s doing?
A girl told me the other day … “Truth is – I’d rather be here with you than working in some office with a bunch of bitches.”
LMFAO!
I know many don’t like it – I haven’t seen those girls. And – they say that the difference between Lincoln’s views on slavery and Jeff Davis’ views on it could be attributed to the fact that Lincoln saw the “nasty” side of slavery on trips with his Dad to New Orleans while Davis saw the more gentle side of it in isolation in his plantation upbringing. Sooo … maybe I haven’t seen the “dark side” (if it exists) … but then again, I ALWAYS seek out girls who seem to have a positive view on the occupation and a solid track record. I’m not the guy who calls the “hot new chick” on Backpage at 2 am when I’m drunk.
I know one of the more moving things I’ve read on this blog was Maggie’s recounting of her retirement. It seems like she loved that part of her life very much.
‘A girl told me the other day … “Truth is – I’d rather be here with you than working in some office with a bunch of bitches.”’
How could you tell she meant it? Purpose of interest: I don’t know how to tell a truth I want to hear apart from a flattering or mollifying lie; don’t understand how other people can; and would like to fix that if someone can explain it.
Have you ever worked in an office full of women? Backstabbing bitches. I’d rather be on a call with Krulac too!
Way off topic, and I do mean way off topic, but I just came from another blog where I was hit with an epiphany: the difference between male and female sexuality is that women need way too many candles. And can’t accept the male reluctance to so much uncontrolled fire.
I’m not trying to hijack the thread,
Clearly the solution is to date a pyromaniac.
The good news is that Barbara Keshen realizes that the solution to the problems she sees, as exaggerated as they are in her mind, is not to “crack down.”
It would be nice if more people were familiar with the knowledge served up here. Even the antis would be well-advised to learn what’s really going on. It can save them the embarrassment when the whore hordes fail yet again to show up at the Superbowl, or when all those child sex slaves continue in heartlessly refusing to exist.
Here’s something: if somebody who apparently does believe in the huge international trade in underaged unwilling hookers can support decriminalization, or legalization, or even a gentling of criminalization, then decrim might be an idea whose time has come, because imagine how she’d support it if she knew the truth.
Question: would it have been a lot better for all parties involved if general Petraeus had just visited an escort instead of hooking up with (and falling for?) Paula Broadwell? It sure seems like that to me. That was some very costly sex indeed.
He still would have met Broadwell, because she still would have been a biographer. If his attraction to her was anything other than unsatisfied horniness, it still would’ve happened.