If we let consenting adults have sex, who knows what else they’ll want permission to do? – The Onion
This is a pretty decent explanation of reaction formation:
…some of the people who rail against porn…or any of the other controversial items on the sexual smorgasbord…are actually turned on by the thing they decry. They may not know it consciously, but being anti-whatever actually gives one a grand excuse for being immersed in whatever…many absexuals don’t truly understand what a strong erotic response they’re actually having…They just can’t seem to shut up about it. And they get really worked up—I believe they go into the sexual response cycle when they begin to pontificate about the things they hate so much…
Fayetteville, North Carolina, cops have charged 17-year-old Cormega Copening with sexual exploitation of a minor—his girlfriend, who is the same age—because the couple sent each other nude photos of themselves…There’s no evidence the photos were ever sent to anyone else, and police only became aware of them because they searched Copening’s phone for unrelated reasons that haven’t been specified. Even so, the teen…faces decades on the Sex Offender Registry and up to ten years behind bars if convicted…Copening’s girlfriend—who remains unnamed in the news articles—is also facing charges…
Prince George’s County, Maryland has more than its share of predatory cops:
…State…trooper Brian Tucker…picked up [a]…woman…and the two decided to have sex…Tucker…drove the woman to an abandoned industrial area…and…the two had consensual sex before the trooper asked the woman if she wanted to have anal sex and she refused…Tucker put his service weapon to the woman’s head and anally raped her…
…In 2011 the city council of Lynn, Massachusetts, enacted an ordinance than prohibits certain categories of sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school or park—exclusion zones that cover 95 percent of the town’s residential property…the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) of Massachusetts overturned the ordinance, concluding that it conflicts with the state’s scheme for regulating sex offenders after they are released from prison…”By requiring level two and level three sex offenders to move from their residences or face a civil penalty of $300 per day,” the opinion says, “the ordinance disrupts the stability of the home situations of sex offenders. As a supervised and stable home situation has been recognized as a factor that minimizes the sex offender’s risk of reoffense, this disruption is inconsistent with the Legislature’s goal of protecting the public”…
…Accusations of unrepresentativeness in sex industry debates are most often deployed to silence – acting as full stops in the conversation. They enable sex industry abolitionists to restrict the discussion to the topic of identity, miring it in issues of “representativeness” instead of exploring the substance of the representations being made. This preoccupation may be partly why abolitionists seem to have such a poor grasp of the subtleties of sex industry politics…
…Brian Bates, known to many as the “Video Vigilante,” posted a video…on his JohnTV website…using a drone…the device he uses now costs about $2,000. He also had to spend the equivalent of several 24-hour days learning how to fly the thing…Bates said he earns a living through posting his videos on YouTube and by licensing his footage to TV production companies all over the world…
Las Vegas…recently wrapped up its participation in a national initiative designed to [inflict Swanee Hunt’s sad, sick psychodrama on people who never did her any harm]…Cook County (Ill.) Sheriff Thomas J. Dart began these operations in 2011…[and the number of pigs at the teat] has grown from eight agencies to more than 70. The 10th “National Johns Suppression Initiative” ran from June 1 through Aug. 30…A variety of sting operations locally resulted in…34 “John” arrests…36 [underage sex workers arrested]…44 adult sex [workers arrested]…26 [other people charged as pimps and]…23 search warrants served [to look for loot]…
The humor sites have much better, more sensible coverage of sex work than the so-called “serious” media. With the exception of one very flat note in the “cons” section, The Onion‘s “The Pros and Cons of Legalizing Prostitution” is wonderfully snarky and dead on target.
It’s so, so wonderful to have Glenn Kessler on our side:
ECPAT…attributed [the “100,000 trafficked children” lie] to 2010 congressional testimony by Ernie Allen, at the time president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC)…Allen said he relied on two reports…Estes and…Weiner…and the 2002 National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway and Thrownaway Children (NISMART)…Both of these…rely on data collected in the 1990s…the Estes-Weiner report has been the subject of criticism by social scientists for years, and yet for some reason it remains the go-to source for anti-trafficking advocates…But…the NISMART report…shows that only 1,700 kids — less than one percent — reported having engaged in sexual activity in exchange for money, drugs, food, or shelter during the episode…more than three-quarters were away from home for less than a week; 99.8 percent…were recovered. So the pool of children who could end up being trafficked is relatively small…
If You Want Something Done Right…
Police say they are seeking tips after a woman working as a prostitute at a [Michigan] motel fought with two armed robbers and took a rifle away from one of them. She called…police…to report the robbery…When she heard a knock at her door she thought it was [a client but]…a masked man with a rifle forced his way into the room…A second young man followed behind the first…and there was a scuffle…The woman fell or was knocked down the stairs after she seized the rifle from one of the young men…One of the two assailants grabbed the woman’s purse from her room after she fell…
It’s starting, slowly but surely:
[Oklahoma City] Councilman Ed Shadid said he wants the city to consider legalizing – or at least decriminalizing – prostitution…”I think we should stop criminalizing sexual behavior.” Shadid spoke during a discussion of a “Disorderly House” ordinance, which expanded the definition of an “open lot disturbance violation” to include drugs and prostitution. The ordinance passed, but Shadid said criminalizing prostitutes is not the way to solve the city’s problems…Shadid, a surgeon, said he is worried about the spread of antibacterial-resistant and sexually-transmitted diseases…”Do you want to use [shame and impoverishment and imprisonment] for nonviolent, consensual activities, where perhaps in some cases it could be safer if it were regulated?”…
I was wondering how long it would take them to cram this into the “sex trafficking” paradigm:
Three women who pose painted and topless for tips in Times Square say that ten undercover police officers [stole] their clothing, purses, cellphones and wallets from the pedestrian plaza at 42nd Street…while they were using the bathroom at a nearby parking garage. The women had to walk nine blocks in their paint and robes to the Midtown South precinct in order to retrieve their possessions. There, before returning any items, detectives questioned them each separately in an interrogation room…The [harassment]…coincided with the arrest of their assistant Chris Olivieri [who] spends afternoons…holding their tips…running for snacks and tampons, guarding their clothing, and painting their breasts, backs, and legs…the Daily News, the mayor, and Governor Cuomo have recently tried to imply that male “managers” (“pimps,” if you read the tabloids) force the women, so-called “desnudas,” to work…
Of course, this was glaringly obvious from the start:
…The New York Times served up a prime example of…incongruence in two editorials that ran…on the very same day. In…a statement by the august Editorial Board, the Rentboy raid was presented…as an attack on civil liberties enabled by the illegality of prostitution. The Times board advanced the notion that the men using the site — on both the buying and selling side — were rational actors who were victimized only by hectoring law enforcement. The solution, clearly, was the decriminalization of sex work…Contrast that with the op-ed by Rachel Moran, a [prohibitionist pretending to be a] former prostitute…which is…an attack on the recently proposed Amnesty International policy drafted to protect the rights of sex workers worldwide…The two editorials…fall along lines of gendered doublespeak that remain consistent in mainstream media: Decriminalization would liberate male sex workers, who are presumed to have complete sexual autonomy, while it would all but enslave females, who are presumed to have none…
Even MSNBC published a sensible position for a change:
…unlike MyRedbook.com (also raided by the federal government) and Craigslist Erotic Services (shuttered by political pressure), no one has justified the raid on Rentboy as necessary to stopping human trafficking or protecting any victims…Sex workers consistently say they find it safer to screen clients online than on the street. Closing down such websites directly increases the risk of harm to sex workers. That is the effect of criminalization…Advocates of prosecution invoke racialized myths of sex work as dominated by “pimps” and “traffickers” that don’t bear out in research…Meanwhile…resources that could go to uncovering actual trafficking and supporting victims are being wasted on locking up sex workers and shuttering escort sites…
Saving Them From Themselves
If that’s the story I think it is, it gets even more ridiculous: he’s also facing charges, as an adult, for exploitation of a minor – due to his possession of pictures of himself.
From that it is only a very tiny step to severely punishing and executing people “to save their soul”, i.e. to utter and complete evil. Also shows that right and wrong does not figure in this kind of “justice”, just power.
While the theory of Reaction Formation presented has a good deal on it’s side, there is another reaction, and assuming that the one discussed is the only one out there is likely to cause trouble.
I think that some of the people who rail against some kinds of porn simply don’t get the attraction, and are unable to grasp that other, non-dangerous, people might.
I don’t “get” Gay porn. The message is there, but it isn’t being delivered to my address. At best, it simply leaves me unmoved. At worst, it is static, and can get pretty loud. I feel the same way about a couple of categories of hetero porn. Not my circus, not my monkeys .
Now, I don’t assume that anyone who is into something I’m not is a danger to society at large. I know that 99.99% of people who view porn would be horrified at the suggestion that they should go out and force somebody to do that. The .01% don’t need porn to be a danger to society.
But I’m a crank. I don’t assume that my preferences naturally rule life. I know better. And a lot of people DON’T.
Yes, some folks are anti-porn because they like it and are ashamed. But I think some people are anti-porn because some of it genuinely shocks and disgusts them, and they feel they have a right – a duty! – to keep other people from enjoying that. Like Vegans and meat. And if you tell a devout Vegan that she really wants a nice bloody steak, you should expect to get bean-curd up your nose.
Also, while a charge of Reaction Formation can be valid, as with most psychological diagnosis, it needs to be applied appropriately and not casually nor universally when assessing “opponents”. Otherwise, opponents have as much basis for turning it around — as in, “See, women such as Maggie are actually disgusted by any and all sexuality, and their adoption and advocacy of prostitution is merely a Reaction Formation to mask their disgust.”
Nope. Reaction formation doesn’t work that way; it’s always a negative reaction to an attraction or urge, not a positive reaction to a repulsion.
According to the definitions I’ve ever read, it can work either way. For examples:
” 2. Reaction formation is the fixation in consciousness of an idea, affect, or desire that is opposite to a feared unconscious impulse. A mother who bears an unwanted child, for example, may react to her feelings of guilt for not wanting the child by becoming extremely solicitous and overprotective to convince both the child and herself that she is a good mother.
“…and reaction formation, turning into its opposite a tendency rejected in oneself—as in excessive generosity as a defense against avarice.”
:http://www.britannica.com/topic/reaction-formation
“Reaction formation may explain why a parent who unconsciously does not care deeply for a child will smother that child with toys and attention.”
http://psychologydictionary.org/reaction-formation/
“….So a child, angry at her or his mother, will become overly concerned with her and rather dramtically shower her with affection….”
https://books.google.com/books?id=hGHtDF7F2roC&pg=PA434&lpg=PA434&dq=reaction+formation+psychology&source=bl&ots=GAgBIyXpkU&sig=HG6TqS2hOkdXCSWuWlw8dqsLAws&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEgQ6AEwBzgoahUKEwj58orqhOHHAhVIy4AKHZl9A_s#v=onepage&q=reaction%20formation%20psychology&f=false
That seem to be the same thing to me: The negative reaction is to the feeling of not wanting that child. The opposite reaction is used to suppress the genuine, native feeling. (That usually makes the problem worse.)
Of course, you need to use the relative definitions of “negative” and “positive”, i.e. negative=”rejecting something” and positive=”accepting something”, in both cases disregarding completely any moral or ethical judgment on the “something”, just whether it is accepted or rejected.
Absolute definitions like classifying “affection to a child” as “positive” do not fit here (and are misleading anyways, because if you give anything and everything to a child, you are most likely ruining its life…).
The thing here is also that these people universally do not get that dangerous people do not usually escalate dependent on material available to them. They escalate anyways, regardless of what porn/drugs/whatever they have available. In fact, when it comes to urges people have trouble to control, “substitution” comes into play. There are some well-established numbers that say that availability of porn _decreases_ rapes (and so does legalizing prostitution). That alone would be sufficient reason to legalize both.
But the cave-man mind-set does not get that at all, and part of that may be them reacting with suppressed guilty pleasure to the stuff they want to outlaw combined with strong elements of self-loathing. (In a sense they never learned to cope with being human. On can only hope they reincarnate as something else next time…) They have this fantasy that you can suppress sexual urges, when that clearly does not work, but is known to frequently have horrible consequences. Maggie is quite right that sex-starvation causes progressive insanity in men and can in some lead to loss-of-context, leading to them becoming rapists, violent killers, fanatics and other problematic actors.
Dr Shadid represents my ward in Oklahoma City; we’ve had our differences on some matters, but I think he’s spot-on with this one. We already lock up more women than almost any other place on the planet, and it’s accomplishing very little.