Stop scapegoating sexworkers

One of the great articles from lovely Tracy Quan:


http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/03...vada-quan-1-2/


Stop scapegoating sex workers
Harry Reid's bid to close bordellos is a petty public-relations move
BY TRACY QUAN WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2, 2011

U.S. Senate majority leader Harry Reid is certainly audacious. His recent foray into anti-prostitution rhetoric — his call for Nevada’s licensed brothels to be outlawed — is an insult, not only to women like his mother, who at one point made her living taking in laundry from a local brothel, but to the intelligence of his constituents. He seems to have lost touch with the concerns of working women.
Reid has a family connection to the sex industry, a fact often shared with the public, so his enthusiasm for banishing sex workers to the margins of society is reminiscent of a self-serving character in a 19th century novel who, for the sake of his reputation, shuns a cousin born out of wedlock.
The Nevada senator has argued that schoolchildren need to be protected from licensed sinners — a guaranteed panic generator — but the reality is more mundane. Melissa Ditmore, policy analyst and author of a recently published textbook "Prostitution and Sex Work," points out that "in rural counties, revenue from licensed prostitution supports public schools and other essential services working families need." The brothels themselves are remotely located and hardly obvious to schoolkids.
In fact, Reid is playing fast and loose with the welfare of people in less-populated parts of his state. Prostitution is licensed only in counties with populations under 400,000. It’s these locales where brothels would be eliminated, in order (he claims) to attract new business ventures. Without having secured these hypothetical investors to replace existing revenues, that’s irresponsible.
Reid sounds like a casino tout, but I’m guessing that Nevadans are too savvy to fall for that.
Brothels are run on more realistic lines — and you don’t have to work in one to benefit, as he probably knows. Bartenders, cooks and other support staff are also employed by the bordello industry.
What is Reid’s game? Can he really be serious about closing legal brothels in a state where so much illegal prostitution also occurs? In the rest of the country, we often forget that prostitution is illegal in, say, Las Vegas and Reno, where so much of it goes on. Licensed brothels represent only a portion of commercial sex earnings.
Reid says he’ll create new jobs by turning sex workers and their managers into criminals. One outcome I foresee is the creation of extra work for police officers. A likely side effect is criminal behavior on the part of the police. (Where prostitution is illegal, police corruption and abuse are common, along with overtime.) As a scheme to enrich police officers, this almost makes sense, but it’s hard to believe a senior figure like Reid is that petty. Prosecutors may also be kept busy dealing with the creation of new criminals.
There is something hateful about turning your constituents into parasitical adversaries while claiming to help them. Reid’s morality campaign plays better to the nation (where his newfound zeal can be experienced as a sideshow) than it does to the state where his ideas may have consequences. Could national ambitions be driving this ugly display?
It’s not that legal brothels are uncontroversial among prostitutes themselves. American sex workers have a love-hate relationship with illegality. Many believe that commercial sex needs to be illicit to remain profitable. Or they subscribe to an outlaw code that rolls its eyes at those who want legal status. (In this respect, they’re a bit like gay people who don’t buy into marriage.)
The birth of the U.S. prostitutes’ rights movement in bohemian, feminist San Francisco coincided with the 1971 debut of licensed bordellos in rugged, macho Nevada. These brothels were seen by activist hookers as paternalistic and oppressive, not much better than the anti-prostitution laws.
The prostitutes’ rights movement, though, has evolved since then. In 2011, a regulated brothel looks like one option among many, there to choose or reject. Many prostitutes still feel the Nevada system is unfair to brothel workers, but that doesn’t mean they favor Harry Reid putting them out of business.
Whether they secretly identify with that quintessentially American outlaw Billy the Kid or publicly embrace legalized prostitution, sex workers can see Reid’s move for what it is. A seasoned politician thinks he can improve his uncertain status with voters by scapegoating some very hardworking ladies who earn every dollar they take home.

Tracy Quan is a frequent contributor to The Daily Beast and the author, most recently, of "Diary of a Jetsetting Call Girl."

I posted a thread about this here the other day, a popular theory on some of the civilian political boards is that Dirty Harry is paying back the mob bosses who've supported him by hoping to push all prostitution back into organized crime's loving arms.

It's amazing what some of the brain washed masses have to say about legalization. They always start with "threat to marriage and the family", then "spreading disease" , "human trafficking, and always, always end up saying it will lead to more exploitation of minors.

All of the despite the facts that divorce is more common now than during the 19th century when prostitution was for the most part legal in the US (at least over-looked). And that the US army twice in it's history established brothels specifically (and successfully) to decrease the incidence of stds amongst the troops. Also, I think, common sense would dictate that a more open industry would be much better equipped to police itself vis a vie under aged or forcibly trafficked workers. UV light is a great disinfectant.

These are the same folks who argue that gay marriage leads to pedophilia and bestiality, every blessed time I get involved in a blog about the issue. The social conservatives have far darker minds than anyone I've read here.

There is no escaping the emotional component of this issue. Even my beloved wife, who is more forceful and vocal than I am about the need for prostitution to be legal and respected as a proven necessity in any properly functioning society. . . would probably come well unglued if she knew I participated in it. In industry one worries about scaling up processes from lab to pilot plant to production, but when it comes to social issues, often its the transition from macro to micro that is the rub.

I posted a thread about this here the other day, a popular theory on some of the civilian political boards is that Dirty Harry is paying back the mob bosses who've supported him by hoping to push all prostitution back into organized crime's loving arms. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

Now...now. Perhaps, there is a simpler explanation....

One of the great articles from lovely Tracy Quan:

is an insult, not only to women like his mother, who at one point made her living taking in laundry from a local brothel, Originally Posted by ninasastri

He might have been scarred for life if Mom made him help with all the sheets....

It's amazing what some of the brain washed masses have to say about legalization. They always start with "threat to marriage and the family", then "spreading disease" , "human trafficking, and always, always end up saying it will lead to more exploitation of minors.

. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

Man , now I'm the one worried! I'm agreeing with you.

He might have been scarred for life if Mom made him help with all the sheets.... Originally Posted by Sisyphus

Old Harry needs to dirty them sheets a time or two to un scar his ass.

Is scapegoating an upsell item? I'm not seeing anything about it in "Another Realm."

Harry is just appealing to the remaining housewives in Las Vegas. In Houston, we have an ordinance that a sexual oriented business cannot be within 750 ft of a school or church. It used to be 1500 ft. The council just passed that and the 3 ft rule to get re-elected. There is much more "non-victimless" crime going on at the bars and non-strip clubs. All they are doing is making the stripper moms drive further to pick up the kids.

The avg housewife just doesn't want the competition. They are screaming 'JUST FUCKING FUCK ME' but they won't to eat a salad and turn off Oprah. Good thing AA batteries are cheap.

Now...now. Perhaps, there is a simpler explanation....





He might have been scarred for life if Mom made him help with all the sheets.... Originally Posted by Sisyphus

+1. I always forget what a teacher once told me about diagnosis, "if you hear hoof-beats, don't look for zebras."

Is scapegoating an upsell item? I'm not seeing anything about it in "Another Realm."

Harry is just appealing to the remaining housewives in Las Vegas. In Houston, we have an ordinance that a sexual oriented business cannot be within 750 ft of a school or church. It used to be 1500 ft. The council just passed that and the 3 ft rule to get re-elected. There is much more "non-victimless" crime going on at the bars and non-strip clubs. All they are doing is making the stripper moms drive further to pick up the kids.

The avg housewife just doesn't want the competition. They are screaming 'JUST FUCKING FUCK ME' but they won't to eat a salad and turn off Oprah. Good thing AA batteries are cheap. Originally Posted by gnadfly

Good points all. I'm reminded of the source for the term "scapegoat". As I recall the ancient Hebrew tradition was to sacrifice one goat and set another one free, hence the escape goat. Put into those terms scapegoat maybe a worthwhile ambition.

Man , now I'm the one worried! I'm agreeing with you. Originally Posted by WTF

We all have our "cross to bear" my friend, you guys on the left have the socialist, redistribution crowd, we on the right have the crowd pre-occupied with bronze age mythology.

In the end there is very little difference between them, both see government as a necessary tool to impose their world view rather than a necessary evil we must overcome to express our own world views.

When political theorists insist on perpetrating the "straight line" model placing the communists at the extreme left and nazis at the extreme right it just makes me roll my eyes. In the final analysis, for all of their rhetoric, from the perspective of their victims (the only perspective that really matters), the only difference was the caliber bullets they used to murder those who opposed their world view.

We all have our "cross to bear" my friend, you guys on the left have the socialist, redistribution crowd, we on the right have the crowd pre-occupied with bronze age mythology.

In the end there is very little difference between them, both see government as a necessary tool to impose their world view rather than a necessary evil we must overcome to express our own world views.

When political theorists insist on perpetrating the "straight line" model placing the communists at the extreme left and nazis at the extreme right it just makes me roll my eyes. In the final analysis, for all of their rhetoric, from the perspective of their victims (the only perspective that really matters), the only difference was the caliber bullets they used to murder those who opposed their world view. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

True dat!

We all have our "cross to bear" my friend, you guys on the left have the socialist, redistribution crowd, we on the right have the crowd pre-occupied with bronze age mythology.

In the end there is very little difference between them, both see government as a necessary tool to impose their world view rather than a necessary evil we must overcome to express our own world views.

When political theorists insist on perpetrating the "straight line" model placing the communists at the extreme left and nazis at the extreme right it just makes me roll my eyes. In the final analysis, for all of their rhetoric, from the perspective of their victims (the only perspective that really matters), the only difference was the caliber bullets they used to murder those who opposed their world view. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

Absolutely! It's not a political spectrum...it's a political circle. The far "left" & the far "right" have much more in common with each other than either has in common with the center.

Of late...it seems have become more a political circle-jerk..

Absolutely! It's not a political spectrum...it's a political circle. The far "left" & the far "right" have much more in common with each other than either has in common with the center.

Of late...it seems have become more a political circle-jerk.. Originally Posted by Sisyphus

Similar, but also even less satisfying. My analogy is "Professional" wrestling. The fans likely do far more harm to each other than the performers do to each other.

Similar, but also even less satisfying. My analogy is "Professional" wrestling. The fans likely do far more harm to each other than the performers do to each other. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

Great analogy....the greater the fever pitch they can work the masses into , the more they assure themselves continued employment.

I have always tried to explain to my friends on the right that we have way more in common than not....yet as we prove in this forum every day, we most discuss the things we do not agree on thus the preception is that we have nothing in common.