(no subject)

[tylik]

This post made me furious, not only because of the basic concept (Craigslist being used to set up a prostitution sting) but because of the last two paragraphs:

'Though some may argue that prostitution and patronizing a prostitute— both misdemeanors — are victimless crimes, Sano doesn't see it thatway: "No young girl grows up dreaming of doing this. These prostitutes are women who have had a rough life, whether they're addicted to drugs, or they've been abused or they have some pimp forcing them into it.

"It is easy money ... but these women are being exploited and it's degrading," he said. "You should hear what some of these guys haveasked our detectives to do — it's disgusting."'

(Note, I'm not upset at the writer of the article, just at the events described.)

I think it's the appeal to the emotions in place of a logical argument that annoys me the most. "No young girl grows up dreaming of this..." Yeah, I bet most young girls don't grow up dreaming of being actuaries, adjusters, night stockers, civil engineers, morticians or any number of other things. And most intelligent adult women aren't astronauts, firefighters or ballerinas with ponies, either.

Does he have any evidence that the women who are advertising on Craigslist are drug addicts, abused, and/or under the control of pimps? Oh, they've had rough lives. Well shit. I've had a rough life. Maybe that's why I prostituted myself at Microsoft for so long. Apparently women who've had rough lives are unable to make decisions about how to live their lives and make their livings.

And not discussion at all whether the illegality of prostitution might be part of problems that do exist. (Not to mention the illegality of drugs, but that's another rant.)

I know a number of intelligent adult women who would *like* to be prostitutes, were it possible to do so in a manner than was safe and legal. (And while it hasn't ever been an ambition of mine, if I could have worked in an environment that provided adequate protections for my health, and allowed me to select my own clients and set my own schedule, I may well have chosen prostitution over, say, working as a fry chef for $7 an hour while I was in college... hmph. Instead I went and worked at a preschool after that.) Safe, legal, licensed (I'm not thinking of anything excessively onerous, but some basics around safety, psychology, and disease would see appropriate) and taxed strikes me as a vast improvement over the current situation.

And "disgusting"? Yeah, that's a fine thing to base a law on. I wonder how many intimate acts which I have performed (unpaid, but enthusiastically) he would find disgusting? And he seemed to be describing a situation in which the client comes in and negotiates what will be done and how much it will cost. This doesn't sound particularly coersive. (Well, except about the part about police advertising these services under false pretenses and then using this the entrap the prospective clients.)

And yes, I will be writing a letter to the editor. I just need to get the ranting down a bit first.