The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewFred Reed Archive
A Cry for Justice: The Abuse of Prostitutes
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

One of the few remaining unjustified restrictions on the freedom of women–one of few remaining barriers to equality in the workplace–is the prohibition of prostitution. No other service industry is forbidden to women on the basis of gender. Other sexist obstacles have come down. It is time this one did.

Treating prostitution as a crime represents an unconscionable restriction of a woman’s right to control her body. This right is legally recognized, allowing her to have an abortion, and must certainly extend to allowing her to decide with whom to go to bed. Any rational feminist (I know, I know) must favor legalization. So must libertarians opposed to governmental interference, conservatives favoring free enterprise, and advocates of free-markets. Keeping prostitution illegal smothers initiative and prevents capital formation.

Note that America’s attitude toward prostitution is not the norm among civilized nations. It is legal in Spain, Germany, Holland, Finland, Austria, Denmark, Italy, the United Kingdom, Portugal, Argentina, Brazil, and many others. Canada, idiotically, makes it legal to sell sex but not to buy it. (It gets cold up there, and I guess sometimes they forget to wear hats.)

Feminists, most of whom are in little danger of sex with a man, have for mysterious reasons regarded prostitution as exploitation of women. This is like saying that piano movers exploit musicians. A prostitute offers a service for a fee, like a barber. We do not penalize barbers, most of whom are men, but do penalize prostitutes, most of whom are women. It is a clear case of disparate impact—in a word, of sexism.

Typically feminists, pathological reformers, and married women oppose prostitution. That is, they want the government to control the sexual lives of women. This is an outrage, and little better than purdah. Can suttee be far behind?

Note, though, that feminists are not disinterested parties. They regard heterosexual sex as miscegenation, and heterosexual men as poachers. With them it is a matter of competition for resources. Married women, moving on in years, putting on a bit of weight, and perhaps not erotic thunderstorms in the first place, yearn not for houses full of young, luscious, available and—Hallelujah!—feminine women within hubby’s purview.

Reformers argue that because prostitutes are mostly women, somehow the trade represents discrimination against that sex. How so? Piano movers have almost always been men. Does this imply that a woman who has her piano moved is exploiting men? This would seem to imply that pianos by law should be stationary.

The Predatory Good insist disingenuously that prostitution is bad for women. In particular, they tell of the miserable lives of prostitutes working in filthy brothels and dark and dangerous streets, of the pimps who beat them and of occasional brutal customers. These, they say, show that prostitution is a great evil. But these great evils—and they are great evils—exist because prostitution is illegal. That is, moral uplifters force women to work in sordid cribs and back streets. They leave them no choice. It is legal oppression and obvious misogyny.

But it is the illegality, not the prostitution, that that engenders tragedy and ruined lives. If piano-moving were illegal, it also would quickly fall into the hands of shady characters and occur in the dark of night by unlicensed and perhaps incompetent movers. They might drop the piano. Corruption of the police would soon follow. Injuries would occur as movers took pianos up rickety back stairs to avoid being seen. And if the moving itself were illegal, possession of a piano would be prima facie evidence of the crime of felony solicitation of piano moval.

As sit turns out, more-or-less normal women now use prostitutes. Irrational feminists (I know, I know) disapprove of prostitution almost as much as they do of housewives and marriage, but chiefly I think because both involve—ugh!–men. Unfortunately for them, heterosexual—ugh!–women apparently are using the services of heterosexual—ugh!–men—ugh!-for reasons resembling those of men who patronize prostitutes. Headline:”More women than ever are paying for sex because they are too busy for conventional relationships….” Given the nature of businesswomen, female lawyers, and such, this may be a service to the rest of us. However, if these brave men laboring in the trenches (so to speak) of social progressivism are not being arrested, why should female prostitutes be? It is sheer vindictiveness by the matriarchy.

Of course prostitution does not have to occur under the sordid conditions associated with unregulated piano-moving. Just as the illegality of abortions resulted in death and trauma, so illegality of commercial sex results in the grim conditions of the unregulated trade. It is not the merchandise but the banning that creates problems.

By contrast, legal bordellos, inspected as restaurants are, can be safe, clean, and elegant with bars, smoking rooms, oil paintings, crystal chandeliers, and other elements of a theme park. A well-run bawdy house would allow the women to dress and behave as ladies and require that the men so treat them, thus elevating public manners. In the United States, such houses would constitute almost the only places where men could be alone with each other and agreeable women.

For reasons beyond my ken, Doers of Good believe that the customers of prostitutes hold these women in contempt, and enjoy degrading them. Perhaps some do. Some hold piano-movers in contempt. (“They are not our sort of people, dear.”) I know many men who have spent long years in Asia and patronized countless prostitutes. These men do not at all speak of the girls with contempt, and indeed often remember them fondly. The disdain seems to come from the Doers of Good, not from men.

ORDER IT NOW

A bargirl in Thailand once told me approximately, “I can work in an electronics-assembly plant twelve hours a day, barely make a living, and almost never see my little boy, or I can work here where it is comfortable and I have my days off.” So you see: Illegality consigns women to sweatshops. And it is bad for children.

In the past, and in many places today, women were and are forced by physical threats to work as prostitutes. This is utterly reprehensible, as immoral as forcing men to fight wars in which they have no stake, or forcing them to pick cotton. Again, it is the forcing, not the prostitution that is an evil. Picking cotton is not in itself a moral disgrace.

Under today’s economic conditions, compulsion would be nonexistent, especially in licensed houses rigorously inspected. Any prostitute who became dissatisfied could simply walk out the door. Today, a girl of eighteen can make her living without selling sex, and almost all do. If she chooses voluntarily to work in a brothel for whatever reason—better money than Starbuck’s, and less boring—why is that not her business?

Illegality? I say unto ye, brothels and sistels, herein lies a great evil, and it should not stand.

(Republished from Fred on Everything by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Prostitution 
Hide 106 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Tom_R says:

    THOSE WHOM THE GODS WANT TO DESTROY, HE FIRST MAKES MAD.

    Fred, I used to like your articles, but somehow, this article makes me wonder if you are losing your moral compass, because your idea that prostitution should be legal is immoral, repulsive and disgusting.

    And just because some countries have legalized it, does not make it right.

    This “consenting adults” argument is a slippery slope that can lead to many problems. For eg. if a country allows women to sell their bodies (under the consenting adults argument), what is there to stop the country from allowing men from selling their mothers? Or people from selling their organs? Or rampant pornography? Or polygamy? Or a man from marrying his mother or sister? Or uneducated people practicing a licensed profession (like law or medicine) on clients/patients who are willing be advised or treated by uneducated charlatans for a fraction of the price as long as they know the lawyer or doctor is not licensed? All these can be justified under the “consenting adults” argument.

    The libertarians are often just closet lib-barbarians.

  2. Michelle says:

    Legalization will help younger and better looking prostitutes. Brothel owners will not hire your basic street prostitute. Older, less attractive and drug addicted prostitutes will still work on the street in dangerous substandard conditions, but they will, at least be free from police harassment. Then again, maybe not, as once prostitution is legalized, the public demands for zoning laws will begin. Prostitution is already self zoned to a degree.

    I agree that prostitution should be legalized, but doubt that legalization will cure all ills. In the Asian countries of which Fred speaks, there is a very dire social stigma placed on prostitutes. Many of them are completely disconnected from their families, who want nothing to do with them. I can only imagine the stigma their children deal with. And here we are talking about cultures wherein men are almost “expected” to frequent prostitutes. I have no reason to think that won’t happen in our culture, as well.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Carpenter
  3. Thirdeye says:

    Feminism, like all totalitarian ideologies, seeks to extend its control over people’s personal lives and trample the rights of the individual. Now that the West is becoming secular and losing the functions of religion in legitimizing totalitarian control, feminists are stepping into that role.

    Women who feel that prostitution is a threat to their relationships with men need to look at themselves first.

    • Replies: @Michelle
  4. Tony says:

    Hey Fred whats your position with male prostitutes?

    • Replies: @Fred Reed
    , @Odysseus
  5. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    Treating prostitution as a crime represents an unconscionable restriction of a woman’s right to control her body. This right is legally recognized, allowing her to have an abortion, and must certainly extend to allowing her to decide with whom to go to bed.

    If you’re going to use this logic, then you’d have to legalize drug use and suicide.

    • Replies: @Stan D Mute
    , @Anon
    , @Carpenter
  6. Fred Reed says: • Website
    @Tony

    Since I don’t do male prostitutes, the question of positions has not occurred to me.

    • Replies: @HLMunchkin
  7. Fred Reed says: • Website
    @Tom_R

    With every passing year I am more surprised by the number of irony-challenged, humor deficient readers who otherwise appear to be intelligent. A sort of literalism seems to be overcoming the country. Maybe I should at the top write “Joke! A Funny! Kidding!” Or maybe I just write confusingly. Anyway, apologies for unintentional deception.

  8. Tom_R says:
    @Fred Reed

    IF THIS ARTICLE IS MEANT TO BE SARCASM/HUMOR, I AM SORRY, FRED.

    I do see some of your statements do sound sarcastic, but I took the article literally, so I am sorry–did not mean to offend you.

    But then reading other commentators, it seems they are also thinking that your article supports legalizing prostitution, so a label such as Irony/Humor might help.

  9. @Fred Reed

    It’s very hard to tell that it’s irony or satire, as in A modest Proposal. Even so, you hit more than you miss, sir, and make many lives better for it.

  10. Talha says:

    “…possession of a piano would be prima facie evidence of the crime of felony solicitation of piano moval…” – that is classic!

    Oh my God – the sides hurt! Please people DO NOT read this after having stuffed yourself on a Christmas feast – it’ll hurt double!

  11. That some took it seriously shows how far down the continuum we’ve come where satire just sounds like the latest outrage actually visited upon us. Brothels and sistels, indeed, in case you didn’t get it!

  12. If comedians say funny things and comics say things funny Fred is a comic. He has a funny way of saying it but prostitution really should be legal. There cannot be a crime without a victim. A specific, identified, individual victim. Don’t tell me “society” is a victim. That’s bull shit.

    No victim no crime. No harm no foul.

    Yo Fred. Do you think prostitution should be legal? Yes or no God Damn It.

  13. bossel says:
    @Fred Reed

    Or maybe I just write confusingly.

    Or – maybe – a lot of what you write about prostitution which you think is satire, actually is very close to the truth.

    • Agree: Jeff Davis
  14. memorials says:

    Fred, meet Maggie: https://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com
    I can imagine y’all might have some interesting conversations.
    Merry Christmas.

  15. @Fred Reed

    I just appreciate the thought process.

    When smoking laws were being enacted/debated, there was a postulate that “second hand smoke was worse for you than smoking”.
    I decided that meant that smoking was good for you. If the smoke being breathed out was worse than what was breathed in, then smoking must be removing toxins from your body.
    Or the Fem/Dems that claim banning abortion is a “War on Women”, when half the babies aborted are women.
    Or, they’re for abortion, but against capital punishment.

    Consistent thinking is not the Liberals forte.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  16. Michelle says:
    @Thirdeye

    I disagree with you. There are many reasons why men visit prostitutes. The “natural” male desire for sexual variety being, probably, the number one. Being loving, beautiful and sexually receptive does not preclude a woman from having a partner who will visit prostitutes. Often, the prostitutes a man has relations with are less attractive than his wife or partner, a la Hugh Grant, Devine Brown and Elizabeth Hurley. It is, for the most part, the man’s decision to have sex with prostitutes. It really has little, to nothing,to do with his wife or partner. Sometimes it is a stop gap measure men use in between relationships with committed partners. A lot of times it is just a result of horniness and alchohol use.

    There will always be men who enjoy sex with professionals for whatever reason. Many men who live in male dominated cultures still have relations with prostitutes. In those cultures women are not encouraged to enjoy, or give the appearance of enjoying, sex for fear of being labeled whores and arousing the jealousy of their husbands. So their husbands frequent prostitutes, whom they suspect are insatiable Nymphos!

    I look at it this way, in this era of online porn I thank goodness there are still men who want to have contact with real women’s bodies.

    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    , @Carpenter
  17. Ole’ Fred Reed is approaching H.L. Mencken status with his insightful and fearless evaluations of the American social experiment. (This is a great compliment to Fred as this commentator considers Henry Louis Mencken the only true American Saint).

    Mencken wrote a scandalous and wonderfully hilarious book that’s generally unknown, published in 1917, entitled, “In Defense of Women” (found on Gutenberg.org), that makes a non-sentimental investigation into the interplay between the sexes. Of course in those days there were only two sexes in common parlance so Mencken was able to focus his acerbic wit on less varied fields of gender than is found today.

    Permit a few quotes from H.L.’s amusing diatribes:

    Regarding prostitution, in one segment of “In Defense of Women” (titled, “The Lady of Joy”) Henry Louis writes:

    “…The prostitute is disesteemed today, not because her trade involves anything intrinsically degrading or even disagreeable, but because she is currently assumed to have been driven into it by dire necessity, against her dignity and inclination. That this assumption is usually unsound is no objection to it; nearly all the thinking of the world, particularly in the field of morals, is based upon unsound assumption, e.g., that God observes the fall of a sparrow and is shocked by the fall of a Sunday-school superintendent. The truth is that prostitution is one of the most attractive of the occupations practically open to the sort of women who engage in it, and that the prostitute commonly likes her work, and would not exchange places with a shop-girl or a waitress for anything in the world. The notion to the contrary is propagated by unsuccessful prostitutes who fall into the hands of professional reformers, and who assent to the imbecile theories of the latter in order to cultivate their good will, just as convicts in prison, questioned by tee-totalers, always ascribe their rascality to alcohol. No prostitute of anything resembling normal intelligence is under the slightest duress; she is perfectly free to abandon her trade and go into a shop or factory or into domestic service whenever the impulse strikes her; all the prevailing gabble about white slave jails and kidnappers comes from pious rogues who make a living by feeding such nonsense to the credulous. So long as the average prostitute is able to make a good living, she is quite content with her lot, and disposed to contrast it egotistically with the slavery of her virtuous sisters. If she complains of it, then you may be sure that her success is below her expectations.”

    “…Even the most lowly prostitute is better off, in all worldly ways, than the virtuous woman of her own station in life. She has less work to do, it is less monotonous and dispiriting, she meets a far greater variety of men, and they are of classes distinctly beyond her own.”

    In another chapter Mencken goes on to condemn the sanctity of marriage writing:

    “…In the present case experience is still overwhelming on the side of monogamy; civilized men are in favour of it because they find that it works. And why does it work? Because it is the most effective of all available antidotes to the alarms and terrors of passion. Monogamy, in brief, kills passion—and passion is the most dangerous of all the surviving enemies to what we call civilization, which is based upon order, decorum, restraint, formality, industry, regimentation. The civilized man— the ideal civilized man —is simply one who never sacrifices the common security to his private passions. He reaches perfection when he even ceases to love passionately—when he reduces the most profound of all his instinctive experience from the level of an ecstasy to the level of a mere device for replenishing armies and workshops of the world, keeping clothes in repair, reducing the infant death-rate, providing enough tenants for every landlord, and making it possible for the Polizei to know where every citizen is at any hour of the day or night. Monogamy accomplishes this, not by producing satiety, but by destroying appetite. It makes passion formal and uninspiring, and so gradually kills it.”

    Thank you, Fred, for reminding me of Mencken’s great classic and bringing this social bugaboo into a contemporary framework!

  18. Red Robbo says:

    Absent from this satirical piece, like the debate in general, is the socialist perspective that employment is prostituition. Marx saw sex work as ’only a specific expression of the general prostitution of the labourer.’ Such dehumanisation of those involved will only end when the terms buyer and seller become redundant with the establishment of socialism.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Bill Jones
  19. Another garbage article from Mr. Reed. I agree with others that Fred seems to be losing his marbles and perhaps it has become of waste of time even reading his posts.

  20. Handle53 says:
    @Fred Reed

    I’ve read enough of your articles that I immediately took this as satire.

  21. in some countries, what goes on between a man and a woman is a private affair. no middle man can be involved. that is a crime.

  22. Great column, mr Reed.

    The land of unlimited gambling with free drinks, prescription and illegal drugs, on-and offline porn, guns and bombing. Using a quarter of all energy resources on air-conditioning and huge cars to drive one person. Having millions of poor, undernourished people. Hundred thousands left death on operating tables. More people in prison an tortured than any other ‘free’ country. Thanking handicapped for their service killing peasants in far away lands. Waving flags and singing the national anthem before breakfast and every goddamn ballgame.

    It is endlessly funny to see how those people are against some woman making a buck by giving pleasure to men, trying to pay off their student debt or not willing to work two jobs cleaning the offices of the rich. More power to them, I say.

  23. I have no idea if it is satire or not, but I agree with the article’s points :/

  24. Singh says:

    Can suttee be far behind?

    If you weren’t committing suicide, due to abrahamic madness we might have nuked you for that comment..

    Sati still exists & is perfectly normal. Once you get out of abrahamic christianity & secularism you should look up how women & children would throw themselves in a fire. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WQtUYv1_-s

    Our country may be poor today, due to millenia of war.

    Atleast even the smallest child is a lion, while you are circumcised cowards.
    https://sikhkindlebooks.wordpress.com/2011/12/24/shaheedi-of-sahibzada-baba-zorawar-singh-ji-and-sahibzada-baba-fateh-singh-ji/

  25. @Tom_R

    Fred lose his moral compass? Surely you jest. The poor boy was born into a Presbyterian family. You don’t just walk away from brain damage like that.

  26. Rehmat says:

    Most probably, the next “smoking gun” Fred Reed is going to fire would read: “Iran Kills Prostitutes”.

    On June 24, 2009, America’s most powerful Zionist think, ‘Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)’ released a study, entitled, “Reform and Women Rights Movements Intertwined in Iran”. The CFR’s Senior Fellow, Isobel Coleman, an “expert on women’s rights”, while loathing over lack of women rights under Iran’s “Islamist” regime – forgot his duty as a “moral feminist Jew” to do something for her Jewish sisters in Israel who are discriminated in EIGHT sectors of the society.

    http://rehmat1.com/2014/05/15/8-places-jewish-women-discriminated-in-israel/

  27. Ragno says:
    @Blogsworthy

    In my opinion, Fred needs to start employing Mencken-era traffic-stoppers like “disesteemed” in his columns. That way, even fewer people will be able to tell when he’s taking the piss.

  28. Clyde says:

    65% of prostitutes are inclined this way because they like sex with a variety of men. And this way they can get paid for it.

    • Replies: @Truth
  29. Fred Reed says: • Website
    @Blogsworthy

    Thank you for your kind remarks. “In Defense of Women” is available in both print and Kindle at Amazon. I will buy it.

  30. Ben Gunn says:

    Fred, do you recognize married men spending their limited resources on prostitutes rather than their families?- a fundamental argument against prostitution. Raiders, thieves. At best it is a gray area.

    • Replies: @TontoBubbaGoldstein
  31. Dave37 says:

    I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see legal prostitution advertised at Indian casinos. It’s been said before that sarcasm is hard to tell from the modern reality of everyday news.

  32. @Ben Gunn

    Fred, do you recognize married men spending their limited resources on prostitutes rather than their families?- a fundamental argument against prostitution.

    Couldn’t this “fundamental argument” be made against…well anything?

    Also your argument is against married men patronizing prostitutes, not prostitution, per se.

  33. I see you’ve been hanging out again at Guadalajara de Noche don Fred. Don’t worry though, I won’t tell doña Julieta

  34. Well in China you can get a haircut and sexual services at the “barbershop”.

    • Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter
  35. Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Us whores have a term for those feminists :SWERF. sex work exclusionary radical feminist. You’d think they own everyone’s vagina, not just their attached ones, from the way they speak and act!
    Great essay.

  36. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Michelle

    Legalize drugs, open up safe injection clinics, provide a basic income.

    • Replies: @Willem Hendrik
  37. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Tom_R

    Calm down for just a moment.

    You are missing the point of what he is talking about. There are two points.

    First, he is trying to say that feminist have a contradictory view when it comes to what women can and can’t do with their bodies. In general feminist say that women should have control over their body for example the right to abortion. Yet at the same time, they are against prostitution. So they want women to have control over one thing, but not another.

    Second and the most important point is that by making prostitution illegal it is creating the issues that are seen in prostitution. Women being used, abused, and sold. If it was legalized, then laws could be made to protect the women or men who wish to sell their bodies. All you have to do is look at prohibition of alcohol and see how badly that went. It doesn’t matter if something is illegal or not. People will do what they want. He isn’t making a moral argument on if it is right or not.

  38. @Anonymous

    Good luck with that.

    Hundreds of thousands of government people are directly depended on drugs staying illegal, providing a basic income for them.

  39. Odysseus says: • Website
    @Tony

    Fred Garvin, male prostitute.

  40. @Blogsworthy

    If Fred’s article is satire, that makes me sad. I believe every word of what he wrote to be true.

    After learning detail about H.L. Mencken in these comments, I am with him – and ultimately plan to learn and read much more about this esteemed writer from the early 20th century. He appears to be far, far ahead of this time – even light years ahead of some of these commenter’s of the early 21st century.

  41. @Elmer T. Jones

    And in the US, you can also get a “Happy ending” at the local Chinese nail salon/therapeutic massage/spa clinic.

  42. Since modern feminism is basically just man bashing, feminists simplistically believe that prostitutes are good, but men who pay for sex are bad. This is why they have decided that the word “prostitute” is offensive and must be replaced with the word “sex worker.”

    In contrast, religious conservatives believe both prostitutes and their clients are morally dodgy. The conservative position may be tough on women with few skills and work options, but at least it’s morally consistent.

  43. Fred, no whore story from Mexico would be complete without some sort of reference/commentary regarding the following chronicle:

    http://www.asesinos-en-serie.com/hermanas-gonzalez-valenzuela-las-poquianchis/

  44. joe webb says:

    Mencken, per these quotes, is merely a smart alec and foolish into the bargain

    Unrestrained sex brings down society. Whether it is the harem in the orient, prostitution in general, playboy and down to the porn of today, it is all degrading the human potential for high life functioning by sexual seduction devoid of pro-social consequences…family life, etc.

    Christianity put sex under control with rules and monogamy. Every genuine society regulates sex. Unregulated, society suffers. Smart people can handle sex, drugs, and rock and roll better than stupid people. They know when to stop and go back to work, and when to sober up generally.

    If you are old enough to have lived thru sex, drugs and rock n roll and seen the particularly degrading effect of same on the working class, then you know this. It has had less impact on smarter white people because they know when to stop, etc. However, they are not innocent either.

    Murray’s Coming Apart addresses some of this. The only people holding it together pretty well in the US these days are the upper-middle class whites who are smart enough to recognize when they are endangered and so something about it.

    Blacks have been greatly damaged by the sexual revolution and drugs, not that they were particularly safe beforehand given their proclivities for sexual randiness. Once given permission, the genie has been released from the bottle for them….Back to Africa.

    As for prostitution, it is a low-life world which could not get more degrading than it usually is, with drug addiction, downward spiral, disease, etc. Making it legal would not change this. We are probably stuck with it, but these girls would be much better off in a nunnery or some kind of sheltered workshop situation. Prostitutes are very stupid people in general.

    The gutter of Hollywood and Jewish dominated porn industry and TV is a moral hazard generally, Any house with a TV in it is occupied territory and you know who the occupiers are.

    Sexual passion is profound, and its control is society’s largest problem during relative peacetime.
    The fundamental fact is that the only way to control it is to either be born pretty smart, so that one finds creative things to do, as well as possessing self-discipline, or for the great unwashed to be disciplined by external authority, be that church or community censure.

    The city has always been the center of wild sex. This is as direct an attack on high culture and civilization as it is possible to get, particularly with the kind of unlimited privacy that we now have. It is a recipe for disaster as social relations are diminished unto anarchy. The only real cure for it is a good little war, and or government/community intervention.

    We may get a little war going soon that will sober up the libertines, and sex addicts. Prostitution is only one of the stations on the way to the swamp.

    Fred is usually wrong these days. Prostitution is nothing to be satirized or promoted/defended. It is a social menace, just like other contemporary practices in advertising, movies, and pop culture.
    We need to recall that AH was a total prude when it came to sex. He was right, at least about that.
    Every school child is subverted by the Bill Clinton, or JFK peccadillos, etc. It is savagery to allow kids to be exposed to this dirt.
    Joe Webb

    • Replies: @Willem Hendrik
    , @Anon
  45. @Red Robbo

    Only a few years ago I realised the Marx’s Das Kapital contained good satire, such as his celebration of the work created for police, lawyers and magistrates by criminals. Can you perhaps quote something satirical about prostitution from Marx?

    And can you spell out the implications for sexual relations of what you say about socialism? Equal shares perhaps? Non-discrimination on grounds of appearance, or smell, or indeed sex?

    • Replies: @Red Robbo
  46. Antiwar7 says:
    @Tom_R

    Selling one’s mother is NOT consensual for the mother.

    As usual, an overabundance of marketing indicates a deficient product, in this case, your handle.

  47. @joe webb

    Lol
    Make war, not love. A little bombing will sort out those prostitutes.
    Please tell me you have a little American flag on your desk and were playing the national anthem while typing your heroic reaction.

    • Replies: @joe webb
  48. Civilization is an unnatural state, kept in place by a profusion of strictures against all sorts of natural urges that most men feel from time to time. Picking at these strictures is something like picking at a loose thread on a knitted garment – you can never be quite sure you aren’t going to unravel the whole damned thing.

    My preference for air-conditioning, cold beer, and indoor plumbing is strong enough that I can refrain from picking at the rest of the fabric of civilization, tattered though it may be.

    • Replies: @Thirdeye
  49. @Fred Reed

    Fred, are you suggesting that your satire was just kidding, just a joke, when you make a perfectly logical and, in the 21st century West, quite commonplace argument for legalising prostitution at least as it is legal in many countries where there is, nonetheless regulation as well? If I didn’t think you would eschew commonplace boring arguments I wouldn’t have thought the writer was being satirical. As it is I see your satire directed at hypocritical or confused feminists but am left in doubt about your belief that women should be able to sell sex outside marriage.

    I used to think that we men, when in our prime, ought to be protected from billboards and other visual images likely to stimulate sexual distraction in the average male. Just as Prohibition was supposed to have been good for national productivity perhaps assisted celibacy outside the marital bedroom might have been good also for healthy family life…. Too late for the Western world and not very relevant to the retired..

  50. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @joe webb

    It is easy to agree that the lifting of all sexual discipline on the lower classes has created problems which are at least expensive and probably damaging for those countries which were first to give the world the benefit of the Enlightenment (in one or more of its several national flavours) but you make statements for which I would invite you to explain your source of knowledge and advance your evidence before accepting them.

    Why do you say that “prostitutes are very stupid people in general”? Is there any evidence for that at all? Are those forced into prostitution of lower than average intelligence? Are those earning in a legal brothel several times what they could earn in the same time behind a shop counter stupid whether they sell sex because they find it quite an agreeable way to earn money or do so because it is the only way to pay school fees and the mortgage?

    Accepting that street prostitution is as degraded and damaging as you portray all prostitution “usually” is what do you know about legal prostitution, in brothels, discreet apartments or as escort services which justifies your saying that legalisation wouldn’t change any of the evil circumstances you nominate?

    It is true that illegal brothels with cheap Asian prostitutes are not unknown in jurisdictions where prostitution is legal and regulated. That serves as a reminder of how bad and corrupt the policing was before legalisation.

    • Replies: @joe webb
  51. Truth says:
    @Clyde

    Of course, and %65 of Starbucks Baristas do their job because their greatest desire in life is to make coffee for rude yuppies.

  52. @Dave Pinsen

    If you’re going to use this logic, then you’d have to legalize drug use and suicide.

    YES!!! And why the hell not? Who are you to dictate what I may do with myself provided I harm no others? We euthanize our dogs and cats, but force mom to endure unspeakable agony because “morality”? Billy can get all he wants of his preferred drugs (alcohol & nicotine) but Johnny goes off to prison for the drugs that make him feel best (THC & MDMA) despite mountains of evidence that Billy’s drugs are FAR more harmful than Johnny’s.

    Someone else above mentioned selling one’s own organs in a similar vein. Again, why the hell not? If I’m destitute and possess an extra organ I don’t need, who are you to deny me the money to feed my kids and deny another the chance to extend his life? His surplus $1,000,000 does him no good without my kidney and my kidney does me no good if my kids are homeless and starving. What business of yours is it?

    All you moralizers need to remember that your morality is enforced by thugs with guns. You would rather some psycho thug with a badge murder me than that I engage in free commerce with another adult. Some morality you have there.

  53. Rurik says:
    @Blogsworthy

    That’s some damn choice prose Blogs

    And yes, it does smack of the Fredster’s wry, sardonic style

    The prostitute is disesteemed today, not because her trade involves anything intrinsically degrading or even disagreeable, but because she is currently assumed to have been driven into it by dire necessity, against her dignity and inclination. That this assumption is usually unsound is no objection to it; nearly all the thinking of the world, particularly in the field of morals, is based upon unsound assumption

    : )

    but, he does use the word ‘usually’

    for the record, I don’t think there are too many who find the institution of prostitution nearly so repellant as when it practiced out of charity or amusement, than when it’s practiced out of necessity. The former being nearly laudable, and the latter deplorable.

    Nothing wrong with Elliot Spitzer’s $5000.oo a romp hooker, but lot’s and lot’s wrong with rich westerners going into third word countries or the bombed out ruins of some ravaged nation and buying flesh from the starving. Fat, wealthy old men buying little girls and boys in third world countries is an abomination to the Gods; “consensual” exchange of services for cash notwithstanding. In a world without want and the indigent willing to do even the most mortifying thing imaginable to feed their children, prostitution would not be nearly so appalling. But all too often, those willing to sell their dignity are too often doing so out of the worst kind of abject deprivation.

    So perhaps there’s ‘good’ prostitution (some would include marriage here) and then there’s iniquitous prostitution (some would include marriage here ; )

    • Replies: @Thirdeye
  54. joe webb says:
    @Willem Hendrik

    what can I say, except to avoid the common expletive and simply point out that you are lost.

    Joe Webb

  55. joe webb says:
    @Anon

    I have known a few prostitutes …very stupid and very prone to emotionalism, much more so than other women, and all drug users.

    Now the issue is what to do about it. Probably not much, but to legalize it is bad policy because it lends respect to it. Nothing respectful about it.

    Guys who cannot abstain or masturbate to deal with their urges, just follow the primrose path to merely animal life. The whole edifice of western civilization is to escape our animal nature, or at least its least admirable forms. The most esteemed facet of our animal nature, the urge to follow genetic similarity, etc. is condemned by the same liberal/jew/commie folks who tell you that sexual polymorphous perversity (words of Nobbie Brown, Jew ) is the only natural trait that one should follow. This is swamp/jungle devilry preached by conniving jews, and degraded whites.

    The murderer gets top rank in prisons, and the molester the lowest. These prisoners are at least in touch with a couple fundamentals. Fighting is respectful, cuming is always a joke, and most folks realize that. Of course, in the context of marriage or at least romantic love which is the precursor to marriage, sex is fine and leads to pair bonding and children. Guys who go to whores are probably without children, one of our White problems.Funny that Whites are the only people who naturally kiss, and invented romantic love

    Modesty is universally admired. Slutish behavior is universally condemned, also in men until recently with jewish porn, etc. Now the jews push the negress and other low life semi-whores to reveal all in their dresses, or undresses. This is low life, some of the lowest, short of cannibalism which is not far behind with regard to the darker bros.

    Aztec heart surgery also included cannibalism. Our brown brothers from Reed land.

    Public Life is interesting to most people. Private life is not, unless it leads to admirable Public life.

    Joe Webb

  56. @Willem Hendrik

    In the land of “unlimited gambling with free drinks,” that being Nevada, prostitution is also legal.

    What do millions of poor, undernourished people have to do with any of this? Are you preening?

    What business is it of yours what size car anyone drives? Are you leftwing douchebag?

    Is there some sort of mystical connection between those of us you use air conditioning and some people being undernourished? Is air conditioning evil?

    What’s wrong with criminals being in prisons? Isn’t that where they belong?

    Who’s waving flags? Where? When? At the Olympics? Other countries do that too.

    Who sings the national anthem before breakfast? Where? When? And what’s wrong with singing it at a “ballgame”? Perhaps other people don’t hate their own country. Maybe they don’t fancy themselves as being so “above it all.”

    And maybe you’re moral degenerate who thinks he’s pretty awesome. Grow up already.

  57. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Tom_R

    Pardon me for asking but what country in the world that allows prostitution lets men sell their mothers? Thanks for the big laugh. Unintentional hilarity is always the best.

    P.S. Don’t forget to take your meds.

  58. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Dave Pinsen

    Why shouldn’t drug use be legalized? And organ selling too? I can DONATE an organ to you but I can’t SELL it to you. Why not? You get a new lease on life and the doctors doing the operation all get paid for their time and efforts. WHY SHOULDN’T the organ-giver get something out of it too?

    • Agree: Bill Jones
  59. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    What is prostitution? Are not porn stars prostitutes? They get paid for sex. What about a woman who sleeps with her boss to get a promotion? How about a gorgeous 21 year old girl who marries an unattractive, decades older sugar daddy type?

    • Replies: @Thirdeye
  60. annamaria says:
    @boogerbently

    “…they’re for abortion, but against capital punishment…”

    A food for thought: the Bible belt is for capital punishment, for unrestricted poisoning of water and soil (business is sacred!), and for restricted access of poor women and their children to medical care. The very pious catholic men in very expensive garments are also categorically against any abortion, even for a 10-year old victim of rape, even if a pregnancy is going to kill her – the holy fathers have excommunicated a doctor that saved the raped child’ life by aborting her pregnancy. But the same holy fathers in the expensive garments are dead-silent about an obvious case for excommunication for certain war profiteering politicians that are guilty of destroying thousands of thousands of lives, including babies and pregnant women (see also the pictures of genetic deformities caused by using depleted uranium against the civilian population in Fallujah). Have you ever heard about a call for excommunicating the pious Tony Blair (who is collecting good money nowadays) or Bush the lesser that was encouraged by God to make his decision to bomb out Iraq? Aha. This is too much. We should not talk about the powerful and wealthy men and their right to make good money on war profiteering and on poisoning wells and soil (see Texas and the blatantly undemocratic measures taken there by the wealthy and powerful politicians – mostly Christians – against those locals that did not want their kids become poisoned by fracking).
    It is easy to show moral superiority on a cheap. It is much more difficult to demand from the pious men the universal health care, maternity leave, protection of air and water and soil against big ChemoCorporations, GMO labeling, accountability for the overseas wars.
    It is not your business how many pregnancies a given woman wants to carry on to terms, particularly when a pregnancy threatens a woman’s life or could result in a disabled child. Perhaps you need to discuss the right to choose with your daughter or some other female relative; it could open your eyes when you have a discussion about childbearing with a young mother surviving on a low-paying job.

  61. Thirdeye says:
    @Michelle

    There’s a difference between married couples where, for whatever reasons, one partner seeks extramarital sex but basically remains loyal to their partner, and where such dalliances threaten the stability of the marriage. Prostitution is actually less of a threat to the stability of a marriage than extramarital affairs because it is contained while extramarital affairs can create their own out-of-control emotional dynamic. East Asian societies have lots of prostitution but extremely low rates of divorce. If a married couple isn’t on the same page sexually but otherwise loyal, prostitution can be a safety valve. One thing we learned with the whole Ashley Madison imbroglio is that a lot of those who were exposed had partners who knew about it beforehand.

  62. @annamaria

    “A food for thought: the Bible belt is for capital punishment, for unrestricted poisoning of water and soil (business is sacred!), and for restricted access of poor women and their children to medical care.”

    Really?

    So you’re saying that a survey in the “Bible belt” was taken, and it showed that a majority of respondents actually said that were FOR unrestricted poisoning of water and soil? And that they were FOR preventing poor women and their children from having medical care?

    Would you mind terribly providing me with a link to that survey? I’d truly be interested to see it. I want to make sure that you’re not merely yet another anti-Christian liar making up stuff because it suits your godless self.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  63. Thirdeye says:
    @Rurik

    If we step away from the stereotypes of prostitution in the Third World, it’s actually one of the best means that women from modest backgrounds have for attaining agency and upward mobility. It’s an attractive alternative to an economically forced marriage in the village, which can resemble slavery with its poverty and lack of agency for the wife, or working in a sweatshop. Economically producing offspring are the only source of security for lots of peasant parents.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  64. @Red Robbo

    Thanks for the laugh.
    Not quite as good as Fred’s but worth the effort.

    • Replies: @Red Robbo
  65. Rurik says:
    @annamaria

    boogerbently

    “…they’re for abortion, but against capital punishment…”

    just like the religious right is against abortion but for capital punishment

    ending a pregnancy in the first weeks is ‘playing God’, but executing a breathing man (or woman) for breaking man’s laws isn’t

    hypocrisy to go around

    nuance is wildly lacking

    but nuance takes thoughtfulness, and thoughtfulness is perhaps impossible for some people

    – same with prostitution, or drug use or euthanasia or so many other issues that have confounded the wisdom of humankind for centuries

    The very pious catholic men in very expensive garments are also categorically against any abortion, even for a 10-year old victim of rape, even if a pregnancy is going to kill her

    Catholic abortions, just like birth control, mean less arses in the pews- and dollars in the collection plate! Or, more to the point, less raw power for those pompous men in robes and funny hats.

    >>><<<

    IMHO I consider Christians as just as good and noble and charitable as any other people, perhaps more so than some

    but I also consider the Christian leadership as some of the most venal, perfidious, avaricious, soulless rotten cowards to sellout a religion and a people and their very God who have ever befouled the air with their Judas-like betrayal of everything noble and, well.. Christian that has ever been taught by that Man of peace. Starting with the Catholic church.

    the Catholic people = good

    the Vatican = satanic

    and so on ..

    • Replies: @Carpenter
    , @boogerbently
  66. Thirdeye says:
    @Anon

    Yes, yes, and yes.

    There have been social experiments that introduced exchangeable reward tokens, i.e. currency, among monkeys. Guess what became the preferred method among female monkeys for getting male monkeys to give them reward tokens.

  67. Rurik says:
    @Thirdeye

    It’s an attractive alternative to an economically forced marriage in the village,

    quite the judgment call no?

    Nothing attractive about having sex with unattractive and often revolting men for reasons of harsh economic realities. And it isn’t just young women and girls that are forced by starvation-like want or exposure to make such devil’s deals to stay alive, it’s boys too. Straight boys who’re forced to service pedophiles for money to survive. There’s a very ugly side to humanity that we’d all prefer to not contemplate, but it’s there.

    Like I said, if a gal does it for the fun or excitement or even for the money, so long as she isn’t being drugged and beaten and/or psychologically imprisoned by a professional pimp, but is engaging in commerce willingly, then all to the good. But I’ve seen the (very) young women in the third world with the fat, wrinkled old men and it riles something inside me. And I’m no prude.

    In fact I’ll share with you that when I was a young man, I knew some gals that wanted me to pimp them out. It was their idea! And they were attractive and in their late teens. They were just fun loving girls that liked the idea of sex with lots of fellas and thought it would be an exciting way to make a living. I was even dating one of them, sort of, and that’s how I got to know them. But I had to decline, being as my moral sensibilities were I suppose a little too hidebound for that kind of thing. Alas.

    But anyways, yea, when the woman (or man) is happy to do it, then no foul. But when it’s done out of sheer desperation (especially by the young or very young) and their tender souls are lost for all time to a loving relationship and they become cynical and disenchanted, then I think it’s terrible.

    http://i2.wp.com/listverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/the_butterfly_effect08.jpg?resize=272%2C400

    We in the west should be shamed from buying the flesh of others in lands that are relatively poor. Yes, they need the money, and yes the girls are sometimes happy t0 oblige, and yes, it’s it a harsh reality, but yet there’s something sleazy and untoward about the whole affair that strikes me as morally loathsome when the parties to the arrangement are from wildly disparate stations in life. I’d somehow rather see the young women married off to one of the (even poor) young men from her village if there was a hope for a tender, loving relationship, even if it meant less upward mobility. But then, I am a hopeless romantic at heart.

    • Replies: @edNels
    , @Thirdeye
  68. Thirdeye says:
    @another fred

    Guess which establishments civilized the small towns of the Nineteenth Century American west. Hint: It wasn’t churches.

  69. annamaria says:
    @Unapologetic White Man

    “Would you mind terribly providing me with a link to that survey…

    You did not use any surveys to post your opinion, neither did I. There are facts:
    “The state of Texas is as aggressive as industry in battling a new national health standard for smog” http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/20150317-ozone-air-pollution-clean-air-act-smog-texas-houston-dallas/
    “Leaders of a North Texas city have repealed a voter-approved ban on hydraulic fracturing by energy companies:” http://crooksandliars.com/2015/07/texas-democracy-denton-city-council
    “Why are 1,200,000 children denied basic health care coverage in the state of Texas? That is a lot of children that the governor who hosted a prayer before he announced his presidential run is willing to let suffer. Those same people who hosted his prayer rally, by the way, were not praying that these children would be covered. They were not praying that the state and legislature of Texas would care for the sick, the dying, the young, the poor, the imprisoned.”
    https://leftcheek.wordpress.com/2012/07/25/misdirected-moral-outrage-in-the-pro-life-bible-belt/
    “…the state, which is fighting a court battle to strip the group of hundreds of thousands of dollars in Medicaid funds, is struggling to figure out who would provide poor women with family planning care if not Planned Parenthood.” http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/09/louisiana-said-women-could-go-dentist-if-planned-parenthood-were-defunded
    one of the results of the hypocrisy: http://www.empowermagazine.com/bible-belt-now-epicenter-hivaids-u-s/

    Note that I am not against true Christianity that cares for the poor and weak but against the wealthy and powerful hypocrites that always “know better.” And again, the sanctity of life should manifest in a real, tangible care for the young mothers (free prenatal, maternity leave) and the born children (free health care and decent education) and in the care for environment, for the purity of water and air and soil.
    As for the anti-Chritistian liars, see no farther than Bush, Blair, Cheney, Rice, Clinton and other pious war criminals.

  70. edNels says:
    @Rurik

    Right you are Rurik (Rurik the Red…?) I took a course at the local college night school, on Russian History. so, I know about Rurik…He was a Viking who went down the rivers into the middle of Russia.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  71. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @annamaria

    that’s a lot of words and so on, but I agree with it…99% agreed…

  72. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The Americans and British did exactly the same thing using both white and black radio stations. Perhaps the most famous song to come out of the war was Lili Marlene. Marlene Dietrich became famous the world over when she recorded this song for the American Office of Strategic Services. It was a favorite of both German and Allied troops. It is a strange that a sentimental song that speaks of such pure love can be written about a woman that seems to be a prostitute leaning against a lamp pole.

    Underneath the lantern,
    By the barrack gate
    Darling I remember
    The way you used to wait
    T’was there that you whispered tenderly,
    That you loved me,
    You’d always be,
    My Lilli of the Lamplight,
    My own Lilli Marlene
    http://www.psywarrior.com/MusicUsePSYOP.html

    There is no music of Isis because they have no souls and without soul music all you have is a love of power and no power of love.

  73. Rurik says:
    @edNels

    That’s the one nelsedward,

    I took the name because my agenda for posting here was to be a tiny voice in the wilderness to point out the madness of the burgeoning war between Russia and Ukraine, and I knew of this king and of his exploits and I figured he was positioned in history on that fault line between the ethnic Russians and Ethnic Ukrainians. (also being of Norse blood, I have an affinity for that kind of history ; )

    Speaking of preventing wars, one of the posts here references a song that was famous to all the soldiers during the second general insanity that was WWII. But his interesting link doesn’t have the song!

    so here it is

    she starts out in German and then switches to English, but you can also find the original by Marlene Dietrich

    all those millions of young men and all those heartbroken young women, all for the greed and hate of evil old bastards, just like today!

    -in fact, since I’ve sort of taken this off topic a little, let me just add that watching all the talking heads and all the lies about Libya and Syria and Ukraine and all the horrors my government has foisted on those poor people, I’m even more disgusted at the world wars and all that terrible loss, because I see now why men like Lindberg were so determined to stop the madness. Because it’s no different than today. All of it based on lies and deceit and greed and treachery, and always the innocent who suffer and pay the price while the guilty profit. God damn I hate these wars!

  74. George Carlin summed it up nicely:

    Selling is legal. F*cking is legal. Why isn’t selling f*cking legal?

  75. Thirdeye says:
    @Rurik

    If you’re going to quote me, you should at least have the courtesy to quote the whole sentence.

    Economically forced marriages of peasant girls tend not to fit your warm fuzzy romantic ideas of marriage. The bride is as often as not just a pawn under pressure from her family and not doing it of her own free will. If the husband turns her into his slave or is otherwise abusive or revolting there’s not a lot she can do. That’s an ugly side to traditional marriages that we’d all rather not contemplate, but it’s there. She’s as victimized as anyone forced into prostitution. It’s more accepted in some circles, but just as bad from the standpoint of her well-being. A working girl has better options. She’s not stuck with they guys she dislikes and she at least has a chance to better her lot.

    In countries where prostitution is legal, the age of consent still applies. More than a few pedophiles have ended up behind bars in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Thailand after getting the wrong idea. Just ask Gary Glitter.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  76. A well regulated sex life; What could possibly go wrong?

  77. Red Robbo says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    >Can you perhaps quote something satirical about prostitution from Marx?
    I’ll add your request to my ever-growing list of projects.

    >And can you spell out the implications for sexual relations of what you say about socialism? Equal >shares perhaps? Non-discrimination on grounds of appearance, or smell, or indeed sex?
    Very good! We’ll have to rely on sebots!

  78. Red Robbo says:
    @Bill Jones

    Thanks! 2016 – another year of wage slavery for us and other members of the 99%.

    • Replies: @Carpenter
  79. Carpenter says:
    @Tom_R

    “For eg. if a country allows women to sell their bodies”

    False feminist nonsense. They are selling a service, not their bodies. Try to think for yourself rather than repeat leftist mantras.

    “what is there to stop the country from allowing men from selling their mothers?”

    As slaves? How about anti-slavery laws? Are you suggesting that people in Germany sell their mothers as slaves because prostitution is legalized?

    “Or people from selling their organs?”

    Excellent, let them do so. It is legal in Iran, which means people empoverished by Zionist Washington’s sanctions can get a lot of extra money by selling a kidney, saving them from starvation. Those who need a kidney can get one and survive. Those who don’t want to sell a kidney don’t have to.

    “Or rampant pornography?”

    Oh no, pornography! It will come for your children!

    We already have “rampant” pornography through the internet, didn’t you know that? Despite anti-prostitution laws. So your argument falls flat.

    “Or polygamy?”

    How about anti-polygamy laws?

    “Or a man from marrying his mother or sister?”

    How about anti-incest laws?

    “Or from allowing men to set off nukes in every city and sacrifice the souls to Satan?”

    Okay, this last one I added myself, but it makes as much sense as your other questions.

  80. Carpenter says:
    @Michelle

    “I agree that prostitution should be legalized, but doubt that legalization will cure all ills.”

    Neither do vegetables or tivolis. But whether something cures all ills is never relevant.

    “In the Asian countries of which Fred speaks, there is a very dire social stigma placed on prostitutes.”

    A stigma that hardly gets worse from legalization, so that’s also irrelevant.

    “Many of them are completely disconnected from their families, who want nothing to do with them.”

    False. Prostitutes in Thailand and the Philippines use the money to help their families. But again this would not be worsened by legalization, so again it’s irrelevant.

    • Replies: @Michelle
  81. Carpenter says:
    @Dave Pinsen

    “If you’re going to use this logic, then you’d have to legalize drug use and suicide.”

    Nope.

    Longer answer: legalizing one thing doesn’t mean you have to legalize another. Drugs are slow mass murder, and the fact that some of the sheeple can’t resist it doesn’t mean it should be legalized. The fact that there are children who grow up surrounded by drugs, and therefore are brainwashed into accepting a drug-filled culture from the time they are born, doesn’t mean it should be legalized. Drugs could be done away with easily if there was an actual “war” on drugs, meaning the known drug peddlers and unrepentant drug users were all put in jail and kept there, and forced to reveal their sources so the whole thing would be rolled up.

    As for suicide, it has been legal for most of human history. But the Catholic Church wanted to keep the masses as its slaves, paying money to the church, so they forbade the slaves from this way out. That’s not exactly a good argument for keeping a ban on suicide. There are old people whose every hour is full of pain, who are only waiting for death, and religionuts like you are keeping them from ending their lives early and dying with dignity, surrounded by their loved ones when they still have their minds intact. Smart. Very compassionate of you.

  82. Carpenter says:
    @Michelle

    “Often, the prostitutes a man has relations with are less attractive than his wife or partner”

    No.

    “Many men who live in male dominated cultures still have relations with prostitutes.”

    All cultures are male-dominated, or they wouldn’t be cultures. Men, or at least a substantial minority of men, have a far superior capacity for logical thought processes unencumbered by feelz. Without men’s leadership mankind would be living in the world’s best decorated caves.

    “In those cultures women are not encouraged to enjoy, or give the appearance of enjoying, sex”

    Feminist lie. Few men want sex with a woman who doesn’t enjoy it. Even when men frequent prostitutes they want the prostitutes to be warmer and more active during the sex, instead of just being a cold and machine-like Romanian whore. (The Balkanese are probably the exception to the rule that men want sex with women who enjoy it. The Balkans is a cold, cruel place.)

    “I look at it this way, in this era of online porn I thank goodness there are still men who want to have contact with real women’s bodies.”

    Because you are a woman you don’t understand that men never think of porn as a better option than sex with an attractive woman.

    • Replies: @Michelle
  83. Carpenter says:
    @Red Robbo

    You two pathetic failures should move to Cuba to enjoy the riches of communism. Of course, if you could work hard enough to afford a plane ticket you wouldn’t be communists.

  84. Carpenter says:
    @Rurik

    Personally I approve of both abortion and capital punishment, so no contradiction here. Both are good instruments for creating a better society. Abortions help the poor have less children, because despite the priests’ best efforts people will have sex without wanting kids from the process every time.

    The utilitarian argument that abortion leads to less babies is false. It rests on the faulty assumption that a woman is destined to have a fixed set of pregnancies during her lifetime, so if you take away one she will have X-1 children. But that an unwed nineteen-year-old girl doesn’t have a child today doesn’t mean she will have less children during her lifetime. If she had that kid out of wedlock she could actually end up having LESS children, as men are less eager to marry a single mother. Better that she be allowed to be childless until she is older and gets married, so the kids are born within wedlock.

    Christianity wasn’t always against abortion. The Bible says nothing about abortion, which was widespread at the time the texts were written. Christians will dishonestly throw out some Bible chapters and hope people never look them up; when you do, you notice that they don’t say anything about abortion. (“But what about you shall not kill!” This from a Christian, whose religion has come up with thousands of exemptions to that rule? Never mind that the Bible doesn’t even say aborting a fetus is “killing”.)

    Even Baptists in the early 20th century would approve of abortions in cases of rape and incest, or when the birth would endanger the mother. The change only came later when churches were attacked by the Left, using the all-people-are-precious morality (ironically first created by Christianity), and they needed some issue where they could catch the moral high ground the way the Left did in almost every issue. The Left was anti-colonialist, anti-executions, etc etc using the all-are-precious-and-especially-the-weak slave morality. Churches then latched onto abortion, taking it before the Left got to it. Really, anti-abortion should be a leftist stance since it fits their morality, while the Right has always been goal-oriented (except when hijacked by some crazed church leaders) and should argue for the national benefits of abortion as a tool.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @annamaria
  85. Rurik says:
    @Thirdeye

    Hey Thirdeye,

    If you’re going to quote me, you should at least have the courtesy to quote the whole sentence.

    OK, here is the whole sentence.

    It’s an attractive alternative to an economically forced marriage in the village, which can resemble slavery with its poverty and lack of agency for the wife, or working in a sweatshop.

    out of which the salient point as far as I can see it what I posted..

    “It’s an attractive alternative to an economically forced marriage”

    that the alternative to prostitution in the third world can be and often is a life of grinding poverty seems and I suppose often is the harsh reality. But then poverty in the third world isn’t the same as poverty in the first world. The villagers in these third world countries are often very poor, but quite happy, especially by western standards. They have families, and traditions, and quite often million dollar views, at least the ones living out of the crowded and stinking barrios with sewage running down the streets. But then too, if you’re a prostitute in one of the most terribly poor places, the western men will try to buy you on the cheap, and you’ll still return to your stinking barrio at night, but with a few more pesos and a little less grace in your soul.

    I’m not knocking the institution. I think under many circumstances it’s just part of life. I know of very intelligent western women who have become quite financially successful as escorts or ‘call girls’ and are happy in their work, at least part of the time. Or housewives who dabble for the excitement (and/or money). If it’s the only way a young woman can feed her children, then you won’t find me condemning her. No way. In fact I never judge the prostitute. Just the John, and particularly the pimp. I’m very disgusted by the trafficking in poor women and their abuse at the hands of callous pimps who beat them and drug them and rape them take their passports and psychologically imprison them as modern day indentured servants, (sex slaves). Mencken seems to think this is a rare thing, and perhaps is was in his time and place, but today this is a big problem.

    A while back Fidel in Cuba got exasperated by all the western men who were coming to Cuba as sex tourists. These were/are his people, and he and a lot of the Cubans didn’t much like the idea of their young women (and boys) being used as cum dumpsters for men from Canada or Europe who couldn’t get dates in their own countries. Who wants the young women and girls of their race to be treated like gutter tramps for the coarse amusement of the men from a fortuitously wealthier nation? Is a microwave and a DVD player that important?

    What if it was your daughter? Would you rather your daughter, even if she were of a modest background, to become a whore if that’s what it would take to have agency and upward mobility? Or would you prefer her to take a young man from her village and raise a family in their traditional way making rice or weaving baskets if that what was available? But with some shred of childlike innocence in her soul, and the capacity for love in her heart.

    I’m not being Pollyanna here, I know the harsh realities, but I do feel pity for these women (and girls and boys) and I understand why the people of Cuba (and everywhere else) would want to protect the tender flower of their inland’s future families from the depraved humiliations of arrogant men who often treat their women and girls as less than human. Something to be bought like chattel and very often degraded (or worse) for the sheer, tawdry amusement.

    • Replies: @Thirdeye
  86. Rurik says:
    @Carpenter

    Hey Carpenter,

    For the record, I’m not anti-abortion or anti-capital punishment. (I’m not ‘pro’ these things either, but I certainly am sympathetic to arguments in their favor). I was just pointing out the rank hypocrisy of the religious right as they demand that no child be aborted but then are perfectly sanguine about killing people once they’re born (or letting the newly born babies starve to death)

    If they’re consistent, and demand that Christianity forbids killing and demands compassion and they do all they can to help care for the children born to indigent mothers and oppose wars and capital punishment, then I can hardly fault them in their piety.

    It’s the hypocrisy that I was pointing out.

    For me abortion is a complicated question. If my wife’s life was in danger by a pregnancy, and some anti-abortion crusader tried to legally or otherwise force that pregnancy to get his street cred with God, at the price of my wife’s life, I suspect I would kill such a cretin, and should expect a medal of valor for doing so.

    Yet if I were the husband of a pregnant wife, and we were both ecstatic over the prospects of a new baby, but in the hospital bed, she became semiconscious and delusional, and said something that a doctor interpreted to mean she didn’t want the baby, and he proceeded to kill the perfectly healthy baby on the spot based on the absolute sanctity of the mother’s wishes right up to the point of when the baby is being born- then I would be very vexed at that doctor to say the least. And at anyone who would think that the doctor did what was right.

    It’s a complicated thing.

    The utilitarian argument that abortion leads to less babies is false.

    the last thing this planet needs is more babies

    If I had my druthers, I’d make birth control free to the entire world. And mandatory for any women who had a baby that she couldn’t afford. The day she stepped into the office of social services and said “I can’t feed my baby, it’s your responsibility to feed it for me”, then I’d say fine, here’s your check and here’s your Norplant chip. On the day you can feed yourself and any more babies you want to have, then come back and we’ll remove the chip.

  87. annamaria says:
    @Carpenter

    “…anti-abortion should be a leftist stance since it fits their morality, while the Right has always been goal-oriented…”

    Just a minor addition: the predecessors of the “leftists” had cared first and foremost for the rights of grown individuals (J-J Rousseau was not keen on nurturing babies, for instance). Was not this country based on the “leftist” agenda of human rights (liberté, égalité, fraternité)? Perhaps the “leftist” are pro-choice because they understand the difference between a sentient human being versus a potentiality for one.
    Just imagine for a moment a world where the goal-oriented Right (and the Church) were dedicated to saving the born children from the ravages of wars, for example, from the wars of aggression in the Middle East… You see the problem? That would mean the accountability of and criticism towards the wealthy and powerful. Hence the invented “morality” of anti-abortionists including the GOP leaders Rick Perry, Bush the lesser, Gingrich, and (gasp) McCain.

  88. @annamaria

    You’re retarded. I didn’t make any assertions, so why would I need to cite a survey. There’s nothing in my post that COULD BE supported with a survey, since all I did was ask you to support YOUR assertions.

    You offered no “opinion,” but rather you asserted facts. Big difference. I shall again quote your unsupported assertion:

    “A food for thought: the Bible belt is for capital punishment, for unrestricted poisoning of water and soil (business is sacred!), and for restricted access of poor women and their children to medical care.”

    You have not supported those assertions, because you pulled them from the depths of your anus.

    No one is restricting anyone’s access to healthcare. You’re the one that used the word “restricted.” That’s a specific word. A restriction would actually PROHIBIT someone from purchasing healthcare. It’s just that you’re a bleeding heart leftwing lunatic, and you think that if taxpayers are not robbed of their earnings, and those earnings showered upon people who did not earn them, that those parasitical “poor people” are being victimized somehow.

    You also didn’t show any evidence that the “Bible belt” is FOR poisoning the water and the soil. An actual survey indicating that the majority of people in the “Bible belt” said “Yes” when they were asked if they wanted the water and soil to be poisoned.

    Moreover, since you’re a godless leftwing heathen, you don’t really get to assess what is and is not “true Christianity.” Christian charity is supposed to happen at the individual level. It is the left-winger that says it must happen at the bureaucratic level. Don’t ever again presume to define Christianity. The Bible does that. Not you.

    And lastly, don’t bother yourself with what Christians pray about, and don’t pretend to know what Christians pray about. You’ve got a screw loose, and your primary goal here is to lie about Christianity. I called you on it, and now you’re scrambling to un-embarass yourself.

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @annamaria
  89. @annamaria

    “Was not this country based on the “leftist” agenda of human rights (liberté, égalité, fraternity)?”

    No.

    “Perhaps the “leftist” are pro-choice because they understand the difference between a sentient human being versus a potentiality for one.”

    Perhaps it’s because the leftists are the spiritual descendants of those godless heathen who used to throw babies into the fires of their god, Moloch.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  90. Rurik says:
    @annamaria

    J-J Rousseau was not keen on nurturing babies, for instance

    hmm, that seems contre-intuitif to me, as I’ve always thought of him as advocating for a more natural kind of harmony with ourselves and each other and nature, in general, n’est-ce pas?

    • Replies: @annamaria
  91. annamaria says:
    @Unapologetic White Man

    “…those earnings showered upon people who did not earn them…”
    Like poor women and their newborns?

    “Christian charity is supposed to happen at the individual level.”
    Like Dickensian England, when old people and young children were begging on the streets and there were not labor laws to protect child labor and no medicare for the elderly? What was children mortality at that glorious time of “individual level of charity?” By the way, who could forget the tea-partiers’ battle cry, “Hand-off of my medicare?” As you wrote, “It is the left-winger that says it must happen at the bureaucratic level.” Suddenly the anti-statists love the leftists’ “bureaucratic level,” when that “socialist” program benefits them.

    “..don’t pretend to know what Christians pray about..” It prays for peace and kindness and care and charity for the weak and poor. And it is quite humble (unlike your very rude post).

  92. annamaria says:
    @Unapologetic White Man

    “Perhaps it’s because the leftists are the spiritual descendants of those godless heathen who used to throw babies into the fires of their god, Moloch.”

    No. I am firmly against “collateral damage” of wars of aggression initiated by the supposedly Christian American men like Bush the lesser. Look for pictures of the young victims of wars in the Middle East: of babies burnt alive during bombardments or irrevocably hurt by depleted uranium. The nowadays Moloch is the Military-Industrial-Complex and Federal Reserve that both know no mercy for the ordinary humans. If you want to see a face of devil, look for the diabolical Mr. Cheney and no less diabolical Mr. Prince of Blackwater fame. You present yourself as a devoted Christian and believer in the sanctity of life. Then you should be for free healthcare for children and pregnant women and against wars of aggression run by warmongers of various stripes, including those that call themselves Christians.

  93. annamaria says:
    @Rurik

    He was sending his babies to orphanage.

  94. annamaria says:
    @Unapologetic White Man

    Catholic Nun Explains Pro-Life:

    “I do not believe that just because you’re opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don’t? Because you don’t want any tax money to go there. That’s not pro-life. That’s pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is.”
    https://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/30/1407166/-Catholic-Nun-Explains-Pro-Life-In-A-Way-That-May-Stun-The-Masses?detail=emailclassic

    “This quote applies well to many Republican lawmakers who continue to introduce/pass restrictive misogynist laws against woman’s reproductive rights. At the same time, the GOP works to shut down women’s health clinics, with a special vengeance towards Planned Parenthood.
    You don’t hear of these Right Wing anti-choice extremists adopting children from unplanned pregnancies or putting funds into sex education. But you do see Republican lawmakers cut access to birth control, which prevents abortions. You do see the GOP’s 54 attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act and their $24 Billion Government Shutdown both to destroy universal health reform which protects the needs of millions of American children. And you do see Republican lawmakers cut government programs like school lunches for children and block government financial aid to families who are homeless and/or in need. No, the goals of these so-called anti-choice/’pro-life’ hypocrites are not about fetuses or children once born, their agenda is about controlling women’s bodies and women’s futures. How great to hear Sister Joan Chittister, a Benedictine nun, define the pro-life/anti-choice GOP double talk so well.”

    • Replies: @geokat62
  95. @annamaria

    Oh, the old “What about the case of rape?” argument.
    OK, we’ll allow any abortion for any woman who has been raped……
    meaning a man has been tried and convicted of rape in a court of law.
    But then, you’d just change your argument, wouldn’t you ?

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @annamaria
  96. geokat62 says:
    @annamaria

    Thanks, Annamarina. I especially liked this line:

    “That’s not pro-life. That’s pro-birth.”

  97. annamaria says:
    @boogerbently

    “OK, we’ll allow …”

    Who are these “we?”
    Here for you are the words of a true Christian: “I do not believe that just because you’re opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don’t? Because you don’t want any tax money to go there. That’s not pro-life. That’s pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is.” Sister Joan Chittister, a Benedictine nun.

    Why don’t you, boogerbently, go to the heart of the problem and start discussing the morality of pro-life: the universal health care, maternity leave, free and superb education for our children, investment in infrastructure, anti-pollution legislature, accountability from the high-placed war-mongers for the trillions of dollars spent on the illegal wars of aggression… Or you believe that the powerful and wealthy men can do no wrong? And that this gives men the right to “allow” or not?

    Perhaps you should consider the collateral damage of the ongoing wars in the Middle East (courtesy the US neocons) that have resulted in thousands and thousands of killed babies and pregnant women. Or these are expendable lives that should not concern you?

  98. annamaria says:
    @boogerbently

    “…we’ll allow”

    Don’t you like the “moral deciders” deciding what should be allowed to women and what should not, But the same “deciders” do not want to see the obvious immorality of the US war-and finances-oriented economy and they care not about either the pre born or newborn or pregnant women.
    http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/34245-the-inequality-of-child-care-in-the-us-why-some-women-are-more-invisible-than-others
    “There are two countries in the world that have no laws mandating paid maternity leave. One is Papua New Guinea. The other is the United States of America.
    …for women, the first job of giving birth is to survive it – which is harder to do in the US than in almost all other OECD nations.
    Pregnancy and childbirth are of primary importance to the species. Yet here in the US, with one of the highest per capita income rates in the world, these tasks (and associated tasks, such as breastfeeding and bonding in the early weeks) are not honored in even the most minimal of ways.”

  99. Thirdeye says:
    @Rurik

    I’m very disgusted by the trafficking in poor women and their abuse at the hands of callous pimps who beat them and drug them and rape them take their passports and psychologically imprison them as modern day indentured servants, (sex slaves). Mencken seems to think this is a rare thing, and perhaps is was in his time and place, but today this is a big problem.

    Most trafficking, defined as complete denial of the woman’s agency, that has been identified in the US and abroad, has been local. Do you want to know one of the most common ways girls get trafficked in the Third World? The parents sell them! There’s not such a great distance between that and selling them into marriage where the husband has the legal right to do with her as he pleases, including forcing himself on her.

    International trafficking is rare because the risks of getting caught aren’t worth it. Case in point: Under the T-1 visa program, where someone can attain legal resident status for helping to bust a trafficking ring, there have been only a handful of takers. Most of the girls who get those offers don’t take them. They bug out to ply their trade elsewhere rather than accept the opportunity to be a minimum wage worker in the US. They’re asserting their agency.

    Mencken seems to think this is a rare thing, and perhaps is was in his time and place…

    That’s probably so, in comparison to today. The reason is that society was just beginning to clamp down on prostitution and enforcement of prostitution laws was pretty lax. The result of more rigorous enforcement was the rise of the pimps, who had more power over the working girls than anyone had before. If you want to get rid of trafficking, get rid of the key element that gives the pimps their power: the laws against prostitution.

    What if it was your daughter? Would you rather your daughter, even if she were of a modest background, to become a whore if that’s what it would take to have agency and upward mobility?

    We’re not in a position where offspring are expected to support us in old age, so it would be presumptuous for either of us to judge. I suppose if I had a daughter who found a way to improve her lot beyond what anyone in the family had before, as well as provide for her dear old parents, I would be happy for her.

    Or would you prefer her to take a young man from her village and raise a family in their traditional way making rice or weaving baskets if that what was available? But with some shred of childlike innocence in her soul, and the capacity for love in her heart.

    How on earth would shaming one’s daughter into becoming the property of a man in the village enhance her innocence or capacity for love? That denial of agency is not that much different from pimping your daughter against her will.

    “….the depraved humiliations of arrogant men who often treat their women and girls as less than human.”

    That sounds like the treatment of wives and daughters in certain traditional societies. A woman who attains her own agency has a better chance of finding respect from male company. Yes, even whores can find respect and even adulation. No two ways about it, the power to have someone pay for sex is considerable power.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  100. […] also got a new, characteristically charming post entitled If It Flies, Floats or Fucks. A defense of prostitution. The Empty Subject Blog is getting two inflatable rods put into the bottom of his cock so that he […]

  101. Rurik says:
    @Thirdeye

    Do you want to know one of the most common ways girls get trafficked in the Third World? The parents sell them!

    OK, let’s say someone bought a teenage girl and gave her to you. Her parents sold her and now she’s your responsibility. What should you do with her?

    There’s not such a great distance between that and selling them into marriage where the husband has the legal right to do with her as he pleases, including forcing himself on her.

    would she be better off as a whore or married? I think it depends on the temperament of the individual. But if she’s the marriage type, personally I think it would be doleful for her to have to suffer the life of a whore.

    Most of the girls who get those offers don’t take them. They bug out to ply their trade elsewhere rather than accept the opportunity to be a minimum wage worker in the US. They’re asserting their agency.

    I suspect there’s more to it than that.

    If you want to get rid of trafficking, get rid of the key element that gives the pimps their power: the laws against prostitution.

    when the status of the john and the prostitute are at least equivalent, I think prostitution should be legal. My only problem with it is when you’re dealing with the desperately poor, and how they’re sometimes forced into a life of exploitation to the often degenerate ravages of some low-life men who happened to be able to offer them enough to eat for the day or to feed their children. A situation I consider deplorable.

    I suppose if I had a daughter who found a way to improve her lot beyond what anyone in the family had before, as well as provide for her dear old parents, I would be happy for her.

    well then there’s the difference between us

    How on earth would shaming one’s daughter into becoming the property of a man in the village enhance her innocence or capacity for love?

    you have a very cynical notion of love and marriage. Most marriages even in the poor third world are not simply cases of ownership and rape-slavery. I’m sure it happens, but I’d say it’s the exception, not the rule.

    No two ways about it, the power to have someone pay for sex is considerable power.

    no less so when you consider it from the marriage angle

    Prostitution is fine when it’s done for fun or monetary gain, but when it’s done out of desperation, then I find it abhorrent. Especially when the prostitute is destitute and forced by circumstances to do things degrading to their dignity.

    We can debate over the exact degree that this kind of prostitution exists, but I’ll simply say that if it does, I’d rather it didn’t.

  102. aml says:

    The problem is that sex trafficking is a side effect of legalized prostitution. Studies have shown that countries that have legalized prostitution create a high demand which supports sex trafficking. Because of the increased demand, thousands of women are brought from Eastern Europe to countries such as Germany each year, after they often have been promised a great job and better life. Some experts in Germany estimate the victims of forced prostitution in Germany at more than 10 000 each year. Maybe we should think about the big picture before promoting something like this, because the problem is so enormous that authorities either ignore these crimes or are helpless in preventing it.

  103. @Rurik

    “Straw man”, Rurick,

    The capital offender killed one or many, the baby is innocent.
    You DO see the difference, don’t you ?

    I originally approved of abortion. Why should I pay for an unwanted/entitlement baby for life?
    &
    A baby needs love more than food. Why subject him to some girls half hearted attempts a parenthood ? THE BABY deserves better.
    But, after decades of liberal strongarming in the social/cultural arena, I decided to go with morality. It’s NOT a “womans choice”. She CHOSE to get pregnant by not preventing it.

    As far as “rape” goes, Let’s say we JUST allow abortions in that case. A man is tried and convicted of rape and the victim can get an abortion. But ONLY in those cases. That wouldn’t please you, would it?
    So, it’s a lame argument for you to use.

  104. Michelle says:
    @Carpenter

    You are different, is all! Many men prefer sex with themselves than sex with attractive women, because women come with baggage, as in stress.

  105. Michelle says:
    @Carpenter

    No it is not false. Many of the prostitutes in Vietnam, Cambodia and Thailand, are not welcome by their families who live off of the income the prostitutes make. Hypocrisy of the highest form!

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Fred Reed Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Not What Tom Jefferson Had in Mind
Sounds Like A Low-Ranked American University To Me
Very Long, Will Bore Hell Out Of Most People, But I Felt Like Doing It
It's Not A Job. It's An Adventure.
Cloudy, With Possible Tidal Wave