The President of the United States gets blow jobs from some chick and then has a high powered attorney try to get her a high paying job with some Fortune 500 firm, and it is deemed his own business - a private matter. I get a blow job from some chick and give her $50 - I'm a criminal. It is a matter of degrees? Am I not paying enough money? If, in exchange for the blow job, I give the chick a $60,000 a year job; will that be okay? How far have we gone on the hypocracy scale? Now, I am not callilng Monica Lewinsky a prostitute; but it does seem that the only thing she ever did for Bill Clinton was wax his rocket a few times and then she gets a cushy job at the Pentagon and then high paying offers from the U.N. and Revlon. What were her qualifications otherwise? At least prostitution is a more honest trade. You pay your money for a specific act - perform that act (or have it performed on you), and you're on your way. Strictly a business deal; no bullshit. The prostitute knows what is expected of her for the money and the customer (hereafter known as the "john") knows that it is not real. Ok, the act is real; that is her really giving the john a blowjob, that is her really riding the john. But it is not real emotionally or passionately (no, she didn't really come), it was strictly business. But that's okay; what do you expect for $200 an hour; lifelong love? I don't think so.
Some people have a strong need for sex; whether they are married, engaged, or single; and they aren't getting their "needs" met. Some turn to prostitutes to try to fulfill their needs; others go to bars and pick up women for one night stands. I'm not going to judge either venture; but a comparison is in order. If I pick up a girl at a bar, pretend like I am interested in what she is saying, tell her that she is the girl I've been searching for, take her back to my place (or better yet, hers), fuck her brains out and then never call her again; I might be considered a cad (or maybe not, depending on who you're asking), but I wouldn't be considered a criminal. But, if I contract with a girl to have her perform a sex act on me (say a blow job) for a specified amount (say $50); I am a crook. Even though in this latter exchange, everything between the two parties is honest and above-board. I am exchanging x amount of money for y act and the girl is performing y act for x amount of money. She is not expecting or hoping that I call her the next day (although I'm sure that prostitutes appreciate repeat business) and I am not feeling fuilty about lying to someone to try to get them in bed. It is strictly business; my business, and literally, her business - nobody elses. It may not be moral in some people's eyes; but they are free not to partake in this particular activity. Prostitution is a contract between two parties, pure and simple. If a person does not like the concept of prostitution, I would suggest that they not enter into this contract.
It has been suggested that prostitution is an attack on women, that women don't freely choose it an an occupation; but they are forced into it, because of economic or personal forces. Well - to put it bluntly - bullshit. No one is forced into any job - they make choices. Now, those choices may be limited for some people; but the choices are there. If you ask the average prostitute what they would rather be doing for a living, being a coal miner or a hooker, I would predict that most would pick prostitution. Not that there is anything wrong with being a coal miner - there isn't. It is an honored and noble profession; but it is tough, dirty and dangerous work; and probably doesn't pay as it should. People make as much of a free choice to become coal miners as they make to become prostitutes. There are economic and personal pressures on everyone.
It has also been suggested that prostitution remain outlawed because it is too dangerous for the prostitutes. Well, one reason (in fact I would say the main reason) that prostitution is dangerous is the fact that it is illegal. If a john is harassing a prostitute, what can that prostitute do, go to the police? No. They very often have to turn to an alternative form of protection, namely a pimp; which many times ends up causing them more grief than it is worth. If they are working in a brothel and they feel that the brothel owner is treating them unfairly, where can they turn, to the National Labor Relations Board? I think not. If a john fails to pay, or otherwise fails to uphold his end of the contract, can the prostitute sue? Not likely. So you see, by the act of prostitution being illegal, we have removed from the prostitute most of the legal protections that the rest of us enjoy. The laws against prostitution have made the prostitute's life much more dangerous than it needs to be. To say that prostitution should be illegal because of how dangerous of a profession it is, is the height of hypocracy.
People should be left alone to try to make a better life for themselves. If someone reasons that prostitution, or any other profession, at this time in their life is a way for them to survive or even thrive, who are we to judge. We cannot enforce our own (and differing) morals onto society as a whole. If someone is trying to make a living by doing something that is not good form them (which is debatable in this case) how can we justify stopping them? What other profession are we going to outlaw, in the name of protecting people from their own choices: boxers, police offiers, window washers, lion tamers, gymnasts, ..... Where does it stop? Who gets to decide? The founders of our country knew who should decide - the individual for him or her self.
"Law, being a sign of Corruption in Man; many laws are signs of Corruption of a State."
JSC
Back to current month's essay.