Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I read an article once about an NGO which buys the freedom of slaves around the world (yes, slavery still exists). They said that many of the slaves, when bought and "freed" could not fathom their new situation. Having been slaves since childhood, they were unable to think of themselves as free.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Nov 30th, 2005 at 05:15:53 PM EST
Human beings have been merchandise in many cultures at many times.  What is strange and different about the post-Enlightenment era is the notion that slavery is wrong and unacceptable, or that there is something wrong about exacting slavish service from others even with the institution of wages as a veneer.  Personally this is something I rather like about the Enlightenment  :-)

It is a post-Enlightenment, rights-oriented outlook that tells us it is not appropriate for a businessman to tell his secretary to dress sexy for the office, or to do his holiday shopping for him;  we draw a basic distinction between the kinds of services that are appropriately exchanged for money, i.e. 'what is in my job description,' and those which are, or should be, a reflection of intersubjectivity and reciprocity.  We look down on people who use sexual favours to get ahead in academia or the workplace.  We don't want to work for bosses who grope the staff, or make pay raises conditional on a quick shag in the storeroom.

If we take a classic laissez-faire neoliberal approach to prostitution and say that there are no services which it is inappropriate to exchange for money, and that therefore performing sex for money is no different from typing or canning fish for money -- hey, it's just supply and demand, rational actors completing a transaction like any other in a free market -- then how do we at the same time maintain that the secretary should not be required to fellate the boss?  After all, if there is nothing shaming or demeaning about performing sexual acts on persons for whom one has no intimate affection, no basis of trust or love, then why should this not be in her job description right along with shorthand and typing?

But instinctively we know that using the lever of money-power to coerce sexual service is a qualitatively different type of transaction from paying for 8 hours of someone's time to translate documents or wash cars.   Permitting extreme physical intimacy from an untrusted and unloved Other or stranger, on their terms, according to their demand, requires a renunciation of fundamental human boundaries, the acceptance of a profound violation of personal space and bodily/emotional integrity.  Having at the same time to maintain a pretence -- an artificial persona -- only adds to the alienation.  Anyone who has ever worked Reception for 8 hours a day can tell you how wearying and crazy-making it can be to smile brightly and make nice with often obnoxious strangers all day, even when you are having trouble at home or not feeling very well -- to have to put on an act all day long;  imagine having to provide them with the most intimate sexual services as well.

We can judge the depth of our attachment to personal integrity by the shock, outrage, and/or fear that we feel when we read about (or heaven help us, experience) male/male prison rape and prostitution.  When men in prison must submit to sexual service in order to survive or to get along or to earn money, we consider this a tragedy and a horror, a dreadful indictment of an inhumane prison system, a damaging and traumatising experience -- even when some degree of (constrained) choice is involved, we know that rape and the threat of rape are forever hovering to sway that choice.  And we know that vanishingly small numbers of men would make those choices if they were free, on the outside.

But we are supposed to believe that women and girls -- who live in a society not so different from prison society for men, where an unprotected female without wealth is at high risk for rape, and where the protection of one man (however exploitative) may seem better than being "thrown to the wolves" -- take no harm from the same experience.  To believe this, seems to me, is to believe that men are somehow more real human beings, with more dignity and sense of self and self-worth, than women;  which, if I may speak strongly for a moment, is the fundamental assumption of a bigot -- whether racial religious, or sexual.  To assume that another person's self-respect and dignity are inherently of less worth or importance than another's is surely the base assumption of anti-democracy, the root of caste and feudal class and race slavery.

When men are treated as sexual merchandise by other men in prison, we are deeply shocked and understand that this experience could wound and scar an individual's soul and pride for life.  We understand the same when men are coerced into playing out pornographic scenes in Abu Ghraib.  When the coercion used is money rather than guns (or money and guns and fists in many cases), and the coerced or constrained person is female, for some reason we collectively believe that she is miraculously resilient and tough and ultra-balanced enough to take no harm from relinquishing her physical boundaries and allowing the occupation and use of her body by an untrusted other.

Right.  And the Iraqis will run to greet the invading US troops, throwing rice and flowers.  There's more than one kind of exceptionalism and double standard in this world...

There's a good paper on this very issue -- why "sex work" is qualitatively different from most other kinds of paid labour -- from, I think, Journal of Ethics.  I'll try to track it down when I have access to my home library.

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Wed Nov 30th, 2005 at 05:16:06 PM EST
So many things to say..

I can not say them all..

So I will focus on one: the problem is not interchanging money for sex. I personally think is a  wonderful idea (I just can not imagine this world without prostitutes, I love them because of the service they provide to te wordl peace).

The problem is the way our society looks at sex. How many societies put sex and violence as the things children should not see?? I will tell you, only us.

Sex, in most places, is fun, sometimes not even fun, just neutral, like going to sleep, or cooking.

It is our perception (some say jew-chrisitan perception) that the body is bad and the soul-mind is good. This is why if you prostitute your brain for a big company, there is no problem, but prostitute your body and there IS a problem.

So the ideal enlightment is that the things that come into your job from your pay should never excess a certain threshold. In principle it does not matter what is your profession. So, a secreatry should do the work of a secretaary: She can be a secreatry and a prostitute and get paid accordingly for both. But you can not join them. this leads to the slavery zone.  

And this is what the present system does. Because we have this look at what sex is we generate thousands of women who are salved and treated in the most awful ways.

It is time to look for sex in another way. It is time to fill the airwaves and TV with histories of love followed by ral and visual sex so that the new generation can understan it in another way.... it is time to link sex with a neutral thing...and now you can call the police so that they come put me in jail...(snark) In the meantime, legalize it once and for all, give social security, collect taxes. You advance int he health problems, reduce slave adn change the overall vision of sex...

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Wed Nov 30th, 2005 at 05:32:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
women and girls -- who live in a society not so different from prison society for men, where an unprotected female without wealth is at high risk for rape

Do you honestly believe that women's life in Western society is equivalent to a prison?

Do you believe that wealth is all it takes to protect women from rape?

And as for shock/outrage, I'd argue that society is more outraged about prostitution than about prison rape (which in any case affects women as well as men).  Prison rape has been a known problem for decades, but there has never been a serious attempt to stop it.  Instead, incarceration rates have skyrocketed in recent years, by a society knowing full well the people it imprisons stand a good chance of being raped.  Meanwhile, police continue to sweep the streets for prostitutes.

The worst irony is women sent to prison for prostitution and raped while behind bars.

Permitting extreme physical intimacy from an untrusted and unloved Other or stranger, on their terms, according to their demand, requires a renunciation of fundamental human boundaries, the acceptance of a profound violation of personal space and bodily/emotional integrity.

This is a subjective judgment - most women do feel this way, but there are a few exceptions.  Decriminalization would allow women to make that choice themselves, instead of having it imposed on them.

Having at the same time to maintain a pretence -- an artificial persona -- only adds to the alienation.

Only the higher-fee, upmarket prostitutes maintain such a persona.  The downmarket ones, who face the most exploitation, are not.  Again an issue that could be solved with decriminalization.

by tyronen on Wed Nov 30th, 2005 at 07:08:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
After all, if there is nothing shaming or demeaning about performing sexual acts on persons for whom one has no intimate affection, no basis of trust or love, then why should this not be in her job description right along with shorthand and typing?

Because women (and men) should have a choice. If all professions (because that's basically what you're getting at right?) would have 'performing sexual acts' as part of their job description, everyone that doesn't have enough money to start their own business would be forced to be a prostitute.

by LC on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 05:52:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ok now i have you figured out

i appreciate all your comments i really do

but when i was reading this...the light bulb went off in my head.

you wrote;

"But instinctively we know that using the lever of money-power to coerce sexual service is a qualitatively different type of transaction from paying for 8 hours of someone's time to translate documents or wash cars.   Permitting extreme physical intimacy from an untrusted and unloved Other or stranger, on their terms, according to their demand, requires a renunciation of fundamental human boundaries, the acceptance of a profound violation of personal space and bodily/emotional integrity. "

what you are missing is that not everyone experiences this the way you describe....in my case i feel the power....at the end of the day im giddy with the pile of money i have on the bed....the money is the power and im the one getting the money...no one is in control of me except me....the money gives me the power to do alot of things....to live the way i want, to help the people i want to help....i suppose if i were a politician who got bribes for access i would feel the exact same way....and beyond the money its the feeling i am giving a gift...some people may feel they are being used but i feel very strongly that i am performing a very spiritual service...my clients cry....i realize im not a normal prostitute but that is my point...we arent all doing or experiencing the same things and you are putting us all in the same box....the other thing you are missing is the level of control i feel....i dont ever feel a violation of personal space with my work....i have boundaries....the client is there for a specific experience....if he gets more it will be because i want more...i make the rules...and i have to honestly say that i have never had a client try to break the rules or overstep the boundary...unlike in real life where men do try to overstep my boundaries all the time.....i think the basis of what you arent getting is not everyone comes away with the same feelings about an event...some people transform their feelings and empower themselves from an experience...for example my sister and i have very different reactions to the way our parents treat us...she takes everything personally and literally and thinks every comment is a personal attack on her....i dont experience it that way at all....i think she needs meds and therapy if for no other reason than to just be able to chill and find some serenity in situations she cant change.....she isnt necessarily wrong in her perceptions....she just processes it different than i do and as a result her life is miserable....im not blaming her....im saying its her responsibility to deal with life, accept what she can, change the things she cant....the serenity prayer if you will.

im not sure i communicated precisely what i am thinking....im off to a session right now but i look forward to continuing this discussion.

by anna in philly (jrsygir1@aol.com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 10:10:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The primatologist Frans de Waal in The Ape and the Sushi Master writes:
every program in women's studies ought to include a little excursion into the world of the bonobo

Bonobos are, with Chimpanzees, humans' closest relatives. Being primates, both species have complex social behaviour. The ability for cultural transmission has been documented in apes as far from humans as macaques.

Anyway, what makes bonobo society remarkable is that their normal social interactions involve the exchange of sexual favours for material gains. If a male has some food, a female may come close, offer to rub her heginals against his, and then take away a portion of the food. In the much more violent chimpanzee society males usually eat first even when the females find the food, and the females eat what's left. Bonobos engage in genito-genital rubbing to make up after a fight, to ask for favours and to establish social bonds, both with the opposite and the same sex.

If there were no cultural stigma associated to sexual behaviour, it is likely that women would voluntarity exchange sex for money or other favours as the occasion demanded.

Bonobos also give the lie to the idea that only humans have sex for enjoyment and not for procreation --- or indeed that human sex should "naturally" be for procreation only.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Nov 30th, 2005 at 06:13:03 PM EST
Gee, I just can't type (or proofread) to save my life this week...
her heginals
her genitals

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 06:01:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Migeru if you would not exist, we would have to invent you.

Exactly the point I should have been made in my comment before. More clear, more to the point. Together with Izzy you have expressed my opinion better than myself.

It is time for me to shut up for a while and learn.

But before doing it, let me recall that both men and women would be able to interchange sex for objects if sex would be neutral and there would be no myth/concept regarding sex-male-female. And of course, among women and among men... but this is another topic.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 09:40:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Bonobos are, with Chimpanzees, humans' closest relatives. Being primates, both species have complex social behaviour. The ability for cultural transmission has been documented in apes as far from humans as macaques.
Macaques are primates, and Bonobos and Chimps are apes (technically, hominids, but that's just because taxonomists like to shock and outrage Christians).

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 10:02:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Frans de Waal has two books that I have not read but seem like would be very instructive: Chimpanzee Politics and Bonobo: the Forgotten Ape. Although de Waal is no tkeen on drawing inferences about humans from animals, what he does insist on is that many notions of human "uniqueness" are just based on prejudice.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 10:40:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for the thought-provoking series, AgnesaParis.  I agree with most of what you're saying, however (to go back to the legalization thread) I'd disagree with the whole concept that legalizing prostitution is a lesser evil.  I think making it criminal is "evil."

It also bothers me that people put all this moral weight on "legalization."  Why can it not be neutral?  We can argue for days whether selling one's body is "good" or "bad," whether it's healthy or unhealthy, a social construct or a cultural more, but why does that even matter?  

What I'm asking, I guess, is how is making laws that take away someone's right to do what they want with their body any different from controlling the person's body?  To my mind, someone owning someone is not a whole lot worse that someone insisting you don't own yourself.  I think both slavery and punitive criminalization are evil concepts.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Nov 30th, 2005 at 07:07:29 PM EST
Agnesa writes: 'Indeed, prostitution is about being false, not admitting, even to yourself, that you are demeaned by what you do. Most of the women we talked with were not even able to consider wanting out, as if some kind of brainwash had convinced them that they did not deserve a better life (their self-esteem had been totally annihilated) or worse, that they were not unhappy doing that (denial of self-inflicted violence).'

Agnesa, I disagree.

I lived in Via del Mandrione in Rome, which not only is the most renowned street for prostitutes, gipsies, poor immigrants from the south, shanty huts, but also famous for its people, their soldarity and the films shot there by P.P. Pasolini (killed by a  male prostitute in Ostia) and - of course - F. Fellini. If you ever lived in a street like the Mandrione and got befriended to the people, ate with them in the trattorie, invited them to your BBQs, you would find that the puttane are quite respectable and respected persons.

Later I lived several months in a hotel, which was really a brothel, in the Dominican Republic. It was not much different from the Mandrione in Rome. Prostitution was a fact of daily life. The girls were very fully integrated in the social life of the community and very much liked.

There is something wrong with America and the UK, which both have serious problems with poor people, prostitutes and non whites. They are all pitied for, despised, or they must be helped out of their  mere existance.

Lutheran countries are morte relaxed and Catholic nations don't have no problem at all with prostitutes. They will always see the individual first and have developed the mamma-santa-puttana thing.

Here are some historic and recent photos and a oil painting of an artist friend of mine of the Mandrione.

Pasolini also made a film called: Il Mandrione. I got to know some of the characters, who still lived in the neighborhood.

http://www.giardinodivenere.it/rubrichefiles/casilina15.jpg

http://tazzuti.com/quadri/carita_mercenaria.jpg

http://users.libero.it/artware/Fotografie/R/r008.JPG

Here is an article from La Repubblica about the street and its people:

Nella città fra elegia e parodia Mandrione, come una vertigine

MANDRIONE è prima di tutto un nome. Praticamente nessuno a Roma che non sia un archeologo o un carrozziere o un pappa o un impiegato della Banca d'Italia (vedremo poi perché) ha una percezione chiara di questo luogo, ma il nome sì, il nome produce una strana eco e uno si ricorda di esserci stato, magari una notte, in un tour avventuroso...

I falò delle prostitute, le grandi sagome buie degli acquedotti che si accavallano l'uno sull'altro, i treni che ti sfrecciano sotto i piedi... Pasolini, il cinema... gli zingari...

Io non ci andavo forse da quindici, vent'anni. Ragazzi, Roma è inesauribile. Ml ci sono ritrovato una mattina per sbaglio, cercando il commissariato di Torpignattara. E allora ho cominciato a tornarci, una, due, tre volte, e ancora: in metropolitana (fermata: Porta Furba-Quadraro), in moto, in Vespa, in automobile, da solo o a piedi con un amico architetto, Alberto Alessi, che mi spiegava l'unicità di questo luogo dove s'incrociano almeno quattro paesaggi totalmente diversi, uno per ogni punto cardinale, e una vertiginosa stratificazione di storia e antropologia.

Il modo migliore è sempre su due ruote, e imboccando via del Mandrione da fuori, da Porta Furba, sulla Tuscolana. Anche qui il nome, allusivo: alcuni dicono che sl chiami cosi per la presenza di briganti o ladri (dal latino -fur). Per me era sinonimo di una porta che frega chi ci passa sotto: una specie di avvertimento sul carattere fraudolento e ironico della città che finge di accoglierti coi suoi grandiosi monumenti - quando in realtà si fa beffe di te. Ti sfila il portafoglio, mentre hai il naso per aria a guardare gli acquedotti. Ti lascia a bocca aperta. E in effetti, oltrepassato il primo arco, si entra in un altro mondo. Innanzitutto, questa è la campagna romana. Ma sì, il mito di viaggiatori e di pittori. Stiamo entrando in città, eppure subito ne siamo fuori. Espulso, sospesi nel tempo. Lo dico senza enfasi, o forse con un po' di enfasi: è un posto meraviglioso. Gli archi sono masse cupe che si inseguono e si accoppiano. I primi sono interamente murati, altri murati a metà o quanto bastava per costruirci sotto una casetta, una capanna, un magazzino. Gli acquedotti sono tre, l'Acqua Claudia, l'Acqua Marcia (romani) e l'Acquedotto Felice, costruito da papa Sisto V usando i pezzi dei primi due, gli avanzi di un immenso Lego (mi viene in mente una frase di Kafka sul fatto che la nostra esistenza è come costruirsi una casa nuova usando i pezzi della vecchia: e intanto abitiamo in questa incompletezza, in questo continuo trasloco). I due antichi corrono paralleli, almeno virtualmente, perché del Marcio non resta quasi nulla, e quello Felice si accoppia ora all'uno ora all'altro scavalcando il Mandrione da destra a sinistra e poi ancora a destra e poi di nuovo a sinistra, come se non sapesse decidersi. Più avanti le arcate scompaiono dietro mura alberi e cancelli.

Il Mandrione era famoso anzi mitico per la baraccopoli. E per gli zingari, per lo più Rom abruzzesi che vennero ad abitarci tra le due guerre. Fu materia di varie indagini sociologiche, tra cui una bellissima ricerca di Franco Pinna che ci tornò a fotografare nel 1956 e nel 1968. Allora: «... c'erano, davanti ai loro tuguri, a ruzzare sul fango lurido, dei ragazzini, dai due ai quattro o cinque anni...» (indovinate un po' chi ha scritto questo). Ancora quand'ero ragazzo io e ci passavo col vespino per le trasferte calcistiche o musicali, me lo ricordo come un posto brulicante. Ora è quasi deserto. Gli zingari pare che abitino le case popolari a Spinaceto o hanno comprato più avanti, sull'Anagnina. Tutta la striscia a sinistra del Mandrione è proprietà della Banca d'Italia, ai cui impiegati invidio i campi verdi bene innaffiati. E l'erba rara per il calciatore romano, abituato a pestare spianate di terra dura come cemento o affondare nella pozzolana. A destra invece: una sfilza di carrozzieri, fabbri, falegnami, e poi fabbricanti di gommapiuma, infissi, profilati, cancelli, porte blindate, metal-qualcosa, sider-qualcosaltro.

Ecco dove sono finiti tutti gli artigiani della città! Ormai a Roma la gente che lavora si nasconde, è diventata invisibile. Riserve indiane, oasi del lavoro manuale.

Di cani invece ce n'è tanti: ogni volta che sosto davanti a un cancello... dieci secondi e arriva una bestia o più bestie ululanti, in genere lupastri dalle orecchie troppo lunghe o flosce o strappate a morsi e dal pelo chiazzato, pastori tedeschi ibridati, improbabili...

Il Mandrione. si snoda lunghissimo e silenzioso. Passata la stazione Casilina, risbucano dal nulla gli archi a fianco della strada e incastonato come una fortezza d'angolo, un mulino. Di li parte via della Marrana. Proprio a ridosso dell'acquedotto, ma sul lato che dà verso la Tuscolana, c'è un bellissimo centro sportivo, l'AS "Le Mura", quintessenza di romanità, cinquantenni che a mezzogiorno si scambiano pallonetti e battute acide. Sullo sfondo. le arcate secolari, tutte sbreccate contro il cielo azzurro, con ciuffi di rampicanti che invece di rampicare penzolano, e appendiabiti inchiodati nella malta. Di nuovo, debbo dire, che questo è meraviglioso: questa compresenza. Di tempi e funzioni. Qualcosa che sta tra un'elegia struggente e la parodia. Nel silenzio quasi campestre risuonano le grida dell'istruttrice dell'Acquagym e i bassi della musica techno.

Ora siamo nella zona più misteriosa del Mandrione. Il piano stradale si alza per cui le arcate si fanno basse, nane. Molte all'interno sono piastrellate, intonacate, dalle tamponature sbucano ancora gli attacchi dei cessi divelti, dei lavandini. Altre sono sbarrate da reti e ondulati metallici. Qui ci abitava un sacco di gente. Hanno strappato via le baracche, scoperchiando le stanzette ricavate nell'acquedotto. Portate violentemente allo scoperto, le maioliche brillano come sui portali di Babilonia. O come nelle case che ho visto nei dintorni di Mostar, Bosnia, fatte esplodere una per una, con metodo, squarciate dall'interno. Materassi sparsi un po' ovunque. Nel pieno sole fervono le tracce dei traffici notturni. Duecento metri più avanti, tecnicamente parlando, il Mandrione termina, ripassando sotto l'acquedotto e ramificandosi in un quartierino di villette e orti molto ben curati, un piccolo feudo giallorosso su cui campeggia, appeso con lo spago tra una palazzina e l'altra, un paio dl forbicioni simbolici, con cui i "cuginetti" (ma perché questa parentela?) hanno scucito lo scudetto dalla maglia del laziali. Lo so, tout comprendre c'est tout pardonner... anche se io sono un po' stufo sia di comprendere che di perdonare!

La strada che continua a correre sotto l'Acqua Felice qui è la Casilina Vecchia, ma ha il medesimo ritmo sonoro scandito dal passaggio radente del maxi-scooter e i flash visuali degli archi: luce-ombra-luce-ombra-luce, arco-pilone-arco-pilone. E ancora fabbrichette di porte blindate (una vera ossessione...), sfasciacarrozze coi musi e le occhiaia vuote di 500 e Giulia Super che sbucano a mezz'altezza tra le arcate, e fasci di binari a stringere a tenaglia l'abitato. Mi fermo di fronte a una deliziosa casetta ridipinta di verde, col cartello VENDESI, è un locale videobar "per soci con tessera Arci", e da una Simca perfettamente mantenuta sl sporge il guidatore per informarmi: «Là, se vuoi, se scopa».

Sento di essere nell'ombelico della visione. All'incrocio perfetto. II paesaggio si è fatto verticale. Cinque o sei livelli sovrapposti e intersecati. L'acquedotto, in alto. Un Eurostar che sfreccia verso Napoli. La schiena arancione dei bus e le facciate gialle dei palazzoni laggiù sulla Casilina. Voltandomi, a occidente, stagliata, la torretta con l'orologio fascista della ex-fabbrica di lampadine Coppola e l'agglomerato della Stazione Tuscolana, verso cui, sbucando all'improvviso dalla galleria sotto i miei piedi, striscia faticosamente un treno merci.

E' la vertigine. E proprio in questo punto, in questo snodo ideale, si affacciano tra gli archi le statue di gesso, anzi, di "marmocemento" (!!) della fabbrica "ROMA ANTICA": Ursus che piega la testa del toro, un imperatore Giulio-Claudio a scelta, un bronzo di Riace (quello più rollaccione) e poi colonne infrante, satiri, veneri callipigie, e la copia della Bocca della Verità, dove mio padre, copiando Gregory Peck (o era Gregory Peck che copia mio padre?) mise la mano dopo aver sposato mia madre A.D. 1955. E' il trionfo di Roma, del suo beffardo gioco vero-falso. La materia dell'illusione, il "marmocemento"...

Torno iindietro sulla Tuscolana e dal Quadraro mi rifaccio il Mandrione per misurarlo sul contachilometri della moto. Incredibile: è come via del Corso, anzi più lungo: due chilometri. E se ci aggiungo l'ultimo pezzo di Casilina, diventa un tragitto come da Piazza del Popolo al Colosseo. Un impressionante pezzo di città...

Proprio al termine del percorso, mentre la Casilina s'imbuca contromano sotto un arco solitario con su scritto: MOTO PERICOLO!!, ripassando sotto l'Acqua Felice la strada prende nome di Via della Stazione Tuscolana e forma un gomito, una piccola ansa di qualche decina di metri quadrati, nascosta dall'ombra di fichi e palme. Qualcuno, la dentro, protetto dall'incannucciata, sta lavorando. Cosa fa? Zappa la terra.

E' un orto di guerra, incastonato nella città.

di Eraldo Albinati

"The USA appears destined by fate to plague America with misery in the name of liberty." Simon Bolivar, Caracas, 1819

by Ritter on Wed Nov 30th, 2005 at 07:49:02 PM EST
Picking up on your point about self-esteem, HBO often shows documentaries about underground, shadow-economy "sector" -- drugs, prostitution, etc. -- and they played one a while back, showing the differences between women who were prostitutes in countries where it was illegal and those in countries where it was legal.  As I recall, there was an enormous difference in the way these women saw themselves.

Those from areas where it was illegal were, largely, from broken homes.  The ones in legalized areas were, typically, women putting themselves through law school.

Has this been your experience?  It seems like there should probably be a substantial difference between a prostitute who has been smuggled into (say) the US via Los Angeles from China, and a prostitute in (say) Vegas, where it's legal, regulated, and taxed.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Wed Nov 30th, 2005 at 10:18:30 PM EST
Blanket assumptions regarding how prostitutes experience their 'work' seem going to far. I am certain that for some high end ones, particularly those doing it temporarily while getting an education, it is experienced as a far better alternative to temping or working retail.  Some might go as far as seeing it as glamorous, a few might even do it for fun.

But, but - the vast majority of prostitutes do their jobs out of desperation brought on by extreme poverty. It is not really a choice but a miserable life brought on by misery.

So as you put it, the question is whether that misery is at least a bit smaller with criminilization or regulation. I'm inclined to believe that it is the latter, though it won't fully eliminate criminal involvement any more than legalized gambling completely gets rid of illegal bookies and their enforcers.

i dziekuje za te 'dzienniki', sa ciekawe, wywarzone dyskusje trudnego tematu.

by MarekNYC on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 03:57:11 AM EST
If I could make a few observations. First is that there would seem to be a difference between legalising prosttution and regulating by establishing a set of rule for running establishments housing prostitutes - like a requirement for STI testing. Englans is in a somewhat mixed situation where the act of acceptin or paying money in exhange for sex is not illegal but other activities surrounding it are punishable. This can make attempts to make working safer very difficult.

I would also suggest that a definition of prositution is very difficult in a society where many social arrangements involve the implied exchange of sex for some form of financial support. At one extreme it could be argued that a marriage involving one partner being the sole earner is a form of prostitution - indeed many feminists have made the point. Now you may very well argue that marriage is a social institution to recognise a wider relationship than purely a sexual one. So what about the mistress of a wealthy man who sets her up with home and supports her financially and "keeps her sweet" with gifts of jewllery say. Is she any less of a prostitute than the escort who accompanies her client to a meal and followed by a sexual encounter. Is it different if that sexual encounter is an explicit part of the arrangement or a voluntary extension?

If there is an element of consent or mutual attraction as those interactions, are they qualatively different from a girl being lured from eastern Europe and then forced to work in a brothel under threat of violence to her or her family in her home country? I would suggest that there is but the exact definition is difficult to identify. Is it OK for the rich or attractive to pay for sex as a convenience but not for those who might not otherwise be able to find company? Do we condemn the elderly or disabled for hiring a prostitute because they are not confident or too socially isolated to enter into a relationship leading to a sexual one or with a person whose looks are idealised as the most attractive in our society? What about the women, is there a difference between the street walker in her 30s who is trying to feed a family and the young student doing "escort" work to pay off the University fees and loans that the Blair government introduced?

What you have skimmed over are male protitutes. You link this in your diary above to prison rape and the selling of a man's sexual services by a more powerful one in the jail. I would suggest that that is similar to the position of the eastern European girls forced to work in brothels. Although there is commercial exploitation of their bodies, it is more to do with abuse and the exercise of power. There are many male prostitutes outside of prisons. Some service rich female clients who are using them purely for convenience so they do not have to go out to socialise, just like the businessman. Others alternatively or in addition service gay clients. The motive for the clients of the "escorts" who advertise in the various gay magazines or sites is surely to have sex with someone who has one of the stereotypically ideal bodies withing the community or sometimes to indulge in activities it is difficult to find a partner for. An example here might be the guy in his mid-50s who services clients who are into headmaster/schoolboy fantasies. That is of course not to say that there are not young and vulnerable boys who are forced into prostitution to survive or feed a drug habit.

While I think there would be unanimity that the owners and operators of brothels were force and coercion is used to exploit the workers, there surely is a case to be made that properly run "houses" could provide a safer working environment, certainly much safer than either street walking or setting up in an isolated room without the opportunity of either screening clients or having some personal security. If we accept that, what should be done about those who are streetwalking because they are unable to get work in the "houses" Should they be arrested and most likely fined and forced back on the streets to pay the fine?

At the very least we should ensure that advice, testing and counselling is freely available for sex workers. The abusive brothels I would suggest need no extra legislation in most countries. They are clearly involved in quasi-slavery and those running them should be prosecuted for kidnap, incitement to rape and imprisonment. Proper social services and hostels should reduce the need for the young and vulnerable to use prostitution to fill the funding gap tht means they do not have such help. We should be aiming to provide the sex workers with the best protection and working conditions we can alongside opportunities for alternative employment if they want to "retire".  

by Londonbear on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 04:05:46 AM EST

At the very least we should ensure that advice, testing and counselling is freely available for sex workers. The abusive brothels I would suggest need no extra legislation in most countries. They are clearly involved in quasi-slavery and those running them should be prosecuted for kidnap, incitement to rape and imprisonment. Proper social services and hostels should reduce the need for the young and vulnerable to use prostitution to fill the funding gap tht means they do not have such help. We should be aiming to provide the sex workers with the best protection and working conditions we can alongside opportunities for alternative employment if they want to "retire".


Could not have put it better. But the fundamental question I am interested to have your view on is "why does prostitution exist in the first place?"

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill
by Agnes a Paris on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 04:18:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
While I appreciate the evocative anecdotal quality of the posting about the relatively decent life of prostitutes in (selected neigbourhoods in) Rome, seems to me a single micro-counterculture does not a sweeping justification of the sex industry make.  Nor does the local culture of one street or district even carry much weight in the national picture.

Doubtless the high respect in which prostitutes are held in Italy explains the lively business of smuggling in Nigerian women without papers and using them  for rough trade:


        Last October, a local weekly, The News, reported the Italian ambassador to Nigeria, Giovanni Germano, as saying that 60 percent of all sex workers in his country were Nigerians. Statistics show that more than 90 percent of those repatriated or intercepted came from Edo State in the southwest.

        Olateru-Olagbegi, whose organisation has embarked on a campaign against the trend, says even where the girls realised that the object of the trip was to engage in prostitution, most did not bargain for the type of bondage and abuse to which they were subjected.

        "The sponsors usually make them undertake secret oaths or lawyers are brought in to make agreements. They now arrange all the travel documents, give them orientation and send them into the streets," she said.  

        "The type of sex involved often includes bestiality - sex with dogs and monkeys, and many of them didn't bargain for that," she added.  

        The amounts they owe to their sponsors, usually in the region of US $50,000, have to be paid off over years before the women can earn their freedom.

Followups:  Two articles which make it pretty clear that trafficking works about the same in the UK,
where prostitution is technically illegal, and in Italy where it is legal:
BBC article 1,
BBC Article 2

More:


Sure is good to know that the Virgin/Mama/Whore pigeonholing of female nature has made Italy such a safe and fun place to be prostituted...

Anyway, here's some reading material to enrich the debate.

Here is an argument for the elimination of commercial sex, "counterbalanced" by what I take to be a satire on arguments for its promotion (though it could be serious): Prostitution:  Solutions for a Global Problem ... and here is an interview with one of the most active "investigative journalists" (actually an academic) researching the material conditions of modern prostitution Merge Magazine interviews Dr Melissa Farley, which states the "anti" case pretty succinctly.

This may be the most cogent argument I know of for legalisation, and it makes telling points (but I am not sure it stands up all that well to actual research and testimony from "legalised" countries and brothels): Prostitution in Canada: The Invisible Menace or the Menace of Invisibility?

And this may possibly be the best summary of the counterargument:  Ten Reasons for Not Legalising Prostitution

As to the actual experiences of many prostituted persons and how they compare to the sanitised, "happy hooker" or "top dollar dominatrix" story told by Hollywood and popular humour and folklore: Here is a study on PTSD among prostitutes, a comparative survey across five countries:
"Across countries, 73 percent reported physical assault in prostitution, 62 percent reported having been raped since entering prostitution, 67 percent met criteria for a diagnosis of PTSD. On average, 92 percent stated that they wanted to leave prostitution. We investigated effects of race, and whether the person was prostituted on the street or in a brothel."    The whole paper is worth a read.

Is prostitution simply a matter of a commercial transaction between adults?  Not really, since a large percentage of prostitutes start working the streets as children or teenagers: "Undercutting the myth that prostitution is an act between two consenting adults, a study of the lives and needs of prostituted women in Chicago reveals that the women started in prostitution as teens. According to the Center for Impact Research, 32 percent first exchanged sex for money between the ages of 12 and 15."

This is a fairly comprehensive paper (warning, PDF!) from the anti-prostitution viewpoint, including specific data based on interviews with legalised brothel workers in Australia (the poster child for legalisation).  I apologise for the somewhat explicit and disturbing nature of the excerpt below, but I think it is important to bear in mind what kind of work this really is, what the customers demand as "sex," and how often and to what extent their demands include, inevitably, the 'right' to treat contemptuously, hurt, and damage the bodies of the prostituted women.


The idea that prostitution should be seen as work is one of the arguments that was made in favour of the legalising or decriminalising of brothel prostitution that has taken place in several states of Australia. In fact there is always an illegal industry vastly larger than that which is licensed or has planning permission. In Victoria, according to the owners of the legal brothel industry, there are 400 illegal brothels to 91 legal ones. So the industry is mostly illegal and run by criminals. Street prostitution, in which women dependent on drugs and girls too young to work in brothels are exposed to the most extreme forms of sexual exploitation and violence, is increasing in Victoria. None of the problems that legalising brothels was said to solve, such as an out of control illegal industry and street prostitution, has been alleviated.

It is well known that street prostitution is extremely dangerous. Women are at risk of rape and murder, beatings, knifings [...] The violence is carried out against so-called high class prostituted women as well. A booklet for call girls in London recommends having mirrored walls so women can see whether the man has a knife behind his back. [...]

In brothel prostitution these extraordinary problems (after all what other form of work includes murder as an ordinary hazard?) are supposed to be reduced. Let us consider the legal brothels of Melbourne, supposedly the créme de la créme of prostitution.

One of my students did research in a legal brothel by interviewing women both before and after bookings about the boundaries they tried to create to control what men were able to do to them and to what extent they were successful.

The brothel she studied contained a lounge in which the introductions took place. All the women waited in the lounge. Men came in one at a time to make their selection and the women had to compete to be chosen. They would come up and touch the men sexually and vie with each other in offering what they would do. Some might offer sex without condoms if they particularly needed the money. Then they went up to the room. Women would often apply lubricant in a bathroom on the way up because the men would be most unhappy if they got the impression the women were not sexually aroused and some would refuse to pay.

Then the women had to try to control the encounter. Men would sometimes want an all around the world i.e. access to any orifice in any way and the right to touch any part of the womans body. The woman must then struggle to restrict him whilst not losing the booking. One woman said that for anal she would charge $500 but this would be according to how large it was i.e. a larger penis means more pain. Another woman said a man had started to put lubricant on his fist and when she asked what it was for he said he intended to fistfuck her. The demand for fistfucking suggests that the increasingly violent and degrading practices carried out upon women in pornography are educating men in what they wish to do to women, first in prostitution and then in their relationships. This applies also to anal sex. When women came down from bookings one would shower for 10 minutes in very hot water to get the dirt off her body.

Before a booking one woman would come out in goose bumps. Her skin was crawling at the thought of what she would have to endure. Sexual harassment is what the man pays for. The women dissociate to survive the ordeal using psychological techniques or drugs and alcohol.  Women in prostitution are not a different kind of women who can endure the unwanted hands and penises of men in and on their bodies more easily than others. It is true that many are seasoned by previous sexual violence in childhood or adulthood.  To such women the violence of prostitution can seem less severe. But they hate it just as much. Any acceptance of prostitution is an acceptance that certain women can reasonably be set aside as appropriate objects of exactly the harassment that other non-prostituted women seek to get out of their workplaces and lives.

This is the story of the most respectable form of prostitution in the world. Here in Australia there are codes for the implementation of occupational health and safety OHS) in brothels drawn up by state authorities, but only for the tiny number of brothels that are legal. It is hard to work out occupational health and safety codes for work in which women are regularly at risk of violence and harassment such as men twisting nipples and shoving fingers up women's anuses. Codes have to deal with diseases which are life-threatening, where women may be required to handle faeces and urine as well as semen, where they have to suffer the psychological damage of dissociation. Codes for other workplaces require the isolation of dangerous substances, wearing gloves etc. Prostituted women are in no position to do these things.

More on Prostitutes and PTSD


The experiences of a woman who prostituted primarily in strip clubs, but also in massage, escort and street prostitution, are typical (Farley et al., 2003). In strip club prostitution, she was sexually harassed and assaulted. Stripping required her to smilingly accommodate customers' verbal abuse. Customers grabbed and pinched her legs, arms, breasts, buttocks and crotch, sometimes resulting in bruises and scratches. Customers squeezed her breasts until she was in severe pain, and they humiliated her by ejaculating on her face. Customers and pimps physically brutalized her. She was severely bruised from beatings and frequently had black eyes. Pimps pulled her hair as a means of control and torture. She was repeatedly beaten on the head with closed fists, sometimes resulting in unconsciousness. From these beatings, her eardrum was damaged, and her jaw was dislocated and remains so many years later. She was cut with knives. She was burned with cigarettes by customers who smoked while raping her. She was gang-raped and she was also raped individually by at least 20 men at different times in her life. These rapes by johns and pimps sometimes resulted in internal bleeding.

Yet this woman described the psychological damage of prostitution as far worse than the physical violence. She explained that prostitution "is internally damaging. You become in your own mind what these people do and say with you" (Farley et al., 2003).

Almost two decades earlier, Norwegian researchers noted that women in prostitution were treated like commodities into which men masturbate, causing immense psychological harm to the person acting as receptacle (Hoigard and Finstad, 1986).

In other words, the harm done to women in prostitution is not merely a byproduct of the illegality of the trade and the secrecy, repression and coercion typical of an illegal business.  Harm is also the commodity being sold.  In the legal brothels of Australia, a woman can lose income if she refuses painful anal intercourse with a client;  her only other option is to charge more for enduring the painful experience.  I suggest the reader -- particularly the hetero male reader -- might wish to think seriously about how much a well-endowed man would have to pay him to cooperate with such a demand -- would it be more than $500 AUD?  How much would it be?  What would it be like to make a living catering to such demands, several times a day?  To lose significant money by insisting on only "safe" or ordinary sex?  To be offered big bonuses for risking HIV infection by not insisting on a condom?  How much money would one have to earn to make it worthwhile?  Would it be preferable to other "dirty" jobs like bricklaying, ditch-digging, or cleaning toilets?

And more fundamentally, is there any such thing as a "fair price" for hurting and demeaning another person?  Perhaps we can calculate one by asking, What price would you or I pay to have our daughter, or any other woman we cared about, spared from such an experience?  What would we pay in ransom to get our daughter safely out of such a situation?  I'm thinking five figures, six figures, heck, most parents would pay whatever was asked, if they had to go into debt for the rest of their lives.  Why are not prostituted women paid these kinds of sums, if that is the fair-market price for the various harms they are expected to endure?

The question of why so many men wish to hurt or demean women is a far larger one.  The scope of a discussion of patriarchy, misogyny, and their bearing on male sexuality as constructed in various cultures around the world, is so vast that I doubt a whole forum could hold it, let alone one thread or diary.  (Head over to Stan's place and join the brawl in progress.) I would suggest that for the moment, rather than fleeing to idyllic fantasies of Bonobo-land, those concerned with social justice should accept the prevailing Hobbesian realities: that many men enjoy hurting women and find sex inadequate unless it includes bullying and hurting;  that these men are very likely to try to buy access to "disposable" women and children for anonymous use, so as to avoid the complications and loss of reputation involved in being a known batterer or abuser within a community;  and working from these distressing but well-attested realities, figure out how to curb this tendency and protect our society's most vulnerable women and children from it.  Figuring out how these men got to be this way and how we could raise boys to be less violent and hateful towards girls and women, would be a fine project;  but that's a multigenerational effort.  In the meantime there is actually-existing abuse and suffering to be addressed, and no easy answers.  

Certainly criminalising the prostituted women themselves is absurd and misogynist.  They are either free agents engaging voluntarily in sexual trade, or victims of coercion, and in neither case are they coercing or doing harm to others.  Perhaps what should be criminalised is "profiteering off the sexual labour of another person" (there have been laws like this in the past prohibiting pimping specifically).  And of course existing laws against kidnapping, rape, assault and GBH should be applied without prejudice to offences against prostituted women (fat chance of that, in a world where male police, judges, lawyers and politicians are often among the men abusing the prostitutes, but it's a nice idea).

The paper on choice, law, and prostitution is S Anderson, "Prostitution and Sexual Autonomy:  Making Sense of the Prohibition of Prostitution", from Ethics July 2002.  I don't think it is available online, unless you have access to Lexis/Nexis or something similar.  Which is a pity as it is one of the best discussions to date of the debate between normalisers and abolitionists.


The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 04:07:59 AM EST
As you say, the extract is from a group opposed to legalisation. Clearly the opportunity exists for the sex workers to be abused and assaulted but surely that indicates the places are not being run properly and that they have insufficient negotiation skills/training to negotiate the session in advance. They then go on to imply that the conditions are even worse in the illegal brothels. Surely the inference from that is that the laws are not being properly applied so that only legal brothels can operate, if that is the law.

There has been a series here (I believe originally on MTV) showing one of the legal brothels outside Vegas which is male owned but run by a madam. She appears to ensure new recruits are given help in negotiations etc with the clients by the more experienced. Part of their procedures involved the girls examining the client for obvious signs of infections or infestations and strict use of condoms. This did not stop a client causing one girl mental trauma when he slipped a condom off and she had to be tested and was off work with the shock. It was unclear whether the client was arrested over it. I believe not and that was clearly wrong. If legal brothels were to be introduced, the willingness of the police to apply the ordinary laws of assault and rape to protect the workers would have to be assured. The "fisting" episode described in the submission was clearly assault. Whilst I suspect most of the potential clients would wish to be the subject, there are will obviously be some women prepared to be the subject of sado-masochism so a defence against an assualt charge on the grounds it was consensual and paid for would have to be allowed. An important caveat to that would have to be that a signed or recorded verbal contract would be the best defence and that the client's "toys" could not be used so that in the absence of a contract the consent could be implied by the type of set-up. It would depend on the juridiction whether these should form part of a set of regulations or arose from case law.

If prostitution were legalised and controlled, compulsory regular health checks would form part of it and I see no reason why compulsory counselling at the same time could not be legislated for. Whilst an objection against this might be that workers not in brothels would not have to have such licences, the penalty for street walking could be ammended to compulsory testing and extended counselling, including in that case financial advice.

I think it is necessary for those who use the harm argument for prohibition and presumably punishment of those still working, to explain how that would protect the workers from abuse and harm.  

by Londonbear on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 06:23:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
After all the serious (and exceptional) comment above, I'm a bit leery of trying to hit a slightly lighter note, but here we go:

This is to illustrate the title of the diary: what's consumable? what do we actually buy? The body can be sold, and can be used to sell (other products). Is it the "promise" of an access to that body which you buy when you buy that product? If that's what advertising is suggesting, what's the responsibility of that sector in perpetuating the mindsets and stereotypes that then generate, or at least make posssible and "normal" the abusive behaviors we've discussed?

Or can bodies be enjoyed by simply looking?

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 04:29:42 AM EST
Sorry about that, the picture seems to have disappeared from the server. I won't be able to correct this before tonight. Will repost it then.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 04:56:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
We are all looking forward to seeing the picture Jerome !

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill
by Agnes a Paris on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 02:51:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Strnagely enough, I can see the picture on my Mac, but here's a new version (hopefully also visible on PCs):



In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 03:12:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]


When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill
by Agnes a Paris on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 03:53:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
couple of afterthoughts

-- I am puzzled with regard to the contribution of prostitutes to world peace.  This would include no doubt the camp followers who have accompanied every imperial army into battle at least since Roman times and probably long before?  Or the legions of women forcibly prostituted for the "comfort" of occupational armies throughout history?  Or the girls and women who "acted" and posed for the video pornography which was provided to US bomber pilots in Gulf War I for their pre-mission viewing, to get them "revved up" and ready to drop explosives on other human beings?  When the Germans occupied Paris, iirc, the first businesses commanded to re-open were the brothels.  Doubtless this was a sincere gesture, on the part of the occupiers, towards world peace?  Colour me puzzled.

-- I am not sure why the example of "typical prostitute" that seems to spring to mind (for liberals attempting to defend the institution anyway) is a high-dollar dominatrix in a Berlin nightclub or brothel ... must be some kind of Weimar nostalgia trip :-)  Anyway, given the choice between wearing an uncomfortable and silly costume and acting out silly rituals either at EuroDisneyWorld or in a brothel, I think I would very quickly choose EuroDisney... even if the pay was considerably lower, which it probably would be.  neither set of customers could be anything other than boring as hell (is there anything more tedious than the same old dozen or so patriarchal sex fantasies with their trivial variations? yaaaawn), and at least I wouldn't have to get as up close and personal with the turistas at Mouse Heaven :-)

I should probably mention the recent (from Australia no less) book Not For Sale, a collection of essays critiquing the global convenience-sex industry.  [Disclaimer:  I did contribute some material to this book, but I don't get a penny from its sales, so there's no profit interest involved.]  Also Christa Wichtericht, The Globalised Woman...  and speaking of Weimar, for historical interest Theweleit's Male Fantasies (in two volumes) iirc (it's been a while) explores the connections between sexual fantasies, masculinity, national identity, militarism, violence and all the rest in the run-up to the Third Reich.  

Lastly I suggest a valuable mental exercise for every contributor who sincerely believes that there is nothing wrong with prostitution, that there should be no quibbling about the perfectly reasonable exchange of sex for money, etc.  Here it is:  every time (every single time) you hear someone, including yourself, use prostitution or sexual accommodation as a metaphor for spinelessness, gutlessness, venality, dishonesty, vacuity, weakness etc. -- stop and issue a verbal correction.  When someone refers to the corporate media as "presstitutes," interrupt and tell them that there is nothing wrong with prostitution, it is an honest profession and quite separate from corruption or cowardice.  When someone talks about spineless Democrats despicably "rolling over for" the Bush regime or the US press "going on its knees" to Bush, remind them that there is nothing at all demeaning about submitting to male sexual demands, particularly if money changes hands.  Every time someone calls a politician "corporate whore", tell them how legit a career prostitution is or should be, and how unfair it is to invoke it as a casual insult.  Every time someone says "lies like a whore" or "whores around" or "what a cocksucker" or "he's Cheney's bitch" or "that sucks" or "I wouldn't just bend over for that" or "jeez we really took it in the shorts that time" or any of the plethora of other everyday expressions that reveal a reflexive equation of sex and domination, receptivity and inferiority... interrupt the conversation, and defend the whores.

Just some more food for thought.

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 04:39:48 AM EST
I would be grateful if you could answer my point above, is the answer strict prohibiition? Would not that involve punishing the "self employed" as well as those "employed" in brothels? Then are not the most vulnerable being punished twice - one by being forced by poverty or abuse into being paid to perform sexual acts and then again by imprisonment or fines?

I agree one should not extrapolate from some Weimar or Belle Epoch nostalgia. Neither should we extrapolate from those forced into selling themselves by extreme poverty or homelessness. I have addressed that by saying we should have other social policies to avoid such circumastances in the first place or to offer alternative solutions if we cannot. While I respect your arguments about alternative work, there may well be others who see prostitution as a better alternative. If say a student found that an evening entertaining a businessman/woman paid the same as working for 6 evenings a week in a bar and allowed them that extra time to study, would you deny them your choice even if they did not decide on the "legitimate" option?

The situation is not black or white but one of deciding which shade of grey to go with. I am reminded of a story about Winston Churchill at a dinner who asked a woman he disliked if she would go to be with him for a million pounds. When she said she might, he then asked if she would do so for a shilling. She responded haughtily "what do you think I am?" to which he said "Madam, we have established what you are, we are merely trying to agree the price"

by Londonbear on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 06:49:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think Winston Churchill had a satirical bone in his body, and he was too conservative for such jokes.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 06:57:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I may well have been mixing it up with an exchange he certainly was involved in at a dinner party:

Lady Astor: "If I were married to you, I'd put poison in your coffee"
Churchill: "If you were my wife, I'd drink it"

by Londonbear on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 07:23:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Man: if that child were mine I'd throw him out the window.
Woman: if he were yours I'd trow him out, too.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 07:26:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
it seems to me a very conservative joke.

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...
by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 06:42:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I totally agree, but I don't know if you meant it to be reductio ad absurdum or to be taken seriously. I'll take it seriously. There is a lot of rude language and "humour" involving sex, submission and other qualities assigned indistinctly to women and prositutes. And there is a dire need to expunge that from our language, then from out thoughts, then from our attitudes.

If there were no cultural stigma attached to sex we'd all be much happier, as well as being able to openly discuss sex-related issues like reproductive health, reproductive freedom, rape...

So, yes, we should not use sexual images to indicate submission. We should talk about selling out instead of prostituting oneself and so on and so forth.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 06:53:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes Migeru I did mean it seriously, though it may have seemed satirical... what I was trying to point out was the disconnect, not in every person but in very many "liberal" persons (especially males) who defend the instutition of prostitution and insist that it be normalised, and yet in daily discourse, in online postings, in jokes, etc., repeatedly use prostitutes as a metaphor for dishonesty, venality, cowardice, etc. this kind of "prickspeak" is particularly common in all-male venues where it seems to serve as a kind of male-bonding mechanism, cementing solidarity among the securely male and dominant by making a joke and laughingstock of the Other.  it is trendy right now in mainstream media and the slang of college students, at least where I live.

in a related note I have heard people who think of themselves as liberal or progressive joking about how they hope Bush and his henchmen "go to jail and get cosy with Bubba" -- a not very veiled allusion to prison rape.  few people could dislike W more than I, but imho rape is not something I would wish even on him.  (the corresponding trope on the Right I suppose would be the openly expressed wish that war protestors, especially women, get kidnapped and beheaded by Islamist fanatics.) anyway the use of vivid metaphors of rape, forcible penetration, voluntary fellatio and, implicitly and explicitly, prostitution, to describe anger, domination, submission, misfortune, or contempt are endemic to colloquial speech.  and these attitudes are inevitably carried onto the street and into the brothel -- not to mention the bedroom, the kitchen, and the boardroom -- by the "customers".  such speech is not merely "pungent," "colourful," or "salty."  it encodes and expresses deep cultural beliefs about sex as a ranking behaviour.

consider for example the glee with which even liberal bloggers may announce that "Fitzgerald rips Cheney a new one," (an allusion to violent anal rape), or "Hirsh  bitch-slaps Bush in new article" (allusion to the calculated beating of a prostitute by a pimp so as to inflict maximum pain with minimum visible damage).  the language of rape, forcible prostitution, and contempt for women and prostitutes is the common jargon of the times, as common as "Jew him down" or "works like a n*gger" or "lies like a Welshman" were in my grandfather's day.

when self-professed liberals start to challenge this neverending stream of deeply misogynist phatic utterance, then I may start taking seriously the liberal claim to respect and care about the lives and dignity of prostituted women...

btw I think the anecdote about Churchill tells us what he was, more than anything else: a misogynist jerk.  what kind of conversational opener is that anyway, "how much would you have to be paid to sleep with me?"  I've heard better pickup lines from construction workers on lunch break...

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 07:59:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
DeAnander wonders why: '...the girls and women who "acted" and posed for the video pornography which was provided to US bomber pilots in Gulf War I for their pre-mission viewing, to get them "revved up" and ready to drop explosives on other human beings?...'

DA, you sure remember the scene of good-bye at Southampton habour when the British war fleet left the UK for the Falklands? While the troops were standing on the decks waving at the enthusias-testicly cheering crowds on the pier their wives pulled up their shirts and showed them their breasts as a last salute. It was done spontaneously.

The same happened - so Roman sources tell us - before the Cimberi and Teutons engaged the Roman legions in battle in Padania. Their wives too showed the warriors their breasts when they left.

You know why? Have a guess.

Btw: I think working for EuroDisney is far worse than working in a brothel. There are hundreds of songs, poems, books, films and paintings about prostitutes and I clearly prefer them to the songs, comic strips and films about M. the Mouse and Goofy. The first are art the latter are pornography.

 

"The USA appears destined by fate to plague America with misery in the name of liberty." Simon Bolivar, Caracas, 1819

by Ritter on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 07:01:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Hi De ander. I ma the one of world peace.

Funny I always defend prostitutes when they are used as something down or evil or as an insult. Always. I guess you would not find a lot of people like that, but funny, you just met one.

Regarding prostitutes and world peace, puff .. how many examples do you want?

Now seriously. It is clearly that you do not get my point. Only from a perspective where sex is bad and mind-sould is good, a reference that sex is a good thing for the human being is taken as something literal.

I think you fall exactly into the trap. I am sorry. it is exactly this vision about sex and about prositutes that generates the salvery according to me. If everybody would recoignaze that sex is netural, that sometimes a prostitute (in the general sense of using sex to obatin something in exchange) can have insisted on generating a war (there are some examples in the Bible) and that other times these same prostitutes have tried to force understanding.. if prositution would be normal you would read read my sentence as you would read "the whole contribution of physicist to world peace...".

Regarding the possiblity of defending that this society would be much more worst withtout prostitutes.. frankly I think  I could make an argument in favor of that, but this was not the point.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 09:52:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
 "Anyway, given the choice between wearing an uncomfortable and silly costume and acting out silly rituals either at EuroDisneyWorld or in a brothel, I think I would very quickly choose EuroDisney... even if the pay was considerably lower, which it probably would be.  neither set of customers could be anything other than boring as hell (is there anything more tedious than the same old dozen or so patriarchal sex fantasies with their trivial variations? yaaaawn), and at least I wouldn't have to get as up close and personal with the turistas at Mouse Heaven :-)"

A) i would like both choices..all choices....to be legal....thats the point isnt it?  self determination.

and i would choose the brothel....mickey mouse gives me a headache.

B) again you have not only generalized about the clients but you are completely wrong according to my experiences...probably because you really dont have the experience of ever doing what you have a multitude of opinions on....one of my joys is my clients...they are fascinating....i love hearing their stories and getting to know them....i spend considerable time with them and remember all the details.....50% of my clients are regulars which is very high....im very successful at what i do and part of that is because of the way i treat my clients and that they know i genuinely care about them and this experience.

we are not all the same....can you see a world where we can deal with all the different issues, protect the people we need to protect, and allow the women who do what i do to do it without the threat of arrest?

by anna in philly (jrsygir1@aol.com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 10:28:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Anna,
Thank you for stepping in and contributing an insider's view to that thread. As you rightly pointed out, the cornerstone of the debate around prostituion is self-determination, ability to make a choice. There is no more grounds to criticise someone who chose to work in a bank than someone who chose your profession. The point is, there are likely to be more people going to banking as a result of a "free" decision process, than people chosing prostitution. This is not about making it more difficult for people who have chosen this occupation, but to avoid abuse. Same thing in banking with bans on insider trading and compliance procedures against money laundering.

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill
by Agnes a Paris on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 03:52:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Va MyDD, this thread over at Feministe, which unearthed a site saying things like:


Actually, the only thing that makes me consider rape to be as awful as it is IS the possibility of life, and also STDs. In of itself, while it can be fairly painful, is not that much of a big deal. Certainly, it's trespassing against your property and could result in great bodily harm, and you have the right to defend yourself, but mostly it's psychologically damaging more than anything else.

I'm always very skeptical of women who claim they were raped- especially to completion- because it is actually extremely difficult to rape a struggling, dry woman. Now, if there's a weapon involved I could see why a woman might not resist, but for the most part I think that if a woman regrets having sex, she thinks it was rape.

And there's lots more where that came from.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 08:47:14 AM EST
This is just APPALLING ! It would almost lead to question the free expression right to see such statements !

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill
by Agnes a Paris on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 09:54:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Does whoever wrote this know just how difficult it is to rape a "struggling, dry" woman from personal experience, or just as a theoretical exercise?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 10:08:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
old bad ideas never die...

because old bad ideas always serve someone's self-interest...

I'll bet a quarter -- no a whole dollar -- that those words were written by a guy, and that the guy who wrote them has never been raped.  though it could also be a woman "talking tough" or trying to overcome her own fears by making light of them.  but I have known enough women who survived being raped, and the aftereffects they lived with for years, to know that "no big deal" is hardly an accurate description for most.

it's as transparent as the old doctrine that the Darkies are differently made from you and me, and their simple minds and strong backs make it no hardship for them to sweat and slave in the fields under the blazing sun.  or that "they just don't feel these things the way we do" so they don't care when we tear their children from their arms and sell them downriver.  it's  no big deal.

someone else's pain is always "no big deal" when we want to exonerate ourselves from our share of the responsibility for it...

having said this, it is somewhat difficult for a man to rape a struggling and determined woman of roughly equal weight, who has the will and determination to fight it out.  but most women are not trained in physical fighting -- they don't teach wrestling, boxing, or tackle football to girls in most schools -- many women don't expect to be hit or hurt and go into shock/fear at the first blow or threat.  this "freeze-up" and confusion gives the deliberate and premeditated attacker a decisive advantage.  most women are also incredibly squeamish about hurting anyone else, physically.  I remember taking a basic self-defence course for women, many years ago, through a City program;  the hardest thing for most of the students was to be able to imagine themselves actually hitting another person, to get past the horror of "not being nice."   this may be less true today with more tough-girl media role models, female martial artists, etc. widening the envelope of acceptable female behaviour.

other solutions that rapists often adopt to make it safer and easier to appropriate another person's body:  getting the woman drunk to slow her reflexes and muddle her thinking, or drugging her (roofie rape), or talking her into "bondage play" so as to tie her up first;  picking on women who are markedly weaker and smaller than the predator;  brandishing a weapon; threatening to harm the woman's children.  ganging up (hunting in pairs or groups) is a disturbingly common tactic.  all of which shows that despite the persistence of fairly marked sexual dimorphism in late model humans, the average rapist is a coward as well as a jerk.

more later -- many interesting points are being raised here which I think could with a little effort be separated out into distinct topics.  law, ethics, culture, nature/nurture debates all come into play as we approach the vexed topic of sex and power.

btw, speaking of power, male prerogative, female inability to negotiate sexual terms, etc, dryness does nothing to prevent intromission or apparently to reduce male satisfaction.  a woman can be raped without lubrication, as can a man;  it just hurts a lot more.  

perhaps the fundamental challenge of human sexuality is its inherent asymmetry:  a "functional" man can, if he chooses and can get away with it, get genuine physical pleasure and orgasm from acts which hurt or injure the other person.  although 2nd wave feminists staunchly insisted that "rape is violence, not sex," the uncomfortable truth is that -- if we accept e.g. tyronen's assertion that "sex" for men begins and ends with physical stimulation and the use of another person's body for same, regardless of intimacy, trust, respect, affection and all that "feminised" stuff -- then for the successful rapist, rape is perfectly good sex.  does the exchange of money really solve this problem?  I wonder.

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 04:14:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Agnes, great diaries - I am still trying to catch up with them.

You are touching a very important and controversal topic. One about which I have very mixed feelings, as it involves so many things, power, money, shame, slavery. misstreatment... - but on the other hand I also feel grateful to these women as they are providing a important service, which saves other women from being hurt. I do know of some men who go to prostitutes to live out their more negative phantasies with a prostitute, instead of living them with their wives. Whatever the problem what I consider wrong is that usually there are laws against prostitutes, but no laws against their clients.

Sorry for the ramble, shouldn't write when in a hurry, but wanted to let you know that I appreciate you bringing up the topic.

by Fran on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 10:25:24 AM EST
Fran, I am taking this opportunity to thank YOU for the daily press review. I've only been on ET for a little more than one week and I already cannot think of starting my internet day without reading the articles you selected. Praise for a job well done!

When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill
by Agnes a Paris on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 02:46:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
but on the other hand I also feel grateful to these women as they are providing a important service, which saves other women from being hurt.

maybe.  otoh there is also a pretty well-attested trend, with the mainstreaming and legitimising of corporate/commercial sex, of men demanding that their girlfriends/wives do things they have seen in porno, or on visits to prostitutes or live sex shows.  the "catharsis" theory of sexual behaviour is not very well substantiated;  the "addiction" model may be more accurate for many people.

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 04:18:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
DA writes about: "...men demanding that their girlfriends/wives do things they have seen in porno, or on visits to prostitutes or live sex shows."

Stupid question: What would porn actors do in movies what people would not normally do in their kitchens, living- and sleeping rooms, cars and elevators?

Am I missing something?

Up to now I thought that I had as much fantasy as the average Joes and Janes who write the plots for porn movies. Actually having read some classic literature and been to some art shows I always thought that I might possess a more vivid imagination than the playwrites who work for Teresa Orlowsky and Jenna Jameson.

Hmm...

I also don't get all the references to rape and the broad shoulders of black men. (?)

Here is another snippet of news from The Netherlands and Germany I want to share with you:

Handicapped people who have no partners and who are on low incomes can ask their city's social security office to send them a sex worker to their home. The office pays for two visits each month.

"The USA appears destined by fate to plague America with misery in the name of liberty." Simon Bolivar, Caracas, 1819

by Ritter on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 06:20:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah, lest that I forget: The handicapped person can choose the sex partner from a catalogue provided by the social security office. I don't know however if they can choose him/her on-line from their local brothel's website yet.

Well, it's still very much 'Old Europe'.

I guess the Feds in the US are far ahead with these sort of client oriented disabled citizen programs and probably more flexible, too.  

"The USA appears destined by fate to plague America with misery in the name of liberty." Simon Bolivar, Caracas, 1819

by Ritter on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 06:35:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ritter, I think you are conflating soft porn and hard(core) porn, which are quite different beasts.

I have found the articles by Robert Jensen eye-opening in this respect. A cruel edge: The painful truth about today's pornography -- and what men can do about it

It hurts to know that no matter who you are as a woman you can be reduced to a thing to be penetrated, and that men will buy movies about that, and that in many of those movies your humiliation will be the central theme. It hurts to know that so much of the pornography that men are buying fuses sexual desire with cruelty.
People routinely assume that pornography is such a difficult and divisive issue because it's about sex. I think that's wrong. This culture struggles unsuccessfully with pornography because it is about men's cruelty to women, and the pleasure men sometimes take in that cruelty. And that is much more difficult for people -- men and women -- to face.
"Gag Factor #10" is a 2002 release from J.M. Productions. The company's web site notes the Gag Factor tapes' awards as "best oral series" and answers the question, "What makes Gag Factor different than all other blowjob tapes out there?"

  1. Every girl must swallow the load of cum!

  2. Every girl gets throatfucked until she gags and almost pukes!

  3. Gag Factor has more stroke value than all other blowjob tapes combined!
So, there's nothing surprising in the observation that some pornography includes explicit images of women in pain. But a healthy society would want to deal with that, wouldn't it? And from my research, both through these content analysis projects and my reading of material from the industry, it seems clear that mainstream heterosexual pornography is getting more, not less, cruel. A healthy society would take such things seriously, wouldn't it?
Men typically consume pornography specifically to avoid love and affection.

That means pornography has a problem. When all emotion is drained from sex it becomes repetitive and uninteresting, even to men who are watching primarily to facilitate masturbation. So, pornography needs an edge. Pornography has to draw on some emotion, hence the cruelty.

As Jerome Tanner put it during a pornography directors' roundtable discussion featured in Adult Video News, "People just want it harder, harder, and harder, because like Ron said, what are you gonna do next?" Another director, Jules Jordan, was blunt about his task: "[O]ne of the things about today's porn and the extreme market, the gonzo market, so many fans want to see so much more extreme stuff that I'm always trying to figure out ways to do something different. But it seems everybody wants to see a girl doing a d.p. now or a gangbang. For certain girls, that's great, and I like to see that for certain people, but a lot of fans are becoming a lot more demanding about wanting to see the more extreme stuff. It's definitely brought porn somewhere, but I don't know where it's headed from there."

Director Mitchell Spinelli, interviewed while filming the first video ("Give Me Gape") for a series for his new Acid Rain company, seemed clear where it was heading:

"People want more. They want to know how many dicks you can shove up an ass," he says with a shrug. "It's like Fear Factor meets Jackass. Make it more hard, make it more nasty, make it more relentless. The guys make the difference. You need a good guy, who's been around and can give a good scene, fuckin' `em hard. I did my homework. These guys are intense."

We live in a culture in which rape and battery continue at epidemic levels. And in this culture, men are masturbating to orgasm in front of television and computer screens that present them sex with increasing levels of callousness and cruelty toward women.

When a female student has a meeting about a research project with a male college professor who the night before was watching "Gag Factor #10," who is she to him? What is she to him?

When a woman walks into a bank to apply for a loan from a male loan officer who the night before was watching "Two in the Seat #3," what is he thinking?

When a woman goes in front of a male judge who the night before was watching "Sopornos #4," does she want to throw herself on the mercy of the court?

In pornography, women are three holes and two hands.

Women in pornography have no hopes and no dreams and no value apart from the friction those holes and hands can produce on a man's penis. If anyone doubts that, let me describe one more video from my research, one more video from the mainstream section of a store that carries adult product, where men rent and buy films to help them masturbate.

"A Cum Sucking Whore Named Kimberly" is a 2003 release from Anabolic Video Productions. The tape is a compilation of five scenes featuring Kimberly, taken from five other films produced by this company. The first scene is from "World Sex Tour #25," in which two men explain that this will be Kimberly's first anal scene and first d.p. Kimberly is French Canadian and speaks little or no English. At the end of the scene, when the men ejaculate into her mouth, she starts to gag, and the two men tell her (through a translator off screen) that she has to swallow the semen, which she does. Through the translator, they tell Kimberly to say, "Thank you for fucking me in Montreal." Kimberly says, "Thank you for fucking me in Montreal." The scene ends with the two men talking later about the experience. "We blew out her asshole," one says. This is how the film presents Kimberly's introduction to what she will be in pornography, what men want her to be.

The remaining scenes follow Kimberly through her "career" in pornography, finishing with "Gang Bang Girl #32." In this scene a frustrated football coach berates his players after practice, asking them whether they are "football players or fags." He says they will lose the game the next day, which he wouldn't mind if his players were men -- he just hates to lose with fags. He turns to the assistant coach and says, "prove to me they're not fags" before walking away. The proof will be in the 13 players having sex with Kimberly, one of the cheerleaders in the stands. She comes down to the field and engages in sex in a variety of different positions. As the men wait for their turn, they stand around her, masturbating to keep their erections, joking and laughing. At one point she is in a double-penetration with a third man's penis is in her mouth while she masturbates two other penises.

She is three holes and two hands.

Comic books by Milo Manara or films by Federico Fellini are one thing, and what passes for mainstream pornography are a very different thing.

Anyway, Robert Jenses also writes eloquently about "white privilege". Just like his papers about pornography are eye-opening to me as a heterosexual male, his papers about white privilege are equally eye-opening as a white European male. I highly recomment his writing.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 06:40:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Robert Jensen writes: ...People routinely assume that pornography is such a difficult and divisive issue because it's about sex. I think that's wrong. This culture struggles unsuccessfully with pornography because it is about men's cruelty to women, and the pleasure men sometimes take in that cruelty...
and
...In pornography, women are three holes and two hands....

snip

Jensen clearly doesn't know what pornography is. He is talking BS, or more precisely about the current hardcore film production by 'directors' who are - with all due respect - C grade film makers. Especially the American productions feature mostly sport fucking flics.

Pornography can be defined in one sentence: It is a sexual fairy tail for adults.

Voila'!

Fairy tails are about many things, about snow-white and the seven dwarfs (big noses - big penises), about young poor and ugly boys which make the princess kiss the cold, wet frog (penis) and become shiny princes, about young girls somewhat unconfortably sleeping on peas (pea - pisello - penis), about red caped girls who mistake bad wolfs for their grandmothers (why do you have such a long nose?), the abduction of kids and their torture in a house of sweets, etc. pp.

There are no more violent porn stories like children fairy tales. It all depends on how they are told.

The adult porn film industry suffers from the fact that the stories are told by bad playwrites and bad directors.

Btw; PP Pasolini made a good porn movie. The title is Salo'.

"The USA appears destined by fate to plague America with misery in the name of liberty." Simon Bolivar, Caracas, 1819

by Ritter on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 07:11:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I forgot to mention that the European porn fairy tales (Grimm Brothers) were de-authenticised by Disney. They tell the stories without the intrinsic sexual content. The cartoon caracters lack the prime and secondary sexual attributes. Mickey Mouse has no penis. DisneyWorld has created a sex free porn fairy tale. Another reason why America will not stand as an empire.

"The USA appears destined by fate to plague America with misery in the name of liberty." Simon Bolivar, Caracas, 1819
by Ritter on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 07:24:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Another reason why America will not stand as an empire.

and America "standing as an empire" would be a good thing?

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 08:17:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Look, the American harcore porn industry provides what the market demands crude, cruel, direct sex: certainly not art films by PP Passolini.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Dec 2nd, 2005 at 04:05:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
BTW, Bob Jensen has actually done onsite research in typical American porn stores in his own state and town.  I think he has a better idea of what actually-existing commercial pornography is than the average outside observer.  case in point:

"Blow Bang #4" was in the "mainstream" section of a local adult video store. For a research project on the content of contemporary mass-marketed pornography, I asked the folks who work there to help me pick out typical videos rented by the typical customer. [editor's emphasis] One of the 15 tapes I left with was "Blow Bang #4."

"Blow Bang #4" is: Eight different scenes in which a woman kneels in the middle of a group of three to eight men and performs oral sex on them. At the end of each scene, each of the men ejaculates onto the woman's face or into her mouth. To borrow from the description on the video box, the video consists of: "Dirty little bitches surrounded by hard throbbing cocks ... and they like it."

In one of these scenes, a young woman dressed as a cheerleader is surrounded by six men. For about seven minutes, "Dynamite" (the name she gives on tape) methodically moves from man to man while they offer insults that start with "you little cheerleading slut" and get uglier from there. For another minute and a half, she sits upside down on a couch, her head hanging over the edge, while men thrust into her mouth, causing her to gag. She strikes the pose of the bad girl to the end. "You like coming on my pretty little face, don't you," she says, as they ejaculate on her face and in her mouth for the final two minutes of the scene.

this is something that no one I know does in their own bedroom or kitchen.  nor do I know -- over a long life in which I have known many women friends well enough to talk about intimate matters -- even one who ever said to me that she had the slightest desire to allow a group of strange men to ejaculate on her face.  

this is, however, a patriarchal disciplinary practise of long standing -- known as bukkake in Japan where it was used as a public humiliation and punishment for women found guilty of adultery;  if you google for it you will find that it is a fetish with an astonishingly large "fan base" online -- hundreds of sites, videos, alleged "home movies", textbased fantasies, etc.  [now why, we ask ourselves, should thousands or millions of men be sexually fascinated and fixated on a practise originally calculated to shame and humiliate a woman for rebelling against male authority?  could this have anything to do with a panicky backlash against the advances in women's status in the industrialised nations during C20?]

yes, these are Z (let alone C) movies -- total drek.  but they are also a mainstay of the US porn industry, with millions of rentals per month.  (McDonalds food is also pretty darned awful, and it is still the most popular "restaurant" food in the US.)  as Jensen coolly notes, Even a cursory review of pornography reveals that great camera work is not a requirement for success. "Blow Bang #4" is one of 11,000 new hardcore pornographic videos released each year, one of 721 million tapes rented each year in a country where total pornographic video sales and rentals total about $4 billion annually.  (that's more cash flow than the "legit" film industry, btw -- so much for the idea that  the trade is "suppressed" in any practical way).

For many of the women who feel so defeated by knowing, the most distressing part doesn't seem to be simply learning what is in the videos but knowing that men gain pleasure from what is in the videos. They ask me, over and over, "Why do men like this? What do you guys get from this?" They want to know why the mostly male consumers spend an estimated $10 billion a year on pornography in the United States and $56 billion around the world.

It is an important question with, no doubt, complex answers. What does is say about our society when men will take home a tape like "Blow Bang #4" and watch it, and masturbate to it? What does it say about our society's conception of sexuality and masculinity that large numbers of men can find pleasure in watching a young woman gag while a penis is pushed into her throat followed by six men ejaculating on her face and in her mouth? Or that other men, who might find that scene too extreme, prefer to watch one man have sex with a woman that begins with tender words and ends with "Do you want me to fuck you in the ass?" and ejaculation on her breasts? What does it say that such a video, made for men to masturbate to, is considered classy and upscale?

I think it says masculinity in this culture is in trouble.

some bitter old cynics would say that masculinity in this culture is doing just great -- adhering to good ol' patriarchal values familiar for millennia -- and that it's women who are in trouble.

Prof. Jensen's freelance articles on the convenience-sex industry.  Author of books The Heart of Whiteness and Citizens of the Empire.  Professor of Journalism (mostly investigative, one suspects) at UT.  Articles on US politics, imperialism, corporate power, Bush regime and related topics

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Thu Dec 1st, 2005 at 09:12:18 PM EST
Thanks for hammering the point once more. Maybe Ritter will get it this time.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Dec 2nd, 2005 at 04:10:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series