The whore is despised by the hypocritical world because she has made a realistic assessment of her assets and does not have to rely on fraud to make a living. In an area of human relations where fraud is regular practice between the sexes, her honesty is regarded with a mocking wonder.

-Angela Carnter

----------------

as seen at "Who is IOZ".

http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/

Very clever! You did a good job of mischaracterizing other POVs in order to create your list. Well done.

Oh, Bamage, if you only knew.

OT ~[Don't worry about the lava-flows William. I've got a deal with mt. Vesusvius... it wont' blow again until Im' dead and long gone.

This should give me time to return to Sorrento ...O' Sorrento. What a place. I spent about 8 months in one of 'older' hotels on the cliffs overlooking the blue sea and Isle of Capri. *Roman tile, sleep late, breakfast in bed, spectacular views, and then sing with gypsy Kings all night throwing dollars on the floor. what a life*.] encrypted.

bah.

I am suggesting that the "pretty woman" myths of high end prostitution (fantasies) cloud the realities.

High end hookers get STDs. They aren't prettier and they don't smell nicer because she was paid more.

She has to pay emotional and psychological costs no matter how much money she earns.

According to studies, she is high risk for addiction because of her lifestyle.

Once she is addicted, she can easily slide down the scale and become that street walker that everyone thinks is so "different". A woman who worked with prostitutes in England about the time of those murders said the women she worked with were in her their 40s, having slid down the scale. When they were young, they were call girls and went on wonderful trips and screwed famous people and so on. Usually they were seduced into the lifestyle by one man who treated them like a princess (Jean Rhys writes about this too).

Point is, it all changes, doesn't it? And it does so in a few very short years.

So no, I'm not buying into it that a call girl is a completely different animal because for a short time, she makes more money.

The comparison to blacks was to indicate that no matter how abominable a practice is, someone can be found to defend it. Victims will defend it. Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? That was my point.

You have to look at the reality and decide for yourself.

I don't know how legalizing prostitution enters into the Spitzer story. I think drugs should be legal, myself, but they aren't legal, and if Spitzer had been caught shooting heroine I would still think he should resign. Fair? Maybe not, but he's not just a regular guy--he's the governor and a former prosecutor. He wouldn't have hesitated to ruin the lives of people who got caught doing the stuff he did.

The fact that other people have done worse (ie, Bush) without being called account doesn't seem like much of an argument either. Nothing would make me happier than seeing Bush frog-marched off to prison. But I don't think that the criminal justice system should grind to a halt because Bush still roams free.

One thing I do agree on is that there is way too much focus on the sex scandal and not the investigation that brought it about.

As for the happy hooker argument... My worst job ever was typing labels for eight hours per day for four dollars and eighty cents an hour. But I'd still rather do that than have sex with Eliot Spitzer.

All good people agree,

And all good people say,

All nice people, like Us, are We

And every one else is They.

--Rudyard Kipling

Have they mentioned for the 1 billionth time that Elliot Spitzer spent an estimated $80,000?

Have they mentioned, at all, that their own Bill O 'Reilly paid $20 million dollars to get out of felony charges on sexual harassment of a much younger employee while using a vibrator on himself while his wife and two small children were in the house and he was in the shower?

Didn't think so....

I am having a real hard time understanding how the current law helps women who are prostitutes. How does locking people up in jail form a method of helping them? If the goal was to end prostitution then setting up half-way houses and paying for vocational training would make sense not locking them up. Clearly the goal of prostitution laws has little to do with helping the women themselves. I think that supposed concern for the women involved in prostitution is mostly just a fig leaf for those who find all sex repulsive. Personally if a woman freely decides to exchange sex for money I don't see a problem. Most women exchange sex for some good or advantage and we all know it.

On another topic discussed here. Clearly this whole affair points to yet another political use of the Justice Dept. We are turning into the Soviet Union. Compared to that Elliots little perversions pale in comparision.

Once again, a perfect crystallization of a number of thoughts that were swirling around my head.

Ugh, not this crap again. Do you really still think you can get some mileage out of the meaningless It's-a-republic-not-a-democracy line?

Real quick, Ron: republics are democracies. You're making a distinction without a difference. The fact that there are constitutional limitations on a democracy doesn't mean that it's not a democracy. The fact that we elect people rather than voting on provisions doesn't mean it's not a democracy. "Democracy" is a broader term than includes the antiquated term "republic."

Furthermore, contemporary use of the term "democracy" implies constitutional limitations. That is because the term "democracy" is now short for "liberal democracy." Liberal democracies are composed of limited governments that have respect for individual rights.

So, please, please don't accuse me of not adhering to definitions when you choose to use out of date concepts.

I'm sorry you can't imagine other uses for a government. The rest of us can.