I just wondered why you would have sex with someone you found "disgusting and vile". I had no idea that you weren't speaking from personal experience..

This argument is circular really. Of course you would not want to have sex with someone you found "disgusting and vile"--these are the kind of terms people use to describe their ex-spouses or rapists, not consensual partners.

I must say that I am filled with admiration for call girls who have sex with men who smoke, because this is something that I do find disgusting and vile in women, but I don't think there is anything inherently disgusting or vile about the human body per se.

I have, a few times, had sex (not for money, though) with women who were completely lacking in sexual attractiveness. The reason I did this was partly out of curiosity to see what it would be like, and partly because they wanted to, and I didn't want to turn them down because it seems mean to refuse someone who wants to have sex with you just because they don't look so good.

There was nothing repulsive about the experiences, because a human being is a human being, though there were some practical considerations. For example one woman's belly was so large that it made positions for sex difficult and her preference was for an alternate mode of intromission that does not appeal to me at all. Another women was so heavy that when she was on top I felt like I was being crushed by a truck.

So I can see that a woman who is being paid for sex, depending on the market segment she is targeting, may have to put up with certain inconveniences, but this is not necessarily traumatic and she may need to be assertive in defining what is and is not on the menu. But in my experience these things are negotiated in both paid and nonpaid relationships, so nothing new there.

I'm not in a position to look up statistics on prostitution at the moment, but have worked with a great many street prostitutes. The women I met ALWAYS had some sort of pimp higher up the chain from them. He was usually also a drug dealer and dealt in stolen merchandise (these three things almost always go together). The only women I met who did not have a pimp were those that were too poor (i.e. non-valuable). These were women on their last legs and frankly not long for the world, but they would usually team up with a male drug addict and "split the winnings". He provided pretty shaky protection, and she provided pretty shaky drug money. The amount of "oversight" provided by the pimp varied, but usually very little threat of physical violence was necessary. The women were so desperate for drugs that they would cut off their right hand if it would get them a big enough sack of heroin (but hey, you'd have no problem with that since it's "her right" to her body huh?)

As for what happens with "high class" call girls, I'm pretty ignorant. It's my understanding that that market is largely controlled by organized crime and that there is a large human trafficking element involved. The people I worked with were only involved with organized crime indirectly (aka there were a hell of a lot of middlemen).

I have no doubt that there are some girls in college that independently "work their way through school" by posting on craigslist or something along those lines, but I think they are few and far between.

----

As for your point about torture being "intrinsically wrong". What features make an act "intrinsically wrong"? My point was that even the most morally repugnant act can be framed in a way where it can be viewed as beneficial. I would argue that one has to carefully examine and weigh consequences of systems of behavior to determine whether they are right or wrong, rather than making random judgments and saying that one is "intrinsic" and the other is not.

might be thinking of noting that Tina says, “And you are wrong about prostitution--it demeans all women who are involved in it, even "high class" call girls--whatever that means. Until you have had sex with a man you find offensive or vile, but you must go on, you cannot appreciate this fact. You just can't.” and further says, “um---no, I wasn't talking about myself” and then asking, in some faux-sophisticated, misogynist fashion, “Is not Tina saying that she, herself, can not appreciate that prostitution demeans all women?” And I say onto you, frequenters of prostitutes, that you have forgotten that Tina is right, and that you are wrong. And that the inability to appreciate without experience, of which Tina so rightly speaks, is only lacking in those who persist in being wrong. And that the seeming paradox upon which you so gleefully seize is nothing more than a chimera, a sick illusion generated by your woman hating minds.

Kristen may not be a literal slave, but she can be self-hating and self-deluding and wrong. Just because someone says it does not make it so.

Glenn, I don't think you are an anarchist, really, but what you are arguing is coming dangerously close to it. So you disagree with every single law I listed?

These are the laws the people in the democracy of America have chosen to make. They are remarkably similar to other laws in other democracies with a few exceptions.

So you are saying we cannot make judgements about what other people may do, but you, Glenn Greenwald, alone, know what is best for Americans. And you can push your viewpoints on us and force us to live the way you want?

Funny how it doesn't work that way. Someone who would run on a platform of abolishing all the laws that you object to will never win an election in this country. You can call all your fellow Americans prudes if you want.

You sound like some relatives of mine who live out in the woods with their guns and they sit on the porch hugging their guns and talking about ways not to pay their taxes 'cause--gosh darn it--nobody has any right to tell them what to do! Gosh-darn busybody government and their intrusive laws!

And you know what? They are hyper-conservative AND they tend to like Jerry Falwell.

The circle closes. You're starting to sound like the very thing you decry. "Let us not become the evil that we deplore".

Be interested in your response.