I was reading along in Newsweek, and I got to a fascinating piece about Heidi Fleiss's new business venture.
It seems that she's moving to Nevada, where prostitution is legal, and starting a new brothel. This place is a discreet 80 miles from The Strip, and will be designed like a palace. Beyond the marble foyer, the castle will contain a high-end sex toy shop and a luxurious spa, in addition to secluded bungalows for hire.
What makes this so unique is that the prostitutes will be men, and the clientele will be women.
Two things are making me see red here:
- Apparently, this isn't currently legal. The statutes would need to be rewritten, because prostitutes are universally referred to as "she" in the current codes.
- Everyone, from conservative Christians to the Nevada Brothel Association, is ready to go to the mat to fight this venture.
Why? Because it's so offensive that women might choose to pay for sex, that it could bring down the whole legalized prostitution industry. The inference is that people will be so upset by the vision of women paying for sex, that they'll get rid of legalized prostitution rather than allow this to happen.
Fleiss plans to fight this on the grounds that it's discrimination against men who want to be prostitutes. That might work.
But let's be honest here, it's really discrimination against women. Because, God knows, only men want sex enough to pay for it. Women don't actually like sex, except maybe with our husbands once a week. Mostly, we have to be cajoled into it with diamonds and promises of pampering. The idea of women paying for sex upsets the whole virgin/whore applecart. And that just won't do.
5 comments:
I had heard of the new venture but did not know everyone was so up in arms about it....very interesting - and I love your post.
I knew she was planning to do this, but I had no idea the law didn't allow for men prostitutes.
I am simply dumbfounded. As if prostitution weren't already sexist enough. Now, only women can legally sell their bodies to men and the occassional woman?
I'm agree with you, this is a crock. (ignoring the other issues, of course)
Oh, good! I was afraid that some people would take that last paragraph literally. Heh. Where are my diamonds, eh? Pamper me! PAMPER ME NOW!
Clearly, I need sleep.
The statutes would need to be rewritten, because prostitutes are universally referred to as "she" in the current codes.
But... but... I thought everybody understood that, even if it says "she," it still applies to both women and men. I mean, isn't it obvious that the feminine pronoun subsumes the sense of the masculine?
That is absolutely the best thing I've read all day.
Post a Comment