All posts in the topic Last prostitution business on Lake St. (Short link)
Summary
- There are 51 posts — by 23 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Carol Becker at 2008 Nov 10 04:34 UTC
Today's Strib had a story about Liqing Liu who was arrested for transporting
women across state lines for purposes of prostitution. The paper gave his
address as 515 E. Lake St., a well-known prostitution address (once called the
Royal Knight, now called Kim Y's).
This address has been a prostitution address for at least 30-40 years. So,
nachurly, I'm jumpin and shouting that the place must be boarded, hooray!
Right? Wrong. Tonight I drove by there and the neon open sign is still on.
When the cops closed 628 E. Lake St. (second last prostitution address on E.
Lake St.), the day they busted the person, the doors were closed and barred.
So, if anyone knows, what is the difference between the two?
While I don't know the details on those two in particular, I was
quickly brought up to speed on the history of prostitution on the
eastern end of Lake Street as I worked on renovating my office space.
My office is located in a former house of ill repute on Lake Street
not far from the river. The renovation process uncovered interesting
items including an escape hatch that had been boarded up many years
ago. A packet of money envelopes (alas - no money in them) dating
back to 1972 that fell from behind a wall we tore down. When pulling
down the ceiling, in addition to a bottle of holy water, I did find a
$10 check from an individual dating to the early 1970s. I often
wonder what would happen if I drove the check to the person at that
check's address to return it to them.
During the renovation, many neighbors came and shared stories of
their joint ongoing efforts to get rid of this particular
prostitution house. We have many thanks to give to those who worked
so hard to clean up this part of Lake St.
Tom Madden
Lowry Hill
Longfellow office
It’s simply a childish and immature attitude that pans prostitution. If the
prostitution police are going to whiskey bent and hell bound to arrest male and
female prostitutes the St. Paul jail is going to be overflowing by the end of
convention this coming year. The rich and powerful LOVE their carnal pleasures!
Do you really think the cops will arrest bigwigs that will be attending the GOP
convention? This, of course, will not happen.
We, as a society, LOVE our prostitutes!
Consider also that Anna Nicole Smith was nothing more than a prostitute. (We
couldn’t get enough of her!) Consider that models prostitute themselves on the
runways of America and we stand up and whistle as the women, some as young as
fifteen years old, strut their stuff for our general enjoyment! Jon Benoit
Ramsey was only five years old and she was already a prostitute in training!
Yep! She did all the things that the big girls did out on the runway…at the age
of seven!
What separates the prostitutes of Lake St. and the above is simply the amount
of money they make! We love our prostitutes so long as they’re successful at
it! Money talks and the prostitutes of Lake St. were simply trying to exist and
live the best life they could in a capitalistic system that shun and damm the
least among us. Simply these girls didn’t make enough money for you to respect
them, it would seem.
If the Twin Cities is ever going to expand and grow to be a world class city,
with all of its accompanying development, carnal pleasures are going to be a
part of it. In fact, a city will never be included in the category of “world
class” until it does include an avenue of varied carnal experiences. All world
class cities include this feature. You just can’t visit one without it. The
closing of this establishment and the prohibitions regarding other outlets for
public carnal enjoyment really is a step backwards for a society that wants to
idolize super advanced notions like, Block E.
Finally, I find it hypocritical to condemn prostitution, as if you are a
“pay-checker” under capitalism, you ALREADY ARE a prostitute! So you better run
right down to cop shop and turn your hypocritical self in; and only then will
you have a clear conscience in the morning!
Rowdy Russ Hanson.
The Truth in St. Paul.
Clearly, Mr. Hanson has not had to live with prostitution or he has a very high
tolerance level. The reality of the lives of prostitutes is very different for
those contending with street prostitution and sauna prostitution.
When you look outside and see a pimp slapping around a woman, it is more than
unpleasant.
When prostitutes are doing business behind your trash cans, it is just awful.
When drug dealers roam your block because the prostitutes want their products,
many times in direct exchange for sexual favors, commerce has taken an unhappy
turn.
When johns are cruising your neighborhood looking for females and trying to buy
sexual favors from your children, it is outrageous.
When johns, pimps, and prostitutes are using your recycle boxes to deposit
human feces, it really is sickening.
When you see woman who has been on the street for 20 years and looks like
something the cat dragged in, it's depressing.
When the prostitutes tell you that their children were gathered up by child
protection, you understand how miserable life can be.
When the prostitutes and their "dogs" (male thieves) cruise the cars parked all
around Lake St. looking for something to steal, you get furious.
When from your upstairs window, your mother looks out and observes the naked
sauna prostitutes running a 60' x 15' track as their only exercise, it is, to
day the least, disconcerting.
When the prostitutes sashay into your yard to solicit the men digging a garage
foundation, it causes homeowners' blood pressures to rise dangerously.
When prostitutes break into your van to do business or just sleep uninvited, it
is invasive, shall we say.
When a prostitute is "doing" a john, bent over the window of the john's car as
you leave your house for work in the morning, it really puts a cloud on the
day.
When you are picking up trash--used condoms, needles, and other detritous of
the prostitution business, you are disgusted.
When you watch pretty young teens get turned out and within two years look
as though they had been dragged through life by their hair, it's heart
breaking.
There is nothing about the lives of street walkers and sauna prostitutes which
is anything but misery cubed. When the police busted Kim Y's (once the Royal
Knight) those prostitutes had been brought to this country in bondage and
forced into prostitution. I suspect that the same conditions existed at the
Utopia "Health" Club, directly across from my dining room windows for the 30
years it did business. (Closed two summers ago by Phillips residents and
CCP/SAFE.)
One can be all airy fairy theoretical about the connections between prostitutes
and every other type of wage slave there is, but where the actual prostitution
takes place, there is no way to judge it as anything but a blot on the
escutcheon.
For all the people who worked to get prostitution off Lake St. (they were
mostly women, of course) the fact that society 'loves' prostitution cuts no
ice. The same prostitutes who walk our streets or who are held hostage in
saunas live in the neighborhoods fronting Lake St. and every one in the
environment has to deal with the consequences. It gets old.
Nice response Wizard. You gave some very real ways in which illegal
prostitution negatively impacts the prostitutes and the people who live around
where they "do business". At the 3PAC meetings there is a prosecutor (either
Minneapolis or hennepin county, i forget which) named Paula who does most of
the prosecution of prostitution related cases. I will ask her about your
question at the next 3PAC meeting i am able to attend(fourth Monday of the
month at 6:30 at the 3rd precinct building on Lake and Minnehaha). One of my
Powderhorn neighbors recently followed a John after his interfacing (the John,
not my neighbor) with a prostitute. My neighbor followed the John until he
parked his car (not far, just South in the Bancroft neighborhood) and my
neighbor went up to him and asked him to stop Johnning and gave him a few
examples of how the Johnning activity has affected him (again, my neighbor, not
the John). Turns out this john is married with two young kids. His reaction
was to appear completely embarrassed and to run into an apartment building.
These Johns are an interesting lot. I have seen the prostitutes that frequent
Lake street, 31st street, etc, and they all pretty much look haggard and spent.
Who are these guys who want to get it on with these women? How can one be so
desperate or so willing to degrade themselves, their families, and the
prostitutes. It just makes no sense to me. I understand how a woman can get to
a place in life where she begins to sell herself, i just don't understand the
customers.
Recently we have seen more ho'in around 34th and 35th and Chicago. We started
using brown paper bags to put our recycling in years ago, so i guess at least i
don't have to worry about feces in the recycling containers...
I also think it’s hypocritical for Nevada to allow prostitution and to disallow
everywhere else. It’s a well run tax paying adult venue for years in Nevada and
we don’t see calamities out there.
I see the industry as one of voluntary effect and highly temporary for most of
the vendors. It’s revolving door employment as older workers are really not
that much in demand. In a LEGAL setting, most independent contractors work to
amass some money that allows them entrance to other types of employment and
lifestyles. It also can be used to bolster a temporary tight household cash
flow.
In fact, because industries of this sort (adult bookstores and arcades,
theatres and bathhouses, are “fast buck” generators, the local cash strapped
governments should own and operate them. This approach would keep out organized
crime as well as the cops but would add another enjoyable venue that allows
adults to be…adults. We have plenty of venues that are particularly designed
for kids…to participate as kids. We don’t have anything for adults to
participate with each other as adults. We do have strip clubs but they are
totally non-participatory.
Finally, all those mentioned worst case scenarios do and can exist because
there are no LEGAL venues and outlets. When you ban and disallow, the chickens
…will come home to roost. This the natural result. Public annoymus encounters
have always been with mankind and will continue. Maintaining a closed attitude
will only make the encounters more dark, dirty and dangerous, not to mention
disconcerting to the casual on-looking non-participants.
Rowdy Russ Hanson.
The Truth in St. Paul.
Mr. Hanson's screed is one to justify government run prostitution, which, in
the puritan environment which describes the US of A, is a most unlikely
scenario to ever come about.
To bolster the argument with "We don’t have anything for adults to
participate with each other as adults," is not true. We have assorted venues
where adults can and do participate with each other: gyms, bars, restaurants,
parks, lakes, rivers, zoos, convention centers, houses, etc.
Since the preponderance of users of prostitution are men, it would be incumbent
upon them to mount the organized advocacy to "redress" such a "grievance."
It is the case that the preponderance of those used in prostitution are
children and women. I know of no argument which justifies using children and
women (or young men and teen boys) for anonymous sex. The argument that
prostitution can augment ones budget is preposterous when much less dangerous
and socially acceptable jobs are there to be had.
On Lake St. many, many people collectively decided that the present conditions
which describe prostitution as we have witnessed it and have been forced to
deal with it are not conditions we are willing to put up with anymore.
The City Council has issued an ordinance that, once a house of prostitution is
closed, it can never again be opened in a neighborhood and the council has
concomitantly designated a "red zone" where such behaviors can take place.
(It's downtown somewhere, but I'm not sure exactly where.)
It isn't a happy thought to me, but I would be willing to entertain the notion
that the state take over both prostitution and drug dealing, keeping minors
well away from being used in such a way. However, no politician can get elected
on such a platform. Forgeddaboudit!
From a moral and health viewpoint, there is no justification for using children
or adults for anonymous sex. Given the world we live in, one where prostitution
is illegal, the situation can only be described as fraught with abuse. That
abuse has been demonstrated over and over, which is why the last prostitution
business on Lake St. was closed down. Yippee!!
It is not at all hypocritical for us to have worked to close the prostitution
businesses on Lake St. We have witnessed all the abuses that prostitution
entails, we have witnessed all the problems that we have had to cope with
because of prostitution, and we, working together, have decided to, if not get
rid of prostitution (which we fairly certain cannot be done in our society), at
least move it out of our neighborhoods.
All the changes that have been made and are being made on Lake St. have
certainly put a dent in the prostitution that was one of the plagues we had to
contend with. Those changes also put some crimpers in the street drug trade. I
am happy with those changes, as are most of my close neighbors.
Unless The Truth in St. Paul, where Mr. Hanson lives, is a great deal different
from The Truth on Lake St., St. Paul is also trying to get rid of prostitution
businesses. I think they raided and closed down a sauna pimp named Rebecca
something-or-other a decade or more ago. They also closed a "flower shop" (a
front for prostitution) on University Av. some 30 or more years ago for the
same reason. Good for St. Paul.
People are always going to want sex. Some will pay cash for it. Making it legal
would cut down on most of the negativity you guys object to. State ownership is
an even better idea. Prostitution can be a great moneymaker for the state and
we'd have less harping about taxes....
John Wilson
Whittier
John Wilson: "People are always going to want sex. Some will pay cash for it."
People always want to murder and steal, too.
Whether you make prostitution legal or not, there will always be men willing to
abuse children, no matter the cost. The abuse of children cannot be separated
out from prostitution. That's only one of the primary reasons for opposing
legalizing prostitution.
WMarks, Central
At 04:25 PM 1/10/2008, wizard marks wrote:
>John Wilson: "People are always going to want sex. Some will pay cash for it."
>
>People always want to murder and steal, too.
>
>Whether you make prostitution legal or not, there will always be men
>willing to abuse children, no matter the cost. The abuse of children
>cannot be separated out from prostitution. That's only one of the
>primary reasons for opposing legalizing prostitution.
>
>WMarks, Central
Wouldn't separation of child abuse from adult prostitution be a
reason for legalization of the latter?
When everything is under the table wouldn't children be more at risk
than in a legalized or decriminalized situation for adult prostitituion?
Maybe prostitution is never completely a "victimless crime", but much
(most?) prostitution is surely entered into far more willingly than
being a murder or assault victim... its not really a fair comparison.
Mike Jensvold
East Isles
wizard marks wrote:
> Whether you make prostitution legal or not, there will always be men willing
to abuse children, no matter the cost. The abuse of children cannot be
separated out from prostitution. That's only one of the primary reasons for
opposing legalizing prostitution.
>
Mark Anderson:
You forgot about women also abusing children, but otherwise your first
sentence is right.
But the second and third sentences are completely ridiculous claims.
Legalizing prostitution would no doubt save many underage girls that are
now stuck in the system because prostitution is entirely underground.
Is there support in Minneapolis for legalizing prostitution? There
hasn't been much discussion about that, unlike periodic discussions of
legalizing drugs. It would be a beneficial change for the city. Is
prostitution legalization something that could be done in the city, or
is it a state law? I suppose the cops could just stop arresting people,
and maybe work on real crimes. I hear that we are short of cops here.
Mark V Anderson
Bancroft
> ... its not really a fair comparison.
Nor is it fair to say that it's only men who abuse children. Anyone who reads
the news often enough will hear something of women abusing children, and young
adults as well; and lets not even forget spousal abuse.
Any legal document allowing prostitution would certainly say much more than
"Hey Guys, let's make this legal" if it was going to get through any governing
body. There would certainly be chances to define who is legally able to sell
sexual services. I realize many people would then like to call up discussion
of age of consent, saying that everything depends on a legal definition of an
adult, but despite the fact that this boundary is hazy, we have plenty of laws
that prohibit people from doing things in a heavily age-based manner. Why not
just use pre-existing definitions? If, as an 18 year old, you are mentally
capable of buying tobacco, porn, living on your own, taking out loans, buying
license plates, and gambling or voting, you're probably capable of deciding
what else you want to do with your body. If that's not enough, why not define
a legal age of prostitution at 21, where you become legally able to buy alcohol
and own firearms? If the government will give you all the tools to do more
damage, why is prostitution such a no-no?
A government legalizing prostitution will also (hopefully) be providing for a
system of registration for prostitutes that requires health checks, as well as
educating prostitutes and anyone involved with the trade to encourage them to
take care of their sexual health. I mean, it's either this, or we could just
keep prostitution illegal, and let STDs and dangerous situations proliferate.
This won't change the situation with child abuse, but maybe it would give
investigators check up on things.
Ryan Johnson
CARAG
94% of a women in prostitution were sexually abused as children, most often by
male relatives, overwhelmingly by males. Sexual abuse is not about sex, it's
about the ability to exercise power over the victim.
Sexual abuse of girl children creates female prostitutes, most of whom enter
the prostitution trade while still minors. They do not enter into prostitution
willingly, but enter it after the theft of their person as an autonomous human
being. (That is what rape and sexual abuse do to the victims.)
After the child is victimized--without any assistance to recover from the abuse
wizard marks wrote:
> 94% of a women in prostitution were sexually abused as children, most often
by male relatives, overwhelmingly by males. Sexual abuse is not about sex, it's
about the ability to exercise power over the victim.
>
> Sexual abuse of girl children creates female prostitutes, most of whom enter
the prostitution trade while still minors. They do not enter into prostitution
willingly, but enter it after the theft of their person as an autonomous human
being. (That is what rape and sexual abuse do to the victims.)
>
> After the child is victimized--without any assistance to recover from the
abuse--does the victim ever enter into prostitution willingly? Prostitution
repeatedly re-victimizes.
>
> Legalizing prostitution means we legalize the continued sexual abuse of
chronologically adult females. I seriously question that any of them are ever
emotionally adult. Those wounds inflicted as children have not been healed,
just crusted over with scab.
>
> Adult women who have a sense of themselves as autonomous human beings are
very unlikely to enter into prostitution voluntarily. Perhaps, if such were
possible, it would be the 6% of prostitutes who were not sexually abused as
children.
>
> Women do sexually abuse children, but it is much more subtle than rape. It is
usually by taking away the child's right to any boundaries and/or pimping their
own children. I haven't seen any current research on this, so I cannot give any
numbers. The fact that the information isn't disseminated very widely, if at
all, means there is no research going on, or that the percentages of female
sexual abuse of children are very minute.
>
>
Mark Anderson:
I believe that most of the claims above are untrue. Some citations for
these claims would be helpful.
I seriously doubt that prosititutes or their clientele are concerned about
health issues and whether or not their vaccination records are up to date. Why
else would they be having sex with strangers? Sex with a stranger is free - why
don't the clients just hit a ladies night at a bar sometime after midnight and
save their money, or better yet, go to the john (no pun intendedd) at
Minneapolis/St. Paul airport? If prostitution were legalized it would likely
become unaffordable to most consumers because there would likely be taxes,
user-fees and necessary adjustments to the gross national product to consider.
Did anyone recently read the story about the man in Poland who visited a
brothel and discovered his wife was working there? He apparently became
outraged and they're getting a divorce. No mention of his reasons for being
there...the biggest irony is that men seem to be the most vocal proponents for
legalizing it. I don't hear of many lobbyist hooker groups at the
legislature...but then they're probably behind closed doors in "committee".
Jill Laxen
Cleveland
> Is there support in Minneapolis for legalizing prostitution? There
> hasn't been much discussion about that, unlike periodic discussions of
> legalizing drugs.
I strongly support legalizing all victimless consensual crimes (and
regulating and licensing them as appropriate). I'm thinking primarily of
drugs and prostitution but I'm sure there are a lot of other things that fit
into this basket. Euthanasia would fit here as well.
Since most of the posts that have supported the concept of legalization have
been from men, I'd like to add this to the mix: As we were discussing some
other political issues last night, I asked my s/o what she thought on this
topic. Her response was that she could only support legalizing some drugs
but that prostitution should definitely be legal.
As far as child abuse goes, it is absolutely clear to me that legalization
and regulation would make it less likely, not more likely - both on the
supply and demand end. A major argument for the legalization of both drugs
and prostitution is that it would significantly disrupt the criminal
victimization of both clients and providers in these industries.
I am, of course, assuming that any legalization of prostitution would
require anyone in the business to be above the age of consent, whatever that
is decided to be at the time.
- phaedrus (j.goray), 3-6, earth.
A "screed" I guess - because it is apt to be both long and possibly
opinionated
What Wizard writes about the "94%" is probably not really relevant. What is
relevant is that the vast majority of women engaging in prostitution were
sexually abused. That was true in the seventies, when I doing such research,
and I am sure it is still true. I know of NO research ever done that showed
this not to be the case.
Of course not all women who are sexually abused become prostitutes. There
just would not be room for them all. Sadly, the same research indicated that
as much as 30% of ALL women are sexually abused. This was research done in
Minneapolis, but studies around the country seem to support it.
Another fallacy is that ALL people who are sexually abused have their lives
destroyed by that abuse. That also is not true. Granted that almost all of us
so abused are heavily impacted by that abuse, but some of us do heal. Maybe not
completely, but enough to get on with our lives.
It is also true that the vast majority of abusers were themselves abused.
Though it is again not true that most abused children do not themselves become
abusers. Though it certainly happens often enough to keep the "crop" growing.
Sometime ago I started a work I called the "Demon Seed" to address the issue.
It looked at a family with four generations of abusers and how the crop of
abuse was planted each generation by the one before it.
Prostitution may not be evil in some societies, but it certainly is in our
own uptight society of Minneapolis. Would legalizing it change that? It would
probably start.
The sad thing is that prostitution has become pretty much institutionalized
"Child abuse" itself in Minneapolis. With the closing down of all "winked" at
business what is left is the children selling their bodies on the street for
drugs. When was the last time a "John" was arrested and prosecuted as a
"Criminal Sex Offender" for having consensual sex with a minor prostitute? The
law does not say anything about if she or he is doing it for money. It simply
makes it illegal to have sex with a minor.
Prostitution is also a class thing. High class sales of sex are almost never
even noticed. Women or guys who make weekly or monthly arrangements are not
considered prostitutes for some reason. I guess if you are able to "keep"
someone for a longer period of time it just is not the same.
Perhaps we should have a lie detector for young attractive people marrying
wealthy older people. To insure they love the person and are not doing it for
the money. Could this be nothing more than selling sex and access to a good
looking body on a long term basis for simply larger amounts of money?
What seems to be true is that society does not seem to care about the sale of
sex, and even smiles at it, as long as it is not on the street corner or not in
a sleazy massage parlor on "MY" block. To be truthful, I guess I also engage
in that class-ism "NIMBY" myself. It does seem to me that the present laws as
enforced on prostitution are not much different than many of the ones making
homelessness illegal. Not meant to stop it, just to make the more affluent
more comfortable in their self righteousness, and keep them the heck off my
block.
Prostitution by young girls and boys selling themselves for drugs has NOT
gone down because the "Parlors" have been closed down. In fact it is far more
prevalent. So one has to ask themselves, if the legal establishment has not
actually contributed to the "aggravated child abuse" that has replaced it.
Adult people can make decisions of their own (even some of us damaged people),
I am worried about the children who are condemned to the continuing abuse that
our laws and society seem to allow and even create the possibility of.
Have the present laws and government actions reduced the number of abused
children selling their bodies on street corners? Have the laws on the
consumption of hemp caused a reduction in drug use? Is the consumption of
untaxed Corn Liquor (higher because the growing of corn is legal? If not
perhaps we should revisit those laws and possibly change them to be more
rationale. I think there is more grass smoked in Minneapolis than there is
corn "shine" drunk.
Jim Graham,
Ventura Village
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without
accepting it."
Is there anything else in Minneapolis (or anywhere for that matter) that is legal to give away for free, but illegal to sell. Just curious. It has always been the mysterious irony of this issue. KR 'Flash' Schiebel St. Paul (Midway) http://centrisity.com
"Is there anything else in Minneapolis (or anywhere for that matter) that is
legal to give away for free, but illegal to sell."
But it's NOT LEGAL to give sex away for free (except between married partners).
Look up the Minnesota Fornication Law (609.34).
So I did look it up:
609.34 FORNICATION.
When any man and single woman have sexual intercourse with each other, each is
guilty of fornication, which is a misdemeanor.
History: 1967 c 507 s 11; 1971 c 23 s 43
That means it's ok for _married_ women to have sexual intercourse with anyone
they choose. Wonderful -- the law encourages adultery.
I'm not sure Minneapolis is ready for legalized prostitution. It's legal in
quite a number of major cities elsewhere in the world to no obvious detriment
(Amsterdam, Berlin, etc.). But it would take some serious study to really
determine if it's better or worse than only illicit prostitution. Generally I
lean towards regulating such behaviors (drinking, smoking, non-addictive drug
usage) rather than wasting money trying to squeeze them out of existence
unsuccessfully and providing a market for organized crime (prohibition, war on
drugs, prostitution).
Flash wrote:
> Is there anything else in Minneapolis (or anywhere for that matter) that is
> legal to give away for free, but illegal to sell. Just curious. It has
> always been the mysterious irony of this issue.
>
>
Mark Anderson:
1) Votes, whether by citizens or by elected officials (as Dean Zimmerman
found out).
2) One's own body parts.
All I can think of for now, but I bet there are more. We live in a
highly regulated society, so just about everything is illegal somewhere
if you look hard enough.
Jim Graham: "Another fallacy is that ALL people who are sexually abused have
their lives destroyed by that abuse." I think Jim has conflated sexual
abuse/rape and sexual abuse of a child. 94% of prostituted women were sexually
abused as children. While many people who are victims of child sexual abuse get
help to overcome the hurt they have endured (I don't necessarily mean
psychological therapy), many go untreated. I maintain that those whose sexual
abuse is untreated and who do not discover any way out of that nightmare, are
those most likely to get trapped in systems of prostitution. A clinical
psychologist friend of mine calls that "being zombified." Jim also avers that
"With the closing down of all "winked" at business what is left is the children
selling their bodies on the street for drugs." Alas, they are not all closed
down. The ones on Lake St. are closed down, but these saunas/health clubs/chat
rooms are like dragon's teeth, slap one down, it crops up elsewhere. The
children on the street selling their bodies for drugs (known locally as
'strawberries') are another strata of the vast system of prostitution. For
females caught in this system, not only does the prostitution trap them, but
the whole culture sets up females to accede to being prostituted. 'Be nice,
smile, wear this to be in style, pink blankets, buttons and bows, etc.' are all
cultural constraints that prepare females to violate their own right to
boundaries and cooperate in setting themselves up for prostitution. Males, the
vast majority of them, defend the right to whorehouses, whether they use them
or not. They are defending a male privilege to do so. It is no different from
the Lord of the Manor, under feudalism claiming the right to "bed" any female
among all the people living on his lands whom his considers as his property.
But to return to the point of this thread, prostitution saunas on Lake St.,
from the date SSB engineered getting Ferras Alexander off the corner of Lake
and Chicago (circa 1979-80?), has been a long, very long, progression. Closing
Alexander's bookstores, his daughter's whoopie video store (SE corner Park and
Lake), and moving all the commercial prostitution venues off Lake St., has been
a 30+ year task participated in by the state, county, city, feds, police, and
residents. It has literally been like pushing a boulder uphill with our noses.
In empires like ours property is the Great Googa Mooga tenet of our real
religion. We came to this country to take over and that's how we did it. Ask
the Indians. It is worth recognizing that police of whatever jurisdiction, have
closed the very last of those prostitution health club/saunas. It's a
milestone! One phase of the work of reclaiming Lake St. for slightly upscale
business is done. Hooray for our side. Rah, rah, rah! Did we erase prostitution
in the bargain? What, are you daft? Erasing prostitution is like trying to
refinish the oak floor in a ballroom with a toothbrush. WMarks, Central
Everyone agrees that getting "the french business" out of
neighborhoods is a good thing.
It's not true that most men defend it. Most men, as well as most
women, are intellectually dishonest with themselves and with others
on the subject because its an extremely difficult one to discuss.
There is an innate human nature that defines rough
boundaries. Within that there is a wide range of behavior in all
aspects of life.
The prohibitionist attitude on the surface seems to be morally
superior. But at its core it suggests that: if we don't completely
stop X behavior, it will devour us.
The permissive attitude, while on the surface hedonistic, even
nihilistic, I think is actually the more hopeful one. It
acknowledges the dark side of human nature, attempts to avert the
worst harm, and trusts that, for example, most people will choose
more fulfilling, committed relationships, most of the time, and most
people will prefer reality, most of the time, to life in a chemical
haze. Those that do not will be little deterred by the law.
Mike Jensvold
East Isles
Wouldn't it be interesting to know what percentage of purchasers of
prostitution come from each of the 'attitudes' Michael presents to us?
My own bet would be a 50/50 split or leaning toward the 'prohibitionist'
fold. Any others want to place a bet on this?
It far too often seems that those who scream the loudest on a behavior
are the guiltiest of participation in that behavior. Think the preacher
in Colorado or the Senator from Idaho. Even Michelle Bachman sees fit
to hide out in bushes at gay rallies at the capitol (not saying she's
lesbian, just that its odd behavior for someone that spouts off about
proper behavior so much).
Of course, I know all to well that I'm a rather liberal nut to many
persons.
Ron Leurquin
Nokomis East
Michael wrote:
Everyone agrees that getting "the french business" out of neighborhoods
is a good thing.
It's not true that most men defend it. Most men, as well as most women,
are intellectually dishonest with themselves and with others on the
subject because its an extremely difficult one to discuss.
There is an innate human nature that defines rough boundaries. Within
that there is a wide range of behavior in all aspects of life.
The prohibitionist attitude on the surface seems to be morally superior.
But at its core it suggests that: if we don't completely stop X
behavior, it will devour us.
The permissive attitude, while on the surface hedonistic, even
nihilistic, I think is actually the more hopeful one. It acknowledges
the dark side of human nature, attempts to avert the worst harm, and
trusts that, for example, most people will choose more fulfilling,
committed relationships, most of the time, and most people will prefer
reality, most of the time, to life in a chemical haze. Those that do
not will be little deterred by the law.
Mike Jensvold
East Isles
WIZARD MARKS wrote:
> Jim Graham: "Another fallacy is that ALL people who are sexually abused have
their lives destroyed by that abuse." I think Jim has conflated sexual
abuse/rape and sexual abuse of a child. 94% of prostituted women were sexually
abused as children. While many people who are victims of child sexual abuse get
help to overcome the hurt they have endured (I don't necessarily mean
psychological therapy), many go untreated. I maintain that those whose sexual
abuse is untreated and who do not discover any way out of that nightmare, are
those most likely to get trapped in systems of prostitution. A clinical
psychologist friend of mine calls that "being zombified." Jim also avers that
"With the closing down of all "winked" at business what is left is the children
selling their bodies on the street for drugs." Alas, they are not all closed
down. The ones on Lake St. are closed down, but these saunas/health clubs/chat
rooms are like dragon's teeth, slap one down, it crops up elsewhere. T
> he children on the street selling their bodies for drugs (known locally as
'strawberries') are another strata of the vast system of prostitution. For
females caught in this system, not only does the prostitution trap them, but
the whole culture sets up females to accede to being prostituted. 'Be nice,
smile, wear this to be in style, pink blankets, buttons and bows, etc.' are all
cultural constraints that prepare females to violate their own right to
boundaries and cooperate in setting themselves up for prostitution. Males, the
vast majority of them, defend the right to whorehouses, whether they use them
or not. They are defending a male privilege to do so. It is no different from
the Lord of the Manor, under feudalism claiming the right to "bed" any female
among all the people living on his lands whom his considers as his property.
But to return to the point of this thread, prostitution saunas on Lake St.,
from the date SSB engineered getting Ferras Alexander off the corner
> of Lake and Chicago (circa 1979-80?), has been a long, very long,
progression. Closing Alexander's bookstores, his daughter's whoopie video store
(SE corner Park and Lake), and moving all the commercial prostitution venues
off Lake St., has been a 30+ year task participated in by the state, county,
city, feds, police, and residents. It has literally been like pushing a
boulder uphill with our noses. In empires like ours property is the Great
Googa Mooga tenet of our real religion. We came to this country to take over
and that's how we did it. Ask the Indians. It is worth recognizing that police
of whatever jurisdiction, have closed the very last of those prostitution
health club/saunas. It's a milestone! One phase of the work of reclaiming Lake
St. for slightly upscale business is done. Hooray for our side. Rah, rah, rah!
Did we erase prostitution in the bargain? What, are you daft? Erasing
prostitution is like trying to refinish the oak floor in a ballroom with a
toothb
> rush.
Mark Anderson:
Does this have anything to do with whether or not prostitution should be
legalized? It's pretty obvious that you believe it to be a BAD thing,
Wizard, but do you have any opinion on legalization?
So far I haven't seen anyone that thinks it should stay illegal. Maybe
this is a slam dunk win for any Mpls official to stop this crazy law?
It looks like there may be some happy endings being dealt out of a salon on E
Lake. Shoot me an email if you'd like evidence.
Mike Jensvold: "The prohibitionist attitude on the surface seems to be
morallysuperior. But at its core it suggests that: if we don't completely stop
X behavior, it will devour us." No, you are reinterpreting what I've said. Six
percent percent of female prostitutes (usually those working for the expensive
out call services) enter into prostitution as functioning adults, both
physically and emotionally. The other 94% of prostituted women (those who were
sexually abused as children, but had no help to recover from those wounds) are
emotionally retarded concerning issues of adult sexuality. Ergo, a male's
chances of paying for sex with a functioning adult prostitute are 16 to 1
against that happening. For the 94% of prostituted women, a male is actually
engaging in sex with a child. Therefore, when men are using any of the 94% of
prostitutes, they are, by that act, revictimizing an unrecovered victim of
child sexual abuse. Know that when you pay for prostitutes' attention, you are
paying to re-victimize a child-woman. Concomitant with that, you may have
gotten hold of a prostitute who is tired of being victimized and has enough
gumption to 'whup your sorry a**' for the insult. Does not happen all that
often, of course, sometimes the prostitutes steal your wallet, your car, or
give you some venereal disease, gratis, no extra charge. You could look on
those events as 'revenge of the lawn' actions. The other thing I've said is
that "customers" can no longer use store front commercial prostitution services
on Lake St. because they are all closed after 30+ years of work on many
people's parts. Whoopee! I was sick of looking at the Utopia East out my
kitchen and dining room windows. Maybe someone will rent that building, put a
new face on it, and help people with their tax returns in Spanish or Arabic. Or
fix bicycles. Prostitution will probably never get wiped out so long as people
lead with the lizard brain. We are predatory by nature as a species. But it
does not keep us from recognizing what we do with different types of our
predation. We've outlawed canniblism, murder, etc. for that reason. It hasn't
stopped any of those behaviors, but it has slowed down some of them.
The cost to us, the taxpayers, is enormous. How many prostitutes have their
children taken away from them. One prostituted woman I know had her five
children taken by the state/county. If they are kept in orphanages, it cost to
raise them and school them. If they are fostered out, the foster parent gets
over $900/mo. to keep each child. I doubt the prostituted women are paying
taxes. When they get sick, someone pays the costs, they don't have the money.
I've never met a prostituted woman who had any money. (Except Rebecca Rand, but
she was a sauna pimp.) If she gets AIDS, that costs three fortunes. Prostituted
women don't have insurance.
Legalizing prostitution means legalizing the right to sexually abuse women and
children and paying the cost of the damage.
WMarks, Central
I'd have usually chimed in on a thread like this before now, but I am
weary of the routine reaction.
I think the aim for most proposing to legalize these activities is to
shift the proportion of the damaged women and children whom Wizard is
talking of to those with their eyes open to what they are engaged in.
Certainly if legalizing the business will not do this by moving would
be pimps, johns, and whores from the shadows of society to the
limelight to deal with all the associated consequences of the
business, then it is a bad idea. Will the pickup trucks and SUVs from
the suburbs stop prowling E. Lake Street if we legalize the activity
and regulate it so that neighborhood folks are no longer plagued with
the problems of 'poor business practices' and 'clueless
customers' (for lack of better descriptors).
I don't know that things will improve with legalization, but I do
know that most police departments are fighting losing battles most of
the time in attempting to control the illegal activities. If we are
to protect and serve the general public who do not engage in most
vices like drugs and prostitution, then it makes sense to isolate
those vices and manage the activities as best we can rather than
drive it beyond all control. If we are to help the victims of abuse
whom Wizard wishes to protect, then we must be able to reach them; in
that context law enforcement against vice makes no sense, because
these folks need some help with economics, education, and therapy for
their problems and not a police officer throwing them in jail.
Wouldn't state law have to be changed to accomplish legalization?
Seems like this may be a larger issue and not local and perhaps
that's why I haven't rushed in to talk about one of my banner topics.
Just to attempt to stay local, however, I will say that I agree that
we will continue to see these people doing what they do as long as we
deal with them as we have dealt with them for so long, as criminals
instead of potentially productive members of society.
WIZARD MARKS wrote:
> Legalizing prostitution means legalizing the right to sexually abuse women
and children and paying the cost of the damage.
>
Mark Anderson:
I disagree that prostitution amounts to sexual abuse. But then I
believe that adults have the right to do what they want with their own
bodies. Perhaps others believe that those sexually abused forfeit this
right? Of course most of the numbers and analysis concerning
prostitution and abuse are presumably highly exaggerated, since not one
bit of evidence has been provided.
If prostitutes are forced into the profession, so it is no longer their
decision to be in the business, then legalization has gotta make it
easier for them to escape.
As far as state law versus city law, it probably is Minnesota law that
controls here. But isn't it possible for Minneapolis to just stop using
police resources to enforce the law? Even if it isn't possible to stop
all enforcement, the city certainly has the right to put fewer resources
into enforcement.
I believe that many of the problems you list are due, in part, to the
current laws against prostitution.
You say that the majority of women currently entering into
prostitution were sexually abused as children and have had no help
coping with that abuse. You may well be right. It is hard to get
good demographics on criminal industries. My sense is that you may be
overstating the numbers but even if its 25%/75% that's not OK.
I wish I could recall the source on this, but a man who I was talking
to was telling me about his wife's job which was to find young girls
who had been abused and coerced into prostitution and intervene.
According to them, one source of prostitutes on the streets of
Minneapolis are kids who left home (for a wide variety of reasons,
some of which were probably abuse but others likely weren't) and got a
bus ticket into the city.
Being kids, they often don't have much when they get here. There's a
certain type of scum who waits at the bus station for these kids.
Acts nice to them. Gives them food, a place to stay, assures them
that their parents are bad and that they can crash here for as long as
they like and have the freedom they were craving. Then, they maybe
get them drunk or get them high. Coerce or encourage them into sex
and take pictures. After this, they tell the kids, "You can never go
home, your family wouldn't accept you back now that you've done this".
They make these kids feel dirty, tainted, worthless and trapped.
They are practiced and experienced at this psychological conditioning
and they are good at it. Within 4 - 8 months, the pimp's got a new
prostitute.
There are some folks in the world that shouldn't have to wait to get
to hell to burn.
Do you really think this dynamic would be nearly as likely to exist if
prostitution were legal and licensed? I tend to be hesitant about
over licensing, but some licensing is good and prostitution is a good
prospect for it if for no other reason than to make sure this kind of
stuff doesn't happen.
You argue about intervention - don't you think that having
prostitution legalized and licensed gives much more opportunity for
intervention? I personally think that licensing should involve
regular health screenings and see no reason why, especially for people
applying for new licenses, this shouldn't involve some sort of
discussion with a mental health counselor.
I'd mentioned that I consider euthanasia to be a related issue. It
could easily be considered appropriate that as a prelude to the doctor
giving a prescription for something lethal, the candidate be required
to go through some work with a counselor to be sure this was really
what the person wanted. I think for men and women going into
prostitution, a similar screening session could be appropriate. Do
you know what you're getting into? Is this really what you want to
do? Are you fully aware of the physical and psychological risks?
When people go into dangerous careers, we require that they be
informed of the risks. This should also be a part of licensing. Yes,
all this means that licensed prostitutes are likely to be a bit more
expensive than black market ones but I would be amazed if the vast
majority of clients wouldn't be willing to pay the premium, if for no
other reason than less fear of taking AIDS or other nasties home with
them.
You talked about prostitutes having their kids taken away from them.
Don't you think this might have something to do with the fact that
prostitution is illegal?
There's also something else that has stuck with me for a long time:
When I was young, I was at my parents house in southern Wisconsin
listening to NPR. They were talking about child prostitutes in
Minneapolis and stated that boys who prostituted themselves on the
streets of Minneapolis had an average lifespan of 2 years. Now, this
was a long time ago. I don't know if it was accurate then or if it is
accurate now, but it nailed me pretty hard. They were talking about
kids my age, many of whom would be dead in two years.
Legalizing prostitution would go a long ways towards ending this dynamic.
Right now there is financial and sexual incentive to the rampant child
abuse that occurs around black market prostitution. Legalizing
prostitution would, in a large part, remove this incentive.
To my knowledge, in places where prostitution is legalized or
decriminalized, the types of abuses that we should all be concerned
about are significantly reduced. The conditions that the men and
women in the industry work under are significantly increased. If I am
mistaken in this understanding, please point me at some facts that
prove it.
And, all this set aside. When you do have two adults (mentally and
physically) who wish to exchange money for sex, what on earth is your
justification for telling them that they can't?
We had the couple that lives downstairs in my house up for dinner the
other night. I asked them their opinion the subject. The female
member of the couple just scoffed and said "of course it should be
legal, its ridiculous that it isn't."
You're going to get no disagreement from me that non-consensual
physical and psychological abuse are crimes that should not be
tolerated. You'll get no disagreement from me that children are
easier to manipulate and coerce and should have a greater degree of
protection and that we need to be more vigilant in watching out for
their welfare.
Where I disagree whole heartedly is on the idea that criminalizing a
transaction that should be legal between consenting adults does
anything to protect those we wish to protect. In fact, I argue
heavily to the contrary - by putting the entire industry in the
shadows, we make it far easier for those who will abuse the
vulnerable.
- phaedrus, (j.goray), 3-6, earth.
On Jan 15, 2008 7:55 AM, WIZARD MARKS <email obscured>> wrote:
> Mike Jensvold: "The prohibitionist attitude on the surface seems to be
morallysuperior. But at its core it suggests that: if we don't completely stop
X behavior, it will devour us." No, you are reinterpreting what I've said. Six
percent percent of female prostitutes (usually those working for the expensive
out call services) enter into prostitution as functioning adults, both
physically and emotionally. The other 94% of prostituted women (those who were
sexually abused as children, but had no help to recover from those wounds) are
emotionally retarded concerning issues of adult sexuality. Ergo, a male's
chances of paying for sex with a functioning adult prostitute are 16 to 1
against that happening. For the 94% of prostituted women, a male is actually
engaging in sex with a child. Therefore, when men are using any of the 94% of
prostitutes, they are, by that act, revictimizing an unrecovered victim of
child sexual abuse. Know that when you pay for prostitutes' attention, y
ou
> are paying to re-victimize a child-woman. Concomitant with that, you may
have gotten hold of a prostitute who is tired of being victimized and has
enough gumption to 'whup your sorry a**' for the insult. Does not happen all
that often, of course, sometimes the prostitutes steal your wallet, your car,
or give you some venereal disease, gratis, no extra charge. You could look on
those events as 'revenge of the lawn' actions. The other thing I've said is
that "customers" can no longer use store front commercial prostitution services
on Lake St. because they are all closed after 30+ years of work on many
people's parts. Whoopee! I was sick of looking at the Utopia East out my
kitchen and dining room windows. Maybe someone will rent that building, put a
new face on it, and help people with their tax returns in Spanish or Arabic. Or
fix bicycles. Prostitution will probably never get wiped out so long as people
lead with the lizard brain. We are predatory by nature as a species.
B
> ut it does not keep us from recognizing what we do with different types of
our predation. We've outlawed canniblism, murder, etc. for that reason. It
hasn't stopped any of those behaviors, but it has slowed down some of them.
>
> The cost to us, the taxpayers, is enormous. How many prostitutes have their
children taken away from them. One prostituted woman I know had her five
children taken by the state/county. If they are kept in orphanages, it cost to
raise them and school them. If they are fostered out, the foster parent gets
over $900/mo. to keep each child. I doubt the prostituted women are paying
taxes. When they get sick, someone pays the costs, they don't have the money.
I've never met a prostituted woman who had any money. (Except Rebecca Rand, but
she was a sauna pimp.) If she gets AIDS, that costs three fortunes. Prostituted
women don't have insurance.
>
> Legalizing prostitution means legalizing the right to sexually abuse women
and children and paying the cost of the damage.
> As far as state law versus city law, it probably is Minnesota law that
> controls here. But isn't it possible for Minneapolis to just stop using
> police resources to enforce the law? Even if it isn't possible to stop
> all enforcement, the city certainly has the right to put fewer resources
> into enforcement.
I am concerned that this sort of approach could increase the problems
that Wizard has brought up unless it were matched with a pretty
massive social-services effort.
The people who are in the situation that Wizard describes need to know
that if they go to public officials (police or welfare) that they
won't be treated as criminals.
I'm not confident that this would end up working out because I doubt
we'd put the necessary resources into it. The type of "recruitment" I
mention in my previous email is abhorrent and must be combated rather
than be allowed to continue unabated.
Perhaps if we stopped prosecuting prostitutes but aggressively went
after their pimps? Most of them are likely also guilty of weapons and
violence offenses as well as possibly rape (statutory and otherwise).
I believe that the angel pimp probably exists but there are a whole
lot of demon ones that need to be confronted.
In any case, I'd far rather see legalization and licensing. Can we
license something in the city that is illegal on the state level?
Sort of the "marijuana tax stamp" concept but for better reasons?
- phaedrus, (j.goray), 3-6, earth.
phaedrus wrote:
>> As far as state law versus city law, it probably is Minnesota law that
>> controls here. But isn't it possible for Minneapolis to just stop using
>> police resources to enforce the law? Even if it isn't possible to stop
>> all enforcement, the city certainly has the right to put fewer resources
>> into enforcement.
>>
>
> I am concerned that this sort of approach could increase the problems
> that Wizard has brought up unless it were matched with a pretty
> massive social-services effort.
>
>
Mark Anderson:
I don't see how a slowdown in enforcement would make matters WORSE. A
de facto legalization in Minneapolis might improve the prostitution
environment by making it easier for prostitutes to use welfare and
police services, and by encouraging a discussion at the state for true
legalization. It would ease prostitutes' lives by removing the constant
threat of arrest. Even if these things were not significantly improved,
at least we'd get the use of police resources for real crimes.
Sure, I'd like true legalization, but dropping enforcement is a good
second best.
Instead of going point to point, I would ask for consideration of the following
excepting for a couple of simple points that should be made.
Prostitution could be called: public anonymous carnal encounters (P.A.C.E.)…For
Profit.
Why not consider putting the profit into public coffers instead of private
hands? The cities could really use the dough.
P.A.C.E. For Profit CAN be driven from the streets and neighborhoods. The
solution is P.A.C.E. For Profit…Not, or simply P.A.C.E.
1. The “haggard” prostitute of saunas, massage and the street fame are a very
small part of the sex worker picture. Most m/f workers are students, housewives
and single parents trying to make ends meet and see their situation as
temporary. Minors engaged in the trade are an extreme rarity. Because of the
illegality, it’s a very profitable business. A good hustler can easily make
$1-2K per week for just a few hours on duty. There’s no part-time job that
offers this kind of wage and still be legal.
2. There isn’t anyplace available in the state for P.A.C.E. excepting the
public parks that now have heavy police scrutiny.
3. The establishments offered by Ferris Alexander accommodated P.A.C.E. and
made Mr. A. a very wealthy man. He was also intolerant of P.A.C.E. for profit
at any of his locations. Any known solicitors were immediately expelled.
People want P.A.C.E. If not, what was Sen. Craig doing in that restroom? I
wouldn’t agree that it’s strictly a “class issue.”
The answer was shown to us by Ferris A. and the reason can best summed by the
old adage: “Why buy the cow …when the milk is free?” “For Profit”…can’t compete
with… “For Free.”
If the bookstores, bathhouses and theatres were operational AND legal, both men
and women of legal age, would flock in droves and the entrance and browse fees
could rest inside the city coffers. Of course, Ferris’ operations didn’t stop
prostitution because what he did allow was deemed to be illegal.
Adult entertainment would be a tremendous shot in the arm for St. Paul’s dismal
nightlife.
Rowdy Russ Hanson.
The Truth in St. Paul.
Legalizing prostitution will be counterproductive in dealing with the core
issue that keeps prostitution in business. I stand by the factualness of 94% of
prostituted women were sexually abused as children, never treated adequately,
and are, consequently, injured child-women. (I did this research in 1977 and I
will not go up to the attic and find the citation. I remember the statistic so
well because it is so startling. The effect it had on me was like being hit
between the eyes with a brick.)
The first premise of prostitution is that adults have the right to use children
as commodities for sexual purposes, so long as they pay in coin of the realm.
Legalizing prostitution means legalizing that paradigm. To pretend that adult
women, except for the aberrant 6%, are choosing prostitution each time they
turn a trick after the age of 18, or worse yet, that legalizing it would allow
women to leave prostitution, cannot be the first premise of changing the
paradigm. It's illogical. We are still legalizing a brutal predation among the
members of our own species. And we will still have to deal with the increasing
costs of that predation.
There is no escaping the fact that the root of prostitution is the sexual abuse
of children. That is where our predation has got to stop. Legalizing the
symptom does not cure the disease and is, in my estimation, abhorrent.
WMarks, Central
WIZARD MARKS wrote:
> Legalizing prostitution will be counterproductive in dealing with the core
issue that keeps prostitution in business. I stand by the factualness of 94% of
prostituted women were sexually abused as children, never treated adequately,
and are, consequently, injured child-women. (I did this research in 1977 and I
will not go up to the attic and find the citation. I remember the statistic so
well because it is so startling. The effect it had on me was like being hit
between the eyes with a brick.)
>
Mark Anderson:
There are two reasons that I've been so insistent on citations for the
unlikely claim that 94% of prostitutes were sexually abused:
1) I wanted to be sure that the writer hadn't just made up the number.
It sounds like that is not the case here.
2) I've seen so many "statistics" over the years that weren't true, that
I wanted to see for myself where it came from. This of course is still
up in the air, since Wizard isn't sure herself where the number came
from, just that she found it in 1977. Many "statistics" turn out to be
mere estimates by some practitioner that build an aura of believability
over the years through mere repetition. Even those numbers from actual
studies are, more often than not, based on poorly designed methodologies
that don't really show what they purport to show. So I give the number
little credence. Also, the number is at least 30 years old. Things do
change, so even if it really was true at one time, it might not be true
today.
>
> The first premise of prostitution is that adults have the right to use
children as commodities for sexual purposes, so long as they pay in coin of the
realm. Legalizing prostitution means legalizing that paradigm. To pretend that
adult women, except for the aberrant 6%, are choosing prostitution each time
they turn a trick after the age of 18, or worse yet, that legalizing it would
allow women to leave prostitution, cannot be the first premise of changing the
paradigm. It's illogical. We are still legalizing a brutal predation among the
members of our own species. And we will still have to deal with the increasing
costs of that predation.
>
Mark Anderson:
This claim seems to be based on the proposition that (94% of )
prostitutes aren't competent to run their own lives. That in turn is
based on the proposition that being sexually abused makes one
automatically incompetent. Even beyond the dubious origin of the 94%,
the leaps of logic are gigantic. Even more, it scares me a bit that
someone believes that a person shouldn't be allowed to run their own
lives because of an unfortunate childhood. I think that people are a
lot more resilient than implied. People recover from all sorts of bad
childhoods to live good lives. I was never sexually abused, but this
discussion makes me worried that something else in my childhood might be
grounds to consider me incompetent.
Selling sex for money is a bit icky, but I don't get the "brutal
predation." To the extent prostitution does trap people in a terrible
fix, legalization (or even de facto legalization) has got to make it
easier to escape. Is illegal prostitution a better life than legal
prostitution?
>
> There is no escaping the fact that the root of prostitution is the sexual
abuse of children. That is where our predation has got to stop. Legalizing the
symptom does not cure the disease and is, in my estimation, abhorrent.
>
Mark Anderson:
I assume you mean that without sexual abuse of children, there would be
few or no women willing to be prostitutes. I find this very hard to
believe. Where there is demand, supply pops up. It's just a matter of
the price needed to attract the supply. Part of the price might be to
make the whole process a little less "icky," which legalization might
help. I imagine that women involved in legal prostitution are on the
average a bit less dysfunctional than the ones involved in the illegal
trade.
I certainly don't think that legalizing prostitution would cure child
sexual abuse (although it might provide a bit of help by giving an
outlet to some). But keeping prostitution illegal doesn't help sexual
abuse either, so it is irrelevant to legalization.
I'm sorry, while I accept that this number may be near to valid in a society
that has only blackmarket prostitution, I have a very hard time believing
that it is close to valid in places where prostitution is legal. (And if
its this society, keep in mind that we're talking about a society where
25-30% of ALL women were sexually abused as a child or young adult. There
is a much bigger problem at hand here.)
I will need to see some sort proof that this disparity exists in societies
where prostitution is legal (and preferably, where they are licensed) before
I'm willing to consider it anything close to fact.
I also would like to know the facts about both men and women. Men should
also have the right to seek work as a prostitute if they wish and the
concerns about exploitation of boys is also valid.
But anyway you cut it, it comes down to this:
I see no way in justifying preventing two competent adults from exchanging
money for sex. It was a source of income I considered when I was trying to
fund college. I chose not to (at least not anonymously for money) because
it was the early 90s and I was terrified of AIDS but I'm sure there are men
and women who have gone ahead and made the choice with their eyes wide open.
If we are concerned about abused children not being further abused (and we
should be), then the best possible solution is to legalize and screen during
licensing. It gives us much more ability to offer these people help than we
currently have.
The core issue that keeps prostitution in business is that sometimes people
want either sexual satisfaction or the sense of physical closeness that
comes with it without the time, energy, cost, frustration and pain that
comes with seeking a relationship or a one night stand. This is true for
both adulterous clients and single clients.
A secondary issue that keeps prostitution in business is that many people
have desires or fetishes that it is hard to find a partner to fulfill or
that one's current partner is not interested in fulfilling. As any regular
readers of Savage Love can attest, the general advice is to find a
professional who is willing to do it for money (Ideally, with the knowledge
and consent of any sexual partner you might have).
The abuse issue (child and otherwise) is a product of making prostitution
only available on the black market. It is not a fundamental premise nor the
root of the concept, it is exactly the sort of sickness that forms when
anything is artificially repressed. You have your causality reversed.
- phaedrus (j.goray), 3-6, earth.
Stip clubs are legal. Would you like to guess how many of those women were
abused as children? Are there studies?
I'm willing to wager a high amount. I went with a stripper to the second
Woodstock (long story). She had more issues than I could shake a stick at.
That's not a life I would wish for anyone--a life of prostitution is something
we talk about rescuing women from. So if stripping is a tough life for a woman
and its considered above prostitution. And prostitution causes and is a result
of life destroying habits (I say both) and something to be rescued from...why
are we having this conversation?
Comparing us to "other countries" is the best and worst argument and only used
when it fits the agenda. We're Americans. No one should have to, nor be
encouraged to sell their body for any reason.
Jennifer Rubenzer
Maple Grove
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:33:34 +0000, Maple Grove real estate agent
Rubenzer wrote:
>We're Americans. No one should have to, nor be encouraged to sell their body
for any reason.
Anyone who works for money is selling either their body or their mind.
Mark Anderson: "1) I wanted to be sure that the writer hadn't just made up the
number. It sounds like that is not the case here. 2) I've seen so many
"statistics" over the years that weren't true, that I wanted to see for myself
where it came from. This of course is still up in the air, since Wizard isn't
sure herself where the number came from, just that she found it in 1977. Many
"statistics" turn out to be mere estimates by some practitioner that build an
aura of believability over the years through mere repetition."
j.goray/phaedrus: "I see no way in justifying preventing two competent adults
from exchanging money for sex. It was a source of income I considered when I
was trying to fund college."
Dave Garland: "Anyone who works for money is selling either their body or their
mind."
Mr. Anderson accuses me of being so intellectually dishonest that I would
collect statistics from trash cans or not trace the legitimacy of statistics I
read. I am not intellectually dishonest enough to do that. That statistic
comes from research done by very ernest and meticulous university women,
professors and associate professors, who were very brave about doing that
research at that time when university women were still few and far between.
Those researchers walked on eggs by doing the research while their positions in
the hierarchy of professordom were so tentative.
I challenge the insulting Mr. Anderson to research anything legitimate that
contradicts the statistic I presented.
The myth, Mr. Goray, is that male competent adults are only likely to meet
female competent adults who are willing to exchange sexual favors for money.
That can only happen six times out of every 100 meetings. (Actually, it is less
than six times in 100 because most of that 6% is concentrated in expensive
outcall services which most men who seek out prostituted women do not have the
cash with which to indulge their urges. If you, Mr. Goray thought of
prostitution as a career choice, you would have entered it as a male. I know
virtually nothing about males in prostitution, I'm not even sure there is any
research out there that addresses the situation.
And finally, Mr. Garland, I hope your statement is facetious. On the universal
level, of course you are right. We are all wage slaves and that is unlikely to
change so long as we insist on the unfair distribution of this earth's
resources. That does not describe the situation for women caught in systems of
prostitution.
Mark Anderson: "Of course most of the numbers and analysis concerning
prostitution and abuse are presumably highly exaggerated, since not one bit of
evidence has been provided." ... This claim seems to be based on the
proposition that (94% of ) prostitutes aren't competent to run their own lives.
That in turn is based on the proposition that being sexually abused makes one
automatically incompetent. ... I assume you mean that without sexual abuse of
children, there would be few or no women willing to be prostitutes. I find
this very hard to believe. Where there is demand, supply pops up." No, the
numbers are not highly exaggerated. The numbers were gathered by university
women in the throes of legitimate research. I'm not intellectually dishonest
enough to present trash as legitimate research. No, I did not say, nor would I
ever say, that 94% of women caught in systems of prostitution are not capable
of 'running their own lives.' I stated specifically that 94% of female
prostitutes have untreated child sexual abuse issues, which translates into
emotional immaturity. When a child is sexually abused, his/her emotional growth
stops at that point because of the nature of the injury to his/her person.
Women can and do overcome that injury, but only through either formal or
informal therapeutic work. Those who undergo that work successfully either do
not get caught in systems of prostitution or work their way out of those
systems. The injury of child sexual abuse is very profound, the child has been
attacked at the very core of his/her personhood. (The word 'rape' is from the
Latin, it means 'to steal.' What is stolen is the core of one's being--an
autonomous self. Good families nurture children's autonomous self. Abusive
families undermine the autonomous self by attacking the child's sexual
autonomy.) The work of recovering is very very much more difficult than say,
becoming sober after 35 years of drunkenness, or even working through the
injury of child abuse that is not of a sexual nature. If that is not enough
burden, it is also the case that pimps, procurers, and those who think they're
are somehow superior to prostituted women, work very hard to keep women in
systems of prostitution. The archives of the Tribune chronicles the story of
how the MPHA (Minneapolis Public Housing Authority) treated one of their
directors in the late 80s or early 90s is illustrative. A sorrier display of
viciousness on the part of a board of directors we are unlikely soon to witness
again. In the end, Mr. Anderson has got it correct. Where there is demand,
supply will follow. That is my argument, Mr. Anderson. The demand is for girl
children who are not emotionally mature to work in systems of prostitution and
abusive families, acquaintances, and total strangers are willing to create the
supply. That is sexual predation. There are a lot of coy euphemisms and
millions of miles of trashy "literature," movies, plays, songs, operas,
billboards, advertisements which pressure us to keep supplying more and more
girl/women for the demand. It's a really repugnant facet of our culture.
WMarks, Central
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 02:44:59 +0000, Wizard Marks wrote:
>On the universal level, of course you are right. We are all wage slaves and
that is unlikely to change so long as we insist on the unfair distribution of
this earth's resources.
Thank you.
>That does not describe the situation for women caught in systems of
prostitution.
"Caught in", perhaps. "Forced", definitely. "Choosing", no. In any
case, while you may have provided argument about how abused children may
end up prostitutes, you have provided none about how prostitutes result
in abused children. You have provided none about why women (or men)
should not be allowed to choose what they do for money. (I'll stipulate
that pimps are slime, except inasmuch as they provide physical
security.)
In the world you describe, it is hard to say which of those categories
applies. Are you and I "caught in" the systems that determine what we
do for money? Of course. Why is driving a bus, or telling someone how
to make their computer work, for money, any different than fucking,
except for the particular muscles involved?
I think the numbers are suspect, too. Remember the statistic that came out
many years ago about spousal abuse going up on Super Bowl Sunday? Pure
fiction, through and through.
Banning prostitution is more nanny-statism, masquerading as some kind of
moral high-ground, as most nannyism does. What bothers me is that the
arguments made against legalizing prostitution in this forum have been so
incredibly disrespectful to the victims. What has been said, to boil it down
is "because you have suffered as a child, we'll protect you from yourself
and the decisions you make as an adult." It revictimizes, albeit much more
subtly, for it removes the ability of adults to choose what they do with
their bodies because of what they have suffered as children..........AND
that decision is being made by supposedly caring people. It's patronizing,
condescending, and arrogant. Child sexual abuse is about a lot of
things...... not having choices about your body is one of those things. In
the long run, automomy is again taken from them, and they lose again the
ability to make their own choices in their lives.
Mike Thompson
Windom
On Jan 16, 2008, at 11:07 PM, Dave Garland wrote:
>
> Why is driving a bus, or telling someone how
> to make their computer work, for money, any different than fucking,
> except for the particular muscles involved?
Well, except it isn't fucking. I think for the fucking you have to
have two people freely engaged in it. For the sex buyer it is a
purchase of fantasy. For the seller it is a money exchange. In this
exploitation of fantasy there is no net gain for either side.
Working is different. For the buyer it is purchase of necessary labor
to achieve profit or surplus goals. For the seller it is a money
exchange. In this exploitation of labor the two people are keeping a
close eye on the how much more to get or how much less to give.
Laura
Southeast/Como
Laura Waterman Wittstock
President and CEO
Wittstock & Associates
913 19th Ave SE
Minneapolis, MN 55414
612-387-4915
www.laurawatermanwittstock.com
i have attempted to read this whole thread several times
what i do want to say is that sadly if we want sexual abuse, rape and
prostitution to stop
the only ones who can really make it stop are men
we are not doing enough to prepare our children for life in so many ways
but this is such a sign of our neglect of boy babies and young men
with violent video games, the media etc. creating bigger and bigger
disconnection for young people and again especially young men.....i am afraid
for some of the possiblities of the future
peace
leigh
powderhorn park
I wouldn’t necessarily disparage Wizard Marks assertions that there are some
women who were abused. Wizard Marks doesn’t show how many people were
interviewed. Was it 94% out of 100? 1000? 10,000? However, it doesn’t void the
issue of people engaging themselves in a voluntary setting. Nevada could easily
be one of the prostitution capitals of the world. Were the studies Wizard Marks
cites conducted in Nevada or just in Minneapolis?
If one would visit the Chicken Ranch in Nevada I wonder if we would find a
stable of maladjusted sex workers that would need 10 years of therapy to
overcome their terrible burdens. If it were true, the pro-women’s groups would
have a field day and demand action.
Moreover, horror stories abound in a capitalistic society where exploitation is
the rule. Sure, there’s always exploitation. If we really want to reduce the
instances of prostitution for profit, then take the profit motive away. This
can be done with the Ferris Alexander approach. We keep the kiddies out of the
bars, don’t we? Keep the kids out of the bookstores and theatres too.
You all should know that there are swing parties. It doesn’t cause the
participants to become emotionally or mentally unstable. The couples that
attend find swing activities to be additions to, rather than a replacement of,
their lives together. Many singles today are involving themselves as they too
damm busy climbing the corporate ladder to have time for a “meaningful”
relationship. Many women and men today, are starving off raising a family until
later in life when their better off financially. This attitude makes
multi-partner anonymous enjoyments a viable option. All Ferris did was to make
a business out of it. He also was very successful with it simply because,
that’s what people want.
Rowdy Russ Hanson.
The Truth in St. Paul.
Jennifer Rubenzer wrote:
> Stip clubs are legal. Would you like to guess how many of those women were
abused as children? Are there studies?
>
> I'm willing to wager a high amount. I went with a stripper to the second
Woodstock (long story). She had more issues than I could shake a stick at.
That's not a life I would wish for anyone--a life of prostitution is something
we talk about rescuing women from. So if stripping is a tough life for a woman
and its considered above prostitution. And prostitution causes and is a result
of life destroying habits (I say both) and something to be rescued from...why
are we having this conversation?
>
Mark Anderson:
I've met people working next to me in offices that had many many issues,
which made me both feel sorry for them and want to get away. Should we
ban office work? Perhaps there are a higher percentage of dysfunctional
folks in the sex industry. What does that have to do with banning a
profession? If a profession is full of people that want to get out, the
best thing for them is to make them legal so they have a mechanism to do it.
Wizard Marks wrote:
I stated specifically that 94% of female prostitutes have untreated
child sexual abuse issues, which translates into emotional immaturity.
When a child is sexually abused, his/her emotional growth stops at that
point because of the nature of the injury to his/her person. Women can
and do overcome that injury, but only through either formal or informal
therapeutic work. Those who undergo that work successfully either do not
get caught in systems of prostitution or work their way out of those
systems. The injury of child sexual abuse is very profound, the child
has been attacked at the very core of his/her personhood. (The word
'rape' is from the Latin, it means 'to steal.' What is stolen is the
core of one's being--an autonomous self. Good families nurture
children's autonomous self. Abusive families undermine the autonomous
self by attacking the child's sexual autonomy.) The work of recovering
is very very much more difficult than say, becoming sober after 35 years
of drunkenness, or even working through the injury of child abuse that
is not of a sexual nature.
Mark Anderson:
Now here are comments that are many times more incredible than even the
94% claim. How can such broad claims be made concerning every single
person that has memories of sexual abuse as a child? There must be
tremendous differences in level of such abuse, between a one time
incident by a stranger to sexual slavery by one's parents over several
years. Yet for every one of these people the same result occurs, per
the comments above. I don't believe it for a minute. The above
comments need citations even more than the numbers cited.
Russ Hanson wrote:
I wouldn’t necessarily disparage Wizard Marks assertions that there are
some women who were abused. Wizard Marks doesn’t show how many people
were interviewed. Was it 94% out of 100? 1000? 10,000? However, it
doesn’t void the issue of people engaging themselves in a voluntary
setting. Nevada could easily be one of the prostitution capitals of the
world. Were the studies Wizard Marks cites conducted in Nevada or just
in Minneapolis?
Mark Anderson:
These are exactly the right kinds of questions! This is why the 94% is
pretty worthless without citations. We can't get these kinds of answers
that go to the heart of the question of legalization.
OK, cant take the seemingly endless posts on this issue.
I get lost after a few paragraphs and stop reading.
Thank you all for the wonderful information and discussion, but could
you try and keep it a bit shorter and .....
I don't dispute that abused persons end up in prostitution. Abused
people also end up NOT in prostitution.
Why does it always seem the crime (and victim) are always the seller.
What about the buyers?
Are they guiltless if this is a crime?
What about clear answers to the question of weather we want prostitution
to be legal, regulated, etc. etc. etc. Or do we prefer it to remain
illegal and under cover of night? What about all the high priced call
persons in the world, are they not hookers too? Were they mostly abused
as well?
Making, or in our case keeping, it illegal will not make it go away.
Do I need to repeat that often enough for everyone to understand that?
What do we as a society want to do with the reality that it exists?
I don't see the discussion about prostitution that much different than
one that could be had regarding drugs or alcohol or even abortion.
I'm more of a make it legal, regulate it and tax it to death and move
on. I don't have to buy any just because its legal. Isn't this our
approach to cigarettes and booze?
Any comments?
Ron Leurquin
Nokomis East
The discussion of prostitution and child sex abuse in the Minneapolis Issues
has become a flight of fantasy by both sides. Child sex abuse and legalization
of prostitution are two separate issues that though they cross over are still
logically separate. The two positions are argueing two separate issues as if
they were one and the same. Attempting to deal with them as one causes the
problem of both parties being possibly correct, and just as equally discounted
by the other side.
I did appreciate Mark Anderson's post to the List asking for documentation
of research that had been quoted as hard fact. Mark is correct to ask for
citations of actual research when hard statistics and specific numbers are
used.
While Wizard Marks assertion of an absolute of 94% is scientifically
ridiculous, she is NOT wrong about research showing that a very high percentage
of women engaging in prostitution were sexually abused as children. Only her
hard statistic is wrong. Her use of a spurious statistic to make further hard
fact ascertains regarding EVERY person so abused is the problem. This
Pop-Psychology on its face is so ridiculous that it allows others to discount
totally the entire logic of her argument. Which is truly unfortunate, as a good
portion of the argument has merit, is correct, and certainly deserves true
attention,
We in this country, and Minneapolis in particular, have a huge problem with
rape, child abuse, and yes prostitution. It is no secret that Minneapolis has
been one of the best places to recruit child prostitutes as well as women.
They had an area of New York City named for all the young prostitutes that had
been taken from Minneapolis. During one period Minneapolis lead the nation in
per capita rapes. During a period of a few years my neighborhood (with 6500
people) averaged over 30 rapes a year (fortunately that number has been reduced
significantly by hard work on the part of the community with help from the
police). This story was totally ignored by the media, because as one reporter
stated, you would expect that to happen in those neighborhoods, so it is not
news. So lets not get too caught up in attacking the cause just because the
statistics are questionable.
Wizard Marks wrote:
I stated specifically that 94% of female prostitutes have untreated child
sexual abuse issues, which translates into emotional immaturity.
When a child is sexually abused, his/her emotional growth stops at that
point because of the nature of the injury to his/her person. Women can
and do overcome that injury, but only through either formal or informal
therapeutic work. Those who undergo that work successfully either do not
get caught in systems of prostitution or work their way out of those
systems. The injury of child sexual abuse is very profound, the child
has been attacked at the very core of his/her personhood. (The word
'rape' is from the Latin, it means 'to steal.' What is stolen is the
core of one's being--an autonomous self. Good families nurture
children's autonomous self. Abusive families undermine the autonomous
self by attacking the child's sexual autonomy.) The work of recovering
is very very much more difficult than say, becoming sober after 35 years
of drunkenness, or even working through the injury of child abuse that
is not of a sexual nature.
This statement is such an incredible mixture of that truth and fantasy. The
injury of child sex abuse is indeed profound, but I can assure you from deep
personal experience it is no more profound than other physical and emotional
abuse. It is only more profound when a society defines it as such. The stigma
attached to it by society, and I might add Pop-Psychology, is the truly
damaging part.
In poor families in parts of our society such abuse may be so prevalent as to
not even be deviant; it might actually be the norm. I have known many such
people. I might add that very few of those people went on to prostitution. I
also do not know any of them that received that therapeutic help other than
from themselves or from sharing with fellow victims later in life. Did many of
them have psychological problems? Absolutely! It is why I call it the Demon
Seed. Those who had themselves been abused replant it, and only through an
awareness of that condition and effort can that seed be restrained and have it
finally fall on fallow ground.
I must add that those insisting that the person so abused is injured so
gravely as to not be able to recover without formal or informal therapeutic
work can also be injurious to a person who has been so injured. Such societal
beliefs strike at personal identity as well. Am I forever condemned to be less
than a person?
If one was to do research in the general population prisons, (and such
research has also been done) one would likely find that the majority of
criminals in them had also been sexually and physically abused. This is
equally true of BOTH male and female facilities. Most deviant populations I
think will be similar. In fact I would bet that if you could accurately assess
the women police officers of Minneapolis you would find that a majority had
been physically or sexually abused in some form during their lives.
Should prostitution be legalized? Probably, if for no other reason than to
take minors, as much as possible, out of it. Also, legalize in order to
regulate and have some control of it, and to get professional help to those who
may need it. Should we change societys devastating attitudes about sex and
abuse that does the most profound damage? Absolutely! I also feel that we
should have far more severe punishment for pimps who prey upon prostitution.
That should be a minimum sentence of ten years at hard labor or at a facility
to house Dangerous Criminals.
Now I will throw out a little crazy of my own. I am also in favor of a
change of law that would be truly therapeutic. Empower those who have been so
abused. Make it justifiable homicide for any person suffering provable child
sex abuse to hunt down the abuser for the rest of that persons life. So that
for the rest of that perpetrators life he has to always fear what may come at
any time. For the victim it would give them the power of CHOICE to decide if
the perpetrator should live or die. I felt incredibly cheated that my abuser
died before my brother and I became old enough to kill him ourselves, as we had
planned. So perhaps there is a little foundation for a part of Wizards theory
of arresting maturity at a childs level, because I continue to think this is a
good idea even though it happened fifty years ago.
Jim Graham,
Ventura Village
>"It is always an utter folly to underestimate the lure and attraction of a
great evil. The whitened bones of their victims litter the highways and byways
of mankinds history. Stopped only by the few willing to pay the ultimate price
and make a stand."
- Toe
WIZARD MARKS wrote:
> I challenge the insulting Mr. Anderson to research anything legitimate that
contradicts the statistic I presented.
>
>
Mark Anderson:
Well I tried to be as nice as I could, but sometimes skepticism is
perceived as insulting.
I did try surfing the internet for a while, but couldn't find any
research available there. However, my wife is a student at Augsburg, so
she was able to access their data base and find some research articles.
She looked for articles as close to our discussion as she could find.
She did find for me an article that covers some of what we have been
talking about. I downloaded the article. Since the data base is
proprietary, I can't send a link to the article. The List rules
preclude me from attaching it to this e-mail, but I will send the pdf to
anyone who asks for it off-List.
In this 1999 study, the researchers interviewed about 1300 female
inmates at the Cook County, IL jail. The study itself didn't state the
percent of prostitutes that were sexually abused, but it did cite three
other studies that came to the conclusion that 50-60% of prostitutes
were subject to sexual abuse as children. The study does include child
sexual abuse as a large risk factor for entering prostitution, but at
least it doesn't build a theory on prostitution based on child abuse.
The study also indicates that the average age the prostitute started
doing tricks was 21. That to me says that the story of the minor
runaway being tricked/forced into prostitution is at best a minority
case of those on the street. I'm sure there are a number of underage
prostitutes in the city, but we need to keep a perspective on the problem.
Certainly one study is not definitive, but at least I have now provided
a real study (okay, this comment wasn't very nice).
I'm dusting off this thread for an update. You can't have a thread called "Last prostitution business on Lake St" if it isn't true. Arrests were made at the place I was referring to in my Jan 14th post not long after that. I worked with the 3rd precinct on that. It doesn't appear to have kicked back up over the past 10 months. The place Wizard mentions in the first post in this thread, Kim's, is still open. And there appears to be some action at: Peaceful Image Tanning & Body Works 822B W Lake St Here's a link to Google search results for a phone number used by an escort out of that location: http://tinyurl.com/6xm2t8 And their Craigslist Erotic Services ads (I got a chuckle out of "It's Erection Day!!! Vote for Sexy") http://tinyurl.com/6yrrnf And they have a website that doesn't have much about the tanning side of their business: http://secretgarden.rare-escort.com Here is the building. I imagine it's upstairs and not affiliated with the excellent restaurant/bar/theater on the first floor: http://tinyurl.com/66v2ac I'll deal with issues like this when the pop up in Longfellow. In this case, I'm bringing it to your attention so you can decide how you want to handle it in your neighborhood. -Ed Kohler Cooper
I have to say, the prostitution houses really torque me off. Let's see...where
oh where could there be crime? Oh, yes, the house of prostitution on Lake
Street. And the one up on Central. The one on Central is just a couple blocks
from the Police Precinct. Cops must drive past dozens of times a day. Nothing
drags a community down like having something that screams "We tolerate crime"
right on your major thoroughfares. And the frustrating thing is that these
things can be shut down if the City would just choose to allocate the resources
to do so. But it chooses not to. Maybe someone can explain to me why?
Carol Becker
Longfellow
Need help? Please contact technical support and we will follow-up in 24-48 hours.
Hosted by E-Democracy.Org. Powered by OnlineGroups.Net using the open source web-based mailing list manager GroupServer.