Opinion of opebo

[Gustaf]

Even if you disagree with his views (and why would you do that?) he's certainly one of the most entertaining posters and has a distinct and interesting style of writing.

Well, one might believe in human rights, even for those who are poor and non-white. Not everyone does though.

He's a fascist bigot and the most reactionary poster on the site. His view of an ideal society is one where the rich and powerful do not have to bother with the poor. He's the only person on here I know of who supports killing people who want democracy.

Since he has a red avatar that apparently makes him cool and adorable in the eyes of the forum left. Since I actually think human beings deserve a little bit of respect even if they happen to have the misfortune of being born in a poor, oppressive society I can't think of him as anything other than an HP. 

[Gustaf]

A fighter of freedom.

Uh, he's probably the most freedom-loving Atlasian. He fled The Bad Place over repression.

Eh? He moved to Thailand to allow him to oppress people! The reason he likes Thailand is that it isn't a democracy and has a sufficient supply of poor people for him to exploit. He obviously doesn't like America because it was founded by people running away from societies like Thailand.

[Gustaf]

A fighter of freedom.

Uh, he's probably the most freedom-loving Atlasian. He fled The Bad Place over repression.

Eh? He moved to Thailand to allow him to oppress people! The reason he likes Thailand is that it isn't a democracy and has a sufficient supply of poor people for him to exploit. He obviously doesn't like America because it was founded by people running away from societies like Thailand.

Uh, Thailand has had free elections and certainly did when he started going there.

Let's imagine he went to the Netherlands instead. Then would he be oppressing people?

They outlawed the party which won the elections because they promised to redistribute too much wealth and then shot down people who protested. It is a serious crime to say anything critical of the king who rules the country.

And before you tell me that the king and nobility had to step in to fight the corruption - yeah, that's what KKK said in the 1860s as well.

The Netherlands is completely irrelevant. Have you no ability to read between the lines? Opebo likes Thailand because it is a poor country with great class differences, which means that he can be king there and buy poor people who do not have better choices. In the Netherlands it is the same thing, but the Eastern European girls they import aren't as cheap as the Thai hookers because their countries aren't as sh**tty.

I know you think it is really awesome how he sticks it to the poor gooks, showing them that this can still be a white man's world where you have to bend over and be grateful you can catch a piece of bread afterwards, but I don't. I don't see anything cool about an undemocratic, sexist oppressive society at all and those of you sitting here snickering about the misfortunes of others from your comfortable homes actually ought to be ashamed of yourselves for it.

I should perhaps add that it is possible that Opebo is a fake in some way. Partly for that reason I don't care so much for the evil of the Opebo-persona. It does worry me though that so many people on here choose to idolize someone who represents a form of evil that plauged the world for almost all of history until the left of the French revolution and onwards finally rooted it out to a large extent in our society.

I'm very happy to live in a society where it is allowed to criticize, mock and make fun of the rich and powerful and where most people aren't so poor and desperate that they have to enslave themselves to others. I guess that makes me a prude.

[Gustaf]

...I actually think human beings deserve a little bit of respect even if they happen to have the misfortune of being born in a poor, oppressive society

The Gini Co-efficient is worse in the oppressive USA than in Thailand, Gustaf. 

Or, rather, ones where the rich and powerful assist the poor out of some kind noblesse oblige, sort of the way the plantation owners of the Old South used to give a ham to their old mammies every Christmastime, just before he sold off her grandchildren.

Ha yes, at least noblesse oblige recognizes the real nature of wealth and power, and doesn't give the poor an earful of pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps Horatio Alger nonsense like neo-liberalism does. 

But people in the US aren't as poor and that matters a hell of a lot more. And it's a stretch anyway. The UN ranks Thailand as having a higher Gini, for instance.

Sweden has a really low Gini. Unfortunately, you can't shoot or buy poor people here so I guess we still won't be seeing much of you, huh?

[Gustaf]

But people in the US aren't as poor and that matters a hell of a lot more. And it's a stretch anyway. The UN ranks Thailand as having a higher Gini, for instance.

Sweden has a really low Gini. Unfortunately, you can't shoot or buy poor people here so I guess we still won't be seeing much of you, huh?

Actually no, relative inequality is what matters, though Thailand is also not very poor in absolute terms either - generally speaking the poor in america are worse off than the poor in Thailand.  Dire poverty has little to do with prostitution - people go into the work in Thailand so they can have relatively easy, luxurious lives (for example, high-end mobile phones, jewelry, motorbikes, sometimes even tens of thousands saved or even cars purchased.  I know one girl who makes more than my teacher colleagues do, working 3 hours per night 5 nights a week, and she's very typical).  If they just want to eat three good meals a day and have a roof over their heads they can do dozens of other jobs.

Lastly, why must you use the inaccurate and tiresome term 'buy'?  Do you say 'buy' when you use the services of a waiter, a tree-trimmer, or a shoe-repairman for an hour?  No, you're just a prude who sees sex as different somehow, a frightful taboo.

Yes, yes and the slaves were better off being taken care of by their owners too, I'm sure.

Being a prude isn't really the issue. Believe it or not, I don't think a society filled with shoe-shiners or gladiators is a good one either.

But, since people from rich classes and especially in rich countries rarely become prostitutes it must follow from your logic that the poor, especially in poor countries, are a lot more socially liberal than rich people in rich countries? If only this was borne out by actual facts and not be so obviously ludicrous. Ah, well.

I get why it makes you sleep better to uphold this delusion that poor people want to be your servants, but I don't see why so many people on here cheer it on.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf I don't get why you think I should be horrified that opebo has *gasp* hired hookers. I've even technically hired a prostitute before myself, though they never did anything except with their hands (erotic massage you know), and they never appeared to be impoverished, drug addicted and were clearly not immigrants, clearly just some massage students looking for some extra money. So why do you expect that I think that just because someone has hired a hooker before that I will instantly hate them and consider them irreedemable trash and consider every single person who has ever hired a prostitute a far right poor hater?

If you're this thick, I'm not sure what to say. I'm not horrified that he's hired hookers. I'm not your 90-year old grandma. And I'm sure you get white thrash prostitutes instead of Russian or Thai ones in North Dakota.

And, as I said, those exploiting the poor always delude themselves that the people they exploit are enjoying it and doing it as their free choice. This is, amusingly, Opebo's favourite point to make - except when it comes to his own behaviour.

If you are unaware of the link between prostitution and poverty, prostitution and being abused as a child, prostitution and drug addiction and so on, well, good for you. But next time someone says all poor people are just lazy and want to cheat off on welfare, I won't expect you to complain. After all, I've met a poor lazy person once so I clearly know what I'm talking about.

I know a girl who worked briefly as a stripper. I know there are exceptions to all the rules. But I'm also well aware that even sexually very liberal people (of whom there are a lot in Sweden) tend not to work as prostitutes, as long as they're sufficiently rich and educated. I'd like to see you explain why prostitutes tend to be poor, abused drug addicts from Eastern Europe if it really is such a great line of work? Is it because poor people from Eastern Europe are so much more liberal than educated people in Sweden? Because I'd like to see the statistics backing that up.

I'm not horrified that he wants to hire hookers. I'm horrified that he has actively sought out the closest place to the nineteenth century (his stated ideal society) that he could find so that he could enjoy living as an aristocrat, abusing the poor. I'm horrified that he actively wants to shoot down who oppose oppressive rule, whether in Thailand or Egypt. He's a cold-blooded fascist who wants to kill people who wish for freedom of expression or economic redistribution to alleviate their poverty. He is a white man exploiting coloured people and wanting to kill them if they protest. He wants to return to the white imperialism of the 1800s. You apparently think white colonialism is fun (the African women first exposed to the missionary position probably loved it too, don't you think?) but I don't.

[Gustaf]

It's not like he has any real power does he? He posts on the internet. He proposed feeding Christians to lions before, and I am a Christian. Who cares. And he is quite hilarious.

I love the time he said he wears a "Death Cab For Cutey" shirt that he found in Thailand for a buck even though he's never heard their music. The way he mispelled the band name makes it even better. I laugh my ass off at the thought of this guy in a Death Cab For Cutie shirt visiting a Thai brothel. It was the main thing I thought about in my thread about which actor should play him in a movie.

So, powerless evil person are freedom fighters now? You're making a lot less sense than usual. You should love Hamilton then, he's extremely powerless.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf I don't get why you think I should be horrified that opebo has *gasp* hired hookers. I've even technically hired a prostitute before myself, though they never did anything except with their hands (erotic massage you know), and they never appeared to be impoverished, drug addicted and were clearly not immigrants, clearly just some massage students looking for some extra money. So why do you expect that I think that just because someone has hired a hooker before that I will instantly hate them and consider them irreedemable trash and consider every single person who has ever hired a prostitute a far right poor hater?

If you're this thick, I'm not sure what to say. I'm not horrified that he's hired hookers. I'm not your 90-year old grandma. And I'm sure you get white thrash prostitutes instead of Russian or Thai ones in North Dakota.

And, as I said, those exploiting the poor always delude themselves that the people they exploit are enjoying it and doing it as their free choice. This is, amusingly, Opebo's favourite point to make - except when it comes to his own behaviour.

If you are unaware of the link between prostitution and poverty, prostitution and being abused as a child, prostitution and drug addiction and so on, well, good for you. But next time someone says all poor people are just lazy and want to cheat off on welfare, I won't expect you to complain. After all, I've met a poor lazy person once so I clearly know what I'm talking about.

I know a girl who worked briefly as a stripper. I know there are exceptions to all the rules. But I'm also well aware that even sexually very liberal people (of whom there are a lot in Sweden) tend not to work as prostitutes, as long as they're sufficiently rich and educated. I'd like to see you explain why prostitutes tend to be poor, abused drug addicts from Eastern Europe if it really is such a great line of work? Is it because poor people from Eastern Europe are so much more liberal than educated people in Sweden? Because I'd like to see the statistics backing that up.

I'm not horrified that he wants to hire hookers. I'm horrified that he has actively sought out the closest place to the nineteenth century (his stated ideal society) that he could find so that he could enjoy living as an aristocrat, abusing the poor. I'm horrified that he actively wants to shoot down who oppose oppressive rule, whether in Thailand or Egypt. He's a cold-blooded fascist who wants to kill people who wish for freedom of expression or economic redistribution to alleviate their poverty. He is a white man exploiting coloured people and wanting to kill them if they protest. He wants to return to the white imperialism of the 1800s. You apparently think white colonialism is fun (the African women first exposed to the missionary position probably loved it too, don't you think?) but I don't.

LOL, I've never been to a "massage parlor" in North Dakota. The girls at the parlors in Minneapolis (you know, where I live now) aren't white trash or Eastern European immigrants either, they're not much different from your typical urban young. I don't think trafficked Eastern Europeans tend to wear Modest Mouse shirts or talk about Call of Duty games or the Uptown bars they're going to once they finish their shift but meh whatever. BTW whoever writes this blog doesn't strike me as some abused, impoverished girl, she strikes me as rather intelligent: http://happyendingz.blogspot.com

Anyone who has ever bought food at the supermarket in the US (and probably Sweden too), has bought the product of people working degrading work that affluent educated people don't. It's not just California, even here way up north most of the giant corporate farms are staffed by uneducated and often illegal Mexicans, I can point out tons of spots of high levels of Hispanics and poverty in rural Minnesota. I suppose everyone should just go to being a subsistence farmer then.

Buying food at the supermarket is different from buying a hooker. As you point out, the former is pretty unavoidable, while the latter kind of is. But I do find it interesting how you're doing a reverse-Opebo, becoming a libertarian who supports poor people doing degrading jobs. I didn't know that about you.

The rest of your post just reminds me of how pointless it is to discuss with you.

I'll just ask whether you agree with Opebo that an absolute monarchy like the European ones in the nineteenth century is the ideal society?

[Gustaf]

The amusing part about Gustaf's little obsession is that he 1) thinks people are better off under 'democratic' capitalism, and 2) he thinks having sex for money is worse than all the other jobs. 

I don't want to mow down the poors because they'll be any less exploited under democracy Gustaf (they won't be).   I just want to mow them down to prevent them from imposing their prudery.

1. Yes, like most people.
2. No, not really. I do think there is a reason why its almost exclusively pursued by the most impoverished and emotionally damaged people in society. I realize your bigotry won't be affected by facts though.

Torie: I'm not sure what you mean exactly, so you'll have to elaborate.

[Gustaf]

The amusing part about Gustaf's little obsession is that he 1) thinks people are better off under 'democratic' capitalism, and 2) he thinks having sex for money is worse than all the other jobs. 

I don't want to mow down the poors because they'll be any less exploited under democracy Gustaf (they won't be).   I just want to mow them down to prevent them from imposing their prudery.

1. Yes, like most people.
2. No, not really. I do think there is a reason why its almost exclusively pursued by the most impoverished and emotionally damaged people in society. I realize your bigotry won't be affected by facts though.

Torie: I'm not sure what you mean exactly, so you'll have to elaborate.

BRTD had certain personal experiences that he candidly admitted (one thing I admire about BRTD is his candor), colored his views about Catholicism. Not that any of that applies to you. Maybe your views on prostitution were fashioned solely as an abstract intellectual matter, and have nothing to do with any personal experiences, religious or otherwise.

Eh. I don't have any personal experience of prostitution, no. I'm a white middle class male who can get sex for free, living in a country where it's illegal and shunned by polite society. Why would I have any experience of it?

I do have this little thing called empathy where I can feel outrage on behalf of other people, you got me there. The concept of prostitution is one of an archaic, unequal society, based on sexism, racism and classism. I'm not really adamant about outlawing prostitution (I don't care much for making things illegal, as a general rule) but I don't find rich white guys buying poor coloured women particularly cool.

[Gustaf]

Has Gustaf read the profile on that girl Eliot Spitzer spent thousands on?

I find it rather silly to be accused of doing a "reverse opebo" and supposedly changing ideologies just because I dislike the government interfering with actions between consenting adults, regardless if money is involved or not. So every single person who thinks prostitution should be legal is some libertarian extremist?

I have a hard time getting angry at people over the internet but your stupidity is so frustrating it really comes close. One single observation means nothing. How is it that you think that you can use one observation to prove anything? I didn't even say that every prostitute was a certain way. I said that most are.

And you didn't say that you were just in favour of prostitution. You said you were fine with any kind of labour being done by anyone on a free market, regardless of whether they were poor or whether it was degrading. I'm assuming this means you're in favour of abolishing all trade regulations, child labour laws, regulations on trade with organs and so on as well? After all, you wouldn't want to prevent consenting adults from making free choices, would you?

(or should I understand that you disagree with Opebo and want to make an arbitrary distinction as regards child prostitution? Because that would actually destroy a lot of the prostitution industry if you wanted to go there, and we wouldn't want that would we? And before you ask, this one stripper who promised she was over 18 doesn't count as evidence that they all are over 18)

[Gustaf]

Yes Gustaf, but there is something about the sex act that you find different than say a person of color waiting on you hand and foot consensually for pay sans sex.  Not that your drawing this distinction is unusual or anything, I understand. But it does require a host of what are to me, certain almost a priori assumptions/distinctions. Anyway, enough.

I don't think a society where people have slaves is palatable either, even if they aren't used for sex.

It's true though that I think sex isn't the same as, say, cleaning. But differences between actions are obviously hard to define in any objective sense. On the other hand, I don't think I'm in the minority in thinking sex is a special class of action.

[Gustaf]

Obviously Opebo's entire lifestyle is extremely unethical. There is little doubt in my mind about the ethical dimension of (economically or otherwise) forced prostitution. Opebo basically lives like a king due to the oppresion of the people surrounding him. But to be absolutely fair, it's not as if opebo is the one doing the oppressing. Like all of us his entire quality of life is built upon the suffering of others. What's the ethical difference between buying a T-shirt from a Pakistani sweatshop and paying for Thai prostitutes? To me it seems like the difference is quite small at best.

What I think people like Gustaf find unsettling about opebo is what appears to be a lack of hypocrisy. Where most of us will refrain from reminding everyone about that time we bough a 2$ T-shirt, that was extremely cheap because the factory in India had to close after a horrible chemical accident, Opebo has no problem talking about all his experiences with prostitution.
I guess Opebo in person is a very likeable guy, who in a lot of aspects is extremely normal, yet he lacks our own sycophantic defense of freedom in a world where our own elected governments are the ones (in)directly responsible for 80% of ongoing oppression and this is what we find shocking.

Does Opebo lack in the department of morality? Sure
But is that what we find disturbing about him? I don't believe it is.

Eh, no. Actively seeking out and supporting a given system isn't the same as not taking part in a revolution to overthrow it. Of course, no one is perfect but the idea that we all are equally evil if we aren't Dalai Lama is ridiculous to me. I don't actively abuse people, nor do I glorify anything.

In fact, what bothers me about Opebo isn't that he's so honestly evil. It's that he is dishonestly evil. He actually claims that it is great to be exploited and even pretends to care about social justice. The old Opebo was openly fascist and I guess you could argue that he was honest in some sense. He, on the other hand, wasn't as popular for some reason.

[Gustaf]

...I'm a white middle class male who can get sex for free, living in a country where it's illegal and shunned by polite society.

My god, what breathtaking arrogance, and what pathetic delusion!  Any man who thinks he 'gets sex for free' is a comical figure, but surely you realize you will soon be old.  Old men can't have sex with pretty young girls unless they give generously in return.

...I don't think I'm in the minority in thinking sex is a special class of action.

Yes, yes, we know all about how you feel and all the other prudes, but the point is that I disagree with that.

I don't know if it makes you feel better, but I do realize how sad you must be. I would pity you if you had any redeeming traits, but unfortunately you don't.

[Gustaf]

Has Gustaf read the profile on that girl Eliot Spitzer spent thousands on?

I find it rather silly to be accused of doing a "reverse opebo" and supposedly changing ideologies just because I dislike the government interfering with actions between consenting adults, regardless if money is involved or not. So every single person who thinks prostitution should be legal is some libertarian extremist?

I have a hard time getting angry at people over the internet but your stupidity is so frustrating it really comes close. One single observation means nothing. How is it that you think that you can use one observation to prove anything? I didn't even say that every prostitute was a certain way. I said that most are.

OK but as someone with clearly more personal experience with them than you (though granted neither of us has much), I've never noticed that. Though I have noticed from prostitution review sites I've browsed before (btw you can find some very interesting things about your hometown if you read the forums you find by Googling "opebo") that most escorts tend to be independent practitioners and often have their own sites and whatnot, so I have a tough time seeing them as exploited. So we should both probably drop the generalities about whether they are exploited and admit that many are, many aren't, and ideally prostitution that does do so would be shut down while the non-exploited left alone. Does that sound reasonable?

BTW I read about the Netherlands shutting down a big human trafficking ring a few weeks ago, so you can't say they aren't doing anything about exploitation or anything.

Something else I've noticed btw is that the people on the other prostitution forums aren't misogynistic at all, most are very respectful of who they hire, are disgusted by pimping and exploitive prostitution and have rules about posting real names or personal info about people in the business. Now on the other hand I have a feeling many prudes so strongly against it probably think all the women are useless dirty whores who need to be locked up and show a hell of a lot less empathy.

And you didn't say that you were just in favour of prostitution. You said you were fine with any kind of labour being done by anyone on a free market, regardless of whether they were poor or whether it was degrading. I'm assuming this means you're in favour of abolishing all trade regulations, child labour laws, regulations on trade with organs and so on as well? After all, you wouldn't want to prevent consenting adults from making free choices, would you?

Please point to me where I said it. No I do not support abolishing all trade regulations (if you've read my posts you'd see I am against free trade too), child labor laws or regulations on organ trade. I think comparing just having sex with money involved to those is pretty asinine. Can you please explain to me the huge difference between the two following scenarios?

1-Guy meets girl at bar, buys her a drink. They end up going to his place and having a one-nighter.
2-Guy meets girl at bar, buys her a drink. He wants to have a one-nighter but she's reluctant, so he offers her $50. She agrees.

(or should I understand that you disagree with Opebo and want to make an arbitrary distinction as regards child prostitution?

Arbitrary? No more arbitrary than child labor laws in any other business. But anyway you are correct here, I don't think child prostitution should be legal or allowed.

Because that would actually destroy a lot of the prostitution industry if you wanted to go there, and we wouldn't want that would we?

Wow, you are really jumping to conclusions here. Yes I think the part of the prostitution industry that involves anyone underage should be destroyed. I never said it was good under all circumstances. I don't see how this is hypocritical. The Netherlands has shut down child prostitution rings and arrested people for engaging in it so it's clear they draw the line at that.

Speaking of which I read about an incident here where a guy who was a frequent client of an escort service called in requesting someone around 15. The actual owner of the escort service was so disgusted that she put in an anonymous tip to the police and agreed to anonymously cooperate with them to get him arrested, which did happen. Even the owner of an escort service doesn't tolerate child prostitution.

You gave an example of people working in factories and seemed to imply that prostitution was degrading but it was fine since all other degrading jobs are fine. You seemed to be saying that using poor Mexicans in sweatshops was the same as prostitution, as implied by your support of the latter I took it that you defended the former.

But I'm eager to hear your rationale here. Why is it wrong to buy cheap t-shirts made by workers in Pakistan but right to buy cheap hookers? And before you say anything, I once met a poor worker in China and he seemed to be fine, so I think the story of horrible working conditions in the third world probably isn't true.

Anyway, I'm surprised people who buy prostitutes give such a positive picture of prostitution. Luckily, it is such an objective source of information that we can close that case right away.

Most of the rest of your post I can't really see as relevant. I'm still waiting for you to explain why prostitution is so correlated with poverty, being abused as a child or using drugs if it is such a great, free choice. How many friends do you have who are prostitutes for instance?

(P.S. I think I have more empathy than someone who thinks prostitutes are just having a fine time without problems)

[Gustaf]

I don't know if it makes you feel better, but I do realize how sad you must be. I would pity you if you had any redeeming traits, but unfortunately you don't.

Not at all, I'm famously happy.  I ride round the town here with a huge grin on my face - many people have remarked at it - 'why are you so happy on your motorbike?', and told me it looks a bit simpleminded.  But the truth is I'm just happy all the time - like a man escaped from prison.  Every moment is so incredibly enjoyable.

No need to overdo it. I'm not expecting you to leave denial, at least not on here. But your overcompensation is pretty obvious and shines through most of your posts.

[Gustaf]

I think there is a very big moral difference between someone like me and someone like Opebo. I'm obviously not perfect, but I do my share of good deeds.

Secondly, Opebo is obviously a pretty deluded character. He has a number of obsessions that all seem to spring from a need to cover up failures in his own personal life. He says no one can get money any other way than from working, which is obviously untrue, but maintained by him because he can't get money any other way than leeching off his parents.

He claims that one cannot get beautiful women once over 40, which also is obviously untrue. I know of several such men. Of course, they're not misogynistic, egotistic failures living off their parents.

And he claims that everyone wants to screw cheap hookers, except for women who all want to be cheap hookers which is also clearly untrue to anyone who actually has real friends.

And then there is the pathological insistence that everyone wants to live like him and everyone else must be deeply unhappy because his lifestyle is the only reasonable one.

The overall picture is that of a person who has failed at pretty much everything there is to life and has fled into delusion instead of facing up to it.

What's strange to me isn't all that (failed people deluding themselves is nothing new) but rather the fact that anyone would idolize it. 

[Gustaf]

OK Gustaf let's ignore everything up until here and I'll just break my down my overall view of prostitution. What do you disagree with?

1-I don't think prostitution is fantastic for everyone involved or that everyone is happy, just like every other job. I also don't think that is a negative experience for every single person involved and that there aren't any who enjoy their job or feel it's worth the money it brings. I don't think such women should be legally prohibited from doing so.
2-I don't think the state should be interfering with actions between consensual adults, especially if they are legal if done with no money involved.
3-I think regulated and organized prostitution is something that every state should at least consider, but am open to that it is not ideal in all places and can lead to to trouble. However I don't believe the best solution to that is to ban something that is fundamentally at its core harmless (by that I'm referring to paying for sex, once again how is the pickup situation any different with money involved?), but rather simply regulate away the harmful elements. I don't think the current law in Canada for example, where it is not illegal to buy or sell sex, but almost all associate activities are illegal is all that bad.* The way almost all US states enforce prostitution laws besides Rhode Island until recently and part of Nevada on the other hand really doesn't help anyone involved in prostitution, including the abused and exploited women, and really is mostly to make moralistic prudes feel superior. Did you read the story about the woman who was arrested for offering sex for World Series tickets?
4-As a market for prostitution will always exist and full criminalization removes any type of legal alternative, it merely provides a windfall for the illegal market which is obviously going to be far more exploitive, dangerous and abusive. Similar to the War on Drugs deal. Some US cities have adopted unofficial policies of turning a blind eye to some escort agencies and brothels as long as they avoid the bad stuff. (Minneapolis for example has zoning laws actually put "massage parlors" zoned into the same category as strip clubs and other sex businesses, but makes a distinction between simply therapeutic massage businesses which are exempted and simple "massage parlors". Even some places that violate those laws are tolerated, there's at least two very obvious brothels in town very close to police stations. Some cities require licenses for escort agencies and who they employee, including STD testing.)
5-I don't believe human trafficking is harmless and should be cracked down on vigorously, like it is in basically all developed countries whether prostitution is legal or not. And in undeveloped countries where it proliferates whether or not sex for money is legal or not has little effect.
6-I don't believe child prostitution should be legal or tolerated.

*Though granted there are some silly bits in the law in Canada**, if someone hires an escort and meets her in the hotel lobby and they start discussing sexual acts for money, they can be arrested, and apparently this has happened before. However if not discussion occurs before they are in the hotel room, there is technically no law broken. I think the law in the UK and France is of the same general situation but not quite as rigid or technical, but I'm also not too familiar with either one.
**Though granted not quite as silly or overtly technical as the laws in some states, Minnesota's is almost comical for how technical and bureaucratic it is as to whether or not certain actions are legal or not even if there is little difference between them. Of course the result of this is that Minnesota's law is just full of loopholes and more permissive than most states, so it's not something I'll complain about...though it does show just how silly trying to regulate consensual sex is.

Let me begin by saying that you seem to take a very Moderate Hero position on this issue. I thought you would have to either argue that all prostitution is bad or that all of it is good, to avoid falling into the middle ground fallacy that you so abhor?

I agree with most of that, except for one point. You basically seem to be running the argument that prostitution is mostly fine, and then there are some people being abused and that needs to be regulated. Sort of like with oranges being sold in a super market - some may have been produced under bad working conditions, but it is mostly fine. I take the opposite view. I think prostitution is by and large not a free choice in a real sense. I do this in the exact same way I don't consider alcoholism or heroin abuse to be a "free" choice. I don't think anyone deep down wants to be a heroin addict. People still become it for a variety of reasons and that warrants society intervening to help them.

I'm sure a lot of prostitutes claim to be happy and content with their lives. BushOK claims to be extremely happy with his life too. That's called denial. When it is to an actual client, it's not even denial it's just sales practice. If you ask any person trying to sell something to you whether they think you're being an asshole exploiting them or whether they love doing it, they're likely to reply the latter. I don't think sex is in the fundamental sense supposed to be bought and sold and I think it is psychologically damaging to most people to engage in it (I actually think this of people who are repeatedly buying as well). Even those women who aren't say drug addicts or trying to escape extreme poverty often had issues growing up, such as being abused as kids by their fathers, lacking father figures and stuff like that.

Sure, I will grant you not all prostitutes have a horrible life, at least not at first. And I'm sure there is the odd one here and there who actually enjoys that lifestyle. There are people who enjoy all sorts of weird stuff, after all. Some people get turned on by being eaten by others too. But I do not for a second buy that the millions and millions of prostitutes we have in the world are making a great choice for themselves. You're picking out your examples of high-end escorts running blogs. In the world of prostitution I think those cases pale in comparison to the millions of poor prostitutes in third world countries. Third world countries like a particular one that begins with T and ends with hailand.

On legalization I've actually used your point with the drink myself in prostitution debates. That is why I find illegalizing it to be dubious. On the other hand, I really don't think it has any place in society either. So I end up not really caring much about whether it should be illegal or not. But there are a lot of legal activities I find deeply, deeply immoral and using prostitutes is one of them. Again, I don't think it's particularly immoral to be a prostitute. I understand they're often being forced to make tough choices.

Finally, none of this is what Opebo argues, mind you. He has never admitted to anything negative as regards prostitution and thinks child prostitution should be legal and that all opposition to it is just prudery.

[Gustaf]

And I say again, those two excuse the fact that he cheerleads rape and pedophilia how, now?

I've never 'cheerlead' either of those things, Svensson, and your accusation is a slander.  I don't believe I could get away with saying 'Svensson supports the Holocaust and frottage' without garnering some deadly points from the moderators.  I suggest that you delete the offensive post in order to avoid censure.

But you are so opposed to censorship! Oh, right, that's only when it's about someone else. I forgot how you report every attack on yourself.

[Gustaf]

I think there is a very big moral difference between someone like me and someone like Opebo. I'm obviously not perfect, but I do my share of good deeds.

'Good deeds'?  Sounds mighty childish, Gustaf.  How old are you again?  Do you mean like using your turn signal, putting the toilet seat down (or up, which is it again?), or going down on your big-boned Swedish girlfriend?  I would feel a terrible twat if I did a 'good deed'.

He claims that one cannot get beautiful women once over 40, which also is obviously untrue. I know of several such men.

Yes, those men are desirable, Gustaf - in other words rich, powerful, having status, etc.  Most people aren't like that.  And I didn't say beautiful 'women' I said young girls.  In any case, paying for sex is a wonderful way out for the very numerous old men who can't get what they want any other way - after all, why shouldn't they get what they want?  Better to spend and enjoy, you can't take it with you.

And he claims that everyone wants to screw cheap hookers, except for women who all want to be cheap hookers which is also clearly untrue to anyone who actually has real friends.

I've never claimed that.   

And then there is the pathological insistence that everyone wants to live like him and everyone else must be deeply unhappy because his lifestyle is the only reasonable one.

I've never claimed that, Gustaf.  Jeering at fools who have poor taste isn't the same as 'insisting that everyone wants to live like him'.

The overall picture is that of a person who has failed at pretty much everything there is to life and has fled into delusion instead of facing up to it.

'Failed'?  At what?  I honestly don't think of life as me (the godhead of my universe) 'succeeding' or 'failing' at jumping through hoops.   Perhaps I'm a sociopath, but I would never take to heart that kind of nonsense.

Well, I'm not as old as the 40+ guy who just went "you're girlfriend is probably fat." The mature wit of Opebo strikes again!

I realize the concept is foreign to you, but I was referring to regular charity donations and volunteer work. Not big things that makes me into a hero, but still more than a lot of people and enough, imo, to allow me to make a distinction between myself and an evil creeper like you.

I realize you think that men, especially men with enough money, shouldn't be denied anything and be allowed to spend their wealth on what they want. What I don't understand is how anyone claiming to be left-wing can agree with it. After all, you don't want your generous dole allowing people not to work to be extended to Thai hookers, right?

[Gustaf]

You know, it's no so much opebo that I have a problem with...it's the fact that the majority of the Left on this site worships the sick, arrogant chickenhawk. Even if he is just a persona, it doesn't change the fact that he has a cult of his very own.

That, to me, is terrifying.

LOL. This is someone from the Libertas/Hamilton clique! The fact that anyone whatsoever liked Hamilton is something I actually find rather disturbing but not worth getting into here.

Let me begin by saying that you seem to take a very Moderate Hero position on this issue. I thought you would have to either argue that all prostitution is bad or that all of it is good, to avoid falling into the middle ground fallacy that you so abhor?

Having a position in the middle is not that fallacy, rather it's arguing that it's correct DUE to being in the middle. Moderate Heroism is like where one group wants to spend $X on a project and another group doesn't want to fund it at all, so someone proposes spending $X/2 on it which is not enough to properly fund it and will just waste money. But benconstine and Gabu used to take such positions all the time.

I agree with most of that, except for one point. You basically seem to be running the argument that prostitution is mostly fine, and then there are some people being abused and that needs to be regulated. Sort of like with oranges being sold in a super market - some may have been produced under bad working conditions, but it is mostly fine. I take the opposite view. I think prostitution is by and large not a free choice in a real sense. I do this in the exact same way I don't consider alcoholism or heroin abuse to be a "free" choice. I don't think anyone deep down wants to be a heroin addict. People still become it for a variety of reasons and that warrants society intervening to help them.

I wouldn't consider arresting someone "intervening to help them."

I'm sure a lot of prostitutes claim to be happy and content with their lives. BushOK claims to be extremely happy with his life too. That's called denial. When it is to an actual client, it's not even denial it's just sales practice. If you ask any person trying to sell something to you whether they think you're being an asshole exploiting them or whether they love doing it, they're likely to reply the latter. I don't think sex is in the fundamental sense supposed to be bought and sold and I think it is psychologically damaging to most people to engage in it (I actually think this of people who are repeatedly buying as well). Even those women who aren't say drug addicts or trying to escape extreme poverty often had issues growing up, such as being abused as kids by their fathers, lacking father figures and stuff like that.

Even if this is true, I don't see how the intervention of the law helps improve manners. Do you think having cheap casual sex for free is not psychologically damaging? I really don't see a difference between some girl who goes to the bar and goes home with a different guy every night and a prostitute, the prostitute is just making money off it.  Even if a person has "psychological issues", that's not always the place where the state can intervene best, especially if the intervention is just with the law. Is putting a prostitution arrest on a woman's record going to help her adjust to society more and get a "normal" job? Is fining and giving a criminal record to some depressed guy going to help improve matters much?

For the record I think a lot of people who hire hookers are pretty scummy, think David Vitter, there are ones who are married and just do it for the thrill and all. But there's plenty of cases where I don't see anything wrong. You told opebo earlier that there are guys over 40 who do get beautiful women. Well maybe but not every guy is Brad Pitt. Not every guy over 40 can. Plenty of other scenarios. What about someone with Asperger's? What about a guy who makes a lot but does so in a very demanding and stressful job that doesn't give him much time for dating and all that? I suspect that type is a pretty frequent profile for johns. What about a recently divorced or broken up guy in severe depression? I know at least one who admitted to hiring an escort from an "alternative" newspaper here after his divorce?

Sure, I will grant you not all prostitutes have a horrible life, at least not at first. And I'm sure there is the odd one here and there who actually enjoys that lifestyle. There are people who enjoy all sorts of weird stuff, after all. Some people get turned on by being eaten by others too. But I do not for a second buy that the millions and millions of prostitutes we have in the world are making a great choice for themselves. You're picking out your examples of high-end escorts running blogs. In the world of prostitution I think those cases pale in comparison to the millions of poor prostitutes in third world countries. Third world countries like a particular one that begins with T and ends with hailand.

I'm referring more to simply developed countries here. Though I will note that as I stated before legal status has little effect in the third world. Prostitution is illegal in Thailand after all. The South American countries where it's legal have less of a problem.

On legalization I've actually used your point with the drink myself in prostitution debates. That is why I find illegalizing it to be dubious. On the other hand, I really don't think it has any place in society either. So I end up not really caring much about whether it should be illegal or not. But there are a lot of legal activities I find deeply, deeply immoral and using prostitutes is one of them. Again, I don't think it's particularly immoral to be a prostitute. I understand they're often being forced to make tough choices.

In that case you should be against a system that threatens them with legal blackmarking if caught and drives the trade underground and causes fear in reporting abusive clients or pimps. I really don't see anyone who is benefited by criminalization besides self-righteous prudes who consider themselves oh so superior to "whores and perverts". Well that and the organized crime who are filling the void.

Finally, none of this is what Opebo argues, mind you. He has never admitted to anything negative as regards prostitution and thinks child prostitution should be legal and that all opposition to it is just prudery.

I've never said I'll defend every opebo position. I just find it amusing for being called a libertarian extremist and all that for a rather common view.

1. Who said anything about arresting? Swedish prostitution law, for instance, does not even criminalize the prostitutes. It isn't illegal to be a prostitute, it's illegal to be a pimp or a john.

2. I'm not saying everyone who uses prostitutes is a horrible person. But I note with interest that none of the examples you mention include Opebo. He doesn't have a demanding work. He doesn't have aspergers. He claims to be extremely happy. And he doesn't seem to have been in any troubled relationships. So what's his excuse? I would also note that now you're basically saying that prostitution is used to deal with severe problems, such as a job that has destroyed one's social life, depression or emotional handicaps. Still, you seem to think it is cool and awesome? It seems to me that you could exchange prostitution for alcohol in those sentences and it would work perfectly. Yet, few people think alcoholism is really cool.

3. I'm not talking about Brad Pitt. I'm talking about people I know and have met in real life.

4. Opebo isn't buying high-end escorts in the US or those legal prostitutes in South America. He is buying them in Thailand. A country not exactly known for its great treatment of women or avoidance of underage prostitutes and so on.

5. As I said above, I never even said I wanted it criminalized. I'm just arguing for its immorality. And it's perfectly possible to criminalize it without criminalizing the women, which is what a progressive prostitution law would do. Like the one where I live.

6. You are taking an extremely libertarian position. You're claiming that sex should be traded on a completely free market and that the state has no right to interfere. If someone think American hookers are too expensive or demand too much respect or too little abuse, one should have the right to buy cheaper ones in Thailand. Yet, I believe you do not think this should be true of other products, right? You favour tariffs, workplace safety regulations and minimum wage laws, right? And I bet that if a forum for owners of coal mines were filled with posts about how much they respect their coal miners (especially those who are dead)  and how they think the coal miners are really having a great time and they sometimes talk to them like equals, you wouldn't just accept that as proof that there was no need for legislation.

I'm not seeing how you can not just defend, but think the one is completely awesome and superior to everyone else's opinion, but then think the other is completely unacceptable. What Opebo has done is pick out a cheap country to buy sex in. This choice is conditioned on the Thai being so poor that they think the low payment they get for sex is still good. If someone were to do this with something else, say buy cheap products made in China by non-unionized workers, would you also think that it was really cool and escaping the oppressive prudery of American regulations?

What Opebo wants is a society where people are sufficiently poor that many will go into prostitution and not charge much for it and where the state is sufficiently authoritarian to shoot down anyone who criticizes it. How can a left-winger think that is awesome?

[Gustaf]

I must say that there has been a lot of dissing of posters lately - considerably more than usual. It is as if most of us are going through our period right now, and are just out of sorts. Don't they have drugs to mitigate some of this?

I can't speak for anyone else, but I've always disliked Opebo, even when he was praising Pinochet.

[Gustaf]

...Svensson... I suggest that you delete the offensive post in order to avoid censure.

But you are so opposed to censorship! Oh, right, that's only when it's about someone else. I forgot how you report every attack on yourself.

I oppose censorship, but when living in a world of censorship, I must live in a world of censorship.   Of course I will say 'we should have no censorship', but when if we have it, I certainly want to use it to my advantage.  If I can't say what Svensson so obviously is (remember the days when I used to call all and sundry 'simpletons'?), then why should I not object when he maligns me with his prudery?

It is ridiculous to demand of powerless people that they somehow 'live by their own principles' - we all live as slaves, and we can't change that.

That doesn't really make any sense, because your freedom of speech doesn't contradict anyone else's. If one opposes, say, state-funded education it obviously isn't hypocritical to still use it, since you will have to pay for it with your taxes anyway.

But if you think it should be allowed for someone to insult you, why does it matter whether you're allowed to insult them as well? Shouldn't you defend everyone's right to be insulting?

[Gustaf]

Is there seriously anyone here who thinks the forum would be a better place without him?

He hasn't been funny (except in an awkward way) for years, since his posts are just endless repetitions. And he tends to derail threads by turning them into silly discussions on his own obsessions.

I don't really see what we would lose.