For Discussion: Legalizing Prostitution Will Not Stop the Harm
Chive Mynde
Making the Harm Visible
Global Sexual Exploitation of Women and Girls
Speaking Out and Providing Services
Legalizing Prostitution Will Not Stop the Harm, Donna M. Hughes
Prostitution is consuming thousands of girls and women and reaping
enormous profits for organized crime in post-communist countries. In
addition, each year, several hundred thousand women are trafficked from
Eastern European countries for prostitution in sex industry centers all
over the world. The practices are extremely oppressive and incompatible
with universal standards of human rights. The sex trade is a form of
contemporary slavery and all indications predict its growth and
expansion into the 21st century.
Approximately three-fourths of the women who are recruited and
trafficked are unaware that they are destined for strip clubs,
brothels, or the street, where they are sold to eager male buyers. Most
of the women are seeking to escape poverty, violence and lack of
opportunities, but once they are under control of pimps or traffickers,
they are "seasoned" into prostitution by physical and sexual violence
and economic coercion. With no recourse, the women submit in the hope
of eventually earning enough money to buy their way out of debt bondage
or finding a way to escape. Women's compliance to multiple unwanted
sexual acts results in trauma to the mind and body. Survivors of
prostitution often report that each act of prostitution felt like a
rape. In order to endure the multiple invasions of the body women use
drugs and alcohol to numb the assaults to their dignity and bodily
integrity. Eventually, the woman's physical and emotional health is
destroyed.
Above all, state bodies and non-governmental organizations should
understand that prostitution is a demand market created by men who buy
and sell women's sexuality for their own profit and pleasure. Legal
reforms should therefore create remedies that assist victims and
prosecute perpetrators.
Most existing laws concerning prostitution were formulated on the
assumption that prostitution is immoral activity, with women being the
most immoral participants. Therefore, laws that ban prostitution
usually criminalize the women. By listening to women's experiences of
prostitution and moving beyond moralistic analyses, women's rights
groups have defined prostitution to be sexual exploitation and a form
of violence against women. All legal reforms should be based on this
understanding. Therefore, states should decriminalize prostitution for
women-that is, stop punishing women for being prostituted. Considering
the documented harm to women who are trafficked and prostituted, it is
only logical that women should not be criminalized for being the victim
of those abuses. Decriminalization also means that women will not fear
arrest if they seek assistance and may be more likely to testify
against pimps and traffickers.
But there absolutely should be no decriminalization for pimps,
traffickers, brothel owners, or the men who buy women in prostitution.
All legal reforms should aim to stop these perpetrators and profiteers.
Prostitution should not be legalized. Legalization means that the state
imposes regulations under which women can be prostituted. In effect,
regulation means that under certain conditions it is permissible to
exploit and abuse women. In several Eastern European states "tolerance
zones" are being considered; in other states there are proposals for
legalization. Most arguments in favor of legalization are based on
trying to distinguish between "free" and "forced" prostitution and
trafficking. Considering the extreme conditions of exploitation in the
sex industry, those distinctions are nothing but abstractions that make
for good academic debates. They are, however, meaningless to women
under the control of pimps or traffickers. Certainly, the sex industry
doesn't differentiate between "free" and "forced," and my research
reveals that men who buy women and children in prostitution don't
differentiate either. Legalization and regulation aim to redefine
prostitution as a form of work, indicated by the use of the term "sex
work." The renaming may clean up the image of prostitution, but it
doesn't end the violence and exploitation. It only allows criminals and
members of organized crime rings to become legitimate businessmen and
work hand-in-hand with the state in marketing women's bodies. In the
Netherlands, where two-thirds of the women in prostitution are
immigrants and one-half of them are trafficked illegal immigrants,
legalization has, in fact, increased prostitution and trafficking.
Prostitution is an extreme form of gender discrimination. Legalization
of this violence to women restricts women's freedom and citizenship
rights. If women are allowed to become a legitimate commodity, they are
consigned to a second-class citizenship. Democracy is subverted.
Women's bodies and emotions must belong to them alone. They must not be
traded or sold. The sex industry targets and consumes young women,
usually under age 25, often girls in their teens. If a state permits
prostitution to flourish, a certain portion of each generation of young
women will be lost. Prostitution causes extreme harm to the body and
the mind. Women who survive the beatings, rapes, sexually transmitted
diseases, drugs, alcohol, and emotional abuse, emerge from prostitution
ill, traumatized, and often, as poor as when they entered.
The enormity of the sex trade throughout the world is overwhelming, but
the only way to proceed is to acknowledge the violence and exploitation
for what it is and create remedies accordingly. Legalization will only
benefit traffickers and pimps and compromise individual women and the
status of women in the long run. In the words of one survivor of
prostitution: "Legalization will not end abuse; it will make abuse
legal."
Author
Donna M. Hughes has been an activist in the feminist anti-sexual
violence and exploitation movement since the early-1980s. She holds the
Eleanor M. and Oscar M. Carlson Endowed Chair in Women's Studies, and
is the Director of Women's Studies at the University of Rhode Island,
USA.
Published by
The Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, February 1999
Donna M. Hughes and Claire M. Roche, Editors
Donna M. Hughes, dhu...@uri.edu
http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes
http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/catw/mhvlegal.htm
Help Wanted: Psychic. You know where to apply.
Angel
But isn't a woman's body a woman's choice? If she wants to prostitute
herself what gives the patriarchal government the right to tell her what
she can and cannot do with her body?
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Prostitution is an extreme form of gender discrimination.
Ooops, forgetting male prostitutes, again! But I guess reality can't be
allowed to intrude upon feminist fantasy.
You just keep ignoring the real world, if that's what makes you happy.
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<llinve...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
> > Women's bodies and emotions must belong to them alone. They must not be
> > traded or sold.
If women's bodies belong to them alone, then who the hell are you to
try to stop them from selling them? What hypocrisy!
Angel
You gave me blame for that line. It was part of the article and it
wasn't from me. The line is horseshit and I would never claim it.
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<llinve...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
Sorry; thought I was responding to Chive.
Angel
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee wrote:
>
> In article <3AF91518...@socal.rr.com>, Angel
> <llinve...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > A Little Sugar in Your Coffee wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <3AF8BC97...@socal.rr.com>, Angel
> > > <llinve...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Women's bodies and emotions must belong to them alone. They must not be
> > > > > traded or sold.
> > >
> > > If women's bodies belong to them alone, then who the hell are you to
> > > try to stop them from selling them? What hypocrisy!
> >
> >
> > You gave me blame for that line. It was part of the article and it
> > wasn't from me. The line is horseshit and I would never claim it.
>
> Sorry; thought I was responding to Chive.
No problem ;-)
Chive Mynde
Thanks for demonstrating your ignorance, troll.
What part of "extreme" don't you understand?
Let me guess, you don't understand anything you read in the
first place, right?
"Extreme gender discrimination" is an accurate description of
prostitution since there are an extreme number of females in
that industry, as opposed to males.
Of course, you knew that, but you just had to troll anyway.
You're a moron.
- Chive
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 09 May 2001 19:56:05 +1200, in article
> <090520011956052691%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
> >
> >In article <9da81...@drn.newsguy.com>, Chive Mynde
> ><chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Prostitution is an extreme form of gender discrimination.
> >
> >Ooops, forgetting male prostitutes, again! But I guess reality can't be
> >allowed to intrude upon feminist fantasy.
> >
> >You just keep ignoring the real world, if that's what makes you happy.
>
> Thanks for demonstrating your ignorance, troll.
>
> What part of "extreme" don't you understand?
>
> Let me guess, you don't understand anything you read in the
> first place, right?
>
> "Extreme gender discrimination" is an accurate description of
> prostitution since there are an extreme number of females in
> that industry, as opposed to males.
>
> Of course, you knew that, but you just had to troll anyway.
>
> You're a moron.
>
> - Chive
>
> Help Wanted: Psychic. You know where to apply.
Oh Chive...
The idea was supposed to be that prostitution is male discrimination
against women. But since male prostitution exists, the idea that
prostitution is male discrimination against women is clearly WRONG.
But now you have changed your story about what you meant, because you
realise that you can't defend that obviously absurd idea. Your new
story makes even less sense: is what is wrong with prostitution the
fact that there are more female than male prostitutes?
Would it no longer be a form of "discrimination" if there were as many
male as female prostitutes? Sounds to me like you are arguing for more
male prostitution...well sure, let's let more men get in on the game!
Women shouldn't have all the fun!
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 09 May 2001 19:56:05 +1200, in article
> <090520011956052691%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
> >
> >In article <9da81...@drn.newsguy.com>, Chive Mynde
> ><chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Prostitution is an extreme form of gender discrimination.
> >
> >Ooops, forgetting male prostitutes, again! But I guess reality can't be
> >allowed to intrude upon feminist fantasy.
> >
> >You just keep ignoring the real world, if that's what makes you happy.
>
> Thanks for demonstrating your ignorance, troll.
>
> What part of "extreme" don't you understand?
>
> Let me guess, you don't understand anything you read in the
> first place, right?
>
> "Extreme gender discrimination" is an accurate description of
> prostitution since there are an extreme number of females in
> that industry, as opposed to males.
>
> Of course, you knew that, but you just had to troll anyway.
>
> You're a moron.
>
> - Chive
>
> Help Wanted: Psychic. You know where to apply.
Oh, one more thing.
If there aren't enough male as opposed to female prostitutes, strictly
speaking shouldn't that be considered discrimination against men?
Chive Mynde
No, you moronic, anti-feminist, propagandist.
Prostitution is an extreme form of gender discrimination.
That's a fact.
HTH.
Chive Mynde
Nonsense.
You are an anti-feminist, propagandist, without the necessary
reading comprehension skills in order to understand what an idea
is or isn't.
HTH.
Angel
And for proof of this "fact" you offer what? The opinion of someone
the majority of people on this board think is a sick, twisted
individual?
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
No, it's an assertion, and not a very convincing assertion at that.
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
So, we agree that prostitution isn't male discrimination against women
then. Good.
Would you now mind explaining in exactly what sense prostitution is
supposed to be discrimination? Come on Chive, don't be shy!
Chive Mynde
Angel, your moronic comments only demonstrate your ignorance.
Prostitution is an extreme form of gender discrimination.
The statistics, facts, evidence, and data that I've posted and
that you consistently ignore, prove it.
Of course, you know that, but you are still trolling alt.feminism.
When you are mature enough to engage in *actual* discussion, and
not silly games, let me know.
Here is the evidence you refuse to acknowledge:
29 Important Facts about Prostitution
1. The higher percentages (80%-90%) of reports of incest and childhood
sexual assaults of prostitutes come from anecdotal reports and from
clinicians working with prostitutes (interviews with Nevada
psychologists cited by Patricia Murphy, Making the Connections: women,
work, and abuse, 1993, Paul M. Deutsch Press, Orlando, Florida; see
also Rita Belton, "Prostitution as Traumatic Reenactment," 1992,
International Society for Traumatic Stress Annual Meeting, Los Angeles,
CA)
2. Estimates of the prevalence of incest among prostitutes range from
65% to 85%. The Council for Prostitution Alternatives, Portland, Oregon
Annual Report in 1991 stated that: 85% of prostitute/clients reported
history of sexual abuse in childhood; 70% reported incest.
3. 68% of 130 San Francisco prostitutes reported having been raped in
prostitution.
88% of 130 San Francisco prostitutes reported having experienced
physical threat in prostitution.
82% of 130 San Francisco prostitutes reported having experienced
physical assault in prostitution.
(Melissa Farley and Norma Hotaling, 1996, in press, "Prostitution,
violence, and posttraumatic stress disorder").
4. "About 80% of women in prostitution have been the victim of a rape.
It's hard to talk about this because..the experience of prostitution is
just like rape. Prostitutes are raped, on the average, eight to ten
times per year. They are the most raped class of women in the history
of our planet. " (Susan Kay Hunter and K.C. Reed, July, 1990 "Taking
the side of bought and sold rape," speech at National Coalition against
Sexual Assault, Washington, D.C. )
5. 70% of San Francisco prostitutes reported being raped by customers an
average of 31 times. (Mimi Silbert, "Compounding factors in the rape of
street prostitutes," 1988, in A.W. Burgess (ed.) Rape and Sexual
Assault II, New York, Garland Publishing.
6. 78% of 55 women who sought help from the Council for Prostitution
Alternatives in 1991 reported being raped an average of 16 times a year
by pimps, and were raped 33 times a year by johns.
(Susan Kay Hunter, Council for Prostitution Alternatives Annual Report,
1991, Portland, Oregon)
7. The average age of entry into prostitution is 13 years (M.H.
Silbert and A.M. Pines, 1982, "Victimization of street prostitutes,
Victimology: An International Journal, 7: 122-133) or 14 years (D.Kelly
Weisberg, 1985, Children of the Night: A Study of Adolescent
Prostitution, Lexington, Mass, Toronto). These studies are outdated,
since the age of entry into prostitution is decreasing. For example,
how do we even conceptualize "juvenile" prostitution, when the age of
consent is lowered to 12 years, as has happened in 1995 in Australia
and Netherlands?
8. 65% of prostitutes reported sexual abuse in childhood (M.H. Silbert
and A.M. Pines, 1982, "Victimization of street
prostitutes, "Victimology: An International Journal, 7: 122-133)
9. 80% of prostitution-survivors at the WHISPER Oral History Project
reported that their customers showed them pornography to illustrate the
kinds of sexual activities in which they wanted to engage. 52% of the
women stated that pornography played a significant role in teaching
them what was expected of them as prostitutes. 30% reported that their
pimps regularly exposed them to pornography in order to indoctrinate
them into an acceptance of the practices depicted. (A facilitator's
guide to Prostitution: a matter of violence against women, 1990,
WHISPER - Women Hurt in Systems of Prostitution Engaged in Revolt -
Lake St. Station, POB 8719, Minneapolis, MN 55408)
10. 32% of 130 prostitutes interviewed in San Francisco reported that
they had been upset by attempts by customers to coerce them into acts
seen in pornography. (Melissa Farley and Norma Hotaling, 1996, in
press, "Prostitution, violence, and posttraumatic stress disorder).
11. 48% of 110 prostitutes interviewed in Thailand reported that they
had been upset by attempts by customers to coerce them into acts seen
in pornography. (Melissa Farley, 1996, unpublished data, POB 16254, San
Francisco CA 94116)
12. In prostitution, "men buy not a self but a body that performs as a
self, and it is a self that conforms to the most harmful, damaging,
racist and sexist concepts of women..." (Kathleen Barry, The
Prostitution of Sexuality, 1995, New York, New York University Press)
13. The prostitution market is driven by customer demand for sexual
service. During WW II, the Japanese military forced from 100,000 to
200,000 Korean women into prostitution to service their military.
(Kathleen Barry, The Prostitution of Sexuality, 1995, New York, New
York University Press)
14. In 1974, police estimated that there were 400,000 prostitutes in
Thailand, procured primarily for the U.S. military on R & R from the
Vietnam War. As of 1993, an unofficial estimate is that there are 2
million prostitutes in Thailand, whose national economy is dependent on
tourism. Prostitution is the largest commodity for the 450,000 Thai men
who purchase prostitutes daily and for a large percentage of the 5.4
million tourists a year who arrive in Thailand for "sex tours."
(Kathleen Barry, The Prostitution of Sexuality, 1995, New York, New
York University Press)
15. 90% of prostituted women interviewed by WHISPER had pimps while in
prostitution (Evelina Giobbe, 1987, WHISPER Oral History Project,
Minneapolis, Minnesota).
16. Pimps target girls or women who seem naive, lonely, homeless, and
rebellious. At first, the attention and feigned affection from the pimp
convinces her to "be his woman." Pimps ultimately keep prostituted
women in virtual captivity by verbal abuse - making a woman feel that
she is utterly worthless: a toilet, a piece of trash; and by physical
coercion - beatings and the threat of torture. 80% to 95% of all
prostitution is pimp-controlled. (Kathleen Barry, The Prostitution of
Sexuality, 1995, New York, New York University Press)
17. The answer to the question "why do prostitutes stay with their
pimps" is the same as the answer to the question "why do battered women
stay with their batterers." Humans bond emotionally to their abusers as
a psychological strategy to survive under conditions of captivity. This
has been described as the Stockholm syndrome (see Dee Graham with
Rawlings and Rigsby, Loving to Survive: Sexual Terror, Men's Violence,
and Women's Lives, 1994, New York University Press, New York.)
18. In 1994, women in the sex industry were identified as one of three
populations most in need of specialized services, primarily as a result
of the violence inflicted upon them as a result of their work. (City of
Seattle Dept of Housing and Human Service, Domestic Violence Community
Advocacy Program Expansion, Feb. 1994)
19. Men call up the image of the whore when they are abusing their
partners. The accusations in between the kicks and slaps: "You
slut....whore...." Historically, the words mean "subhuman," "having no
rights," "invisible," and "wicked." As recently as 1991, police in a
southern California community closed all rape reports made by
prostitutes and addicts, placing them in a file stamped "NHI." The
letters stand for the words "No Human Involved." (Linda Fairstein,
Sexual Violence: Our War Against Rape, 1993, New York, William Morrow.)
20. We usually don't see prostitution as domestic violence because it
is just too painful: "...the carnage: the scale of it, the dailiness of
it, the seeming inevitability of it; the torture, the rapes, the
murders, the beatings, the despair, the hollowing out of the
personality, the near extinguishment of hope commonly suffered by women
in prostitution." (Margaret A. Baldwin "Split at the Root: Prostitution
and Feminist Discourses of Law Reform" in Yale Journal of Law and
Feminism, 1992, Vol 5: 47-120)
21. "Furthermore, 90% of the women in this study had experienced
violence in their personal relationships resulting in miscarriage,
stabbing, loss of consciousness, and head injuries" (Parriott, Ruth.
Health Experiences of Twin Cities Women Used in Prostitution: Survey
Findings and Recommendations. Unpublished, May 1994. Available from
Breaking Free, 1821 University Ave., Suite 312, South, St. Paul,
Minnesota 55104; also available from the Coalition Against Trafficking
in Women.)
22. A Canadian Report on Prostitution and Pornography concluded that
girls and women in prostitution have a mortality rate 40 times higher
than the national average. ( Margaret A. Baldwin, 1992, "Split at the
Root: Prostitution and Feminist Discourses of Law Reform" in Yale
Journal of Law and Feminism, Vol 5: 47-120)
22. In one study, 75% of women in escort prostitution had attempted
suicide. Prostituted women comprised 15% of all completed suicides
reported by hospitals. (Letter from Susan Kay Hunter, Council for
Prostitution Alternatives, Jan 6, 1993, cited by Phyllis Chesler in "A
Woman's Right to Self-Defense: the case of Aileen Carol Wuornos," in
Patriarchy: Notes of an Expert Witness, 1994, Common Courage Press,
Monroe, Maine.
23. In 1993, 42% of women arrested in Seattle on prostitution-related
charges were convicted.
In 1993, 8% of men arrested in Seattle on prostitution-related
charges were convicted. (Seattle Women's Commission, 1995, "Project to
Address the Legal, Political, and Service Barriers Facing Women in the
Sex Industry" Seattle, Washington.
24. Like combat veterans, prostitutes suffer from posttraumatic stress
disorder (PTSD), a psychological reaction to extreme physical and
emotional trauma. Symptoms are acute anxiety, depression, insomnia,
irritability, flashbacks, emotional numbing, and being in a state of
emotional hyperalertness. 130 prostitutes from San Francisco, and 110
prostitutes from Thailand had higher PTSD scores than 123 Vietnam
veterans requesting treatment and 1006 Persian Gulf War veterans.
(Melissa Farley, "Posttraumatic stress disorder among prostitutes -
preliminary data from California and Thailand," October, 1995,
Study Group on Disability, American Public Health Association Annual
Meeting, San Diego, CA)
25. "In addition to the physical and sexual violence clients
perpetrate against women in prostitution, there is also the
psychological and spiritual violence of this invisibility, of listening
to all these details about 'real' sex with 'real" human beings, wives
and girlfriends, and then being expected to fulfill the needs and
fantasies that these non-prostitutes cannot or will not submit to (or
don't know about). It is a violence that spreads, with the john as the
vector of violence, like venereal disease from the bed of one woman to
the bed of another, from the woman in prostitution to the steady
partner. It is invisibility on one end and deception on the other. It
is a tapestry of lies undermining every woman's humanity." (Jane
Anthony, 1996)
26. "[In the past, we had a women's] movement which understood that
the choice to be beaten by one man for economic survival was not a real
choice, despite the appearance of consent a marriage contract might
provide. ...Yet now we are supposed to believe, in the name of
feminism, that the choice to be fucked by hundreds of men for economic
survival must be affirmed as a real choice, and if the woman signs a
model release there is no coercion there." (Catharine A.
MacKinnon, "Liberalism and the Death of Feminism," in Dorchen
Leidholdt and Janice Raymond (eds), The Sexual Liberals and the Attack
on Feminism, 1990, Teachers College Press, New York.)
27. In 1994, women in the sex industry were identified as one of three
populations most in need of specialized services, primarily as a result
of the violence inflicted upon them as a result of their work. (City of
Seattle Dept of Housing and Human Service, Domestic Violence Community
Advocacy Program Expansion, Feb. 1994)
28. 88% of 130 San Francisco prostitutes stated that they wanted to
get out of prostitution (Melissa Farley and Norma Hotaling, 1996, in
press, "Prostitution, violence, and posttraumatic stress disorder). 94%
of 110 Thai prostitutes, and a similar percentage of 108 prostitutes
from Zambia stated that they wanted to get out of prostitution (Melissa
Farley, unpublished data, 1996)
29. There are few if any programs which address the needs of children
of prostitutes. In a recent study of 1,963 prostitutes, more than two-
thirds had at least one child. The average number of children was 2.
40% of the children lived with their grandmothers, but 20% lived with a
mother working as a prostitute. 9% of the children were in foster care.
5% of the working prostitutes were pregnant when interviewed. (Adele
Weiner, "Understanding the Social Needs of Streetwalking Prostitutes,"
1996, Social Work, 41: 97-106.)
Chive Mynde
29 Important Facts about Prostitution
HTH.
Chive Mynde
No, it's a *fact*, as demonstrated by the following evidence:
HTH.
- Chive
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Ah Chive, you know as well as I do that that post does not in any way
answer the question. You've obviously run out of new ideas. Even as a
troll, you're a loser.
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Dear oh dear, but this *does* get boring.
I don't believe your victimologists. Sorry.
And even if I did believe much of anything that they said, it still
wouldn't prove what you say it does.
Chive Mynde
>Dear oh dear, but this *does* get boring.
Sure it does, since you continue to avoid the evidence.
>I don't believe your victimologists. Sorry.
You mean to say, you don't believe in facts, evidence, statistics,
and science.
Instead, you cling to irrational and biased Rush Limbaughisms and
delusional, anti-feminist ideology.
So basically, you are admitting that you aren't interested in
honesty nor discussion. Thanks for making yourself clear.
>And even if I did believe much of anything that they said, it still
>wouldn't prove what you say it does.
I'm not asking you to believe anything. I'm asking for you to
examine the evidence. As for proof, that is the realm of mathematics,
not science.
Get an education before posting again.
Chive Mynde
<120520010015461717%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
>> >Would you now mind explaining in exactly what sense prostitution is
>> >supposed to be discrimination? Come on Chive, don't be shy!
That wasn't what was said, Mr. Strawman.
What was said was that prostitution was extreme gender discrimination.
Here is the evidence for that claim:
Sorry, troll, I've answered the question, multiple times.
And you continue to avoid the evidence like the troll you truly are.
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >Dear oh dear, but this *does* get boring.
>
> Sure it does, since you continue to avoid the evidence.
The "evidence" you keep posting in vain attempts to distract attention
away from the fact that you don't have anything resembling a rational
argument is irrelevant, as I've explained before.
> >I don't believe your victimologists. Sorry.
>
> You mean to say, you don't believe in facts, evidence, statistics,
> and science.
No. I mean I don't believe in a bunch in the fantasies of a bunch of
neurotics with an anti-male agenda.
> Instead, you cling to irrational and biased Rush Limbaughisms and
> delusional, anti-feminist ideology.
Ooooh! You're comparing me to Rush Limbaugh! Well, thanks. I take Rush
Limbaugh a whole lot more seriously than any of your dreary feminist
ideologues.
By the way, nothing I've said has been anti-feminist in the least. But
I guess "anti-feminist" just means disagreeing with you, right?
> So basically, you are admitting that you aren't interested in
> honesty nor discussion. Thanks for making yourself clear.
>
> >And even if I did believe much of anything that they said, it still
> >wouldn't prove what you say it does.
>
> I'm not asking you to believe anything. I'm asking for you to
> examine the evidence. As for proof, that is the realm of mathematics,
> not science.
>
> Get an education before posting again.
>
> HTH.
>
> - Chive
>
> Help Wanted: Psychic. You know where to apply.
What a sorry excuse for a human being you are.
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2001 00:15:46 +1200, in article
> <120520010015461717%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
>
> >> >Would you now mind explaining in exactly what sense prostitution is
> >> >supposed to be discrimination? Come on Chive, don't be shy!
>
> That wasn't what was said, Mr. Strawman.
>
> What was said was that prostitution was extreme gender discrimination.
>
> Here is the evidence for that claim:
None of those articles provide any support whatsoever for the claim
that prostitution is "extreme gender discrimination" - a phrase that
you don't even bother to define, I notice.
And by the way - if even one of those articles proved your case, that
is the only article you would need to cite.
Chive Mynde
<120520011204374732%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
>
>In article <9dhbp...@drn.newsguy.com>, Chive Mynde
><chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> >Dear oh dear, but this *does* get boring.
>>
>> Sure it does, since you continue to avoid the evidence.
>
>The "evidence" you keep posting in vain attempts to distract attention
Wrong again. Evidence does not distract attention, you do. The
evidence that I posted substantiates the claims that have been
made. Meanwhile, you continue to obfuscate and make fallacious
arguments in the hopes of distracting attention away from *yourself*
since you have completely failed to substantiate every claim you
have ever made.
Get an education. You aren't fooling anyone.
Clearly, you are nothing more than a troll.
Chive Mynde
<120520011206281418%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
>
>In article <9dhc2...@drn.newsguy.com>, Chive Mynde
><chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 12 May 2001 00:15:46 +1200, in article
>> <120520010015461717%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
>>
>> >> >Would you now mind explaining in exactly what sense prostitution is
>> >> >supposed to be discrimination? Come on Chive, don't be shy!
>>
>> That wasn't what was said, Mr. Strawman.
>>
>> What was said was that prostitution was extreme gender discrimination.
>>
>> Here is the evidence for that claim:
>
>None of those articles provide any support whatsoever for the claim
>that prostitution is "extreme gender discrimination" - a phrase that
>you don't even bother to define, I notice.
The articles that I posted provide 100% support and substantiation
for the claim that prostitution is "extreme gender discrimination".
The fact that you don't understand the evidence that was posted,
demonstrates your ignorance.
>And by the way - if even one of those articles proved your case, that
>is the only article you would need to cite.
All of the articles prove the claim. Every single one.
You dismiss the evidence because it contradicts your biased,
anti-feminist agenda.
Get an education.
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2001 12:04:37 +1200, in article
> <120520011204374732%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
> >
> >In article <9dhbp...@drn.newsguy.com>, Chive Mynde
> ><chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >Dear oh dear, but this *does* get boring.
> >>
> >> Sure it does, since you continue to avoid the evidence.
> >
> >The "evidence" you keep posting in vain attempts to distract attention
>
> Wrong again. Evidence does not distract attention, you do. The
> evidence that I posted substantiates the claims that have been
> made.
"Substantiates" = proves. Except that you claimed that proof isn't
possible. Ooops, a contradiction! You're a fuckwit, Chive.
Meanwhile, you continue to obfuscate and make fallacious
> arguments in the hopes of distracting attention away from *yourself*
> since you have completely failed to substantiate every claim you
> have ever made.
>
> Get an education. You aren't fooling anyone.
Oh really? Would anyone else like to comment on that? Am I in fact
"fooling" you?
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Still no definition of "extreme gender definition" then? If you weren't
a troll, I'm sure you would have loved to explain just what that
sexy-sounding expression actually means...
Chive Mynde
<120520012141066047%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
>
>In article <9di3m...@drn.newsguy.com>, Chive Mynde
><chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 12 May 2001 12:04:37 +1200, in article
>> <120520011204374732%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
>> >
>> >In article <9dhbp...@drn.newsguy.com>, Chive Mynde
>> ><chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Dear oh dear, but this *does* get boring.
>> >>
>> >> Sure it does, since you continue to avoid the evidence.
>> >
>> >The "evidence" you keep posting in vain attempts to distract attention
>>
>> Wrong again. Evidence does not distract attention, you do. The
>> evidence that I posted substantiates the claims that have been
>> made.
>
>"Substantiates" = proves.
Nope. Substantiate, in this context, means to verify by *competent*
evidence.
I can prove nothing, however I can establish the validity of your
statements.
You have proved, for example, that you are full of shit.
Chive Mynde
The definitions have been offered in the evidence you refused
to read, acknowledge, and verify.
You are nothing more than a troll.
Chive Mynde
<Xns909FF260E...@194.42.224.159>, far...@subdimension.com wrote:
>
>Chive Mynde <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote in
>news:9di3m...@drn.newsguy.com:
>> you have completely failed to substantiate every claim you
>> have ever made
>
>one has the time to substantiate everything they say Chive :)
I think you missed the word "claim". I did not say that he had
to substantiated everything he said, just his claims, which remain
unsubstantiated.
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
<chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2001 21:41:06 +1200, in article
> <120520012141066047%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
> >
> >In article <9di3m...@drn.newsguy.com>, Chive Mynde
> ><chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 12 May 2001 12:04:37 +1200, in article
> >> <120520011204374732%wha...@ihug.co.nz>, A wrote:
> >> >
> >> >In article <9dhbp...@drn.newsguy.com>, Chive Mynde
> >> ><chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> >Dear oh dear, but this *does* get boring.
> >> >>
> >> >> Sure it does, since you continue to avoid the evidence.
> >> >
> >> >The "evidence" you keep posting in vain attempts to distract attention
> >>
> >> Wrong again. Evidence does not distract attention, you do. The
> >> evidence that I posted substantiates the claims that have been
> >> made.
> >
> >"Substantiates" = proves.
>
> Nope. Substantiate, in this context, means to verify by *competent*
> evidence.
>
> I can prove nothing, however I can establish the validity of your
> statements.
>
> You have proved, for example, that you are full of shit.
>
> HTH.
>
> - Chive
>
> Help Wanted: Psychic. You know where to apply.
Well lordy lordy lordy.
Verify also means "prove." Look it up in a dictionary.
Does anyone want to share their opinion as to which of us - Chive or
myself - is full of shit?
A Little Sugar in Your Coffee
Chive Mynde
<Xns90A1E850...@194.42.224.159>, far...@subdimension.com wrote:
>
>Chive Mynde <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote in
>> I think you missed the word "claim". I did not say that he had
>> to substantiated everything he said, just his claims, which remain
>> unsubstantiated.
>
>kind of thing :)
That's strange, I haven't found one serious post on this group.