They’re at it again. Scarcely two months after warning Craigslist.com to censor personal ads government bureaucrats say are actually solicitations for prostitution, the same morality police are threatening tougher action. What has Craigslist done so far in response?
The online advertising site has changed its “erotic services” category to “adult services,” and has further reputedly banned some of the more graphic photos. However, this won’t satisfy Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart, who earlier this year filed a lawsuit against the San Francisco-based company, citing it as being, in his estimation, America’s largest source of prostitution. Dart’s attorney, Dan Gallagher, says that some of the Craigslist ads offer escort services for as little as 15 minutes. “They go to great lengths to say this is just a site so that people can meet one another to fulfill their romantic aspirations,” Gallagher said. “I don’t think having an escort for 15 minutes is a fulfillment of romantic aspirations.”
Therein lies the problem. If Gallagher and Dart don’t find anything romantic or appealing about a short tryst with a consenting adult, that’s strictly their business, and there’s nothing necessarily wrong with holding that opinion. However, they are obviously not content with keeping their feelings to themselves. They are attempting to use coercive violence – the power of the “law” – to prevent others from pursuing peaceful desires. What’s the difference between a simple date that ends in a sexual encounter, and one in which some money or other form of compensation changes hands? Whose business is that other than those directly involved? What incursion upon life, liberty, or property is being initiated by capitalistic acts taking place between two or more consenting adults?
Perhaps the questions go beyond any supposedly moral arguments (and I would argue that there is nothing moral to begin with in using violence to alter peaceful behavior), and have to do more with government’s inability to profit from such activities. In the War on Drugs, since anyone can grow marijuana, it is too difficult logistically to license, regulate, and tax growers – unlike with liquor and tobacco, which both require more complicated and expensive processing in order to produce products of marketable quality. So it is with the War on Sex – even in jurisdictions of legalized prostitution, such as Nevada, countless unlicensed sex workers ply their trade without paying taxes or following other governmental regulations. This is perhaps the greater part of the reason why, in addition to Dart and Gallagher’s lawsuit, no fewer than 40 state attorney generals are currently examining further and more aggressive actions against Craigslist.
One of the axioms among anarchists is that governments are little more than organized theft and violence. Perhaps nowhere is this more evident than in government’s war on human sexual activity. Not ever content in the scope of their power, government bureaucrats are even so brazen as to intervene in this most private and personal realm of human affairs. Such egregious invasions upon liberty, on top of all other ways in which governments involve themselves in our affairs, ought to prompt us not to look for ways in which such an institution might be best limited – as with constitutions that have done nothing of the sort in practice – but how to most expediently, and without compromise, affect its summary dissolution.
The “other war” on Craigslist is the slanderous attacks by the mainstream media. Some fellow charged with murdering someone he met through a Craigslist ad is always referred to as the “Craigslist Killer.” As if Craigslist was somehow involved in the murder. If someone was caught selling stolen cars through ads placed in the Dallas Morning News, would he then be referred to as the “Dallas Morning News Thief?” I seriously doubt it.
When people see this inaccurate reference over and over it creates a negative image of the website in the minds of the uninformed, which of course, is exactly what the mainstream media, particularly newspapers, hope to achieve. Craigslist is responsible for the loss of millions of dollars of classified advertising by these news organs. This is their revenge.
As long as prostitution is illegal, going after Internet prostitution is to be expected.
Two things need to happen to stop such government hijinks. The first is to legalize prostitution at large between consenting adults who are free agents (from both human trafficking and addiction). The second is to make sure that children, addicts and sex slaves (often all three) are rescued and given succor and treatment regardless of the legality of prostitution – even if they do not immediately consent to this.
Until the latter occurs, don’t expect the former anytime soon.
legalize prostitution at large between consenting adults who are free agents (from both human trafficking and addiction)
I fail to see how someone's mental state (i.e. "addiction") ought to enter into any kind of "justice" calculation regarding the sex trade.
And most "addicts" rescue themselves, anyway.
Mike, addiction relates to their freedom to consent. If someone is adled by drugs and alcohol their consent is likely not informed and they are likely to be taken advantage of. In fact, putting the moves on someone who is high or drunk, even if they respond, is considered rape. There is no room in prostitution for rape, which is why human trafficking and sex slavery must also remain illegal.
Prostitution can never be legal until we all understand that no consent = rape.
Before i begin, i want to make it clear i love craigslist, i love sex, and i hate the state.
I agree completely with the thesis of this post. However, i want to make a minor point of contention.
“What’s the difference between a simple date that ends in a sexual encounter, and one in which some money or other form of compensation changes hands?”
One is a gift, the other; exchange. This is the difference. Even if there is no state there is a difference. Even though many here don’t want to see it, turning yourself and/or others into a commodity (whether through sex, labor, or anything else) is a reduction, rather than expansion.
I just hope that absent the state, most people will realize that the “security” or assuredness that comes with exchange was only necessary under the thievery of the state. (and other such institutions)
A good point, xveganx. Enlightened, in fact.
Michael,
Re: informed consent, that may be so. However, one must adopt some sort of benevolent omniscient perspective in order to determine whether another is capable of granting that consent. I'd prefer to just ask them, rather than presuming.
Prostitution already is legal in any number of jurisdictions on this watery rock of ours. This observation alone reduces the last statement to a non sequitur, though I do see where you're coming from.
Consent is not that hard to determine. If she is drunk or high, a child, under the control of pimp – especially if she doesn’t speak english, you can be pretty sure she is not able to give consent. If you are dealing with such a situation in the guise of prostitution, the only honorable thing for an anarchist to do is to rescue the poor girl and shoot the pimp if he comes after you. If there is no pimp and you are dealing with an addict or a child, give up any goals of sex and act like a concerned parent.
While prostitution is legal in some places – often with salutory effects on the prostitutes themselves – in general it is not going to expand in legality unless we take care of the problem cases – not because it shouldn’t legalized (and I think it should be) but because the voting public won’t allow it to be.
Very interesting blog, I like it, good job!
Very interesting blog, good job!