A Bit of P.C. Male Bashing from John Banks
In issuing an abatement notice banning a brothel from operating near a school and the homes of retired people, John Banks stated “My first and foremost interest in all of these matters is making sure that the residents, particularly elderly families and families, can live in suburbs without fear of intimidation by the kind of people that tend to frequent these places.” Instead of highlighting the brothel and its exploitative business, Banks conveniently blames the customers. That’s like blaming drug addicts while failing to criticize the pushers. It’s a shame that Mr Banks and others critical of the prostitution industry tend to be so mealy-mouthed. They seem to be frightened of standing up to a feminist whitewashing campaign regarding prostitution.
Banks’ comment of course has little validity. Most brothel customers are ordinary employed men who earn reasonably well. A good proportion will be shy and unconfident and the proportion who are criminally oriented may well be lower than that in the general population. They will need enough disposable income to pay women the kind of hourly rate people could otherwise expect ony with professional qualifications requiring years of study. The poor ethical standards of the brothel owners, prostitutes and their associates present a much greater risk to the local community than the customers ever will. The prostitutes and brothel managers are more likely than the customers to come from a criminal underworld, and the prostitutes, brothel managers, their boyfriends and associates are more likely to be responsible for any increase in burglaries, drug supplying etc in a neighbourhood the brothel moves in to.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not a campaigner against prostitution or some legalization of it. However, few topics ever gave rise to so much official denial and b.s. Prostitutes were seen as poor, defenseless, exploited victims forced into degradation to indulge men’s depraved sexuality. The result was the Clark government’s prostitution legislation that largely ignored customers’ interests and essentially gave prostitutes open slather to exploit men’s sexual needs for profit. Aside from some basic rules, e.g. about hygiene and brothel location, the legislation placed no ethical responsibilities on prostitutes but instead seemed to assume they would all be benign providers of personal care services. In contrast, other service providers such as doctors and health workers are thought to be particularly untrustworthy and therefore are covered by strong legislation enforced by a powerful commission with judicial powers, obliging them to operate under strict codes of ethical conduct in order to protect the public from them. Other industries that present special risks to customers (e.g. used car sales, alcohol and gambling providers) are also covered by restrictive ethical rules intended to protect their customers. Not so for prostitution. Not a hint of special protection against the fostering of sexual addictions, against deceptive ploys to lure customers (e.g. initially pretending to be a woman out socializing and wanting to get to know a man), against exploiting drunk or drug-affected men, against damage to family units and children when spouses find out their husbands have been spending money at brothels, against false representation of what services customers can expect for their money, against thieving from customer’s wallets, or even against extortion that is so conveniently available to prostitutes who have direct knowledge about the secret and potentially embarrassing activities of customers.
One can understand why feminists have promoted the cause of prostitution and associated propaganda that led to the current privileged status for prostitutes and their industry. The ability for women to make a lot of money easily from men due to biological forces is a power they do not want constrained, certainly not by any notion of wider ethical responsibilities to men, society, families or children.
Community pressure everywhere has made things difficult for brothels in spite of the aims of the Clark government’s law changes. Here’s hoping that some of that pressure will include enough bravery and integrity to discuss issues honestly rather than resorting to the politically-correct convenience of blaming customers, i.e. men.
In reality I suggest the majority of customers don’t want to be noticed! It’s a bit like living with the Black Power over the road. Safest place in town and quietest. The last thing they want to do is attract attention!
Comment by Alastair — Mon 27th April 2009 @ 5:36 pm
More Vigilante Justice Against Prostitute Laws
Family First is predicting that there will be more ‘vigilante justice’ against street prostitution and residential-based brothels as communities around the country become victims of a flawed law change. “It is not only the residents of Papatoetoe that have had a gutsful of the antics of the sex and street industry,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “We are being regularly contacted by groups around the country who are opposed to brothels opening next door to family homes, and within a short distance of sensitive sites such as schools, playgrounds, and playcentres. Communities such as Manurewa and Papatoetoe who unwillingly ‘host’ street workers are distressed by their public behaviour, the aftermath of their activity, and the unacceptable exposure to children and families.”
“The decriminalisation of prostitution has been a community disaster harming families, businesses, and the welfare of workers caught in the industry. Cities throughout NZ have been trying to deal with the ‘hospital pass’ given by the politicians when they passed this law. It’s time they fixed the law.” READ MORE
Comment by julie — Mon 27th April 2009 @ 7:30 pm
Sex workers given one month’s grace
NZ Herald Apr 22, 2009
An Auckland community group that warns people not to use street sex workers has agreed to a month’s amnesty – but has warned it will not stop until street prostitutes are out of the neighbourhood. The Papatoetoe Reclaiming our Streets group, made up of local residents, has been patrolling Hunters Corner for the past few months after becoming fed up with noise, violence and offensive litter being left behind by street prostitutes. The group will stop its patrols for a month, to let the police and street prostitutes work to find a solution for all the parties involved. But the head of PROS, Stephen Grey, said that the group would be back if was it unhappy with the result. “We’ve agreed so the police and the [Prostitutes] Collective can tidy up their act,” he said. “We want them off our streets and out of Papatoetoe.” Mr Grey said the group’s ideal outcome – with the residents of Papatoetoe, particularly around Hunters Corner – would be to have street prostitutes outlawed from residential streets and suburban areas.
…Meanwhile, Manukau City Council will again recommend to the Government to have the Prostitute Reform Act 2003 changed, which would see street prostitution made illegal. Former MP and now Kiwi Party president Gordon Copeland yesterday said it was time to “clean up” the prostitution law.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/
Comment by julie — Mon 27th April 2009 @ 7:34 pm
Hamilton City brothel bylaw fight reignites
Waikato Times 06 April 2009
Hamilton’s sex-in-the-suburbs stoush looks set for another round. The city council’s 2004 prostitution bylaw is up for review and will go out for public consultation following a full council meeting this week. Sex workers and some advocacy groups want the bylaw abolished because they say it forces the industry underground and makes for an unsafe working environment. But opponents want the tough rules, which ban sex workers and brothels from operating in residential areas, to stay put and think the bylaw is doing a good job. READ MORE
Comment by julie — Mon 27th April 2009 @ 8:05 pm
This group I understand seeks to expose and to embarrass customers, a dangerous undertaking that could result in considerable injustice. For a start, customers are doing nothing illegal. Secondly, the group may incorrectly assume that people are customers simply because they are in the area. I don’t know any details of how they operate thoug, and clearly they are also trying to get the prostitutes away from the area.
Comment by Hans Laven — Tue 28th April 2009 @ 1:01 pm
They have also been named as a group called “Community Patrol” This is an adjunct to the police, however civilians. (Refered to behind their backs locally at least as “Dads Army” Their members are generally drawn from the would be’s if they could be’s of the community. They have among other things access to police computers, CCTV surveilance systems, and in some districts drive around in cars with markings very similar to the police. They have used their “Special” status with the police to “Settle scores” with people who have earned their disfavour. The fact that the police are attempting to distance themselves in this instance suggests that they have earned police disfavour.
Comment by Alastair — Tue 28th April 2009 @ 1:14 pm
You are right of course Hans regarding customers. And you wrote a great thread.
Comment by julie — Tue 28th April 2009 @ 4:52 pm
Thanks for sharing this Alistair.
Comment by julie — Thu 30th April 2009 @ 11:26 pm
An interesting aside here. The story inspires several responses from me. Firstly, good on these Kenyan women for their use of what may be an effective method to encourage their male partners to find solutions for political differences. Secondly, the story highlights the influence that women often had on politics within their societies even though they may not have been the politicians. (It’s better that women in many countries can now participate directly in government, but feminist claims that women had no say in the past were never accurate.) Thirdly, feminists rarely admit to women’s biologically determined sexual power but will readily exploit it and defend their right to do so. They certainly don’t account for it in any way when devising law. Lastly, I doubt that many Kenyan prostitutes will forgo the windfall that awaits them during this sex strike!
Comment by Hans Laven — Sun 3rd May 2009 @ 12:50 am
I always heard that behind every great man is a great woman.
I was never told what was behind every failure. Behind every failure-of-a-man is …?
Comment by SicKofNZ — Sun 3rd May 2009 @ 11:28 am
More brothel problems in the news here, this one operating in an otherwise quiet residential street in a house owned by a government MP Mr Bakshi. To his credit the MP moved quickly to get rid of the brothel when complaints were made. However, note the continuing trend of reluctance to speak truthfully about the increasingly powerful prostitution industry in the feminist era. Bakshi claimed he had never bothered to confirm that it was a brothel at his rental property, that he “can’t say about anybody’s profession” and that he was only concerned about disruption to neighbours.
Comment by Hans Laven — Sun 3rd May 2009 @ 1:21 pm
What a load of crap here…..
Mothers day and Keystone cop wants all men to do an equal amount of
the housework with thier womenfolk.
Never mind that the guys might have worked 50+ stressful hours a week
under the watchful eye of a supervisor with deadlines and quotos whilst
the missus flicked a duster about and prepped a meal before retiring her
lardy arse to Oprah on TV.
You sure can tell Key was ‘raised’ by only a mom…….still clinging to
her skirt hem I see.
The guy doesn’t have the balls to get rid of the department of wimmins affairs
and now he’s huffing about housework.
What a doofer!
Fem Comradski Hell’un Clarke will be delighted.
Comment by And a bit of male bashing from John Keys too... — Sun 10th May 2009 @ 9:31 am
Yes, because women don’t work these days. And even if they do, their jobs aren’t nearly as hard right?
Also, raising children is REALLY easy. What else? Oh yes, cleaning threatens masculinity. Can’t have that.
Comment by CGP — Wed 18th May 2011 @ 10:39 pm
I’m hoping to pose your question to 29 miners from Pike River Coal mine.
I’m a single Dad. I raised three children and yes, it was very, very easy.
Cleaning doesn’t threaten masculinity. Men have cleaned motor-mowers, wheelbarrows, car motors, motor vehicles etc since they were invented, by men I might add. Many men have semi-permanent grease and oil stained fingernails because they get stuck with the real dirty work. They even break their fingernails cleaning machinery without having an emotional breakdown.
For some strange reason most women refuse these types of domestic chores. Maybe real cleaning threatens femininity? Can’t have that!
Comment by Waye — Wed 18th May 2011 @ 11:24 pm
Characteristics of malignant narcissism are: solipsistic, lazy, manipulative, compulsive and pathological lying, lacking analytical skills, lacking empathy, remorse, shame and guilt, great sense of entitlement, parasitic lifestyle, opportunistic, no capacity for long-term planning, short-sighted, and no personal responsibility (to name a few). With characteristics like these, of course most women believe that raising children is hard. For them with these qualities, everything is hard. Most women believe that household chores and raising children is hard because they have never done any actual work. They have never had to invest in the long-term (money or labor). They have never had to be self-reliant. Since the have no analytical skills, they are not able to connect hard work or lack there of with the consequences. Everything gets done for them so they don’t understand that they live in a civilization that is not the result of their laziness but the hard work of men and they do not understand that as more and more men are destitute and in prison and cannot work because of the gov’ts imposition on them and have no incentive to get educations, there is no one else left to work to maintain civilization and that is why our economy is collapsing. They can’t connect cause with effect. That is why the malignant narcissism of women is so dangerous. They do not understand how destructive their behavior is.
Comment by Darryl X — Thu 19th May 2011 @ 12:14 am
Raising children is very easy, unless you’re a woman. Then it’s difficult, like everything else.
Comment by Darryl X — Thu 19th May 2011 @ 12:18 am
Raising children is hard eh? So hard that baboons and chimpanzees do it in the jungle without any of our modern amenities. Don’t see them complaining about it either and they don’t seem to have half the number of problems raising their offspring than a “modern” woman.
Comes to something when the average woman is being upstaged by a jungle dwelling primate.
Comment by Mr. Anonymous — Thu 19th May 2011 @ 12:28 am