The voice of the majority is no proof of justice. – Johann von Schiller
In “That Was the Week That Was” #28 I told you about a horrible new ballot measure in California:
A former Facebook executive wants to outdo Google by linking an anti-whore campaign to an expansion of the number of people condemned to “sex offender” registration: “Facebook’s former chief privacy officer is bankrolling an anti-human trafficking ballot measure that…would toughen penalties for sex trafficking and add those convicted of the crime to the state’s sex offender registry. Most significantly, it also would require all registered offenders to surrender their “Internet identifiers” to law enforcement, including user names and email accounts…Chris Kelly…has contributed $1.6 million to the initiative since December…” The campaign is based largely on lies such as “Every girl sold on the street today is also being sold on the Internet”, a triple-whopper which 1) equates performing a service with chattel slavery; 2) uses passive voice to imply girls do not choose prostitution when in fact over 86% do; and 3) bizarrely defines 25% as “every”.
Well, thanks to information provided to me by the Erotic Service Provider Legal, Educational and Research Project (ESPLERP), I’ve discovered that Proposition 35 (its official designation) is even worse than I had initially thought. Not only does it do everything I described above, it also greatly expands the number of offenses (and, shockingly, non-offenses) considered as “human trafficking”. Take a look at last Tuesday’s column again and you’ll start to get the picture. First off, it redefines “pimps” as “human traffickers”, then defines “pimp” so broadly that parents, adult children, roommates, spouses and landlords of prostitutes could all be charged with “human trafficking” and threatened with decades-long prison sentences and lifelong “sex offender” registration. And that’s just a start:
…Prop 35…potentially [turns] even misdemeanor offenses dealing with prostitution, solicitation, non-marital sex, sex with minors, “sexting,” pornography [and] obscenity…into major, multi-year felonies. One doesn’t have to think that such activities should be legal to think that they should be addressed with some sense of punishment being proportional to the crime…Prop 35 would enact the “CASE Act.” CASE stands for “Californians Against Sexual Exploitation,” which is intended as a model law for other states to adopt. Notice that we’ve gone from opposing “Slavery” — a pretty well-defined concept — to opposing “Sexual Exploitation,” which is a lot broader and more nebulous…rather than going after prototypical human trafficking, the law goes after the broader definition of human trafficking: prostitution. Proponents…[claim] Prop 35 only deals with forced prostitution…[but does not clearly define] what constitutes “force.”
…The CASE Act…[also attacks] underage sex…[it] could literally make penalties for statutory rape greater than those for violent rape…[and] is so broadly written that in the hands of aggressive police and prosecutors it could sweep illegal (but not uncommon) sexual encounters into the category of “human trafficking”…by expansively defining…terms such as “commercial sex,” “force,” and “coercion”…[for example] §6(h)(2) of the CASE Act…[defines] a “commercial sex act” as one that…occurs on account of anything of value being given or received by any person…“anything of value”…[could] include…dinner…a movie…a drink…if [the section] meant “money or its equivalent” it would say so…many sexual activities, including those involving minors, may be facilitated in part by the gift or receipt of “something of value” without being what we’d normally think of as “commercial”…
The article then goes on to explain what the act defines as “coercion”:
…Coercion includes any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process; debt bondage; or the provision and facilitation of any controlled substance to a person with the intent to impair said person’s judgment. So sharing drugs with someone could be enough for “coercion”…for someone under 21, alcohol [might even count]…“Serious harm” includes any harm, whether physical or nonphysical, including psychological, financial, or reputational harm, that is sufficiently serious, under all of the surrounding circumstances, to compel a reasonable person of the same background and in the same circumstances to perform or to continue performing labor, services, or commercial sexual acts in order to avoid incurring that harm. So if a woman without many resources…feels that she has to stay in the relationship because…if she left him she would suffer psychologically or financially, that could constitute “serious harm.” Or if a high school junior dating a high school senior is worried about breaking up because of the prospect that he will tell others at school that she was performing oral sex on him, that also counts as “serious harm”…
And remember, if these things are “crimes” no complainant is necessary, any more than it is for “domestic violence” now:
…you could now be arrested on suspicion of “human trafficking”; it doesn’t have to be something that your partner demands…Now, you’re looking at a prospect of many years in jail, having to register as a sex offender, having to notify the government every time you create a new internet account…and more…Let’s say the prosecutor comes to you and says “OK, we’re willing to put aside the human trafficking charge if you’ll plead guilty to this misdemeanor” (“which we otherwise couldn’t prove,” the prosecutor will not add.) What are you going to do?…
That last is, of course, the clincher. The hopelessly naïve are fond of saying “but they won’t use the law that way!” despite the demonstrable fact that police and prosecutors don’t ever hesitate to use laws any way they want to in order to “get” whomever they target, for whatever reason they choose. And they never, ever allow trivialities like “truth” or “justice” to get in their way.
>…Coercion includes any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process; debt bondage;
Sounds to me like most of the government is devoted to coercion.
this is just more of the capitalist plan to imprison as many people as possible to use a s cheap slave labor.
And take their stuff. Don’t forget take their stuff.
Well, not to be picky or anything…. but anything that involves coercion is not capitalist. When a whore offers sex for money, and he pays and she delivers, *that* is capitalism.
No, most of the government is not devoted to coercion. *All* of it is.
Comixchik generally uses the word “capitalist” to mean what I would call “fascist” and some people refer to as “crony capitalist”.
Well, I really wish that she wouldn’t. Because if “capitalism” is reserved for that sort of evil, there is no word left for people who engage in voluntary exchange or a system that is based on voluntary exchanges.
I agree. To me, plutocracy isn’t true capitalism.
No word available other than, say, “free market” or “agoric” or …
I see capitalism as a system that allows some, who have accumulated much wealth, to use others, often without their free choice, as resources.
That’s a bit different from freely engaging in commerce.
It also requires government collusion, which makes it into something other than true capitalism; it’s at best cronyism and at worst fascism or feudalism.
Well, I see at least one organization there that’s at least partly funded by government tax dollars – Planned Parenthood. You can bet that, beyond endorsement, they’ll also spend some of our tax dollars to print up literature to support this proposition through “educating” people. That’s if they don’t take out TV spots, etc. Hmmm – I feel so good to be supporting this measure with my tax dollars!
And … having Marc Klass backing this is pretty devastating to our side.
California Labor Federation – 1,200 AFL-CIO and “Change to Win” unions … good to see the unions still in there fighting the good fight against child labor!
Hey Skipper! Who the fuck do we send money to defeat these assholes? This will be the first round of elections in a long time where I haven’t given THOUSANDS of dollars to worthless GOP candidates – so I’d like to make up a little for past transgressions! LMFAO!!
Good question; let me send out a few emails and I’ll let you know ASAP.
Yeah I’d like to send a donation somewhere where it will be effective.
It may be too late though, as the supporters are now claiming some polling data in July suggests that the proposition enjoys over 60% support by Californians – over 80% if the “lean toward” folks are included.
Most people really don’t pay attention to WTF is going on and don’t realize they’re getting duped by silly-assed deceptive titling of laws. Here’s the full name for this prop …
“California Proposition 35, Ban on Human Trafficking and Sex Slavery (2012)”
What sheeple ISN’T going to vote to ban Human Trafficking and Sex Slavery?
“Wait – what? You mean human trafficking and sex slavery is currently LEGAL in California? How the fuck did we miss this after the civil war? By GOODNESS! We must correct this situation but fast!”
Pretty depressing – I think all this is really headed for a serious trainwreck. I used to be a Californian – and was utterly amazed at the plethora of absolutely stupid resolutions that were put on the ballot each year.
I mean, if GOD appointed me the savior of the United States of America and told me to find a way to save this country … I’d have to tell him that, imo – it’s “B.E.R” – Beyond Economical Repair. It breaks my heart but the only way this shit will be fixed is for this leviathan to collapse under the weight of its bullshit laws. Then maybe we can rebuild it – or some powerful dude with a lot of guns will tell us what comes next.
I’m so depressed – I’m just going to watch the Michelle Jenneke video over and over for the rest of the day to get my dopamine levels back in order. 🙁
There’s a “donate” button on the upper right of the ESPLERP link.
The irreparable damage to the US happened in 1824. Seriously. That was the year that the Supreme Court decided that the enumerated powers in the Constitution were to be given the broadest possible interpretation. Leviathan didn’t happen then but only because it took another century for progressivism to arise and figure out how to take advantage of what the Supreme Court had done.
What gets me is just how many people refuse to see this, including most of my fellow libertarians. They’re all invested in trying to fix a system that clearly can’t be fixed, and refuse to put any serious effort into surviving (or allowing their children to survive) the inevitable fall.
I think most thinking people realize we’re “fucked like chuck” but don’t want to quit on the Republic as long as a thread of hope remains. Then there is a little of the … “well how do you kick the next thing off?” thing going on and it’s easier for people to just do the best they can with what they’ve got and let events dictate reaction.
There is, of course, a private analogy to that sort of idiocy. It’s women (and occasionally men) who refuse to leave an abusive relationship, telling themselves that “He’ll change!” and “I can make him change!” It doesn’t work with abusers and it doesn’t work with an abusive government.
America, the codependent…..
I wouldn’t say it’s easier, because those thinking people have to live with knowing that the system has to break somewhere, but are unable to see a solution that doesn’t seem to involve massive amounts of chaos, bloodletting or both.
Take myself, a serving member in the Armed Forces. I’m in a real Catch-22, as the government has allowed me to enjoy a very good standard of living, the same government that everyone here is extremely angry at and predicting the imminent collapse of. If the latter happens before I find a way to exit the military and still survive, then my life goes out the window, as the economy right now is messed up to the point where I doubt I’d find a good job. As a representative of said failed government, I could even find myself singled out for some retribution, right or wrong.
Krulac, you’re a former Navy man, and I presume you stayed in long enough to receive a pension. If it’s not getting too personal, how much would your world change if that pension suddenly stopped coming in since the government collapsed?
Everything I’ve just written probably sounds horribly confused, but what I’m trying to say is for me, that thread of hope is all I feel I have left sometimes. I hear a lot about how people don’t learn anything from history, but I think if nothing else people have a general idea how people lived in the Dark Ages and don’t want to see the world return to that.
Every generation, without exception, believes itself to be living in The End Times. The imminent collapse of America has been predicted from, probably 1776 I suppose.
Now, I suppose that everything has to end eventually, and if every single solitary year without exception there are people declaring, “it’s all over!!” (and there are always such people, every single solitary year without exception), well eventually they will be right, and future generations will wonder how the prophets knew.
I’m sure that the fall of the Soviet Union was predicted every year, without fail, since 1922. And hey, eventually the USSR did fall! At which point a lot of self-satisfied doomsayers no doubt started crowing. “Мы же вам говорили!” Before we give those guys the Golden Daniel Award with Nostradamus Clusters, though, let’s remember that their only real accomplishment was being born at the right time.
twwells, what’s the title of that ruling in 1824?
Reblogged this on GFE Desires.
I have no coherent reaction to this. That people could vote for this in food conscience makes my eyes want to bleed. It seriously calls into question my faith in democracy.
I’ve shown this post to several people Reaction: “It can’t be that bad. The motivation is understandable.”
Yeah it reminds me of something I “half-learned” in school – something from Plato and how it only takes one bad horse to crash the chariot and smash it to bits.
We have more than one bad horse though. 🙁
Not trying to make excuses for them, believe me, but I wonder how many of them just heard, “Protecting women and children from sexual exploitation” and just tuned out the details? Like so many people who hear what they want to hear. Obviously the ones pushing it know full well the extent of the proposal and what it means.
Aside: that guy’s hand in the illustration is clamping down on the girl’s breast so hard, it looks like a mammogram machine! Ouch!
As if California didn’t have enough people in prison as it is. Where are they getting the money for that?
New York State has shut down a good deal of our prisons. What’s wrong with those people?
Also, I can see landlords refusing to rent to single women because of this. And non-married couples. But Planned Parenthood and NOW don’t think of this consequence.
“Coercion includes any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; ”
So that would include virtually ALL divorced fathers. I was threatened with jail if I did not pay extortion money called “interim support”. So I told the judge that if he unlawfully incarcerated me I would kill him. No order was ever issued for my arrest.
How many women support coercion of men? 99.9% of them in the west. But lets not mention that, eh? That is off topic. Right? It just potentially affects practically every man in the western world, not worth talking about, right?
But since sex workers are pretty much all women, might they not have an opinion about the coercion of men into slavery via alimony and child support, both of which are VOLUNTARY payments? Just askin.
*Huff huff huff*
*doubles over*
Whew! Finally caught up to today’s post after reading through all the archives in sequence. Oh well, it was a labor of love.
On prop. 35, I think it’s going to be a landslide for the Yes side. Since the value of any individual vote is approximately zero, voters rarely learn anything about a topic that’s up for vote (because their having learned about the topic wouldn’t affect the outcome of the election/referendum one iota). As a consequence, the median voter tends to vote with their feelings rather using dried, reasoned analysis of the costs/benefits of a given law.
Amid the height of a moral panic about human trafficking and sex slavery, even a truly abominable law titled “(a) Ban on Human Trafficking and Sex Slavery” is a shoe-in. Ultimately, voting is all about how things are framed, rather than how things really are. As a result, you can get otherwise kind, intelligent people to vote for some truly terrible laws, like the one on the ballot at the moment. 🙁
All of them in sequence? I am seriously impressed! 🙂
I vaguely remember seeing photographs and news stories from the early 1900s in places like Australia where they were overrun by rabbits. When there was a plentiful food supply, and good conditions for breeding, the rabbits reproduced again and again, until there were so many of them, that they ate all the vegetation, and then there was nothing left to eat, and then they all died.
We have made conditions favorable for people breeding. No need for men to quit fathering children because they can’t support them, or for women to quit having children because they can’t support them, the government will provide subsidized housing, and food. Go ahead and keep breeding, and not working, and not producing. Soon, like right now, we wont be able to sustain all the dumb bunnies, and we will all be fucked.
If that were the case, then the states and countries which offer the highest welfare benefits to women with children would have the highest teen and out-of-wedlock birth rates.
Do they?
Nobody took this up, but the answer is, “No, they do not.”
[…] I pretty much have Maggie McNeill as my own, personal Google Reader…only decidedly more entertaining and lovely. This next post is inspired by hers on the subject of California’s Proposition 35, “Worse Than I Thought”. […]
I am making the offer to any activist against California’s Prop. 35 to use my OpEdNews article from March, “Making Sex Illegal,” and the follow-up “Rebel, Rebel,” in whole or in part, gratis against this immoral Proposition. I am also sending copies to the U.S. Senators and Representatives involved in this matter. Will it do any good? Who knows?
First they came for our genitals, then our hearts, then our minds; by the time they came for us we had nothing left.
Awesome! Every little bit helps. It may not turned the tide immediately, but all those little drops of water will eventually create a deluge.
Good on you, Richard! I, too, have no idea if it will help, but I doubt it will make things any worse. Now if we only had a few thousand of you, and some more Maggies wouldn’t hurt, either.
I’m thankful that while I was married that my wife quit having sex with me, her favorite comment was ” Quit bugging me, go take care of it yourself.” Now 20 years on it’s like any other excrement, you get uncomfortable 2 minutes in the bathroom and you’re good to go, no muss, no fuss and it’s taken care of .
“Debt bondage”? If this law will criminalize the practice of women using their monopoly on “choice” to extract decades of child support from guys without their consent, I’m voting for it! 😀
It is unfortunate thatyou have no understanding of the terms you are defining. With the passage of Prop 35, the law enforcement community will finally be able to try human traffickers at the state level and send the message that California will not tolerate trafficking. I have met and worked with women who were trafficked. They exist and are trying to rebuild their lives. They need our support.
It is unfortunate that you are a gullible ass, and that there are many like you who are only too happy to give government whatever power it asks for no matter how ridiculous the excuse or how dangerously vague the law.
One more thing: If busybody freaks like you were more concerned with human lives than with “sending messages”, we wouldn’t be living in a police state which destroys human lives as casually as people swat flies.
What’s scary is that “regular Joes” are frightened into supporting it because of the way it gets presented. The average “mom on the street,” who might not be a prudish, religious, or otherwise self-righteous person, will likely not take the time to research the matter as thoroughly as you’ve presented here. They just are led to believe it could happen to their child easily and against the child’s will, and since that’s a horrifying thought to them, they’d rather be safe than sorry. Not realizing, of course, that their actions have consequences that are way farther reaching than they would have ever intended or even supported, had they known. Ignorance is not an excuse, but I fear being uninformed is a reality for many busy moms who have other, more pressing daily concerns than taking the time needed to keep up with current events, local politics, and important social and economic issues. Just my two cents. Thank you, as always, for an enlightening, insightful piece.
With these wide ranging endorsements there is no hope of defeating this referendum. Of course in the case of a real trafficking operation, the top honcho will be far removed, and some local stooge will take the long prison term until another can be found. Where there are young women who are actually in bondage, it would take a real financial commitment to help them find a better life, so this seems so much easier, as the Voter Guide gives an annual estimated cost of a few million, which comes to about 30 people incarcerated.
The guide also mentions this:
Expanded Definition of Human Trafficking. This
measure amends the definition of human trafficking
under state law. Specifically, the measure defines more
crimes related to the creation and distribution of
obscene materials depicting minors as a form of
human trafficking. For example, duplicating or selling
these obscene materials could be considered human
trafficking even if the offender had no contact with the
minor depicted
Which was refuted by the Alemeda County DA in this letter to the Oakland Tribune:
First, Proposition 35 applies to those who traffic children, not those who traffic in child pornography. Proposition 35 could only be construed to include the distribution of child pornography if the distributor caused the child to engage in the sexual act, such as by selecting the child to appear in the film. There are laws on the books to fight the possession and distribution of child porn and Proposition 35 will not augment them.
I hope the DA is right, as I’ve written her to follow up and get back to me. What is stunning is that the voters of California did not object that copying child porn shall be punished with up to life in prison. It seems that while we have loosened our sexual mores, we have displaced our antipathy on one action, the debasement of children. This has distorted reasonable laws that could actually be effective in discouraging such abuse.
May Rin Kokonoe kick them in the balls if they keep expanding this stuff.
[…] talk these days about “reforming” the policies and laws; however, “reform” generally means making the penalties even more draconian and the definitions broader, or condemning sex workers to involuntary “rehabilitation”, or violently persecuting clients in […]
[…] war and supported by the same bogus “sex trafficking” claims which are being used to justify so much draconian legislation in the United States (despite the fact that Sweden found no effect on coerced prostitution, and a […]
[…] is overwhelming evidence of the harm criminalisation, strict regulation and end-demand causes for sex workers. But the myth is that if you stay away […]
“for someone under 21, alcohol [might even count]”
Why the age limit? Alcohol is a drug, no matter what your age. Yes, eugine, they really will start throwing people in the slammer for buying a girl a drink. Expect a police sting operation in your town soon!