Thursday, January 17, 2013

The Curious Blind Eyed Liberal Acceptance of Objectifying People

There's really nothing complicated about it,  prostitution turns the bodies of prostitutes into a commodity for sale and since the body of a living person is inseparable from the person,  it turns people into object of commerce.   Prostitution turns people into a thing that is rented out to be used by men - almost always - and like any rental appliance, the prostitute is injured in use.   Pornography is just prostitution filmed or photographed, sometimes paid for by the photographer, sometimes not.   That isn't when it's not actually filmed rape or gang rape, which it so often is.

But people are not objects.  Unlike furniture or appliances you can use through Rent-a-Center, prostitutes can be infected with pathogens that will injure and kill them.  Prostitutes also feel pain, which makes more than a few of those who rent them able to find sexual satisfaction by hurting them.   This is, of course, gratifying to the customer because it is related to a feeling of power over another person,  something that in our incredibly twisted sexual culture is a predominant trait of a large number of people.   That twisted sense of entitlement to treat people as objects, to dominate them and to use them, especially against their will,  is what prostitution is really all about.  You can use a prostitute without any obligation to care for them or risk legal obligations to them.  Men who use them not infrequently lie to them and cheat them, refuse to pay the agreed to rental fee and prostitutes are usually powerless to do anything about it.

If a boss in a factory or  on a farm treated workers like objects for use, exploitation, abuse, and disposal like that, liberals would be expected to see exactly what the situation was and they would champion the workers.   The objectification of prostitution and pornography isn't restricted to mental cruelty and disrespect, it turns people into objects as surely as the Nazis did the harvested hair of those it murdered or the corrupt officials of the Chinese government does those from whom it kills to sell their organs.  When it's prostitutes and porn actors turned into objects for use and sale, they go all libertarian, pretending that prostitutes are in some position to set the terms of rental. They might point out to some accounts, generally unverifiable, of elite prostitutes who claim to have had that kind of power but the vast majority of women, children and men who are prostitutes, that story is a total fiction.  That is the case in countries where prostitution is illegal, it is the case in countries where prostitution is legal.   The claims made about legal prostitution being some kind of guarantee of the safety and dignity of prostitutes is dependent on the most careful of choices of stories to tell and, in some cases, is based on leaving a lot of that story out.

What is it about prostitution and its flip side, pornography, that makes liberals go all stupid, supporting industries that violate their most basic metaphysical foundations, equality, an assertion of inherent rights and dignity, and the moral obligation to respect rights equally and entirely.   Without those liberalism is meaningless, it devolves into something little different from right wing libertarianism pretending to be liberalish.  

I've thought about that question a lot over the past decade as the gay porn it's impossible to avoid online has grown increasingly a celebration of all of those things mentioned above and more.   Online porn is an open invitation to use and destroy women, children and men in increasingly violent and destructive ways, to rape them and degrade them, to turn them into objects to be used like a bratty little boy would gleefully destroy a doll and deface an image.   And liberals, championing that feel a sense of virtue due to their superior free speechiness.   That idiotic, preening sense of virtue at enabling some of the most degrading and destructive use of real human beings is a symptom of a fatal flaw that was introduced into post-war liberalism.  As it has taken hold liberalism has become ineffective and has failed at the polls.   We are in a time when the the liberal presidents,  Clinton, Obama, have been less liberal than President Eisenhower was.  That is more than a symptom, it's a crisis of liberalism that has destroyed it.

There is something downright prissy about the demonstrations of virtuous free speech absolutism on the left today, an inversion of a theatrical stereotype of a purity campaigner as seen in comedies of the 1950s.    There is an unthinking assertion of an official virtue, a self-righteous demonstration of an opposition to any kind of criticism of the industries of prostitution and pornography that would be comical in itself it it wasn't such a serious lapse of morality and reason.  It is a bizarre thing to recognize for what it is.  The insistence among the self-appointed free-thinkers that everyone ignore what they can see clearly and get in line with the official line.

A lot of it is based in a rejection of traditional morality, it being sex, blinds liberals.   They idiotically miss that the "sex" involved with prostitution and pornography comes with an objectification and commodification of people, something they can usually not miss when "sex" isn't a part of it.   Many liberals have an easier time seeing the moral atrocity of the abuse of animals in farming than they can of people as horribly abused in porn and prostitution.   The secret videos of chickens and pigs released by the animal rights people get a reaction that the thousands of times more numerous videos and photos of women, children and men that they can hardly avoid in a day of google searches don't.

This is a situation that can't continue if there is to be a left.  There is no coexisting with an industry that does what porn and prostitution do,  the championing of the "rights" of those industries is destroying the left.  The pornographers buy off the left at times with "free speech" awards.   They co opt the media which sees the benefit to them of the same "free speech" language and legal framework.

Either the left acts as if people are more than merely objects of commerce, or it doesn't exist.  It can't pretend what is really happening in pornography and prostitution isn't real.  Today, online and off, "liberals" conform to a rigid line of free speech absolutism that sees the use and destruction of women, children and men by industries that destroy them as a price worth paying so they can ply their trade without having to wonder if they're crossing a line hardly any of them ever would cross, anyway.   They see any restrictions on the most extreme and depraved pornography, of prostitution as it really is in the real world instead of in their fantasies,  as a slippery slope.   Well, there's another side of that slope from the inability to use casual profanity in a feature story or showing a married couple with a double bed on TV and it is into the kind of pit of depravity that is a websearch away.   The pro-porn, pro-prostitution side, which has developed into an industry in itself, will mock the phrase "pit of depravity" but that's what so many of the pornographers advertise their product as being.   The same people would jocularly gloat in the same terms if someone hadn't brought up these issues and ruined their boy bonding fun, delighted in their puerile wickedness.


3 comments:

  1. One thing we probably should argue is the futility of criminalizing any sort of behavior. Or regulating it either, given a state of public corruption in which the regulating agencies will almost certainly be staffed and paid off by the regulatees.

    Murder? Were we wrong to criminalize murder? I can't honestly say we've done wrong in that -- merely that we can't count on any such secular mechanism to keep ourselves or anyone else safe.

    "The greatest purveyor of violence in the world today" -- is still our own government, including the corporations which it nominally controls and which de facto own its chief personnel.

    Libertarianism is no answer to that fact; if its program could be successfully carried out we would merely fall victim to a horde of smaller tyrannies [as we already have, wouldn't you say?]

    What are the effects of making a practice illegal? It represents a public stand that "We don't hold with this sort of thing." It also drives "this sort of thing" into hiding. In significant ways that criminalizes the people who practice it. It gives the police a steady job, and a handy source of tips against anyone outside the system of secret payoffs & monopoly. It makes police The Enemy to people who might otherwise seek police protection from violence.

    As we in the 60's "drug" culture realized -- and only belatedly regretted -- any law that's routinely violated brings the law into contempt, and enriches people you really don't want dominating your investment markets.

    And concentrated money, of course, can underwrite a great deal of tendentious propaganda, including the pervasive promotion of notions ranging from organized [and personal] violence as a "necessary" evil to the widespread illusion that personal wealth comes from usefulness to society rather than from public impoverishment.

    Solutions? "For God all things are possible." For us, so far as our true reliance is on other means, probably not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that when you have a close member of your family who becomes involved with, first, drug addiction and, so, prostitution that it looks different. I've had that experience. It's why whenever I hear a leftish-libertarian who favors prostitution or porn, my first question is if they're OK with it as a "career" for their nearest and dearest. In all but one instance, the answer to that question wasn't much of anything but rage that I'd even ask that, proving that they are lying, that for them, it's OK for those who don't appertain to them but definitely not OK even as a theoretical possibility for those who they feel do appertain to them - I feel justified in using that term because ownership and use are the issues. The one exception claimed that it was OK with him but when I pressed him if that were true for his girl-friend he went all one of Margaret Dumont's characters on me.

      Delete
  2. Here in Southern California, people are understandably wary of having rattlesnakes nearby. The result has not been an improvement in the situation, but a rattlesnake population increasingly dominated by a mutant line with no rattles.

    If we want to get to the roots of why addiction, why pornography, why prostitution... we end up needing to look at early childhood experiences (not necessarily "traumatic," nor necessarily anyone's fault, but still stressful) and feelings of insecurity about being loved. (Love isn't just about making someone feel better, but that's how we first learn to recognize it.) The appetite for painkillers is due to pain. Appetites for the external rewards of sexuality... are compelling because they serve as ersatz tokens of love, but are never sufficient because they don't satisfy the emotional needs they conceal.

    This left me with a whole new understanding of the condition which has killed and/or debilitated many of my friends, as well as the father of my favorite cousin.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpHiFqXCYKc

    ReplyDelete