Quoth Suzie Bright:
> >Valis inadvertently reveals how little he knows first hand of the sex bus
> >because of the hysterical view he portrays, and even more pointedly because
> >he doesn't register the incredible class differences in sex work. The
> >middle class end of it is HUGE HUGE HUGE, there is an almost aristocratic
> >end to it that we rarely hear about, and then there is the lumpen side
> >to it that is ironically the most talked about and least affected by all
> >the talk. Of course there are people being grievously exploited, used as
> >virtual slaves, disposable humans. This happens with and without sexual
> >aims, and no one defends it. It's only one's puritanical morality that
> >concludes that the appetite for SEX is what causes such degradation.
(I hope Suzie doesn't mind my playing editor with her screed so I can
effectively read what she says.)
Now Suzie, from just these words written in this place within this context,
can have NO IDEA of what my sexual attitudes are and how much slack I give
to others as they traverse this historical minefield of human relations.
True, I have taken no unhurried hike through the full galaxy of commercial
sex, but if the middle class contingent is HUGE HUGE HUGE, this is likely
because it is more adept at staying alive than the inarticulate lumpen
part that often doesn't. If Jim Craven was immediately moved to death camp
imagery, perhaps it's only because he has actually witnessed some brusque
disposal of depreciated assets at the lower end of the business spectrum.
So, I don't mind saying that I am indeed a bit of a puritan, if that's
the right name for someone who believes that anything reaching so low to
effect a cure is on the wrong track to begin with.
So, as everywhere else, I have in this subject stepped on a class fracture
line that separates very different worlds of experience (actual or touted),
and I don't give a shit about Suzie's off-the-bat mockery because she and
her Mac are not really in the trenches, now if ever.
> >Nina, myself, and many other women in the sex business are sick and tired
> >of holding all these lust-o-phobes hands to reassure, debate and plead with
> >them to listen to reason and the voice of experience. WE have our own
> >gripes and dilemmas, and revolutions we like to see in the sex business
> >which we would like to discuss without having to take a break every five
> >minutes to reply to witchhunters and born again virgins.
> >
> >!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*
More of the same. I'll just say that I don't think the sex trade will
therapeutically end the problems it depends upon for its living, so I
find Suzie's clinical posturing about it all rather farcical at best.
I hope she can simply do what she feels is right and best without
engaging in hot-button slander of a total stranger.
As for Salon, sad to say that, aside from some of the syndicated cartoons,
I concluded sometime last year that it's neither fish nor fowl. I can do
without it, even for free, same as with Nina's services. I leave it to
you, David Horowitz, and all those other awful LSD-smoking '70s lefties.
(For this I picketed induction centers?)
valis
