Wednesday, March 12, 2008


The thing about Maureen Dowd is that her columns almost always address things that I at least care enough about to think about, which is mainly why she is so adept at stoking the embers of my righteous indignation. And it's not that she's offensive, exactly, it's more her capacity to take issues that I think are serious and distill them down to the most incomprehensibly asinine commentary imaginable. By way of illustration, her closing remark from yesterdays' piece:

Hillary would never have to pretend to be a man to get aides to respect her, proving that she has moved past gender in a way Ferraro never did.*

Which makes me feel like...

BTW, Ms. Dowd gets extra cool pts this week for knowing someone who knows something about sex work. JK LOL!!!

Speaking of which I was going to post the Times' two pieces addressing the "issue" of prostitution alongside some snarky comment, but NYT u r so boring to me today why. Why dont u go print a screenshot of an escort service website or something?**

What is MOAR INTERESTING is what those zany Cornerites think, in particular John Derbyshire's great issuance of profundity on the topic of prostitution (via):

Prostitution, like drug trafficking, is one of those zones where libertarianism bumps up against the realities of human nature.

To a lover of liberty, it's hard to see why a woman shouldn't sell her favors if she wants to. Trouble is, weak or dimwitted women end up in near-slavery to unscrupulous men, and I think there's a legitimate public interest in not letting that happen.

The best private sector solution would be a guild system, like the geishas had in old Japan. There'd be entry standards for the guild. Women would have to pass exams, and have some entertainment skills other than the obvious ones. The guild would police itself, expelling miscreants. Freelancing outside the guild could be under strong social disapproval, even made illegal.

I have to hand it to him, I like the idea of having a system in place to keep ppl from being unwittingly TRICKED into potentially having their labor exploited. I can imagine a similar system in place at say, McDonald's. You would have to pass an exam to be hired and if you did not meet their standards of intellectualism, work could be provided elsewhere (perhaps as a columnist for the New York Times, say). This way, only people who were truly up to the task would be able to work at McDonald's. Also McDonald's would have to pay $3,000 per hour, lol and if u got turned down u could just find another job that paid $3,000/hr.

Neway, dont h8 me I just think there's a legitimate public interest in not having ppl be alienated from their labor? o how cool, im libertarian!

* BTW Too Sense has something to say about Geraldine Ferraro which is less dumb.

** o wait, u linked to ashley dupre's myspace page??? omg nevermind nyt, yr the best! xoxoxoxo!!1


AJ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AJ said...


why am i pretending like i know something about socialism this week?

AJ sez lolAJ FTW!!

internetz speak 4 teh politically l33t brought to you by!!!!

What should I get tattooed on my chest this summer?

About Me

AJ lives in Minneapolis and is interested in stuff that's political. AJ has a lot invested in his masculinity.


email at and be awsum!