>Good lord, that
>sounds very final! We're inspired to ask: well then, who IS able to
>conceptualize freedom? I suppose it must be people who hold the most
>strenuously opposed views to the ideas $pread and co. espouse.
Here's what they espouse:
"We believe that all sex workers have a right to self-determination; to choose how we make a living and what we do with our bodies."
They sound like typical freedom-loving Americans, in the noblest traditions of your great nation. I suppose in the old days there were similar noble organisations of chattel slaves, defending their self-evident right to choose for themselves the best way to pick the master's cotton. Perhaps they would not have been so audacious as to demand the right to determine what they do with their own bodies, those bodies being self-evidently their owners to do with as he pleased. But these cheeky radicals might have stood for the right to determine for themselves the style and colour of their chains? You have to forgive them. Yearning to be free is only human nature, after all.
>Again, the point here is not that Joanna/Bill are necessarily wrong
>and $pread and co. are absolutely right. Rather, the point is to
>dissect and reveal the assumptions of greater moral vision which are
>tightly helixed with Joanna/Bill's dramatic pronouncements.
I'd welcome that. If Hal can spare you the leisure to address such issues. Like you, I have work to do for the moment, I have to go weed my pumpkins. Damn the rain, it just encourages the weeds!
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas