NY Times criticizes Rentboy raid

[+ beethoven]

I was delighted to see the New York Times editorial today, Aug. 29, strongly criticizing the government's raid on Rentboy. ("Male Escorts a Homeland Security Threat?") As I wrote here the other day, the Times wonders why the Dept of Homeland Security can't find more important things to do, "while far more serious crimes, including human trafficking and sexual exploitation, go unpunished."

 

The editorial also says of the criminal complaint, "It's hard not to interpret it as an indictment of gay men as being sexually promiscuous."

 

Good for the New York Times!

[+ stevenkesslar]

The editorial also says of the criminal complaint, "It's hard not to interpret it as an indictment of gay men as being sexually promiscuous."

 

+1000 %

 

We need more media to be sending this message, and it may work.

 

What I am about to say is total speculation, but I am pretty sure that whoever wrote that editorial read the discussion on this website. It's core message is exactly what Daddy said the day this started, and that we have all been saying: is this really how we should be using the limited resources devoted to the war on terror? Some of the rhetorical devices used - liking naming the actual DHS agent involved, Susan Ruiz, and making fun of her by pointing out how "helpful" it is that she explains elements of gay sex to us - is exactly what we have been doing. Importantly, I feel very strongly that if this is only an issue about gay prostitutes, we are marginalized. If it is perceived as a broader attack on the entire LGBT community, we are stronger. The editorial just helped us define it that way in a big way.

 

Even if I am wrong, and it is just a coincidence, it proves that brilliant minds think alike, and our message is reasonable and powerful. The New York Times is the #1 paper in America.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/29/opinion/homeland-securitys-peculiar-prosecution-of-rentboy.html?smid=pl-share&_r=0

 

Thank you, thank you, thank you New York Times! We need more of this. Fast.

[+ Tom Isern]

page six reports that "gay activists" are furious over the rentboy.com raid, but they aren't too detailed re: who those activists are. http://pagesix.com/2015/08/28/gay-activists-fume-over-de-blasios-role-in-rentboy-com-raid/

[AdamSmith]

And I was struck by the key word in their headline:

 

Homeland Security’s Peculiar Prosecution of Rentboy

 

'Peculiar' I have to think was chosen to subtly underscore what the attitudes behind this 'indictment of gay men as being sexually promiscuous' share with the race prejudice that flowed from the 'peculiar institution' of slavery.

[Rudynate]

And I was struck by the key word in their headline:

 

Homeland Security’s Peculiar Prosecution of Rentboy

 

'Peculiar' I have to think was chosen to subtly underscore what the attitudes behind this 'indictment of gay men as being sexually promiscuous' share with the race prejudice that flowed from the 'peculiar institution' of slavery.

 

 

"Peculiar" is a wonderful word - so understated yet dripping with insinuation . . . just the right word for so many occasions.

[rvwnsd]

+1000 %

 

We need more media to be sending this message, and it may work.

 

What I am about to say is total speculation, but I am pretty sure that whoever wrote that editorial read the discussion on this website. It's core message is exactly what Daddy said the day this started, and that we have all been saying: is this really how we should be using the limited resources devoted to the war on terror? Some of the rhetorical devices used - liking naming the actual DHS agent involved, Susan Ruiz, and making fun of her by pointing out how "helpful" it is that she explains elements of gay sex to us - is exactly what we have been doing. Importantly, I feel very strongly that if this is only an issue about gay prostitutes, we are marginalized. If it is perceived as a broader attack on the entire LGBT community, we are stronger. The editorial just helped us define it that way in a big way.

 

Even if I am wrong, and it is just a coincidence, it proves that brilliant minds think alike, and our message is reasonable and powerful. The New York Times is the #1 paper in America.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/29/opinion/homeland-securitys-peculiar-prosecution-of-rentboy.html?smid=pl-share&_r=0

 

Thank you, thank you, thank you New York Times! We need more of this. Fast.

Although your theory is possible, I think it is improbable. The opinions outlined in the New York Times editorial are plain old common sense. Most of the people who post on this forum are common-sensical. I think the editorial demonstrates that our opinions are shared by the mainstream, probably because they are not unique, they are not "out there," and they do not represent a fringe group's wacky notion of how society should operate.

 

My personal opinion is that the acting US attorney thought this would be a great way to impress her way into a permanent position as her old boss's replacement, much like the New York attorney general decided to "get tough" on a financial institution and require their compliance operations to relocate across the Hudson from NJ to NY. It is silly grandstanding that, I think and hope, will result in her relegation to obscurity. I'm thinking the mouse who roared.

[+ Tom Isern]

I found the Times editorial relieving. after a week of anxiety, it has been good to see the major rights and activist organizations of our movement on the right side of this. and then the Times as well. mainstream opinion does seem to be opposed to the raid, and that—to the extent that it is true—is welcome good news. I have in-the-know friends who believe that the feds don't really have a winnable case and that Rentboy may actually make a legal return. fingers crossed for this all to blow over and die down!

[+ stevenkesslar]

Although your theory is possible, I think it is improbable. The opinions outlined in the New York Times editorial are plain old common sense. Most of the people who post on this forum are common-sensical. I think the editorial demonstrates that our opinions are shared by the mainstream, probably because they are not unique, they are not "out there," and they do not represent a fringe group's wacky notion of how society should operate.

 

My personal opinion is that the acting US attorney thought this would be a great way to impress her way into a permanent position as her old boss's replacement, much like the New York attorney general decided to "get tough" on a financial institution and require their compliance operations to relocate across the Hudson from NJ to NY. It is silly grandstanding that, I think and hope, will result in her relegation to obscurity. I'm thinking the mouse who roared.

 

I hope you are right. It is better if you are right. I certainly think what I think is "common sense," and I agree 1000 % with what The New York Times wrote. The main reason I hope you are right is that right now we really need more media outlets like The New York Times - like The Washington Post, the LA Times - to name a few, to write a similarly "common sense" editorial. The more of them that do, the more likely this is to end quickly and well.

 

The other thing you are saying that I want to reinforce is we have to think about this as an attack that started with individuals with motives. One of them, Homeland Security Agent Glenn Sorge, actually did just call us a "global criminal enterprise." It actually sounds kind of scary, doesn't it? Just like "the federal government" may. But it's actually a couple people in a government agency. And in this case we know it's a set of government agencies that is not immune to democratic review by the media and Congressional oversight. We know the media questioned the NSA's claim that massive bulk data collection (meaning spying on our email) had stopped "dozens" of terrorist attacks. We know Congress just clipped the NSA's wings in continuing to spy in this way. We know the DHS itself just issued a report saying the TSA absolutely sucks at running airport security checks. We know as a result the Acting TSA Director was reassigned. If anything, these particular cast of characters and agencies don't have a stunning track record. So I hope you are right on all counts, and that this was a very bad miscalculation.

[+ WilliamM]

And I was struck by the key word in their headline:

 

Homeland Security’s Peculiar Prosecution of Rentboy

 

'Peculiar' I have to think was chosen to subtly underscore what the attitudes behind this 'indictment of gay men as being sexually promiscuous' share with the race prejudice that flowed from the 'peculiar institution' of slavery.

 

Adam, I agree. But, as Beethoven shows not all New York Times editions of August 29th have the same editorial headline. I have the national print edition with the headline, "Male Escorts a Homeland Security Threat?"

[+ stevenkesslar]

Yeah, that is confusing. I assume it is the same editorial as the one hyperlinked above, right? I assumed when this post started it was, as soon as it said New York Times. Then I noticed the headline is different. I just Googled both headlines, and it seems to lead to the same editorial. Both headlines make different but very good points, so we're lucky.

[Lankypeters]

I think there's a very good possibility that the Times eddy writer did, indeed, research this site. "Daddy's" has come up in discussions and, more importantly, in legal filings related to this case. A solid, thorough writer -- and the Times has a good number of them -- would research what's goes on here and what, in the Rentboy case, is being said. This is particularly likely if the Times author is straight. S/he would probably have known nothing of "Daddy's."

[AdamSmith]

Adam, I agree. But, as Beethoven shows not all New York Times editions of August 29th have the same editorial headline. I have the national print edition with the headline, "Male Escorts a Homeland Security Threat?"

 

Interesting! Would be fascinating to know their thinking behind the variants.

[+ Charlie]

I read both the online and print editions of the NYT, and on a number of occasions, I have noticed that the headlines in the online edition can vary somewhat from the print edition.

[+ stevenkesslar]

I read both the online and print editions of the NYT, and on a number of occasions, I have noticed that the headlines in the online edition can vary somewhat from the print edition.

 

You know, I can never figure these things out. The desktop version of Rentboy said my cock was cut and 7 1/2 long, and the iPhone version said it was uncut and 11 long. I have no idea why there would be such a discrepancy??? Especially since it barely is 5 inches long, anyway!

 

Guess it just goes to show why all the bullshit written on Rentboy and this site is just basically hearsay, anyway! What judge is gonna believe it? They're gonna figure out the awful truth. We're not REALLY a global criminal enterprise, but we are a bunch of insecure little queens.

 

http://www.homeschoolmath.net/teaching/g/images/draw-parallel-line-with-ruler.gif

 

Oh, wait! Sorry, I forgot. We are still in mourning. No jokes for at least a week.

 

[rguer]

 

Didn't the U.S. Constitution give us the right to live our lives "in the pursuit of happiness"?

 

No, that's part of the Declaration of Independence.

 

There's debate over whether the Declaration is part of US law. There are certainly parts of it that the US government would not like to see in action ("That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government").

[+ Charlie]

The "pursuit of happiness" clause in the Declaration of Independence was an emendation. Jefferson originally intended the third part of the "inalienable rights" sentence to be about the right to private property, but changed it to something more general in consultation with Adams and Franklin.

[+ Gar1eth]

We're not REALLY a global criminal enterprise, but we are a bunch of insecure little queens.

 

 

I don't really see myself as ever being a queen. Going by the rankings here I'm just an insecure little Peer.

 

Gman

[Glenn1441]

I was delighted to see the New York Times editorial today, Aug. 29, strongly criticizing the government's raid on Rentboy. ("Male Escorts a Homeland Security Threat?") As I wrote here the other day, the Times wonders why the Dept of Homeland Security can't find more important things to do, "while far more serious crimes, including human trafficking and sexual exploitation, go unpunished."

 

The editorial also says of the criminal complaint, "It's hard not to interpret it as an indictment of gay men as being sexually promiscuous."

 

Good for the New York Times!

 

Remember Senator David Vitter? Here's a reminder: "A staunch advocate of conservative platforms from abstinence-only education to a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, the Republican Louisiana Senator apparently had no problem with high-class call girls, as his phone number was revealed to be on a list belonging to a company owned by the infamous "D.C. Madam." Larry Flynt's Hustler magazine found the phone number and contacted Vitter's office to inquire about it. The next day, Vitter issued a public apology for his "very serious sin," and later managed to retain his seat in the Senate." Talk about double-standards. The raid and indictment are absolutely a veiled attack on the sexuality of gay men. Funny how it comes at a time when same-sex marriage, trans advocacy, etc. are making headlines day after day. I can't shake the feeling that the raid began as the brainchild of an individual who is deeply threatened by his own sexuality.

[rvwnsd]

...Didn't the U.S. Constitution give us the right to live our lives "in the pursuit of happiness"?...

 

As another poster pointed out, it is the Declaration of Independence that states "...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...."

 

Given that sex work is illegal in almost every jurisdiction, using this phrase from the Declaration of Independence in defense of the seven indicted Rentboy employees would probably be ineffective. However, one might effectively use the clause in making the argument that sex work should be decriminalized.

[+ stevenkesslar]

I'm not giving any warnings I haven't already gotten personally. I'm currently putting together a guide line for clients to safely hire guys for their time in the future. If you're interested in being in the mailing list please send me an EMAIL THRU MY GMAIL ACCOUNT.

 

Excellent idea, Killian.

 

Broken record me, let's all remember. None of this is new. I've been doing this for 15 years, and Daddy has been saying it all along. Don't panic, know the law, follow the law.

 

Speaking of learning our lessons, it strikes me there are a few new things we need to factor in as we decide how to respond to this attack:

 

1. After over a millenium of being victims of a certain type of harassment and discrimination, the world is now looking at the LGBT community as effective fighters who did an excellent job of working hard and successfully to secure our civil rights.

 

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21595464-what-victorious-gay-marriage-campaigners-can-teach-others-heads-and-hearts

 

The woman quoted in this article, Thalia Zepatos, is one of the best organizers in the country, and a dear friend from my Portland organizing days. As she said, the lesson is simple: heads you lose, hearts you win. Our community has a lot of heart. The world has learned that, and DHS is about to, I suspect.

 

2. The 9/11 hysteria has abated, "let's do crazy shit without thinking" is not highly regarded now, and the New York Times editorial is a foretaste of how I think people are going to react to the stupid way DHS just chose to allocate their resources to target the gay community. While DHS may have had 66 % or so approval rating in 2013, they had less than 50 % approval a few years before that, and I think based on every headline recently the post 9/11 national security agencies are headed into the shitter. They can't make airports safe, they lie to Congress about the fact they are spying on us, they then lie to the world about whether their spying on us is effective, and they can't even figure out how to make their own buildings safe from cyberattack.

 

Rvwnsd was right on. They are the mouse that roared.

 

http://www.pestrevenge.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/mouse-trap-helmet.jpg

[bigvalboy]

"Heads you lose, hearts you win"...Thalia Zepatos,

"I don't believe you change hearts....you change laws, you change allocation of resources, you change the way systems operate.” Hillary Clinton

 

Either way, there is much work to do...

 

http://www.companyofmen.org/threads/other-ways-you-can-get-involved.107127/