Interesting article about Rentboy ....

[+ LIguy]

http://www.edgenewyork.com/news/national/news//187565

[+ stevenkesslar]

It is an interesting article. Now that a few months have passed, it's a good time to take a pause and review what happened and what it means, and where we go from here.

 

The article lends credence to the argument that Rentboy only has itself to blame for the bust, because it submitted an immigration visa request to DHS. Like the author of the article, I've felt by submitting the visa request Rentboy was asking DHS to act in a way that Rentboy wouldn't like.

 

Having said that, even if that's true, DHS could have simply denied the visa request, and left Rentboy itself alone. By busting Rentboy and arresting their staff and writing the complaint in a way that touched some of our hottest buttons - regarding the privacy of consensual Gay sex between adults - the article is also right that DHS turned this into something much larger than an immigration visa. Perception is reality. Whatever this started out as, it has turned into an attack on Gay sexuality and the Gay community.

 

This is even more true because the article confirms what most news sources say - Rentboy screened ads and was not a party to sex trafficking or exploiting Gay runaways. So two months later what it still boils down to is the quote made after pointing out that Rentboy didn't do anything particularly offensive: "But it's still illegal." The question the bust raised and that we have in one way or another been struggling over and bickering about ever since is this: "But should it be?"

 

As recently as today I've been exchanging private emails with other activists about where we go from here, and who and what additional fundraising or organizing should be intended to help. And the bottom line I think is the answer to that question is still twisting in the winds of fate.

 

One of the interesting debates you can always have about history is whether it is driven by larger trends and forces beyond the control of mere mortals, or whether it boils down to individual acts of leadership by particular human beings. I've always felt the answer is "both, and ....." and I think this is a perfect example of why.

 

First and foremost, what comes next depends on the decisions of the 7 Rentboy staff named in the complaint. If they all plea bargain (like 2 Redbook staff did), this is a done deal, and DHS has shown they can use a minimal amount of research to maximum effect by shutting down a leading Gay website. If any of the 7 decide to fight the charges, it opens the door to a trial that will shine a spotlight on a series of issues ranging from decriminalization to sexual privacy to Gay sexual freedom. I think a lot of us agree that we simply need to wait and see what 7 individuals decide to do, and whether and how they ask for support, and then we can figure out how we can best support them.

 

Having said that, regardless of what Jeffrey and his staff do, this is only happening because a whole set of larger forces are in play. Stonewall matters. If we were living in the world before Stonewall, we would't enjoy the acceptance of Gay sexuality or of sexual privacy that made the existence and success of Rentboy possible. The shocking thing about the Rentboy bust is that everybody - the staff, the escorts that used it, the clients that hired off it, the people that post reviews on this site - assumed that a level of de facto decriminalization already existed. The minute DHS busted the Rentboy office, it called the questions behind that assumption. That's not about individuals. That's about history.

 

It also matters that a few weeks before the Rentboy bust, a coalition of groups including a lot of LGBT activist groups announced their support for decriminalization. It also matters that the Rentboy bust transformed an issue that historically has mostly been a concern of female escorts, transgendered activists, and street workers by dropping it squarely in the laps of a "respectable" elite of relatively affluent and older Gay men, and the relatively educated group of younger men they hire. For both reasons, the Rentboy bust adds force to a decriminalization movement that was already on a historical trajectory of its own.

 

The last paragraph of the article really calls the historical question: The Rentboy raid occasioned a burst of outrage against outdated laws criminalizaing prostitution. At this point, it's not only asking where all these activists were before the raid, but asking: Where are they now?

 

Well, that's a no brainer. We're right here, ready to act. The harder question is this: what do we do?

 

To me, that is what makes this moment just like Stonewall. It is both about a small group of individuals who need to decide whether to fight or capitulate, and about the angry and politically powerful group of organizations and actors around them that need to decide whether they are really prepared to support those individuals. And a lot more. Even if the Rentboy 7 capitulate, history will still move forward. Some other vehicle will present itself, whether that is a coalition of groups pushing for decriminalization, or another misguided government bust, or something else.

 

In the article, someone is quoted as saying you can't compare a few rich guys running an illegal website to a persecuted class of people not being able to drink in a bar, a right everyone enjoys. Maybe. But I don't see it that way. The bar Stonewall and the "perverts" in it were both actually illegal at the time the bust happened. And with all due respect to alcohol, my guess is that matters of sex and sexuality go even deeper to the core of what many Gay men feel should be a private and respected right. That is the larger force of freedom adding fuel to this debate.

 

I still haven't seen it, but I'm pretty sure from everything I've read the movie Stonewall didn't live up to it's potential, the way the bust of the real bar did. Whether the bust of the Rentboy 7 lives up to its historical potential has yet to be seen. It depends on both individuals, and larger forces. But one thing is sure: this is going to take way longer, and be far more interesting, than a two hour movie.

[+ WilliamM]

I had just been discharged from the Army in Oakland after being in SE Asia for a year when Stonewall happened in June 1969. It was impossible to predict in 1969 that Stonewall would become such an iconic moment in gay history. For me, I believe that the Rentboy 7 will be a more difficult cause for the gay community and the general piblic. I hope I am wrong, badly hope I am wrong. I am cencerned (as I assume

most gays are) that the Rentboy 7 may get lost in the concern about the bigger issue of sex trafficing. Even though Rentboy has nothing to do with sex trafficing.

[bigvalboy]

It is an interesting article. Now that a few months have passed, it's a good time to take a pause and review what happened and what it means, and where we go from here.

 

The article lends credence to the argument that Rentboy only has itself to blame for the bust, because it submitted an immigration visa request to DHS. Like the author of the article, I've felt by submitting the visa request Rentboy was asking DHS to act in a way that Rentboy wouldn't like.

 

Having said that, even if that's true, DHS could have simply denied the visa request, and left Rentboy itself alone. By busting Rentboy and arresting their staff and writing the complaint in a way that touched some of our hottest buttons - regarding the privacy of consensual Gay sex between adults - the article is also right that DHS turned this into something much larger than an immigration visa. Perception is reality. Whatever this started out as, it has turned into an attack on Gay sexuality and the Gay community.

 

This is even more true because the article confirms what most news sources say - Rentboy screened ads and was not a party to sex trafficking or exploiting Gay runaways. So two months later what it still boils down to is the quote made after pointing out that Rentboy didn't do anything particularly offensive: "But it's still illegal." The question the bust raised and that we have in one way or another been struggling over and bickering about ever since is this: "But should it be?"

 

As recently as today I've been exchanging private emails with other activists about where we go from here, and who and what additional fundraising or organizing should be intended to help. And the bottom line I think is the answer to that question is still twisting in the winds of fate.

 

One of the interesting debates you can always have about history is whether it is driven by larger trends and forces beyond the control of mere mortals, or whether it boils down to individual acts of leadership by particular human beings. I've always felt the answer is "both, and ....." and I think this is a perfect example of why.

 

First and foremost, what comes next depends on the decisions of the 7 Rentboy staff named in the complaint. If they all plea bargain (like 2 Redbook staff did), this is a done deal, and DHS has shown they can use a minimal amount of research to maximum effect by shutting down a leading Gay website. If any of the 7 decide to fight the charges, it opens the door to a trial that will shine a spotlight on a series of issues ranging from decriminalization to sexual privacy to Gay sexual freedom. I think a lot of us agree that we simply need to wait and see what 7 individuals decide to do, and whether and how they ask for support, and then we can figure out how we can best support them.

 

Having said that, regardless of what Jeffrey and his staff do, this is only happening because a whole set of larger forces are in play. Stonewall matters. If we were living in the world before Stonewall, we would't enjoy the acceptance of Gay sexuality or of sexual privacy that made the existence and success of Rentboy possible. The shocking thing about the Rentboy bust is that everybody - the staff, the escorts that used it, the clients that hired off it, the people that post reviews on this site - assumed that a level of de facto decriminalization already existed. The minute DHS busted the Rentboy office, it called the questions behind that assumption. That's not about individuals. That's about history.

 

It also matters that a few weeks before the Rentboy bust, a coalition of groups including a lot of LGBT activist groups announced their support for decriminalization. It also matters that the Rentboy bust transformed an issue that historically has mostly been a concern of female escorts, transgendered activists, and street workers by dropping it squarely in the laps of a "respectable" elite of relatively affluent and older Gay men, and the relatively educated group of younger men they hire. For both reasons, the Rentboy bust adds force to a decriminalization movement that was already on a historical trajectory of its own.

 

The last paragraph of the article really calls the historical question: The Rentboy raid occasioned a burst of outrage against outdated laws criminalizaing prostitution. At this point, it's not only asking where all these activists were before the raid, but asking: Where are they now?

 

Well, that's a no brainer. We're right here, ready to act. The harder question is this: what do we do?

 

To me, that is what makes this moment just like Stonewall. It is both about a small group of individuals who need to decide whether to fight or capitulate, and about the angry and politically powerful group of organizations and actors around them that need to decide whether they are really prepared to support those individuals. And a lot more. Even if the Rentboy 7 capitulate, history will still move forward. Some other vehicle will present itself, whether that is a coalition of groups pushing for decriminalization, or another misguided government bust, or something else.

 

In the article, someone is quoted as saying you can't compare a few rich guys running an illegal website to a persecuted class of people not being able to drink in a bar, a right everyone enjoys. Maybe. But I don't see it that way. The bar Stonewall and the "perverts" in it were both actually illegal at the time the bust happened. And with all due respect to alcohol, my guess is that matters of sex and sexuality go even deeper to the core of what many Gay men feel should be a private and respected right. That is the larger force of freedom adding fuel to this debate.

 

I still haven't seen it, but I'm pretty sure from everything I've read the movie Stonewall didn't live up to it's potential, the way the bust of the real bar did. Whether the bust of the Rentboy 7 lives up to its historical potential has yet to be seen. It depends on both individuals, and larger forces. But one thing is sure: this is going to take way longer, and be far more interesting, than a two hour movie.

 

This should be published in addition to, or in response to, the original article. Just one mans opinion of course.

[+ stevenkesslar]

This should be published in addition to, or in response to, the original article. Just one mans opinion of course.

 

Thanks. I've had things published on this topic, as have others.

 

Speaking for myself, I'm just waiting to see where Jeffrey and others decide to go.

 

If this goes to trial and they need support, I'll do my part to make sure there is a deafening roar about what a misguided mistake this was.