Crime

I cannot lie : I can't understand the whole concept of prostitution.

I can't understand why I woman would want to get paid by 2, 3, 6, 10 guys (or gals) a night to make rent. I can't understand how people can use their bodies as a tool or an instrument in that fashion.

I can't understand either why a guy would want to pay for sex. Yes, I know, I've heard about the whole "it's about having control and power and no string attached" spiel. Yet whereas many people see that as an exploitative act that gives men an unlimited amount of power, I see it more as a sign of weakness and even impotence. A guy that has to pay for it can't get it any other way and paying it for it is just part of the thrill.

Yet just because I don't understand the psychological dynamics of prostitution does it mean that it should be outlawed. On the contrary, just as with most drugs, I believe that we should follow Holland's lead and legalize prostitution.

Banning prostitution is not going to make it go away. On the contrary, the allure of breaking the taboo would be even stronger. If women and men want to turn sex into a transaction then, by all means, make it safe and make it fair.

Prostitution should be taxed and considered labor.

Prostitutes should be certified by the board of health.

Prostitution houses ought to be licensed and provide security services, along with health benefits and other labor benefits, to all their workers.

Do I believe that Eliot Spitzer is the target of a political witch hunt by the Bush Justice Department? Up to a certain point yes, but when you have the arrogance to not follow your own advice you are royally screwed by your own lack of judgement.

And that's what makes it worse :

People can be very unforgiving of moral crusaders who are caught with their hands in the cookie jar. And money laundering is a far more serious crime for a government official than paying for sex. He might have been forgiven for an affair or even being caught with a prostitute after some time spent with family, a few stiff and tearful press conferences with his wife standing grimly at his side. It’s easy to cast that as a private matter. But when you make a career of fighting financial improprieties and then get caught in some of your own, it’s not easy to be forgiven for that.

On May 25th, 2005, I wrote the following about Lawrence Lessig :

Today we're all having one of those days : the four of us woke up somewhat askew. Whether it is allergies or a cold, we're not feeling well. So I decided to not take the kids to their usual martial arts class. But to minimize the askweness of the day, we followed part of our Monday "script" and procured the "start of the week" stash of candy.

And then, to make things more "different" I bought New York Magazine because this week's cover story caught my eye. Simply titled, The Choirboy, the hook goes : "The American Boychoir School in Princeton was a twisted sanctuary for the sexual abuse of children. Why is one of America's most famous lawyers taking it on? He was one of the victims". Needsless to say, I had to get this magazine. With all the child abuse scandals plaguing the Catholic Church, I was intrigued. So I immediately went on to page 28 while my two little boys were enjoying their Monday afternoon treat and I immediately broke down.

The lawyer and former abused choirboy is none other than Lawrence Lessig; a man who could only be described as force of nature on the internet.

There on page 29 of this week's New York Magazine, is a man that I have long admired, not just because of his books championing freedom of speach on the Internet, not just because he founded Creative Commons, but because Lawrence Lessig was one of the few people to come to our family's rescue and tell us "everything is going to be alright". Back in 1997 my husband became on of the first artists to be threatened with intellectual property lawsuits for derivative work displayed and distributed through the internet and Lessig was one of the few people who was able to offer some advice --because nothing like this had happened to any artists on the net.

It's because of this that nowadays, when working on a project, we always ask WWLLD? or "What would Lawrence Lessig do?" : We're not religious people but we do believe in the legal judgement of Lessig.

As one of the commenters over at Lessig's said, "Having high-profile, successful people step forward with their stories is important. It makes the burden easier to carry for others, and it shows in a practical way that though such a past will always -color- you to some degree, it doesn't need to -define- you."

Yet it's the fact that he took on this legal challenge after losing one of the biggest and most important legal fights in his area of special --copyright and intellectual property-- that is more poignant.

Imagine your son coming from school and telling you that he had to ask permission to the school principal to sit during recess under the "white's only" tree, which happens to be the only tree in the schoolyard. Then imagine your son coming back from school telling you that he could sit under that tree but now there were lynching nooses covering it.

Then imagine that word spreads. People of all ages and races talk about the incident. Some white and black kids get into an altercation and the rumble. One of the white kids draw a gun on 6 of the brawlers, but they're able to rumble harder with one of the white guy's friends.

Now, imagine you are the mother of one of those guys. The white kid that got his ass kick luckily is fine. He even goes to school and to an event the next day.

Now imagine being the mother of one of the 6 brawlers. While the white instigators threatened to kill the black teenagers with a gun, there's a police officer knocking on your door with a warrant for your son's arrest. The crime? Attempted murder. Not disorderly conduct or assault and battery, which would have been possible valid reasons to take your son to the police station. No. Your son is going to jail for attempted murder of a guy who walked away with some cuts and bruises.

That's what The Jena Six Case is all about.

Not all black and/or colored people in this country believed the very black OJ Simpson was "not guilty" in the death of his very white ex-wife, Nicole Brown. I believe he conspired to kill the mother of his children. I also believe was physically involved in the scene of the crime --if not during, then after the deed was done. Even though I believe he got away with murder in ways more Shakespearean that I would care to count, what I do agree with everybody who says the OJ Simpson murder trial was historic.

First, it gave the common person a closer look at the criminal justice system. It taught more than a few people the nuances of being tried for murder vis a vis manslaughter or homicide. There's no going back to trial once aquitted for murder; a painful realization to the millions who thought trying OJ Simpson on that count was a good idea.

Yet the most important lesson learned by the Simpson trial was how far the United States was socially from the days of "To kill a mockingbird". Why? The OJ Simpson trial proved that money and infuence can indeed a black man a "not guilty" verdict.

Which is why, when I read of Mr. Simpson's being held in a county jail without bail, I couldn't help but feel that justice, although deferred, will finally be served. OJ Simpson is waiting looking down the barrel of 30 years in prison for, of all things, stealing "back" his own football memoribilia from associates he claims were going to sell it without his consent.

New America Media, Commmentary, Earl Ofari Hutchinson, Posted: Aug 20, 2007

When Newark Mayor Cory Booker learned that the alleged shooters in the execution killing of three black college students were illegal immigrants, he did the responsible thing.

He did not finger point a porous border and lax law enforcement for allegedly letting so many supposed violent prone illegal immigrants slip into the country as the cause of the killings. Booker said, and did, the right thing as a responsible public official, and in this case a black elected official, who did not want to arouse public passions any more than they already were over the murders. He certainly did not want to inflame the fragile tensions between black and Latinos any more than they already are.

But others have not exercised the same restraint. Some black talk show hosts and black writers have burned up Internet sites, and sent of floods of emails (this writer got several) with outlandish and reckless charges that the killings were part of a concerted plot by Latino gangs to target African-Americans for murder and mayhem.

Leading immigration reform foes from Center for Immigration Studies to Bill O’Reilly also claimed that state and federal officials are so fear being branded racist that they have turned a blind eye to waves of illegal immigrants who supposedly have unleashed a violent crime wave across the country.

This issue comes up in my line of work quite often and it raises some important questions regarding both individual and community accountability. I don't feel that rap artists are to blame on this one. In my view they are just pointing out the realities of the situation and artistically reflecting that a real threat to individual life exists if one decides to come forward with information. I say, don't kill the messengers. In my mind a more important question comes up: how can our government practically implement ways to ensure safety and security if one decides to come forward with information?

To Snitch, or Not To Snitch

NAM, Commentary, Earl Ofari Hutchinson , Posted: Aug 09, 2007

Editor’s Note: Black on black murder rates are off the charts, capped by the recent killing of three students in New Jersey, but there are few witnesses willing to testify. The lack of witnesses helps increase the spiral of violence in poor black neighborhoods, notes NAM editor Earl Ofari Hutchinson. Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His new book, The Latino Challenge to Black America: Towards a Conversation between African-Americans and Hispanics (Middle Passage Press and Hispanic Economics New York), published in English and Spanish, will be out in October.

A few days after veteran black reporter and editor Chauncey Bailey was gunned down on the streets of Oakland, Calif., Oakland City Councilmember Desley Brooks made a heartfelt and impassioned plea for anyone who knew anything about a killing in the city to come forth. She wasn’t talking about the murder of Bailey. A 19-year-old reportedly confessed to that. She was talking about the more than half-dozen killings that occurred in the days immediately after the Bailey killing. The victims were black and the assailants almost certainly were also black.

When I saw this picture of Phil Spector on the cover of today's New York Post, I thought for a moment he was undergoing sex realignment therapy for a possible sex-change operation.

How ironic.

The man who is in court facing charges for the murder of Lana Clarkson and who has been accused of being a misogynist too quick to threaten former lovers with a gun in hand happens to be looking quite womanly these days.

Harsh.

And if you didn't know ... yeah, the man has a wife.