Client 9: "Things... you might not think were safe"

[KamaAina]

Hoo boy. Maybe he was being blackmailed after all?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/xxfactor/archive/2008/03/12/things-you-might-not-think-were-safe.aspx

But here's what really bothers me about L'Affair Spitzer (and so far it's getting amazingly little media attention): Remember that little bit in the affidavit, in which the Feds recorded an exchange between two employees of Emperor's Club VIP—one apparently a sort of booker, and one the prostitute assigned to Spitzer? They have an conversation about whether "Client 9"—alleged to be Spitzer—is "difficult," and "Rachelle" comments that she's heard Client 9 will "ask you to do things that, like, you might not think were safe—you know—I mean that ... very basic things ..." To which "Kristen" responds, "'I have a way of dealing with that. ... I'd be like, listen dude, you really want the sex?' ... You know what I mean.'"

A touch of bravado there—but what we glimpse, behind it, is a world in which the threat of sexual violence is omnipresent: Women are alone in hotel rooms with unpredictable, unknown men, who may demand things "you might not think are safe," or worse, and if a sex worker's "way of dealing with that" doesn't work, what immediate recourse does she have?

For obvious reasons, it's hard to get good stats on violence against sex workers, but this exchange reminds us that the world of high-end call girls isn't, in the end, all that far away from the violence of the streets.

And that's what really bugs me about Spitzer. Not the adultery. Not the "crime" (I tend to think prostitution should probably be decriminalized, though I haven't thought it through completely yet). Not the fantasies, however dark they may have been. But the creepy hints that somewhere, some more important line may have been crossed—that he treated these women whose bodies he bought in a way he knew no one ought to be treated—that fantasies about sex and power may have turned into abusive behavior that endangered real live human beings.

Supposedly the Feds are saying this is a reference to Eliot Mess's preference for not using condoms:

http://cbs2.com/politics/spitzer.prostitution.ring.2.675022.html

Two law enforcement officials say that safety considerations mentioned in the affidavit related to Spitzer's preference to not wear a condom and insistence by the prostitute named Kristen that he wear one.

but what if it were something more, shall we say, Vitteresque?

[TheWraith]

1. Why would you assume that? Is there any evidence of it?

And if not, why would you bother inventing it?

Oh, and Slate needs a good beating about the head:

"A touch of bravado there—but what we glimpse, behind it, is a world in which the threat of sexual violence is omnipresent: Women are alone in hotel rooms with unpredictable, unknown men, who may demand things "you might not think are safe," or worse, and if a sex worker's "way of dealing with that" doesn't work, what immediate recourse does she have?"

Gee, it wouldn't be like, if a client became rough with a girl, they would have evidence of a CRIME to hold over his head, or something.

Fuckwits.

[uppityperson]

2. My first thought reading it was not using condoms, then I read that part.

Sounds like condoms. But assuming, musing of other dark stuff?

[stanwyck]

3. If there ever was a time you'd want to use condoms

you'd think it would be if you're paying for sex.

[aquart]

4. Thank you for your concern.

If they'd had kinky on Spitzer they would have leaked it.

EVERYTHING a client wants to do has a price. And the girls get to say what can't be bought for any price. Yes, they want to say no diplomatically, which is what Kristen was explaining. She was telling the guy NO.

And good luck to you if you beat up a $1500 an hour hooker because that cuts into profits.

Unsafe sex is bareback. Lots of boyfriends want it, too. For free.

Wearing a diaper is extremely safe sex. Changing a dirty diaper is yucky, BUT STILL SAFE SEX.

I'm really sorry you feel the need to create drama where there is none.

[XOKCowboy]

5. Are you getting a kick out of this?

Heck let's speculate some more and make it even more dark. Put a little imagination into it and it'll be reported he had chains and knives in the hotel room. The media's loving this.

It's obvious that you are too. With everything else going on right now, you think this is important?

[KamaAina]

6. I am not "enjoying" nor "getting a kick" out of this

merely wondering, along with the piece's author (Rosa Brooks in Slate), whether there might be another angle to this, which might explain why he resigned within days while Craig, Vitter et al. are still in positions of power.

[amborin]

7. this is a gratuitously salacious post

[pitohui]

8. it's clearly a reference to the guy's desire not to wear a raincoat

no use making any more of it than it is

[Thepricebreaker]

9. Ball gags and Oxygen Deprivation maybe

:evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin: