The online prostitution website OnlyFans has been in the news quite a lot recently. Last week a prominent OnlyFans prostitute went viral for propositioning a Five Guys employee while he was on the clock at the burger restaurant. Fortunately, the young man kept his dignity and turned her down.
This week, the same predatory degenerate — I think we should treat these people like mass shooters and try not to use their names, when possible— has now claimed that she set a “world record” by having sex with 1,000 men in a 24-hour period. Actually it was 1,057. Far be it from me to deprive her of that extra 57 strands of gonorrhea she likely contracted.
Here she is talking about her big accomplishment:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
OF Bonnie Blue says she broke the World Record by sleeping with 1,057 men in 12 hours.
I don’t think that’s an achievement… <a href="https://t.co/OOvLtZHlAx">pic.twitter.com/OOvLtZHlAx</a>
&mdash; Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) <a href="https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1878895706947355081?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 13, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
You often hear people, especially conservatives, say that they feel sorry for women like this. I have to admit I don’t. I reserve all of my sympathy for whoever owns the AirBnB they used for this stunt. You’ll have to go in there with hazmat suits to fumigate that room.
Now, you may remember a few weeks ago the story of the OnlyFans prostitute who had sex with one hundred men. These are not the same people. That woman also planned to jump in bed with a thousand men, but she was apparently beaten to the punch. There is now an arms race among cyber hookers to see who can have sex with the most men in a day. Eventually someone is going to figure out a way to crack a million, which will be a pace of about 11 men a second. I don’t see how that’s physically possible right now, but someone will figure it out. This insatiable quest for sexual self-debasement will be the primary driver of scientific and technological advancement in the future, I have no doubt.
Needless to say, business over at OnlyFans is thriving. Back in the fall, it was reported that the website’s revenue for the previous year had cracked $1.3 billion. They are generating all of that money from the approximately 300 million “fan” accounts on the site. But the “fans” are all there for the hookers, or as OnlyFans refers to them: creators. This euphemism makes no sense, of course, because these women aren’t creating anything. They are selling their bodies — that which has already been created, by God Almighty — to the lowest bidder. They are profiting from their own degradation and humiliation. This is not an act of creation, but of destruction — self-destruction.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1514-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
But whatever you call these women, how many are there? According to recent reports, there are currently about 1.4 million American women producing pornography for OnlyFans. 1.4 million. That number is undoubtedly a severe undercount. It doesn’t count all the women who “created” on OnlyFans in the past. And it doesn’t count the women who use other platforms to sell their bodies. All in all, it’s impossible to know exactly how many women in this country have elected to become prostitutes. We only know that the number, whatever it is, is well into the millions.
This is a truly unprecedented circumstance. Prostitution itself is not new or unprecedented. It is the world’s oldest profession, as the saying goes. And there’s nothing necessarily new about having such a high percentage of women in a given population turning to prostitution to make a living. You could almost certainly find more per capita prostitutes in most third world countries today. Historically, it’s thought that something like 1 in 5 women in 18th century London were prostitutes — 20% of the female population. There are a lot of OnlyFans “creators.” But there aren’t that many, percentage-wise. So the sheer numbers do not reveal the full scope of this problem.
As I tried to explain a few days ago, although prostitution has always been prevalent in basically all human societies, in one form or another, it has almost always been the province of young, poor, desperate women. You would have to drive down to the sections of the city where these women congregated. That’s because prostitution was not a part of polite, mainstream society. It was kept out on the fringes, in the shadows, in the dank, dark places where normal people would never want to go.
That is all changing now, and very rapidly. Suddenly, prostitution has become a career option, or a way to earn extra spending cash, for middle class and upper middle class women. The kinds of women who would never stand on a physical street corner now have the opportunity to sell their bodies on a virtual street corner. And a depressing, even terrifying, number of women have jumped at that chance. Some of them have even become multi-millionaires in the process. That is another thing that separates old fashioned prostitution from the newer variety. There are OnlyFans “creators” making $20 or $30 million a year. The highest paid star running backs in the NFL don’t make that much.
That’s not to say that most of the hookers on OnlyFans are raking in millions. The sad reality is that the vast majority are debasing and dehumanizing themselves for the sake of a few hundred bucks a month at most. They could earn as much selling homemade candles on Etsy. They could earn significantly more if they went out and got real jobs. Instead they choose to become masturbatory aides for random, unseen men. And in return they make only enough money to feed their Starbucks habit. It is hard to imagine something more pathetic than that.
But even this does not fully capture the width and breadth of this crisis. It’s not just that so many women are becoming prostitutes. And it’s not just that women who have many other options are choosing to be prostitutes anyway. It’s that, through platforms like OnlyFans, prostitution — or “sex work,” as it is euphemistically called — is now mainstream. It is a part of popular culture in a way that it never was before. It has been validated, accepted, and therefore elevated, so that prostitution is not just a common practice, but a conventional one. Prostitution may be the oldest profession but it was never considered a “normal” one. Until now.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN &#8217;25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a></h3>
This didn’t happen out of the blue. The stage was set over the course of decades, with the proliferation of internet pornography. Nearly all of the moral guardrails around sex were torn down and replaced with a flimsy, woefully insufficient consent-based moral structure which says that anything is permissible so long as both parties verbally agree to it. But it turns out that just because both parties agree to something, that doesn’t make the thing good, or acceptable, nor does it mitigate the harm done by it. If you sacrifice your dignity while robbing someone else of theirs, it doesn’t matter that you consented to it. A thing is not dignified merely because it was done on purpose, with the willful acquiescence of all parties.
Most of all, we have removed shame from society. At least we have removed it from the things that are actually shameful. History shows that we can put an end to pretty much any type of conduct, or drive it into the shadows and out of public view so that very few people engage in it, simply by using shame. We stopped shaming whorish behavior, and now we have soccer moms turning to prostitution for some extra spending money. One follows from the other.
50 years ago, around half of all adults in the country smoked cigarettes. Now that number is down to about 10%. We have cast cigarette smokers out to the edges of society, and this has been accomplished largely through shame and social pressure. Our culture has relentlessly demonized cigarettes as disgusting, dangerous, and low class, and as a result cigarettes went from cool and mainstream to obnoxious and odious. It used to be that you could smoke cigarettes anywhere. Now cigarette smokers are given an eight foot wide box outside, 100 feet from entrance of any building. Society is more welcoming of sex offenders than cigarette smokers at this point.
Now, I think the anti-cigarette campaigns are quite overdone and hysterical. My point is only that when a behavior is targeted and shamed — even an addictive one — you will end up with less of it, and when it does happen, it will happen out of view, on the margins, where shameful things belong.
We cannot get rid of prostitution entirely. It will always be one of the unsightly barnacles that attaches itself to the hull of civilization. But that’s what it should be. A slimy, crustaceous thing clinging to the outside of the ship, below the water line. Not sitting up on deck, reclining on a beach chair in full view, while the wait staff serves it margaritas.
<h3><a href="https://www.amiracist.com/?_gl=1*jtghwp*_gcl_au*ODQ1NjYzNTg2LjE3Mjg5MDk3OTE.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczMDEyMDgwOS40OS4xLjE3MzAxMjA4MzkuMzAuMC4w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MATT WALSH&#8217;S &#8216;AM I RACIST?&#8217; NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+</a></h3>
This kind of behavior should be shamed. That goes for the customers, the men. Most people aren’t hesitant to call them out, nor should they be. But it also goes for the women. The women who choose this lifestyle. They are not resorting to it out of desperation, or forced into it. We should look at that choice with disgust and contempt, not acceptance and understanding. We should treat it with shame. Which is the primary reason why OnlyFans and all similar platforms should be outlawed. Prostitution is already illegal in most jurisdictions. It makes no logical sense that prostitution should be legal only if it is done with a camera and sold for a subscription. Why should the more accessible version of the thing be legal? If anything, it should be the other way around. Though I prefer for both versions to be banned. Would banning it stop women from selling their bodies online? No, not entirely. But it would go a long way towards ostracizing the behavior so that otherwise normal and financially comfortable people would not engage in it.
There is one side of the ideological divide that wants to actively normalize the most debased forms of human behavior. And the other side which, though not seeking to normalize it, has largely lost the wherewithal and appropriate sense of moral indignation to treat shameful things as shameful. Which is why the conversation around OnlyFans so often centers on how much pity we should have for the prostitutes, and how hard their lives must be, and the deep sadness you can see in their poor little puppy dog eyes. There is almost no one stating plainly what used to be commonly understood: that this kind of conduct is disgusting and reprehensible, and we are revolted by it. That message is harsh and impolite. It also happens to be true. It is honest. And if the recent history of our culture should have taught us anything, it’s that it is better to be honest than polite.

Woman getting ready to party.

This Is How We Stop The Festering Disease Called OnlyFans

Matt Walsh

OnlyFans

Opinion

Pornography

Prostitution

Sex Workers

Social Media

Women

One of the hallmarks of this new era of wokeism that we&#8217;re all living through is that we&#8217;re constantly treated to new terminology for old concepts. Race riots have gotten a makeover, they&#8217;re now known as BLM protests. Goth kids, cross-dressers and other miscellaneous groups now have all found new labels for themselves under the umbrella of “gender identity.” Anti-white and anti-Asian racism, especially when enforced by the government, now goes by the name of &#8220;equity.&#8221; And, in maybe the farthest-reaching rebrand — the one that really goes back thousands of years, — the modern Left has even managed to redefine the term &#8220;prostitution.&#8221; Now, instead of calling prostitutes prostitutes, we&#8217;re supposed to call them &#8220;sex workers.&#8221;
The idea is to rebrand prostitution as something other than morally depraved, reprehensible conduct that no civilized society should ever tolerate, much less embrace. And as you might expect, many media outlets, including the New York Times, are on board with this change in terminology. The paper of record recently ran a whole <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/17/opinion/decriminalize-sex-work-new-york.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">op-ed</a> about the importance of &#8220;meeting the needs of sex workers.&#8221; According to the piece, we need to end &#8220;the social stigma&#8221; surrounding sex work. CBS News, for its part, has run several <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/south-africa-legalize-sex-work-prostitution-to-tackle-crime-against-women-hiv/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sympathetic</a> <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/san-francisco-sex-workers-battle-for-rights-legitimacy/">stories</a> about policies that can &#8220;legitimize the industry&#8221; of sex work.
Given all that, it&#8217;s with great interest that I checked out the websites of both The New York Times and CBS News last night to see how they were covering the story of a Virginia state house candidate named Susanna Gibson. Gibson, as you may have heard, was just outed as a cyber prostitute. She live-streamed videos on a porn website of herself engaging in various sex acts with her husband in exchange for money from strangers. She even offered to urinate for viewers if they paid up. To be clear, Gibson&#8217;s husband was aware all of this was happening. In fact he solicited donations himself at various points. And these were not private videos. They were not password protected, anyone could access them. And without going into too much detail, people could obtain even more salacious footage if they threw money at Gibson, in the form of &#8220;tokens.&#8221; Gibson assured her audience that the money was going to a &#8220;good cause&#8221; — perhaps her political campaign.
Now, if the New York Times and CBS News truly meant what they&#8217;ve been saying all these years about the legitimacy of sex work, you&#8217;d think this would be the easiest imaginable story to cover. Here you have a strong independent woman, engaging in consensual acts of prostitution with a willing partner. What could be more liberating than that? Truly this is what decades of feminism have been leading to, all along. This is the ultimate feminist success story. A “sex worker” becomes a politician —going from one form of prostitution to another. It’s the new American dream.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-matt-walsh-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h4>
Except, strangely enough, that&#8217;s not how these outlets covered this story. Instead of defending Susanna Gibson&#8217;s conduct, both the New York Times and CBS News lied about it. And these were not subtle lies. They were as obvious and lazy as they could possibly be. The Times decided to ignore the facts of this whole situation, and instead <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/us/politics/susanna-gibson-virginia.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that Gibson&#8217;s videos had somehow leaked. This was their headline: &#8220;State House Candidate in Virginia Condemns Leak of Sex Tapes.&#8221; What they&#8217;re doing is hiding the fact that Gibson uploaded the footage herself. They&#8217;re implying that someone else leaked these videos, which they know is not what happened. For its part, CBS News ran this <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/susanna-gibson-candidate-responds-leak-tapes-sex-acts-husband-live-videos/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&amp;linkId=234641763" target="_blank" rel="noopener">headline</a>: &#8220;Virginia election candidate responds after leak of tapes showing her performing sex acts with husband.&#8221; Below that headline, CBS News copy-pasted an accurate Associated Press article describing what happened. So, CBS News&#8217; only contribution to the story was adding an obviously false headline to mislead as many people as possible.
This is all more than a little strange. Here you have a perfect opportunity for both of these outlets — the New York Times and CBS News — to report honestly on the sex work that Susanna Gibson was engaging in. That shouldn&#8217;t be a big deal, because as these organizations have established, sex work is as noble as any other form of work. But instead of doing that, they&#8217;re lying about basic facts of the story. They&#8217;re pretending that Gibson wasn&#8217;t selling pornographic videos for money. Instead, they&#8217;re pushing the lie that she was hacked and her private videos somehow found their way on the internet. When in fact they found their way onto the internet because Gibson put them there on purpose. In case you&#8217;re keeping track, these are the same outlets that went wall-to-wall on Donald Trump&#8217;s so-called &#8220;pee tape,&#8221; which didn&#8217;t exist. Now they&#8217;re telling you that you&#8217;re not allowed to discuss a Democratic Party candidate&#8217;s actual pee tape, which she uploaded on the internet. Brazen does not begin to describe this.
But it gets even more brazen. Susanna Gibson herself went even further than these outlets. She claimed to be the victim of a &#8220;sex crime&#8221;. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Virginia Democratic candidate Susanna Gibson slams release of pornographic videos" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/C78nNGWCoyg?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Let&#8217;s think about this for a second. Susanna Gibson voluntarily uploads footage of herself having sex with her husband, with her husband&#8217;s consent, to a porn website. She and her husband both solicit money from anonymous viewers on this website, and in return, they promise to engage in even more sex acts. None of this is occurring on some private channel. Anyone with a working internet connection can see it. Some of these sex acts, by the way, were broadcast after Gibson announced her run for office in Virginia.
Now, Gibson tells us, it&#8217;s a &#8220;sex crime&#8221; to share this footage. It violates Virginia&#8217;s revenge porn laws. If that&#8217;s true, ironically enough, it would mean that Susanna Gibson and her husband are guilty of sex crimes, because they&#8217;re the ones who shared the footage. So it&#8217;s not just a facile argument that we&#8217;re talking about here. It is completely and totally absurd. It&#8217;s the kind of argument you make when you&#8217;re ashamed of what you&#8217;ve done, and you know there&#8217;s no defense for it, so you blurt out the first thing that comes to mind. Saying that it’s a sex crime for people to share a sex tape that you published on the internet is like selling your car to someone and then calling the police and claiming they stole it. Or perhaps you remember when Anthony Weiner claimed he was hacked, because he had no defense for why he was sending pictures of his crotch to random women on the internet. It&#8217;s a bit like that as well.
The level of desperation is really something to behold. They&#8217;re so desperate that they&#8217;re co-opting the same terminology they told us was sacred — the language of the #MeToo movement — as a political cover for behavior they know is repulsive. They&#8217;re saying we&#8217;re all sex criminals for noticing what they&#8217;re uploading on the internet. This isn&#8217;t simply hypocrisy, these are the panicked cries of feminists who are afraid to confront the logical endpoint of their entire movement, which is that feminism doesn&#8217;t actually liberate women from anything. Instead, it encourages them to become slaves to their most degenerate, base sexual desires. 
A great illustration of this hypocrisy comes to us from the feminist blog Jezebel. Jezebel, like the New York Times and CBS News, is currently <a href="https://jezebel.com/republicans-try-to-smear-virginia-house-candidate-with-1850829023" target="_blank" rel="noopener">claiming</a> that Republicans are demonizing Gibson for the crime of having sex with her husband. That&#8217;s the strawman they&#8217;re running with, as unsurprising and predictable as it may be. And Jezebel of course repeats the line that even talking about Gibson&#8217;s videos might amount to a sex crime. 
What&#8217;s especially interesting about Jezebel&#8217;s coverage, though, is that they just ran a <a href="https://jezebel.com/tim-scott-girlfriend-1850829741" target="_blank" rel="noopener">long post</a> about the personal life of presidential candidate Tim Scott, saying he needs to be more open about why he doesn&#8217;t have a girlfriend at the age of 57. The piece mocks Scott for allegedly being a virgin until he was middle aged. It also suggests he&#8217;s suffering from &#8220;marriage-related trauma&#8221; from his upbringing after his father, a Vietnam War veteran, developed a drinking problem. So the progressive feminists at Jezebel are allowed to mock Tim Scott for all of these personal issues — which they haven&#8217;t even remotely verified. But at the same time, Jezebel also says you can&#8217;t talk about multiple sex tapes that a woman running for office in the Democratic Party published for public consumption. There’s a lot of this on the internet now. The same media outlets saying we should respect Susanna Gibson’s privacy — even though she didn’t respect her own privacy — are also reporting incessantly about their speculations about Tim Scott’s private life.
To be clear, some questions about Scott&#8217;s personal life are legitimate. He seems very much to be lying about having a girlfriend, who he refuses to identify in any way. It does sound a bit like he’s pulling the old “my girlfriend goes to another school” move. And if we&#8217;re being honest, it&#8217;s weird to have a 57-year-old bachelor running for president. But at the same time, there&#8217;s an obvious double standard in the way the media treats questions about a politician&#8217;s private life, depending on their political party. Another example is the incessant reporting on the whereabouts of Melania Trump, who has been absent from the campaign trail. Again, I think objectively those are perfectly valid questions. But by the same token, once we allow for all of that, then it&#8217;s clear that a political candidate&#8217;s history as a porn star is also very relevant.
There is a reason the Left is denying this, and it has nothing to do with one state-level candidate in Virginia. They&#8217;re lying about what Susanna Gibson did because her behavior highlights a very uncomfortable truth about the great experiment that the Left has conducted for so many years. That truth is this: After multiple &#8220;waves&#8221; and generations of feminism, which supposedly were all about treating women like people instead of objects — that’s how it was sold, anyway — pornography has now become so normalized and mainstreamed in our society that we have a bunch of soccer moms whoring themselves out on the internet for a few extra dollars. These aren&#8217;t young girls getting sex trafficked or turning to street prostitution out of desperation. They&#8217;re bored middle-class women with loose morals looking for validation and a little extra spending cash. 
I’ve talked many times about what I call the trajectory of leftism. With any item on their agenda, anything they promote, it always starts and ends the same way. First, they deny that they are doing the thing. Then they admit they’re doing it, but insist that it’s good. Then they say that since it’s good, it should actually be celebrated. And finally, they invite — or demand — that we participate. Now we see that pornography has followed this same path, and we have finally arrived at the participation stage — where the problem becomes terminal. First they denied that they wanted to make hardcore pornography mainstream and accessible to everyone, including children. Then they said that actually porn is good and should be mainstream. Then they demanded that we celebrate the free expression of porn stars. And now porn has been opened up for all to actively participate in it — an invitation that many attention-starved women like Susana Gibson have responded to.
The problem — one of the many, many problems —  is that selling your body to random creeps online is depressing and soul-crushing. Eventually, these women all get sick of it and want to move on. But there is no &#8220;moving on&#8221; in the internet age. Everything you&#8217;ve done there, you do forever. It lives on, whether you like it or not. That doesn&#8217;t make you a victim or give you the right to cry about &#8220;invasion of privacy.&#8221; It just means you need to make better choices, as Susanna Gibson, and many women like her, have now discovered.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>

Matt Walsh 2

Dem Candidate Claims It’s A ‘Sex Crime’ To Talk About The Fact That She’s A Porn Star

Dem Candidate Claims It's A 'Sex Crime' To Talk About The Fact That She's A Porn Star

Democrats

New York Times

Readers Pass

Tim Scott

The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/professor-at-catholic-notre-dame-university-helps-students-access-abortions-despite-indiana-abortion-ban" target="_blank" rel="noopener">University of Notre Dame</a> refused to sponsor an event with Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro, but supported events with pro-abortion and pro-prostitution advocates.
Right to Life Michiana, a pro-life activist group, celebrated its <a href="https://www.prolifemichiana.org/upcoming-events" target="_blank" rel="noopener">annual benefit</a> in October; the university is typically the largest sponsor of the event. But according to Notre Dame&#8217;s Catholic conservative student newspaper, <a href="https://irishrover.net/2022/11/11577/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Irish Rover</a>, the school abruptly pulled its money, and prohibited student groups from donating or selling tickets because Shapiro was set to be the featured speaker. But the university hosted a pro-abortion event the same night, and allowed a student group to pay for an event with a &#8220;sex work&#8221; advocate.
&#8220;This year, a university administrator decided that Right to Life Michiana’s invited speaker transgressed the bounds of acceptable pro-life discourse,&#8221; Irish Rover editor emerita Mary Frances Myler reported.
&#8220;Notre Dame eschewed sponsorship, and, as the fiduciary for all university-affiliated groups, forbade those groups from donating to the benefit or purchasing tickets. The stated grounds? Ben Shapiro’s presence conflicts with the Catholic mission component of the university’s charitable giving policy,&#8221; Myler added.
According to the report, on-campus pro-life group Notre Dame Right to Life had already purchased tickets to the benefit, with the approval of the University, but were abruptly halted by the Student Activities Office without reason.
Notre Dame Right to Life President Merlot Fogarty and several members met with Chuck Lamphier, executive director of Notre Dame&#8217;s Office of Mission Engagement and Church Affairs, for answers. Lamphier reportedly told them that &#8220;this speaker is problematic,&#8221; citing a tweet Shapiro wrote in 2010. He said the event itself was problematic, and that &#8220;university dollars [were] not going to go to it.&#8221; He did, however, say the university would continue to support Right to Life Michiana in other ways that did not publicly connect them to Ben Shapiro, The Irish Rover reported.
But the same night as the benefit event took place, Notre Dame&#8217;s Gender Studies Program and Institute on Race and Resilience co-sponsored an <a href="https://genderstudies.nd.edu/events-and-news/events/2022/10/27/post-roe-america-making-intersectional-feminist-sense-of-abortion-bans/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">event with abortion activists</a>. One of the panelists at the event, <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/slaumsu89/details/experience/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sharon Lau</a>, is currently employed as regional advocacy director for South Bend-based abortion clinic Whole Women’s Health. According to her LinkedIn page, she has previously worked for Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation. Another panelist was Democratic Indiana State Rep. Maureen Bower, who called abortion a &#8220;<a href="https://indianahousedemocrats.org/news-media/bauer-remarks-on-republican-abortion-ban-final-vote" target="_blank" rel="noopener">basic human right</a>&#8221; during the debate over Indiana&#8217;s state abortion ban in August.
Just days before the event, another student group was allowed to use its money on a speaking fee for an event hosted by the University&#8217;s LGBT Law Forum, entitled “<a href="https://twitter.com/EudaimoniaEsq/status/1580938423732699137?s=20&amp;t=wyWp4aG_CTT6Vj42fwooKA" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Decriminalizing Sex Work</a>.” The speaker at that event was <a href="https://cruelvalentine.com/#home" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Cruel Valentine</a>, a Chicago-based burlesque performer, porn star, and sex worker. &#8220;Valentine lectured about the &#8216;whorearchy,&#8217; protested the stigmatization of sex work, and called for the elimination of legal consequences for individuals who either solicit or provide sexual services in exchange for money,&#8221; The Irish Rover reported. Both events were protected by the University&#8217;s academic freedom policies.
&#8220;[U]niversity administrators weaponized policies to obstruct charitable giving to Right to Life Michiana because the guest speaker tweeted something unpalatable more than a dozen years ago,&#8221; Myler wrote. &#8220;And this apparently makes him worse than the women who perpetuate the lie that abortion is a right, worse than the woman who has dedicated her life to stripping away legal protections for vulnerable people coerced into an exploitative economy inseparable from sex trafficking, human trafficking, pornography, and abuse.&#8221;

Campus scene University of Notre Dame

Catholic Notre Dame University Pulled Money From Pro-Life Event Over Ben Shapiro Speech. Pro-Abortion, ‘Sex Work’ Events Had No Issues.

Catholic Notre Dame University Pulled Money From Pro-Life Event Over Ben Shapiro Appearance. Pro-Abortion, 'Sex Work' Events Went Off Without A Hitch.

Abortion

Ben Shapiro

Education

Notre Dame University

Pro-Life Movement

U.S.

Two women who were turned away at a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/florida">Florida</a> strip joint because they weren&#8217;t accompanied by a man are taking their case to the state&#8217;s highest court.
The women, Brittney Smith and Anita Yanes, claim they couldn&#8217;t get through the door at Rachel&#8217;s Orlando in 2018. They say they went to see a dancer they&#8217;d heard looked like Yanes, but were denied entry due to a club rule they say violated their civil rights.
“We do believe that this issue is so important,” their attorney, Matthew Dietz, told the <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/women-denied-entry-at-florida-strip-club-will-take-case-to-state-supreme-court-again/ar-AAX3qBv">Orlando Sentinel</a>. “We’re living in a time when these rights are being constricted.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
2 <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Florida?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Florida</a> women who were denied entry to a strip club because they didn&#39;t have a man with them say they will take their case to the FL Supreme Court &#8212; again. <a href="https://t.co/OSHYBle9T4">https://t.co/OSHYBle9T4</a> via <a href="https://twitter.com/martinecomas?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@martinecomas</a>
&mdash; Craig Pittman (@craigtimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/craigtimes/status/1523679595169402880?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 9, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The legal question, according to Dietz, is whether local governments can enact anti-discrimination ordinances that supersede the Florida Civil Rights Act. The Orange County human rights ordinance goes farther than the state law, and would have nixed the club rule. But the state&#8217;s Fifth District Court of Appeal on Friday refused to rehear the case following its ruling last March that local law was unconstitutional because it is preempted by the state law.
Dietz believes the state Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case in 2020, will take it this time because the appeals judge acknowledged that that the issue of whether local governments are allowed to enact ordinances that go beyond state law is “one of great public importance.”
“The case is going to move forward, and the Florida Supreme Court is going to decide whether the Florida Civil Rights Act preempts local anti-discrimination ordinances,” Dietz said. “For the past 50 years, counties and municipalities in Florida have been passing anti-discrimination ordinances that protect the citizens in their counties and cities. &#8230; Until today, those ordinances have been valid.”
Rachel&#8217;s claims the policy is in place to deter prostitution and prevent domestic incidents. The encounter between Smith and Yanes and the club manager was caught on video.
“It’s club rules. It’s club policy. That’s all,” the manager told the women. ”We’ve had wives come in here and try to get their husbands out of here.”
They sued, claiming the policy violated the county ordinance&#8217;s protections against gender and sexual orientation discrimination. The state Civil Rights Act bans discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations, but offers no specific protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender people.
The judge in the initial case first sided with Rachel’s, holding that the state law trumped the local ordinance. But the Fifth District Court of Appeal sent the case back to circuit court, saying Orange County should have been made part of the suit. Last year, the lower court judge ruled the two laws did not conflict, which Rachel&#8217;s appealed and won when the Fifth Circuit declared the Orange County ordinance partially unconstitutional.
Ironically, Rachel&#8217;s has since changed its policy and allows unaccompanied women to come in and watch strippers perform.
&#8220;Steve Mason, an Altamonte Springs attorney representing Rachel’s, said Orange County overstepped its authority because local governments cannot enact ordinances that conflict with state laws. He said he looks forward to arguing the case before the Supreme Court,&#8221; the Sentinel reported.
“These people are zealots and they are extremists,” Rachel&#8217;s attorney, Steve Mason, told the <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/women-denied-entry-at-florida-strip-club-will-take-case-to-state-supreme-court-again/ar-AAX3qBv">Sentinel</a>, referring to Orange County lawmakers who passed the broader ordinance. “I cannot wait to go to Tallahassee because I am going to rip into them.”

Florida strip club

Two Women Barred From Strip Joint Seek Ruling From Florida Supreme Court

Florida Women Take Case To State Supreme Court After Being Barred From Strip Joint

Florida

Lawsuit

John Oliver can’t understand why “sex work” is illegal in the United States. 
The “Last Week Tonight” host laid out some arguments in favor of decriminalizing prostitution, pointing to how this move would make it “safer” for sex workers, and saying how it could even reduce instances of human trafficking.
The 44-year-old host noted that sex is “a topic that historically we’ve not been very good at talking about” and claims that “sex work” is mishandled in America due to the laws we have in place banning it.
&#8220;Basically, consensual sex for money on camera is legal porn, and consensual sex for money off-camera is illegal sex work,&#8221; Oliver said. &#8220;Makes sense, right? Wrong? Well, exactly. Everything about the way we regulate sex work in this country is confusing and counter-productive.” He claims it’s either “demonizing, patronizing or just plain wrong.”
The HBO host comes down hard on law enforcement during the segment. He says police “position themselves as saviors for sex workers” but are mostly “arresting and jailing them.” 
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Sex Work: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-gd8yUptg0Q?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
He criticized police who have had sex with sex workers during undercover operations, plus pointed out that between 2016 and 2020, almost everyone arrested by the NYPD for selling sex was a person of color.
“I don’t want to paint too rosy a picture here,” Oliver said during the segment. “Sex work can be dangerous and we need to be talking constructively about how to make it safer in every possible way.” But the British host insisted that sex trafficking and “the implicit suggestion is that no sex worker has ever entered the trade by choice” is untrue.
He also noted how prostitutes are less likely to report crime for fear of getting in trouble themselves. “It is no surprise that many workers who have been robbed or abused by clients report that they feel they can’t turn to the police for help,” he said.
Oliver’s solution for all these issues? Decriminalization of prostitution. He points to other countries who have done it as examples of success, such as New Zealand. 
The comedian’s opinion is becoming more and more popular. Last year, a University of Ottawa adjunct professor <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/adjunct-professor-suggests-sex-work-on-the-side-is-the-best-thing-young-people-can-do-early-in-their-careers">said on Twitter</a> that doing “sex work on the side” is the “best thing” young people can do early in their careers.
“Unpopular opinion: the best thing young people can do early in their careers is do #SexWork on the side because your early career prospects will be unstable, unpredictable, low pay, likely contract work and very much exploitative,” she wrote before comparing prostitution to capitalism.
“That’s how capitalism works… People out here saying young people can be exploited in sex work. Literally, that’s capitalism. Lol. And quite literally, that’s any kind of work,” she continued.
Meanwhile, far-left Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/aoc-promotes-prostitution-sex-work-is-work">also used Twitter</a> to promote prostitution, repeating the popular phrase: “sex work is work.” This was in response to a paramedic being “shamed” for creating an OnlyFans account.
The Daily Wire’s first original film, Shut In, has made its cinematic debut, being met with rave reviews. The Daily Wire is building an alternative to the leftist entertainment industry, one gripping movie at a time. Join us in this mission and stream Shut In today by becoming a Daily Wire<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

2015 Summer TCA Tour – 31st Annual Television Critics Association Awards

John Oliver Calls For Decriminalizing ‘Sex Work,’ Calling Laws ‘Confusing And Counter-Productive’

John Oliver

A University of Ottawa adjunct professor recently said on Twitter that doing “sex work on the side” is the “best thing” young people can do early in their careers.
Naomi Sayers, adjunct professor and attorney, made the comments on Twitter last week, which were <a href="https://www.campusreform.org/article?id=17658">reported</a> by Campus Reform.
“Unpopular opinion: the best thing young people can do early in their careers is do #SexWork on the side because your early career prospects will be unstable, unpredictable, low pay, likely contract work and very much exploitative,&#8221; Sayers wrote.
Sayers continued her Twitter comments by comparing sex work to capitalism.
“That’s how capitalism works… People out here saying young people can be exploited in sex work. Literally, that’s capitalism. Lol. And quite literally, that’s any kind of work,” she wrote.
Sayers added that capitalism and prisons should both be abolished, advocating instead for free education and other progressive wish list items.
“Also, if you really want young people to not be exploited, provide them with livable wages, access to safe housing, clean water, free education. Literally. Abolish capitalism… Actually abolish prison but whatever,” she said, oblivious to the fact that capitalism is the reason she has achieved success and a platform to make these claims.
Alex Krause, Sayers’ publicist, insisted to Campus Reform that his client was not promoting sex work.
“Naomi is IN NO WAY promoting or suggesting that anyone should pursue sex work, her point was to facetiously criticize capitalist society, to quote her initial tweet &#8216;&#8230;early career prospects will be unstable, unpredictable, low pay, likely contract work and very much exploitative,’” Krause told the outlet.
Krause, when asked what Sayers really meant by her tweets, told Campus Reform that Sayers was making a nuanced argument comparing sex work and capitalism.
“What Naomi meant is stated plainly. Yes, it is nuanced; but NO, she is not directly advocating for sex work. Her intent remains to call out systemic racism / stigmatization wherever it exists, and it is rampant within for-profit Canadian higher education institutions AND the prison system,” Krause said. “Capitalism, for-profit education, and prison are inherently stigmatizing towards certain marginalized groups. As we noted in the previous email, Naomi’s lived experience of stigmatization in the legal realm is telling, considering the massive investment that she made personally and financially to pursue a legal education.”
Krause added that Campus Reform’s “interpretation of her coy, and nuanced take on exploitation of capitalism vs exploitation of sex work may be indicative of the exact issue she is trying to highlight &#8211; the quickness to stigmatize and/or ‘slut shame’ sex work.”
Krause also said that Sayers has no affiliation with the University of Ottawa, yet her LinkedIn profile claims she still teaches there, as do several advocacy organizations.
While Sayers and Krause advocated for the comparison, Helen Taylor of Exodus Cry, a non-profit organization trying to stop sex work and human trafficking, told Campus Reform that Sayers’ comments were “deeply irresponsible.”
“For Professor Sayers to flippantly encourage young vulnerable students to engage in such a harmful industry is deeply irresponsible and extremely offensive to survivors who are working hard to heal and recover from the damage prostitution inflicted on their lives,&#8221; Taylor told the outlet. “The sex industry is a system of violence and gender inequality. It is not a &#8216;job like any other.&#8217; It puts girls at higher risk daily of rape, theft and murder. It causes long-term PTSD comparable to torture victims… We believe education leaders ought to be protecting young women, and empowering them to aim high, not echoing pimp’s advertisements for the sex trade.”

Street prostitute

Adjunct Professor Suggests ‘Sex Work’ On The Side Is The ‘Best Thing’ Young People Can Do Early In Their Careers

Sex workers are claiming that Twitter, where they have had access to advertising their industry, is cracking down on them and making it far more difficult to ply their trade.
The owner of an industry trade show had her account suspended in December and stated that she contacted Twitter with an appeal but never heard back. She told <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/sex-worker-twitter-deplatform-1118826/">Rolling Stone</a>, “I wrote that we’ve been a small business for 20 years and losing this account is devastating to my business and my ability to connect with my customers. I was crying. I was so upset.”
Her trade show “isn’t the only adult business that’s been deplatformed by Twitter within the past two months,” Rolling Stone wrote, citing Twitter&#8217;s alleged suspension without notice of two other adult content platforms last week — a move that “shocked many in the industry&#8221; and prompted &#8220;sex workers on social media to panic about losing the one social platform that has openly allowed them for years.”
Corey Silverstein, an attorney who represents various adult industry clients, said, “The phone hasn’t stopped ringing. It’s just been ongoing messages of people being terrified they’re going to lose everything.”
Kat Revenga, the head of marketing and events at one adult content company, said that within the last few days multiple accounts for their companies have been shut down, including Arabic and Russian accounts. “These accounts were used to communicate with models, and to promote their work,&#8221; said Revenga. &#8220;The people most affected by this are those who use our platforms to build businesses and communicate with fans … this should frighten everyone in [the adult industry].”
A Twitter spokesperson told Rolling Stone that no purge of sex workers had been implemented, asserting, “There have not been changes to our sensitive media policy this year. Per this policy, ‘You can share graphic violence and consensually produced adult content within your Tweets, provided that you mark this media as sensitive.’ We don’t have plans to change our sensitive media policy as it pertains to adult content.”
Amberly Rothfield, an adult-industry consultant, claimed that since the current year began, Twitter has deleted 704 out of 5,000 sex workers’ accounts that she monitors. Since the start of the year, Rothfield found, the deletion of sex workers&#8217; accounts has increased 82%. She found that 34 accounts are removed per day on average.
Silverstein concluded, “I don’t think people really understand that there’s been a massive shift where adult performers are all in business for themselves. They are their own breadwinners. They feed their families and pay their bills based on the followers they have on social media. Now they’re seeing services bumped off the platform, and they’re scared.” He posited that if Twitter makes its restrictions on sexual content harsher, “it is going to cripple these people. They can’t go to Instagram. They can’t go to Facebook. They can’t go to Skype. You’re not leaving them with many alternatives here.”

Coronavirus – Sex work

Sex Workers Claim Twitter Deleting Their Accounts; Twitter Denies

Twitter

Menu