This is a replacement blog. I’ve withheld the one I wrote originally for reasons which I’ll try to explain.
That effort was triggered by reviews of a book chronicling the little contretemps between its author, Ms Stormy Daniels, and a rather prominent member of the administration of what used to be a major ally. In it, I looked at attitudes to the escort industry and how, in the course of researching one of my crime novels, my notions about it had been reshaped by the testimony of a highly articulate, very intelligent woman who’d worked as an escort for many years.
I offered no judgements on the Daniels/Other case, but tried to present a balanced (and, thanks to my source, informed) view on the varied nature of the transactions conducted between escorts and their clients.
But now, just over a week before the blog was due to appear, the news has shifted to the hearings about allegations concerning a Supreme Court nominee in the USA. And the distortions and fabrications being aired in his support, along with the absurd victimisation of his female accuser and the seeming carelessness about her suffering, have created an atmosphere in which I feel that it would be unforgivably insensitive to express opinions that could (however wrongfully) be construed as a defence of such a disgusting, inhuman imbalance.
In the discarded blog, again and again, I went to great lengths to insist that none of my comments were meant to condone ‘escorting’ and that I recognised the appalling treatment handed out to women by inadequate, self-justifying men with the apparent support of a system that too easily identifies perpetrator as victim. And yet, in the present climate, however enlightened one’s readers, offering opinions which could be interpreted as evidence of support for male ‘entitlement’ would be utterly reprehensible.
I know that the Supreme Court issues are in no way connected with ‘escorts’ but they do highlight the persistence of the same false presumptions about the male’s sexual ‘rights’. Contemporary politics, here and elsewhere, may show signs of adherence to principles which are long outmoded but, gentlemen, droit de seigneur is no longer on the menu. Please grow up.