Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (June 3, 1997)
97 lesday - June 3, 1997 The Battalion 'retty women for lease \galization of prostitution profits society r( | Ihe legalization of prostitu tion in the United States law' wou *d be a great leap to- LJltJreduGing waste due to the ninalization and subsequent fy secution of "consentual LI lies."There are many other mes"lumped into this class, L^ilhisis the silliest. T ( jjjClassifying prostitution as a l ve neisan invasion into the [i n sofconsenting adults in- fed in a business transaction. The per- InAed benefits of making prostitution a ^rv linal act far outweigh the real detri- Jmi jts to society. Legalization of prostitu- jselwould result in a bevy of good out- jes: lower crime rates (especially 1 fori 111 Columnist Jack Harvey Junior economics major violent), increased tax revenue, a slowing of the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and the un burdening of societal hypocrisy. Much crime is perpetrated every year in this nation due to the criminalization of acts between consenting adults (prostitution and drugs among them). At first this seems to be a circular argu ment; it is certain that the crimi nalization of once legal acts will result in a higher crime rate. Moreover, the criminalization of a consentual act which previously had only minor ill-effects on so ciety breeds more serious ills. People are forced to do unsavory things in order to feed their hungers and addictions. The submergence of vices into the black market drives the prices paid by the consumers for them upward, thereby forcing people to commit violent crimes to get exactly what they want. But this is not to say violent crime would come to an end with the decriminaliza tion of crimes like prostitution, but many of them would not be committed. Some argue the great damage done to so ciety is the waste of productive resources on such immoral indulgences as prostitution. The loss can be found in the enormous amounts of time and energy spent in a los ing battle: trying to eradicate vices such as prostitution, not in the comparatively mi nuscule amounts of resources spent by mid dle aged-men who feel wanted. Instead of government wasting efforts to change the unchangeable, it could profit from the world’s oldest profession. So-called “sin taxes,” such as those al ready levied on alcohol and tobacco, could be expanded to include revenues of prostitution. Moralists have no need to worry. One can be a right-wing extremist and still be pragmatic. It is a well-known fact that the tried-and-true mechanisms of supply and demand are the best ways to change people’s behavior. Where militant police action has failed, changes in supply and demand brought about by a sizable tax on incomes of prostitutes is sure to have strong effect. With lower expected earn ings for prostitutes, fewer women and men will work in this field. The change in price caused by the tax also would reduce the demand for these services — government would turn a profit and reduce this “undesirable” ac tivity at the same time. This situation is much better than the current scenario of interminable expenses for the enforce ment of current laws for nominal suc cess. Surely there are better ways to spend this money. The regulation of this industry will also have benefits for the people most closely involved. When raised to the status of good citizens, prostitutes would enjoy a happier, safer life. These women and men are noto riously maltreated by pimps and clients and there is effectively no legal recourse for them because they are labeled crimi nals. Regulation of this trade will help slow the spread of STDs such as AIDS. If each individual can decrease his chances of contracting a STD through the use of a condom, government regulators can protect the public health through mandatory use of condoms and regular medical exams for prostitutes. Even if someone is not planning to have sex with a prostitute, or with someone who al ready has, there are costs all citizens must pay. The financial effect of STDs on the pub lic health care system is staggering. Accord ing to Forbes Magazine, the government of Amsterdam estimates that the cost of treat ing an AIDS patient for one year is $46,000 — this cannot be overlooked. When debate over this issue comes to pass, everyone will feel better. There won’t be as much society-wide hypocrisy when it comes to the ideals that sex once held under Puritan beginnings. Human nature is unchanging and laws should take this reality into account. ampus Voice n ■ illii i $ | || % hit p ms yp f / mMih .. m if Photograph: Tim Moog Action to the McVeigh % verdict: From what I \ the evidence orts the tys decision.” Patrick Traister Senior chemical en gineering major Mail Call Corps officers suffer false blame In response to the editorial printed in the June 2 issue of The Battalion, con cerning the Fish Drill Team: The authors of the editorial are saying that the advisers in question should be considered victims be cause an unnamed officer suppos edly knew what was going on and simply warned the cadets to “not get caught.” This accusation of scape goating is merely a dreamed up de fense tactic, or as we in the Corps say, “pulled out” by the accused cadets’ attorneys. I must also add that it is a rather poor excuse. These cadets are in no way in a vulnerable position. Gen eral Hopgood has made his posi tion on hazing no less than crystal clear. The Corps of Cadets teaches accountability to oneself, a virtue it has so far not demonstrated. Cer tainly, it does not take an officer to explain to college students that striking others with weapon butts and urinating on subordinates in the name of tradition and training is unacceptable and morally wrong. I would hardly call the offi cers in the Trigon the “root” of the problem. The root of the problem is the sophomoric mentality that just because something was done to a cadet as a fish justifies the same actions carried out to others. Only when cadets realize that there is a definite line between mil itary discipline and hazing can the problem be rectified. Yes, the Trigon is opening itself up to criticism by not fully participating in getting questions answered, but the advis ers are no less accountable — cer tainly not victims. They as Ags and Corps members should have known better. Jonathan A. Scott Class of’99 Honor of Kyle Field not given respect I think it is absurd to even allow the removal of the burial sites of the Reveilles of Ol’ Army days. The respect that is devoted to our mascot has been shoved aside only to allow a few to benefit from the addition of a couple of sky- boxes where chances are great none of the students at Texas A&M will even sit in them. This makes me sick to my stom ach to know that not even long time honored traditions are sacred, especially at Kyle Field, home of the Fightin’ Texas Aggies. If there is any way students, being upstanding and true Ag gies, can stop this from happen ing, we should be informed how to stop those money-grubbing individuals immediately. Elena Garza Class of’98 Sexist advertising places women on pedestal of shame mt Mandy Cater Columnist, Senior psychology major nn” walks in her apart ment at 8 p.m. on a ^Wednesday night. After a long day of tests and boring lec tures, she decides to relax in front of the tube. The first channel she comes across displays a leggy blonde perched on a ladder painting in her lacy bra and panties. Not too interested, she flips the channel. This time she is greeted by a red-lipped brunette, coyly sucking on a lollipop. These are the kinds of im ages American consumers are bombarded with daily. Adver tisers effectively send the mes sage that this is the beauty ide al; what every woman should strive to become. Unfortunate ly, this ideal is not realistic for most women. It is this impossi bility that advertisers and their clients depend on to keep their pocketbooks padded. Advertising has proven to be one of the strongest proponents of women’s oppression in American society. As women’s movements raise consciousness and open doors for women, media backlashes consequently slam them in their faces. Today women are greeted on billboards, magazine pages and television commercials by smil ing Cindy Crawfords. These per fect beauties have a few com mon traits, which make them easily recognizable: they are all lipstick-wearing, young women, completely void of cellulite. Women see these goddesses and feel guilty because they are not like them. On the other hand, men see these images and expect women to be exact duplicates. This is where women’s groups are concerned. Accord ing to Naomi Wolf’s “The Beau ty Myth,” the average fashion model today is 23 percent un der the usual weight for an av erage woman. This trend is even more troubling when con sidered in a historical context. Women in America are, on av erage, heavier than they were in the past, but models continually grow thinner. Dr. Mary Pipher, au thor of “Reviving Ophelia” said, “In 1950 the White Rock mineral water girl was 5 feet 4 inches tall and weighed 140 pounds. Today she is 5 feet 10 inches and weighs 110 pounds.” Marilyn Monroe, recog nized internationally as a sex sym bol, is a perfect example of how far society's standards have fallen. These statistics might seem trivial unless there is an under standing about their overall im pact on society. Foremost, there is this issue of weight. In the United States today, upwards of $30 billion in revenue is generated from the “thinness” industry. It is also es timated that one in five young women suffers from an eating disorder, approximately eight million American women in all. In many cases, these women are completely depriving their bodies, “often receiving less nourishment than Jewish con centration camp victims.” This type of sexism in adver tising also devalues women to the status of sex objects. When bikinis are used to sell beer and using a certain brand of shampoo can send women into orgasmic fren zy, consumers are sent a power ful, yet misleading message. Women, despite any ad vancements in the workplace, are trivialized to subservient bimbos. Ads send the message that, no matter what anyone achieves, it all comes down to one’s sex appeal — brains are rendered irrelevant. Real women do not adhere to this ridiculous norm, but they are often the ones who suffer. Violence against women is an extremely common occur rence. Nationwide federal gov ernment data suggests that a woman is beaten every 18 sec onds. This gives validity to the belief that when valuation of women is low, violence against them increases. Moreover, the most disturb ing facet of women in advertis ing is the focus on adolescence. The bodies of most fashion models are glaringly akin to those of young teenage girls (ex cept with respect to large, round breasts). Essentially the message defines young and tender to be sexy. The impact of this notion became clear with the death of six-year-old “beauty queen” Jon- Benet Ramsey in recent months. One might ask how advertising, having these severe repercussions, has gone unchecked in our society. President Clinton blasted advertisers for “glamorizing drug addiction” by portraying models as “strung out” heroin addicts. Although drugs are a serious problem in America, it is interesting that politicians choose now to express opposi tion toward advertising. Women’s groups have voiced concern for years, with not so much as a nod from politicians. One might also wonder why the current campaigns are causing such a stir in Washington after so many years of silence. The answer is simple: drugs are a good fight. When popularity is suffering within the White House, it is always good politics to jump on the “Just Say No” bandwagon. The problems women’s groups address, however, are not as easy. These issues de mand a reevaluation of how we view women in society. They require admittance that the defining characteristic for women of today is beauty. Until millions of women who are beaten and starving themselves is considered a problem in the United States, the voices of women’s opposi tion to sexism in advertising will go unheard. Me. Ar, e you a smmooeL??,