tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12625691.post8075676851446792019..comments2024-02-29T01:43:23.900-05:00Comments on Women's Bioethics Blog: Governor Spitzer--in this Blog?Linda MacDonald Glennhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02378544626277000243noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12625691.post-52568243339306152472008-03-12T07:28:00.000-04:002008-03-12T07:28:00.000-04:00I do suspect, however, given her price, it's a saf...I do suspect, however, given her price, it's a safe assumption to assume that Kristen is indeed a voluntary employee. At least in my experience, forced prostitution rarely commands upwards of $5,000 a night/girl. (I had several friends who worked as very high price call girls when I lived in Seattle, and they all very voluntarily chose the profession, in part because they often made $15,000 or more a week. Well, and I lived in Nevada for a while...)<BR/><BR/>However, I do think you're right about the risks being generated for multiple partners, which is certainly the case regardless of if a partner is being paid or not. <BR/><BR/>The statistics about positive infection rates for men is interesting in light of the statistics posted around my campus right now; the school polled around 1600 students on a variety of subjects and then made flyers about them. Right now one of the popular ones is "87% of students have not engaged in unsafe sex because of drugs or alcohol use". Several people (ahem) have taken to writing editorials on these flyers..<BR/><BR/>"So 13%, or around 200 students, HAVE engaged in unsafe sex because of drug/alcohol use?"<BR/><BR/>"How many students have engaged in unsafe sex without the excuse of drug/alcohol use?"<BR/><BR/>I think what surprises me most about both statistics (yours and mine) is that there's an undercurrent of acceptability to the numbers - like, this is a good amount! We've done well! When, really? Not so much.Kelly Hillshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15027400439081662699noreply@blogger.com