I sure wish I lived in Kennebunk, Maine this week as the list of the names of the johns who allegedly sought and paid for sex with a certain 29-year-old Zumba instructor is released. The talk of the morning news today is, "Should those names be released? Think of the damage to the families, the children...." The first time I heard that comment, my reflexes hurried my tushie over to my computer as fast as they could go. You betcha, I got something to say about this.
I can see absolutely NO reason to protect the "alleged" johns. How on earth could any thinking human being think that this would be a good thing? Good for who, besides the "alleged" johns themselves? They have already "allegedly" behaved in not only an illegal manner but an immoral one as well. They have possibly put their wives in danger healthwise. DON'T THESE WIVES HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT THEIR HUSBANDS HAVE "ALLEGEDLY" BEEN UP TO???? WHY DOES ANYONE THINK THE JOHNS HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN THE PEOPLE THEY HAVE HURT?? OR, MORE RIGHTS THAN ALEXIS?
Ok, ok, I hear the talking heads saying things like, "well, innocent until proven guilty." Well, doesn't that go for the Zumba instructor as well?? And if you are charged with a crime, be it a DUI, a murder, theft, or soliciting sex from a prostitute, it is public record. Even if you are later proved "not guilty", there is still a public record. So---this is why the talking heads are saying it's "not fair" to publish the names of her little black book (or big brown ledger, or videos as it were) because the public scorn and humiliation of just being accused is too great.
Isn't it though??? (insert smirk)
I ask you, would your name be on that list? Would your husband's name be on that list?? How do we know you did not go and solicit sex from her? Well, we don't know for sure, but if your names are written down in her ledger and there's an accompanying video of the encounter, I'm guessing you guys are guilty. Furthermore, if your husband's name was on her list, you'd rightly assume he's guilty. Why would Miss Wright put his name on her list if he hadn't contacted her? Police have recovered extensive bookkeeping records as well as hundreds of videos of her having sex with these men. Police say they "don't know why she took video of the sexual encounters" but hey, I'm no detective but I'd say maybe it was to prove that these men really did solicit sex from her?? Maybe she was thinking ahead, you know, "covering her ass" as you will? She seems like a smart woman, aside from her poor choice to "allegedly" become a prostitute. Maybe really her only poor choice was to become a prostitute where it is illegal. Maybe she should've moved to Nevada? She could've run her business with her head held high(er) and paid her taxes on the income received.
What if Alexis is ultimately proven not guilty? Doesn't SHE deserve to be protected as well? I don't hear anyone defending HER reputation except her attorney. She has children too. She is considered a very well-liked member of her community and Zumba instructor. Doesn't HER reputation deserve protecting as well? Does anyone really think that the men who "allegedly" paid her to have sex with her deserve to be protected more than her? I think this is a blatant example of the old double standard. She's a whore, the guys she had sex with are not. Give me a break.
Dr. Laura Schlessinger would probably back me on this. I listened to her radio show for years when I lived in Southern California and every time a young woman would reluctantly admit to her that she was having sex without the "benefit of marriage", Dr. Laura would say, "hey, at least get paid for it. Don't just give it away."
Would it be any better for Miss Alexis Wright to have just given it away for free? Would her reputation be any stellar for it? Would the men she had sex with be more honorable? What is it about paying someone to have sex with you that makes it so horrendous?
Oh, yeah. It's a crime. (Maybe it's time prostitution was legalized in all 50 states. Aren't states always crying they don't have enough money??)
Cheating on your spouse is not a crime. Neither is lying and deceiving your family and friends that you are a faithful, loving husband when you are having extra-marital sex. We are backward thinking in this country to even consider protecting the perpetrators rather than the innocent victims. In this case, to only publicly chastise the unmarried perpetrator in the bunch is just plain wrong. The men who paid Miss Wright for sex don't deserve to be protected from their bad choices. Who benefits by this besides them? Their children? How does that work? More lying and deception benefits them---how??
Maybe these slimy guys should've thought of the consequences before they unzipped their pants.
No comments:
Post a Comment