Ahhh. Andisheh strikes again. Why this guy still has a venue at CL is a mystery. Surely Atlanta is beyond his superficial, one dimensional "reporting".

I wondered if the residents that they get the fees from are happy with this mans "crusade"?

Seriously I wonder why they are funding his obvious power trip in a custom pick up truck...

Didn't this story come from an attempt to cover the issue of violence against sex-workers? I mean what the hell, how do we know this nutball might know something about the disapearence of Precious Green?

Love it when middle aged white men decide they know all about "us" and need to intervene to save us. What a freak.

Don't get me started on CL and this twisted story, how about you report the real tragedies around town for once. This paper is turning into something worse than a High School Newsletter.

Didn't this story come from an attempt to cover the issue of violence against sex-workers?

Um, yes. Andisheh learned about Gower's "crusade" when he (Andisheh) attended the event at Charis on Dec. 17th, commemorating the International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers. He sat and listened as people recounted personal experiences with Gower's homophobia, transphobia, and whorephobia, and as we discussed the problem of sex workers' voices being glaringly absent in the media. Afterward he expressed interested in writing a story. And this is the result.

Ok, not sure who gets the "assclown" award in this "story", seriously it's a toss up.

Uhm..

"While the two of them talked and smoked pot, he recalls with a chuckle, they saw six young men jump out of a car. Within a couple of minutes, each of the six men had stolen a car."

You'd have to be high to think, "I just watched some dudes steal cars. I think I'll go after prostitutes!"

Yeah that dude is crazy. How dare someone try to get whores and prostitutes out of the neighborhood and streets that children play on.

Sure glad I don't live in the ATL.

Beware the whores! They're in the streets trying to have sex with your children!!

OMG! The sex workers are going AFTER YOUR CHILDREN!!1!1!

Same old bullshit. Attitudes like that are EXACTLY what sex workers' rights activists are working to change. I'm disgusted when I see these attitudes among people who consider themselves progressive.

Do it for the children!

um er, cough, I don't believe RD is "progressive", he just like to stir the pot here on a progressive blog.

Children playing on ponce? hee. It's fairly obvious you don't live in Atlanta.

I'm not a liberal.

I don't purposely try to stir the pot.

Hey, we're working on the same side, we just disagree on certain issues, especially the rights of whores and prostitutes, errrr, excuse me, "sex workers".

I do not see any problem with what the guy is doing. To turn it into some rant about people being bigoted against transsexuals is insane.

That guy is doing his area a service by trying to clean up the trash on the streets.

RD, you don't see any problem with a guy filming people he sees on a public street late at night and throwing their images up on the internet as purported prostitutes? Without verifying that they are, in fact, seeking to exchange sex for money?

Take away everything else that he does, and that's still just a big old stinking defamation claim waiting to happen.

Sara, of course he doesn't see anything wrong, he like the other creep is judge and jury, and possibly would enjoy joining the morality police squad.

Oh and RD, doubt seriously you and I would be on the same side of any issue.

Why the snark quotes around "sex workers." This is the term many workers choose to self-apply. One of the major problems sex workers face is that many people do not even see what they are doing as *work*.

I am sick to death of having these arguments.

Well, they can call themselves whatever they want. They are prostitutes.

I can call myself a millionaire, does that mean I am one? Nope.

Anyway, Jules, you calling me a creep is hilarious.

If you're fine with have transsexuals and prostitutes roaming your street, have fun. I'll prefer to live in the real world where people are opposed to the idea.

RD,
So.. you're arguing that they're not sex workers?

Their profession (work) involves sex = sex work. This doesn't seem like a very difficult concept to grasp to me.

I'm curious how being a prostitute cancels that out somehow. Your analogy makes no sense.

Prostitute is analogous with sex worker. Or, more accurately, a prostitute is one type of sex worker. The term "sex worker" encompasses many different kinds of sex work - street prostitution, escorting, stripping, phone sex operators, porn performers, erotic models, etc. etc. etc.

Also, 'prostitite' and 'whore' are synonymous, so I don't understand the constant using of both above.

Alright, stipulating:
* Gower is a creep and someone out to go after his ass in court for slander if they show up on YouTube.
* RD just put "transsexuals and prostitutes" together as a unit of things we ought not want on our streets, which is stupid. He might have a transsexual lawyer or auto mechanic in his network and what the hell is wrong with that?
* Violence is violence and violence against anybody is wrong, whether it's from a misogynist against a prostitute or some random crackhead against the Atlanta Progressive News guy.
* The article as a whole is notably slanted.

That being said, for the time being, prostitution is illegal and, having to run underground, has a tendency in my neighborhood to coincide with other things like illegal drug use. So long as both these things are crimes, any neighborhood association ought to be able to decide to take *reasonable*, *legal* measures to keep it out off their streets.

So, some of you want to take up the crusade to legalize prostitution so we can regulate it and put it somewhere, knock yourselves out. But if anyone's suggesting that we can't be Democrats and still not want criminal activity in our neighborhoods, or that we have to like the idea of strangers asking strangers on the street for sex if we're going to be good little liberals, well, good luck holding this "big tent" together.

Some reading some of y'all might find useful:

http://www.freedomusa.org/coyotela/decrim.html

http://www.xtra.ca/public/viewstory.aspx?AFF_TYPE=3&STORY_ID=4153&PUB_TEMPLATE_ID=5

I just prefer the term prostitute. You guys prefer the term "sex worker". It's just like I prefer the term liberal and you prefer the term "progressive".

Shelby,

I'm not saying violence is good. Nice try though.

The guy has not physically assaulted anyone. Is his method a little odd? Well, yes.

Here's what I found interesting that no one else has said anything about:

"Gower has patrolled Midtown for the MPSA since 2003. Residents fund the MPSA with a $275 annual fee. Businesses pay $400. The organization raised nearly $100,000 each year, and it pays for 50-60 hours of patrols a week, mostly by off-duty Atlanta police officers.

"We're taxing ourselves to do this," says Peggy Denby, MPSA president."

Apparently the MPSA has no problem with it. Also I see nothing about the guy being anti-transsexual. He simply made the statement that most of the prostitutes that he sees these days are of a mixed gender. What's the problem with that?

These people are moving prostitutes out of their neighborhoods. If that's what the neighborhood wants, more power to them.

You'd think "progressives" would support reducing crime.

I guess not if it'

Sorry, got cut off. The last sentence should read:

"I guess not if it's against prostitutes or transsexuals."

RD,
What is the group being self-funded supposed to prove other than a small enclave of people support them?

Have you ever been to a neighborhood association meeting?

Would you say that the people representing a neighborhood association represent the wishes and best interests of every neighbor? Because if you would, then you've never been to one.

Nope, I have not.

Are any of the neighbors complaining?

Let me ask you guys this and maybe then we'll be on the same page.

Do you want prostitutes walking up and down your street?

Simple question.

Shelby: All stipulations duly noted.

Here's my stipulation: there's a big difference between the idea that some citizens may not like prostitution/crime in the neighborhood and may wish to do something about it, and the overt glee this guy gets from being an obvious jerk (and the tacit approval by Creative Loafing). I bet without the latter, you wouldn't have the clamor about the former.

And RD: while this good progressive supports "reducing crime" that doesn't mean that you and I agree on methods. So, go take your strawman somewhere else, please.

Obviously we don't agree on methods, but everyone seems to side with prostitutes on this.

Jules makes the assumption that the guy is anti-mixed gender. He never said that, he simply said most of the prostitutes he sees now are transgendered.

Basically, it seems that whenever anything negative happens to anyone like that, there's a thread on here about how its so evil.

Things are not ALWAYS done because someone is different.

Having lived in neighborhoods in Boston where there were prostitutes walking down my street on a regular basis, I can honestly say seeing them walk down the street where I live is just not that big of a deal to me. I care about violent crime and noise a lot more than I care about that.

I currently live about 2 miles from the area Gower patrols, by the way.

RD, I didn't suggest you said violence is good; that's why you got your whole own bullet point. Dig with the powerpoint lingo, yo.

I was saying that you put two things together like they were the same, and in suggesting that it's okay to not want "transsexuals and prostitutes roaming your street" like either is equally offensive or that they necessarily overlap to a great extent. We have trans -- okay wait, let me just throw out the disclaimer that I'm still a bit fuzzy on all the LGTBQQIetc terminology so forgive me if I say transsexual when it should be transgendered or something; at least I'm not going to say "mixed gender" like RD, which I'm not sure what the hell that is.

Anyway, we have transgendered people showing up at our Democratic Party functions, RD, who are perfectly nice and normal people with day jobs and mortgages and shit, so when you go saying people ought not want "transsexuals roaming the street" like they're zombies or something, that's where even I am ready to kick you out of this testy, judgmental "progressive tent." We believe in equal rights for all people, regardless of their gender or orientation...and of course equal rights extends to equal accountability under the law. For now, the law says, no soliciting for whoopie on the sidewalk, whatever you've got under your pretty outfit. If the sex-positive community manages to convince enough of the population to cast off the sex-negativity of us reactionary, superstitious religious types who hate our own genitals even while we can't stop playin' with 'em, and we have legal brothels set up on Ponce and Cheshire Bridge where you can go get you some sex, well giddyup and good for you, too. I'm probably still in the "legalization" versus the "decriminalization" camp, having read a bit of Amber's link, 'cause I don't see a problem with sex being just as regulated as my ability to buy beer or smokes, but then I don't like blue laws and smoking bans, either. We're "evolving" as fast as we can.

In answer to your simple question, RD, believe it or not, I suspect that many people moved to Midtown specifically for the mixed-culture that exists there. We have a friend who grew up in New York who chose to buy a house in Midtown in the mid-80s specifically because she liked the "urban-ness" of the neighborhood. Me? I live in Decatur where I am plagued by the next door neighbor's teenaged garage band. They are most definitely violating noise restrictions. Should I take matters into my own hands in order to reduce this crime?

RD,
For your edification, this person and the group he represents has a history of acts motivated by bigotry.

I don't see tacit approval. The very reason many of us are calling him a creepy asshole is because of the way the CL article portrays him. Just doesn't jibe.

Do you want prostitutes walking up and down your street?

It's also predicated on the assumption that one can instantly tell who is and isn't a prostitute just by looking. I don't imagine I have to go into detail about exactly what is wrong with THAT little assumption.

Yes but Sara you can also drive on snow. You have special Boston powers of transcending the frightening. :-)

RuralDem: Um, sure, why not? Here's the problem I have with your idea of "reducing crime": it's a crime to smoke pot, but they seem to be ok with that. It's also a crime to break into cars, etc, but it's harder to confront someone obviously violent and easier to target someone perceived as "harmful" to the community for...wait, why exactly?

That's what I don't get. Where's the harm? Sure, actually talking about paying for sex is illegal, I get that. Let's put aside whether it should be for a moment. Where is the actual harm being done? I hear this argument from pot smokers all the time, and yet no one seems to be following Gower to figure out where he buys his and then putting up pics of him and his dealer on the internet.

But, let's say this "crime" happens: a car pulls up, they talk about having sex, a price is negotiated. She/he/whatever gets in the car, they go somewhere. Who, in the neighborhood, is getting harmed? Who?

Yes, they are residents, they have a right to have an opinion about their community...but I happen to hate small yappy dogs, and don't like seeing them walking around my neighborhood. Do I have the right to harass the people who own them, just because it's my neighborhood?

I think the problem with Gower is not about whether or not prostitution should be a crime - if he were concerned with crime, or a domino effect, he would focus on car security, since fixing it would obviously stop prostitution, right? No, his methods are puerile and bullying. That's the problem. As a progressive liberal, dehumanizing any group should be objected to. And sex workers, sorry, prostitutes, should be no exception.

Shelby,

Ok I should have left the transsexual part out, my mistake. Notice my original two posts were rants about the prostitution part. I meant to stay on that same line, though I did include transsexuals.

My next point is, Jules sits here and goes off on this being some anti-transsexual conspiracy it does not look that way.

Sure, I believe in equality, but I also believe that although there are some cases where certain groups are discriminated against, it's not true in EVERY case.

Grift,
I don't know which article you read. Two-thirds of the article is dedicated to him. Many of his statements go unchallenged. None of the opinions of any of the sex workers interviewed for the article were included.

Further, and really much more damning than any of that, is that Andisheh defends him in the comments section.

Yes, it' tacit approval.

"Sure, I believe in equality, but..."

RED FLAG.

Red flag?

Ah, gotcha, let me rephrase.

"I believe in equality. The end."

Better?

Now that we've got that set aside.

The issue I have with this is Jules throwing up the anti-transgendered flag when there is no proof whatsoever.

Wow there hasn't been this much conversation on here since i stopped being an ass.

Ever been edited Rusty?

Also in the comments Andisheh is defending the article not directly defending Gower.

Sorry. Don't see it.

The issue I have with this is Jules throwing up the anti-transgendered flag when there is no proof whatsoever.

Read the SoVo article Rusty linked to. Read Gower's letter in SoVo. Read the full memo sent by MSPS.

Also, if you had attended the Dec. 17th IDTEVASW event (as several of us commenting here did) you would have heard many people - some sex workers, some trans, some both, some neither - describing personal encounters w/ Gower and MPSA.

I'm going by the article Jules posted.

If this guy is in fact like y'all are saying then ok.

But, still, the fact is Jules rants about these evil anti-transgendered people, yet there's never any real proof.

But, still, the fact is Jules rants about these evil anti-transgendered people, yet there's never any real proof.

Not that you've personally witnessed, maybe. That doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

Ok there is an apparent disconnect here.

Jules posted an article and then went off on how the guy was so evil and he was anti-trans etc.

Her basis? The fact that the guy stated most of the prostitutes in the area where now trans.

Those of us who are unfamiliar with this guy, the group, etc. only has that article to base everything on.

It took y'all to come on here and at least attempt to show some proof instead of going off on another rant filled post with no evidence.

Grift,
If you know something about Creative Loafing's editorial process that the rest of us aren't privy to, do share. The end result is a slanted, poorly-written piece with Andisheh's name on it. Without anything else to go on, I have to assume he is entirely responsible for the result.

Point of clarification, RD: Catherine posted the original piece. Jules commented on it.

I do but it was a private conversation so I won't share. But I will say it would be safe to say when someone is limited to a 1000 word feature not everything can be included.

And yes Rusty. We did read the same article. In fact I've re-read it about a dozen times to try to figure out what I am missing.

Same article. Different opinions. Go figure.

If they print my letter to the editor that may clear some things up. But we'll have to wait to see if they print it.

Um, what article are you accusing me of posting.. I see nothing, I've posting nothing...

Going out now, it's friday and their are cocktails to be had.

Hookers on the street probably help to reduce the car break-ins. Without witnesses on the street, it will be open season on Juniper for Hondas and Volvos.

I suspect the cops leave the fishnet set alone to the extent that they do partly because they can help them with more serious crimes.

That's the way it is on TV anyway.

well jerry, if you have ever seen a police procedural, you would know that hooker's testimony is rarely seen as credible.

I'm not talkin' about testimony here. A crime occurs on the 800 block of Argonne Ave. and there's a person standing on the corner, I think the cops just might stop and ask if they had seen anything. In a way, the cops might like peaceful people on the street.

Unless we are saying that the hookers are the ones breaking into cars?

sorry Jerry, L and O accurately describes every aspect of the legal system in AMerica and never once have they turned to a hooker for that info.

well jerry, if you have ever seen a police procedural, you would know that hooker's testimony is rarely seen as credible.

HELLO... that is another part of the problem!

Why do people not question these things??

*headdesk*

Anecdotally, I once served on jury that convicted the defendant of murder based primarily on the testimony of two witnesses, both of whom were prostitutes. The defense attorney made no attempt to discredit them based on their work history.

you know what, Im going to need all of you to stop proving my preconceived thoughts wrong.

K thx.

As a member of Creative Loafing's editorial team, all I can say about our editing process is that it involves extensive consulting with shamans. That's all I can reveal.

But seriously, I think it's interesting to see all the debate Andisheh's article has ignited.

Btw, this just in... the Midtown Neighborhood Association has officially caused Sex 2.0 to lose our conference venue.

Not that this is in ANY way comparable to the serious threat of violence posed by Gower's treatment of street prostitutes. Not by a longshot, and if this comment (admittedly written in hasty anger) comes off that way, I thoroughly apologize upfront. I just wanted to point out that this is another "crusade" of theirs that unfortunately it looks like they've won.

"I think it's interesting to see all the debate Andisheh's article has ignited."

Sure, that "interesting," but what's actually happening while journalists are creating interesting" articles?

* Transgender members of your community are being harrassed on a continuing basis by someone audacious enough to document it, and no one does anything to stop him.

* Sex workers in your community -- moms, dads, sisters, brothers of people in your community -- who already live with the threat of going to jail and murder in order to take care of themselves and their families, get to watch a whole community sit by and do nothing while they are called "trash" and are terrorized.

* A few brave people DO speak out against this bigotry and find that their gathering, which would have given sex workers a chance to get together and discuss how to improve our lives, are now being run through the mud and have lost the venue for the conference.

Not to put Amber on the spot, but I see these as related, absolutely. In a community that puts more value on vigilantism than compassion, on terror and fear-mongering than on reason and reality.

I can't believe how many progressives, liberals, Democrats -- whatever we want to call ourselves and our shaky big tent here -- can see the big picture of poverty, racism, sexism, and violence, but can't as soon as sex and class enter the picture. What I see when I watch this man's video and read about his crusade is an uncritical community-supported campaign against some of the most marginal people in that community.

Sex workers are not the problem here. In fact, sex workers are part of the solution.