Nightline goes to the Mustang Ranch

I don't think I'd enjoy that experience. The several times I've seen it on TV in various segments, it seems rather antiseptic. And EXPENSIVE. One of the things that I like about the kind of mongering that I do, is that it's off-the-cuff and there aren't a lot of rules. It really ruins the mood if the girl has a lot of "you can touch" and "you can't touch" rules, whether she's an "official" prostitute at the Mustang Ranch or just a lap-dancer who stretches her services beyond the club's restrictions.

Actually the new Mustang ranch is located in a different place. Slightly more to the east. Back in the early 70's I made several trips to the ranch with co workers. We would fly from Los Angeles to Reno, rent a car, do some gambling and drinking and the head for the ranch. On one trip there were 3 of us. I was single, another was married and the 3rd can only be described as "The 40 year old virgin". We hit the ranch, picked our whores and went to the bed rooms. When I came out, there was the ex virgin. A big smile on his face, drinking scotch on the rocks and smoking a cigarette (he was not a smoker).My other friend came out and the ex virgin tells us that he came so fast that she MADE him do it again. We took him back to the hotel and then went out drinking.

It bugs me when these panty waist liberals go to a place like the Mustang Ranch. They can't, for the life of them, figure out why a woman would be anything other than what you see in female TV reporters-surly mouthy angry at men feminists. It blows them away when they see a woman being a woman. They don't know how to deal with it.

I didn't really read the trait, of disapproving of prostitution, as a "typical liberal" trait. I did see a bit of disapproval -- "You're coming out here ... to BE A PROSTITUTE?" he asks pointedly. But I didn't read that as, "We in the Socialist Left who support Obama reject the notion that a female can be a prostitute."

In fact, generally, I find the typical right wing of American politics to have more issues with supposed "moral" infractions, than does the typical left wing. I generally support the Republican platform on the way they want to arrange taxes, smaller government and less regulation, and privatization of many industries. But I don't vote for them because they keep telling me where to worship and whom to fuck. If they'd get the "social conservatism" out of their bedclothes, I'd be happy being a conservative.

But how did this video have ANYTHING to do with the "typical liberal" of American politics? It didn't. You brought that up, not because there was evidence of it. Rather, you brought it up because (A) you think of Nightline as a typically liberal show, and (B) this show had disapproval in it. By poorly considered, roughly associative thought, you decided the COINCIDENCE of a typically liberal show, with disapproval, must mean that liberalism led to the disapproval. It didn't. This type of disapproval (a behavior being disapproved of because it's not socially conservative, and therefore is not "moral") is generally the hallmark of the American RIGHT, not left.

You jumped to conclusions and failed to connect evidence to them. Sorry, that's knee-jerk, and makes the (otherwise generally laudable) Republican platform all the more weak.

Get over yourself and watch and address what the CONTENT IS, not your ASSUMPTION of what the content would be.

Hi Book Guy - because Dudester associates a so-called liberal TV show with disapproval of a whorehouse, you think that makes "the Republican platform all the more weak." HUH? EXPLAIN YOURSELF, MAN. I THINK YOU GOOFED IN THAT SENTENCE

Actually your first three paragraphs made a lot of sense to me as far as logical analysis is concerned. But you and I and Dudester all know that logic is not a big consideration in what we write on this board.

Sorry to break it to you boys, but "Holier Than Thou" comes from both sides of the political spectrum. Book Guy pegs it on the right: anti-sex conservatives are usually fire and brimstone moral majority members who believe you'll go to hell if you do anything outside of marriage, in anything other than the missionary position and get any pleasure out of it. And Dudester pegs it on the left: anti-sex liberals are usually hyper-femminists (of either sex) who think equal means identical, sex workers are slaves (but their undocumented housekeepers aren't) and men who enjoy any sexual activity outside of a committed relationship are oppressors.

Notice any similarity between "anything outside of marriage, in anything other than the missionary position and get any pleasure out of it" and "enjoy any sexual activity outside of a committed relationship." Yep, the anti-sex liberals are okay with other sexual positions (but not missionary because the man on top is a form of patriachial oppression). That's the only difference between these anti-sex morons, not their political parties. The political parties are what separate you two guys, and what prevent the moderate masses from overcoming the special interests throughout the West.

There are no palatable extremes unless you're an extremist.

My only point, was that the Nightline show may have displayed disapproval of prostitution but it didn't do so as a "typical" left-wing show, because the left wing doesn't typically disapprove of such supposed moral offenses as much as the right wing typically does. Consequently, what I saw in another's post was a failure to link evidence to conclusion; and instead, a desire to jump to an anti-liberal rant. He even found liberals being "typically stupid" (so to speak) when they weren't doing something typical to them!

But I couched it in terms that attempted to be more inclusive, since I (like him) often disagree with the left wing. I tried to indicate why I would like parts of the right wing, though I then returned to my initial point, that the right wing generally is more negative about supposed moral offenses than the left wing is.

So, in the long run, I'd agree with a few of you, that both sides have their holier-than-thou moments, and those are the moments when I disagree with both of them. But I'm still wrankled by the connection, between any Nightline disapproval of prostitution, on the one hand, and its weakness as a typical liberal mouthpiece, on the other. The two don't go hand-in-glove at all. It's the right wing that badmouths places like the Mustang Ranch.

Maybe I just got started on a silly rant. But my personal situation and context, in which ANYTHING wrong-headed is derided as "dumb liberal," and in which people with a good deal of power over me, including bosses and employers and city councilmen, tell me whom to fuck and where and when to worship. Were I not under seige by the American right for my many supposed moral offenses, I might not mind so much someone idiotically offhandedly associating an anti-prostitution position with something "typically liberal."

But because of my context, I have to say: that's an idiotic association to make. Generally, it's the right who tell ya whom to fuck. Not the left. And "liberal" isn't a bad word. Not any worse than "conservative" or "feminist" or "environmentalist." They're all terms that we wrongly use, today, to indicate not just, "Has certain political views," but rather, "Has certain political views and is dogmatic about it." Ideologues and others with dogmatic thinking are the problem. And it's a mark of dogmatic ideology to use the term "liberal" to mean "stupid liberal ideologue" (or, in this case, to mean the even stupider, "typically liberal ideologue because he disapproves of prostitution just like all the other liberals and not like the conservatives").

BG, I'm not really sure of the point you were making, but I do think your philosophy is alligned with the Libertarian party and I hope you consider it's candidates the next time you vote. Simplistically, the Libertarian view is fiscal conservatism and liberal social views. I think the Republican party in its current form is doomed to failure on a National basis unless it adopts a much less socially restrictive attitude. I consider myslf one of a large group of Americans who found themselves in the middle this year. I voted Libertarian but a substantial group of them went Democratic, hence the election of Obama. I suspect that a lot of them did so because of the social conservatism in the Republican platform and especially with the accent on conservatism espoused by Sarah Palin. As far as the Nightline program goes, I did not see it but I suspect it emphasized a lot of the negatives of prostitution, which these programs typically do. I suspect they did a little less negative than Fox News would have done, but I think most viewers already have views one way or the other and are not affected by the slant of the reporting.

Oh yeah, I'm quite familiar with the libertarians.

I'm just on an anti-religion kick lately, and have always been on an anti-Fundamentalist-Christian kick. That's where my aggro lies.

The Nightline show wasn't very negative about prostitution in that typical manner that I'm sure we're all familiar with. It had a few slanted comments, but mostly it was about the changing economics. More girls applying to work at the ranch.

Is there a strip club inside this place?? I saw multiple gals workin' the pole in that video. I never saw the lure of these types of places myself...too expensive IMO...

No This is a Nevada whore house. Pure and simple but expensive.