Attached is a little blurb about an attempt in Florida to legalize dwarf (that is, little people) tossing.

It seems to me that there could be some parallels drawn between that in the sex work industry.

For example, both are illegal but they are both the purview of consenting adults.

The Organization representing little people thinks it should be illegal because it dehumanizes little people.  Anti-sex work organizations make the point that sex work dehumanizes women.

Obviously I don't buy the latter argument, but I am not so sure why I don't automatically draw the parallel to little people.

My minds open.

Anyone want to pour their ideas into it?

wear harnesses and ropes to prevent them from getting dropped and falling to the floor! I'll leave it at that in order not to get into politics!

for seeing the old me as a person. big hug sweety.

i got you from top to bottom now haha

He also brings the conundrum clearly into focus.

No work is in and of itself dehumanizing (Working for Rupert Murdoch pershaps, but I digress.) but attitudes certainly can be.

The problem is that we can legislate what work is legal and what work is illegal, but we can't legislate what attitude people  will regard any particular trade with.

I guess that which brings forth the most freedom without any undue harm is the best we can shoot for, but of course that leaves a lot to the opinion of the public and their elected poobahs.

I recall a newpaper column from many years ago by the great and lamented Mike Royko.  When he was a young reporter he discoverd a great injustice:  An amusement park had a concession where young black men sat on a precarious perch over a tub of water hurling insults to the mainly white crowd below them.  For a price, a person could hurl a ball at a target which, if hit, would dump said black man into the tub of water.  He ran a report on it and the concession was closed the next day by the minions of the outraged public.

Only one little problem:  Mike R had to meet with some outraged people the next day himself:  The very black men who were profiting by their racist treatment.  They explained that no one took it that seriously, they had good jobs, and besides, they really enjoyed calling all the rednecks and honkies who passed by rednecks and honkies.  (This was the south side of Chicago, after all.)

So Mike R had a bit of an epiphany and wrote about that experience.  I am not sure if that concession ever came back, but everyone learned something; at least I hope they did.

Maybe, who knows, we will too.

"Little people" covers both dwarfs (dwarves?) and midgets.  Each suffers from a different genetically-caused issue.  So does the proposed rule cover only dwarves, or midgets, too?  I would think this could be an equal-employment issue if midgets are discriminated against.  Please clarify.

What about Little Phil?

This argument has been going on in Florida at least since the early 80s when I lived there.  I think the fact that dwarf tossing is seriously viewed as "fun" by enough folks in Florida to make this a real debate says more about the genetic inbreeding of some (SOME) rural Floridians than anything else.

I always wondered:  is "short chubby person" tossing also illegal, and if so where would they draw the legal distinction between a short chubby people and dwarves?  Is it a statement that taller people are less worth protecting from bodily harm?

as should shortening those over 6'6" by chopping off their feet.

The dehumanizing aspect of such things comes from seeing a person, not as a whole person, but merely as an attribute isolated from the rest of one's humanity.

Seeing a woman just as "pussy" or a little person just as "little" is dehumanizing because it forgets the intrinsic humanity of a person -- hopes, dreams and more.

Obviously, within sex work there IS a propensity for some people to see the women who participate as single-dimensional beings who only exist as warm wet holes. And such attitudes are indeed dehumanizing -- but it is the ATTITUDE of certain people and NOT the work itself.

I am employed for my intelligence. It is just as dehumanizing to see me solely as a "brain" as though my intelligence were some disembodied force completely unrelated to the rest of my humanity.

There is, of course, nothing *at all* dehumanizing about compensating me for my time and effort expended using some subset of my human attributes -- be it my mind, my hands or whatever.

What is dehumanizing is the ATTITUDE.

So it is not the activity which should be subject to legislation. And, of course, you cannot legislate attitudes.

EACH person -- no matter his or her line of endeavor, owes it to him or herself to severely restrict dealings with people who view them as "just a dwarf," a "piece of ass" or whatever and deal predominantly with people who see them as whole persons.

Even more so if the little person and I get properly shitfaced!

I wonder what The_Mrs is doing this weekend?  

so any good im doing is a figment of everyones imagination. i may soon take my leave. my husband worries too much about my activities on the board. he feels he needs to watch over me and its stressing him a bit too much.

TY for your confidence honey

Dwarf tossing?

I would apply the same logic as I do regarding sex work. If the little people are of sound mind, legal age, fully consenting, and don’t mind “getting tossed” for money?

Why not?


Hahahaha….

to the point of doing this... LOL  

Every time I see this video, you and your kneewalking friends are the first to pop up in my mind. lmao

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZmDWltBziM

It's really nothing new, hp.  It started some years ago in Australia.  Gotta love them Aussies!

What's it pay?

By that definition, almost all work is dehumanizing. You're always being paid to do something right? Certainly being a receptionist, salesman, waiter, call-center worker or any other public-facing position causes people you interact with to think of you as little more than that role.

Having said that, we do as a society, believe that the mind is the crux of humanity. Just look at how we think of disease. We don't call spinal injuries dehumanizing, but we certainly refer to dementia in those terms.

I think that the fundamental miss-conception that people who call sex-work dehumanizing make is to think that it's not cerebral or emotional. As much as many of the guys on here sometimes act like they'd screw a melon if somebody would drill a hole in it and warm it up for a second in a microwave, really, clients are often paying for an emotional and sometimes even intellectual connection, what's more human than that?

One could argue that the decision to allow oneself to be tossed is in and of itself sufficient evidence of mental incompetence such that the decision is thereby voided.

Sorta like I wouldn't want to be a member of a club that would accept me. (*grin*)

Not all work IS dehumanizing -- but all work has the potential to be dehumanizing.

For example, I harvest tomatoes. In my case, it is not dehumanizing. But if you pick up a copy of Tomatoland, you will be appalled to discover how dehumanizing picking tomatoes can really be.

The difference between dehumanizing and non- really lies in the attitudes.

People work for me, and I am quite certain they do not feel dehumanized because even though I might only compensate them for using a small portion of themselves; I deal with them as complete human beings. Others, performing the same tasks for another boss, could easily feel quite differently depending on his/her attitude.

These same attitudes don't just apply to work, though. They can be seen in the asshole who weaves around in traffic as though the other vehicles didn't hold human beings whose wellbeing is important to other human beings. Often, they are simply reflections of various forms of narcissism that our society seems to encourage and reward.

We agree that sex work has the potential to be humanizing as opposed to the dehumanizing. It all depends on the individuals involved. Who walks through the door today?

Some ladies have the skill and the luxury of being able to pick clients with whom things can be mutually uplifting. Others, to be frank, have to take pretty much anyone who walks through the door and passed screening. Then it is anyone's guess.

And let's not forget that a person's attitudes -- perceptions -- make a huge difference in how they see something. The exact same objective actions can be seen as uplifting by one person and debasing by another. Some would see some types of work -- such as being a stock clerk at a department store -- as somehow beneath them and that attitude would color their perceptions.

And a huge hug in return for all the good you do!!

I suppose one ‘could’ also argue that the fact that providers potentially put themselves in harms way every time they open the door, and let a stranger BCD is sufficient evidence of mental incompetence.  But then where would we be?....lol….

In the same way I can’t imagine myself trusting a buncha drunks to toss me in the air and not drop me on my head, personally, I do not have the ….umm…balls….to do what providers do.  

I do highly recommend screening and helmets…

We tend in this country at least, to create laws at the drop of a hat. As a culture, we rely too much on forces from outside (laws) to make us behave properly. Personally I would never toss a dwarf or anyone small enough to toss, even if they wanted me to, legal or not.

Something tells me that this law is an old law still on the books, and a source of much amusement (and consternation for some).

The only dwarf tossing I'm personally aware of in the Sunshine state has been in a pub in Ybor City, Tampa. For those unfamiliar, Ybor City is a party Mecca for tourists and out of state transplants. Similar to Baltimore's inner harbor or a mini Bourbon Street. Really not connected to rural Floridians. Think yuppies and college kids.