Randy Cassingham's Blog

Posted by Will, VA on October 13, 2008:

Your report on the ranch was informative. Your comment on wives checking credit card statements, funny, yet also sad in a sense as it relates to the truth issue in marriage. My main reason for comment, I take issue with the statement made by a previous post. The statement was "morality can not be legislated". I would argue that only the pet issues of the day can not be (or are chosen not to be) legislated against. I would ask is it ok to do the following: rape, murder, steal, have slaves or beat your wife, all of which are moral issues but have laws against them. The arguement that government should not make laws to govern morality would, in my mind, raise the question where does morality (moral: pertaining to, or concerned with the principles of right conduct) come from then and who determines what is right and what is wrong. If the answer is, the individual,and we are able to do what is ethical, then why do we have laws against the previously mentioned issues and a host of others? If not the individual, then who,what or where? I am not commenting on my opionion of the right or wrong of the topic of the article because my opinion does not have bearing on my question of legislated morality. At the very least my rebuttal should be a thought to ponder.

---

Rape, murder and theft are not "moral issues" in this context, they're rights issues. -rc

Posted by Cap'n Louie, Georgia, US on October 14, 2008:

I believe the argument about legislating morality vs outlawing crimes relates more to whether there exists an unwilling, and thereby harmed, victim. Clearly, rape or assault has unwilling victims, and is therefore not strictly a morality issue. Prostitution has no more victims than a shoe shine stand or a barber shop. You willingly hand money to another individual for a service. Its legality should be no different, also. For that matter, how different is it that I buy Sally dinner and jewelry, and she has sex with me, and perhaps no further contact? The only difference between Sally and "Wendy" is the form of the "payment".

Here's another example: I live in Georgia, where our state government has decided that I cannot walk into Bob's Package Store and buy a bottle of their finest rum on a Sunday. They pretend it has naught to do with religion, but many legislators admit that they are following fundamental Christian demands. Here's the hypocrisy: On Sunday, I can go into Bob's Restaurant, next door to the liquor store, and drink an entire bottle of rum if I choose, one drink at a time, completely legally. The governor has indicated that to him, it is definitely a morality issue. He has also said that he is helping us with "time management" by having us buy our rum on Saturday instead, therefore having us "plan better". (Disclosure: I am a Christian who has rejected the Fundamentalist notion that we should all be alcohol-free.)

I have never, and due to a satisfactory marriage, do not plan to, employ a prostitute. But I can not make that decision for anyone else. You can attempt to legislate morality, but all you really do is force people to lie about it. Most every large metropolitan city proves that people WILL employ prostitutes, but by outlawing it, the government is the one creating victims. By forcing this act underground, the victim is the girl (or guy) who has to work for the abusive pimps. Funny isn't it? Just like Prohibition, the Government is the one who takes a consenting act and creates victims.

Don't hand me the "wife/husband/family as a victim" of prostitution. Phooey. If a spouse isn't faithful, whether they hire a legal "Wendy", or finds just a local person willing to sleep with them, it's the same thing.

Posted by dave San antonio tx on October 14, 2008:

Very interesting article. How times have changed and remained the same. I made a visit as a single man to the Mustang Ranch in the 70's and had a very satisfying full hour visit for $40. Took three girls about 20 minutes to check me for a clear fluid (the std lookover) and a most titillating pleasant conversation. Made the trip mainly out of curiosity and never went again though I am in the area regularly. An honorable profession for those who can handle it and good learning experience about people.

---

Well, you can't go back to the Mustang Ranch: it was famously taken over by the government, and is no longer in operation. -rc

Posted by Brian, Tucson AZ on October 14, 2008:

Cap'n Louie answered Will's statement very well. The basics of this argument can be summed up by the central tenet of Wicca (I paraphrase): "As long as you harm no one, do as you will."

While I'm not wiccan myself, this basic concept can be used by everyone to check if their laws, rules and regulations pass the "sniff" test -- appropriate for public safety or impinging on the liberty of others.

Posted by Sam - Cincinnati, Ohio on October 14, 2008:

I just have to ask, did this one overload the server? Well it comes down (at least for me) to either self control or imposed control. I have never been to a 'house', but then when younger never had any need to. Those who are outraged by this open access to serve human need seem to require official approval for their own actions. Some of us choose to judge for ourselves what is and is not acceptable. Save us from those who would dictate what is right or wrong by their standard! Nice write up Randy. thank you. I enjoy your "This is true" very much and hope to be able to read it for many more years.

Posted by Ed, Pueblo, Colorado on October 14, 2008:

Interesting comments, Randy. Fifty years ago I surveyed for the SP RR in Nevada during the summers I was going to college. So, I am familiar with the location of the houses in Wells, Elko, and Winnemucca. We also went by the houses in Fernley and Pyrimid Lake.

When in Vietnam in 1968, assigned to MACV in Soc Trang, the three engineers were tasked by the province Senior Advisor to design and build security for the MACV/CORDS compound.

After coordination with the 21st Infantry Division provost marshal advisor, we ended up with a plan that incorporated two brothels within our newly built security fence. Most the clients were GIs from MACV and the Soc Trang Army Airfield.

The four Corps of Engineers advisors living there had a small house next to the Province Senior Advisor's House. A small brothel of three cribs was located across the street from us. While I never visited a whorehouse, two of my housemates did.

One day I came down with some bug and was flat on my back in bed. The madam across the street, "Liz," apparently was an well educated woman knocked on our door and I told our maid to let her in.

She was carrying a huge tureen of chicken soup and said, "Captain Fritz says you are Jewish, and I know Jewish people get well on chicken soup. Enjoy!" Damned if it wasn't the best meal I had that year!

Posted by Glenn, Colorado on October 14, 2008:

There's really no reason to doubt the numbers "Wendy" gave you.

A good stripper in a club with a decent level of traffic can make $2,500 a day; if a woman couldn't make more money having sex than just by taking her clothes off, why would she ever do more than take her clothes off? Plus, if they have a helipad to accept high-rollers, that means they have a fair number of clients expecting to pay thousands, not hundreds. And if "Wendy" was the most attractive girl in the line-up (assuming your standards aren't wildly deviant from the norm), she could expect to get a lot of those high-rollers.

As for the 80/20 unmarried/married split, that seems likely to me, actually. Young unmarried men come to Vegas to party, and hit the local attractions in packs. Why not the whorehouses, too? Besides, my experience with cheating spouses (as a former couples counselor) is that most of them find their flings at work or in local bars; that way, they can tell their spouses (and themselves) that it "just happened". It's hard to pretend it "just happened" after you drive out to find the brothel, pick your girl out of a line-up, and lay out more money than you put towards your mortgage or car payment that month.

Posted by Bonnie Sheila, St. Petersburg, FL on December 27, 2008:

I'm too had to laugh at your piece that basically called the woman that was nice enough to give you a tour and answer your interview questions a liar on several counts. You replied to another similar comment saying that your scepticism was a result of her having a vested interest in overstating her income. I can totally wrap my head around your reasoning, but with no additional research on your part, no other interviews for comparison, and ostensibly having never stepped into a brothel before, it's a pretty hubris attitude. What about also dismissing her estimate of the married/single mix? I can't think of a way that lying about that would benefit her. And I really can't think why you would think that you would know better than her.

---

Well, here's what I find interesting: you, someone who is not a subscribed reader and thus has little idea of who I am or what my qualifications might be, are ready to pass judgment based on a few hundred scribbled words and without ever meeting me face to face or knowing my background, yet you feel qualified to say that I don't have any ability to make a judgment about someone I'm talking to face to face, while on the job and using my two dozen years of experience as a cop, a paramedic, and professional social commentator, to sort fact from fiction as uttered by a professional liar. As far as I can see, this leaves your credibility at nil, and mine unaffected whatever. -rc

Posted by Richard, England on January 17, 2009:

I found the article an interesting read, and would have liked to hear if any of the girls had ever had an embarrassing, unexpected encounter with anyone they knew. Wendy was taking care to keep what she was doing a secret, and that's probably true of many/most of the others. I wonder if any of them have ever walked into the line-up to find an unexpected friend or relation waiting for them.

Posted by Amy - Portland, OR on January 18, 2009:

I have to say, personally, though I do agree that a girl at a brothel could probably make quite an income, a "dancer" of the exotic kind would be LUCKY to pull out a $1,000 in a night due to the recession. Five years ago, maybe; ten years ago, most definitely. But the climate of the sex industry is very different these days. Just watching a girl dance nude only costs a few bucks.

Las Vegas is VERY different and a very competitive industry. People with money visit and people without. Though I can't say how much "dancers" make there, the rest of the country is very different and even a high class call girl would struggle to make what the girls make at those ranches (but they also are a whole lot pickier with their clientele -- if they don't want to be tickled by an 80 year old, they don't have to be).

---

Yeah, things are tough everywhere these days. It used to be "sex sells", but lately.... -rc