Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Civil Liberties

'Sex Purchasers' to Be Branded Online Indefinitely in Orange County

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 11.20.2014 4:52 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | robbrucker/Flickr
(robbrucker/Flickr)
robbrucker/Flickr

In Anaheim, California, anyone convicted of buying sexual services will have their names and mug shots indefinitely posted to a city web page listing "Sex Purchasers." The Anaheim district attorney's office says the scarlet HTML is meant to deter sex traffickers, which makes about as much sense as posting jaywalker mugshots in order to deter car theives. No, let's call this for what it is: straight-up, old-fashioned, puritanical public shaming.

Anaheim, in Orange County, unfortunately isn't the first Cali city to implement this online shaming tactic. Fresno and Oakland also post the pics of those arrested on prostitution-related charges to Facebook, those these photos are then deleted after two weeks. Richmond, California, started doing similarly earlier this fall—until people's propensity for digging up and sharing the addresses, employers, and other personal info of exposed sex workers and clients caused the Richmond police department to reconsider the parameters of the plan. 

"Public shaming as a form of punishment goes back to the days of Puritan colonists," writes Los Angeles Times' Emily Foxhall. "In recent years, it's become a strategy for police departments targeting the sex trade….Orange County's move is expected to heighten debate over whether public shaming is effective at reducing prostitution and whether it exposes johns to too much scrutiny." 

While public shaming may be a historic practice, there's undeniably something different about exposing someone in a town square or local bulletin than in a medium where the exposure has potential global reach into perpetuity. For supporters of such measures, however, I guess that's part of the appeal—the chance to serve up potential lifetime humilitation and punishment for those who would dare to seek sexual satisfaction in the marketplace. And if that sounds like a harsh assessment of their motives, consider this paragraph from the Times article: 

Publicizing the identities of johns is not considered part of the punishment and would not be up for negotiation in a plea deal, (DA cheif of staff Susan Kang) Schroeder said. Asked if concern for solicitors' personal lives factored into the decision to identify them, her response was unforgiving.

"Give me a break."

Yet even many who want to banish prostitution aren't keen on the idea that publicly shaming those who get caught will make much of a dent on the sex trade. Melissa Farley, executive director of the anti-prostitution group Prostitution Research and Education, told the Times she's unaware of any evidence that this kind of shaming results in long-term behavior change.

Peggy McGarry, director of the Center on Sentencing and Corrections at the Vera Institute of Justice, has said that public shaming punishments have "no record of efficacy in turning someone away from crime," especially when it comes to low-level offenders. 

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Networks Not Airing Immigration Speech and the White House Is Furious, Will Utah Give Firing Squads a Chance? P.M. Links

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

Civil LibertiesNanny StateSex WorkSexCriminal JusticeCalifornia
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (71)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

    So they pretend it isn't punishment? Maybe that's why they feel they can label you as guilty in advance of conviction.

    Give the Puritans some credit - they administered public shaming as a *punishment* for people who were *convicted in court.* I guess the Puritans were just hung up on petty technicalities.

    1. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

      Give me a break!

      1. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

        Whether I give you a break depends on the seriousness of your crime.

        1. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

          Oh, I didn't realize you were quoting the prosecutor in the story, sorry.

          1. MJGreen   10 years ago

            He was actually quoting Stossel.

    2. Francisco d'Anconia   10 years ago

      I have no problem publicly shaming convicted felons.

      But:

      A. Consensually buying sex should not be a crime, as crimes require victims.
      B. Human trafficking and prostitution are two completely different things.

      Kalifornia! These guys need to get them some armbands with really cool spider-like designs on them.

      Anyone find it amusing, if not predictable, how the "party of civil liberties" have slid into the "party of force?"

      1. BigT   10 years ago

        " the "party of civil liberties" have slid into the "party of force?"

        More like wildly storming the gates of force.

      2. straffinrun   10 years ago

        No need for arm bands. Their barb wire tattooed biceps will suffice.

      3. Independentmind   10 years ago

        Anaheim actually has a republican mayor and city council. Both parties are more then happy to tell people what they think is wrong.

  2. creech   10 years ago

    Sounds like this might be a lucrative site for working gals and guys interested in trolling for future clients! "Known buyers of sexual services - click here."

  3. np   10 years ago

    As we've seen with alcohol prohibition and now starting with marijuana prohibition, the only way to change criminal law is defiance of them. Sometimes it's relatively quick like alcohol, sometimes many decades with generations of lives lost with MJ. Nonetheless this is the only strategy that works.

    Whether or not we'll legalize prostitution like other countries remains to be seen. Since breaking laws always predicate their change, let us start by turning the hall-of-shame into a hall-of-fame.

    1. BigT   10 years ago

      Hack the site and add all the local pols, clergy, cops, and fire. It'll die a quick death.

  4. Episiarch   10 years ago

    I continue to be amazed not just at the incompetence and pettiness of the government and those who choose to be a part of it, but also at the incredible prevalence of sadism as well. Sadism and vindictiveness are part an parcel of government and will never be separated from it. I guess that only makes sense considering that government is nothing but force.

    1. Gray Ghost   10 years ago

      I continue to be amazed not just at the incompetence and pettiness of the government and those who choose to be a part of it, but also at the incredible prevalence of sadism as well. Sadism and vindictiveness are part an parcel of government and will never be separated from it.

      Related to that, I'm sure it surprises none of you that the piece of filth who shot up the FSU library was not only a lawyer, but worked for the State's Attorney's Office in New Mexico. And then it looked like he went nuts.

  5. Carl ?s the level   10 years ago

    Susan Kang Schroeder's Beauty Tips!

    1. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

      She actually said it's better to be pretty than smart?

      Don't worry, ma'am, for you the question is purely academic.

    2. fish   10 years ago

      Susan Kodos Schroeder is way hotter!

  6. Warty   10 years ago

    Well, I mean, marriage license are public record.

    1. BuSab Agent   10 years ago

      It's not like marriage is a lifetime exclusive contract for sexual services and light housework in exchange for room and board or anything.

      1. Almanian!   10 years ago

        It's not??

        I've been had!

        1. BuSab Agent   10 years ago

          If you have an Ex (this is the generic you ) you most certainly have.

      2. BigT   10 years ago

        I've been swindled!

  7. DEATFBIRSECIA   10 years ago

    Somebody just came right out and asked Bill Cosby if he raped those young girls, and he said, "You know, kids say the darndest things!"

    1. Scruffy Nerfherder   10 years ago

      +1 Pudding Pop

      1. Almanian!   10 years ago

        "The fleebldy flo, bibbelty boop, flabbely moop to the...Jello? puddingggggggg......"

  8. Andrew S.   10 years ago

    Guessing that Hester Prynne will be their first victim?

    1. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

      Only if they have her cancelled check to Dimmesdale.

      1. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

        I wish I hadn't read that novel in high school, I might have liked it.

    2. straffinrun   10 years ago

      I'm thinking Demi Moore. Put the A on her G string.

  9. Sigivald   10 years ago

    How about the other problem, as I believe mentioned on Reason before:

    Prostitution mostly has little to do with "human trafficking" at all, especially in the US.

    1. Andrew S.   10 years ago

      But, but, Dianne Feinstein tells us that 725% of trafficked women are from the US!

      1. Almanian!   10 years ago

        And the average age a person starts as a sex worker is 13 months!!!

      2. MJGreen   10 years ago

        There are 300 million new sex slaves created in the US every year!

  10. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

    Does Disney know about this?

    I doubt they're behind it, but maybe they are.

    They get a lot of convention business in that town.

    1. Riven   10 years ago

      No, no, no, no. Disney needs as many young kids as it can get its hands on for the It's a Small World feature.

  11. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

    Susan *Kang* Schroeder

    They should have hired her sister, Susan Kodos Schroeder.

    1. Acosmist   10 years ago

      I believe I'll hire a third sister!

    2. fish   10 years ago

      Bastard!

  12. Troy muy grande boner   10 years ago

    Sorry, but this wouldn't shame me a bit. I'd just be worried aboot all the wasted bandwidth because of all my pictures.

  13. Faceless Commenter   10 years ago

    Yeah, fine. I think there's more than a hint of sexism and bro-hood in the fact that it's always been the sellers of these services and never the customers who have been named and prosecuted. Just let me get my grudge off.

    1. Aresen   10 years ago

      What you say is historically correct.

      For the record, however, this website and its commentariat are generally opposed to the laws against prostitution, which they feel should be legal for both parties.

      The particular point here is that this practice is being introduced for no other reason than to humiliate the purchasers of sex and is primarily driven by a political agenda that has little to do with protecting sex workers.

      1. Suthenboy   10 years ago

        Little = 0

  14. Almanian!   10 years ago

    And this is why I am so grateful for the plethora of free pr0n via teh intertubes.

    1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

      Once Net Neutrality? is made into law via executive fiat, porn will be government-issued only.

      1. Acosmist   10 years ago

        SortofOT: was there state-produced porn in the USSR? Asking for a friend.

        1. Doghouse Riley Jr.   10 years ago

          "Lie back, and think of sexy, sexy Lenin."

        2. seguin   10 years ago

          IIRC, pornography was illegal in the USSR.

      2. Juice   10 years ago

        Like in the jolly UK.

  15. paranoid android   10 years ago

    I can't be the only one who thinks "Sex Purchasers" would be a great name for a band.

    1. straffinrun   10 years ago

      "Sex Purchasers" or in other words "husbands".

    2. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

      I'd call this band Sexual Acquisition.

  16. straffinrun   10 years ago

    Scarlet HTML, like it. How about the Red Vag of Courage?

  17. Suthenboy   10 years ago

    I missed out on the pm lynx, dammit. I started reading the comments and came across the cruise discussion.

    What the hell is wrong with you people? Carnival? Disney?

    http://www.islandwindjammers.com

    http://www.sailingshipadventures.com

  18. heartburn   10 years ago

    Wait! What about the LOL Right to be Forgotten??!?!/11/1/??

    1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

      There's the competing Right to be Begotten.

  19. Micu5   10 years ago

    Well I hope they at least include their email addresses, so gals can add them to their mailing lists.

  20. Heroic Mulatto   10 years ago

    What about sax purchasers?

    1. Francisco d'Anconia   10 years ago

      I don't know about purchases, but I think we can all agree that there is too much sax and violins on teh teeeveee.

      1. Francisco d'Anconia   10 years ago

        Ooops.

      2. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

        There's too much Saxon violence on the History Channel.

        1. Francisco d'Anconia   10 years ago

          And aliens.

          1. Heroic Mulatto   10 years ago

            And Bigfoot.

  21. straffinrun   10 years ago

    So you publicly shame these guys, render them pervs in women's eyes so they can't find a mate then expect this to reduce prostitution.

  22. juris imprudent   10 years ago

    I'm thinking the Moonlight Bunny Ranch should be chartering regular flights from OC to Reno - the California Special!

  23. Jayburd   10 years ago

    Coming soon-The Deadliest Snatch on Discovery Channel. http://www.ktva.com/stripper-b.....odiak-307/

  24. Bella Robinson   10 years ago

    Perhaps these clowns should be publicly shaming

    Cops who rob, rape, exploit and murder sex workers in the US

    http://www.policeprostitutiona.....s_all/COPS DAs JUDGES RAPE EXTORT PROSTITUTES RUN PROSTITUTION RINGS/Cops_rape_solicit_pimp_prostitutes.pdf

    TRUE STORIES OF RAPIST/PEDOPHILE COPS OUT OF CONTROL AND THE JUSTICE SYSTEM THAT FAILS THE VICTIMS

    http://www.policeprostitutiona.....&Itemid=50

  25. Bella Robinson   10 years ago

    PEDOPHILES AND CHILD PORN- THE COPS, JUDGES, DAs, FBI AGENTS, SECRET SERVICE AGENTS AND OTHER GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES WHO CAN'T KEEP THEIR HANDS OFF MINORS

    http://www.policeprostitutiona.....&Itemid=50

    Putting cops in charge of hookers Poster

    http://www.policeprostitutiona.....itutes.pdf

    1. seguin   10 years ago

      Little tip: single quotes, quotes of any kind really, probably shouldn't be used for emphasis. They're usually used to indicate irony.

      It makes that last sentence on there a little jarring.

  26. Agile Cyborg   10 years ago

    Susan Kang Schroeder is poison on two legs.

  27. missyforsaleepy   10 years ago

    my friend's mother makes $64 /hr on the internet . She has been out of work for ten months but last month her income was $18244 just working on the internet for a few hours. go to website....

    ?????? http://www.payinsider.com

  28. Rick H.   10 years ago

    Typos:

    *thieves

    *"those these photos are then deleted" - then those photos are deleted

    *"DA cheif of staff" - DA chief of staff

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Bernie Sanders: American Success Story

Liz Wolfe | 5.9.2025 9:41 AM

The EPA Is a Prime Candidate for Reform by the Trump Administration

J.D. Tuccille | 5.9.2025 7:00 AM

Review: A Doomsday Murder Mystery Set in an Underground Bunker

Jeff Luse | From the June 2025 issue

Review: A Superhero Struggle About the Ethics of Violence

Jack Nicastro | From the June 2025 issue

Brickbat: Cooking the Books

Charles Oliver | 5.9.2025 4:00 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!