Three academics from Nanyang Technological University, Boston University and Fudan University spent two years interviewing 177 freelance prostitutes plying their trade in Singapore and came up with “findings” which to me is just glorified common knowledge.
First, these hookers are freelancers who do their business while here on social visit passes. They hail from China, Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia.
What a revelation!
That’s been happening since God knows when.
Next, clients pay a different price depending on who they are. The angmohs pay more as they are expected to be able to afford it and are somewhat generous. The locals pay a somewhat more competitive price – all Singaporeans love a bargain – and those from the lowest strata of our society – the foreign laborers – are charged a lot less. (Ok if you need to know, the angmohs pay 81 bucks, locals pay 69 bucks – nice number – the Bangladeshis pay only 44 bucks for their heavily discounted mercy fucks.)
But many hookers won’t accept these foreign laborers as clients, especially the Indians and the Bangladeshis – darker skin tones have negative connotations, the study says.
Again, what else is new? Tell us something we don’t know!
The professor from NTU who was one of those who cooked up the study sounded defensive about it. He told journalists that the project is “an important contribution to the field of labor economics in general” and justified it by adding that “many prominent economists, like Professor Steve Levitt [of Freaknomics fame] from the University of Chicago, have worked with data on prostitutes to analyze issues.”
Er, what important contribution? Would someone pray enlighten?
What issues? Analyze what issues?
His counterpart from Fudan told the press that “data” gathered “gives us a broader understanding of how discrimination operates and policymakers can use it to tackle discrimination in other markets and contexts.”
Yeah, sure. How does a freelance prostitute giving a hefty discount to a Bangladeshi worker help policymakers tackle discrimination?
I think I would need a third PhD to understand all that mumbo-jumbo. Obfuscation personified, these scholars are. A case of “if you can’t convince them, confuse them”?
Unless you were born last night, you ought to know that here in Singapore, racial stereotyping and discrimination exist big time, let’s not deny that. No need to spend two years talking face-to-face with 177 prostitutes to confirm that fact.
I hope the taxes I pay through my nose didn’t go into funding this stupid project. All tax payers want more bang for their bucks. Pardon the pun.
If these guys are really serious they should perhaps work on issues like human trafficking and all the tragic complexities related to that evil; but then they told journalists they didn’t even dare ask if the women were forced into prostitution because that’s a “sensitive” subject.
What the fuck?!