Gov. Ron DeSantis signed HB 7063 which raises the age limit for performers and other employees of adult entertainment establishments—you know, strip clubs— from 18 to 21. DeSantis claims this legislation will “combat human trafficking.” Baloney. It is pure grandstanding, pandering to his supporters who object to sex shows generally on moral grounds, and more to the point, it is unethical age discrimination.
The issue is simple: are 18-year-olds, 19-year-olds and 20-year-olds adult citizens with all the rights of adult citizens, or aren’t they? (Hint: they are.) Since they are, there is no justification for a state telling them that there are activities, occupations and modes of expression that they cannot engage in until they are 21.
Even as an 18-year-old I felt strongly that lowering the age of majority to 18 was a mistake, in part because I knew how mature and responsible the 18-year-olds I knew were: not very. But it was done in the 26th Amendment: the Democrats thought the new voters would help elect superb leaders like….George McGovern???. The logic behind the change was also bizarre: 18-year-olds could be drafted, see, so they must be competent to do everything else in the adult world. This really passed for a persuasive argument in the Sixties.
As my father once explained to me, as he told the pre-D Day tale of how a moron in his platoon blew himself to bits and my father’s foot apart when he pulled the pin on a live hand grenade so he could use it to scrape mud out of his boot, following orders in the military doesn’t require much intelligence, judgment or maturity, certainly not as much as drinking, driving, choosing sex partners and voting.
The law of the land says 18-year-olds are adults with the rights of adults. Calling them “teens” is deliberately misleading. Their parents are no longer responsible for their care and housing, and they can be charged with crimes as adults. If they want to be strippers, porn stars, lawyers or any other morally dubious profession, it should be their choice. The choice to work at a strip joints is a bad one whether you are 18 or 30.
This kind of government over-reach is why Republicans aren’t credible when they complain about the varieties of Big Brotherism that Democrats prefer. Florida’s Republican Lt. Gov. Jeanette Nuñez applauded the new law, blaming “feckless” President Joe Biden for doing “little to nothing to keep our children safe.”
Pssst! Jennette! 18-year-olds aren’t “children.” Try to keep up.
GOP state Rep. Carolina Amesty added, “My vision for the young women of Florida is to not work in an adult entertainment establishment.” Great: then find ways to persuade them not to do it. It’s still their choice.
In this case, the argument that women have a right to choose and should be able to control what they do with their own bodies is air tight. After all, stripping doesn’t kill anybody.
Ethics Alarms 
Yeah, I don’t see the logic in the law other than pandering to the religious right. I suspect Gov. DeSantis would oppose gun regulations limiting persons under 21 years of age from purchasing/possessing fire arms.
jvb
Bingo, the perfect analogy. Is it really that hard to avoid screaming hypocrisy? Apparently so…
Typically I would agree with the sentiment if 18 is ok to vote the it is ok for all other activities afforded to adults.
I don’t think the gun sales to strippers is a perfect analogy. It assumes that both are perfectly consensual. Choosing to buy a gun is definitely consensual but if a young woman is being trafficked into the sex industry then it becomes a different story. I don’t think many women choose to wind up selling their bodies. I am sure there are some, but the majority? How many of these women are promised big money only to find out that the riches go to the club owners. How much pressure is there by management to go to the next step as an adult entertainer? I don’t know but I would bet those in the trafficking business impose their will on the younger girls because those girls probably found themselves in a position that stripping was they only way to survive financially.
? They can consent to sex with their bodies…but they can’t consent to let men look at them?
I quote comedian George Carlin, who began his onstage life as a strip club MC. “I’ve never understood the appeal of strip clubs. I mean, when you’re hungry, do you want to watch someone cook a steak?”
Federal law prohibits the sale of handguns to those under 21. it’s 18 for long guns. No info on whether someone is allowed to buy a shotgun and a hacksaw at the same time.
“If they want to be strippers, porn stars, lawyers or any other morally dubious profession, it should be their choice.”
Thanks for that. Finally, a lucid explanation for my having wasted almost twenty-five years of my life.
By the way, lefties and racial grievance mongers lead the league in calling people of all ages “children.” Have you ever heard a decedent of color who was involved in some even allegedly legal system involved event who isn’t called by the media “a child” and by their mother, her “baby?” I haven’t.
Oh, I know it was a cheap shot, but what the hell.
Au contraire. It was as illuminating as a lightning bolt. And almost as terrifying.
Florida legislators are at it again. While in the 70s every state was coerced by the threat of losing highway funding to increase the legal drinking age to 21, in Florida it remains legal to serve and make drinks as a bartender beginning at 18.
So teenaged bartenders must remain clothed, but they can make you a margarita. Yes, a bar-owning friend of mine also thinks that’s crazy.
I agree this is inconsistent and borderline stupid, but once the door was opened to gradual rights with setting 21 as the minimum age for drinking and buying alcohol (and tobacco in some states) a natural outcome is that graduated rights will be applied to the ones the current people in power dislike (stripping, buying guns, etc.) The only solution I see is a federal law or court decision that states clearly that age-graduated rights are an infringement on everybody’s rights. Same on privileges granted before the age of majority, either they are responsibility of the parents or not; and if it’s bad enough that one needs to be treated as an adult, emancipation is the way to go.
Great point, Alex. The drinking age in New York State was eighteen when I was there for college. Praise Allah! We had a campus pub in the basement beneath the dining hall. We could buy whatever we wanted at the liquor store and grocery stores in town. The local breweries, Utica Club and Genessee, would host “nights” at the frat houses. Miss Gennie Pale Ale even made an appearance at one such event. I have no idea how residential undergrad schools deal with underage drinking. I assume they officially look the other way. Maybe Curmie can fill us in. I asked a woman who is a graduate of my college from the ’90s and she said getting alcohol was never a problem, they just went to the frats.
Anyway, I think eighteen is a good drinking age. Kids are going to do it anyway. Might was well have it out in the open where they have a chance of acting reasonably and are less likely to binge drink if they can do it any time.
OB,
This might be an interesting Open Forum discussion…though maybe it’s been had before (it’s certainly been discussed a billion times outside this forum): the ethics of an 18 vs 21 drinking age.
You cite the rationalization that “everyone does it”, and with regards to drinking, you’re largely correct. I want so badly to disagree with you on the basis of drunk driving and binge drinking and that adults of eighteen years just aren’t as mature as those with twenty-one, but we see drunk drivers in their 70s and 80s and middle-aged women blowing a .25+ on “On Patrol: Live”, which indicates advancing in age doesn’t cause better choices with regards to alcohol.
I’m against lowering the drinking age, but the data might be on your side here. Like I said, it might be good OF topic.
Since you asked, OB…
My experience has been that universities don’t quite look the other way, but pretty close. Sort of like seat-belt law enforcement was: we’re not going to stop you for that, but if there’s something else, too, then it’ll be added to the list of charges.
When I was taking students to Ireland (where saying the drinking age is “you can see over the bar” is only slightly facetious), the official university policy was that it doesn’t matter what the drinking age was onsite, students still had to be 21. The real policy was that as long as they didn’t get drunk and stupid, there was no problem. I could even go to the pub with them, as long as I didn’t buy them drinks myself. But if they did get drunk and stupid (none of them did, fortunately), a violation of the alcohol policy would be included in their list of offenses.
As for NY state… We lived there when the drinking age was being lowered; we were in our mid-20s at the time. A couple of interesting facts: my wife was working for Cooperative Extension at the time, so she got to see a study that was commissioned to show that 18-20-year-olds were a safety risk. What it actually showed was that per mile driven, the drivers most likely to be over the legal limit were women over 65. Oops. Needless to say, that report was never made public.
Traffic deaths did drop after passage of the law, but they went back up to previous levels as soon as those who who were directly affected by the change in the law reached 21. Apparently the key factor wasn’t age as much as experience of drinking: knowing when you’ve had too much.
Binge drinking on campuses skyrocketed, too. If it’s illegal to have one or two, it’s no more illegal to have 10 or 12. Plus, there was all that delicious naughtiness.