Real Men Don't Fight on Twitter?

If you haven't seen it yet, you should probably know that there is currently a twitter war going down between Ashton Kutcher (@aplusk) and The Village Voice (@villagevoice) over sex trafficking.

Yes. It's as bizarre as it sounds.

Now, I haven't read everything that's been posted because twitter conversations between two people with as many followers as both of them have are notoriously difficult to read and I don't have to patience to put up with that amount of (pardon my French) bitchiness. I think that might make me a lazy blogger, but points for honesty?

Anyway, here's my understanding of the situation. Ashton and his wife (the lovely Demi for any pop culture newbs) have created a series of PSA's meant to bring attention to the issue of underage sex trafficking by attacking the demand. The idea is that "Real men don't buy girls." The ads feature Ashton and friends (Justin Timberlake, Drake, Jason Mraz, etc.) doing super manly things and then concluding "Real men (fill in the blank). Real men don't buy girls." This one is probably my fave:

So the village voice decides that it knows everything better than everyone and writes a pretty nasty article attacking Ashton and his campaign. (Read it here.) Their basic complaints are as follows: 1) Ashton and Demi did not have the correct numbers in their campaign. 2) These silly ads take away the seriousness of the situation. 3) Money should be spent on rehab for victims, not on "prosecuting working women" and "attacking the rights of men."

So, since I have a blog and once wrote a paper about modern slavery in Freshman comp, I decided to weigh in.

Here's the truth. Village Voice attacks Ashton and Demi for being celebs who don't check their facts. But, being celebs is not the reason they got those numbers "wrong." According to Village Voice's own article, almost every major newspaper in the US (very credible ones too) have quoted that same study. So if we're not going to hold journalists accountable for citing a "faulty study" then you can hardly expect it from two good hearted celebrities. I'm not saying it makes it ok to quote bad data-- I'm just saying it's definitely more understandable than Village Voice gives them credit for. And, in the name of wanting to help the victimized, I'm willing to give Ashton a little slack.

Further, my understanding of human trafficking is that 1) it happens in America, 2) it happens more overseas, 3) most of the girls in both cases are not American. So, while the statistic on American girls being trafficked may be high (although I doubt it is as low as Village Voice claims) the number of girls being trafficked regardless of nationality or location is VERY high. With that said, attacking the source of trafficking-- men who demand the supply of girls-- will help to stop both cases. There can be no market if there is no demand. So if you attack the demand, you attack all kinds of trafficking and the numbers the Village Voice is so worried about become less important.

As to the silliness of the ads and whether or not they take away from this social issue, it makes me think that Village Voice doesn't really understand the nature of modern social movements. Especially when you have the audience that Ashton has-- and stick your nose in the air all you want, it's a much bigger audience than any newspaper-- the way to get something noticed is to be funny or controversial. Frankly, these PSA's have a lot of appeal. They use well known celebrities, they are funny, and they're pissing people off-- all things you need to get attention. While there may be some truth to the idea that these videos may trivialize the situation, I don't think that will be the overall result. Village Voice needs to wake up and smell the coffee. If they think dramatic youtube videos are going to get more attention than Ashton's they're wrong. And that's all there is to it. Ultimately, these videos are going to get a lot more people-- and probably people who aren't generally activists-- aware of the situation which will hopefully result in action. I can't help but be a fan. And if you think that Ashton is simply unable to create a serious PSA, then you haven't seen them all. Check out this one:

To me this says the use of humor is intentional in the other videos and I can't help but think the foundation is right. If they want their videos to see the most eyes, they're going about it the right way.

And finally, I agree that money should be spent rehabbing victims. But to say that money shouldn't be spent attacking the source is ridiculous. You can only put stitches on someone who keeps cutting into their arm with a chainsaw so many times before you realize you need to try and take away the chainsaw. That might be the most ridiculous image, but I think it's appropriate. We need to bandage the arm and work at not only removing the chainsaw, but destroying it.

I'm not going to argue whether it's a woman's right to sell herself or it's a man's right to buy pornography. But what I will say is this: we need to work to give women who find themselves at the end of their rope other options. We need to make it easier for women to get education or skill training or jobs or something to help keep them out of the industry. Because I don't care if you say it is her choice or not-- nothing good can come of selling yourself. It cannot be good for those women or their children. We need to make another way to earn a living more accessible. Then, hopefully, the problem won't be one we need to debate.

As for the pornography/free speech debate, the reality is that the pornography industry exploits women. So call it art, call it free speech, call it whatever-- but I know that in your heart of hearts you don't want your daughter/mom/sister/friend to be one of the women that happens to. I'm not saying it should be made illegal, but I am saying from the looks of the Village Voice article it seems that they don't think child pornography is too big of an issue. And that is despicable. Further, defending the exploitation and objectifying of women as "a man's rights" is one of the most disgusting things I've ever heard. I don't have any sort of answers but I think it's a real issue that one industry feeds the other.

The last thing I'll say is this: if activism is occurring for nothing more than image and activism's sake, it's worthless. Let me explain. It's too easy to take the position of "I cared about sex trafficking before it was cool to care about sex trafficking." But if that's how you feel, then you probably don't actually care about stopping sex trafficking but your appearance. Village Voice (and others like them) need to get off their high horse and instead of criticizing celebrities for being "bad activists" be excited that someone with 7 million followers on twitter is taking up this important issue as their cause. Like it or not, Ashton is going to reach way more people than Village Voice could ever dream of. Why wouldn't you take advantage of having someone like that on your team? Aren't we all working for the same cause here, trying to stop children from being exploited?

A wise man (Jesus, not Abraham Lincoln) once said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand." That is the ultimate truth. If we spend our time arguing, that's time, energy, and resources not put towards defending the little girls that need it. I suggest Village Voice takes their nose out of the air and see that being a bitchy know-it-all is not going to make people listen to you, much less like you and want to work with you.

So pop culture is a little shallow? The thing is, you need the shallow people (and their money) to get things done. So, I vote, embrace it and use it and maybe we can do a little good in this world.

Besides, if village Voice was really as much better than Ashton as they keep claiming, they wouldn't take the time to fire off 140 character insults. That is the stupidest part of all. Twitter fight, really? I'm kind of disappointed in both of you. All I can hope is this will bring attention to the travesty of child sex trafficking. But, hey, I tend to be an optimist.

This has been very long and editorial, so if you stuck in until the end, I owe you a donut or something. With that said, I would love some feedback. Thoughts? Pop culture activism, good or bad?

Here's to getting things done.

Cheers.