Wish Me Luck

Despite having what would have been an excellent ASSA session turned down, I've decided to try my hand at organizing another one or two.

Here are the details of the first one:

Session: The Economics of Paid Sex Markets JEL: J4

Session Organizer: Taggert J. Brooks University of Wisconsin – La Crosse

Chair: Alan Krueger Princeton University

Paper 1:
"An Empirical Analysis of Street Prostitutes." Steve Levitt , University of Chicago and Sudhir Venkatesh, Columbia University

Abstract:

We collect transaction-level data on over 50 street prostitutes over the course of an 18 month period. We document that prostitutes working in the same area earn very different wages and these wage differentials can be partially explained by observable characteristics.
Considering the risks borne by the prostitutes, they are not particularly well compensated. The prostitutes engage in price discrimination across customers. We also explore the role of pimps.

Discussant: Lena Edlund

Paper 2:
"Enforcing Licensing Requirements: Implications for Disease Transmission in the Sex Market" Manisha Shah, University of Melbourne, and Paul Gertler University of California – Berkley and NBER

Abstract:

Several countries are pursuing the regulation of commercial sex work in order to decrease the spread of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and reduce the probability of a generalized HIV/AIDS epidemic. In many Latin American countries, the commercial sex market is characterized by two sectors, brothel and street, where the latter is marked by riskier behavior (e.g., lower rates of condom use) and higher prevalence of STIs. This paper studies the public health effects of enforcing licensing requirements in a two-sector commercial sex market, where enforcement varies between sectors. Specifically, we use nationally representative data from Ecuador to examine the effect of enforcement in brothels vs. enforcement in the street on overall STI prevalence. We exploit regional variation in the frequency of police visits to verify sex workers are complying with licensing requirements. The major finding of this paper is that increasing police presence in the street sector is most effective in decreasing disease. We find that increasing enforcement by one police visit per month in the street significantly decreases STIs by 8 percent. The second major finding is that increasing enforcement by one police visit per month in the brothel sector has no significant effect on disease outcomes. We propose a partial equilibrium model which is an extension of our previous model in Gertler, Shah, and Bertozzi (2005) to explain these findings.

The model predicts that the cost of enforcement increases the price of commercial sex. As the price of sex increases, demand decreases and the overall number of clients decreases. The effect of enforcement on disease works through the increase in prices, as fewer clients implies less disease. In addition to the price effect, increased enforcement decreases the returns of one sector relative to another. For example, increased street enforcement encourages street sex workers into the less risky brothel sector, improving overall public health. However, increased brothel enforcement could encourage non-compliant brothel sex workers into the street sector, exacerbating public health problems.

We test the predictions of the model and find that an additional police visit in the street increases the price of non-condom sex by ten percent and decreases the number of clients. In addition, sex workers are significantly less likely to join the street sector for an increase in street enforcement. These results explain the 8 percent decrease in overall disease for a given increase in street enforcement. In the unlicensed brothel sector, however, prices do not significantly increase with enforcement. In addition, simulations show that non-compliant sex workers who leave the brothel sector switch to the street sector, resulting in potentially worse public health outcomes. The findings of this paper indicate that the efficacy of regulation does not result from stricter enforcement in the brothel sector but rather from clamping down on the street sector. To minimize perverse effects of regulation, enforcement should account for the underlying characteristics of the sex market and be concentrated in the sector which is marked by lower condom use and higher STI prevalence.

Discussant: Emily Oster, University of Chicago

Paper 3:
“In Da Club: An Econometric Analysis of Strip Club Patrons” Taggert J. Brooks, University of Wisconsin – La Crosse

Abstract:

Conservative estimates from the National Health and Social Life Survey
(NHSLS) suggest 17 million Americans went to a club that featured nude or semi-nude dancers in 1991. Their attendance comprises nearly 67 million visits, 10 million more than the attendance at major league baseball games that year. With reported total revenues earned by strip clubs at 15 billion dollars a year (Smyth, 2005; Thompson, et. al., 2003), the industry arrived at this point following a doubling of the number of strip clubs between 1987 and 1992 according to Hanna (2005). In this paper I estimate a hurdle model using the NHSLS to test two popular theories which purport to explain the rapid increase in the number of clubs. I find that for those who reported changing their behavior in response to AIDS/HIV they were much more likely to go to a strip club and more frequent visitors than those who did not change their behavior. On the second explanation I fail to find support for the belief that attendance at strip clubs was motivated by the desire to escape the uncertain rules of a gender integrated work place. The rise of societal sensitivities to sexual harassment in the workplace does not appear to explain patron attendance at a strip club.

Discussant: Scott Drewianka, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee

Paper 4:
“From Sex to Gender”, Lena Edlund , Columbia University and Evelyn Korn Philipps-Universit at Marburg.

Abstract:

Humans are gonochoric, i.e., the male and female reproduction functions are in separate individuals. Here, we consider the alternative, hermaphroditism. A study of the pros and cons of hermaphroditism yields insights into gender roles as we know them.

Specifically, we find that: (i) female chastity is the preserve of gonochorism; (ii) secondary sexual differentiation, e.g., dimorphism, is a precondition for the existence of pure males; and (iii) only among gonochorsts could intra-male violence, a form of secondary sexual differentiation, be selected for.

Discussant: Ted Bergstrom, University of California Santa Barbara

The Curse of No Winners

Auction theory in economics suggests sometimes the winning bidder pays too much. They call the phenomenon The Winners Curse. Kind of like the LA Galaxy's recent acquisition of Becks.

In DC a "rare" license for a strip club went up for auction. There has been a moratorium on issuing new licenses for sometime (something which in fact is not legal, as we saw in Seattle).

But the $2 million minimum was too high, he decided, and neither he nor anyone else made a bid. Bidders also passed on two dance cages, complete with hydraulic-lift stages, that were going for $5,000 each. The auctioneer had more luck with the two 13-foot dance poles, which quickly went for $50 to Daniel Clark of Severn.

The license was being sold by club owner Ron Hunt, and as one of only 20 such licenses in the city, which has a moratorium on issuing additional licenses, it was considered a valuable asset.

"You're buying an asset that essentially can't be moved because there's so many approval hurdles to open a gentleman's club," Shulman said. "The city has been so developed with high-end real estate. People spend millions for a house, they don't want a gentleman's club next to it. There's no guarantee you could do it."

While the license allows an owner to open a club with nude dancing anywhere in the city that has commercial zoning, a club must sit at least 600 feet away from any schools, community centers and housing. Community members can protest the opening of such a club, and it must get approval from the District's Alcoholic Beverage Control Board

They want 2 million dollars? I'm pretty sure it would be cheaper to sue the city to end the moratorium. Besides, this site is one of the few remaining places that qualify under the zoning requirements. Which -by the way- are also illegal if they rule out every location within the municipality.

Catching Up

To say my posts have been sporadic would be kind. Non-existent would be a more appropriate characterization. So my plan as I get ready to transition into sabbatical starting in May is to post more frequently. Since I've recently implemented David Allen's Getting Things Done, one of the ways I will achieve this is to start knocking off my posts in draft. That means some of them may refer to rather dated news articles. I will try and note when they happened, but I will always make sure I connect their relevance to my research in some way.

So here is to more writing and blogging in 2007.

Oral Sex Laws

This poor kid. From the Volokh Conspiracy.

Ten Years in Prison for 17-Year-Old Who Had Consensual Oral Sex with 15-Year-Old: The Georgia Supreme Court just upheld this. The sentence strikes me as unduly harsh even on its own terms, but it seems especially unjustifiable given that:

1. The age of consent in Georgia is 16.

2. In 2006, the Georgia Legislature amended the statute to provide that oral sex between an under-18-year-old and a 13-to-15-year-old is only a misdemeanor, with a maximum penalty of a year in jail. This revised statute would have thus made the defendant's conduct a misdemeanor had he committed his crime after the statute's enactment, but the statute expressly provided that it wasn't retroactive.

3. Even at the time the act occurred, genital sex between an under-18-year-old and a 14-or-15-year-old was also a misdemeanor.

4. This defendant had no criminal record that would justify an especially long sentence.

Here's a brief opinion from presiding justice Carol W. Hunstein:

Wilson was convicted of aggravated child molestation based upon an act of oral sodomy performed on him by victim T.C., which was documented on videotape and seems to show that the victim's participation in the act was voluntary. Wilson was 17 years old at the time of the act; the victim was 15 years old. Pursuant to the version of the aggravated child molestation statute then in effect, Wilson was sentenced to ten years imprisonment without possibility of parole. See former OCGA § 16-6-4 (d) (1).

The sentence sounds mandated by state statute, and I don't think there's any Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause problem here. One can argue that the distinction between between genital sex and oral sex violates the Equal Protection Clause, but while this argument was accepted in a related context by the California Supreme Court, which held that the distinction lacked a rational basis, it was rejected by the Georgia Supreme Court in Odett v. State, 541 S.E.d 29 (2001), on the grounds that "General Assembly could reasonably conclude that the psychological well-being of minors is more damaged by acts of sodomy than by acts of intercourse" — not very plausible grounds, I think, but likely sufficient to pass the rational basis test (see also this related item from the California Appellate Report blog). The equal protection argument also seems to have been procedurally forfeited, because it wasn't raised until after the guilty verdict; and while the defendant might have argued that there's an equal protection violation in treating pre-2006 actors differently from post-2006 ones, that argument likely wouldn't work, either, and in any event likely wouldn't have been made.
But while the conviction is constitutionally permissible, it hardly seems like a just result. This is so even given that the sex here was public and videotaped and thus more likely to have been psychologically and emotionally injurious to the girl. Such uncharged and even not independently illegal aspects may be relevant in evaluating the overall moral fairness (though not legal validity) of the sentence, but they nonetheless don't seem sufficient to justify a 10-year-term here — especially when the same conduct would have been treated so much more lightly had it happened after the statute was changed, and had it involved genital sex (which tends to be more dangerous for the girl in various ways than oral sex).

Cuckolds

The post entitled conspiracy against cuckolds, by Robin Hanson, reminded me I've wanted to look into the origin of the use of the term cuckold.

What is a cuckold?

A cuckold is a married man whose wife has sex with other men. In current usage it sometimes refers to non-married couples in committed relationships as well, although the traditional meaning is a man whose wife is adulterous.

There are connotations of helplessness and humiliation attributed to the word: implications that the husband lacks the strength to enforce the fidelity due to a man, and is too weak, too stupid, or henpecked to leave or divorce her. Although historically it was a term in general use, nowadays it is much more frequently associated with female domination, power exchange, sexual humiliation, erotic sexual denial or sexual fantasy based on those themes.

"Cuckold" is derived from the Old French for the Cuckoo bird, "Cocu" with the pejorative suffix -ald. The earliest written use of the Middle English derivation, “cokewold” occurs in 1250. The females of certain varieties of Cuckoo lay their eggs in other bird’s nests, freeing themselves from the need to nurture the eggs to hatching. In mediaeval Europe, the law, custom, and the church all defined married women as a category of property held by her husband. Although Christian marriage vows strictly enjoined sexual exclusivity in a marriage for both partners, custom and doctrine rarely enforced it on the husband. A married woman who was unfaithful to her vows made a “cuckoo” of the husband who unknowingly provided her, and potentially her illegitimate offspring, with shelter and protection as a tricked bird does to the cuckoo’s eggs.

I've been surprised at - what seems to me to be - the recent surge in cuckold porn. It seems to be pretty clear evidence disputing the myth that all porn objectifies and humiliates women doesn't it? Apparently some males fantasize about being humilitated.

Cuckolds apparently are paid about $100 per scene, whereas the male performing talent might make $500-600 for the scene.

There was this interesting discussion on Adultdvdtalk where some guy was contemplating being a cuckold in a film which offered to pay him $500. Most of the posters thought he was being conned into producing some solo footage for gay porn. You can read it here, though it is all text some ads may not be safe for work.

Last Minute Gift Ideas

For those last minute gifts for your favorite tech nerd, you might want to try this USB Pole dancer.

Girls Gone Wild

From the Pioneer Press:

'Girls Gone Wild' fined $1.6 million

The "Girls Gone Wild" video empire agreed to pay $1.6 million and its founder was sentenced to community service Wednesday for filming drunken, underage girls in the raunchy videos. The guilty pleas by Mantra Films Inc. and its multimillionaire founder, Joe Francis, stem from the company's use of two 17-year-olds in its DVDs and videos, which feature young women baring their breasts in public. The videos at issue were filmed in Panama City Beach, Fla., during spring break in 2003. U.S. District Judge Richard Smoak ordered Francis to read aloud in court a victim impact statement from one of the women, who said she was emotionally tormented by her appearance on a "Girls Gone Wild" video and that the video damaged her relationship with her family. Smoak told Francis he added the community service because it did not appear a fine would be a meaningful punishment. The fine represents less than 3 percent of Mantra's profits since 2002 and only 12 percent of Mantra's 2005 profits, Smoak said.

So profits, where about 13 million in 2005 and about 53 million from 2002 through 2005. Every article refers to profits, but I have to imagine its probably gross revenues?

Further investigation reveals I would be wrong. The LA Times reports it is a 40 million dollar a year business. With that kind of profit maybe congress should consider a windfall profits tax? I'm going to start the $9.99 a DVD is price gouging campaign, but where shall we picket?