> who are we or the government
> to get between them -- arrest,
> prosecute, fine, and cage
> them?

Amongst our other roles, we are often homeowners who don't want our property zones sullied by tawdry, irresponsible behavior.

I'll never understand why people think whoring is cute when they can never name the woman in their family who ought to have made a career of it.

You're never too old to patrol thots -

https://twitter.com/scooobee/status/1066433953878458369

Good thread about this issue -

https://twitter.com/KanyeTheLobster/status/1066487947996749824

"I'm a libertarian who believes prostitution should be legalized..."

"The older I get, the more apparent it is to me that traditional, restrictive monogamy is absolutely foundational to successful civilizations, and that the conservative obsession with traditional morality is well placed."

"Why do so many young men of the #ThotAudit feel resentful of young women who want to sell nudes without consequence? Because those men understand, at a deep lizard-brain level, that those women are a danger to the integrity of the tribe"

I notice you didn't feel the need to say "I'm not a thot" or "I pay my taxes" when discussing this issue, yet any discussion remotely related to Trump you say "I'm not a Trumper", like you did yesterday.

Surely some sex workers--like self-employed workers in many industries--do underreport or altogether avoid taxes. But somehow, the prospect of tax-dodging Airbnb hosts, YouTubers, freelance writers, and others hasn't spurred the online audit squad to action. And the decision to target only women making a living off their looks smacks of straight-up sexism, not a neutral, civic-minded concern with IRS evasion.

I hate to break it to her, but not all sex workers are women.

So I've heard.

From people who know.

I notice you didn't feel the need to say "I'm not a thot"...

I don't find sex work or having sex as desired shameful.

Patrick, I believe it's women largely or only being targeted, not men.

You kinda proved Snoopy's point there Amy.

Unfortunately legal prostitution correlates with high rates of trafficking and higher rates of illegal prostitution.

While I understand the whole, "You should be able to do what you want with your body" argument, the reality is prostitution comes with a host of other problems, and for that reason I favor the nordic model as the best current option.

No one is tricking vulnerable poor people into becoming accountants. Accountants jobs don't violate OSHA health standards.

This has nothing to do with a love of tax enforcement or prostitution.

These women have been spamming gaming and social media channels trying to sell pictures of themselves. They've become a huge nuisance. So someone came up with the idea to report them to the IRS to scare them off - it's not apparent that's actually happening.

This has nothing to do with 'incels' , 'misogyny' or prostitution.

Yes paula, it takes more than a superficial glance to get to the heart of the "movement". Apparently the game streaming companies are also profiting from the "thot" disruptors so don't really care that the gamers are being disrupted.

Paula nails it... the THOTs are big-time spammers and they have become a major PITA on gamer boards. This is the part of the story that Brown is missing. They employ services that are constantly opening new throwaway accounts. I've been in the position of being an admin on a board that was targeted by these types of spammers, and when you have to spend your time banning hundreds of accounts per day, it becomes not so fun. There's also the issue that there is a lot of fraud. Many of them are over-billing and/or sending out random pics that they pulled off of Pornhub or someplace.

I'm pretty libertarian about sex work too. But these THOTs are not "honest" sex workers. By and large, they are narcissistic scammers who think that they have the right to invade an online space and dominate it, and if they can't, they'll try to shut it down with DDOS attacks and the like. That's what the board admins and supporters are fighting. Been there, done that.

These women have been spamming gaming and social media channels trying to sell pictures of themselves.

*ding*ding*ding*

I think it is the gaming platforms spam that is irksome part. But since I only am on twitter (mostly read-only), I'm can't speak to the spam levels on the other social medium. And I don't see a lot of such spam on twitter. But I'm not using the official twitter app. That may make difference.

Apparently the game streaming companies are also profiting from the "thot" disruptors so don't really care that the gamers are being disrupted.

Oh.

thanks - if these guys really wanted to f*ck with the Thot's, they'd be reporting them for solicitation and distribution of pornography to minors. That's a lot scarier than tax evasion.

Apparently the game streaming companies are also profiting from the "thot" disruptors so don't really care that the gamers are being disrupted. ~ some seppo at November 28, 2018 7:02 AM

If you didn't pay to get on the site or in the stream, you're the product.

"If you sit in on a poker game and don’t see a sucker, get up. You’re the sucker."

Conan: If you didn't pay to get on the site or in the stream, you're the product.

I would add that even if you do pay to get on the site, you're often the product.

I would add that even if you do pay to get on the site, you're often the product. ~ Patrick at November 28, 2018 10:49 AM

Yep.

They should have stayed off Twitch. People don't want to hear about commenting careers, either.

Behind Elizabeth Nolan Brown's remark is the usual female conceit that women should be exempt from enforcement of the law.

They intruded on gamer space to sell nudes. The people don't want them. The girls selling nudies are the invaders and the aggressors. Only someone who is committed to cultural marxist victimology would see the nudie girls as victims here for having to follow the rules.

The feminist cry of sexist usually is here seen as a retreat after she attacked first, like claiming "you can't hit a girl" after she hits you first. Men don't have to accept being your tampon.

Men don't have to accept being your tampon.

They don't?

— Camilla Parker-Bowles

Elizabeth Nolan Brown has been a pretty good advocate for libertarian positions of all stripes. She's one of the people at Reason who are leading the charge against the moral panic that is trying to equate all of prostitution with sex trafficking. I take Crid's point about this, but let's have some priorities. Prostitutes and their patrons are not going to be the end of civilization. I will say of Brown that she did a poor job of researching this particular article; interviewing a few of the thot-warriors would have given her a different perspective. Beware of slotting everything according to your own narrative.

Sort of related: I just finished reading Meaghan Murphy's article at Quilette about her Twitter banning for saying "Men aren't women". And while her statement is true, she goes on to blame the whole brouhaha on... you guessed it... heterosexual men. The TERF perspective is exposed, and it's the same old story: All of those Marxist privilege-demanding trans activities are -- surprise! -- just evil heterosexual men under false flags Typical male behavior, right? Talk about slotting into a narrative. The penis tells all, according to the feminists. Based on this, I have totally lost interest in their plight and I'm not going to lift a finger to assist them. I now see it as like the Iran-Iraq War: I want both sides to lose.

Snitch if you want. Hot women are still going to be hot, and if they are careful to conserve their assets, they will always be better off than the snitch.
Taxed or not.

Meanwhile -- I had never realized so many hot women were a "Public Figure" before Facebook...

...what do the snitches want to do with foreign modeling accounts, like Kounelli Photography?

"...what do the snitches want to do with foreign modeling accounts, like Kounelli Photography?"

Well Rad, they want them to not put spam all over unrelated message boards. And that is pretty much it.

"The page specifically notes that it's interested in situations involving "a significant Federal tax issue"--i.e., not someone making a few hundred unreported dollars per year"

Not in my experience. I failed to report nine ($9.00) of income one year and the IRS attempted to fine me over $900 in fees and penalties. I fought it for six months, finally got it dropped - and then I was audited every year until I handed over all my tax prep duties to a pro - at which point they immediately stopped the audits.

That is my experience too Gog.

One year my parents screwed up and paid too much capital gains tax. So they got flagged and an auditor came to visit. He didn't know why they got flagged (and made that pretty obvious) and then he wandered off into crazy witch hunt land. Tried claiming my sister didn't exit. Wanted my parents to hand over all copies of their tax returns and receipts (and then claimed he never got the copies from them even though it was certified mail). Was very interested in who mowed their lawn. My dad finally figured out the IRS owed him a couple hundred dollars. Bam, that guy was gone as fast as he could run.

They say this is the kinder gentler IRS. All I can figure is that it may be better to have your balls cut off than to have all your fingers crushed one at a time. But personally I'd rather avoid both. Kinder doesn't appear to be that kind.

...and then I was audited every year until I handed over all my tax prep duties to a pro - at which point they immediately stopped the audits. ~ Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at November 29, 2018 12:35 PM

That is my experience too Gog. ~ Ben at November 29, 2018 9:17 PM

Interesting.

I'm dealing with my brother's estate and was notified by the IRS that he had a $3,000 refund coming from 2014. After not receiving it for six weeks, I telephoned the IRS and was told that they did not receive his 2013 return and would need me to prepare one with the income information they would send me before they could release the 2014 refund.

That IRS-supplied W-2 information conveniently did not include any state tax withholding amount, which means the estate would owe the IRS at least $5,000, using the IRS-supplied information as the basis of the reconstructed filing.

The funny thing is, the state Dept. of Revenue told me over the phong that they did receive a 2013 return. To complete and file a state return, he had to file a federal return. So, what's really going on here? I'm guessing the IRS is playing games in order to avoid paying a $3,000 refund.

So, according to my CPA, I can drop the matter and let the IRS keep the $3,000 or I can fight it and possibly open a can of worms by asking the state for a copy of his 2013 state and federal returns. What if they did not, in fact, receive a 2013 return? My brother was notoriously bad about government paperwork. Don't get me started on my adventures with the DMV. By law, I have to close the estate in less than three months anyway, so I'm inclined to drop the matter.