Another point that can be extracted from Hugo Schwyzer’s post about the research into men who hire prostitutes...

It’s not hard to see that this belief — part of what I refer to as the myth of male weakness — serves a particularly important self-justifying function. “I need to have sex with prostitutes”, the line goes, “or I might rape.”

...

They want the myth of male weakness to work because it serves their agenda; they know that in their own lives, the myth is oversold. This is cynical, yes, but devastatingly effective.

Read the quote in context here.

It wouldn’t hurt to ask if the same accusations could be made of the socially-conservative philosophy of some of at least some of the researchers behind the original project (pdf).

Because on the one hand, yes, if it’s very helpful to assume all men are potential rapists if one is asserting that all prostitutes are conscripted.

But!

On the other hand, recalling the major point of Hugo’s post, sticking with that dichotomy handily enables men who excuse themselves hiring prostitutes in those terms!

And even though I’ve run out of hands an even more important consideration is that the dichotomy alienates at least two groups that could be really, really useful allies in confronting abuse in prostitution: men in general for one, and the subset of prostitutes (however large or small) who either aren’t or who don’t perceive themselves as coerced.