Originally Posted by
SeriouslyLost
It depends whether you think the point of the article is the actions of CBP or not. Personally, I thought it was pretty clear she was writing about CBP. Why should you (or I or CBP) give a crap about her personal moral code, let alone the details of her life, that have nothing to do with CBP and transiting the US.
Look, I agree with you. I know about polyamory, and I don't judge other people's sexual choices, lest my own be judged. I just think it's a weakness in the writing that she doesn't tell us, the readers who she wants to sympathize with her, what exactly is her the relationship with this married man. She lays out a whole situation that would make the majority of people at least scratch their heads. She's sharing a bed with him, they would seem to have more than a platonic relationship, he's married, and his wife knows. I don't have a problem with it, I just don't understand it exactly. She is making alternative lifestyle choices, and yet she's seriously offended and traumatized that she would be accused of another fringe lifestyle choice (prostitution). She probably does in fact show the markers of a prostitute in the eyes of CPB, and like it or not, prostitution is illegal and it is their business to stop people they believe to be involved in illegal activity.
I personally think prostitution should be legal and destigmatized, and CPB should be polite to everyone, even if they think they've caught a criminal. And polyamory and even polygamy should have their places in society for those who choose the lifestyles. My issue here is really with the weakness of the essay -- if what she's doing is acceptable and legal, then she shouldn't be cagey with her readers about what it is, especially if one of her larger goals is to normalize her sexual choices. If in fact it's none of my business what she's up to with this married man (and yes, she does write that he's married), then I'm not inclined to sympathize with her because it feels to me as a reader like she's not telling me the whole truth.
My one caveat is that I can't tell from the site whether it's aimed at an audience that would automatically understand her situation, and therefore she doesn't need to explain it. Like, it's audience is notably sexually free-thinking, or perhaps she's a regular columnist with a following who knows her story. I just didn't care to dig that deeply. I would still think, though, in an age when articles get distributed around the internet and away from their original audience, it would be wise to add an explanatory clause or two for the benefit of the uninitiated who may somehow stumble across your writing.