4

Why Does John Wiley Price Keep Calling Guys Who Hire Prostitutes "Sponsors"?

^
Keep Dallas Observer Free
I Support
  • Local
  • Community
  • Journalism
  • logo

Support the independent voice of Dallas and help keep the future of Dallas Observer free.

In 2007, Dallas County began a prostitution diversion plan in which people caught selling sex are often funneled into treatment programs rather than simply locked up. The idea -- a fairly progressive one -- is that prostitutes are most often victims who become trapped in a vicious circle rather than criminals who should be locked away.

Over the next four years, the program contacted 728 prostitutes, 201 of which were eligible and opted to enter residential treatment programs, according to the program's most recent annual report. Of those who completed the treatment, slightly under half weren't subsequently re-arrested for prostitution.

Most of Dallas County's commissioners consider that to be a success. Maurine Dickey was particularly vocal in her support for the program during today's Commissioners Court meeting; she was joined by her colleagues in a bipartisan, 4-0 vote in favor of continuing the county's participation in the program by funding its contribution through the district attorney's office.

The missing fifth vote belongs to John Wiley Price. According to a recap from the Morning News, he questioned the program's cost effectiveness. Then, he asked whether the county's treatment program for johns is mandatory or voluntary. But Price didn't say "johns." He didn't say "men who pay for sex," either.

"You call them 'johns," I call them 'sponsors,'" he explained, according to the News.

Now, "sponsor," is something you do to NPR or the local Little League team. It's a gift, not always without self-interest but always with the hope that it helps the recipient succeed. To think that's ever the case in prostitution is at best paternalistic, at worst a dismissal of the idea that prostitutes can ever be victims, and regardless it's quite odd.

Maybe Price didn't mean anything by the term. Perhaps it's a product of some quirk of his diction. Whatever the case, he stayed mostly silent during the rest of the discussion and abstained from voting on the measure. We've got a call in for an explanation. We'll update this post when ... ah, forget it.

Keep the Dallas Observer Free... Since we started the Dallas Observer, it has been defined as the free, independent voice of Dallas, and we would like to keep it that way. Offering our readers free access to incisive coverage of local news, food and culture. Producing stories on everything from political scandals to the hottest new bands, with gutsy reporting, stylish writing, and staffers who've won everything from the Society of Professional Journalists' Sigma Delta Chi feature-writing award to the Casey Medal for Meritorious Journalism. But with local journalism's existence under siege and advertising revenue setbacks having a larger impact, it is important now more than ever for us to rally support behind funding our local journalism. You can help by participating in our "I Support" membership program, allowing us to keep covering Dallas with no paywalls.

We use cookies to collect and analyze information on site performance and usage, and to enhance and customize content and advertisements. By clicking 'X' or continuing to use the site, you agree to allow cookies to be placed. To find out more, visit our cookies policy and our privacy policy.

 

Join the Observer community and help support independent local journalism in Dallas.

 

Join the Observer community and help support independent local journalism in Dallas.