Recently, in England where I live, there has been a revival of prostitute murdering, following in the footsteps of Jack the Ripper in the eats of London in the 19th century and the Yorkshire Ripper of the 1980s. Two cases of serial killers are prominent, in Ipswich, Stephen Wright, during 2006 and another in Bradford in 2010. The newspaper comment columns were contrasted by gender after the later. Jerome Taylor writing in The Independent and Alan white writing in The Times on 28/5/2010 both focussed on the fact that English laws were putting prostitutes’ lives at risk. Janice Turner writing in The Times the following day blamed male attitudes generically.
I first came across blaming males generically during a university course in the student’s union. After what I thought was a reasonable speech involving a reference to some Victorian write on a subject I forget, a Finnish girl studying got up and made the whole focus of the debate the fact that the quote I had used frequently used the word ‘he’ and she said why not ‘she’. This effectively hijacked the agenda and the union was baying for blood with a totally obtuse piece of obfuscation. Years later when I travelled to Estonia, I discovered that the languages of the region, including Finnish, do not distinguish, like largely Latin derived languages, such as French and English, between sex either in the 3rd person, (he and she), or in gender nouns, (as in French ‘la maison – feminine).
I don’t believe egalitarian sexual values can be furthered by being unfair to males. Whatever are perceived in males as a gender are almost certainly genetically related to needs. Male aggressive dominance tendencies come from seeking to protect females from other males. Of course in a civilised society attacks by other males which led to that sort of need for competitiveness are unnecessary but they cannot be bred out, especially as the act of thinking of such is an attack on males in itself and thereby non-egalitarian. Success of less aggressiveness in males can only come form a less competitive world, but females need a competitive world, increasingly as the struggle for resources continues. The political solution lies in ‘green’ economics where a share is guaranteed. Incidentally that is why a Buddho-Darwinist would struggle to believe I the credibility of the current vogue for ‘green’ elites such as Prince Charles of England and the British business dynasty, the Goldsmiths family including Zac, recently elected as a conservative Member of Parliament.
Taking ‘green’ thinking to relationships requires a certain detachment from nature.  With Buddho-Darwinism, there is a balance between recognising the struggle of nature, of which our ancestors were part of, and the essence of the compassion of Buddha’s teachings.
Janice Turner’s article focuses on entertainment for men, mentioning a new film “Pimp”, the attitudes of the actor-director Robert Cavannah who starred in the role and on video games such as Grand Theft Auto. She mentions too a male friend who sought a prostitute to be a stripper at a stag party an questions why he felt no shame.
My attitude to Janice Turner’s observations  is that shame is an artificial state created by civilisation and religion. I have no doubt that some of my ancestors in ancient history going back over hundreds of thousands and millions of years were killers who knew nothing of laws and therefore acted out of the survival instinct, and I should be grateful and honour the nature I have evolved from, which is why I advocate ‘green’ compassion to nature in Buddho-Darwinism as a balance to any genetic instincts.  Lie the student at my University meeting, Ms turner is being obtuse in denying there is any meaning in the obvious compassion of the male writer’s I mention above for prostitutes. In addition, I do not believe she has researched, (notice the use of ‘she’ there – if only we could call each other ‘it’ like the Estonians and Finns), the matter fully from the egalitarian point of view. A cursory search of the internet will produce many web-sites devoted to male stripper’s for hen parties, one which I found being ‘Dancing Bear’ which appears to based in Miami. All the claims made about abuse of female strippers and lap dancers by males which obsessed feminists, as opposed to those great feminists seeking mindful egalitarian values, say proves their case, seem somehow to lack credibility and balance when these web-sites show clearly that women enjoy open sensual consenting sex involving an objectified ‘actor’.

If we think about where we would like our society to go and we think compassion should be an important part of it, egalitarian sexuality would seem a wise course, without attempting to prosecute those who do others no harm. I remain wary of those with agendas which attempt to straight jacket sex as they appear to have hidden agendas, much like the religious extremists who dream of converting everyone to their own brands of speculation which they brand as actual fact. My advice is to take the scientific route, acknowledging the weakness in our intellects and being prepared to change if facts prove a previously held truth incorrect.

Where in this site I have written of Tantra as an eastern philosophy, I noted it proposes the notion that the male has the capacity, though perhaps not the nature in extreme competitive environments, for compassion. The two male journalists appeared to exhibit this in their articles in trying to resolve how prostitutes can be protected. Tantra also proposes that wisdom is a feminine characteristic that can be cultivated, though perhaps in nature where the instincts to protect children or to seek mates may be the most natural, it may not hold as strongly. As an example there have certainly been times in my life where decisions based in wisdom would have been better than the decisions I took, but that was usually due to a lack of knowledge either of facts or consequences. One thing that derives from this is my concern that certain Islamic cultures are opposing education of women and this leaves them unable to mature their own wisdom and leaves them victims of unenlightened male ambitions. The women of such societies become as breeding machines and servants essentially, but have to be grateful to men for it. This might indicate that the Taleban males totally reject notions such as Tantra. They can be seen to be neither allowing their women to cultivate wisdom nor show any particular compassion themselves other than to teach that some God someone else says exists, will show you compassion if you die for your religion.

Janice Turner takes a view which I believe Islam finds encouraging, since it identifies non-Islamic males as being incorrect in their behaviour, for which Islam could propose they seek salvation. It often seems that ill-considered feminism does that and may be indirectly responsible for the rise of Islam in the West. As  something to consider, if women must wear clothing which shows only their hands and face to protect them from male lustful eyes, (so easily tempted allegedly), then why do males not have to wear the same in order not to tempt homosexuality? Extreme Islam would say because rule by fear means that men do not become homosexual because they will face execution. Could they not apply the same rule to rape, where so often it seems the women is blamed as much as the male? A stock answer might be that God created man lustful for his wife or wives pleasures, but you have to deny evolution for that and also deny female passions, since the same argument for why men should be covered too, to not tempt women, again applies.