I just came across a very brief piece called DC Has Plan To Cut Back on Transvestite Prostitutes. It’s ostensibly from WJLA, the local ABC affiliate, and there’s very little explanation of anything in the article. It begins by telling of the city’s “new plan to cut back on transvestite prostitutes, and drug abuse around 4th and K Streets [NW]” which is near the INS headquarters. Reportedly they are planning to remove abandoned trailers from the area (“where the prostitutes are sleeping”), and cut back trees (“where they are hiding”). Yes, god forbid homeless people sleep and hide out somewhere. When someone is arrested, they will be put into a rehabilitation program and a victim’s impact statement will be taken “so when the prostitutes are arrested, [judges] will keep them off the street for longer periods of time.”
I’m tempted to be outraged by this, but it’s hard without knowing all the facts. It feels like something I should be mad over, but maybe I’m missing something. I don’t know yet.
Added Neither the Post nor the Times had anything about this, but I did find a more extensive article from WJLA. It’s sensationalized, as TV news tends to be, and I can clearly hear an anchorperson reading this: “They come to the area from as far away as Baltimore: men who dress as women, often working as prostitutes that are driving away long-time residents.” That’s just the opening paragraph, but it’s about that same throughout. Even if the accused are acting inappropriately, the article’s focus is on the fact that they’re transvestites, not on the fact that they’re prostitutes. After briefly mentioning transgender rights advocates, the article finishes with “…a letter-writing campaign to urge judges to keep transvestites in jail longer, once they’re arrested.” That’s terrible reporting: they should have said keeping prostitutes in jail, or something – the way they worded it was completely inappropriate. I’ll probably write to WJLA about it sometime today, if I remember.