Though most recognizable for the role of Bella Swan in the ridiculously popular Twilight movies, it was another role which motivated red hot starlet Kristen Stewart toward philanthropy.
…the 20-year-old reveals her secret similarity to Charlie Sheen: she’s going to spend a fortune on hookers this year.
After researching teen sex workers for her role in Welcome To The Rileys, she was inspired to earmark a portion of her Twilight millions to establish a network of halfway houses that would help residents go straight. “That would be amazing,” she says. “Right now it’s the thing I feel most connected to.”
Stewart reveals her intent in the cover story of the February issue of Vogue. The other tidbit from the interview which entertainment blogs are latching onto is Stewart’s bemoaning a lack of privacy. The crux of the coverage is that someone who has met with so much success, and earned such a fortune, ought not complain about being recognized at the mall.
Be that as it may, there is a more instructive point to take from the Stewart interview. It is because of her success, and resulting fortune, that she has the opportunity to make a more meaningful contribution to society. Stewart’s plan is indicative of how the rich disproportionately serve others.
Stewart’s idea is in the same vein as my own philanthropic fantasy. Were I a millionaire, I would be very interested in starting or contributing to an organization that gave people a true hand-up, as opposed to a hand-out. Unfortunately, and with all due respect to NRB managing editor David Swindle and the rest of the management at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, the fruits of my labor do not place me in a position to fulfill such aspirations. Were Stewart limited to my income, which is to say an average one, she would not be able to fulfill her higher aspirations either.
In our consideration of Stewart’s potential contributions, let us not overlook the value of investment. Even if Stewart didn’t have a philanthropic bone in her body, even if she was a cold-hearted capitalist whose only interest was growing her own wealth, the activities she would engage in to do so would contribute to society just as well. It’s Economics 101. Investment enables production, which grows wealth and creates jobs.
In fact, Stewart would be well advised to combine investment with her philanthropy. After all, anyone she helps rehabilitate will need a job in order to survive and thrive. They will need someone to hire them. Why not Stewart? If she can establish a venture alongside her chain of halfway homes, there will be a place for her reformed ladies to go and make something of themselves. The assurance of an employer willing to overlook a shady past could provide hope which would motivate stronger efforts to reform.
That’s the bottom line. No amount of financial or emotional investment on Stewart’s part is going to cause teen prostitutes to reform. The goal is to enable and encourage action which such troubled girls must take of their own accord. If Stewart goes into the effort with any other expectation, she will surely receive an object lesson in human nature. That same nature explains why there will always be income disparities in a free society, and why that’s okay.