Sex workers

[Noir]

Simple question is simple, based on the general point that sex workers fall into two main categories, prostitutes and pornstars - How has it come to be that one is legal line of work, when the other is not?

[Dilloduck]

STDs

[Noir]

STDs

What of them? That is no basis for a legal divide.

[fj1200]

... pornstars...

They are actOrs and deserve their due.
http://images.zap2it.com/images/tv-EP00136771/inside-the-actors-studio-8.jpg

[Dilloduck]

What of them? That is no basis for a legal divide.

Since when did laws need a legal basis? You gotta admit it's one strike against prostitutes.

[Noir]

Since when did laws need a legal basis? You gotta admit it's one strike against prostitutes.

Its the only differenal you provided, and presumably there is enough of a difference for there to be a legal basis for different treatment
and if someone wants to 'run the risk' why should they be criminalised for it?

[fj1200]

The reason that adult film performers are not “prostitutes,” and why paying people to perform in erotica is legal is discussed in the seminal adult-entertainment case, People v. Freeman (http://www.prostitutionprocon.org/pdf/PeoplevFreeman.pdf),
46 Cal. 3d 419 (1988).
http://randazza.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/why-is-prostitution-illegal-but-pornography-is-not/

Google is your friend.

[Noir]

That case has a loophole as wide as any i've seen -
The Court noted that for an act to constitute prostitution, “the genitals, buttocks, or female breast, of either the prostitute or the customer must come in contact with some part of the body of the other for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification of the customer or of the prostitute.” Id (citing People v. Hill (1980) 103 Cal.App.3d 525, at 534-535). Since the payment of the acting fees was the only payment, there was no evidence that any payment was made for the purpose of sexual gratification."

So if i bought my friend a prostitute who did nothing to me, i am the consumer, but i am not being sexually gratified, its legal for them to have sex by my coin?

[fj1200]

You miss the point. Besides, it would be gratifying.

[Noir]

You miss the point.

Howso? The person who is paying is the consumer, the person receiving the payment is the prostitute, and the person who has sex with the prostitute is otherwise unconnected. Since the genitals, buttocks, or female breast, of either the prostitute or the customer never come into contact, where's the problem?

[Dilloduck]

Howso? The person who is paying is the consumer, the person receiving the payment is the prostitute, and the person who has sex with the prostitute is otherwise unconnected. Since the genitals, buttocks, or female breast, of either the prostitute or the customer never come into contact, where's the problem?

I'm pretty sure you can't buy pussy for your buddy but maybe a lawyer can help you out if you can afford it.

[fj1200]

Howso? The person who is paying is the consumer, the person receiving the payment is the prostitute, and the person who has sex with the prostitute is otherwise unconnected. Since the genitals, buttocks, or female breast, of either the prostitute or the customer never come into contact, where's the problem?

It's clearly laid out, "payment was made for the purpose of sexual gratification." It just wasn't your gratification. Unless you're buying hookers to display random acts of kindness on complete strangers.

[Noir]

I'm pretty sure you can't buy pussy for your buddy but maybe a lawyer can help you out if you can afford it.

Going by the wording of that ruling you can. The porn actors/ress' were not considered prostitutes because they did not sexually gratify (or come into bodily contact with) the consumer.

[Noir]

It's clearly laid out, "payment was made for the purpose of sexual gratification." It just wasn't your gratification. Unless you're buying hookers to display random acts of kindness on complete strangers.

and how does that not happen in porn movies? The actors and actress' are paid to gratify each other. The difference (as point out in the text i quoted) is that the recipient of the gratification/bodily contact is not the same person who is paying for it, a loophole wife enough you could drive a bus full of prostitutes through.

[Dilloduck]

and how does that not happen in porn movies? The actors and actress' are paid to gratify each other. The difference (as point out in the text i quoted) is that the recipient of the gratification/bodily contact is not the same person who is paying for it, a loophole wife enough you could drive a bus full of prostitutes through.

Best typo evah

[fj1200]

and how does that not happen in porn movies? The actors and actress' are paid to gratify each other. The difference (as point out in the text i quoted) is that the recipient of the gratification/bodily contact is not the same person who is paying for it, a loophole wife enough you could drive a bus full of prostitutes through.

You might could continue reading.

[Noir]

You might could continue reading.

The more i read of that source the more it reinforces what i'm saying.

From the comments section
Question -
So, if porn is legal, can I just have a still camera in the room with a prostitute and that be considered me paying her a modeling fee for my artistic expression. Couldn’t that be a loophole that would turn “prostitution” into “production”? If a model release form were signed, isn’t pretty much anything we do in front of a camera (turned on or not) legal?


Answer
<cite class="fn" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-size: 1.1em; ">
Dr. Gonzalez</cite> says:

Not exactly, here’s why:
It is not illegal for the director/cameraman to pay both actors to have sex. It is all legal as long as the money is not coming from the person receiving or performing sexual acts between each other.So, I want to have sex with a prostitute, but how can i do it legally? First you have to go through all the model release forms, make sure she’s over 18 etc.. to look even more professional you could have a friend who has small photography business, Here is the trick, you have to hire him or someone who wont snatch you out to hire you to act or perform a sexual scene with a woman.

DONE! This is the only way you can legally have sex with prostitutes PERIOD! oh and by all means have her tested for STD’s and keep the records for gods sake!


So do you have anything specific to quote (other than half a sentence you quoted earlier), which you think i should be reading?

[taft2012]

The crime is solicitation.

You solicited sexual acts. You are a criminal.

[Noir]

The crime is solicitation.

You solicited sexual acts. You are a criminal.

And a porn director does not solicite? (Edit - looking it up, no he isn't, but then neither would I..)

looking into the definition of soliciting - requesting that someone does something unlawful.
Having sex is not illegal.
Someone being paid to be sexually gratified is illegal.
Someone sexually gratifying someone who has not paid (as per my example) is not illegal, therefore not solicitation.

[fj1200]

So do you have anything specific to quote (other than half a sentence you quoted earlier), which you think i should be reading?

The whole thing, but feel free to let me know how your legal theory works in practice.

[revelarts]

your right Noir, they both should be illegal.

[Noir]

your right Noir, they both should be illegal.


Well they should both be legal or illegal, why would you say illegal?

[Noir]

The whole thing, but feel free to let me know how your legal theory works in practice.

Everything i've quoted from the source says the same thing, the judges rules that the 'illegal act' was payment for gratification. Payment without gratification, and gratification without payment are not illegal.

[mundame]

The reason that adult film performers are not “prostitutes,” and why paying people to perform in erotica is legal is discussed in the seminal adult-entertainment case,

Good gracious, what a pun. Intended, I hope.

[revelarts]

Well they should both be legal or illegal, why would you say illegal?

Both are exploitative of women personally and collectively.
Both feed other crimes against women and children.
Both promote unfaithfulness in marriage and the home, the foundation of a solid society.
Both increase the prevalance of STDs in the consumers and general population.

and just as an aside Both are ultimately unfulfilling so they are bad products and false advertising.

And finally God don't like his girls to be prostitutes or paid performance whores.

[Trigg]

It's a state thing, hookers are legal in Nevada outside the city limits.

Honestly Noir, I don't see the difference either. I say make it legal and tax them. Make them get a permit so they come in for testing.

I've never understood why cops waste time on sting operations. It's too much to ask that cops haul in illegals, but a sting operation involving a "hooker" and 5-6 other cops hiding in rooms and following people around somehow isn't a waste of time???????


The only difference I see as far as the law is concerned is porn stars are being paid to act, they are not being paid specifically for the sex they perform.

[Trigg]

Both are exploitative of women personally and collectively.
Both feed other crimes against women and children.
Both promote unfaithfulness in marriage and the home, the foundation of a solid society.
Both increase the prevalance of STDs in the consumers and general population.

and just as an aside Both are ultimately unfulfilling so they are bad products and false advertising.

And finally God don't like his girls to be prostitutes or paid performance whores.

it's called the oldest profession for a reason, it will always be around.

[revelarts]

it's called the oldest profession for a reason, it will always be around.

Murder was around before prostitution but we don't legalize it because it's and old tradition.

[Trigg]

Murder was around before prostitution but we don't legalize it because it's and old tradition.


apples and oranges :lame2:

[Noir]

Both are exploitative of women personally and collectively.
Both feed other crimes against women and children.
Both promote unfaithfulness in marriage and the home, the foundation of a solid society.
Both increase the prevalance of STDs in the consumers and general population.

and just as an aside Both are ultimately unfulfilling so they are bad products and false advertising.

And finally God don't like his girls to be prostitutes or paid performance whores.

Exploitive - Only if you consider it so, if a woman feels empowered by it, then who are you to say she is exploited. Also interesting that you didn't include men in this statement.
Feeding Crimes - Is a logic loop, it feeds crimes if its illegal, and its illegal because it feeds crimes...
Unfaithfulness - There is no strength in not committing an act you have no ability to do, the strength is in not doing what you can. Also using that logic you would also want alcohol made illegal (drunks are more likey to be unfaithful etc)
STDs/STIs using proper protection you're no more as likey to get an illness than you would from someone you had not paid for sex for.

They may be unfulfilling to you, but then so may be playing golf. And the 'false advertising' in porn is no more false advertising than the last Hollywood war movie you saw.

Finally this is the same God (if he does indeed exist) that told you not to pass judgement?

[revelarts]

apples and oranges :lame2:

"prostitution is the old profession..." "...it will always be around"

the only Point in your comment is the AGE of and continuance the activity.

Murder is older and "will always be around"


Apples and apples

[Trigg]

"prostitution is the old profession..." "...it will always be around"

the only Point in your comment is the AGE of and continuance the activity.

Murder is older and "will always be around"


Apples and apples


compairing prostitution and murder? Give me a break :laugh:

[Gaffer]

"prostitution is the old profession..." "...it will always be around"

the only Point in your comment is the AGE of and continuance the activity.

Murder is older and "will always be around"


Apples and apples

How do you know prostitution wasn't around before murder?

[revelarts]

compairing prostitution and murder? Give me a break :laugh:
As crimes go they are on a different scale but you made your point turn on AGE and continuance not the activity itself.
I guess i could say Lying has been around longer if murder is to harsh for you to take seriously.





How do you know prostitution wasn't around before murder?

Well If your of the belief that we came from monkeys then it's safe to assume that our earliest ancestors were killing each other ....survival of the fittist and all... long before the use of money came into play.

If you believe that God made us then the Bible says the 1st sins of man where disobedience to God's 1 Command, then a few years later murder. After that all the other stuff falls in there.

[aboutime]

Kind of ironic, and strange how THIS THREAD'S TOPIC...just popped up the day after BARNEY FRANK announced his marriage to either his Husband, or Wife over the weekend.

And Barney's past, having been accused of a Brothel under his own roof just seems so TIMELY and connected to this thread too!

[revelarts]

Exploitive - Only if you consider it so, if a woman feels empowered by it, then who are you to say she is exploited.
her pimp told me.



Also interesting that you didn't include men in this statement.
more women than men in the game on that side but yes they should be included.



Feeding Crimes - Is a logic loop, it feeds crimes if its illegal, and its illegal because it feeds crimes...
just one point of those i mentioned. But laundering money from stolen goods feeds crime as well. but selling guns to known murderers can make you an accessory to the crime. Its not a logic loop.



Unfaithfulness - There is no strength in not committing an act you have no ability to do, the strength is in not doing what you can. Also using that logic you would also want alcohol made illegal (drunks are more likey to be unfaithful etc)
there a direct action in prostitution that makes party an adulterer. and Adulter is is a legal grounds for divorce. Alchol may be an aid but it's several steps back and can't be held legally libel but can, as YOU point out, be part of the cause.



STDs/STIs using proper protection you're no more as likey to get an illness than you would from someone you had not paid for sex for.
If you and your partner are faithful you have ZERO chance.



They may be unfulfilling to you, but then so may be playing golf. And the 'false advertising' in porn is no more false advertising than the last Hollywood war movie you saw.
i said ultimately.
as for false advertising, well the general Hollywood flick doesn't promise quite as much as porn movie.



Finally this is the same God (if he does indeed exist) that told you not to pass judgement?
for a better understanding of those verse Abby has done a good job here.
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?8992-Top-Ten-Misused-Scripture-Quotes&p=157705#post157705

And the same Jesus who you quote told a woman caught in the act of adultery to "go, and sin no more."

[Gaffer]

As crimes go they are on a different scale but you made your point turn on AGE and continuance not the activity itself.
I guess i could say Lying has been around longer if murder is to harsh for you to take seriously.






Well If your of the belief that we came from monkeys then it's safe to assume that our earliest ancestors were killing each other ....survival of the fittist and all... long before the use of money came into play.

If you believe that God made us then the Bible says the 1st sins of man where disobedience to God's 1 Command, then a few years later murder. After that all the other stuff falls in there.

Prostitution, while looked down on, was not a sin. And before money trade was the currency. In some places it has been the women's only means of survival. Up until recent history it was as acceptable as any trade.

I'm of the man evolved from apes belief.

[fj1200]

Kind of ironic, and strange how THIS THREAD'S TOPIC...just popped up the day after BARNEY FRANK announced his marriage to either his Husband, or Wife over the weekend.

And Barney's past, having been accused of a Brothel under his own roof just seems so TIMELY and connected to this thread too!

:facepalm99:

[fj1200]

"prostitution is the old profession..." "...it will always be around"

the only Point in your comment is the AGE of and continuance the activity.

Murder is older and "will always be around"


Apples and apples

Prostitution doesn't deny anyone their natural rights. Apples and bowling balls. :poke:

[fj1200]

Everything i've quoted from the source says the same thing, the judges rules that the 'illegal act' was payment for gratification. Payment without gratification, and gratification without payment are not illegal.

Everything you've cherry picked.


That case has a loophole as wide as any i've seen -

The Court noted that for an act to constitute prostitution, “the genitals, buttocks, or female breast, of either the prostitute or the customer must come in contact with some part of the body of the other for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification of the customer or of the prostitute.” Id (citing People v. Hill (1980) 103 Cal.App.3d 525, at 534-535). Since the payment of the acting fees was the only payment, there was no evidence that any payment was made for the purpose of sexual gratification."
So if i bought my friend a prostitute who did nothing to me, i am the consumer, but i am not being sexually gratified, its legal for them to have sex by my coin?

The salient part of your quote above:

...
Since the payment of the acting fees was the only payment, there was no evidence that any payment was made for the purpose of sexual gratification.

[ConHog]

Everything you've cherry picked.



The salient part of your quote above:

Irrelevant anyway since the crime most are charged with is solicitation of a prostitute (trying to hire a hooker) no sex need take place. And yes noir hiring a whore for your mate is still illegal.