Why aren't porn stars arrested for prostitution?

[DeeBye]

I'm not an expert in legal matters, so I don't claim to entirely understand the legal system.

I'm just wondering why porn actors/actresses aren't considered prostitutes, and arrested as such. They have sex in exchange for money. That's the general definition, no? Is there some obscure legal loophole that allows them to stay gainfully employed in their chosen profession?

To take this a step further, why don't prostitutes just have the "John" (that's the correct prostitution jargon for "man what wants sex and has $20" I believe) sign a contract and have it filmed (or not filmed, claiming "rehearsal"). They could just say they were filming (or "rehearsing") porn and then everything becomes nice and legal.

Just how does the legal system differentiate between "prostitute" and "porn star"?

[Rinnhart]

I'm not an expert in legal matters, so I don't claim to entirely understand the legal system.

I'm just wondering why porn actors/actresses aren't considered prostitutes, and arrested as such.  They have sex in exchange for money.  That's the general definition, no?  Is there some obscure legal loophole that allows them to stay gainfully employed in their chosen profession?

To take this a step further, why don't prostitutes just have the "John" (that's the correct prostitution jargon for "man what wants sex and has $20" I believe) sign a contract and have it filmed (or not filmed, claiming "rehearsal").  They could just say they were filming (or "rehearsing") porn and then everything becomes nice and legal.

Just how does the legal system differentiate between "prostitute" and "porn star"?
[right][snapback]64885[/snapback][/right]

The fine line between being paid to have sex and being paid to have sex on camera.

[Jarulf]

Just how does the legal system differentiate between "prostitute" and "porn star"?
[right][snapback]64885[/snapback][/right]

Could it have to do with who makes the payment? In one case it is the other part in the sex act that pays, in the other it is an outside part that pays both (or as it appaears in films, more than both).

I assume you ask about how it works in US though since not all countries have such laws and I must admit I don't know the law so can only speculate. By the way here in Sweden it is the one paying for sex that is doing something illegal, not the prostitute. Both advantages and dissadvantages to such a system of course.

[ShadowHM]

I thought that it was not illegal here to be a prostitute. I thought the 'crimes' were soliciting and keeping a common bawdy house.

Isn't that how 'escort services' manage the issue? Nobody solicits on the street and there is no 'sex central' location.

Edit: I did a quick search on Canadian laws.

We have from December 1985 a street prostitution control measure which prohibits communicating in a public place for the purpose of buying or selling sexual services. We also have section 212(2), a separate offence for persons procuring or living on the avails of a person under 18 years of age; and section 212(4) which prohibits attempting to purchase or purchasing sex from persons under 18. In addition to the communicating law, “bawdy houses” are prohibited (Criminal Code sections 210 and 211), as are procuring and living on the avails of prostitution of another person (section 212). Procuring and living on the avails are indictable offences carrying terms of up to ten years in prison (and in the cases of a person under 18, up to 14 years in prison). A common bawdy house is a place kept, occupied or used by at least one person for the purposes of prostitution or indecent acts. “Keeping” a bawdy house (section 210(1)) is an indictable offence liable to up to two years in prison. Being “found in” or an “inmate” of a bawdy house (Criminal Code sections 210(2) and 211) are summary offences carrying a maximum term of six months in prison and/or a $2000 fine (being a summary offence, the communicating law carries the same maximum penalties).

(Cut'n'pasted from the relevant sections here. )

The net effect is that it is not illegal to be a prostitute, but it is difficult to practice the trade without falling foul of the law. And it neatly exempts (adult) porn stars, doesn't it?

[Occhidiangela]

I'm not an expert in legal matters, so I don't claim to entirely understand the legal system.

I'm just wondering why porn actors/actresses aren't considered prostitutes, and arrested as such.  They have sex in exchange for money.  That's the general definition, no?  Is there some obscure legal loophole that allows them to stay gainfully employed in their chosen profession?

To take this a step further, why don't prostitutes just have the "John" (that's the correct prostitution jargon for "man what wants sex and has $20" I believe) sign a contract and have it filmed (or not filmed, claiming "rehearsal").  They could just say they were filming (or "rehearsing") porn and then everything becomes nice and legal.

Just how does the legal system differentiate between "prostitute" and "porn star"?
[right][snapback]64885[/snapback][/right]

What disappoints me is that prostitution is illegal at all. Strikes me as a victimless crime, when viewed in isolation of the simple transaction for services rendered. (The entire underground network required to support the institution is another matter.)

I am going to go out on a limb here.

1. If all someone wants is sex, a service as it were, pay for it if you must, or convince someone to have it with you for free. Your option. Each is frought with its own upsides and downsides. (No jokes about up and down, please, thank you.) Making this activity above board might reduce the number of "marriages for sex" since "simple sex" would be available . . . although I doubt it. While I wonder if it would do anything to reduce rape by making the "urge" satiable in the same way that a thirst for whiskey is satiable . . . I also doubt that. There is more to that crime than the act.

2. There will always be a demand for sex, go figure. If it is legal and regulated, like alcohol sales, you might reduce the problem of the pimp/organized crime tie in, and as a benefit accrue state and local revenue. There would of course be the necessary bureaucracy, such as the Texas State Commissioner for whoopee (Hey, I will sign up for that job). Also, I'd venture to say that structure would require a health maintenance contract, either via group rates (no group jokes, pleasse) or via the independent contractor format that is so common these days. By law, mandatory like auto insurance (no puns about who has a sweeter ride, nor about wreckless drivers!) which to a certain measure should be able to keep the spread of STD's disease down.

3. Tax revenues accrue from this activity. Some will keep our roads repaired for out other rides (Hey, I said no ride puns!!!!!) And maybe even a skim off the top to fund education. (Hey, I'm "doin' it" for the kids!)

Moral issues: The Prohibition was a law passed to prevent our fellow man from having a drink. It was an abysmal failure. So, why should we have a law that precludes our fellow man / woman from having a roll in the hay? I'd say we take a risk, and let those who choose a more "moral" approach to life take that road, and those who see sex as a hobby or sport, follow their libido into debt. :blink: With the crime taken out, our prisons will hopefully have fewer guests, our cops can concentrate on violent crimes and fraud, and the parole officers won't be handling their case load. Our courts will unclog a bit, and we will never have to see Heidi Fleiss on TV ever again! Man, that alone makes this initiative a good idea!

4. This train of thought is all based on the premise that sex is not solely for child creation, but rather a recreational activity under certain conditions.

Legalize prostitution, and let the gold diggers make their livings on their backs in an unhypocritical way, and the gigilos as well. Who's with me?

Occhi

[[wcip]Angel]

I assume you ask about how it works in US though since not all countries have such laws and I must admit I don't know the law so can only speculate. By the way here in Sweden it is the one paying for sex that is doing something illegal, not the prostitute. Both advantages and dissadvantages to such a system of course.
[right][snapback]64888[/snapback][/right]

Are you sure? Here to the left of Sweden, it's perfectly legal to both sell and buy sex. The "john" and his "date" aren't doing anything illegal when they have at it in a darkened back alley. However, pimping is a crime, and if caught the perpetrator will receive a slap on the wrist and a small fine. (If he doesn't have any money, a small slap on the wrist will do just nicely.)

"I'm all for legalising prostitution" seems a bit redundant now, as I've just stated that it's already legal. Still, it shouldn't just be legalised, but also domesticated. It should become a natural part of nature. An 18-year old lad should be able to tell his mother before leaving the house. "I'll just pop out for a prossie. Be back in a bit." I'm also a fan of Joss Whedon's form of prostitution in his cancelled series "Firefly".. Basically, all prostitutes are refined, well-educated, respected and respectable women who do not simply sell their bodies, but rather a unique experience. They are all members of a guild which offer them benefits and protection. They also choose their own clients. Every "john" (and "jane" for that matter) is admitted into a registry, and each "companion" (as they are called) choose whomever they wish to take on as a "client" from this registry.

But that's sci-fi. :)

[Occhidiangela]

Angel,Jan 10 2005, 09:13 AM]Are you sure? Here to the left of Sweden, it's perfectly legal to both sell and buy sex. The "john" and his "date" aren't doing anything illegal when they have at it in a darkened back alley. However, pimping is a crime, and if caught the perpetrator will receive a slap on the wrist and a small fine. (If he doesn't have any money, a small slap on the wrist will do just nicely.)

"I'm all for legalising prostitution" seems a bit redundant now, as I've just stated that it's already legal. Still, it shouldn't just be legalised, but also domesticated. It should become a natural part of nature. An 18-year old lad should be able to tell his mother before leaving the house. "I'll just pop out for a prossie. Be back in a bit." I'm also a fan of Joss Whedon's form of prostitution in his cancelled series "Firefly".. Basically, all prostitutes are refined, well-educated, respected and respectable women who do not simply sell their bodies, but rather a unique experience. They are all members of a guild which offer them benefits and protection. They also choose their own clients. Every "john" (and "jane" for that matter) is admitted into a registry, and each "companion" (as they are called) choose whomever they wish to take on as a "client" from this registry.

But that's sci-fi. :)
[right][snapback]64910[/snapback][/right]

In the for what it's worth department:

The utopian set up you describe from the TV show / sci fi story harkens back to some of Heinlein's inane sexual fantasy themes in his later books. Due to the vision of the writer and director, the story necessarily removes or omits some of the nastier people-to-people issues that come up when the intimate character of sex inserts its influence. Not everyone approaches, or can approach, sex as a service, as a cash and copulate transaction -- even if on the surface they proclaim to do so. The converse is true, in that some folks claim more than physical appeal when in reality, that is all that is there for them.

I know this sounds cliche, but as I am sure you realize, people do not always remain objective. You can easily imagine some nightmare scenarios wherein the guy "tries to take her away from all this" and she just isn't interested in leaving her profession, which then leads to his obsessive attempts to get her to be his. Or, the lady in question tries to get her John, a well to do or particularly nice fella, to "take her away from all this" when all he wants is some whoopee. And any number of variations on that theme.

You also open Pandorra's box (she's a call girl in LA, I hear) regarding liability issues between married couples where one is charging for services, tort damages filed against call girls for their damage to marriage. Business or no, there is the problem of infidelity if the John dallies, or the Jane has a gigolo habit. Some states still hold infidelity as illegal.

Darned few people can remain objective about physical intimacy. A strong case for monogamy can be made on a very practical basis, due to the powerful connection often made on a personal level during the "no secrets" intimacy that can accompany love making. The usual problems arise when

1) it is not a two way street
2) there is only physical interaction

Such disparity plays out over and over in court, on TV, in movies, in novels . . . in short, this is an element of the sexual experience in toto, "pay for passion" or not. The idealized world views of so many novels and movies, or TV shows, are not possible without a fundamental change in how people think and feel about sex.

In an idealized world, of course, we'd have no neurotics. Where, then, would we get actors and actresses to tell these stories? :lol:

Occhi

Edit: Preview if my friend, need to quit neglecting him

[TaMeOlta]

Ah , sweet Pandora :P I can't wait til the release of her sister .... Hope ...... :lol:

[Mavfin]

And I thought I'd seen all the possible subjects for a Lounge off-topic thread........

Guess I was wrong!! :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :w00t:

Just keep it clean, boys and girls.

(Good question, wot?)

[Rinnhart]

It was my understanding the key reason for the actually passing laws banning prostitution in the states was the spiraling STDs rate among service men. Moral concerns weren't enough in most parts of the country.

[--Pete]

Hi,

It was my understanding the key reason for the actually passing laws banning prostitution in the states was the spiraling STDs rate among service men. Moral concerns weren't enough in most parts of the country.
[right][snapback]64923[/snapback][/right]

That was a rationalization, not a rational. History has shown, again and again, that controlled legal prostitution spreads less STDs than does illegal prostitution. The moralists make a fundemental mistake in thinking that making something illegal will make it go away. The 'it keeps disease down' argument is a fallback position used by the moralists when they find that their bigoted arguments are insufficient. They depend on two principles to get their way: (1) Whatever is said loud enough and often enough is accepted as truth. (2) Most people would rather listen to authority than to do a little digging and a little thinking to establish the real truth.

--Pete

[--Pete]

Hi,

Just a guess:

There is no law against being paid to be photographed/filmed/videotaped/watched while having sex. Such a law would open a can of worms -- consider all the movies (with a rating less than X) and TV shows where a couple is 'shown' having sex. The depiction, of course, varies a lot from case to case, and we all know, 'of course' that they aren't really 'doing it'. But such a law would put the burden of proof on said actors -- not a good situation.

There are few enforced/enforcable laws limiting sexual conduct amongst consenting adults. This, at least, is one of the things that the 'porn' industry (Yeah, like Hugh the Hef) actually achieved. In the nineteenth century, the government looked into your bedroom but not into your wallet. In the twentieth, with the passage of income tax, that was reversed. Wonder which way the twenty-first will go ;)

So, as long as the fiction is maintained by all concerned that the sex was consensual and done 'for the fun of it' and the payment was simply to have it photographed/filmed/videotaped/watched, then no crime is being committed.

At any rate, that's my story till something better comes down the line :)

--Pete

[Jarulf]

Are you sure? Here to the left of Sweden, it's perfectly legal to both sell and buy sex.
[right][snapback]64910[/snapback][/right]

Yes, I am sure. It was passed into law a few years ago.

[Leshy]

Basically, all prostitutes are refined, well-educated, respected and respectable women who do not simply sell their bodies, but rather a unique experience.
[right][snapback]64910[/snapback][/right]

*picks a nit*

Actually, that would only be the Companions. As the episode "Heart of Gold" demonstrates, there are also brothels operated by non-registered prostitutes, who aren't all that revered in comparison to a Companion.

But yes, I do agree on the notion that prostitution should not be illegal in any way, on the basis that no crime is committed, there are no victims, only mature adults consenting to a mutually beneficial transaction.

[Munkay]

I'm also a fan of Joss Whedon's form of prostitution in his cancelled series "Firefly".. [right][snapback]64910[/snapback][/right]

A good friend of mine is a cohost of the childrens TV show Firefly (A PBS show for little children, taped in Minnesota). I've seen tapes of her show, and there is definately no prostitution in it!

Funny how there were two shows in the US with the same name with no legal problems. (Both aired at the same time (2002-2003)).

:P

Cheers,

Munk

[Rinnhart]

Hi,
That was a rationalization, not a rational.  History has shown, again and again, that controlled legal prostitution spreads less STDs than does illegal prostitution.  The moralists make a fundemental mistake in thinking that making something illegal will make it go away.  The 'it keeps disease down' argument is a fallback position used by the moralists when they find that their bigoted arguments are insufficient.  They depend on two principles to get their way: (1) Whatever is said loud enough and often enough is accepted as truth.  (2) Most people would rather listen to authority than to do a little digging and a little thinking to establish the real truth.

--Pete
[right][snapback]64928[/snapback][/right]

I see.

Can you point me towards any supporting literature, Pete?

[--Pete]

Hi,

I see.

Can you point me towards any supporting literature, Pete?
[right][snapback]64956[/snapback][/right]

Nothing in particular, just various articles over the years in papers, news magazines, and other sources. Recently, there was a series on The History Channel called The History of Sex or something similar. Of special interest was the episode on the American Civil War, where the results of two cases, one where the general in charge 'banned' prostitution and another general controlled it. The soldiers under the second general had a vastly lower incidence of STD.

In addition, a google search using 'prostitution legalization std' as individual keywordss gave a fair number of pertinent links. Like this, and this, and this.

This is an example of the kind of results that came about through the decriminalization of prostitution. The conclusions of that article are worth quoting in fill:

"This brief review of prostitution in NSW has revealed many significant changes in the
industry in recent years. The identification of the precise causes of these changes is a
difficult task but some tentative conclusions may be drawn.
Successive NSW Governments have ignored the comprehensive
recommendations of the NSW Parliamentary Select Committee. Instead, a number of
piecemeal reforms have been made to the criminal law. These piecemeal reforms
have, however, had a strong liberal character and when combined with other policy
initiatives, appear to have resulted in a number of positive changes. The NSW
prostitution law is the most liberal in Australia. Brothel keeping per se is not an
offence (except as previously indicated) and soliciting for prostitution is legal outside
residential areas. These liberal laws, combined with structural and prosecutorial anticorruption
measures in the police force, widespread AIDS education, improved
funding for STD services, the establishment of outreach Health Services and funding
for prostitutes organisations appear to have resulted in certain positive changes: a
reduction in the public order problems associated with the industry; a reduction in
police corruption; a decentralisation of the industry; the proliferation of small groups
of independent workers; an increase in the use of condoms and other safer sex
practices; a reduction in the prevalence of STDs amongst prostitutes; and an
awareness amongst prostitutes and the general community of the measures necessary
to assist in HIV prevention.
Many problems, however, remain. Violence, drug abuse, exploitation, poor
health, stress and a multitude of other health and social problems are experienced
daily by prostitutes. HIV prevention measures are not adopted in a certain proportion
of brothels and are less common in other forms of prostitution. The threat of
prosecution still plays a significant role in the industry and many workers are subject
to dangerous working conditions. The extent to which a liberal, laissez-faire approach
to the industry can adequately deal with these problems in the long term is
questionable."

So, in the final analysis, the legalization of prostitution does not remove all the problems. It is not a perfect solution, but is the better of two poor choices.

--Pete

[Minionman]

here's the wikipedia article on how Nevada works it: here.

For people who don't know, prostitution is legal in some places in Nevada, and it has bee nan issue for awhile from what I've read, and the arguments cover some stuff you huys brought up here.

[DeeBye]

So, as long as the fiction is maintained by all concerned that the sex was consensual and done 'for the fun of it' and the payment was simply to have it photographed/filmed/videotaped/watched, then no crime is being committed.

At any rate, that's my story till something better comes down the line :)
[right][snapback]64929[/snapback][/right]

That's my take on it as well, at least until a full-fledged lawyer shows up.

I'm just wondering though why some enterprising prostitute doesn't just walk around with a video camera and a stack of photocopied contracts. Bingo, she's no longer soliciting for prositution; she's advertising her film venture.

I mean seriously, it's kind of stupid that sex-for-money is illegal while sex-for-money-while-on-camera is completely legit.

[whyBish]

Just keep it clean, boys and girls. 
[right][snapback]64916[/snapback][/right]

There once was a man from Nantucket ....

Oops, wrong thread :P