NationStates Jolt Archive


An odd question for our legal types . . .

Redwulf25
27-04-2007, 09:12
What exactly is the legal difference (in America) between being a prostitute (which you can be arrested for in most of America) and being paid to star in a pornographic movie? Both instances involve having sex for money and yet one is legal and the other is not.
Posi
27-04-2007, 09:19
My Uneducated Guess:
Porn: Both participants are paid.
Prostitutes: One participant pays the other.
NERVUN
27-04-2007, 09:28
This: http://writ.news.findlaw.com/colb/20050810.html walks though the difference. Pretty much the boils down to that porn actors are just that, actors, the sex isn't real and the porn itself becomes a play, albet with a very poor plotline and dialog.

Prositution however is "real" sex and illegal.
Ginnoria
27-04-2007, 09:45
Next time I visit the whorehouse, I'll bring along a video camera, and my fear of the law will vanish. Am I right?
Eraeya
27-04-2007, 09:47
What exactly is the legal difference (in America) between being a prostitute (which you can be arrested for in most of America) and being paid to star in a pornographic movie? Both instances involve having sex for money and yet one is legal and the other is not.

Am I really the only one here who wonders why you're asking?
Redwulf25
27-04-2007, 09:49
Am I really the only one here who wonders why you're asking?

Curiosity. I wonder why a porn star has the right to use their body as they see fit and a prostitute does not. Just file it under weird questions that occur to weird people.
Eraeya
27-04-2007, 09:58
Curiosity. I wonder why a porn star has the right to use their body as they see fit and a prostitute does not. Just file it under weird questions that occur to weird people.

Oki :p
Zagat
27-04-2007, 10:08
Next time I visit the whorehouse, I'll bring along a video camera, and my fear of the law will vanish. Am I right?
No.
Jello Biafra
27-04-2007, 10:33
Next time I visit the whorehouse, I'll bring along a video camera, and my fear of the law will vanish. Am I right?Only if you distribute the film.
Damor
27-04-2007, 11:19
Next time I visit the whorehouse, I'll bring along a video camera, and my fear of the law will vanish. Am I right?Just bring someone to watch and you can call it a performance play.
I suppose you could always get away with calling it a rehearsel, as long as you have a flimsy script to work with. Although, I suppose 'improv' works too.
"No officer, we weren't having real sex, it was an improv performance rehearsel."
Pompous world
27-04-2007, 11:26
why should prostitution be illegal? I just dont get it
Compulsive Depression
27-04-2007, 12:28
why should prostitution be illegal? I just dont get it

Competition with marriage...
Bubabalu
27-04-2007, 13:05
Because porn stars is seen by the law as legal employment, thus taxable. Whereas prostitution is non-taxable, thus the government declares it illegal. Unless you go to the state of Nevada, where prostitution is lega.

Vic
Gift-of-god
27-04-2007, 14:03
From a more socio-cultural point of view, it is also a holdover from when women were considered as property. In making a porn film, the producer and distributor make the money. The woman is merely an employee. In prostitution, the woman herself is making the money, i.e. she is a self employed business person. But our patriarchical culture(s) imply that it is wrong for a woman to make money off sex, while it is allright for a man to make money off women's sexuality.

I'm sure Bottle could provide a better rant to explain this though.

Or my favourite columnist:
http://www.montrealmirror.com/2005/032405/sasha.html
Khadgar
27-04-2007, 15:35
Competition with marriage...

There's no competition, prostitutes state the price up front and always put out.
Deus Malum
27-04-2007, 15:37
Curiosity. I wonder why a porn star has the right to use their body as they see fit and a prostitute does not. Just file it under weird questions that occur to weird people.

Is Kbrook aware of your "curiosity" :D
Drunk commies deleted
27-04-2007, 15:38
Do porn actors need a SAG card? If not you could open a legal whorehouse just by filming all the action and claiming that it's porn, not prostitution.
Arthais101
27-04-2007, 15:39
The short short answer is:

pornography (as long as it contains some value) is a form of expression and communication. As such it's protected under the first amendment. As such it's a whole lot harder to get rid of it.

See: The Miller Test (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test)
Neesika
27-04-2007, 15:39
I can only speak for Canada here...but prostitution isn't illegal per se. Communicating for the purposes of prostitution is. Keeping a 'bawdy house' is. But selling sex? Not illegal. No idea how it is in the US.
Neesika
27-04-2007, 15:42
The short short answer is:

pornography (as long as it contains some value) is a form of expression and communication. As such it's protected under the first amendment. As such it's a whole lot harder to get rid of it.

See: The Miller Test (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test)

Interesting...

Yes, we have a section 2(b) Charter right similar to the first amendment, subject to s.1 (reasonably limits in a free and democratic society) that ban certain forms of pornographic 'expression' (ie. kiddie porn). But is prostitution actually ILLEGAL in the US?

Edit: ah, I see it is for the most part, though some states have similar provisions as Canada... 'all the stuff surrounding prostitution is illegal, but not the act itself'.
Arthais101
27-04-2007, 15:50
Interesting...

Yes, we have a section 2(b) Charter right similar to the first amendment, subject to s.1 (reasonably limits in a free and democratic society) that ban certain forms of pornographic 'expression' (ie. kiddie porn). But is prostitution actually ILLEGAL in the US?

It is an intrastate activity that doesn't, theoretically, fit in with any constitutional framework, so it is a state issue.

In nevada, for instance, it's perfectly legal.
Neesika
27-04-2007, 16:03
Ha, it's a provincial issue here because it falls under the enumerated provincial head of power dealing with 'property and civil rights'...which includes jurisdiction over professional trades, labour relations and consumer protection :D
CthulhuFhtagn
27-04-2007, 21:11
What exactly is the legal difference (in America) between being a prostitute (which you can be arrested for in most of America) and being paid to star in a pornographic movie? Both instances involve having sex for money and yet one is legal and the other is not.

IIRC, it's because the person paying is not the person receiving the sex. But, knowing as little as I do about law, I'm probably wrong. I'm almost certain it's been used as a justification, though.
Kitsune Kasai
27-04-2007, 22:09
Really, they should just legalize prostitution and have it be like it is in the Firefly 'verse with regulations and all that that protect the...ah...Companions.
Llewdor
27-04-2007, 22:42
Keeping a 'bawdy house' is.
For this reason I've always found it amusing that the city of Calgary licenses escort services. And because they're licensed they somehow get away with fairly graphic adds in the yellow pages.
Dakini
27-04-2007, 23:41
I think it's similar to boxing...

If you pay someone to go fight someone else without paying the other person, that's not legal. If you pay two people to fight each other, that's fine.
Zagat
28-04-2007, 00:29
Untill a recent law change, where I live it was legal to prostitute yourself or to frequent a prostitute, it was legal to offer someone money for sex, but it was illegal to offer someone sex for money.
Ashmoria
28-04-2007, 00:51
i think that the problem is that you are trying to co-mingle 2 different legal streams. prostitution and pornography are only similar in that they (at this time) involve fucking for money. they exist in 2 totally different legal realms though.

prostitution has "always" been illegal. its always been the same function--paying for sex. it has a long term justification for it being illegal, including such things as spread of disease, breaking up of families, exploitation of women and children, immorality, among others. many of those justifications seem thin today with our liberal sexual attitudes but the laws linger because no politician wants to be on the side of immorality.

porn is different. it started out as drawings and stories of naked bodies and sexual acts. no real fucking occurred. it was all "art". over the course of time the supreme court decided that such artistic representations were protected by the constitution. some limited amount of regulation is allowed but its generally OK. today, we have actual sex acts put onto film. women and men are paid for the sex they perform on camera. (although they are paid as actors not as prostitutes). however, since its already legal AND our sexual mores have changed it stays legal. only the most prudish of lawmakers try to ban porn and no politician needs to worry about the ramifications of making it legal--it already is.
German Nightmare
28-04-2007, 00:53
I think it's similar to boxing...

If you pay someone to go fight someone else without paying the other person, that's not legal. If you pay two people to fight each other, that's fine.
I've seen chicks fight in a porn movie. :D Now, how does that work, then? :p
NERVUN
28-04-2007, 02:10
In nevada, for instance, it's perfectly legal.
Not quite. Prostitution is legal within certain counties, but not Las Vegas, Reno, or Carson City. And the prostitute has to be in a licensed and regulated brothel. It's not a matter of a free for all.
Marrakech II
28-04-2007, 03:35
There's no competition, prostitutes state the price up front and always put out.

The price is half of everything and anyone with a brain knows that after awhile you just don't get as much as before.