Why is it okay for Pornstars to get paid for having sex but its not okay for prostitutes? Just something I've always wondered.
Why is it okay for Pornstars to get paid for having sex but its not okay for prostitutes? Just something I've always wondered.
♥Dirty♥ ♥Nerdy♥ ♥Curvy♥
XoXo Nikki
Eh, it's sort of the classic debate. Most likely because the precedent has been set before. For example, it's illegal to go out and fight someone, that would be considered assault, but you get a ring together, and an audience, and you've got boxing, or MMA as the case may be. It's probably got a lot to do with a mix of old societal values and stigmas with current values and stigmas.
I think because pornography can be seen as a form of entertainment.
Now, you could argue that visiting a prostitue is a form of personal entertainment. But the element of seediness that comes with prostitution is always going to make it a taboo.
Comrade Stalin didn't kill enough people.
The legal difference used to be about whether or not the man cums inside the woman. That's why when porn started off the man always had to pull out before cumming...which is why cumming in the girls face became so standard.
Hookers on the other hand let you cum inside them which from a puritanical point of view (which is how we're governed) is more damning and therefore sinful to get paid for.
Granted...the line has been blurred in recent years and we now get creampie action in porn but I believe that was always what legally seperated porn from prostitution.
Babe I think there is already a thread going about this topic.Originally Posted by hissexslave
http://board.freeones.com/showthread...stitute&page=2
You can please some of the people all of the time, All of the people some of the time, But not all of the people all of the time.
***Warning: can of worms about to be opened***
In my mind, there's no difference between porn stars and prostitutes.
Lawmakers, the church, church and state in bed together even though they're supposed to be seperate...
It's funny how people still believe that applies even though it does not appear in any single legal document produced by the Founding Fathers.
Its all bullshit!
ive always thought the same. what is the difference ??
I think it depends on who you ask... IMHO prostitutes deserve as much respect as pornstars, who in turn deserve as much respect as actors, singers, writers, etc...
^This.
Short & sweet... and on the money (pardon the pun). Give that man some rep, won't ya please?!
What two (or more) consenting adults do with each other behind closed doors (or in front of a camera) is no ones business but their own.
I think that when what you do behind closed doors is distributed to the public a different set of rules apply.
But porn (generally speaking) is legal. In most states, prostitution (behind closed doors or not) is illegal. Do you see the paradox?I think that when what you do behind closed doors is distributed to the public a different set of rules apply.
The difference is porn has been deemed by the courts as an artistic expression and found under that philosophy to be protected speech.
Not that I think prostitution should be illegal,it shouldn't.Just pointing out how one is legal and one isn't.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
- George Orwell
But, of course, the seediness is a result of the act being taboo, so it becomes a circular argument. If it weren't taboo, then it could be as aboveboard and presentable as any business.
It's up to each state. Currently the only states where prostitution is legal are Nevada and R.I., and even in those states it is legal only under certain conditions. I think your question though is a valid one, and points to the hypocritical nature of a legal system where booze is legal but pot isn't, and it's legal to get paid for sex if it's being filmed.
That is more or less whether prostitution should be legal my question is more or less why is prostitution NOT legal and porn IS...
♥Dirty♥ ♥Nerdy♥ ♥Curvy♥
XoXo Nikki
There's no difference at all between prostitutes and porn stars. Porn stars are nothing more than video prostitutes. Porn stars who provide escorting services [] use the medium for more exposure to charge more $$$ when trolling for customers or vice versa. They all will fuck for money. . . but at what price?
Signature is too big. Maximum allowed size is 575x100 pixels.
It would be much better in the long run if it were legalised. Better care put towards the workers with better protection against violent pimps and customers. Along with access to proper medical care which would probably cut down on the spread of disease. And the government could tax it so everyones happy.
As long as it is illegal, it's going to have that seedy element to it.
Comrade Stalin didn't kill enough people.
I always asked myself that i mean they not only have sex for money but let people sell it too.That seems to be worse..I guess theres a legal loophole with them saying its acting and a movie.ISnt america great.
Whether it's true or not, I'm not sure. But someone claiming to be an attorney wrote on here that it is not legal (in California?) for the person performing in the sex scene to be the same person who pays the performers.
I understand where you're coming from, and that you're just explaining the legal basis. But it makes no sense. If I paint or take photos (non nude, let's say), I can be in the picture or the photo. Woody Allen and Spike Lee act in all their movies (though I wish they wouldn't). I'm not aware of any prohibition which prevents them from paying the actors out of their own pockets at the end of each day. So if the law recognizes porn as art, why are there special prohibitions on how the talent is paid (if that person knew what he was talking about)?
I'm not pro prostitution, but on most social issues I have a libertarian view: what consenting people do is their own business. Same with pot. I don't smoke it. And I don't allow it in my house if I have a party. But those are my rules for my property. If someone wants to smoke a dried plant that they grew in their back yard, what do I care... and why should the government care? If a girl and a guy agree that she'll sleep with him if he gives her $X, why should the government be involved in that? What if she goes out with him and he buys her a $200 bracelet or a $200 dinner? What about the 20 something year old girl dating or married to the 50-60 something year old wealthy man? Aren't those girls (legally) hookers? Shouldn't the government also be looking into that... especially when the guy leaves his wife of 20+ years for this trophy wife/fling? I mean, at least when it's "dating", the relationship is based totally on a financial arrangement, right?
I'm not throwing these questions at you. But to me, it makes no sense, except to the morality police, Moral Majority types. And IMO, Senator John Ensign is the biggest hypocrite in the U.S. right now. That bible thumper went after other people on moral issues, while he had a (taxpayer) funded mistress on his staff - she was (by definition) a hooker, right? When she stopped sleeping with him, he stopped paying her (and her whole flippin' family). If he'd paid her with his own money, like Spitzer (supposedly) did, that's his business, IMO. But I still don't understand the logic behind how porn is viewed versus how prostitution is viewed in the U.S.
That's so true.There's no difference at all between prostitutes and porn stars. Porn stars are nothing more than video prostitutes. Porn stars who provide escorting services [
Some pornstars do escort, work at strip clubs etc.
They are basically the same. If you cant see otherwise you need glasses.
The difference that I see is that in the case of a prostitute she is getting paid by the customer for sexual favors. In the case of a pornstar both her and her partner are getting paid by a third party for sexual performance.
Ash nazg durbatulūk,
Ash nazg gimbatul.
Ash nazg thrakatulūk,
Agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
- Inscription on the One Ring
Its not always a 3rd party.Max Hardcore appeared in his own productions and I don't think that he was prosecuted for that.Same can be said for Rodney Moore ,he owns his production company and usually is the male performer in his movies as well.I'm telling yas porn is art lol and is protected by the 1st amendment,thats what courts have said.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
- George Orwell
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
