close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Porn VS prostitution

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Batesmotel, Feb 5, 2010.

  1. Batesmotel

    Batesmotel

    Messages:
    17,201
    Likes Received:
    6,061
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Utah
    If one person is paid to have sex with another that is prostitution and a crime in most places. So why is it when two people are paid to have sex with each other and it is filmed for distribution as porn it is not also prostitution?

    Not wanting to argue the moral or ethical grounds of either but it seems that the camera makes one OK and not the other in the eyes of the law. A man has sex with a woman for money and it is a crime but if someone films it in the name of "Art" or "Free Speech" it is OK?
     
  2. geronimo509

    geronimo509

    Messages:
    701
    Likes Received:
    17
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2009
    Location:
    DFW
    Good question.

    IBTL
     

  3. Nestor

    Nestor Lean & Mean

    Messages:
    13,826
    Likes Received:
    6,164
    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2003
    Location:
    Canada
    Once the taxes are involved it's called a business.
    Not a big difference though.
     
  4. glock19_fan

    glock19_fan ... --- ...

    Messages:
    3,383
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Location:
    USA
    I'm thinking the major difference is in porn both parties are willing participants, and both get compensated for their involvement.

    With prostitution, it's often viewed that the prostitutes sometimes can be unwilling participants, forced to do it just to survive, or because they were kidnapped unwillingly and put into the trade (mostly outside of the US).
     
  5. JoeCitizen

    JoeCitizen

    Messages:
    1,601
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    That deserves a big "TRUE DAT"!
     
  6. Batesmotel

    Batesmotel

    Messages:
    17,201
    Likes Received:
    6,061
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Utah
    Porn industry is the same way once the girls get involved in drugs. They are controlled by producers instead of pimps and keeping many dependent on drugs is often the key to control. Also if a girl or guy starts in porn and wants to back out they are threatened by having films delivered to family and friends back home so they keep filming until they are no longer of use to the industry.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2010
  7. czsmithGT

    czsmithGT

    Messages:
    13,974
    Likes Received:
    5,212
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2004
    Filming porn is only legal in a few places in the US- California and possibly one other state. Prostitution is only legal in certain places in Nevada. So for the USA, your premise is not correct- both prostitution and filming porn are both only legal in a very limited range of locations.
     
  8. Zatec

    Zatec

    Messages:
    331
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2009
    Location:
    NY
    George Carlin said "prostitution laws are wrong, I mean really why can't you sell something that is perfectly legal to give away free?"

    Any way, would the one woman in the US and the other in New Zealand fall under the same idea of prostitution for selling their virginities? After it is sex in exchange for money.

    Just some observations....
     
  9. JASV.17

    JASV.17 Prime Example

    Messages:
    4,913
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    I'm no porn expert, but I'd say this was the case "back in the day". I think the times have probably changed.
     
  10. ithaca_deerslayer

    ithaca_deerslayer

    Messages:
    24,477
    Likes Received:
    12,790
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2000
    Location:
    Upstate NY, USA
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test


    The Miller test is the United States Supreme Court's test for determining whether speech or expression can be labeled obscene, in which case it is not protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and can be prohibited.

    The Miller test was developed in the 1973 case Miller v. California.[1] It has three parts:

    Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
    Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions[2] specifically defined by applicable state law,
    Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. (This is also known as the (S)LAPS test- [Serious] Literary, Artistic, Political, Scientific.)
    The work is considered obscene only if all three conditions are satisfied.

    The first two prongs of the Miller test are held to the standards of the community, and the last prong is held to what is reasonable to a person of the United States as a whole. The national reasonable person standard of the third prong acts as a check on the community standard of the first two prongs, allowing protection for works that in a certain community might be considered obscene but on a national level might have redeeming value.

    For legal scholars, several issues are important. One is that the test allows for community standards rather than a national standard. What offends the average person in Jackson, Mississippi, may differ from what offends the average person in New York City. The relevant community, however, is not defined.

    Another important issue is that Miller asks for an interpretation of what the "average" person finds offensive, rather than what the more sensitive persons in the community are offended by, as obscenity was defined by the previous test, the Hicklin test, stemming from the English precedent.

    In practice, pornography showing genitalia and sexual acts is not ipso facto obscene according to the Miller test. For instance, in 2000 a jury in Provo, Utah, took only a few minutes to clear Larry Peterman, owner of a Movie Buffs video store, in Utah County, Utah, a region which had often boasted of being one of the most conservative areas in the US. Researchers had shown that guests at the local Marriott Hotel were disproportionately large consumers of pay-per-view pornographic material, accessing far more material than the store was distributing.
     
  11. DaGroaner

    DaGroaner Anti-Socialist

    Messages:
    20,343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2004
    Location:
    Firmly planted under Statist skin
    Johns should bring cameras along and claim the porn exemption. :)
     
  12. DrMaxit

    DrMaxit Dirtbag Airman

    Messages:
    5,229
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Location:
    Oahu HI
    One is a service and one is a job. The guy on camera isn't giving the girl money to have sex, the company is paying them both.
     
  13. LongGoneDays

    LongGoneDays Misanthropical

    Messages:
    9,249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Location:
    Louisiana
    Sex is like deer meat. You eat what you shoot but don't shoot what you eat or something rather another.


    I have thought about this very topic before, I'm not sure what the low budget movies cost but if you were to produce one and star in it, it might be cheaper and better than hookers.

    Be like that Ed guy with the pony tail. *shudder*
     
  14. ithaca_deerslayer

    ithaca_deerslayer

    Messages:
    24,477
    Likes Received:
    12,790
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2000
    Location:
    Upstate NY, USA
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_v._Freeman


    California v. Freeman

    California v. Freeman was the criminal prosecution of Harold Freeman, a producer and director of pornographic films, by the U.S. state of California. Freeman was arrested in 1987 for hiring adult actors, which the prosecution interpreted as pimping, as part of an attempt by California to shut down the pornographic film industry. The prosecution's interpretation was ultimately rejected on appeal by the California Supreme Court. Prior to this decision, pornographic movies had often been shot in secret locations.

    Freeman was initially convicted, and lost on appeal to the California Court of Appeal. The trial judge, however, thought jail would be an unreasonably harsh penalty for Freeman's conduct, and sentenced him to probation, despite the fact that this was explicitly contrary to the statute. The State appealed this sentence but lost.

    Freeman appealed to the California Supreme Court, which subsequently overturned his conviction, finding that the California pandering statute was not intended to cover the hiring of actors who would be engaging in sexually explicit but non-obscene performances. Freeman could only have been lawfully convicted of pandering if he had paid the actors for the purpose of sexually gratifying himself or the actors. The court relied upon the language of the statute for this interpretation, as well as the need to avoid a conflict with the First Amendment right to free speech. The court viewed Freeman's conviction as "a somewhat transparent attempt at an 'end run' around the First Amendment and the state obscenity laws."


    The State of California unsuccessfully tried to have this judgment overturned by the United States Supreme Court. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor denied a stay of the California Supreme Court's judgment, finding that its ruling was founded on an independent and adequate basis of state law. The full Court subsequently denied the petition for review.

    As a result of this precedent, the making of hardcore pornography was effectively legalized in California.

    In 2008, in the case of New Hampshire v. Theriault, the New Hampshire Supreme Court, citing Freeman, upheld the distinction between pornography production and prostitution in that state.
     
  15. BigFelipe

    BigFelipe BeenQuietTilNow

    Messages:
    422
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Location:
    Raleigh,NC
    It's business on both sides of the sex. Both are paid and it's not for the act. They don't just do it and film it. It's shot and reshot from different angles/positions, stop and go and such; a lot of it is looped. It's acting, sort of...
     
  16. JASV.17

    JASV.17 Prime Example

    Messages:
    4,913
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Powers. Ed Powers. :whistling:
     
  17. ithaca_deerslayer

    ithaca_deerslayer

    Messages:
    24,477
    Likes Received:
    12,790
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2000
    Location:
    Upstate NY, USA
    http://prostitution.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?questionID=127

    Budd G. Goodman, JD, former New York County Supreme Court Justice, was quoted by Mark Fass in the Aug. 2, 2005 New York Law Journal article "Judge Sees No Link Between Prostitution, Paying for Sex to Make Films" as having written in People v. Paulino that:
    "...[P]rostitution is and has always been intuitively defined as a bilateral exchange between a prostitute and a client....
    The defendant contends that the targeting of so-called 'escort services' for prosecution, while ignoring 'Goliath corporations' that 'conspicuously reap huge profits from the distribution of adult films,' violates [the U.S. Constitution's Equal Protection Clause] because both enterprises are similarly situated...
    Because the definition of prostitution is generally confined to a bilateral exchange between only two parties, escort services and 'Goliath' corporations are not similarly situated."
     
  18. LongGoneDays

    LongGoneDays Misanthropical

    Messages:
    9,249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Location:
    Louisiana

    That's the one. Grunting man. Ginger follicles swaying in the wind. He was in Crank High Voltage. I couldn't believe it. What a crap pile that flick was.
     
  19. tbhracing

    tbhracing Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,711
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Location:
    CA
    Probably already been said- The performers are consenting and under contract. And they have fake names which means I am guessing the company and their Lawyers launders the process so it comes out clean and legal on the production end?




    PS- The scoops are on their way.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2010
  20. Turbodreams

    Turbodreams

    Messages:
    1,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Thats a rather large assumption.