Porn legal. Prostitution illegal. What gives?

[ty gorton]

So, what if some dude carries a video camera with him and hires a prostitute for sexual purposes...for a "movie"?

I don't understand the difference.

I'm not trying to start a debate about the "right and wrong" of pornography. I'm just curious why there is a distinction between porn and prostitution.

Both PAY people for sex. One video tapes it and then sells it worldwide. And yet the intimate version...the private one on one version, is illegal???

Could it be because the government makes a shitload in taxes off porn and it would be damn hard to do the same on prostitution?

Or is there really a difference here?

The only thing I can think of is the health issues...prostitution spreads disease while in porn (hopefully), everyone involved is tested to avoid spreading VDs etc.

[En Sabah Poo]

Health and safety issues are indeed major factors. Plus, porn can be easily regulated.

[WillieLee]

It's not like the laws for porn and prostitution were created at the same time. And it wasn't that long ago when porn was illegal to make.

[ty gorton]

If we can get those rebellious dentists to follow rules, we can surely get the hookers in line, can't we?

How much safer would everyone be if prostitution WAS a regulated business?

I guess this comes down to some kind of morality facade...allowing porn but making prostitution illegal...it's like the illusion of ethics. Prostitution could be all legit if we were so inclined, but that would make us morally bankrupt or something?

Strange world we live in.

[JoeE]

I'm not trying to start a debate about the "right and wrong" of pornography. I'm just curious why there is a distinction between porn and prostitution.

Both PAY people for sex. One video tapes it and then sells it worldwide. And yet the intimate version...the private one on one version, is illegal???

With prostitution, one party is paying another party for sexual favors. With porn, one party is paying one or more other parties to have sex with each other. The party offering the consideration receives no sexual favors himself/herself, he/she merely watches (or films, in the case of the filmmakers).

That's the distinction. It may sound like nitpicking, but legally it's a huge one.

[ty gorton]

With prostitution, one party is paying another party for sexual favors. With porn, one party is paying one or more other parties to have sex with each other. The party offering the consideration receives no sexual favors himself/herself, he/she merely watches (or films, in the case of the filmmakers).

That's the distinction. It may sound like nitpicking, but legally it's a huge one.

That makes sense, though realistically, I find it rather hard to believe But yeah, I can see where this could be argued on a legal front.

[En Sabah Poo]

With prostitution, one party is paying another party for sexual favors. With porn, one party is paying one or more other parties to have sex with each other. The party offering the consideration receives no sexual favors himself/herself, he/she merely watches (or films, in the case of the filmmakers).

That's the distinction. It may sound like nitpicking, but legally it's a huge one.

BUT, the quandry is, the women in the porn are still being paid to have sex.

[JoeE]

BUT, the quandry is, the women in the porn are still being paid to have sex.

But not with the person furnishing the consideration. It does sound strange at first glance but no one has ever successfully challenged pornography on this basis.

[ty gorton]

BUT, the quandry is, the women in the porn are still being paid to have sex.

But one person isn't paying another for sexual acts on them...it's a thin line but it's definitely there.

[WillieLee]

With prostitution, one party is paying another party for sexual favors. With porn, one party is paying one or more other parties to have sex with each other. The party offering the consideration receives no sexual favors himself/herself, he/she merely watches (or films, in the case of the filmmakers).

That's the distinction. It may sound like nitpicking, but legally it's a huge one.

But what about the directors like Seymore Butts? He films himself having sex with paid performers.