hire a few "actors" and make a porn movie, but not to hire a few providers and watch them perform in your room?
Funny to me why the law makes a distinction here.
This subject comes up on this board regularly. I'll give a quick explanation, but if you search the board you will find some more detailed discussions.
The definition of prostitution we usually hear is "sex for money", but the actual definition is more complex. The added complexities seldom matter when discussing the subject, but for this particular question one of them does.
Sex for money is only prostitution when it is done for the sexual gratification of at least one participant. When it is instead done to make a movie, it becomes a form of expression and thus comes under the protection of the 1st amendment. The actors get their gratification, but that is only a means to the end of having a film to release. It's only prostitution when gratification is an end in itself. (No double entendre intended.)
A related question which also comes up fairly often is whether filming a session with an escort would make it legal. The answer is no, because the point of such a session is to get off. Making a movie isn't your motive, it's just a smokescreen to pretend your money is being spent for something other than getting off.
Anyone who thinks this strategy will fool the police or the D.A. should think again. It might fool some laypeople, but not those on your jury. Why? Because they will hear the judge explain what prostitution is and will hear the D.A. explain why the facts of your case fit the definition. And don't forget that the D.A. will show the jury your home movies to prove that you got what you paid for.
-- Modified on 8/17/2006 5:56:09 PM
Please don't get me wrong, I am not being critical of you for your very clear and precise explanation, far from it, I do appreciate you doing so.
Nevertheless, one has to appreciate the zaniness of the logic. It reminds me a bit of an exchange between Chico and Harpo Marx in, I believe, A Night at the Opera:
In it, Chico imagines what he would do for a million dollars, he even contemplates murdering someone, then turning to Harpo he exclaims: "For a million dollars I'd even murder you!"
Harpo betrays a look of shear horror which unnerves Chico. To calm his friend he then says:
"Don't worry, you're my friend. I'll kill you for nothing." At which the wittless Harpo resumes his jovial nature.
The zaniness of the logic is what I was referencing. It's a little like the punshment for attempted murder being different from that of murder. Same act, different result. Penalty if I'm turned on by the act, not if I make a movie of it to sell.
The punishment for homosexuality was to be locked up with a bunch of horny men.
Maybe the punishment for attempted suicide should be the death penalty?
The laws against prostitution aim to stop prostitution, not sex. The fact that the same physical activity is involved is only part of the picture. Another part is the parties' motivation.
The law distinguishes between similar conduct based on different motives all the time. If you accidently knock someone down a flight of stairs, you haven't committed a crime. If you do it on purpose, you have.
There are other things you can give away but not sell. If you don't believe me try auctioning off a kidney on eBay and see what happens to you. The law likewise forbids selling babies but allows adoptions, even if the baby would end up going to the same family either way.
Why does the law do this? Because society does not want to encourage certain behaviors which would become common if financial incentives were legal. Many poor people would sell organs if they could, just as many poor mothers would sell babies. Whether society has made the right call in each of these areas is a fair question, but this is the reason why people are allowed to have sex for free and forbidden to do it for money.
If a person proposes marriage to another and they say yes, then the proposer whips out a prenup and they change from yes to no,
toss them in jail?
mrfisher: sidone took a lot of time to put up two detailed posts answering the question. He obviously has legal training and experience, and if he is not a law professor, he could be.
Wannarideher seems to have taken a vacation from posting here on the Legal Corner; please do not feel that you need to fill the "vacuum".
However I do not like to censor myself.
I suggest that you and any others who feel the same simply skip over any future posts from me.
That way we'll have a win/win.
I agree fully with your take on Sidone.
By the way, while not a lawyer, I have represented myself in court on four occasions and won each time, so some credit is due.
As they say: From the mouths of babes....
porn movies are illegal in sc and the whole prostitution issue is bullcrap
the fact that the police have their hands full with murderers, rapists and pedophiles but choose to spend most of their time busting escorts even after having sex w/ them shows that our legal system is full of corruption and bribery.
I know drug dealers who spent years selling coke to school kids and when they were caught, they were let go because they turned in the people they sold drugs to.
I know a man who tried to rape and stalk me for 4 yrs and got underage girls pregnant but the police did nothing b/c of who he knew.
Police officers hit their wives and don't get arrested but two consenting adults can't have sex if one of them is helping the other one pay her bills so she can free up her time for him
the prostitution laws are only there to give the police more ways to harass innocent people. If they really cared about us, they would out and spend more time on the rape cases or check out the backgrounds of "strange men" who hang around elementary schools w/o taking a kid home. I see them all the time and the kids are able to point them out too but the police don't care. Escorts are easy money like speeders on the interstate.
Just two comments about two things you said.
1. "porn movies are illegal in sc"
That's probably an overstatement. The law can ban obscene materials but a lot of porn isn't remotely obscene. Obscenity is determined by community standards and the standards in South Carolina are probably among the strictest, but an outright ban on porn would be clearly unconstitutional.
2. "two consenting adults can't have sex if one of them is helping the other one pay her bills so she can free up her time for him"
This is a common misunderstanding. Giving somebody money doesn't make having sex with that person prostitution. It's only prostitution if the money is a quid pro quo for sex. However, merely CLAIMING the money wasn't for sex has no legal effect. What matters in these cases is the actual motive for the payment and not what the participants claim that motive was.
-- Modified on 8/19/2006 5:15:57 PM
I asked 3 lawyers if I could do a porn movie and they all told me that their clients moved away as they were being harassed by sc authorities
I am not argueing with you but sometimes it is easier to live in a liberal state as this state recently allowed tattoo parlors in and we become a free pour alcohol/no mini bottle state in January.
I would like to have a porn site but I have decided that it isn't worth the emotional trouble
porn magazines are allowed but many a porn shop has been closed in chaleston, We now have just one. All the others were protested against. My lawyer told me to not even try having an escort agency as many older men love the idea of going to dinner w/ a nice lady before paying for a session. SC loves planting informants in an agency and have them break the law and you get arrested. I don't want to deal with the hassle. I just wish that the police would care about real crimes as I was nearly raped at age 14 by a drug informant and again on my first year of college
The police told me that women should be in college at night if they didn't want to be raped. I love this hobby as I have had less negative experieces w/ hobbyists than civilians and people to put down the escort industry should have their teeth kick out
Disclaimer: I don't hate sidone and want me meet him one day, I am just drunk off my ass and my girlfiend is married to an abusive cop and she is trying leave him and no cop is helping her and I HATE posters who flame me
I wasn't flaming you. I just wanted to correct some of the statements you made about the law for the benefit of other readers. I believe everything you said in this message, and I'm sure you won't be surprised when I say that the police actions you describe are illegal. Making porn is a constitutionally protected activity, and the police are not allowed to harass people for acting within the law. The protests you describe are legal, and not very surprising in South Carolina.
The officer's comment that women should be in college if they don't want to be raped is outrageous. Even coming from a civilian it would be outrageous; from a cop it's disgusting. Cops should know that crimes are the fault of the perpetrators and not the victims.
It would be nice to meet you some day. Let me know if you come to L.A., and I'll let you know if I go to South Carolina.
I appreciate the compliment and the recognition of my efforts. At the same time, I think the comment about wannarideher (of whom I have been the harshest critic on this board) was out of line.
If a person asks another to get married and they say "yes", then the asker presents a prenup and the answer changes to "no", then lock them up?
-- Modified on 8/19/2006 6:36:33 AM
-- Modified on 8/19/2006 6:37:39 AM
That has finally put it in terms I can understand. Thank you. I hadn't considered the "big picture" implications in this way before.
I'm sure you'll get a lot of complex answers, but here's the short and sweet of it:
Politicians are fucking, power hungry assholes.
ALL of them. Left and right.
And that's pretty much the alpha and omega of it. Everything else is trivialities.