"Goddess of pleasure...

Awaiting to tap into your most intimate desires and feed your hunger for the most exotic and unique experiences.

Erotic, seductive and exciting.
Three words that describe the essence of this peach seductress.

So come and treat yourself to a deliciously curvy peach colored, premium woman who caters to upscale gentlemen with exquisite taste.

Only 30 years old, standing 5'4" with soft shapely succulent legs and romantic almond shaped green eyes.

You will enjoy an enchanting and unforgettable GFE experience where you will feel both pampered and unrushed.

I am available for incalls/outcalls.
Dinner dates / massage / and dancing.
Advance reservation is suggested , but also available for short notice.
I do also travel with prior notice, in state and out of state."


If you dissect this ad, you can see there is no mention of money in exchange for sex, but what about when an escort as in the following example, mentions how she's a "Goddess of Pleasure", how she's "erotic", and how she's a "seductress".   Are these words that can get her and her client arrested?  

They won't make an arrest on an ad alone, but it could lead to an investigation.

The fact that there is no mention of money is irrelevant.  See my post below. There are no magic words.  Especially when you use the language of the prostitution business like "GFE."

Here is the test. You are a guy reading the ad. Do you think you might be able to score for money?  If you went there and got nothing sexual, would you write a review "total rip off?"  If so, the ad is suggestive enough.

There is no way to avoid saying the magic words and be safe.

"They won't make an arrest on an ad alone, but it could lead to an investigation."



How exactly would they do an investigation on it?

I don't think the website is enough in itself for an arrest for a solicitation or prostitution offense. Those offenses usually require some sort of act as well. If ads were enough for an arrest, I think American Apparel will be in trouble for most of its ads. It's just using sexual appeal to sell a service or a product. However, it could probably be used as evidence of the intent of the parties.

I basically view websites this way. It's all a matter of communications and context. If a "hobbyist" can read a website and infer from the language what activities are promised, how does it suddenly become opaque for a policeman and a jury of twelve? They might not be familiar with the codewords, but it isn't hard for someone to find a guide to them so that they're deciphered. For example, I don't think substitution of "roses" for dollars fools anyone. Then there's the more esoteric terms such as Russian or BBBJCIM, or FBSM, which explicitly describe certain activities. Your ad doesn't mention any of them, which might make a hobbyist wonder what you're providing, but it also will make law enforcement or a jury wondering what you're providing. You do use GFE. GFE seems to be a term that escapes definition, but it definitely is an abbreviation in use in this hobby. I would take it out if you want to remove anything suggestive of money-for-sexual acts.

if you live in a state where a license is required to provide that service and you do not possess said license.

In the state I live in (Mass.) I understand that it is a felony offense.

You might want to substitute the term "body rub" instead.

(still not a lawyer)

The ad isn't mine, I'm not an escort, lol.   It is an ad that I seen on Eros.

TAn arrest for what? But here is how you would analyze it.

       You would start by looking at the statutes in your state to see precisely what is prohibited. Almost all states prohibit OFFERS of sex for pay and some states prohibit advertisements of offers of sex for pay.

       Let’s assume that in your state there is no advertising statute but simply one that prohibits offers of sex for pay. Before considering whether the language used in the ad on its face violates the statute, let’s first consider two easy “outs” to the question.

         In some states, the solicitation statute is construed as requiring an act in furtherance of the offer.

      If this is true in your state, then we do not need to address the language of the ad since on the facts you gave us there is no act in furtherance of the offer. The ad alone would not violate the law.

         If your state has a pure solicitation statute –i.e., no act in furtherance is required – then the next question is whether in your state an offer to the world violates the statute, or if the offer has to be made to a specific individual. If the latter, than again we can conclude that the ad alone would not violate the law.

       If, however, neither “out” applies in your state –i.e., we have a pure solicitation statute where an offer to the world violates the statute – we have to address the language of the ad.

        As you note, there is no explicit offer of sex for pay. The ad does use language from which this can be inferred. But most likely there is a disclaimer on the ad that expressly states this is not an offer of prostititution. While such disclaimers have no value in protecting buyers and sellers of sex when they actually so engage, the disclaimer does have some value in protecting against ambiguous language in an ad from violating a solicitation statute.

        So any line officer deciding to arrest or seek a warrant for the ad alone knows he would have to convince a neutral officer that the language of the ad could reasonably be construed as being an offer for sex even in the face of the disclaimer. I think this would be a very hard sell indeed and this is probably why we at the Legal Corner hear no reports of arrests made solely on the basis of ads such as the one you quoted.

     Conclusion: the likelihood of an arrest being made solely on the content of the ad is very slim, and the likelihood of the arrest withstanding a probable cause determination by a neutral officer is even slimmer.

Even if the cop is a complete scoundrel & arrests you with no violation.

They will  use "anything" they find on you like "feminine hygiene products" ,cell phone, any cash (even just a few dollars) a family picture.

my point, They will create a case out of bits & pieces of nothing.

Even if you only references to cooking & going to church. They will say it is ambiguous.

I would have loooooved to shown personal Ad/ social network page to a jury.. but, it costs lots of money to even get a chance.

you can count on it

any thing you say can and WILL be used against you
and will not be used to help you

yes, massage is not good to use but ,Mr. Fisher, I believe you are referring to Florida where bodyrub is legal. NOT SO in most other areas.
In most places you do not want to use touch or rub.
It is really important to speak with an attorney to find out your exact rights and what terms you have the right to use.
In some places you could be arrested for dancing in  a g-string bikini. In some places the rear end must remain covered if money is involved.
So really do your homework for each jurisdiction you work or play in.

you cannot use massage without a license. It could make her an easy target here.
Women offer massage all time here though and I haven't heard about a lot of arrests for it.