Has not been legal since 2002 when this MN state law was passed. 146A
(d) Engaging in sexual contact with a complementary and alternative health care client, engaging in contact that may be reasonably interpreted by a client as sexual, engaging in any verbal behavior that is seductive or sexually demeaning to the client, or engaging in sexual exploitation of a client or former client. It's just that Minneapolis has decided to add more to the law then what Minnesota already had.
I've been hearing all sorts of rumblings about a change to the statutes in Minneapolis that now mandates that any nude massage is essentially illegal. I see that the term 'legal' doesn't get any search hits on BP anymore. These DIY providers were never doing it because of the legality, they were doing it because of preference. The whole technically legal thing was a good way to indicate the level of comfort with touching the provider was willing to do. Now that any DIY rub is illegal, how will they indicate it? Will they still be able to get similar rates to other sensual providers who do lay their ands on the little mister? I have visited a couple former DIY practitioners who have gone hands-on, but requested that it not be reported. I just wonder how this law change will actually impact the business.
As far as I know, if she was not fully clothed or there was anything sexual including you touching yourself it was illegal anyway. All the new law does is give another tool to LE to harass people. But then I could be wrong.
-- Modified on 1/28/2014 4:35:31 PM
It was completely legal to give nude massage, mutual masturbation, kissing/making out in Minneapolis until this recent ordinance. The books had been scoured with an attorney, and that was what came out.
Has not been legal since 2002 when this MN state law was passed.
146A
(d) Engaging in sexual contact with a complementary and alternative health care client, engaging in contact that may be reasonably interpreted by a client as sexual, engaging in any verbal behavior that is seductive or sexually demeaning to the client, or engaging in sexual exploitation of a client or former client.
It's just that Minneapolis has decided to add more to the law then what Minnesota already had.
I trust that Ms. Lake does her homework, given the professionalism with which she runs her successful business.
My knickers off to her...one of these days...
Peace,
Astrid
Has not been legal since 2002 when this MN state law was passed.
146A
(d) Engaging in sexual contact with a complementary and alternative health care client, engaging in contact that may be reasonably interpreted by a client as sexual, engaging in any verbal behavior that is seductive or sexually demeaning to the client, or engaging in sexual exploitation of a client or former client.
It's just that Minneapolis has decided to add more to the law then what Minnesota already had.
This coming from someone who's been in the business a lot longer,
It never was legal. Even before 2002 .
I've been around on both ends of the spectrum since the days of "RR".
Yoshikos got popped at least 10 times for minuscule offenses that only implied there'd be some sort of sexual activity before she left town for good .
I happened to work at a few other well known places that got popped every other year for a gal jokingly flirting.
I was present during one of the stings and all this one gal said was "sure I'll take my top off for a million dollars!" I wasn't hassled but all I can say is LE and the judges were pretty clear to the owner that it's not welcome even without the happy ending so much that they took the equipment and anything else that wasn't bolted down after tracking her down any time she reopened.
To mock police is just asking for trouble IMO.
alas,
They have bigger fish to fry so,
unless you're causing problems with the neighbors to the point where they'd complain there's nothing to worry about.
Astrid
Has not been legal since 2002 when this MN state law was passed.
146A
(d) Engaging in sexual contact with a complementary and alternative health care client, engaging in contact that may be reasonably interpreted by a client as sexual, engaging in any verbal behavior that is seductive or sexually demeaning to the client, or engaging in sexual exploitation of a client or former client.
It's just that Minneapolis has decided to add more to the law then what Minnesota already had.
...even before the new ordinances, to titillate another or pleasure oneself in a public place. The law is very liberal in what it considers a public place. A hotel room, or a private room in a rented space is considered a public place. If a woman operates out of her owned home, I'm guessing that would make a strong argument that it's not a public space but since she offers it out to anyone in the general public, the prosecutors would argue that it's a public venue.
"Owning, operating, leasing, or allowing the use of any place for purpose of prostitution (Minn. Stat. Ann. § 609.33.)"
It faces essentially the same charges as operating out of a hotel room-- i.e. a gross misdemeanor. So, no need to even make an argument that an owned home is a public place; there's already a law set aside with the same punishment as using a hotel room.
Does anyone else think the term "disorderly house" is funny?
So... if the client doesn't see the act as sexual or demeaning everything is fine. Hell, I've never seen any of this as sexual or demeaning. It's all therapeutic.
Are we good now?
Well that was one lawyers take on the subject. I am not a lawyer nor am I smart but looking at the laws....
609.321 PROSTITUTION AND SEX TRAFFICKING; DEFINITIONS.
Subd. 9.Prostitution.
"Prostitution" means hiring, offering to hire, or agreeing to hire another individual to engage in sexual penetration or sexual contact, or being hired, offering to be hired, or agreeing to be hired by another individual to engage in sexual penetration or sexual contact.
Subd. 10.Sexual contact.
"Sexual contact" means any of the following acts, if the acts can reasonably be construed as being for the purpose of satisfying the actor's sexual impulses:
(i) the intentional touching by an individual of a prostitute's intimate parts; or
(ii) the intentional touching by a prostitute of another individual's intimate parts.
So since I am not smart I figured I would have to look up what intimate parts meant.
Intimate parts.
"Intimate parts" includes the primary genital area, groin, inner thigh, buttocks, or breast of a human being.
So my take on the subject where these DIY massages happened and everyone talked about the DIY gal rubbing her tits on them, them sucking on her tits, touching her ass, her touching his ass, etc. BUT she stayed within legal limits and I jacked myself off...
Well me thinks that maybe another lawyer could read that and say that maybe those legal DIY massages were not as legal as the lawyer in question thought.
Either way if would be up to a judge and/or jury not what some lawyer thinks.
Just my uneducated thoughts. Feel free to educate me, bash, whatever
Nah ... I don't want to but my $.02...
The thing is with law ... It can be interpreted many ways. If laws were so cut and dry then we would have fewer court cases and less laws changing based on court cases. Some cops can and do lie or manipulate the truth as well as defendants and prosecutors.
Just be smart and be safe!!
-- Modified on 1/28/2014 8:58:53 PM
The changed ordinance is clear regarding DIY: if you can remain covered and out of sight of the provider, then jack away.
These fine ladies are professionals in regards of massage. How about the facility requirements? It seems the new rules require quite the facility and many private studios would no longer qualify. Please enlighten me on these changes and their effect. Any massage provider can answer.
I have never been DIY, so I haven't changed anything. I still believe that the real purpose that LE wants to pursue is the trafficking, which I am all for them saving these women who have been trafficked. While I don't agree with the laws invading the rights of consenting adults, I DO agree that trafficking is a horrible situation that LE is up against, and I fully support their endeavors, in that arena.
It's a tough call for all of us where to draw that line.
ooxx,
Trinity
that was a fantastic answer Ms. Lake .. I am reminded why I love you so much
Couldn't of said it better myself, high five!
The whole point of all that extra regulation is to combat human trafficking and underage sex workers which I'm also highly against, might I add I think they're looking in completely the wrong place . Not all human trafficking has to do with sex work. Xo V.
It's a tough call for all of us where to draw thawht line.
ooxx,
Trinity
Then they'd have more resources to go after real traffickers.
Honey, I've been licensed internationally for over 10 years and run very legitimately in fact.
Anyone would be stupid not to .
The only thing that bothers me is the difference in costs, they should just make it statewide & one price like most states do rather than all these different ones and perhaps revise the grey language to save on the hassles of confusion as to what's what . It also wouldn't hurt to just legalize it that way you the client can decide without guessing .
-- Modified on 1/29/2014 10:51:19 AM