Technically by the strict definition of "prostitute," you are correct BUT the real issue here is in connotation, not strict definition. In the real world, prostitute, porn star, call girl and escort all have different connotations. At some level it might be semantics and rationalizations to make the providers and customers feel better but at the end of the day you can't tell me that when you think of the word "prostitute," you get the same picture in your head as you do when you think of "porn star" or "call girl." So, lets be honest about our terms and what they really mean out in the real world.
Kayne West, Joe Wilson, Serena Williams... what the fuck is happening to civility in this country?
There seems to be a recurring theme appearing lately on this forum that I find disturbing... that theme being that because a pornstar fucks for money in front of a camera, she's a prostitute.
It seems to me that this is like when a guy asks a girl out and when she shoots him down he calls her a "whore" or a "dyke". It's just sour grapes.
The history and etymology of the word prostitute dates to the 1500's - "to offer indiscriminate sexual intercourse (USUALLY in exchange for money)," from L. prostituere "to expose to prostitution, expose publicly," from pro- "before" + statuere "cause to stand, establish" (see stature). The noun sense of "harlot" is from 1613, from L. prostituta "prostitute," fem. of prostitutus, pp. of prostituere. THE NOTION OF "SEX FOR HIRE" IS NOT INHERENT IN THE ETYMOLOGY (emphisis added), which rather suggests one "exposed to lust" or sex "indiscriminately offered."
So while one may be able to narrowly apply the term prostitute to a pornstar, the common usage of the word today generally refers to the ILLEGAL selling of sex for money. In fact, the reason that making porn is legal in California is that a production company was busted for prostitution and pandering, and when they challanged the charge in court it was ruled by the California Supreme Court that it was NOT, in fact, prostitution (or pandering) and was protected under first admendment rights.
BUT ALL OF THE ABOVE ASIDE, what really disturbs me is the sense I get from these posts that guys feel that if a girl shoots porn, then hobbyists should be able to fuck them, and if the girl chooses not to escort she's somehow a bitch or a cunt. Typically these posts include all kinds of reasons WHY the girl should escort... "she'll make more money in one hour than she will in four", "the clients treat the girls with more respect than the people they work with", etc. But do we ever consider the other side of the coin? That making porn is legal, prostitution isn't? That they know the people they're working with but when escorting they're seeing strangers? That when they're fucking on camera they're surrounded by a group of people engaged in a commercial enterprise but when they're escorting they're alone in a hotel room with a stranger? These are all valid reasons for a woman who does porn to choose not to escort.
As for pornstars who act like they're better than their fellow PSs who escort, well, we all have coping methods... if that's what it takes for them to accept what they do, who really gives a shit? And if she gets pissed off if you ask her if she's "available", again, who cares?
Maybe it's EXACTLY because most people think of pornstars as whores that they have that response. It's pretty much the equivilent of someone asking a black man if he's a good dancer or if he's good at basketball, or asking an overweight person why he doesn't diet or suggest he start an exercise program. It's rude and insulting... But when a pornstar gets insulted when we ask her if she escorts, we can't understand it when she gets pissed off. So if a girl chooses to get upset about it rather than letting it roll off her back, that's her perogative; t doesn't necessarily make her a bitch. I would be willing to bet that ANY pornstar who doesn't escort gets upset when someone asks her if she does; some just handle it better than others.
It seems to me that we've become a nation of people who are used to and expect entitlements... we obsess about the things we can't have, and when we don't get them we get pissed off about it and verbally excoriate the person or people who don't think we deserve the same things that we do. When a pornstar says she isn't a prostitute, we have no qualms in openly calling her a bitch and gleefully pointing out that by definition she really is a whore, and to expose her as "delusional" or a "hypocrit". There's just no civil discourse any more.
For whatever social or economic reasons, we currently have many more PSEs available at much lower prices than we've had in the last 10 years. We should be concentrate on talking about the new girls and the financial savings and just ignore those who choose not to participate in our hobby.
the girls that do provide take a huge risk every time we see someone! trust me it's scary out there sometimes... and creepy too... i have been doing porn since Jan '07 and the thought of being in a hotel room all by myself in some random city, i just couldn't imagine. BUT i then got educated by the girls that did and i was introduced to very respected people like pam peaks that taught me everything i know now. i felt so much safer! screening is huge to me, and having references is huge to me! Pam will do whatever it takes to make her girls feel confident and safe.
Problem is too, that most of the girls that don't, i believe are just uneducated and scared, they hear all the horror stories! plain and simple. i had a couple girls take me under their wing and show me the "right" way. for that i'm thankful and grateful...
just my 2 cents...
Now that you feel confident and safe, are you having fun meeting your fans???
Great post. I agree with you 100%. It's hard sometimes to think about it from the lady's perspective but as Rachel Starr has put it, there is a lot of risk with providing especially when girls don't know how to take the proper precautions.
Not only do they have to deal with the legal aspect of it, but they also have to deal with the risk of potential aggressors. This is one reason why PS charge less in Europe, they don't really have to worry about the LE.
I was at a WNBA celebration once and guys there were ticked off at the women who were dates of some of the players. Why worry about one or two slices of bread when you have the rest of the loaf available? That's high school behavior.
If you don't like what's on TV.. change the channel. If you have a bad experience, post it here for others to learn. Bad mouthing a woman because she doesn't want strip for every dick out there is silly.
Ladies who escort and Porn ladies who frown on it..As Nina Hartely and Raquel Devine told me because they did not understand why some porn ladies were against porn ladies who escort and said simply "It is sex for money bottom line so what is the difference?"
As I said I have been fortunate to have access to porn ladies who escort and porn ladies who do not escort..You can call me a "John" or a "Trick" and "Male Talent" and I am not afraid to admit it..And when I tried to arrange doubles the non-escort porn lady sometimes would say to me "I am not doing a double with a prostitute"..and I would politely say "Well what is the difference between what you do and them other than filming?" And than you have the escorts who say "I am not doing a double with her because I saw she has unprotected sex!" and I politely reply "Yes but she gets tested once a month what about you?"..Those nasty responses that was posted about Shawnee just cracked me up like she has never done anything illegal and is going to report somebody..I know for a fact that she has done filming outside of CA which is illegal..And I know she has gone to swinger clubs which is also illegal..So for her to feel that escorting is beneath her is something I do not understand..
The good thing is more of these porn ladies who used to not escort are coming out because they are not getting the work that they were promised..
Danny
It's not so black and white, just because she might have done something illegal does not mean she should do everything that is illegal.
As far as filming outside of CA being illegal, you need to get a little bit more informed. Filming porn in NV, FL, and NY is not illegal. Also, no state can constitutionally ban all filming of pornography, they can however strictly regulate it. But an outright ban would likely be unconstitutional as a violation of the first amendment (outright bans are usually struck down much like the DC ban on firearms being too restrictive because it was a ban on all weapons and not narrow enough).
Sorry for the Con Law lesson but that's what law school does to you.
I do agree with you however that girls who rip on other girls because they provide are a bit hypocritical. I'm all for girls doing what they want and if they don't want to provide, that's perfectly fine. But I also have a problem with girls who talk shit about girls that provide because what they do is not much different.
"I'm all for girls doing what they want and if they don't want to provide, that's perfectly fine. But I also have a problem with girls who talk shit about girls that provide"...
Exactly....If a star chooses not to escort, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that...However, she shouldn't blast other stars that do...
The one new person I saw this last trip told me she preferred escorting (to filming)...
who convert from being in porn to escorting (ZaSu Knight, Ashley Shye, etc) actually prefer escoring because they can be relaxed and be themselves..
Than you have the girls who actually get off on being filmed..
D
I have heard the exact same thing from more than one PS who does both. One actually complained about the guys in porn and said she is much happier escorting, especially if she gets along very well with the guy.
I barely got out of college so it is nice to see someone like you on these Boards to interpret laws!
D
I believe California is the ONLY state where the act of shooting porn has been officially challanged and supported in the courtroom.
During the Clinton administration, they took a very relaxed view of porn (no suprise there! lol). When Bush took office, you saw a LOT of porn being pulled off of the shelf. Lot's of fisting scenes, bukakke scenes, etc. disappeared from the distributor's lists.
There have been several busts in Florida over the last year or two, the most notable being the SUCCESSFUL prosecution of Max Hardcore. But it wasn't the only successful prosecution in Fl.
There is a BIG difference between a state where filming sex is legal and a state where filming sex is considered to be too small a problem to agressively prosecute.
Pornography has been upheld by the Supreme Court as being under the first amendment. The constitutional standard is what is acceptable in the community as a whole. I never said any porn could not be prosecuted. A ban on all pornography will be held unconstitutional, but states can restrict porn. Max Hardcore's stuff was deemed to have no artistic or redeeming social value to the court. The Supreme Court has not chosen to hear the case.
So much porn is shot in FL that the companies wouldn't risk being prosecuted if that was the case. The phrase filming porn is too broad to classify all porn. The stuff Bangbros and Realitykings films is fine and all legally done within the the state. But the Max Hardcore stuff was not.
In the end, it comes down to what you are filming and not simply that you are filming porn.
It's a very iffy area of the law with a very malleable standard. But, since the supreme court has ruled on pornography as a whole, that is the minimal standard applicable to all states, so an outright ban on all pornography would be unconstitutional while prosecution of specific scenes would still be constitutional.
I kind of tried to keep it simple but you challenged me Eddie.
The right to view porn as protected under the first admendment and the right to MAKE porn are two seperate and distinct issues. California is the ONLY state where it's LEGAL to shoot porn, ONLY because it's the only state where that right has been challanged and upheld in court.
Other states get a "pass" for the simple reason that there are more pressing issues, but that doesn't mean that the Fla. porn industry (or any state outside of Ca.) should get complacent about their luck so far.
I get the point that California is the safest place to film porn and some day you could have a problem in other states. But saying porn is only legal in California is a misstatement of the law.
The Supreme Court case was not the right to view porn but the right to produce it as well. Banning the production of porn amounts to a ban on the right to view the porn. Viewing porn is not protected by the first amendment but making it is. That is why the court went the route of first amendment. First Amendment protects the speaker and not specifically the listener.
Your analysis that California is the only state where it is legal is incorrect. Our legal system and laws are designed to prohibit and restrict behavior. So, if there are no cases saying porn is illegal in a state, then it means it is legal. Is California the only state that has given full constitutional protection to porn, yes, but it's not the only state where porn is legal.
There is no Florida law that says filming porn is illegal, there are other laws that could be used to prosecute porn, much like Max Hardcore, but until the laws are interpreted as such by the court, it is not illegal. Could it be some day? Maybe. But is it? No.
This argument is very semantics based and may appear very knit picky but that's what being a real lawyer is all about. Whatever the Supreme Court says governs and since a Supreme Court standard for pornography exists (regardless of whether you are watching it or producing it) a State cannot ban all pornography. If you were to read the entire decision, that is what the court says. When you read newspaper articles reporting on the case, they tend to oversimplify it and miss the nuances completely.
That is why you only saw some fisting movies and other "Hard Hard Core" movies removed from shelves but not all porn movies. It's just like abortion, states can limit forms but cannot ban abortions completely.
Both of you made some great points there..Bravo!
D
Most of my knowledge of the laws regarding pornography I've gotten from two sources; J.D. Obenberger (http://www.xxxlaw.com) and Lawrence G. Walters (http://www.firstadmendment.com).
These are the two most repsected lawyers specializing in adult industry related legal issues.
Since you seem to have an interest in this subject, I think you'll enjoy checking out their websites.
Maybe I'm doing an apples to oranges comparison, but do the Supreme Court cases of Lawrence vs. Texas and Griswald vs. Connecticut which are privacy cases have any bearing on the right to view pornography?....
I need to read up on Griswald but Lawrence v. Texas I have studied extensively (had a professor who was obsessed with the case). At first glance I would say no but it could be stretched. LvT struck down anti-sodomy laws because it was discriminatory against gays (though the court did a great job to hide that in their decision). Now, would a law prohibiting the distribution of videos depicting sodomy apply? The court could easily go either way. This is a very difficult case because the court is not clear. Many scholars say LvT established laws discriminating against homosexuals to require the same level of scrutiny as those that discriminate against gender, but the court never outright said it. So if they decided to change their mind, they could easily do it would overturning that decision.
Are you fuckin kidding me? To begin with lets call a spade a spade. It is OBVIOUS that you are not male talent. You are nothing more than an admittedly clever hobbyist/con man who is taking advantage of the financial troubles that these talent agencies and porn girls are going thru to book them thru a legitimate talent agency claiming to be a so called producer and then fucking them bareback with a lacky in the room holding a video camera.
Great work if you can get it and I'm not critisizing you for being smart, but please do not pretend to be anything else. OBVIOUSLY 5 years ago when things were going good the talent agencies would have asked you for links to your website and other verifications and you would have been shit out of luck.
And OBVIOUSLY I doubt that you've had the conversations you claim. I just cannot see a pse refusing to do a double with a working pornstar because she has bareback sex when filming her scenes.
You have beat the system and are living a fantasy life. But instead of being happy you have to brag about it here. If I had come up with your idea i would have kept it to myself for fear of too many other people doing it and fucking it up for everyone, but your ego just would not have allowed you to do that would it?
So just keep fucking all of the non-escorting pornstars and...
Perhaps the GREATEST post in the history of this Board. ROFLMAO!!!
Can you explain to me the qualifications of male talent? Or let me just say it is a guy who fucks on film..The same thing for a lady who considers themselves a porn star..If a girl on this board can call her a porn star than I can call myself Male Talent or a Trick or a John..You can take your pick and I am not ashamed of it..
Second I said that I have come across escorts who would NOT do doubles with a porn lady because of the bareback..It does not make sense for a porn lady not do a double with another porn lady..Yes there are porn ladies will not work with certain men either because of skin color or they find out that the guy has done bi-sexual scenes (like Christian)..
And as for me taking advantage of talent agencies how is that? I am paying their commissions, their talent, etc? I am helping out the economy!
My post was to question ladies in porn who put down ladies who escort..Since I have access to both I gave my opinion..And I do add value to this board based on the PM's I get everday with questions..At least I am not an alias like you!
D
"At least I am not an alias like you". ROTFLMAO! OBVIOUSLY we are ALL using aliases. So what you're you are really doing is criticising me for using an alias of an alias! 90% of the shit that shows up here would never be posted if we had to use our real names.
As for explaining the qualifications of male talent, here is the OBVIOUS one. They get paid for what they do! They are either paid for doing a scene or if they are a producer/talent, they get paid from the profit they make when the scene is sold.
As for coming across escorts who won't do doubles with a porn lady, are you talking about a PSE escort or a regular escort. I can understand a regular escort refusing to do a double with a pse, but then again, is she willing to fuck you without a condom? Because if she will do you bareback it doesn't make sense that she would refuse to do a bareback double with you and a pornstar especially if the ps is actively shooting content and so is regularly tested.
I'm not busting your balls because you found a loophole in the system. God love you, I wish I had been that smart. You are living a fantasy life that most of us only dream of. But I think as smart as you were to think of that, you are pretty dumb to talk about it here. If I were you I wouldn't have said anything about it. There is no up-side to revealing it on TER other than massaging yoour ego, but there could be several major down-sides for you to do so.
And living the life you are leading, you should be the last one to worry about which ps escorts and which one doesn't and should be less critical.
I think Danny Ocean, Fasteddie, SteakandGuy, The Moose, etc. all have vaild points most of the time. The bottom line is escorting is the same thing as prostitution. Most PSE [90%] would never even entertain the thought of sending time with most hobbyists, except they are presented with some cold hard cash. I wish there was more reviews posted and some how we could have current photos associated with PSE's [not like a 5 year or more old photo like some agencies and web sites use].
I don't think anyone here would disagree with you that escorting is the same thing as prostitution. But that's really not the point of this discussion; the point is whether being a pornstar is the same as being a prostitute.
I believe being a Pornstar is being a prostitute and there is legal and illegal prostitution. Prostitution is legal in the making of Porn films in California, parts of Neveda and Rhode Island [in doors of course in RI only]!
Technically by the strict definition of "prostitute," you are correct BUT the real issue here is in connotation, not strict definition. In the real world, prostitute, porn star, call girl and escort all have different connotations. At some level it might be semantics and rationalizations to make the providers and customers feel better but at the end of the day you can't tell me that when you think of the word "prostitute," you get the same picture in your head as you do when you think of "porn star" or "call girl." So, lets be honest about our terms and what they really mean out in the real world.
Eddie, you really think asking a pornstar if she escorts is like asking a black person if they are good at basketball or something. Why do white liberal always use blacks as there pawns (why not jews or mexicans, or even in your case fat guys-which i see you did). Insulting people on stereo types is never a good thing but asking a woman that sucks cock for millions to see if she does porn I don't think carries the weight of the stereo types blacks have endured.
What do white conservatives use as their pawns?
OK, we'll eliminate the black man...
It's the equivilent of asking a jew if hs's cheap. It's the equivilent of asking an Asian if he gets a lot of traffic tickets. It's the same as asking a Mexican if he has a green card.
And the point is it wasn't about "asking a woman that sucks cock for millions to see if she does porn" as you stated, it was about asking a woman that sucks cock for millions to see if she escorts" - BIG difference.
You're 100% right... Insulting people on stereotypes is never a good thing, but it seems that a lot of people on this board figure just because a girl fucks on camera for money that it's perfectly acceptable to stereotype and insult her, and if she gets upset about it she's a bitch, which was the entire point of my post.
If that was the point of your post then why use blacks...i don't care who conservatives use as a pawn, i am asking you....If that was the point of your post why get into black people....Just state your claim.....Use your people (whoever you may be) instead of using negroes, that's my point..Asking a women that swallows cum on camera, which is a choice, is not the same as stereotyping people for something they have no control over for many, many years....
How many years now, Eddie, have I had to take time out to correct you? What is the basis of this mental block you have concerning that common and relatively simple word?
One must wonder...
What are you, a third grade grammer school teacher? Excuse me for not being perfect. In the future, JUST for you, I'll compose my posts in "Word" and spell check it before posting it here so you won't be offended by any grammatical errors.
Making the same mistake repeatedly no matter how many times you have been corrected is symptomatic of a malady aside from mere grammatical error.
Might I suggest analysis?
