An organization representing prostitutes in California has filed a lawsuit in a federal district court in San Francisco, arguing that the Supreme Court’s substantive due process “liberty” decisions–which protect the right of consenting adults to engage in sex in private–also protect the right of consenting adults to pay for sex.  If it’s legal to have sex, the plaintiffs argue, how can it be illegal to pay for it?  And relatedly they argue:  If a person can pay for dinner, wine, roses and other items as a prelude to sex, why not just offer to pay the sexual partner cash instead?

How is it legal to be filmed and be paid and illegal to not film? Back in the day, there was COYOTE: Call Off Your Old Tired Ethics... 'bout time!!! After gays and pot, we are next to be liberated.

It's never going to happen. If gays didn't come out and risk both prosecution and persecution nothing would have changed,  The same with pot smokers. Do you really think anything would have been done without millions of both pot smokers and gays standing up for themselves.

Ask yourself this, how many people do you know willing to admit to being either a hooker or a john? I bet you it's no more than a handful. NOTHING is going to happen until that changes.

Did I miss something? Looks like someone had the balls to FILE A LAWSUIT. Don't know if that qualifies for standing up for yourself in your book, but in mine, it certainly does. Since most of the LE attention is focused on the female side of the equation, ti behooves us to be activists.

While not a legal expert by any means, I think that porn has been brought up in the appellate courts many times and that it has been defended under the freedom of expression rights (the 1st Amendment)

Good point. However, it is the same "family values" crowd who tries to suppress homosexual equality and marijuana legalization, so there is some hope that if the other two "evils" can be somewhat accepted in society, a person' right to engage in an adult consensual exchange can become acceptable as well.

I'd argue that the prelude to sex - is not sex

But really, why are we even talking about it?  We see escorts and we are hobbyists

What if I am heterosexual, but for shits and giggles decide to have a homosexual encounter?

Should that be a crime but a person whose orientation is gay can engage in same and that is legal?  That is Alice through the looking glass logic.

The right to engage in whatever consensual activity one chooses should be paramount.  Unless someone can show a compelling reason why sex for pay would hurt society (Just making reference to standards of decency, blah, blah, bullshit don't cut it.) then legalized sex for pay (As is allowed in most of the rest of western democracies and a few eastern ones too.) should be a slam dunk if politics didn't enter the equation.

I think a closer parallel to our situation is Roe vs. Wade, but again...

still not a lawyer

I would stand up and shout from the rooftops if it weren't for the probable negative press it would bring on my employer. I don't think they'd blink an eye if I was to get caught engaging, but drawing attention to myself and thereby them would be professional suicide and I couldn't blame them.

That's an interesting and important distinction you point out, about the "it's not a choice" argument being used for homosexuality. I think, if people were to look at it charitably, that having no sex or paying for a provider, is still similar to foregoing sex or engaging in socially unacceptable homosexuality. But there is a belief that anyone can have sex unless they are morally bad (creepy, old, beta), in which case they don't deserve to.

if our world was the void of politics these things would not be issues.

Does that mean I'm going to have to register to be a John?  That ain't happening.

You should host a one monger march, take your gopro and record it on video, then post a youtube video for the world to see. Don't forget to post a link on this here site

There are TWO ways to affect wholesale change of this magnitude:

No it does NOT matter one bit whether there is a choice involved or not. Nor like somebody said whether johns and hookers are special class of people. Free speech applies all over. Negotiating for sex should be a free speech/freedom of expression issue.

..massive public support and coordinated pressure on politcians backed by big money is another thing entirely. That aint happening any time soon. BTW, would you sign up and out yourself.

I'd imagine lots of licensure would be in order, which is fine. I'd also guess that a lot of health reporting would be involved for those operating a "paid sex" business. Which I'd be fine with too. Spot checks to ensure that I'm keeping up my end of that licensure? No problem.  

I appreciate the comments of those that  identified the  differences between the  pot/homosexual movements and the decriminalization of our work. You are right that there is much broader support for and participation in those movements. But indulge me long enough to hear the other point of view.  

Admittedly, I did not articulate the last part of my last post very well. However, I tried to express that one's sexuality, whether heterosexual or homosexual, for most parts is not a matter of choice. With that said, engaging in any sexual activity is absolutely a matter of choice. There are many instances where these lines get blurred and one should not necessarily equate someone's sexual activities with that person's sexuality! For instance in our prisons, our inmates engage in homosexual sex whereas they may not necessarily be homosexuals. In porn, homosexual men may act as heterosexual actors which goes against their sexuality.

withholding, social security, medicare, insurance, fees, permits, zoning... all the wonderful stuff our government throws at any business person in their ongoing war against small business.  

Who does??

But unfortunately it often comes back to bite many of you gals in the ass for approaching it that way.

Posted By: Alyssa Marie

Who does??  
   
 I claim enough so that I could buy a house if I could ever decide where want to stay put for 8 years.

What if gopro's didn't sell?

So if you are gifted $500 for Christmas from your grandparents, you would report that?
If you'd boss took you on an all expenses paid vacation, you would report that?
If you played scratch offs and won, you would report that?
etc, etc, etc.

1)  Nope...gifts from Gramps aren't income.  Unless you're V.Stiviano...although she's now appealing the courts decision..and will lose on that  LOL

Posted By: Alyssa Marie

So if you are gifted $500 for Christmas from your grandparents, you would report that?  
 If you'd boss took you on an all expenses paid vacation, you would report that?  
 If you played scratch offs and won, you would report that?  
 etc, etc, etc.  
   
 Its not illegal to have a sugar daddy. I file my taxes with a tax professional. I have done alright since 2005. No audits when I applied for fasfa. Maybe I'm one of the lucky ones, or maybe I just pay enough to keep the tax people out of my life.  
   
 And 8 years was just a "throwing it out there." I kinda like to move every 8 or so months. It's the free spirit in me. My lease in Vegas is 9 months and it has me itching. Let's say, I file enough and have a credit score that I could buy a new car if I knew I wouldn't abuse it and take off to the beach every weekend.  
 

Would it still be hot in July

Your point is EXACTLY what I was trying to convey, and for the record YES I would not only sign up and out myself, but I am already "out" The only people I will lie to about fucking prostitutes are police officers trying to arrest me, and I won't even lie to them, but I won't exactly give them the rope to hang me.

but you won't use it for yourself?

The court will assess this under a strict scrutiny standard and find states have a compelling governmental interest in prohibiting prostitution. I would venture to say the state will cite to the plethora of studies demonizing prostitution, and purportedly showing how it victimizes and abases women. I'll leave it to GaG to set the odds, but I don't see this case having a snowball's chance in hell. I think we'll continue the need to play underground.

What if Johny already came, would JCA cum twice? Is multi popping fair

Sorry russ, but if you aren't part of the solution then you are part of the problem.

I don't suppose many of you remember when gays were "forcibly outed" by other gays, just to force them to take a stand. Without something of the sort, prostitution is never going to be decriminalized in this country because not enough people either give a fuck or have the courage to stand up for themselves, and russ as much as I like you, you are the living proof of this, You my friend are AFRAID of taking a stand and as such you have ZERO room to complain

I'm not sure why you have to talk to me like I am a child, "you do know what a w-2 is, right?" when I am a 36 year old adult, but if it makes you feel some type of fuzziness at the end of the day, go ahead. It doesn't make me lose any of mine. I guess there is a reason that I have you on ignore and I signed out of TER to see why someone who I have on ignore felt the need to reply to a post of mine. Won't happen again. I come here and choose this lifestlye to not have stress, not to look for someone who thinks they are my dad.

and I filed my extension at  least a week ago, I have more important things to do today, like get drunk and fuck prostitutes.

FWIW, I hope you charged triple for having to work when you could have been out drinking and fucking hookers like me.

And if you're going to make remarks that are false and/or inaccurate...be prepared to hear why they are.

I tend to call it "value added billing"  

Would you file a restraining order on Deez Nutz?

Actually, strict scrutiny works the opposite way. It is used by courts to assess state actions when a fundamental freedom or a suspect class in affected by the state action. Unless the plaintiffs can convince the courts that the ability to pay or receive payment for sexual services is a fundamental right - a stretch in my opinion - the court will apply the far less onerous "rational relation" test. The state would only have to show a legitimate purpose for anti prostitution laws and the means employed are rationally related thereto. Btw, laws tested under strict scrutiny almost always are struck down, laws tested under rational relation almost always survive.

What if you came once but never returned?  Would you come again before coming existed?

I would, although I doubt my efforts would merit social change.

Would gag still march in the street if streets didn't exist?

prostitution will be made 100% legal.  

All the mandatory health screenings, the licensing, the fact that a hooker will no longer be able to pick and choose who she sees, so there might be security at the door....