ha! only in canada. on topic. prostitution is illegal for the fact 93% of prostitutes are under 18 here.Sightless Wisdom said:
Prostitution/Pornography
- Thread starter aseelt
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Hell yes! They have freaking adverts in the yellow pages. No need for alley transactions.Sightless Wisdom said:
Both are going to happen anyway. And it's better if they're under the governments control rather than crime lords.
I have visited Amsterdam twice in the last 2 years. It's a strange place, but also liberating. Prostitution is like becoming a Model in this country. It's a legit career. And one I respect.
Not everyone can get a girl/boy friend. It's sad, but true. If I'm still a virgin when pushing 20 something you damn right I am buying myself a lady of the night. These women (and in rare cases men) are providing a service like anyone else. I'd much rather they where kept in reasonable working conditions in the red light district than on a street corner in Ipswitch.
I watch porn regularly so I support that too. Once again, if it's governed properly it's fine.
EDIT: Ok, just relived I didn't read the first post at all and made a complete arse of myself.
But yeah, it's fucked up that ones legal but the other isn't.
I have visited Amsterdam twice in the last 2 years. It's a strange place, but also liberating. Prostitution is like becoming a Model in this country. It's a legit career. And one I respect.
Not everyone can get a girl/boy friend. It's sad, but true. If I'm still a virgin when pushing 20 something you damn right I am buying myself a lady of the night. These women (and in rare cases men) are providing a service like anyone else. I'd much rather they where kept in reasonable working conditions in the red light district than on a street corner in Ipswitch.
I watch porn regularly so I support that too. Once again, if it's governed properly it's fine.
EDIT: Ok, just relived I didn't read the first post at all and made a complete arse of myself.
But yeah, it's fucked up that ones legal but the other isn't.
Granted a lot of women are forced into prostitution, but that a) isn't the issue here since this is about prostitution and an apparent legal loophole; and b) does mention those women who *do* choose prostitution.SonicKoala said:
I agree with the first two statements. However, the act between the two porn stars is essentially prostitution, since money is exchanged (between the company and the actors) for the purpose of the sex act. The subject isn't related to the viewer, nor the likelyhood of the viewer doing such things.Ultratwinkie said:
With regards to the first paragraph, the pimps in this case would be the producers/directors/film companiesMelasZepheos said:
Willem Defoe! Apparently had a sex scene (or a body double) in Antichrist at the start of the film. I would liken it to the same situation a porn star is in yes.
This is copied from MelasZepheos:
I've thought this for a while, and I have yet to come up with a satisfactory answer, but it certainly is an interesting point.
I guess you could say there's a degree of professionalism? Maybe? This is a shaky point, but there are companies set up to deal with pronography, whereas prostitution is more one guy pimping, I guess. Maybe it's just a case of no one having got around to making a law forbidding it.
As a secondary question, if an actress has a real sex scene rather than a simulated love scene, are they prostituting themselves?
My reply:
If an actress has a real sex scene and not a simulated one, then she is making a porno, right? What differentiates the movie with sex in it from a porno? (plot? or lack there of?)
I've thought this for a while, and I have yet to come up with a satisfactory answer, but it certainly is an interesting point.
I guess you could say there's a degree of professionalism? Maybe? This is a shaky point, but there are companies set up to deal with pronography, whereas prostitution is more one guy pimping, I guess. Maybe it's just a case of no one having got around to making a law forbidding it.
As a secondary question, if an actress has a real sex scene rather than a simulated love scene, are they prostituting themselves?
My reply:
If an actress has a real sex scene and not a simulated one, then she is making a porno, right? What differentiates the movie with sex in it from a porno? (plot? or lack there of?)
Surely if it was legal people could do something to stop women being forced into it.SonicKoala said:
It's going to happen either way. Better that it's kept under control.
Welcome!cakitty said:
And I've never heard of a case where a movie that appeared in the same theaters you can watch a Disney movie had a real life sex scene in it. It's all simulated if I am very, very much mistake. If I am my view of the majority of Hollywood actresses...hasn't changed one bit.
I agree with this - I did some research on the topic for a project back in high school, and the conclusion that many experts reached was similar; legalization would force out the criminal element and provide for a safer environment.SomeBritishDude said:
In Canada, independant newspapers who have a reader base of well over 500K have 10 pages devoted to prostitute ads and callgirls.Pimppeter2 said:
We pretty much don't care. Hell, Montreal and I think Vancouver has a "Red Light District".
Toronto is trying to get one designated here.
[sub][sub]If you're ever in Toronto and need a pick me up, go to John and Bathurst or Warden and Steels![/sub][/sub]
Gentlemen, I do believe we've provided the internet with possibly one of the most hilarious loop holes ever.
Canada really is quite awesome despite what some people would have you believe. I heard they're even thinking about legalizing the green over there, care to specify?Sightless Wisdom said:
OT: I've thought about that before as well and I just don't care anymore. Porn is only occasional for me and I consider prostitution to be Cheating in real life. I think I've made a thread about that before actually.
Not really.aseelt said:
It's been many years since I was in school, but the bottom line is this. All pornography is illegal in the US. Labeling sexual material "porn" is a slang term which has nothing to do with the legal definition. To be declared Pornographic someone has to find something offensive and in addition it has to be determined to be without any redeeming merits (including artistic).
Your "porn stars" on paper are not producing "porn" they are acting in "Art Films", sex and nudity being able to be defined as part of an artistic process. This is why many adult movies include some kind of plot (possibly revolving around sex) since it means that if declared porn the movie producers could then turn around and fight it based on those elements (at least in theory). The nature of the US system though is one where you can't ban things like recording sexual acts, so each work needs to be reviewed individually. This means that the "adult entertainment industry" survives through proliferation as much as anything else. Basically even if one movie gets banned, hundreds of others get made and distributed, and there is no way anyone could go after them all. It can get complicated.
My instructor was the former head of the Connecticut State Police while I was in college. He went down the process as it was in Connecticut a couple of times, and talked about how he was involved a few times in reviewing such films. I'm not sure if it varies state to state or what, nor about how things might have changed since the area has been a constant battleground. Still from what I learned in another article here with some guy getting nailed for having imported adult comics with underage looking protaganists, it seemed like he lost the case due to mostly falling prey to intimidation and defending himself the wrong way under the circumstances (ie with a Jury as opposed to a Judge, when dealing with a case probably relying on a technical defense).
When it comes to prostitution the situation is a bit more complicated than many people seem to think. A lot of it comes down to NIMBY sentiment (Not In My Back Yard). Basically nobody wants streetwalkers and whores doing their thing in their neighborhood. What's more it's very much an issue when everyone knows what some of these people do for a living and go wandering around the same areas frequented by their johns and the like.
It goes beyond things like healthcare and violence as well, because simply put with legalized prostitution you suddenly have to have the police doing the job of pimps for all intents and purposes. A fight over payment and services? Well your boys in blue and judges now need to sort that mess out. A paticular pain in the butt because hte nature of the business means it could very well be simply one person's word against another's. Then of course with such services publically availible you have to worry about the temptation it presents for married people, or people simply vulnerable to scandal. All comments about morality aside your going to have a lot more interpersonal problems, divorces, fights, scandals, drama, and violence not directly linked to the business of prostitution itself
but linked.
In the US this is specifically problematic because of the way our legal system works as well. Among other things every space in jail we save by legalizing prostitution, we fill up with a crime related to legal prostitution.
Right now we have come up with a pretty good compromise in the US in setting up a national "Red Light District" in Nevada to cater to the rest of the country, with laws specifically geared towards dealing with these problems there. We pretty much get most of the benefits for those willing to go there, while preventing the negative aspects from leaking out to everywhere else. Opinions vary, but in my case I feel it's a good middle ground compromise to simply banning "vice" or permitted it everywhere.
-
When it comes to Canada (and other nations) with legalized prostitution, one has to consider that even the most free of these nations do not have the same level of freedoms and protections as the USA which makes things somewhat easier.
To use Canada as an example, I've been privy to a lot of comparison between the two systems. While hardly an expert, a number of points have been made about things like Canadian "blank warrents" which allow cops to suspend civil liberties pretty much any time they want providing they get results and similar things. Simply put the rules of evidence, guidelines for search and seizure, and other things are a heck of a lot looser. Canada being more concerned in many cases about results rather than how they are achieved. If things like the blank warrents (allowing a cop to issue his own warrent) have changed it was after my time studying this kind of stuff.
It's also noteworthy that the US's system which FUNCTIONS on a principle of "innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" in criminal matters is very unusual. It gives criminals a lot more rights. and ties the hands of the goverment a lot more, than most other nations including very free ones that are similar to the US. Some other nations use the same terminology but in practice typically operate more on a system relying on a "preponderance of evidence" (which is a lower standard in the US used for civil matters). That is to say that if it's very likely someone is guilty in other nations like Canada he will be convited. In the US simply being very likely is not enough.
The basic point is that what would be relatively simple matters for the system in other nations to handle, are a lot less so in the US. Sorting out an issue between a hooker and john could turn into a major production if criminal charges like theft, or refusal to pay for services came up. This also means that we in turn have to pay for all of this in our legal system, and deal with all the chaos, and bad blood. I mean if a local teacher gets into it with a local cathouse, that's something people in the local area are going to be exposed to and have to deal with, like it or not. Here this could go on for months or years, in Canada they could probably get it done a lot quicker and more decisively.
Of course, if this sounds like an endorsement of Canada's legal system it really isn't. Truthfully I like to invoke Canada and Britan as examples of more strict systems that manage to function without turning into a police state, when suggesting in certain places that we here in the US tighten things up (when this rarely occurs). However overall, I think those systems are a lot more likely to throw innocent people in jail. The basic attitude in the US being that we'd rather let a guilty person go free, than see an innocent punished. In Canada and the UK they tend to be content with simply making sure they get it right the majority of the time.
Say there is an entire film, with a single sex scene in, but that sex scene is real insteado simulated, for reasons of realism. It's been suggested that this has happened a lot of times (Willem Defoe, Anglina Jolie and Antonio Banderas, Kim Bassinger and Mickey Rourke) and definitely has happened in quite a few indie/art films (9 Songs springs to mind)cakitty said:
So these films, which may have been based around sex, but the plot was more focused on the characterisation, the narrative thread, and just happened to include a sex scene that was unsimulated. That's the difference for me between a porno and a film with real sex in it.
And by the way, welcome to the Escapist, don't go into the basement. (I'm going to steal that from you Namless)
