Prostitution as Pornography
2006-09-06 23:18 - Ideas
I know I'm not the first person to think of this. I can't be. And people have thought similar things enough to wonder, in court, what the difference between the two is.
So, there are already film production companies. You can hire people to write scripts, to shoot the film, do the wardrobe, set up the lighting, and so forth. So, what's to stop you from setting up a "custom movie production" company? Nothing of course.
What's to stop that company from encouraging prospective clients, by providing a prescreened set of actors to help you get your film rolling? A quick google search found a team that will shoot your movie for you, you just provide the script. So let's make it even easier and just slightly different.
Say you want to star in a movie, but you don't have any costars, or story, or cameras. How about I set up a shop, with all sorts of cheesy stories ready, a troupe of actors, and a big wardrobe. A set of backdrops and boom, we can shoot your movie, and you can star in it. Great. Completely legitimate.
So, make the story line pornographic. Is this now illegal? I wonder.
Please note: this is just a crazy idea I've had. It's not a secret desire, and it's not something I plan on doing.
2006-09-10 12:10 - FrenchKiss
...that the production company must pay the actors for their participation, and if the actor is paying the production company who provides the actresses and film production services, it is considered prostitution. In some cases the owner of the production company plays a role in the sex scenes (eg Seymore Butts, Jenna Jameson) but these aren't cases of a third party paying for the privelige of having sex.
However, in order for a prostitution arrest to occur, there must be police involvement and some kind of documentation, usually a wire recording that supplies vocal evidence of an agreement to exchange sexual services for goods or monitary consideration plus an act of furtherance. If the police come across a video of you handing money to someone who is agreeing on tape to have sex with you for that payment, they cannot prove that an actual act of prostitution took place, because you could have been "play acting" and for all they know the woman would have had sex with you anyway, and may not have taken or intended to take the money.
Married and dating couples engage in behavior that legally falls within the definition of prostittuion all the time. However, because they're just having sex with eachother, and therefore aren't ever targeted by stings, they can continue to engage in illicit sexual behavior to their hearts' content without worrying about getting arrested for it.
If a cop were to conduct an undercover sting on the film production agency you linked, and they agreed to make a movie for him that involved sexual acts between the customer and one of the models, then as soon as they showed up for production, it would be considered a violation of 647b (in California) (or if they hosted at their studios, as soon as the "model" removed her top). Where it gets a bit sticky would be in cases of "simulated sexual activity." Under California law, acts played out in virtually all R rated movie sex scenes are considered lewed acts subject to prostitution laws. Lewd acts are those involving sexual stimulation by touching the genitals, buttocks or nipples, and needn't produce orgasm to qualify.
My personal take on all this, is that the laws of prostitution are ridiculous at best and should be gotten rid of. There are already laws against public indecency, slavery, sex with minors, loitering, littering, being intoxicated in public et cetera, as well as employment laws that outlaw the behavior most often associated with pimping. Hopefully someday we'll be able to see past all the bullshit and allow consenting adults to engage in monetary exchange for sexual services. Until then, be careful and take measures to protect yourself from getting caught up in a sting.