4 ms·
In front of a judge, or just on HN?
by mesofile 5y ago
In front of a judge, or just on HN?
- treeman79 5y agoCould be both. To oversimplify, It is legal to pay someone for sex in a film as an entertainer. Just not in private. Other places have hour long marriages to get around the problem.
- lostcolony 5y agoYeah; our laws are weird. Pay a person to have sex = criminal; pay a person to have sex -on camera- = perfectly legal.
- kjeetgill 5y agoI get that you're just quiping but for anyone else that's curious, it's not as absurd as it sounds. There are a number of substantial differences. Intent and purpose are huge parts of many laws. The money flows in very different directions. Both actors are being payed and contribute to producing a sincere commercial good. No one is paying to have sex at all. There are enough laws around documentation and licencing that no one's out there running a brothel calling it a studio.
- elric 5y agoI'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Prostitution is legal (or mostly legal) in many parts of the world. I would argue that most progressive leaning folks are in favour of a legal framework for sex workers. Sex work is work, whether it comes with a fancy word like "sex surrogate therapist" or a derogatory one like "hooker". The issue is controversial in many places, to some extent because of real issues of abuse/trafficking, but more so because of moralizing. I would argue that all sex workers deserve respect, in front of judges or on HN, regardless of whether it's prostitution or surrogation.