Yes. Try getting someone who isn't a sexworker to recognise that though. Money takes the place of consent. With no money, there is no consent. Who's the fool turning tricks without getting the money first, though? Perhaps they're a 'trusted' client who rips them off, I got done for $100 that way last week. I did get the other $550 out of him first, though, and I justified it by reasoning he'd brought champagne. It's lying to myself as he's an otherwise good client who spends much but often short changes me $50 or so. There's no sex, he just likes me fisting him. Next time I might just not cut my nails before he arrives and accidentally spike him once or twice. Grr to him!
I would say it's not rape but it is very bad fraud/theft of services. I feel uncomfortable having my definition of rape watered down by a case where, for instance, the act could be turnedback fom rape into consenual sex by the payment being made later.
Ethically, sure. Legally no. Legally, rape laws defend those forced, coerced or otherwise unwillingly had 'sex'.
It could be viewed as breach of contract,or theft. This is tricky (pardon any pun), when it happens somewhere where prostitution is not legal, and therefore is an invalid contract to begin with, however.
As a sexworker, I would warn, always get the money first!
I could only view it as rape if perhaps a sexworker was forced or coerced into sex when not in a sexwork context. Or, within a sexwork context, if there was never any 'business' done...say a man picks up a street girl, she gets in the car, he threatens her and rapes her, with no business being done.
Whilst I acknowledge other points I have to vote for 'no'. Rape is a forced non consensual act - non payment of services should not effect the fact that at the time it was consented to.
If the decision was that it was rape, where is the line drawn? Is having sex with your partner in the mistaken belief that they love you/behave in a certain way/like certain things/promise things rape at the future point you discover they have lied? How about after a relationship breaks down and love disappears - was some sex rape, and other sex just sex?
I think it's a gap in the law. I don't think it qualifies as rape, on balance. To some, rape involves force, violence, or threat of violence - fear - which is absent. To most, rape involves loss of self-determination over something intimate, which is present but qualified: It's retrospective, and could be fixed by a modest sum of money.
At the same time, I think it's far more morally reprehensible than mere theft because the sex worker has made an extraordinary personal concession by giving sex, and so not paying is demeaning and damaging. There ought to be a special legal concept for this, but it's tricky because (I feel) sex should not be an enforceable part of a contract. Some kind of "breach of intimate agreement" concept might work.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Money takes the place of consent. With no money, there is no consent. Who's the fool turning tricks without getting the money first, though? Perhaps they're a 'trusted' client who rips them off, I got done for $100 that way last week. I did get the other $550 out of him first, though, and I justified it by reasoning he'd brought champagne. It's lying to myself as he's an otherwise good client who spends much but often short changes me $50 or so. There's no sex, he just likes me fisting him. Next time I might just not cut my nails before he arrives and accidentally spike him once or twice. Grr to him!
I'd like to know how that's *not* rape.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
Bad lock! No biscuit!
Re: Bad lock! No biscuit!
(no subject)
Re: Bad lock! No biscuit!
no subject
no subject
It could be viewed as breach of contract,or theft. This is tricky (pardon any pun), when it happens somewhere where prostitution is not legal, and therefore is an invalid contract to begin with, however.
As a sexworker, I would warn, always get the money first!
I could only view it as rape if perhaps a sexworker was forced or coerced into sex when not in a sexwork context. Or, within a sexwork context, if there was never any 'business' done...say a man picks up a street girl, she gets in the car, he threatens her and rapes her, with no business being done.
(no subject)
no subject
If the decision was that it was rape, where is the line drawn? Is having sex with your partner in the mistaken belief that they love you/behave in a certain way/like certain things/promise things rape at the future point you discover they have lied? How about after a relationship breaks down and love disappears - was some sex rape, and other sex just sex?
(no subject)
no subject
At the same time, I think it's far more morally reprehensible than mere theft because the sex worker has made an extraordinary personal concession by giving sex, and so not paying is demeaning and damaging. There ought to be a special legal concept for this, but it's tricky because (I feel) sex should not be an enforceable part of a contract. Some kind of "breach of intimate agreement" concept might work.