Hmm. While I think it's right that non payment is not rape, I can think of false pretences that definitely would be. Supposing I am involved in a scene in which I await my partner coming home blindfolded, and blow them when they arrive. Suppose further that a third party, learning of this arrangement, breaks into the house and takes my partner's stead, and I only learn of this when the blindfold is removed. I would want that to be classed as rape, even though I only discover that I did not consent after the fact.
[76] There are also two conclusive presumptions: if the defendant [..] impersonates someone known personally to the complainant in order to get them to consent, they're guilty.
It would be breach of contract but I think you can't sue for a contract made for immoral purposes. You can't sue for a gambling debt but I think they are about to change the law on that. Perhaps they should also change it on this, so that it becomes a contract you can sue for.
I don't think it's rape, but I do think it's abuse. Not sure what the solution is, though. Making the contract enforceable by the non-paying party only would be a start, but I'm not sure how many sex workers would take advantage of that, and it's still only a civil remedy, whereas if it really is abuse, there ought to be a criminal one as well. Maybe it could be categorised as assault rather than rape.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
baggyeyes
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2003-12-22 12:52 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-12-22 01:36 pm (UTC)Tricky business.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-12-22 01:49 pm (UTC)[76] There are also two conclusive presumptions: if the defendant [..] impersonates someone known personally to the complainant in order to get them to consent, they're guilty.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-12-22 02:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-12-23 02:23 am (UTC)