• FenrirIII@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’m sure there’s a line around the block of women who were paid for sex parties. How is this not prostitution? Oh yeah, they’re politicians and rules don’t apply to them.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      She claims she wasn’t paid for sex but to attend the party and that the sex was consensual. There are certainly other ethical/moral/legal concerns about this whole thing, but if you are honestly looking for why this wouldn’t be considered prostitution…well, you simply have to read the article and the answer is pretty obvious.

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      If there was a camera rolling and the film was sold it isn’t prostitution it’s pornography.

      • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Having consensual sex: legal.

        Having consensual sex for money: illegal.

        Having consensual sex for money but there’s also a cameraperson: legal.

        I love nonsensical laws.

        • CaptainPedantic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          I definitely agree it’s nonsensical, but it makes a little bit more sense than that. Consensual sex being filmed is free speech as long as it’s not “obscene” (whatever that fucking means).

          Still stupid tho.