Hey everyone, I want to get some opinions from a feminist community about a conversation I recently had with a friend. We started talking about prostitution, sexual assault and rape. A mainstream myth is that a prostitute cannot be raped or sexually assaulted (* as a feminist, I completely disagree with this assertion). During the conversation, my friend presented a scenario concerning rape and prostitution:
Let’s say a prostitute and his/her customer mutually decide on a particular transaction (i.e. X amount of money for sexual acts X, Y, and Z). This is an agreement made by two consenting adults, of course with the expectation of proper payment in exchange. After the sexual acts are over and its time to pay, what happens if the customer refuses payment? I seem to remember reading that from a legal perspective, it would probably fall into the category of theft and not sexual assault or rape (*I’m not saying the law is right here, we all know the law does not always have women’s best interest in mind, and rarely considers sex worker’s interests). The classification as theft bothers me because, although it is technically a business transaction, it seems to objectify the woman and her body as nothing more “things” meant to be bought, or in this case stolen. However, since the original sexual acts were decided upon consensually, could this fall into the category of rape/sexual assault?
I think this is a complex issue and I would really appreciate your opinions! If the above scenario were to take place, which I’m sure is probably common, would you classify it as sexual assault/rape or theft or something else all together? Thanks for your comments and opinions!
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Rape, Sexual Assault and Prostitution.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16703
The classification as theft bothers me because, although it is technically a business transaction, it seems to objectify the woman and her body as nothing more “things” meant to be bought, or in this case stolen. However, since the original sexual acts were decided upon consensually, could this fall into the category of rape/sexual assault?
--------------------------------------------
Good topic. In this specific scenario I would have to agree that theft, or failure ot pay for a service, is the most appropriate charge for a man refusing to pay a prostitute. The reason is, as you noted above, the woman is actually treating her body as a thing to be traded for money.....she is commodifying her sexuality. Her body is a product in this business transaction of her chosen profession (assuming we are not talking about women who have been involuntarily forced into prostitution, in which case it is always as act of rape even when paid for).
Of course, we both agree that a woman has the right to refuse sexual contact of any kind regardless of how she makes a living. So my answer specifically refers to transactions where a man refuse to pay following a consensual act.
I agree with Crumpet. Basically, she was in a verbal contract to exchange a service for money, not unlike a masseuse, hair-dresser, construction worker, office worker, etc.
Honestly, I think it's a good thing the courts would see this as theft. I think that would demonstrate a sense of legitimacy towards the business, recognizing it as something other than two people having sex but as a governmentally-protected transaction.
Now, if the scenario was that they agreed on a certain *act* and the man ended up doing something which the prostitute did NOT consent to, my instinct would be to call that rape, regardless of if he paid her or not.
I am not a sex worker, however I have friends who are/have been. I try to keep up on what the workers themselves believe to be most beneficial for them, and so I support decriminalization (www.spoc.ca).
So, I would call it theft - not of an object, but of a service.
If you went to a massage therapist (or any other worker where you purchase a service, and not an item - how about tutor/instructor, hair stylist, life coach, counsellor, etc), and skipped out without paying, that would be theft, yes?
I think one of the key issues here is that a sex worker provides a service. I've seen some folks say that we shouldn't condone/decriminalize sex work because it contributes to the idea that bodies are something that can be bought or sold. But this doesn't really hold weight - a client does not 'rent' or 'purchase' the worker's body, to use in whatever way he wants. The client is purchasing a specific service (or services), which is agreed upon in advance. Even in a bdsm situation, the services/scenario are agreed upon in advance.
This does not mean that a sex worker cannot be raped. If a client does not pay for the agreed upon services, that is theft. From what I understand, it would be classified as rape if the client did something to which the worker did not consent.
The classification of this as theft indicates that the services of the worker are something that can be purchased, which is true.
From what I understand, a decriminalized scenario, these events would be much easier for the worker to report, since they would not have to fear being charged themselves.
I think you're looking at a "theft of services" crime rather than rape here. Though sex is fundamentally different than any other "service", is the harm felt by an unpaid prostitute any different than that felt by an unpaid auto mechanic, an unpaid attorney, etc. (who also gave time and labor for no compensation)? She was violated -- but she was okay with being violated as long as she was paid ... that's a difficult argument to make to a jury.
In some jurisdictions there is a separate area of sex-crimes law called "seduction" (I think), which I believe was defined as sex where the consent was knowingly obtained under false pretenses. The example I recall was a wife consents to sex with her husband's twin brother thinking it was her husband (where the twin knew that she mistook him for her husband ... if the twin thought she knew exactly who he was, this creates a completely different problem).
Your unpaid prostitute example may be able to fall under that category, though I think it is unlikely to be prosecuted. In your prostitute example, as in the wife/twin example ... fundamentally, she did consent -- so it is technically not rape. If the john thought he could pay (credit card rejected, lost wallet, whatever), then he wouldn't have knowingly seduced ... just as if the twin genuinely thought she knew he was the brother and not her husband.
But, if he had sex with the prostitute with the intention of not paying, I can see how you could argue seduction (presuming I correctly remembered the name of that crime).
kbz
It's theft unless the client does something the prostitute did not consent to. Then it's rape.
Hi everyone, I'm the OP. Thanks for your comments! They are all very informative and have helped clear up my confusion. Now I agree that considering it "theft of services rendered" makes the most sense here. Originally I felt uncomfortable referring to the crime as theft because it seemed to objectify the prostitute's body (in my mind). However, after reading all the comments, I think referring to the transaction and the sexual actions as services is a much better perspective. Thanks again!
Hi everyone, I'm the OP. Thanks for your comments! They are all very informative and have helped clear up my confusion. Now I agree that considering it "theft of services rendered" makes the most sense here. Originally I felt uncomfortable referring to the crime as theft because it seemed to objectify the prostitute's body (in my mind). However, after reading all the comments, I think referring to the transaction and the sexual actions as services is a much better perspective. Thanks again!
I'd say it would depend on whether or not it was legal. If it was, we would obviously classify that as theft of services. It would not be sexual assault because the damage done to her would be purely financial.
Hopefully though, prostitution would be illegal. In which case, we shouldn't charge him or her with theft of services at all. Protecting the "service rights" of prostitutes in that way would legitimize what it was they were doing. Prostitutes don't deserve to be paid anything.
Yes, 'cause they're filthy, filthy human beings who deserve only our scorn and derision!
Gimme a break. There are plenty of arguments against prostitution, but unless it's one that treats sex workers like the humans they are, it's just loud noise.
Is it REALLY that fun to hang out on a blog that goes against your core values so much? I don't know how you have TIME for that, assuming that you spend at least part of your week engaging in things that are pleasurable to you.
Whoa. Just whoa. Seriously? I checked out your blog. Why are you here except to spread vitriol?
Whoa. Just whoa. Seriously.
Ah, jesus. Double post. One more civil than the first. My apologies.
Actually sex workers DO deserve to be paid - and paid very well.
They provide a very useful service - and put themselves at considerable physical, emotional and psychological risk to do so.
Sex worker here, this has happened to me. Also was acquaintence raped at 19 so at least I have perspective on the differences in the feeling... It's definitely theft of services, I know you already determined that, but just wanted to give you an official Seal of Whoreproval!
My favorite story of this was the first time it happened to me. Now I would like to bore you with it :)
Client paid up front, I was foolish and let him see where I put the money. After finishing (was approx 15 min oral) I stepped out of the room, into the doorway of the bathroom to wrap and discard the condom, and when I went back in the room, I went to grab the money and stick it in my regular money spot. Client was still getting his pants on and I sensed discomfort from him as I reached in for the money. He had taken half of it back. But only half. Obvs that he left some to possibly fool me if I only glanced in the drawer. We then had the following exchange:
"Where's my money?"
"Huh?"
"My money, asshole, I counted it when I put it in here"
"Huh..ohidunnoooo..huh.. isn't that it, wa...huh?"
"Oh hell no. This shit don't fly..."
- I exit the room and grab my bat, Buster, and hold him with two hands in the middle of the bat (it's much harder for someone to take it from you that way, and you can strike using the top or bottom of bat) go back in the room and say:
"It's your choice, you can either give me my money back or I'm about to change both of our lives forever."
He fumbles in his pants pockets (which he hadn't gotten entirely back on yet) trying to placate me saying, "I was just kidding... really I was gonna see what you said when you noticed and then I swear I was gonna give it back to ya." Totally believable, right?
"Wow that's pathetic" as I snatch the money back that he took. "Get the fuck out. Never come back."
also- there is always a method of revenge, phone numbers, emails used in making appointments, other sneaky stuff we do like observe the vehicle and plates they have... so if we (ripped off sex workers) really wanted to get even or try to get our money, we could... usually it's obvious that these stealers-of-sex-services are too pathetic to waste revenergy on. Revenge-energy is for people who do far worse things.
Though I did one time steal an outcall client's patio chairs after he shorted my best friend 100 bucks on a 400 dollar call -- I was so mad cuz I recommended him as a decent client (he had been honest up till then) I coulda took the patio table too, but I have ethics.
Certain escort services require credit card transactions up front that are not handled by the sex worker himself/herself. Not leaving a trail is important for many clients, so often the charge is disguised as something tremendously vague and innocuous and shows up on the statement as such. Some clients still don't wish to pay for anything other than in cash alone and one way of getting around theft is insisting that after payment has been made in advance, the sex worker will call the company to verify.
In the course of my life, I have known sex workers who have explained to me the tricks of the trade, and I have to admit that I've never been tremendously comfortable with all of the cans of worms that prostitution opens. It is a complex issue, certainly, but I will always see it as a supremely dangerous occupation that I would never want a close friend or family member pursuing out of fear for their safety and their health.
I guess a consensus seems to have been reached that it is theft, but I would have been inclined to say it is also rape... I was under the impression that consent given under false pretences is not consent (the most generic example would be someone directly lying when asked whether or not they have an STD). In this case, the sex worker's original consent was (presumably) only given with the understanding that she would receive payment. To not pay her is to go against her conditions of consent.... so I would argue that it is rape as well as theft.
Obviously, I'm not looking at this from a legal perspective, as I doubt any courts would take my view. But that was my understanding of consent.
But then every woman who has ever had sex with a partner she told she was using birthcontrol and wasnt- raped him. Every woman who lied about her age raped him/her. Every woman who said she was single and wasn't raped him/her. Every woman who ever cheated and claimed she was faithful raped him/her. EVery woman who lied about her weight raped him or her. Every woman who lied about her natural hair color raped him/her. This could go on and on forever and ultimately end up with a bunch of liars being thrown in jail as sex offenders.
I stand by the assessment that the OP's case is theft of services and not rape. Consent is giving before and during. You can neither renege on consent after the sex act is over (and accuse a partner of rape because they dont call you back) or be coerced into saying it was consentful when you didnt give your consent at the time of the act.
Similar things are codified in some jurisdictions. E.g. sabotaging condoms is considered sexual assault, same goes for failure to disclose a sexually transmittable illness which is known by the party who has contracted it. Same goes for impersonating someone else. Duplicity to varying degrees can make something rape.
The difference could be that in some way this is something which the courts can force to be rectified by compelling the guilty party to pay for the service they didn't initially pay for and for lost wages/punitive damages.
This is not funny. Number one in most states prostitution is illegal so it is illegal to profit from it and there is “no theft of services from an illegal act...”.Second most women who are prostitutes are not fully consenting a pimp is usually holding something over there head. And number three rape of prostitutes is a very real crime and common along with murder see this and know it’s more the norm them not. http://community.feministing.com/2009/10/some-one-forgotten-tied-to-a-t.html
Now go to where you worship or think deep thoughts and apologize if this posting of yours was a joke. And hope karma doesn’t catch up with you.
Second most women who are prostitutes are not fully consenting a pimp is usually holding something over there head.
Thank you for pointing this out.
I don't think anyone was suggesting it is a joke. And secondly, I am skeptical most prostitutes are controlled by pimps. Perhaps a large number in street economies, and street economies are about 30%-50% of prostitution. (There was a recent study in Chicago on street workers.) And finally, while it may be illegal to profit from it (under pimping laws in most states), sex workers still frequently pay taxes because it sure is illegal to earn income and not pay taxes.
Violence IS extremely prevalent in sex work (sexworkersproject.org) often because the police don't take seriously either the rape of sex workers nor the theft of services.
Wow are you serious? Why are you even posting on this blog if this is your attitude. This is an important feminist issue and to dismiss sex workers and the topic out of hand and just dismiss it all as illegal totally drops the ball. Troll.
It seems to me that the OP was asking a legal hypothetical or for legal theories regarding failure to pay for the services of a prostitute. In theory, failure to pay for a service rendered, including the services of a prostitute, is theft of services. The fact that the service voluntarily rendered is sexual in nature does not elevate the crime to rape, because, fundamentally, genuine consent was obtained.
In reality, prostitution is illegal in most jurisdictions. Theft of illegal services may not even be a crime in some areas, and even where it is technically a crime, theft of the services of a prostitute will simply never be prosecuted. It would be similar to "he stole my heroin stash", "I got swindled smuggling illegal weapons", etc. -- even if it were prosecutable, you'd never find a jury that would have sympathy for a defendant that got screwed in an illegal transaction.
kbz
Yes, it is illegal in most states but it shouldn't be. The rapes, murders, and pimps would not be part of the equation in legalized sex work and this has been proven by the areas of the country where (albeit still not equitably enough for my taste) prostitution has operated as a legitimate service. Some women sincerely, truly enjoy having sex for money. I was one. To even see prostitution as something you could eliminate from human culture-it's just laughable.
In the scenario you described I think it has to be theft, because consent was given AT THE TIME the acts occurred. To me that's the key. YOu can't retroactively remove your consent or decide later after the acts that it was something else. If up until the point of not receiving payment it was consensual then it cannot be rape or sexual assault.
I can see why calling it theft feels wrong but that's what it is.