Is forcing sex on a pornstar the same as rape?

As I noted earlier, it depends on the judge. Er, unfortunately.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Tiassa, you keep asking this question of heterosexual males. Yes, we would all find it disgusting to have a penis enter our bodies. That's simply part of being heterosexual.

But for a female or homosexual male, there is nothing intrinsically disgusting about penis's entering their bodies. Hell, they like it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thank you for making my point. While you are correct that there is nothing intrinsically disgusting about penises entering bodies, such a simplistic dismissal of the fundamental power of self-governance--e.g., the right to say, "No"--not only explains much about the functionally inappropriate comparison to coal mining, but viewed alongside that comparison brings about the compelling suggestion that you really haven't much idea what you're talking about. The dimensional distortion of such a perspective, while atrocious in and of itself, is a tragic realization of one among many potential outcomes spawned by an absence of information.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I have seen some interesting responses, I'm glad this topic sparked a lot of interest, sex usually does.

Many of you started going down the legal path, some of you covered the rape question. This topic post was mostly aimed after far left or far right situations.

Firstly I want to mention that any woman who is semi-attractive can do porn, however, different porn films treat you differently, and more importantly pay you differently. If you are 18 years old and are just entering the industry, don't expect to be making Pamela's gross income.

I worked for a Guniiy Industries for a year as a camera/boom operator for porn films. There was an 18 year old up-and-coming actress (yes we refer to them as actresses because they are pretending) who came in for an interview, the interview process is simple, she signs all her rights away on a one page document which basically informs her that she is aware she is here for a sexually revealing photo/video shoot, these are STANDARD forms from the Court House in my town. She is asked to not associate with the cameraman and pretend he is not there and to do some form of sexual act. At this point, whatever the girl does is her own doing, she can open the door and leave if she likes, and it has happened before. Usually however, the girl undresses and masterbates. A few weeks later the film is developed and a survey is taken if people want to see the actress in future films. If she gets a positive survey review, she is called to make more movies. This is where every pornstar starts.

If you are selected, your first couple of shoots will be for less than $2,500 per movie. The average movie grosses about $50,000 and costs less than $15,000 to make, so one can see the profits. Now, if you feel you are worth more than $2,500 you have to find a manager to find larger spreading films for you to act in. Please understand this point, the actress WANTS a manager to SET UP STRANGERS for her to have sex with so she can yield larger amounts of money.

Now this girl in particular, lets call her Laura, she found a big-time manager who promised her over $10,000 per film. She reluctantly agreed, and filmed 2-3 movies for this man, I can't remember how many, I spoke to her over 2 years ago about this. She received a paycheck after 3 months for $4000 for all the films together. After complaining to her manager, he stated that the movie grossed less and he had to pay her less, and to quote his words, "Fuck better, get more money sweetheart."

Now in any other business, that sentence alone is considered sexual harassment, but go ahead and try to take that to court. She quit her job, and the manager in question still had a healthy supply of other up-and-coming actresses to take her place, he will never fall in the market like some posters are claiming.

Some stated that she can sue for any rape allegations, et cetera. I liked the prostitute example where it was asked if raping her is burglary or rape. Because Laura agreed to sex for ten thousand dollars, not four thousand, was she raped? Just like the prostitute for no money, or for 10 dollars less than what she charged.

Also, I want to end a couple of people's strays of information. If you have sex with a prostitute and she sues you for rape you will NOT have a 25 year sentence. It is understood that she coerced you into the position and both of you will be charged with anti-prostitution laws. You can't sue Majorska for your fatal car accident.

But, trying to get back to topic, I am asking more along the lines of ethics. If you agree to have sex for money, but then for whatever reason no longer agree, is rape really the word that defines your situation?

Laura attempted to sue the manager completely unsuccessfully and I suggested suing for rape, she thought it was silly.

 

She has a breach of contract complaint, at least. And if that is substantiated, she does, in fact, have a rape case.

Out of curiosity, where is this company located?

 

Is throwing a stunt man down a flight of stairs when he doesn't want you to assault?

Oh, I think it is.

 

Tiassa:

Porn stars have the right to say No.

 

Granty:

That's a completely retarded comparison.

But let me just see if I understand the argumentation on this thread:

1. A porn star enters a contract, agreeing to have sex with anyone the director wishes, in return for payment.

2. The porn star comes across a client who she does NOT want to have sex with.

3. If she refuses to have sex with this client, she will be breaking the contract, and hence will lose her job.

4. This amounts to 'blackmail'. In order to keep the contract, the porn star must have sex with someone they don't particularly want to, in order to keep their job. As they aren't 'willing', it amounts to rape. Although rape only occurs when consent has not been given (either implicitly or explicitly).

Just for fun:

1. A cleaner enters a contract, agreeing to clean the caravans in the caravan park of the manager, in return for payment.

2. The cleaner comes across a caravan whose floor is smeared with shit and vomit.

3. If she refuses to have clean this caravan, she will be breaking the contract, and hence will lose her job.

4. This amounts to 'blackmail'. In order to keep the contract, the cleaner must have clean something that they don't particularly want to, in order to keep their job. As they aren't 'willing', it amounts to slavery.

 

So it went beyond you disagree.

The title of the thread is about forcing on sex on the pornstar. Even on the job she gets to say 'N0' and walk out of the room. Maybe the producers can fire her, but they cannot hear her 'no' and hold her down and force her to have sex.

I think stuntmen and women cannot also be forced to participate in a stunt, that they feel is unsafe, for example. You cannot grab them and shove them into the car that's going flying off the bridge.

And the work that these people do does not make it open season on them in downtime.

 

This thread is the reason you nerds have no real social awareness in emphasizing pornographic perspectives in society. Consequently your lack of knowledge in the pornographic trade has lead you to trail this topic with irrelevant questions in order to hide your mere compulsive desire.
You all are sick!!!

 

How is that 'blackmail'?

 

it does if they are a portar!?!! what do they think they'd be doing handing out flowers?

 

Help us with your slang, dude ... I can't find a definition for "portar" anywhere. At least, not in English.

 

pornstar sorry

 

Oh.

Okay.

See Vega's note.

And then read this.

And then remember that the problem with legally enforcing this kind of pornography contract is that at some point, a manager, producer, or director will have to admit to pimping. The tacit presumption is that the actors are not actually performing sexual acts on camera for money, but that nod and wink will disappear quickly if someone actually tried to make the case in court that they had the right to force a woman to have sex.

 

the point is it is different to rape - a woman being raped - cannot get away from the situation - the man will keep her there until he gets what he wants and then he des whatever. A pornstar has the option to walk away from her job (assuming there isnt some kind of ang involvement or something lol) she may lose her job but she can actually walk away - a woman being raped cannot.

 

You're employing an inappropriate standard. Sexual consent extracted under duress is not legitimate, and therefore the act that follows still constitutes rape.

This is one of the risks a manager, producer, director—and, yes, porn star—undertakes by entering the business. Remember that The Hedgehog himself was nearly blacklisted because even the kinky actresses had limits, and Ron Jeremy was, after a fashion, one of those limits. (I once had this magazine ... I think it was, like, Shaved Girls, or something, that did a parody movie poster ... "Starring Sharon Stone as 'Yeasty', the pussy so disgusting even Ron Jeremy wouldn't fuck it.")

The flesh industry is, all around, a dangerous one to be in. At no point, however, does awareness of that danger legitimize genuine coercion.

 

No, Laura was not raped. No force was involved, she consented to the act.

However, she was defrauded. I suspect the contract was poorly written, otherwise she should have won her case.

A prostitute cheated out of her money is somewhat different because (in US anyway) there was never any possibility of a legally enforceable contract. Still, I would hesitate to call it "rape".

[Edited -- the above is my OPINION. I am not a lawyer.]

BTW, about a year ago some man in Denmark sued a prostitute for "failing to deliver" on his money. He lost the case.

 

Tiassa:

There's no duress involved.

 

If you think about it, pornstars are just glorified prostitutes (at least the hardcore ones are, anyway)

they get paid to have sex, and are therefore prostitutes, and their managers are their pimps.