Ethics of Paid Sex - Are gay escorts and porn stars — prostitutes or ambassadors of gay culture?

[ellentonboy]

I support an individuals's right to make a living, but prostitution is illegal is most states in the US and based on the way the political arena is moving it's likely to stay that way.  Those who either offer or purchase these services are risking arrest and ending up on some kind of sexual offender's list.   Dick is everywhere, why not search it out without risking your liberty?

I'm not judging  anyone involved in this business, either consumer or provider, but I don't know if now is a good time to get involved in that profession, as a provider or consumer.

[BlackDude]

As much as we like to lie to the public about gay culture, the fact is many gay men lonely and long for the affection of others. Im not talking about the men who are eternally holding out, but men who don’t fit into the gay stereotype of attractiveness

If a man wants a hit experience, and someone will give it too him, I don’t see what’s wrong with that? Do you get some sort of sick, twisted satisfaction in depriving men from happiness?

[ellentonboy]

I have to agree with @BlackDude. In many cases it has nothing to do with sex, more with companionship 

[Nikba]

Prostitution serves the need on both sides. Personal choice and interests. Mostly due to financial issue. Living alone for the first time with limited fund and other issues, leads many youngsters to prostitution. Quick money,  if the person enjoy the work and good at it then it makes sense for individual. escorts also have choices with their customers and agreements on their services.

I met a guy in his mid fifty with good look and superb in bed during COVID. We regularly met on the weekend and near the end of the pandemic, he suggested 3some, I said ok. 
He searched and searched mostly on chat rooms, an application sites but couldn’t find the particular type, “18-23, smooth, baby’s face, versatile and willing for just anything. 
out of the blue, I received pictures from him, showing a youngster exactly what he wanted, young adorable college boy, naturally smooth, bubble butt and completely versatile. I was super excited and looking forward for my first 3some. 
my older friend had a fantasy of doing two youngsters with similar sizes, age, look and body type. 
He placed a cute college boy on his back with legs over his head. Placed me on top of the boy, chest to chest, and cocks are rubbing. My legs wrapped tightly against his with my arms holding on the shoulders.
In this position, two ass holes were less than a few inches apart. Rubbing our cocks, balls and chests against each other with deep kissing. 
For an older top, his fantasy came true, he alternated fucking one hole to the other. After heavy pounding, he stopped to eating & sucking our holes and inspected it to admire his handiwork. He repeated and repeated  for an hour. Finally, he decided to unload his love juice on a new hole. Once he stopped shaking and paused for a minute, pulled out. The guy under me pushed me off him and swallowed the cock and took all the remaining juices. The top was covered with sweat. Bald headed, thick hairy chest, thick legs, big low hanging balls  and cock gave us a big big smile, magnificent top. The scene, smell and connection were beyond amazing. The young college guy was enjoying himself and we had a wonderful time. 
Once it all done and time for him to leave, the top handed him an envelope with an extra hundred bill on top…. It hit me, the boy was a sex worker. Wonderful surprised. I stayed for the night and next morning I was rewarded with a load and cleaned his cock for the first time. 
we communicated with college guy and repeated several times. He graduated and stopped the business. Extra fund made life a lot easier and he was able to focus on studying….. it works for him….. 

[Alwaz4fun]

I would bottom in porn for free, getting paid would be a bonus

[Hungryforbbc]

It’s ridiculous that they think it’s somehow okay to tell people what they can do with their bodies. Ironically Roe was the lynchpin of the subsequent cases that led to the end of anti gay laws and made many forms of discrimination illegal and unconstitutional which at least leaves the door open for litigation.

heres the trick: first, providers have to incorporate themselves. Then, when with a client, shoot at least two minutes of video that you can post to your OF/X/whatever site and have them sign a limited release form so there’s no drama later. Its now legal cause it’s a porn shoot.

you’re welcome!

[BootmanLA]

On 6/29/2024 at 4:32 PM, Hungryforbbc said:

It’s ridiculous that they think it’s somehow okay to tell people what they can do with their bodies. Ironically Roe was the lynchpin of the subsequent cases that led to the end of anti gay laws and made many forms of discrimination illegal and unconstitutional which at least leaves the door open for litigation.

heres the trick: first, providers have to incorporate themselves. Then, when with a client, shoot at least two minutes of video that you can post to your OF/X/whatever site and have them sign a limited release form so there’s no drama later. Its now legal cause it’s a porn shoot.

you’re welcome!

Actually, the lynchpin was a case many years before Roe, Griswold v. Connecticut, in 1965. Griswold is the case that established the notion of a right to privacy in one's personal affairs, despite that right not being explicitly named in the Constitution. Griswold involved a Connecticut law that forbid anyone - even married couples - from using artificial contraception (the pill, condoms, IUD, etc.). The Court held that there was a zone of privacy inherent in a marriage into which the government could not intrude, and contraception was one such area.

Roe built upon Griswold (and other intervening cases). When the first challenge to state sodomy laws reached the Supreme Court in 1986 with Bowers v. Hardwick, the Court held that privacy did not extend to same-sex acts, even in private. Seventeen years later, the Court expressly overturned Bowers in Lawrence v. Texas, holding that, in fact, sexual relations (a) between persons over the age of consent (b) in private that were (c) consensual were, in fact, also included under the right to privacy.

Of note, the farthest right portion of the Court, in 2003, rejected that entirely. Of the dissenting justices, only Thomas is still on the Court, but Rehnquist was replaced by Roberts and Alito was replaced by Gorsuch. Worse, though, Kennedy (who wrote the opinion striking down Bowers) was replaced by Kavanaugh, who is nothing like his former mentor on gay rights. O'Connor was replaced by Alito, who is as far to her right as Thomas is from Thurgood Marshall's. Ginsburg was replaced by Barrett. So that's three votes from the original 6 who would, if voting anew, would almost certainly have upheld Bowers (whether they'd vote to reverse course again is another matter).

Whether there are now five votes on the Court to allow states to recriminalize gay sex is uncertain. There are certainly two (Alito and Thomas), probably three (Kavanaugh), and possibly up to three more (Gorsuch, Roberts, Barrett).

Edited July 1 by BootmanLA

[hntnhole]

I haven't taken part in this voting exercise yet, since try as I might, I'm not able to come up with a viable definition of what gay "culture" actually is.  

Wikipedia offers a wordy, bland, vague definition of "gay culture", rather amorphous and unsatisfying, and glosses over the practice of prostitution within "gay" life.  

Even the Oxford definition - "a person, in particular a woman, who engages in sexual activity for payment." is clearly (at least to my eyes) somewhat exclusive (and therefore a suggestion of denigration) of this activity. 

We all know what "prostitution" entails, but what do we mean by "gay culture"?  Relatively few gay men or gay women engage in the business of prostitution, and when they do it is usually associated with pecuniary needs that cannot be met in any other (as perceived by that individual) way.  

I don't see how we can offer perceptions of that particular business endeavor without knowing more about the reasons the individual engages in it.  That would apply to both genders, and equally. 

While prostitution has existed for millennia, and in virtually every "culture" that has or continues to exist, I don't see any particular characteristic that separates us (gay men) from every other "culture" regarding the OP.

 

Edited July 1 by hntnhole

[BootmanLA]

9 minutes ago, hntnhole said:

I haven't taken part in this voting exercise yet, since try as I might, I'm not able to come up with a viable definition of what gay "culture" actually is. 

I tend to define "X culture" as those habits, interests, behaviors, etc. which tend to be associated with people who are X. That list may change over time, and it's not exclusive to X. For example, I would say that gathering around food is one element of Italian culture, but it's also an element in many other cultures. And not all Italians may gather over food. Still, it's a general "thing", and it's recognizable.

The problem with "gay culture" as a concept is that it's itself culture-dependent. Despite air travel and disposable income and all that, the way gay men live in a handful of big cities in the U.S. is vastly different from the way their smaller number of compatriots live in less populated areas. The way gay men live in western Europe (writ large) is markedly different in many respects from how they live in eastern Europe, in Asia. Parts of Africa have almost no recognizable "gay culture" because same-sex sexual activity is still illegal (or illegal again), while other parts, especially in parts of north Africa and in South Africa (the country, not the region), have much more tolerant environments and there's a local culture. And of course, various parts of Asia run the gamut in terms of whether there's any gay "culture" at all.

In other words, there's no single "gay culture" - there are lots of things that are popular or commonplace behaviors among selected groups of gay people, but certainly not a national one and absolutely not an international one. Which may be why it's hard for you to to pin it down.

[AlB]

On 9/28/2023 at 4:20 PM, BootmanLA said:

I'm going to reject the options presented, for the following reasons:

1. I agree that escorts and porn stars are sex workers, just as are cam girls, cam boys, guys with sexually explicit OF or JFF or whatever accounts, street hookers, and more. They're all involved in businesses (as workers) where sex (be it physical contact with the purchaser, or stimulation via imagery and/or sound) is part of the product or service provided. But I don't put sex work into the category of "degrading or dehumanizing" - it CAN be, but that's not inherent in the work. It's inherent in the society in which the workers live.

2. I don't think the second option describes all sex workers. Some do it because they're broke. Some do it because they like the supplemental income it can provide. Some do it because they're substance addicts and need cash to feed their habit. I do agree that people who judge sex workers are wrong, but I don't think it's always sour grapes; sometimes it's just plain old disapproval, sometimes it's resentment that they can't control other people's sexuality.

3. I'm not sure that there is an inherent difference between gay and straight people. Perhaps between the *typical* or *average* gay and straight person - the former probably has more lifetime sex and more partners than the latter, for instance - but I don't see gay sex workers as any sort of ambassador for the gay sex experience (except, of course, in the literal sense that a straight person can satisfy any curiosity he might have about gay sex acts by watching porn). I think gay people bringing home partners to their families, and integrating gay partners into families, goes much farther to show the world what's important about being gay - we're pretty much just like you - than anything else.

I more simply agree.  Escorts (who are paid for sex) are prostitutes. Whether it is degrading or dehumanizing is variable by circumstance.  I don’t believe that porn actors are prostitutes. Prostitutes or their agents) accept money to have sex and to give sexual gratification to the payer.  The survey is grossly flawed in this choice as in the others available.  
 

Porn is the depiction of sex by two or more individuals and is considered free speech.  Where this line gets fuzzy in my own mind is the current “content creators” who pay other participants in the content. 

[BootmanLA]

4 hours ago, AlB said:

I more simply agree.  Escorts (who are paid for sex) are prostitutes. Whether it is degrading or dehumanizing is variable by circumstance.  I don’t believe that porn actors are prostitutes. Prostitutes or their agents) accept money to have sex and to give sexual gratification to the payer.  The survey is grossly flawed in this choice as in the others available.  
 

Porn is the depiction of sex by two or more individuals and is considered free speech.  Where this line gets fuzzy in my own mind is the current “content creators” who pay other participants in the content. 

FWIW, "prostitute" is a specific kind of sex work. So is porn.

Content creators produce porn to get subscriptions (if they have an OF/JFF/etc. account), or followers (on other social media, which can be monetized). There are the rare, occasional folks who produce porn content of themselves to freely distribute, but again, they're rare. But except for those rarities, they're having sex and making money at it - ie sex workers. This applies to solo videos and pics, duos, orgies, and whatever else is produced.

Likewise, cam boys who get "tips" for live performances on cam? Sex for money.

That may be different, in some forms, from someone who is paid to actually have sex with the paying individual, but it's not really a completely separate concept.

Mind you, I have nothing against sex work. I don't think there's anything inherently worse about monetizing your body than monetizing a skill (like software development) or talent (like music) or athleticism (like pro sports players) or even looks (like models, body builders, and the like). We monetize what we have in order to be able to afford things - whether it's a roof over our heads or a Ferrari.

[AlB]

On 7/14/2024 at 4:07 AM, BootmanLA said:

FWIW, "prostitute" is a specific kind of sex work. So is porn.

Content creators produce porn to get subscriptions (if they have an OF/JFF/etc. account), or followers (on other social media, which can be monetized). There are the rare, occasional folks who produce porn content of themselves to freely distribute, but again, they're rare. But except for those rarities, they're having sex and making money at it - ie sex workers. This applies to solo videos and pics, duos, orgies, and whatever else is produced.

Likewise, cam boys who get "tips" for live performances on cam? Sex for money.

That may be different, in some forms, from someone who is paid to actually have sex with the paying individual, but it's not really a completely separate concept.

Mind you, I have nothing against sex work. I don't think there's anything inherently worse about monetizing your body than monetizing a skill (like software development) or talent (like music) or athleticism (like pro sports players) or even looks (like models, body builders, and the like). We monetize what we have in order to be able to afford things - whether it's a roof over our heads or a Ferrari.

But the (poorly worded) question was: are porn stars prostitutes or … ?  “Sex work” isn’t the legal construct; prostitution is.  Prostitution isn’t a type of sex work; it’s an unlawful act statutorily defined.  

[BootmanLA]

10 hours ago, AlB said:

But the (poorly worded) question was: are porn stars prostitutes or … ?  “Sex work” isn’t the legal construct; prostitution is.  Prostitution isn’t a type of sex work; it’s an unlawful act statutorily defined.  

It can be both. In fact, the whole point and message of efforts to decriminalize prostitution is to legalize sex work, recognizing that it is, in fact, work.

There are many kinds of "work" that are, in fact, illegal. Doesn't mean it's not work. 

[AlB]

On 7/15/2024 at 4:26 PM, BootmanLA said:

It can be both. In fact, the whole point and message of efforts to decriminalize prostitution is to legalize sex work, recognizing that it is, in fact, work.

There are many kinds of "work" that are, in fact, illegal. Doesn't mean it's not work. 

Again, that wasn’t the question. And while I don’t agree that prostitution should be legalized (without a whole host of attendant requirements and alternate laws to enforce them) I definitely agree that it is work.  
 

In my middle school government class our teacher used prostitution as an example of capitalism.  When he said, “Let’s consider the case of a prostitute who practices her trade ten times a night … “ I piped-up with my recently deepened voice and said, “If she’s doing it ten times a night, she doesn’t need any more practice!”  Another trip to the monsignor’s office! 

[BootmanLA]

1 hour ago, AlB said:

Again, that wasn’t the question. And while I don’t agree that prostitution should be legalized (without a whole host of attendant requirements and alternate laws to enforce them) I definitely agree that it is work.

FWIW I have no problem with regulating the industry just like, for example, some places regulate the porn industry.