Is a prostitute obliged to have sex if she's been paid?

[Aella]

And if a prostitute is paid for sex, and changes her mind in the middle (let's say she got a phone call from a friend who wants to meet up), does not refund him the money, and he forces himself on her, is it rape?

I saw this discussion on another forum and thought I'd get your opinions on it here.

 

[NoelleBright]

And if a prostitute is paid for sex, and changes her mind in the middle, does not refund him the money, and he forces himself on her, is it rape?

I saw this discussion on another forum and thought I'd get your opinions on it here.

It is rape, IMO, if she makes it known that she doesn't wish to continue.
She should 100% give him his money back though. They would both be in the wrong.

 

[ACFFAN69]

And if a prostitute is paid for sex, and changes her mind in the middle, does not refund him the money, and he forces himself on her, is it rape?

I saw this discussion on another forum and thought I'd get your opinions on it here.

It is rape, IMO, if she makes it known that she doesn't wish to continue.
She should 100% give him his money back though. They would both be in the wrong.

^ This.
It's definitely rape in my mind, but she is obliged to have sex after being paid otherwise the money should be refunded. Of course there's not much the John can do morally/legally to enforce this.

I wonder though, should all the money be refunded? He didn't get his payoff, but in theory if the John took longer then the half hour or hour paid, he would have to pay for another half/hour or the sex would be rightfully discontinued before his payoff. In this case she changed her mind in the middle, does that mean she should be paid for that time spent previous to the change of heart even if he didn't get to finish?
I personally think it should rightfully be a 100% refund, but I'm not entirely sure.

What if he initially requested a half hour and he took longer, they then agreed on another half hour for him to finish. She then changed her mind in that second half hour, should she refund the entire amount in that case? Or just a refund on the second half hour?
I think she should only have to refund the second half hour personally.

 

[NataliaGrey]

To me, it depends on why she changed her mind. If they agreed to have vaginal sex, and then he tries to stick it in her ass and keeps insisting (for example), I don't think he should get his money back. I think he forfeited that right when he went back on their verbal agreement. Otherwise if she stops I think she should refund him. Either way it's rape. It becomes kind of a sticky situation if all the details weren't discussed enough, though. It's hard to cover all your bases.

Proving any of this is court... would be hard, though. Verbal contracts don't mean much, and no one's going to keep clear paperwork of their illegal business. If prostitution were more accepted and legal, I think a pretty fair way to do this would be to keep audio recordings of sessions, for the financial and physical safety of both involved.

ACFFAN, I don't think he should get a refund in that case. If they agreed "we have 30 minutes together, and in that time we can have sex" and he starts having sex with her 28 minutes in and doesn't finish in those 2 minutes that are left, that's his fault. You're paying for her time as much as for the sex. Now, a conscientious escort would push for him to have sex earlier than later if that's what she thought he wanted, but if he keeps dragging his feet she shouldn't be expected to be responsible for that, in my opinion.

Edit: You edited your post after I wrote that up, I agree that only the second half should be refunded then, so long as he didn't do anything wrong within that period.

 

[Nordling]

And if a prostitute is paid for sex, and changes her mind in the middle (let's say she got a phone call from a friend who wants to meet up), does not refund him the money, and he forces himself on her, is it rape?

I saw this discussion on another forum and thought I'd get your opinions on it here.

In this case, what does "in the middle" mean?

At any rate, yes, it's rape, and short of that, yes, she should refund him. Unlike goods, sexual intercourse involves one's private space, not a bag of potatoes or whatever. If he's able to yank the money back without involving her body, the question gets a little blurry--does he have a right to invade her purse? Is it assault if she batters him while he's getting his money back?

 

[mynameisbob84]

As soon as consent is revoked, if the sex doesn't stop, it's rape. If she doesn't give him the money back, then she's ripped him off, which is shitty. But I don't think being ripped off by somebody justifies raping them :twocents-02cents:

 

[Ambers Troll]

It's rape.

But let's for a moment assume that the client respected consent... then the prostitute has committed fraud, she is actually obliged to have consensual sex if she has been paid.

 

[Sevrin]

It's rape.

But let's for a moment assume that the client respected consent... then the prostitute has committed fraud, she is actually obliged to have consensual sex if she has been paid.

Fraud requires intent to defraud, which has not been proven. She is not obliged to have sex, but she needs to refund payment received, or agree to provide compensation at a future date.

 

[Ambers Troll]

It's rape.

But let's for a moment assume that the client respected consent... then the prostitute has committed fraud, she is actually obliged to have consensual sex if she has been paid.

Fraud requires intent to defraud, which has not been proven. She is not obliged to have sex, but she needs to refund payment received, or agree to provide compensation at a future date.

According to the OP it was intended, she simply wont refund the money. Fraud also requires a legal activity, which prostitution is usually not. The client paid for consensual sex, so he can't just take that via rape. He may be justified in forcibly taking back stolen money, but not as some form of credit (i.e taking the sex part). The client should pursue a simple theft claim where prostitution is illegal (his money was taken without his consent), if not he can claim a refund under contract law in that country.

 

[Sevrin]

Fraud, in law, requires intent to deceive, for which there is no evidence. Changing her mind after taking money does not constitute fraud. I'm not arguing that fact that she owes her client money, just that the conditions for a finding of fraud have not been shown to exist.

 

[SaffronBurke]

Proving any of this is court... would be hard, though. Verbal contracts don't mean much

In my state, you can buy and sell anything, even a house, with a verbal contract alone, and the transaction is considered valid and must be honored. However, I can imagine that proving it would be difficult, and I don't know how likely the courts would be to even deal with such a case.

I feel that it's a given that any non-conseual sex is rape. If the sex worker were to change her mind partway through, I can understand offering a partial refund, depending on the circumstances. To borrow NataliaGrey's example, if they agreed to have vaginal sex and the guy keeps trying to put it in her butt, he's lost his right to a refund. Same if he keeps trying to weasel out of using protection. If, like in Aella's example, she gets a call and decides that she wants to go hang out with friends, I feel that it would be fair to either offer a partial refund or reschedule for another time. If she has to leave because of an emergency (death or injury of a loved one, sick kid, what have you), it's not either party's fault, so rescheduling would be most fair in that case, rather than her just keeping the money and not finishing the job or him demanding a refund when she's unable to continue.

 

[JickyJuly]

If you think of prostitution as a service and try to put the sex part out of your head, it's easily compared to other services. As a hairdresser, if I agree to do highlights on someone and leave halfway through having taken their money, they can take me to small claims. In court, they would likely be refunded that money possibly with additional punitive damages. I would NOT be ordered to fulfill the hair service. To force yourself on a prostitute after paying because she's conned you is to take something that the law would not be allowed to grant you in court. So, the john would be in the wrong and certainly be committing rape.

This is actually one of the reasons that legalizing prostitution would be beneficial. Cultivating a situation in which sex workers are comparable to other service industry people makes for better, safer business interactions. Instead of the whole "can't rape a whore" mentality this would be a clear business misstep followed by rape. The two issues really are separate. The prostitute should be accountable for not rendering services FINANCIALLY. (In my opinion, that means 100% refund). The rapist should be held accountable for the rape.

ETA: What is your opinion Aella? Did you share it and I missed it?

 

[ThePrincessLuxy]

It still is rape, although she should refund 50% of the money if she spent half of his time. Although I'm not sure if I'd want to refund anything if someone had fucking raped me. :-x

 

[ramblin]

Definitely criminal rape on the client's part, also something in the small claims fraud/theft area on the prostitute's part in keeping the money.

 

[eclipse76]

please don't use a slur to talk about sex workers

 

[JickyJuly]

please don't use a slur to talk about sex workers

:roll:
While I understand trying to be polite, this whole pc police nonsense really inhibits people from discussing actual issues for fear of offending others or being called out. Using the word "prostitute" is not anywhere in the same realm of rape or even robbery.

 

[SaffronBurke]

please don't use a slur to talk about sex workers

While I understand your intent, telling cam girls, who are sex workers, not to use "prostitute", is kinda like telling black folks not to use the n-word.

 

[eclipse76]

please don't use a slur to talk about sex workers

While I understand your intent, telling cam girls, who are sex workers, not to use "prostitute", is kinda like telling black folks not to use the n-word.

While I understand your answer, whorephobic sex workers are not that uncommon, especially lateral whorephobia against FSSW. Besides this website welcomes a population of non sex-worker that would benefit from knowing not to use that slur.

 

[Gen]

please don't use a slur to talk about sex workers

While I understand your intent, telling cam girls, who are sex workers, not to use "prostitute", is kinda like telling black folks not to use the n-word.

Cam girls aren't full service sex workers, imo it's no different than any other non-full service person using it. Obviously anyone's free to use whatever words they want, but I don't think camgirls have any more claim to the word than any other non-full service sex working person.

Anyways. Rape is rape, money doesn't factor into it at all. Especially with sex work being criminalized, there's no legal entitlement to the service. Is it shitty to take his money and leave? Yes. But it's irrelevant, really - her being a sex worker doesn't waive her right to consent. So no, she's not obliged to have sex if she's been paid.

 

[LilyMarie]

Wait, prostitute is a slur now?? I thought it was the most neutral non-offensive word you can possibly use :shock:
I saw eclipse's post and at first thought I must have missed someone saying "whore" in the thread, scrolled through it again and it turned out that nobody had and that he seriously meant prostitute.

What else are people supposed to say now? "Escort" is definitely not necessarily the same, and "sex worker" is too vague, covering a multitude of professions. What is someone who means somebody trading IRL sexual services for money supposed to call them?! There is no word that's more neutral and less negatively connotated than prostitute.

The news, encyclopedias and other neutral sources use it. It is the one neutral word for someone who's a prostitute. It's been neutral and non-offensive for centuries and that's supposed to change suddenly..?

 

[Gen]

Lily, if you read the link it'd laid out why a lot of full service sex workers feel that way. I disagree that prostitute is neutral. I've posted about this before but sex worker was specifically created as a replacement that was meant to be emphasize the work and de-emphasize the illegal and sexual aspects. I know it's become a catch-all term for various kinds of workers but 'sex worker' is the preferred term among most girls I know. Honestly most people who aren't involved in the industry won't know the diversity of the term anyways and just think sex worker = prostitute.

Also a lot of sex workers have been campaigning news agencies to stop using prostitute specifically for this reason. That's why any organization run for and by sex workers uses the term in their name (as well as the added benefit of being inclusive of different types of workers). Usually any organization with prostitute in the name is run by antis, same with how anti-sex work folks use the term "prostituted women" or "prostitution survivor". Prostitute is used to convey victimization, illegality, etc. Same reason a lot of cam models use the term sex worker, because it legitimizes the work, defines it blatantly as work, and has a greater connotation of choice/empowerment.
The news isn't a good source for how to best talk about sex work/workers. (in fact I wouldn't consider the news a neutral source but that's probably for a different thread :lol

Obviously some people feel differently or not care about the terminology. But I do think the link lays out the reasoning for it pretty well.

 

[mynameisbob84]

I honestly had no idea whatsoever the word 'prostitute' was considered a slur. The more you learn...

 

[Ann_Sulu]

I honestly had no idea whatsoever the word 'prostitute' was considered a slur. The more you learn...

Yeah I was thinking pretty much every term used to describe any type of sex workers generally gets used in a negative sense. It's unfortunate, but the way the world tends to see us...it just sorta happens to be how it is till things change. I think probably the least likely to be considered negative is "sex worker", but perhaps I'm wrong. Also, of course it has the problem with being an umbrella term. Sex workers after all don't do the same things aside from money for something sexual.

 

[Sevrin]

(as well as the added benefit of being inclusive of different types of workers).

I think this "added benefit" is the primary motivation for discouraging the use of the term "prostitute". As time goes by, advocacy groups become institutions, and institutions like to expand their reach in order to sustain their mission. By choosing the more inclusive term, these organizations can claim to represent the interests of the large number of individuals who would not dream of renting their bodies to strangers for sex, such as cam models, phone sex performers and strippers.

This change of focus is fairly transparent. We've had a number of discussions on this very forum in which cam models have rejected the designation "sex worker", specifically because that term, to most people, is a synonym for "prostitute". What's more, the vast majority of initiatives advanced by these groups are intended, quite rightly, to protect prostitutes and legitimize prostitution. I can't recall anyone marching in the streets on behalf of cam models.

Oh, and by the way, International Sex Workers' Rights Day is on March 3rd. How many cam models are donating their tips to the cause?

 

[Misono]

Unlike goods, sexual intercourse involves one's private space, not a bag of potatoes or whatever.

It doesn't? Why has nobody ever told me I was doing it wrong...

 

[Nordling]

I just think euphemisms are silly, especially when it's so general ("sex worker") that it could include almost anyone. I have yet to see a good reason to abandon "prostitute." The negative connotation is not about that word or ANY word but about the profession itself, and until people quit being judgmental about what other people are doing, any new word will also devolve into a negative.

 

[Minnie]

And if a prostitute is paid for sex, and changes her mind in the middle (let's say she got a phone call from a friend who wants to meet up), does not refund him the money, and he forces himself on her, is it rape?

I saw this discussion on another forum and thought I'd get your opinions on it here.

Wow .. since this is what I do on a part-time basis. Yes it would be considered rape if that scenario played out and as for the refund well if you are selling sex maybe, but generally we sell time and companionship. and as for if the money is actually returned it really depends on the conversation that happens.

and I really hate the term prostitute for many many reasons.

 

[lovesheidi]

And if a prostitute is paid for sex, and changes her mind in the middle (let's say she got a phone call from a friend who wants to meet up), does not refund him the money, and he forces himself on her, is it rape?

I saw this discussion on another forum and thought I'd get your opinions on it here.

I actually know someone that this happened to. Here in Germany prostitution is legal as long as you have a license. This guy paid two prostitutes from an escort service, they pulled down his pants, laughed at his dick, said nothing would be happening and started to leave. He asked for his money back, they just threatened to lie about the whole thing and say he got violent. So yeah, he got scammed and just cut his losses because he was embarrassed about the whole thing.

Prostitutes are just like everyone else, normal people, good people, and some are nasty little scammers.

Oh and yeah, if he had just forced himself on one/both of them, it's rape.

 

[Picnic]

Yes, of course, it would be rape.

If you force yourself on somebody sexually, that is rape. Even if you are a prostitute/sex worker/whatever.

 

[Alexandra Cole]

This debate's interesting, and I don't want to throw a wrench in it, but I just wanted to mention that sex workers don't usually charge for sex acts. They usually charge for time. So if we're comparing it to other jobs, she'd fail at her job if she didn't show up, not if she refused to have sex. It's also pretty common to attach terms that clarify whether the guy gets his money back if she decides to leave early. I've never known a sex worker who didn't protect her right to say no.

It's like camming. When a guy takes you private, he's charged for the time. Everything else is either implied or understood, but not mandatory.

So the question's more along the lines of, "if a guy buys you a fancy steak dinner, takes you back to his place, and puts on the mood music, and you say 'no' in the middle of the make-out session that will inevitably follow, is it rape if he fucks you anyway?"

Also: the word 'prostitute' isn't a slur. It looks like that writer means to say that it's loaded, which it is, but every word used to describe prostitution is loaded.