# Hi, Dio! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 21, 2008, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910 "2008-11-21T21:18:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/41 "2008-11-21T23:09:23Z")
> [@KneadToKnow](#): > > Note to **A Priori Tea** : I know you don’t need me to defend your honor. Tough titty. I’m a daddy dom. It’s part of my makeup. 🙂 Thought about biting my tongue but hell with it. Ohhh, Daddy! (I’d say don’t hurt me, but you don’t like doing that anyway. MUHAHAHA!) ---
**Author:** ![Absolute](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b2d939/32.png) [@Absolute](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absolute)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/42 "2008-11-21T23:09:34Z")
> [@KneadToKnow](#): > > Please see my first post in this thread for one answer as to “why it matters.” If **Chefguy** were in here, would you say it was okay to (essentially) call him a “burger flipper”? If **Rick** were in here, would it be okay to (essentially) call him a “pump jock”? Again, the difference is that the terms you are using are insulting - prostitute is not. The argument you guys are making is like **Rick** getting all pissed off that someone called him a mechanic, because he thinks the term is insulting and prefers to think of himself as a “Professional Automotive Service Technician”. ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/43 "2008-11-21T23:10:29Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > “Prostitute” is an accurate, accepted, unbiased, polite term for people who are paid for sexual favors. Agreed. Now if you can wrap yourself around the thought that professional doms are not “paid for sexual favors” but “paid for power exchanges,” perhaps you will understand some of the reticence. > [@Absolute](#): > > Again, the difference is that the terms you are using are insulting No, the difference is those terms don’t describe what those individuals do. ---
**Author:** ![Kamino\_Neko](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kamino_neko/32/34_2.png) [@Kamino\_Neko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kamino_Neko)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/44 "2008-11-21T23:11:38Z")
> [@Binarydrone](#): > > I mentioned this in the other thread but think that it is worth reiterating here. The people involved in this subculture do not define this as prostitution and have made clear in no uncertain terms that this is so. To continue to use this (charged) term is pretty insulting and obtuse. It’s pretty typical for Dio. ‘You’re not doing what you say you’re doing, you’re doing what I say your doing, and you’re just a liar’. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/45 "2008-11-21T23:13:14Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > Nigger and faggot are deliberately insulting and prejudicial. “Prostitute” is an accurate, accepted, unbiased, polite term for people who are paid for sexual favors. Okay, substitute “negro” for “nigger” then. ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/46 "2008-11-21T23:13:25Z")
> [@Antinor01](#): > > Thought about biting my tongue but hell with it. > > Ohhh, Daddy! > > (I’d say don’t hurt me, but you don’t like doing that anyway. MUHAHAHA!) 😉 ---
**Author:** ![A\_Priori\_Tea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@A\_Priori\_Tea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A_Priori_Tea)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/47 "2008-11-21T23:35:18Z")
I was, indeed, AFK for a bit - real life called. Let me see if I can clarify the whole dom vs. prostitute thing: I don’t mind being called a prostitute because I think prostitution is wrong or “beneath me” - it’s not either one of those things. I object to being characterized as a prostitute because it is\*\* FACTUALLY INACCURATE\*\*. It’s wrong, I’ve explained fairly clearly why it’s wrong, and I object to the continued use of misleading terminology. Yes, the services that pro doms provide are often sexual in nature - but that doesn’t mean they are sexual acts. That may seem like splitting hairs to some, but in the eyes of both the community and the law, it’s an important distinction. A pro dom who wants to avoid prostitution does not provide sex acts for money, but strictly BDSM activities. Paying someone for sex is not the same as paying someone to be beaten, by any metric. Yes, when you include things like anal training, orgasm denial, and etc., the area becomes more gray - however, in every case, there is a _definition_ of what prostitution is and is not, and successful pro doms stay on the right side of that line. I understand that there is an attitude present that implies because one fits a vague definition of prostitute, that it is a perfectly acceptable term to use. I disagree, and I’m going to continue to disagree. The use of prostitute in this case is **FACTUALLY AND LEGALLY WRONG** , and any opinion (however informed, uninformed, or misinformed) to the contrary is something I am going to take issue with. **Diogenes** , your assertion that you are not making value judgments or calling people morally wrong is disingenuous, at best. Generally speaking, it’s just a flat-out lie. In that thread alone, you said: > [@](#): > > Of course, why anybody wants to actually PAY to take abuse from psycho control freaks is something I have absolutely no ability to relate to in the first place, so I know I’m not getting the culture here at all. > [@](#): > > I don’t think it’s asking too much to not want to be raped up the ass with a filthy, disease-ridden dildo. > [@](#): > > I don’t think there’s aything wrong with insisting on a clean dildo, and I don’t see any reason to give a shit what some hooker thinks about it. I think Savage is out of line on this one. Role playing needs to take a back seat to basic hygene and hookers are supposed to do what they’re told. The customer is always right. If the hooker’s not going to do as she’s told, then what the hell is she getting paid for? Let’s review some other gems from a past thread you and I have met in: > [@](#): > > I have absolutely no problem judging that “relationship.” It’s sick and dysfunctional and fucked up and the kids should be taken away from them. The man is especially sick. Only a psychopathic, sadistic, pathologically self-centered individual would want to live in that kind of profoundly abusive relationship (and I don’t want to hear any bullshit about how it’s “consenual.” Suck my dick. It’s "consensual because the victim is fucking mentally ill and being exploited by a slimeball pervert). It’s not a “relationship” at all. It’s a codependent sex addiction. It wouldn’t be anyone’s problem than their own if there weren’t kids involved. Acting out this kind of obsessive sexual behavior in front of one’s own kids shows a selfishness and lack of responsibility that shoul not be tolerated by decent society. > > Grow the fuck up and show some goddamn concern for your own children. Get some fucking counselling, for Christ’s sake. > [@](#): > > How the fuck is non-consensual sex really consensual? What kind of shithead says “tough” if his partner isn’t in the mood? How is that remotely “respectful?” If the partner doesn’t want sex, then the “respectful” thing to do is not rape them. I could go on and pick out a number of other threads I was not even a participant in where you did this sort of half-blind staggering selectively twisted arguing, but that’s a waste of my time - which is valuable. You get the point, I’m sure. My problem with **Diogenes** in general is that he chooses to ignore facts when they don’t suit him, replacing them with uninformed, ridiculous opinions and then asserting those opinions as fact, all evidence to the contrary. My problem with him in that particular thread is that there was a perfectly civil, interesting difference of opinions going on until he burst in, started howling about hookers and “Johns” (why the capital?), and insisted that no sex worker has a say in what s/he does with the time alloted once s/he has been paid. Let’s review that one more time: all pro doms are hookers (not prostitutes, not till he started backpeddling into more acceptable terminology, but hookers), hookers do what the “John” says without question, because he’s paying, and they get no say in what goes on. That’s the most back-assward, idiotic conceptualization of professional domination I have ever heard, and yet he asserts it as The Truth. It’s stupid. By the way, **Dio** , notice how I’m using a lot of words that are pretty hot and push emotional buttons, because they’re inflammatory? That should be a familiar tactic for you by now, since you seem incapable of engaging in discourse that does not involve you being a condescending, inflammatory asshole and using loaded terminology. What’s really precious is when you back up and try to say you don’t have a problem with any of it, that it’s really okay, and that you’re not judgmental. Your vocabulary choice betrays you, you dippy bastard, and it drags down the intelligence level of every thread related to other peoples’ proclivities I’ve ever seen you involved in. Just for the record: words like hooker, rape, abuse, psycho, slimeball pervert, codependent sex addiction, etc. ARE inflammatory, pejorative, and condescending. Pretending otherwise only makes you look even dumber, which is kind of a feat at this point. Note to **KtK** : your intelligent contributions are very much appreciated, and I don’t take offense. Try to get all Daddy on me, though, and you’ll have a scrap on your hands. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/48 "2008-11-21T23:39:06Z")
I find it humorous that the OP refers to someone who shoves dildos into people while calling them worthless as being part of an “industry.” I just get this picture in my head of a leather bustier clad Inga Queen of the Nazi’s carrying her lunch pail and whipping crop to the time clock, while planning for that night’s Dominatrix Local 119 meeting, where the topic will be … Fuck those wimps, we won’t bleach our rubber cocks! ---
**Author:** ![Absolute](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b2d939/32.png) [@Absolute](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absolute)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/49 "2008-11-21T23:45:36Z")
> [@KneadToKnow](#): > > Agreed. Now if you can wrap yourself around the thought that professional doms are not “paid for sexual favors” but “paid for power exchanges,” perhaps you will understand some of the reticence. I can’t be wrapped quite that tightly. You can twist the words all you want - you’re saying the guy paying for this doesn’t get any kind of sexual pleasure from the “power exchanges”? Sorry, I don’t buy that for a second. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/50 "2008-11-21T23:50:46Z")
> [@KneadToKnow](#): > > Agreed. Now if you can wrap yourself around the thought that professional doms are not “paid for sexual favors” but “paid for power exchanges,” perhaps you will understand some of the reticence. > > No, the difference is those terms don’t describe what those individuals do. The individual in question was planning to stick a rubber cock up a man’s ass. What some of us are finding difficult to accept is that this is not a “sexual service”. If the man in question was _not_ concenting to the act, normally I’d have no difficulty in thinking of such an act as a “sexual assault”, even if the person performing the act didn’t get off on it - but only (say) wished to humiliate his or her victim. It seems to my mind that “sex” is integral to the act, objectively speaking, whatever power games these people are playing. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/51 "2008-11-21T23:51:31Z")
> [@](#): > > Paying someone for sex is not the same as paying someone to be beaten, by any metric. Yes, when you include things like anal training, orgasm denial, and etc., the area becomes more gray … Does it? Seriously? Because for massage therapists, there’s no gray at all. There’s a very clear line, literally, from the PSIS to the ischial ramus over to the gluteal cleft, including anything in the gluteal cleft itself, the external genitals, and the breasts of women that not only am I prohibited from touching in a sexual manner, I can’t touch in a \*massage \*manner, or even SEE at all. Draping these areas - covering them with a sheet or towel, is legally mandated at all times. I’d like to see the professional regulatory law that allows anyone without a license to touch or insert things into the genitals. Legally speaking, in my state anyhow, if you’re moving soft tissue, you better have a medical, nursing, cosmetology (which specifically forbids genitals), acupuncture, dentist, physical therapist or massage therapy license. And in none of those is there a gray area about sexual stimulation. ---
**Author:** ![A\_Priori\_Tea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@A\_Priori\_Tea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A_Priori_Tea)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/52 "2008-11-21T23:58:45Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > The individual in question was planning to stick a rubber cock up a man’s ass. What some of us are finding difficult to accept is that this is not a “sexual service”. > > If the man in question was _not_ concenting to the act, normally I’d have no difficulty in thinking of such an act as a “sexual assault”, even if the person performing the act didn’t get off on it - but only (say) wished to humiliate his or her victim. > > It seems to my mind that “sex” is integral to the act, objectively speaking, whatever power games these people are playing. One more time: acts with sexual context and sex acts are not the same thing. Also, a point of order: there are lots and lots of ways to do dildo training on a man, and only some of them involve the dom ever touching the dildo while it is in contact with the man. The assumption that she’s going to be fucking him is ill-informed, at best. If she _does_ penetrate him with it, she is probably over the line for prostitution in her jurisdiction. This is why so many people have gotten very creative in making folks do things to themselves, rather than doing things to them, if it involves genitals and the appearance of sex. What I don’t think is coming across is the idea that prostitution has a codified, legal definition that varies from county to county and state to state. Using it as a layman’s term is fine if you’re not discussing a business that the legal definition directly impacts; however, if you’re talking about pro doms, the legal definition is the only one that will function well, even in conversation, because we’re a little touchy about being accused of crimes of which we are innocent. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![A\_Priori\_Tea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@A\_Priori\_Tea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A_Priori_Tea)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2008, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/53 "2008-11-22T00:10:17Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Does it? Seriously? Because for massage therapists, there’s no gray at all. There’s a very clear line, literally, from the PSIS to the ischial ramus over to the gluteal cleft, including anything in the gluteal cleft itself, the external genitals, and the breasts of women that not only am I prohibited from touching in a sexual manner, I can’t touch in a \*massage \*manner, or even SEE at all. Draping these areas - covering them with a sheet or towel, is legally mandated at all times. > > I’d like to see the professional regulatory law that allows anyone without a license to touch or insert things into the genitals. Legally speaking, in my state anyhow, if you’re moving soft tissue, you better have a medical, nursing, cosmetology (which specifically forbids genitals), acupuncture, dentist, physical therapist or massage therapy license. And in none of those is there a gray area about sexual stimulation. LOL! See, now _that’s_ a smart question. The practical answer is: there are no cases of which I am aware in which a dom has been accused of practicing massage (or similar) without a license, with the exception of medicine. (And the medicine thing was over needles, which are a whole 'nother topic.) Because I am not aware of anyone being prosecuted for it, I never thought to look at what the legal lines for acceptable touching were for those types of professions. The area becomes gray because the primary things that doms are prosecuted for are prostitution, assault, battery, and kidnapping, with prostitution being **by far** the most common. Unfortunately, it’s also often the most poorly defined. [Florida law](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0796/SEC07.HTM&Title=-%3E2008-%3ECh0796-%3ESection%2007#0796.07) states: > [@](#): > > 796.07 Prohibiting prostitution, etc.; evidence; penalties; definitions.– > > (1) As used in this section: > > (a) “Prostitution” means the giving or receiving of the body for sexual activity for hire but excludes sexual activity between spouses. > > (b) “Lewdness” means any indecent or obscene act. > > (c) “Assignation” means the making of any appointment or engagement for prostitution or lewdness, or any act in furtherance of such appointment or engagement. > > (d) “Sexual activity” means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object; or the handling or fondling of the sexual organ of another for the purpose of masturbation; however, the term does not include acts done for bona fide medical purposes. > > (2) It is unlawful: > > (a) To own, establish, maintain, or operate any place, structure, building, or conveyance for the purpose of lewdness, assignation, or prostitution. > > (b) To offer, or to offer or agree to secure, another for the purpose of prostitution or for any other lewd or indecent act. > > (c) To receive, or to offer or agree to receive, any person into any place, structure, building, or conveyance for the purpose of prostitution, lewdness, or assignation, or to permit any person to remain there for such purpose. > > (d) To direct, take, or transport, or to offer or agree to direct, take, or transport, any person to any place, structure, or building, or to any other person, with knowledge or reasonable cause to believe that the purpose of such directing, taking, or transporting is prostitution, lewdness, or assignation. > > (e) To offer to commit, or to commit, or to engage in, prostitution, lewdness, or assignation. > > (f) To solicit, induce, entice, or procure another to commit prostitution, lewdness, or assignation. > > (g) To reside in, enter, or remain in, any place, structure, or building, or to enter or remain in any conveyance, for the purpose of prostitution, lewdness, or assignation. > > (h) To aid, abet, or participate in any of the acts or things enumerated in this subsection. > > (i) To purchase the services of any person engaged in prostitution. So, if I (as a pro dom) do not penetrate another person or handle their genitals for the purpose of masturbation, I’m mostly in the clear. However, there’s also “lewdness,” which is “any indecent or obscene act.” That’s a little more clearly defined through case law, but not nearly enough to give a specific line of what is and is not acceptable in even most cases, much less every case. So it’s a gray area, you see, particularly for independent practitioners who do not have the good sense to hire an actual lawyer for the purpose of establishing what they will and will not do. That is not to say that a dom cannot be prosecuted under other statutes, but it rules out the most common for the most part. ---
**Author:** ![Absolute](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b2d939/32.png) [@Absolute](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absolute)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2008, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/54 "2008-11-22T00:19:09Z")
> [@A\_Priori\_Tea](#): > > One more time: acts with sexual context and sex acts are not the same thing. > > Also, a point of order: there are lots and lots of ways to do dildo training on a man, and only some of them involve the dom ever touching the dildo while it is in contact with the man. The assumption that she’s going to be fucking him is ill-informed, at best. If she _does_ penetrate him with it, she is probably over the line for prostitution in her jurisdiction. **This is why so many people have gotten very creative in making folks do things to themselves, rather than doing things to them, if it involves genitals and the appearance of sex.** > > What I don’t think is coming across is the idea that prostitution has a codified, legal definition that varies from county to county and state to state. Using it as a layman’s term is fine if you’re not discussing a business that the legal definition directly impacts; however, if you’re talking about pro doms, the legal definition is the only one that will function well, even in conversation, because we’re a little touchy about being accused of crimes of which we are innocent. 🙂 > > … > > The area becomes gray because the primary things that doms are prosecuted for are prostitution, assault, battery, and kidnapping, **with prostitution being by far the most common**. > > _(emphasis added)_ So, you admit that: 1. Doms have to be clever to still do their job, while technically avoiding anything that would make them guilty of prostitution. 2. Many of them still get prosecuted for prostitution anyway. And your argument here is that there’s something inaccurate about ordinary people calling them prostitutes? This is not a distinction that you can expect normal people to accept, or for that matter, care about. > [@Some Weenie](#): > > Technically, a peanut isn’t actually a nut, it’s a legume. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2008, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/55 "2008-11-22T00:23:59Z")
> [@A\_Priori\_Tea](#): > > LOL! See, now _that’s_ a smart question. Thanks! And that was a smart answer, so thank you again. 🙂 Here in Illinois, citing someone for practicing massage without a license is the easiest way to take down “massage parlor” type prostitutes. I’m not sure how often it’s actually done, but it was something they used to scare us into passing our boards and getting our licenses ASAP after massage school. If there’s any sort of touching going on beyond the extremely vanilla and casual, one could use it against a dom, but again, I don’t know whether or not it has been. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2008, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/56 "2008-11-22T00:24:14Z")
> [@KneadToKnow](#): > > If it were just about sex (the penetration, the orgasm), he could do that at home. . Is that all there is to sex? Penatration and orgasm? ---
**Author:** ![Amber\_in\_Treasury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/bc79bd/32.png) [@Amber\_in\_Treasury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amber_in_Treasury)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2008, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/57 "2008-11-22T00:26:04Z")
I thought this was going to be about Ronnie James Dio. ---
**Author:** ![A\_Priori\_Tea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@A\_Priori\_Tea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A_Priori_Tea)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2008, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/58 "2008-11-22T00:44:41Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > So, you admit that: > > 1. Doms have to be clever to still do their job, while technically avoiding anything that would make them guilty of prostitution. > 2. Many of them still get prosecuted for prostitution anyway. > > And your argument here is that there’s something inaccurate about ordinary people calling them prostitutes? This is not a distinction that you can expect normal people to accept, or for that matter, care about. It’s a distinction that I expect intelligent people to understand, and have the decency not to accuse their peers of committing a crime when being falsely accused of that exact crime is a worry that said peers must deal with in their profession. If you don’t care whether someone is a criminal or not, by the only definition that counts, that’s your burden to bear. It doesn’t make you any less wrong, and it doesn’t make my expectation of using accurate terms and having intelligent, well-defined discourse unreasonable. There are lots and lots of terms available for the woman in the article that do not include accusations of criminal activity: dom, domme, pro dom/me, professional dominant, dominatrix, sex worker, and on and on. I take umbrage with the one that is so inaccurate as to be dangerous when used against someone in her profession. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2008, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/59 "2008-11-22T00:44:48Z")
> [@A\_Priori\_Tea](#): > > What I don’t think is coming across is the idea that prostitution has a codified, legal definition that varies from county to county and state to state. Using it as a layman’s term is fine if you’re not discussing a business that the legal definition directly impacts; however, if you’re talking about pro doms, the legal definition is the only one that will function well, even in conversation, because we’re a little touchy about being accused of crimes of which we are innocent. 🙂 Well, this is a general topic message board, not a BDSM message board. I can see some contexts where you might have a point, but you can’t really expect that society at large conforms with your general expectations when what “pro doms” do would be considered prostitution by much of society at large. If at any point there was a **legal** debate then you might have a point, from what I’ve seen of this and the linked-to thread, no legal debate was ongoing. I don’t think anyone was unaware that in most states prostitution (or some variation) is a codified criminal act. As a similar example, if I got into a drunken brawl with someone outside of a bar and they ended up dead some people would call me a murderer. Under the eyes of the law it would be very doubtful I’d be convicted of murder (in my state) for that action. But that doesn’t mean that to call someone who violently killed someone a “murderer” is “wrong” just because it doesn’t match the legal definition. [As an aside about 15 years ago a friend of mine was giving a coworker a ride home from work. Her estranged husband drove them off the interstate and murdered both of them, my friend first and then he chased his screaming wife 200 yards down the interstate and eventually shot her several times in the back. This man was not convicted of murder, but manslaughter, that does not mean I’m wrong to call him a murderer.] Many legal terms are also common-usage words which have looser (and entirely correct) meanings. The only real complaint you could raise is if someone claimed you were a criminal, or claimed you were a “convicted prostitute” (assuming you aren’t either of those things.) ---
**Author:** ![A\_Priori\_Tea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@A\_Priori\_Tea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A_Priori_Tea)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2008, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910/60 "2008-11-22T00:48:29Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Thanks! And that was a smart answer, so thank you again. 🙂 > > Here in Illinois, citing someone for practicing massage without a license is the easiest way to take down “massage parlor” type prostitutes. I’m not sure how often it’s actually done, but it was something they used to scare us into passing our boards and getting our licenses ASAP after massage school. If there’s any sort of touching going on beyond the extremely vanilla and casual, one could use it against a dom, but again, I don’t know whether or not it has been. This is what cracks me up about the sex laws in our country. They make prostitution illegal, and then prosecute people who engage in prostitution under a whole different statute. Then they decide that engaging in consensual, paid s/m ought to be illegal, but can’t manage to pass a law about it, so they prosecute pro doms as prostitutes (with varying degrees of success). It amuses me that it’s so… roundabout. Just let us engage each other in ways that make us happy, already, and get the hell out of it! Or, even better, make it legal and regulate it so that there _are_ safety standards that are easily enforceable! Argh! (not that this is a pet topic or anything, heh) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hi-dio/473910.md?page=4)