THEFT OF SERVICES = RAPE

Judge Deni says that a violent gang rape at gunpoint is an insult to what “real rape” is. And the sexual assault activist community is on board with that but how many people can wrap their heads around the idea that theft of services to a prostitute is NOT an INSULT to what real rape is…

CA PENAL CODE SECTION 261-269 should be amended to incorporate the LIVES of sex workers who are robbed, raped or ripped off. There was a time when rape between a WIFE and her (male) SPOUSE was not legally defined at all, so I KNOW that change is possible. I know that it is slow and difficult. There was also a time when most people believed that it was not even possible for a prostitute to be raped, or that when a prostitute was raped it should just be prosecuted as robbery. Today, I say it should be the other way around: ROBBING SEX WORKERS AFTER SEX ACTS HAVE OCCURED SHOULD BE PROSECUTED AS RAPE…

but Judge Deni tells us that we have so so so long to go.

but Duke University Lacrosse team tells me–

we have so so long to go.

but the Orange County cop that ejaculated on the stripper he pulled over and was NOT GUILTY tells me

we have so so long to go.

The following section, in my opinion is likely the closest protection that the law offers our situation:

261 (a) Rape is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person under any of the following circumstances:
4) Where a person is at the time unconscious of the nature of the act, and this is know to the accused. As used in this paragraph “unconscious of the nature of the act” means incapable of resisting because victim meets one of the following conditions:
D) was not aware, knowing, perceiving or cognizant of the essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator’s fraudulent representation that the sexual penetration served a professional purpose when it served no professional purpose.

If rape is defined as any non consensual act of sexual intercourse, and the condition of consent for sex workers that perform acts of sexual intercourse is solely contingent upon payment and the payment is revoked by threat of force, fear or intimidation or by fraud or manipulation (bad checks, stolen credit cards) then the act was accomplished against the victim’s will and should be prosecuted as RAPE. I like the part about ‘professional purpose’ because it could be applied to the work of sex workers who are professionals. And it can be used to protect them without incriminating them.

Currently, prostitute lives are classified to the police department as N.H.I (No Humans Involved). Sex workers fear standing up for their human rights for fear of retaliation from law enforcement. Cops and Robbers are BOTH the bad guys and we battle them and their wrath day in and day out just to survive and/or live our dreams.

There has to be some police officers (1 or 2) that believe in justice and protecting us from violence. I hate even trying to approach the police because I have so much animosity towards them, but this situation has got to change. And I think I possess the privilege required to get some people to listen to what I am saying.

I want to set up a prostitution task force in LA like Scarlot Harlot did in San Francisco. I have approached LA Commission on Assaults Against Women (LACAAW) about this. Anyone with ideas, legal experience and/or similar passion please join me or lend your advice.

..most of the statement above was from a blog I wrote after I had been robbed. I believe that most of the bloggers on here and I share the same sentiment about this case but I’m having trouble swallowing the idea that “RAPE IS NOT AN OCCUPATIONAL HAZARD….” because I think that it is. Because it has happened to me.

After I was robbed at pseudo gunpoint, I was almost scammed for $1000 when I did a credit card transaction with a shady shady middle class suburban white man who didn’t think this dumb whore would keep her receipts or have the strength or survival skills to FIGHT BACK WITH EVERY OUNCE OF FIGHT IN MY BODY AND MY SOUL. You will NOT RAPE me again without me biting off your ear, your tongue, your dick…I will fight you until I die in prison…This same man tried to scam me on the night of the date, said he would take me to an ATM and get out cash because the credit card imprint that I had was not verified live because I didn’t have the phone number to verify it with me. It gives FUCK YOU PAY ME a whole new meaning, because when I say this–when i scream this as I am lighting your house on fire, as I am kicking you repeatedly as I cry…

7 Responses

  1. This is really powerful Mariko. It is a passionate statement that I would like to share with others via my blog if you approve. So many more people should see this!

    Solidarity

  2. First of all, I fully share the outrage on most of the situation with Deni and almost all other examples involved. And in no way am I trying to stir a controversy – just to understand.

    It’s just that I came to believe that the Wikipedia account of the Duke Lacrosse case is fairly accurate and summarizes most verified facts about the situation. And in that case, I don’t know why it is mentioned here.
    Situations where women are not believed are terrible. But situations of false accusations are not good either, and all the coverage I’ve seen of the Duke Lacrosse case made me believe that those men were guilty of verbal, not physical assault – still despicable, but not nearly on the same page.
    If there is something I don’t know, I would appreciate more information.

  3. Sorry for typos!
    *fully share the outrage about the situation with Deni*

  4. It looks like no one on this site lets anyone post who has a different opinion. I posted yesterday, it’s apparently gone.

  5. Regarding the Duke University Boys who were welcomed back onto campus with a standing ovation from the lacrosse stadium..I just don’t agree that they are NOT GUILTY. Just because the system says lack of evidence doesn’t mean there was a lack of evidence. I don’t believe every woman who cries rape but I definitely don’t buy society’s quick chime in of “she’s doing it for attention or money response” to sexual assault charges. When enduring a criminal or civil rape case one is literally enduring a repeat of the trauma through the institution. Sure the boys were not guilty by courts, but my comment had to do more with how society views the validity of sex workers or ANY women crying rape for that matter. And then how society views rich white privileged police officers, scholarship athletes, frat boys etc versus working class sex workers, who may be of color or not..and how the system and the media has historically and systematically hung the jury and the survivor. I am less concerned about the actual verdict. Same thing with Kobe Bryant’s case…

    check out Ubuntu’s statement on the Duke rape, I second their sentiments..

    http://iambecauseweare.wordpress.com/a-statement-about-sex-work-sex-workers-and-sexual-assault/

  6. As a legal sex worker in Nevada I was enraged when I first heard of this case.

    However… when I read a news report listing the details, I have to say the outrage should have been directed toward the District Attourney who so obviously misfiled this case, allowing this ruling to be brought forth.
    The DA should have filed this case seperating the first two “clients” of the woman, whom she did AGREE to have sex with for money. Their not paying her was therefore, correctly, Theft of Services.
    Now, consequent men who arrived and forced her to have sex at gunpoint, should have been brought up under charges of rape.
    It was unclear to me if the first two were involved with the rape, and if they were, they should have been listed as accessories to the subsequent rape, and as defendants in that case as well, should they have indeed had sex with her, unconsented, subsequent to the original consentual act.
    By throwing this all together, they set this case up to fail.

    The one thing that does interest me most is this:

    If the act (of prostitution) is illegal, how can they uphold a theft of “services” charge for an illegal act at all? By calling it theft of services, isnt the judge validating the act of prostitution as a viable services based business?

  7. There is actually no such charge as “theft of services” first of all. The judge made it up. Secondly, she withdrew her consent verbally and physically and it therefore should not matter that she ever arranged to do so in the first place. Most importantly, the initial contact never had any intention of paying her, he arranged a bogus meeting so that he and his three friends could ambush her and rape her.

    The DA did not screw up the case. It is a rape case, clear and simple. The rape victim’s occupation, legal or not, was in no way the point of this case.

    I’m also wondering, as you seem to defend the judge’s ruling here, do you also defend her statements to the press?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: