Comments on: What is Prostitution, Anyway? http://www.feministlawprofessors.com/2009/07/what-is-prostitution-anyway/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=what-is-prostitution-anyway Nearly all of us root for fairness, not for our own sex. - Nicholas Kristof Sat, 04 Sep 2010 19:02:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Beldar http://www.feministlawprofessors.com/2009/07/what-is-prostitution-anyway/comment-page-1/#comment-5518 Beldar Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:09:34 +0000 http://feministlawprofessors.com/?p=12039#comment-5518 The language you quote from the proposed Rhode Island statute very closely tracks language used by states like Texas and New York. For a Texas case discussing and following New York law on what "fee" means in this context, see Tisdale v. State, 640 S.W.2d 409, 413 (Tex. App. -- San Antonio 1982, pet'n ref'd) (quoting & adopting holding from People v. Block, 71 Misc.2d 714, 337 N.Y.S.2d 153, 157 (1972), emphasis omitted): "The fair import of the word 'fee' then is payment in return for professional services rendered. It is not intended facetiously to point out here that prostitution has long been euphemistically known as 'the oldest profession.' 'Fee' in [New York] Penal Law § 230.00 can fairly be said to connote professionalism. It restricts the purview of the statute. For example, it would eliminate the situation (suggested by the defendants) of a wife who withholds the performance of her conjugal duties unless her husband gives her a mink coat. It further defines and limits the type of behavior the Legislature intended as criminal." Certainly there's at least an argument to be made in favor of Rhode Island adopting statutory language that has already been used, and is well interpreted to good effect, from other states rather than trying to re-invent the wheel in ways that are likely to spawn lots of cases testing the interpretation of the legislators' new handiwork. The language you quote from the proposed Rhode Island statute very closely tracks language used by states like Texas and New York. For a Texas case discussing and following New York law on what “fee” means in this context, see Tisdale v. State, 640 S.W.2d 409, 413 (Tex. App. — San Antonio 1982, pet’n ref’d) (quoting & adopting holding from People v. Block, 71 Misc.2d 714, 337 N.Y.S.2d 153, 157 (1972), emphasis omitted):

“The fair import of the word ‘fee’ then is payment in return for professional services rendered. It is not intended facetiously to point out here that prostitution has long been euphemistically known as ‘the oldest profession.’ ‘Fee’ in [New York] Penal Law § 230.00 can fairly be said to connote professionalism. It restricts the purview of the statute. For example, it would eliminate the situation (suggested by the defendants) of a wife who withholds the performance of her conjugal duties unless her husband gives her a mink coat. It further defines and limits the type of behavior the Legislature intended as criminal.”

Certainly there’s at least an argument to be made in favor of Rhode Island adopting statutory language that has already been used, and is well interpreted to good effect, from other states rather than trying to re-invent the wheel in ways that are likely to spawn lots of cases testing the interpretation of the legislators’ new handiwork.

]]>