Do you understand the difference between a prostitute and an escort?

[LJ_Reloaded]

Since my thread about the dude who got away with shooting an escort over a bogus claim of "theft" sank away, it seems obvious that people - especially the legal genius prosecutors in Texas - don't understand the difference between prostitutes and escorts.

Prostitutes are sex workers. Basically: prostitutes offer sex in exchange for money.

Escorts are female companions. They accompany you to events and dates and stuff, but they do not necessarily offer sex-for-pay.

In the case of Ezekiel Gilbert, the problem was clear: she did not consent to sex as part of the agreement, but he didn't understand the difference between an escort and a prostitute, so he incorrectly assumed that the whole deal involved sex at the end, and after he shot her, the jury fell in line with this ignorance.

Two things come out of this for certain:
1) Texas (and perhaps other states) need to clarify the legal definition of an escort vs a prostitute;
2) Until then, anyone offering their services as an escort on Craigslist needs to clarify that they aren't selling ass for cash.

I think people will get it if some woman pays for a male escort and shoots his ass for refusing to provide sex.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You really could use professional counseling.


You would make a great Master's thesis.

 

[Liar]

Meanwhile, in the real world, ads for women who call themselves escorts frequently feature detailed lists of available sexual services, and lines like "$50 extra for anal".

One might understand how he'd be confused on the matter

Anyway, isn't the more interresting part here that it's apparently ok in Texas to shoot people if they have a business disagreement with you?

 

[richard_daily]

Wait, is LT actually siding with a woman?

Something's amiss here.

 

[pointless]

now do whores v. hookers.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Meanwhile, in the real world, ads for women who call themselves escorts frequently feature detailed lists of available sexual services, and lines like "$50 extra for anal".

Please show where the woman in question who was killed in this situation, had such things in her Craigslist ad.

Go!

 

[Phelia]

What?? I hadn't realized that sex was never explicitly agreed upon by both parties, and I STILL though the verdict was disgusting/outrageous. What the heck was going on in those jurors' heads?

Thanks for posting about this, LT.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

What?? I hadn't realized that sex was never explicitly agreed upon by both parties, and I STILL though the verdict was disgusting/outrageous. What the heck was going on in those jurors' heads?

Thanks for posting about this, LT.

Yup, the dude interpreted the agreement to include sex, I have yet to see ANY evidence that she ever offered it. So since she didn't fuck him and he felt he had been robbed, he skipped right to sherobbedme ergo shootthefucker.

The jurors were crazier than a bunch of Litsters and this illogical courtroom interpretation of things WILL come back to bite Texans on the ass.

 

[Liar]

Please show where the woman in question who was killed in this situation, had such things in her Craigslist ad.

Go!

Why should I do that?

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Why should I do that?

You're right, why would you try to back up your assessment of my OP with facts.

 

[Phelia]

Why should I do that?

While I am sure you didn't mean it that way, your previous post came off a little callous and victim blame-y. Of course it's reasonable for someone to conflate escort with prostitute, and you are correct that many escorts will do the same. I'll even go ahead and declare that I would assume that most escorts would offer sex as part of their services.

I'm sure you agree that even if she were an escort who offered any number of Aristocrats-level sex acts, or even a good old fashioned prostitute, there is no excuse for that man's actions. What is chilling about what LT is suggesting is that if sex were never on the table in the first place, this man committed a murder that was in no way protected by the law, and yet a jury found him innocent because of their preconceptions regarding loose women.

 

[Liar]

You're right, why would you try to back up your assessment of my OP with facts.

You said, and I quote:

Prostitutes are sex workers. Basically: prostitutes offer sex in exchange for money.

Escorts are female companions. They accompany you to events and dates and stuff, but they do not necessarily offer sex-for-pay.

I said escorts routinely offer sex for pay. The term escort is de facto routinely used as a synonym for prostitute.

Whether one who chose not to have been killed for it or not before now, is one hundred percent irrelevant to my post.

 

[kbate]

What?? I hadn't realized that sex was never explicitly agreed upon by both parties, and I STILL though the verdict was disgusting/outrageous. What the heck was going on in those jurors' heads?

Thanks for posting about this, LT.

The jurors did not believe prosecution's claim that she was not a prostitute. As she is not available to testify and her pimp/handler/driver/whatever apparently was not very convincing - they acquitted under the moronic Texas law allowing deadly force for property protection after dark.

Regardless of whether she promised sex and refused in order to steal the $150 or whether she was a legitimate $300 an hour escort - killing someone over money or simple property is plainly wrong and the killer belongs in prison for life.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

While I am sure you didn't mean it that way, your previous post came off a little callous and victim blame-y. Of course it's reasonable for someone to conflate escort with prostitute, and you are correct that many escorts will do the same. I'll even go ahead and declare that I would assume that most escorts would offer sex as part of their services.

Ayup. The only error one could interpret into my OP is not mentioning that escorts themselves make that mistake. But this case was not like that.

I'm sure you agree that even if she were an escort who offered any number of Aristocrats-level sex acts, or even a good old fashioned prostitute, there is no excuse for that man's actions. What is chilling about what LT is suggesting is that if sex were never on the table in the first place, this man committed a murder that was in no way protected by the law, and yet a jury found him innocent because of their preconceptions regarding loose women.

A total abomination of a law made even worse and worse as further analysis digs into the details.

At its base, the dude carried out a summary execution. The cartoonish world of Texas just got ugly. Er, uglier.

 

[renard_ruse]

Who was the marketing genius who thought that re-labelling prostitutes as "sex workers" was a good idea?

Talk about completely taking the mystique and romance out of it. "Sex worker" is so clinical sounding. Extremely dumb idea from a marketing standpoint. Lady of the night is much more intriguing. The term "public girl" was common at one time, even that sounds better.

 

[Liar]

While I am sure you didn't mean it that way, your previous post came off a little callous and victim blame-y. Of course it's reasonable for someone to conflate escort with prostitute, and you are correct that many escorts will do the same. I'll even go ahead and declare that I would assume that most escorts would offer sex as part of their services.

I'm sure you agree that even if she were an escort who offered any number of Aristocrats-level sex acts, or even a good old fashioned prostitute, there is no excuse for that man's actions. What is chilling about what LT is suggesting is that if sex were never on the table in the first place, this man committed a murder that was in no way protected by the law, and yet a jury found him innocent because of their preconceptions regarding loose women.

Jesus on a pogo stick. Did you read my post? Or did you only read the part that LJ quoted?

I'm saying, clearky, that there is no justification to shoot her, and if the law in some contrived way gives cover for that because she "stole" money from him (not to mention that he was trying to commit a crime by buying it), the law is fucked up.

 

[Liar]

Who was the marketing genius who thought that re-labelling prostitutes as "sex workers" was a good idea?

Talk about completely taking the mystique and romance out of it. "Sex worker" is so clinical sounding. Extremely dumb idea from a marketing standpoint. Lady of the night is much more intriguing. The term "public girl" was common at one time, even that sounds better.

Um... the idea IS to make it sound unsexy. It's a term thought up by people who are against that sort of thing.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

You said, and I quote:


I said escorts routinely offer sex for pay. The term escort is de facto routinely used as a synonym for prostitute.

Whether one who chose not to have been killed for it or not before now, is one hundred percent irrelevant to my post.

Phelia nailed it. Escorts sometimes confuse the issue, too. There is still a difference.

 

[marshalt]

The difference between a prostitute and an escort is the same as a cook at McDonald's and a chef at a 4 star restaurant.

 

[Liar]

Phelia nailed it. Escorts sometimes confuse the issue, too. There is still a difference.

So what part of: "One might understand how he'd be confused on the matter" did you fail to understand?

 

[Phelia]

The jurors did not believe prosecution's claim that she was not a prostitute. As she is not available to testify and her pimp/handler/driver/whatever apparently was not very convincing - they acquitted under the moronic Texas law allowing deadly force for property protection after dark.

Regardless of whether she promised sex and refused in order to steal the $150 or whether she was a legitimate $300 an hour escort - killing someone over money or simple property is plainly wrong and the killer belongs in prison for life.

Agree 100%.

Jesus on a pogo stick. Did you read my post? Or did you only read the part that LJ quoted?

I'm saying, clearky, that there is no justification to shoot her, and if the law in some contrived way gives cover for that because she "stole" money from him (not to mention that he was trying to commit a crime by buying it), the law is fucked up.

I read it, and I know what you were saying. I think we all agree that the law is fucked up, and I don't think you were saying it was any LESS fucked up because of semantics. You could certainly say "I can understand why he might have thought sex was part of the transaction," and I (and most people) would agree with you, but I did think it was a bit of an odd thing to focus on given this implication:

What is chilling about what LT is suggesting is that if sex were never on the table in the first place, this man committed a murder that was in no way protected by the law, and yet a jury found him innocent because of their preconceptions regarding loose women.

That's all. Really, it wasn't a criticism of you.

 

[renard_ruse]

The difference between a prostitute and an escort is the same as a cook at McDonald's and a chef at a 4 star restaurant.

A hamburger is a hamburger and a pussy is a pussy.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

So what part of: "One might understand how he'd be confused on the matter" did you fail to understand?

Because I am not confused on the definition of an escort vs a prostitute.

Others, including some escorts, may improperly mix the two up, but that does not mean I am confused.

 

[SeaDaddy1]

It's all the same to me. No matter how it's labeled or packaged.

Like hotels and motels; can you afford the Ritz-Carlton or do you go w/Motel 6?

 

[Liar]

Because I am not confused on the definition of an escort vs a prostitute.

Others, including some escorts, may improperly mix the two up, but that does not mean I am confused.

I was not talking about you. When I speak to you, like when I reply to your posts, I don't refer to you in third person. I was talking about the killer.