Negotiating boundaries and frankly discussing what you bring to or want out of a relationship is a good thing, but threatening to withdraw financial support from your partner if your sex life isn't satisfying is a weird and alarming way to approach it. The point of prostitution laws is not to intrude on bedrooms, but to manage what policymakers believe is a social blight, and it's enforced accordingly in the huge majority of situations.Įdit thanks to /u/CopprRegendt's prompt - A relationship negotiation that explicitly ties intimacy to money may be legal as above, but for most people it would be either uncomfortably transactional, or if there's a significant power imbalance between the partners, potentially very coercive and potentially abusive. While a contract for financial support in return for sex is facially a contract for prostitution, a document like that in the context of an ongoing romantic relationship, where both parties are giving and receiving those things anyways and where it's clear that the document is less about enforcement and obligation and more about negotiating boundaries, might be interpreted as a particularly legalistically-voiced form of pillow talk - unenforceable, certainly, but also not criminal.Īny intimate relationship inevitably involves some exchange of service, value, and intimacy, and there's no public benefit in making it illegal to talk about the terms of that exchange as part of negotiating the boundaries of the relationship. In addition to the points raised so far, context matters.
0 kommentar(er)
