Procuring (prostitution)

Pimps and madams are diverse and variegated, depending on the strata in which they work, and they enter and leave the sex industry for a variety of internal and external reasons, such as family pressure, interactions with the police, and in some cases recruitment from peer sex workers.[2][3][4]

Procuring can take abusive forms. Madams/pimps may punish clients for physical abuse or failure to pay, and enforce exclusive rights to "turf" where their prostitutes may advertise and operate with less competition.[5] In the many places where prostitution is outlawed, sex workers have decreased incentive to report abuse for fear of self-incrimination, and increased motivation to seek any physical protection from clients and law enforcement that a madam/pimp might provide.

The madam/pimp–prostitute relationship is often understood to be abusive and possessive, with the pimp/madam using techniques such as psychological intimidation, manipulation, starvation, rape and/or gang rape, beating, tattooing to mark the woman as "his", confinement, threats of violence toward the victim's family, forced drug use and the shame from these acts.[6][7][8] Recent empirical research of madams/pimps, however, suggest that these assumptions about abusive relationships represent stereotyped oppression narratives that may only represent a small percentage of the relationships between madams/pimps and sex workers. [9][10]

In the U.S., madams/pimps can be arrested and charged with pandering and are legally known as procurers.[11] This, combined with the tendency to identify pimping with African-American masculinity, may provide some of the explanation for why approximately three-fifths of all "confirmed" human traffickers in the United States are African-American men.[12] It has recently been argued that some of the extreme examples of violence cited in the article below come primarily from such stereotyping supported by Hollywood screenwriters,[13] selective and decontextualized trial transcripts, and studies that have only interviewed parties to sex commerce in institutions of rescue, prosecution, and punishment, rather than engaging rigorous study in situ.[14]

A 2018 study by researchers from the University of Montreal divided the construct of a "pimp" into three distinct categories, including “Low-profile” pimps (primarily female pimps), “Hustlers” (predominantly male and violent, marking the common stereotype) and the “abused” (even male-female split, more likely to be subjected to violence than committing it).[15]

Where prostitution is decriminalized or regulated, procuring may or may not be legal. In jurisdictions where procuring is allowed, however, the forms permitted do not involve threats or other forms of non-consensual acts towards the prostitute or other persons; all procuring regulations differ widely from place to place.

Procuring and brothels are legal in the Netherlands, Germany, Greece, New Zealand, and most of Australia and Nevada.[16]

The White Slave statue by Abastenia St. Leger Eberle, location unknown

Pimping is sometimes operated like a business.[32] The pimp may have a bottom girl who serves as office manager, keeping the pimp apprised of law-enforcement activity and collecting money from the prostitutes.[33] Pimps recognize a hierarchy among themselves. In certain pimp strata, the least respected, or newer pimps, are the "popcorn pimps" and "wannabes". "Popcorn pimps" was a phenomenon which occurred among adolescent cocaine users of both sexes who utilized children younger than themselves to support their habits.[34] A pimp who uses violence and intimidation to control his prostitutes is called a "gorilla pimp", while those who use psychological trickery to deceive younger prostitutes into becoming hooked into the system are called "finesse pimps".[35] In addition, a prostitute may "bounce" from pimp to pimp without paying the "pimp moving" tax.[36]

Some pimps in the United States are also documented gang members, which causes concerns for police agencies in jurisdictions where prostitution is a significant problem.[37] Pimping rivals narcotic sales as a major source of funding for many gangs. Gangs need money to survive, and money equates to power and respect. While selling drugs may be lucrative for a gang, this activity often carries significant risk as stiff legal penalties and harsh mandatory minimum sentencing laws exist. However, with pimping, gang members still make money while the prostitutes themselves bear the majority of the risk. Pimping has several benefits to the gang that the pimp belongs to. These benefits include helping the gang recruit new members because the gang has women available for sex, and the money brought in by prostitution allows gang members to buy cars, clothes and weapons, all of which help to recruit younger members into the gang by increasing the reputation of the gang in the local gang subculture. The presence of gangs (and weapons and drugs) is a virtual guarantee when prostitutes are present, which is why many law-enforcement agencies advocate taking an aggressive stance against prostitutes. Many vice units work to ascertain if the prostitute they have arrested has a pimp, and if so, they pressure them to provide information about their pimp and the gang involved. This information can then be used to go after the more serious and violent offenders.[38]

Some pimp businesses have an internal structure – built around violence – for dealing with rule breakers. For example, some pimps have been known to employ a "pimp stick", which is two coat hangers wrapped together, in order to subdue unruly prostitutes.[33] A variation is a "pimp cane", used for similar purposes. Although prostitutes can move between pimps, this movement sometimes leads to violence. For example, a prostitute could be punished for merely looking at another pimp; this is considered in some pimp milieus to be "reckless eyeballing".[33] Violence can also be used on customers, for example if the customer attempts to evade payment or becomes unruly with a prostitute.

Attempts have been made in the U.S. to charge pornographic-film producers with pandering under state law. The case of California v. Freeman in 1989 is one of the most prominent examples where a producer/director of pornographic films was charged with pandering under the argument that paying porn actors to perform sex on camera was a form of prostitution covered by a state anti-pandering statute. The State Supreme Court rejected this argument, finding that the California pandering statute was not intended to cover the hiring of actors who would be engaging in sexually-explicit but non-obscene performances. It also stated that only in cases where the producer paid the actors for the purpose of sexually gratifying themselves or other actors, could the producer be charged with pandering under state law. This case effectively legalized pornography in the State of California.[44][45][46] In 2008, the New Hampshire Supreme Court issued a similar ruling (New Hampshire v. Theriault) which declared that producing pornography was not a form of prostitution under state law.[47]

• Procuring in art
• 
  The Procuress by Dirck van Baburen, 1622
• 
  The procuress by Jan G. van Bronckhorst, 1636–1638
• 
  At the procuress, by Jan van Bijlert, second quarter of 17th century
• 
  In Salon of Rue des Moulins, (La Fleur blanche), by Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, 1894

• American Pimp, a 1999 documentary by the Hughes Brothers consisting of first-person interviews with people involved in the pimping lifestyle in the U.S.
• Brothel
• Pandarus
• Prostitution

Media related to Prostitution at Wikimedia Commons