Procuring (prostitution)
The procurer may receive this money in return for advertising services, physical protection, or for providing and possibly monopolizing a location where the prostitute may solicit clients.
Dawn Turner Trice of the Chicago Tribune argues that there is "something truly unsettling, to say the least, about attaching such a vile word to a scholarship" and expresses concern about the glamorization of the term.
[9] The word "pander", meaning to "pimp", is derived from Pandarus, a licentious figure who facilitates the affair between the protagonists in Troilus and Criseyde, a poem by Geoffrey Chaucer.
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.
[14] 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.
[21] A 2018 study by researchers from the University of Montreal divided the concept of a pimp into three distinct categories: "low-profile" (primarily female), "hustlers" (predominantly male and violent, marking the common stereotype), and "abused" (even male–female split, more likely to be subjected to violence than to commit it).
In 2010, Ontario Superior Court Judge Susan Himel overturned the national laws banning brothels and procuring, arguing that they violated the constitution guaranteeing "the right to life, liberty and security".
[26] Since the passing of the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act in 2014, Canada has followed the Nordic model of prostitution, which makes pimping and the purchasing of sexual services illegal.
(2) Knowingly lets or rents a building or other place or any part thereof for the purpose of the prostitution of others.Various UN commissions however have differing positions on the issue.
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.
"Popcorn pimps" was a phenomenon which occurred among adolescent cocaine users of both sexes who utilized children younger than themselves to support their habits.
[40] 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.
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.
[47] Some scholars and sex workers' rights advocates dispute portrayals of third-party agents as violent and extremely committed to a pimp subculture, finding them inaccurate exaggerations used to foster harmful policies.
