Sarah Katherine Lewis (markedformetal) wrote,
  • Mood: yikes

this just in

"The Academy" (see my book, Indecent: How I Make It And Fake It As A Girl For Hire, 2006) just got BUSTED.

I hope none of my friends were working at the time.

Honestly, I'm surprised it took so long. Management was making some really dumb decisions and a significant portion of the prostitutes who worked there did not believe that what they were doing was against the law, due to the quasi-Eastern "spirituality" mumbo-jumbo in which the sexual services were veiled. Most of the practitioners knew exactly what the clients were paying for (hint: would you like your root chakra adjusted a little faster, baby?) but a sizable percentage of them believed that by paying lip service to the spiritual stuff, they'd be protected against prosecution. Unfortunately--whether you call it a "donation" or not--accepting money for sexual service is against the law, whether you're wearing a sari or a g-string (and usually, we wore both).

Furthermore, operating a whorehouse (pimping and pandering) is a great big federal offense, and I have no idea if management was square with the IRS but my guess is that as a "church," they were probably playing pretty fast and loose with their taxes. The individual operators, of course, have always been responsible for their own tax reporting--but if the feds demand records, a lot of women could be in a lot of trouble.

I am fascinated to see where this goes.

[EDIT: Thanks to dafnagreer for the tip-off.]

[2nd EDIT: Oh man, there's more. Yikes.
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 55 comments