What makes Sex for Money not Prostitution?
If you are making a movie then sex for money isn't prostitution. If it is part of dancing on stage then sex for money isn't prostitution. If it's in the context of a relationship then sex for money isn't prostitution. If it's in the context of therapy then sex for money isn't prostitution. If it's in the context of getting a job then sex for money isn't prostitution. If it's in the context of friendship then sex for money isn't prostitution. If they are living together then sex for money isn't prostitution.
It seems that the common element that makes sex for money not prostitution is that if it's not only sex for money. In all these cases there is a third element involved. It's always sex for money and something else. The one example of prostitution was when there was only sex for money and nothing else. Thus, although the statute defines prostitution as sexual contact in exchange for something of value, it seems like in practice that the real rule is an exchange of something of value for only sex and nothing else. Because if you are buying sex and friendship or sex in the context of a relationship or therapy, or making a movie, then the third element makes the event not an act of prostitution, even with the element of sex for money.
Thus the language of the statute is incomplete because it doesn't say what it really means. Prostitution is more accurately defined as:
"Prostitution", a person commits prostitution if he, in return for something of value to be received by the person or by a third person, engages or offers or agrees to engage in only sexual conduct with another person.