It's time to talk about pornography - and specifically whether women who work as porn stars can be also be dignified. I raise this issue only because the president of the United States has just said he doesn't believe they can.
He was agreeing with the assertion of his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor and now resident White House flame thrower. In a speech in Tel Aviv this week, Giuliani said Stormy Daniels, the woman who claims she had an affair with Mr Trump in 2006, lacks credibility, simply because of her profession.
"If you're going to sell your body for money, you just don't have a reputation. I may be old fashioned, I dunno," said the thrice-married lawyer. Asked about those comments on his way to the G7 summit today, Trump says he didn't disagree with his lawyer.
Giuliani didn't address the obvious question of whether selling your body for money could potentially include fashion models, of which Melania Trump was one. The comment caused outrage among many female commentators, to whom Giuliani responded on CNN: "If you're a (feminist) and you support the porn industry, you should turn in your credentials."
The big question at heart of Stormy Daniels saga
The president and the porn star: Why this matters
Yet again the porn industry is the subject of thorny ethical issues and double standards.
First off, why can't a woman who works in the porn industry also be credible? Just because you act in sex films doesn't mean you are a liar - as Daniels herself said on US TV a few weeks ago. You can perform sex on camera and still know right from wrong.
Second, what about all the men who watch women in porn films? Are they too lacking in moral fibre? If that's the case, then America is a hot bed of reputation-less, non-credible individuals. After all, there is an awful lot of porn made and consumed in this country - who knows, possibly even by high-powered lawyers.
The US porn industry is a multi-billion-dollar industry, with some 600 porn movies made in Hollywood every year
It would be rather hypocritical to suggest people who watch porn are upstanding members of society, but people who star in it are disreputable.
Personally, I'm interpreting it less as "people who watch porn are upstanding members of society" and more as "you can prove she stars in porn, but you can't prove I watch it."
I thought this battle was won the minute live-action pornography was covered under freedom of speech. But no. Apparently prostitution isn't just "selling your body," but so is porn. So selling services you provide, or goods you manufacture, with some of your body parts, isn't selling your body, but selling video of other things you do with other body parts is. Seems a tad arbitrary a distinction.
And what of marrying for money; which many conservatives advocate as the solution to poverty? How is that not ALSO "selling your body?"
