Montreal Escorts

Bill C-36 Media Watchlist - you can help!

purpman

Member
Dec 30, 2022
67
62
18
47
Ça fait depuis 2017 que je travaille en prenant des pauses et je n’ai jamais eu de visite d’un policier, jamais eu de clients se faire intercepter non plus.

C’est une certaine type de clientèle qui se fait cibler je crois

quelle type de clientèle selon vous? Cet article me rend nerveux :(
 

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,112
4,061
113
Like many politicians these days, they all got the Not In My Backyard Syndrome (we see how governments are doing their max to shutdown all stripclubs). They do this every year to make a show to the world that they are doing something. Having said that, Bill C-36 is a sexist bill and one derived from feminism, it infantiles women and puts the men as the predator. This bill also facilitates scams on Leolist types of sites and we see how scams and poor service on Leolist types of sites took a big hike since Bill C-36 came into effect. This was done by design to make the hobby inhospitable. With feminism taking over the world, banning prostitution will be the norm everywhere except in third world countries.
 

LC18

Incall Downtown Montreal & outcall anywhere
Supporting Member
Sep 8, 2020
2,960
9,522
113
quelle type de clientèle selon vous? Cet article me rend nerveux :(

Les clients qui fréquentent LL et qui voient des femmes qui ont l’air d’avoir un pimp.

Je sais que beaucoup de clients n’aiment pas les femmes qui demandent beaucoup d’infos comme nom complet, numéro de téléphone etc mais c’est quelque chose que les autorités ne prendraient pas le temps de faire s’il cherchait à arrêter à surprendre quelquun
 

purpman

Member
Dec 30, 2022
67
62
18
47
Les clients qui fréquentent LL et qui voient des femmes qui ont l’air d’avoir un pimp.

Je sais que beaucoup de clients n’aiment pas les femmes qui demandent beaucoup d’infos comme nom complet, numéro de téléphone etc mais c’est quelque chose que les autorités ne prendraient pas le temps de faire s’il cherchait à arrêter à surprendre quelquun
Ohhhh je vois. Merci du renseignement. C’est très apprécié:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Murd0c

2fast2slow

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2005
2,543
2,527
113
Les clients qui fréquentent LL et qui voient des femmes qui ont l’air d’avoir un pimp.

Je sais que beaucoup de clients n’aiment pas les femmes qui demandent beaucoup d’infos comme nom complet, numéro de téléphone etc mais c’est quelque chose que les autorités ne prendraient pas le temps de faire s’il cherchait à arrêter à surprendre quelquun
ce n<est pas comment j'interprète l'article. Ils ne siblent personne en particulier. C'est monnsieurs tout le monde qui se fait arrêter...pères de familles, hommes célibatiairers ou mariées.

je trouverais ça tellement pénible le 'john school'
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cap'tain Fantastic

Cap'tain Fantastic

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2011
4,128
7,950
113
Les clients qui fréquentent LL et qui voient des femmes qui ont l’air d’avoir un pimp.

Je sais que beaucoup de clients n’aiment pas les femmes qui demandent beaucoup d’infos comme nom complet, numéro de téléphone etc mais c’est quelque chose que les autorités ne prendraient pas le temps de faire s’il cherchait à arrêter à surprendre quelquun
Désolé Lena mais, soit tu n'a pas lu l'article, soit tu n'a pas compris. C'est pourtant très clair, on vise la clientèle "normale" , c.a.d. les "very plain johns", on prend même la peine de préciser que ça exclu tout clients qui favorise l'exploitation sexuelle.

Le programme sert à forcer le client à participer au "John School" où, on prétend réhabiliter l'individu, s'il refuse il se retrouve avec un dossier criminel.
 

LC18

Incall Downtown Montreal & outcall anywhere
Supporting Member
Sep 8, 2020
2,960
9,522
113
En général ce sont les clients qui se font attraper le plus souvent.

Cet article parle d’un projet spécial qui n’est pour l’instant pas appliqué partout et qui n’a pas les mêmes buts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cap'tain Fantastic

Dave in Phoenix

Active Member
Mar 21, 2003
257
172
43
Phoenix AZ USA
www.sexworkcanada.com
In Ontario, C36 has been struck down 3 times, and another case is in process. There are mixed messages if the Crown has appealed to the Canadian Supreme Court or not.

When C-36 was first enacted, Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver police issued press releases that they would not change their enforcement - basically only responding to complaints or if underaged, illegally in Canada, or by force, as I recall. I have them saved somewhere in my vast computer files that go back like 40 years!

This is only a precedent in Ontario but courts have followed the same legal arguments (Charter safety of persons) that stuck down the prior law against incalls, working of avails, etc. Outcall of course was legal.

But would seem doubtful (or wishful thinking) that Quebec would be hesitant to charge if a private consenting adult.

A couple of years ago in Toronto (Peal region), I had a companion stopped by the police as she was pulling into my hotel. We have no clue how they knew she was a companion. She was with a well-known agency, I believe with an agency driver as I recall. The police's only interest and questions were related to if she was doing the work willingly and not sex trafficked. She assured the officer she was. She was shaken up a bit wondering how they knew she was on a "date". She called me later and explained and I met her at an incall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2fast2slow

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,112
4,061
113

The latest case in Ontario has been struck down. I am not surprised. Those in power want to play Grandma. Letting others decide whats best for them is beyond the government. The issue is government is too big.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TooSexy4MyCat

2fast2slow

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2005
2,543
2,527
113

The latest case in Ontario has been struck down. I am not surprised. Those in power want to play Grandma. Letting others decide whats best for them is beyond the government. The issue is government is too big.
does this mean the whole challenge to c-36 has hit a dead end?
 

Dave in Phoenix

Active Member
Mar 21, 2003
257
172
43
Phoenix AZ USA
www.sexworkcanada.com
does this mean the whole challenge to c-36 has hit a dead end?
It has been awhile since I tracked the cases, but as I recall we have 2 or 3 prior Ontario Superior Court wins challenging C36 including the escort agency case. Supposedly, one was appealed by the Crown to the Canada Supreme Court. - Or first, the Ontario Supreme Court, I forget how your system works.

In the news, it didn't mention as I recall the issue that under C36 technically the customer is illegal just not the sexworker. Of course, at least the 3 largest cities PD announced would not enforce consenting adults unless they were underage or not in Canada legally.

So now we have conflicting rulings out of the Ontario Superior Court.

In the article, it also said:
The alliance plans to appeal the decision. A House of Commons justice committee review last year of the new 2014 laws on sex work found the laws made sex work more dangerous. Then-attorney general David Lametti acknowledged the laws were "divisive" and that more must be done to address the risks and harms sex workers face.
 

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,112
4,061
113
does this mean the whole challenge to c-36 has hit a dead end?
I personally do not think it will go anywhere. The more they protest, those in power will respond with more restrictions. The SWs should have left it alone, the British model worked very good. Bill C-36 just enabled SWs to scam clients easier knowing that they have no recourse. We see since Bill C-36 the amount of scams on Leolist types of sites took a big jump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patron

anon_vlad

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2004
1,554
532
113
Visit site
Yes, why? We have an enduring peace. Why do people insist on fucking it up by fighting?

The “line in the sand” is more sex-worker and John friendly in Canada than the U.S. but the same fundamental situation exists in the U.S.

U.S. law enforcement goes after mass classified advertisements (often by posting fake ads), massage parlors and interstate agencies.

U.S. law enforcement, in all but the most politically conservative states, leaves alone independent escorts and small intrastate agencies that do screening.

Guess what? U.S. Johns are wise to see the latter instead of the former.

But every year in the U.S. lots of time and money is spent on decriminalization and Nordic Law legislative proposals. We have an acceptable system now, even in the U.S. A peace.

In Canada, a John is now forced to choose among the hundreds of reviewed independent and agency ladies who must submit enough information for everyone to be sure they are 18 or over, and who charge the market price and are therefore unlikely to be trafficked or conducting a scam. Oh, the horror.

The challenges to the old law brought nothing but problems to everyone and the peace put everyone back where things started.

Nothing is ever accomplished with lawsuits and law changes.

Society doesn’t like or approve of this activity. Everyone needs to accept that and move on.
The system works for us mongers because of the lax enforcement. Who knows if one day, a conservative government will enforce the law strictly?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patron

2fast2slow

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2005
2,543
2,527
113
The system works for us mongers because of the lax enforcement. Who knows if one day, a conservative government will enforce the law strictly?
thats exactely my fear. With the conservatives riding high in the polls, i feared if the courts overturned c-36, the timing would lead to the PCs again getting to redraft the laws.
Not sure if they would be worse than the liberals though and the over-woke mentality
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_vlad

ocean

Active Member
Dec 12, 2006
629
47
28
thats exactely my fear. With the conservatives riding high in the polls, i feared if the courts overturned c-36, the timing would lead to the PCs again getting to redraft the laws.
Not sure if they would be worse than the liberals though and the over-woke mentality

the law doesn’t let advertisement Happen wtf free speech?
 

ocean

Active Member
Dec 12, 2006
629
47
28
Not sure how Canadian courts would view things, but that was an early issue with the legal Nevada brothels.

Those places have become worthless now that technology allows escorts to easily work independently.

But the Nevada law prohibited advertising. The legal brothels were pissed, obviously, and said it violated the state and federal constitution.

They were operating legally and should be able to advertise in the Las Vegas and Reno markets (counties where brothels were illegal) they argued, and in fact should be able to advertise nationwide.

They got absolutely killed in state and federal courts. Just rejected with almost no discussions in the judgements.

Courts don’t like this stuff. In fact they hate it. They don’t want these cases brought, so you will never be able to reconcile the decisions to principles like Freedom of Speech, or Right to Advertise.

One of the first things one of the Ontario courts did in ruling against c-36 was limit the decision to that Province. Apparently, the limit was stricter than that, since as Dave in Phoenix pointed out, there are now multiple decisions even in Ontario with some ruling c-36 Constitutional and some ruling it not to be so. But perhaps those cases are ruling on components of the law instead of the entire law. Otherwise it makes no sense.

It is possible that the Canadian Supreme Court just simply never picks the issue back up, especially if some of the decisions are limited to a specific province.

The last time they agreed to hear a case of the issue, a hell of a mess was created. The Court put the decision on hold to allow the legislature to choose between decriminalization or a new law. The legislature overwhelmingly passed a new law that is such a hell of a mess that the police in the three biggest cities adopted a limited enforcement policy that keeps us safe. That is a very workable compromise. Why the hell would the Canadian Supreme Court want to stir things up by hearing a new case? If they give the legislature another choice between Decriminalization or a brand new law, there will be a new law that will create a new cyclone of shit.

This is all just for eggheads, troublemakers (like Ms. Bedford in the case that brought us c-36), and legal show-offs who have no interest in the consequences of the cases they win.

A wise Supreme Court would just not accept a case re-litigating the issue. There is a reasonable compromise in place. Commercial sex readily available among adults in the big Canadian cities, with the providers realizing the necessity of keeping it out of the public eye to minimize the chance of the police changing their policies. The politicians even in the big cities can zone out any establishments blatantly offering sex. Little villages and wealthy suburbs can make life miserable for their populace if they choose to do so by not doing a limited enforcement policy.

It works better than any system in most big countries. Hopefully these “social scientist” types will burn themselves out with these lawsuits regarding c-36 and life will continue as it is now with few, if any, issues.
I disagree with this comment for several reasons, but I will only highlight just one or two points.

If a SP or escort, stops or attempts to stop her vehicle, in a parking lot or the side of the road, in order to pick up her phone and text messages a potential client, then both potential client and provider have just violated the law, as your vehicle is considered a "public place" as per criminal law.

This regardless of the nonsense that the AG/police say about we only punish the client as per the Nordic model. IF IT ISN'T WRITTEN IN LAW , IT IS JUST A PROMISE nothing more.
 

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,112
4,061
113
The system works for us mongers because of the lax enforcement. Who knows if one day, a conservative government will enforce the law strictly?
The laws are enforced provincially and even more so municipally. Bill C-36 might be federal but how it is enforced is decided by the provinces and ultimately the municipality. There might be a big difference in enforcement say between Montreal and Quebec City or Toronto or Ottawa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wessex

peachy

Active Member
Dec 13, 2023
64
179
33
65
I remember when C-36 was first introduced and the panic and hysteria by so many clients on-line. Everyone got super paranoid that cops would pull them over and check their phone texts for contact with providers. Or that the police would devote huge cyber resources to monitor our emails. What I remember saying at the time and it has mostly held true is that the cops, for the most part, had far more important issues to deal with than some middle aged dude just getting laid by a beautiful young lady. They also don't have the financial resources to make prostitution their highest priority.
I also remember warning everybody that the bill would push the industry further down the path of black market criminals taking advantage and that has also held true as the scammers have basically flooded the industry. Basically the law was written as a placebo to make the do-gooders and self righteous feel good. Please your constituents and try to get re-elected. Politicians are too unintelligent to think beyond that. As for the courts, they basically have to do what they have to do. Fwiw, I have no problem with them busting dumbasses who knowingly try to get with a minor or the lowlifes who exploit women. But for the most part, that is not the situation most of us are in. I don't feel that I have anything to feel guilty about when seeing a reputable escort. We are consenting adults just having a good time.
 

BrittanyMontreal

Supporting Member
Apr 20, 2017
229
334
63
48
Montreal
I remember when C-36 was first introduced and the panic and hysteria by so many clients on-line. Everyone got super paranoid that cops would pull them over and check their phone texts for contact with providers. Or that the police would devote huge cyber resources to monitor our emails. What I remember saying at the time and it has mostly held true is that the cops, for the most part, had far more important issues to deal with than some middle aged dude just getting laid by a beautiful young lady. They also don't have the financial resources to make prostitution their highest priority.
I also remember warning everybody that the bill would push the industry further down the path of black market criminals taking advantage and that has also held true as the scammers have basically flooded the industry. Basically the law was written as a placebo to make the do-gooders and self righteous feel good. Please your constituents and try to get re-elected. Politicians are too unintelligent to think beyond that. As for the courts, they basically have to do what they have to do. Fwiw, I have no problem with them busting dumbasses who knowingly try to get with a minor or the lowlifes who exploit women. But for the most part, that is not the situation most of us are in. I don't feel that I have anything to feel guilty about when seeing a reputable escort. We are consenting adults just having a good time.
WoW! Vous dîtes si bien les choses! Je suis tellement d'accord avec tous vos points. Les policiers ont autre chose plus urgente à faire, ils vont faire la visite des endroits où il y a des plaintes graves, ils n’ont ni le financement ni assez de personnels pour en faire une priorité. J’adore votre comparaison avec les lois, les politiciens et les placebos! Il y a beaucoup de lois stupides qui entourent l’industrie du sexe, dont la loi sur l’immigration, qui dit que tu peux être déportée si tu travailles dans tout ce qui entoure cette industrie (danseuses, masseuses, escortes), peu importe ton statut de réfugié, même avec une résidence permanente.https://chezstella.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Statut-dimmigration-et-Travail-du-sexe.pdf
Quand les filles paniquent, comme plusieurs avec la loi C-36, je leur dit que c’est quasi impossible que les policiers se présentent dans un endroit, à moins d’avoir des plaintes graves. Il y en a beaucoup trop et avec trop peu des moyens.
Par contre, nous tentons d’abolir cette clause qui va à l’encontre de la charte des droits et libertés de la personne.

https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/...-l-expulsion/2024-02-09/une-loi-a-changer.php

WoW! You say things so well! I so agree with all your points. The police have something more urgent to do, they are going to visit places where there are serious complaints, they have neither the funding nor enough staff to make it a priority. I love your comparison with laws, politicians and placebos! There are a lot of stupid laws surrounding the sex industry, including immigration law, which says you can be deported if you work in anything surrounding the industry (dancers, masseuses, escorts), it doesn't matter. your refugee status, even with permanent residence. content/uploads/2016/01/Statut-dimmigration-et-Travail-du-sexe.pdf
When the girls panic, like many with Bill C-36, I tell them that it It's almost impossible for the police to show up in a place, unless there are serious complaints. There are too many and with too few resources.
On the other hand, we are trying to abolish this clause which goes against the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Published last Friday in the Press.

https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/...-l-expulsion/2024-02-09/une-loi-a-changer.php
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts