I strongly disagree with you on this one. There is still large amount of population that are conservative and religious (go to church every Sunday). They would like prostitution gone not just from their neighborhoods but from existence. The less conservative people do not want this in their neighborhoods or near their kids. This is why some massage got shut down. In the US which is an very conservative country and religion has a very strong presence there... Over half the population want prostitution to be illegal. In Canada your statement is more applicable. Most people do not care much about it but most do not want it in their neighborhoods.
grand prix mtl anti hobby campaigns
- Thread starter Ricky bonds
- Start date
I strongly disagree with you on this one. There is still large amount of population that are conservative and religious (go to church every Sunday). They would like prostitution gone not just from their neighborhoods but from existence. The less conservative people do not want this in their neighborhoods or near their kids. This is why some massage got shut down. In the US which is an very conservative country and religion has a very strong presence there... Over half the population want prostitution to be illegal. In Canada your statement is more applicable. Most people do not care much about it but most do not want it in their neighborhoods.
The Left is split on the issue of Prostitution. The old guard Feminists are for Legalized prostitution. They consistently use the argument, it's a woman's body and she should be free to do with what she wants to do with it.
The new guard Feminists would like to castrate every male on the planet. They hate men. They see prostitution as demeaning to women and a way to cut men off from their natural sexual drive. They don't recognize or would even admit that there are women who are not forced to prostitute themselves. Their narrative is all women engaged in prostitution are victims of prostitution. We know that is so far from the truth.
The Religious Right is certainly a force against legalized prostitution, but the new guard Feminist are just as politically involved in this fight.
Yep. I was offered take out by this sexy spinner Black girl at L'Axe yesterday. She was very serious about it and insisted for me to take her phone number.
My remark was not country specific. I think it applies quite equally all over the world, including muslim countries. I don't think that neither political or religious orientations have a big influence on the way people see sex work. The strong opposition comes from radicalized components of the right, of the left, of religious groups and of feminism. They strongly believe in their opinion and, as a corollary, would like to have them imposed on others. That's why they monopolize public debates.
Most people are not radicalized. They may have opinions on all sorts of things, like prostitution, but they are not fighting to have them imposed on other, except if they are personnally impacted by them. So yes, moderated people may indeed combat prostitution in their neighbourhood. However, I would say that in the neighbourhoods where prostitution is more visible, the residents re more used to dealing with all sorts of "deviant" behaviours". Otherwise, people tend to let others to their own private affairs.
This statement is really only true for the Bible Belt portion of the US. The two coasts of the USA are collectively probably less conservative and more liberal than Canada as a whole. Prostitution is legal in parts of Nevada and effectively decriminalized in Key West. Although modern New England is much less conservative than the Bible Belt, it is New England where the religious zealots fleeing persecution from England settled. As a result, many prostitution laws on the books in the New England states date back to the 1600s and 1700s, when these states were ruled by the powerful political elites of the Puritans, Quakers, and other religious sects and factions, all of which were very conservative and anti-prostitution. The average Canadian who is weak on the history of American legal and political institutions simply doesn't understand that we got shackled with a legal heritage that has been very slow and hard to change, despite the immense changes in the demographics of the population here even in the last 30 years.
Just the announcement of crack downs on GP weekend put a damper on the business. They the cops are busy enough with their GP and traffic duties they will not crack down now. There will be one or two big publicity campaigns and one or to high visibility bust leading up to the 375th. anniversary of Montreal. I think the biz will roller coaster and fizzle in the next year. This publicity hound mayor wants to be re-elected and a vote is a vote. If he gets feminist on his side, more votes for him.
Woe, what in the world do you know about Muslim countries and prostitution? In the most restrictive Muslim countries, there is no prostitution - just rape or they temporary marry them. This would apply to Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and now the Islamic State (wherever that may be at the moment). In Northern Africa, there is no Prostitution. In Egypt, it may exist in Cairo. In the moderate Muslim Countries like Turkey, United Arab Emirates, there is some Prostitution but all foreign women. https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2013/02/03/prostitution-in-the-muslim-world-a-survey/ http://www.rebe.rau.ro/RePEc/rau/clieui/SP14/CLI-SP14-A5.pdf
That's not true. Prostitution was LEGAL in all states in the US until the 1910's when the Women's suffrage movement started.
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-po...nt-crime-fascinating-history-sex-work-america
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_the_United_States#Legal_measures
Great post DD. I liked that brief history of prostitution in America. The last chapter pertains to what is going on today. The North American Do-gooder that wants to impose their will on everyone else. This is so true:
Cops, governments and social reformers are part of those environments, too, and in their own ways, each profits from commercial sex. In these same American cities today, vice cops arrest suspected customers to fill seats in “johns' schools,” where the men are lectured by employees of social reform projects that aim to abolish prostitution with “scared straight” tactics. Vice cops draw a salary from making these arrests, and the anti-prostitution lecturers are paid, too – sometimes from the fees paid by those arrested and funneled into the programs as a way to avoid conviction. The programs themselves create an incentive for cops to police the sex trade, and they support a professional class of people – anti-prostitution campaigners – who make a living attempting to abolish the ways other people make a living.
Indeed, my little buddy did make a very good post. Very interesting to read, i must say. :thumb:
This isn't actually true, since Boston made brothels illegal in 1672 and various nightwalking laws existed after that. Although not always enforced, vagrancy laws were often used to arrest those engaged in prostitution, especially if gratuity was not given to he police or the wrong neighbor complained. I am also fairly certain I read statutes dating back to the 1700s which outlawed prostitution in Connecticut and in other New England states. The authorities you cite aren't talking about all the laws in all of the states in any kind of scholarly manner. These are generically researched conclusory pieces which you wouldn't cite in a law review article written under pain of not being certified for law review credits.
Apart from what laws existed or were on the books at the time, it is fair to say prostitution was both more prevalent and more out in the open in the USA before the early 20th Century especially in the Wild West and in Colonial America when Colonial America was mostly men who had not yet brought over their families.
Radical left wing feminists are behind most anti-prostitution efforts in both Canada and the USA, and these are historically unattractive lesbians who see women as fit for consumption only by other women, and not by men. They are man-haters.
1 The law was not the result of political pressure but an obligation imposed by the courts.
2 The radical left wing feminists had 0 influence on the conservative government. They were simply used as sales representatives. The Evangelicals had a lot more influences.
3 Long lived religious organisations like the Y are still very active in the rescue industry. They have more money than most secular organizations that are smaller. I haven't looked at the distribution of the 20M$ that came with the law, but I would bet that at least half of it went to church driven organisations.
4 Radical feminism of both the left and the right was more influential in France and Sweden.
Really? Where are you sources? Every account of prostitution laws I have read have said that Prostitution was legal in the US prior to the 1910's and then a movement across the States made it illegal. Fairly certain means nothing. Produce your sources.
Dude, your sources are poorly researched trash journalism written by lightweights writing agenda pieces. Brothel owner was convicted in Boston in 1672. I guess it wasn't legal-- DUHHHHHHH!!!!!!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...im-adam/ece60370-07cc-4804-adff-66c732e0288e/
"The Puritans of Massachusetts weren't as pragmatic when it came to randiness and ribaldry. America's first prostitution scandal occurred in 1672 in Boston, where a certain Alice Thomas was convicted of keeping a bordello. A court ruled that Alice was nothing more than a "common baud," having given "frequent secret and unseasonable entertainment in her house to lewd lascivious and notorious persons of both sexes, giving them opportunity to commit carnall wickedness." As punishment, according to Nash, "she was whipped through the streets of Boston."
It probably wouldn't have occurred to your "source" that Boston was the only city in New England at the time and the only place where prostitution was going on because it didn't exist in the Puritan farming communities.
Maybe if your sources did more than 30 seconds of Google research they would have read that account. And this will be the last time I provide research you and your "source" should be doing.
Duuhhh, Dude, for a lawyer you don't know your US history too well. In 1672, even in Boston, the US was not a country yet. That happened 100 years afterwards. Therefore, prostitution was legal in the US until the 1910's.
Look it up. A simple Google search would have told you when the American Revolution happened.
http://www.history.com/topics/american-revolution/american-revolution-history
Go back and look at my original post which you attacked as not correct:
Where in this post did I limit my discussion to prostitution in the historical period when US was an actual country, as you now have suddenly done to change the discussion? I wrote about US history in the 1600s - was the US a country in the 1600s? Or did the states as we know them today just have a colonial history at that time which you are trying to forget?
I talked about the Puritans and US history in what is now the New England states (we do have history that predates 1776). Don't bother letting the facts get in the way of any of your posts, you never have. You think we are supposed to forget about history of the US that happened in the colonies before the US Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776? Is that what you were taught in school, that US history started with the Declaration of Independence and we can forget everything else that happened before? Are you for real? Why do we celebrate Thanksgiving every year, does it maybe having something to do with things that happened before 1776? Or you wouldn't know because you were not taught the part of US history that happened before it was a country?
Do you understand that American common law in the various states dates back to before when the United States became a country? Do you even know what common law is? I would really like to see you argue in any New England court that a judge can forget about any common law that happened before 1776, because the US wasn't a country yet. Legal cases were decided for hundreds of years based on common law precedents that predated 1776.
The supposed journalistic sources that you posted previously are neither journalism nor research, they are pure agenda and/or generic summaries. People writing with agendas never, ever let actual historical facts get in the way of any of their writings.
Similar threads
