interesting???

[Mtdl]

Actually, Patron, there is another business being decriminalised in north america: marijuana. I haven't read extensively on the subject, but I read somewhere that the number of DUIs by pot went way up, officers weren't prepared to deal with this, etc ( in Colorado, for example). Just saying.

The thing is, if they start regulating the escort business, it's gonna hit hard on the agencies while the indies will profit. Like you said, we'll be forced to go for CBJ when we really want BBBJ, because of a regulation (to protect the sex workers, they'll say). So, an indy is gonna charge us a fortune to get our fix. Since everyone will have to declare their revenue, we will see prices doubling so the escorts still get the same amount in their pockets while paying the other half in taxes. How the hell is this going to be enforced, anyway? An inspector from Revenu Québec will inspect the agency and try their best girl to see if she charges the right amount? It will only get like the construction business, where everyone pays cash to save taxes.

 

[blkone]

Considering how agencies always "lie" on the age of the providers, it would be hell to apply. Adults are adults, im one of those guy that believe everything should be alright at 18 and find the law in the states pretty dumb that to drink you have to be 21, but you can enroll yourself and kill people at 18... lol.

I must disagree. And, you can become a soldier at a younger age, I was in the military at the age of 17. They changed the age when I enrolled, it used to be 16 - I think.

I still believe that the legal age for sex work should be 23.

 

[blkone]

Be carefull with your suggestion, because you are going to raise your lots of protestations.
I said, many years ago on Merb, my idea of the perfect timing would be that women should be 25 years old at minimum before entering that kind of activity, for the reason to permit themselves to develop plenty there own sexuality based only on their own desires, and to be also confident more in themselves then. And be more prudent. We know young people are sometimes just a bit too much adventurous and learn the hard ways.
We all did. Escorting needs to be done wisely, not by impulses.

I welcome the protests. If I ever run for federal office, when it comes to sex-work. twenty-three is the word. For women and men.

 

[blkone]

If our society established that you are an adult at 18 years old, then a woman is supposed to be mature enough to make that decision for herself. This should be the only regulation enforced. The rest isn't the state's business.

Well, I am part of that society and I do not believe that if "prostitution" was legalized that any person under the age of twenty-three years may work as a sex worker.

I guarantee you, given a referendum, many people would agree with me.

 

[blkone]

I like your post! I am surprised at the number of people asking for more laws and regulations on a forum discussing something which is essentially illegal.

Oh, that's because it's hard to tax, that's all.

 

[Maria Divina]

Maria, what specifically do you mean by "real consent?" It sounds like a version of this:

Sexual Consent Form Video

Beautiful parody is this video.

No, in "our activities", that wasn't what I meant.
There was a very interesting discussion about that, very long time ago, about girls (and boys) being very highly addicted (ei: alcool, drugs, meds, gambling, shopping, name all the addiction possible ) OR living a psycho crisis where the person isn't anymore his/her real self, so few other situations can make a woman/man be forced into the sex industry apart the classical "being pimped" (I insist here, we're talking of people having an out of control deep problem) So, can we think that people living that at that point, could give a real consent? That could be a good debate, because that could raise a moral dilemma for some who care about others.

I think that discussion started related to "street action", but we extended quickly to all possible backgrounds/playgrounds.

C-36 has put escorts more at risk.

Because it's now illegal to buy sex, clients are more inclined to hide their identities and try to meet escorts in more clandestine settings. C-36 encourages the move of paid sex into the shadows. That's bad for escorts because it's harder for them to vet clients before they meet them.

The real intent of the radical feminists and religious conservatives who banded together to pass C-36 is to abolish prostitution. They want to scare all clients away from the business. Of course there is no way to fully accomplish that, but they feel good about sending some clients to prison and taking away the livelihood of lots of escorts. Do they care what happens to you when you lose your livelihood because there are fewer or no clients? Definitely not!

Oh politics have been related to religions/personal believing very often. That new law is such a sad thing because this is a regression, in place to recognize the demand to be more in security by the 3 demanders and legal while receiving their clientele, they just did the opposite. The laws we got before look way more tolerant. Maybe this is another thing, maybe they want to stop any further demand in the future from Sp's?

To tell you the truth in my activities, that didn't change anything. People reacted at the beginning. But I am a proven legit provider, I imagined that could have been more difficult for the new girls possibly, but I don't think that changed very much, except that I continue to be discrete as I have ever been.

 

[CaptRenault]

There was a very interesting discussion about that, very long time ago, about girls (and boys) being very highly addicted (ei: alcool, drugs, meds, gambling, shopping, name all the addiction possible ) OR living a psycho crisis where the person isn't anymore his/her real self, so few other situations can make a woman/man be forced into the sex industry apart the classical "being pimped" (I insist here, we're talking of people having an out of control deep problem) So, can we think that people living that at that point, could give a real consent? That could be a good debate, because that could raise a moral dilemma for some who care about others.

I agree that girls who are experiencing the unfortunate problems that you mention will probably make their lives worse by working as sex workers under the current legal regime. Such girls will probably use the money to fund the behaviors that have harmed them in the first place and they will compound their problems by taking part in an illegal business.

There's no easy answer to how to best help such people. They don't simply need access to more money. Like other citizens who have such problems, they need better mental health care, addiction care, alcoholism treatment, and shelters where they can take care of basic needs such as sleeping and eating.

A law like C-36 is ineffective in helping sex workers who are down on their luck and have these kinds of problems. If you criminalize the business that escorts with problems are engaged in, they are less likely to seek help. It doesn't matter if the criminal aspect of the business applies to the escort, the client (as with C-36) or both of them. The criminalization of prostitution stigmatizes the business and forces it to move more underground and pushes it away from social service agencies that could help unfortunate escorts who suffer from addiction and mental health problems.

 

[westwoody]

Call it what you will.

Yes, you are correct, buying was made illegal and selling was made legal.
There is a saving clause that allows one to sell and advertise if they are doing it for themselves.
The intent is the offer of sex must be made by the seller of their own free will. It should not be as a result of coercion by the buyer. This decriminalises the prostitute's actions.



 

[CaptRenault]

Here is an awful example of police in Canada harassing escorts and stealing their time even though they have not committed a crime. This is a perfect example of why I think prostitution should be decriminalized.

http://cnews.canoe.com/CNEWS/Canada/2016/10/17/22675279.html#1

Maria, how would you feel if the police did this to you?

 

[Maria Divina]

Capt,

I read completely the article before answering.

To be fair, if what they report is true, that some escorts were relieved to have some help for stopping escorting, so probably this intervention was worth, if the police assured a serious follow-up obviously.

But I'm having in mind that maybe those ladies have been placed between 2 choices: you cooperate and say that you want help OR you are going to face consequence (like to be exposed...)

Were the women strategically saying to be "victims and needing help" to save themselves of eventual consequences, who knows what the police has told them to begin.

If I was trapped this way, I would at first be very surprised and probably choked. After I think I would say first clearly and calmly "thank you, but no thank you, I don't need to be saved" but if a threat against me was possible, I would be tempted to save myself of that situation. But, to my knowledge, women cannot be charge for their activities. I hope the police didn't play on their ignorance of it and did the "bad cop, good cop strategy" with the girls. I cannot be against good intentions, if they are able to find out the real ones who struggle, that's good.

But what would be more magnific, is to stop to believe that we are all victims and to stop to report it like that. Maybe it's because that's something so way beyond their personal comprehension, they can't believe otherwise what they have been told about it in their formation or they are having opinions based on their beliefs/religions or based on the fact they don't imagine themselves doing it. Never ever an activity has been so badly judged in the entire world. We are often considered as less that second grade citizens when some had the courage to declare publicly what their are doing in life and being very fine with it. That's always been a kind of sacrilege, an abomination and amply considered as a lie to attract clients, even on board like Merb I read that sometimes. " Oh, she's telling she likes her activities, that's self-promotion" we have read it quite often.

But, thinking about it many time, and if, at the end, I would like that people stop to ostracize ladies & gentlemen who are revolving around the sex industry, and for my part, I don't need to be recognized and having the consent of all the society about my private activities. I do exist, I do what I want, I harm no one. Even, I know I do good. So the rest is "incomprehension of the unknown" from the people from the outside. AND that's not my business at that point. Not my problem, theirs.

I just want the gouvernement to be outside of the room of all the consenting adults citizens. I was so very sad when they proposed and later adopted the law criminalizing buyers. We faced the clash and the incapacity to accept people who just live and think differently of those who are making the laws AND\OR and MOST OF ALL of the majority of their electors.

But that's really strange they are having such a budget to make that kind of operation, don't you think?
And, humm, isn't in the province cherished by the ancient Prime Minister that made passed this law? It might explained then.

 

[Ponce de León]

I believe the sex trade ( in Montreal ) has already reached it own level and will not increase if it is legalized.

 

[CaptRenault]

...But, thinking about it many time, and if, at the end, I would like that people stop to ostracize ladies & gentlemen who are revolving around the sex industry, and for my part, I don't need to be recognized and having the consent of all the society about my private activities. I do exist, I do what I want, I harm no one. Even, I know I do good. So the rest is "incomprehension of the unknown" from the people from the outside. AND that's not my business at that point. Not my problem, theirs...

I just want the gouvernement to be outside of the room of all the consenting adults citizens. I was so very sad when they proposed and later adopted the law criminalizing buyers. We faced the clash and the incapacity to accept people who just live and think differently of those who are making the laws AND\OR and MOST OF ALL of the majority of their electors.

But that's really strange they are having such a budget to make that kind of operation, don't you think?

Maria, well said, thank you for your thoughtful and eloquent analysis. Bien dit, merci pour votre analyse réfléchie et éloquente. :thumb:

 

[starry]

B36 is an abomination. Turning the buyer into a criminal is of course not really a response to the problem of sex worker safety and is in reality simply a mechanism for enabling despicable and repressed individuals to satisfy their jealous desire for revenge against those who are luckier or more enlightened than they are. The clown Tory Justice Minister responsible for this suggested that the objective was the elimination of prostitution altogether. On exactly what planet does this asshole reside? Prostitution is the world's oldest profession and it aint going anywhere. A law that has zero chance of achieving its policy objective is a bad law and, TBH, people responsible for bad laws, especially those attempting to legislate sexual morality, are actually bad people and the true and only villains of the piece.
I would string them up to a tree and let them hang there till they rot.
Prostitution should be legal. It should also be regulated to address such issues as public health and the bodily security of workers and clients but in such a way as to respect the privacy of the persons engaged in the business in whatever capacity.

 

[CaptRenault]

...The clown Tory Justice Minister responsible for this suggested that the objective was the elimination of prostitution altogether. On exactly what planet does this asshole reside?

He lives on the same planet as Justin Trudeau, who in 2014 famously stated that "prostitution itself is a form of violence against women."

When asked about the possibility of changing C36 in 2016, "Trudeau dodged the issue."

“As an avowedly feminist government we know we have an awful lot of work to do on a number of different files; sexual violence, discrimination in the workplace, harassment along with the challenges posed by prostitution and human trafficking remain big, meaty issues that we are very much hoping to tackle in the coming months and years.”

 

[starry]

No problem. I would hang him from a tree too. And put a lit bomb in his mouth.

 

[Mtdl]

Interesting article. To go back to discussing prostitution, we're screwed, as it stands, no matter which side of the political spectrum wins. If it's the left, they want to criminalise us customers and treat the poor escorts as victims (while most live lives of luxury and have good clients). To the right, we're immoral, sinners, whatever. The only government good for us is small, unintrusive, which gives us maximum freedom. We can only dream...

 

[Mtdl]

It's no surprise feminists hate escorts: nothing is more opposite to a feminist than a woman who likes men, wants to please them and makes a carreer out of it. Also, the modern feminist has nothing to offer a man besides sex, which is much cheaper with escorts.

 

[Mtdl]

Do you have the link to that article somewhere? I would be interested in reading it. I am quite against pornography, though I would never propose to ban it. I would be interested in hearing arguments for it, for once. You might be right regarding feminists getting older. Women lose some of their privileges as they get older and some get angry about it. Luckily for us, despite their laws to make them feel good about themselves, police doesn't seem all that interested in enforcing them.

 

[CaptRenault]

Do you have the link to that article somewhere?

Why? It's drivel, just like all of his other ideas.

http://www.smerconish.com/daily-news/man-and-woman-by-bernie-sanders/

 

[hungry101]

Considering how agencies always "lie" on the age of the providers, it would be hell to apply. Adults are adults, im one of those guy that believe everything should be alright at 18 and find the law in the states pretty dumb that to drink you have to be 21, but you can enroll yourself and kill people at 18... lol.

Amen Mike. Mind boggling isn't it? And if you are 20 years and 364 days old and blow .02 you are a drunk driving.