It's Official Canada has adopted Nordic Model Prostitution Law

[daydreamer41]

The Vista Analysis evaluation of Norway's law is available here http://www.regjeringen.no/pages/38780386/Evaluering_sexkjoepsloven_2014.pdf

I find this section in the report very interesting:

The working conditions of men and women in prostitution
The law that criminalises buying sex strengthens the rights of the seller in the sense
that the buyer can be reported to the police. This has given the seller a tool for
managing “bad” customers as well as leading to more careful customers and possible
prevention of violence.
Still, women in the street market report to have a weaker bargaining position and
more safety concerns now than before the law was introduced. At the indoors market,
prostitutes express concerns for “out-door calls”. They prefer to have customers
visiting them at their own apartment or own hotel room. The threshold for reporting a
violent customer to the police also seems to be higher after the law. People in
prostitution are afraid that such actions will come back to halt them at later stages.
Even so, this analysis finds no clear evidence of more violence against women in the
street market after the introduction of the law. It is the customer that engages in
illegal action and thus has the most to fear if reported to the police by a prostitute. The
police have no indications on more violence following the ban on purchasing sexual
services.

 

[gugu]

Well, DD, if sex workers are not to report a bad client because they fear police will come back to catch their other clients, then it's not surprising they have no indication of an increase in violence.

On reporting bad clients, I think legalization (Holland and Germany) or decriminalization (New Zealand) provide the same tool with one big difference: sex workers do not have to fear reporting will have an effect on their future business.

That being said, I am not convinced there is an increase in violence by clients in Sweden and Norway. However, there is an obvious increase in stigmatization by the general population (that can lead a higher risk of violence by some ordinary citizens) and an increase in harassment from the police targeting migrant workers.

Also, there is something tricky in the negative formulation: "no clear evidence of more violence". If the market shrank, we would expect violence to shrink also. Same amount of violence in a smaller market means sex workers are worse off.

 

[Siocnarf]

The report goes into a fairly detailed explanation of how they made the link between the number of phone numbers and how many providers this represented. Personally, I thought their whole argumentation unconvincing and the methodology to be flawed. It is based on the approach taken by a single prior study done in 2008, that the panel itself thought was questionable.

Basically they have no idea how many there are before and after. No one, in any country has any idea exactly how many escorts there are at any given time. Especially since many of them are working on and off.

Do they make any distinction between agencies and independent providers for the phone numbers? Do they consider that many indys simply use e-mail instead of phone number?

After a change from legal to criminal, you can expect advertisement to change. We could expect prostitution to be 10-20% less visible than before. That is no measure of how many providers there actually is. In fact even a real 10% decrease in providers does not mean there is a decrease in the demand. It's hard to know what the demand is, because it's very easy for these men to go to Holland or Germany or Denmark or even Finland to get it.

It reminds me of that study in the US where they estimate the number of trafficked underage by asking people to guess the age from the pictures in the ads.

 

[daydreamer41]

Basically they have no idea how many there are before and after. No one, in any country has any idea exactly how many escorts there are at any given time. Especially since many of them are working on and off.

Supposedly, it's measured demand that drops. Also, I am sure there are guys who get cold feet and lower their activity. But statisticians use modeling to come up with supposed numbers. It's based on a lot of assumptions that the statistics they can measure are accurate or even in the ball park. As you said, the activity is much more hidden than before and can not be measured as well as it was when the activity was legal.

Also, in Norway it's illegal for citizens of Norway to travel and engage in prostitution even if it is legal in the country they are engaging in the deed. Of course, that is crazy. Talk about a government being tyrannical. You are correct, most of these guys from the Nordic countries travel to Germany, Netherlands or other European countries that are legal to engage.

 

[Siocnarf]

But for the most part, the comments boil down to: the study proves that the law works, so let's keep it.

What do they mean by ''the law works''? A 10% decrease with no effect on violence. Even if it was true, they consider the law a success because things are about the same as before?

''The Norwegian law applies to all its citizens anywhere, making it illegal for Norwegians to buy sex even in countries where the activity is accepted.''

Is that true? I find that hard to believe that they could enforce that except when it's in conjunction with other serious crimes. Of course, I'm not familiar to what extent the law is enforced in the country itself but I bet it's pretty lax. And they have even less ability of policing anything that happens in other countries

 

[BookerL]

Is that true? I find that hard to believe that they could enforce that except when it's in conjunction with other serious crimes. Of course, I'm not familiar to what extent the law is enforced in the country itself but I bet it's pretty lax. And they have even less ability of policing anything that happens in other countries

The law is not necessarily there to be enforced in court !
It can be used as leverage so the person will plead quilty !
Not every Johns has the money and the experience required to beat the charges what ever they may be.
The more charges you have and the more counts you have increases the level of
Difficulty and your level of stress .
Someone that was never charge might not necessarily understand how stressful it is even when the charges are trump ones.
Your faith is no longer in your hands.
So the leverage is present for many
Regards
BookerL

 

[Siocnarf]

Getting back to the recent ''Success'' report in Norway, here are a couple of replies and analysis:
http://swop-nyc.org/wpress/2014/08/12/nordic-model-redefines-success-as-no-results-all-collateral-damage/
http://www.nswp.org/resource/nswp-statement-response-norwegian-evaluation-the-ban-the-purchase-sex

The difference between Norway and Canada is that Norway does not have to worry about colateral damage and the human rights of sex workers.

 

[The Snark]

A solid argument against C-36 and the criminalization of prostitution:

http://www.lawtimesnews.com/2014081...arms-of-criminalization-outweigh-the-benefits

...the state ought to face a heavy burden to show that the upside of a criminal prohibition is sufficient to justify all of the misery attendant upon arresting people, trying them, and putting some of them in jail. The burden is especially difficult to satisfy when the candidate for criminalization is a consensual act such as the purchase or sale of drugs or sex.

 

[escapefromstress]

The Sex Workers Perspective, an interview with Jessica Lee

Video here: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...rs-perspective-an-interview-with-jessica-lee/

 

[escapefromstress]

Media Advisory - Press conference - Sex workers and allied communities across Quebec aim to rebalance the upcoming Senate debate on prostitution laws

​

MONTREAL, Sept. 3, 2014 /CNW Telbec/ - The conservative government is rushing through Bill C36 which they hope to see passed as law by December 2014. Bill C36 violates the Supreme Court of Canada's December 2013 decision, which deemed existing prostitution laws unconstitutional. We encourage politicians to integrate sex workers' realities into workable and sustainable community based solutions, rather than proceed with measures which segregate and displace us.

Those present will offer perspectives on the harmful impacts of Bill C36 on female, trans and male sex workers in the sex industry.

- News Conference -
9 a.m.
September 5th,
Stella, l'amie de Maimie
2065 rue Parthenais, Suite 404 - Buzzer 65
Montréal, QC

The following people will be addressing the media at the Press Conference:

Anna-Aude Caouette & Robyn Maynard, Stella, l'amie de Maimie

Frank Suerich-Gulick & Betty Iglesias, ASTT(e)Q : Action Santé Travesti(e)s et Transsexuel(le)s du Québec

Claude Poisson, Rézo, projet travailleurs du sexe

Karine Hudon, l'Association québécoise pour la promotion de la santé des personnes utilisatrices de drogues (AQPSUD)

Viviane Namaste, Professor, Simone de Beauvoir Institute, Concordia University

SOURCE Concordia University

For further information:
regarding the Press Conference, please contact:
Jenn Clamen, Community Mobilizer - Stella, l'amie de Maimie
Tel: 514 / 285-1599
Email: [email protected]

http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1405...stitution-laws

 

[hungry101]

Yes, Reverdy, good article. Looks like the dying pulp and paper industry is going to get another whammy.

You know, until lately, my trips to Montreal were mostly business trips. At night I would practice the hobby on my dime. But the purpose for flying in and out of Montreal were strictly for business. That being said, I found every excuse to use the Montreal airport and have an overnight stay on beginning and end of a business trip. Trips to anywhere in Quebec, eastern Ontario, upstate NY, Vermont, New Hampshire, and even Maine would necessitate a trip into Montreal. If a Montreal customer, university, or consortium wanted or needed something I made every effort to service that client personally (later that night I would get serviced). If there was a professional trade show I made sure that I was in attendance. I have to think I am not the only one.
Once the law is put in place and if the supply dwindles or the quality of service dwindles or if prices rise...why bother? Like the article said, it will cut into every business and just about every tax generator you can think of in the city.

When will the new law go into effect?

 

[Siocnarf]

It has a few steps to go, but that can be pretty quick. After it's completely accepted, there is 30 days before it is active. It should be active in december for sure or even november.

But don't worry too much. Those who are opposed to the law tend to exaggerate as much as those who defend the law. Like in a court case, each side tries to be as dramatic as possible. It might have an impact on newspaper, but I doubt there will be much change apart from that. The problem with newspapers is not how the law will really be enforced by authorities, but how much they will auto-censor themselves to play it safe or to avoid losing other advertisers.

 

[Siocnarf]

Tories accused of rushing prostitution bill through Parliament

The Tories are forgetting rule 1 of enjoyable and safe sex work. Relax, don't rush.

 

[Siocnarf]

... we want to try and remove those underlying causes and demands that cause prostitution to proliferate,”

Like I read somewhere, if he wants to get rid of prostitution all he has to do is raise minimum wage to 200$/h

 

[Siocnarf]

A recent interview with Maggie McNeil. Not exactly about Canada, but worth watching.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2fCPvuoHx0

 

[Siocnarf]

I'll just copy here what I posted on TERB:

"How can you even talk about 'balance' when you use the word 'asymmetrical,'" he wondered.
"I've never seen anything in the history of criminal law that sets up asymmetrical prohibitions … You've actually just legalized entrapment."
....
Senators also heard from Canadian Police Association president Tom Stamatakis, who spoke by video conference from Charlottetown.
He told the committee that he supports the bill, including the shift in focus from sex workers to those who buy their services.

I had a good time watching Young and I really liked when he said that.

Police support the bill because they always want to have as many laws as possible they can use. No policeman is ever going to say they don't need a law. However, what was evident in his answers is the preponderance of police discretion and the difficulty of getting evidence for indoor prostitution. Take-home message, they should pretty much continue to enforce as before. I wished someone had asked him how it could reduce demand if they just continued to enforce with discretion as before. This a key point. If the law doesn't do what the objective claim, it is unconstitutional.

 

[gugu]

He was brilliant as usual. However, there was something paradoxical in one of his statements. He says the law will push back sex workers on to the streets because clients, fearing entrapment at indoor sites, will prefer to go on the streets. The truth is that clients may well feel that entrapment risks will be greater on the streets.

 

[Siocnarf]

I feel that the arguments are not always completely genuine, even on our side. He also said that the 1985 communication law moved the industry indoor, but my understanding was that the majority has always been mostly indoors. Certainly, the street-level work can increase or be displaced indoor, but the majority has always been indoor.

The problem is that these arguments are always theoretical and look only at some aspects of the whole issue. In theory Indoor is more risky, because we are a sitting duck. In reality, enforcement is aimed at street level so that's where it's more risky to get arrested. Also, how many guys actually like driving around and having sex in a car, when you can do it in the comfort of a real bed? Many people in big cities don't even have a car.

In practice, we can assume that most workers/clients will not be bothered by police. So the arguments focus on the most vulnerable. These are the ones that can fluctuate between indoor/outdoor and these are the ones that are going to effectively be hurt by the law.

I also understood the reason for why they now consider ropes as a weapon: sometimes guy can have rope or duck tape in their cars and that could give police legal reason to suspect that the guy is up to no good. It would be the same as having a knife next to you. Before, if a police stopped a guy and he had a rope on his backseat he could just say that there is no law against that. Now it's a potential weapon.

(I still can't believe that Georgialee Lang cited a Sheila Jeffrey ''study'' with a straight face)

 

[Siocnarf]

I believe Young fears in part a repetition of an analogous cycle of different enforcement scenarios and mistakes, by police forces.

But on the other hand, I think police mentality evolved to some extent in the last 30 years. I have a hope that they work more intelligently now on this issue. Like Stamatakis said, they learned from their mistakes. At least I hope.

 

[BookerL]

But on the other hand, I think police mentality evolved to some extent in the last 30 years. I have a hope that they work more intelligently now on this issue. Like Stamatakis said, they learned from their mistakes. At least I hope.

Hi all

What is the real authority of the Police in our judicial system ?
It has not change over the last 30 years
They do not have much !
If we need to respect someone its is honor the judge .
We are all innocent until proven guilty by a court of law
Whatever the police may think .
,or for some confessing .hopefully it will not be a experience merbist !

Good luck to all


Booker