Because what happened 20 years ago and organizations of businesses wasn't new then and it's not a new development now. It didn't disappear and it's a part of the history of the business. You are supposed to learn from history and not ignore it. The debate is not a new one.
Nice la Presse Article on XO this morning
- Thread starter felixLg
- Start date
Quebec law is exactly the same as CT law on independent contractor status as is mentioned in my post. It's also pretty much the law in all 50 states. So you should give a fuck. If you took a bar exam anywhere and guessed that it's what you file your taxes as you guessed wrong. Do a 10 second AI search and you will know this.
oh i got it. I very well know there are good and bad apples everywhere. I was just making the point that one of the many reasons I prefer mps over agencies, is I dont have to go into residential buildings where i have no business being. Plus i basically have adopted a couple of places i dont have any doubts about ethically, at least with respect to the girls.
Off topic, indies are my most preferred choice, but i just about stopped seeing them for reasons I wont go into now.
At this point, LE probably has every single text message sent to XO. Could well be the case with other agencies that may be monitored by LE.
Everything is new the agencies the government the SP, LE.
The law against prostitution.
History of the business nor how the law was applied 20 years ago serves zero purpose and there is nothing of value to be learned from it.
This debate is new as it applies to current events current laws and how LE is reacting to XO.
If LE comes after you because you were a client of XO or of any other agency and they have a history of your texts ( I doubt it will happen) what you did or what the industry was like 20 years ago won’t make dick of a difference.
Plenty of unethical things are legal and things that are ethical are illegal for instance possessing weed was illegal until a few years ago. For me, legal doesn't necessarily means ethical.
Well we dunno. Did they really keep every text since their conception? We are talking about ten years from so many clients. Also do you think they kept the same phone? Probabl got new phones. Texts probably have been deleted. Regular users of XO texts are more likely to be there.
Why not? What makes it unethical to you? Because it's against the law?
What is ''ethical'' anyways?
I think most of us would agree with you.
Again the Capt was talking about the majorities view of paying for sex being unethical not what members of an escort review board would consider it to be.
I have no problem with what 2 consenting adults do in the bedroom and whether money is exchanged or not.
En effet, parce que c’est illégal, et comme toute activité illégale et profitable $$$, on peut présumer qu’un grand % de ces activités sont aux mains du crime organisé. Et le crime organisé est un cancer pour toutes les sociétés.
Ok, mais si la femme travaille pour elle même et qu’elle n’a aucune affiliation avec le crime organisé? En plus c’est pas illégal pour elle de vendre ses services
I respectfully disagree with this. What’s legal and what’s ethical are two very different things. Ethics is a pretty complex philosophical subject matter with various schools of thought that can be defended on pretty much any question.
Having said that, paying for sex from a willing adult who is not being exploited or otherwise coerced is not necessarily unethical. This holds true regardless of the legal regime in place where this transaction occurs.
Having said that, paying for sex from a willing adult who is not being exploited or otherwise coerced is not necessarily unethical. This holds true regardless of the legal regime in place where this transaction occurs.
I think to me it's impossible to do everything in a 100 percent ethical way in the society we live in. I value making educated choices, practicing harm reduction and treating others with kindness.
Le crime organisé ... Mes 2 chats à qui j'achète de la bouffe avec mon argent de prostituée.
What the fuck has taxes got to do with LE cracking down on XO and perhaps going after their clients which they could easily do according to Canadian law.
You keep injecting irrelevant nonsense and USA law that nobody gives a shit about, no I didn’t take a bar exam and if I want advice from a lawyer I would pick one that lives here.
You don’t see us posting about SP In New England or how the law applies to them because we know nothing about it like you know nothing about Montreal as it is for the past 7-8 years.
Point is you haven’t been in Montreal in ages and you don’t have a fucking clue as to how agencies and independents operate today or how LE does.
We actually have former XO ladies and current Indy’s opinions and comments which are far more valuable.
A lot of terrible things are perfectly legal too. I feel like we're straying from the initial subject and I hope this conversation is over personally because I think the goal is to dismiss all of this as silly concerns by conjuring a bunch of logical fallacies
De un, ça devient de plus en plus compliqué de séparer le bon grain de l’ivraie. Alors la majorité ne s’en donne pas la peine.
De deux, c’est p-e légal de ton point de vue mais ce ne l’est pas du tout, vue du mien! Alors je devrais enfreindre la loi, donc de commettre un acte criminel parce-que, soudainement, j’ai le goût de fourrer! Si je me fais prendre, les conséquences sont énormes!
Ça ne veut dire que ce que tu fais n'es pas éthique. Le mot éthique et le mot légal n'ont pas la même signification. Tu le sais très bien. On s'éloigne de plus en plus du sujet.
Le sujet étant une réalité matérielle très facile à identifier : les mauvaises conditions de travail imposées par le patron d'une agence montréalaise spécifique, qui reflète des pratiques similaires ailleurs (mais pas partout)
Les mauvaises conditions : abus, viols, présence d'au moins une mineure, coercition, menaces et chantage etc.
While the Capt is a big boy and quite capable of defending his view point I think he was just basically saying that according to the majority of the populations view there is no ethical way of paying for sex.
Obviously he along with all of us here don’t share that opinion and none of us have a problem with paying for companionship with a lady of our choice who is of age and freely chooses this profession.
I don’t really think there is a need to further dissect this.
Ça n’est pas éthique si par mégarde j’encourage le crime organisé, simple à comprendre.
Similar threads
