Sex-trade workers to fight Canada's prostitution laws
- Thread starter Kepler
- Start date
The laws will never be changed, at best prostitution will be tolerated like it is in Montreal. No polititian or husband will ever admit that he favors changes in the law.
I don't do drugs but I support legalization. Some people do speak out.
Who would have thought, 10 years ago, that $10 dances would become legal overnight?
Who would have thought, 30 years ago, how prevalent this business would become (FS strip clubs, massage parlors, agencies advertising openly, free hardcore porn everywhere, FS vacation resorts, ...)?
I don't know how your courts work, but if these women win their case before the Canadian Supreme Court, does that mean these laws will have to be changed? or ruled ineffective?
In the US, the US Supreme Court rules on the Constitutionality of a particular law. Congress, or a State legislature, must then act within the construction of the courts ruling. They can pass another law, but it cannot contradict the court's opinion.
If the existing laws are decriminalized,.I don't think there will be an increase of sex tourism in Canada as the Crown lawyers contend It seems that LE goes after Street prostitution and under-aged prostitution and is laxed in most all other areas. I am sure that Canadian authorities will be viligent in combating human trafficking as far as women who are held against their will. And those laws will never be repealled by Canada's court.
In the US, the US Supreme Court rules on the Constitutionality of a particular law. Congress, or a State legislature, must then act within the construction of the courts ruling. They can pass another law, but it cannot contradict the court's opinion.
If the existing laws are decriminalized,.I don't think there will be an increase of sex tourism in Canada as the Crown lawyers contend It seems that LE goes after Street prostitution and under-aged prostitution and is laxed in most all other areas. I am sure that Canadian authorities will be viligent in combating human trafficking as far as women who are held against their will. And those laws will never be repealled by Canada's court.
Before 1982 the Canadian Supreme court could not strike down laws that infringed rights. In 1982 Canada chose to change it's constitution and adopt the Charter of Rights. This gave the power to courts to strike down laws that violated our fundamental rights.
Normally, the Legislature would then redraft the law not to violate our rights. BUT, unlike the USA, the Canadian Charter contains an "escape clause". If the Legislature doesn't like the Court ruling, it can override it. This "notwithstanding" clause is very controversial and unpopular and therefore has rarely been used.
Many people work in careers that are inherently dangerous, police officer, firefighter, armed forces, deep sea fishing (deadliest catch anyone?) I can go on but you get the idea. Canada is already a destination for sex tourism, anybody who has ever read a review board has figures that out.
IMHO, decriminalization will not result in an increase in sex workers, nor would it result in a higher level of sex tourism. In fact not too much would change other than perhaps more indys offering incalls. If they allowed SW to work in certain areas, then we wouldn't have the problem of SW in residential areas.
Think about this, a stripper is allowed to go outside the club where she works for a cigarette, scantily dressed, obviously working for the club. Since she is not allowed to smoke inside the club, this is seen as acceptable and the club benefits from the additional advertising just her mere presence outside offers. Two doors down a working girl can get arrested for soliciting in public... does this make any sense to you? The strip clubs presence would indicate the there are no schools or parks for children, or whatever in the area.
Ronnie,
Naughtylady
Ronnie,
Naughtylady
same thing in french section......
http://www.radio-canada.ca/regions/Ontario/2009/10/06/005-tribunal-prostitution.shtml#commentaires
And Ariane wrote a letter to La Presse
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/opinions/...ravailleuses-du-sexe-un-mepris-injustifie.php
http://www.radio-canada.ca/regions/Ontario/2009/10/06/005-tribunal-prostitution.shtml#commentaires
And Ariane wrote a letter to La Presse
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/opinions/...ravailleuses-du-sexe-un-mepris-injustifie.php
Last edited:
I dunno you all, I kinda like things the way they are. On the low low and relatively safe for both escorts and customers.
I wouldn't want to be seen outside a legal house of pleasure if you know what I mean, I have a reputation and so does my wife. I avoid strip clubs for the same reason. I've let up on the hobby just because the regular doormen at the usual hotels I visit were starting to recognize me.
I don't need that kind of publicity and frankly, I don't think anyone not working in the industry does.
Face it, would any of us advertize that we use tube8 or redtube (both internet porn sites) to our employers, families, kids?
I didn't think so.
I wouldn't want to be seen outside a legal house of pleasure if you know what I mean, I have a reputation and so does my wife. I avoid strip clubs for the same reason. I've let up on the hobby just because the regular doormen at the usual hotels I visit were starting to recognize me.
I don't need that kind of publicity and frankly, I don't think anyone not working in the industry does.
Face it, would any of us advertize that we use tube8 or redtube (both internet porn sites) to our employers, families, kids?
I didn't think so.
L
Lily-Rose
The National Post published her letter today: http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=2098361
Thank you Ariane!
shut up...leave the secret on the closet......
You're right, you have over a dozen words.
It has to be understood that nowhere on earth, and at any time during any recorded history, has the implication of any political government, in any affair, been beneficial.
Ever.
Isn't the status quo the best of all worlds. To have toleration as we do in Montreal is best for all concerned. The only down side to toleration is that the powers that be can change their minds and crack down at any time. To have legalization would mean that there would be a flood of ladies that would enter the trade that would have not participated if it is illegal as it is now. There would be a flood od full timers as well as part timers ranging from week end warriors to individuals participating on a need basis.
No, that's a terrible situation. It means you can be blackmailed, that the cops can arrest you in a bawdy house if they don't like your face, that ladies cannot safely work from their own premises, that their husbands can be arrested and charged with living off the avails, that it's more difficult for them to save for retirement, etc.
Besides the obvious fact that the government has no business legislating the acts done between consenting adults.
Legalization would be a much saner and healthier alternative for everyone.
The National Post published her letter today: http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=2098361
Thank you Ariane!
Her best line is:
"Criminalizing sex workers is tantamount to branding them, identifying them as outcasts, as women of "ill repute."
While I am for legalizing most forms of prostitution, I do think street prostitution should be illegal and houses of prostitution should be in zoned areas so neighborhoods with children are not exposed to the trade.
Similar threads
