Seems to be two different issues here. First is whether an SP should/can deny service to a guy because of the way he looks. Second is whether the SP should/can deny service based on colour/religon/nationality/etc. I would say in either case, the answer is yes. And I really don't see what the big deal is. If I was checking out an SP's website and it said 'no caucasions', I would just go look for someone else. Or no 6' tall people. Or no people with brown hair. Does it matter? Unless the industry as a whole was conspiring against me, but even then, I don't see that I have any rights as a customer.
The sex industry and Descrimination?
- Thread starter breadman
- Start date
Rights are not absolute, they are limited primarily by other rights. Your right to swing your fists ends at someone else's nose. Similarly a women's right to control her own body trumps your commercial rights. Namely your right to buy services free from racial discrimination ends at her vagina.
While that is your opinion, that is not the law in Ontario. And your logic is faulty. The law in Ontario I think is pretty clear:Rights are not absolute, they are limited primarily by other rights. Your right to swing your fists ends at someone else's nose. Similarly a women's right to control her own body trumps your commercial rights. Namely your right to buy services free from racial discrimination ends at her vagina.
At the moment there are no decided cases of an SP refusing service based on an enumerated ground, but if prostitution becomes more legitimized it could be interesting...Section 1 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 states, Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to services, goods and facilities, without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status or disability. The Ontario Human Rights Commission’s position is that the obligation not to discriminate on the basis of ‘sex’ includes an obligation not to discriminate on the basis of pregnancy, breastfeeding and gender identity.
Yes, with the new laws changing - sure. All SP's should now be required to see all clients of legal age regardless of preference.
Offer your time and companionship ladies. That is what you do. So if a gentlemen of color wants to see a woman who prefers not to have sexual intercourse with that certain race, then I guess is a massage and some chit chat for him.
Sexual services may be implied but never is it guaranteed.
So men, go for it. Rip into the ladies that they have to see to you. You can still not force them under any law, human rights act, etc to have sex with you. Paid or not.
She can talk you through an hour of jerking off. Sexual services come in all forms after all. :Eek:
Offer your time and companionship ladies. That is what you do. So if a gentlemen of color wants to see a woman who prefers not to have sexual intercourse with that certain race, then I guess is a massage and some chit chat for him.
Sexual services may be implied but never is it guaranteed.
So men, go for it. Rip into the ladies that they have to see to you. You can still not force them under any law, human rights act, etc to have sex with you. Paid or not.
She can talk you through an hour of jerking off. Sexual services come in all forms after all. :Eek:
If the Human Rights Code covers prostitution that ain't gonna fly.Yes, with the new laws changing - sure. All SP's should now be required to see all clients of legal age regardless of preference.
Offer your time and companionship ladies. That is what you do. So if a gentlemen of color wants to see a woman who prefers not to have sexual intercourse with that certain race, then I guess is a massage and some chit chat for him.
Sexual services may be implied but never is it guaranteed.
So men, go for it. Rip into the ladies that they have to see to you. You can still not force them under any law, human rights act, etc to have sex with you. Paid or not.
She can talk you through an hour of jerking off. Sexual services come in all forms after all. :Eek:
It is like saying we only serve beer to blacks at our restaurant, but will bring fine wine for the white folk.
It is sex work. Sex comes in all types. From BDSM where there is no sex. to MPA and SC - again no sex. Tantra - another.If the Human Rights Code covers prostitution that ain't gonna fly.
It is like saying we only serve beer to blacks at our restaurant, but will bring fine wine for the white folk.
I am sorry but I would really love for you to explain to the class how legally a woman who works as an "Escort" is going to be forced to have sex with any willing man who has the right donation? or faces the BBB, HRT, and other possible infractions that a bar would have if proven they didn't service the whole menu to black people?
I think there is already at least one exception to the "come all, serve all" rule. If I want to rent out a room in my personal residence, I believe that I do have the legal right to decline people I don't like for whatever reason. Maybe escorts can fit under this exception as well.
Then the same can be said for a penis covered in warts, or dick cheese, or herpes etc.If we want this profession to stay legal. We need to start treating it like any other industry IMO. So this argument is counter-productive to this cause, using language like 'forced' is ridiculous, you shouldn't be working if you can't stand to see a different coloured penis.
Sex workers provide ALL kinds of sexual services limited but not always including penetration. If a lady says" I do not want a dick in my mouth" She has that right. Period. Anything different to deter that choice is therefore "forced"
Renting a room to someone with a shared kitchen/common areas with yourself, the renter has no rights at all bascially.I think there is already at least one exception to the "come all, serve all" rule. If I want to rent out a room in my personal residence, I believe that I do have the legal right to decline people I don't like for whatever reason. Maybe escorts can fit under this exception as well.
It is simply not going to happen that an Ontario judge orders the police to hold a woman down so a client, refused paid sexual intercourse on the basis of race, can fuck her. Nor is any Ontario court judge going to impose financial penalties that would amount to the same thing. It simply will not happen. You're making these grand theoretical arguments, as you usually do, while losing sight of the issue. Think about how such a law would be enforced--it won't happen.While that is your opinion, that is not the law in Ontario.
As such, it IS the law in Ontario.
You can cry Human Rights Code all you like, but where the Human Rights Code contravenes the constitution it will be struck down. This trumps it:
"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice."
You cannot use any law of Canada to rape someone. Neither the Human Rights Code nor any other law in Canada nor Ontario has the power to over-ride the right to security of person.
"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice."
You cannot use any law of Canada to rape someone. Neither the Human Rights Code nor any other law in Canada nor Ontario has the power to over-ride the right to security of person.
To some it may be - who knows. The point is the same. You say don't work if you won't take all cocks, so where is the line drawn then?????I had no idea, fucking a black guy was a health risk. Apologies.
Cheese dick is not a health risk as far as an STD, it is just gross. Can someone not make the argument that hygiene should not matter either? Or that all clients who pay for it must do so for a reason like below average looks, low morals, low health and personal care so it shouldn't matter what his issue be - she still has to suck it or fuck it how he wants.
Can we then add that SP's have to preform GREEK, get fucked in the ear if that is a guy's thing? She has to do BBBJ over CBJ. Because that is what the client is paying for? She has to do face fucking, CIM, etc?
Based on what you say, she has to preform for anyone who brings her money.
Yup. I was replying really to RLD, and others, who seem to lose sight of the fact that enforcing a human rights code requirement that a prostitute has to fuck anybody would amount to making the state complicit in her rape.You're right fuji.
I was only replying to someone who compared sex with minorities to people that are std-positive.
You made that comparison. Not me. I took what you said to a further level of stupidity I agree, but I think it is stupid to pose the force of services on anyone. That is just me though. You seem fine with it and if that works for you - ok!You're right fuji.
I was only replying to someone who compared sex with minorities to people that are std-positive.
Coming from the South, this is a situation I have seen faced many times. As an agency girl it was a benefit as I had two qualifications. The first was that the guest verified properly and the second was that his money was green. Many escorts refused to see blacks and in Atlanta that eliminated half of their potential client base.
Here in Canada I have only had 1 black guest but many other ethnic groups are well represented on my guest list. I have developed different screening methods for different groups to ensure the pinchers, biters, nipple twisters and time vampires are kept at bay. These traits I have found to be rarely represented in Caucasian guests but exceedingly common in other ethnicities. If they make it thru the initial screening I will entertain them the first time to give them the opportunity to show me they are decent men. If the first meeting goes awry, it is terminated immediately and they are not invited back. Seldom do these issues present with my Caucasian guests.
Would I screen even if it were legislated I see every guest with $ and risk legal ramifications? Absolutely. Just as lawyers have the right to choose which cases they will take on, I feel sex workers should have the right to feel safe and comfortable with the guests they welcome into their bodies.
cat
Here in Canada I have only had 1 black guest but many other ethnic groups are well represented on my guest list. I have developed different screening methods for different groups to ensure the pinchers, biters, nipple twisters and time vampires are kept at bay. These traits I have found to be rarely represented in Caucasian guests but exceedingly common in other ethnicities. If they make it thru the initial screening I will entertain them the first time to give them the opportunity to show me they are decent men. If the first meeting goes awry, it is terminated immediately and they are not invited back. Seldom do these issues present with my Caucasian guests.
Would I screen even if it were legislated I see every guest with $ and risk legal ramifications? Absolutely. Just as lawyers have the right to choose which cases they will take on, I feel sex workers should have the right to feel safe and comfortable with the guests they welcome into their bodies.
cat
Really? Show me said law. This from the guy who claimed adultery was not grounds for divorce.It is simply not going to happen that an Ontario judge orders the police to hold a woman down so a client, refused paid sexual intercourse on the basis of race, can fuck her. Nor is any Ontario court judge going to impose financial penalties that would amount to the same thing. It simply will not happen. You're making these grand theoretical arguments, as you usually do, while losing sight of the issue. Think about how such a law would be enforced--it won't happen.
As such, it IS the law in Ontario.
Here is section 1 of the Ontario HRC:
Show me the law you are relying on.1. Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to services, goods and facilities, without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status or disability.
The difference is that our Human Rights Code does not list a transmissable illness as an enumerated grounds. In fact our Workplace Safety legislation covers that issue quite well.To some it may be - who knows. The point is the same. You say don't work if you won't take all cocks, so where is the line drawn then?????
Cheese dick is not a health risk as far as an STD, it is just gross. Can someone not make the argument that hygiene should not matter either? Or that all clients who pay for it must do so for a reason like below average looks, low morals, low health and personal care so it shouldn't matter what his issue be - she still has to suck it or fuck it how he wants.
Can we then add that SP's have to preform GREEK, get fucked in the ear if that is a guy's thing? She has to do BBBJ over CBJ. Because that is what the client is paying for? She has to do face fucking, CIM, etc?
Based on what you say, she has to preform for anyone who brings her money.
But our Human Rights Legislation guarantees equal access to services no matter what your race. Try reading it. It is more interesting than F-stops and you might one day know what you are talking about.
rld and Fuchsia do u get rejected alot or something? You both sound really butthurt about this issue.
Not yet, but there is always a first time.rld and Fuchsia do u get rejected alot or something? You both sound really butthurt about this issue.
However, the law is pretty clear in Ontario that you cannot have service discrimination based on race.
Perhaps you think I have misread the HRC somehow?
Or maybe you can draft a new one for the government?
To some it may be - who knows. The point is the same. You say don't work if you won't take all cocks, so where is the line drawn then?????
Cheese dick is not a health risk as far as an STD, it is just gross. Can someone not make the argument that hygiene should not matter either? Or that all clients who pay for it must do so for a reason like below average looks, low morals, low health and personal care so it shouldn't matter what his issue be - she still has to suck it or fuck it how he wants.
Can we then add that SP's have to preform GREEK, get fucked in the ear if that is a guy's thing? She has to do BBBJ over CBJ. Because that is what the client is paying for? She has to do face fucking, CIM, etc?
Based on what you say, she has to preform for anyone who brings her money.
Finally someone who's got it right. We gave them the vote. What else do they want.
Runs like hell and hides behind HH
