Most recent articles on prostitution related laws, opinions, comments
- Thread starter gustave55
- Start date
Prostitution bill violates the Charter, critics warn
By Cristin Schmitz
June 20 2014 issue
Critics say the government’s new anti-prostitution bill is as legally flawed as the unconstitutional law it replaces, and even supporters of the bill are demanding Ottawa scrap a proposed “communication” offence targeting street prostitutes.
The proposed Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act (Bill C-36), tabled in the Commons June 4 by Justice Minister Peter MacKay, would create new offences criminalizing: the purchase of sexual services; the sale of sexual services in public areas where minors could be present; profiting by third parties from the sex work of others; and the advertising of commercial sexual services.
Lawyers involved in Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford [2013] S.C.J. No. 72, which struck down the old prostitution laws for violating sex workers’ safety, said Bill C-36 will endanger sex workers by pushing them from indoors to outdoors, where they can more easily be hurt or killed.
“This bill will do the exact opposite of what it purports to do in its preamble,” warned Katrina Pacey of Vancouver’s Pivot Legal Society, counsel for current and former sex workers from Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside who intervened in Bedford.
“It will drive them into dark and isolated places: under bridges, into industrial areas, under viaducts, into alleys, and these are the locations where there is nobody to help them when they’re in trouble. It will continue to place sex workers at risk. It will not result in less, or no prostitution in Canada, and it will continue to violate their most fundamental rights to have safety in their work environment.”
Pacey said she considers the bill “extremely vulnerable” to a challenge pursuant to the Charter’s s. 7 guarantee of security of the person, and perhaps the s. 2(b) guarantee of freedom of expression.
“The government is thumbing its nose at the constitutional concerns identified by the Supreme Court,” echoed Matthew Gourlay of Toronto’s Henein Hutchison, on behalf of the Criminal Lawyers’ Association. “I don’t see how this bill is likely to survive constitutional scrutiny given the analysis in Bedford.”
http://www.lawyersweekly.ca/index.php?section=article&articleid=2163&rssid=4
By Cristin Schmitz
June 20 2014 issue
Critics say the government’s new anti-prostitution bill is as legally flawed as the unconstitutional law it replaces, and even supporters of the bill are demanding Ottawa scrap a proposed “communication” offence targeting street prostitutes.
The proposed Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act (Bill C-36), tabled in the Commons June 4 by Justice Minister Peter MacKay, would create new offences criminalizing: the purchase of sexual services; the sale of sexual services in public areas where minors could be present; profiting by third parties from the sex work of others; and the advertising of commercial sexual services.
Lawyers involved in Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford [2013] S.C.J. No. 72, which struck down the old prostitution laws for violating sex workers’ safety, said Bill C-36 will endanger sex workers by pushing them from indoors to outdoors, where they can more easily be hurt or killed.
“This bill will do the exact opposite of what it purports to do in its preamble,” warned Katrina Pacey of Vancouver’s Pivot Legal Society, counsel for current and former sex workers from Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside who intervened in Bedford.
“It will drive them into dark and isolated places: under bridges, into industrial areas, under viaducts, into alleys, and these are the locations where there is nobody to help them when they’re in trouble. It will continue to place sex workers at risk. It will not result in less, or no prostitution in Canada, and it will continue to violate their most fundamental rights to have safety in their work environment.”
Pacey said she considers the bill “extremely vulnerable” to a challenge pursuant to the Charter’s s. 7 guarantee of security of the person, and perhaps the s. 2(b) guarantee of freedom of expression.
“The government is thumbing its nose at the constitutional concerns identified by the Supreme Court,” echoed Matthew Gourlay of Toronto’s Henein Hutchison, on behalf of the Criminal Lawyers’ Association. “I don’t see how this bill is likely to survive constitutional scrutiny given the analysis in Bedford.”
http://www.lawyersweekly.ca/index.php?section=article&articleid=2163&rssid=4
http://www.simcoe.com/news-story/4594928-barrie-escort-rails-against-proposed-prostitution-law/
Barrie escort rails against proposed prostitution law
A licenced escort is concerned about a proposed law aimed to curb prostitution.
'Sierra' is her professional name and she said the federal government's Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act would put her out of a job.
The law would clamp down on women who advertise sexual services online or anywhere children are found. It would also up penalties for “Johns” who buy sex. Fines would start at $500 for first offence and grow to $1,000 for subsequent offences, higher if the transaction took place near parks, schools or religious institutions. Those convicted could also face 18 months in jail.
The act also targets people who live off the avails of prostitution — including Sierra's boss.
"This is putting me into a position where I'll have to work for myself," the Barrie escort said. "And I don't want to because it's dangerous."
Sierra said she would have to give out her own phone number and work in risky locations.
"I could still get a driver, but I'm not protected by an agency. I've been with (my current) agency for eight years and the drivers are like family to me."
The law may appear to target streetwalkers, but Sierra said it will affect everyone in her profession.
The threat of the law being approved has her customers scared, she said.
"After this came out in the news, customers stopped calling. I have some regular customers who texted me and say they're out — it's been nice getting to know me," Sierra said.
Sierra said she believes in what she does. offering her customers hope.
"I had seen a guy a week ago for two days, and we read the bible the entire time. He had fallen off the wagon and was drinking," she said.
The Conservatives have also pledged $20 million in new funding help women and youth escape from prostitution.
Judy Nuttall, a member of Barrie-Alert Canadian Children Trafficked, said when someone wants to get out of prostitution, there face medical and dental bills, and need safe housing and self-esteem courses.
"The money is there to help people who want to get out, to get out," Nuttall said. "But that is all. This has upset some people because they thought it was everyday money to get housing and put the kids through school."
Nuttall said she's been taken aback by the reaction the proposed law has received, both nationally and locally.
She said it's in keeping with the government’s stance, even though the Supreme Court of Canada has struck down Canada’s old prostitution/solicitation laws.
Nuttall agreed with the ban on advertising sex online, saying it will make the Internet safer for children.”
"Canadian citizens have right alongside everybody else and the children in our families need to grow up in a situation that has normal and centuries-long understanding of what family life is."
These are the same online ads Barrie Police officers recently used to find local escorts during an investigation.
Last year, investigators booked online 'dates' with local escorts, offering them resources if they wanted to escape the lifestyle.
One 20-year-old woman said she did and her story prompted a five-month investigation that resulted in a man being charged with human trafficking.
Barrie Police Const. Melanie Turner said police couldn't comment on the logistics of enforcing such a law because it has yet to be approved.
"We can't speculate on the effects this would have," Turner said.
Barrie escort rails against proposed prostitution law
A licenced escort is concerned about a proposed law aimed to curb prostitution.
'Sierra' is her professional name and she said the federal government's Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act would put her out of a job.
The law would clamp down on women who advertise sexual services online or anywhere children are found. It would also up penalties for “Johns” who buy sex. Fines would start at $500 for first offence and grow to $1,000 for subsequent offences, higher if the transaction took place near parks, schools or religious institutions. Those convicted could also face 18 months in jail.
The act also targets people who live off the avails of prostitution — including Sierra's boss.
"This is putting me into a position where I'll have to work for myself," the Barrie escort said. "And I don't want to because it's dangerous."
Sierra said she would have to give out her own phone number and work in risky locations.
"I could still get a driver, but I'm not protected by an agency. I've been with (my current) agency for eight years and the drivers are like family to me."
The law may appear to target streetwalkers, but Sierra said it will affect everyone in her profession.
The threat of the law being approved has her customers scared, she said.
"After this came out in the news, customers stopped calling. I have some regular customers who texted me and say they're out — it's been nice getting to know me," Sierra said.
Sierra said she believes in what she does. offering her customers hope.
"I had seen a guy a week ago for two days, and we read the bible the entire time. He had fallen off the wagon and was drinking," she said.
The Conservatives have also pledged $20 million in new funding help women and youth escape from prostitution.
Judy Nuttall, a member of Barrie-Alert Canadian Children Trafficked, said when someone wants to get out of prostitution, there face medical and dental bills, and need safe housing and self-esteem courses.
"The money is there to help people who want to get out, to get out," Nuttall said. "But that is all. This has upset some people because they thought it was everyday money to get housing and put the kids through school."
Nuttall said she's been taken aback by the reaction the proposed law has received, both nationally and locally.
She said it's in keeping with the government’s stance, even though the Supreme Court of Canada has struck down Canada’s old prostitution/solicitation laws.
Nuttall agreed with the ban on advertising sex online, saying it will make the Internet safer for children.”
"Canadian citizens have right alongside everybody else and the children in our families need to grow up in a situation that has normal and centuries-long understanding of what family life is."
These are the same online ads Barrie Police officers recently used to find local escorts during an investigation.
Last year, investigators booked online 'dates' with local escorts, offering them resources if they wanted to escape the lifestyle.
One 20-year-old woman said she did and her story prompted a five-month investigation that resulted in a man being charged with human trafficking.
Barrie Police Const. Melanie Turner said police couldn't comment on the logistics of enforcing such a law because it has yet to be approved.
"We can't speculate on the effects this would have," Turner said.
how is the briefing the Justice committee going? anybody here will go a speak to the Justice committee?
SEX INDUSTRY LEGISLATION PERPETUATES STEREOTYPES: STUDY
University of Victoria researchers have highlighted preliminary findings from the largest and most comprehensive study of the sex industry undertaken in Canada in a brief (pdf attached) to the Justice and Human Rights Committee, which is poised to begin examination of Bill C-36—the proposed legislation governing the sex industry—in Ottawa on July 7.
Faculty members Cecilia Benoit and Chris Atchison are available for comment about the findings of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research-funded study as they relate to specific provisions of the bill. The study is based on coast-to-coast surveys in English and French of buyers and sellers of sex as well as industry managers, spouses and partners, and others involved with the creation, enforcement and regulation of applicable laws. The team expects to release the full report in early September.
One of the key findings states that the “commodification” provision of the proposed legislation—286.1(1)—is based on a false assumption that sellers of sex are weak, without control, and are always victims. Their research shows that over 80 per cent of sellers of sex agree or strongly agree that they feel empowered to set the terms and conditions of the service. Further, it shows that for buyers and sellers, advertising—internet advertising in particular—acts as a safety mechanism. Benoit and Atchison contend that proposed legislation will also make it impossible for either sellers or buyers seek police assistance if they've been victimized.
Benoit is a professor in the Department of Sociology and a scientist at UVic’s Centre for Addictions Research of BC. In the past 20 years, Benoit has interviewed over 500 female, male and transgender sellers of sexual services. Her research was referenced in the Bedford case.
Atchison is a research associate in UVic’s Department of Sociology. In the past 18 years, Atchison has interviewed close to 3,000 sex trade clients and has extensively researched the physical and virtual communities where sellers and buyers interact.
For more info: www.understandingsexwork.com
http://communications.uvic.ca/releases/tip.php?date=24062014#1574
http://www.understandingsexwork.com/sites/default/files/uploads/BillC36brief.pdf
the Brief on C36
University of Victoria researchers have highlighted preliminary findings from the largest and most comprehensive study of the sex industry undertaken in Canada in a brief (pdf attached) to the Justice and Human Rights Committee, which is poised to begin examination of Bill C-36—the proposed legislation governing the sex industry—in Ottawa on July 7.
Faculty members Cecilia Benoit and Chris Atchison are available for comment about the findings of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research-funded study as they relate to specific provisions of the bill. The study is based on coast-to-coast surveys in English and French of buyers and sellers of sex as well as industry managers, spouses and partners, and others involved with the creation, enforcement and regulation of applicable laws. The team expects to release the full report in early September.
One of the key findings states that the “commodification” provision of the proposed legislation—286.1(1)—is based on a false assumption that sellers of sex are weak, without control, and are always victims. Their research shows that over 80 per cent of sellers of sex agree or strongly agree that they feel empowered to set the terms and conditions of the service. Further, it shows that for buyers and sellers, advertising—internet advertising in particular—acts as a safety mechanism. Benoit and Atchison contend that proposed legislation will also make it impossible for either sellers or buyers seek police assistance if they've been victimized.
Benoit is a professor in the Department of Sociology and a scientist at UVic’s Centre for Addictions Research of BC. In the past 20 years, Benoit has interviewed over 500 female, male and transgender sellers of sexual services. Her research was referenced in the Bedford case.
Atchison is a research associate in UVic’s Department of Sociology. In the past 18 years, Atchison has interviewed close to 3,000 sex trade clients and has extensively researched the physical and virtual communities where sellers and buyers interact.
For more info: www.understandingsexwork.com
http://communications.uvic.ca/releases/tip.php?date=24062014#1574
http://www.understandingsexwork.com/sites/default/files/uploads/BillC36brief.pdf
the Brief on C36
There is a big problem with the researchers' submission to the Committee: It is entirely based on objective research and is totally reliant on logic in its recommendations and conclusions.
Objectivity and logic is incomprehensible to the opinionated idiots who run the government.
http://www.the-peak.ca/2014/06/study-critiques-vancouvers-prostitution-policies/
Study critiques Vancouver's prostitution policies
A recent study has concluded that the Nordic Model of prostitution laws could endanger sex trade workers even further and does not affect the demand for prostitution.
The Nordic Model, originating in Nordic nations such as Norway and Sweden, criminalizes the act of buying sex but not selling it — johns and pimps are prosecuted rather than sex trade workers themselves.
Conducted by UBC researchers and the Gender & Sexual Health Initiative (GHSI) of the BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, the study found that the Vancouver Police Department’s (VPD) new policies — which focus on punishing clients — neither deterred prostitution nor increased the safety of sex trade workers.
Since the VPD’s policy shift, sex work related arrests have increased from 47 in 2012 to 71 in 2013, a 51 per cent increase. However, the report notes that there has been “no change in rates of work-related physical and sexual violence against sex workers” since the change in policy.
Andrea Krüsi, one of the authors of the report and a research assistant at GHSI, explained the results to The Peak: “In the context where clients are criminalized, it’s still in the shared interests of the client and the sex worker to be undetected by the police and so this led to women having to rush screening their clients [. . .] What they need to do is just hop into the car and hope for the best.”
The report states that the VPD’s new approach “severely limits street-based sex workers’ control over their health and safety due to [an] inability to screen clients or negotiate terms of transactions,” being forced to relocate to remote areas such as industrial areas, and an “inability to access police protection.”
In addition, due to the increased difficulty of targeting clients who are willing to risk potential criminal charges, many sex workers are forced to stay out longer, thus increasing their risk.
Krüsi added that, even though the police emphasized prioritizing the safety of sex workers, “sex workers were reluctant to report violence to police because they were worried that if they go to [the] police to report a violent client, that the police might use some of that information they give to refine their enforcement methods.”
“Our findings are very clear: that when clients are continued to be targets, the harms of criminalization are reproduced.”
Earlier this month, the federal government tabled new legislation on prostitution that would criminalize selling sex in areas where children under 18 are present. It would also criminalize advertisement of sex services, for which sex workers could face five years in prison.
However, these new regulations would share the Nordic Model’s focus on clients by criminalizing the buying of sex, which was previously legal.
John Lowman, an SFU criminology professor, said that policies targeting just clients could be challenged as unconstitutional: “To have one party in what is a legally consenting adult relationship [. . .] held criminally responsible while the other party is not, is state-sponsored, institutionalized entrapment.”
Lowman expressed concern that new regulations designating areas where sex is criminalized could further endanger sex workers by forcing prostitution out of residential districts.
He explained that police enforced similar policies in the 1990s, and would not go after sex workers if they worked in places such as industrial districts. “That industrial area, which the police had turned into a red light district in the 1990s, became the killing field of Vancouver. That’s where Mr. Pickton picked up most of [his] victims,” said Lowman.
Both Lowman and the report state that decriminalization of sex work, with the potential for regulation and protection, is the best way to ensure the safety of sex workers, following the lead of countries such as New Zealand.
“[We should focus on] accepting that prostitution is a profession and is not inherently sexual abuse,” Krüsi told The Peak. “And therefore we should allow women, or sex workers in general to have working conditions that are conducive of safety and not make it harder to protect themselves.”
Criminalisation of clients: reproducing vulnerabilities for violence and poor health among street-based sex workers in Canada - a qualitative study
Study critiques Vancouver's prostitution policies
A recent study has concluded that the Nordic Model of prostitution laws could endanger sex trade workers even further and does not affect the demand for prostitution.
The Nordic Model, originating in Nordic nations such as Norway and Sweden, criminalizes the act of buying sex but not selling it — johns and pimps are prosecuted rather than sex trade workers themselves.
Conducted by UBC researchers and the Gender & Sexual Health Initiative (GHSI) of the BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, the study found that the Vancouver Police Department’s (VPD) new policies — which focus on punishing clients — neither deterred prostitution nor increased the safety of sex trade workers.
Since the VPD’s policy shift, sex work related arrests have increased from 47 in 2012 to 71 in 2013, a 51 per cent increase. However, the report notes that there has been “no change in rates of work-related physical and sexual violence against sex workers” since the change in policy.
Andrea Krüsi, one of the authors of the report and a research assistant at GHSI, explained the results to The Peak: “In the context where clients are criminalized, it’s still in the shared interests of the client and the sex worker to be undetected by the police and so this led to women having to rush screening their clients [. . .] What they need to do is just hop into the car and hope for the best.”
The report states that the VPD’s new approach “severely limits street-based sex workers’ control over their health and safety due to [an] inability to screen clients or negotiate terms of transactions,” being forced to relocate to remote areas such as industrial areas, and an “inability to access police protection.”
In addition, due to the increased difficulty of targeting clients who are willing to risk potential criminal charges, many sex workers are forced to stay out longer, thus increasing their risk.
Krüsi added that, even though the police emphasized prioritizing the safety of sex workers, “sex workers were reluctant to report violence to police because they were worried that if they go to [the] police to report a violent client, that the police might use some of that information they give to refine their enforcement methods.”
“Our findings are very clear: that when clients are continued to be targets, the harms of criminalization are reproduced.”
Earlier this month, the federal government tabled new legislation on prostitution that would criminalize selling sex in areas where children under 18 are present. It would also criminalize advertisement of sex services, for which sex workers could face five years in prison.
However, these new regulations would share the Nordic Model’s focus on clients by criminalizing the buying of sex, which was previously legal.
John Lowman, an SFU criminology professor, said that policies targeting just clients could be challenged as unconstitutional: “To have one party in what is a legally consenting adult relationship [. . .] held criminally responsible while the other party is not, is state-sponsored, institutionalized entrapment.”
Lowman expressed concern that new regulations designating areas where sex is criminalized could further endanger sex workers by forcing prostitution out of residential districts.
He explained that police enforced similar policies in the 1990s, and would not go after sex workers if they worked in places such as industrial districts. “That industrial area, which the police had turned into a red light district in the 1990s, became the killing field of Vancouver. That’s where Mr. Pickton picked up most of [his] victims,” said Lowman.
Both Lowman and the report state that decriminalization of sex work, with the potential for regulation and protection, is the best way to ensure the safety of sex workers, following the lead of countries such as New Zealand.
“[We should focus on] accepting that prostitution is a profession and is not inherently sexual abuse,” Krüsi told The Peak. “And therefore we should allow women, or sex workers in general to have working conditions that are conducive of safety and not make it harder to protect themselves.”
Criminalisation of clients: reproducing vulnerabilities for violence and poor health among street-based sex workers in Canada - a qualitative study
Nikki Thomas @MsNikkiThomas · Jun 23
Message to Canada from @MinPeterMacKay: Knock up 17yo babysitter, divorce wife of 30yrs, & you're fit for the bench! Just don't pay her!
Nikki Thomas @MsNikkiThomas · Jun 23
So @MinPeterMacKay: A client buying sex is a criminal & pervert, but Vic Toews impregnates his babysitter & you make him a judge? #sexwork
Message to Canada from @MinPeterMacKay: Knock up 17yo babysitter, divorce wife of 30yrs, & you're fit for the bench! Just don't pay her!
Nikki Thomas @MsNikkiThomas · Jun 23
So @MinPeterMacKay: A client buying sex is a criminal & pervert, but Vic Toews impregnates his babysitter & you make him a judge? #sexwork
Dominatrix Writes Premier
Dominatrix Writes Premier
Posted on 2014/06/25
The Honourable Kathleen Wynne
Premier of Ontario
Dear Premier,
I am the Bedford in Bedford Versus Canada, the case that overturned Canada’s prostitution laws. Three court decisions, culminating in the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in December 2013, confirmed that these laws were unconstitutional.
Prime Minister Harper was elected with a majority government. He has recently introduced Bill C-36 into Parliament to make illegal the purchase of sex acts, whatever that means, advertising of the sale of sex and numerous other related activities. I and many legal experts, informed activists, sex trade workers and concerned citizens believe the new bill is not constitutional.
The opposition parties in the House of Commons have asked that the Government refer the bill to the Supreme Court immediately after a final vote in the House because of this concern. To date the Government has refused.
You too were elected with a majority government. If and when the bill becomes law you can ask The Ontario Court of Appeal to render an opinion on whether it is constitutional. You can indicate any time before that that you will do so. You can also instruct crown attorneys not to lay charges under the bill, even in advance of it passing, and not to do so at least until a final court decision, possibly the Supreme Court, has ruled on whether the law, or its various parts, is constitutional.
I am asking that you do to do both. I am asking you to do both in the coming days. I am asking that you not say this is a federal matter. I am asking that you not say you need to study the matter. I am asking you not to delegate this decision. If you need more information please contact me and I will have eminent Canadians get in touch with you.
Already the horrible results of C-36 are being seen. Already some sex workers are leaving the safety of agencies and going back underground, meaning working alone without security or a safe location. Already some clients are seeking anonymity and secrecy, preventing screening and accountability. There are other terrible consequences looming and in progress. Premier, you know this means more murdered women at the hands of sexual predators – because of C-36. A simple search of the Internet will provide you with the opinions of lawyers, legislators, academics and the sex workers themselves of the dangers that C-36 creates – constitutional or not.
I know you realize the freedom that you enjoy in your personal life was once at issue as well, and were opposed by the same segments of society now behind C-36. Same sex marriage, same sex benefits and even same sex relationships were illegal not long ago, and some people would make them illegal again if they thought they could get away with it. Now the proposed requirement that women only have sex for free, that men can be entrapped, that local authorities will have unreasonable discretion, that freedom of speech concerning advertising the legal sale of sex will be threatened, and that personal friends and associates of women and men who sell sex but who are not involved in the business but can be implicated, is surely alarming to you both personally and as my Premier.
I am sharing this letter with the public. I believe they have a right to know that you have the option to act and have been asked.
I congratulate you on your election and thank you in advance for standing up for the people of Ontario against the appalling conduct of our federal government.
Yours truly,
Terri-Jean Bedford
http://blog.terrijeanbedford.com/2014/06/25/dominatrix-writes-premier/
Dominatrix Writes Premier
Posted on 2014/06/25
The Honourable Kathleen Wynne
Premier of Ontario
Dear Premier,
I am the Bedford in Bedford Versus Canada, the case that overturned Canada’s prostitution laws. Three court decisions, culminating in the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in December 2013, confirmed that these laws were unconstitutional.
Prime Minister Harper was elected with a majority government. He has recently introduced Bill C-36 into Parliament to make illegal the purchase of sex acts, whatever that means, advertising of the sale of sex and numerous other related activities. I and many legal experts, informed activists, sex trade workers and concerned citizens believe the new bill is not constitutional.
The opposition parties in the House of Commons have asked that the Government refer the bill to the Supreme Court immediately after a final vote in the House because of this concern. To date the Government has refused.
You too were elected with a majority government. If and when the bill becomes law you can ask The Ontario Court of Appeal to render an opinion on whether it is constitutional. You can indicate any time before that that you will do so. You can also instruct crown attorneys not to lay charges under the bill, even in advance of it passing, and not to do so at least until a final court decision, possibly the Supreme Court, has ruled on whether the law, or its various parts, is constitutional.
I am asking that you do to do both. I am asking you to do both in the coming days. I am asking that you not say this is a federal matter. I am asking that you not say you need to study the matter. I am asking you not to delegate this decision. If you need more information please contact me and I will have eminent Canadians get in touch with you.
Already the horrible results of C-36 are being seen. Already some sex workers are leaving the safety of agencies and going back underground, meaning working alone without security or a safe location. Already some clients are seeking anonymity and secrecy, preventing screening and accountability. There are other terrible consequences looming and in progress. Premier, you know this means more murdered women at the hands of sexual predators – because of C-36. A simple search of the Internet will provide you with the opinions of lawyers, legislators, academics and the sex workers themselves of the dangers that C-36 creates – constitutional or not.
I know you realize the freedom that you enjoy in your personal life was once at issue as well, and were opposed by the same segments of society now behind C-36. Same sex marriage, same sex benefits and even same sex relationships were illegal not long ago, and some people would make them illegal again if they thought they could get away with it. Now the proposed requirement that women only have sex for free, that men can be entrapped, that local authorities will have unreasonable discretion, that freedom of speech concerning advertising the legal sale of sex will be threatened, and that personal friends and associates of women and men who sell sex but who are not involved in the business but can be implicated, is surely alarming to you both personally and as my Premier.
I am sharing this letter with the public. I believe they have a right to know that you have the option to act and have been asked.
I congratulate you on your election and thank you in advance for standing up for the people of Ontario against the appalling conduct of our federal government.
Yours truly,
Terri-Jean Bedford
http://blog.terrijeanbedford.com/2014/06/25/dominatrix-writes-premier/
I wrote my first blog on Bill C-36. The link is here: http://ericaobsession.wordpress.com/
Last edited:
ACE Society @PaceSociety 10m
PACE's Sheri Kiselbach to speak before the Justice Committee on the unconstitutional #BillC36.You're one awesome woman! #SexWork
PACE's Sheri Kiselbach to speak before the Justice Committee on the unconstitutional #BillC36.You're one awesome woman! #SexWork
No idea what's happening with donations, but it's telling that the Tories struggled to hold on to the Fort McMurray riding in yesterday's by-election, after getting 72% of the vote in 2011. You'd figure there are a number of oilsands workers in that area who are not big fans of Bill C36.
After Bedford @AfterBedford 21m
Important read: the Benoit Atchinson Brief to the Justice Committee on #C36
http://ow.ly/yEiei #sexwork
http://www.nswp.org/resource/bill-c-36-and-the-views-people-involved-the-canadian-sex-industry
fighting to save Canadian civilization
Important read: the Benoit Atchinson Brief to the Justice Committee on #C36
http://ow.ly/yEiei #sexwork
http://www.nswp.org/resource/bill-c-36-and-the-views-people-involved-the-canadian-sex-industry
fighting to save Canadian civilization
Ironic. The oilsands are the bread and butter of Harper's economic policy, and he's going to make criminals of them all. Lol
It's Joy Smith's work, she has most of the male conservative MPs by the balls as she know most of them visit escorts (including McKay) and she is willing to out them if they are not on board with bill C-36. Blackmailing femi-nazi.
