Because radical feminists want to exert control over men's sexuality by limiting their sexual options.
Why is being the client of a SP not allowed, but it's legal to be a sugar daddy.
- Thread starter shane4
- Start date
Never seen vapourware used in that context before, nicely doneBecause C36 is a vaporware law. Put in place to please the Karen's that see all escort as underage exploitation (most probably because no one dared to fuck her for the last 15 years). And to please the pro sex crowd as it does not crimilize them anymore.
Let's put it clear. An escort is selling sex. An SB is selling sex. They are both whores and that's beautiful if you ask me
That's always how it breaks down.
Before 2016, Canadian prostitution law was based on the Victorian era British common law. That law provided that girls who worked at brothels or on the street and men who visited them there were illegal; but girls who visited the guy at his home or a hotel were legal.
Why was this?... Because the poor worked on the street or in brothels and upscale girls visited their rich clients at a hotel room. The poor were seen as having a social conduct problem. The rich were seen as having a little discreet, private recreation.
But it's still mainly about getting cash to take dick. Just a few more hoops to jump through.
Just like how within the provider industry, we have the..."whorearchy"
I guess it's just a form of eliteism in a sense. Not everyone can afford the luxury of constantly spoiling an individual (like a sugar daddy could), so a lot of men opt to just see an escort, and give her one small gift.
That's just my thoughts on it though!
I guess it's just a form of eliteism in a sense. Not everyone can afford the luxury of constantly spoiling an individual (like a sugar daddy could), so a lot of men opt to just see an escort, and give her one small gift.
That's just my thoughts on it though!
Yes.
You can legally have anal sex between two consenting adults over 18 if done in private.
If one person is recieving payment for anal sex it is illegal.
If you record it and distribute it, it is then legal to recieve payment.
If a third person is in the room filming it is considered illegal and could land you in jail for up to 10 years.
In order to legally recieve payment for anal sex in Canada it must be recorded from a POV or mounted camera then distributed.
If you contact a sugar baby saying you will pay her X dollars in cash or in kind for a certain amount of sexual services and Johnny Law was to somehow find out, and if they were to give a fuck, I am sure you can be charged as it's prostitution.
If you were to tell a girl that you will pay her way on dates, pay her rent and give her an allowance if she dates you without setting a list of services and number of times, than that's dating [and marriage] and if you make one illegal, as someone pointed out, you would have to make dating mostly illegal and many marriages where one party is supported by the other.
I don't think either should be illegal but I can see the difference.
Now the whole porn thing, that's another weird ass kettle of fish. I love these porn stars, and I've seen it a few times who insist they are not escorts, honey you are, don't get airs about that. Not that there is anything wrong with it, but accept who you are, that path lies happiness.
If you were to tell a girl that you will pay her way on dates, pay her rent and give her an allowance if she dates you without setting a list of services and number of times, than that's dating [and marriage] and if you make one illegal, as someone pointed out, you would have to make dating mostly illegal and many marriages where one party is supported by the other.
I don't think either should be illegal but I can see the difference.
Now the whole porn thing, that's another weird ass kettle of fish. I love these porn stars, and I've seen it a few times who insist they are not escorts, honey you are, don't get airs about that. Not that there is anything wrong with it, but accept who you are, that path lies happiness.
There was an escort on Merb who was saying her accountant said she didn't have to declare earnings because they were "gifts".
People tried to explain that said accountant was nuts and the CRA isn't run by mooks but she trusted her professional.
Odd actually, a lot of professional tax people are dangerously incompetent.
People tried to explain that said accountant was nuts and the CRA isn't run by mooks but she trusted her professional.
Odd actually, a lot of professional tax people are dangerously incompetent.
Thank you, now it makes sense. I believe some laws are made to keep the poor in line, but the poor is less in ratio now then it was back then. I like your statement.
