“If a prostitute is a willing participant and has chosen that profession, we have no issue,” Sgt. Kapuscinski said
Most recent articles on prostitution related laws, opinions, comments
- Thread starter gustave55
- Start date
Sgt. Kapuscinski is a reasonable man. Thanks for the emphasis (I caught that line too).
The Barrage Against the Nordic Approach
I have seen and been told that there has been a constant stream of articles saying the government should not criminalize the purchase of sex or being a pimp. It appears that a couple of items in favour of that approach, such as put forward by Member of Parliament Joy Smith, have been demolished. Other articles have revealed how police in several areas of Canada are cooperating in treating the sex trade, whatever that is, just like any other business. So the question going forward is who gets hurt. If Mr. Harper brings in new laws, instead of basically enforcing remaining laws for a change, organized crime and bad pimps and so forth will prosper and celebrate. If he does what we have advocated, women will be safer and better off in every respect. If he finds the idea of women being paid for sex acts (which he has yet to define) wrong, he should look at the booming businesses of strip clubs, massage parlours, dungeons, and escort agencies that have flourished since he came into office. It’s a little late in the game to get up on a high moral horse. I’m up on mine, and I think women should not be legally required to perform sex acts only for free.
http://blog.terrijeanbedford.com/2014/04/06/the-barrage-against-the-nordic-approach/
I have seen and been told that there has been a constant stream of articles saying the government should not criminalize the purchase of sex or being a pimp. It appears that a couple of items in favour of that approach, such as put forward by Member of Parliament Joy Smith, have been demolished. Other articles have revealed how police in several areas of Canada are cooperating in treating the sex trade, whatever that is, just like any other business. So the question going forward is who gets hurt. If Mr. Harper brings in new laws, instead of basically enforcing remaining laws for a change, organized crime and bad pimps and so forth will prosper and celebrate. If he does what we have advocated, women will be safer and better off in every respect. If he finds the idea of women being paid for sex acts (which he has yet to define) wrong, he should look at the booming businesses of strip clubs, massage parlours, dungeons, and escort agencies that have flourished since he came into office. It’s a little late in the game to get up on a high moral horse. I’m up on mine, and I think women should not be legally required to perform sex acts only for free.
http://blog.terrijeanbedford.com/2014/04/06/the-barrage-against-the-nordic-approach/
Shannon, Bruckert & Shaver: Canada must set sex workers free
The unanimous decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Bedford case last December was a very clear: the current criminalization regime is not only ineffective at protecting sex workers but is having devastating consequences on sex workers’ safety, health and human rights.
As the Global Commission on HIV and the Law so aptly stated: “the law is the torturer’s fist or the healer’s hand.” The law is a powerful tool to reduce global social and health inequities and ensure human rights for all, but it is also a dangerous weapon with which to limit the rights of marginalized populations in the name of “social morality” or “public nuisance.” Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms stands as a model for ensuring laws uphold rights afforded to all citizens, including rights to security, liberty and equality.
In an open letter sent to all Canada’s MPs and federal political parties this week, more than 300 of our fellow Canadian and international academics and researchers expressed their profound concern that the federal government is blatantly ignoring a large body of scientific evidence from Canada, Sweden, Norway and other countries that criminalization of any aspect of sex work, including the purchasing of sex, has overwhelmingly negative harms to sex workers’ safety, health and human rights.
Within weeks of the Supreme Court of Canada decision, the federal government made clear their plans to introduce new legislation that would criminalize the purchasing of sex. Often referred to as the “Swedish” or “Nordic” Model, banning the purchasing of sex is not scientifically grounded and sorely misguided by moral judgment of sex workers as victims. In fact, evidence strongly suggests that this approach would recreate the same social and health-related harms of current criminalization regime to sex workers and communities. Where sex work operates within a criminalized and policed environment — whether targeting sex workers, their working conditions, their clients or third parties — sex workers are at increased risk of violence, abuse, HIV infection and other health and social harms.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...kert-shaver-canada-must-set-sex-workers-free/
The unanimous decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Bedford case last December was a very clear: the current criminalization regime is not only ineffective at protecting sex workers but is having devastating consequences on sex workers’ safety, health and human rights.
As the Global Commission on HIV and the Law so aptly stated: “the law is the torturer’s fist or the healer’s hand.” The law is a powerful tool to reduce global social and health inequities and ensure human rights for all, but it is also a dangerous weapon with which to limit the rights of marginalized populations in the name of “social morality” or “public nuisance.” Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms stands as a model for ensuring laws uphold rights afforded to all citizens, including rights to security, liberty and equality.
In an open letter sent to all Canada’s MPs and federal political parties this week, more than 300 of our fellow Canadian and international academics and researchers expressed their profound concern that the federal government is blatantly ignoring a large body of scientific evidence from Canada, Sweden, Norway and other countries that criminalization of any aspect of sex work, including the purchasing of sex, has overwhelmingly negative harms to sex workers’ safety, health and human rights.
Within weeks of the Supreme Court of Canada decision, the federal government made clear their plans to introduce new legislation that would criminalize the purchasing of sex. Often referred to as the “Swedish” or “Nordic” Model, banning the purchasing of sex is not scientifically grounded and sorely misguided by moral judgment of sex workers as victims. In fact, evidence strongly suggests that this approach would recreate the same social and health-related harms of current criminalization regime to sex workers and communities. Where sex work operates within a criminalized and policed environment — whether targeting sex workers, their working conditions, their clients or third parties — sex workers are at increased risk of violence, abuse, HIV infection and other health and social harms.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...kert-shaver-canada-must-set-sex-workers-free/
FWIW just had a conversation with YRP vice squad detective. He is under the impression that by about September the entire industry will be fully criminalized. Not sure if it was wishful thinking on his part, but it seems like he and his buddies who mostly deal with pimps and underage victims are fully supporting criminalization.
Last edited:
and just a month before, an open letter from 306 academics was sent to Harper opposing the Nordic Model, so there is a huge range of opinion. If the cons really want to abolish the sex trade they would actually have a better case if they just criminalized both sides like they do in the states. Trying to adopt Nordic model would be too complicated and hard to implement. This organization is in Vancouver, ironically the Vancouver police chief supports legalization.
This whole thing is a clusterfuck I dunno how Mckay is gonna appease the masses, the women's support groups, the MPS, all the sexworkers, He was right earlier this month when he said there is no simple answer to this.
This whole thing is a clusterfuck I dunno how Mckay is gonna appease the masses, the women's support groups, the MPS, all the sexworkers, He was right earlier this month when he said there is no simple answer to this.
Last edited:
https://openparliament.ca/debates/2014/4/28/jim-hillyer-1/
Jim Hillyer Lethbridge, AB
Mr. Speaker, petitioners in my riding are not happy that there is a chance that Canada will have no laws around prostitution and human trafficking. They call upon the House of Commons to criminalize the offence to purchase sex with a woman, man, or child, and to make it criminal for pimps, madams, or others to profit from the proceeds of that sex trade.
another day another one ignoring that supreme court ruling on criminalization placing SPs in danger. and why is that all of the pro-Nordic model people silent on the bawdy house law which is struck down? if they enact the Nordic model. what are they going to do with the bawdy laws which is struck down? how will they explain the public why purchasing sex is illegal but bawdy houses are not.. I can't see how the the Nordic model being enacted with this contradiction.
Jim Hillyer Lethbridge, AB
Mr. Speaker, petitioners in my riding are not happy that there is a chance that Canada will have no laws around prostitution and human trafficking. They call upon the House of Commons to criminalize the offence to purchase sex with a woman, man, or child, and to make it criminal for pimps, madams, or others to profit from the proceeds of that sex trade.
another day another one ignoring that supreme court ruling on criminalization placing SPs in danger. and why is that all of the pro-Nordic model people silent on the bawdy house law which is struck down? if they enact the Nordic model. what are they going to do with the bawdy laws which is struck down? how will they explain the public why purchasing sex is illegal but bawdy houses are not.. I can't see how the the Nordic model being enacted with this contradiction.
As Winston Churchill said: The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.
several academics wrote a letter to the Harper government saying the nordic model put SPs in danger
another another one ignoring the bawdy house and the communications laws that were struck down and the SCC rulings which says criminalization put SPs in danger
I'm not so sure it's that clear cut an argument. The SCC had a problem with the previous regime because it made them criminals for undertaking an otherwise legal activity. Thereby forcing them to expose themselves to risk in order to evade prosecution. A Nordic model places no criminal sanctions on the prostitutes.
The concerns of the petitioners are common sense and logical. But they are policy issues.
Would the radical feminists therefore be receptive to prohibiting prostitution itself? It makes sense based on the fundamental premise of their objection to the industry. But we all know that wouldn't fly.
Let's be careful what we ask for (this time).
The sentence that makes the most sense in the entire article is the very last one.
The concerns of the petitioners are common sense and logical. But they are policy issues.
Would the radical feminists therefore be receptive to prohibiting prostitution itself? It makes sense based on the fundamental premise of their objection to the industry. But we all know that wouldn't fly.
Let's be careful what we ask for (this time).
The sentence that makes the most sense in the entire article is the very last one.
why am I not surprised Joy Smith the man hating feminazi. SPs constantly complain she refuse to meet with them
