Most recent articles on prostitution related laws, opinions, comments

[canada-man]

Why ex-sex worker calls prostitution law consultation ‘ridiculous’

TORONTO – Former sex worker and current rights advocate Valerie Scott said the day the Supreme Court struck down three prostitution-related prohibitions was the “best day” of her life.

But in the four months since then, as Parliament touted a consultation process with key stakeholders to craft new legislation, Scott and other sex worker advocates don’t feel the government is taking their feedback seriously.

Scott, who works as a legal coordinator for Sex Professionals of Canada (SPOC), was one of the applicants in the landmark Bedford ruling that struck down three prostitution-related prohibitions. Her co-applicants were Amy Lebovitch and Terri-Jean Bedford—namesake of the ruling.

Scott said Justice Minister Peter MacKay held a meeting at his office March 3 with about fifteen groups on both sides of the debate, who were each given five minutes to present their position on what the new legislation should look like.

“I believe it was nine anti-sex worker groups and six sex worker groups,” said Scott. “But it was clearly simply an optics meeting: We were given nine days notice to come up with the money to get to Ottawa, and for five minutes. And that has been the extent of the consultation.”

Christine Bruckert, a board member of Ottawa-based sex worker rights group POWER and criminology professor, said she wasn’t aware of further consultations with sex workers.

“You had an online survey then the government has apparently consulted with some—what they would consider key stakeholders—so the police and municipalities, we know for sure,” she said.

MacKay said Tuesday that he did consult with sex workers in face-to-face discussions at the justice department, but “for reasons of privacy, I’m not going to say who.”

“There was also a number who participated in the online consultations, so yes, we’ve heard directly from sex workers,” he added.

But Scott warned that the online consultations—which were open to all Canadians—meant that people unfamiliar with how prostitution works may have been over-represented.

http://globalnews.ca/news/1301781/why-ex-sex-worker-calls-prostitution-law-consultation-ridiculous/

 

[canada-man]

imaging this music playing in that senate room/chamber

 

[GPIDEAL]

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.

I also like the comment that the Nordic model punishes men for their misogyny if prostitution is equal to violent oppression by men. It's ironic for the abolitionists that women cannot be permitted to make a very good living satisfying the basic needs of the weaker sex.

 

[GPIDEAL]

“It doesn’t objectify. It puts us in a position of power. Think about it: we’re not calling them, they’re calling us,” she says. “Girls have one-night-stands all the time, at least girls that work get paid for it. And who do you have more respect for? Honestly? Because she’s not getting money, do you have more respect for her? It doesn’t make sense.”

Well, some do email or text certain of their regulars, she should say. So it's not just men 'luring' the ladies with wads of cash. The providers are also like mythological Sirens.

 

[GPIDEAL]

Seize property of johns, pimps

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/columnists/seize-property-of-johns-pimps-257622271.html

BRANDON -- It is a story that again proves the need to drastically change the manner in which Canada addresses its prostitution problem.

A Winnipeg courtroom was told recently a teenage girl was repeatedly injected with crystal meth by a man to keep her awake and working for days at a time for an escort service being run out of rooms in two city hotels.

Arrests were made after the girl required hospital treatment for a wound caused by the drug injections, which had dangerously festered as she continued to turn "dozens and dozens and dozens" of tricks for clients supplied by her employers.

Robert Gow, 29, pleaded guilty to living off the avails of prostitution last week and was sentenced to two years in jail. His co-accused, Andre Collins Mitchell, 42, faces several prostitution-related charges, including keeping a common bawdy house. He is presumed innocent.

The facts of this case are disturbing, but they are far from unusual. Numerous studies and reports have shown Canada's sex-trade industry relies upon the exploitation of vulnerable people, many of them children, who are recruited, lured or kidnapped into a life of horror that often ends violently.

Hoping to change that reality, the federal government is expected to soon introduce amendments to the Criminal Code that will revamp the current law, by targeting pimps and johns but exempting prostitutes from prosecution. It is the approach advocated by Winnipeg MP Joy Smith, who deserves credit for her tireless work against human trafficking and exploitation.

While the amendments will signal an important change in attitude toward prostitution, it is unrealistic to expect that tougher criminal penalties will be the magic bullet that kills Canada's sex-trade industry. Indeed, soliciting prostitution, keeping a bawdy house and living off the avails of prostitution have been crimes for many decades and prostitution is still a thriving industry.

A different approach to the problem is needed. If prostitution is to be eradicated, it must also be fought at the provincial level. Provincial laws move faster, have fewer procedural impediments, and could pose a far more immediate threat to the sex-trade industry if properly deployed.

In Manitoba, the Criminal Property Forfeiture Act has been used to seize and sell properties used for marijuana grow-ops, child molestation, and by the Hells Angels. The law should be used to seize and sell the cars and computers used by johns (and janes) to arrange their "dates," everything a pimp uses to run his or her business and everything purchased with the profits.

Hotels almost always emerge unscathed from these stories, but it is impossible to believe a hotel's staff or management doesn't notice the "dozens and dozens and dozens" of johns going to the same room at all hours of the day and night and doesn't suspect what is happening.

If the province starts seizing and selling hotels and apartment buildings where prostitution is occurring, hotel owners and apartment landlords will be less likely to turn a blind eye and more likely to call the cops.

The proceeds from the sale of the seized property could fund programs to help prostitutes exit the sex trade.

The province can also use liquor and gaming laws to revoke a hotel's liquor and VLT licences -- the sources of revenue that keep most hotels afloat. If hotels must choose between tolerating prostitution on their premises and VLT and booze profits, the choice will be obvious.

Given the myriad health dangers associated with prostitution, provincial and municipal health laws should also be used to shut down buildings that have hosted the activity. The public must be protected from hotel rooms and mattresses that have been used for marathon prostitution.

We need to stop regarding prostitution as an issue that can only be addressed by Ottawa with tougher criminal laws. A more co-ordinated approach, using existing provincial laws, could go a long way to reducing the problem.

There was the story of a pimp and trafficker here in Toronto on last night's news who forced a woman too. This gives the hobby a bad reputation, even though it's not a john's fault.

It's sad to read about girls/women being drugged to work. Those pimps should be put away and do hard labour too.

 

[canada-man]

seizing property goes against the SCC ruling. everything in that article goes against the SCC

 

[D-Fens]

seizing property goes against the SCC ruling. everything in that article goes against the SCC

This type of approach of seizing the property of johns and pimps would be more effective under our old laws you know....the laws that just got struck down? and didn't any of these johns notice she was being drugged?

 

[GPIDEAL]

seizing property goes against the SCC ruling. everything in that article goes against the SCC

How so? I just noticed the part about seizing the property of johns. WTF?!

 

[canada-man]

How so? I just noticed the part about seizing the property of johns. WTF?!

sizing property where they suspect prositution took place is against the SCC ruling on bawdy houses

 

[canada-man]

Superstitious Bronze agers get head start lobbying on federal government’s prostitution laws

The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada has a head start in lobbying on prostitution legislation as several interest groups jockey for position while the government prepares to table its bill.

The Conservative government has been consulting with Canadians and interest groups on prostitution legislation after the Supreme Court unanimously struck down Canada’s laws in December as unconstitutional.

While some organizations representing sex workers say the government hasn’t been consulting in good faith, the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC) has reported a number of communications with government officials since December and circulated a report to all MPs supporting the “Nordic model”—used in Sweden, Norway and Iceland—a week before the Supreme Court’s decision.

The EFC has been engaged on prostitution legislation for three or four years and had been working on human trafficking prior to that, policy analyst Julia Beazley said in an interview with The Hill Times. She started networking with what she called “survivor organizations” of former sex workers as well as women’s groups when the challenge first went to the Supreme Court.

The EFC put out a series of three reports beginning in 2010 with the last one, called “Out of Business: Prostitution in Canada—Putting an End to Demand,” released about a week before the Bedford decision.

The report was distributed to all Parliamentarians in mid-December. The EFC has reported a number of communications on the subject of “justice and law enforcement.” It contacted Nancy Baker, Justice Minister Peter MacKay’s (Central Nova, N.S.) policy advisor, four times in February as well as on the day of the Supreme Court decision, the Lobbyists Registry shows. It also communicated with a group of Liberal and NDP MPs in January, and with Cynthia Tran, who handles stakeholder outreach at the Prime Minister’s Office, on the day before and the day of the Supreme Court decision.

http://www.hilltimes.com/news/news/...n-federal-governments-prostitution-laws/38382



http://blog.terrijeanbedford.com/2014/05/04/new-prostitution-laws-may-be-coming-soon/

New Prostitution Laws May Be Coming Soon
Posted on 2014/05/04
I believe that the government has the information it needs to recognize that the Nordic approach will replicate the harms of the laws just struck down and won’t even be legal in itself. They also do not want to have the burden of telling us what we cannot do as consenting adults in private. So two things. If they do bring the Nordic model, meaning say they are targeting customers and associates of sex workers, it means they are just kicking the can down the road again, so they can say the courts forced them to decriminalize sex work. If they don’t, they will finally in effect decriminalize it, and just bring in laws targeting the negative aspects of the sex trade such as human trafficking. Laws like that are already there, so it means they say they will enforce existing laws for a change, or actually do something to protect women. Either way, we have won, will win and there is no going backwards. When the new law comes out, I will make sure I read it and ask what other informed observers think of it before I comment publicly. That is something those opposed to our challenge should consider trying some time.

 

[canada-man]

minister of censorship and the anti-sex league is at it again ignoring the SCC rulings on criminalization which put SPs in danger.

Joy Smith Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, I have with me 6,621 petitions with names on them from all across this country, from constituents in ridings all across this country, who are requesting that Parliament amend the Criminal Code to decriminalize the selling of sexual services and criminalize the purchasing of sexual services and to provide support to those who desire to be in prostitution.

In addition to this petition, I have 55,000 postcards on the same topic from all across this country that I cannot present to the House.



Joy Smith Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, in addition to that I have 1,238 petitioners from across the country who are asking the government to require Internet service providers to provide a mandatory opt-in Internet pornography filter as a tool parents can use to protect their children from Internet pornography.


parents who can't be bothered to monitor their children's online activities don't deserve to have them.

 

[lovelatinas]

The Toronto Sun writer believes the Nordic Model will be rejected.

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/04/30/court-will-reject-nordic-model

 

[Ace88]

Maybe this is a good sign. Sounds like the Montreal police is gonna focus on streetwalkers, the under-aged, human-trafficking and bawdy houses, just like before.

 

[wilbur]

Maybe this is a good sign. Sounds like the Montreal police is gonna focus on streetwalkers, the under-aged, human-trafficking and bawdy houses, just like before.

Not so good news because they conflate the term 'trafficking' with just about anything concerning transportation of sex-workers. They treat all sex workers as victims, so any facilitating of transportation of sex workers (even being chauffeured to outcalls) is considered as trafficking, even if (in most cases) the sex-workers are doing it of their own free will. The police then get to exaggerate the trafficking figures in order to get public officials to increase their budgets. The public imagines human trafficking as slave ships with people chained inside. Most bona-fide human trafficking involves smuggling willing illegal workers into Canada so that they get to improve their lives, like what happens through Akwesasne. Most human trafficking has nothing to do with the modern equivalent of slave ships because the people getting trafficked (smuggled in exchange for money) are doing it of their own free will.

The definition of a bawdy house is so broad as to apply to massage parlours. The SCC said hands off brothels as it improves safety of sex-workers, but I guess the SPVM meatheads haven't got that yet.

 

[TeasePlease]

The public imagines human trafficking as slave ships with people chained inside. Most bona-fide human trafficking involves smuggling willing illegal workers into Canada so that they get to improve their lives, like what happens through Akwesasne. Most human trafficking has nothing to do with the modern equivalent of slave ships because the people getting trafficked (smuggled in exchange for money) are doing it of their own free will.

These are two ends of the spectrum, with a lot of room for grey in between.

 

[staggerspool]

Not so good news because they conflate the term 'trafficking' with just about anything concerning transportation of sex-workers. They treat all sex workers as victims, so any facilitating of transportation of sex workers (even being chauffeured to outcalls) is considered as trafficking, even if (in most cases) the sex-workers are doing it of their own free will. The police then get to exaggerate the trafficking figures in order to get public officials to increase their budgets. The public imagines human trafficking as slave ships with people chained inside. Most bona-fide human trafficking involves smuggling willing illegal workers into Canada so that they get to improve their lives, like what happens through Akwesasne. Most human trafficking has nothing to do with the modern equivalent of slave ships because the people getting trafficked (smuggled in exchange for money) are doing it of their own free will.

The definition of a bawdy house is so broad as to apply to massage parlours. The SCC said hands off brothels as it improves safety of sex-workers, but I guess the SPVM meatheads haven't got that yet.

Please provide support for this notion that all transportation of sex workers, including driving escorts to outcalls, is conflated as "trafficking." This is the first time I've seen this stated, and I suspect that is because this is your imagination working overtime. Who are "they?" According to you, they are not the "public", as the public thinks they come in chained up in slave ships. So the police, then, or the government? The police are clearly not speaking with one voice, and the government hasn't said what it thinks yet.

So this is pretty much fantasy, as far as I can see.

 

[wilbur]

Please provide support for this notion that all transportation of sex workers, including driving escorts to outcalls, is conflated as "trafficking." This is the first time I've seen this stated, and I suspect that is because this is your imagination working overtime. Who are "they?" According to you, they are not the "public", as the public thinks they come in chained up in slave ships. So the police, then, or the government? The police are clearly not speaking with one voice, and the government hasn't said what it thinks yet.

So this is pretty much fantasy, as far as I can see.

First, this is not a court of law, and I don't have to provide squat as far as evidence.

We are talking about the police, and those politicians who want to see prostitution abolished. I didn't say that they are out to get drivers. What I'm saying is that you're going to get mission creep until you get to that point. They are preying on the fact that most citizens have this idea that human trafficking is human sexual slavery; it's not and it involves mostly willing participants who aren't even in the sex business. This is certainly the situation in the UK, and conflated statistics does wonders to bolster their notion that prostitution has to be abolished, hence the pressure on politicians to increase police budgets.

The Montreal SPVM (police) are trying to make to point that most sex workers are victims (see above)..... who need to be rescued (whether they want to or not, and more money for the police budget, thank you). So anybody doing any facilitation, such as driving someone, will be seen to be participating in this exploitation of those victims once they get the bandwagon going.

The term 'human trafficking' is being conflated as a pretext to eliminate prostitution through other means, now that the Supreme Court of Canada has struck down sections of the Criminal Code of Canada. The mayor of Montreal wants to eliminate massage parlours and his police department is going to facilitate that in other ways than before.

 

[canada-man]

This is what i call the Finnish Model.

 

[canada-man]

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/op-ed/Criminalizing+work+harmful/9834353/story.html

the pwning of feminazi Joy Smith

 

[canada-man]

http://www.straight.com/news/553446...ejects-mps-suggestion-clients-can-be-targeted

A VANCOUVER LAWYER who represented sex workers before the Supreme Court of Canada has poured cold water on the idea of the federal government targeting the buyers of sex.

Elin Sigurdson told the Georgia Straight by phone that the Nordic model presents a model of "asymetrical criminalization".

She said that this approach—which has been endorsed by Conservative MP Joy Smith—"isn't consistent" with the Supreme Court of Canada's recent ruling striking down three of the country's prostitution laws.

"The client is criminalized, but not the sex worker," Sigurdson said. "In that context, the same issue of danger and jeopardy will persist when one of the parties rather than the other is criminalized. We would take the view that it couldn't be upheld under this decision of the Supreme Court of Canada because you're going to find the exact same problems persisting."