NO BLACK MEN! (That thread again, with a different slant to it.)

[fuji]

No Canadian court is going to order that a woman be raped, which is what ordering a woman to have sex against her will amounts to. Nor will any court fine a woman for refusing to be raped.

The right to security of person is a fundamental charter right that absolutely trumps the Ontario legislation that enacts the human rights code.

 

[shack]

We will LIE. We will not say service was refused due to race, religion or any other reason that's listed in the charter.

Will probably work most of the time. If however, several clients of the same race who were rejected came forward, then regardless of your lie, a clear pattern will have been established.

My suggestion would be to become an equal opportunity discriminator and pick a few here and there from all segments of the population.

 

[LKD]

do they only cut men's hair?

dykes are always looking for problems... we know how some muslims are due to their religion.. why go looking for trouble?

 

[trytolikeme]

I don't understand the problem with that. She went into a Muslim Barbershop wtf did she expect to happen

 

[Teal]

I'm not getting defensive, I've given you a very real and accurate idea of what I and many others will do. We will LIE. We will not say service was refused due to race, religion or any other reason that's listed in the charter. What I'm trying to say is the problem as you keep describing it, is simply not a problem for me.

That never worked before, I don't see why it would work now. I don't think you understand the Charter.

 

[Calgacus]

 

[Azprint]

LMAO. Love the scene.

 

[cuttysark]

That never worked before, I don't see why it would work now. I don't think you understand the Charter.

And you do?

 

[fuji]

We will LIE. We will not say service was refused due to race, religion or any other reason that's listed in the charter.

The Charter doesn't constrain your actions, as part of the constitution it limits what a government can do with law, it does not apply to private individuals. What purports to constrain your behavior are the commercial dealings aspects of the Ontario Human Rights Code.

The OHRC, however, is just mere legislation that IS clearly constrained by the Charter. So it is very clear that no proceedings under the OHRC can be used to infringe a Charter right like security of person.

Your charter right to security of person cannot be infringed by someone claiming discrimination under an Ontario commercial law.

 

[fuji]

That never worked before, I don't see why it would work now. I don't think you understand the Charter.

I don't think you understand that the Charter does not apply to SPJ. It is constitutional law that limits the power of government to do things to individuals, it does not limit individuals.

Think about it. The Charter prohibits the government from discriminating on the basis of sex, but YOU absolutely can discriminate on the basis of sex, race, age and religion when choosing your spouse!

 

[explorerzip]

Will probably work most of the time. If however, several clients of the same race who were rejected came forward, then regardless of your lie, a clear pattern will have been established.

My suggestion would be to become an equal opportunity discriminator and pick a few here and there from all segments of the population.

And who in their right mind would admit to seeing escorts just to complain about discrimination?

 

[shack]

And who in their right mind would admit to seeing escorts just to complain about discrimination?

A single/divorced guy in a jurisdiction where everything is legal and licensed?

 

[canada-man]

I am not attracted to black women am i racist?

 

[goalie000]

Have there been people charged as criminals due to discrimination? Exploring these issues would require reading through all the previous threads that have gone on for pages about this same topic (all the same points have been brought up) and perhaps looking up actual related cases.



Have there been cases of that happening to women in body rubs and strip clubs? I'm no lawyer, but I do believe they do a lot of research on previous cases that relate to the matter at hand, right?



If anything, this is the most racist thing I've heard in this whole thread. "No blacks" just means she doesn't want to see black men for sex - it could be for any reason. I don't see Filipinos. Am I racist? Will the courts come to get me and then take away my right to have sex and be compensated for it in some way? What if I take payment in gifts instead? lol



+1



Exactly. Those douchebags and just stirring shit as usual.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These threads will never stop and we all know it lol Just like the following topics that some of you may want to start a new thread for:
- I think I'm in love with an SP
- What's the definition of GFE vs PSE???
- Should I tip?
- I'm coming to Toronto, who do you guys recommend? (no preferences listed of course)
- I'm looking for an RMT that provides release and insurance receipts!
- Why choose MPA's over SPs?

You Go Alona

 

[fuji]

I am not attracted to black women am i racist?

Nope. Missing out, maybe, but not racist.

 

[explorerzip]

A single/divorced guy in a jurisdiction where everything is legal and licensed?

It's already not illegal to see escorts. I don't see too many guys (outside of terb) bragging about the escorts they were with. There's still a social stigma to it in North America and many other places. Not sure how it is in places like Amsterdam or Australia where it's been legal and perfectly fine to see escorts for quite some time.

 

[explorerzip]

These threads will never stop and we all know it lol Just like the following topics that some of you may want to start a new thread for:
- I think I'm in love with an SP
- What's the definition of GFE vs PSE???
- Should I tip?
- I'm coming to Toronto, who do you guys recommend? (no preferences listed of course)
- I'm looking for an RMT that provides release and insurance receipts!
- Why choose MPA's over SPs?

You missed one Alona:

- Why do guys pay for sex?

 

[Conway_Stewart]

No Canadian court is going to order that a woman be raped, which is what ordering a woman to have sex against her will amounts to. Nor will any court fine a woman for refusing to be raped.

The right to security of person is a fundamental charter right that absolutely trumps the Ontario legislation that enacts the human rights code.

The State has a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence to enforce it's rules.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence


The State (usually through the police) can take your money, physically detain you, hold you against your will, and (if necessary) kill you. How is sexual assault any different?

 

[fuji]

The State (usually through the police) can take your money, physically detain you, hold you against your will, and (if necessary) kill you. How is sexual assault any different?

In the case of Canada, the State we are discussing, the difference is Section 7 and Section 12 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

If you are talking about some horrible dictatorship like Syria then sure, there is nothing stopping that State from raping and murdering. However, partly as a result of such violence that particular State seems to be losing its monopoly on force....

 

[Imperius]

Aznprint, despite this thread's similarity to the many others on the subject - at least on the surface - I think you've framed the discussion well. Problem is, there are a lot of IFs before we get to the stage where this becomes an actual issue.

- IF prostitution was completely legal (regardless of situation - incall/outcall/brothel/solicitation/etc).
AND
- IF it required some sort of business licence as a regulated commercial enterprise
AND
- IF a requirement of obtaining and/or keeping that licence was adherence to the Human Rights Code
AND
- IF prostitution became so widely accepted in society that participants had no qualms about admitting to providing or using the service or reporting infractions of the Human Rights Code
AND
- IF it were possible to police and enforce
AND
- IF it could be demonstrated that a licenced provider was not providing service solely due to race
etc, etc.

IMO all of the above are very unlikely to occur. But assuming the above does come to pass... what then?

Fuji asserted that security of person in the Charter would take precedence over the commercial dealings of the OHRC. Would this hold up if the primary claim is that the provider's security is threatened solely due to the race of the customer? (i.e. the customer has not exhibited any characteristics or behaviour that would cause a person of another race to be denied this commercial service)

Is there any precedent in Canada? Are there any existing commercial dealings in Canada that involve sex that might shed some light on this? The only thing even remotely connected that comes to mind is surrogacy. Others?