Court Ruling, What does it Actually Mean To Us In The Industry?

[Pink Kitty Escorts 6195]

As of yesterday's ruling. What kind of changes are actually in place as we speak?

 

I really think it is an awesome step in the right direction, but does it now open the door to a new law to pass that might be even more prohibitive to our industry?

 

I also think that if this is going to sit well with the public at large, there has to be some effort on our part (ppl in the sex industry) in some way to assure the average individual that this isnt going to affect their lives or society in a negative manner so that there won;t be a huge uproar that will come back to bite us in the ass.

[AlanRho 172]

As of yesterday's ruling. What kind of changes are actually in place as we speak?

 

I really think it is an awesome step in the right direction, but does it now open the door to a new law to pass that might be even more prohibitive to our industry?

 

I also think that if this is going to sit well with the public at large, there has to be some effort on our part (ppl in the sex industry) in some way to assure the average individual that this isnt going to affect their lives or society in a negative manner so that there won;t be a huge uproar that will come back to bite us in the ass.

It means absolutely nothing at the moment. The judge put a 30 day delay on the ruling to allow for the right to appeal to happen from the gov't. They will appeal -probably going all the way to the supreme court. Which they estimate will take 3 to 5 years.

 

In the mean time they are allowed to prosecute people as they have been.

[Guest s******ecan****]

So far nothing has changed. The laws were struck down but left in place for 30 days to give the government time to adjust. The Gov't will appeal the decision and ask that the ruling that struck down the law be stayed (or suspended) until the appeal is heard which could be quite a while.

 

Long term implications are more uncertain, but since you run an agency as I understand it don't start offering Incall yet as you'll get busted!

[Pink Kitty Escorts 6195]

We have always been offering Incall it represents about 95 percent of our business..

[TGirl-Kay 7484]

To here the leaders of our community, our mayor and our politicians talk you would think that there was a pimp on every corner and we as SPs where all crazy on drugs and in need of saveing. There are problems in the sex industry granted but the vast majority of sew workers out there arn't on drugs, pay their taxes, look after there familys, get educations and live what are deemed normal lives. The problem is that most folks don't know this.

 

I don't know how to speak this message publicly with out putting my self at risk.

If I write to my MP I have to sign my name to the letter for it to have any bearing.

If I stand up at a town hall meeting and speak my mind I announce my self to my community.

If I write for the paper again my words have no weight with out a name.

 

How do we as sex workers and people who seek the services of sex worker find our voice.

 

Through groups like POWER, through personal risk and by not being ashamed of this age old work we do. By educating.

 

I've come out twice now first as queer and a second time as transexual, this has cost me the relationship with my parents a marriage and a home.

But I've been rewarded ten fold with a better life.

 

I'm going to sign my letters

I'm going to call the CBC

I will stand up and be counted

 

I will not go quietly back to the closet

[whiteman 14028]

Incalls will become easier, both for the clients and the providers. They may enact laws locally to prevent bawdy houses from being erected in residential neighborhoods, but if bawdy houses are no longer illegal, then you can set one up far from a residential area without fear of hiding away from the LE. There will be no need to hide inside an apartment or hotel anymore.

[teched 418]

It is true, most of us can not stand up and speak to support legalization. We must though support groups that can and do, http://www.spoc.ca and/or power.

 

I also think these groups should be proposing, through the press, what new laws are required. In many cases the laws are already in place, but the press is not talking about that. The focus seems to be on drug using street walkers and human traffickers.

 

I think there would be value if SPOC or other group could propose what needs to replace the struck down laws.

 

I am not an expert but something like.

- pimping laws are already in place, need to stay in place and be enforced

- underage prostitution is now and must continue to be a focus for the LE. This is a place where sex trade workers can help, if they are not afraid to call the LE

- human trafficking laws, if not already in place, must be put in place and enforced strongly

- drug treatment must be stepped up and additional efforts made to identify those in need and get them to treatment

- the three regulations recently struck down should be taken off the books

- identify why it works in New Zealand, Denmark, etc.

 

Just some thoughts, but somehow we need to get ahead of those who now bundle all the problems in the world with the exchange of money for sex. I think the only way to do that is to educate the public through the media.

 

Unfortunately, I like many others are not in a position to get out there and publicly discus the subject. SPOC, how can we help.

[BiffC 100]

I strongly agree with many of the comments above, especially, as pkjason initially stated, about the importance of getting the word out. SPOC is the lead on this and they are doing a great job.

 

The issue of stigmatization certainly affects workers as noted by November. But it also affects the clients. It clients are not standing up and coming out to support the sex workers, then how can one hope to help this industry get better? I know it's not easy, but maybe clients also need a group to speak for them. Come on Cerbites!

 

Regards,

 

Biff

[Summer Meadows 1676]

Sounds like nothing has changed. Oh well business as usual! :)

[RobX 2084]

... if this is going to sit well with the public at large, there has to be some effort on our part (ppl in the sex industry) in some way to assure the average individual that this isn't going to affect their lives or society in a negative manner so that there won;t be a huge uproar that will come back to bite us in the ass.

 

I don't think that the decision, it it stands, will affect the average individual in a negative way. For example, in Montreal, recent citizen mobilization against the industry has centered on street walkers and their presence near schools. If "bawdy houses" were legal and street walkers moved indoors, provided they choose a discrete location, I think that the citizens who live in neighborhoods formerly frequented by SWs would see the change as an improvement in their lives.

 

Also I don't think it will help if "ppl in the sex industry" "make an effort assure the average individual". I believe that the strongest opponents of the sex industry are the religious right, who are opposed on ideological and "moral" grounds. Therefore, too much visible campaigning by sex workers may actually be counter-productive.

 

... don't start offering Incall yet as you'll get busted!

 

I think one has to distinguish between what the law allows, and the rigor with which the various police forces decide to enforce the various laws, based on their priorities. For example, here in Montreal incalls do not generally get busted unless some other factor is present - underage girls, street gangs, Hells Angels or other organized crime involvement, drugs, or citizen complaints, which rarely happens. Otherwise, they are generally left alone.

[whiteman 14028]

The ruling was done in Ontario. I'm not sure were these laws federal laws or Ontario laws? If they were merely Ontario laws, do they apply in the rest of the country, other than merely on academic similarities?

[TGirl-Kay 7484]

This is a sample of the letter that we have been sending out please feel free to use it as well. If your not sure where to send it PM me and I'll give you a ton of addresses for media and government.

 

November

 

 

 

 

Dear [RECIPIENT],

I?m writing regarding the recent decision by Ontario Superior Court Justice Susan Himel to strike down three of the four anti-sexwork laws (communication, living off the avails of, and the bawdy-house law) listed in the Criminal Code of Canada.

Specifically I?m writing to express my full and enthusiastic support of her decision.

By striking down the communications law, the avails-of law, and the bawdy-house law, Justice Himel has made it much, much safer for sex workers to work in their chosen professions.

Now street workers will be able to negotiate the terms of their contracts openly, and can work free of harassment by police and ?community associations?. Similarly sex workers of all types will no-longer be at risk of losing their homes due to eviction by landlords afraid of being, themselves, charged with operating a common bawdy house.

Additionally, and also through her decision to leave the procurement law intact, Justice Himel offers those coerced into sex work by pimps, traffickers, and other predators, legal recourse against those who are exploiting them without their risking being brought up on prostitution-related charges themselves.

Pierre Trudeau told us that the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation. I tell you that this is no different.

[RECIPIENT], it is time, beyond time, that we stop treating sex workers as non-citizens and non-people and grant them the rights they deserve as labourers and as human beings.

To that end, I strongly encourage you to speak out against the misinformation being spread on this subject and to give your support, through word and action, to Justice Himel?s historic decision.

Sincerely, and with great hope

[your name]

[your general location]

[any relevant information you wish to include]

[thompo69 198]

The ruling was done in Ontario. I'm not sure were these laws federal laws or Ontario laws? If they were merely Ontario laws, do they apply in the rest of the country, other than merely on academic similarities?

 

All criminal law if federal, but the ruling applies only in Ontario.

[Guest s******ecan****]

I believe that the strongest opponents of the sex industry are the religious right, who are opposed on ideological and "moral" grounds.

 

There is also widespread support on the left to outlaw prostitution which is also driven by a moral viewpoint. Many on the left view all prostitutes as exploited victims, and all johns as predators. They simply refuse to consider any scenario where a sex worker would chose to be in the industry voluntarily. Here the moral imperative does not have a religious basis so much as a sociological or one of "social justice".

 

In fact Sweden's new law reflects this viewpoint since it criminalizes the behaviour of the johns rather than that of the sex workers (victims). The Swedish models allow opponents of prostitution to play "bait and switch" by pretending to be advocates of social progress when in fact they are turning the clock back in a different way.

 

Even with a Conservative minority gov't, I think there is a good chance the end result of this will be a new law that effectively "prohibits" prostitution if the new law satisfies both the religious right and the leftist zealots. This could easily be achieved by adopting the "Swedish model". How many members of the NDP would vote against a law that prohibits "human trafficking" and promises to punish only "johns" and "pimps" while liberating women and children?

[Capital Hunter 18263]

Even with a Conservative minority gov't, I think there is a good chance the end result of this will be a new law that effectively "prohibits" prostitution if the new law satisfies both the religious right and the leftist zealots. This could easily be achieved by adopting the "Swedish model". How many members of the NDP would vote against a law that prohibits "human trafficking" and promises to punish only "johns" and "pimps" while liberating women and children?

 

Likely there will be conservative back benches too who will vote against this anti-democratic, distatorial model if ever introduced in the parliament. Hopefully not all tory MPs are ultra right religious zealots and against the principles of charter of rights and freedoms. I do agree some leftist zealots will also vote for that system and it may be enough for the law to pass which would make Canada a very backward country indeed. Best is to hope and vote for a liberal majority in the next general election.

 

If such a backward model ever pass by the parliament however, I believe that it will be challenged again and again by many citizens all the way to the supreme court of Canada. I do however acknowledge that I have been an optimist all my life lol.