fortunateone 156618 Report post Posted July 16, 2014 I've been talking to a friend who is a legal scholar about this bill. She thinks that the supreme court will also shut this one down as unconstitutional. Controversial, I know, but she seems to have good justifications. Your friend agrees with the over 200 legal experts who sent a letter to the MPs and Justice Committe, and who were not on the list of presenters at the recent justice committee hearings. Along with a family member of a Picton victim, who is against C36 was not invited to speak, but someone else who is pro C36 was invited to share the story. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drlove 37202 Report post Posted July 17, 2014 The war is only just beginning.... the Bedford case was the first battle this bill and it's pathway back to the courts several years from now will be the second... this is a cultural change similar to the civil rights movement... it will take years but the die is cast... the outcome certain... all we need now is SP'S and Clients willing to stay the course and fight the battles. Just my opinion Will this new challenge at least take less time than the first one? I'm not cherishing the idea of having to give up the hobby for an extended period...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest S****r Report post Posted July 17, 2014 If you stick with reputable, known providers, you shouldn't have to give up the hobby at all. Probably best not to try anyone new on the scene, though, once it goes through. Will this new challenge at least take less time than the first one? I'm not cherishing the idea of having to give up the hobby for an extended period...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Erica Obsession 2076 Report post Posted July 17, 2014 This is an interesting article regarding dignity and human rights in Bill C-36: http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/views-expressed/2014/07/does-bill-c-36-really-bestow-dignity-and-human-rights-upon-an 6 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gabriella Laurence 301887 Report post Posted July 22, 2014 . "The Lancet is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is one of the world's oldest and best known general medical journals,[1] and has been described as one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world..." http://www.thelancet.com/series/HIV-and-sex-workers Executive summary: With heightened risks of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, sex workers face substantial barriers in accessing prevention, treatment, and care services, largely because of stigma, discrimination, and criminalisation in the societies in which they live. These social, legal, and economic injustices contribute to their high risk of acquiring HIV. Often driven underground by fear, sex workers encounter or face the direct risk of violence and abuse daily. Sex workers remain underserved by the global HIV response. This Series of seven papers aims to investigate the complex issues faced by sex workers worldwide, and calls for the decriminilisation of sex work, in the global effort to tackle the HIV/AIDS epidemic. HIV and sex workers Published July 22, 2014 Bringing sex workers to the centre of the HIV response Pamela Das, Richard Horton Full Text | PDF Dispelling myths about sex workers and HIV Steffanie A Strathdee and others Full Text | PDF Trafficking, sex work, and HIV: efforts to resolve conflicts Richard Steen, Smarajit Jana, Sushena Reza-Paul, Marlise Richter Full Text | PDF Responses to HIV in sexually exploited children or adolescents who sell sex Craig McClure, Caitlin Chandler, Susan Bissell Full Text | PDF Why are sex workers who use substances at risk for HIV? Maia Rusakova, Aliya Rakhmetova, Steffanie A Strathdee Full Text | PDF Register for free to view the full articles, it takes 2 seconds! 6 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cinelli 22184 Report post Posted July 22, 2014 I heard that discussed on CBC so I looked it up. As Ms Laurence points out, there are several other papers supporting the findings of the Lancet article. Coles Notes version: prostitution may be disagreeable but decriminalising and managing the risk reduces overall harm to society. The Tories cannot grasp this. Like they cannot grasp the idea of "Harm Reduction" in the case of the safe injection site they tried to shut down. Managing through decriminalising reduces the cost to our legal system, the cost to our healthcare system, and the cost to our social services. It also reduces the dangers and violence against the women who work as prostitutes. So it should be a logical decision to opt for decriminalising. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drlove 37202 Report post Posted July 23, 2014 I heard that discussed on CBC so I looked it up. As Ms Laurence points out, there are several other papers supporting the findings of the Lancet article. Coles Notes version: prostitution may be disagreeable but decriminalising and managing the risk reduces overall harm to society. The Tories cannot grasp this. Like they cannot grasp the idea of "Harm Reduction" in the case of the safe injection site they tried to shut down. Managing through decriminalising reduces the cost to our legal system, the cost to our healthcare system, and the cost to our social services. It also reduces the dangers and violence against the women who work as prostitutes. So it should be a logical decision to opt for decriminalising. One thing I will say about all of this, is that it has brought to light how flawed our justice system is. In other words, if the SCC renders a decision, then forthcoming laws by government should be made to follow that ruling - not disregarded only to have similarly bad laws enacted so that we are forced to endure the same harms all over again. There should be some clause that lets the SCC intervene in a situation such as this, instead of going through another court challenge to have them (eventually) struck down (again). Additional Comments: ... I am sincerely saddened by the performance that I witnessed last week and the fact that science and expert testimony were ignored while anecdotes and art projects were accepted without question. Let's not forget we're talking about the Harper Conservatives here... they probably still believe the earth is flat too... 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canuckhooker 19202 Report post Posted July 23, 2014 Seriously? Understand how our government works. The SCC is the body that decides if any particular is constitutional. They can only do that after a law is passed, unless the government decides to pass a bill to them for a ruling before tabling it in the house. Simple. In this case the government, ( and yes despite how much you may hate them, they are the government) has proposed new laws, that they say, address the issues raised by the SCC ruling. We are all speculating on whether the SCC will have issues with the new laws currently being discussed, nobody knows how they may react. The one thing that is clear is that the Bedford decision said the government can decide on how they want to view prostitution. So they could make it wide open and go for local regulation, or the could outlaw the whole businesss (sale and purchase) or they could go for the hybrid, which is what they chose. Their approach IMHO is flawed only because they only outlawed one side of the transaction. They didn't have the will to outlaw totally. If they outlawed, sale and purchase then there would be nothing to appeal. The whole Bedford decision was based on people engaged in legal acts being put in a bad spot by inconsistent laws. If the whole thing is illegal, then all those arguments are moot. We don't have to ensure a safe work place for criminals. As was said earlier during the whole Bedford process, be careful what you wish for, you may not like the result. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LadyMichelle 730 Report post Posted July 23, 2014 Really sad that it has come to this... 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roamingguy 300291 Report post Posted July 23, 2014 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fortunateone 156618 Report post Posted July 24, 2014 I think this is appropriate here. I think that some people seem to have fingers in ears lalalaing away, while attacking the comments of some of us who've been dealing with this stuff for a while. Maybe they can stop attacking the people who have legitimate concerns and direct that venom to people like this random stuff https://twitter.com/BridgetST101 https://twitter.com/GIDWatch/status/492024537157230592 https://twitter.com/Im2old4thisship/status/488488039799193600 classic trying to justify saving sps, then turns into an outright obscenity attack lol 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheRiddlerMan 872 Report post Posted July 24, 2014 I think at this point we're beyond opinions pro or con, and are simply going to have to deal with the facts. The law is going to pass. It may have some minor amendments and tinkering around the advertising restrictions, but the bulk will be going into effect no later than the fall. Is it unconstitutional? Quite possibly, but that does nothing for today, tomorrow or next year. It'll still be working through the courts when we go to the polls in 2015, and probably years past that point. In the meantime, we will all have to adjust to this new situation and what impacts it will have on real world scenarios. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drlove 37202 Report post Posted July 24, 2014 I think at this point we're beyond opinions pro or con, and are simply going to have to deal with the facts. The law is going to pass. It may have some minor amendments and tinkering around the advertising restrictions, but the bulk will be going into effect no later than the fall. Is it unconstitutional? Quite possibly, but that does nothing for today, tomorrow or next year. It'll still be working through the courts when we go to the polls in 2015, and probably years past that point. In the meantime, we will all have to adjust to this new situation and what impacts it will have on real world scenarios. Sad, but true... :( Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canuckhooker 19202 Report post Posted July 24, 2014 I think this is appropriate here. I think that some people seem to have fingers in ears lalalaing away, while attacking the comments of some of us who've been dealing with this stuff for a while. Maybe they can stop attacking the people who have legitimate concerns and direct that venom to people like this random stuff https://twitter.com/BridgetST101 https://twitter.com/GIDWatch/status/492024537157230592 https://twitter.com/Im2old4thisship/status/488488039799193600 classic trying to justify saving sps, then turns into an outright obscenity attack lol The point is not that people are lala-ing away, but that comments are being made that do not reflect the reality of how our system works. The government can pass any law it wants. The courts decide if it violates the charter. So this C-36 can be passed, and it can be challenged in the courts. But that will take time. So prepare to "live in interesting times". But what has really been forgotten in this whole debate is that wonderful gift that Pierre Trudeau left us with, Section 33 of the Charter, "the notwithstanding clause". (sarcasm is intended about Trudeau's gift) If the government wants it can over-rule the SCC on any ruling including section 7 which was the basis for the Bedford decision. They can ignore any SCC ruling for a period of 5 years, and that can be extended indefinitely. So even if the Supreme Court rules, parliament can say, "Too bad, so sad, this law is for the public good." That is the reality. That is how our government works. There is a big difference between attacking someone's comments and opinions and pointing out that they don't have a clear understanding of the subject on which they are commenting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lexy Grace 103696 Report post Posted August 13, 2014 (edited) So the bill has passed second reading with minor amendment to the section about solicitation--they changed it from illegal "anywhere a minor could reasonably expected to be present" to illegal "outside schools, parks or daycares." Goes to the Senate next. When is the day the bullshit bill goes to Senate and then after Senate is that it? I've looked everywhere and admit I was getting quite frustrated and upset re-reading everything so I will just ask. Hobbyists of all genders: Start your lists of all the Companions you have seen and would like to see. Obviously the established, reputable and trusted companions are not LE. Keep as much info as you can gather, Names, Phone numbers, Emails, Websites and a Notes Section/Column (read their reco thread or had good discussions etc.). Put it in an Excel Spread sheet and email it to your hobby email or put it on a USB and in a safe spot. It's always good to have a Plan B if this bullshit bill passes!! No hobbyist needs to stop hobbying, just do your research and don't wait until the last minute/night before. All My Love, Support, Hugs and Kisses, Lexy Edited August 13, 2014 by Lexy Grace 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Studio 110 by Sophia 150333 Report post Posted August 13, 2014 Thanks for the reminder Lexy, us ladies will need to support each other as industry references no more then ever. Also, Hobbyist, you will need to learn NOT to ask about service details!!! No more chats and abbreviations. You are booking for time spent only. I have explained this to many of my loves, but even after explaining it, I am still being asked for details, it is frustrating that they wont use their imaginations. Like if we say " hour of our time is XX" then I get a responds that says " so what we sit around for an hour?" LIKE really?? How else can I say it while remaining legal and not incriminating you? I suppose these men will figure it out soon enough after asking me 10 times, what do we do for an hour?? LOL 6 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waterat 20911 Report post Posted August 13, 2014 Also, Hobbyist, you will need to learn NOT to ask about service details!!! ... ....I suppose these men will figure it out soon enough after asking me 10 times, what do we do for an hour?? LOL Aaah, men - we can often be quite slow and insecure! Fortunately we are very often horny, sometimes even suddenly - "on the sperm of the moment" as my brother used to say! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lexy Grace 103696 Report post Posted August 13, 2014 This link has some great/lots of information on how the whole system works after it goes to Senate and is passed or not and so much more. https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B3mqMOhRg5FeWEZ4VTFRb3R0V2M&usp=sharing&tid=0B3mqMOhRg5FeNlY4ZkxFb2pLaWM I still have yet to find out when the bullshit bill goes to Senate, anyone know the date? As individual companions we are from what I'm reading from the bullshit bill it will be legal to sell our sexual services, I'm sure we will need to change the language but it is the "client" who it will be illegal for them to communicate for said sexual services. It's just so F*cking STUPID!! All My Love, Support, Hugs and Kisses, Lexy 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LadyMichelle 730 Report post Posted August 13, 2014 Really scary what this could mean smh... But escorting is still not illegal? This make no sense... How r clients suppose to fine Sp? Push it underground only makes it more dangerous. Really sad... 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Escapefromstress 2976 Report post Posted August 13, 2014 I still have yet to find out when the bullshit bill goes to Senate, anyone know the date? All My Love, Support, Hugs and Kisses, Lexy Committee meetings are set to resume on September 9th. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jasmine Rain 23126 Report post Posted August 16, 2014 Really scary what this could mean smh... But escorting is still not illegal? This make no sense... How r clients suppose to fine Sp? Push it underground only makes it more dangerous. Really sad... I find it extremely sad as well. I am starting out in this industry fully aware of what I am choosing to do. I am actually choosing this lifestyle of paid companionship because I enjoy sex immensely and wish to continue to have it without being in the confines of a "typical" relationship. I am not interested in a single partner, and I enjoy variety as well as many men I know. While I can go to a bar on the weekends to look for a DTF hook up, I would rather spend a little time getting to know my lovers in a safe way. In a way that allows me to exchange ideas, information details and place a boundary on the distance the companionship will go in the future. Since a monetary amount is exchanged, in my opinion, a boundary is placed on the emotional components that often arise in on going sexual based relationship. This is what I want to do. This is 100% my choice. I have done the research, I know the pros and cons, I am ready and willing. However, that is now all at risk thanks to Peter McKay and the Conservative party. I find it very sad that someone with an opinion (not fact) and in a political position of temporary power (since parties change power all the time) can suppress my sexual freedoms and desires for companionship that work for me and that I am happy with in my life. I find it sad that someone I don't know, did not vote for, and truly wish to never meet, entertain or interact with, gets to set laws prohibiting who can enjoy my body, my fantasies and my sexual needs simply based on whether I get a monetary donation or not. 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nicolette Vaughn 294340 Report post Posted August 17, 2014 Prostitution is the world's oldest profession. It is NEVER going away! Are you listening Peter Mackass Uh... I meant Mackay?? Even the Cons need a hot woman every now and then to release them of their uppity, uptight moral values. 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrgreen760 37785 Report post Posted September 1, 2014 Looks like a bit of a stacked deck........... Peace MG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest S****r Report post Posted September 2, 2014 Looks like a bit of a stacked deck........... Peace MG My exact thought. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
conquistador 18487 Report post Posted September 2, 2014 What's with the evangelicals being there.... Teaching us about morals....please. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
