Clients, what will you do if the Nordic model becomes law

[Guest Ou**or**n]

Before McKay introduced the new bill many were saying that it wouldn't happen. This was despite McKay being fairly upfront the government was leaning towards the Nordic model.

 

Now that the bill is introduced many are still in denial and don't want to give this issue much consideration as they believe it will get changed as goes through committee and the senate.

 

I think we need to be realistic and concede that core of the bill - the Nordic model which makes it a crime to purchase sexual services is pretty much certain to pass. Some parts may be tweaked such as a clearer definition of sexual services or more clarification on the advertising issues.

 

Thus I think its time many of clients reflect on our future in this business. I've read many of the comments in other threads and I see many people brushing off concerns - both providers and clients. However as a client, I work in a job where a police record will end my career. This is one of those situations where the chance of getting caught is likely low, but the consequences are high. Right now I'm leaning heavily towards quitting.

 

I view this to be the equivalent to how ladies approach certain sexual services - managing the risk on a personal level. To me the Nordic model is the equivalent of BBFS services. The actual risk may be low but the consequences simply nullify that as they are so high.

 

However I'm curious as to what others think.

 

If it becomes illegal to purchase sexual services, will you continue to do it?

[roamingguy 300291]

Well I wonder how many who are thinking of swearing off seeing companions in the future saw ladies from agencies or went to a lady's incall to see her (just as examples) which was illegal

Unless they are really serious (ie increased money/resources to LE) about enforcement I'm not going to worry

Maybe I'll celebrate the passing of the bill into law by discretely contacting a special lady and we can celebrate together ;-)

 

RG

[cinelli 22184]

Will definitely stick to a very very few ladies I trust.

[Ice4fun 78396]

As I said in other threads this law will hurt.. it will make me less willing to meet / contact new SP'S but i don't see it as the end. The risks for clients are going to increase so i think that will make life much harder on SP'S who may be pressured to do more for less with less than ideal clients because demand will decrease especially on the short term.

 

Those of us who stick it out will find ways to manage...just like they do in US.

 

Just my opinion

[mrgreen760 37785]

This could become a risk/reward kind of thing and I think unfortunately some of the 'better" clientele will scale back big time or disappear completely. It could end up simply being too much hassle and or too much risk for lots to make it worthwhile pursuing. I also think some quality SP's will ultimately disappear as well for the same reasons.

 

Peace

MG

[Guest N***he**Ont**y]

I have a small Circle of Trusted Providers that I will see even if I have to travel elsewhere . It maybe only a few times of year but i could handle that.

[Guest Ou**or**n]

The exact phrasing of the proposed bill is as follows:

 

(1) Everyone who, in any place, obtains for consideration, or communicates with anyone for the purpose of obtaining for consideration, the sexual services of a person is guilty of

 

 

The huge thing is that won't just be illegal to pay for sex. It will be illegal to communicate for the purpose of obtaining paid sex. You don't even have to have paid for sex to be guilty. A simple text inquiring about services or rates could land you as a convicted criminal.

 

To me (providing I'm understanding this correctly), this is huge. The cops don't have to bother busting the door down on a ladies hotel room or come by your house or hotel. Nope, all they need a record of any communication where you are 'communicating for the purpose of buying sex'.

 

So if the cops (or border police), inspect the cell phone or computer of a provider and find such communications they could arrest you and you will have a criminal record. If you think the odds of them inspecting a providers phone or computer are low then you need to read the other sections of the bill outlining the conditions with which they can seize such things - namely the prohibitions on advertising.

 

There is also the on-going mass surveillance of email, texts and so on.

 

It is this provision that is most making me thinking of quitting.

[Ice4fun 78396]

What your saying is correct... the adjustment will be that conversations will no longer be about sex...

[jafo105 39057]

I am going to try and connect with a lady in my neighborhood and see her once or twice a year. More often if finances permit.

 

I would see her with the intentions of just social dates and anything more would be between two consenting adults -- in the privacy of my home.

 

The challenge is finding a (non-smoking) lady in my neighborhood who is willing to see me.

 

Nudge... Nudge... Wink... Wink...

[Warped88 5815]

I'll be out of the game until things settle down and we all TRULY know how things are working.

 

However, if the law goes through as is-- and it behaves as the wording would have us believe-- then, I'll be out.

[Guest Ou**or**n]

What your saying is correct... the adjustment will be that conversations will no longer be about sex...

 

I know the first reaction is to switch to the US-style 'monetary compensate is for time and companionship only'. However we have no idea if this would hold under the Canadian legal system. There are many instances where laws 'see through' certain pretext explanations and win prosecutions.

 

The reality is we will have no idea how effective this will be at the outset. Over time there little doubt that overzealous police forces will charge guys and some of them will fight. Once the legal precedents begin being set then we'll have some guidance.

 

However I'm not sure I want to be a legal guinea pig, pay those legal expenses and potentially end up with a criminal record.

[roamingguy 300291]

The exact phrasing of the proposed bill is as follows:

 

 

There is also the on-going mass surveillance of email, texts and so on.

 

 

Not unless they plan to allocate more resources to the police, be it new hiring of officers, or money. They only plan to help ladies to the tune of twenty million dollars total!.....calculate that amount divided by the total number of major cities in Canada...it's pitiful but shows how much of a political priority this REALLY is.

Now you can enact all the laws you want, if LE isn't given a dime to enforce them, and they weren't, don't expect mass raids and arrests. They could have done raids and arrests under the current laws but didn't, did they. And just my opinion, but even if a law enforcement focus, it will be on street prostitution.

I don't have blinders on. But as pissed off as PM makes me, his comments in his speech were all about street prostitution. His actual monetary allocation in the bill, really pitiful if he truly cares, and none earmarked for enforcement and prosecution.

 

RG

[FunValerie 8573]

I am in the neighborhood and I would be happy to see you for social dates and whatever else might happen.

 

I am going to try and connect with a lady in my neighborhood and see her once or twice a year. More often if finances permit.

 

I would see her with the intentions of just social dates and anything more would be between two consenting adults -- in the privacy of my home.

 

The challenge is finding a (non-smoking) lady in my neighborhood who is willing to see me.

 

Nudge... Nudge... Wink... Wink...

[Guest a**4*]

For me it will be my regular lady until all this gets sorted out

[Guest Ou**or**n]

They could have done raids and arrests under the current laws but didn't, did they.

 

This is an excellent and valid point. The whole reason ladies very openly do incalls is that LE has become very predictable in not enforcing this law. In fact LE have openly supported and protected women running incalls mostly because it offered them safety.

 

I don't see them having the same motivation to not enforce these new laws though. We clients are now 'pervs' and not potential victims of violence. There is a very different and new dynamic at play.

 

However at heart I don't trust LE as politics and quotas come into play. Until there is a very well established pattern of these laws also not being enforced then I'll likely be sitting things out.

[roamingguy 300291]

This is an excellent and valid point. The whole reason ladies very openly do incalls is that LE has become very predictable in not enforcing this law. In fact LE have openly supported and protected women running incalls mostly because it offered them safety.

 

I don't see them having the same motivation to not enforce these new laws though. We clients are now 'pervs' and not potential victims of violence. There is a very different and new dynamic at play.

 

However at heart I don't trust LE as politics and quotas come into play. Until there is a very well established pattern of these laws also not being enforced then I'll likely be sitting things out.

 

Us clients are pervs to Peter MacKay and the Conservatives (actually kinda rich considering they brought us Senators who screwed us taxpayers out of our hard earned money)...his bandwagon isn't the same as police and Crown Attorney's bandwagon The new dynamic at play was the Conservative's response to the SCC decision. I didn't see standing at that press conference police officers and Crown Attorney's singing the praises of Peter MacKay and the new bill

Everyone is going to do what is comfortable for them...I'm just not going to get too worried

RG

[loopie 15358]

I will definitely leave this hobby if this law passes.

[Studio 110 by Sophia 150333]

The exact phrasing of the proposed bill is as follows:

 

(1) Everyone who, in any place, obtains for consideration, or communicates with anyone for the purpose of obtaining for consideration, the sexual services of a person is guilty of

 

 

The huge thing is that won't just be illegal to pay for sex. It will be illegal to communicate for the purpose of obtaining paid sex. You don't even have to have paid for sex to be guilty. A simple text inquiring about services or rates could land you as a convicted criminal.

 

To me (providing I'm understanding this correctly), this is huge. The cops don't have to bother busting the door down on a ladies hotel room or come by your house or hotel. Nope, all they need a record of any communication where you are 'communicating for the purpose of buying sex'.

 

So if the cops (or border police), inspect the cell phone or computer of a provider and find such communications they could arrest you and you will have a criminal record. If you think the odds of them inspecting a providers phone or computer are low then you need to read the other sections of the bill outlining the conditions with which they can seize such things - namely the prohibitions on advertising.

 

There is also the on-going mass surveillance of email, texts and so on.

 

It is this provision that is most making me thinking of quitting.

 

You are correct, however if you noticed in my other posts on the subject,

IF YOU DO NOT ENQUIRE ABOUT SEXUAL ACTIVITES, THEN CHARGES CAN NOT STICK. This is the main point in all my post so far.

 

Ladies: Even though we CAN advertise as INDY, if your ad is " sexual services" then in a way you are incriminating your client who merely responded to your ad. If your ad was for TIME AND COMPAIONSHIP/REALAXATION, well then any LE that could moderate either email, txt, conversations, then they still will have no clear charge to lay.

 

Gent: Do not ask what the rate for GFE or BBBJ etc, as this also shows intent for purchase "sexual services" You simply ask what the donation for her time or relaxation massage. You now will book blindly not knowing ALL the activities on your first date.

 

As others mentioned, we all did in call even though was illegal but not enforced.

At least now it is legal to work in call, lol...just come over for tea and cookies...lol...

[tomfool 220]

It has been , as far as I understand, legal in Canada to see a lady in ones hotel room. This is explicitly no so with the new law. Many stuck mostly to this activity in in the past.

 

It is going to be not worth the risk for many travelling businessmen to take the risk , no matter how much care is taken with carefully worded ads etc.

 

Each potential client will have their own tolerance of risk. The threat of a criminal record and jail time is very serious. Too high for many.

[jafo105 39057]

I have always start off with tea and cookies for outcalls like Suite Escapes suggests. The donation envelope is always on the hall table by the front door. So there is no visible transaction. We socialise over tea/coffee and a lite snack. Some casual conversation and never about sex. Although there can be some lite flirting... Who knows what that will lead to... ;)

[loneskater 25635]

So what! I have been in this business for 33 years and seen ladies in many different countries all with different laws, and it never stopped me. There is nothing wrong with seeking the company of a woman. Now if we happen to get naked in private, oh well things happen! Its as much legal to give cash to a lady that you spend time with so she can buy herself a gift, as it is to taking her out to a fancy restaurant and paying for the food and drinks.

[peacectryguy 12523]

Well, the criminal record part doesn't worry me too much. But that's just me. I think the big thing here is what some have already mentioned. The enforcement of the law. The government will toss a little money at it and in the short term, police will step up the presence on the street side and at questionable agencies where under age girls could be involved. The "Johns" will get busted and the Tories and religious right wing will be singing the praises and twisting their arms patting themselves on the back.

 

Over some time, however, the resources won't be there for L.E. and prostitution in this country will be like everywhere else in the world. Supposedly illegal to buy sex but most cops just looking the other way other than in circumstances where it is blatantly being exposed to the general public. All these "morality" laws are just made to appease the do-gooders who don't want to see it. Honestly, I truly believe if you were to sit down privately with most cops, they probably aren't too much in favor of this legislation. It just creates extra work on an already heavy workload. That's just the way I see this going. Sex has been "for sale" since the dawn of human history. I doubt this will have a great impact in the long term. I also doubt the cops will be targetting touring or discreet SP's and their clients as much as the guys picking girls up off the street corner.

Having said that, any decision I make about continuing this hobby or not will be based on many other factors, not this one.

[conquistador 18487]

It's all relative I think, some guys on here won't care and kudos to you, and I'll enjoy reading your recos but for some it's a big issue. I think for myself that I would have to think long and hard about continuing. I do have lots that I want to do in life and I would hate to have to jeopardize my future with getting caught. I would have to see how things play out. But if caught by the police it will be much easier for them to charge you with a crime and maybe end up on the sex offender's registry (possibly)... Something I would never want!

 

Yes I think the cops will have bigger issues than catching "pervs" but to not think they will set up stings or entrapment of people, is living in a bubble. The police will have the ability to do what they want and the power... Thanks to this bill.

 

To those that will continue in this lifestyle, you got big balls ;) Lol. And wish you luck. But some of us will be looking from the sidelines when this comes out.

 

But for now enjoy! As I hope to until things change.

[cinelli 22184]

If you think the odds of them inspecting a providers phone or computer are low

 

Police requests to telecom companies for information about customers is in the HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS per year.

 

Seriously.

 

McKay makes it sound like they are only going after a few "perverts" but in actual practice they are routinely fishing in people's email accounts and text message records, thousands of people a day.

[fortunateone 156618]

This is an excellent and valid point. The whole reason ladies very openly do incalls is that LE has become very predictable in not enforcing this law. In fact LE have openly supported and protected women running incalls mostly because it offered them safety.

 

I don't see them having the same motivation to not enforce these new laws though. We clients are now 'pervs' and not potential victims of violence. There is a very different and new dynamic at play.

 

However at heart I don't trust LE as politics and quotas come into play. Until there is a very well established pattern of these laws also not being enforced then I'll likely be sitting things out.

 

but LE doesn't see the clients and sps as any different. A new bill isn't going to have them seeing you as any more or less the perv they currently view clients. And I agree, enforcement is most likely to go the same way that incall laws are currently enforced, as in not at all, for indoor workers. It seems that the indy incall worker is at the same place with the proposed laws as they were with the overturned ones. The ones that concern me are the street workers, and now we all need to be more concerned about what is to happen to massage parlour and agency employees.

 

While they will probably have to do enforcement in order to make it look like they are actively pursuing the pervs, the bulk of that will always be with the street workers. It's just too easy to get the numbers within a few hours or over a couple of days, and low cost as well. They charge 25 guys in a few hours, and stats start to look really good. Like all stats about 'all' sex workers, there isn't going to be any differentiation between outdoor and indoor, so the stats will still appear to be affecting both :)

 

I can't stress this enough tho, if the bill as unlikely as it is now were to pass, stop doing everything in emails or texts. Does LE want to see what 'communicating' is all about? They will simply read your texts. If you have a conversation, it is unlikely they can get the OK for wire tapping any sp's phone, and they aren't going to do yours, so no record.

 

That's worst case scenario of course. Opposition parties are already calling on the govt to send this bill to the SCC right now. There are so many holes in it, very few are going to let it pass in the form it is right now. The govt already knows this. This bill is considered a nose thumbing at the SCC for overturning the prior laws against the wishes of the govt, even the the govt failed to defend their position in court to prove they were valid.

 

I mean, how do you go from the SCC saying that public communication (solicitation) is dangerous for street workers, to creating a bill that plans to make all communication in all locations criminal?