Brothels now legal in Canada

[warpus]

Oh in case it wasn't clear, I favour the change in the law.

Yeah, I know, I was just tagging on to your comment.

This is wrong.

We make things illegal because they are wrong, not because it's easy to enforce the laws.

And since the only things wrong with prostitution are exploitation and the potential for sexual disease transfer, and this law should help fight those 2 things - This was the right thing to do.

Laws aren't written for things that are "wrong". They are written to prevent people from doing things that hurt others. Morality doesn't come into it.

 

[Crezth]

That seems to me a difference of degree, not of kind. Sex workers are not the only women to face denigration in work, nor is their denigration purely gendered. I don't disagree that these issues are significantly more pronounced in sex work than in most other forms of employment, and so demand special attention, but to proclaim that it needs to be uniquely met with the full force of state repression is a leap of logic that nobody has yet take the time to support.

I think that the issue requires special attention, as you acknowledge, is in and of itself the crux of Defiant's point. He is simply uniquely frustrated in what he must regard as a flippancy over so crucial an issue, hence his position.

The current problem with sex work, the "prostitution industry," if you will, is not that it is sex work as such, but that the way the industry works, and how those careers manifest themselves in all practicality, are often destructive of women. The issues are myriad: you have businessmen murdering prostitutes, pimps slappin' ho's, STDs running rampant, and the fact that being a prostitute in general is not a safe occupation unless you have a pimp, who himself is a male and by inference in a position of authority over you. But on top of all of this, and the reason Defiant is upset, is the fact that many women go into this admittedly dangerous industry not necessarily out of their free will, but because they have no other options. They make 70 cents to the man's dollar in virtually all other lines of work, get stuck with children on a semiregular basis, are treated unequally by health insurance companies and the law - you see where I'm going with this, I don't need to belabor the point. The system, in all its capitalism and misogyny, has forced these women into this line of work which is dangerous and uniquely dangerous for women. It is an exacerbation of the unequal treatment women are already forced to suffer. If the system did not exist in its current sense, or perhaps existed in some unimaginably different sense, there'd be no issue. But, it does. Hence the opposition.

 

[say1988]

those careers manifest themselves in all practicality, are often destructive of women. The issues are myriad: you have businessmen murdering prostitutes, pimps slappin' ho's, STDs running rampant, and the fact that being a prostitute in general is not a safe occupation unless you have a pimp, who himself is a male and by inference in a position of authority over you

All of which are lessened by this ruling. Operating indoors and legally hiring protection and allowing for regulation and the ability to get help without fearing prosecution will unquestionably aid a large number of women in those positions. That is why his position doesn't make sense because it is "we should protect women forced into this situation by not allowing them to have any protections if they are in this situation."

 

[Crezth]

All of which are lessened by this ruling. Operating indoors and legally hiring protection and allowing for regulation and the ability to get help without fearing prosecution will unquestionably aid a large number of women in those positions. That is why his position doesn't make sense because it is "we should protect women forced into this situation by not allowing them to have any protections if they are in this situation."

Well it's not like a snap of the fingers will make all that mess get away. You will still have that stuff I mentioned, plus the brothels with all its very fine legality.

It's a step in the right direction, to be sure, and I agree with you - hell, I don't think illegalizing prostitution is any sort of solution at all - but the problem isn't something you can delete with a flick of The Legislation Swtich.

 

[RobAnybody]

All of which are lessened by this ruling. Operating indoors and legally hiring protection and allowing for regulation and the ability to get help without fearing prosecution will unquestionably aid a large number of women in those positions. That is why his position doesn't make sense because it is "we should protect women forced into this situation by not allowing them to have any protections if they are in this situation."

Agreed. A lot of those problems exist because the prostitute can't exactly go to the police for fear of being arrested themselves. Also, they can't (or couldn't) hire bodyguards because it was illegal to "profit from prostitution", as in take money generated by prostitution, so the bodyguard was subject to being arrested as well, particularly if he actually had to do his job. While we all know pimpin' ain't easy today, if the prostitute can hire her own bodyguard, then pimping will become even more difficult.

 

[say1988]

Well it's not like a snap of the fingers will make all that mess get away. You will still have that stuff I mentioned, plus the brothels with all its very fine legality.

It's a step in the right direction, to be sure, and I agree with you - hell, I don't think illegalizing prostitution is any sort of solution at all - but the problem isn't something you can delete with a flick of The Legislation Swtich.

Make no mistake. I do not believe that this is going to solve any problems, It is just a step that generates benefits with little or no cost.
This isn't about legislating the problem away, it is about removing the legislation that makes it worse.

 

[Crezth]

But that still does not impact the problem of women forced into the discipline, for whom these laws matter very little - for example - if they don't join a brothel. They could hire a personal bodyguard I guess, but that's not a very realistic scenario especially since in many cases the person in question only needs to pull a trick or two and a bodyguard would cut into that.

As Defiant said, the essential nature of this problem permeates the very soul of the system, and reforming prostitution will no doubt help those for whom it is a career, but it will not ameliorate the situation of the woman who turns to prostitution out of desperation.

 

[Disgustipated]

This thread is hilarious. I love how liberal men dictate what women should do with their bodies. And I thought conservatives were bad. I suggest you all talk to legal prostitutes, and not just assume their job is crappy. I know some men have trouble realizing this, but women enjoy sex too. And getting paid to do something you enjoy is a pretty sweet deal. Legalized prostitution (in brothels with security and condom usage) is safe, and fun for the women. The job is 100 times easier than working as a convenience store clerk or something along those lines.

I'd like you to read some of the responses of prostitutes in my state when Harry Reid suggested last year we should make prostitution illegal in my state. His main issue is it makes our state look bad (and most likely hurts his chances of running for president).

 

[say1988]

The inability to protect everyone does not justify punishing everyone. Those that are forced into it will be forced into it whether legal or illegal. This will make it easier for them to gain some minimal protections and a chance to claw their way out without getting punished with a criminal record, it won't work for everyone, but if we help some while not harming others we are stupid (and simply wrong) not to.

 

[Formaldehyde]

This thread is hilarious. I love how liberal men dictate what women should do with their bodies. And I thought conservatives were bad. I suggest you all talk to legal prostitutes, and not just assume their job is crappy. I know some men have trouble realizing this, but women enjoy sex too. And getting paid to do something you enjoy is a pretty sweet deal. Legalized prostitution (in brothels with security and condom usage) is safe, and fun for the women. The job is 100 times easier than working as a convenience store clerk or something along those lines.

I'd like you to read some of the responses of prostitutes in my state when Harry Reid suggested last year we should make prostitution illegal in my state. His main issue is it makes our state look bad (and most likely hurts his chances of running for president).

Defiant and random are now "liberals"? Contre is as well? Ayn Rand?!? And that was just from the first page...

 

[Disgustipated]

Funny thing is I used to consider myself liberal on social issues until this thread. I certainly am not conservative on social issues- they are against prostitution as well. I don't know what I am now.

 

[Crezth]

^^^ Maybe don't identify yourself with meaningless labels.

The inability to protect everyone does not justify punishing everyone. Those that are forced into it will be forced into it whether legal or illegal. This will make it easier for them to gain some minimal protections and a chance to claw their way out without getting punished with a criminal record, it won't work for everyone, but if we help some while not harming others we are stupid (and simply wrong) not to.

Hahaha, we keep getting mixed up.

I agree, I think this (potential) law is a step in the right direction, and I do not support the criminalization of prostitution, I don't see that doing anything. I'm just following Defiant's line of digression to its logical conclusion: the fundamental problems with prostitution are a function of the society it is a part of, the system it exists in, are as inexorable as homelessness and wage slavery. No, problems such as these cannot be removed, save by elimination of wage-based labor altogether, but they exist. And legalizing prostitution treats the symptoms - those of abuse and violence - but not the disease - that of women being forced to sell intercourse with no recourse.

 

[Disgustipated]

And if the main reason is there are no better jobs for women, shouldn't the logical thing to do be to not criminalize prostitution, but provide training and jobs for women coming out of high school? Give them a choice of a job that can sustain them financially.

 

[say1988]

^^^ Maybe don't identify yourself with meaningless labels.



Hahaha, we keep getting mixed up.

I agree, I think this (potential) law is a step in the right direction, and I do not support the criminalization of prostitution, I don't see that doing anything. I'm just following Defiant's line of digression to its logical conclusion: the fundamental problems with prostitution are a function of the society it is a part of, the system it exists in, are as inexorable as homelessness and wage slavery. No, problems such as these cannot be removed, save by elimination of wage-based labor altogether, but they exist. And legalizing prostitution treats the symptoms - those of abuse and violence - but not the disease - that of women being forced to sell intercourse with no recourse.

But the idea of refusing to treat the symptoms is ridiculous. Period. That is no reason to object to this ruling.

 

[Crezth]

And if the main reason is there are no better jobs for women, shouldn't the logical thing to do be to not criminalize prostitution, but provide training and jobs for women coming out of high school? Give them a choice of a job that can sustain them financially.

Well, yeah. There's not a lot of interest to get that done, though. See prevailing sexism and the interesting myth that there is no more political, social, economic disenfranchisement of women anymore.

But the idea of refusing to treat the symptoms is ridiculous. Period. That is no reason to object to this ruling.

I know. I'm not saying there is. Treating symptoms is often very valuable, but the grounds upon which Defiant objects to the situation of prostitution remain unmoved by this ruling. They are two completely separate things.

 

[Glassfan]

Oh, Canada...



Never mind the Ho's, check this Canadian out!!!!!!

 

[JollyRoger]

This thread is hilarious. I love how liberal men dictate what women should do with their bodies.

Glad I'm not a liberal.

 

[Narz]

I know some men have trouble realizing this, but women enjoy sex too. And getting paid to do something you enjoy is a pretty sweet deal.

I have no trouble realizing it, I am reminded by a woman every time I have sex.

That said, I imagine prostitutes generally don't enjoy having sex with johns any more than you'd enjoy having sex with 50-year old obese smelly women just because it happens to be sex.

That said, maybe they do develop some affection for repeat clients who aren't overly offensives, who knows.

Regardless they should have the right to do it & the right to be safe (legal) doing it.

As with drugs (and alcohol) making it illegal only increases the harm & danger to all involved.

 

[kochman]

I have no trouble realizing it, I am reminded by a woman every time I have sex.

That said, I imagine prostitutes generally don't enjoy having sex with johns any more than you'd enjoy having sex with 50-year old obese smelly women just because it happens to be sex.

That said, maybe they do develop some affection for repeat clients who aren't overly offensives, who knows.

Regardless they should have the right to do it & the right to be safe (legal) doing it.

As with drugs (and alcohol) making it illegal only increases the harm & danger to all involved.

Or abortion...

It's going to happen, whatever people try to legislate... paid sex will happen. If it happens in an organized and safe fashion, this is better...

We don't want back alley abortions... we don't want street walkers...

 

[GhostWriter16]

Defiant and random are now "liberals"? Contre is as well? Ayn Rand?!? And that was just from the first page...

Other than Ayn Rand, I'm pretty sure all of them would qualify as social liberals (Though Defiant frequently plays Devil's Advocate, so we cant really know for sure

Or abortion...

It's going to happen, whatever people try to legislate... paid sex will happen. If it happens in an organized and safe fashion, this is better...

We don't want back alley abortions... we don't want street walkers...

Why on Earth throw abortion into it? The debate on abortion is very different than any of these other issues, since the argument is not "Even if it does not have a direct effect on someone else, its immoral and should be banned" the argument against abortion is "The thing you are destroying is a human life."