Brothels now legal in Canada

I'm sure the Australian Institute of Criminology and the Scarlet Alliance have some publications since they both advocate decriminalisation. Have a google, I'll do some research myself later.

Bear in mind though Australia has different laws by state, generally shading from legal to legal and regulated.

Edit: You might start with the Scarlet Alliance's statement of principles Possibly one of the most salient points is "Treating sex workers as potential criminals rather than workers denies sex workers access to workplace benefits such as sick leave, holiday pay, workers compensation and superannuation entitlements"

Also, on the topic of brothels: after 1992 when Queensland restricted sex work to privately operating from one's own-premises:

"A direct consequence of forcing Queensland sex workers to operate in one sector of the sex industry has been a significant rise in violence and other crimes against sex workers (SQWISI, 1996a & b). In fact, six sex workers have died as a direct consequence of Queensland laws. In addition, there was a substantial increase in street work and whilst the number of brothels was reduced they did not disappear altogether.

Generally, sex workers who have chosen private work as their preferred work option have been workers who have had experience in other sectors of the industry (e.g. brothel, escort) and have therefore acquired the skills to “go out on their own”. In a sense they have been through an apprenticeship in more supportive sectors of the industry. Without the choice or ability to do this, sex workers are left isolated and vulnerable to those who seek to cause them harm."


And:

Where legislation is deemed necessary it must recognise and incorporate all sectors of the sex industry with the primary aim of supporting occupational improvements in all sectors of the sex industry. Legalisation introduced to tightly regulate or control the sex industry is not necessary and will only act against occupational health and safety outcomes. Further, it has failed in every state where control/licensing models have been introduced. For example, in Victoria a legal brothel industry operates alongside an illegal industry. Street work remains highly criminalised yet this has failed to halt street work, even though violence against Victorian street workers is apparently increasing (Pyett & Warr, 1996). Alternatively, in New South Wales where street work has been decriminalised violence against street workers remains significantly lower.

and:

Currently, in South Australia police routinely confiscate condoms and safe sex literature produced by SASIN (the sex worker
organisation in South Australia) to use as evidence of prostitution taking place in court proceedings.


(South Australia has since liberalised somewhat)
 
I'm really interested in the bolded as I don't see that as being self-evident, perhaps you could cite examples?
I meant to say "prostitutes" instead of "women", but I think the general case may very well still apply. I certainly can't prove it, however, other than to point out some per capita rape statistics:

Sweden (illegal) 53.2
New Zealand (illegal) 30.9
US (illegal) 28.6
Belgium (sort of legal/illegal - edited) 26.3
UK (sort of illegal) 24.3
Israel (illegal) 17.6
France (sort of illegal) 16.6
Germany (legal) 8.9
Switzerland (legal) 8.1
Denmark (sort of legal) 7.3
Spain (sort of legal) 5.5
Greece (legal) 2.0

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_by_country
 
Rape stats are actually terrible due to under-reporting. Sweden having a high rate of per capita rape likely indicates trust in the police and judicial system rather than more incidents of actual sexual assault.

There's also a broader comparability issue:

This list indicates the number of, and per capita cases of recorded rape. It does not include cases of rape which go unreported, or which are not recorded. Nor does it specify whether recorded means reported, brought to trial, or convicted. Nor does it take the different definition of rape around the world into account.
 
Here we go, the documented risks from criminalisation from the Scarlet Alliance statement of principles:

The major health and safety concerns for sex workers under criminal laws are as follows:

* Research demonstrates that laws criminalising sectors of the sex industry hinder the implementation of STI education and prevention strategies and occupational health and safety standards in the sex industry. Criminalised frameworks do not support the development of mechanisms and standards to enhance the occupational health of sex workers and hinder public health initiatives (IGCA, 1991:20);

* Those sex workers most marginalised by their work environment (e.g. street workers), as determined and influenced by legal constraints, are at greatest exposure to health risk (Pyett and Warr, 1996);

* Sex workers working illegally are unlikely to disclose their occupation when accessing health care therefore a range of sexual health tests may not be conducted;

* Sex workers are more vulnerable to sexual assault and other violence when they work illegally as they perceive police do not take crimes against them seriously and clients are aware of the propensity for sex workers not to report crimes of violence to the police (Banach, 1999a);

* Criminal laws operate against the development of organisational and industrial safe sex cultures as sex workers and establishments are reluctant to keep material on premises regarding safe sex practices and street workers my not carry condoms or lubricant for fear of seizure by police (Banach, 1999b);

* Occupational health and safety standards can not be implemented in those sectors of the sex industry that remain illegal as they are unenforceable;

* Increased occupational stress on sex workers due to the necessity to lead a double life to minimise stigmatisation.
 
@Arwon: Those are all very excellent sources, I can't really comment on them beyond to say that they seem to know what they're talking about. However...

I meant to say "prostitutes" instead of "women", but I think the general case may very well still apply. I certainly can't prove it, however, other than to point out some per capita rape statistics:

...this may be the best argument for legalization that there is. The evidence in aggregate seems to suggest that legalization is a step towards decreasing the exploitation of women in this business.

But the problem at hand here has deeper roots than that which are caused by the legal/illegal controversy, it is an inherent quality of the system itself which has created this dilemma. Women should not even have to consider prostitution as some "last resort" thing, which they would not do if they had any other options, and empowering women is more than just legalizing prostitution. That is one step, certainly, as the choice should be theirs', but to leave it at that is wrong. It is, frankly, specious to say that a woman is doing some bold, independent thing by making six figures in prostitution, as if the fact that she can't make that money on as regular basis as men is at all justified by some inherent truth which we cannot recognize and is seldom stated in plainer terms. No, that is silly. Women should have all those same opportunities as men, which they do not, and hence they work in prostitution. Prostitution, in this case, is viewed as some great equalizer - which it should not be. That is not its function. It is another career, and should be treated as such, and women should be treated like men - just as capable and smart, able to make six figures in investment banking as readily as turning a trick.
 
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.
These are all very fair points, and I don't disagree for a second that addressing these issues will take a lot more work than just decriminalising prostitution and hoping the problem fixes itself. However, I would suggest that decriminalisation is an important step in that direction- and in this, I'm following the majority of sex worker organisations, as Arwon has outlined- so it's foolish to reject this development simply because it isn't a magic wand.
 
I also agree completely, Crezth. I'm also just absolutely convinced that the least bad position regarding sex work is a smartly regulated legal industry. Accepting sex work as a legitimate choice and making the rules accordingly seems to be essential to minimising the all of the harms that are near-intrinsic to the industry, and to maximising autonomy, dignity and safety. In addition to the impact on the problem of security and violence, I also can't see how prohibition helps with the fight against sex trafficking and sex slavery, which are, globally, the two major scourges of the industry.
 
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."
OK Dommy... work with me here. I know you are pro-life...
But, you know that abortions will happen, like it or not. Morals of it aside.
So, we know that when illegal, back alley, quite dangerous abortions occur...

Same with prostitution, you can make it illegal, but it is going to happen, morals aside. If it is legal but frowned upon, it can at least be safe... If it is illegal we get the scene we see in big cities of America... street walkers forced into the industry by their pimps via abuse and drug addiction, which makes the women more and more shamed...
If they work legally out of brothels, their can be regulations, protections, better wages for such vile work, etc.

But, if you'd rather that people suffer at the hands of others for their choices which you disagree with... that's up to you.
 
OK Dommy... work with me here. I know you are pro-life...
But, you know that abortions will happen, like it or not. Morals of it aside.
So, we know that when illegal, back alley, quite dangerous abortions occur...

I followed the argument up until you said that. I only have a minute or two to comment right now, but, in short, what if the servants of molech (If you're familiar with the OT at all) wanted to start sacrificing children again, and it became so prevailent that it would "Happen anyway" whether legal or not? Now, imagine that, if legal, the sacrifices would not be as dangerous to the sacrificer. In other words, by banning the human sacrifice, the sacrificing person may also die.

Now, I know its a stretch, but think about it. Would you allow it?

If abortion is indeed murderous, as I believe it is, it doesn't matter how disastrous banning it would be. That "It will happen anyway, but will be worse for the woman" simply isn't a valid argument. Think like me for a second and think about it. If abortion is indeed murder, its better to happen illegally than legally. Then the government would not be allowing it, and would be dealing with it when it happens and the perpetraitors are caught.
 
I followed the argument up until you said that. I only have a minute or two to comment right now, but, in short, what if the servants of molech (If you're familiar with the OT at all) wanted to start sacrificing children again, and it became so prevailent that it would "Happen anyway" whether legal or not? Now, imagine that, if legal, the sacrifices would not be as dangerous to the sacrificer. In other words, by banning the human sacrifice, the sacrificing person may also die.

Now, I know its a stretch, but think about it. Would you allow it?

If abortion is indeed murderous, as I believe it is, it doesn't matter how disastrous banning it would be. That "It will happen anyway, but will be worse for the woman" simply isn't a valid argument. Think like me for a second and think about it. If abortion is indeed murder, its better to happen illegally than legally. Then the government would not be allowing it, and would be dealing with it when it happens and the perpetraitors are caught.
The difference is who controls the person's body?
The woman controls her body, and can have sex with who she wants, under circumstances that are acceptable to her.
 
I find people restricting prostitution seem to be discriminating against people who can't get it. They want to feel superior to other people, and want to keep other people down. Dare I say it? There is something wrong with people who want to keep prostitution illegal. I see it no different than rich people who want to keep poor people down. It's only people who are in loving, sexual relationships that want to prevent prostitution for guys who aren't (the exception being priests who are against it for religious reasons).

I know a sex surrogate is not a prostitute, but both provide services for men who aren't able to find a normal, loving relationship with a woman. There's a movie coming out soon with Helen Hunt called The Surrogate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Surrogate_(2012_film) ). Basically, a guy who is paralyzed from polio hires a sex surrogate to lose his virginity. People who want to prevent people with disabilities from having sex are bad people imho. I know a sex surrogate is not a prostitute, but many people with disabilities do lose their virginity and have sex with prostitutes. The brothels in Nevada do have handicap access, and do service people with disabilities.

People who are against prostitution hate men with disabilities and other conditions as far as I'm concerned.

edit: typos. I still don't like the wording on some of it, but I think my point got across. Don't go around thinking every guy out there is good looking enough to get a woman. Not everyone is like you, so don't assume they are like you.
 
...what?
 
Top Bottom