May 12/21. Hello! I thought this was a very good video. However, I have a couple of questions. First of all, I think that anytime a society has tried to curtail or criminalize an activity, such as alcohol- or cannabis consumption or gambling, that human beings find pleasurable, what would happen was that that activity would go "under the radar" and be purveyed by the "black market," which means organised crime. (Incidentally, it may be that the City of Vancouver, B.C., Canada, will have street/hard drugs made legal such that they can be injected safely at doctor- or nurse-supervised injection-sites, if I have my facts right. Is this a "lesser of two evils-" solution for an out-of-control drug problem? By extension, would the same logic, applied to laws concerning Canada's sex trade, mean that "decrim" (a nickname for decriminalization) would be better for Canadian society as a whole, all things considered?) Secondly, however the following notion may seem incredible, I'm wondering: If Canada's sex trade were decriminalized, wouldn't more men, who could start serving clients (men or women) legally, become involved in the industry and, over time, help create (a sub-culture or social movement) of men who are more understanding towards women, generally? Incidentally, when I read something at the "Quora-" website about male escorts, I learned that, at approximately the current time known as "nowadays," the market for serving female heterosexual clients is small and competitive, and that male escorts who do this can be paid extremely well. Therefore, if we get decrim, what if Canadian society were to advance, in some ways? -Renee K. Taylor, Kamloops, B.C., Canada.
I don't support Canada's prostitution laws. That being said, I have questions about the actual review: - when is it being held? I've heard for months now that it will be held, but who knows when that will be - who is doing the review? - who will be called to testify for and against PCEPA? - how long will the review last? - will it examine how each major municipality implements PCEPA? Some places don't implement it at all (Vancouver) and some places do (London Ontario) - will the Crown Attorney of Ontario be asked why they didn't appeal the Fantasy World Escorts case? I think they didn't appeal because they knew they would lose. - will it examine body rub parlours? Again, some cities essentially have legalized prostitution in body rub parlours. - will it call for more government funding? The MAPI program ended earlier this year and funding was not renewed. - Since 2014 we now have 300,000 sugar babies in Canada on Seeking Arrangement. Clearly these laws are not working to prevent women from entering prostitution which is one of its stated goals. Your side has lost in the courts 4 times. You lost three times while Bedford made it through the Ontario Superior Court, the Ontario Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court of Canada. You lost earlier this year in the Fantasy World Escorts decision which proves that parts of PCEPA violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. PCEPA assumes that there is always exploitation in prostitution. The Fantasy World Escorts case decided that exploitation must be proven instead of assumed. PCEPA violates the presumption of innocence and that is why it fails. Should a disabled man be arrested for paying a sex worker who has a background in health care? No, he should not. Paying a dominatrix to tie you up and flog you is illegal. This is ridiculous. PCEPA makes no attempt at discerning exploitation and that is why it must be repealed. Lastly, you can give money to people to help them exit prostitution without arresting sex buyers. So lets do that instead.
It doesnt matter that there are ppl willingly doing prostitution, because in practice those cant be distinguished effectively in the market. So the logical solution is to diminish demand as much as possible.
@@lachusity I notice that you did not mention a single thing about exit services or Universal Basic Income (UBI). That's the problem. It's always "arrest the sex buyers" and everything else comes a distant second place if it even comes at all. It is more important to deliver UBI than to arrest sex buyers. 10,000 Sugar Babies from Seeking Arrangement are attending post secondary education. In all that probably means that thousands of women are selling sex from that site alone. There has never been a sugar daddy sting by the cops in Canada. Do you really think that the cops are going to arrest sex buyers in the amount required to make a difference? They aren't. Yes, you can distinguish sex workers in the market place who willingly do prostitution. 1) There are sex workers who cater to disabled clients. So don't arrest them or make their life difficult. 2) Video about Samantha X. Her clients should not be arrested. If they are then that is a waste of resources. You can't just assume exploitation. So let me ask you again: would you arrest a disabled person who pays for sex? ruclips.net/video/e_ZsT6y_XA0/видео.html 3) Terri-Jean Bedford, Valerie Scott, and Amy Lebovitch -- the three women who won at Bedford. Don't arrest their clients.
@@WorldPeace21 You are desperate to conclude my opinion based on what I didnt say and not what I did say. "Yes, you can distinguish sex workers in the market place who willingly do prostitution." Really? What % of the prostitutes are currently coerced? You cant tell, nobody can, because its impossible to distinguish them effectively. "would you arrest a disabled person who pays for sex?" Of course. He supports the exploitative mechanism for his own sexual desires. This is not okay. All clients have to be punished to lower demand for sex victims. Do you have a better method to decrease demand?
@@lachusity I'm not trying to decrease demand because I don't see prostitution as always being bad. Yes, we should help people exit who don't want to be in prostitution. In reality, countries that have adopted the Nordic Model are not doing this. There is never enough money for exit services. Canada spent $4 million dollars a year for 5 years hoping that would end prostitution. What a joke. It's a false promise. I just showed you a video of Samantha X. She is not coerced. Therefore, if I pay Samantha X for sexual services then I should not be arrested. That's the problem with the Nordic Model. It does not discriminate and therefore wastes time arresting people who should not be arrested. You said: "Really? What % of the prostitutes are currently coerced? You cant tell, nobody can, because its impossible to distinguish them effectively." My Response: If nobody can tell what percentage of prostitutes are coerced then it's not fair to assume either way. Most of them could be coerced. Most of them could not be coerced. So it's a draw. If we bring prostitution into the light and say "this is what it is" then women can make an informed choice about it. Regarding disabled clients: No, they don't support exploitation. Sex workers are not victims. In NSW Australia there is an organization called Touching Base which connects disabled clients to sex workers trained in dealing with them. There is a documentary about this called The Scarlet Road. Here is the trailer for it. I encourage you to watch the full documentary (it's on RUclips). ruclips.net/video/mOpC0tYp_Qg/видео.html
@@WorldPeace21 You admitted that you cant distinguish effectively the coerced layer from the un-coerced one. This does not only have implications on the general picture of prostitution, but on the effectiveness of laws on it. Lets say a population criminalized prostitution before, then legalizes prostitution increasing the number of prostitutes to 140% and the regulations are weak and decrease violence to 90% of the original level. How would the number of victims react in this case? It would increase. Sadly, this mechanism is what happens based on most evidence available. This is why the Nordic model is superior than decriminalization. On the exclusions you mentioned about Samantha X: Although I agree in theory, there is a reason laws need to be consequent and clear in practice without many exclusions. For a prostitute to claim to be not coerced she would need analysis on her background, finances, mental health etc. this would place extra burden on inspectors as well. For this reason, these exclusions from blanket laws are often not viable. Its like you would argue for not punishing substance abuse during driving if the person has never done any accidents or not punishing the purchase of military rocket launchers if the person only used them as decorations so far. Its irrealistic burden on the law enforcement. Have you ever wondered why organ trade is illegal even if the seller is a consenting adult?
Thank you for sharing this information
Great video! Thank you - I will send this with my own email to my MP and MLA. Thanks for your courage and leadership!
May 12/21. Hello! I thought this was a very good video. However, I have a couple of questions. First of all, I think that anytime a society has tried to curtail or criminalize an activity, such as alcohol- or cannabis consumption or gambling, that human beings find pleasurable, what would happen was that that activity would go "under the radar" and be purveyed by the "black market," which means organised crime. (Incidentally, it may be that the City of Vancouver, B.C., Canada, will have street/hard drugs made legal such that they can be injected safely at doctor- or nurse-supervised injection-sites, if I have my facts right. Is this a "lesser of two evils-" solution for an out-of-control drug problem? By extension, would the same logic, applied to laws concerning Canada's sex trade, mean that "decrim" (a nickname for decriminalization) would be better for Canadian society as a whole, all things considered?) Secondly, however the following notion may seem incredible, I'm wondering: If Canada's sex trade were decriminalized, wouldn't more men, who could start serving clients (men or women) legally, become involved in the industry and, over time, help create (a sub-culture or social movement) of men who are more understanding towards women, generally? Incidentally, when I read something at the "Quora-" website about male escorts, I learned that, at approximately the current time known as "nowadays," the market for serving female heterosexual clients is small and competitive, and that male escorts who do this can be paid extremely well. Therefore, if we get decrim, what if Canadian society were to advance, in some ways? -Renee K. Taylor, Kamloops, B.C., Canada.
How refreshing!!!!
End Demand!!
YESSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!
NOW🙏🏾💖💛🥳🥳🥳♥️♥️
I don't support Canada's prostitution laws. That being said, I have questions about the actual review:
- when is it being held? I've heard for months now that it will be held, but who knows when that will be
- who is doing the review?
- who will be called to testify for and against PCEPA?
- how long will the review last?
- will it examine how each major municipality implements PCEPA? Some places don't implement it at all (Vancouver) and some places do (London Ontario)
- will the Crown Attorney of Ontario be asked why they didn't appeal the Fantasy World Escorts case? I think they didn't appeal because they knew they would lose.
- will it examine body rub parlours? Again, some cities essentially have legalized prostitution in body rub parlours.
- will it call for more government funding? The MAPI program ended earlier this year and funding was not renewed.
- Since 2014 we now have 300,000 sugar babies in Canada on Seeking Arrangement. Clearly these laws are not working to prevent women from entering prostitution which is one of its stated goals.
Your side has lost in the courts 4 times. You lost three times while Bedford made it through the Ontario Superior Court, the Ontario Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court of Canada. You lost earlier this year in the Fantasy World Escorts decision which proves that parts of PCEPA violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
PCEPA assumes that there is always exploitation in prostitution. The Fantasy World Escorts case decided that exploitation must be proven instead of assumed. PCEPA violates the presumption of innocence and that is why it fails. Should a disabled man be arrested for paying a sex worker who has a background in health care? No, he should not. Paying a dominatrix to tie you up and flog you is illegal. This is ridiculous. PCEPA makes no attempt at discerning exploitation and that is why it must be repealed.
Lastly, you can give money to people to help them exit prostitution without arresting sex buyers. So lets do that instead.
It doesnt matter that there are ppl willingly doing prostitution, because in practice those cant be distinguished effectively in the market. So the logical solution is to diminish demand as much as possible.
@@lachusity I notice that you did not mention a single thing about exit services or Universal Basic Income (UBI). That's the problem. It's always "arrest the sex buyers" and everything else comes a distant second place if it even comes at all. It is more important to deliver UBI than to arrest sex buyers. 10,000 Sugar Babies from Seeking Arrangement are attending post secondary education. In all that probably means that thousands of women are selling sex from that site alone. There has never been a sugar daddy sting by the cops in Canada. Do you really think that the cops are going to arrest sex buyers in the amount required to make a difference? They aren't.
Yes, you can distinguish sex workers in the market place who willingly do prostitution.
1) There are sex workers who cater to disabled clients. So don't arrest them or make their life difficult.
2) Video about Samantha X. Her clients should not be arrested. If they are then that is a waste of resources. You can't just assume exploitation. So let me ask you again: would you arrest a disabled person who pays for sex?
ruclips.net/video/e_ZsT6y_XA0/видео.html
3) Terri-Jean Bedford, Valerie Scott, and Amy Lebovitch -- the three women who won at Bedford. Don't arrest their clients.
@@WorldPeace21 You are desperate to conclude my opinion based on what I didnt say and not what I did say.
"Yes, you can distinguish sex workers in the market place who willingly do prostitution."
Really? What % of the prostitutes are currently coerced? You cant tell, nobody can, because its impossible to distinguish them effectively.
"would you arrest a disabled person who pays for sex?"
Of course. He supports the exploitative mechanism for his own sexual desires. This is not okay. All clients have to be punished to lower demand for sex victims. Do you have a better method to decrease demand?
@@lachusity I'm not trying to decrease demand because I don't see prostitution as always being bad. Yes, we should help people exit who don't want to be in prostitution. In reality, countries that have adopted the Nordic Model are not doing this. There is never enough money for exit services. Canada spent $4 million dollars a year for 5 years hoping that would end prostitution. What a joke. It's a false promise.
I just showed you a video of Samantha X. She is not coerced. Therefore, if I pay Samantha X for sexual services then I should not be arrested. That's the problem with the Nordic Model. It does not discriminate and therefore wastes time arresting people who should not be arrested.
You said:
"Really? What % of the prostitutes are currently coerced? You cant tell, nobody can, because its impossible to distinguish them effectively."
My Response:
If nobody can tell what percentage of prostitutes are coerced then it's not fair to assume either way. Most of them could be coerced. Most of them could not be coerced. So it's a draw. If we bring prostitution into the light and say "this is what it is" then women can make an informed choice about it.
Regarding disabled clients:
No, they don't support exploitation. Sex workers are not victims. In NSW Australia there is an organization called Touching Base which connects disabled clients to sex workers trained in dealing with them. There is a documentary about this called The Scarlet Road. Here is the trailer for it. I encourage you to watch the full documentary (it's on RUclips).
ruclips.net/video/mOpC0tYp_Qg/видео.html
@@WorldPeace21 You admitted that you cant distinguish effectively the coerced layer from the un-coerced one. This does not only have implications on the general picture of prostitution, but on the effectiveness of laws on it.
Lets say a population criminalized prostitution before, then legalizes prostitution increasing the number of prostitutes to 140% and the regulations are weak and decrease violence to 90% of the original level. How would the number of victims react in this case? It would increase. Sadly, this mechanism is what happens based on most evidence available. This is why the Nordic model is superior than decriminalization.
On the exclusions you mentioned about Samantha X:
Although I agree in theory, there is a reason laws need to be consequent and clear in practice without many exclusions. For a prostitute to claim to be not coerced she would need analysis on her background, finances, mental health etc. this would place extra burden on inspectors as well. For this reason, these exclusions from blanket laws are often not viable. Its like you would argue for not punishing substance abuse during driving if the person has never done any accidents or not punishing the purchase of military rocket launchers if the person only used them as decorations so far. Its irrealistic burden on the law enforcement. Have you ever wondered why organ trade is illegal even if the seller is a consenting adult?