Canada lower house passes Swedish Model

[Derec]

Senate being the only hope against passage.
Controversial prostitution bill passed

Justice Minister Peter MacKay was behind the new legislation, Bill C-36, and took the approach that it would criminalize the purchase of sex, but not its sale.
MacKay called his legislation a "made in Canada" approach and the best way to eliminate prostitution altogether.
By allowing prostitutes to sell sexual services without fear of criminalization, the law won't prevent them from implementing safety measures such as bodyguards, MacKay has said.
[..]
He said the prostitution bill represents a "paradigm shift" in Canada because it deals with sex workers as victims who need help, rather than criminals who deserve punishment.

Because no woman would ever chose to do sex work of her own volition, right?

Unlike Sweden, where both left and right supports this illiberal approach, in Canada the liberal factions voted against.

France already moved in this ridiculous direction, now Canada also.

 

[Jayjay]

I opened this thread with hopes of pictures of a Swedish model. Anyhow...

The Swedish model is better than criminalizing prostitution altogether, and as such I don't see how it would not be a step in the right direction at least.

 

[dismal]

Someone needs to remind them that making money is evil and spending money is demand for the economy.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I opened this thread with hopes of pictures of a Swedish model.

 

[dystopian]

The Swedish model is better than criminalizing prostitution altogether, and as such I don't see how it would not be a step in the right direction at least.

"Right, we won't arrest you... but we're going to make it fucking impossible for you to do your chosen profession by making it a crime for anyone to buy your services" isn't really a step in the right direction; especially since there's no indication that it would be an actual *step* instead of the end destination.

 

[Valjean]

Why not just legalize and regulate it?

 

[Jokodo]

I opened this thread with hopes of pictures of a Swedish model. Anyhow...

The Swedish model is better than criminalizing prostitution altogether, and as such I don't see how it would not be a step in the right direction at least.

How is this supposed to be "a step in the right direction"? And why compare it with "criminalizing prostitution altogether" when that's not the starting point where Canada was at prior to this decision?

(BTW: I'm agreeing with Derec. The end times must be near.)

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

In Soviet Russia, you ask prostitute if she is a cop.

 

[prideandfall]

Why not just legalize and regulate it?

because jesus - same reason every fucking stupid thing on this planet is done.

 

[whichphilosophy]

In Soviet Russia, you ask prostitute if she is a cop.

She won't admit it if she is moonlighting.

 

[ZiprHead]

In Soviet Russia, you ask prostitute if she is a cop.

She won't admit it if she is moonlighting.

I see the ads for sexy Russian girls looking for American guys but I never see any of them in uniform. Too bad, that might be even hotter.

 

[Jayjay]

The Swedish model is better than criminalizing prostitution altogether, and as such I don't see how it would not be a step in the right direction at least.

"Right, we won't arrest you... but we're going to make it fucking impossible for you to do your chosen profession by making it a crime for anyone to buy your services" isn't really a step in the right direction; especially since there's no indication that it would be an actual *step* instead of the end destination.

And how would the chosen profession be any easier if they would arrest her/him? And the legislators did not make it a crime to buy those services, it was already a crime.

Even if it were the end destination for the proponents of the law, so what? Those who want prostitution to be legalized are not in any worse position to push for further reform, especially if this leads to less harmful side effects that come with it being a criminal underground activity.

 

[arkirk]

Why not just legalize and regulate it?

because jesus - same reason every fucking stupid thing on this planet is done.

Your post has a note of exasperation to it, but it is still not too clear just what exasperates you.

I have a dear friend who has been a prostitute all her working life. She is 43 y.o. and sick a lot of the time, has no medical coverage, and is going nowhere. Even though she actually is quite bright and skilled at other things, all she feels she can do is prostitution. I am not one of her customers, but I have on occasion given her money, lodging, and helped her get medical attention. There are many in our society who are where she is in terms of security. She would be one of the first to tell you she loves her work. It has a romantic aura that appeals to her, but I see her heading to the land of penniless retired whores and it breaks my heart. She has no social security, no savings, and no safety net other than the Clinton version of welfare. If regulation could help the girls I guess I would be for it. There are a lot of women middle aged and above who are in her shoes. The Canada thing just looks like an excuse to say they did "something." They do have medical coverage for all there, so it is not so bad as here, I would guess.

I personally think there is something wrong with our society and that is why we have prostitution in the first place.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I opened this thread with hopes of pictures of a Swedish model. Anyhow...

The Swedish model is better than criminalizing prostitution altogether, and as such I don't see how it would not be a step in the right direction at least.

I disagree. It's one-sided nature is worse than our rules.

 

[Sabine Grant]

Senate being the only hope against passage.
Controversial prostitution bill passed

Justice Minister Peter MacKay was behind the new legislation, Bill C-36, and took the approach that it would criminalize the purchase of sex, but not its sale.
MacKay called his legislation a "made in Canada" approach and the best way to eliminate prostitution altogether.
By allowing prostitutes to sell sexual services without fear of criminalization, the law won't prevent them from implementing safety measures such as bodyguards, MacKay has said.
[..]
He said the prostitution bill represents a "paradigm shift" in Canada because it deals with sex workers as victims who need help, rather than criminals who deserve punishment.

Because no woman would ever chose to do sex work of her own volition, right?

Unlike Sweden, where both left and right supports this illiberal approach, in Canada the liberal factions voted against.

France already moved in this ridiculous direction, now Canada also.

Do you have any idea why France moved in that direction? Here is a hint : 90% of prostitutes in France are of foreign import versus only 10% in the early 90's. What do you think is the source of such drastic increase of foreign born and foreign imported prostitutes? Let's see if you can connect the dots....Other hint to make it easier for you : countries of origin being Sub Sahara Africa, Sahel, Asia, Romania and ex eastern Block countries.

 

[Derec]

Do you have any idea why France moved in that direction?

Illiberal streams in French politics.

Here is a hint : 90% of prostitutes in France are of foreign import versus only 10% in the early 90's. What do you think is the source of such drastic increase of foreign born and foreign imported prostitutes? Let's see if you can connect the dots....Other hint to make it easier for you : countries of origin being Sub Sahara Africa, Sahel, Asia, Romania and ex eastern Block countries.

How does that justify criminalizing the customers but not providers?
If it turned out that 90% of drug dealers were foreign born does that justify criminalizing drug buyers but not sellers?
Instead of criminalizing people that want to engage in sex between consenting adults maybe the government should go after human trafficking. However, just because a sex worker is foreign born doesn't make her a victim of trafficking. Neither does her being an illegal alien mean that. By that logic you would have to treat illegal aliens in other lines of work as "trafficking victims" as well. It is about time that sex work is treated as any other work and not subject to special stigma or punitive legislation.

- - - Updated - - -

I opened this thread with hopes of pictures of a Swedish model. Anyhow...

The Swedish model is better than criminalizing prostitution altogether, and as such I don't see how it would not be a step in the right direction at least.

I disagree. It makes just about as much sense as criminalizing drug use but treating drug dealers as "victims".

 

[Derec]

And how would the chosen profession be any easier if they would arrest her/him?

At least it would be equitable in that providers and clients would both be subject to arrest, like we do with any other illegal activity. Why should sex be treated differently? Not that sex for hire should be illegal in the first place of course.

And the legislators did not make it a crime to buy those services, it was already a crime.

I do not think so. According to an article about the original court decision it seems the original law didn't criminalize buying or selling sex outright, just certain anciliary activities that made selling sex difficult.

In striking down laws prohibiting brothels, living on the avails of prostitution and communicating in public with clients, the top court ruled Friday that the laws were over-broad and "grossly disproportionate."

Honestly, I do not see how this new law passes constitutional muster either, as it is just as over-broad and grossly disproportionate as the old one, just in the other direction.

Even if it were the end destination for the proponents of the law, so what? Those who want prostitution to be legalized are not in any worse position to push for further reform, especially if this leads to less harmful side effects that come with it being a criminal underground activity.

Actually it puts people buying sexual services in a worse position and it still pushes the industry underground as clients are subject to arrest and prosecution. This sexist, illiberal nonsense didn't work in Sweden and I do not see why other countries want to ape it.

 

[Jayjay]

I opened this thread with hopes of pictures of a Swedish model. Anyhow...

The Swedish model is better than criminalizing prostitution altogether, and as such I don't see how it would not be a step in the right direction at least.

I disagree. It makes just about as much sense as criminalizing drug use but treating drug dealers as "victims".

Drug use is not criminalized. Possession and sale is. And this is a false analogy because in sex trade the "dealer" would be the pimp, and the prostitute is the product being dealt.

 

[Jayjay]

At least it would be equitable in that providers and clients would both be subject to arrest, like we do with any other illegal activity. Why should sex be treated differently? Not that sex for hire should be illegal in the first place of course.

Because the customers are not the ones who are being trafficked or victimized by their pimps. Sure in a perfect world every sexual encounter would be 100% consensual, there is no poverty or crime, but in reality, that's just not the case. In particular if prostitution is criminalized the prostitute faces far greater risk than the customer, while the pimps and the traffickers are the ones who benefit most.

And the legislators did not make it a crime to buy those services, it was already a crime.

I do not think so. According to an article about the original court decision it seems the original law didn't criminalize buying or selling sex outright, just certain anciliary activities that made selling sex difficult.

I stand corrected. But apparently, one of the anciliary activities is making a living with prostitution (according to wikipedia anyway). To me it sounds like making it harder to sell sex services by criminalizing buying thereof would still be less of a blocker than outright ban on having it as a livelihood.

Even if it were the end destination for the proponents of the law, so what? Those who want prostitution to be legalized are not in any worse position to push for further reform, especially if this leads to less harmful side effects that come with it being a criminal underground activity.

Actually it puts people buying sexual services in a worse position and it still pushes the industry underground as clients are subject to arrest and prosecution.

So what? Nobody has to use the services of prostitutes to survive or make a living. It's a minor inconvenience to the customers, wheras leaving women (and some men, but let's face it, it's mostly women) vulnerable to criminal exploitation is potentially life-ruining.

 

[Derec]

Drug use is not criminalized. Possession and sale is.

Hair splitting, so let me rephrase. Should selling and "possession with intent to distribute" be legal but buying and possession for personal use be criminalized?

And this is a false analogy because in sex trade the "dealer" would be the pimp, and the prostitute is the product being dealt.

Wrong. The prostitute is not the product but a service provider (she performs a service, you are not buying her (she is not a slave) any more than you are buying your massage therapist or plumber) and thus equivalent to the dealer. The only difference between the drug and sex scenarios is that drugs are a product while sex is a service.