Sweet Emily J

^^^ Word. More about "the sexy tax" : http://everydaywhorephobia.wordpress.com/2013/08/30/taxable-blow-jobs/ :biggrin:

You could consider trying a professional sex therapist. :) Especially at your age, much of these kinds of issues are psychological and do have a fix! http://www.sexwithsue.com/counseling/ Sue is a legendary sex therapist in Ottawa! :) Sessions are covered by health insurance, and she does counselling in a variety of ways, including over the phone, by Skype with webcam, and of course in person. If she can't solve the issue in a few sessions, she will refer you to someone who can. There is also lots of great info on her website and blog. :)

Ooh, crappy. :( I just realized that I didn't come across that issue because I was auto-logged in from a trial subscription I signed up for a while back with my twitter account (you can view 8 articles per month with a free subscription). It's too long and there is too many citations/links and photos to effectively copy & paste the whole thing here. Wouldn't be right.

Sorry to hijack for a second, but Canada is actually much more ethnically and culturally diverse than the USA. :) Your statement is misleading and a poor generalization. This lady's photo might be stolen, but that doesn't mean that all ladies with a certain body type are "likely to be stolen" as well. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/07/18/the-most-and-least-culturally-diverse-countries-in-the-world/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/16/a-revealing-map-of-the-worlds-most-and-least-ethnically-diverse-countries/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_ranked_by_ethnic_and_cultural_diversity_level

Congrats! :) January 17 will be 2 years smoke free for me, and I know for sure that I will never smoke again. I prepared mentally for several weeks and then just went completely cold turkey. For a while, I replaced the physical habit with a piece of fruit, which worked well, and was obviously a healthy tradeoff. Everyone has their own methods that they say for work for them, and if they actually do work, that is great.. everyone is different, and if it works, great! However, I am of the belief that all nicotine replacement therapies, prescription drugs, "cutting down" methods, e-cigarettes, etc just prolong the pain and madness more than necessary (or exactly as PassionVitto said, replacing one bad habit with another). Just end it. Be a non-smoker. Nicotine is physically out of your body within 72 hours; after that it's just the mental battle. I just constantly reminded myself that I was stronger than the addiction. One thing that really helped me was The Canadian Cancer Society's Smokers Helpline Online. There is lots of great info there, and it's all personalized and interactive. The best resource I found there was the online forum. It's like CERB, except for people quitting smoking. It tracks your progress in a variety of ways, and can be very motivational and helpful to talk to others in the same situation, share experiences, tips and ideas, push each other, etc. I also read a few books which I found helpful. Reading a few chapters everyday, early on in my quitting journey, kept me on track, and made me want to stay a non-smoker, and not have to start all over again (remember - 72 hours is key). Alan Carr - Easy Way to Stop Smoking Joel Spitzer - Never Take Another Puff I knew I would *feel* better physically after quitting, but what I didn't expect, and the best thing that happened, was the amazing feeling of freedom I felt. It was so good to know I wasn't tied down to the addiction anymore, and I didn't have to constantly find a place to smoke, go out in the cold, find a store to buy them, spend my hard earned money on this bullshit that was contributing to my early death, and be a slave to these disgusting multi-million dollar death corporations anymore.

Local MPs is definitely a good idea; I would also recommend Justice Minister Peter MacKay. PM Harper would be helpful as well. :) Also, possibly the leader of the official opposition to encourage him to put the pressure on. Btw, letter mail sent to any member of parliament or senator does not require any postage. Just pop it right in the box! ;) The Honourable Peter Gordon MacKay Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada 284 Wellington Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8 Email: [email protected] Office of the Prime Minister 80 Wellington Street Ottawa, ON K1A 0A2 Fax: 613-941-6900 Contact online:http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/contactpm Thomas Mulcair House of Commons Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6 Phone: 613-995-7224 Fax: 613-995-4565 [email protected]

Moving map of Canada showing the evolution of Canadian provinces & territories from 1867 to present day.

Censoring Cunnilingus in Film By Carlin Ross http://dodsonandross.com/blogs/carlin-ross/2013/12/censoring-cunnilingus-film

[B]Statement by the Minister of Justice Regarding the Supreme Court of Canada Ruling in Attorney General of Canada V. Bedford et al.[/B] [URL="http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/news-nouv/nr-cp/2013/doc_33020.html"]http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/news-nouv/nr-cp/2013/doc_33020.html[/URL] [QUOTE] [B]December 20, 2013[/B] I am concerned that, with its ruling in the case of Attorney General of Canada v. Bedford et al., the Supreme Court of Canada has found sections 210, 212(1)(j) and 213(1)(c) of the Criminal Code related to prostitution unconstitutional. The court has ordered, however, that these provisions remain in force for 12 months to give Parliament time to consider how to address this very complex matter. We are reviewing the decision and are exploring all possible options to ensure the criminal law continues to address the significant harms that flow from prostitution to communities, those engaged in prostitution, and vulnerable persons. We are committed to the safety of all Canadians and the well-being of our communities. A number of other Criminal Code provisions remain in place to protect those engaged in prostitution and other vulnerable persons, and to address the negative effects prostitution has on communities.â? [/QUOTE] [B]Statement from the Official Opposition on the Canada v. Bedford decision[/B] [URL="http://www.ndp.ca/news/statement-official-opposition-canada-v-bedford-decision"]http://www.ndp.ca/news/statement-official-opposition-canada-v-bedford-decision[/URL] [QUOTE] [B]December 20, 2013[/B] â??This is an extremely important ruling. Today the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed that Canadaâ??s current prostitution laws are placing vulnerable women in unacceptably dangerous situations. As New Democrats have long said, we need immediate action to protect the safety and rights of sex workers. The decision by the Supreme Court is clear: everyone in Canada has the right to live free of violence. Rather than an approach that further marginalizes already vulnerable sex workers, we need the government to focus upon working with them in order to build a comprehensive strategy to better protect and support women. The government now has a year to address the Courtâ??s decision. Ensuring that sex workers are protected from violence must be central to the discussion. We will be looking for the Conservatives to work with us on important related issues, such as income support, education and training, poverty alleviation, housing and treatment for addictions.â? [/QUOTE] P.S. Sadly, but unsurprisingly, I found no officials statement from Liberals or Greens. If you hear of anything, please share.

[COLOR="Blue"]Really great article here, detailing what really just happened and the potential for what could be next. I recommend visiting the original article for links to many sources.[/COLOR] [B][U]Canadian Supreme Court Ruling Affirms Human Rights of Sex Workers[/U][/B] By Kate Zen, [URL="http://truth-out.org"]Truthout[/URL] [B]December 24, 2013[/B] [URL="http://truth-out.org/news/item/20814-canadian-supreme-court-ruling-affirms-human-rights-of-sex-workers"]http://truth-out.org/news/item/20814-canadian-supreme-court-ruling-affirms-human-rights-of-sex-workers[/URL] [QUOTE] [I]A landmark decision, Bedford v. Canada, passed at the Canadian Supreme Court on Friday, struck down all three anti-prostitution laws in the Canadian federal criminal code and recognized sex workers' rights to occupational safety. On Friday, a landmark decision was passed at the Canadian Supreme Court: In a 9-0 unanimous ruling, all three antiprostitution laws in the criminal code were struck down in Bedford v. Canada. Many people mistakenly believe that prostitution is now "legalized." But prostitution has never been illegal in Canada. However, several related activities were criminalized: Sex workers were prohibited from communicating with clients on the street, which would create a public nuisance. They were also prohibited from working indoors in "bawdy houses," where they could conduct their business more safely. Anyone who benefited from prostitution, including the boyfriend or girlfriend of a sex worker who unknowingly shared the rent, and the landlady, driver, bodyguard, or accountant of a sex worker, could be considered a "pimp," and therefore a criminal. These laws effectively isolated sex workers and prevented them from screening their clients and negotiating for safe sex practices, directly contributing to violence and harm in the sex industry. [URL="http://truth-out.org/news/item/20814-canadian-supreme-court-ruling-affirms-human-rights-of-sex-workers"][COLOR="Red"][B]Read Moreâ?¦[/B][/COLOR][/URL][/I] [/QUOTE]

[B]The #NordicModel and the CPC Approach to #BedFordSCC[/B] By [URL="http://kwetoday.com"]kwetoday[/URL] - Fierce Indigenous Feminism [URL="http://kwetoday.com/2013/12/23/the-nordicmodel-and-the-cpc-approach-to-bedfordscc/"]http://kwetoday.com/2013/12/23/the-nordicmodel-and-the-cpc-approach-to-bedfordscc/[/URL] [QUOTE] [I]Awww isnâ??t this sweet, the cons want to help the hookersâ?¦ no wait, they want to help women because hookers are a different class of people altogether in their eyes. But for real, this is how the Othering of sex workers that their bed buddy, Sun News, contributes to the violence and whorephobia that they experience. Is it really all that hard to refer to sex workers as sex workers and not prostitutes, prostituted women, or hookers? I get the right to self determination as some sex workers refer to themselves as hookers or prostitutes but only to reclaim the word and sometimes to refer to the history and legality of the word (Source). For real though, sex workers, is it all that hard? Also, the cons attempts to address the SCC decision is a step in the wrong direction. If you werenâ??t angered after reading this article, entitled â??Conservatives set to replace prostitution laws to help sex workers,â? then you probably missed the gaps in their argument to criminalize the buyers or adopt the Nordic Model. [URL="http://kwetoday.com/2013/12/23/the-nordicmodel-and-the-cpc-approach-to-bedfordscc/"]Read More...[/I][/URL] [/QUOTE]

[B]Sex Work Law Reform in Canada: Considering problems with the Nordic model[/B] [URL="http://www.aidslaw.ca/publications/interfaces/downloadFile.php?ref=2103"]http://www.aidslaw.ca/publications/interfaces/downloadFile.php?ref=2103[/URL] From the [URL="http://www.aidslaw.ca"]Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network,[/URL] this is a published briefing paper discussing human rights related to sex work, and compares the nordic model to recently repealed Canadian laws. Also provides recommendations for future legislation. [QUOTE] [I]In Canada, two cases have been making their way through courts in Ontario and in British Columbia, challenging provisions of the Criminal Code that deal with sex work. While sex worker activists who promote the human rights of sex workers argue for the complete removal of prostitution laws that criminalize sex workers (known as decriminalization), others propose alternative models of criminalization. Known as the â??Swedishâ? or â??Nordicâ? model of regulating sex work, this model has been proposed as an alternative to the current regime of criminalization. This model â?? adopted in Sweden, Norway and Iceland â?? criminalizes the purchase of sexual services, most indoor sex work and promoting and â??living on the avails ofâ? sex work. Given the strong prospect that at least some of the challenged provisions of the Criminal Code may soon no longer form part of Canadian law, it is important to consider the impact of the Swedish model on sex workers and whether it is a constitutional â?? and therefore legal â?? alternative, or if it merely replaces one unconstitutional set of laws with another. This policy brief considers the impact of the Swedish model on sex workers and, in light of its harmful effects, argues that this approach would not withstand constitutional scrutiny in Canada. [URL="http://www.aidslaw.ca/publications/interfaces/downloadFile.php?ref=2103"]Read More...[/I][/URL] [/QUOTE]

[B]Lawyer who argued Supreme Court prostitution case rejects MP's suggestion that clients can be targeted[/B] [I]By Charlie Smith[/I] [URL="http://www.straight.com/news/553446/lawyer-who-argued-supreme-court-prostitution-case-rejects-mps-suggestion-clients-can-be-targeted"]http://www.straight.com/news/553446/lawyer-who-argued-supreme-court-prostitution-case-rejects-mps-suggestion-clients-can-be-targeted[/URL] [QUOTE] [I]A VANCOUVER LAWYER who represented sex workers before the Supreme Court of Canada has poured cold water on the idea of the federal government targeting the buyers of sex. Elin Sigurdson told the Georgia Straight by phone that the Nordic model presents a model of "asymetrical criminalization". She said that this approachâ??which has been endorsed by Conservative MP Joy Smithâ??"isn't consistent" with the Supreme Court of Canada's recent ruling striking down three of the country's prostitution laws. "The client is criminalized, but not the sex worker," Sigurdson said. "In that context, the same issue of danger and jeopardy will persist when one of the parties rather than the other is criminalized. We would take the view that it couldn't be upheld under this decision of the Supreme Court of Canada because you're going to find the exact same problems persisting." The Supreme Court of Canada decision gives the federal government a year to bring forward legislation that is consistent with the ruling, which struck down laws against keeping a common bawdy house, communicating in public to sell sex, and living off the avails of prostitution. Sigurdson called the ruling a victory for sex workers and sex-worker advocates across the country whoâ??ve been working for decades for decriminalization. "Itâ??s extremely significant because it represents the court acknowledging the dangers that are faced on a daily basis by sex workers who are involved the street-level sex trade and who have been stigmatized and marginalized to the point where theyâ??ve found themselves completely disregarded by the law," she said. "This is a moment when theyâ??ve been recognized in their full humanity and true participants in Canadian society. Itâ??s extremely exciting and it presents a real opportunity for change. Itâ??s a chance for Canada to become a world leader recognizing human rights of people who have often been truly discarded.â? Sigurdson also stated that it's "extremely important" to recognize that the Supreme Court of Canada ruling will have no impact on Criminal Code prohibitions on the child sex trade. "So any sex work involving underage people is criminal and that is rightly so," she emphasized. "Any human trafficking remains criminal and everybody agrees that situation of exploitation [and] coercion of minors must remain enforceable and police should pay greater and closer attention. This situation actually presents an opportunity to have a more transparent industry, in which eyes can be laid on people who may be underage and who shouldnâ??t be in coercive and exploitive circumstances. So you know, I think the scope of the decision is really important. Itâ??s about adult consensual sex work. Itâ??s not about children who very clearly should not be involved in the sex trade.â?[/I] [/QUOTE]

Charlotte made a great point on this other thread today that I want to give more attention here too. Post SCC ruling, Canada will be making a decision on what direction we will be going next. The SexSafetySecurity survey is a great way for clients to discreetly have their voice's heard about your thoughts, feelings and experiences. It's even more important now for people to know that clients are generally good people, and are just average Canadians! This is a perfect way to get the word out! "We believe that the generalizations that groups seeking the abolition of prostitution make about the attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of ALL people who pay for sexual services in Canada are based on moral convictions and speculation as opposed to actual evidence. In our ongoing effort to present a more complete and accurate picture of the diversity of attitudes, beliefs and experiences of people who have paid for sexual services in Canada we are inviting you to be a part of the largest and most ambitious study of Canada's sex industry undertaken to date. The Sex, Safety and Security Study, which is part of a larger research initiative funded the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR), seeks to provide a safe, secure and nonjudgmental environment for people who have purchased sexual services to have your voices heard and respected and the details of your experiences acknowledged." Visit the website to learn more! You can even do it online! Go! The deadline is January 15, so don't procrastinate! http://www.sexsafetysecurity.ca

I'm not an expert on the subject, from everything I've read, the way the New Zealand (and I believe some provinces in Australia) have handled this issue, is the direction that would be most desirable for everyone directly affected. Other sex workers seem to also be advocating for something along these lines. Here is a good article about the benefits of the New Zealand way: http://www.fairobserver.com/article/legalizing-prostitution-new-zealands-example#.UrUSLxglBWI.twitter Everyone has their own opinion of which way it will go. I am predicting that the current government will leave it up to the provinces/municipalities. I don't see us going backwards. And doing nothing about this is less politically risky than doing something, especially with an election creeping up. I honestly don't think most real Conservatives really care about this issue (of course there is some extreme exceptions), and neither do the vast majority of Canadians, since most aren't directly affected. They mostly say, regulate & tax it, enforce the laws we already have instead of making more laws, let consenting adults do their own thing in private, and let's move onto more important issues. A reader poll in the Sun online today is showing 75% voted that prostitution "should be allowed", with over 5000 votes. Highly un-scientific, yes. But interesting, nonetheless. Also, Justice Minister Peter MacKay said this last week: "I'm not entirely convinced that the direction that has been attempted in other countries, and this Nordic model being one, is the right fit for Canada" So, we'll see. The nordic "model" is basically a non-issue in my mind, because it's so fucking illogical, and I honestly have more faith in our country than that. Like I said, I'm no expert, and I am an optimist, but I really believe we will go a progressive direction with this.

I agree. I don't really understand why, if the laws are deemed unconstitutional, as they have been, that they would give a stay of one year. It's basically saying: yes, we have determined that your constitutional rights are being broken, but we are allowing it to continue. Even the Federal Justice Minister Peter MacKay said himself: "A number of other Criminal Code provisions remain in place to protect those engaged in prostitution and other vulnerable persons, and to address the negative effects prostitution has on communities." He basically means that laws prohibiting violence & abuse, exploitation, slavery, kidnapping, unlawful confinement, rape, sex with a minor, coercion, trafficking, public nuisance, and commercial zoning laws are all still in place. That said, then what is the real purpose of keeping these other unconstitutional laws in place for another year? How is it not unconstitutional to keep unconstitutional laws in effect? There is a few reasons that come to mind. None of which I would condone.

Here is another good piece that I found today written by a (former) escort. Belle Du Jour/Dr Brooke Magnanti, known to many as the lady behind "The Secret Diary of a Call Girl" tv show, books, blog, etc. This one also mentions Germany and the Amsterdam way of dealing with prostitution, which is often mentioned by both sides of the debate. Prostitution Freed From Legal Restrictions in Canada http://reason.com/archives/2013/12/21/prostitution-loses-some-of-its-legal-bag

[B][U]Legalizing Prostitution: New Zealandâ??s Example[/U][/B] By Catherine Healy [URL="http://www.fairobserver.com/article/legalizing-prostitution-new-zealands-example"]http://www.fairobserver.com/article/legalizing-prostitution-new-zealands-example[/URL] [QUOTE] It has been ten years since New Zealand parliamentarians, after considerable debate and encouragement from sex workers, mainstream womenâ??s organizations, and public health advocates, voted for changes to the laws governing prostitution. The Prostitution Reform Act 2003 (PRA) heralded a significant turnaround in approach, repealing laws that had been used to criminalize sex workers and created circumstances that contributed to their vulnerability. Rather, the aim of the PRA is to decriminalize prostitution and safeguard the human rights of sex workers, while protecting them from exploitation. The law also states the importance of promoting sex workersâ?? welfare and occupational safety and health, and that the law be conducive to public health. In addition, it prohibits the â??use in prostitutionâ? of people who are under 18. [B]â??Low-Keyâ? Decriminalization[/B] Today, as it was before the change in law, sex work is widespread, and mostly occurs in a low-key way in minor towns and in every major city throughout New Zealand. Yet the industry has not grown in the last ten years. It's not obvious that the sex trade has been decriminalized: brothels are not on every corner, nor are â??sex for saleâ? signs flashing at the unsuspecting. However, inside, brothels now display safer-sex information prominently. Sex workers are allowed to work in managed brothels with no size restrictions, or to collectivize and work as equals with colleagues, or to work alone. Home occupation and standard business zoning laws generally apply â?? although there have been some city councils who have been successfully challenged in court for the development of unreasonable bylaws restricting the location of brothels. Street-based sex work is allowed and there is no regime of licensing or mandatory testing of individual sex workers. Sex worker registers are a thing of the past, in recognition that it is not sex workers who need monitoring as criminals. However, operators of brothels, and anyone involved in directing sex workers for profit, are required to have an operatorâ??s certificate. These certificates are issued by the District Court and withheld from people with specific convictions, including those for violence. The PRA enables sex workers to reach out for help and access justice if necessary. While the police were previously the enforcers of anti-prostitution laws, they are now widely regarded by sex workers as their allies in the prevention of violence. The police, too, report the effectiveness of decriminalization in building non-coercive relationships with sex workers as a violence prevention strategy. While decriminalization has not stopped all violence â?? as no law alone could achieve this in any context â?? there is overwhelming evidence that decriminalization has enabled sex workers to decline contact with people they perceive to be potentially dangerous clients. The law also explicitly reinforces the right of sex workers to refuse to continue providing services to any client, to prevent the confusion that sex workers give away this right as contractors to brothel operators. The government has published guidelines with input from sex workers that expands on this, and which address issues of security and safety in the context of sex work. [B]Anti-Trafficking Tool[/B] Decriminalization of sex work creates many opportunities to head off exploitation, and is significant as an anti-trafficking tool â?? Immigration New Zealand continues to report that they have found no instances of sex trafficking in New Zealand, despite their determined forays into the migrant sector of the sex industry. Reports that large numbers of youth are now trafficked by gangs into prostitution are not backed up by police evidence. Government and community-based agencies, including peer-based sex worker groups, collaborate to assist youth who are involved in sex work. This collaboration would not have occurred prior to decriminalization due to mistrust of the police. Decriminalization has also created higher standards and expectations in relation to occupational safety and health. Sex workers, and even their clients, will blow the whistle if they suspect something in the work place that doesnâ??t look quite right. There have been mundane complaints about withheld money by clients or brothel operators, which have been resolved in an easy to access Disputes Tribunal setting in the local district court (though there is an arbitrator rather than a judge, and no lawyers are present), to more serious reports of underage sex workers being illegally hired, resulting in jail time for brothel operators. Sex workers have utilized their right to combat workplace sexual harassment from their bosses using human rights legislation; a right unimaginable prior to decriminalization and probably unobtainable while brothel-keeping was illegal. [B]Better Communication[/B] There is also a freeing up of communication. Prior to the law change, the sex industry was hidden under a range of misleading identities, such as escort agencies and massage parlors, which had to pretend that commercial sex was not their main purpose. This distancing inhibited the health promotion strategies that sex workers and brothel operators now use to build a strong culture of safer sex. Today, people who are considering sex work are unlikely to arrive at a business with the promise of â??Earn $$$ Nowâ? and â??onsite training availableâ? and be unaware that its real purpose is to provide commercial sex services. Instead, they are legally able to seek practical and realistic information to inform their decision to become a sex worker. Of course, negotiations between sex workers and their clients can be more focused on the things that matter. Sex workers can negotiate more carefully without the pressure of wondering if their next client is an undercover cop who is about to arrest them and count their condoms, or someone who may cause them other kinds of harm. Corruption has also been nipped in the bud, with the police recently prosecuting one of their own for unlawfully trying to extort sexual favors from a sex worker with traffic offences. The Department of Labour has produced guidelines after consulting with sex workers and brothel operators, which expand on issues of security and describe safe ways in which to provide services such as â??outcallsâ? to the homes of clients. They also address sexual and reproductive health themes and promote the importance of regular, but non-mandatory, testing, in recognition that it is condom use and other safer sex practices, and not testing, that most effectively prevents the spread of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The law forbids brothel operators promoting or implying that their staff are free from STIs, but requires them to explicitly promote safer sex. The prevalence of sexually transmissible infections for the countryâ??s estimated 5,000 sex workers is in line with other general populations, with HIV remaining negligible. Medical Officers of Health, under the auspices of the Ministry of Health, have the power to inspect brothels and check compliance with health and safety requirements. The police only routinely visit to inspect liquor licenses. The approach to allow sex work to occur, supported by labor and other mainstream laws, is now accepted by most people in New Zealand. There are local controversies, such as the lack of zoning for street-based sex workers, which ignite debate, with a bill before the parliament to give councils the power to do so. Interestingly, the police have backed the New Zealand Prostitutes Collective in opposing this bill, recognizing that informal agreements are more effective than imposed legal regimes. Decriminalization of prostitution is being called for by sex workers in many countries, including India, Fiji, Scotland and, of course, the United States. For sex workers, it goes much deeper than repealing key parts of legislation that criminalize their work. Like others, they want the rights and responsibilities to participate in society without discrimination. The New Zealand model of law reform is a step to creating conditions that allow this to happen. [/QUOTE]

Okay, this has been bugging me since yesterday when you posted this, and I've been trying to figure it out allllll day! What is C&K's!? Also, Leigh Munroe (Formerly Mature Lee) is definitely worth a mention here too. ;)

[B]The fake â??War on Christmasâ? outrage[/B] By David Sirota [URL="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/23/the_fake_war_on_christmas_outrage/"]http://www.salon.com/2011/12/23/the_fake_war_on_christmas_outrage/[/URL] [QUOTE] One of the defining qualities of late December is the predictable and ritualized nature of Americaâ??s holiday season. Other than discovering whatâ??s inside the wrapped gift boxes, thereâ??s no mystery or suspense to it anymore. The Christmas music starts right before Thanksgiving. Then come the flickering lights, the red-and-green decor, Hollywoodâ??s vacation movie blitz, and finally, with media charlatans turning the key, the fake outrage machine rumbles back to life. Like a narcissistâ??s souped-up 4-by-4, this turbocharged colossus of self-righteous indignation makes a lot of noise and leaves a mess in its wake â?? but ultimately says a lot more about its driversâ?? pitiable insecurities than anything else. This year has been particularly illustrative, as the fake outrage machine has caricatured itself like a Bigfoot-esque monster truck in a desperate bid for attention. In just the last few weeks, the Heritage Foundation billed an Agriculture Department initiative to raise revenue for tree farmers as a â??Christmas Tree Taxâ?; Fox News said that standard federal safety warnings were proof that the government wants to â??tell you how to decorate your Christmas treeâ?; and conservative activists criticized Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee, an Independent, for daring to consecrate a â??holiday treeâ? â?? rather than a â??Christmas Treeâ? â?? at the statehouse. Meanwhile, under the headline â??â??Modern Grinches Step Up Anti-Christmas Efforts,â? the Christian Broadcasting Network lashed out at cities for trying to respect the separation of church and state at holiday time, and the American Family Association continued its annual effort to denigrate companies that substitute â??Happy Holidaysâ? for â??Merry Christmas.â? To know that this machineâ??s outrage is indeed fake is to appreciate some telling facts about the alleged transgressions. For instance, the governmentâ??s recent revenue and regulatory moves were entirely routine and nonreligious, while Gov. Chafee was just preserving a long-standing tradition in a state founded as a haven for religious pluralism. Similarly, many cities are still including Christmas in their winter festivities â?? they are just including other celebrations as well. And if saying â??Happy Holidaysâ? somehow represents a â??War on Christmas,â? then none other than Christian icon Tim Tebow must be one of the aggressorsâ?? lead field generals, what with the NFL quarterback now appearing in a television ad wishing Coloradans â??Happy Holidaysâ? â?? not â??Merry Christmas.â? These facts, of course, are no deterrent to the fake outrage machine, because the machineâ??s operators arenâ??t really interested in preventing religious bigotry. In a majority-Christian nation whose politics and culture are steeped in Christianity, these zealots are interested in pretending their fellow Christians are somehow oppressed, contradictory facts be damned. In propagating such an illusion, theyâ??re not earnestly embodying their religionâ??s missionary spirit. Instead, theyâ??re manufacturing victimhood, all to gin up sympathy and create a rationale to continue ramrodding their theology down everyone elseâ??s throats. That some feel this need to push their faith with such craven tactics speaks volumes about the nature of spiritual self-doubt today. Sure, our tumultuous world of bombast and chaos leads us to assume that the loudest are the most devout. But in practice, those who are truly comfortable in their faith are often the most humble about their orthodoxies because they have nothing to prove. By contrast, those who are the most insecure in their beliefs can sometimes be the most in-your-face about their dogma. In that sense, thereâ??s a â??doth protest too muchâ? tenor to the roar of the fake outrage machine. That self-indicting message may be difficult to detect amid all the exploding ordnance in the War on Christmas, but itâ??s there â?? and the more the machine revs its engines every December, the more that message comes through. [/QUOTE]

An older article, but a great one, worthwhile of your time & attention. â?¦ [B]'Men buy girls, not sex' and other myths of anti-prostitution moralists'[/B] [URL="http://www.theguardian.com/profile/melissa-gira-grant"][I]By Meliisa Gira Grant[/I][/URL] [URL="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/23/prostitution-sex-trade-demand-myth?newsfeed=true"]http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/23/prostitution-sex-trade-demand-myth?newsfeed=true[/URL] [QUOTE] [I]According to the documentaries running on near-constant repeat on CNN and MSNBC, men all around America are just waiting to buy women for sex, fuelling what is referred to as a "multibillion dollar industry". In CNN's latest sex trade special, Selling the Girl Next Door, we're told that girls are "routinely bought and sold for the pleasure of grown men". Attorneys general, mayors and sheriffs across the United States are using the same tabloid statistics and rationale to set public policy. They claim that the way to end exploitation in the sex trade is to "end demand" for the sex trade â?? that is, end men's desire for sex they can pay for. The notion that men's desire to buy actual people fuels the sex trade has gone so mainstream that when aspiring celebrity philanthropist Ashton Kutcher launched a public service campaign against prostitution this year, he called it "Real Men Don't Buy Girls". The problem is, real people buy sex, and real people sell sex. The numbers on how many people are involved in the sex trade are notoriously hard to gather, or trust, but there is one constant: buyers are not buying people. When politicians, social service providers and celebrity philanthropists insist that sex workers are selling ourselves, they engage in the same kind of dehumanisation that they claim johns do to us. When they claim that men can buy us, they rob us of our power and our choices. If you're someone whose understanding of the sex trade is patched together from cable specials like these, with their endless reels of women in miniskirts and fishnets and boots leaning into cars, it's probably impossible to imagine that sex workers have power or choices. [URL="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/23/prostitution-sex-trade-demand-myth?newsfeed=true"]Read More...[/URL][/I] [/QUOTE]

[B][COLOR="Red"]DEC 13, 2013 - The SCC has announced that it will render it's judgement in the appeal of Bedford v Canada on Dec 20, 2013 - [URL="http://scc-csc.lexum.com/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/news/en/item/4470/index.do"]http://scc-csc.lexum.com/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/news/en/item/4470/index.do[/URL][/COLOR] [/B] [B]Supreme Court to decide on validity of anti-prostitution laws on Dec. 20[/B] [URL="http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/12/13/supreme-court-to-decide-on-validity-of-anti-prostitution-laws-on-dec-20/"]http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/12/13/supreme-court-to-decide-on-validity-of-anti-prostitution-laws-on-dec-20/[/URL] [QUOTE] OTTAWA â?? Canadaâ??s top court will bring down a landmark decision on the legality of the countryâ??s anti-prostitution laws next week Friday. The ruling relates to challenges to laws against brothels, living off the avails and soliciting. Ontarioâ??s Appeal Court had previously struck down the laws against bawdy houses and altered the ban on living off the avails of prostitution to preclude exploitation. It also upheld the ban on street prostitution. The federal government appealed the decision that invalidated or altered the laws, while a group of sex-trade workers who brought the case initially appealed the soliciting ban. The rulings were put on hold pending the outcome of the Supreme Court of Canada appeal. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in June. At issue is whether the laws violate the rights of sex workers and whether they can then be justified as a reasonable infringement. [/QUOTE] [B]What does the Supreme Court decision mean for sex workers and people in the sex trade?[/B] [URL="http://maggiestoronto.ca/news?news_id=109"]http://maggiestoronto.ca/news?news_id=109[/URL][QUOTE] [B]Dec 13, 2013[/B] - [I]On December 20, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada will release its decision on â??the Bedford caseâ?.[/I] The Bedford case is being fought by three Ontario sex workers to demand that the laws prohibiting sex work be struck down. We stand behind sex workers in their demand for the full decriminalization of our work. [URL="http://scc-csc.lexum.com/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/news/en/item/4470/index.do"](See here for details about the release of the decision)[/URL] [B]What does this decision mean for sex workers and people in the sex trade/sex industry?[/B] The three laws being challenged at the Supreme Court are: a. Communicating For The Purposes of Prostitution in a public place (section 213) b. Living off the avails of prostitution (section 212) c. Keeping a common bawdy house (section 210) Since the introduction of the anti-sex work laws in 1985, there has been a 500% increase in mortality amongst our sisters and brothers in the sex industry. Sex workers and people in the sex trade are our family members, our friends, children, colleagues, partners, leaders and part of our communities. Over our 26 year history, we have seen how criminalizing any aspect of the sex industry hurts all of us. Decriminalization is only one step in the process of achieving our goals of living and working in safety and dignity. [B]How repealing these laws will increase protection for the most marginalized sex workers 1.Repealing the law prohibiting â??keeping a common bawdy houseâ?[/B] In the midst of the slaughter of sex workers in the downtown eastside of Vancouver, an Indigenous street-based sex workerâ??Jamie-Lee Hamiltonâ??opened her own house up so that other sisters in the trade could work indoors rather than disappearing into cars with clients. Women were disappearing, the police were doing nothing and something urgent had to be done. This effort to save lives was shut down by the Vancouver police force using the Bawdy House lawâ??and the massacre of women continued. If the law were struck down, workers could create our own collective workplaces run by and for other sex workers, where we are in charge and protected, where safer sex and services are openly negotiated. [B]2.Repealing the law prohibiting â??Communicating for the purposes of prostitution in a public placeâ?[/B] Upwards of 95% of all prostitution related charges are through this law which primarily impacts street-based (outdoor) sex workers. This law makes being homeless and a sex worker illegal and dangerous. A criminal record has a dramatic impact on someoneâ??s life. Criminal records marginalize those doing sex work due to poverty, can lead to the apprehension of their children and limits other economic options. For the most part, street based sex workers experience the criminal legal system as a source of danger and harassment, not protection. Indigenous sex workers are vastly more likely to experience violence by police and over-incarceration. Repealing this law would be one step to reducing contact between the criminal legal system and sex workers. Removing this law would remove a significant barrier that sex workers face when attempting to negotiate services, safer sex and assess risk. This is a critical interaction between sex workers and prospective clients that saves lives. Removing this law means that sex workers no longer have to work in areas that are isolated and under-protected, another source of danger. [B]3. Repealing the law prohibiting â??Living off the avails of prostitutionâ?[/B] This laws is purportedly for the protection of sex workers from exploitative pimps and organized crime. In its impact however, it criminalizes all relationships between sex workers and their community, leaving workers without access to colleagues, security, receptionists, community and support. We have reports that boyfriends, managers and friends are often charged under this law based on racial profiling, where men of colour are more likely to be perceived as â??pimpsâ? or â??traffickersâ? due to racist stereotyping. Repealing this law will allow sex workers to make decisions about who they want to work with and will remove one tool of racial profiling used by police. [B]No More Colonial Laws[/B] The first anti-sex work laws in Canada were in the Indian Act. At the root, all laws in the Criminal Code of Canada were introduced by colonial governments, imposed and are still enforced without the free, prior and informed consent from the care-takers of these landsâ??the First Nations. There was no assessment nor concern for the impacts these laws have on Indigenous people and nations. As a result, we see that our criminal legal system is bursting with Indigenous people and people of colour who are vastly over-represented. It is the nature of the system to over-police but under-protect certain communities and criminalizing any aspect of the sex industry will put more poor and working-class racialized people behind bars--sex workers, clients and third parties such as management and security. More colonial laws will not rescue us from bad colonial laws. Criminalizing any of us tears communities apart. Sex workers have the solutions to the problems we face. Among these are honouring treaty rights, affordable housing, respectful healthcare and substance treatment, an end to poverty and an overhaul of the child welfare system. Another is to pull the anti-prostitution laws off the backs of the sex workers who are harmed--not helpedâ??by them. For this decision to truly make a difference in our lives, sex workers must be in leadership roles for all decision making about regulations that impact our safety and livelihood including: zoning and licensing, control over the conditions and locations of our work, human rights and labour rights protections, the right to organize as workers. Sex work is real work and we demand fair and safe working conditions for all of us including those without status. We stand against the exploitation of all workers and legislation that advances the precarity of labour and creates vulnerability to exploitation. The disregard by the state for the lives of Indigenous people involved in sex work and the over-representation of Indigenous people in the most precarious and vulnerable forms of sex work cannot be separated from the ongoing economic exploitation of Indigenous people, the extraction of resources from Indigenous lands, the ongoing pursuit of profit at the expense of Indigenous communities and environmental protections, and the displacement of Indigenous peoples from land and labour. Our call for labour rights for all sex workers supports the right to self-determination for Indigenous peoples. Sex worker rights are labour rights. Health and Safety for Sex workers is a labour rights issue. [/QUOTE] [URL="http://gshi.cfenet.ubc.ca/supreme-court-canada-release-decision-bedford-v-canada-friday-december-20th#.UqwSQ6U0wdu"]http://gshi.cfenet.ubc.ca/supreme-court-canada-release-decision-bedford-v-canada-friday-december-20th#.UqwSQ6U0wdu[/URL] [QUOTE] â?¦ On Friday the Supreme Court of Canada will release their decision in Bedford v. Canada. [B]There are several possible outcomes:[/B] 1) The Supreme Court could find all three of the challenged laws unconstitutional. The laws would be â??struck downâ??, meaning no longer valid. If this happens, it does not necessarily mean that things will change right away, as the Supreme Court may give the Federal Government time to draft new laws. The Supreme Court could provide some guidance to the government in their decision. 2) The Supreme Court could uphold the three challenged laws. If this happens, the laws would remain in the Criminal Code and police can continue to enforce them. Sex workers would not be allowed to challenge the same laws again using the same Charter rights argued in Bedford v. Canada. They could challenge the same laws based on different Charter rights, or challenge different aspects of the laws, like in the B.C. case Sex Workers United Against Violence & Kiselbach v. Canada, which is on hold pending the outcome of this case. 3) The Supreme Court may find some of the three challenged laws unconstitutional and uphold some of the others, or change some of the current laws; a mixed result. In this case, the Supreme Court may give the government time to rewrite or change some of the laws, while others remain in effect. [/QUOTE]

Love a man who loves dogs :)