Bill C-36 (winnipeg's opinion)

[fresh 8278]

If they want to find coerced and abused service providers they shouldn't be raiding hotels. anyone who has taken a drive in the west end can spot the pimps/drug dealers lurking not far from some obviously 'person at risk' type street workers.

Seems like they ignore the real problems that are rift there in front of their face and are obsessed with a problem that isn't really a' problem at all. no wonder our police resources are so stretched

[Cooperuke 110]

Question: can someone explain what legal merit can be enforced by outting an individual? Speculation about a transaction that may have occurred in private? Thanks.

[cinelli 22184]

The intent of outing someone was to expose them as hypocrites.

 

Bedford implied that she knew of politicians who dealt with escorts. If those same politicians support C36 there is a conflict of interest and hypocrisy as well.

[ThisOneWorks 4707]

Well, from reading and tracking this bill, it does appear that even experienced P's or seasoned or well reviewed.... Whatever word you want to use.... Are certainly considering stepping away from this world.

I spent what will most likely by my last money spent on a local experienced sp last week and even she does not think she will renew her ad as she feels that this will hurt her business.

For me? It's simply no longer worth the risk!

With this new law and the instant public outrage those that partake of a service that has been around for thousands of years will be guilty until proven innocent! Basically if you get caught say goodbye to whatever life, career, family everything you have.

For me? It's simply no longer worth the risk!

 

To those ladies I had the pleasure of spending time with thank you! For those that I wish I could have spent time with...... And that list is long too. My loss!

[cinelli 22184]

For me and most guys, this is a hobby. If I have to do without for a while it is not the end of the world.

 

For a lot of women this is their livelihood. Losing this income is going to really hurt them. I really feel bad about this, I know a couple of ladies personally who really count on this for extra income. They are not buying fur coats or Benzes, they are feeding their kids.

 

How does C36 "help" them? Frankly it pisses me off that Conservative politicians can play games and exploit vulnerable women just for a few votes.

[young60 1118]

Zoe

I would like to know your opionion on this matter, as you are very intelligent and I am sure have been following it closely. What are your thoughts, observations, concerns etc.

I highly respect and value your thoughts on all of this from a SP perspective.

Thanks

[Zoe Zee 13876]

I really don't know yet. I have listened to the reading of the proposed bill and I think what it will really come down to is how each municipality/province is going to enforce the bill...

 

The part that worries me is "anybody caught advertising FOR the sp is liable to criminal charges."

 

So, I wonder how EC will change and all that sort of stuff.

 

I will not risk a criminal record.

 

I am currently looking for other work. If I find it. I may stop advertising and just take my regulars. I truly do like this work. I've gone through privacy breaches, slander etc and have pulled through not taking it personally.

 

I think this is really going to be a wait and see situation. If they just go after people in forced conditions - good. If they go after providers who are choosing to do this on their own, then I'm out.

 

I also wonder how each of our potential new mayors will react to this, whether they will address it or if they even have any say on it.

 

Right now, it is "what if, and then what?" and I find no value in speculation. (fear-mongering)

 

EDIT: as for outing clients etc. I cannot see how that would ever come into play with me. I have had my privacy breached before and know how it feels. I would NEVER do that to anybody. SP or client. If the police held charges vs outing people - then I feel that is exploitative and essentially a threat. I would out myself and the misguided attempts of the police before I ever gave out a clients personal information, tell the media SPs are being threatened and be done with it all. I believe in client and SP right to privacy.

[fortunateone 156618]

i will say don't worry about EC, it is an advertising site, not an agency or a 3rd party poster. You submit the ad to EC, therefore you are the one posting the ad, not EC.

[Zarhan Fastfire 6450]

The fellow who pointed out that the balance of power shifts on to the SP's side (excessively) had it absolutely right--and this is what will make things difficult for SPs in general and new SPs in particular. Any SP with whom one is unfamiliar is a potential honey trap, or a blackmailer, as far as the less sophisticated punter is concerned (those who don't read these boards and have very little to go on but internet searches or ads in the phone book and the papers). I don't know what our entrapment laws are like but I am sure we have all seen honey traps at one time or another in the North End or the West End.

 

And speaking of the netherworld which is Winnipeg's "low track", I was once approached by a sleazy guy literally dragging an unwilling lady along Ellice Avenue and it quite literally made my skin crawl. (I had stopped my car to take a call and my windows were open, so I guess he thought he saw his moment.) It burns me up to see so much energy wasted by both LE and the media's chatterboxes on all-but non-existent trafficking networks in presumably expensive city hotels or condos when the real thing, in all its ugliness, is going on under their very noses the way it always has. I draw two things from this.

 

The fact is, there is no incentive to traffick women from countries where there is either high unemployment, a very low cost of living (where our dollars go so much further), limited freedom of choice, or an entrenched glass ceiling (how else does one explain the number of educated Korean women working here now?)--no need, because the incentive to make some real money makes the use of force redundant. Organized crime may well be involved with some such agencies (they may be easy targets), but most probably in the form of skimming ("protection" services) or buying them out on occasion.

 

As has also been pointed out, when people think of the hobby and its SPs, they think of the sad plight of the addict or the very poor, at the mercy of whomever they choose to join in a car (conversely, he may also be at her mercy if she threatens him with a knife or calling LE on her phone). Sadly, these women (and a few men, mostly transgendered) exist and they exist in very large numbers. Anyone who has driven our city's mean streets without the rose-coloured glasses will notice them--in broad daylight, not just after dark. I am certain that on any given night in Winnipeg they outnumber the ads on Backpage by a factor of 100:1. This is what people think of, and they are not wrong in wanting "something" to be done about it. The problem is, of course, the laws do nothing but make a bad situation worse.

 

All well and good for us to complain. We won't be heard unless we offer an alternative. Mine is simple enough: ok, society acknowledges that the women on the street are in danger and should not be criminalized for either supporting themselves, their kids, or their habits, but it still wants to "help" them. Fine. So put your money where your mouth is and help them instead of making it worse. If they really are doing this for drugs (and many are, no one disputes it, from oxycontin and Tylenol all the way up to meth and crack), supply them with the drugs they want until they are ready to enter rehab of their own free will--which may be never. For those who are not on drugs, but are having trouble making ends meet--make it easier for them: affordable housing, zero red tape for basic living benefits, and teach them how to balance a budget if they don't know how. Help them find a job that pays. After you've done all that, you know what? You will STILL have some left over who refuse to be "good". There will still be some who want more things and the money that buys those things than you can ever give--or they just don't do nine to five. You'll never stamp it out entirely, but you can at least keep the numbers low enough that you can manage this social illness instead of making it worse, as you are now. Worried now about all the "johns" who find fewer girls on the street? They will begin to save up so they can see the ladies online thereby making the invisible market online the new norm. That's not shuffling one problem from one area to another (which is what crackdowns in neighbourhoods achieves), it's making a dangerous activity that much safer.

 

This, or something like it, is how it's done in places where it's legal. Would we were so enlightened.

[cinelli 22184]

That sounds a lot like the harm reduction model. The safe injection site in Vancouver is similar and really does work.

 

The really ugly face of street prostitution is the only side most people know. Only a tiny minority of pooners read these boards, let alone the general public. I often get the same come-ons as you, I go to the University of Winnipeg and park in that area. There are a lot of SW's that are obviously on something. I was getting in my car after class and was propositioned by a girl, when I declined she kicked the side of my car. Two doors wrecked! Car break ins are common too.

 

That is a huge money pit for the city, there are always cops, ambulances and fire running around. It is also home for about a third of city gangbangers.

[fortunateone 156618]

I'm confused by that - do you not pay EC a fee to put up the advertisement? And then how are they not a second party advertising for you and profiting from it?

 

 

 

Well that's the problem with C36, as mentioned a few times.

 

The fact that it may be illegal for EC to accept payment in exchange for an sp to post an ad does not make it illegal for the sp to post OR pay for the ad.

 

The sp is not responsible for the risks the 2nd part is taking by taking her money to post her ads, and she is also not legally liable for those risks in any way. she is also not conspiring in any way with EC by paying them to publish any ads that she is legally allowed to post.

 

is there a logical way to explain this? no. because it is not logical.

[Zarhan Fastfire 6450]

I think "first, do no harm" should be the mantra for every well intentioned person involved in social policy. If people stopped to think about what those words "first, do no harm" actually mean, they would begin to understand why they have to think through what their policies will result in. I agree with others that the Conservatives do not actually care, nor are they concerned that their policy flies in the face of classical liberalism (like their Republican counterparts to the south, whose 1990s through 2000s playbook they have been following since 2011). But there are many for whom the Conservatives' message resonates who do care, and they are the ones we need to reach, to make them understand that it is indeed possible to help the most desperate, but not through any kind of criminalization--victims of something these ones may well be, but casting "johns" as the melodramatic villains of the piece achieves nothing that means anything to them: it's not getting a girl off drugs, feeding her kids, getting her kids back from Child and Family Services, providing her with a stable home life of her own, etc., etc.). All it may achieve is, potentially, the ruining of the life and career of a few johns, either through loss of their jobs, forfeiture of their vehicles, or even turning them into self-haters through john school.

 

And speaking of harm...

 

Think it all through: first, do no harm. What are the consequences of my actions? What do I need to know about the problem I want to solve? You cannot accomplish anything unless you understand the background, the root causes, of the complex web of patterns you are trying to change. Friends, how can Stephen Harper possibly begin to address any of that when he refuses to acknowledge that a crime, such as a the murder of a 15 year old aboriginal girl in our very city, has at the very least a "sociological" context? By denying such a context exists (her age, her gender, her appearance), and focusing only on bringing her killer to justice, he all but ensures that she will be joined by another girl just like her in the future--and another, and another, and another. If there were a pattern of missing fortysomething men of a single ethnic group disappearing (let's say Ukrainian Canadians since there's still a few in the North End), we would hear about nothing else. Why is it that some people think that examining that context, the conditions which make some people vulnerable, is so undesirable? Why are we so god-dammed defensive when this kind of thing happens and so quick to say "nothing else could have been done" (as TB said in the Sun not long ago)? How long must we continue to turn a blind eye to that which is staring us all in the face every day in our cities? That young girl did not die "because" she was an aboriginal girl, but the fact it was more likely to happen is something that should give us all a long and sober pause of reflection. I doubt very much that someone like TB would have said there was nothing that could have been done to help her had she been white.

[Cloud 1210]

I wonder if this will be applied to our non-contact private dances at our strip clubs. It's a sexual service. You might fight it by saying that prostitution laws don't apply to strip clubs where no prostitution takes place (overbroad and arbitrary seeing as dancers and clubs are licenced). I've read that strip clubs in Sweden suck, and Iceland banned them. I can see C-36 supporters being okay with shutting down strip clubs.

[fortunateone 156618]

I wonder if this will be applied to our non-contact private dances at our strip clubs. It's a sexual service. You might fight it by saying that prostitution laws don't apply to strip clubs where no prostitution takes place (overbroad and arbitrary seeing as dancers and clubs are licenced). I've read that strip clubs in Sweden suck, and Iceland banned them. I can see C-36 supporters being okay with shutting down strip clubs.

 

 

i think if there is no contact, there's no contact. I noticed some referrals to lap dances, that is contact so it was mentioned that would possibly qualify as a sexual service. Whether it does or not remains to be seen. The adult entertainment industry has the benefit of money, business licenses, zoning and organization, if it comes to that, they could be among the first to challenge C36. Which is a good thing.

 

All complaints are out the window if the SC allows sexual services in the private rooms, tho, and this does indeed happen in various places in the country.

[batmeez69 525]

Do you think that this bill will affect escort agencies (ie mgf) the way it will affect indies?

[Guest K****4]

When dose this bill come into effect is it dec 1 ???

[fortunateone 156618]

Do you think that this bill will affect escort agencies (ie mgf) the way it will affect indies?

 

 

It will affect everyone, but my guess is that the impact will be felt more by agencies and massage parlours. They are the targets of C36, considered to be the exploiter/pimps of sps. However, LE are the final decision makers as to who, if anyone, and how they plan to enforce any new legislation.

 

For example, Edmonton has a method that works for them, maybe they will simply apply a new C36 law to what they find more important. Vancouver LE has a no harm to sps, which probably includes not harassing their workplaces (mps and agencies), in fact they don't have anything to do with the nationwide Operation Nothern Spotlight farce, and Edmonton uses the ONS to focus solely on traveling sps who may be literally trafficked/forced.

 

Each LE is going to do something different, and my guess is that Winnipeg LE have always seemed to leave your massage parlour owners and workers alone, so that probably won't change.

[Regent 35404]

The bill will come into effect once the Senate and House of Commons agree on an identical bill and it receives royal assent.

 

I'm unclear as to how C-36 is going to affect my business, particularly the nuances of it.

 

I have no doubt that it will make it harder to screen, and that business will take a hit until people can see how the law is being enforced. It's also unclear to me what kind of activities will be covered under C-36. My services are all kink related, and while it's all sexual to me, it's hard to say where the line is going to be drawn. I don't ever have sex with clients, at least not any conventional definition of sex.

 

If any Winnipeggers are interested in working to combat criminalization, we have a working group here that's part of the Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform. https://www.facebook.com/WinnipegWG

 

If you want more info on how to get involved directly, email us: [email protected]

 

Sex workers and allies are encouraged to participate.

[ezish12 577]

I have a question for you guys. I read the whole thread also on other boards regarding this bill. I see some people are really scared which make sense to me. I hate having a record on my file if I get caught. I love travelling and don't want to cause an issue. Also won't go well with work. When EB/TO OR Nevada (a MP in Winnipeg) got raided and guys were caught inside, did they get a record as well. Or they were just let go with a warning?

There is another group who thinks business will be usual. I think I am somewhere in between. So it comes down to minimize the risk as much as possible. Here is what I am thinking. Let me know if there are ways I can minimize it more.

 

1. See someone who I have seen before. A regular.

2. When I contact her send an email asking simply to meet for 1 hour. *That's all. Nothing more in the email. I think email is safe and secure. Don't like texting. Also email from my hobby account.

3. Meeting at a hotel room or condo.

 

Now the question here. She will have a ad or website somewhere. I am not replying to her ad or mentioning anything about the site or ad. Am I still at risk? Just because she has an ad somewhere. SP have friends and they communicate with them all the time. I can simply be one of them.

 

2nd question: carrying cash with u, that can't be a risk,,,right?. You are only handing it over in a private room with someone you trust. Will it help if I do an online transaction? Like eMail transfer or PayPal.

 

3rd question: Lets assume I am really unlucky and got caught as a part of a sting operation. Let's say the hotel owner called the LE or some other client when to see her made a stupid mistake and I am just happen to be the next guy. I have no explicit communication by email or txt, what type of trouble will I be in.

 

Let me know is there anything more I can do to minimize the risk ?

 

Winnipeg question: what about places like Main 1360 or oriental place on portage or any other non RMT massage place. R they safe too?

[Regent 35404]

It's really hard to say how this is going to be enforced in Winnipeg. The "Counter-Exploitation" unit (formerly Vice), is really small (nine members, two of whom are dedicated to sex trade stuff) http://winnipeg.ca/police/ceu/, so there may be little to no enforcement when it comes to indoor sex workers. Or there might be an uptick in enforcement at the beginning. We just don't know.

 

The Winnipeg Working Group sent letters to all of the mayoral candidates during the election, to ask how they intend to enforce C-36, but Bowman didn't bother responding, so I'm unclear about his stance on anything related to sex work.

 

With regards to being confronted by the police, I think it all depends on the attitude and assumptions of the officers on scene. Even if there's no real evidence to suggest that you intend to purchase sexual services, they may make assumptions based merely on your presence and your gender.

 

They may arrest you even if they have no intention of charging you. They may also threaten or try to intimate you with threats of being arrested or charged for other things if you don't co-operate. If you do have an encounter with the police, know your rights and don't say anything more than you're legally required to. http://winnipegcopwatch.org/ has some good local resources.

 

With regard to communication, I believe phone calls have the best legal protections around privacy, though I could be mistaken.

 

DO NOT send money via Paypal. Paypal is aggressively anti-sex work, and will seize and hold funds if they suspect that they are for sexual products or services, OR if they suspect that one of the people involved provides sexual services, even if they aren't using Paypal for those transactions (eg someone who performs in porn uses Paypal to sell vintage clothes on eBay, account frozen.)

 

The Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform just updated their Q&A on C-36. The section that discusses ramifications for clients starts on page 3 https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B3mqMOhRg5FeMVRlTk93Q2ZBS2c&usp=drive_web&tid=0B3mqMOhRg5FeNlY4ZkxFb2pLaWM#list

 

It's 19 pages and I recommend everyone read it.

 

I know that's more questions than answers, but I hope it helps somewhat.

[ezish12 577]

The Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform just updated their Q&A on C-36. The section that discusses ramifications for clients starts on page 3 https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B3mqMOhRg5FeMVRlTk93Q2ZBS2c&usp=drive_web&tid=0B3mqMOhRg5FeNlY4ZkxFb2pLaWM#list

 

It's 19 pages and I recommend everyone read it.

 

Thanks a lot for posting this. This was very helpful. I recommend everyone to read this, at least the summary page.

This wasn't fun to read. I can't believe those stupid people made the law so vague. It made me more mad after reading it. "Any public place"? Really. They didn't define it specifically. How stupid is that? Now we need to see if we get charged and it will be up to the judge's to decide if my internet communication were public. That's crazy. Why we have such stupid people in charge to write law. Democracy is failing, stop voting for these nut jobs. Sigh!!

Posted via Mobile Device

[Ice4fun 78407]

 

The Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform just updated their Q&A on C-36. The section that discusses ramifications for clients starts on page 3 https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B3mqMOhRg5FeMVRlTk93Q2ZBS2c&usp=drive_web&tid=0B3mqMOhRg5FeNlY4ZkxFb2pLaWM#list

 

It's 19 pages and I recommend everyone read it.

 

I know that's more questions than answers, but I hope it helps somewhat.

 

This document is very informative and I would recommend it to anyone involved in the industry as a worker or hobbiest.

[usernametaken 2886]

I think new girls coming into the business should pair up with a well known sp...so we can gradually ease them in!

[stbordie 387]

Not sure if these girls are new but I don't even ask anything specific and they're like responding to a whole slew of menu prices and services without even being asked. Seems like being set up or something or is it just me be paranoid. What do you guys think.

[fortunateone 156618]

Not sure if these girls are new but I don't even ask anything specific and they're like responding to a whole slew of menu prices and services without even being asked. Seems like being set up or something or is it just me be paranoid. What do you guys think.

 

 

i think you are being paranoid. Firstly because the law is not in effect yet. And secondly because you are probably assuming that everyone who works, advertises or responds to advertisements even knows about C36

 

 

I would say that the vast majority will carry on as before in complete ignorance that there are any laws, just as they do currently.