Thanks for sharing. That’s definitely traumatic and they definitely profile Asian and certain other women travelling alone for being sex workers if you can’t tell them what your job is or salient details about your travel. The funny thing is, this is why women get trafficked. To cross borders without being harassed.
@Josephine long post
Here is a more right leaning whore perspective on the Bill. Girls reading it will not like it
I think there’s very little that’s wrong with Bill C-36. It still fully retains all the protections sex workers got before in Supreme Court, and the changes to problematic language in Bill C-49. Nothing changed for the worse with this Bill. We can still work safely and legally.
I might even argue it cares more about women, than what existed before it.
Yes they limited places of sex work — there have always been laws in Toronto about not having places of sex work near schools, and laws about signage in residential neighborhoods. I don’t think that’s oppressive to SWs.That is just sensible.
Do you know why we have so many one way streets downtown? It was so Johns couldn’t cruise around as easily for street hookers
. Street hookers are considered a nuisance. That shouldn’t offend anyone. And, it’s not safe for them anyway. Nobody wants to walk through a track full of prostitutes. It’s scary and indecent. They shouldn’t be out there.As long as the bill doesn’t push women into unsafe places (like the street) then it’s doing its job to protect our safety. That was the point of changing the laws before. To get them safe, and off the street.
Do you support complete decriminalization? There is only one aspect of that I like, which is the government not having a say in how or why or who I fuck, and just the privacy of it.
But, I don’t think it’s necessary nor is it responsible, and it’s been shown to have poor outcomes now that it’s been some time after they did it in NZ and somewhat in Finland.
There’s always going to be people who think decriminalization is just so women can just peddle pussy unfettered anywhere they want. Fuck no. Nobody wants to live in some weird dystopian sex tourism capital.
Besides, it is still largely decriminalized in this bill regardless, for SWs. Bill C-36 is about public nuisance issues mainly, protection of children/family secondly, and encouraging women not to do this job and helping them exit the industry.
Do our rights to do sex work out in the open matter more than public nuisance and kids? I think they absolutely do not. Sex is a private adult thing, it doesn’t belong out in the public domain IMO. That doesn’t endanger SWs at all, it’s just asking for us to respect other members of our society. We have civic duties too.
Many women get trapped in this job just from having no work experience, skills, network of normal people etc. so what’s wrong with the bill helping them exit? It’s often not a good thing when this is your only option.
The talking point I come across the most with hoes, is that this kind wording “stigmatizes” sex work as a terrible path for women, but I am fine with that personally. Sex work is not ideal usually, and I don’t think it should be normalized as some legitimate option, as if it is perfectly unproblematic. We all know that’s a lie.
I’m fine with sex work remaining an underbelly industry, and somewhat clandestine. If we keep it private, stigma shouldn’t even matter. Stigmatization is what keeps it a bit suppressed. That’s how we organically morally regulate things.
And what’s wrong with the light stigmatization introduced in Bill C-36 anyway? It’s hardly a condemnation. Is it so people don’t judge us for being sluts
?We can’t reduce political discourse on rights to “don’t judge me!” — that is juvenile.
I don’t fully buy the “stigmatization = more violence” argument I’ve always heard, either. This is only true with certain stipulations. Another questionable talking point from hoe scholars.
I also think SW should be stigmatized on some level because frankly, I am tired of every public discourse being about sex and sexual orientation. It’s just sex stuff being constantly discussed, ad infinitum. Talking about who fucks who, or why, or how. Like you go on a dating app now, and people have all these weird BDSM acronyms and stuff. Why not just put your hobbies and interests? It’s gross and uncivilized. Same goes for LGBT123 stuff.
And yeah, as with places of sex work, I don’t want any of that stuff discussed around kids either. So it’s the same principle. That’s not sexual education. If anything it retards their natural sexual education and development. It confuses them. They don’t need to hear about all that.
I am not sure what sex worker rights are being lost with this bill at all.
I don’t believe you can answer me either, because I asked you. Three times.
Oh and, last thing, it also criminalized men to buy sex from us, but that’s a GOOD thing for us. It keeps us safe, bc they know we have the upper hand legally if something happens and they don’t act up while alone with us. This is a great protection for us.
It looks to me like they made this bill FOR women. Not to hurt us. I just can’t see it that way. I mean, if you aren’t exactly sure how it hurts you, then at least consider how it helps potentially? And if you can’t see that, there probably is no issue worth discussing at all about Bill C-36.
I obviously haven’t been doing this since 2014, but I think sex worker rights are perfectly preserved, and they aren’t going to just throw out our Supreme Court decisions now because of a change to a Conservative government. You shouldn’t be voting with whoredom as your hinge issue anyway, you should vote for who is best government for all of us, tbh.
A cover for what?
Last edited:
