[SWAF-Potluck] Problem with the Nordic Model

[Chenoa]

Very informative Andy, thank you.

Sent from my iPhone





On 2014-04-02, at 11:11, Andy Sorfleet <a.sorfleet at gmail.com> wrote:

> I was reading the Open Letter from Kate Shannon et al, that was circulated here and I feel I would like to make some personal observations about some of the "evidence" presented in the letter.
> 
> Here is the statement I wish to address:
> 
> "2. Enforcement prohibiting communication in public spaces between sex workers and their clients directly elevates risks for violence, abuse and other health and social harms. Since the Communication Law was enacted in 1985 to reduce “public nuisance”, the number of sex workers who have gone missing and been murdered in Canadian cities has escalated dramatically, with disproportionate numbers of Indigenous women. Evidence has consistently shown that in order for sex workers and their clients to avoid police detection, sex workers have to work alone, in isolated areas and rush into vehicles before they have the opportunity to screen prospective clients or negotiate the terms of transactions, severely limiting their ability to avoid dangerous clients or refuse unwanted services (e.g. unprotected sex)."
> 
> First, you should know that the "communicating law" is not really anything new. Canada has had laws prohibiting prostitutes and their clients from communicating in public since 1867. In 1972, "Vag-C" -- the Criminal Code section used to arrest a "prostitute or night-walker who ... fails to give a good account of herself" -- is repealed. It is replaced by a law stating that "Every person who solicits any person in a public place for the purpose of prostitution is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction."
> 
> The 1972 soliciting law was taken to Supreme Court who  redefined it in R.v Hutt to mean that the soliciting had to be "pressing and persistent." From 1978 to 1985 police refused to enforce the soliciting law and prostitution strolls grew (particularly after the 1975 raids on The Penthouse, a bar where prostitutes met clients) and so did hostility from vigilante neighbours, who -- with the help of police -- lobbied for a new law to deal with the street sex trade.
> 
> It may be a fact that "the number of sex workers who have gone missing and been murdered in Canadian cities has escalated dramatically" since 1985, but there is no evidence of causal link. If there were, it would be logical to assume that there were dramatic numbers of missing and murdered women dating back to the birth of the nation.
> 
> Perhaps the social science "evidence" does suggest that sex workers "rush into vehicles before they have the opportunity to screen prospective clients or negotiate the terms of transactions, severely limiting their ability to avoid dangerous clients or refuse unwanted services (e.g. unprotected sex)."
> 
> In my personal experience working on the street, however, I can say that if I had any fear that there were police around, or that the person driving the car might be a police officer I did NOT rush to jump in the car. In fact I was much more like to not get in the car at all, since if you do, the police who are watching can arrest you both.
> 
> I have asked many of my friends who have worked the street this question: "Honestly, have you ever jumped in a car in a hurry because you were worried about being busted?" The answer is always, "No."
> 
> There is also this idea that you can determine whether a client is dangerous with your intuition. This is a dangerous myth. Sure, you should always trust your gut. But that in no way is any guarantee that you have not misjudged someone. It can happen with a client you feel comfortable with and have seen several times.
> 
> I also find it offensive to suggest that sex workers have unprotected sex with clients because the police might enforce the communicating law. Negotiating sex for pay whether its inside or outside the vehicle requires both parties to bargain in good faith. If the terms change once you are in the car, and you don't want to provide the service in question, you get out of the car. Otherwise, it's sexual assault.
> 
> Certainly I don't see the need for a special soliciting law just for sex workers. I think our municipalities do just fine with the by-laws that keep street-selling from becoming a nuisance -- like for food carts or busking or jewellery corner stands.
> 
> But, I also don't believe in blaming the communicating law for statistical anomalies caused by the actions of villainous people -- serial murderers who carefully disposed of all remains. Such people commit their crimes on their unsuspecting or trusting victims, regardless of how prostitution is regulated.
> 
> In solidarity,
> Andy
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SWAF-Potluck mailing list
> SWAF-Potluck at lists.resist.ca
> https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swaf-potluck
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SWAF-Potluck mailing list
> SWAF-Potluck at lists.resist.ca
> https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swaf-potluck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/swaf-potluck/attachments/20140402/a7d0676d/attachment-0001.html>