C36 Merged thread, everything goes here

[Banger77]

Originally saw this on TERB, from the section of the DoJ Technical Paper:Bill C-36 "b) Offences: Purchasers and Third Parties"
http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/other-autre/protect/p1.html#edn31

The following activities have been found to constitute a sexual service or an act of prostitution, if provided in return for some form of consideration: lap-dancing, which involves sitting in the client’s lap and simulating sexual intercourse;[31] masturbation of a client in the context of a massage parlour, whether or not the client climaxes;[32] and, sado-masochistic activities, provided that the acts can be considered to be sexually stimulating/gratifying.[33] However, jurisprudence is clear that neither acts related to the production of pornography,[34] nor stripping[35] meet the test. In most cases, physical contact, or sexual interaction, between the person providing the service and the person receiving it is required; however, acts for which consideration is provided that take place in a private room in a club and that are sexual in nature, but do not involve physical contact between the “client” and “performer”, such as self-masturbation, have been found to constitute prostitution.[36]

Oh Nooooo , Is this the death of the strip club, the ladies might have to find regular employment and also byebye to all the good clubs in Quebec and Ontario. That new club Gallery Show Lounge is going have a short life.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Bill C-36 and its impact on rates.

Curious to everyone's opinion on how this bill will affect rates?
Ladies please chime in with your thoughts.

Was chatting on-line with a fellow pooner the other day and this came up.
We agreed that the new bill will significantly polarize rates. The established ladies whom we know and feel safe with, will be able to raise their rates due to increased demand.
The lesser known, especially those on sites like BP will drop their rates due to reduced demand and as a way to attract clients who may be "on the fence" about seeing someone they aren't sure isn't a LE sting.

 

[phreak]

God Save Us from the Queen

Bill C-36 has almost become the law pending the Royal Assent. Will the Royal Assent make any difference? All Canada's 'democratic' institutions clearly demonstrated total inefficiency by their inability and unwillingness to protect fundamental freedoms against fascism. Should we count on the remnants of monarchy to do it? I doubt...

Bill C-36 has already made ALL Canada's government branches (executive, legislative and judicial) a laughing stock, and the final act of the farce will be the 'Queen' endorsing the lawlessness. This reminds me of Hitler who successfully transitioned Germany from democracy to fascism using 'democratic' procedures. But that was almost 90 years ago. Are we still that naive to go the same road?

Make no mistake - it's not just about 'bad' Conservatives. The so called 'Opposition' contributed as much to make this bill pass as its creators. How is that possible? They voted 'No'! That is exactly the point. They did vote on the bill which was inherently persecutory and clearly in defiance of the Supreme Court ruling. The 'Opposition' didn't refuse to vote, they didn't try to launch a campaign of civil disobedience, they didn't demonstrate in any way that they didn't want to have anything to do with the obvious abuse and lawlessness.

All the 'Opposition' care about is not to be directly associated with the bill, but did absolutely nothing out of ordinary to prevent it from becoming a law. And that's in spite of the fact that the bill was way out of ordinary for any civilized democratic society. Why is that? The reason is likely very simple though not too obvious: the 'Opposition' don't want anything out of ordinary to happen to them when and if they form the government. And that's because they are no better than Conservatives and are capable of the same lawlessness in their own ways. Otherwise they wouldn't have endorsed the fascist bill by voting 'No'.

 

[Lo-ki]

Curious to everyone's opinion on how this bill will affect rates?
Ladies please chime in with your thoughts.

I was wondering about that to.

 

[Maxfield]

According to this article http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/senate-oks-controversial-prostitution-bill/ar-BBd7KL6 SP's can advertise, but it is illegal to run the ad. It's a complete catch 22. Seems to me if you post a review, you are giving the Police all the evidence they need to arrest you. Personally I think rates will drop. Many hobbyists aren't going to take their chances on anyone new. I know I won't.

 

[take8easy]

I am trying to see as many SP's I can see before LE comes into action. The idea is to have a good date base of phones of SP's whom I trust (and who trust me).

I have talked to some SP's about it and most are worried. Many of them have said that they would still see the regular ones and hope that word of mouth brings them more clients.

T8E

 

[Slapshot1]

Just finished reading an article on here about arrests made very, very close to my city which has made me really take a second look at this hobby. This was the intention all along by the Cons. Squeeze from the bottom and work their way up. There will be too many hobbyists that will not even bother with new BP ladies, even if the rates are ridiculously low. This will force the new ladies to quit and do something else. The well known trusted providers may see an increase in clientele, or maybe not. No one here seems to be addressing the rate question and understandibly so. Too many unknown variables in this to know exactly what to do. I've already made some decisions myself, no toftt, no hotels, only an incall to a private residence. The unfortunate thing for the ladies regarding the unknown is that the bills don't stop coming, even if the johns do.

 

[susi]

in sweden the rates went up indoors and down outdoors...which means once again the outdoor workers will bear the brunt of this bad law....

amp's will be illegal especially one's operating out of condo's/ apartments etc....any unlicensed business will be under scrutiny...all business owners are considered pimps and exploiters under the new law.....

amp's, since migrant workers are often the subject of false human trafficking claims...will certainly be under watch closely because of racism, anti immigrant shit and the lies that have been spread about their lives....it will be a strange new time...everyone be careful.

again, in vancouver we have our policy with police and the city so are not expecting any backlash enforcement but in burnaby, new west, surrey,etc....its a different story.....

 

[green]

in sweden the rates went up indoors and down outdoors...which means once again the outdoor workers will bear the brunt of this bad law....

amp's will be illegal especially one's operating out of condo's/ apartments etc....any unlicensed business will be under scrutiny...all business owners are considered pimps and exploiters under the new law.....

amp's, since migrant workers are often the subject of false human trafficking claims...will certainly be under watch closely because of racism, anti immigrant shit and the lies that have been spread about their lives....it will be a strange new time...everyone be careful.

again, in vancouver we have our policy with police and the city so are not expecting any backlash enforcement but in burnaby, new west, surrey,etc....its a different story.....

I agree. I think some of the Highgate shops may have to move downtown. The RCMP will not be working under the same policies as the VPD, and are much more subject to political manipulation.

I think that the trusted shops will do better with the new legislation, but all of us will be much less adventurous, and I'll be far less likely to cross Boundary Road.

 

[westwoody]

Jethro ad Susi are both right.

I would not see anyone I do not already know and trust. Period.

So demand for known and trusted sps will go up, maybe way up. Unknown bp types will be lucky if anyone calls. Polarising is a good word for it. There will be expensive high end providers and subsistence low end providers, with nothing in between.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

in sweden the rates went up indoors and down outdoors...which means once again the outdoor workers will bear the brunt of this bad law....

amp's will be illegal especially one's operating out of condo's/ apartments etc....any unlicensed business will be under scrutiny...all business owners are considered pimps and exploiters under the new law.....

amp's, since migrant workers are often the subject of false human trafficking claims...will certainly be under watch closely because of racism, anti immigrant shit and the lies that have been spread about their lives....it will be a strange new time...everyone be careful.

again, in vancouver we have our policy with police and the city so are not expecting any backlash enforcement but in burnaby, new west, surrey,etc....its a different story.....

Thanks for your comments Susi. You're the expert on this and its impact on the ladies.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Seems to me if you post a review, you are giving the Police all the evidence they need to arrest you.

That's not going to happen unless maybe you happen to post your real name and address on the forum.
While I never underestimate the zeal of some cops or the politicians pushing their buttons, this law is aimed at giving the cops the power to go after and arrest Johns and Pimps out on the streets/hotels/MP's etc. The amount of time and effort necessary to track people down on the internet would be beyond their manpower and budgetary limits.
We're all anonymous here and as I understand it the administrators of sites such as PERB have taken them offshore (not sure of the exact computer lingo) to prevent any problems they may have. So even if the cops decided they wanted to know who Jethro on Perb is, they couldn't get it, even with a court order.

Damn, I think I just hijacked my own thread.:doh:

Let's get back to the original question.

Cheers

 

[take8easy]

Thanks for your comments Susi. You're the expert on this and its impact on the ladies.

No matter what the impact is on the rates, this bill is archaic. Prostitution is the old profession on earth. More you try to suppress it, darker it gets.

Like I said before, I am only going to see my regular ladies or the ladies who these trust worthy ladies refer me to. Same with SP's they can only see the guys they trust and then these clients can refer more clients to them.

I hope local police forces stay out of this and let people enjoy this wonderful hobby. RCMP is a different story!

 

[summerbreeze]

it is perfectly normal in a democratic country for politicians to put forward a law which suits the majority.

also, if not constitutional or impractical it will run its course and be amended or struck down.

prohibition in the US is a good example of this

a democracy can have two conflicting jurisdictions co-exist and of course require time to fix but are ultimately fixable

in this case an incident brought before the courts which forces them to rule against the law will trigger a constitutional challenge, it could be in provincial court then move to a federal jurisdiction

this particular law would never have gone this route unless it had majority support in the public, sorry pooners, your demographic and lobby not strong enough

need to allow democratic process to go through its process on this one, unfortunately for those how are against this bill

 

[vancity_cowboy]

But how much did the whole of Canadians know about this bill, the whole of it's effects or even if this bill existed? I didn't even know about it living out on the Coast until I came on Perb to mingle before planning my trip to the mainland. I doubt that the real voice of Canadians has been truly heard on this subject.

imo, the female (roughly) 50% of voters are decidedly FOR c-36

add in a few percentage points for devoted, church-going, happily married men - and you've got your majority of the population

summerbreeze is right - no matter how hard or how logically we argue against this bill, the majority of voters are against us. this is an unfortunate fact of life that we had better get used to

the only thing we've got going for us is the 'independent' supreme court of canada. they are NOT a democratic institution, and don't have to listen to voters when they pass their judgements

hopefully in the 10 years or so that it takes for them to rule this travesty unconstitutional, there will be some positive changes

unfortunately, by then i'll likely be pushing up daisies instead of firing out cum-shots, so i've pretty much resigned myself to being a criminal for the last years of my life

 

[felixthecat]

in sweden the rates went up indoors and down outdoors...

Nice to know, it's a good indication how things could be long term. I wouldn't bet it's the same here though, if even Vancouver and suburbs could end up differently.

It's safe to say street walkers outside of Vancouver won't be able to increase the rates. For everybody else, there are many factors involved. If VPD are not intervening, obviously Vancover will be the place to do the business. The demand might increase in Vancouver (specially indoors) or it could drop, and supply likely increase from other areas, the end result is not obvious.

Short term, it's natural for people to wait and see. The rates will probably stay for a while though demand will drop at least originally.

 

[phreak]

it is perfectly normal in a democratic country for politicians to put forward a law which suits the majority.

also, if not constitutional or impractical it will run its course and be amended or struck down.

prohibition in the US is a good example of this

a democracy can have two conflicting jurisdictions co-exist and of course require time to fix but are ultimately fixable

in this case an incident brought before the courts which forces them to rule against the law will trigger a constitutional challenge, it could be in provincial court then move to a federal jurisdiction

this particular law would never have gone this route unless it had majority support in the public, sorry pooners, your demographic and lobby not strong enough

need to allow democratic process to go through its process on this one, unfortunately for those how are against this bill

What you are saying is not totally incorrect, but way too simplistic. It is 'perfectly normal in a democratic country for politicians to put forward a law which suits the majority' ONLY IF it is not contrary to fundamental freedoms and if it DOES NOT discriminate/persecute minorities. In other words any proposed law can't be in contradiction with the principles the democracy is founded upon. Defining modern democracy as simply the rule of majority is barbaric - democracy these days means protecting minorities from the despotism of majority in the first place.

Bill C-36 has it all: criminalization of basic human rights, persecution of minorities, and worst of all this is done for the sake of ideology and nothing else. The hope that if the law is 'not constitutional or impractical it will run its course and be amended or struck down' is naive - it may take years before and if this happens. That means that the knowingly and obviously unconstitutional inherently persecutory law will be in full force in a 'democratic' country for an extended period allowing the government to 'legally' persecute innocent citizens and taxpayers! And we are talking about CRIMINAL prosecution (persecution?) here - it's not a minor issue. That's what I call fascism - Hitler would be proud of our government and parliament.

And now imagine that you are an MP and a new bill is proposed to... (here is an example which will be very clear for the majority of PERB members) ... to ban the immigration of a clearly identifiable group (ethnic Chinese) just because the majority think that they drive the real estate prices up, etc; and confiscate their property because they just have too much money of unknown origin, and use this money to fight poverty. Also Chinese Canadians must use separate washrooms, education of their kids will be segregated, and they must seat at the back of a bus since the majority of Canadians just don't want them around. And of course criminal prosecution for breaking the law.

Would you vote on this bill? I understand you would vote 'No' if you do vote, but do you think it would be appropriate to vote at all in this case? If you think my example is too extreme, well, Bill C-36 is not much different considering how damaging it is to the principles democracy is based upon.

 

[sensualsixty]

Wishful thinking!!!!

The governor general has been known to do strange things - such as letting Harper porogue parliament. Maybe, in my wildest dreams, our present g-g will do the right thing and refuse to sign the bill.

 

[sensualsixty]

Wishful thinking!!!!

The governor general has been known to do strange things - such as letting proroguing parliament at Harper's request. Maybe, in my wildest dreams, our present g-g will do the right thing and refuse to sign the bill.

(Spelling error, and error in facts in original.)

 

[johnsmit]

This word majority of the people...majority .of the voters.....majority of the women or men
Actually mean nothing..When you only have less then 50% of the voters pertisapate. .
For any vote to be truly binding in a democratic society .. you must have over 60 % ideally 75% of all registered voters voting ...and. Over 60% of them must agree for something to pass

That's how referendums are past or failed in the US...The one thing I agree is done right.