While the motivation to protect the health and well being of "sex trade workers" (a euphemism for women who are victimized by sexual exploitation) is noble, it does not go nearly far enough. Yes, we should decriminalize those who are being sold for sex, but we should also offer these women options to exit if they so choose, AND criminalize the buyers, those who are paying for and demanding sexual services. There is a myth that says legalization and moving sexual services indoors will offer safety and limit trafficking, but countries like Holland have proven otherwise.
Melissa Farley from www.prostitutionresearch.com, reports that while 15% of Canadian purchase sex, 85% of prostitutes report a history of sexual abuse in childhood, 75% were victims of rape and girls and women in prostitution have a mortality rate 40 times higher than the national average. This will not change if prostitution moves indoors and has legitimacy attached to it. In Sweden they have seen a 66% decline in prostitution since they instituted laws that decriminalize supply, but criminalize demand.
The majority of women in the sex trade would like out. Yes, we cannot afford to pretend it doesn't exist. However, we must also fight for the dignity of the young, poor, abused and aboriginal women across our country who would like more options than being in this lifestyle.
Former prostitute Shona Stewart talks about the myths of our current attitude toward the sex trade industry. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqhQUuLM4KU&feature=youtu.be&hd=1
This is far too simplistic a solution. While in some cases licensed brothels do provide safer environments for women working as prostitutes, the reality is that this law serves to provide more shelter and protection to the pimps, traffickers, and the small number of prostitutes who do have a level of control over their situation, than it does for those who are the most vulnerable. The new law makes it easier for trafficking rings to operate under the guise of 'legal' brothels. I agree with Sarah Mah on this – we should provide protection for those at risk (the women) and make it harder for those who profit most from this venture and are most likely to profligate exploitation and violations of human rights (the pimps & johns, generally speaking).
Sarah Mah - 12 years ago
I voted NO. I already know that brothels don't keep Asian women safe here in Vancouver. Women are poor, trafficked, abused, kept in prostitution by blackmail, and murdered in brothels where no one can see. Brothels have been tried and failed, here and in other places of the world (New Zealand, Australia, Nevada, the Netherlands). Why would I support that? I vote: decriminalize women in prostitution, give us what we need (money, shelter, food, education, jobs, childcare), and criminalize the men that choose the buy and sell women and children.
Jared - 12 years ago
I voted Yes. I believe that prostitution is a damaging and truly saddening perversion of what sex is really about, but denying brothels the regulation and protection afforded other legal businesses only makes it more dangerous for the people who will inevitably choose that line of work. Idealistically, I'd like to see prostitution go away, dispite the lack of a historical precedent, but measures have to be taken to combat the demand, not the supply.
Jacqueline gullion - 12 years ago
I Vote for "buying sex" is wrong and should be illegal in all forms. Men should stop buying women in prostitution
Jacqueline gullion - 12 years ago
I Vote for "buying sex" is wrong and should be illegal in all forms. Men should stop buying women in prostitution
While the motivation to protect the health and well being of "sex trade workers" (a euphemism for women who are victimized by sexual exploitation) is noble, it does not go nearly far enough. Yes, we should decriminalize those who are being sold for sex, but we should also offer these women options to exit if they so choose, AND criminalize the buyers, those who are paying for and demanding sexual services. There is a myth that says legalization and moving sexual services indoors will offer safety and limit trafficking, but countries like Holland have proven otherwise.
Melissa Farley from www.prostitutionresearch.com, reports that while 15% of Canadian purchase sex, 85% of prostitutes report a history of sexual abuse in childhood, 75% were victims of rape and girls and women in prostitution have a mortality rate 40 times higher than the national average. This will not change if prostitution moves indoors and has legitimacy attached to it. In Sweden they have seen a 66% decline in prostitution since they instituted laws that decriminalize supply, but criminalize demand.
The majority of women in the sex trade would like out. Yes, we cannot afford to pretend it doesn't exist. However, we must also fight for the dignity of the young, poor, abused and aboriginal women across our country who would like more options than being in this lifestyle.
Former prostitute Shona Stewart talks about the myths of our current attitude toward the sex trade industry. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqhQUuLM4KU&feature=youtu.be&hd=1
Ty McKenzie
This is far too simplistic a solution. While in some cases licensed brothels do provide safer environments for women working as prostitutes, the reality is that this law serves to provide more shelter and protection to the pimps, traffickers, and the small number of prostitutes who do have a level of control over their situation, than it does for those who are the most vulnerable. The new law makes it easier for trafficking rings to operate under the guise of 'legal' brothels. I agree with Sarah Mah on this – we should provide protection for those at risk (the women) and make it harder for those who profit most from this venture and are most likely to profligate exploitation and violations of human rights (the pimps & johns, generally speaking).
I voted NO. I already know that brothels don't keep Asian women safe here in Vancouver. Women are poor, trafficked, abused, kept in prostitution by blackmail, and murdered in brothels where no one can see. Brothels have been tried and failed, here and in other places of the world (New Zealand, Australia, Nevada, the Netherlands). Why would I support that? I vote: decriminalize women in prostitution, give us what we need (money, shelter, food, education, jobs, childcare), and criminalize the men that choose the buy and sell women and children.
I voted Yes. I believe that prostitution is a damaging and truly saddening perversion of what sex is really about, but denying brothels the regulation and protection afforded other legal businesses only makes it more dangerous for the people who will inevitably choose that line of work. Idealistically, I'd like to see prostitution go away, dispite the lack of a historical precedent, but measures have to be taken to combat the demand, not the supply.
I Vote for "buying sex" is wrong and should be illegal in all forms. Men should stop buying women in prostitution
I Vote for "buying sex" is wrong and should be illegal in all forms. Men should stop buying women in prostitution