I have a female friend that wants to try her hand at being an independent escort. She wants to know what the laws/ rules are in Ontario are on this line of work. Can anyone point me to a site that has the laws writen out in black and white?
Independent S.P. laws in Ontario
- Thread starter badseed
- Start date
whats the AG site? I clicked on >PART V SEXUAL OFFENCES, PUBLIC MORALS AND DISORDERLY CONDUCT but it was about offences having to do with children not escorts.
Thanks Sheik, but where did you read that? I don't think if something goes wrong she can say "your honer Shiek from Terb said so"....lol. She would just feel better if she could read it for herself I basicly told her the same thing myself.Sheik said:
So you are taking over from me, eh?Sheik said:
Well, at least you are a good student!
Perry
p.s. (after reading Sheik's post immediately below) Good article. It covers all the bases left uncovered by the generality of the "black and white."
*Coughs*Perry Mason said:
Well, at least you are a good student!
Perry
Check his spelling
*Coughs*
So if incalls are the difference between freedom and jail why do so many S.P.s offer it? Just a question.
Please check out the S.P.O.C website as it is a non-profit/non-government funded orginization fighting for the decriminalization of prostitution. It has all the information you need about legalization and decriminalization.badseed said:
www.spoc.ca
Sex Professionals of Canada , formerly (The Canadian Organization for the Rights of Prostitutes) is an organization of people working in the sex industry. We were founded in 1983. Our goal is the decriminalizaton of prostitution. We want to work in dignity and safety. For these reasons we, along with virtually every sex pro organization in the world reject legalization, (and of course criminalization). Please visit our News Button as it's the best place to go for current news.
Okay, let`s get right to it. Most people, including a lot of sex pro`s don`t know the difference between legalization and decriminalization.
Differences are;
*next post*
LEGALIZATION
Legalization views prostitution as a vice that needs to be heavily contained and controlled. In places that have legalization systems, such as Amsterdam, Germany and the State of Victoria in Australia etc., sex pros must regisister at the police station, be photographed, fingerprinted and give very personal info about themselves to the police. (Anyone previously convicted of prostitution is denied a licence).
Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense does it?
One can only work in certain licenced areas, and those brothel owners that end up owning the (hughly expensive) licences are usually rather unsavoury people, best to be avoided.
Poeple in this industry should not be regulated into sex gettoes. SPOC disagrees with any kind of segragation.
If you work without a licence, it remains entirely illegal. Licenced sex pro`s must pay (equivelent CDN dollars) thousands in licence fees per year to authorities ). For that we don`t get any help or protection at all.
In legalized systems, typically, the house takes 50%, then the government takes another 25%, (of the gross, not the net, in the form of "sin" taxes ). (We are not a package of cigarettes or a bottle of alcohol). So we`re, (after they charge us inflated prices for such basics as clean sheets, soap, meals, usually the cheapest take-out food), are lucky to take home 25%. This, after we have done the actual work!
Also usually, it`s 12 hour shifts and we do not have right of refusal, ie., if a client wants a certain kind of sex we`re not comfortable with, well, then we still have to do it. We, at SPOC, call that sexual assault.
Many ordinary Canadians have their hearts in the right place, and will say things like, "There is nothing wrong with prostitution, they should legalize it and the girls can have health checks". Unfortunately this majority of Canadians do not have access to the real info re decriminalization, legalization and criminalization. And who can blame them for thinking this way? It`s not like they can walk into a library or read a newspaper and get that info. (We at SPOC have been speaking at universities and doing media, for years, but it clearly is not enough). Aside from the general ignorance of pro's legal issues, let's talk about forced STI (sexually transmitted infection) checks. All sexually active people should be responsible for their own sexual health. No, you can't fob off that responsibility on to a government official so you can have unsafe sex with us.
What we've seen happen in places like Germany, where they have legalization and forced STI checks, is that the checks are done on Thursdays. The pro then has to display her Grade A Disease Free Meat certificate on the wall of her room. (While the brothels officially state they insist on condom use, the girls tell a very different tale). The client then walks in, checks that she's disease free and says, "Great, you don't have anything! I'm not wearing a condom".
The reason we can get clients to use condoms is because they're concerned about getting something
from us, not because they're worried about giving us an STI. When that "bargaining
chip" is taken out of the equation, we're left with no way to protect ourselves. Also, if a pro does contract a STI, from coersive unsafe sex, her licence is revoked and a new girl is brought in.
Finally, we at SPOC have all agreed to refuse outright to participate in any kind of government legalization schemes.
While we do take an active role in our sexual health, we will not allow any agents of government to be poking and prodding around our vaginas.
Forget that we'll work illegally, like we do now.
*next post*
Legalization views prostitution as a vice that needs to be heavily contained and controlled. In places that have legalization systems, such as Amsterdam, Germany and the State of Victoria in Australia etc., sex pros must regisister at the police station, be photographed, fingerprinted and give very personal info about themselves to the police. (Anyone previously convicted of prostitution is denied a licence).
Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense does it?
One can only work in certain licenced areas, and those brothel owners that end up owning the (hughly expensive) licences are usually rather unsavoury people, best to be avoided.
Poeple in this industry should not be regulated into sex gettoes. SPOC disagrees with any kind of segragation.
If you work without a licence, it remains entirely illegal. Licenced sex pro`s must pay (equivelent CDN dollars) thousands in licence fees per year to authorities ). For that we don`t get any help or protection at all.
In legalized systems, typically, the house takes 50%, then the government takes another 25%, (of the gross, not the net, in the form of "sin" taxes ). (We are not a package of cigarettes or a bottle of alcohol). So we`re, (after they charge us inflated prices for such basics as clean sheets, soap, meals, usually the cheapest take-out food), are lucky to take home 25%. This, after we have done the actual work!
Also usually, it`s 12 hour shifts and we do not have right of refusal, ie., if a client wants a certain kind of sex we`re not comfortable with, well, then we still have to do it. We, at SPOC, call that sexual assault.
Many ordinary Canadians have their hearts in the right place, and will say things like, "There is nothing wrong with prostitution, they should legalize it and the girls can have health checks". Unfortunately this majority of Canadians do not have access to the real info re decriminalization, legalization and criminalization. And who can blame them for thinking this way? It`s not like they can walk into a library or read a newspaper and get that info. (We at SPOC have been speaking at universities and doing media, for years, but it clearly is not enough). Aside from the general ignorance of pro's legal issues, let's talk about forced STI (sexually transmitted infection) checks. All sexually active people should be responsible for their own sexual health. No, you can't fob off that responsibility on to a government official so you can have unsafe sex with us.
What we've seen happen in places like Germany, where they have legalization and forced STI checks, is that the checks are done on Thursdays. The pro then has to display her Grade A Disease Free Meat certificate on the wall of her room. (While the brothels officially state they insist on condom use, the girls tell a very different tale). The client then walks in, checks that she's disease free and says, "Great, you don't have anything! I'm not wearing a condom".
The reason we can get clients to use condoms is because they're concerned about getting something
from us, not because they're worried about giving us an STI. When that "bargaining
chip" is taken out of the equation, we're left with no way to protect ourselves. Also, if a pro does contract a STI, from coersive unsafe sex, her licence is revoked and a new girl is brought in.
Finally, we at SPOC have all agreed to refuse outright to participate in any kind of government legalization schemes.
While we do take an active role in our sexual health, we will not allow any agents of government to be poking and prodding around our vaginas.
Forget that we'll work illegally, like we do now.
*next post*
DECRIMINALIZATION
Decriminalization views prostitution as a legitimate and nessesary business. Its implementation would entails removing prostitution related offences from the Canadian Criminal Code, for adults involved in this profession. In places that have decriminalization, such as the state of New South Wales, Australia, sex pro's may operate freely, without the threat of criminal charges and / or the state seizing their assets.
Brothel licences are not required, so sex pro's can open their own operations. Individual sex pro's do not require a licence. However if a brothel is being a true nuisance to its neighbours, it can be shut down. Which is fair. Brothels have only had to be shut down in rare intances.
Street pro's may not work within 200 meters of a place of worship, school or a hospital. Also fair.
Itis rare for a sex pro to be assaulted in Sydney, Australia and when it does occure the police and courts take it very seriously, unlike the current situation in Canada.
Sex pro's in places that are decriminalized pay income taxes at the same rate as any other small business owner.
It is SPOC's view that the Living On the Avails section of the Canadian Criminal Code should be abolished. Anyone abusing sex pro's should be charged with the appropriate offence, whether it be assault, sexual assault, extortion, forcible confinement etc. Currently it is illegal for us to live with someone or to even be " habitually " in someone's company. Also, under the procurring law, anyone who, " lives wholly or in part " on our earnings can be charged and convicted of, " Living On the Avails ". This law does nothing to protect us. Instead, it infantilizes us. Adult prostitutes are equipped with the same intellectual capabilities as other people.
Please know that no government or religion in history, including the most repressive, (i.e. those that have the death penalty for prostitution, Iran, Afganistan, etc.) have ever been able to eradicate our noble profession. For the simple reasons that money and sex are so much more powerful governments and / or religions.
It is beyond time for the Canadian federal government to decriminalize our profession.
________________________________________________
A REMINDER: Don't forget about the S.P.O.C meeting/party on December 17/04 at Buddies In Bad Times (12 Alexander Street - doors open at 7:00PM)
Annessa
S.P.O.C Spokesperson
XOXO
Decriminalization views prostitution as a legitimate and nessesary business. Its implementation would entails removing prostitution related offences from the Canadian Criminal Code, for adults involved in this profession. In places that have decriminalization, such as the state of New South Wales, Australia, sex pro's may operate freely, without the threat of criminal charges and / or the state seizing their assets.
Brothel licences are not required, so sex pro's can open their own operations. Individual sex pro's do not require a licence. However if a brothel is being a true nuisance to its neighbours, it can be shut down. Which is fair. Brothels have only had to be shut down in rare intances.
Street pro's may not work within 200 meters of a place of worship, school or a hospital. Also fair.
Itis rare for a sex pro to be assaulted in Sydney, Australia and when it does occure the police and courts take it very seriously, unlike the current situation in Canada.
Sex pro's in places that are decriminalized pay income taxes at the same rate as any other small business owner.
It is SPOC's view that the Living On the Avails section of the Canadian Criminal Code should be abolished. Anyone abusing sex pro's should be charged with the appropriate offence, whether it be assault, sexual assault, extortion, forcible confinement etc. Currently it is illegal for us to live with someone or to even be " habitually " in someone's company. Also, under the procurring law, anyone who, " lives wholly or in part " on our earnings can be charged and convicted of, " Living On the Avails ". This law does nothing to protect us. Instead, it infantilizes us. Adult prostitutes are equipped with the same intellectual capabilities as other people.
Please know that no government or religion in history, including the most repressive, (i.e. those that have the death penalty for prostitution, Iran, Afganistan, etc.) have ever been able to eradicate our noble profession. For the simple reasons that money and sex are so much more powerful governments and / or religions.
It is beyond time for the Canadian federal government to decriminalize our profession.
________________________________________________
A REMINDER: Don't forget about the S.P.O.C meeting/party on December 17/04 at Buddies In Bad Times (12 Alexander Street - doors open at 7:00PM)
Annessa
S.P.O.C Spokesperson
XOXO
ok, so independent SPs are covered, but I've seen nothing explaining the legality of escort agencies. [would that be covered under the living off the avails??]
1. It is illegal to live of the avails of prostitution.ThePunkPanther said:
2. The courts have held that in order to obtain a conviction, the relationship between the prostitute and the "availer" must be parasitic in nature. Thus, a prostitute's kids or sick, bedridden mother cannot be found guilty under this charge. But the relatives could be charged if they were forcing her to go out. The judge would have to look at the specifics of the case.
3. The courts have held that agencies are parasitic in nature, in that the business would not exist if the girls weren't being sent out as prostitutes. So the idea that the agency is a normal business and is charging a fair commission for referrals is not a defense. However, a web designer could (PROBABLY!) accept a fee for web-design and not be charged, as long as he could show that he did work on comparable terms for other (non-escorting) clients. Every now and then a chief of police will get bumptious and threaten newspapers with charges of living off the avails (for taking advertising). So far that hasn't worked and we are still afflicted with naughty ads enticing us into lives of sin and depravity. But an agency doesn't, under current law, have a leg to stand on.
Well, you are close:Sheik said:
Public solicitation is illegal.
Incalls are illegal
Living off the avails is legal (for the prostitute and her children but no one else)
Prostitution is legal (but not if you practice it somewhere)
Outcalls are legal (if you don't get caught )
As long as she declares her income and pays her taxes its legal ( unless she shows receipts).
Cannot get a greater puddle of muddle than that
