I think much talk of C-36 on this board about C-36 has hit an impasse until the Premier or Police Chief makes a public stance on the issues. I do however have the following general comments:
1. When it's said "There is zero intent to pursue body rub parlors. Regardless of mileage. Stop fear mongering. ", I do believe such absolute statements are unlikely to be true. You can't ever say that there is absolutely zero interest to investigate a single body rub parlour. Especially since many are run by less than reputable individuals. Even if true, such a policy stance could change in a hurry after a single publicized incident.
2. "They would have to witness the john's attempt to purchase. Walking in/out of a brp is 1000000% legal. As is getting a body rub." - Again here, getting a "body rub" as defined in the municipal act is legal, but body rubs and sexual services are not mutually exclusive. You could receive a body rub which is also a sexual service. The exact definition is "body-rub is a service where the primary activity is the kneading, manipulating, rubbing, massaging, touching or stimulating by any means by at least one person of at least one other person‟s body or part thereof". If an attendant were to stimulate her customers penis with her vagina, would you consider it a sexual service?
3. There's also confusion around what "evidence" really means. Evidence can be either circumstantial or through direct witness testimony of the crime. Enough circumstantial evidence potentially could be used to convict someone. To give an example, most of the time when a murder occurs there is rarely a direct witness to the event. The entire case, and potential conviction relies on circumstantial evidence (i.e. He bought the murder weapon, His DNA was at the crime scene, He had a motive to kill, etc.). The same concept applies here. Cops don't need to physically see money changing hands if they have sufficient circumstantial evidence.
4. MPASqaured has told myself and several others to do your own research. To this, I would respond that we have done research. Research is based on facts, not what we have gathered from some informal conversations. The facts are quite clear: (a) Most guys going to a massage parlour are purchasing a sexual service either directly or indirectly; (b) Massage Parlour Owners & Escort Agencies are trying colorful attempts to create technicalities to fool officers (i.e. We only sell body rubs or we only sell companionship); (c) clients should hope that the police turn a blind eye to this victim-less crime. The facts here are quite clear. No one in their right mind should doubt they are breaking the law as written when they pay an MPA or SP. While I greatly support the efforts the MPASquared is trying to help the sex industry, I think her opinion comes off a little too biased and it would be more constructive conversation to accept some of the realities under C-36.
I can only speak about licensed body rub parlors in toronto. And yes, I know for sure, at this time there is zero intent to pursue c36 in relation to bodyrub parlors. I don't expect folks to believe me. But please tell me where your research comes from? And why you assume my meetings were, as you call them, informal. Why because you weren't there? Or because the Star didn't report it? What qualifies to you as formal? To date, ive had over 25 meetings with more than 8 different levels of enforcement, each lasting well over 2-4hrs. I've had both casual & professional meetings with politicians ranging from local ridings to toronto officials to provincial representatives. I've compiled a team of 12 lawyers ranging from bylaw to criminal to constitutional to litigation. I've also spent time with SPOC, Ms Bedford, a couple Senators, and today even spoke with the Premier of BC. While you guys are arguing semantics, I'm out getting facts. Never assume.
My knowledge is based on repeated consensus, reliable sources, decision makers, and the fact that I've been brought into some of the efforts on what they actually are focusing on.
As for your bodyrub confusion, a bodyrub is not defined as a sexual service. Not federally, provincally, or Municipally. Not regarding Toronto anyway, which is where my efforts have been concentrated.
Toronto body rub parlors are licensed to sell body rubs. For the past 2yrs my spa has only sold time. We don't sell nudes or toplesses or bodyslide. I changed nothing on our website except nekkid pics& the encore. I did not have to adjust our services, WE SELL BODY RUBS.
Collection of evidence for a murder is entirely different than howbody rub parlors are policed. Read this thread to learn about how it works:
http://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?505711-LE-walked-in-on-my-session
What a bylaw allows or defines is not the same as law. Let's not confuse the 2 sir. In Toronto, an attendant would have to be clothed & use her vagina, quite the challenge if u ask me lol. And, muse is 100% non-full-service. So, next!
Purchase indirectly is not in c36. Profiteering indirectly is. And there are exceptions to that. Its all in the bill. Have a read.
I don't need to fool anyone. You can't honestly say or think I'd bet my criminal liability on "colourful technicalities" do you? I have 15yrs, my vagina, my reputation, hundreds of thousands of dollars, and my future invested in this industry honey. Quit the bullshit before you click "post" next time.
I have said all along that I'm bias. Hence do your own research. I'd love to hear about yours! Your time invested, money, resources......lets hear it. I couldn't possibly fit more into my schedule, so if you have been out fact-gathering/lobbying/working and have different conclusions, of course I'd love to know! Just as I have shared mine.
Judge all you want, but you don't fool me, you don't scare me, and you aren't harming my business. I wouldn't stop because a few terbies disagree, there are sex workers lives at risk here people!!!! This frustrates me because people blabber on without facts (ahem, fuji), and readers believe it. Then I have to spend more time to reply and correct the bs. Which, obviously, I care enough to do so. But I have yet to hear 1 single person say "Hey Emily, so-and-so decision maker sent me this" or "Come meet with my lawyer, his take is extremely different" or "Join me while I sit with XYZ and you'll hear why I said blah blah blah".
Meanwhile, I'm busy busting my ass to get this dangerous bullshit publically denounced, sent back to SCC, and a modernized Decrim system on the books.
"Ain't no body got time for...." this! get busy being proactive. Too many pessimists here sitting on their hands crying wolf.
