Posted April 7, 2016 http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/07/europe/france-prostitution/index.html 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 7, 2016 2 hours ago, Heidi the Housewife aka The Maui Muse said: http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/07/europe/france-prostitution/index.html Fingers crossed that the US doesn't eventually follow in those footsteps. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 7, 2016 (edited) Thats a dam shame. I learned to speak french for nothing. lol This is the 4th language I speak fluently. It doesn't matter to me what the government does. But I do like reading this stuff. Thank you for the info! Edited April 7, 2016 by Nikki Holiday 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 7, 2016 35 minutes ago, Lucy Kitten said: Fingers crossed that the US doesn't eventually follow in those footsteps. Are we sure it would be a bad thing? Right now both sides of the transaction are illegal in US (except Nevada). Wouldn't this be a 50% improvement? 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 7, 2016 18 minutes ago, Raoul said: Are we sure it would be a bad thing? Right now both sides of the transaction are illegal in US (except Nevada). Wouldn't this be a 50% improvement? No. It seems more like a lateral move. It seems to me it would make clients the bigger target and that's not he goal. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 7, 2016 I'm think we agree that the goal is the decriminalization of transactional activity between consulting adults. Hard to see how we get there as long as we have this aggressively narrow minded conflation of sex work and human trafficking that seems to have poisoned the conversation about these issues. Meanwhile though, wouldn't it be better if at least the sex worker weren't being arrested? Feels like a decent sized target on my back already. But I am slippery. I know how to serpentine! 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 8, 2016 4 hours ago, Raoul said: Are we sure it would be a bad thing? Right now both sides of the transaction are illegal in US (except Nevada). Wouldn't this be a 50% improvement? Not in my opinion, no. Other than the obvious that we all agree upon - that it should be legal - if one side of the transaction is to be punished (persecuted more like) then it should apply to both. It can't be wrong for one and not the other. And to basically tell providers they will be held immune simply removes virtually all incentive for discretion, making it more likely that my sorry ass gets busted. So my opinion is that just when you think the geniuses that make laws and run the joint can't make it any more asinine - surprise, they do! 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 8, 2016 4 hours ago, Lucy Kitten said: No. It seems more like a lateral move. It seems to me it would make clients the bigger target and that's not he goal. Thank you Lucy and I don't think either of us should be the goal... Pretty sure that someone out there is committing an actual hurt someone crime while Jos is getting her rimjob! 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 8, 2016 @Raoul I can only echo what Gr8owl has said. Right now both sides of the coin have the same chance of getting busted. With the Nordic Model you're painted as a predator and I as a victim. That is more regression than progression. It's also really hard to undo once put in place. I personally don't want to see and I know the community at large doesn't want to see our clients targeted. It also greatly impacts the earning potential for sex workers and would make places like this disappear. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 8, 2016 12 hours ago, gr8owl said: Not in my opinion, no. Other than the obvious that we all agree upon - that it should be legal - if one side of the transaction is to be punished (persecuted more like) then it should apply to both. It can't be wrong for one and not the other. And to basically tell providers they will be held immune simply removes virtually all incentive for discretion, making it more likely that my sorry ass gets busted. So my opinion is that just when you think the geniuses that make laws and run the joint can't make it any more asinine - surprise, they do! It wouldn't translate well in America. While it seems fair that that both sides should be viewed equally there are reasons that they're not in other countries. In Europe you have state sized countries making things like trafficking much easier. That's not to say it's a huge issue but an issue those countries face in a way that America doesn't. Americans are however buying into the myth and it's that argument that's being used against the fight for decriminalization. The bigger the decrim movement becomes the more inflated the trafficking stats get. Not to sound like an activist or anything but it's time that more join the efforts. Volunteer their time, their voices or money if they're not quite ready to join the cause. It wont succeed until everyone who participates and agrees that this a good thing jumps on board. In my opinion we as the sex work community need to address the trafficking thing if we want to be taken seriously. I think we can fight the inflated stats while still acknowledging that there is some trafficking going on. The latter we collectively do and frequently. Law makers have redefined what trafficking is and have been convinced that all providers are coerced. And that's how we end up with these types of laws, women (because male sex workers are never considered) can't choose for themselves to do this and men who perpetuate it must be punished. Which brings us back to is it no way a good idea and I agree with you. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 9, 2016 On 4/7/2016 at 3:48 PM, Nikki Holiday said: Thats a dam shame. I learned to speak french for nothing. lol This is the 4th language I speak fluently. It doesn't matter to me what the government does. But I do like reading this stuff. Thank you for the info! What? No French in France? What's next? No Russian in Russia? No Greek in Greece? No Cowgirl Out West? No English Sidesaddle in England? No Brazilian in Brazil? So it ain't so Joe??? 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 9, 2016 (edited) Wait, what, you're saying I won't be able to fuck some tranny who's workin the Bois de boulogne? Plus, as the article states, if prostitution is now legal, how are you gonna sell what you're offering? Ah, never mind Edited April 9, 2016 by 2Big 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 9, 2016 4 hours ago, The Wise Old Owl said: What? No French in France? What's next? No Russian in Russia? No Greek in Greece? No Cowgirl Out West? No English Sidesaddle in England? No Brazilian in Brazil? So it ain't so Joe??? You have been on pain meds for too long lol 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 20, 2016 I'm glad that I stocked up when the supply was plentiful. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 22, 2016 Interesting situation. Turns the tables on the need for screening for LE. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 28, 2016 (edited) On 4/7/2016 at 3:22 PM, Lucy Kitten said: Fingers crossed that the US doesn't eventually follow in those footsteps. Very interesting... I wonder. If the state to somewhat pioneer the legalization of recreational use MJ could do what they did for the 420 community, why can't something be done for the sex worker community? Edited April 28, 2016 by BadLeroyBrown 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 28, 2016 8 hours ago, BadLeroyBrown said: Very interesting...[Snip} Take a good, hard look at the size the respective population groups. For starters, almost 1/2 of the voters(F) are likely to oppose this idea, and half of the other 1/2(M) are probably against it too, even in the privacy of the voting booth. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 28, 2016 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Bit Banger said: Take a good, hard look at the size the respective population groups. For starters, almost 1/2 of the voters(F) are likely to oppose this idea, and half of the other 1/2(M) are probably against it too, even in the privacy of the voting booth. Bit, you truly do not think people are more open minded than that in CO. I look at the number of open same-sex relationships there are in high schools right now among that age group, and I can tell you, brother "times are a changing". I honestly never expected them to legalize MJ, shocked the shit outta me, and now you look at the money being generated in revenue from the taxes, and I'm sure people are like I wish we had done this sooner. I wonder if they might not be as progressive, and forward thinking about the red light industry as well. Maybe with the right PR and spin on it, possibly pushed as a way to stop illegal trafficking, and coercion, help generate revenue, etc... How much revenue do you think Vegas bills off all the uneducated people who believe it's legal in the state of Nevada. We need protest, but considering the entirety of this line of work is anonymity, how does that work??? Edited April 28, 2016 by BadLeroyBrown 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 28, 2016 2 hours ago, BadLeroyBrown said: Bit, you truly do not think people are more open minded than that in CO. I look at the number of open same-sex relationships there are in high schools right now among that age group, and I can tell you, brother "times are a changing". I honestly never expected them to legalize MJ, shocked the shit outta me, and now you look at the money being generated in revenue from the taxes, and I'm sure people are like I wish we had done this sooner. I wonder if they might not be as progressive, and forward thinking about the red light industry as well. Maybe with the right PR and spin on it, possibly pushed as a way to stop illegal trafficking, and coercion, help generate revenue, etc... How much revenue do you think Vegas bills off all the uneducated people who believe it's legal in the state of Nevada. We need protest, but considering the entirety of this line of work is anonymity, how does that work??? Anonymity is counterproductive to the decriminalization movement. Anonymity has only ever been important to avoid punishment. If you were at all interested in the movement there is plenty of reading material. Decriminalization is preferred to legalization because we don't want to see heavy regulations. It doesn't matter how progressive a state or country is, if those that are involved in the decrim fight aren't cohesive then we'll never win the war. Discussion boards are great example of how the larger sex work community can't agree on squat. The first step to having the rest f the world take us seriously is taking each other seriously. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 28, 2016 16 minutes ago, Lucy Kitten said: Decriminalization is preferred to legalization because we don't want to see heavy regulations. Is decriminalization preferred to avoid heavy regulation, or taxation? 🤔 nevertheless, I do agree with you Lucy. Something has to be done, it seems to me it would have to be the sex workers to unite, and step forward. A bunch of married men, senators, mega church pastors, etc. Coming forward seems highly unlikely. You seem very passionate about the issues, I actually utilized this "search" function everyone raves so much about, and read some of your earlier post about the issue. Has anyone considered protest and marches for this cause here locally? I think stranger things have happened, so with today's society why not try. I really only mentioned legalization because if Uncle Sam can figure out a way to turn a buck from it, they will in turn figure out a way to make it legal. Decriminalization seems to make it not illegal for the providers and clients to operate, but where then is the revenue for Uncle Sam? You can rest assured he wants his "cut". 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 28, 2016 31 minutes ago, BadLeroyBrown said: Is decriminalization preferred to avoid heavy regulation, or taxation? 🤔 nevertheless, I do agree with you Lucy. Something has to be done, it seems to me it would have to be the sex workers to unite, and step forward. A bunch of married men, senators, mega church pastors, etc. Coming forward seems highly unlikely. You seem very passionate about the issues, I actually utilized this "search" function everyone raves so much about, and read some of your earlier post about the issue. Has anyone considered protest and marches for this cause here locally? I think stranger things have happened, so with today's society why not try. I really only mentioned legalization because if Uncle Sam can figure out a way to turn a buck from it, they will in turn figure out a way to make it legal. Decriminalization seems to make it not illegal for the providers and clients to operate, but where then is the revenue for Uncle Sam? You can rest assured he wants his "cut". By simply decriminalizing you allow for thousands, hundred of thousands really to become official tax payers. It doesn't need to be taxed or regulated for the gubment to make money off of the business.Legalization allows for a level of government involvement that's just not wanted or necessary. There are many sex work advocacy works across the country making strides. Here not so much. We don't have a strong organization or a face for the movement. There is a whole other world of sex work activism and advocacy and it's not easy to get in to. It has it's own politics and it's frustrating, which leads me back to my previous point. There is no unified front until we're unified. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 29, 2016 (edited) My personal opinion is that this type of law (legal to sell sex, illegal to purchase sex) is just a sham to appease the voters, while giving LE a strong option to turn their heads when consensual paid sex is occurring. After all, no client will be arrested for paying for sex with a legitimate, well established provider because it occurs behind closed doors. Providers wouldn't have any reason to "work with LE" because they aren't doing anything illegal. I really think it's just a farce and there will be absolutely no push to arrest clients in the countries that pass these laws. They are only in place to make the government appear as though they do not approve, while making it easy for the activities to continue unfettered between consenting adults. Canada passed a similar law last December, and the fallout is unseen. There have been NO sweeping arrests of clients.... and providers continue to work without fear of arrest. Always, Gina Edited April 29, 2016 by GinaXXX 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted April 29, 2016 11 minutes ago, GinaXXX said: Canada passed a similar law last December Jeepers, time flies. The law was passed in December 2014, not this last December! 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
