Don't Change Prostitution Laws 

July 1st, 2013 | J. Hodgson 

"There is something besides simply criminalizing everyone involved in prostitution — including women — and decriminalization and legalizing the sex trade so men are free to buy women at will." - Janine Benedet, The Women's Coalition for the Abolition of Prostitution


It’s probably happened to you. You’ve been at a party or gathering and a progressive type states boldly that “prostitution should be made legal, you know, so it’s safe!” Then some other progressive type will chime in with, “think of all the tax revenue!” Then everyone assures each other that THEY would never use a prostitute, but the option should be on the table, because of, you know...progressiveness. Everyone nods and the few conservatives that disagree just keep their mouths shut in order to keep the peace and get the conversation back to last night’s episode of Game of Thrones, or whatever.


This article intends to bury that conversation once and for all.


Progressive types lament that prostitution should be legal, but in reality, it already is legal. It’s about as easy to order a hooker as it is to order a pizza. All you need to do is look up “escorts” either on the internet or in the back of newspapers and free weekly newsprint magazines that most cities give out for free.


There are phone numbers attached to these escorts. Call these numbers and arrange a “date”. Either you will go to the escort’s place or she will come to yours. You then hand her an envelope full of cash in order to compensate her for her “time”. How you then spend the time you purchased is between two consenting adults in a private residence.


The end.


The other way to do it is to get in your car and slowly perv-drive around grubby neighbourhoods looking for cracked out women standing idle on the street. When you see one, pull over and roll down the window. She will come over and ask you if you’re looking to “party” or if you’re looking for, “a good time”.


Say yes.


Have her enter your car and then conduct your business somewhere discreet. Pay her for her “time” and then do what you both agree upon. When finished, drop her back on the corner.


The end.


These are the two ways to use hookers in Canada. The first way will almost never cause anyone a problem. It’s basically an honest mercenary transaction that isn’t much different than a bar hook-up. Often there is an agency involved that will do some pre-screening so the women know who it is that they are getting involved with and where the guy lives. This creates accountability and safety. It’s discreet, consensual and more common than you think.


The second way will probably land you in jail sooner or later.


The key difference is the practical problems.


Dealing with the practical problems of prostitution requires legal technicalities built into the justice system. It allows the system to pick and choose actions based on common sense. So if a women is high on meth and her pimp is beating her into having sex with “clients”, the police will be able to find some legal reason to intervene. If a woman is looking to pay off student loans and decides to do a cash deal with some John Smith at his house on a Friday night, the police will shrug and go for coffee.


But, but, but...progressive types will lament. This doesn’t provide the optimum health safety for either woman. It doesn’t guarantee their physical safety either. We need government involved in some way in order to streamline everything and make us all feel good about it!


Ultimately, you have to ask these progressive people what they want. Do they want government run whorehouses with lab technicians ready to do blood tests and RCMP officers standing in the corner, ensuring that no abuse is taking place? Do they want to swing open the doors to the free market so a corporation can open a McBlowJobs across the street from your kid’s school? Do they want the moral stamp of approval that comes with the government decriminalizing something so that higher volumes of regular people can feel okay about indulging in it?


There seem to be two main camps of progressives in regards to this issue.


Camp #1. The utopian liberal who thinks the government can make heaven on earth if only we willed it to be so.


This is usually a white, middle or upper class liberal who thinks everyone shares their enlightened views. To say anything negative about any moral act is a form of intolerance and mitigating the consequence for stupid actions is the purpose of government. These people think if the government turned prostitution into some kind of crown corporation, then nothing bad associated with prostitution would ever happen. At this point you have to start asking the tough questions.


“Don’t you think some men would be afraid of a heavily regulated government system of prostitution, which would lead them to look for paid sex outside that system?”


“Don’t you think the costs of running a system like this would be too expensive to justify?”


“What if a man wanted something that the official whore house was unwilling or unable to provide?”


“What would you charge customers and how could you justify charging them?”


“Who would be held liable for injuries?”


“Would this encourage sex trafficking or secondary pimping?”


“Would recruitment drives be held on college campuses?”


“Would women have their E.I. benefits cut off if they turned down employment?”


We could do this all day, and the more ideologically strident the liberal, the more they’ll try to answer these questions as though the spin-off problems from the implementation of such an idea would be anything other than catastrophically hideous. They’ll also cherry pick some data about some country in Europe legalizing prostitution and it’s just wonderful, even though it increasingly isn't.


Camp #2. The freedom loving (secret) capitalists.


These folks will coach any opposition to unbridled prostitution as an affront to their liberty loving sensibilities. “How dare the government say I can’t open up Marge’s Hand Job Shop in the mall downtown! What is this, the Soviet Union?”


These folks are just modern day pimps looking to get in on the action. They see an opportunity and they want to jump on it. (No pun intended.) These people are just trying to use the courts to force mainstream society to help them make a buck. Any rhetoric they use is simply a cover for their desire to take a monetary percentage of whatever sexual act it is they’re selling. At the end of the day, the mass commodification of prostitution has been rejected by Canadians for all the same logical reasons listed above.


So where does all this leave us?


Exactly where we are right now.


It’s not perfect, but it’s good enough. The ambiguity in the law allows for enough flexibility that police are able to help women who are truly victims and ignore women who just want a good price for their vaginas. If a crack whore is on your front lawn...you can call the police. If an escort walks up your neighbour’s driveway...mind your own business.


The litany of laws that are already on the books provide enough guidance for the control of prostitution in our free society. Attempts to radically rearrange the status quo isn’t going to lead to more safety and more freedom. It will simply lead to more problems, requiring more oversight from bigger government, requiring more money derived from even higher taxes. This outcome might be fine for socialists desiring a responsibility-free nanny state, but for regular Canadians, that patronizing cure is worse than the disease.

You can’t live someone’s life for them, no matter how much benefit to their own interest they may receive. 

 

Solutions:


When semi-interested liberals say prostitution should be legalized, let them know that they can hire escorts quite easily. They’ll then say they really want to simply avoid Robert Pickton situations via legalization. Once that understanding is established, ask them if trying to get Robert Pickton to legally have sex with women under government supervision is really the type of society they want to develop. A little bit of Socratic Method involving serial killer Robert Pickton, paying to sexually exploit women, will probably lead to quick frustration. At this point ask if it wouldn’t be better to just help women get out of the exploitive situations that put them in danger in the first place. They’ll probably agree. At this point hit them up for a donation to the Canadian Women's Foundation which provides support to women trying to escape the Robert Pickton lifestyle.


Now brace yourself for massive social awkwardness as the liberal tries to sound open to the idea of contributing, but doesn’t actually want to. You see, ACTUALLY doing something is the job of government. ACTUALLY financing solutions is something we should force rich people to do via higher taxes. ACTUALLY getting involved, even with a low level donation, requires a seriousness beyond what typical progressive slackivists are willing to endure.

In the end, prostitution in Canada is the way it is, because people have a general understanding that as imperfect as it may be...that’s life. The downside of being a hooker will always remain a downside and getting a politician and a bureaucrat to draw up plans to make things more complicated isn’t going to solve anything. Help where you can, mind your own business when you must. Prostitution isn’t going to change, and neither should our laws.