Recently, Toronto judge Susan Himmel, ruled Canada's prostitution laws as "endangering sex workers' lives." If her ruling is passed, many experts believe that there will be far reaching changes in how the sex trade operates here in Ontario e.g. prostitutes will be able to work from their homes, solicit customers on the street, and hire bodyguards or accountants.
However, the federal government launched an appeal just a day after the Toronto judge’s ruling, threatening the future of the ruling and possibly leading to more uncertainty regarding Canada’s sex trade laws.
Although there are laws in place criminalizing certain aspects of the trade, prostitution is not illegal in Canada. In light of the recent turmoil, the following arguments debate for or against the legalization of prostitution.
However, the federal government launched an appeal just a day after the Toronto judge’s ruling, threatening the future of the ruling and possibly leading to more uncertainty regarding Canada’s sex trade laws.
Although there are laws in place criminalizing certain aspects of the trade, prostitution is not illegal in Canada. In light of the recent turmoil, the following arguments debate for or against the legalization of prostitution.
.
Sandra DeGrandis - The Pro
Recently in Canada, Justice Susan Himmel struck down Canada’s current laws on prostitution, stating that three of the provisions that deemed some of the acts of prostitution illegal were unconstitutional because they “violated the women’s Charter rights to freedom of expression and security of the person.” If this court ruling goes through, it will mean that prostitutes will be able to conduct business in their own homes or have their own brothels, hire bodyguards, accountants and other security personnel and be able to talk to customers on the street as long as it does not disrupt traffic or people. Although many people feel that further loosening the strings on prostitution laws and fully legalizing it in Canada is an immoral thing to do, what is worse is allowing these women to live in constant fear and danger as a result of their profession.
Because they have no protection under the law, prostitutes face danger every time they walk the streets or quickly get into a car with a customer to avoid arrest. With the case of Robert Pickton still fresh in our minds, it is obvious that women working in shady areas are at risk of being murdered, raped or robbed. By allowing the court ruling to go through, women would be able to conduct business in the safety of their homes and make well thought out decisions about who to let through their doors. They would not have to make hasty decisions that could fatally harm them.
Secondly, allowing these women to hire protection and other security services would ensure they do not end up dead because some crazy person decided to beat them to death. No one deserves to be subject to such treatment no matter what path they are on. Many women are killed or severely abused and nothing is done to protect them, while those who are guilty from such crimes walk away without proper punishment. If they had had a bodyguard, abuse would be avoided. If any other woman was treated this way, then the culprit would surely be tried and punished. Why is it different if it is done to a prostitute? We are not fit to judge the choices other adults make in their lives but the best we can do is ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to live a safe and secure life no matter who they are or what they do.
Recently in Canada, Justice Susan Himmel struck down Canada’s current laws on prostitution, stating that three of the provisions that deemed some of the acts of prostitution illegal were unconstitutional because they “violated the women’s Charter rights to freedom of expression and security of the person.” If this court ruling goes through, it will mean that prostitutes will be able to conduct business in their own homes or have their own brothels, hire bodyguards, accountants and other security personnel and be able to talk to customers on the street as long as it does not disrupt traffic or people. Although many people feel that further loosening the strings on prostitution laws and fully legalizing it in Canada is an immoral thing to do, what is worse is allowing these women to live in constant fear and danger as a result of their profession.
Because they have no protection under the law, prostitutes face danger every time they walk the streets or quickly get into a car with a customer to avoid arrest. With the case of Robert Pickton still fresh in our minds, it is obvious that women working in shady areas are at risk of being murdered, raped or robbed. By allowing the court ruling to go through, women would be able to conduct business in the safety of their homes and make well thought out decisions about who to let through their doors. They would not have to make hasty decisions that could fatally harm them.
Secondly, allowing these women to hire protection and other security services would ensure they do not end up dead because some crazy person decided to beat them to death. No one deserves to be subject to such treatment no matter what path they are on. Many women are killed or severely abused and nothing is done to protect them, while those who are guilty from such crimes walk away without proper punishment. If they had had a bodyguard, abuse would be avoided. If any other woman was treated this way, then the culprit would surely be tried and punished. Why is it different if it is done to a prostitute? We are not fit to judge the choices other adults make in their lives but the best we can do is ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to live a safe and secure life no matter who they are or what they do.
Anna Marszalek - The Con
The term “legalization” connotes safety, concern for the public, and moral justness. Pairing it with the term “prostitution,” a section of the sex trade industry that is often considered demoralizing, psychologically damaging, and physically harmful, would seem awfully paradoxical. Yet this pairing is what Toronto Judge Susan Himel ruled in favour of when she decided that Canada’s prostitution laws needed a complete reversal. Instead, she said, measures must be taken to support sex workers by allowing them to hire body guards, solicit customers in broad daylight, and work from their homes.
Through legalizing prostitution, Himel’s focus lies on improving the safety and well-being of prostitutes, but the federal lawyers who appealed the case believe that she fails to consider the negative, long-term effects of such a law.
Although legalizing prostitution would make this part of the sex industry safer, the risks are still there. Having the Government’s seal of approval on a trade that would, in any case, face many problems might misguide young, inexperienced women into thinking that offering sex for payment is harmless and a good opportunity to make a living.
The threat of sexually transmitted diseases is not lessened when a prostitute works from her own home instead of a public street corner, and violence against prostitutes is just as likely to occur indoors as it is out. What’s more, clients or hustlers who sustain this practice will always find a way to bring in more money through sexual exploitation, perhaps along the way encouraging a new black market trade to replace the former illegal trade of prostitution. Instead of mentioning some of the potential consequences of her ruling and of prostitution itself, Himel simply seems short-sighted.
Human trafficking is one such new replacement that can flourish if prostitution becomes legal and consequently more popular and in high demand. The misguided allure of prostitution through its legalization can generate a lot of naive sex workers, and through its changed legal status encourage involvement for those who were previously too afraid of getting caught. Clientele who before might have also been convicted for negotiating with prostitutes would feel confident enough to participate this time around. A huge flow of prostitutes and society’s demand for them can enable human trafficking to occur in Ontario if the appeal is rejected.
The term “legalization” connotes safety, concern for the public, and moral justness. Pairing it with the term “prostitution,” a section of the sex trade industry that is often considered demoralizing, psychologically damaging, and physically harmful, would seem awfully paradoxical. Yet this pairing is what Toronto Judge Susan Himel ruled in favour of when she decided that Canada’s prostitution laws needed a complete reversal. Instead, she said, measures must be taken to support sex workers by allowing them to hire body guards, solicit customers in broad daylight, and work from their homes.
Through legalizing prostitution, Himel’s focus lies on improving the safety and well-being of prostitutes, but the federal lawyers who appealed the case believe that she fails to consider the negative, long-term effects of such a law.
Although legalizing prostitution would make this part of the sex industry safer, the risks are still there. Having the Government’s seal of approval on a trade that would, in any case, face many problems might misguide young, inexperienced women into thinking that offering sex for payment is harmless and a good opportunity to make a living.
The threat of sexually transmitted diseases is not lessened when a prostitute works from her own home instead of a public street corner, and violence against prostitutes is just as likely to occur indoors as it is out. What’s more, clients or hustlers who sustain this practice will always find a way to bring in more money through sexual exploitation, perhaps along the way encouraging a new black market trade to replace the former illegal trade of prostitution. Instead of mentioning some of the potential consequences of her ruling and of prostitution itself, Himel simply seems short-sighted.
Human trafficking is one such new replacement that can flourish if prostitution becomes legal and consequently more popular and in high demand. The misguided allure of prostitution through its legalization can generate a lot of naive sex workers, and through its changed legal status encourage involvement for those who were previously too afraid of getting caught. Clientele who before might have also been convicted for negotiating with prostitutes would feel confident enough to participate this time around. A huge flow of prostitutes and society’s demand for them can enable human trafficking to occur in Ontario if the appeal is rejected.
