Will court ruling protect prostitutes? The jury’s still out
While some hail decision, others say it’s ‘naïve’ and ‘hypocritical’
The Issue: On Monday, the Ontario Court of Appeal struck down as unconstitutional some of Canada’s prostitution laws, arguing that sex workers should be able to ply their trade from the relative safety of brothels and hire support staff. Proponents of the decision hailed it as a move that would protect prostitutes. Others, including the prime minister, had different ideas. Former prostitute Valerie Scott, who was involved in the court case: “We’re almost real citizens (now). . . . I didn’t think I would see it in my lifetime, but here we are.”
From the court’s decision: “Prostitution is a controversial topic, one that provokes heated and heartfelt debate about morality, equality, personal autonomy and safety. . . . It is not the court’s role to engage in that debate.” Prime Minister Stephen Harper, reacting to the ruling: “We view prostitution as bad for society and we view its effects as particularly harmful for our communities and women, and particularly for vulnerable women, and we will continue to oppose prostitution in Canada.” Former teen prostitute Katarina Macleod: “There’s going to be no (police) sweeps (of brothels anymore) . . . . What about the girls that are trapped inside there? There’s no voice for the voiceless any more and it just disgusts me that we’re in a world where this is looked at that this is okay.” Marie (not her real name), a former sex worker in Montreal who became a prostitute as a teen and gave it up when she was 30: “It’s hypocritical — it’s merely legitimizing pimps into businessmen. . . . Prostitution is not a choice, it is a reality. Legalizing bordellos is simply telling men it’s okay to go there. . . . The violence against women is not on the street, it’s between four walls. There are escort services, massage parlours, all operating now with organized crime and street gangs. Bordellos will be the same.” Former Montreal prostitute Julie: “This isn’t a choice and it’s not a job. There’s no more security in doing this inside a bordello. . . . Minors are going to still be in prostitution and their numbers will increase.” Bob Hughes, head of the AIDS Society of Kamloops Wellness: “Anything that supports . . . programs and efforts to assist women to get off the street and working in the sex trade to a safer indoor setting should be applauded . . . . women who are out on street-level sex trade are (at) far more risk of harm than if they’re indoors.”
Terri-jean Bedford, a dominatrix and former prostitute who was also part of the case, saying working inside a brothel protects women: “When you are out on the street, the laws are horrible . . . and they move people into the shadows . . . . We’re not sex slaves. We’re not going to give it away. We’re not going to lay down and take the beatings any more like the police and the federal government would like us to.”
Valerie Scott, before the ruling: “It’s a matter of life and death. . . . In what other legal occupation is a worker not permitted by law to take any security measures?”
Editorial, Calgary Herald: “The ruling, however, is naive. It presumes that prostitutes, male or female, will operate their businesses like walk-in clinics, presumably with all the licensing prerequisites of any business.. . . The grim reality is that prostitution is mostly practised by the drug-addicted, the mentally ill and the desperately poor. For these, a licensed brothel will matter little.”