Two sides of prostitution
I have found a computer.
Last night I was asked by some friends why I did not oppose the Prostitution Law Reform Act. This is one of the reasons why the Prostitution Law Reform Act is a good thing. It’s a story about a prosecution for unsafe sex. However this story about a grandmother concerned about her grand daughter’s welfare due to her daughter’s sex work is more about how local authorities police their bylaws rather than the failure of Prostitution laws as this sort of scenario did not arise as a passage of the Act.
What is most concerning is now that Prostitution is “legal”, all of a sudden this girl is deemed “not at risk” by government authorities. Whether or not someone is at risk does not derive from whether something is legal. If so, you may as well say that there is no risk attached to getting horribly drunk, or driving a car after four nights without any sleep – both of which are legal, as well as risky and unsafe practices.
1 comment:
It is criminal offence to put a prostitute at risk by removing a condom. However, it is not a criminal offence for a prostitute that knows that she is HIV+ not to tell her client as long as so called safe sex is practiced. Tim Barnett misled the public about the bill. He said prostitutes would be tested but forgot to say that due to privacy laws they do not have to inform anyone.
Post a Comment