These laws were originally drafted to give law enforcement the means to control street prostitution, pimping, and the operation of prostitution rings by organized crime. However, law enforcement can and do use these laws to charge escorts and escort agencies.

In Canada, independent escorts can (and do) avoid the solicitation charge by only discussing and conducting sexual commerce in private (a residence, hotel room, by telephone or by email). Escort agencies run a greater risk of being charged and convicted with living off the ‘avails’ if it is proved that their escorts are engaging in prostitution and they are collecting fees from prostitution activities. Agencies are also vulnerable to the procuring charge which is heavily sanctioned if underage escorts are employed. An independent escort can live off her earnings without fear of the ‘avails’ charge.

However, before anyone draws conclusions or anything else, any sex work, including exotic dancing, is immensely stigmatized in Sweden.

What can be done? As long as men and women continue to patronize and promote TER, either by paying for subscriptions, submitting reviews, or using it as a marketing tool, it will continue to wield the power that it does.

As of this morning, the message boards over there had been pruned of the few mentions made of the NYT article. But the comments were telling. There was no outrage. There was no “Gee, maybe we shouldn’t be lining the pockets of a freebasing rapist.”. Instead, there were statements dismissing the NYT’s journalistic mettle.

There is an undeniably ugly side to this business, consisting of men who are misogynists to the core and don’t see prostitutes as human beings. I’m all in favor of decriminalization, but the seamier aspects of the business of prostitution are too often glossed over by activists. This troubles me greatly.

or something like that…