Okay, sure.
I'm hoping for a little more clarification, if possible, as this section is worrisome to many people in our region. We have heard the term “pimp” used in relation to Bill C-36 with little clarification of what is meant by this term. My colleagues and I recently interviewed 61 persons who manage commercial enterprises. We found that 60% were women and just over 70% of these women identified as current or former providers of sexual services. Therefore, if this provision aims at so-called pimps, it is likely that it will capture other women, many of whom are or were sex workers themselves.
I'm going to run short of time here, but as a support person in an escort agency in our region noted:
In addition to supplying safer sex supplies, safe rooms equipped with alarms, indoor agencies provide a lengthy screening process.... We brainstorm tactics for boundary setting and coping with the small percentage of clients that are disrespectful, drunk, aggressive. I hold the safety and security of people in the agency I work in highest regard.
Another person who worked in an agency commented, “It allowed a safe place to work, and the company of other women with whom I felt a closeness.”
In closing, I'd like to reiterate that engaging women, men, and trans people in the sex industry can only effectively happen when you respect their varied perspectives and the complexities of their experiences and the complexity of factors that give rise to those experiences.
I will end with another quote:
I wouldn't have gone to PEERS if I thought they would tell me how to live my life or try to make my decisions for me. I went to them because I knew they would provide emotional support and a free medical exam in a non-judgemental environment.