Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Blessed St. Nicholas, start praying for us

Santa Claus in his holier aspect is 'told off' as the patron saint of prostitutes. It is said that he saved a poor man from pimping his three daughters by giving him a sackful of gold. Why else would a guy want to peddle his daughters' butts than for some of the long green? It seems, though, that this story makes Nicholas the patron saint of almost-prostitutes, gals who get 'on the game'  need more patronage than that.

And so it goes in summertime Canada. For a decent little first world spot, Canada has its share of  'sex trade workers' - males and females who extend whatever paypacket they've got with a little 'professional' sex on the side. Now a non-association "they've" formed to 'represent' them has been hied into court to defend against a government challenge to a lower court ruling on 'anti-prostition laws' being contrary to their Charter rights and freedoms. This after another court ruling that cited prostitution as a "legitimate" occupation. Nobody seemed to challenge the notion that balling for dough was much different than anything else people do for dough, except when it comes to doing it on the street, or by bothering passers-by to find somebody with dough to do it for. Those laws about public prostitution, communicating for prostitution and living on the avails of prostitution are being challenged as laws that 'force' women  to 'work in the shadows' where, sometimes, their customers do them harm. What they want, I imagine, is the right to hang out a shingle, along with the more marketable body parts.

Strikes me that, unless the gals are working out of a high-security establishment, with glorified 'bouncers', that risk of harm isn't much diminished. Nor is any risk to 'johns' from those bouncers - who might be equated with guys who flunked out of police foundations courses at best, or a self-ordained 'lawmen' like 'The Dawg' at worst. One can only imagine the clientele. When you're breaking 'Mom's first law' and exposing yourself to 'strangers' you're asking for some trouble. Just look at the havoc caused by overly-friendly uncles and overzealous persons in authority - even to, we're told, the willing! I would doubt prostitution, even where it's a pillar of the society isn't plagued with a whole whack of related social ills. If it was any sort of social panacea, or even decent way to make a living, it would be promoted world-wide and we wouldn't be trying to remake it, again.

When it comes to banging for bucks there is no telling when a 'relationship' of long-standing isn't going to 'go sour' and somebody receive a good hiding - even in those non-prostitutional relationships. Adding a cash exchange just adds a flillip to the level of customer satisfaction and fogs the notion of another 'tip'. Cash enterprise is the stuff of real-world hurt feelings, donneybrooks and gunshots on  regular occasions. Prostitution has been a risky business since the days when the ladies had to 'show up for duty' in honor of the goddess at the temple once a year. Even nice gals, doing their religious duty, were exposed to the social misfits  who hung around the temple, gland in hand, waiting for just such an opportunity. Just look at the Pig Farmer of Kelowna. He could have slaughtered nice girls, but the hookers' lifestyle made it oh-so-much easier. That wouldn't have changed much, even if there were no 'take-out services', he was inviting them to 'parties'.

The Sex Trade Workers essentially want the law changed so they can 'open' their business in places it's not open now.  Anybody who's had the privilege of living beside an 'illegal' bawdy house can only imagine the fun it would be to have a legal one - running all above-board, 24/7 (closed for Christmas and high holidays)- next door. The increased tax revenue wouldn't begin to cover the increased police costs to fend off the phone complaints and investigate the damage to customers cars. And why would the girls want to give up the goodies they've got now - welfare, state child support  and/or disability payments, untaxed income, free health coverage and other social service benefits? No doubt these lifestyle 'perqs' wouldn't be included in any new legislation, but they will be, eventually, if prostituion continues to be expanded as a legitimate way to earn a living.

Hey, there's a new career field - specializing in the business end of the sex trade for 10 percent off the top. And let's not forget the investment opportunities provided by a chain of franchised high-end bordellos. Or is that just legalized pimping?

No comments: