STI's and social responsibilty.

[kristopin]

education information

hi all
let me give you a bit of self background
im 58, white, married 30 yrs, not in the sex industry.
i am very new to the tgirl scene in toronto. say 3 months.

one of the most important features of this site is the information and education if you will, that i can get from here. the discussion are frank and friendly.
since i havent been very active sexually for 30 yrs, i find that i am ignorant of most STD's and how they can be transmitted., therefore i think more education is one of the keys. we teach our kids sex ed in school but probably fail in that dept for ourselves. the more informed we are then the more we can 'self' regulate. as i told a friend recently there will always be people that just dont care except for themselves and will cheat any system that is put in place, they will lie to get what irregardless of consequences.

i am not the most educated here, having graduated from college so many yrs ago, but i do like having the ability to offer my thoughts here.
being an old hippy and having been part of the 'counter-culture', i find that personal freedom means that we have the ability to make decisions and have the responsability to accept the consequences of our actons. the more informed we are then we should be able to make better decisions.

darn thats a little heavy for this time of morning.

cheers all

[kristopin]

i agree

i just think sex needs to be in the privacy of your own home not out on the street where are kids can see it.look at it this way if anyone needs to be begging off the streets its time for a career change dontcha think?

yes i think that is also true, however i think we are some of the fortunate few who are not impacted by social and financial factors that we sometimes lose site of those who have no choice, be it drugs, low education, etc. those that have been forced into an industry they do not want to be in. i may be an old romantic but personally for me my compassion forces me to try to understand those that have fallen thru the cracks and help if i can.

cheers lisa, we should meet some day.

[toban]

I think Andrew's suggestions are worth your reading!

I do not have anything of my own to add to what has already been written here, but while reading new posts today on the thread that inspired me to start this thread, a post by andrew_69 provided much good, solid information in support of governmental regulation of the Sex-trade industry.

In case you do not follow the original thread, I post this link to Andrew's post of today:- http://tgirlforums.com/yabbse/showpost.php?p=159891&postcount=57

I feel that Andrew makes some very good arguments for what he calls "O & S" (oversight and regulation). It appears to me this kind of intervention might go a long way towards accomplish most of the changes that I think are needed to address current deficiencies relating to STI issues in the Sex-trade.

Such regulation certainly seems reasonable to me, especially in that our lives, health and welfare are already protected by hundreds of very similar regulations currently in place in Canada right now, e.g. in food stuffs, pharmaceuticals, health care, clergy, air travel, rail travel, automotive manufacturing and safety specifications, broadcasting, telephone, hospitals and licensing of all forms of health care workers such as physicians, nurses, all forms of medical technicians, teachers, and on and on ad infinitum! So why not sex-trade workers?

[Foxy Basket]

I've been following the suggestions proposed in this thread, as well as Andrew69's thoughts in the previous one. I've seen some very good suggestions, as well as some that require revisions. But I'm glad that the discussion has been productive and insightful so far, and I hope it will continue as such.

I'm still preparing my response, but I have four weeks left in the semester, and school is much higher on my list of priorities. If I can't give this subject the attention it deserves, I may choose to withdraw from the discussion due to time constraints. I'll know by the end of this week; until then, your continued patience is appreciated.

[Foxy Basket]

Just wanted to mention that I'll be posting something useful by tomorrow evening at the latest.

Don't worry, toban, I haven't forgotten about this thread - better late than never!

[Foxy Basket]

Part 1 ? Identifying the nature of the problem

At long last, I've completed my piece on STI's and social responsibility. It's a very long read, but worthwhile. I welcome any and all comments, suggestions and responses. Sorry it took so long, but it's worth the wait!

Before we discuss the potential for regulation, it is most important to identify the nature of the HIV/AIDS problem. Unlike other communicable diseases, HIV presents several unique issues that one must consider:

- Most people with HIV are completely asymptomatic. Therefore, it is difficult to determine who has HIV without a blood test.

- HIV is not spread by casual contact. A person with HIV can live a completely normal life for decades, and never pass it on to another person. An HIV-positive person can also engage in many sexual activities without ever compromising the safety of their partner.

- Sexual contact with an HIV-positive individual does not guarantee HIV infection. Certain behaviours are riskier than others (unprotected receptive anal sex = high risk, protected oral sex = low risk) and certain factors, such as circumcision, can lower one’s susceptibility to HIV infection.

- HIV has an incubation period of up to 3 months, during which a blood test may not detect the presence of HIV antibodies; however, an HIV-positive person is capable of unknowingly transmitting HIV to another individual during this timeframe.

- People who are HIV-positive may never acquire AIDS in their lifetime, and there are several treatments available (including antiretroviral drugs, known as “the cocktail”) which can slow the spread of HIV in a positive individual.

- There are many test sites available where one can receive HIV test results in 60 seconds or less; the Hassle-Free Clinic has one of these test machines, as do many GTA-area hospitals.

- If someone suspects they have been infected with HIV (usually through unprotected sex with a known HIV-positive partner) there are drugs (PEP, or Post Exposure Prophylaxis) available that can stop that person from acquiring HIV. These drugs should be administered within 24 hours of exposure to be effective, and most hospitals in the GTA will administer the drugs with reasonable cause, and without prejudice.

- There is currently no vaccine to prevent HIV infection, nor is there a cure for HIV-positive individuals.

- Many people who are infected with HIV (including up to 1/3rd of gay men in Ontario) are unaware of their HIV-positive status.

Simply put, we do not have the resources or the infrastructure to force mandated blood tests every three months for the entire sexually-active population of Canada. Even if our health system were capable of handling this massive undertaking, we do not have the resources to enforce the mandated testing through the police or courts, particularly with underhoused or street-involved people, illegal immigrants, and others who may be living “outside the system.”

Because of these unique challenges, methods for HIV control cannot be compared to other diseases, such as TB or smallpox. The HIV problem requires unique solutions, and certain proposed solutions – such as total isolation of HIV-positive individuals – are insufficient and not viable.

We do not have the resources to isolate HIV-positive individuals (potentially for decades) nor do we have the right to imprison them permanently. As mentioned before, an HIV-positive person can live a completely normal life without ever passing along their infection; it is absolutely wrong to segregate them from society for something they might do, unless there is just cause due to previous actions (such as "dangerous offenders"). With other diseases, when someone can spread the infection through casual contact, isolation makes sense, but HIV-positive people pose no such threat.

The threat of total isolation would certainly make people less likely to get tested, particularly those who engage in high-risk activities; if someone believes themselves to be infected, the threat of imprisonment will make them increasingly less likely to get tested at all – which makes them a bigger risk to others. Increasing stigma around HIV will only make people less responsible.

Sources:
Hassle-Free Clinic (www.hasslefreeclinic.org)

ACT – AIDS Committee of Toronto (www.actoronto.org)

PRIMED (www.queertransmen.org)

[Foxy Basket]

Part 2 ? Legal Issues

While legislation has been passed that makes it illegal for an HIV-positive person to have unprotected sex without informing their partner, there has been a great deal of variation in charges and judicial decisions. In the case of Henry Currier (R. v. Currier) the court convicted him of aggravated assault, and claimed that failure to disclose HIV status constituted fraud; however, in its decision, the court also found that an HIV-positive person who practices safer sex does not necessarily have a legal responsibility to disclose his or her status. It is also notable that neither of the two women that Currier had unprotected sex with has ever tested positive for HIV.

In another similar case, Jennifer Murphy was charged in 2004 for failure to disclose her HIV-positive status, but because she insisted on condom use, the charge was withdrawn in 2007. Other cases have resulted in convictions ranging from criminal negligence causing bodily harm (R. v. Mercer) to aggravated sexual assault (R. v. Smith). Even the case of Johnson Aziga (two counts of first-degree murder) is a long way from conclusion; until this legislation is subjected to judicial review, the law will remain unclear.

It is important to note that all convictions relating to criminal HIV transmission involve cases of unprotected sexual activity, which suggests that the law does not require disclosure during protected sex. This only adds to the ambiguity of the law, and illustrates the difficulty in using legislation to combat the problem.

Most importantly, these cases only involved people who were aware of their HIV-positive status; as such, the threat of criminal prosecution may deter people from getting tested – which, again, only makes them a bigger risk to others. A person who refrains from testing cannot possibly transmit HIV knowingly, and is subsequently immune from charges; therefore, this legislation appears to be counterproductive in the fight to slow or stop the transmission of HIV.

Sources:
R. v. Currier, 1998 CanLII 796 (S.C.C.) http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/...canlii796.html

R. v. Currier, Wikipedia (includes alternate link to Supreme Court decision) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._Cuerrier

Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network http://www.aidslaw.ca/EN/index.htm

After Currier: Canadian Criminal Law and the Non-Disclosure of HIV-Positive Status
http://www.aidslaw.ca/publications/p...cEN.php?ref=28

[Foxy Basket]

Part 3 ? What exactly IS the problem?

One of the main reasons that prostitution remains criminalized is due to the assumption that prostitutes are prone to acquiring STI’s, and passing them along to their clients. Many studies have shown higher rates of STI’s among prostitutes, and rate of STI infection is negatively correlated with rate of condom use and level of income, and positively correlated with substance abuse, street involvement, and shared use of needles.

Translation: STI rate goes up as substance abuse, needle sharing, and homelessness go up, and STI rate goes up as income and condom use go down.

However, this does not tell the whole story. While prostitutes have more sexual partners and higher rates of infection than the general population, this conflates several factors that are also true of non-prostitutes. Many studies have also shown that poverty, street involvement, substance abuse, irregular condom use, and needle sharing all increase one’s susceptibility to STI’s. These other confounding variables make it hard to determine whether sex work, as an independent variable, results in a significant increase in STI transmission. Given that multiple risk factors affect most prostitutes, it is difficult to determine a sole cause of STI transmission, but of all the considered variables, unsafe sharing of injection tools has the highest correlation with HIV-positive status.

Given that commercial sex accounts for only a small percentage of overall sexual behaviour, it is hard to determine whether commercial sex also has a major impact on infection rates for STI’s. According to the CDC, approximately 19 million new cases of STI infection occur in the USA every year; almost 50% of these cases are found in youths between 15-24.The most vulnerable demographics include women and infants, adolescents and young adults, racial and ethnic minorities, men who have sex with men, and persons entering correctional facilities. These were the demographics subjected to Special Focus Profiles in the most recent (2006) STD Surveillance Report; although sex workers may fall into several of these demographics, sex workers are not considered responsible for a notable percentage of STI infections.

Dr. Charles Winnick summarized the role of prostitution in STI prevalence, explaining that “we know from many different studies that the amount of VD attributable to prostitution is remaining fairly constant at a little under 5%, which is a negligible proportion compared to the amount of VD we have” (Almodovar, page 154, in Spector, 2006).


Van Ness Prevention Division - Transgender Harm Reduction Program

One notable study examined behaviours among 209 MTF trans women, 76 of whom identified as sex workers. The study found that sex workers had much higher rates of substance use, use of needles for injection, and homelessness or marginal living situations, when compared with the 133 non-sex workers in the study. The sex workers tended to be younger, non-Caucasian, and of a lower socio-economic status than the non-sex workers.

However, some notable differences in sexual behaviours were recorded. While sex workers had many more male sex partners within a 30-day period (an average of 20.9 partners, compared with 2.6 male partners for the non-sex workers) they also reported a much higher rate of condom use than non-sex workers (94.3% vs. 55.6%). The 94.3% reported rate of condom use is much, much higher than any other demographic.

In their conclusions, the authors of the study claimed, “although the sex workers reported significantly more male partners, their HIV risk through sexual behaviour may be lower than for non-sex workers as a result of their higher use of condoms” (Reback and Lombardi, page 66, 2001).

This does not necessarily mean that sex workers themselves are more responsible; it is equally likely that clients, realizing that sex workers represent a higher risk of infection, take the responsibility to protect themselves.

Based on this information, it is difficult to conclude that sex work plays a significant role in the spread of STI’s. On the contrary, it appears that some participants in the sex industry - and potentially, a large majority of both clients and providers - are actually more responsible than the general public. This also shows that STI risk is determined more by sexual behaviours than number of partners, which further suggests that personal responsibility is the best way to minimize risks.

Sources:
Almodovar, Norma Jean, “Porn Stars, Radical Feminists, Cops and Outlaw Whores” in Prostitution and Pornography: Philosophical Debate about the Sex Industry (ed. Spector, Jessica). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006.

Reback, Cathy J, and Emilia L. Lombardi, “HIV Risk Behaviours of Male-to-Female Transgenders in a Community-Based Harm Reduction Program.” in Transgender and HIV, (eds. Bockting, Walter, and Sheila Kirk). Binghampton, NY: The Haworth Press, 2001.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/dstd/Stats...and_Trends.htm

[Foxy Basket]

Part 4 ? Regulation: A mutual-responsibility approach

In other threads, there have been several suggestions for the regulation of the sex industry, and the perceived benefits that government regulation might offer. The only way that government regulation will serve to lower STI rates among prostitutes and clients is if the regulations increase safe-sex behaviours among both parties. There is no guarantee that this will occur, and the research shows that the opposite is usually true – regulation of prostitution, with mandated health tests, tends to reduce safer-sex behaviours.

There is not one single example of government-regulated prostitution that results in better work conditions for sex workers; all existing regulatory systems are highly punitive and treat prostitution as a vice which must be controlled, resulting in “vice taxes” such as those imposed on cigarettes and alcohol.

However, for the sake of argument, I will propose a hypothetical scenario, based on real examples, whereby prostitution might exist as a regulated industry. However, this would require both sex workers AND potential clients to register themselves before engaging in any commercial sexual activity.

There is a great deal of precedent for requiring both the supplier and purchaser to be licensed. To purchase alcohol for distribution, a bar owner/manager must present their license to the clerk at the LCBO, who charges a higher amount for the alcohol. The owner/manager is required to keep all receipts on hand, and if a liquor inspector enters the bar, they can ask to examine any bottle, and confirm that it was purchased legally (at the higher cost) for distribution.

A construction company that uses dangerous materials (such as explosives) can only acquire these materials from a licensed dealer, and must present ID and a license in order to purchase dangerous materials. A person requiring prescription drugs must purchase them from a licensed pharmacist, and must provide proof that the doctor believes the patient requires those drugs (the prescription itself). And a person renting a large truck for transportation must present a valid driver’s license, as well as proof of insurance, to rent the vehicle.

So, it’s not a far stretch to suggest that both providers and clients should both have to acquire licenses or permits. Here’s how it could work:

Licenses and Permits
All sex workers would have to procure a license before engaging in sex work. As is currently the policy in Nevada (where prostitution is legal in registered brothels) sex workers would have to visit a police station, where they would give their full legal name, submit to a criminal records check and fingerprinting (whereby any previous convictions would result in disqualification) and also submit proof that they are not currently infected with any STI’s. In an attempt to stop street-based prostitution, the police would also require the sex worker to provide a fixed address, where the license, including name and photograph (to ensure that it’s really her) will be sent after the paperwork is processed (2-4 weeks). To ensure proper accounting practices, the police would also record the sex worker’s Social Insurance Number, and provide that information to the CCRA. The license could cost anywhere from $100 - $500, and would require a monthly renewal. The sex worker would also be provided with safer-sex literature and condoms.

Any potential client would have to procure a permit to visit a registered sex worker. He would have to visit a police station, give his full legal name, and submit to photographing, fingerprinting and a criminal records check (to search for any previous history of sexual assault or violent behaviour, which would result in refusal of a permit). He would also be required to visit a clinic and confirm that he does not have HIV (there are many places that provide 60-second tests) and show these results to police. He would then be issued a permit allowing him to visit a licensed sex worker within the next 7 days, and the cost for the permit would be $50 - $100, to cover the costs of the records check and administration. His information would remain on file, to deter him from harming the sex worker, and also in case the provider later tests positive for an STI. He would also be given literature on safer-sex practices, as well as condoms.

Advantages to Clients
This would provide potential clients with peace of mind that their service provider was not showing any proof of STI infection at the time of their last test. The client would also be assured that the sex worker is at least 18 years old, is a legal resident of Canada, and has no criminal record.

Advantages to Sex Workers
This would give sex workers peace of mind that the client has not tested positive for STI’s, and has no history of sexual assault or violence, which would increase her safety. This would also tell her that the client is registered with the police; if he assaults her or treats her poorly, she can contact the police with a formal complaint, which could result in the rejection of future permits for the client, or criminal charges. This also guarantees that the client is at least 18 years old.

Advantages for minimizing HIV transmission
If a sex worker tests positive for HIV, she would be required to notify the police immediately, and would be required to identify as many of her recent clients as possible. The police database would be used for her to identify those clients (either by name or photograph) and they would be contacted immediately, and required to have an immediate blood test for any potential STI’s. If a client tests positive, he would be required to notify police of all his recent sex partners (including sex workers) who would then require immediate testing of all individuals. Any and all future licenses or permits would display an HIV-positive indicator for sex workers or clients to see, so that they can make an informed choice, and sex workers and clients would be required to divulge this information to their current and future sex partners or spouses.

Potential Disadvantages – Loss of Privacy and Opportunity
The police would be responsible for maintaining the database – no other government body would be capable of handling the amount of administration, and it would be too expensive to establish a separate government body, with offices that can be accessed from all parts of the country. Therefore, any police officer, in any police station in Canada, could potentially access the database. Employers dealing with vulnerable people (such as day-cares, hospitals or schools) may choose to search the database to see if the candidate has ever engaged in sex work, or has been a client. Such practices are commonplace in many areas; companies are permitted to search for criminal records, or past charges related to violent or sexual crimes (even if the charges are withdrawn, or the accused is found not guilty, these records are still accessable to certain organizations). These practices are not considered discriminatory; courts have upheld the right of companies to deny employment to people with similar records, so it’s not unreasonable to assume the same could be true of sex workers.

Registering as a sex worker or potential client would necessitate a permanent record of a highly-stigmatized behaviour, which could easily limit future employment opportunities. Also, it would not be difficult for a future or current partner or spouse to ask a police officer to search the database, to see if their partner has engaged in these activities. Even if laws prevented disclosure of this information, such transgressions by police officers are not uncommon, and the database could result in ruined relationships for both sex workers and clients. Lastly, simply viewing the sex worker’s license would give clients access to the provider’s personal information (legal name and address) which could result in identity theft, blackmail or worse; additionally, the provider would have access to the client’s name, also raising the potential for improper conduct.

Potential Disadvantages – Unlicensed Workers and Clients: An STI Nightmare
Because street prostitution would remain illegal, sex workers without fixed addresses would be more susceptible to police harassment or arrest. There is no proof that licensing would encourage clients to restrict their visits to licensed providers; in fact, clients that don’t want to register (or don’t qualify) would be more likely to see an unlicensed provider. This would result in higher risks for both the provider and client, because neither one can contact the police if things go bad. Also, there would be no way to track the spread of HIV if either of them later test positive, and providers who don’t qualify for a license would not have the same mandated requirement to get tested. Coupled with laws necessitating HIV-positive disclosure, this would serve as a huge deterrent to engaging in responsible testing behaviours, especially for those unable to work legally.

Potential Disadvantages – Economic Costs
The cost for setting up a database, testing sites, and ensuring access for sex workers and clients would be significant. As mentioned above, there would be no way to set up a government bureau with regulation as its mandate without significant costs, and such a bureau would have to work with the police to conduct records checks and collect information. Therefore, like all other licenses and permits, those involved in the industry would bear the brunt of the costs. Additional taxes would likely apply to licensed providers (thus lowering the incentive to acquire a license) and would also force prices among registered providers to rise. Clients would also feel a pinch when applying for a permit, which would also lower their frequency of visiting providers, and also give them further incentive to meet with unlicensed sex workers. Lastly, the police departments would require additional funding to enforce the new regulations.



In essence, such a program would increase costs for all registered sex workers and clients, while driving down prices for unregistered providers. It would result in a legal industry, and an illegal shadow industry; with the combination of higher prices, disclosure of personal information, and potential loss of future opportunities, clients would be more likely to entertain the idea of visiting unlicensed providers, which would result in riskier practices.

Let’s break it down very simply – if you’re a man who wants a quick BJ before you head home from work, which are you more likely to do?
1) get tested, register at the police station, buy a permit, and pay a higher price to visit a licensed provider; or
2) skip all that hassle, pick up a streetwalker, and get a $50 covered BJ?

Remember, the only way that regulation will slow the spread of STI’s is if it also increases safer-sex behaviour! There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that my fictional proposal (or any other regulations that have ever existed) will have that effect, and for some people outside the regulations, it will actually lead to less-responsible behaviours.

Sources:
Sex Professionals of Canada http://www.spoc.ca

Sullivan, Mary Lucille, Making Sex Work: A Failed Experiment with Legalised Prostitution. Melbourne: Spinifex Press, 2007.

[Foxy Basket]

Part 5 ? Conclusions

The irony of this discussion is that it began with a guy who claimed he had been infected with herpes by a TS escort, and passed it on to his wife. As the thread developed, there were calls for the “outing” of escorts with STI’s, demands to regulate the industry, and suggestions on how it could be done responsibly.

When the dust finally settled, we found that this individual: 1) had refused to insist on safer-sex practices (somehow allowing the escort to squeeze his dick inside her, without a condom); 2) had no idea how herpes is actually spread (and therefore, had no proof that the escort had given it to him); 3) had no idea what the proper method of testing for genital herpes was (he claimed he went for blood tests, but never mentioned genital swabs in any of his posts); and 4) never actually confirmed if she had herpes, nor did he ever reveal the results of his own tests.

More than anything else, this discussion tells me that EDUCATION ABOUT STI’S AND SAFER SEX IS ABSOLUTELY VITAL TO SLOW AND STOP THE SPREAD OF HIV. So many people have so much to learn about the various STI’s (myself included) and all of us will benefit more from honest discussion than from witch hunts and false accusations. The only thing that will provide a long-term solution to the pandemic (other than a vaccine or cure) is EDUCATING PEOPLE ABOUT RESPONSIBLE SEXUAL HEALTH. The government can only do so much; we can’t rely on others to take care of us, so we must take care of ourselves.

According to the United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, research shows very clearly that “coercive measures, such as mandatory screening, lack of confidentiality and segregation drive people away from preventative education and health-care services and subvert this process of behavioural change” (Sullivan, page 266 - see previous citation).

I believe that this point has been proven several times in each of my posts, and I believe I have provided sufficient evidence to prove that the HIV problem cannot be fixed by outside forces alone.

In Part 1, I demonstrated that the HIV/AIDS problem is filled with unique challenges that cannot be resolved using traditional methods, such as those utilized during previous pandemics; isolation or segregation is not a viable option, and increasing stigma will only deter people from acting responsibly.

In Part 2, I showed that legal mechanisms are incapable of slowing the spread of HIV, and that the existing legislation is unclear and unbalanced. Again, the threat of imprisonment will result in reluctance to get tested, and would have a negative effect on efforts to slow or stop HIV.

In Part 3, I used evidence to show that the sex industry is not, by any means, the main source of STI infections, and also showed that safer-sex behaviours are often higher among sex workers than the general public. Again, it proves that safer sex is a personal choice, and it cannot be assumed that sex workers are solely responsible for safer sex – the client’s responsibility is just as important!

In Part 4, I created a fictional method of regulation, designed to demonstrate that government control over the sex industry is highly punitive and generally ineffective. Did you ever find yourself thinking, “forget it, I’ll never go through all that just to get a permit!” If so, then you understand perfectly why sex workers are equally reluctant to provide all that information, simply to legalize something that shouldn't be illegal in the first place. If you were worried about your wife, parents or kids finding out that you visited a sex worker, imagine how we would feel, being forced to get fingerprinted, photographed, and entered into a database as a "registered prostitute!"

It’s the virtual equivalent of a “scarlet letter” that we would never be free from. Most of us do not think of sex work as our lifelong career; most of us would be happy to leave the industry behind someday, and never be subjected to discrimination, social stigma, or blackmail because of choices we made in the past. The perceived benefits far outweigh the actual costs, and there is not one case of government-run prostitution, anywhere in the world, that improves the overall health and safety of sex workers. The argument "they're doing it wrong" doesn't work, because there's no way to "do it right!"

Regulation will never eliminate street prostitution, because people with no alternatives will continue to do what they have to do to survive. The main effect of regulation will be to create two separate markets of prostitution; one legal, overpriced, and punitive, and the other illegal, underpriced, and increasingly unsafe.

I’ve said it a million times, and I’ll say it a million times more: THE ONLY WAY TO MINIMIZE YOUR CHANCES OF ACQUIRING AN STI IS TO TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR SEXUAL HEALTH. No amount of isolation, legislation, legalization or regulation will protect you from your own mistakes. So read up on STI transmission, take the steps to lower your risk, and choose your partners carefully – if you don’t, and you catch something because of your own irresponsible actions, you have no one to blame but yourself.

[kristopin]

well done.

that took a ot of time and effort and is very thorough.

i agree completely in the final analysis. education is the key as well as being responsible.

with the abundant amount of info on the net we can certanly self educate about STI's.

i also think that perhaps we need more info about cliniques where potential clients can get anonymously tested.

i also think that for the most part the girls in the sex trade are careful and resposible enough to get themselves tested regularly. someone that is professional will take care her business. i am more concerned about clients getting themselves tested.

cheers

[toban]

Nikki you have done an amazing job!

While the majority of us on the Forum have essentially been shooting from the hip on this issue, putting forth our superficial personal views on the matter, your serious work on this problem has been quite outstanding IMHO!

You have researched and backed up your previous claims, and then you?ve also offered some suggestions to us for a possible solution. Your five part post today has certainly reinforced your initial position, where you had consistently pointed out the futility of trying to solve the problem by some form of regulation, as had been advanced by many of us here, including myself.

As you suggest in your discussion of the many disadvantages of such regulation, it is clear that neither sex workers nor clients would likely be willing to endure the impact that such controlling regulations would necessitate being applied to them.

Good work Nikki! Congratulations on a job well done!

Now Nikki, I trust that you will get back to your course work and give that your full attention. Maybe, some day in the future when you finish your studies, we?ll be able to recognize you as our friend, Dr. Nikki !

[Foxy Basket]

Hiatus

Thanks for being patient with me; a lot of this research was done for one of my courses, and I was able to use it to construct my response. Nice to see my scholastic pursuits overlap with the forum!

Anyways, I'm in my second-last week of classes, so I've decided to take a couple of weeks off from this website. I'll be back in early December, so if anyone wants to get in touch with me, please e-mail me, rather than sending a PM.

Be back soon!

[Foxy Basket]

Thank you, Toban!

As I mentioned before, my postings on this topics overlapped with some of my studies at school. If you remember my attempted project back in September, my compromise was to research secondary sources in the sex industry, and later, do primary research as part of my graduate studies.

Well, several sections of my recent 5-point post (mostly parts 2, 3 and 4) were included in my term paper. This thread inspired me to focus on the pros and cons of government regulation, so I spent most of November researching this topic, and handed in my paper this week (shortly after I posted my rough draft on this site). Earlier today, my professor just sent me his comments, along with my mark:

Hi Nikki,

This was a very thoughtful, well-written paper. You've raised several interesting points, and your hypothetical scenario displayed a lot of insight, as well as illustrating the potential pitfalls of regulation. It's clear that you've done your research well, and your analytical skills have improved greatly over the course of the term. Well done!

Grade: A

So, thank you for the inspiration! I look forward to discussing the topic further in person, when you next return to Toronto.

[toban]

Good Prof!

Nice work Nikki!

I don't think you needed any inspiration from me to spur on that research work - I believe you were on that road anyway!

So your prof. and I think alike.