Does Stephen Harper Hate Women?

Probably. If he were in support of laws that put women at risk of bodily harm and impeded their ability to protect themselves from forces that could cause bodily harm, you might say, sure. If he were in support of this law and did not allow the women who are most affected by these laws to protest his position you might say, absolutely.

On April 25th, the Harper government asked the Supreme Court to hold the ruling of an Ontario appellant court decriminalizing the "operation of a bawdy house" and "profiting off the avails of prostitution". Measures thought to protect women in the sex trade by allowing women to hire body guards and work in a safe location. The appeals court found these provisions senseless given that prostitution is in itself legal and laws surrounding this legal activity are unnecessarily intrusive.

The timing of the government's appeal adds to this misogynistic impression. The appeals court allowed 30 days for a government response and it came at the bitter end, denying sex workers the opportunity to counter the government's claims. The government's late intervention stifled their safety and their voice.

The Harper Government's spokesman on the motion was Prosecutor Michael Morris who claimed, "If the stay is not extended, the public interest, communities and neighbourhoods and the proper administration of justice will suffer irreparable harm.”

Mr. Morris added, “It does so without affording any opportunity for the various levels of government to legislate in response to address the consequences and prevent any resulting harms.”[i] The response of women however, was evidently inconsequential.

These comments only further elucidate the government's disregard of women by placing a theoretical assault on neighborhoods over the actual assault of women in prostitution. The "resulting harms" of these laws have already been demonstrated in the court of appeal and the only reason for preventing change to occur is to further harm women involved. 

The neighborhood defense is a tried and tested position when there is no evidence to support a counter argument. One need only point to the innocent children to stir the primal protective instinct that pulls child to breast, places key to lock and forms a resounding sentiment of not in my backyard. The appellant court upheld the laws against communicating for the purposes of prostitution; this fear is unwarranted since solicitation is not permitted under the law. Any expectation that the road hockey game at the end of the cul-de-sac will be interrupted by a scantily clad prostitute hoping for a quick lay to satiate a sudden drug urge is completely erroneous. There will not be teams of prostitute's henchman flooding the streets, strong arming children and crashing backyard barbecues.

There will however be more opportunity for prostitutes to engage in a legal profession with a mortality rate 40 times greater than the national average, a profession where 80 percent of its workers have been raped with an average of 8 to 10 rapes per year and 65 percent are victims of physical violence from their customers. [ii]

Stephen Harper is probably well aware of the dangers that exist. Surely, these statistics do little to move Mr. Harper. Perhaps, because he is quite comfortable with the way things are.


[i] Makin, Kirk. Feds launch '11th-hour' bid to keep Ontario pimping law in place. Globe and Mail.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/feds-launch-11th-hour-bid-to-keep-ontario-pimping-law-in-place/article2413984/o pimping law in place.

[ii] Flowers, R. Barri. Prostitution in the Digital Age: Seelling Sex from the Suite to the Street. Praeger, 2011.