Given the deluge of anti-pay-for-play legislation that has been coming down the past two years, this is a breath of fresh air.

Where is the collateral legislation to remove the stigma for a John who has a conviction on his record?  By leaving the convictions on the Johns, aren't you condemning them to a life of spending their money on young, hot, hookers, without any chance to get out?   I heard about a guy once who didn't want to do this anymore, but he had a conviction from a LE sting, so he was trapped into this life.  The same sentiments that prompt legislation like this for the ladies should also apply to the men who are arrested.  Why ruin their lives forever, too?

This is NOT a "good" article. Quite frankly the article itself sucks ass, for all the reasons you have mentioned. It tries to portray ALL sex workers as victims because "NO ONE would ever choose to be a ho", well once upon a time there were literally hundreds of "ho's" who would take serious issue with that self serving and ridiculous statement.

I don't see how this moves the needle in the direction of either decriminalization or legalization. It essentially maintains the status quo by allowing a reset if a provider avoids a second conviction within 3 years of the first. It seems to me that providers who successfully evade LEO will simply continue on as always. Those who are less fortunate have at least a few options: 1) Continue providing and hope they can avoid future convictions; 2) Continue providing while not caring about additional convictions unless/until the legal consequences start to get serious; 3) Continue providing but relocate to another state for 3 years. At the end of the day nothing has really changed. Providers keep on providing, mongers keep on mongering, and the nanny-state continues apace. And, by not requiring proof of "trafficking" to have convictions expunged, it (IMHO) tacitly reinforces the mentality that all prostitution = trafficking. The entire article oozes that viewpoint with statements such as the average age of entry into sex work is 13 and that 80% of Hawaiian sex workers are trafficked. In fact, an argument can be made that this is a step in the wrong direction because it perpetuates the idea that all sex workers are trafficked and can't take care of themselves or make their own decisions.

that from my own experiences as a sex-customer,  the work-ethic of sex workers (especially Kgirls I have known) dwarfs that of most other people of either sex, and I, too, would not hesitate to hire a former prostitute for an office job, but unlike you, I would not automatically expect her to work in the space under my desk.  Lol     The open-mindedness means if somebody gets pissed and swears in the office, she is not going to come running to management and report it as a "hostile work environment", which is something I had never heard of until a few years ago, much less knew it was a cause of action for a lawsuit.  

and his inability to read a plainly written sentence must be rubbing off on you. I clearly said that I would be interested in hiring an ex hooker NOT because I was interested in fucking her, but because all of the other reasons that you clearly agree with.  

even a tiny bit, that is a good thing.

What it does, similar to the so called "Nordic model" is make victims out of all prostitutes and the reason the conviction is expunged isn't because she hasn't actually committed any type of crime against society, but  because she is deemed to have been an unwilling victim. I am with Jim, I don't see how this really moves the needle.

The Dems are predicting that, by the 2024 election, Texas will be a Blue State because the exodus from California.   Soon after, they will control the government, and then you and yours will get to share in the rampant homelessness with pissing and shitting on the sidewalk, taxes for healthcare for illegals, state income tax and, of course, sanctuary cities.  

"age-out" of sex work, I wish more would do what other business owners do, and bring their daughters in to take over the business.  If you're a straight customer, just be wary of any that call their business something like "Anastasia & Sons."  Lol

By the time many of these women finally retire even their daughters are too old for me. How about "Anastasia and granddaughters" instead? lol

If you see an ad like that, send it to me.  Lol

You can argue the merits / demerits of this law and slice and dice things you wish were different. But, contrary to GaG's point, this law does away with the need to prove "victimization" or trafficking which the discussion says is often impossible to prove anyway. Despite any legal or social flaws you might want to criticize, how do you vote: For or Against?  
.
I am FOR this law for the same reasons that mrfisher is for it. I would add that a one-time handjob in the back of a car caught be a nosy street cop with a flashlight tapping on the window might create the same criminal record as an international touring pro with a private website and 5 years of clientele who gets nabbed in a 5-star hotel at the start of a 3-hour luxury session with an  undercover cop in Honolulu.  Let them both retire and leave those records behind.  
.
And a question: Does anyone see Perfectstorm anywhere in that signing photo? Hiding behind a curtain, maybe?

Unfortunately chicks are more likely to file workplace harassment suits to cash in, rather than any real feeling of offense, so I am not sure you can count on former sex workers to leave money on the table.

But with most women, they will either join in the fun and can become "one of the guys" or she will leave the conversation if it gets a little too randy for her. My policy is to treat everyone the same, regardless of gender, race, or anything else, but on the other hand, I don't have a problem telling someone they are not making enough effort to fit into the "team" and so they should make a bigger effort, or consider moving on.  

Not on the Texas/Mexico border, I've got no problem with beaners, and as an employer I welcome the influx of cheap labor, me and the Koch brothers, lol  

And it shows with your every post. Your PTSD, that is, from being pummeled serially around the head and neck. Your sadly poor ability to read, write and comprehend English makes you a sad spectacle. I will agree you are "open minded." But it's the kind of open mindedness that exists when you have large holes on either side of your cranium. I hope all the fireworks haven't further upset you. Happy Fourth!

Come on Jake, KEEP UP!!!

But thank you for your oh-so-typical dimwittedly literal response.
Keep up, Wu!

You are VERY sloppy with the English language yourself.  

And I am going to a Fourth Of July Weekend cookout at a friend's. While, YOU, no doubt, are sobbing softly into your lonely Tequila. And NO, my use of Happy Fourth doesn't even qualify as sloppy since it;s Fourth Of July weekend.  ALL weekend.  
KEEP UP, WU! rofl
PS: I suppose you've never wished anyone "Merry Christmas" on Dec. 26th, fool.

-- Modified on 7/5/2019 1:44:31 PM

Why would I wish someone Merry Christmas the day AFTER Christmas? Even you aren't THAT dumb, are you?

I'll let Mr. Goodbar do the talking. Again. It is all your idiotic responses deserve.

While it's certainly the case that some women will probably benefit from this law, that doesn't mean it does anything constructive toward making sex work/workers more acceptable to society in the US. In fact, the rationale for doing away with the trafficking/victimization requirement is to simply assume that ALL prostitution is de facto trafficking and therefore requiring proof is unnecessary. And by enshrining and institutionalizing that concept, this law essentially declares all sex workers to be victims who need the nanny-state to protect them. So, in terms of whether this law moves the needle toward decriminalization/legalization/acceptance of sex work, it doesn't . . . not even a little bit.

"Ramming the ramparts."  Is that something that requires another person to bend over?  

You never heard the expression? You didn't listen to Trump's speech? He recounted how, in the early days of our nation, our military "rammed the ramparts." He also praised the Space Force again.  
.
It's on Fox! http://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-says-malfunctioning-teleprompter-to-blame-for-airport-gaffe-in-july-4-speech  
""Our Army manned the air, it rammed the ramparts, it took over the airports, it did everything it had to do, and at Fort McHenry, under the rocket’s red glare it had nothing but victory,” he said. “And when dawn came, their star-spangled banner waved defiant.""

Since he claims to be a veteran, perhaps he'll avail himself of these "4th of July Savings" on JULY 7TH!.  But of course Home Depot is WRONG! rofl

He still got thousands of people to turn out.  Can you imagine if he was "high-energy?"  The Dem hopefuls for 2020 are still turning the crowds out by the tens in coffee shops all across America.  Is this a great country, or what?

Without the need to prove victimization under this new law, and with all the benefits that come with "claiming" victim status, this could easily skew the statistics that LE and others use to "PROVE" that virtually all prostitutes are unwilling victims of traffickers.  

of Cuddling hardly makes you an expert on what is harassment and what isn't.  With that said, the kinds of things that are considered harassment TODAY are activities that were chalks off to "boys will be boys" in the past.  Your youth and lack of experience with women in a workplace setting gives you zero understanding of what it was like 20 or 30 years ago.  Admittedly, some execs who live in an insulated environment are not fully aware of how much some things have changed until they find themselves the target of a lawsuit.  

Trump spent MILLIONS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS to fund an event that was a thinly disguised campaign rally.

to spit on DeBlasio, but couldn't get close enough.  Lol

No matter what the facts are, you manage to twist them into a negative for Trump.

events are also annual, so they build a following over time through repetition.  In SoCal, we have the Huntington Beach 4th of July Parade.  It was crap and nobody but a few hundred spectators showed up in the beginning for several years, but 50 years later, its a big deal with people lining the parade route five-deep, and its broadcast live by the local ABC affiliate.  Trump's celebration was NOT an annual event, so the large turnout is all the more remarkable.  

This shot of you was taken while you listened to an Obama speech.

I always appreciate a good con artist, as long as I'M not the victim.  With that said, I do think she should be subject to the same laws as the rest of us, which if charged, would land her in prison by almost any criminal standard.