Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

Expand Messages
  • Ned Barnett
    The court has legalized brothels and pimping http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimpin g-legalized-in-ontario-canada .
    Message 1 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      The court has legalized brothels and pimping
      http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimpin
      g-legalized-in-ontario-canada . another blow for women, right?


      Maybe not so much



      Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now
      supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either -
      damaging to the Canadian "brand' for sure.



      So . what say you?



      Ned Barnett, APR

      Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

      Barnett Marketing Communications

      420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

      702-561-1167 - cell/text

      <http://www.barnettmarcom.com> www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

      <http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/>
      http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/



      05-6-16 BMC Logo





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Duncan Matheson
      Ultra conservatives won t applaud this, and these days that is the brand of government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which means
      Message 2 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.

        Duncan Matheson
        BissettMatheson Communications
        506-457-1627(O)
        506-447-2388(mobile)
        duncan@...
        Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
        www.bissettmatheson.com


        On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:

        >
        > The court has legalized brothels and pimping http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimping-legalized-in-ontario-canada � another blow for women, right?
        >
        >
        > Maybe not so much
        >
        >
        >
        > Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either � damaging to the Canadian �brand� for sure.
        >
        >
        >
        > So � what say you?
        >
        >
        >
        > Ned Barnett, APR
        >
        > Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
        >
        > Barnett Marketing Communications
        >
        > 420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
        >
        > 702-561-1167 - cell/text
        >
        > www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett
        >
        > http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/
        >
        >
        >
        > <image001.jpg>
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Samuel L Waltz Jr
        A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you. What s amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but
        Message 3 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you.

          What's amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but rather on Pragmatism and Efficacy, "if we can't keep these girls safe selling sex illegally, then we need to legalize it in an effort to keep them safe." Only argument the Court left out is that it could mean "better sex" for these women and their customers!

          Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA
          SamWaltz@...<mailto:SamWaltz@...>
          (302) 777-7774

          Sam Waltz & Associates LLC
          Business & Communications Counsel
          11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville
          Wilmington, DE 19807-2555

          www.SamWaltz.com<http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications Counsel
          www.RLSassociates.com<http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking / Merger & Acquisition

          Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate
          Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues
          to Achieve Their Goals!
          =======================================
          DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination, distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this Disclaimer.
          ________________________________
          From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of Duncan Matheson [duncan@...]
          Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:49 PM
          To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
          Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???



          Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.


          Duncan Matheson
          BissettMatheson Communications
          506-457-1627(O)
          506-447-2388(mobile)
          duncan@...<mailto:duncan@...>
          Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
          www.bissettmatheson.com


          On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:



          The court has legalized brothels and pimping http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimping-legalized-in-ontario-canada � another blow for women, right?

          Maybe not so much

          Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either � damaging to the Canadian �brand� for sure.

          So � what say you?

          Ned Barnett, APR
          Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
          Barnett Marketing Communications
          420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
          702-561-1167 - cell/text
          www.barnettmarcom.com<http://www.barnettmarcom.com/> - twitter @nedbarnett
          http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

          <image001.jpg>







          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Duncan Matheson
          Sam, you are absolutely right. They could have made prostitution illegal. Of course. That always works. If they had only thought of it. Oh well, maybe the step
          Message 4 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Sam, you are absolutely right. They could have made prostitution illegal. Of course. That always works. If they had only thought of it. Oh well, maybe the step they took is the next best thing?

            Duncan Matheson
            BissettMatheson Communications
            506-457-1627(O)
            506-447-2388(mobile)
            duncan@...
            Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
            www.bissettmatheson.com


            On 2012-03-26, at 4:51 PM, Samuel L Waltz Jr wrote:

            >
            > A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you.
            >
            > What's amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but rather on Pragmatism and Efficacy, "if we can't keep these girls safe selling sex illegally, then we need to legalize it in an effort to keep them safe." Only argument the Court left out is that it could mean "better sex" for these women and their customers!
            >
            > Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA
            > SamWaltz@...
            > (302) 777-7774
            >
            > Sam Waltz & Associates LLC
            > Business & Communications Counsel
            > 11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville
            > Wilmington, DE 19807-2555
            >
            > www.SamWaltz.com Business & Communications Counsel
            > www.RLSassociates.com Investment Banking / Merger & Acquisition
            >
            > Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate
            > Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues
            > to Achieve Their Goals!
            > =======================================
            > DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination, distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this Disclaimer.
            > From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of Duncan Matheson [duncan@...]
            > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:49 PM
            > To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
            > Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???
            >
            >
            > Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.
            >
            >
            > Duncan Matheson
            > BissettMatheson Communications
            > 506-457-1627(O)
            > 506-447-2388(mobile)
            > duncan@...
            > Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
            > www.bissettmatheson.com
            >
            >
            > On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:
            >
            >>
            >>
            >> The court has legalized brothels and pimping http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimping-legalized-in-ontario-canada � another blow for women, right?
            >>
            >>
            >> Maybe not so much
            >>
            >>
            >> Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either � damaging to the Canadian �brand� for sure.
            >>
            >>
            >> So � what say you?
            >>
            >>
            >> Ned Barnett, APR
            >>
            >> Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
            >>
            >> Barnett Marketing Communications
            >>
            >> 420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
            >>
            >> 702-561-1167 - cell/text
            >>
            >> www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett
            >>
            >> http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/
            >>
            >>
            >> <image001.jpg>
            >>
            >>
            >>
            >
            >
            >
            >



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Ned Barnett
            The reasonable right to commit a crime in a safe environment. A truly Canadian perspective. Prostitution exploits women. It demeans women. Brothels and
            Message 5 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              The reasonable right to commit a crime in a safe environment. A truly
              Canadian perspective.

              Prostitution exploits women. It demeans women. Brothels and pimps are
              people and organizations which exist to exploit women. This law legalizes
              that exploitation.

              Amazing that a civilized country could have such an attitude - instead of
              truly protecting those women from exploitation, the state legalizes their
              exploiters "in the name of" protecting the victims.

              Whew.

              Ned Barnett, APR
              Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
              Barnett Marketing Communications
              420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
              702-561-1167 - cell/text
              www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett
              http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/




              -----Original Message-----
              From: prquorum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:prquorum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
              Of Duncan Matheson
              Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 12:50 PM
              To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
              Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [PRQuorum] Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

              Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of
              government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which
              means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive
              ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is
              win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against
              soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the
              population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect
              most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous
              practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the
              girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them
              out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the
              protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and
              that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which
              include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.

              Duncan Matheson
              BissettMatheson Communications
              506-457-1627(O)
              506-447-2388(mobile)
              duncan@...
              Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
              www.bissettmatheson.com


              On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:

              >
              > The court has legalized brothels and pimping
              http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimpin
              g-legalized-in-ontario-canada . another blow for women, right?
              >
              >
              > Maybe not so much
              >
              >
              >
              > Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now
              supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either -
              damaging to the Canadian "brand' for sure.
              >
              >
              >
              > So . what say you?
              >
              >
              >
              > Ned Barnett, APR
              >
              > Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
              >
              > Barnett Marketing Communications
              >
              > 420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
              >
              > 702-561-1167 - cell/text
              >
              > www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett
              >
              > http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/
              >
              >
              >
              > <image001.jpg>
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



              ------------------------------------

              In an effort to curb spam, PRQuorum now moderates messages from NEW members
              before allowing them to be distributed to the list.Yahoo! Groups Links
            • Ned Barnett
              Duncan I always thought that the law was there to protect victims. Foolish me. Yes, making prostitution illegal doesn t work - especially if the government has
              Message 6 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Duncan


                I always thought that the law was there to protect victims. Foolish me.
                Yes, making prostitution illegal doesn't work - especially if the government
                has no interest in enforcing the laws. But the solution, it seems to me, is
                to act to help the victims (the prostitutes).



                Perhaps my views are colored by the fact that I'm working with a client in
                putting together a program to help rescue teen-aged prostitutes before they
                get too far sunk into the lifestyle to escape.



                Check out the life expectancy of a prostitute, then tell me again how this
                "humane" new law, which protects pimps and bordello operators (the
                exploiters) is such a great idea.



                Call me ultraconservative and sweep me under the rug, but I'd rather see
                society do something to help these women escape from a life of exploitation
                and victimization than to legalize their abuse. Not because God told me to,
                but because these young women are victims, who need help.


                Ned



                Ned Barnett, APR

                Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                Barnett Marketing Communications

                420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                702-561-1167 - cell/text

                <http://www.barnettmarcom.com> www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                <http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/>
                http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/



                05-6-16 BMC Logo



                From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] On
                Behalf Of Duncan Matheson
                Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 1:17 PM
                To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???





                Sam, you are absolutely right. They could have made prostitution illegal. Of
                course. That always works. If they had only thought of it. Oh well, maybe
                the step they took is the next best thing?



                Duncan Matheson

                BissettMatheson Communications

                506-457-1627(O)

                506-447-2388(mobile)
                duncan@...
                Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                www.bissettmatheson.com



                On 2012-03-26, at 4:51 PM, Samuel L Waltz Jr wrote:









                A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you.



                What's amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a
                principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but rather on Pragmatism and Efficacy, "if
                we can't keep these girls safe selling sex illegally, then we need to
                legalize it in an effort to keep them safe." Only argument the Court left
                out is that it could mean "better sex" for these women and their customers!



                Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA

                SamWaltz@...

                (302) 777-7774



                Sam Waltz & Associates LLC

                Business & Communications Counsel

                11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville

                Wilmington, DE 19807-2555



                www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                Counsel

                www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                Merger & Acquisition



                Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate

                Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues

                to Achieve Their Goals!

                =======================================

                DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                Disclaimer.

                _____

                From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of
                Duncan Matheson [duncan@...]
                Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:49 PM
                To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???



                Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of
                government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which
                means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive
                ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is
                win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against
                soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the
                population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect
                most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous
                practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the
                girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them
                out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the
                protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and
                that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which
                include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.



                Duncan Matheson

                BissettMatheson Communications

                506-457-1627(O)

                506-447-2388(mobile)
                duncan@...
                Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                www.bissettmatheson.com



                On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:









                The court has legalized brothels and pimping
                http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimpin
                g-legalized-in-ontario-canada . another blow for women, right?


                Maybe not so much



                Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now
                supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either -
                damaging to the Canadian "brand' for sure.



                So . what say you?



                Ned Barnett, APR

                Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                Barnett Marketing Communications

                420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                702-561-1167 - cell/text

                www.barnettmarcom.com <http://www.barnettmarcom.com/> - twitter @nedbarnett

                http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/



                <image001.jpg>

















                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Samuel L Waltz Jr
                Actually, Ned, and I m pleased to hear you tell your story on this... In a curious juxtaposition to our exchanges over the weekend on CCW that could have left
                Message 7 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Actually, Ned, and I'm pleased to hear you tell your story on this...

                  In a curious juxtaposition to our exchanges over the weekend on CCW that could have left outside observers feeling as though anyone who "carries" is some kind of "make my day" redneck bigot...

                  I've been involved for years with several organizations in our State of Delaware involved in progressive social change...
                  > www.SURJ.org , Stand Up for what's Right & Just, one of them, where I served on its Board for 4 or 5 years, actually has a national-quality pilot program for "prostitution diversion," and I'd be happy to chat with you about that. Effective in February, we merged SURJ into the Delaware Center for Justice www.DCJustice.org<http://www.DCJustice.org> which has taken over that program
                  > www.PALde.org,<http://www.PALde.org,> the Police Athletic League, in that organization, we run a number of "prevention" programs around youth-related issues, with a focus on keeping kids off the streets, and I have served several years on the PAL Board
                  > http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml, the Office of Prevention of the Delaware Dept of Services for Children, Youth and their Families, also has some programs that may be of interest, and I've been a speaker to their annual conferences.

                  By the way, I need to give credit where credit is due, and I always hasten to acknowledge the critical role of my daughter Rachel Waltz, now 32, a UDelaware grad and Columbia MSW, who now -- after 5 years of helping run a neighborhood social service agency on Fulton Street in Bedford Stuveysant, America's toughest neighborhood -- is doing social work for the County Medical Society in N Carolina where UNC is located at Chapel Hill. Rachel came through St. Mark's HS and the UD with an extraordinary social conscience and with / through her insights, I've made it a point to find ways where I can make a difference in some of these things.

                  Sam

                  Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA
                  SamWaltz@...<mailto:SamWaltz@...>
                  (302) 777-7774

                  Sam Waltz & Associates LLC
                  Business & Communications Counsel
                  11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville
                  Wilmington, DE 19807-2555

                  www.SamWaltz.com<http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications Counsel
                  www.RLSassociates.com<http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking / Merger & Acquisition

                  Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate
                  Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues
                  to Achieve Their Goals!
                  =======================================
                  DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination, distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this Disclaimer.
                  ________________________________
                  From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of Ned Barnett [ned@...]
                  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 4:36 PM
                  To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                  Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???


                  Duncan

                  I always thought that the law was there to protect victims. Foolish me. Yes, making prostitution illegal doesn�t work � especially if the government has no interest in enforcing the laws. But the solution, it seems to me, is to act to help the victims (the prostitutes).

                  Perhaps my views are colored by the fact that I�m working with a client in putting together a program to help rescue teen-aged prostitutes before they get too far sunk into the lifestyle to escape.

                  Check out the life expectancy of a prostitute, then tell me again how this �humane� new law, which protects pimps and bordello operators (the exploiters) is such a great idea.

                  Call me ultraconservative and sweep me under the rug, but I�d rather see society do something to help these women escape from a life of exploitation and victimization than to legalize their abuse. Not because God told me to, but because these young women are victims, who need help.

                  Ned

                  Ned Barnett, APR
                  Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
                  Barnett Marketing Communications
                  420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
                  702-561-1167 - cell/text
                  www.barnettmarcom.com<http://www.barnettmarcom.com> - twitter @nedbarnett
                  http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                  [05-6-16 BMC Logo]

                  From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Duncan Matheson
                  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 1:17 PM
                  To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                  Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???



                  Sam, you are absolutely right. They could have made prostitution illegal. Of course. That always works. If they had only thought of it. Oh well, maybe the step they took is the next best thing?

                  Duncan Matheson
                  BissettMatheson Communications
                  506-457-1627(O)
                  506-447-2388(mobile)
                  duncan@...<mailto:duncan@...>
                  Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                  www.bissettmatheson.com<http://www.bissettmatheson.com>

                  On 2012-03-26, at 4:51 PM, Samuel L Waltz Jr wrote:




                  A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you.

                  What's amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but rather on Pragmatism and Efficacy, "if we can't keep these girls safe selling sex illegally, then we need to legalize it in an effort to keep them safe." Only argument the Court left out is that it could mean "better sex" for these women and their customers!

                  Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA
                  SamWaltz@...<mailto:SamWaltz@...>
                  (302) 777-7774

                  Sam Waltz & Associates LLC
                  Business & Communications Counsel
                  11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville
                  Wilmington, DE 19807-2555

                  www.SamWaltz.com<http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications Counsel
                  www.RLSassociates.com<http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking / Merger & Acquisition

                  Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate
                  Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues
                  to Achieve Their Goals!
                  =======================================
                  DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination, distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this Disclaimer.
                  ________________________________
                  From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com<mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com> [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of Duncan Matheson [duncan@...]
                  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:49 PM
                  To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com<mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com>
                  Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com<mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com>; prquorum@yahoogroups.com<mailto:prquorum@yahoogroups.com>
                  Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???


                  Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.

                  Duncan Matheson
                  BissettMatheson Communications
                  506-457-1627(O)
                  506-447-2388(mobile)
                  duncan@...<mailto:duncan@...>
                  Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                  www.bissettmatheson.com<http://www.bissettmatheson.com>

                  On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:




                  The court has legalized brothels and pimping http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimping-legalized-in-ontario-canada � another blow for women, right?

                  Maybe not so much

                  Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either � damaging to the Canadian �brand� for sure.

                  So � what say you?

                  Ned Barnett, APR
                  Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
                  Barnett Marketing Communications
                  420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
                  702-561-1167 - cell/text
                  www.barnettmarcom.com<http://www.barnettmarcom.com/> - twitter @nedbarnett
                  http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                  <image001.jpg>










                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Ned Barnett
                  I am always amazed at Feminists who support prostitution (siding with sex workers ) instead of realizing that the vast majority of prostitutes are victims,
                  Message 8 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I am always amazed at Feminists who support prostitution (siding with "sex
                    workers") instead of realizing that the vast majority of prostitutes are
                    victims, exploited (usually by men - pimps - but also by madams) and used
                    like Kleenex by men who have no self-respect and no respect for others.
                    This goes double for those who normally stand against human rights abuse.
                    People who rightly (and all too often self-righteously) decry slavery in
                    sub-Saharan Africa see no problem in supporting legalized prostitution,
                    which in so many cases is just another form of slavery.


                    I have no doubt that Duncan means well - certainly, his post shows that he
                    cares for the work situations of prostitutes and sees this misguided legal
                    action as "helping" them - but I can't for the life of me see why instead of
                    standing against the near-slavery-like exploitation of women, he sees
                    legalizing their exploitation as the answer.



                    Nevada has legalized bordello prostitution in some counties (but not in
                    Clark County/Las Vegas) - but here we have "escort services" which are
                    thinly-disguised call-girl services. Prostitution is blatant and rampant
                    here in Vegas, and the human toll - from disease (which the Canadian
                    legalization won't change), from drug abuse (which is often how pimps
                    control their stable of victims) and from the God-Awful abuse this life
                    imposes on young women (some as young as 14, many of them not yet of legal
                    age, and even the "adults") - it destroys them, body and soul. How any
                    civilized society made up of civilized, cultured and socially-conscious men
                    and women who have wives and daughters and mothers and sisters (and
                    presumably, sufficient empathy to envision their
                    wives/daughters/mothers/sisters trapped in "the life") allow this to happen,
                    who don't make eradicating this evil a top priority . that's beyond me.


                    Ned



                    Ned Barnett, APR

                    Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                    Barnett Marketing Communications

                    420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                    702-561-1167 - cell/text

                    <http://www.barnettmarcom.com> www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                    <http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/>
                    http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/



                    05-6-16 BMC Logo



                    From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] On
                    Behalf Of Samuel L Waltz Jr
                    Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 2:27 PM
                    To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                    Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???





                    Actually, Ned, and I'm pleased to hear you tell your story on this...



                    In a curious juxtaposition to our exchanges over the weekend on CCW that
                    could have left outside observers feeling as though anyone who "carries" is
                    some kind of "make my day" redneck bigot...



                    I've been involved for years with several organizations in our State of
                    Delaware involved in progressive social change...

                    > www.SURJ.org , Stand Up for what's Right & Just, one of them, where I
                    served on its Board for 4 or 5 years, actually has a national-quality pilot
                    program for "prostitution diversion," and I'd be happy to chat with you
                    about that. Effective in February, we merged SURJ into the Delaware Center
                    for Justice www.DCJustice.org which has taken over that program

                    > <http://www.PALde.org,> www.PALde.org, the Police Athletic League, in
                    that organization, we run a number of "prevention" programs around
                    youth-related issues, with a focus on keeping kids off the streets, and I
                    have served several years on the PAL Board

                    > <http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml>
                    http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml, the Office of Prevention of the
                    Delaware Dept of Services for Children, Youth and their Families, also has
                    some programs that may be of interest, and I've been a speaker to their
                    annual conferences.



                    By the way, I need to give credit where credit is due, and I always hasten
                    to acknowledge the critical role of my daughter Rachel Waltz, now 32, a
                    UDelaware grad and Columbia MSW, who now -- after 5 years of helping run a
                    neighborhood social service agency on Fulton Street in Bedford Stuveysant,
                    America's toughest neighborhood -- is doing social work for the County
                    Medical Society in N Carolina where UNC is located at Chapel Hill. Rachel
                    came through St. Mark's HS and the UD with an extraordinary social
                    conscience and with / through her insights, I've made it a point to find
                    ways where I can make a difference in some of these things.



                    Sam



                    Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA

                    SamWaltz@...

                    (302) 777-7774



                    Sam Waltz & Associates LLC

                    Business & Communications Counsel

                    11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville

                    Wilmington, DE 19807-2555



                    www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                    Counsel

                    www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                    Merger & Acquisition



                    Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate

                    Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues

                    to Achieve Their Goals!

                    =======================================

                    DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                    U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                    warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                    and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                    buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                    advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                    responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                    are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                    content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                    18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                    this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                    information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                    intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                    distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                    receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                    Disclaimer.

                    _____

                    From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of
                    Ned Barnett [ned@...]
                    Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 4:36 PM
                    To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                    Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???



                    Duncan


                    I always thought that the law was there to protect victims. Foolish me.
                    Yes, making prostitution illegal doesn't work - especially if the government
                    has no interest in enforcing the laws. But the solution, it seems to me, is
                    to act to help the victims (the prostitutes).



                    Perhaps my views are colored by the fact that I'm working with a client in
                    putting together a program to help rescue teen-aged prostitutes before they
                    get too far sunk into the lifestyle to escape.



                    Check out the life expectancy of a prostitute, then tell me again how this
                    "humane" new law, which protects pimps and bordello operators (the
                    exploiters) is such a great idea.



                    Call me ultraconservative and sweep me under the rug, but I'd rather see
                    society do something to help these women escape from a life of exploitation
                    and victimization than to legalize their abuse. Not because God told me to,
                    but because these young women are victims, who need help.


                    Ned



                    Ned Barnett, APR

                    Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                    Barnett Marketing Communications

                    420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                    702-561-1167 - cell/text

                    www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                    http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/



                    05-6-16 BMC Logo



                    From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] On
                    Behalf Of Duncan Matheson
                    Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 1:17 PM
                    To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                    Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???





                    Sam, you are absolutely right. They could have made prostitution illegal. Of
                    course. That always works. If they had only thought of it. Oh well, maybe
                    the step they took is the next best thing?



                    Duncan Matheson

                    BissettMatheson Communications

                    506-457-1627(O)

                    506-447-2388(mobile)
                    duncan@...
                    Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                    www.bissettmatheson.com



                    On 2012-03-26, at 4:51 PM, Samuel L Waltz Jr wrote:







                    A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you.



                    What's amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a
                    principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but rather on Pragmatism and Efficacy, "if
                    we can't keep these girls safe selling sex illegally, then we need to
                    legalize it in an effort to keep them safe." Only argument the Court left
                    out is that it could mean "better sex" for these women and their customers!



                    Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA

                    SamWaltz@...

                    (302) 777-7774



                    Sam Waltz & Associates LLC

                    Business & Communications Counsel

                    11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville

                    Wilmington, DE 19807-2555



                    www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                    Counsel

                    www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                    Merger & Acquisition



                    Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate

                    Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues

                    to Achieve Their Goals!

                    =======================================

                    DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                    U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                    warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                    and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                    buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                    advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                    responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                    are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                    content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                    18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                    this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                    information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                    intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                    distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                    receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                    Disclaimer.

                    _____

                    From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of
                    Duncan Matheson [duncan@...]
                    Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:49 PM
                    To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                    Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???



                    Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of
                    government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which
                    means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive
                    ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is
                    win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against
                    soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the
                    population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect
                    most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous
                    practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the
                    girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them
                    out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the
                    protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and
                    that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which
                    include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.



                    Duncan Matheson

                    BissettMatheson Communications

                    506-457-1627(O)

                    506-447-2388(mobile)
                    duncan@...
                    Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                    www.bissettmatheson.com



                    On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:







                    The court has legalized brothels and pimping
                    http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimpin
                    g-legalized-in-ontario-canada . another blow for women, right?


                    Maybe not so much



                    Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now
                    supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either -
                    damaging to the Canadian "brand' for sure.



                    So . what say you?



                    Ned Barnett, APR

                    Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                    Barnett Marketing Communications

                    420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                    702-561-1167 - cell/text

                    www.barnettmarcom.com <http://www.barnettmarcom.com/> - twitter @nedbarnett

                    http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/



                    <image001.jpg>

















                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Duncan Matheson
                    Ned, I think we agree that in a perfect world, we wouldn t have prostitution. That s not the world we live in. So as a society we decide, hopefully, how to
                    Message 9 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Ned, I think we agree that in a perfect world, we wouldn't have prostitution. That's not the world we live in. So as a society we decide, hopefully, how to make the best of what our world is. I think that that often boils down to making it safer for the most vulnerable. That's what this ruling is about. I know you have decided it is a bad ruling and I know you are not given to changing your mind, but let me try anyway. You wrote: "I always thought that the law was there to protect victims. Foolish me."

                      Actually Ned, that's exactly what the court ruling does. First understand the background (and your comments thus far suggest you don't) Even prior to this ruling, prostitution was not illegal in Canada. Solicitation and living off the avails of prostiution was,. but not prostitution itself. It's a little crazy I'll give you that, which actually is all the more reason to fix what is a faulty law. OK, that's the background context. Now on to today's ruling. Prostitution is a dangerous practice and what makes it so is the fact that it is on the street, where the prostitutes are at the mercy of the johns - they jump in the car and the john is in complete control, taking them wherever and having their way. With this ruling, the profession can move indoors, in legal brothels where there is safety in numbers. A further part of the ruling allows the prostitutes to hire support, including bodyguards. It's OK to live off the avails of prostitution but not to the point of exploitation. This will put many pimps out of business. You wrote earlier that the law legalizes pimping - this is inaccurate.

                      What this law does is bring a measure of safety to the profession. Exploitation remains illegal, as does solicitation. Also Ned, you characterize prostitutes as victims. No question that is true of some, even many, but it ignores the reality that not every prostitute is a pimp controlled drug addict who has little choice. It ignores the reality that many grown women choose to be prostitutes and are very much in charge of their own lives. Under this law, if it stands up and that is a very big "if", it means these woman will be working in a much safer environment. At the end of the day, this is what today's ruling is about - keeping prostitutes safer.

                      Ned, one person who has studied the sex industry in-depth is right in your backyard, and she studied Nevada specifically, Professor Barbara Brents of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. She lauded the Ontario judges for their decision.
                      "Nevada's legal brothel system has helped prevent violence, trafficking and gives women needed rights and resources. It is heartening that these judges are recognizing that simply criminalizing prostitution has done little to protect sex workers. I hope their efforts stick."

                      So Ned, it is about protecting victims.

                      Duncan
                      Duncan Matheson
                      BissettMatheson Communications
                      506-457-1627(O)
                      506-447-2388(mobile)
                      duncan@...
                      Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                      www.bissettmatheson.com


                      On 2012-03-26, at 5:36 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:

                      >
                      > Duncan
                      >
                      >
                      > I always thought that the law was there to protect victims. Foolish me. Yes, making prostitution illegal doesn�t work � especially if the government has no interest in enforcing the laws. But the solution, it seems to me, is to act to help the victims (the prostitutes).
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Perhaps my views are colored by the fact that I�m working with a client in putting together a program to help rescue teen-aged prostitutes before they get too far sunk into the lifestyle to escape.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Check out the life expectancy of a prostitute, then tell me again how this �humane� new law, which protects pimps and bordello operators (the exploiters) is such a great idea.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Call me ultraconservative and sweep me under the rug, but I�d rather see society do something to help these women escape from a life of exploitation and victimization than to legalize their abuse. Not because God told me to, but because these young women are victims, who need help.
                      >
                      >
                      > Ned
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Ned Barnett, APR
                      >
                      > Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
                      >
                      > Barnett Marketing Communications
                      >
                      > 420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
                      >
                      > 702-561-1167 - cell/text
                      >
                      > www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett
                      >
                      > http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > <image001.jpg>
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Duncan Matheson
                      > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 1:17 PM
                      > To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                      > Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                      > Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Sam, you are absolutely right. They could have made prostitution illegal. Of course. That always works. If they had only thought of it. Oh well, maybe the step they took is the next best thing?
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Duncan Matheson
                      >
                      > BissettMatheson Communications
                      >
                      > 506-457-1627(O)
                      >
                      > 506-447-2388(mobile)
                      > duncan@...
                      > Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                      > www.bissettmatheson.com
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > On 2012-03-26, at 4:51 PM, Samuel L Waltz Jr wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > What's amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but rather on Pragmatism and Efficacy, "if we can't keep these girls safe selling sex illegally, then we need to legalize it in an effort to keep them safe." Only argument the Court left out is that it could mean "better sex" for these women and their customers!
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA
                      >
                      > SamWaltz@...
                      >
                      > (302) 777-7774
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Sam Waltz & Associates LLC
                      >
                      > Business & Communications Counsel
                      >
                      > 11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville
                      >
                      > Wilmington, DE 19807-2555
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > www.SamWaltz.com Business & Communications Counsel
                      >
                      > www.RLSassociates.com Investment Banking / Merger & Acquisition
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate
                      >
                      > Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues
                      >
                      > to Achieve Their Goals!
                      >
                      > =======================================
                      >
                      > DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination, distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this Disclaimer.
                      >
                      > From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of Duncan Matheson [duncan@...]
                      > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:49 PM
                      > To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                      > Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                      > Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Duncan Matheson
                      >
                      > BissettMatheson Communications
                      >
                      > 506-457-1627(O)
                      >
                      > 506-447-2388(mobile)
                      > duncan@...
                      > Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                      > www.bissettmatheson.com
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > The court has legalized brothels and pimping http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimping-legalized-in-ontario-canada � another blow for women, right?
                      >
                      >
                      > Maybe not so much
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either � damaging to the Canadian �brand� for sure.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > So � what say you?
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Ned Barnett, APR
                      >
                      > Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
                      >
                      > Barnett Marketing Communications
                      >
                      > 420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
                      >
                      > 702-561-1167 - cell/text
                      >
                      > www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett
                      >
                      > http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > <image001.jpg>
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Geri Wilson
                      just my two cents (pun not intended :-) ned, in many ways i agree with you about everything you wrote. and, duncan, same to you. many years ago i knew a lot of
                      Message 10 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        just my two cents (pun not intended :-)

                        ned, in many ways i agree with you about everything you wrote.
                        and, duncan, same to you.

                        many years ago i knew a lot of dancers, many of whom engaged in
                        prostitution. my experience with these women, many of whom i became friends
                        with, was that it was purely economical. they had no other skills, and often
                        they had poor educations, though most were quite smart women.

                        if they'd had half the advantages i'd had they would probably not have been
                        where they were.

                        many of them were single mothers, and they could make more money faster
                        dancing and prostituting themselves out then they could slinging burgers or
                        working in a shop. and in a lot less hours!

                        very few were drug addicted.
                        none had a pimp.

                        all had issues. . .but those issues came from tough childhoods where there
                        wasn't enough money, few education opportunities, few role models, and, in a
                        whole lotta cases, really rotten families.

                        every one of them did this because it was one of the few jobs (and, yes,
                        they viewed it totally as a job), that was open to them in which they could
                        make good money.

                        i have wondered often what happened to them as they aged.

                        and as an aside, ned, i remember one of the dancers, who also prostituted
                        herself, was an ex-Vegas showgirl.

                        my point is that until we improve education, provide counseling services,
                        and there are real jobs where people can make a living wage working decent
                        hours, you can bet that prostitution is not going away. it's not about being
                        socially conscious, it's about economics.
                        best-
                        geri

                        geri wilson
                        the jonathan group
                        - marketing for business -
                        626.487.2235


                        _____

                        From: prbytes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                        Ned Barnett
                        Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:38 PM
                        To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                        Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [prbytes] RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???




                        I am always amazed at Feminists who support prostitution (siding with "sex
                        workers") instead of realizing that the vast majority of prostitutes are
                        victims, exploited (usually by men - pimps - but also by madams) and used
                        like Kleenex by men who have no self-respect and no respect for others.
                        This goes double for those who normally stand against human rights abuse.
                        People who rightly (and all too often self-righteously) decry slavery in
                        sub-Saharan Africa see no problem in supporting legalized prostitution,
                        which in so many cases is just another form of slavery.

                        I have no doubt that Duncan means well - certainly, his post shows that he
                        cares for the work situations of prostitutes and sees this misguided legal
                        action as "helping" them - but I can't for the life of me see why instead of
                        standing against the near-slavery-like exploitation of women, he sees
                        legalizing their exploitation as the answer.

                        Nevada has legalized bordello prostitution in some counties (but not in
                        Clark County/Las Vegas) - but here we have "escort services" which are
                        thinly-disguised call-girl services. Prostitution is blatant and rampant
                        here in Vegas, and the human toll - from disease (which the Canadian
                        legalization won't change), from drug abuse (which is often how pimps
                        control their stable of victims) and from the God-Awful abuse this life
                        imposes on young women (some as young as 14, many of them not yet of legal
                        age, and even the "adults") - it destroys them, body and soul. How any
                        civilized society made up of civilized, cultured and socially-conscious men
                        and women who have wives and daughters and mothers and sisters (and
                        presumably, sufficient empathy to envision their
                        wives/daughters/mothers/sisters trapped in "the life") allow this to happen,
                        who don't make eradicating this evil a top priority . that's beyond me.

                        Ned

                        Ned Barnett, APR

                        Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                        Barnett Marketing Communications

                        420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                        702-561-1167 - cell/text

                        <http://www.barnettmarcom.com> www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                        <http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/>
                        http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                        05-6-16 BMC Logo

                        From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                        [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ]
                        On
                        Behalf Of Samuel L Waltz Jr
                        Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 2:27 PM
                        To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                        Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                        prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                        Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                        Actually, Ned, and I'm pleased to hear you tell your story on this...

                        In a curious juxtaposition to our exchanges over the weekend on CCW that
                        could have left outside observers feeling as though anyone who "carries" is
                        some kind of "make my day" redneck bigot...

                        I've been involved for years with several organizations in our State of
                        Delaware involved in progressive social change...

                        > www.SURJ.org , Stand Up for what's Right & Just, one of them, where I
                        served on its Board for 4 or 5 years, actually has a national-quality pilot
                        program for "prostitution diversion," and I'd be happy to chat with you
                        about that. Effective in February, we merged SURJ into the Delaware Center
                        for Justice www.DCJustice.org which has taken over that program

                        > <http://www.PALde.org,> www.PALde.org, the Police Athletic League, in
                        that organization, we run a number of "prevention" programs around
                        youth-related issues, with a focus on keeping kids off the streets, and I
                        have served several years on the PAL Board

                        > <http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml>
                        http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml, the Office of Prevention of the
                        Delaware Dept of Services for Children, Youth and their Families, also has
                        some programs that may be of interest, and I've been a speaker to their
                        annual conferences.

                        By the way, I need to give credit where credit is due, and I always hasten
                        to acknowledge the critical role of my daughter Rachel Waltz, now 32, a
                        UDelaware grad and Columbia MSW, who now -- after 5 years of helping run a
                        neighborhood social service agency on Fulton Street in Bedford Stuveysant,
                        America's toughest neighborhood -- is doing social work for the County
                        Medical Society in N Carolina where UNC is located at Chapel Hill. Rachel
                        came through St. Mark's HS and the UD with an extraordinary social
                        conscience and with / through her insights, I've made it a point to find
                        ways where I can make a difference in some of these things.

                        Sam

                        Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA

                        SamWaltz@... <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>

                        (302) 777-7774

                        Sam Waltz & Associates LLC

                        Business & Communications Counsel

                        11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville

                        Wilmington, DE 19807-2555

                        www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                        Counsel

                        www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                        Merger & Acquisition

                        Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate

                        Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues

                        to Achieve Their Goals!

                        =======================================

                        DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                        U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                        warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                        and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                        buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                        advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                        responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                        are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                        content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                        18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                        this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                        information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                        intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                        distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                        receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                        Disclaimer.

                        _____

                        From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                        [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ] on
                        behalf of
                        Ned Barnett [ned@... <mailto:ned%40barnettmarcom.com> ]
                        Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 4:36 PM
                        To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                        Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                        prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                        Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                        Duncan

                        I always thought that the law was there to protect victims. Foolish me.
                        Yes, making prostitution illegal doesn't work - especially if the government
                        has no interest in enforcing the laws. But the solution, it seems to me, is
                        to act to help the victims (the prostitutes).

                        Perhaps my views are colored by the fact that I'm working with a client in
                        putting together a program to help rescue teen-aged prostitutes before they
                        get too far sunk into the lifestyle to escape.

                        Check out the life expectancy of a prostitute, then tell me again how this
                        "humane" new law, which protects pimps and bordello operators (the
                        exploiters) is such a great idea.

                        Call me ultraconservative and sweep me under the rug, but I'd rather see
                        society do something to help these women escape from a life of exploitation
                        and victimization than to legalize their abuse. Not because God told me to,
                        but because these young women are victims, who need help.

                        Ned

                        Ned Barnett, APR

                        Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                        Barnett Marketing Communications

                        420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                        702-561-1167 - cell/text

                        www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                        http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                        05-6-16 BMC Logo

                        From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                        [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ]
                        On
                        Behalf Of Duncan Matheson
                        Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 1:17 PM
                        To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                        Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                        prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                        Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                        Sam, you are absolutely right. They could have made prostitution illegal. Of
                        course. That always works. If they had only thought of it. Oh well, maybe
                        the step they took is the next best thing?

                        Duncan Matheson

                        BissettMatheson Communications

                        506-457-1627(O)

                        506-447-2388(mobile)
                        duncan@... <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                        Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                        www.bissettmatheson.com

                        On 2012-03-26, at 4:51 PM, Samuel L Waltz Jr wrote:

                        A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you.

                        What's amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a
                        principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but rather on Pragmatism and Efficacy, "if
                        we can't keep these girls safe selling sex illegally, then we need to
                        legalize it in an effort to keep them safe." Only argument the Court left
                        out is that it could mean "better sex" for these women and their customers!

                        Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA

                        SamWaltz@... <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>

                        (302) 777-7774

                        Sam Waltz & Associates LLC

                        Business & Communications Counsel

                        11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville

                        Wilmington, DE 19807-2555

                        www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                        Counsel

                        www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                        Merger & Acquisition

                        Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate

                        Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues

                        to Achieve Their Goals!

                        =======================================

                        DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                        U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                        warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                        and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                        buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                        advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                        responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                        are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                        content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                        18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                        this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                        information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                        intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                        distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                        receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                        Disclaimer.

                        _____

                        From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                        [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ] on
                        behalf of
                        Duncan Matheson [duncan@...
                        <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com> ]
                        Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:49 PM
                        To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                        Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                        prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                        Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                        Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of
                        government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which
                        means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive
                        ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is
                        win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against
                        soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the
                        population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect
                        most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous
                        practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the
                        girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them
                        out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the
                        protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and
                        that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which
                        include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.

                        Duncan Matheson

                        BissettMatheson Communications

                        506-457-1627(O)

                        506-447-2388(mobile)
                        duncan@... <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                        Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                        www.bissettmatheson.com

                        On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:

                        The court has legalized brothels and pimping
                        http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimpin
                        g-legalized-in-ontario-canada . another blow for women, right?

                        Maybe not so much

                        Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now
                        supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either -
                        damaging to the Canadian "brand' for sure.

                        So . what say you?

                        Ned Barnett, APR

                        Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                        Barnett Marketing Communications

                        420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                        702-561-1167 - cell/text

                        www.barnettmarcom.com <http://www.barnettmarcom.com/> - twitter @nedbarnett

                        http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                        <image001.jpg>

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Duncan Matheson
                        Good points Geri, especially about very few being drug addicted, and none having pimps. It does fly in the face of the stereotype of prostitutes that people
                        Message 11 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Good points Geri, especially about very few being drug addicted, and none having pimps. It does fly in the face of the stereotype of prostitutes that people like Ned have bought into. However, these aren't the ladies that are most at risk that the court ruling is meant most to protect - it's those who are physically on the street, at great risk who will now be able to ply their trade indoors - where it is much safer.

                          Duncan Matheson
                          BissettMatheson Communications
                          506-457-1627(O)
                          506-447-2388(mobile)
                          duncan@...
                          Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                          www.bissettmatheson.com


                          On 2012-03-26, at 9:44 PM, Geri Wilson wrote:

                          > just my two cents (pun not intended :-)
                          >
                          > ned, in many ways i agree with you about everything you wrote.
                          > and, duncan, same to you.
                          >
                          > many years ago i knew a lot of dancers, many of whom engaged in
                          > prostitution. my experience with these women, many of whom i became friends
                          > with, was that it was purely economical. they had no other skills, and often
                          > they had poor educations, though most were quite smart women.
                          >
                          > if they'd had half the advantages i'd had they would probably not have been
                          > where they were.
                          >
                          > many of them were single mothers, and they could make more money faster
                          > dancing and prostituting themselves out then they could slinging burgers or
                          > working in a shop. and in a lot less hours!
                          >
                          > very few were drug addicted.
                          > none had a pimp.
                          >
                          > all had issues. . .but those issues came from tough childhoods where there
                          > wasn't enough money, few education opportunities, few role models, and, in a
                          > whole lotta cases, really rotten families.
                          >
                          > every one of them did this because it was one of the few jobs (and, yes,
                          > they viewed it totally as a job), that was open to them in which they could
                          > make good money.
                          >
                          > i have wondered often what happened to them as they aged.
                          >
                          > and as an aside, ned, i remember one of the dancers, who also prostituted
                          > herself, was an ex-Vegas showgirl.
                          >
                          > my point is that until we improve education, provide counseling services,
                          > and there are real jobs where people can make a living wage working decent
                          > hours, you can bet that prostitution is not going away. it's not about being
                          > socially conscious, it's about economics.
                          > best-
                          > geri
                          >
                          > geri wilson
                          > the jonathan group
                          > - marketing for business -
                          > 626.487.2235
                          >
                          >
                          > _____
                          >
                          > From: prbytes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                          > Ned Barnett
                          > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:38 PM
                          > To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                          > Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                          > Subject: [prbytes] RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???
                          >
                          > I am always amazed at Feminists who support prostitution (siding with "sex
                          > workers") instead of realizing that the vast majority of prostitutes are
                          > victims, exploited (usually by men - pimps - but also by madams) and used
                          > like Kleenex by men who have no self-respect and no respect for others.
                          > This goes double for those who normally stand against human rights abuse.
                          > People who rightly (and all too often self-righteously) decry slavery in
                          > sub-Saharan Africa see no problem in supporting legalized prostitution,
                          > which in so many cases is just another form of slavery.
                          >
                          > I have no doubt that Duncan means well - certainly, his post shows that he
                          > cares for the work situations of prostitutes and sees this misguided legal
                          > action as "helping" them - but I can't for the life of me see why instead of
                          > standing against the near-slavery-like exploitation of women, he sees
                          > legalizing their exploitation as the answer.
                          >
                          > Nevada has legalized bordello prostitution in some counties (but not in
                          > Clark County/Las Vegas) - but here we have "escort services" which are
                          > thinly-disguised call-girl services. Prostitution is blatant and rampant
                          > here in Vegas, and the human toll - from disease (which the Canadian
                          > legalization won't change), from drug abuse (which is often how pimps
                          > control their stable of victims) and from the God-Awful abuse this life
                          > imposes on young women (some as young as 14, many of them not yet of legal
                          > age, and even the "adults") - it destroys them, body and soul. How any
                          > civilized society made up of civilized, cultured and socially-conscious men
                          > and women who have wives and daughters and mothers and sisters (and
                          > presumably, sufficient empathy to envision their
                          > wives/daughters/mothers/sisters trapped in "the life") allow this to happen,
                          > who don't make eradicating this evil a top priority . that's beyond me.
                          >
                          > Ned
                          >
                          > Ned Barnett, APR
                          >
                          > Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
                          >
                          > Barnett Marketing Communications
                          >
                          > 420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
                          >
                          > 702-561-1167 - cell/text
                          >
                          > <http://www.barnettmarcom.com> www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett
                          >
                          > <http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/>
                          > http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/
                          >
                          > 05-6-16 BMC Logo
                          >
                          > From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ]
                          > On
                          > Behalf Of Samuel L Waltz Jr
                          > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 2:27 PM
                          > To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                          > prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???
                          >
                          > Actually, Ned, and I'm pleased to hear you tell your story on this...
                          >
                          > In a curious juxtaposition to our exchanges over the weekend on CCW that
                          > could have left outside observers feeling as though anyone who "carries" is
                          > some kind of "make my day" redneck bigot...
                          >
                          > I've been involved for years with several organizations in our State of
                          > Delaware involved in progressive social change...
                          >
                          > > www.SURJ.org , Stand Up for what's Right & Just, one of them, where I
                          > served on its Board for 4 or 5 years, actually has a national-quality pilot
                          > program for "prostitution diversion," and I'd be happy to chat with you
                          > about that. Effective in February, we merged SURJ into the Delaware Center
                          > for Justice www.DCJustice.org which has taken over that program
                          >
                          > > <http://www.PALde.org,> www.PALde.org, the Police Athletic League, in
                          > that organization, we run a number of "prevention" programs around
                          > youth-related issues, with a focus on keeping kids off the streets, and I
                          > have served several years on the PAL Board
                          >
                          > > <http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml>
                          > http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml, the Office of Prevention of the
                          > Delaware Dept of Services for Children, Youth and their Families, also has
                          > some programs that may be of interest, and I've been a speaker to their
                          > annual conferences.
                          >
                          > By the way, I need to give credit where credit is due, and I always hasten
                          > to acknowledge the critical role of my daughter Rachel Waltz, now 32, a
                          > UDelaware grad and Columbia MSW, who now -- after 5 years of helping run a
                          > neighborhood social service agency on Fulton Street in Bedford Stuveysant,
                          > America's toughest neighborhood -- is doing social work for the County
                          > Medical Society in N Carolina where UNC is located at Chapel Hill. Rachel
                          > came through St. Mark's HS and the UD with an extraordinary social
                          > conscience and with / through her insights, I've made it a point to find
                          > ways where I can make a difference in some of these things.
                          >
                          > Sam
                          >
                          > Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA
                          >
                          > SamWaltz@... <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>
                          >
                          > (302) 777-7774
                          >
                          > Sam Waltz & Associates LLC
                          >
                          > Business & Communications Counsel
                          >
                          > 11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville
                          >
                          > Wilmington, DE 19807-2555
                          >
                          > www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                          > Counsel
                          >
                          > www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                          > Merger & Acquisition
                          >
                          > Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate
                          >
                          > Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues
                          >
                          > to Achieve Their Goals!
                          >
                          > =======================================
                          >
                          > DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                          > U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                          > warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                          > and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                          > buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                          > advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                          > responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                          > are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                          > content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                          > 18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                          > this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                          > information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                          > intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                          > distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                          > receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                          > Disclaimer.
                          >
                          > _____
                          >
                          > From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ] on
                          > behalf of
                          > Ned Barnett [ned@... <mailto:ned%40barnettmarcom.com> ]
                          > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 4:36 PM
                          > To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                          > prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???
                          >
                          > Duncan
                          >
                          > I always thought that the law was there to protect victims. Foolish me.
                          > Yes, making prostitution illegal doesn't work - especially if the government
                          > has no interest in enforcing the laws. But the solution, it seems to me, is
                          > to act to help the victims (the prostitutes).
                          >
                          > Perhaps my views are colored by the fact that I'm working with a client in
                          > putting together a program to help rescue teen-aged prostitutes before they
                          > get too far sunk into the lifestyle to escape.
                          >
                          > Check out the life expectancy of a prostitute, then tell me again how this
                          > "humane" new law, which protects pimps and bordello operators (the
                          > exploiters) is such a great idea.
                          >
                          > Call me ultraconservative and sweep me under the rug, but I'd rather see
                          > society do something to help these women escape from a life of exploitation
                          > and victimization than to legalize their abuse. Not because God told me to,
                          > but because these young women are victims, who need help.
                          >
                          > Ned
                          >
                          > Ned Barnett, APR
                          >
                          > Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
                          >
                          > Barnett Marketing Communications
                          >
                          > 420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
                          >
                          > 702-561-1167 - cell/text
                          >
                          > www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett
                          >
                          > http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/
                          >
                          > 05-6-16 BMC Logo
                          >
                          > From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ]
                          > On
                          > Behalf Of Duncan Matheson
                          > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 1:17 PM
                          > To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                          > prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???
                          >
                          > Sam, you are absolutely right. They could have made prostitution illegal. Of
                          > course. That always works. If they had only thought of it. Oh well, maybe
                          > the step they took is the next best thing?
                          >
                          > Duncan Matheson
                          >
                          > BissettMatheson Communications
                          >
                          > 506-457-1627(O)
                          >
                          > 506-447-2388(mobile)
                          > duncan@... <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                          > Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                          > www.bissettmatheson.com
                          >
                          > On 2012-03-26, at 4:51 PM, Samuel L Waltz Jr wrote:
                          >
                          > A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you.
                          >
                          > What's amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a
                          > principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but rather on Pragmatism and Efficacy, "if
                          > we can't keep these girls safe selling sex illegally, then we need to
                          > legalize it in an effort to keep them safe." Only argument the Court left
                          > out is that it could mean "better sex" for these women and their customers!
                          >
                          > Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA
                          >
                          > SamWaltz@... <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>
                          >
                          > (302) 777-7774
                          >
                          > Sam Waltz & Associates LLC
                          >
                          > Business & Communications Counsel
                          >
                          > 11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville
                          >
                          > Wilmington, DE 19807-2555
                          >
                          > www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                          > Counsel
                          >
                          > www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                          > Merger & Acquisition
                          >
                          > Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate
                          >
                          > Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues
                          >
                          > to Achieve Their Goals!
                          >
                          > =======================================
                          >
                          > DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                          > U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                          > warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                          > and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                          > buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                          > advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                          > responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                          > are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                          > content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                          > 18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                          > this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                          > information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                          > intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                          > distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                          > receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                          > Disclaimer.
                          >
                          > _____
                          >
                          > From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ] on
                          > behalf of
                          > Duncan Matheson [duncan@...
                          > <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com> ]
                          > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:49 PM
                          > To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                          > prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???
                          >
                          > Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of
                          > government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which
                          > means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive
                          > ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is
                          > win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against
                          > soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the
                          > population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect
                          > most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous
                          > practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the
                          > girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them
                          > out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the
                          > protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and
                          > that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which
                          > include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.
                          >
                          > Duncan Matheson
                          >
                          > BissettMatheson Communications
                          >
                          > 506-457-1627(O)
                          >
                          > 506-447-2388(mobile)
                          > duncan@... <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                          > Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                          > www.bissettmatheson.com
                          >
                          > On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:
                          >
                          > The court has legalized brothels and pimping
                          > http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimpin
                          > g-legalized-in-ontario-canada . another blow for women, right?
                          >
                          > Maybe not so much
                          >
                          > Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now
                          > supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either -
                          > damaging to the Canadian "brand' for sure.
                          >
                          > So . what say you?
                          >
                          > Ned Barnett, APR
                          >
                          > Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association
                          >
                          > Barnett Marketing Communications
                          >
                          > 420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110
                          >
                          > 702-561-1167 - cell/text
                          >
                          > www.barnettmarcom.com <http://www.barnettmarcom.com/> - twitter @nedbarnett
                          >
                          > http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/
                          >
                          > <image001.jpg>
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >
                          >



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Rob Frankel
                          ... I personally have nothing against people who do drugs, as long as they manage their activity in a way that avoids any type of public harm. I feel the same
                          Message 12 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            At 11:31 PM -0300 3/26/12, Duncan Matheson wrote thusly:
                            >Good points Geri, especially about very few
                            >being drug addicted, and none having pimps. It
                            >does fly in the face of the stereotype of
                            >prostitutes that people like Ned have bought
                            >into. However, these aren't the ladies that are
                            >most at risk that the court ruling is meant most
                            >to protect - it's those who are physically on
                            >the street, at great risk who will now be able
                            >to ply their trade indoors - where it is much
                            >safer.
                            >


                            I personally have nothing against people who do
                            drugs, as long as they manage their activity in a
                            way that avoids any type of public harm. I feel
                            the same way about people exchanging money for
                            sex. The act itself doesn't seem criminal to me.
                            However, like the abusive circumstances that can
                            exist in the drug world, there are criminal
                            aspects to prostitution that cause public harm.
                            Those, IMHO, are the issues requiring legislation.

                            An additional aspect I haven't seen discussed
                            here is the movement toward acceptance of
                            prostitution as evidenced by the proliferation of
                            sites dealing with "escorts" and, more blatantly,
                            sugar daddy relationships. It seems there are
                            women who have no trouble at all publicly
                            advertising for a well-paid, mistress-style
                            arrangement with the right candidate.

                            To me, that's prostitution. And if two
                            consenting adults aren't doing anyone any harm,
                            have at it. Legislation should be aimed at any
                            criminal byproducts of prostitution, not
                            prostitution itself.

                            My 2¢.

                            --
                            Rob Frankel, Branding Expert
                            Twitter: @brandingexpert http://www.RobFrankel.com
                            http://www.PeerMailing.com http://www.i-legions.com
                            http://www.FrankelAnderson.com
                            Yes, there's an RSS feed blog, if you can handle
                            it: http://www.robfrankelblog.com
                          • Duncan Matheson
                            I totally agree with Rob and again, that is what the court ruling speaks to - the criminal element of those who victimize prostitutes, mainly pimps and abusive
                            Message 13 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I totally agree with Rob and again, that is what the court ruling speaks to - the criminal element of those who victimize prostitutes, mainly pimps and abusive johns.

                              Duncan

                              Sent from my iPhone

                              On 2012-03-26, at 11:35 PM, Rob Frankel <rob@...> wrote:

                              > At 11:31 PM -0300 3/26/12, Duncan Matheson wrote thusly:
                              > >Good points Geri, especially about very few
                              > >being drug addicted, and none having pimps. It
                              > >does fly in the face of the stereotype of
                              > >prostitutes that people like Ned have bought
                              > >into. However, these aren't the ladies that are
                              > >most at risk that the court ruling is meant most
                              > >to protect - it's those who are physically on
                              > >the street, at great risk who will now be able
                              > >to ply their trade indoors - where it is much
                              > >safer.
                              > >
                              >
                              > I personally have nothing against people who do
                              > drugs, as long as they manage their activity in a
                              > way that avoids any type of public harm. I feel
                              > the same way about people exchanging money for
                              > sex. The act itself doesn't seem criminal to me.
                              > However, like the abusive circumstances that can
                              > exist in the drug world, there are criminal
                              > aspects to prostitution that cause public harm.
                              > Those, IMHO, are the issues requiring legislation.
                              >
                              > An additional aspect I haven't seen discussed
                              > here is the movement toward acceptance of
                              > prostitution as evidenced by the proliferation of
                              > sites dealing with "escorts" and, more blatantly,
                              > sugar daddy relationships. It seems there are
                              > women who have no trouble at all publicly
                              > advertising for a well-paid, mistress-style
                              > arrangement with the right candidate.
                              >
                              > To me, that's prostitution. And if two
                              > consenting adults aren't doing anyone any harm,
                              > have at it. Legislation should be aimed at any
                              > criminal byproducts of prostitution, not
                              > prostitution itself.
                              >
                              > My 2¢.
                              >
                              > --
                              > Rob Frankel, Branding Expert
                              > Twitter: @brandingexpert http://www.RobFrankel.com
                              > http://www.PeerMailing.com http://www.i-legions.com
                              > http://www.FrankelAnderson.com
                              > Yes, there's an RSS feed blog, if you can handle
                              > it: http://www.robfrankelblog.com
                              >


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Ned Barnett
                              Geri - your experience and mine come from totally different worlds - and I m guessing that exotic dancers who occasionally turn a trick a night are different
                              Message 14 of 18 , Mar 26, 2012
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Geri - your experience and mine come from totally different worlds - and I'm
                                guessing that exotic dancers who occasionally turn a trick a night are
                                different from women who do nothing but turn dozens of tricks a night. Many
                                of you know that my career background includes 25 years of working with
                                hospitals (and in hospitals), including psychiatric and substance abuse
                                hospitals. The prostitutes I saw were patients - crack-addict patients, or
                                other drug-addicted patients, many with HIV and half-a-dozen STDs, and no
                                particular life-expectancy. I didn't see many "volunteers" . Now I'm
                                working with a mental health agency trying to launch a program trying to
                                reach and save teen-aged prostitutes . which again puts a different
                                perspective on things.



                                For adult women who can make mature life-choices for purely economic
                                reasons, the libertarian in me says, "it's up to you, none of my business."
                                But most prostitutes I've ever come across or heard of didn't fit that mold
                                you're describing. My concern is for the victims.



                                Ned



                                Ned Barnett, APR

                                Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                                Barnett Marketing Communications

                                420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                                702-561-1167 - cell/text

                                <http://www.barnettmarcom.com> www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                                <http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/>
                                http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/



                                05-6-16 BMC Logo



                                From: prbytes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                Geri Wilson
                                Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 5:45 PM
                                To: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                                Cc: prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: RE: [prbytes] RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women"
                                ???





                                just my two cents (pun not intended :-)

                                ned, in many ways i agree with you about everything you wrote.
                                and, duncan, same to you.

                                many years ago i knew a lot of dancers, many of whom engaged in
                                prostitution. my experience with these women, many of whom i became friends
                                with, was that it was purely economical. they had no other skills, and often
                                they had poor educations, though most were quite smart women.

                                if they'd had half the advantages i'd had they would probably not have been
                                where they were.

                                many of them were single mothers, and they could make more money faster
                                dancing and prostituting themselves out then they could slinging burgers or
                                working in a shop. and in a lot less hours!

                                very few were drug addicted.
                                none had a pimp.

                                all had issues. . .but those issues came from tough childhoods where there
                                wasn't enough money, few education opportunities, few role models, and, in a
                                whole lotta cases, really rotten families.

                                every one of them did this because it was one of the few jobs (and, yes,
                                they viewed it totally as a job), that was open to them in which they could
                                make good money.

                                i have wondered often what happened to them as they aged.

                                and as an aside, ned, i remember one of the dancers, who also prostituted
                                herself, was an ex-Vegas showgirl.

                                my point is that until we improve education, provide counseling services,
                                and there are real jobs where people can make a living wage working decent
                                hours, you can bet that prostitution is not going away. it's not about being
                                socially conscious, it's about economics.
                                best-
                                geri

                                geri wilson
                                the jonathan group
                                - marketing for business -
                                626.487.2235


                                _____

                                From: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                [mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
                                Behalf Of
                                Ned Barnett
                                Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:38 PM
                                To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Subject: [prbytes] RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                                I am always amazed at Feminists who support prostitution (siding with "sex
                                workers") instead of realizing that the vast majority of prostitutes are
                                victims, exploited (usually by men - pimps - but also by madams) and used
                                like Kleenex by men who have no self-respect and no respect for others.
                                This goes double for those who normally stand against human rights abuse.
                                People who rightly (and all too often self-righteously) decry slavery in
                                sub-Saharan Africa see no problem in supporting legalized prostitution,
                                which in so many cases is just another form of slavery.

                                I have no doubt that Duncan means well - certainly, his post shows that he
                                cares for the work situations of prostitutes and sees this misguided legal
                                action as "helping" them - but I can't for the life of me see why instead of
                                standing against the near-slavery-like exploitation of women, he sees
                                legalizing their exploitation as the answer.

                                Nevada has legalized bordello prostitution in some counties (but not in
                                Clark County/Las Vegas) - but here we have "escort services" which are
                                thinly-disguised call-girl services. Prostitution is blatant and rampant
                                here in Vegas, and the human toll - from disease (which the Canadian
                                legalization won't change), from drug abuse (which is often how pimps
                                control their stable of victims) and from the God-Awful abuse this life
                                imposes on young women (some as young as 14, many of them not yet of legal
                                age, and even the "adults") - it destroys them, body and soul. How any
                                civilized society made up of civilized, cultured and socially-conscious men
                                and women who have wives and daughters and mothers and sisters (and
                                presumably, sufficient empathy to envision their
                                wives/daughters/mothers/sisters trapped in "the life") allow this to happen,
                                who don't make eradicating this evil a top priority . that's beyond me.

                                Ned

                                Ned Barnett, APR

                                Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                                Barnett Marketing Communications

                                420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                                702-561-1167 - cell/text

                                <http://www.barnettmarcom.com> www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                                <http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/>
                                http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                                05-6-16 BMC Logo

                                From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ]
                                On
                                Behalf Of Samuel L Waltz Jr
                                Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 2:27 PM
                                To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                                Actually, Ned, and I'm pleased to hear you tell your story on this...

                                In a curious juxtaposition to our exchanges over the weekend on CCW that
                                could have left outside observers feeling as though anyone who "carries" is
                                some kind of "make my day" redneck bigot...

                                I've been involved for years with several organizations in our State of
                                Delaware involved in progressive social change...

                                > www.SURJ.org , Stand Up for what's Right & Just, one of them, where I
                                served on its Board for 4 or 5 years, actually has a national-quality pilot
                                program for "prostitution diversion," and I'd be happy to chat with you
                                about that. Effective in February, we merged SURJ into the Delaware Center
                                for Justice www.DCJustice.org which has taken over that program

                                > <http://www.PALde.org,> www.PALde.org, the Police Athletic League, in
                                that organization, we run a number of "prevention" programs around
                                youth-related issues, with a focus on keeping kids off the streets, and I
                                have served several years on the PAL Board

                                > <http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml>
                                http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml, the Office of Prevention of the
                                Delaware Dept of Services for Children, Youth and their Families, also has
                                some programs that may be of interest, and I've been a speaker to their
                                annual conferences.

                                By the way, I need to give credit where credit is due, and I always hasten
                                to acknowledge the critical role of my daughter Rachel Waltz, now 32, a
                                UDelaware grad and Columbia MSW, who now -- after 5 years of helping run a
                                neighborhood social service agency on Fulton Street in Bedford Stuveysant,
                                America's toughest neighborhood -- is doing social work for the County
                                Medical Society in N Carolina where UNC is located at Chapel Hill. Rachel
                                came through St. Mark's HS and the UD with an extraordinary social
                                conscience and with / through her insights, I've made it a point to find
                                ways where I can make a difference in some of these things.

                                Sam

                                Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA

                                SamWaltz@... <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>
                                <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>

                                (302) 777-7774

                                Sam Waltz & Associates LLC

                                Business & Communications Counsel

                                11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville

                                Wilmington, DE 19807-2555

                                www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                                Counsel

                                www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                                Merger & Acquisition

                                Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate

                                Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues

                                to Achieve Their Goals!

                                =======================================

                                DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                                U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                                warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                                and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                                buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                                advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                                responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                                are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                                content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                                18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                                this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                                information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                                intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                                distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                                receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                                Disclaimer.

                                _____

                                From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ] on
                                behalf of
                                Ned Barnett [ned@... <mailto:ned%40barnettmarcom.com>
                                <mailto:ned%40barnettmarcom.com> ]
                                Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 4:36 PM
                                To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                                Duncan

                                I always thought that the law was there to protect victims. Foolish me.
                                Yes, making prostitution illegal doesn't work - especially if the government
                                has no interest in enforcing the laws. But the solution, it seems to me, is
                                to act to help the victims (the prostitutes).

                                Perhaps my views are colored by the fact that I'm working with a client in
                                putting together a program to help rescue teen-aged prostitutes before they
                                get too far sunk into the lifestyle to escape.

                                Check out the life expectancy of a prostitute, then tell me again how this
                                "humane" new law, which protects pimps and bordello operators (the
                                exploiters) is such a great idea.

                                Call me ultraconservative and sweep me under the rug, but I'd rather see
                                society do something to help these women escape from a life of exploitation
                                and victimization than to legalize their abuse. Not because God told me to,
                                but because these young women are victims, who need help.

                                Ned

                                Ned Barnett, APR

                                Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                                Barnett Marketing Communications

                                420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                                702-561-1167 - cell/text

                                www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                                http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                                05-6-16 BMC Logo

                                From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ]
                                On
                                Behalf Of Duncan Matheson
                                Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 1:17 PM
                                To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                                Sam, you are absolutely right. They could have made prostitution illegal. Of
                                course. That always works. If they had only thought of it. Oh well, maybe
                                the step they took is the next best thing?

                                Duncan Matheson

                                BissettMatheson Communications

                                506-457-1627(O)

                                506-447-2388(mobile)
                                duncan@... <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                                www.bissettmatheson.com

                                On 2012-03-26, at 4:51 PM, Samuel L Waltz Jr wrote:

                                A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you.

                                What's amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a
                                principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but rather on Pragmatism and Efficacy, "if
                                we can't keep these girls safe selling sex illegally, then we need to
                                legalize it in an effort to keep them safe." Only argument the Court left
                                out is that it could mean "better sex" for these women and their customers!

                                Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA

                                SamWaltz@... <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>
                                <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>

                                (302) 777-7774

                                Sam Waltz & Associates LLC

                                Business & Communications Counsel

                                11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville

                                Wilmington, DE 19807-2555

                                www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                                Counsel

                                www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                                Merger & Acquisition

                                Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate

                                Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues

                                to Achieve Their Goals!

                                =======================================

                                DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                                U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                                warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                                and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                                buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                                advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                                responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                                are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                                content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                                18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                                this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                                information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                                intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                                distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                                receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                                Disclaimer.

                                _____

                                From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ] on
                                behalf of
                                Duncan Matheson [duncan@...
                                <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com> ]
                                Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:49 PM
                                To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                                Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of
                                government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which
                                means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive
                                ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is
                                win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against
                                soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the
                                population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect
                                most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous
                                practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the
                                girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them
                                out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the
                                protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and
                                that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which
                                include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.

                                Duncan Matheson

                                BissettMatheson Communications

                                506-457-1627(O)

                                506-447-2388(mobile)
                                duncan@... <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                                www.bissettmatheson.com

                                On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:

                                The court has legalized brothels and pimping
                                http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimpin
                                g-legalized-in-ontario-canada . another blow for women, right?

                                Maybe not so much

                                Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now
                                supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either -
                                damaging to the Canadian "brand' for sure.

                                So . what say you?

                                Ned Barnett, APR

                                Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                                Barnett Marketing Communications

                                420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                                702-561-1167 - cell/text

                                www.barnettmarcom.com <http://www.barnettmarcom.com/> - twitter @nedbarnett

                                http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                                <image001.jpg>

                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Geri Wilson
                                my point was that women in prostitution are as varied as any other group. and just for the record, it wasn t an occasional trick. it s how they economically
                                Message 15 of 18 , Mar 27, 2012
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  my point was that women in prostitution are as varied as any other group.
                                  and just for the record, it wasn't an occasional trick. it's how they
                                  economically survived.
                                  i think we all care for the victims.
                                  and these women are victims, too.
                                  believe me, they wouldn't have chosen either exotic dancing or hooking if
                                  they'd had another way to support themselves and their families.
                                  gj

                                  geri wilson
                                  the jonathan group
                                  - marketing for business -
                                  626.487.2235


                                  _____

                                  From: prbytes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                  Ned Barnett
                                  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 8:48 PM
                                  To: prbytes@yahoogroups.com; PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com
                                  Cc: prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                                  Subject: RE: [prbytes] RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women"
                                  ???




                                  Geri - your experience and mine come from totally different worlds - and I'm
                                  guessing that exotic dancers who occasionally turn a trick a night are
                                  different from women who do nothing but turn dozens of tricks a night. Many
                                  of you know that my career background includes 25 years of working with
                                  hospitals (and in hospitals), including psychiatric and substance abuse
                                  hospitals. The prostitutes I saw were patients - crack-addict patients, or
                                  other drug-addicted patients, many with HIV and half-a-dozen STDs, and no
                                  particular life-expectancy. I didn't see many "volunteers" . Now I'm
                                  working with a mental health agency trying to launch a program trying to
                                  reach and save teen-aged prostitutes . which again puts a different
                                  perspective on things.

                                  For adult women who can make mature life-choices for purely economic
                                  reasons, the libertarian in me says, "it's up to you, none of my business."
                                  But most prostitutes I've ever come across or heard of didn't fit that mold
                                  you're describing. My concern is for the victims.

                                  Ned

                                  Ned Barnett, APR

                                  Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                                  Barnett Marketing Communications

                                  420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                                  702-561-1167 - cell/text

                                  <http://www.barnettmarcom.com> www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                                  <http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/>
                                  http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                                  05-6-16 BMC Logo

                                  From: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  [mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
                                  Behalf Of
                                  Geri Wilson
                                  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 5:45 PM
                                  To: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                  PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Cc: prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Subject: RE: [prbytes] RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women"
                                  ???

                                  just my two cents (pun not intended :-)

                                  ned, in many ways i agree with you about everything you wrote.
                                  and, duncan, same to you.

                                  many years ago i knew a lot of dancers, many of whom engaged in
                                  prostitution. my experience with these women, many of whom i became friends
                                  with, was that it was purely economical. they had no other skills, and often
                                  they had poor educations, though most were quite smart women.

                                  if they'd had half the advantages i'd had they would probably not have been
                                  where they were.

                                  many of them were single mothers, and they could make more money faster
                                  dancing and prostituting themselves out then they could slinging burgers or
                                  working in a shop. and in a lot less hours!

                                  very few were drug addicted.
                                  none had a pimp.

                                  all had issues. . .but those issues came from tough childhoods where there
                                  wasn't enough money, few education opportunities, few role models, and, in a
                                  whole lotta cases, really rotten families.

                                  every one of them did this because it was one of the few jobs (and, yes,
                                  they viewed it totally as a job), that was open to them in which they could
                                  make good money.

                                  i have wondered often what happened to them as they aged.

                                  and as an aside, ned, i remember one of the dancers, who also prostituted
                                  herself, was an ex-Vegas showgirl.

                                  my point is that until we improve education, provide counseling services,
                                  and there are real jobs where people can make a living wage working decent
                                  hours, you can bet that prostitution is not going away. it's not about being
                                  socially conscious, it's about economics.
                                  best-
                                  geri

                                  geri wilson
                                  the jonathan group
                                  - marketing for business -
                                  626.487.2235

                                  _____

                                  From: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  [mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
                                  Behalf Of
                                  Ned Barnett
                                  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:38 PM
                                  To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                  prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Subject: [prbytes] RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                                  I am always amazed at Feminists who support prostitution (siding with "sex
                                  workers") instead of realizing that the vast majority of prostitutes are
                                  victims, exploited (usually by men - pimps - but also by madams) and used
                                  like Kleenex by men who have no self-respect and no respect for others.
                                  This goes double for those who normally stand against human rights abuse.
                                  People who rightly (and all too often self-righteously) decry slavery in
                                  sub-Saharan Africa see no problem in supporting legalized prostitution,
                                  which in so many cases is just another form of slavery.

                                  I have no doubt that Duncan means well - certainly, his post shows that he
                                  cares for the work situations of prostitutes and sees this misguided legal
                                  action as "helping" them - but I can't for the life of me see why instead of
                                  standing against the near-slavery-like exploitation of women, he sees
                                  legalizing their exploitation as the answer.

                                  Nevada has legalized bordello prostitution in some counties (but not in
                                  Clark County/Las Vegas) - but here we have "escort services" which are
                                  thinly-disguised call-girl services. Prostitution is blatant and rampant
                                  here in Vegas, and the human toll - from disease (which the Canadian
                                  legalization won't change), from drug abuse (which is often how pimps
                                  control their stable of victims) and from the God-Awful abuse this life
                                  imposes on young women (some as young as 14, many of them not yet of legal
                                  age, and even the "adults") - it destroys them, body and soul. How any
                                  civilized society made up of civilized, cultured and socially-conscious men
                                  and women who have wives and daughters and mothers and sisters (and
                                  presumably, sufficient empathy to envision their
                                  wives/daughters/mothers/sisters trapped in "the life") allow this to happen,
                                  who don't make eradicating this evil a top priority . that's beyond me.

                                  Ned

                                  Ned Barnett, APR

                                  Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                                  Barnett Marketing Communications

                                  420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                                  702-561-1167 - cell/text

                                  <http://www.barnettmarcom.com> www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                                  <http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/>
                                  http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                                  05-6-16 BMC Logo

                                  From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ]
                                  On
                                  Behalf Of Samuel L Waltz Jr
                                  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 2:27 PM
                                  To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                  prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                                  Actually, Ned, and I'm pleased to hear you tell your story on this...

                                  In a curious juxtaposition to our exchanges over the weekend on CCW that
                                  could have left outside observers feeling as though anyone who "carries" is
                                  some kind of "make my day" redneck bigot...

                                  I've been involved for years with several organizations in our State of
                                  Delaware involved in progressive social change...

                                  > www.SURJ.org , Stand Up for what's Right & Just, one of them, where I
                                  served on its Board for 4 or 5 years, actually has a national-quality pilot
                                  program for "prostitution diversion," and I'd be happy to chat with you
                                  about that. Effective in February, we merged SURJ into the Delaware Center
                                  for Justice www.DCJustice.org which has taken over that program

                                  > <http://www.PALde.org,> www.PALde.org, the Police Athletic League, in
                                  that organization, we run a number of "prevention" programs around
                                  youth-related issues, with a focus on keeping kids off the streets, and I
                                  have served several years on the PAL Board

                                  > <http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml>
                                  http://kids.delaware.gov/pbhs/pbhs.shtml, the Office of Prevention of the
                                  Delaware Dept of Services for Children, Youth and their Families, also has
                                  some programs that may be of interest, and I've been a speaker to their
                                  annual conferences.

                                  By the way, I need to give credit where credit is due, and I always hasten
                                  to acknowledge the critical role of my daughter Rachel Waltz, now 32, a
                                  UDelaware grad and Columbia MSW, who now -- after 5 years of helping run a
                                  neighborhood social service agency on Fulton Street in Bedford Stuveysant,
                                  America's toughest neighborhood -- is doing social work for the County
                                  Medical Society in N Carolina where UNC is located at Chapel Hill. Rachel
                                  came through St. Mark's HS and the UD with an extraordinary social
                                  conscience and with / through her insights, I've made it a point to find
                                  ways where I can make a difference in some of these things.

                                  Sam

                                  Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA

                                  SamWaltz@... <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>
                                  <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>
                                  <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>

                                  (302) 777-7774

                                  Sam Waltz & Associates LLC

                                  Business & Communications Counsel

                                  11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville

                                  Wilmington, DE 19807-2555

                                  www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                                  Counsel

                                  www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                                  Merger & Acquisition

                                  Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate

                                  Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues

                                  to Achieve Their Goals!

                                  =======================================

                                  DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                                  U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                                  warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                                  and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                                  buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                                  advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                                  responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                                  are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                                  content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                                  18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                                  this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                                  information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                                  intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                                  distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                                  receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                                  Disclaimer.

                                  _____

                                  From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ] on
                                  behalf of
                                  Ned Barnett [ned@... <mailto:ned%40barnettmarcom.com>
                                  <mailto:ned%40barnettmarcom.com>
                                  <mailto:ned%40barnettmarcom.com> ]
                                  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 4:36 PM
                                  To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                  prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Subject: RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                                  Duncan

                                  I always thought that the law was there to protect victims. Foolish me.
                                  Yes, making prostitution illegal doesn't work - especially if the government
                                  has no interest in enforcing the laws. But the solution, it seems to me, is
                                  to act to help the victims (the prostitutes).

                                  Perhaps my views are colored by the fact that I'm working with a client in
                                  putting together a program to help rescue teen-aged prostitutes before they
                                  get too far sunk into the lifestyle to escape.

                                  Check out the life expectancy of a prostitute, then tell me again how this
                                  "humane" new law, which protects pimps and bordello operators (the
                                  exploiters) is such a great idea.

                                  Call me ultraconservative and sweep me under the rug, but I'd rather see
                                  society do something to help these women escape from a life of exploitation
                                  and victimization than to legalize their abuse. Not because God told me to,
                                  but because these young women are victims, who need help.

                                  Ned

                                  Ned Barnett, APR

                                  Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                                  Barnett Marketing Communications

                                  420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                                  702-561-1167 - cell/text

                                  www.barnettmarcom.com - twitter @nedbarnett

                                  http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                                  05-6-16 BMC Logo

                                  From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  [mailto:PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ]
                                  On
                                  Behalf Of Duncan Matheson
                                  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 1:17 PM
                                  To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                  prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                                  Sam, you are absolutely right. They could have made prostitution illegal. Of
                                  course. That always works. If they had only thought of it. Oh well, maybe
                                  the step they took is the next best thing?

                                  Duncan Matheson

                                  BissettMatheson Communications

                                  506-457-1627(O)

                                  506-447-2388(mobile)
                                  duncan@... <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                  <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                  <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                  Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                                  www.bissettmatheson.com

                                  On 2012-03-26, at 4:51 PM, Samuel L Waltz Jr wrote:

                                  A fascinating post and link, Ned, thank you.

                                  What's amazing to me is that this is not being argued by the Court on a
                                  principle, e.g., Libertarianism, but rather on Pragmatism and Efficacy, "if
                                  we can't keep these girls safe selling sex illegally, then we need to
                                  legalize it in an effort to keep them safe." Only argument the Court left
                                  out is that it could mean "better sex" for these women and their customers!

                                  Samuel L. Waltz Jr., APR, Fellow PRSA

                                  SamWaltz@... <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>
                                  <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>
                                  <mailto:SamWaltz%40SamWaltz.com>

                                  (302) 777-7774

                                  Sam Waltz & Associates LLC

                                  Business & Communications Counsel

                                  11 Downs Drive, Limerick at Greenville

                                  Wilmington, DE 19807-2555

                                  www.SamWaltz.com <http://www.samwaltz.com/> Business & Communications
                                  Counsel

                                  www.RLSassociates.com <http://www.rlsassociates.com/> Investment Banking /
                                  Merger & Acquisition

                                  Helping Leaders & Organizations Navigate

                                  Difficult Events, Trends, Times, People & Issues

                                  to Achieve Their Goals!

                                  =======================================

                                  DISCLAIMER: Sender is NOT a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or
                                  U.S. Investment Adviser. Sender is a Consultant, and Sender makes no
                                  warranties or representations as to any party or transaction. Via sending
                                  and receipt, each party declares that this email is not intended for the
                                  buying, selling or trading of securities, or the offering of counsel or
                                  advice with respect to such activities. All due diligence is the
                                  responsibility of the parties. This email and the attached related documents
                                  are never to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or
                                  content. This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
                                  18 USC SS2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The information contained in
                                  this email is intended solely for the Recipient and may contain privileged
                                  information. If the reader of this message and any attachments is not the
                                  intended Recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination,
                                  distribution, or copying of the material is strictly prohibited. Upon
                                  receipt of these documents, the Recipient hereby acknowledges this
                                  Disclaimer.

                                  _____

                                  From: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  [PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com> ] on
                                  behalf of
                                  Duncan Matheson [duncan@...
                                  <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                  <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                  <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com> ]
                                  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 3:49 PM
                                  To: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:PRMindshare%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Cc: prbytes@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prbytes%40yahoogroups.com> ;
                                  prquorum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  <mailto:prquorum%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  Subject: Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

                                  Ultra conservatives won't applaud this, and these days that is the brand of
                                  government we have so it is fully expected the government will appeal, which
                                  means the ruling will go to the Supreme Court of Canada, so a definitive
                                  ruling is a year away at the very least. I hope it stands up because it is
                                  win-win. It affords prostitutes more safety but since the provisions against
                                  soliciting remain in effect there is no negative effect on the rest of the
                                  population. This just came down so not a lot of reaction yet, but I expect
                                  most women's group will support it. Prostitution is a very dangerous
                                  practise, and this means it can now be practised in a setting where the
                                  girls don't have to worry so much about the crazy people that search them
                                  out. Technically, what the court did was agree that prostitutes deserve the
                                  protections afforded Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and
                                  that the ban on bawdy houses amounted to refusing them these rights, which
                                  include a reasonable right to work in a safe environment.

                                  Duncan Matheson

                                  BissettMatheson Communications

                                  506-457-1627(O)

                                  506-447-2388(mobile)
                                  duncan@... <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                  <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                  <mailto:duncan%40bissettmatheson.com>
                                  Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                                  www.bissettmatheson.com

                                  On 2012-03-26, at 4:22 PM, Ned Barnett wrote:

                                  The court has legalized brothels and pimping
                                  http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10869813-brothels-and-pimpin
                                  g-legalized-in-ontario-canada . another blow for women, right?

                                  Maybe not so much

                                  Seems to me, a country that used to stand for human dignity, is now
                                  supporting the systemized abuse of women. Not a great PR move, either -
                                  damaging to the Canadian "brand' for sure.

                                  So . what say you?

                                  Ned Barnett, APR

                                  Marketing & PR Fellow, American Hospital Association

                                  Barnett Marketing Communications

                                  420 N. Nellis Blvd., A3-276 - Las Vegas NV 89110

                                  702-561-1167 - cell/text

                                  www.barnettmarcom.com <http://www.barnettmarcom.com/> - twitter @nedbarnett

                                  http://pr-marketing2point0.blogspot.com/

                                  <image001.jpg>

                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • David Adrian
                                  FYI, see “Myths and Facts about Nevada Legal Prostitution” at http://www.nevadacoalition.org/factsheets/LegliznFactSheet091707c.pdf. David David J. Adrian
                                  Message 16 of 18 , Mar 27, 2012
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    FYI, see “Myths and Facts about Nevada Legal Prostitution” at
                                    http://www.nevadacoalition.org/factsheets/LegliznFactSheet091707c.pdf.



                                    David



                                    David J. Adrian

                                    Adrian & Associates

                                    Public Relations Counselors

                                    248.322.9226

                                    david.adrian@...





                                    From: prbytes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                    Rob Frankel
                                    Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 10:35 PM
                                    To: prquorum@yahoogroups.com; prbytes@yahoogroups.com
                                    Cc: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: [PRQuorum] Re: [prbytes] RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up
                                    for Women" ???





                                    At 11:31 PM -0300 3/26/12, Duncan Matheson wrote thusly:
                                    >Good points Geri, especially about very few
                                    >being drug addicted, and none having pimps. It
                                    >does fly in the face of the stereotype of
                                    >prostitutes that people like Ned have bought
                                    >into. However, these aren't the ladies that are
                                    >most at risk that the court ruling is meant most
                                    >to protect - it's those who are physically on
                                    >the street, at great risk who will now be able
                                    >to ply their trade indoors - where it is much
                                    >safer.
                                    >

                                    I personally have nothing against people who do
                                    drugs, as long as they manage their activity in a
                                    way that avoids any type of public harm. I feel
                                    the same way about people exchanging money for
                                    sex. The act itself doesn't seem criminal to me.
                                    However, like the abusive circumstances that can
                                    exist in the drug world, there are criminal
                                    aspects to prostitution that cause public harm.
                                    Those, IMHO, are the issues requiring legislation.

                                    An additional aspect I haven't seen discussed
                                    here is the movement toward acceptance of
                                    prostitution as evidenced by the proliferation of
                                    sites dealing with "escorts" and, more blatantly,
                                    sugar daddy relationships. It seems there are
                                    women who have no trouble at all publicly
                                    advertising for a well-paid, mistress-style
                                    arrangement with the right candidate.

                                    To me, that's prostitution. And if two
                                    consenting adults aren't doing anyone any harm,
                                    have at it. Legislation should be aimed at any
                                    criminal byproducts of prostitution, not
                                    prostitution itself.

                                    My 2¢.

                                    --
                                    Rob Frankel, Branding Expert
                                    Twitter: @brandingexpert http://www.RobFrankel.com
                                    http://www.PeerMailing.com http://www.i-legions.com
                                    http://www.FrankelAnderson.com
                                    Yes, there's an RSS feed blog, if you can handle
                                    it: http://www.robfrankelblog.com





                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • Duncan Matheson
                                    It s a dead link. Duncan Matheson BissettMatheson Communications 506-457-1627(O) 506-447-2388(mobile) duncan@bissettmatheson.com Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                                    Message 17 of 18 , Mar 28, 2012
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      It's a dead link.

                                      Duncan Matheson
                                      BissettMatheson Communications
                                      506-457-1627(O)
                                      506-447-2388(mobile)
                                      duncan@...
                                      Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                                      www.bissettmatheson.com


                                      On 2012-03-28, at 12:20 AM, David Adrian wrote:

                                      > FYI, see �Myths and Facts about Nevada Legal Prostitution� at
                                      > http://www.nevadacoalition.org/factsheets/LegliznFactSheet091707c.pdf.
                                      >
                                      > David
                                      >
                                      > David J. Adrian
                                      >
                                      > Adrian & Associates
                                      >
                                      > Public Relations Counselors
                                      >
                                      > 248.322.9226
                                      >
                                      > david.adrian@...
                                      >
                                      > From: prbytes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                      > Rob Frankel
                                      > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 10:35 PM
                                      > To: prquorum@yahoogroups.com; prbytes@yahoogroups.com
                                      > Cc: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                                      > Subject: [PRQuorum] Re: [prbytes] RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up
                                      > for Women" ???
                                      >
                                      > At 11:31 PM -0300 3/26/12, Duncan Matheson wrote thusly:
                                      > >Good points Geri, especially about very few
                                      > >being drug addicted, and none having pimps. It
                                      > >does fly in the face of the stereotype of
                                      > >prostitutes that people like Ned have bought
                                      > >into. However, these aren't the ladies that are
                                      > >most at risk that the court ruling is meant most
                                      > >to protect - it's those who are physically on
                                      > >the street, at great risk who will now be able
                                      > >to ply their trade indoors - where it is much
                                      > >safer.
                                      > >
                                      >
                                      > I personally have nothing against people who do
                                      > drugs, as long as they manage their activity in a
                                      > way that avoids any type of public harm. I feel
                                      > the same way about people exchanging money for
                                      > sex. The act itself doesn't seem criminal to me.
                                      > However, like the abusive circumstances that can
                                      > exist in the drug world, there are criminal
                                      > aspects to prostitution that cause public harm.
                                      > Those, IMHO, are the issues requiring legislation.
                                      >
                                      > An additional aspect I haven't seen discussed
                                      > here is the movement toward acceptance of
                                      > prostitution as evidenced by the proliferation of
                                      > sites dealing with "escorts" and, more blatantly,
                                      > sugar daddy relationships. It seems there are
                                      > women who have no trouble at all publicly
                                      > advertising for a well-paid, mistress-style
                                      > arrangement with the right candidate.
                                      >
                                      > To me, that's prostitution. And if two
                                      > consenting adults aren't doing anyone any harm,
                                      > have at it. Legislation should be aimed at any
                                      > criminal byproducts of prostitution, not
                                      > prostitution itself.
                                      >
                                      > My 2�.
                                      >
                                      > --
                                      > Rob Frankel, Branding Expert
                                      > Twitter: @brandingexpert http://www.RobFrankel.com
                                      > http://www.PeerMailing.com http://www.i-legions.com
                                      > http://www.FrankelAnderson.com
                                      > Yes, there's an RSS feed blog, if you can handle
                                      > it: http://www.robfrankelblog.com
                                      >
                                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      >
                                      >



                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • Marc Snyder
                                      This is the correct link: http://www.nevadacoalition.org/factsheets/LegliznFactSheet091707c.pdf MS Marc Snyder
                                      Message 18 of 18 , Mar 28, 2012
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        This is the correct link:
                                        http://www.nevadacoalition.org/factsheets/LegliznFactSheet091707c.pdf

                                        MS

                                        Marc Snyder
                                        http://hkstrategies.ca<http://www.hkdp.qc.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1&Itemid=4&lang=fr>
                                        http://marcsnyder.ca <http://www.marcsnyder.ca>
                                        514 244-5228



                                        On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 08:02, Duncan Matheson
                                        <duncan@...>wrote:

                                        > It's a dead link.
                                        >
                                        > Duncan Matheson
                                        > BissettMatheson Communications
                                        > 506-457-1627(O)
                                        > 506-447-2388(mobile)
                                        > duncan@...
                                        > Twitter: @DuncanFMatheson
                                        > www.bissettmatheson.com
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > On 2012-03-28, at 12:20 AM, David Adrian wrote:
                                        >
                                        > > FYI, see �Myths and Facts about Nevada Legal Prostitution� at
                                        > > http://www.nevadacoalition.org/factsheets/LegliznFactSheet091707c.pdf.
                                        > >
                                        > > David
                                        > >
                                        > > David J. Adrian
                                        > >
                                        > > Adrian & Associates
                                        > >
                                        > > Public Relations Counselors
                                        > >
                                        > > 248.322.9226
                                        > >
                                        > > david.adrian@...
                                        > >
                                        > > From: prbytes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:prbytes@yahoogroups.com] On
                                        > Behalf Of
                                        > > Rob Frankel
                                        > > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 10:35 PM
                                        > > To: prquorum@yahoogroups.com; prbytes@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > Cc: PRMindshare@yahoogroups.com; prquorum@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > Subject: [PRQuorum] Re: [prbytes] RE: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands
                                        > up
                                        > > for Women" ???
                                        > >
                                        > > At 11:31 PM -0300 3/26/12, Duncan Matheson wrote thusly:
                                        > > >Good points Geri, especially about very few
                                        > > >being drug addicted, and none having pimps. It
                                        > > >does fly in the face of the stereotype of
                                        > > >prostitutes that people like Ned have bought
                                        > > >into. However, these aren't the ladies that are
                                        > > >most at risk that the court ruling is meant most
                                        > > >to protect - it's those who are physically on
                                        > > >the street, at great risk who will now be able
                                        > > >to ply their trade indoors - where it is much
                                        > > >safer.
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        > > I personally have nothing against people who do
                                        > > drugs, as long as they manage their activity in a
                                        > > way that avoids any type of public harm. I feel
                                        > > the same way about people exchanging money for
                                        > > sex. The act itself doesn't seem criminal to me.
                                        > > However, like the abusive circumstances that can
                                        > > exist in the drug world, there are criminal
                                        > > aspects to prostitution that cause public harm.
                                        > > Those, IMHO, are the issues requiring legislation.
                                        > >
                                        > > An additional aspect I haven't seen discussed
                                        > > here is the movement toward acceptance of
                                        > > prostitution as evidenced by the proliferation of
                                        > > sites dealing with "escorts" and, more blatantly,
                                        > > sugar daddy relationships. It seems there are
                                        > > women who have no trouble at all publicly
                                        > > advertising for a well-paid, mistress-style
                                        > > arrangement with the right candidate.
                                        > >
                                        > > To me, that's prostitution. And if two
                                        > > consenting adults aren't doing anyone any harm,
                                        > > have at it. Legislation should be aimed at any
                                        > > criminal byproducts of prostitution, not
                                        > > prostitution itself.
                                        > >
                                        > > My 2�.
                                        > >
                                        > > --
                                        > > Rob Frankel, Branding Expert
                                        > > Twitter: @brandingexpert http://www.RobFrankel.com
                                        > > http://www.PeerMailing.com http://www.i-legions.com
                                        > > http://www.FrankelAnderson.com
                                        > > Yes, there's an RSS feed blog, if you can handle
                                        > > it: http://www.robfrankelblog.com
                                        > >
                                        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > ------------------------------------
                                        >
                                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >


                                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.