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

Re: [PRMindshare] xp - Ontario "Stands up for Women" ???

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 18 , Mar 26 1:17 PM
    • 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 2 of 18 , Mar 26 1:30 PM
      • 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 3 of 18 , Mar 26 1:36 PM
        • 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 4 of 18 , Mar 26 2:27 PM
          • 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 5 of 18 , Mar 26 3:37 PM
            • 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 6 of 18 , Mar 26 4:42 PM
              • 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 7 of 18 , Mar 26 5:44 PM
                • 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 8 of 18 , Mar 26 7:31 PM
                  • 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 9 of 18 , Mar 26 7:35 PM
                    • 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 10 of 18 , Mar 26 7:48 PM
                      • 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 11 of 18 , Mar 26 8:48 PM
                        • 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 12 of 18 , Mar 27 9:36 AM
                          • 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 13 of 18 , Mar 27 8:20 PM
                            • 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 14 of 18 , Mar 28 5:02 AM
                              • 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 15 of 18 , Mar 28 8:21 AM
                                • 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.