mgd777 #SurvivorsAgainstSESTA, Adult Business, Best Practices For Journalists and Media, Community Services For Prison Re/Entry, harm reduction, Policy Models on Prostitution, Sex Work Friendly Support Services, Sex Work v Sex Trafficking, Social Justice and Policy Reform

NEW: Pennsylvania Project

Torturing Sex Workers, with Melanie Dante: Ken’s guest is Melanie Dante discussing various issues surrounding the sex trades, badly needed decriminalization, and holes in the law that create “viminals”, i.e., making criminals out of victims of sexual abuse.

mgd777 Sex Work v Sex Trafficking

Hit & Run: Homeland Security Raid Eros

"That [Homeland Security raid] is going to expose a whole bunch of innocent people," Maxine Doogan, president of the Erotic Service Providers Legal, Education, and Research Project told Raleigh-Durham's ABC 11. "There's a big question about how the government will honor people's privacy. People have the right to their privacy and they should not be convicted or set up for moral judgment for adult activity."

mgd777 Adult Business, Policy Models on Prostitution, Sex Work v Sex Trafficking

E v G 9 Covered On Fox News

The legal challenge was brought by three ex-prostitutes, a would-be client, and ESPLER (Erotic Service Providers Legal, Educational and Research Project). They received good news Thursday after the 9th Circuit judges hinted that some scrutiny of the law was needed. “Why should it be illegal to sell something that it’s legal to give away?” asked, as the Chronicle reported.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White rejected the challenge last year, saying the 2003 Supreme Court ruling was concerning intimate personal relationship and did not apply to commercial sex, adding that California justified the law against prostitution as a deterrence to violence against women, sexually transmitted diseases and human trafficking, according to the Chronicle.

mgd777 Sex Work v Sex Trafficking

E v G In The 9th Circuit

After nearly 30 months working through the US Federal Court system, we finally get to stand up before a panel of judges and argue that California Penal Code 647(b) unfairly deprives consenting adults of the right to private activity, criminalizes the discussion of such activity, and unconstitutionally places prohibitions on our rights to freely associate.