Don't Carry Condoms in D.C. -- You Could Be Charged With Prostitution

UPDATE: DC police clarify that condoms can be used as a factor in arrest -- but that a person would also have to be congregating with another person, "late at night with no apparent destination" (how often does that happen anyway?) to receive a disperse order, and getting caught congregating again later within the PFZ "will result in arrest without a second warning." We urge you to sign the petition telling the mayors of D.C., New York, and San Francisco that using condoms as a factor discourages sex workers from practicing safe sex and is a public health disaster, especially given the risk of spreading HIV/AIDS.

Think you might get lucky tonight? Well, if you're in D.C., don't bring more than two condoms in your purse, or you could be arrested as a prostitute.

In D.C., police can declare "Prostitution Free Zones" where officers can pick up (I mean, arrest) issue a disperse order to anyone they have "sufficient cause" to suspect of sex work. And they've been accused of using carrying three or more condoms as proof of intent to sell sex -- rather than intent to spend the weekend getting jiggy with a guy. Update: As stated above, a spokesperson clarifies that "sufficient cause" can be "congregating with at least one other person ... late at night with no apparent destination, and in possession of multiple condoms." Failure to disperse, or getting caught again later congregating within the PRZ, will get you arrested "without a second warning." So don't worry too much -- condoms could be a factor in arrest, but you'd also have to be hanging out with someone in the dark, and fail to get out of the PFZ.

But as RH Reality Check points out, the real danger of this practice falls to people who actually are sex workers. [Update: due to some confusion in articles that have picked this story up, we've changed the term "law" to "practice," since by "law" we intended to refer to the declaration of Prostitution Free Zones, as distinguished from the enforcement practice of using condoms as evidence. The minimal other requirements for "sufficient cause" directly discourages sex workers from carrying condoms.] It pushes them to abandon safe sex techniques, putting their own health at risk as well as that of the general population. Add to this the fear of arrest or harassment that keeps sex workers from seeking health care, and you have a recipe for disaster.

Everybody should know by now that the nation's capital has a rampant problem with HIV/AIDS; this backwards practice contributes to its spread (at three times the rate that characterizes a severe epidemic). It's not like you can expect the johns to bring their own rubbers. This practice prioritizes making commercial areas look clean and pretty lady-free, not protecting the public's health.

But the root of the problem isn't this one practice: it's the criminalization of sex work. If you want to criminalize something, stick to pimping -- after all, many of these women have been trafficked unwillingly and subjected to violence. If they weren't so afraid of being arrested for stepping forward to condemn their pimps, we'd have a better chance of finding the true criminals in this situation.

Photo: Corey Ann

Alex DiBranco is a Change.org Editor who has worked for the Nation, Political Research Associates, and the Center for American Progress. She is now based in New York City.

Comments (86)

  • Kathleen Stykowski
    Jan 07, 2010 @ 08:52AM PT
    Kathleen Stykowski

    This article just made my jaw drop. Whoever came up with that "condom cause for arrest" is an absolute moron!

  • C C
    Jan 07, 2010 @ 04:07PM PT
    C C

    Wow. There are no words for this level of [insert cuss words here].

     

    HOW DARE THEY.

  • Shaktiva Irahs
    Jan 07, 2010 @ 04:17PM PT
    Shaktiva Irahs

    We ought to inflict some serious STD in these lawmakers.

    What are they thinking? Condoms are prostitution? I say forcing people to abandon safe sex practices is unlawful and epidemic-inducing.

  • R B
    Jan 07, 2010 @ 04:34PM PT
    R B

    Just goes to show that when you have puritan idiots in high places or in positions of power...This is what you get.

  • Stacey Burns
    Jan 07, 2010 @ 06:02PM PT
    Stacey Burns

    Alex, thanks for publicizing this--it's making the rounds on twitter, very informative for those of us outside of DC. I can only imagine the discussions that took place prior to introducing this harmful piece of legislation; I wonder who thought this was a good idea, and exactly how many public health officials were consulted...

    Since it IS making the rounds, now would be a great time to ask if it's possible to edit the piece to remove all instances of the term "prostitution" other than those specifically in reference to the name of the law itself. It's an ideologically-loaded pejorative that further stigmatizes sex workers, and that's clearly not the intended effect of your article.

    • Alex DiBranco
      Jan 07, 2010 @ 06:36PM PT
      Alex DiBranco

      Thanks for your suggestion (and for publicizing this). I've altered the terminology in a couple places where it seemed as though it wouldn't conflict with the need to get across how the police conceptualize the issue.

    • Charles Hancock  Be Helpful Not Hurtful
      Jan 15, 2010 @ 04:17PM PT
      Charles Hancock Be Helpful Not Hurtful

      I am such a nerd.  I am impressed of your appropriate usage of the strikethrough font.  You can easily see what you changed and why.  Why I believe it is such a great idea is that many people have passed this message along, passed it along for what the article said not what is says.  With the strikethrough we can see what they intended to pass along as well as what you really intended.

      Oh and I am very against discouraging anyone to use birth control or condems.  We have a population problem, food shortage, recession, far too many orphans and homeless.  And encouraging sex workers to not use condems, shame on you!  How many of these people have spouses?  It is bad enough their spouse has an unfaithful partner, there is no reason to sentence the spouse to death as well.  Prostitution, selling or purchasing has never and should never be a death sentence.

      We need seriously need to re-examine the punishments for trafficking, forced and underage sex workers!  We must take into account how the lives where taken, forced addiction, kidnapping, physical abuse even emational abuse, age and how many years were stolen.  We need to always ensure the safety and sometimes relocation of anyone willing to come forward.  Remember, in human trafficking, there is a victim and it will take years if ever to undo the damage done!

      I think this is a somewhat relavent solution to protecting the women from the Pimps...

      http://www.change.org/actions/view/restraining_order_enforcement

      Be Helpful, Not Hurtful

    • Reply to thread
  • Stacey Burns
    Jan 07, 2010 @ 06:49PM PT
    Stacey Burns

    Awesome, Alex! Thanks for the swift response. And I'm actually quite curious about the attitude of law enforcement officials, which probably varies.

  • Fiona Moore
    Jan 07, 2010 @ 07:56PM PT
    Fiona Moore

    Seriously? How backwards are we going here?

    And I always have a couple if not a few condoms on me, particularly when I'm on a night out. Better not stand on a corner waiting for my ride *rolls eyes*

  • Najia  Arrihani
    Jan 07, 2010 @ 08:45PM PT
    Najia Arrihani

    Whoaaa that's just crazy!  That's an utterly irresponsible justice system!

    Whoever came up with the idea to limit the carry-on amount of condoms should be charged with endangerment.

  • C P
    Jan 08, 2010 @ 06:08AM PT
    C P

    only in Amerika!

  • Andrea Amel
    Jan 08, 2010 @ 07:20AM PT
    Andrea Amel

    Seriously???  Ugh...I can't stand it when they try to legislate morality.  IT NEVER WORKS....nor should it even be attempted.  Besides, are they really going to be able to enforce this consistently?  Don't law officers have more serious things to deal with in D.C.?  Crimes that hurt people?  I'd be curious to know who propsed this law in the first place.  That it got approved astounds me.  And in D.C.!!! 

  • tony freeman
    Jan 08, 2010 @ 12:45PM PT
    tony freeman

    who are the people who introduced this?!! published their names on the internet now! put them on blast! twitter everybody these idiots are morons!

  • tony freeman
    Jan 08, 2010 @ 12:57PM PT
    tony freeman

    since DC is 80% black then who will be going to jail?? then these black idiots will be crying later that the reasons why so many blacks are in jail is because of the racist white system that always makes it hard for blacks to get ahead

    • dallas alphonso
      Jan 10, 2010 @ 10:33AM PT
      dallas alphonso

      What? That is a stretch, I don't think any one is as confused about this issue as you are wow!  Reread what you wrote and see if you that is what you meant to say, really!

    • R B
      Jan 11, 2010 @ 04:32AM PT
      R B

      Black idiots mr. freeman ?

      If this law does unfairly target the african american citizens then it would indeed be racist...Wouldnt you say ?

      I would.

      In any case, at least we can agree that its just another dumbass law dreamed up and implemented by the bible thumpers to further lord it over those of us who actually has a brain and uses it.

    • Lara Nunes
      Jan 11, 2010 @ 09:32AM PT
      Lara Nunes

      I dont think this law will target ONLY african americans, We are talking about human beings who are ALL americans.. Color shouldnt matter except for those who has an obama agenda to make something racists when its not. This is about Women rights.. not Color rights.

      Its time for people to look at the bigger picture and stop trying to make it an issues based on color.

      Anyways, If African american women were arrested, shouldnt these women find a legit job instead of taking the chance to harm themselves with people who may have STD's or AIDS?

       

    • Brynne Jennings
      Jan 12, 2010 @ 05:32AM PT
      Brynne Jennings

      Mr. Freebaser...oops! I mean Mr. Freeman...For you to have made such a racist and ignorant statement shows that you're simply an idiot. This issue has NOTHING to do with color...but because you are unable to contribute anything positive to this article (let alone this world), you turn to bigotry and hide behind it. After reading your statement I realized that there truly are "wastes of sperm" in existence. I pity you...no...I pity those that know you. What an embarrassment you must be!

       

      To Ms. Nunes, please stick with your opening statement..."I don't think the law targets ONLY African Americans". Your closing statement is somewhat of a contradiction. Instead of referring to African American women you probably should have just said "women". Anyone who has sex nowadays runs the risk of harming themselves by contracting an STD or HIV with so many people on the "down-low" or not being honest about their sexual activity.

      All in all, this new law completely reverses the work done by people who encourage safe sex practices.

    • Lara Nunes
      Jan 12, 2010 @ 08:59PM PT
      Lara Nunes

       Brynne

       Your closing statement is somewhat of a contradiction. Instead of referring to African American women you probably should have just said "women".

      well actually since I was responding too mr.Freeman comment i believe my words are not a contradiction, because according to Avert.org which is a International AIDS charity organization it states "over 225,000 African Americans have died of AIDS - nearly 40% of total deaths - and of the more than 1 million people living with HIV in the United States of America today, around half are black.The estimated lifetime risk of becoming infected with HIV is 1 in 16 for black males, and 1 in 30 for black females, a far higher risk than for white males (1 in 104) and white females (1 in 588)".

      http://www.avert.org/hiv-african-americans.htm

      I think condoms are good for everyone who has sex, but truthfully the lawmakers of this country only cares for population control.

       

    • Reply to thread
  • Larry Roberts
    Jan 08, 2010 @ 03:43PM PT
    Larry Roberts

    Same thing happens in supposedly liberal San Francisco: http://missionlocal.org/2008/10/prostitutes-burned-by-rubbers/ even though in 1994 the old District Attorney agreed not to use condoms as evidence of prostitution: http://www.bayswan.org/lawindex.html

    • Alex DiBranco
      Jan 09, 2010 @ 05:12PM PT
      Alex DiBranco

      Thanks for the tip!

    • Reply to thread
  • roland clark
    Jan 08, 2010 @ 07:46PM PT
    roland clark

    If they get away with this they can get away with anything, because a condom isn't an illegal product.. this can be fought in supreme court and won easily..  what's to stop them from saying you can carry three packs of cigarettes because you might sell them on corner, or anyting by that matter

  • Andre Francisco
    Jan 08, 2010 @ 08:32PM PT
    Andre Francisco

    I wonder if while debating this anyone mentioned that condoms come in three packs. 

    • Bryan Snowden
      Jan 10, 2010 @ 05:22AM PT
      Bryan Snowden

      That is an extremely "telling question", which I seriously hope some reporter will ask them about publicly... ASAP!

      When was the last time these folks bought and/or carried condoms? Did they last buy them one at a time from those old restroom machines 10-20 yrs ago?? 

      Maybe they just bought the one, you know "just in case" = to put in their wallet and leave there for years. The condom's primary function in their case, was that of creating that tacky & cliche "I'm prepared ring" visible on the outside of the leather.

      OR...  Nah, I would go on but that could get truly offensive and even more tacky - I think the point has been made well enough.

      I think the bigger point is that the police there in DC seem willing to make up B.S. reasons to do - whatever they damn well please - just as long as they THINK they can get away with it!

      That, and that this is just one more example of a futile attempt to enforce a law created to 'legislate morality' (as mentioned above), which is I have to say is literally my greatest pet peeve with society/government overall.

    • Reply to thread
  • Amanda Fox
    Jan 09, 2010 @ 11:39AM PT
    Amanda Fox

    I have an idea to combat this completely backwards law - encourage EVERYONE to carry around a ton of condoms everywhere they go. Eventually they won't be able to use that criteria for arresting people becuase they'll have too many arrests of innocent people.

    I don't know if it would work, but it might be work a try.

    • Roger Anderson
      Jan 10, 2010 @ 11:35AM PT
      Roger Anderson

      My thoughts exactly. Challenge the law by wearing ribbons of condoms on your body. What are they going to do? Arrest you and look like the jackasses they are.

    • sonny basore
      Jan 10, 2010 @ 08:39PM PT
      sonny basore

      people could make belts , necklaces and bracelets out of them.

    • Lara Nunes
      Jan 10, 2010 @ 10:44PM PT
      Lara Nunes

      people could make belts , necklaces and bracelets out of them.

      Posted by sonny basore

       And Balloons too

    • R B
      Jan 11, 2010 @ 04:35AM PT
      R B

      Thats a good idea miss fox and another good benifit would be that more safe sex would be had...Hopefully...As opposed to unsafe sex.

      Kudos to you.

    • Akasha Jade
      Jan 12, 2010 @ 07:54AM PT
      Akasha Jade

      It's a good thing they didn't try to pass this in the 80's.  I remember there was an entire condom clothing line, underwear, earrings, necklaces, hats, sunglasses.  

      I find it funny that 30 years ago women were embarrassed to go into stores to purchase condoms because someone might think she was promiscuous and now someone has made a law that is stating that. 

    • Reply to thread
  • Ron. Price
    Jan 10, 2010 @ 03:41AM PT
    Ron. Price

    In Texas A known street lady( prostitute) if she is infected with a virus, can be charged with attempted man slaughter, if she is in the streets with out them, try asking the law if they would like you to try spreading aids in the hopes it will come around to there family.

     who are the morons that thought up such a law  ?

     Ps. my wife does not want me to carry them around,or own them,though I don't think she can press chrages on me,,,if I get caught I hope you will take up a collection to go my bail.!

  • Roger Anderson
    Jan 10, 2010 @ 11:32AM PT
    Roger Anderson

    Yes folks, the clowns are running the circus and the asylum is being run by the inmates. Mayor of D.C., you are in the running for the "Dumb & Dumber" Award.

  • Julie Springer
    Jan 10, 2010 @ 04:00PM PT
    Julie Springer

    I believe that anyone that gets an STD in any of the cities that has such a backwards and antiquated law should sue that city for contributing to unsafe sex practices.  Unbelievable that laws like this get passed in this day and age.

  • Michael Ivey
    Jan 10, 2010 @ 05:57PM PT
    Michael Ivey

    I read the MoveAlongReport.pdf that you link to as a source and I couldn't find any indication that carrying more than 2 condoms is illegal.  There wasn't any mention at all of any significance of carrying a specific number of condoms.

    Can you cite a clear source for this information?  I hate to imagine the damage that might be done to women if numerous web sites start spreading the word that it's illegal to carry condoms.

    • Lara Nunes
      Jan 10, 2010 @ 08:17PM PT
      Lara Nunes

      Micheal if you place the title of this article on the search engine, you will see how many places has already reported.

       On page 28  of

       Move Along: Policing Sex Work in Washington, D.C.

       http://www.differentavenues.org/MoveAlongReport.pdf

       its ask a question if condoms are conficated.

       

       

       

       

       

    • Lara Nunes
      Jan 10, 2010 @ 08:53PM PT
      Lara Nunes

      Then on page 33 at the same site  it tells about a latina trans women who was mistreated by cops and carrying condoms was postitution and they took it away.

      Under : Negative experiences included:

        Move Along: Policing Sex Work in Washington, D.C. (2008) Negative experiences included: page 33, paragraph 4,5

        http://www.differentavenues.org/MoveAlongReport.pdf

    • David Schrag
      Jan 13, 2010 @ 07:25AM PT
      David Schrag

      I had the same question. I see numerous references in the "Move Along" report to the confiscation of condoms but I don't see anything about possession of any number of condoms being used by itself as probable cause for an arrest. I think we are seeing the birth of an urban legend.

    • David Schrag
      Jan 13, 2010 @ 07:30AM PT
      David Schrag
    • Reply to thread
  • Lara Nunes
    Jan 10, 2010 @ 07:01PM PT
    Lara Nunes

    Washington DC is controlled by corrupted goverment and who thinks they can make more money arresting people instead of thinking about condom saving a life...

    But what do you expect from Washington DC.. especially when

    “D.C. is a hot spot for labor trafficking as well as sex trafficking,”

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/012509-More_than_a_thousand_women_were_forced_into_sex_slavery_Justice_Department_reports.html#ixzz0cGkKx7xX

    pathic

  • j y
    Jan 10, 2010 @ 09:31PM PT
    j y

    i really don't see the point to this article. cops see someone whom they think is a prostitute. they perform a search. they find condoms. they draw an arbitrary line at 3 for determining whether the number of condoms suggests the woman is a sex worker. they do or do not arrest the woman based on their assessment.

    what exactly is the problem here? provided that the search is constitutional (ie., was based on a reasonable suspicion or on an actual search warrant), then i see no problem. carrying a number of condoms is rationally related to working as a prostitute.

    this law is very unlikely to have a chilling effect on the average person, unless the average person happens to be acting in such a way that would give a cop reasonable suspicion to believe she was a hooker. in that case, it's unsurprising that you would be charged with prostitution. i, for one, think that establishing some objective tests for making arrests is a step in the right direction.

    • Lara Nunes
      Jan 10, 2010 @ 11:31PM PT
      Lara Nunes

      The ones who should be arrested are the PIMPS and sex traffickers not the women,  some of the women who goes out at night with friends are not hookers... its just we have cops in this country would rather target women instead of the PIMPS and sex traffickers.

      A condoms are there to keep people safe from std's..

    • R B
      Jan 11, 2010 @ 04:41AM PT
      R B

      Since condoms cost money that can be going into a pimp's pocket...Just how many sex slaves do you think would really be carrying any condoms at all ?

      As for those who choose to go into the sex trade...They should be able to carry as many condoms as they want/need. 

      In the end...The existance of condoms as justification for charging folks with prostitution is every bit as stupid as banning gay marriage.

    • Lara Nunes
      Jan 11, 2010 @ 09:19AM PT
      Lara Nunes

      This is true that condoms cost money for some, but actually a person can go to a free clinc and get free condoms. I would rather people use condoms to keep them safe from STD's  then waste my tax money on people who are idiots to promote a stupid law like this one to make it illegal for people to carry condoms.

      A cops job is to protect and serve, not to walk around cities acting like Nazi cops.

    • Reply to thread
  • Nilah Mckinney
    Jan 10, 2010 @ 09:57PM PT
    Nilah Mckinney

    Who ever came up with this STUPID law needs to have their a$$ kicked from the earth to the moon!! 

    WHAT IS THIS WORLD COMMING TO? WE HAVE IDIOTS FOR LAWMAKERS!!!!!!!!!!!! 

  • Lara Nunes
    Jan 10, 2010 @ 11:27PM PT
    Lara Nunes

    Posted by Nilah Mckinney

    WE HAVE IDIOTS FOR LAWMAKERS!!!!!!!!!!!! 

    Check out who your lawmakers are

    http://www.house.gov/

  • David  English
    Jan 10, 2010 @ 11:46PM PT
    David English

    I have a good solution for you, get a large group of people to go to DC give them each a bunch of condoms and then call on the police to enforce the law. You need 300-500 people. What are they going to do, not arrest you because you don't "look" like a prostitute? If they are truly enforcing the law and not being selective about it, the police should act. Otherwise they are hypocrites.

    Bonus: Do it on the day of a city council meeting. If they don't arrest you, then go and complain about selective enforcement by the police.

    Unfortunately I live abroad and am not anywhere close to DC, but believe me if I was there, I'd be helping to organize something like this.

  • Lara Nunes
    Jan 11, 2010 @ 12:23AM PT
    Lara Nunes

    David

    Actually Since I am a lady and I dont go out at night, maybe you need to advocate  the police to arrest the PIMPS and sex traffickers. And the goverment agents who also sell women on the streets.

    • David  English
      Jan 12, 2010 @ 12:07AM PT
      David English

      Lara,

      I think you are misunderstanding what I mean. I'm all for going after the pimps the Johns or whoever else they can, but this is about overturning the law. The city councilors need a wake up call that the law is not feasible and it discriminates. By defying the law in mass, they have two choices, arrest everyone or watch it happen. If they do the latter, it proves my point that they can't enforce the law. If the arrest everyone (which they won't), it would muck up their jail system causing a lot of misspent resources (which also goes to prove it would be feasible.

      The question is, do you sit here and complain about it, or do something? I personally think the petition is a start in the right direction, but I doubt they will budge on their position unless something else is done.

    • Lara Nunes
      Jan 12, 2010 @ 12:37AM PT
      Lara Nunes

      Do you remember during the DNC of 2008? When all those protesters were arrested for expressing their freedom of speech during the presidential campaign? Well guess what they will use the same type of cops to arrest people. Plus our country makes more money housing people in prison then having them walking in the streets. This is what our politicians has been working on doing for years and without people really knowing what hit them, because none of this is broadcast on the mainstream media. And when it does happen they will use another wording in order to get the brainwashed Americans to support these tactics.

      I think your idea is great but what is the chance it can back fire? That is my concern and no misunderstanding we just see the same thing at a different way.

    • Reply to thread
  • Lara Nunes
    Jan 11, 2010 @ 12:28AM PT
    Lara Nunes

    Sex industries traffic in ever-younger girls. Forced prostitution, often accompanied by violent abuse and disease, can be a death sentence. Millions of Asian girls and women have been forced into prostitution during the past decade, although this human rights abuse is by no means limited to that region of the world.

    Rape, used as a weapon of war, spares neither young girls nor elderly women. Fleeing for their lives, refugee women and girls often face assaults, sometimes lethal, at the hands of government agents who are supposed to protect them.

    http://www.udhr.org/Womensrights/intro.htm

  • Mariko Passion
    Jan 11, 2010 @ 01:17AM PT
    Mariko Passion

    Los Angeles ALSO is guilty of using condoms as evidence.  I can speak from experience.  My work bag has wayyy more than 2 condoms.  It has flavored condoms, dental dams, gloves for fisting, lube to make the condoms not break, massage oil in a spray bottle, mace for some protection...

    because I've been arrested before and the above contents have been used to incriminate me it I KNOW that the bag will be used as evidence but I choose to risk arrest instead of HIV or pregnancy. 

    And most women and girls are NOT trafficked.  Especially in that area of DC.  Most of the women who are most affected by the law are the transgender street workers who are arrested again and again add violations in a PFZ as another risk on their list.

  • Phyllis Schafly
    Jan 11, 2010 @ 02:49AM PT
    Phyllis Schafly

    Spermbortion is MURDER!

    I would rather see my children infected with STD's than for them to know about condoms!

    AIDS is punishment!

    "S*x-Ed" corrupts minors!

    Outlaw condoms nationwide!

    • R B
      Jan 11, 2010 @ 04:45AM PT
      R B

      ROTFLMFAO...

      Sweety...Your village called...

      Theyre missing their idiot.

    • Andrea Amel
      Jan 11, 2010 @ 05:56AM PT
      Andrea Amel

      I assume you are being sarcastic, considering you posted as Phyllis Schlafly. =)

    • Lara Nunes
      Jan 11, 2010 @ 09:12AM PT
      Lara Nunes

      There are some blinded idiots in this country who thinks Condoms are bad. And these people should not be able to reproduce.. its bad for society.

    • Reply to thread
  • chere winnek-shawer
    Jan 11, 2010 @ 03:49AM PT
    chere winnek-shawer

    I can sympathize with the sex workers,etc.  However, I find a much more threatening and long term consequence to such laws.  When did condoms become an unlawful substance or product?  When did it become alright to limit the purchase of a lawful substance?  When did it become alright to dictate the practice of lawful sexuality?  The answer is that it never has!  This is not to keep the streets free of sex workers, this is an attempt which seems to be working, to dictate to the common citizen what is right or wrong.  Read the book "The Family" to get a clear picture of what has been happening right under our noses for many, many years.  The time is coming, if we don't stop it, that so called "righteous people" will have a peep hole and a listening device in our bedrooms to make sure we have sex as they believe it should be, or should I say the way the want us to have sex but don't need to bother about such things for themselves.  Just look at Phyllis Schafly's post above, "Spermbortion", indeed.

    • Andrea Amel
      Jan 11, 2010 @ 06:58AM PT
      Andrea Amel

      I am pretty sure the "spermbortion" comment was satire.  Phyllis Schlafly is a political activist born in 1924.  Most famously, she opposed the ERA for women and feminism.  I doubt at her advanced age she would be browsing "change.org" and talking about "spermbortion".  =)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phyllis_Schlafly

    • Reply to thread
  • chere winnek-shawer
    Jan 11, 2010 @ 11:12AM PT
    chere winnek-shawer

    Do youy really think so!

    • Andrea Amel
      Jan 11, 2010 @ 12:52PM PT
      Andrea Amel

      Yep - especially since she wouldn't have mispelled her own last name on her profile.  Her last name is "Schlafly", whereas the profile name says "Schafly".  If not satire, some crazed follower of her anti-feminism ideals.

    • Reply to thread
  • S D
    Jan 11, 2010 @ 04:42PM PT
    S D

    Arrested for being safe.  Great job D.C.!

  • Tony  Bones
    Jan 12, 2010 @ 07:58AM PT
    Tony Bones

    It's all part of there plan to spread disease and population control. They know exactly what there doing when they make/pass laws. Be aware. 

    http://www.infowars.com

    • S D
      Jan 12, 2010 @ 09:48PM PT
      S D

      They know what they're doing but they won't admit just how stupid they're being.

    • Reply to thread
  • Akasha Jade
    Jan 12, 2010 @ 08:08AM PT
    Akasha Jade

    I'm curious does this law apply to men as well?  Are men who carry more than three condoms considered sex workers as well, or is that just "boys will be boys".  

     

    • S D
      Jan 12, 2010 @ 09:50PM PT
      S D

      I'm going to assume it's "boys will be boys" because boys don't have uteruses.

    • Reply to thread
  • Ron Combs
    Jan 12, 2010 @ 08:10AM PT
    Ron Combs

    The phamacutical companies buy the politicians to vote for this law. Which of course causes more VD .Which in turn increases profits on aids meds...EVERY decision that a politician makes is based on who's the highest bidder.

  • Carol Hill
    Jan 12, 2010 @ 12:25PM PT
    Carol Hill

    This is beyond stupid and insane and that is a fact.

  • David Schrag
    Jan 13, 2010 @ 08:31AM PT
    David Schrag

    This headline is extremely misleading and the article stretches the truth. See http://davidschrag.com/schrug/2010/01/13/mommy-where-do-urban-legends-come-from/.

    • Stacey Burns
      Jan 13, 2010 @ 08:43AM PT
      Stacey Burns

      Feministing.com is "a magazine read by teenage girls"? Do a little more research and check your dismissive attitude. It's difficult to take your post seriously when it's dripping with such contempt. The headline's a headline--meant to capture interest. The fact remains that possession of condoms can be used as evidence that a person is engaging in sex work.

    • David Schrag
      Jan 13, 2010 @ 08:50AM PT
      David Schrag

      No, Stacey. Feministing.com was the source cited on Facebook by Teen Voices (www.teenvoices.com), which is my client and which is indeed targeted to teenage girls. And the fact remains that carrying condoms cannot by itself get you arrested. Nevertheless, it is this factoid that is making its way around the Internet.

    • Reply to thread
  • Stacey Burns
    Jan 13, 2010 @ 09:06AM PT
    Stacey Burns

    My mistake, David, re feministing.com, and my apologies. However, the fact does remain, as RH Reality Check elaborates in the post, that using condom possession as even ONE of the factors identifying sex workers will have the effect of discouraging condom possession (and, one would assume, condom use) AMONG SEX WORKERS. In other words, while the headline is a "hey, read me!" headline, the important story that follow highlights the difficulties of promoting public health in at-risk populations (sex workers and their clients.)

    • David Schrag
      Jan 13, 2010 @ 09:22AM PT
      David Schrag

      Stacey, if it were up to me prostitution would be legalized and condoms would be required by OSHA. That's not the point. The point is that the headline is simply inaccurate. If it's OK for headlines to be inaccurate, why not write just write "DC prostitutes being murdered by police?" That would probably grab even more attention, and it's only a slightly greater exaggeration.

    • Stacey Burns
      Jan 13, 2010 @ 10:49AM PT
      Stacey Burns

      I'm just going to quote from Alex's updated post (http://bit.ly/4WF8zJ): "Given these regulations for 'sufficient cause,' I can definitely understand why sex workers would be afraid to carry condoms." Come on--"prostitutes being murdered by police" is not an exaggeration of "arrest on suspicion of sex work", whereas "charged with prostitution" follows from the actual regulations. I do appreciate watchdogs, but as the intent of this article is to draw attention to a public health problem, I find it difficult to get worked up by what you're labelling as an urban legend, surely itself an exaggeration.

    • David Schrag
      Jan 13, 2010 @ 12:17PM PT
      David Schrag

      Maybe not an urband legend yet, but consider what I saw on Facebook today and look at some of the blogs that have picked up on this, such as http://lafiga.firedoglake.com/2010/01/07/once-twice-three-times-a-lady-of-the-night-dc-cops-can-arrest-you-for-carrying-more-than-two-condoms/

      The REAL issue here is that police are confiscating condoms and then releasing sex workers back to the streets unprotected. That's getting lost in all the talk about how many condoms in your purse will get you arrested.

      BTW, has there been even one case documented in which a woman's possession of multiple condoms was the deciding factor in an arrest?

      Stacey you sound like an intelligent person and as such I imagine that you were horrified by all the "death panel" talk from last summer. While discussions of death panels may indeed have drawn attention to the health care reform debate, I submit that they did not do so in a constructive manner.

    • Reply to thread
  • Lara Nunes
    Jan 13, 2010 @ 09:51AM PT
    Lara Nunes

    If prositution was legal,how would this work for millions of innocent women and children who are forced into sex slavery? Will this give the right for the sex trafficers to continue to abuse women and children who are kidnapped from other countries and many of our american children and women and boys are also kidnapped and forced into sex slavery..

    David do you support Sex slavery?

    • David Schrag
      Jan 13, 2010 @ 10:11AM PT
      David Schrag

      Wow, OK, I really only wanted to chime in about the responsibility of bloggers to get their facts right. Lara, I am not an expert in this topic, but I believe the idea is that if you legalize and regulate prostitution you would cut down on sex slavery because workers in the industry would be more willing to seek help from police and other government agencies if they were in trouble. I'm sure it wouldn't be perfect. There are probably many people -- mostly undocumented immigrants -- in the farming, landscaping, and hospitality industries right now who are working against their will and could be considered slaves. But I would imagine there is less of a problem in those fields than there is in prostitution. I could be wrong.

    • Bryan Snowden
      Jan 13, 2010 @ 09:59PM PT
      Bryan Snowden

      David,

      While I would tend to agree with what you're saying above...

      Legalization & Regulation would seem (to me) preferable overall to an unregulated "workplace" for sex-workers of all types/sorts/gender.

      I should warn you that this blog/site is just not the place for that debate, that the prevailing view here (any & every time I've read anything here remotely rlating to the topic) - is that having any prostitution in society leads to "sex-slavery", period - end of arguement, (OR it becomes the beginning of a long, nasty arguement).

      I'm actually very hesistant/leary about even posting this reply - but I thought you should get a 'heads-up', before you go any further with that line of thought/debate.

      I'm truly sorry if this upsets and/or offends anyone... I believe in 'harm reduction' - however imperfect or problematic it may be, (in this case - that includes allowing sex-workers to carry as many condoms as they might have use for).

    • Lara Nunes
      Jan 13, 2010 @ 10:16PM PT
      Lara Nunes

      Bryan,

      why are you leary from posting your reply ? isnt this change.org about solving issues and trying to find away to stop something from happening or defend those who are innocent from being abused or other reasons.

      we are all adults here and I am sure David has a good head on his shoulders, there is nothing to gain if we keep silenced on the problems of sex slavery , since it affects the future generation of our children and other innocent people.

      Those who are silenced has something to hide or afraid to defend the innocents from bad people.

    • Reply to thread
  • Lara Nunes
    Jan 13, 2010 @ 11:10AM PT
    Lara Nunes

    David,

    When I asked the question I wanted your honest opinion, I can say at least you are honest and by me asking that question I was in no way of disrespecting you as a person.

    Regulating prostitution should be done when police actually arrest the PIMPS and the sex traffickers who abuse women and children who were forced into prostitution. This means when the women are arrested instead of treating the women as criminals they should try to built a trust with them by actually helping and not try to scare them into trusting the police.

    FEAR doesn’t get help, it only causes people to keep silence. There are some people who are kidnapped by bad people who do force them into farming and house workers and other things, but a lot of women and children are kidnapped for the sex slavery. Many of these people are from different countries and like i said many of our own women and children are also kidnapped and shipped to other parts of the world for sex slavery too. Have you notice a lot of beautiful women and children in USA are missing and these people are often times never found. Why is that? It is because no one cares or someone is turning a blind eye within our government and police agencies.

    I will post some good resources to help explain the importance about sex slavery and about how to stop it from happening.

    Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking (CAST)
    www.castla.org

    Coalition against Trafficking in Women: www.catwinternational.org

    Global Alliance against Traffic in Women (GAATW): www.gaatw.org

    End Child Prostitution and Trafficking/Child Wise: www.ecpat.org

    International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol): www.interpol.com

    The Protection Project:
    www.protectionproject.org

    Antislavery International:
    www.antislavery.org

    Free the Slaves:
    www.freetheslaves.net

    Shared Hope International
    www.sharedhope.org

     

     

  • Lara Nunes
    Jan 13, 2010 @ 01:46PM PT
    Lara Nunes

    Can Having Three Condoms In D.C. Really Get You Arrested?

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/01/13/can-having-three-condoms-in-d-c-get-you-arrested/

    More on Those Prostitution Free Zone Condom Regulations

    http://dcist.com/2010/01/more_on_those_prostitution_free_zon.php

  • T N
    Jan 15, 2010 @ 02:07AM PT
    T N

    Hey guys,

    I did some fact checking on this one, because it just didn't seem legit to me. The article above is very misleading and is spreading quite quickly. Here's an excerpt from one of the links I have included, which may help spread a little light on the situation. (Also, please read the links I have included. Possession of condoms is actually not grounds for arrest- thank God)

    "Neither the report nor the police regulations nor anything else outside the blogosphere, state that carrying condoms - whether three or three hundred - can get you arrested....One may approve or disapprove of DC's actual tactics to thwart prostitution, but boiling down their policy to "carrying condoms in DC will get you arrested" is preposterously misleading. Advocates do their causes no favors by repeating errant claims, and bloggers should take the time to drill down to the original source material before rebroadcasting inflammatory reports.....It's probably too late to prevent this urban legend from making the rounds. Look for it someday at snopes.com.."

    http://davidschrag.com/schrug/2010/01/13/mommy-where-do-urban-legends-come-from/... See More

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/01/13/can-having-three-condoms-in-d-c-get-you-arrested/

  • Shaktiva Irahs
    Jan 15, 2010 @ 08:09PM PT
    Shaktiva Irahs

    This is the response I got after signing this petition:

     

    Thank you for bringing your concerns to my attention. As you may be aware, prostitution in the District of Columbia has been a longstanding problem in certain neighborhoods and the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and other members of the law enforcement community are working diligently and using all resources available to address this problem.

    The Chief of Police has the authority to designate Prostitution Free Zones (PFZ), which are areas that have accumulated high levels of proven prostitution cases/activities in the present and/or past during late night and early morning hours. DC Code 22-2731 explains the definitions, designation of prostitution free zones, and violation penalties in more detail. 

    Therefore, a police officer cannot arrest a person for the sole reason of having two or more condoms in their possession whether they are inside or outside of a PFZ perimeter. The criminal offense associated with a PFZ involves the failure to disperse, after an officer issues such an order to two or more persons congregating on public space within the PFZ.   

    The District of Columbia supports the usage, distribution, and awareness of condoms as a means to promote general public safety health practices. The District is one of only two cities in the country with a large scale public sector condom distribution program, with a goal to distribute 3 million free condoms a year.

    For more information on the District's free condom distribution and education program, please feel free to visit the DC Department of Health's web site at: http://doh.dc.gov/doh/cwp/view,a,1371,q,602647.asp   I hope you find this information helpful. 

    Thank you for writing.

    Sincerely,

    Adrian M. Fenty, Mayor

  • Sheila Gredzinski
    Jan 18, 2010 @ 03:31PM PT
    Sheila Gredzinski

    wow what a crock! condoms are the new 'contaband' ahah!, who would have thought we would see the day, God I must be getting old..

  • Nathan Scheer
    May 01, 2010 @ 08:39PM PT
    Nathan Scheer

    Amazing, ly stupid! Bah.

    Simranjeet Singh

    www.simranjeet.com

  • Mariko Passion
    May 01, 2010 @ 09:49PM PT
    Mariko Passion

    @DavidS you are right on the money, and that is pretty good for someone who considers themselves not an expert on the topic.  Sex Workers believe that decriminalization would help us be able to regulate our own safer sex practices and not let the police or government decide that for us. Lara N is just using you as a pawn to sound off her prostituion prohibitionist campaigns.

    I want to clarify the idea that are being tossed around about whether possession of condoms can be the SOLE REASON FOR YOUR ARREST.  The answer is NO, HOWEVER if you are being SET UP by the police in a PROSTITUTION STING OPERATION and you do not know your rights so well that it becomes your very gutt instinct to yell out I DO NOT CONSENT TO ANY SEARCHES faster than 3 ARMED OFFICERS can BUST THROUGH AN ADJACENT HOTEL DOOR then they will be immediately on top of your purse or person where you stashed away the fake money/prop for your arrest. This is how that law pans out for workers who work indoors not like in the PFZs in DC.  Both indoor/outdoor workers fear arrest and they fear being caught with incriminating evidence (drugs or too many condoms).  Officers search your belongings to fish out the money that they gave you to bust you exchanging sex for money and they look for additional evidence that could make their misdemeanor arrest turn into a felony.  (Drug possession is the most common one used).  Condoms are automatic ADDITIONAL and EASILY OBTAINED evidence.  The other evidence they easily obtain is your cell phone w/ all its work texts, numbers and voicemails.  Because I have been arrested before, and have seen my condoms, lube and other safer sex supplies used as EVIDENCE AGAINST ME I now do not take more than 1 condom with me in my pocket whenever I go to the areas that are known for sting operations...1 condom is not enough folks!  I am a professional, and I NEED LOTS OF LUBE.  you need 2 condoms in case one breaks or gets messed up or dirty.  I hate just having 1 condom.  But, these are the breaks as long as prostitution remains a crime.   if you think this is bullshit then please, help sex workers change the laws!  Decriminalize SAFE SEX WORK!  If pimps are violating labor laws or commiting other crimes against us, we won't be able to come forward with those claims until our work is seen as work, and sexworkers are seen as humans not criminals. 

     

     

     

     

     

  • Deanna Jackson
    Jun 22, 2010 @ 11:57AM PT
    Deanna Jackson

    Condoms prevent HIV and STDs!  What is wrong with these people?  The more people using condoms and practicing safe sex, the less spreading of HIV and STDs!  The folks who put this is the law have seriously flunked sex ed...

  • Rebecca Last Name
    Jul 12, 2010 @ 12:39PM PT
    Rebecca Last Name

    So ridiculous I thought I was reading The Onion for a bit.

  • Add a Comment

    Comment Policy

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

close

This user's Profile page is not public. They have restricted it to only their friends.

Already a Member?

Create an Account

You must create a Change.org account to complete this action. If you already have an account click here.