One of the workshops today will challenge so-called ‘sex positive’ thinking, the idea that all sex that isn’t obviously coerced is good, that ‘sexual liberation’ can only mean saying yes to any and all sexual activity. I ask you to take that critical thinking and apply it to the sex industry.
To be truly positive about sex is to say that sex actually matters, that being forced, directly or indirectly, into sexual activity you don’t want is wrong and is abuse, that the right to be able to say no to sex is just as important as the right to be able to say yes.
liberal feminism for many women, is a desperate way to try to achieve liberation with the only tools they think they have.
For men, it is the feminism they always wanted. Women catering to men and thinking it is empowering.
The Northern Ireland Assembly has voted by 81 to 10 in favour of making it a crime to pay for sex.
MLAs spent several hours on Monday debating the measures, which formed part of a private member’s bill on human trafficking and exploitation.
Clause six of the bill makes it illegal for someone to obtain sexual services in exchange for payment.
Northern Ireland is the first part of the UK to vote in favour of the measure.
There is still some way to go before the bill becomes law, but the prospect of a ban on paying for sex in Northern Ireland has taken a significant step forward.
Research published last week suggested that about 17,500 men pay for sex each year in Northern Ireland.
The study by Queen’s University, Belfast, was commissioned by the Department of Justice in response to Lord Morrow’s proposed bill.
Meanwhile, another poll has indicated that almost 80% of people in Northern Ireland support the criminalisation of paying for sex.
The Ipsos Mori survey found support for the Human Trafficking Bill was strongest among people aged between 16 to 34.
I’m not going to reblog the post because I don’t want to contribute to hijacking what was meant to be a moment of solidarity for a victim but jesus christ if your politics cause you to believe it’s important to put “friendly reminders that radfems are evil!” on posts about a radical feminist who was raped then you are a garbage person, your politics are absolutely worthless, and you need to fuck off to a mountain where no one but the rocks and lizards will be bothered by your horribleness.
The Conservative government’s prostitution bill — Bill C-36 — passed in the House of Commons Monday night by a 156-124 vote.
In 2007, a case challenging Canada’s prostitution laws as unconstitutional resulted in the Supreme Court of Canada throwing out the laws criminalizing pimping, communicating for the purposes of prostitution, and running a brothel. The federal government was therefore tasked with coming up with new laws.
The new legislation, brought forth in June by Justice Minister Peter McKay, explicitly names pimps and johns as exploiters, criminalizing the purchase of sex while decriminalizing prostituted women.
The bill states that the Parliament of Canada “has grave concerns about the exploitation that is inherent in prostitution and the risks of violence posed to those who engage in it” and “recognizes the social harm caused by the objectification of the human body and the commodification of sexual activity.”
The intention behind this kind of legislation is to work towards an eventual end to prostitution and follows in the footsteps of countries like Sweden, Norway, and Iceland. The EU passed a resolution last year encouraging member states to “reevaluate their policies on sex work,” with the Nordic model as a framework.
That this legislation was considered and then adopted by the Canadian government in its current form is thanks, in large part, to feminists across the country who worked tirelessly on the issue, ensuring a feminist analysis was central to the legislation and bringing forth research, studies, analysis, evidence from the front line, and testimonies of their own experiences working in the sex industry.
The bill must now pass the Senate before being proclaimed into law. The stay in the Bedford decision expires December 20.
Anonymous: Why don’t you like the FB and Apple policy to freeze an employees eggs? The proposed solution of providing more flexible arrangements doesn’t appear to solve the problem. Leaving a career when one is fighting to establish themselves is detrimental, whether it be for motherhood, illness, etc. It seems that the solution is to “be there” during that critical window, which is what the policy provides. What am I missing?
Two reasons: first, it seems like yet another fake benefit that’s being touted by a company wanting to seem progressive and pro-worker when in reality it’s really designed as yet another method of forcing employees to center their lives around the company instead of actually maintaining a work/life balance.
Secondly, as it said in the commentary, this doesn’t actually do anything to combat the overarching culture wherein women are punished for our reproductive capacity and expected not only to be primary caregivers to our children but also to maintain successful careers (see how men are never asked whether they can “have it all” when it’s culturally acceptable for them to leave the majority of the burden of maintaining the family and home to their female partners.) Rather than creating generous maternity leave, encouraging paternity leave, giving better options for child care, flexible hours, work from home, etc., the answer is “freeze your eggs so we can work you to death!” It’s only critical to “be there” during that window because the culture of the workforce makes it so. Basically what they’re doing is admitting they have no interest in changing harmful attitudes, just provide a little compensation for giving up your life for them.
QotD: “Anita Sarkeesian cancels talk at Utah State University over threats of ‘the deadliest school shooting’ in US history”
The feminist pop culture critic Anita Sarkeesian has been forced to cancel a talk at Utah State University, after a threat of a “Montreal Massacre-style attack”.
Sarkeesian, who is best known for her YouTube series “Tropes v Women in Video Games”, assessing various anti-feminist trends in gaming, was scheduled to talk at the university on Wednesday, when the unsigned email was sent.
The author of the email threatened that if the talk was not cancelled, they would carry out an attack in the style of the 1989 Montreal massacre, when Marc Lépine murdered 14 women, claiming he was “fighting feminism”.
“I have at my disposal a semi-automatic rifle, multiple pistols, and a collection of pipe bombs,” the letter said. “This will be the deadliest school shooting in American history and I’m giving you a chance to stop it.”
“You have 24 hours to cancel Sarkeesian’s talk … Anita Sarkeesian is everything wrong with the feminist woman, and she is going to die screaming like the craven little whore that she is if you let her come to USU. I will write my manifesto in her spilled blood, and you will all bear witness to what feminist lies and poison have done to the men of America.”
Initially, Sarkeesian stated her intention to hold the talk despite the threat, but was forced to back down after discovering that it was impossible to prevent guns being taken to the event.
“Forced to cancel my talk at USU after receiving death threats because police wouldn’t take steps to prevent concealed firearms at the event,” she tweeted. “Requested pat downs or metal detectors after mass shooting threat but because of Utah’s open carry laws police wouldn’t do firearm searches.”
It is amazing sometimes how much men hate women, and how terrified men are of even the small gains women have made. Men see anything other than women’s complete subjugation as men loosing out, as men being oppressed; they don’t even want meager ‘equality’, they want total domination.
Revenge pornography – sharing sexually explicit images of former partners without their consent – is to become a criminal offence punishable by up to two years in prison.
The legislation is to be introduced into the criminal justice and courts bill that is currently going through parliament, the justice secretary, Chris Grayling, has announced.
There has been mounting political pressure to outlaw the practice of humiliating former lovers by posting intimate pictures of them online.
Among those pressing for a change to the law has been the former culture secretary, Maria Miller. Others have argued that the problem is already covered by existing laws against obscenity or blackmail.
The new offence will cover the release of explicit images both online and in the form of printed pictures.
Of course, the problem with this is that it is only meant to protect ‘normal’ women, if the images are from a porn set, they won’t be covered by the law, no matter how much distress or harm they cause the woman in the image, or how unethically the images were produced – she signed a contract (who cares if the contract wasn’t followed, if the only way she could get the money she needed was by signing the piece of paper), she ‘chose’ it, ‘those’ women are not seen as deserving of protection.
Malala Yousafzai once wrote: “We realise the importance of our voices only when we are silenced. I was shot on a Tuesday at lunchtime, one bullet, one gunshot heard around the world.”
Two years and a day after her attempted assassination by Taliban gunmen, that shot continued to reverberate with the Nobel committee’s announcement that the 17-year-old Pakistani schoolgirl is to share the peace prize, its youngest recipient ever.
When the news broke, Malala was in a chemistry class at Edgbaston high school for girls, Birmingham, far away from the mountain-fringed city of Mingora in the picturesque Swat Valley where she was born, and where she began her outspoken campaign for the right to education, and where she almost died on 9 October 2012.
Also, her co-prize winner, Kailash Satyarthi, seems like a great person as well:
Last week he was on a raid on a factory suspected of using children as cheap labour. In his 34 years as an activist, Satyarthi has freed tens of thousands of young Indians, some just five or six years old, forced into servitude by unscrupulous agents, businessmen, landowners and brothel owners.
recorded rough sex sounds from my daughters room