QotD: “the reason why boys are made to wear blue and girls are violently discarded and burned right after birth”


Found at Next Years Girl

QotD: Isn’t sex more important and socially relevant than a joke?

people who think it’s wrong to make jokes about rape or slavery or paedophilia but think it’s fun and sexy to re-enact it when no-one’s looking


isn’t sex more important and socially relevant than a joke

and isn’t what you do privately a bigger indicator of your character than what you do publicly

It is. And being able to engage in safe, consensual play often indicates a high degree of empathy and intellectual and emotional maturity. Stop shaming people’s sexuality.

hear that?

beating the shit out of each other, using rape, racism, and pedophilia as some kind of super sexy funtimes game means you are empathetic towards the people who suffer under these acts of violence!

comedians who tell rape jokes are deffo just being empathetic too! right?

you’re being intellectual and mature when you use other people’s suffering for your own sexual pleasure!

yeah, I AM shaming you for your sexuality, because it’s built on the exploitation of women, POC and minors, and that is something you SHOULD be ashamed of.

From Pixiepienix

QotD: “if that never happened irl you wouldn’t have your precious kink”

people who get off on pedo-play – they say it’s just pretend

but like

if it didn’t exist in the real world, there would be nothing for you to pretend and therefore get off on

your sexual pleasure literally depends on the existence of the real-life act of raping children

if that never happened irl you wouldn’t have your precious kink

why would you want to hop online and get mouthy about defending something like that? like, “I know children have to be raped for my kink to exist but like, um, orgasms! also don’t shame me ur so oppressive.”

how does someone go through that thought process I don’t even know

and then always carrying on about it and posting stories and pictures whist saying it stops in the bedroom, when for you it obvs doesn’t, as you feel the need to yammer on about it on public platforms

if it really was “just in the bedroom” then how come I know it even exists? because bad as it is, you can’t just leave it there, can you? you have to push it out into the shared reality of victims where they stumble across it and have to relive that shit it’s fuckin cruel


“Eight held in human trafficking investigation”

Eight men have been arrested in connection with human trafficking and sexual exploitation, police said.

An investigation was launched last month in Bristol after two women, aged 18 and 21, reported incidents of sexual exploitation committed against them at a property in the Eastville area of the city.

The women also gave details surrounding the arrangement of forced marriages, Avon and Somerset Police said.

As a result of police inquiries, six warrants were carried out at four addresses in Bristol and two in the Hockley area of Birmingham.

A 42-year-old man from Birmingham was arrested on suspicion of trafficking, rape and assault. He has been bailed for these offences but has been remanded in custody in relation to an outstanding warrant.

All the other men arrested were from Bristol.

Two men, aged 38 and 36, who were arrested on suspicion of trafficking have been released on bail.

A 24-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of money laundering and was also bailed.

Full article here

QotD: “I don’t think you’re ready to be part of this political movement”

You make me not even want to be a feminist. Your the reason people hate feminism.

Well if my analysis is all it takes to push you away, then I don’t think you’re ready to be part of this political movement.

I’ve had a lot of this. Both online and irl. It’s a THREAT.

We are raped and murdered for being women. Feminism is the movement that aims to free us from that. So when someone says the above, recognise that THIS is what they are really saying:

“If you don’t shut the fuck up about men raping and murdering you, I am going to advocate, through passivity, more of the same. Either directly from me, or from the men who have access to you who don’t appreciate mouthy women. Toe the line or die.”

These people have never and will never give one single shit about women’s freedom or safety. The most they could ever care for is is in a perfunctory socially-acceptable way.

See: liberalism, humanism, egalitarianism.

From Pixiepienix and Evil Feminist.

“‘Women will die’ as legal aid becomes more difficult for victims of domestic abuse to get”

In recent months, domestic violence has never been far from the headlines, from reports on widespread police failures in handling cases to the closure of specialist refuges because of cuts. Most recently, the government announced a consultation on how the law could be strengthened by explicitly stating that domestic abuse covers coercive and controlling behaviour as well as physical harm.

This week it is on the agenda once again, with a fresh challenge to restrictions on legal aid for domestic abuse victims that were introduced 18 months ago as part of sweeping changes to the law and swingeing cuts to legal aid budgets.

On Monday, the Law Society held an Access to Justice day at which its new president, Andrew Caplen, launched a fresh push to persuade policymakers to revisit the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offender Act 2012 – or Laspo as it is known – and amend what he says are significant restrictions on the legal assistance now available to victims. “The ability to get legal aid for domestic violence is much tougher” in the wake of Laspo, he says. “It’s not that legal aid is not available, but it’s harder to get it.”

Caplen plans to make domestic abuse a priority for the Law Society over the next year and, if possible, help to remove some of the obstacles to legal aid.

The reasons that victims of abuse might need legal aid are manifold, ranging from child contact issues – say where children have remained with a partner after a mother has fled violence – to applying for an injunction against a perpetrator. After Laspo and the regulations that accompanied it, civil legal aid advice and representation was no longer routinely available for a range of cases.

The law, which came into force across England and Wales in April 2013, removed almost all private family law areas from the scope of civil legal aid. Domestic violence was named as an exception, but only under specific circumstances or with strict “evidential” eligibility requirements and a slew of conditions attached – something campaigners have argued puts onerous obstacles in the way of access to justice for the poorest and most vulnerable victims.

Campaigners and lawyers have also warned that with more than £300m to be wiped off the total civil legal aid budget by 2014-15 it would mean fewer experts for victims to turn to. The bill had a tortuous passage through parliament with peers refusing to pass it multiple times – and even when it did get through, it was with numerous amendments.

Yet a number of major hurdles remain, say campaigners, such as the requirement that victims produce mandated “evidence” that they have been domestically abused. The list of approved evidence includes a letter from a GP, time spent at a refuge or proof that a place was needed but none was available, and verification that an abusive partner has a conviction or is on bail. Caplen points to a number of serious problems with these “evidential requirements”, such as that victims of domestic violence frequently don’t report their abuse due to shame or fear, meaning documentation such as a letter from a GP proving their abuse is simply impossible to get. He points to research carried out by Rights of Women, Women’s Aid and Women’s Aid Wales a year after Laspo was introduced, which found that 43% of victims reported not having the prescribed documentation required to successfully apply for legal aid – meaning they couldn’t even get to the first stage of meeting with a solicitor.

Despite non-physical abuse being included in the definition of domestic violence, it is almost impossible to prove psychological abuse, as there is unlikely to be any documentary proof that would meet the evidence requirements, says Caplen.

Another significant obstacle is that those who have experienced abuse must prove it took place within 24 months of making a legal aid application. Given that many victims sometimes take years to come forward, imposing such an arbitrary limit shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature of domestic violence and of coercion and control over an extended time period, says Polly Neate, chief executive of Women’s Aid.

Emma Scott, director of Rights of Women, describes Laspo as a “fundamental attack on the rule of law”. “There are women who tell us that without [access to] legal aid they are staying in abusive relationships. It is not over-dramatic to say that women will die,” she says.

She points to some of the findings of a post-Laspo survey in which 46% of respondents took no action as a result of not being able to apply for legal aid while 25% represented themselves in court and almost a third paid a solicitor out of their own pocket. “We have found that victims are borrowing money and going into debt [to get legal help],” she adds. She is critical too of the “exceptional funding” scheme put in place by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) when Laspo was enacted that was supposed to help people most in need. The scheme has come in for considerable criticism because the application process is extremely complex and there has been a miniscule success rate of applications. Scott concludes: “It is simply not the safety net the government said it would be.”

Continue reading here

QotD: “the expectations of idiots”

There is plenty of evidence to show that boys have their quiet contemplation and girls their physical exuberance leeched out of them by the expectations of idiots, but no evidence at all for the central idiocy itself.

Zoe Williams (this is rather out of context, since it comes from an unfavorable review of a book on education, but I like the wording a lot).

QotD: “Feminism is the new misogyny: On ‘Belle Knox feminism’ and the new backlash”

This just in from the backlash: everything is feminism’s fault and we are the real woman-haters.

You knew that, didn’t you? That it was not men, but women — and not just women, but feminists — who were responsible for things like violence against women and sexual repression. It’s a pretty good trick, actually, because guess who gets off scot-free? Men. Also, oppressive systems of power. With women busy attacking other women for their own oppression, who has time to fight the real enemy?

As illogical as it sounds on paper, this phenomenon actually makes a lot of sense.

The most obvious explanation for feminist-hating among women (or even among feminists) is that we live in a culture that teaches us to hate women — that it’s acceptable to hate women, that it’s sexy to hate women, and that it’s funny to hate women. We see this normalized hatred of women manifested in a number of ways:

This is the first few paragraphs of a long essay by Meghan Murphy at Feminist Current, well worth reading in full.

QotD: “joyless, passionless, humourless, incurious about real people’s real lives … the compulsive persistence of the porn addict”

The photographer and film-maker who made his sensational debut with Kids, nearly 20 years ago, returns yet again to the activity of gloating over young people’s bodies, with huge amounts of explicit sex. But the party looks to be well and truly over.

In fact, it looks as if it has gone straight to the hungover-and-can’t-face-clearing-up stage before any fun has been had by anyone. This film is joyless, passionless, humourless, incurious about real people’s real lives. There is no energy or verve, just the compulsive persistence of the porn addict.

Peter Bradshaw

Someone couldn’t answer this question by themselves

exploited black teens.com-racist porn?

This is one of the search engine terms used to find this blog today.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 293 other followers