16 years for raping, attempting to murder and producing porn of a minor? Only in Australia
TRIGGER WARNING: Rape, torture, attempted murder and the list goes on. ________________________________________________
Yesterday morning a horrific rapist and attempted murderer was sentenced to one of the most trivial sentences I’ve seen in this country. Australia is known as one of the worlds ‘pedophile paradises’ for it’s conveniently lenient laws and sentences regarding rape and sexual crimes. What most people don’t know is that compared to many countries Australia has lax and rather unjust laws all around.
Michael Hermogenes pleaded guilty to attempted murder, rape, indecent assault, producing child pornography, arson and theft- all of which he was found guilty of.
He was sentenced to 16 years.
Now, even taking rape, arson and theft out of the picture- 16 years for cold-blooded attempted murder, or child pornography? A sadly short, and sadly common sentence in Australia. So much so that during sentancing the Judge stated a “very stern” sentence was necessary to deter others from similar crimes. And truly, 16 years in Australia is a long sentence especially for rape.
Hermogenes was a church leader who was in a direct position of power over his 14 year old victim. He went to her school posing as her father to take her home early. He took her to her home, plied her with a substantial amount of alcohol and then took pornographic photos of her. When she was not interested in going any further he strangled her with her own stockings until she passed out- when he viciously raped her. He then dragged her naked, unconscious and violated to the bathroom where he left her face down. He then went to purchase petrol (gasoline, fuel for our US readers), which he took calmly back to the house. He made a pile of clothing and other goods on top of the unconscious girl, scattered some flammable goods about the bathroom (deodorant cans, hairspray etc) and then poured the fuel and set it alight- leaving her to die.
Except she didn’t die. She spent a year in hospital with over 50% of her body covered in full depth burns. She also suffered from a massive catalogue of injuries that included having part of a foot amputated, infection that led to loss of skin grafts, bleeding from gastric ulcers, a disorder relating to blood clotting that required multiple transfusions, and kidney failure requiring readmission to the Intensive Care Unit.
The teenager will never be able to drive, has suffered severe damage to her vocal chords and has two sets of pressure garments which she needs to wear for 22 to 23 hours a day and requires a silicone dressing to be worn over all raised scar areas. She will need daily care for the rest of her life. Her mother had to leave work permanatly to give her around the clock attention- and along with the destruction of their home this has thrown them into further poverty.
For all of this: He was sentenced to 16 years. And this was considered a harsh sentance: to make an example to the community. 16 years for a 25 year old isn’t a long time at all, and he will be in protective custody.
If you think this is wrong- help us to make a difference.
Australians: Please let your government know that 16 years for rape, attempted murder, torture, producing child pornography and the lifelong sentence for underage victims isn’t good enough. I’ll be writing to every damned person in parliament I can think of about this- and I’m going to ask the leader of my political party directly. Apart from that I’m not sure what to do. What can we do to make laws change, and punishments reflect what society expects?
I’m making a documentary focused on sexual fluidity and the broad range of sexuality. Tumblr users express a wide range of opinions and I hope to get as many of you to share your views as possible. I have created a series of questions related to sexuality that I would like answered in a video or audio submission. My goal is to get a wide range of answers that I can edit into a full-length product. If you or any of your followers what to participate, please come visit the project's tumblr page: sexualfluidityproject. (Cannot add link, just add tumblr(.)com to the end)
I’d appreciate the help, and hopefully this will be something positive for the LGBT community.
A shout out to all followers who may be interested in this project: CLICKY HERE.
“The point of public relations slogans like “Support our troops” is that they don’t mean anything… That’s the whole point of good propaganda.You want to create a slogan that nobody’s going to be against, and everybody’s going to be for.Nobody knows what it means, because it doesn’t mean anything.Its crucial value is that it diverts your attention from a question that does mean something: Do you support our policy? That’s the one you’re not allowed to talk about.”—
If you don’t like the choices a woman makes about whom she sleeps with and when, you are more than welcome not to sleep with her. But to continue to judge single women for having the audacity to sleep with who they want to—something that single men are generally congratulated for—is to perpetuate an antagonistic dynamic between the sexes that has seen its day.
This is a great little article. I only take issue with the last bit:
If the ethical argument is lost on you here, think of it this way, guys: does it really benefit you to make women feel hesitant to express their sexuality?
That’s the beginning of a slippery slope; using feminism as a device for manipulating women into having sex. While I wholeheartedly believe women should not feel obligated to remain chaste because of society’s expectations, I believe just as strongly that they shouldn’t feel obligated to have promiscuous sex because society is going to call them repressed or a bad feminist if they don’t.
Guys, think about the pressure that’s put upon you to have sex. Think about the fact that when directed at us, virgin is a slur. The less you fuck, the less masculine, the less powerful they think you are. If we push it too hard, we’ll stick women in the same place.
I definitely encourage you to push for the sexual liberation of women, but tread carefully, because this isn’t about the sex—it’s about the women.
In addition to being only the second war criminal charged with rape as genocide, she is the first woman ever to be tried for crimes against humanity. The roles of rape during war, and of a female political figure in the commission of mass rape, underscore vital points about the changing nature of gender and power. While crimes against women are perhaps being taken more seriously, the integration of women into political structures clearly does not prevent such crimes from happening.
Nyiramasuhuko’s trial follows the 1998 trial of Jean- Paul Akayesu for rape as genocide during the 1994 massacre in Rwanda. Akayesu’s conviction marked a vital transition from the understanding of rape as a tool during warfare — shifting it from a “crime against humanity” to “genocide,” a crime against a race. Rape is now considered genocidal because of its strategic use to infiltrate ethnic lines and terminate persecuted groups. Employed as a eugenic method from the Book of Genesis to the present, before 1998 rape had never been singled out from other forms of ethnic conflict and warfare.
“I am betting nine out of 10 times, when a woman asks for a female detective the story is going to be untrue.”—Lt. Adam Lamboy, commander of the Manhattan Special Victims Squad, in a story about how the NYPD Special Victims Division does its job, explaining that if a woman who reports being…
“Princeton University psychologist Susan Fiske took brain scans of heterosexual men while they looked at sexualised images of women wearing bikinis. She found that the part of their brains that became activated was pre-motor - areas that usually light up when people anticipate using tools. The men were reacting to the images as if the women were objects they were going to act on. Particularly shocking was the discovery that the participants who scored highest on tests of hostile sexism were those most likely to deactivate the part of the brain that considers other people’s intentions (the medial prefrontal cortex) while looking at the pictures. These men were responding to images of the women as if they were non-human.”—The Equality Illusion, Kay Banyard (via bangbangblonde)
Awesome article about women and how we can do our part to ensure we bring young ladies into the word thinking about things that matter.
That we have the opportunity - from a young age, to shape a young woman’s mind to believe in herself, to not dumb herself down, and to appreciate EXACTLY who she is and to let that freak flag fly.
Try this the next time you meet a little girl. She may be surprised and unsure at first, because few ask her about her mind, but be patient and stick with it. Ask her what she’s reading. What does she like and dislike, and why? There are no wrong answers. You’re just generating an intelligent conversation that respects her brain. For older girls, ask her about current events issues: pollution, wars, school budgets slashed. What bothers her out there in the world? How would she fix it if she had a magic wand? You may get some intriguing answers. Tell her about your ideas and accomplishments and your favorite books. Model for her what a thinking woman says and does.
Here’s to changing the world, one little girl at a time.
But how would she be able to tell the difference between someone who is a lazy typist and someone who legitimately has trouble spelling? The short answer is, she can’t tell the difference, and assuming that every person who seems to be a bit lazy with their spelling is doing it on purpose can be ableist.
I have updated the post to clarify, and I hope I have done so efficiently. Firstly; I would like to point out that I understand that many people are not able to express themselves fluently with English for a number of reasons (Age, education, disability, ESL etc) whose posts, replies and submissions I have no problem with.
Secondly I’d like to point out (and to answer your question); This is specifically referring to people who as stated in the original post ‘change their tune’ when angry and then decide to type in chatspeak or just decide to ignore the space bar and fullstop entirely so they can get their opinions/insults/backpedaling posted as fast as they can.
The reason I can tell the difference between the above and a person who had legitimate trouble with spelling is because they don’t have trouble spelling originally and change their tune- specifically when angry. As explicitly stated; this only applies to people who decide to be lazy typers when things don’t go their way- but who have proven often numerous times they have no grapples with spelling.
After this I will no longer be replying to YOUR posts. I would like to make it clear this is not because I don’t like people voicing concerns or differences in opinion- You’re account is clearly a troll account as it states: “This is an anti-feminist, egalitarian blog. In my opinion, feminism is both irrelevant and extremely sexist.”
A note to those who don't wish to be disregarded as trolls:
Chances are if we getting into discussion about a topic, you will want to keep debating it and have your say. However; Please be aware of the anti-trolling policy in place on this tumblr. As it states:
"Posts submitted which are purposely defamatory, rude, ignorant, misogynistic or troll like in nature will NOT be posted or responded too. Taking your women-hating sentiments and childishness elsewhere and don’t waste your time. "
I want to be able to engage in dialogue; especially with people who may not agree with the views posted here. However trolling, harassment and immaturity are not welcome here. So; here are some tips to a few people who have replied to posts and submitted posts to this tumblr:
—————————— HANDY TIPS TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY WHEN REPLYING / SUBMITTING:
1. Calling yourself, others or by use the word ‘Feminazi’ you aren’t doing yourself any favors. It clearly shows you are either a troll, are trying to be blatantly offensive or that you aren’t very bright: because no good person in their right minds would compare themselves to a Nazi.
2. Using other defamatory and offensive language and phrasing (examples from our latest troll: ’jesus tittyfucking christ’, ‘motherfucker’, ‘fucking’, ‘dipshit’, ‘fucking suck my dick, already. goddamn.’) doesn’t help your case. It makes you look rude, immature and like you aren’t intelligent enough to make you’re point without swearing, being vulgar or being violent/aggressive. And of course: makes you look like a troll.
3. Writing without any kind of punctuation or grammar just because you are angry and want to get it all out fast is annoying when your other posts are correct and concise. If you decied2replyl eik this thn and swear when you’re non-heated arguments are nothing like that it just shows you aren’t serious or well thought out in your opinions. It’s rushed and lazy. (Note: This only applies when you’re previous/prior posts are grammatically correct/concise and you have changed simply because you’re angry and lazy- not because you are disabled, learning or English is not your first language.)
4. Insulting or threatening people who do not agree with you falls into number two. I should not even have to point out that it’s inappropriate and what it entails. As stated earlier; It makes you look rude, immature and like you aren’t intelligent enough to make you’re point without swearing, being vulgar or being violent/aggressive. And of course: makes you look like a troll.
A tip for all nice guys: You may not think you're sexually harassing but...
Generally, we collectively recognize the groping and grabbing that happens with alarming frequency on public transportation, for example, as problematic—but many of the men who rightfully disdain this behavior nonetheless engage in casual touching without consent in other contexts.
We euphemize nonconsensual but nonviolent touching as “making a pass” or even, simply, “being friendly.” But it is not friendly; it is entitled.
This tends to be a point of contention for straight/bisexual men who can’t imagine how it’s possible to meet, date, flirt with, and eventually become sexually intimate with a woman without ever touching her without her consent. The worry tends to be expressed as, “It won’t be sexy or smooth if I ask,” but that’s not true. Asking a woman, “May I take your arm?” or “May I kiss you?” is actually quite likely to be considered both sexy and smooth, with the additional bonus of being respectful.
What’s decidedly not sexy and smooth, however, is making a woman feel uncomfortable, or even triggering her, if she’s a trauma survivor, by touching her without her consent.
i read a post secret the other day that was like “i bought my 14 year old daughter a vibrator at her request when i offered it to her. i want her to grow up with a healthy attitude towards sexuality. i’d never tell anyone this because they’d label me a bad mother”. and i was immediately blown away…
I feel this piece while making valid points completely denies many facets of pornography, its performers and its consumers and by doing so is somewhat invalid.
The attitude that all porn performers are victims; do not really want to do pornography, and that those people who think they do are just brainwashed by the patriarchy completely disregards and undermines the thought, intelligence and free will of the individual in question- which is oppressing, dehumanizing and degrading. Just because someone does not agree with you and makes choices you may not does not mean that they are not intelligent, cohesive and acting of their own unbiased free will.
It is also completely anti-kink or fetish- including non-violent kink. Many fetishes are not choices and most who practice them do so safely, sanely, respectfully and consensualy. (Thank you to dreaming-backwards for pointing this out.)
“In Tanith Carey’s new book, Where Has My Little Girl Gone?, the author encourages parents to protect their daughters for as long as possible from the harmful world of “sexualisation” and raunch culture. This is a stunningly defeatist attitude: after all, if it is harmful for an eight-year-old to engage with a culture that encourages her to starve herself and shames her for not looking like a porn star, why is it any less harmful at 18, or 28?”—Laurie Penny: The Independent (via thesexmyth)
Yale University didn’t wait for federal civil rights officials to determine whether the presence of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity was contributing to a hostile sexual environment. The University has banned George W. Bush’s old frat from the campus for five years.
This is a pretty historical victory. While it’s only small it’s a great step in the right direction Thank you Yale for doing the right thing.
"Sex workers face deep-seated stigmas which mean that if we don’t disclose our stories of tragedy and the demeaning experiences we have faced we run the risk of not being believed by many in the feminist movement. This has to stop, because we don’t want to perform our ‘tragedy porn’ for you.” writes Elena Jeffreys.
People are arguing about this again, so lemme whip out the book.
First of all, let me just say that historically, every single myth about centaurs, apart from myths about Chiron (a scholar who is basically “the good one”, and who is echoed in HP in the character Firenze), is about them raping women. They were born from Ixion’s attempt to kidnap and rape the goddess Hera — they are, on some level, an elemental manifestation of rape. That is their mythic function. JKR is well-versed in classical mythology and infused a great deal of it into this series.
Now, the centaurs carry Umbridge off into the forest. Then, in the book’s denouement, we get this passage (on page 849 of the standard American hardcover):
Since she had returned to the castle she had not, as far as any of them knew, uttered a single word. Nobody really knew what was wrong with her either. Her usually neat mousy hair was very untidy and there were bits of twig and leaf in it, but otherwise she seemed to be quite unscathed.
“Madam Pomfrey says she’s just in shock,” whispered Hermione.
“Sulking, more like,” said Ginny.
“Yeah, she shows signs of life if you do this,” said Ron, and with his tongue he made soft clip-clopping noises. Umbridge sat bolt upright, looking wildly around.
“Anything wrong, Professor?” called Madam Pomfrey, poking her head around her office door.
“No… no…” said Umbridge, sinking back into her pillows, “no, I must have been dreaming…”
Hermione and Ginny muffled their laughter in the bedclothes.
You can read this passage however you want, but I think the subtext is pretty clear? Obviously the kids don’t get it, but I think anyone who’s ever read a centaur myth or knows about centaur context can pick up what JKR is putting down here.
This is actually really terrifying. Umbridge was awful, I’m not denying that. But taking any character, especially a powerful woman, and punishing them with rape, is so horrifyingly problematic that I just, I can’t. It’s not okay.
Okay, the whole “a fetus is not a baby” argument is starting to wear on me. I get the idea behind it and the POINT of the argument in that it demands that the person bearing the fetus be respected to make decisions about their own body. I agree with this 100%. Also, within Islam, contrary to some modern thinking, abortion was more accepted than people realize - specifically (but not only limited to) because if the life of the mother was at risk Islam states that the life of the living is of more value than the life of the not-yet-living. The Qur’an also states that the soul (ruh) is not placed within the fetus until a certain point that is much later than conception - at 120 days - and that prior to that abortion is an accepted choice because it is not yet a baby. So I get it. I really really do.
BUT, every time I see posts that are screaming about how a fetus is not a baby, a fetus is not a baby, a fetus is not a baby
all *I* can think about is that I lost - by miscarriage - eight fetuses (that I know for sure). Fetuses that were wanted. Fetuses that were prior to 120 days and therefore logically I know did not have their soul yet. But TO ME they were real, and they were babies. They were loved, they were named, they were deaths that were very difficult for me (and their fathers) to deal with.
So while we are wont to scream so loudly that a fetus is not a baby and therefore it is not murder for the person carrying them to decide for themselves if they wish to continue to do so or not - and I agree with this - could we take a moment to realize that saying they are not babies also erases the experience of people who miscarry and are grieving over their loss(es)?
Powerful. Thank you so much for sharing this; it’s something I’ve never thought about before. Let’s open our ears, eyes, and hearts to this side of the story.
Sorry it’s in Farsi (Persian), but the report basically says that a gang-raped woman by 50 men is being arrested for violating the law.
[Edit] Iran has also moved to ban the special UN envoy for Human Rights in Iran from visiting or investigating cases of human rights abuse.
Please excuse me while I vomit into my mouth. The translation was pretty rough; I’m looking for more sources but as far as I can tell the woman was listening to music in an ‘alluring/sexy garden’ which is what attracted the 40-50 men to rape her; so it is of course her fault. Can anyone fluently read Persian?
I am a frequent visitor to the #language and #linguistics tags, and all too often I see a feminist—who clearly has no idea about actual linguistic studies—use the findings of a singular study (most recently, I’ve seen many posts about the works of Lera Boroditsky) saying that engendered languages are misogynistic and detrimental to women. I will explain how this view is incorrect.
I consider myself a supporter of destroying the barrier between men and women—the social and legal constructs that dictate what is masculine and what is feminine and how society should treat each. However,
I know there are a few of you who have studied linguistics; and I know my partner has a specific interest in the topic so I am reblogging this to hear from you.
The OP brings up 3 main points, the first one I see as valid. The other two however… No. Personally I think the OP is missing the point of the argument of why gendered words are offensive and misogynistic because OP is taking language out of context with the society we all live in where to be feminine is to be less than masculine. When you look at words as ‘just words’ it is different than when you look at words in social, real world context.
When you consider in every country in the world women are considered less than men in almost every way, and things considered feminine traits are almost always weak, passive, ‘simple’, emotional or hysterical/irrational- Using words that are considered feminine as opposed to masculine is similar to saying something is weak, passive, emotional, sensitive etc, where as if you used the masculine form of the word; those are not the implications.
So no, OP: Grammatical gender does have something to do with feminism. Words are not just words. Words mean things; and context is key.
Female Genital Mutilation: Cultural Relativism vs. Human Rights
Cultural Relativism vs. Human Rights
There is serious disagreement about whether the practice of FGM is an issue of cultural relativism or an issue of human rights. Some Western anthropologists have equated the practice of FGM with such Western practices as breast augmentation and tattooing. This agrument is flawed, however, for at least two important reasons. The first is that in both the examples given, the subjects making these decisions must, by law, be adults. This is not the case with FGM, whose subjects are often as young as three. The second flaw in this argument is that neither breast augmentation nor tattoing impede natural body functions, in the way FGM can. The argument has also been made that FGM is analogous to male circumcision, which is a common practice in the West. While it is true that both procedures are cultural traditions that have no real health benefits, there are major differences between the two. The most important difference between FGM and male circumcision is that, again, FGM impedes the natural functioning of the female body in ways that male circumcision does not.
There has also been serious debate within the African American community about FGM. While some African American women see the West’s attack on FGM as “ethnocentric,” African American novelist Alice Walker has written about her oppostion to the practice. Walker has produced a documentary and published a book, both entitled “Warrior Marks,” based on her experiences investigating FGM in Western Africa. In the following footage from the documentary “Women Under Attack,” Walker shares an interview from her “Warrior Marks” documentary. If you want to see this video click here.
Many human rights organizations agree with Alice Walker, and view FGM as a violation of human rights, calling for its eradication. In a meeting in Geneva this year, three UN agencies announced efforts to end FGM. These agencies, The World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), and UNICEF, asked for world support for their goal, calling FGM an “unsafe and unjustifiable traditional practice.” Amnesty International has also come out against FGM, saying “the practice is a form of violence and a violation of boldily integrity.” Non-Western organizations such as the Egyptian Human Rights Organisation (EOHR) have also joined this capaign. Egypt has been a battleground in the struggle to eradicate FGM, where the practice is currently banned. The goal of EOHR is to teach Egyptians “the harms of the operation to both individuals and society and to clarify that this pagan custom has no connection with Islam.”
Overcoming Barriers to Eradication
One of the biggest barriers to the eradication of FGM is the perception, among those who practice this rite, that Western opposition to the practice is an example of cultural imperialism. This argument is bolstered by the fact that FGM was once performed in the West. In the past, feminists and human rights activists have also created resentment by not respecting the social and religious implicaitons of FGM. One Somali woman states, “if Somali women change, it will be a change done by us, among us. When they order us to stop, tell us what we must do, it is offensive to the black person or the Muslim person who believes in circumcision. To advise is good, but not to order.” Thus, a serious problem faced by activists, is how to keep opposition to FGM from being viewed as part of “the current Western onslaught on Islam.”
Education programs that are sensitive to the cultural and religious importance of FGM seem to be the best hope of eradicating the practice. Education can, however, be a long process, as evidenced by the UN plan ”to bring about a major decline in female genital mutilation in 10 years and completely eliminate this practice within three generations.” There are some signs, however, that education programs are having an impact. In Ethiopia, the Ministry of Education has used radio broadcasts to warn about the dangers of FGM. The broadcasts are sponsored by the National Committee on Traditional Practices in Ethiopia, a committee that includes UN agencies. These actions, along with a government ban on FGM, have had “encouraging” results. The UN has also helped fund programs in Sudan where Dr. Amna Abdel Rahman has been working through the Sudan National Committee on Harmful Traditional Practices (SNCTP) to eradicate FGM. Allthough the programs in both Ethiopia and Sudan are backed, in part, by UN agencies, they are administered by committees headed by citizens of these countries. This is an important consideration in dealing with the justifiable concerns about Western interference and cultural imperialism.
Not all governments, however, have welcomed efforts to eradicate FGM. The West African nation of Gambia has prohibited any programming that opposes FGM from being broadcast on state-owned radio and television stations, and has even called for the use of radio and television to promote FGM. The reaction of the Gambian government toward educational efforts to end FGM helps to illustrate the difficulty faced by those trying to eradicate the practice. As the Director-General of WHO has stated, “we have to realize that female genital mutilation is a deeply-rooted traditional practice. As such, it can only be abolished completely when attitudes have been changed.” As this statement suggests, change can only be made by the countries involved, and not by well intentioned Western forces.
Can we like seriously stop using this phrase? It takes the conversation about it and it’s cultural and social significance into a racist western context and unfairly judges the act in that context….
By your definition some forms of body modification are mutilation, but many within that community would tell you it’s “Art” or it’s “Self expression”, very few, if any, would tell call it “mutilation”.
Furthermore, that definition of mutilation would also make some degrees of gender transitioning “mutilation”, but I doubt anyone undergoing that process would say they’re mutilating their bodies.
Each of these groups are exercising their autonomy over their bodies. Just because it disturbs you doesn’t mean you get to dictate what it is especially as someone outside of that community or culture.
I think the difference is that most people who decide to split their tongues, get dermals or are undergoing gender transitioning do not to so because their culture, history and society tell them they are unclean, ungodly, unworthy, shameful, sluts etc if they do not do these things. They are not socially conditioned from birth to accept these modifications. They are not shamed, outcast, looked down upon, deemed unworthy or even deemed a threat if they decide they do not wish to undergo these modifications.
"So, you believe women within these cultures lack the intelligence to realize what’s actually good for them, and it’s our job to remind them what is?"
I don’t think it comes down to intelligence. Many very intelligent people believe many things; because they have been indoctrinated to do so. Smart and educated people can believe many things. Female infanticide is another cultural issue. Racism, classism, honour-killings, slavery, corrective rape, homophobia and stoning people to death are other cultural issues. Should we ignore those also simply because we are privileged?
"It doesn’t. The women and people of these cultures have the right to decide and define for themselves what’s “horrid, painful, pointless, and dangerous”. Our job is to check our privilege at the door when it comes to topics"
They also have the right to know that they aren’t ‘unclean’ or ‘ungodly’ or ‘unworthy’ if they don’t cut their genitals off or sew them up; possibly causing themself serious injuries and raising the chance of death during childbirth and infection/pain during intercourse significantly. IMO it’s not our job to ignore abuse because some people are conditioned to not only accept it but want it.
If at the end of the day people decide to maim themselves that is their own choice: however when you ignore social conditioning, social pressure, and education/perspective (or lack thereof) of the people who do it and just say ‘it’s their choice’ it’s undermining what it is to truly have a choice.
Toward the "Mutilation" post, I don't really know how I feel about it. The assumptions that Western Culture is more fair and our traditions aren't harmful like Genital Mutilation. But we pay thousands of dollars for our kids to have metal placed on their teeth for cosmetic purposes.
Indeed we do. However; how often do braces result in permanent scarring, pain, painful eating, infection, degradation or loss of sensation? (among other things)
So I wanted to say HELLO to all the new followers! You’re awesome! I also wanted to start a conversation about the “sex positive” movement.
For those of you who don’t know what it means, it is “an attitude towards human sexuality that regards all consensual sexual activities as fundamentally healthy and pleasurable, and encourages sexual pleasure and experimentation. The sex-positive movement is a social and philosophical movement that advocates these attitudes. The sex-positive movement advocates sex education and safer sex as part of its campaign.” (A Sex Positive Renaissance).
What do you think about this? How do you feel about this?
This is a major part of what I hope to blog about and what I believe to hold a great deal of truth. I want to raise awareness to many of the issues involving gender (identity, sexism and socialization) and sexuality at large so please feel free to overwhelm the ask box with concepts, stories, questions etc. I’ve also enabled anon asks as well.
My issue, or rather misunderstanding (?), is with the idea of consensual-non-monogamous relationships. In theory, I think this is fantastic. But in practice, I think it has potential to be problematic because most (not all) people living in western civilization developed their sexuality within the context of their socialization. I see it as difficult to achieve successful consensual-non-monogamous relationships because often times issues about sex, gender, race, class etc. have been sexualized and are, therefore, played out in a sexual experience. Even if one person involved is conscious, aware of the effects of their addiction to the “stories” they have been told about who they are, who others are and how relationships should unfold, it is likely that one of their other partners is not, potentially reinforcing the story of who they are, who others are and how relationships should unfold…
Anywho! I’m excited to see responses and hopefully gain some new insight/perspective!
Keen to hear your views followers! I’m going to have to think on this one for a while.
Can we like seriously stop using this phrase? It takes the conversation about it and it’s cultural and social significance into a racist western context and unfairly judges the act in that context. What we need to realize is that though there are problematic practices in regards to female…
No, no and no. I couldn’t disagree with you more.We should not stop using this phrase. Mutilation is mutilation.
Of course some women want to do it- they have been indoctrinated from birth to believe it is the right thing to do. Just the same as some are convinced covering themselves from head to toe is the right thing to do, and the way some are convinced being covered head to toe is degrading. Some women are raised to believe they should never cut their hair, some men to never shave their beards.
The difference between these things should be clear. They are all ‘choices’ people are brainwashed into thinking by their societies. But do those things irreversibly physically harm those men and women? No. Are those things likely to cause permanent pain, injuries and suffering or lead to death? No.
If there was a cultural tradition that all women or men should commit suicide, have all their limbs removed, be lobotomised or some such other horrid, painful, pointless, dangerous and irreversible thing because they where taught from birth it was the right thing to do- would that be acceptable? Mass mutilation, pain, suffering, trauma or loss of life?
When a guy opens the door for you it’s because he wants to help you go through your miserable day of being dull and boring. When he offers to carry your bag it’s so he can build up his muscles to beat the crap out of you when you tell him off for being a gentleman. When he takes his hat off, it’s…
I do. Anytime a person makes a joke about another group of people, it’s under the assumption that someone of that group is not actually present, or that someone present doesn’t know someone of said group. Of course, you can’t exactly do that with 1 in 4 women and 1 in 6 men being survivors of sexual abuse— especially not on the internet. So you end up hurting a lot more people than you will ever realize, and those people will never trust you enough to share their story. They might fade out of your life and you won’t know why. They might act differently around you. They might be friendly to your face, but the fact is that they could never trust you again.
I’m not mad. I’m just disappointed.
Ditto. Any time someone laughs at a rape joke and I decide not to say anything; I judge the people laughing- forever. It means I know that the worst thing that ever happened to me in my entire life is entertaining for those people. It means I know they think my trauma is funny and can never fully understand and respect me as a person. It means I know that they are that part of society which not only stops me from healing; but that contributes to these things happening in the first place.
//Trigger warning for everything below and in links. // It was written by a survivor of childhood sexual abuse and as such all posts can be extremely triggering regarding rape, sexual assault, abuse, drug abuse and alcoholism, self injury and a bunch of other topics.
I find a lot of topics covered and many of the reasons listed while not specifically to do with feminism are very important, very real and very close to the hearts of many feminists. As a survivor myself I find the list a hard but worthy read.
A few gems from a typically scathing review:
And that’s before you come to the really offensive bits. Just in case you didn’t feel like the game had adequately rubbed your nose in its horrific depiction of women, Duke arrives at a point where two nude ladies promise to lose their pregnancy weight from bearing their alien children, and they plead with you to let them live. (These are the same characters who performed fellatio on you during the beginning sequences of the game.)
The only way past this section of the game is to kill both women.
In another scene, a woman sobs and asks for her father. You see, the women in the alien craft are being forcibly impregnated by the aliens, and during your journey, you hear a mixture of screams and sexual noises. After I accidentally blew up a few of these female victims in a firefight, Duke made a joke about abortion.
Video games and gamer culture get a deservedly bad rep for virtually every -ism you can think of, and games like this do nothing to dispel that. Certainly, any criticism of this game will be met with “oh, you just don’t get it. Being offensive is what Duke Nukem games are all about!” It’s the worst, most bullshit argument there is, and it’s not acceptable. If there’s a silver lining to this piece of shit game, it’s that it’s been met with universal derision and hatred for its subject matter from mainstream gaming publications. It’s sad that it took something this vile to make gamers go “wow, this is bullshit,” but it’s a start I suppose.