More stuff in the media about homophobia in football.
(For other coverage on this topic see my posts here and here.)
Amazing!
(for other reading recommendations, check out my books lists!)
(via thescarletwoman)
Fucked up law of the day: The Slander of Women Act 1891
(I’ve done a few posts today about wackness in the legal system… funny how it’s turned out.)
The Slander of Women Act 1891 is a law that is still in place in England and Wales. It states that it is libellous to impute “unchastity” or “adultery” to a woman. There is no similar law pertaining to men.
And the best/worst bit? Calling a woman a lesbian counts as imputing unchastity.
Ok, normally I would readily co-sign on the “what a horrible system!” side of the argument, but I don’t think I can this time.
My mother used to be a corrections officer and I’ve heard countless stories from her about incarcerated men masturbating and then throwing their semen (or at least attempting to throw their semen) at the officers, in particular the female officers, when they would enter the cells for mandatory inspections, mealtime, or any other time they needed to; sometimes, these men would just throw it through the bars if they couldn’t incite any officers to come into their cells. I don’t know if these anti-masturbation prison policies originated specifically to protect female officers from this kind of treatment, but they have.
While you might think of masturbation as a sort of last refuge for the incarcerated—a truly inalienable freedom, given the happy proximity of the sex organs—that is not the case. In fact, a number of state prisons regard jerking off as a rule infraction. American University law professor Brenda Smith, who conducted a 50-state survey of prison masturbation policies in 2006, says restrictions are “well-entrenched” in the correctional environment. In North Carolina, for example, it is a violation to “touch the sexual or other intimate parts of oneself or another person for the purpose of sexual gratification.” Violations can lead to disciplinary segregation or the loss of “good time” credits. Tennessee forbids “[a]ny behavior intended for the sexual gratification of the subject.” Ohio prohibits “[s]eductive or obscene acts, including indecent exposure or masturbation.” Kentucky regards inmate masturbation as “[i]nappropriate sexual behavior.” In California, where some 170,000 men and women live behind bars, masturbation is permissible provided it is stopped immediately if noticed by staff, blue balls be damned. If the masturbator perseveres, even if concealed by bed sheets, he can be cited for “Intentionally Sustained Masturbation without Exposure.” These policies are part of a long correctional tradition to forbid all forms of sexual activity.
Jesus christ that’s so fucked up.
I wonder how the rules are in the UK.
Are you joking?
Some prison officers get the Miggs treatment from some prisoners and you think that justifies taking away all prisoners’ rights to their own bodies?!
It’s surely better, if that’s what one’s concerned about, to sanction those who do do a Miggs than to put in place a blanket rule about touching your own fucking body. Unless—as i suspect—that’s not really the aim of the rules and actually those kinds of rules exist to exert sadistic levels of control over people who have few rights to begin with.
It’s not even theoretically a good way to prevent prisoners having access to ejaculate to lob at people: even if, against all probability, all the inmates did stop masturbating just because they’re told they must—they’d end up having wet dreams and could collect the stuff that way. If a prisoner is intent on throwing jizz on someone, they’re going to do it whether or not they’re “allowed” to touch themselves.
[…][T]he number of older and geriatric prisoners [is] growing. By the end of 2009, there were 11,000 prisoners over the age of 55. (Prisoners’ physiological age tends to be 10-15 years more their chronological age due to the stress of incarceration, so 55 counts as elderly.) This number is expected to triple to over 30,000 within the next decade or so (pdf), which will put extraordinary pressure on a state that is already being bankrupted in part by its overcrowded prisons.
…
Statistics consistently show thatpeople tend to “age out of crime” (pdf). Nationwide, the recidivism rate for inmates aged between 16 and 29 is over 50%; for inmates 55 and older, the rate drops to 2%, rendering the chance of an elderly inmate re-offending upon release almost negligible.
But still, they remain locked up. In 2008, for instance, 7,308 lifers were eligible for parole. Only 294 were approved by the parole board, and of those, 81 were denied by then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and more than 30 were sent back for review. In the end, fewer than 60 inmates were released.
While you might think of masturbation as a sort of last refuge for the incarcerated—a truly inalienable freedom, given the happy proximity of the sex organs—that is not the case. In fact, a number of state prisons regard jerking off as a rule infraction. American University law professor Brenda Smith, who conducted a 50-state survey of prison masturbation policies in 2006, says restrictions are “well-entrenched” in the correctional environment. In North Carolina, for example, it is a violation to “touch the sexual or other intimate parts of oneself or another person for the purpose of sexual gratification.” Violations can lead to disciplinary segregation or the loss of “good time” credits. Tennessee forbids “[a]ny behavior intended for the sexual gratification of the subject.” Ohio prohibits “[s]eductive or obscene acts, including indecent exposure or masturbation.” Kentucky regards inmate masturbation as “[i]nappropriate sexual behavior.” In California, where some 170,000 men and women live behind bars, masturbation is permissible provided it is stopped immediately if noticed by staff, blue balls be damned. If the masturbator perseveres, even if concealed by bed sheets, he can be cited for “Intentionally Sustained Masturbation without Exposure.” These policies are part of a long correctional tradition to forbid all forms of sexual activity.
Jesus christ that’s so fucked up.
I wonder how the rules are in the UK.
alittlepieceoflove asked: Hi! I was wondering if you or any of your followers know where I can buy gender neutral clothes for my 19 month old daughter. I'm fine with online stores. Its just really hard for me to find clothes for my daughter that aren't pink and frilly. And although I personally love all things pink, I don't want to assume my daughter does too.
I don’t have children, so maybe this is cringeworthily wrong, but… why don’t you try “boys’” clothes? They usually come in a range of colours and styles. Probably not pink, either.
Readers, any other suggestions? Leave a reply or something.
As the article notes, “88% of women in India resort to using ashes, newspapers, dried leaves and even husk sand during their periods, according to a report by market research group AC Nielsen called Sanitatary Protection: Every Woman’s Health Right. As a result of these unhygienic practices, more than 70% of the women suffer from reproductive tract infections, increasing the risk of contracting associated cancers.”
So one man, after discovering his wife had to choose between using old rags and being able to buy milk for her family, took to inventing a low-cost sanitary towel—and sharing the manufacturing process with rural women’s groups to enable them to make money.
The entire system operates on a woman-to-woman basis. Women making the towels spread awareness of the product locally, eventually helping others make the shift to this more hygienic method of control.
“I am trying to create a second white revolution,” says Muruganantham. Setting up 100,000 units, he says, will generate employment for one million women. “No one is bothered about uneducated and illiterate people. Through this model, they can live with dignity.”
I also love this bit:
With no women willing to discuss Muruganantham’s handmade sanitary towels in any depth, he decided to test them himself. Collecting goat’s blood from a butcher shop and treating it chemically to prevent coagulation, he wore a bladder-and-tube contraption and women’s underwear for a week. His homemade uterus would release a small dose of blood whenever pressed.
Click through to read the whole thing.
Photographer Grace Brown’s project in which former victims of sexual abuse are photographed with their former attackers’ words has struck a chord across the globe
Trigger warning for sexual abuse.
Anonymous asked: hi could you suggest any female comedians? I was talking with friends about our favourite comedians and realised that you don't really see that many female ones on TV.
Do you mean stand-up comedians?
Off the top of my head:
Andi Osho
Gina Yashere
Wanda Sykes
Sarah Silverman
Linda Smith (deceased)
Sarah Millican
Jo Brand
Katy Brand
Elvira Kurt
Joan Rivers
Tina Fey
Ellen Degeneres
Margaret Cho
Jenny Slate
Ruby Wax
Ksthy Griffin
And that rubbish one who’s always on Mock the Week. Lucy something. Ugh.
Shapi Khorsandi ?
Yes! Shappi Khorsandi! I was trying to remember her second name and couldn’t.
Maria Bamford should be on here as well :D
I’d never heard of her till just now, but yes—this woman is funny.
Check out the replies for more recommendations!
Today there is a hearing in DC about the possibility of implementation of a city-wide Prostitution Free Zone. Follow @amyloudermilk and @djbent for live tweets.
The film above was produced by my friend PJ Starr, in collaboration with sex workers in DC.
Here’s some more background info:
From DCist post in December:
Under current D.C. law, prostitution is illegal. Simple enough, right? Well, no.
Prostitution still happens, so, in 2006, the D.C. Council gave the Metropolitan Police Department the power to designate “prostitution-free zones,” areas in which any two people gathering for allegedly engaging in prostitution-related activities can be asked to disperse and, if they don’t, face arrest. The zones can be designated for up to 240 hours, or 10 days. The most recent zone was designated for an area near 59th Street and Eastern Avenue NE from October 27-31; another zone was famously declared during President Obama’s inauguration.
Now the one member of the Council is seeking to extend that policy: on Tuesday, Councilmember Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7) introduced legislation which would allow police to add a new category of prostitution free zone: permanent. Alexander told DCist that the change has come in response to what she called an “epidemic” of prostitution in her ward, primarily along Eastern Avenue and Minnesota Avenue.
From a post on RH Reality Check in January 2010:
Prostitution Free Zone laws, like most punitive approaches to commercial sex work, do further damage by disproportionately affecting the health and safety of the District’s most vulnerable sex workers - those who work on the street. Sex workers are already marginalized and discriminated against by both the larger community and the police due to their race, ethnicity, and/or gender. The District of Columbia currently has an HIV AND AIDS rate of epidemic proportions, affecting people of color and sexual minorities at shockingly disproportionate rates. The Prostitution Free Zones law increases the difficulty of survival and decreases the safety of street based sex workers by pushing sex workers into darker and more isolated areas where they feel unsafe and more vulnerable to harassment, assault, and robbery.
Can someone help me find?
Does anyone have a good “non-sexworker privilege checklist”? (For all sex workers, not just prostitutes or strippers)
Signal boost.
Repeating that signal boost.
spoken like a true rape apologist
Holy crap I can’t get over how full of shite Frothy Mix is.
“See rapists aren’t so bad, they’re just trying to give people a gift.”
Y’know I dislike all of the Republican candidates (and most Republicans period) but Rick Santorum is a very special breed of smug evilness that often eclipses them all.
-Joe
Er, do y’all above realise that there may very well be people who were conceived as a result of rape reading this? Disagree with Santorum all you want, but, fucking hell, must you shit on the very humanity of innocent people with it? Fuck’s sake.
who was blaming a child for anything? the blame lies with the rapist and no one else.
still, the fact remains: rape is never excusable or justifiable.
I didn’t say blame, i said ‘shit on the humanity of’ which is what happens when someone says “no, your life is not valid because you were created out of rape”. Which is what these comments do say.
A baby is a baby. How is that not a human life? But these comments screaming “HOW ABOUT NO” to that idea when applied to babies who happen to have resulted from a rape deny that fact—and thereby deny the humanity of a group of people based on something they have absolutely no control over and that has no bearing whatsoever on what kind of person they are.
Notice that i haven’t said anything defending Santorum, suggesting that rape is a good thing or that rapists aren’t to blame for it, or upholding backwards notions that abortion should not be permitted in the case of rape (or ever).
spoken like a true rape apologist
Holy crap I can’t get over how full of shite Frothy Mix is.
“See rapists aren’t so bad, they’re just trying to give people a gift.”
Y’know I dislike all of the Republican candidates (and most Republicans period) but Rick Santorum is a very special breed of smug evilness that often eclipses them all.
-Joe
Er, do y’all above realise that there may very well be people who were conceived as a result of rape reading this? Disagree with Santorum all you want, but, fucking hell, must you shit on the very humanity of innocent people with it? Fuck’s sake.
