Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Apparently, Feminism is dead!!!

But in doing that, you are basically infantilising one half of the transaction. In this context, I find this rather objectionable. If an adult has sex with a minor, quite rightly, it is the adult who is breaking the law, but not the child. This law treats women in the same way as the law about the age of consent treats children. It does the opposite of the New Zealand approach - it disempowers the women involved.

It is ludicrous, imo, unless you treat the women involved as helpless victims, which is unbelievably patronising. But as that judgement Random quoted above shows, the law in Sweden isn't quite treating the women involved as helpless victims - it's actually being used as a stick with which to beat immigrants.

I didn't have particularly strong feelings about this either way before I started looking into it. Now, I do - I think this is nasty stuff that ought to be vigorously opposed.
:cool:
 
Interesting - I'd be very surprised if they weren't renewed though. It's all very well saying 'women shouldn't be for sale' but that misses the point spectacularly in my opinion. I wonder if the men only-sauna's licence is also included in the renewals.
Not sure, I came across this earlier and thought others may know more ...
 
It'd be particularly interesting to get a handle on whether the men only ones are treated the same.
As far as I know there's only one men-only (gay) sauna in Edinburgh. A friend of mine did some cash-in-hand work there handing out towels, manning the cafe bar etc for a year or so and said it was definitely an interesting experience.
 
There's a bit of a storm brewing in California (and wider across the US) about the controversial Proposition 35 (Prop 35) legislation which targets sex work/trafficking.<snip>
Listing sexworkers as sexoffenders, WTF? How the hell does that make it easier to leave that line of work later on?
 
Listing sexworkers as sexoffenders, WTF? How the hell does that make it easier to leave that line of work later on?
Exactly - also it seems that the legislation might be retrospective opening possibility of criminalisation/sex offenders register for "offences" decades old. Also conflating labour traffic with sex traffic.
 
Rather than start a brand new thread, this seems a reasonable place to link this:

http://gyzym.tumblr.com/post/39004853136/just-shut-up

We can argue for media that doesn’t push the horrible shit we need to unlearn as a society to get to a healthier place, or we can point out the flaws in our preexisting media, or we can do both. But “Just shut up,” isn’t an option. “Just shut up,” can’t be an option, because we can’t keep playing the “Nobody told me because nobody told them,” card. Nothing will ever get better that way. Nothing will ever improve if we keep not telling people this shit.
 
Rather than start a brand new thread, this seems a reasonable place to link this:

http://gyzym.tumblr.com/post/39004853136/just-shut-up

A raw and impassioned conclusion that merits consideration, and not just in the context of this blog entry:-

" Yes, it’s easier not to engage with this stuff. Yes, as always, “Not learning things,” is the easier option. And if you don’t want to learn things (or unlearn them, as the case may be), that’s your right. That’s your call, and nobody can stop you from making it. It’s entirely possible to like and even love problematic media while consuming it critically, while acknowledging its flaws, but if that’s not something you wish to figure out then that’s that, and there ain’t shit anybody can do about it. But for the love of god, stop arguing that people should be quiet, should stop pointing this stuff out, should stop engaging with something in a way you don’t want them to. For one thing, you’re wasting your breath—again, it’s the age of the internet. People are going to use their platforms as they please. But for another thing, there’s a huge difference between saying, “I don’t feel like dealing with this problem,” and saying, “I don’t feel like dealing with this problem and therefore no one else should either.”
:)
 
Listing sexworkers as sexoffenders, WTF? How the hell does that make it easier to leave that line of work later on?

that's what happens to women in the UK. i have plenty of clients who are in this situation.
 
if i understood google translate properly... it doesn't really say much except that it's not on to deny someone agency, which is fair enough, although some would suggest that legitimising the sale of sex really just codifies the unspoken social agreement that women's bodies are for sale and that they are happy with this.
 
Back
Top Bottom