In 2009-10, men were perpetrators in 91% of all violent incidents in England and Wales. The figures vary by type of incident: 81% for domestic violence, 86% for assault, 94% for wounding, 96% for mugging, 98% for robbery. MoJ figures for 2009 show men to be responsible for 98%, 92% and 89% of sexual offences, drug offences and criminal damage respectively. Of child sex offenders, 99% are male. The highest percentages of female offences concern fraud and forgery (30%), and theft and handling stolen goods (21% female).
It's that simple.
Settler Colonial Territory, similar to same stats. Here's how difficult similar stats on sexual offenses were to obtain in Prince William County, USA. (94% of sexual offenses were male perpetrated against 82% female victims, 1/3 against female children, with 58% of the perps being over 18)
"Between 2001 and 2012, 6,410 American women were killed by an intimate partner - more than the combined number of U.S. troops killed in action during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars." -a war by any other definition that no one cares is happening inside its borders. -
“Domestic violence laws should not be controversial.”
Yet it is. The question becomes then, if it doesn't matter, who is benefiting; -what sort of spectrum dominance is conferred by this undeclared sanctioned war (violent reign of terror on the weaker sex (since they are, as a whole, aware of it))? The answer to ambivalence of course is that its threat creates a spectrum that has net benefits for every single male, -particularly the bad/failed ones. It is, in fact, the net benefits it confers to "soft power", i.e., the powers the threat of death confers to 'life control'. It is the desire to control life through the threat of death. The religion confers subservience ideologically; [sanctioning spousal abuse to the point of death]. The courts provide a venue for enforcement. 'Soft power' as 'life control' is more vile in many of its array of forms than death itself. The answer to how ugly the spectrum of 'net benefits' really are, (beyond the ugly, vile spectrum exacted within the realm of 'soft power'), is the fact that 'hard power' must exist in order to confer 'soft power' any real power, and 'hard power' is purely murderous, pure and simple.
Jealous husband who stabbed wife to death is cleared of murder because she said she had a new lover and was leaving him.
In the United States, 'soft power''s 'enforcement mechanisms' have an immense slush fund (responsible for points 1 and 2), thanks to Clinton, initiated by his 'welfare reform' in 1996. (-Definitely not the way to expiate perhaps one of his biggest policy failures. -And then some.) This means that, in order to obtain the funds, Family Courts are throwing their resources behind serial abusers that are convicted felons. It produces an abundance of case histories like these. In fact there's enough funds that they are available to abusive fathers (the sort with a tendency to vie for sole custody) whether or not they've been incarcerated. While this dispensation is available to fathers no matter how much money they happen to make, it is incentivized and offered to fathers who are in arrears for child support, since if they manage to switch custody, they no longer are obliged to make payments. Convicts, obviously, are in arrears. It basically to government funding to obtain custodial rights for fathers who were largely unfit to begin with. Ever wonder the effects of this in producing (literally bought and paid for) bias in the Family Court system?
Now back to the front:
Moreover present day males assumption of responsibility in this aspect is for all intents and purposes close to nil (male birth control -?), a mindset that was culturally reinforced from the beginning to mid-century in North American culture (where it was the female on date nights who was always obliged to provide the limits or boundaries to “petting” and kissing, (based on behavioral anthropologist Margaret Mead’s Male and Female (scroll down to Chapter 14))). This “oblige” of constant sexual pressure being an acceptable male mandate of behaviour was only exacerbated by “free love” explosion in the ‘60’s when it blew up the boundaries to the point of sex becoming “natural” and nigh a cultural pressure on the first date, still putting onus on the woman as the fulcrum of rejection, solely designated in prevention of intercourse and imposing limits.
To be faced with this perpetual social assault becomes utterly untenable while paradoxically in the meantime the Roman Catholic Church prohibits the use of birth control on the part of the woman, thereby instituting virtual enslavement either as impoverished single parents or in the early phases of child-rearing highly dependent on a male to go out into the workforce to support the fact that she must duly be consumed in raising the newborn (unless she can afford to hire the job out). Without birth control this consumption of her existence can be compounded beyond her ability even to function, and is continually a source of utilized abuse employed for deliberate confinement by male spouses. Hence all the social advantages of the wandering dick state of mind just spreading oats are intended in disadvantaging the other gender, and culturally both sides of the fence, morality and immorality, are employed to this end.
First Communion seen from the outside attacks gender from the side of (assumed) morality (i.e., the Bible itself); you may be saddling the girl child with all this high and low investiture of symbolism both at once. In conference of this great honour of entrance into becoming a bride of Christ there is tremendous auxiliary male imposed baggage, but hey, you get to wear a pretty white dress. And so what is in spiritual terms a conference of the greatest honour of assimilation into the spiritual Church can be viewed as the ultimate act of subterfuge whereby the doctrinal conditions created and harnessed to this in fact substitute patriarchal enslavement, for in the deal of providing the subservient lesser personhood of all of female kind, the boon to men for entering this (what turned out to be) ultimate devilry of a bargain with a celibate priesthood, in turn all of male-dom granted the Church the status of a male ruling elite minority with ultimate control over the population. The subjugation of all woman kind was done by tacit trade off, by the now conferred dominant males, who in turn conferred the male only priesthood the ultimate power over everyone, by accepting the tacit belief of the priesthood providing the only conduit or access to God/Christ/Salvation. It was quite the deal.
This provided control over matters of war and state, (with women providing the maximum output of male conscripts to be slaughtered at will), and would result in a cultural genocide of mass burning at the stake for heresy, which turned into a pogrom against both doctrinal argument and an elevated campaign primarily against women which has been argued to have been deliberate insofar as it effectively placed medical control over childbirth (by way of gaining total control over the profession) in the male domain through cultural eradication, by destroying unschooled herbalists as “witches” (including those with a knowledge to use these in childbirth and birth control, which is not to imply this wasn’t simply a concerted attack on individual women who behaviourally stood out against patriarchal imposed society norms, but it remains that the only thing specifically attacked as existent witch behaviour was the concoction of herb based remedies). This was the equivalent wiping out all current and remaining orally transmitted traditions of medicinal knowledge, most particularly in the care of women and reproduction. While this has been debunked in the sense of showing that midwives participated in witch accusations and licensed midwives were less likely to be charged, the shift away from midwifery to a male dominated institutionalized doctoral profession (that dictated to nurses) was made complete very much tandem, and resulted in mass deaths of women in childbirth (ranging over and above 25%) by a backwards male medical profession whose hubris was such that they en masse refused even the most basic safe action of washing/disinfecting their hands before examining a woman in childbirth, which resulted in decades of the unnecessary deaths of women due to unnecessary infection as they ignored and resisted this measure. If you want a further analysis of what happened to women in the witch burning period or the advent of gynaecology as gender based genocidal tendency rooted in the Christian patriarchal theology and its attack on female be-ing, it’s been done, but that wasn’t my point. (The real nature of the attack on females was that widowhood was practically the only means by which individual women could accrue individual wealth, so this acquisition of any sort of wealth power by female individuals had to be destroyed, along with the independence of spinsters).
My point is what arises as banal slaughter that can be rendered and considered merely incidental based on self-justification via a very simple mindset of inherent superiority that must perpetually self-reinforce, in order to indicate just how vicious and deadly the enactment of such mental reinforcement can be. My point was “200 years of deadly blood-poisoning” –(Mary Daly, p. 8) inflicted by male “physicians” on women in childbirth with absolute impunity. It is rather breath-taking too that the modern profession thinks its current performance is perfected and utterly divorced from its wholly barbarous roots (argued by Daly to have been continued into this past century) when a 33% Caesarean rate in American medicine is somehow deemed “normal”. And why is it being done for the absolutely unnecessary superfluous basis of preserving a tighter vagina for male pleasure, unchanged physical appearance, and avoidance of physical pain?
We can’t ignore the ugly fact of forced sterilizations in the U.S. - brought to you by the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations.
In effect the primary physician proponent of disinfecting hand-washing in Europe was sentenced to death in the sense that the medical profession’s blanket rejection and public opprobrium of what lay proven in his practice (and the practice of midwives, who he pointed out did not have the accompanying death toll) would have certainly aided in the degenerative failure of his mental state (as he could never leave the subject of needless childbed deaths). He died within two weeks of being forcibly incarcerated in a mental institution (from an infectious complication of the beating he’d endured while being forcibly incarcerated) after he had been ignored by the entire medical profession, who continued to needlessly kill women, and are still resistant on the matter to this day. While this should be judged in light of a combined climate of a sum of delusions (the profession’s resistance to germ theory), it remains that collective resistance of medical doctors appears on record in a petition letter to the Mayor of New York in 1910 (if this link is anything to go by), where they again assaulted the practice of disinfecting hand washing in pediatrics by asserting that “it was ruining the medical practice by…keeping babies well” (in other words it was culturally acceptable enough to consume children for the sake of male profit that the (predominantly male) doctors of the time could write to the Mayor to complain against any improvement on this basis alone).
It is perhaps no accident that a historical climate capable of such profound neglect (in the nominally Christian, considered enlightened post “age of reason” world (it was in the 1700’s the witch killings reached their peak) as to find it socially acceptable to kill one in four women (or more) from childbirth infections caused by the practitioners of the (male) medical profession themselves is a natural product or outcome of a patriarchally structured society. It provides a ready example of the result of centuries of cultural modification treating the female half of the species as under dominion and utterly subject to the males by enforcing it through religion, which resulted in treatment as non-entities in terms of the ability to exist in concrete terms (other than as objects for male service, enabling, pleasure and procreation), whether that be in terms of profession, property, or the ability to vote. The inferential relation is no stretch at all, with a ready, manifest death toll, as needlessly callous as the death of one in four women at the hands of the medical profession.
That Christian society (accompanied by our general flaws of inertia) managed to generate this climate is proof positive of just how murderous purportedly “benign”, “civilized”, institutionalized patriarchy actually is in terms of its existing consequences (that’s not taking a genocidal pogrom of women (that burned anywhere from 35 000 to 50 000 women alive, though this was not the sole means of execution and certainly not the extent of the torture, and the sourcing makes that your most conservative (kindest possible) estimate; it varies wildly). That this pogrom mainly took place through secular courts (with community courts being the most barbarous, and these would have been the most vulnerable to petty jealousies and behavioural castigation and theft of property from senior single women, who were executed the most) points to the inculcation of the culture irrespective of religious leanings. It was the fear of any women liberated by personal wealth, untrammeled by fertility, liberated from sexual subservience by patriarchally instituted total harnessing to perpetual child-rearing. It is also worth noting it became a hysteria in conjunction with the (originally Church incited) development and formalization of the male medical profession, which interestingly coincided with the gain of total male control over female reproduction medically through hospitalization, where by just the “benign” neglect of refusing to disinfect their hands, the male medical profession proceeded to kill women in droves.
It is a natural inference that the social climate of patriarchal society aided and abetted the medical profession’s inertia in terms of their collective resistance to rationally accepting the existing evidence of the efficacy of disinfecting hand washing, allowing them to be blithely insensitive to the real existing consequences of what was in fact their action of collective slaughter of women while they remained intransigent in this delusion. If you think it is a stretch that the cultural establishment of Biblical religious patriarchy would have been directly to blame, consider that all the male doctors had to do to justify the needless slaughter in their minds was reach for Genesis 3:16 (which was likewise done with the consideration of anaesthetic in childbirth), supporting the then present climate by asserting that greatly increased pain and suffering in childbirth had been ordained by God; they were just facilitating God’s will. In terms of what this justification actually facilitated, if considered as a ratio of total population relative to the number of women fatalities by unnecessary infection due to something so integral and commonplace as childbirth (a matter of reproduction so weighted as to dictate the fate of the human race, and a physical matter that with the shift to institutionalized medicine, guaranteed every woman who became pregnant would be hospitalized), it produced a culture more (accidentally) murderous to women than any we might approach or consider today, apart perhaps from when it comes to dealing with isolated flash point situations of open barbarism, or that generated by patriarchal religious systems in total social breakdown with a total lack of medical care due to grinding poverty. This reflects quite a failing on the part of “civilized” patriarchal society, and that is if you even take the male take-over and establishment of gynaecology to have actually been benign (this doesn’t, and it gets very disturbing indeed).
I need to set this essay aside for a moment for an aside: if you take this footnote analysis as ascribing blame to the Catholic Church for the present fruits of patriarchy, or even blaming Catholicism (or Judaism) for patriarchy in the first place, this is hardly true. It existed before and afterwards; moreover I understand this line of thinking, -and you may well find the existing situation has the capacity to mesh quite beautifully; but it has not historically been treated in an interpretative context that lauded, granted, or arrived at spiritual equity between the genders (if you have the elevation of the Church to true existent equity as The Bride, however, -try this on for size).
The social context generated, however, was quite the opposite, and as Christ said, you examine a tree by its fruit; therein lies the problem, as we have witnessed a great array of fruits. This springs not from the religion itself but the pre-existent bias of patriarchy enacted and exacted through it when supplied with the dispensation, which patriarchy would inherently invest in any religion it established within pre-existent patriarchal culture in order to justify itself. It would be well to bear in mind that the author is far more concerned with what the sowing has reaped in modern times, as all of this went on the chopping block (this is the “porno” section; if you don’t want a huge tangential essay, do yourself a favour: stop now). Patriarchy (female subordination) was our first ideological underpinning formulation for the sake of “you cannot have inequality, the material reality of limited accesses to resources for the majority, without having an attendant ideology that legitimizes that inequality (9:00)”, and it still is, in the conquest of the mind, -without religion (though religion is most likely still the most responsible the world over, and remains very persistent). The new variants however, promise to be much worse.
" 'The culture did a lot of the grooming for me.' " -incarcerated child rapist of his 12 year old step daughter. "The culture is mass perpetrating against our girls. It used to be that you needed an individual perpetrator to perpetrate against an individual girl. -Not anymore." -Gail Dines
Here's a Tip to the old-school: in fact the biblical demand that if a man raped a women, he had to marry her was assignation of responsibility of the inherent risk of a child potentially being produced out of rape. It was an imperative to force him to take responsibility so men would not casually rape women, lest they be assigned to them, -for life, to take responsibility for the risk of offspring being the result. So, if you weren't attracted, you better bloody not rape her casually, 'cause that would be it. It may have been a blunt instrument, but the world was blunt at the time. That was their way of approaching it to cope. As we all know about opportunism, of course it's been opportunistic ever since. But the current divorce climate is in fact not much different apart from the dollar quotient.
Tip #1: Amoral capitalism has developed and will cling to the secularization of patriarchy. That's the lesson to be learned in the American history of slavery. It will be rationalized as long as possible because all forms of exploitation are more profitable than not doing it, and financial inequity and exploitation inherently furnish patriarchy, while simultaneously the market inherently operates in the reverse to buttress and protect itself.
Here’s why it matters when a human rights crusader builds her advocacy on lies - Salon - Nike [read every massive corporate garment producer in SE Asia] adores the social morality constructs entrenched by patriarchy to oppress women. They are their bottom line in exploitation. Amoral capitalism (corporatism) will invariably enforce patriarchy for its potential profit, starting at the complete and utter normalization of the total harnessing of female sexuality as the main advertising platform; it will fight to its dying breath for porn, or preserving those latitudes on Facebook and the internet as the main fount of advertising click-bait. Ignoring the contingent explosion of child-porn as collateral damage? -Doesn't matter to to the tech giants Whatsoever. Porn is already totally based in open misogyny towards women (not to mention its basis in commercialization/ objectification to begin with for the sake of -male orgasms); -this is of no matter at all.
Under the auspices of patriarchy moralizing is only employed to further gendered oppression. And that's why giant garment corporations fund anti-human trafficking initiatives. They wouldn't give a flying f*** otherwise. If they did, the entire realm of culturally enforced misogyny would be addressed, when in fact under the auspices of the "free market" it's exploding beyond all comprehension and all reason to the extent of preying openly on our children. It has already succeeded in indoctrinating our male children to do this to our daughters from the moment they begin to explore sexuality. They even do it to each other.
Tip #2: All structures of intervention and law and protection are useless against the innoculation of the culture, which will simply adapt to structural evolution. This bias is inbuilt through social conditioning. A present example is how patriarchal norm of domestic abuse is now enforced and forced upon children through the enforcement of equal custody sharing via the $50 billion per annum American divorce industry, which is estimated to have put half a million children in unsupervised contact with their (vast majority male) abusers. The rational conclusion for battered women with children is to not seek a divorce to better protect the children by always being present to protect them. The more extreme the batterer, the more extreme the compulsion to do so. Ergo, enforcement to remain in domestic abuse situations is now imposed through the divorce system. Divorce no longer provides a means to escape; it has evolved into the latest form of enforcement.
This inbuilt social sexism bias means that it is irrelevant how much you may 'liberalize' the culture. The dichotomy double standard is simply elevated to a new plane of experience. For example, in social media sexting conducted by 60% of NA teenagers, while this should simply be a new form of 'mate-dance' interaction, the existing context is that young males use the images as sexual trophyism like baseball cards that are just as dispensable, while the young females 'outed' in the images are still apellated 'whores' by their female peers. The blame is still on those victimized by the images rather than the males' use and attitudes towards those images.
Tip #3: The information age and the inundation of social media merely conflates with and expidites the existent bias of patriachy and sexism, with the net result that western culture as conscious awareness constitutes a constant mental assault on women, through the vectors of compliant and sexist conditioning, but more directly in the form of ubiquitous knowledge of the female condition the world over, and how unremittingly hideous it is. There is no longer any need for localized hysterias to terrorize daughters, say, by witnessing the burning and torture of their 'witch' mothers directly, not when you already know what's happening to women en masse in hard core porn (and its male rate of use/consumption), or rape as war that is now targeting female babies in the Congo, the status of women in Saudi Arabia, the Pickford murders in Canada (that weren't worth a warrant), the state of nigh ubiquitous rape stats on college campuses that pass unpunished, the all-encompassing pervasion of domestic and/or familial sexual abuse, the daily news, -not to mention our unparalleled access to an even more brutal his-story. Terrorization through total information awareness/the information highway is perhaps just, if not more effective on the psychological level, especially in terms of collective gender psychology, conditioning that has an even more insidious conditioning effect on males as opposed to females, as their assimilation unconsciously enforces them in terms of perpetration and perpetuation as licensed to enact and participate in this unremitting mass trauma as normalized. A witch burning, after all, was only witnessed by the village itself. The radius of information dissemination of this mass level of extreme horror would not really have exceeded the radius of its location. Not so today. You can accomplish the equivalent terrorization of women through total global awareness of how terrible it is to exist as women globally. This mass trauma is enforced by patriarchy with a design to damage females intergenerationally through hereditary trauma transmission. The same hyper-transmission is being accomplished in developing sexual compliance in terms of the mass hyper-sexualization/objectification to target and commodify self worth through appearance, sexualization and promiscuity, molding female perception to optimally service male sexual predation. -And vise versa.
Tip #4: The fragmentation of feminism into 'isms' by post-modernism and the neo/con/lib triumph of individualism and choice rhetoric has a secondary effect and goal beyond 'divide and conquer' (which it has indeed accomplished); -it is more broadly designed to prevent lateral integration not in terms of the composition of collective opposition, but more importantly to prevent that opposition from developing an integrated sense of what it is opposing, i.e., what the primacy of patriarchy informs, presents and imposes in terms of an idealogical wordview in terms of its cultural action worldwide, namely, that patriarchy's primacy as an ideaology was and is premised on the fundamental of superior physical male strength being the determinant of the superior gender, carried out into all aspects to demand total domination in terms of said gender. Patriarchy's realization as culture likewise dictates world power and supremacy be solely dictated by the superiority of brute force, i.e., military might. Integrated opposition to patriarchy as a systemic worldview would mean implicit opposition to warfare as unilateral aggression or pre-emptive warfare. To prioritize opposition to patriarchy in terms of where it deals the most damage would demand very strong activism and opposition to any and all non-defensive wars, i.e., market driven wars. Feminism's strongest stance would perhaps be to exist as an anti-war movement. It is the determination to destroy any such nascent integrated, lateral opposition in all matters of policy that demands the destruction and fragmentation of feminism. Integrated lateral thinking feminism works even more strongly and in more fundamental opposition to unlimited exploitation of the earth, which 'amoral capitalism' is also trying to prevent any opposition to, at any cost. The philosophy underpinning the subjugation of one half of humanity lends itself even more adroitly to the rape and subjugation of our life source, the planet. Again, lateral integration of these subjects would provide the unequivocal answer that perhaps the strongest opposition to the fossil fuel paradigm in terms of its effect on global policy would again impel feminism to the fore of the anti-war movement, for the US war machine is the greatest individual consumer/ greenhouse gas emitter on the planet. It is military enforcement of energy hegemony that drives it (reflected in the fact that the US population, less that 5% of Earth's population, consumes 1/5 of the world's oil). To oppose planetary destruction is to to be anti-war, first and foremost. (Not to mention, they have attendant socialogical exports...)
Are we Women or Are We 'Menstruators'? - Meghan Murphy
Why Most Men Think They're Over-Working as Parents When, Quantitatively, This Isn't True - Pacific Standard
Female Viagra is another example of society trying to make women sexually "normal" on men's terms - New Statesman
In all likelihood, judge who told rape survivor to 'keep her knees together' will return to the banch - rabble.ca
Spies, Lords & Predators -the greatest 'political' scandal in British history is the Thatcherite pedophile ring that operated with impunity at the top echelons of government.
How Thatcher’s Government Covered Up a VIP Pedophile Ring - The Daily Beast
Where Dr. Richard Gardner, the pioneer on "Parental Alienation Syndrome", the tool used to malign protective mothers in custody disputes in the US, stood on pedophilia (with LAMBDA)
Dads among biggest child-porn producers - The Tampa Tribune
Cops, domestic abuse, and anabolic steroids -Daily Kos
Police Officers three times more likely to commit domestic violence than NFL Players - Daily Kos -actually they have a higher domestic violence rate than any other profession in the US
UK: Paedophile police officers among hundreds arrested for sexual offences [more than 300 since 2012] - International Business Times
Day of the Dead - Salon - the unrestricted female murder spree that is NAFTA's showcase maquiladora city of the future, Cuidad Juarez
The Tip of the Iceberg: Boy Scouts say they have child sex abuse under control. But they designed the system to look that way.
Why do so many women lose custody battles? - Speak Out Loud
35 Women Tell Their Stories About Being Assaulted by Bill Cosby, and the Culture That Wouldn’t Listen - New York Magazine -and so it goes.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Massive Child Sex Abuse Scandal - ThinkProgress
The RCMP: a Royal Canadian disgrace - Macleans -another 12 women lost their lives over failure to proceed on an attempted homicide in the largest serial murder spree in North American history thanks to institutional internalized systemic sexism.
Child-Porn Policing Program Suffers From RCMP Underspending - Huffington Post
Here's one for you: RCMP Officer in child abuse trial has unsupervised visits with his two younger sons, -when this is what he's on trial for doing to his firstborn: burning his son's genitals, chaining and nearly starving him to death, -the father was recommended for sole custody by a psychologist two years prior
In the child's best interests - In a number of Family Court cases, where claims of child sexual abuse have been made against a father, the court has switched care from the mother to the father after a recommendation by a child psychiatrist or psychologist. It is not evidence based.
A wake-up call on the junk science infesting our courtrooms - Washington Post
Childhood, Disrupted - aeon - Adversity in childhood can leave lifelong scars, damaging our cells and our DNA, and making us sick as adults
Grandma's Experiences Leave Epigenetic Mark on Your Genes - discovermagazine
Divorce Courts Favor Money, Power and Influence - Stop Abuse Campaign
Financial Abuse of Women in Intimate Partner Relationships - Elizabeth Branigan
Over 70,000 US rape kits haven't been tested - USA Today
Sex as Terrorism: Sarah Ditum on Andrea Dworkin - New Statesman
Patriarchy, male entitlement, & capitalist greed killed Amy Winehouse, not boozing - Feminist Current
Our Sex Crazed Congress - New York Times
Saudi millionaire who said he 'accidentally tripped and penetrated' teenage girl cleared of rape - Independent
Traditions in Africa Keep Women Oppressed - HRPeople
Don’t worry, Justin Trudeau will never be hurt by sexist objectification - FeministCurrent
"The best you can say is that Jenner self-identifies as a woman with a penis, and that isn't a woman by any definition." -what are the implications, exactly, of having a dick and yet still being able to be "woman of the year"-? Oh, your 'ladybrain' sensibility can take out Germaine Greer. Voila: "the current liberal feminist mandate is that female is a feeling in a man’s head"
"Here’s the bizarre reality: this interviewer is seated across from Germaine Greer – brilliant scholar, feminist icon, a woman who has nearly eighty years of experience and insight – and the best she can do is ask her about Bruce fucking Jenner?"
"Cardiff will not give Greer her earned and deserved honorary degree because she, unlike Steinem, refuses to espouse a belief in ladybrain."
"First of all, "woman as identity" is not limited to Twitter and Tumblr; it is also being taught at colleges and universities, in place of feminist gender analysis - which is now categorized as hate speech. In addition, women who write or speak about feminism publicly are having the language necessary to describe our bodies, lived experiences, oppression and liberation stripped away - and any feminist who resists is branded TERF. [Trans Exclusive Radical Feminist]
The no platforming of radical feminists: A talk by Julie Bindel - FeministCurrent
Meanwhile, gender identity laws are finding rapid acceptance - overriding sex-based protections for women by enabling any male who claims to "feel female" to enter sex-segregated spaces. As you will see if/when you follow any of the links below, women who protest this loss of sex-based boundaries are labeled irrational bigots - our fear of male bodies is just something we need to get over, in the name of progress and "trans inclusion."
Of course, since claims of transgender identity do not require any pursuit of medical transition, in practice "trans inclusion" just means "male inclusion" - and even males who have undergone medical transition have first undergone male socialization. This scientific study found that males who undergo SRS retain a "male pattern regarding criminality," including violent crime. And while I do not agree with this blogger's framing of transsexuality and criminality, her compilation of documented incidents of transwomen's crimes against women is necessary reading for anyone calling women "irrationally bigoted" for recognizing that male bodies bring male socialization and that male socialized people, as a class, are dangerous to women. [Another bracing compilation here.]"
"leave it to born-men to *encourage* women to be exhibitionist, sex-workers, porn-actors, and above all, sexually available to men. how, exactly, is that *different* from what men have been telling women forever?"