1.5M ratings
277k ratings

See, that’s what the app is perfect for.

Sounds perfect Wahhhh, I don’t wanna
wirehead-wannabe
zelsbels: “ blackness-by-your-side: “ When Sherry Johnson was eleven, she found one day that she’s gonna marry a 20-year-old member of her church who had raped her. She became pregnant and in order to avoid investigation and criminal case, her family...
blackness-by-your-side

When Sherry Johnson was eleven, she found one day that she’s gonna marry a 20-year-old member of her church who had raped her. She became pregnant and in order to avoid investigation and criminal case, her family and church officials decided to make the girl a legal wife of this monster.

“My mom asked me if I wanted to get married, and I said, ‘I don’t know, what is marriage, how do I act like a wife?’” Johnson remembers today, many years later. “She said, ‘Well, I guess you’re just going to get married.’” 

However, her case is one of thousand cases of child marriage. According to statistics, children 16 and under are still being married in Florida at a rate of one every few days.

Johnson and her family also attended a conservative Pentecostal church and that other girls of a similar age periodically also married. One girl said when she was 10 she was raped by both a minister and a parishioner and later gave birth to a daughter. There were all documents confirming her and her child’s age, but still, the judge approved the marriage to end the rape investigation, telling her, “What we want is for you to get married.”

And nevertheless, America prefers to interfere in other countries’ internal affairs, like in Syria, calling it “defending freedom” rather than to change states’ laws and to protect American children from rape, coercion and molestation. 

Today, Johnson is campaigning for a state law to stop underage marriage that has already become a norm in some states.

Please, help me to raise awareness to this issue. No one can remain indifferent to the problem of child molestation. 

#StopChildMarriage  #StopChildAbuse

zelsbels

source, btw

mitigatedchaos

A mutual talked about how some guy wandered into his thread and attempted to start a debate about religion.

As long as religion is used for things like this, of course dudes are going to wander into threads to start arguments over it.

Anyhow, this needs to be made illegal.

Source: The New York Times politics gendpol
isaacsapphire
isaacsapphire: “ limeade-henry: “ golbatsforequality: “ Equality Golbat: You have the right to refuse sex for any reason. That doesn’t mean all reasons are exempt from ever being questioned. If you refuse to have sex with someone on the basis of...
golbatsforequality

Equality Golbat: You have the right to refuse sex for any reason. That doesn’t mean all reasons are exempt from ever being questioned. 

If you refuse to have sex with someone on the basis of their race, religion, disability, gender, or sexuality, that is a problem you have to solve for yourself. If you are so hung up on the idea that sex must be able to provide you biological children, that is also a problem you have to deal with.

Basically , if your stance is “i can’t date [x] person because of [a vital aspect of their identity and experience],” understand that line of thinking is bigoted. This person would be much better off with someone who accepts them for who they are, where they won’t have to change themselves for someone else’s (bigoted) satisfaction.

-Glaceon

limeade-henry

By definition it kind of does though

isaacsapphire

Yay rape apologising as progressivism!

Also wtfomgbbq it’s not ok to refuse to have sex or a relationship based on religion?

Or gender?

Ok, is this for real or satire?

Like, this appears to be saying that it’s “a problem you have to deal with” for an atheist lesbian to not have a relationship with a Christian man.

mitigatedchaos

I… think it might be real?  The About claims all their mods are “queer.”

So if you’ve possibly got no monosexual posters (or your monosexual posters desperately don’t want to be monosexual), having an attraction based on genitalia or even things like a subconscious skeletal shape reading of sex, despite that being kind of essential for previous long-term human survival as a group, might seem “fake.”

Even though monosexuality is very, very not fake.  

And in addition to potentially pushing people into unhealthy sex that they don’t want, this sort of approach can also create TERFs and others, who, when told that their reasons for refusing sex aren’t good enough, desperately go hard on attacking the validity of entire sexes as a way out.

Source: golbatsforequality gendpol
mitigatedchaos
mitigatedchaos

Okay, let me make a real post out of this for Prof. Sto– I mean @afloweroutofstone​.

I think part of the public liking of anime and posting of anime tiddies, despite being considered low-class activities on the internet, reflects a coming meltdown in masculinity.

There’s a common perception that masculinity is essentially impervious to attack, which is driven by focusing almost entirely on men at the top and ignoring men at the bottom or treating them as non-men.  (Also by ignoring what masculinity of the kind people want to attack even is.)

The real weaknesses of masculinity, however, are at the margins, not from Trudeau wearing pink.  The men who are already having trouble performing masculinity and being judged wanting just… giving up on performing masculinity in terms of its integration with society.

For now, the broader status hierarchy based on performing masculinity in order to appeal to a combination of other men and neurotypical, heterosexual women, is holding.  

But it’s going to erode as new, competing status hierarchies form and expand among those who have no reason to abide by their low status in the old ones.  We’re seeing a war and division over them in “geek” culture, currently, but new culture hierarchy conflicts are going to spread as the gender system destabilizes.

This is one of those rebellions that begins with the peasants out in the provinces and makes its way into the city.

It’s visible in all sorts of low-status men that many of your readers would hate.  But if it were already accepted, it wouldn’t be a true revolution, and this is what not being accepted looks like, in part, WRT the male gender role.

gendpol the culture war i don't actually watch much anime
the-grey-tribe
gothamist.com

Bank Behind Fearless Girl Statue Agrees To Gender Discrimination Settlement

To the tune of $5 million.
paxamericana

Boston-based multi-trillion asset manager State Street Global Advisors, the controversial company behind the now infamous feminist symbol (and selfie cameo) The Fearless Girl, is settling federal allegations that it discriminated against 305 women in senior positions by paying them less than their male counterparts.

The settlement, first reported by Bloomberg, also names fifteen black vice presidents paid less than their white counterparts, genders not specified.

mitigatedchaos

Now remove the statue so that we can have our glorious bull, which was originally placed somewhat subversively but kept due to the adoration of the people, restored to its original context.

Source: paxamericana gendpol

Anonymous asked:

so in other words, become a chad if you don't want to get falsely accused of rape??

There is no guarantee, and if you look like a sufficiently valuable target, you may be attacked regardless, however…

Being attractive and high-status is a major defense against many forms of social attack.  People will like you and make excuses for you, when they won’t for equally-deserving others that are less handsome and less popular.

It can help even in environments that say they are against lookism and unfair benefits from popularity.

The best defense against this particular accusation, of course, is to be born cis female.  (Of course, that’s still only a partial defense.)

rape cw gendpol anons asks
argumate
argumate

we’ve circled all the way around to “you’re too unattractive to be falsely accused of rape”, the mind boggles.

mitigatedchaos

Oh come on mysterious blogger Argumate is thinking of, surely the ugly, undesirable, and otherwise low-status are the best targets for a false accusation?  

People already don’t like them and find the thought of them as sexual beings to be creepy and repulsive.

gendpol rape cw
athrelon
athrelon

I’ve vaguely heard murmurings about a secular decline in testosterone levels, but imagined it was overhyped or at worst just a result of the obesity epidemic.  @lambdaphagy​ and I had a chance to just scratch the surface of the literature, though, and it’s frankly alarming.

Total T dropped about 20%, bioavailable T dropped 50%, over 20 years from 1987-2004. The Finns aren’t exempt either.   Cohorts were matched for BMI, and even if they weren’t, the effect size of obesity is off by almost an order of magnitude.  Doubling BMI causes T to fall by less than half, and, mirabile dictu, American BMI has not doubled (yet, give it time.) Average BMI went from 25 in 1960 to 28 in 2000.

The speed of that T drop is just jaw-dropping. Obesity doesn’t help, but doesn’t explain this level of cratering.  So: phytoestrogens, xenoestrogens, micropharmaceuticals in the water, behavioral effects?  More work is required, but hit me up if you have any good intel.

mitigatedchaos

Cold Take: Crime declined because we removed lead from the gasoline, lowering the amount of lead-induced brain damage.

Lukewarm Take: Crime declined because we allowed abortion, removing some of the worst-off potential people from being born and raised in substandard conditions.

Hot Take: Crime declined because we put drugs in the water supply and we’re all transgender autistics/neurodivergents now, even the women.  (Especially the women.)

gendpol shtpost not serious

Misc SF Moral Ideas

Here, did you want some background ideas for you science fiction?  In-universe, violating some of these could be considered morally unthinkable.

  • Abortion is banned, but everyone is born naturally sterile unless they get a procedure to allow them to have children.
  • Meat-eating from animals is banned except for a few “traditional” cultures.  This actually includes the Amish and a few "historical,” pasture-based farms.  Everyone just eats engineered meat grown in tubes instead. 
  • Similarly, aside from a handful of traditional farms, the vast majority of milk products are created using tissue engineering and modified bacteria due to perceived animal consent issues.
  • Predator-prey relationships still exist in nature, but prey animals have been genetically modified to lose awareness after sustaining a sufficient level of injury.
  • Prison is considered cruel and inhumane.  Instead, convicted criminals are fitted with internal cybernetic restraints that are monitored by AIs and physically prevent them from engaging in certain actions.  (Alternatively, it weakens, dampens, and delays their motor actions.)
  • Alternatively, prison is considered cruel and inhumane, instead, convicted criminals are subjected to a regime of corporal punishment, but otherwise are allowed to roam a small, isolated town. 
  • It is unthinkable that someone would choose for their child to be monosexual instead of bi- or pansexual.  It has not yet been classified as child abuse.
  • People are almost immortal.  It turns out population explosion isn’t a risk because wanting to have lots of kids is not genetic, but primarily social.  Thus, it’s only considered a weird thing some women do.  To meet population replacement goals, most children are grown in vats and raised by the state.

Moral progress, you guys.

mitigated future mitigated fiction gendpol
thathopeyetlives

Anonymous asked:

hey, i've got an argument against being "prolife." you should listen. here it is. wait for it... IT'S 2017

traveling-spartan answered:

The passage of time magically made unborn children not human beings anymore and killing them not murder?

Morality is an objective constant whether you like it or not. Try again.

thathopeyetlives

What does this even mean? Does anon think that they own the future somehow, or what? Do they think that we are supposed to just vanish away over time? We are the ones who are not killing our next generation. 


In the year 2044 shall we see a revitalized Church? In the year 2068 shall we see ongoing negotiations to restore the Papal States? In the year 2102 shall we see a United Nations Convention On The Rights Of The Unborn? We can only labor to create such a world. 

mitigatedchaos

Only through means that the Church would disapprove of, on the count of its apparent position against contraception - far more fully unlinking sex and reproduction.

And I know the answer in response is “but just don’t have sex then,” but that is not, and never has been, how that works in the real world.

Source: traveling-spartan gendpol
Top Photos