#District Legal Services Authority | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

carriesthewind · 2 years ago

Text

The IA's "Open Library" is Not a Library, Yesterday's Lower Court Decision does Not "Hurt Authors," and the Planned Appeal Is (Almost Certainly) NOT a Good Way to Try to Change Bad Law (In Fact, It's More Likely to Make Bad Law Worse)

Ok, so a day later, I'm still mad about this. If anything, I'm even madder. I'm going to write this as a response to the Internet Archive's "The Fight Continues" blogpost, but before we begin, let's get some facts straight:

Copyright law in the United States, especially the law around digital lending, currently sucks. It's really really bad, and anyone with a stake in the game - except the big publishers and e-book services that profit from it - hate it.

That said, copyright law exists as a thing. As I said in a previous post, you *can* try to change it through court cases, but there are certain things you cannot change. And there are certain things you can try to change, but it will be an uphill battle to change them in a positive direction. And notably, as bad as digital lending law is in the U.S., it still could always get worse! And one general rule of impact litigation: if you are trying to change the law, you want to make sure you have the best possible facts. Because the worse your facts are, the worse your case is likely to go.

Yesterday's district court ruling DID NOT CHANGE ANY SUBSTANTIVE COPYRIGHT LAW IN THE U.S. I cannot emphasize that enough. Regardless of whatever you think of the ruling, it was applying already existing law to the facts.

This is because the Internet Archive's "Open Library" absolutely violates existing copyright law. It just does! They broke the law, they had plenty of notice they were breaking the law and harming authors (more on that below) and just think the law shouldn't apply because they don't like it.

The Internet Archive's "Open Library" is not a library. Some big ways it differs:

While it pretends to have a one-to-one owned-to-loaned ratio, as the opinion granting the publisher's motion for summary judgement notes, IA concedes that it allows "partner libraries" to add books to its collection and then doesn't check (and has no way of checking) if the book is out of circulation at the "partner library" at the same time it's being "checked out" of the Open Library. In other words, it's like if you took a book, scanned the pages, and then gave the scans to your friend who then loaned the scans out to other people but totally promised they were only lending the scans to one person at a time so it's basically like there is still just one copy! And meanwhile you still own, are reading, and lending out the physical copy of the book. Except instead of one book, they were doing this on a massive scale. NO, THAT'S JUST THEFT.*

Speaking of which, the "Open Library" didn't keep that promise! Their "Emergency Library" just let everyone borrow as many copies at a time as they could! Again, THAT'S JUST THEFT.

Like I'm sorry if you don't like the idea of copyright at all: right now, we live in a capitalist system where authors need to be paid for their work in order to, like, not die. If you take their work, scan it into your computer, and give it away for free to anyone and everyone, THAT'S JUST THEFT.

Also, most authors love libraries! Libraries allow more people to access their books while not substantially impacting their revenue and not impacting their rights! AUTHORS - not just publishers, authors - DO NOT LIKE AI'S "OPEN LIBRARY." Why haven't authors sued to stop this before, why is this the publishers suing? From the above letter: "Even simple copyright lawsuits must be brought in federal court, and often cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. A challenge to the Internet Archive could easily cost millions." Publishers have deep pockets that authors and authors' groups don't. Also, authors who object to AI stealing their work are frequently subject to harassment.

If IA won this case, the new law that would be made is this: it would be legal to steal an author's works.

*I'm using "theft" and "steal" instead of "piracy" throughout this write-up to make it clear what this is. "Pirating books" is just stealing them.

So to sum up the facts above: copyright law in the U.S. sucks, but it exists. Attempting to change it for the better through the court system would be very difficult. Even then, changing the law for the better would likely require a case with good facts. Unfortunately, the law could also change for the worse. Yesterday's ruling did not change any law. The facts in this case are very bad, because the IA absolutely violated copyright law. That is in part because the IA's "Open Library" is not a library; they just steal books. Many (if not most) authors and author's groups don't like that IA is stealing from them. If IA won this case, that victory would mean that anyone was allowed to steal an author's works.

*deep breath*

Ok, let's turn to the IA's statement, "The Fight Continues":

"Today’s lower court decision in Hachette v. Internet Archive is a blow to all libraries and the communities we serve."

The Internet Archive is not a library.

No it's not. It is a blow to the Internet Archive, specifically, because you broke the law and it ruled you broke the law. As stated above, it does not change anything with regard to copyright, including digital copyright, law in the U.S., and therefore does not impact libraries or the communities they serve. If you appeal this ruling, as you have stated you intend to, and the law does change for the worse (which is always a risk of appeal, and a risk that gets worse when you have bad facts), THEN libraries might be affected.

"This decision impacts libraries across the US who rely on controlled digital lending to connect their patrons with books online."

I mean yes, in the sense that "controlled digital lending" isn't normal e-book lending. It's the thing you made up where you steal books and illegally redistribute them.

This genuinely sucks for libraries and communities that don't have other ways of accessing digital books because the current copyright scheme sucks so bad! Real libraries are doing things to try to help, and not just steal from authors! More on that below!

"It hurts authors by saying that unfair licensing models are the only way their books can be read online."

OH GO FUCK YOURSELVES

Ok this line, this line right here? That is honestly why I wrote this whole thing.

How DARE you cloak your theft in the real struggles authors face with unfair licensing models. How DARE you pretend you are on the side of authors when you are stealing their works, and they have made it quite clear that they would like you to stop, please. And how DARE you frame it in this "for exposure" bullcrap that ignores the real struggles that authors have to eat, to get healthcare, to get any sort of fair pay and wages for their work, and instead pretend that all authors should care about is whether or not their books can be read online.

And bluntly? If you - not IA, YOU, tumblr user reading this - if you shared this bullcrap statement and told people to donate money to the IA because of this? If you told people they should steal more books in response (because it's the publishers fault, ignore the real authors who are actually harmed)? How DARE you. How DARE you pretend to be on the side of authors and writers.

"And it holds back access to information in the digital age, harming all readers, everywhere."

Except for those readers who are also authors, and need to eat.

And readers who want to read books that will never get written if authors can't write (because they need to eat).

And also, no it doesn't, because it doesn't change the law. It just applies the law that already exists to you. Because you are not above the law.

"But it’s not over—we will keep fighting for the traditional right of libraries to own, lend, and preserve books."

You are not a library.

You were not (and are not) fighting for "the traditional right of libraries." Plenty of other organizations are fighting against bad copyright law in the U.S. This court case, however, was literally just about you stealing books.

Like I cannot emphasize enough that you were just stealing and you got caught.

"We will be appealing the judgment and encourage everyone to come together as a community to support libraries against this attack by corporate publishers."

You aren't a library.

Fuck you for borrowing the (justified) hatred of corporate publishers to paper over your bad actions.

Does "coming together as a community to support libraries against this attack" mean giving you money, as suggested by the calls to action at the bottom of this page? Because you aren't a library.

"We will continue our work as a library."

You aren't a library.

"This case does not challenge many of the services we provide with digitized books including interlibrary loan, citation linking, access for the print-disabled, text and data mining, purchasing ebooks, and ongoing donation and preservation of books."

First, and most important: these are all uncritically good and important things that the IA does! Despite the rest of this post, I am really really glad the IA exists, that it is doing these things, and I hope that it will continue to do this things!

You are correct that this case does not challenge those services! Because those services aren't just stealing books from authors, which is what you were doing, which is what this case is actually about!

I'm skipping the statement from Brewster Kahle because it's just more of the same. The statement then invites you to Take Action! by donating to IA and positing themselves as standing up for libraries! (They are not a library.)

But real libraries and librarians are actually fighting the good fight over lack of access to materials, especially digital materials and bad laws, and you can support them!

If you actually do want to "come together as a community to support libraries," and support digital access, may I suggest instead donating to The Brooklyn Public Library's Books Unbanned program?:

https://www.bklynlibrary.org/books-unbanned

While they aren't directly challenging bad copyright law, they are directly fighting back against laws that are much more actively and materially impact people's access to books, including providing free e-book and database access to everyone in the U.S. age 13-21. It's a great and important program, and your donations can really help!

#libraries #author's rights #internet archive

3K notes · View notes

mariacallous · 4 months ago

Text

The Internet Archive has lost a major legal battle—in a decision that could have a significant impact on the future of internet history. Today, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled against the long-running digital archive, upholding an earlier ruling in Hachette v. Internet Archive that found that one of the Internet Archive’s book digitization projects violated copyright law.

Notably, the appeals court’s ruling rejects the Internet Archive’s argument that its lending practices were shielded by the fair use doctrine, which permits for copyright infringement in certain circumstances, calling it “unpersuasive.”

In March 2020, the Internet Archive, a San Francisco-based nonprofit, launched a program called the National Emergency Library, or NEL. Library closures caused by the pandemic had left students, researchers, and readers unable to access millions of books, and the Internet Archive has said it was responding to calls from regular people and other librarians to help those at home get access to the books they needed.

The NEL was an offshoot of an ongoing digital lending project called the Open Library, in which the Internet Archive scans physical copies of library books and lets people check out the digital copies as though they’re regular reading material instead of ebooks. The Open Library lent the books to one person at a time—but the NEL removed this ratio rule, instead letting large numbers of people borrow each scanned book at once.

The NEL was the subject of backlash soon after its launch, with some authors arguing that it was tantamount to piracy. In response, the Internet Archive within two months scuttled its emergency approach and reinstated the lending caps. But the damage was done. In June 2020, major publishing houses, including Hachette, HarperCollins, Penguin Random House, and Wiley, filed the lawsuit.

In March 2023, the district court ruled in favor of the publishers. Judge John G. Koeltl found that the Internet Archive had created “derivative works,” arguing that there was “nothing transformative” about its copying and lending. After the initial ruling in Hachette v. Internet Archive, the parties negotiated terms—the details of which have not been disclosed—though the archive still filed an appeal.

James Grimmelmann, a professor of digital and internet law at Cornell University, says the verdict is “not terribly surprising” in the context of how courts have recently interpreted fair use.

The Internet Archive did eke out a Pyrrhic victory in the appeal. Although the Second Circuit sided with the district court’s initial ruling, it clarified that it did not view the Internet Archive as a commercial entity, instead emphasizing that it was clearly a nonprofit operation. Grimmelmann sees this as the right call: “I’m glad to see that the Second Circuit fixed that mistake.” (He signed an amicus brief in the appeal arguing that it was wrong to classify the use as commercial.)

“Today’s appellate decision upholds the rights of authors and publishers to license and be compensated for their books and other creative works and reminds us in no uncertain terms that infringement is both costly and antithetical to the public interest,” Association of American Publishers president and CEO Maria A. Pallante said in a statement. “If there was any doubt, the Court makes clear that under fair use jurisprudence there is nothing transformative about converting entire works into new formats without permission or appropriating the value of derivative works that are a key part of the author’s copyright bundle.”

In a statement, Internet Archive director of library services Chris Freeland expressed disappointment “in today’s opinion about the Internet Archive’s digital lending of books that are available electronically elsewhere. We are reviewing the court’s opinion and will continue to defend the rights of libraries to own, lend, and preserve books.”

Dave Hansen, executive director of the Author’s Alliance, a nonprofit that often advocates for expanded digital access to books, also came out against the ruling. “Authors are researchers. Authors are readers,” he says. “IA’s digital library helps those authors create new works and supports their interests in seeing their works be read. This ruling may benefit the bottom line of the largest publishers and most prominent authors, but for most it will end up harming more than it will help.”

The Internet Archive’s legal woes are not over. In 2023, a group of music labels, including Universal Music Group and Sony, sued the archive in a copyright infringement case over a music digitization project. That case is still making its way through the courts. The damages could be up to $400 million, an amount that could pose an existential threat to the nonprofit.

The new verdict arrives at an especially tumultuous time for copyright law. In the past two years there have been dozens of copyright infringement cases filed against major AI companies that offer generative AI tools, and many of the defendants in these cases argue that the fair use doctrine shields their usage of copyrighted data in AI training. Any major lawsuit in which judges refute fair use claims are thus closely watched.

It also arrives at a moment when the Internet Archive’s outsize importance in digital preservation is keenly felt. The archive’s Wayback Machine, which catalogs copies of websites, has become a vital tool for journalists, researchers, lawyers, and anyone with an interest in internet history. While there are other digital preservation projects, including national efforts from the US Library of Congress, there’s nothing like it available to the public.

38 notes · View notes

her-satanic-wiles · 2 months ago

Text

Kinktober Day 16 - Exhibitionism

Papa Emeritus I x Reader

You are a sex worker at the Ministry, performing sensually behind double-sided glass, indulging in fantasies of being desired by Primo. As Primo watches you with intense longing, he succumbs to his own pleasure, yet his desire for you only deepens, fueling a craving to possess you completely.

Masterlist ⛧ Kinktober 2024 Masterlist

Words: 4.4k.

Reading Time: 18 min.

Warnings: exhibitionism, fingering, gang bang fantasies, masturbation, mentions of gang bangs, nipple play, objectification, self-objectification, vaginal fingering, voyeurism

Taglist: @akayuki56 @alien-the-ghost @amazing-bobinsky @angellayercake @anonymous-appreciation @babydestinyinfluencer @bitchywitchygardener @blossomsea @call-me-little-sunshine84 @copiaspet622 @copiasslut @cosmixxdust @da-rulah @dolceterzo @dopey-fandom-girl @faithisyours @ghoulishxdelights @hauntedharmonic-ghoulishhaunter @high-above-the-city @howlingco @inkstainedrat @kaijukimchi @kenken-the-shoggoth @ledger-kaos @magopi @megachaoticstupid @meliza1001 @miss-leto @mommy-dust @neganwifey25-blog @piaart @saintbowie @shycardinale @sister-of-sin-claudia @sisterof-sin @sodoswitchimage @the-did-i-ask @xiyingly @zombiesnips-blog

Author’s note: Hi, everyone!

Today’s fic draws inspiration from the Edo-period (1603–1868) red-light district of Yoshiwara, where peep shows were a popular form of entertainment. Although the exact names of these peep show structures are not well-documented, they provided secluded, intimate viewing spaces. Visitors would discreetly observe courtesans or sexual performances, reflecting the controlled nature of these environments.

These voyeuristic setups were part of the broader ukiyo (“floating world”) culture—a space dedicated to escaping societal norms through pleasure, indulgence, and art. Activities ranged from public erotic performances to private encounters facilitated by intermediaries, such as in tea houses or pleasure chambers. Yoshiwara wasn’t just about sexual activities; it also fostered artistic expressions like ukiyo-e prints and literature, capturing themes of fleeting pleasure and desire.

In modern Japan, venues like Nozoki Beya (peep rooms) mirror some aspects of these historical practices. Nozoki Beya allows customers to watch performers engage in erotic acts, either live or behind glass partitions. These booths offer a voyeuristic experience similar to the setups of Yoshiwara, with a strict separation between viewer and performer.

The popularity of establishments like Nozoki Beya grew in part from legal loopholes created by Japan’s 1956 Anti-Prostitution Law. After World War II, Japan saw a rise in unregulated prostitution and forced sexual slavery. To combat this, the law banned prostitution (defined as vaginal intercourse for money). However, other sexual services—such as non-penetrative acts—remained legal, leading to the growth of businesses like Nozoki Beya.

These venues operate within legal boundaries by prohibiting direct physical contact between customers and performers. They require local government licenses and are subject to zoning laws, which restrict their operation to areas like Kabukicho in Tokyo. Adult entertainment businesses cannot operate near schools, parks, or residential areas, but the ambiguous nature of Japan’s laws creates some gray areas. Venues often navigate the fine line between legality and illegality, especially when performers’ actions approach the limits of prostitution.

While this fic takes inspiration from both Nozoki Beya and the historical practices of Yoshiwara, it is not a direct depiction of these activities. All characters featured are adults above the age of 21, and everything in the story is entirely consensual.

Enjoy the story!

🔞 MDNI 🔞

The red glow of the octagonal room enveloped you, the soft light casting playful shadows that danced across the mirrored glass. You settled onto the padded lounger at the centre, the silk of your robe clinging just enough to tease the senses. This was your space, a sanctuary of seduction where you could lose yourself to the performance, even if the audience remained unseen.

You adjusted your position, allowing the fabric to slip from your shoulder, exposing a hint of skin. You caught your reflection in the glass—a captivating sight that both excited and empowered you. You loved the way it felt to perform, the thrill of revealing just enough while holding back the rest.

But tonight, beneath the intoxicating haze of incense, there was a yearning that stirred deep within you—a desire for a particular gaze. You wished Primo would come to watch. The thought sent a shiver down your spine, the ache of wanting to be seen by him amplifying the heat radiating in the room. You imagined his dark eyes on you, exploring every curve and movement, but the truth was, you had no idea if he would show.

With each languid stretch of your limbs, you painted a picture for the invisible audience. You smoothed your hands over your thighs, the subtle caress igniting a fire in your belly. In the back of your mind, you whispered a silent plea for him to appear, to share in this intimate moment, even if he remained hidden behind the glass.

You leaned back against the cushions, your lips parting ever so slightly as you exhaled, an invitation carried through the air—a sound meant for him, even if he was still just a thought. In this world of shadows and reflections, you held onto hope that he would find his way into your light.

You closed your eyes for a moment, letting the rhythm of your breath guide you. The anticipation thrummed in the air, urging you to embrace the performance. With a soft smile playing on your lips, you let the tension ease from your body, focusing on the sensations that rippled through you.

Opening your eyes, you began to move, each motion fluid and deliberate. You arched your back slightly, allowing the fabric of your robe to slip further down your shoulder, revealing more of your collarbone. The mirrors caught every angle, reflecting a beautiful illusion of yourself—a vision you hoped would entice anyone watching.

You leaned forward, your fingers grazing your thighs, slowly tracing circles on your skin as if inviting the audience to feel the heat emanating from your body. The room felt electric, each subtle movement weaving a spell of seduction that filled the air. You thought of Primo, picturing him in your mind as you performed, his presence a silent motivation that pushed you deeper into the moment.

You turned your body slightly, allowing the curves of your hips to catch the light, shifting to give the reflections a tantalising view. You imagined Primo’s gaze, how he would study every detail, and the thought quickened your pulse. Would he appreciate the way you teased the fabric, pulling it closer to your body, then letting it slip away again?

As the performance intensified, you let your hands roam, exploring your own body as though it were a work of art. The sensuality of it filled you with a confidence that radiated through the glass, mingling with the faint scent of incense in the air. You could almost feel the heat of his gaze upon you, igniting a deeper yearning that urged you to give more.

You shifted again, propping yourself up on one elbow, your body poised in a way that accentuated the curve of your waist. You locked your eyes onto your own reflection, the desire within you manifesting in a wicked smile as you teased the edge of your robe, letting it slip just enough to suggest what lay beneath.

With your heart racing, you let the energy of the moment sweep you away. The way the fabric caressed your skin sent shivers down your spine, urging you to explore further. You took a deep breath, focusing on the sensation of your body and the power it held in this intimate space.

You shifted again, letting your legs fall open slightly as you reclined back onto the lounger, propping yourself up on one elbow. The angle provided a tantalising view, showcasing the curve of your hips and the softness of your thighs. You could almost hear the whispers of admiration from an invisible audience, and you imagined Primo’s eyes drinking in every detail, a mixture of longing and desire.

You began to play with your hair, letting the silken strands cascade down your back and across your shoulders. With each movement, you wove your fingers through your locks, drawing attention to the graceful lines of your neck and collarbone. You could picture him captivated, lost in the way you transformed even the simplest actions into something alluring.

Feeling bolder, you lifted your hand to your chest, tracing a path down the fabric of your robe, teasingly pulling it aside just enough to reveal a hint of skin beneath. The warmth of your own touch sent a rush of heat through you, and you relished in the delicious tension that filled the air. You could almost feel the weight of his gaze pressing against you, urging you to go further.

Primo stepped into the booth, his heart racing with a mix of anticipation and excitement. The moment he entered the dimly lit space, he was enveloped by the warm glow of the red lights that pulsed softly around the octagonal room. His breath caught in his throat as he took in the sight before him.

There you were, a vision of seduction reclining on the lounger, the silk of your robe glistening under the soft light. The way you moved was hypnotic; your hands glided over your skin with an elegance that left him entranced. Each deliberate stroke drew his gaze, the rhythm of your touch igniting a fire within him.

He watched as you leaned back, arching your back just enough to accentuate the curve of your waist. The robe slipped slightly from your shoulder, revealing the delicate expanse of your collarbone. He felt a surge of desire at the sight, his heart pounding as you showcased your body, unhurried and deliberate.

Primo shifted in his seat, the anticipation thick in the air. He didn’t want to miss a moment; your every movement was a tantalising tease that left him yearning for more. He could hardly believe his luck in being here, hidden behind the glass, able to witness this private performance. The thought of you, completely unaware of his presence, only deepened his desire.

As you ran your hands over your thighs, he could feel his pulse quicken. The way you traced your skin, as if awakening every inch of your body, sent a shiver down his spine. He leaned forward, entranced, hungry for the sight of you unraveling before him. The intimate atmosphere heightened every sensation, each flutter of your fingers igniting something primal within him.

“Sathanas, you’re stunning,” he murmured under his breath, even though he knew you couldn’t hear him. He wanted to reach out, to touch you, to draw you closer, but the barrier of glass kept him safely on this side of desire. It was both exhilarating and torturous, and he found himself lost in the depths of your performance.

You lifted your hand to your chest, teasing the fabric of your robe, revealing just enough to stir his imagination. His breath hitched as you let the robe slip further, showcasing your curves, your skin glowing in the red light. Every moment felt electric, the connection between you palpable despite the separation.

Primo’s breath caught as you pulled your robe down, revealing the soft swell of your breasts. The sight sent a jolt of desire through him, tightening his grip on the edge of the booth as he leaned forward, completely captivated. The delicate curve of your body, coupled with the seductive way you played with your nipples, was intoxicating.

You teased the sensitive peaks, rolling them gently between your fingers as you gazed at your own reflection, lost in the moment. Each flicker of your movements seemed to pulse with life, and he could hardly contain himself, the urge to reach out and touch you almost overwhelming. The glass barrier between you was both a comfort and a torment, separating him from the intoxicating beauty before him.

He adjusted his position, feeling the fabric of his papal robes shift against his skin, the weight of them rubbing against his hardness. The thrill of being here, watching you—bare, uninhibited, and so incredibly alluring—left him with an insatiable hunger that only you could satisfy.

The way you surrendered to your own pleasure stirred something primal within him. He imagined the soft sounds of your breaths, the way your body moved with an almost liquid grace. The tension between you and him felt electric, charged with the unspoken connection that bound you in this moment. He wanted nothing more than to see how far you would take this performance, to witness every nuance of your desire.

“Damn it,” he whispered, unable to tear his gaze away. You were exquisite, a living embodiment of sensuality. The thought of you writhing beneath his touch sent a rush of heat through him, and he clenched his fists, fighting against the urge to reach out and break the barrier that separated you.

You sneaked your hands lower, fingers gliding down the curve of your waist and past your thighs. The air in the booth felt charged, and he couldn’t tear his gaze away as you spread your legs, revealing everything to him. The intimacy of the moment was electrifying, leaving him breathless and entranced.

The soft glow of the room highlighted your most intimate parts, and the sight left him utterly captivated. His heart raced in his chest, the primal urge to reach out and touch you coursing through him with every passing second. You were so beautifully exposed, unashamed in your sensuality, and it took everything in him to remain still behind the glass.

He watched as you let your fingers explore, your touch delicate yet purposeful. The way you arched your back, the soft moans that slipped from your lips, ignited a fire deep within him. His pulse quickened with each small movement, every sigh echoing in his ears like a siren’s call, drawing him deeper into your world.

As you continued to caress yourself, he could see the way your body responded to your touch—the slight quiver of your thighs, the way your breath hitched as you sought pleasure. His fingers itched to feel your skin, to explore the soft curves that were so tantalisingly close yet impossibly out of reach.

Every instinct urged him to close the distance, to step through the barrier and claim this moment for himself. The tantalising notion of being the one to elicit those moans, to draw forth your pleasure, filled his mind. It was maddening, the way you performed with such confidence, utterly unaware of how completely you had ensnared him in your web of desire.

With a quick glance around the booth to ensure his privacy, he reached beneath the soft folds of his papal robes. His fingers brushed against his arousal, a low groan escaping his lips as he began to pleasure himself. The sensation of his hand moving over his skin was electrifying, an echo of the pleasure you were experiencing, and the thought of you heightened every stroke.

His eyes never left you as he matched his rhythm to the movements of your hands, each caress of your body a tantalising tease that drew him deeper into desire. You were a vision of pure ecstasy, and he could hardly contain himself as he watched the way you surrendered to the pleasure, each sigh and moan igniting a fire within him.

As he pumped his hand in time with your movements, he imagined what it would feel like to touch you, to feel the warmth of your skin beneath his fingertips. The fantasy of being with you, of tasting the sweetness of your body, pushed him closer to the edge. He bit his lip, stifling the sounds of his pleasure as he focused solely on you.

You were an exquisite performer, every inch of your body a work of art that left him breathless. He could see how you arched your back, the way your eyes fluttered closed in pure bliss. It drove him wild, the thought that you were lost in your own world while he was completely entranced by the scene before him.

“Please,” he murmured, the word slipping past his lips unbidden, a silent prayer to the universe for a chance to be closer to you, to feel your body entwined with his. The moment felt electric, every touch of his hand against himself echoing the rhythm of your exploration.

Primo’s breath came in ragged gasps, the world around him fading away until there was only you, your body, and the sweet tension that hung in the air. He was lost in the spectacle, a willing captive to the allure you created, his pleasure entwining with yours in a beautiful, forbidden dance.

As you reclined on the lounger, every movement felt amplified, each stroke of your hands igniting a flame of desire within you. The soft glow of the red lights illuminated your skin, highlighting every curve and contour, and you revelled in the feeling of being on display. There was something intoxicating about knowing that people were watching you, their eyes glued to your every movement behind the glass.

With each slow caress of your body, you felt a surge of confidence. The sensation of your fingers gliding over your skin was heightened by the knowledge that you were captivating someone—drawing them into your world of pleasure. You leaned into it, letting your hands explore, each stroke deliberate and sensual. The heat pooling in your belly grew as you imagined the desire radiating from the booth, the silent, hungry gazes locked onto you, drinking in the sight of your performance.

Being on display like this was thrilling, a rush of power that electrified your senses. You relished the idea that your body was an object of desire, a canvas upon which fantasies were painted. There was a heady mix of vulnerability and empowerment in sharing such an intimate part of yourself, and you leaned into that feeling, letting it wash over you.

The glass separated you from the outside world, creating a cocoon of intimacy that made the experience all the more exhilarating. You caught glimpses of shadows moving behind the transparent barrier, a silent acknowledgment of the connection being forged in that space. Each sigh that escaped your lips felt like a call to them, an invitation to join you in this moment of pure indulgence.

As you spread your legs wider, the thrill of being so exposed sent a rush of adrenaline coursing through your veins. You played with your nipples, your body responding eagerly to your touch, and you savoured the sensations that coursed through you. The slight pressure, the way your skin tingled, all combined to create a symphony of pleasure that resonated within.

You felt like a goddess, commanding attention and desire, the thrill of the performance fuelling your every move. You enjoyed putting on this show, the way it pushed you to explore the boundaries of your own pleasure. You knew that your every gesture, every gasp, was met with rapt attention and longing, and it filled you with an exhilarating sense of purpose.

As you dipped your fingers inside yourself, a wave of pleasure coursed through you, intensifying the connection between your body and the exhilaration of being on display. You closed your eyes for a moment, surrendering to the sensations, but your thoughts drifted to him—Primo—and the way he would be watching you with such intensity.

But then your mind wandered further, teasing the edges of fantasy. What would it be like to be ravaged by all three papas? The thought sent a shiver of excitement down your spine. You imagined Secondo’s bold, dominating presence, the way he would claim you with a fierce passion, igniting a fire within you. His touch would be rough yet tantalising, pushing you to the edge of pleasure and beyond.

And then there was Terzo, with his playful charm and mischievous grin. You could almost feel his hands on your body, exploring and teasing in ways that made your breath hitch. He’d pull you into a world of sweet torment, drawing out your pleasure until you were begging for release.

But it was Primo who held your attention now, the way his gaze penetrated you even from behind the glass, a silent promise of what could be. You pictured him joining in, commanding the room with his presence, taking control of the scene as he directed the two others to pleasure you together. The thought of being surrounded by them, each one focused solely on your pleasure, sent a wave of desire washing over you.

You thrust your fingers deeper, letting the pleasure build as you imagined the three of them, each taking their turn to ravish you, to claim you in their own unique ways. The heat coiled tightly in your belly, and you could almost hear their voices urging you on, calling you to lose yourself in the moment.

The fantasy felt so real, your body responding to the idea of being the centre of their attention, of being worshipped and desired by all three. You envisioned the scene vividly—bodies entwined, hands exploring, the air thick with the scent of desire and the sounds of pleasure. The thought of being at their mercy, of being claimed by each one in turn, made your heart race.

As you continued to pleasure yourself, you moaned softly, your breath hitching as the fantasy enveloped you. You were lost in the throes of ecstasy, the image of the three papas circling your mind, igniting a fire that left you gasping for more. It was a delicious thought, and you reveled in it, letting it guide you deeper into pleasure, unashamed and utterly consumed by the fantasy.

You thrust your fingers deeper inside yourself, the sensation sending jolts of pleasure radiating throughout your body. With each movement, your mind remained locked on Primo—the way he watched you, those intense eyes filled with desire. The thrill of being on display for him alone heightened every sensation, every gasp that escaped your lips.

You imagined him leaning closer, captivated by the sight of you giving in to your own pleasure. The very thought of him watching you, taking in every intimate moment, stoked the flames of your desire even higher. You could almost feel the heat of his gaze enveloping you, making you feel alive and exposed in the best possible way.

As you continued to tease and caress your body, you relished the idea of him being the sole witness to your pleasure, the one person who understood the intricacies of desire. You could picture him leaning against the glass, his breath hitching as he watched you pleasure yourself, each gasp and moan pulling him deeper into the web of your exhibitionism. You reveled in the idea of being the star of his fantasy, a beautiful spectacle designed solely for his enjoyment.

The way he must have reacted—his breath quickening, desire coursing through him like wildfire—made you want to push even further. You arched your back and spread your legs wider, giving him an even better view, and you felt a thrill race through you. You were not just performing; you were offering yourself to him, inviting him into this moment, even if only in his imagination.

With each thrust of your fingers, you thought of how he would react, the pleasure reflected in his eyes as he watched you give in to the waves of ecstasy. The connection between you two felt palpable, as if the glass that separated you was nothing but an illusion. You imagined him whispering sweet nothings, encouragement urging you to let go, to revel in your own pleasure and the thrill of being seen.

You could feel your climax building, a wave of heat pooling low in your belly, and you surrendered to the fantasy of him—his presence dominating your thoughts. The intimacy of the moment was intoxicating, and you savored the connection that seemed to transcend the barrier between performer and observer.

As you neared your release, the thought of his eyes on you, filled with longing and desire, pushed you over the edge. With a final thrust of your fingers, you cried out, the sound echoing in the intimate space as pleasure coursed through you. In that moment, it felt as if it were only the two of you in the world, lost in the shared experience of desire, connection, and the exquisite thrill of being on display for him alone.

Primo leaned back in his booth, the glass between him and you amplifying the thrill of the moment. Watching you was intoxicating, a sensory overload that consumed him entirely. The way your fingers glided over your skin, the gentle arch of your back, and the soft sighs escaping your lips stirred something primal within him. He couldn’t help but feel a surge of excitement as he realised how much he craved this—craved you.

His heart raced as he observed every intimate detail of your performance. The way you surrendered to your own pleasure, completely unguarded and exposed, ignited a fire deep inside him. He imagined what it would be like to join you, to feel your body beneath his hands, to taste the sweetness of your skin. The fantasy enveloped him, pulling him deeper into the realm of desire.

He watched as you dipped your fingers inside yourself, the sight sending a rush of heat through his veins. It was a sight he could have only dreamed of, and the knowledge that you were performing just for him heightened every sensation. Each thrust of your fingers seemed to draw him in closer, making him feel as if he were part of the scene, even from behind the glass. He could hardly breathe, caught between the beauty of the moment and the longing that surged through him.

Primo’s hand moved instinctively, mirroring your movements as he began to pleasure himself. He matched the rhythm of your fingers, the connection between you two electric. Every moan that escaped your lips was like a sweet invitation, urging him to give in to the raw, primal urge coursing through him. He imagined the warmth of your body, the taste of your skin, the sound of your breath—everything combined to create a world where only the two of you existed.

He could feel the tension building within him, an overwhelming urge to break through the barrier and claim you. The thought of being the one to worship your body, to push you to new heights of pleasure, sent shivers of delight down his spine. You were a vision of pure ecstasy, and the sheer thought of you belonging to him, even for just a moment, was enough to drive him wild.

As you reached the peak of your pleasure, the sound of your cries echoed in the small space, wrapping around him like a lover’s embrace. Primo’s own release was imminent, and he let himself be lost in the moment, caught in the exquisite blend of desire and satisfaction. The image of you, utterly consumed by your own ecstasy, pushed him over the edge. He closed his eyes, surrendering to the wave of pleasure that washed over him, feeling every pulse and throb as he gave in completely.

As the wave of pleasure crashed over him, Primo surrendered completely to the moment, his body tensing with the intensity of his orgasm. He watched as his release spilled forth, hitting the floor in rhythmic splatters that echoed softly in the intimate space. The sight was primal, raw, and it only heightened the exhilaration coursing through him. Each pulse sent shivers down his spine, a testament to the fierce desire that had been building within him since he first laid eyes on you.

But even as he rode the waves of his climax, his thoughts remained fixed on you. The scene was etched into his mind, the image of your body writhing in pleasure, fingers buried deep within yourself, and that glorious expression of ecstasy on your face. It was intoxicating, and as his heart raced and his breathing began to steady, he felt an even fiercer craving ignite within him.

Despite the release, his desire for you burned hotter than ever. He longed to touch you, to feel your skin against his, to taste every inch of you that had been laid bare before him. The throes of his orgasm only served to amplify the need that coursed through him—a desperate ache to possess you completely.

Primo could still see you, the way you were lost in your pleasure, utterly uninhibited and inviting. The thought of all the ways he could worship your body, of how he could take you higher, sent a fresh rush of need through him. He wanted to be the one to make you moan, to feel you quiver beneath him, to guide you to the brink of ecstasy time and again.

He leaned closer to the glass, a silent vow forming in his mind. This was only the beginning. The tantalising connection he felt—though brief—had awakened something within him that couldn’t be easily quelled. Each pattern his release left on the floor was a reminder of the intensity of the moment, and it made him crave you even more.

Even as he began to come down from the high of his orgasm, he knew one thing for certain: he wanted you. The fierce desire that coursed through his veins felt almost unbearable, a need that demanded to be fulfilled. The thought of you lingering in his mind, a haunting echo of what he had just witnessed, was enough to stoke the flames of his passion anew.

He wanted to know the taste of your skin, the feel of your body beneath his, and he could only hope that this performance was just a prelude to something far more intimate. For now, he was content to watch, but deep down, he knew that he would do anything to make you his—now and forever.

Prev./Next

24 notes · View notes

djuvlipen · 2 months ago

Text

Child Removal from Low-Income Romani Families Raises Severe Human Rights Concerns in Bulgarian Child Welfare System

Recent cases in Bulgaria have shed light on significant human rights issues within child welfare practices, particularly affecting vulnerable, low-income families, mainly of Romani origin. The European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) and the Equal Opportunities Initiative are supporting two important legal proceedings representing two different families: the Marinov and Kovachev families. Both highlight crucial issues regarding family rights and potential injustices within Bulgaria's child protection system. The removal of children from their families by child protection services is deeply concerning—mainly when it is based on poverty alone and occurs without clear explanation, substantial justification, or properly informing the family. While this practice should aim to protect children, it frequently fails to address the root causes of family struggles, leading to discriminatory practices, human rights abuses, and unnecessary trauma for both children and parents.

Marinov Family

The Marinov family—parents Andrey and Ivanka and their four children—faced a challenging situation when the children were removed on the grounds of poverty and placed in a Family-Type Accommodation Centre (FTAC). Andrey recently applied for legal recognition of their guardianship of three of the children, while the youngest was already recognised at birth. On August 1, 2023, the eldest child returned to live with his grandfather without informing his parents, prompting them to seek help from the Second District Police Department in Sofia to locate their son.

On January 12, 2023, police found and detained the eldest child at a Home for Temporary Accommodation of Minors in Sofia. Andrey was informed that his four children would be transferred to back to the FTAC. Child Protection employees took the other three children from Ivanka, who claims she was misled—they told her the children would be taken to the Second Regional Police Department for pickup after an hour rather than informing her of their placement in the FTAC.

The parents filed a complaint with Sofia City's Administrative Court, and a child rights lawyer was hired to represent them. In April 2023, the lawyer discovered an administrative order placing the children in FTAC for 3 years and mandating the parents to attend sessions to improve their parenting skills. The lawyer raised concerns that bias regarding the family's ethnicity and economic status affected the officer’s decision on parental skills sessions after just a single home visit, concluding that the family’s living conditions were below the poverty line.

During this time, their eldest son reported instances of abuse and harassment at the FTAC, both towards himself and his siblings. On July 11, 2024, the Marinov family initiated legal actions with the Elin Pelin District Court to reintegrate the children into their family. Social Services supported the reintegration, and after open hearings on August 5, 2024, the court ruled in favour of the family on August 29, 2024. The lawyer's request for immediate execution was granted, paving the way for the family's reunion.

Kovachev Family

Aleksandar and Elena are young parents struggling to keep custody of their newborn son, Stefan. Despite Aleksandar’s willingness to care for his child and partner, authorities placed Stefan in a “Mother and Baby Unit,” effectively separating the family. Aleksandar encountered significant obstacles in obtaining legal recognition of his child, with authorities refusing to accept his declaration of paternity. The Shumen Social Service Directorate (SSD) cited concerns about his ability to provide the necessary living conditions and resources despite Aleksandar’s expressed intention to care for both mother and child. Social services employees allegedly threatened Aleksandar with imprisonment for his relationship with Elena.

An appeal against the SSD's order was filed, leading to ongoing court proceedings, and transferred to the Razgrad Administrative Court, where a hearing was held on June 12, 2024.

This case brings to light several societal and legal issues, including the rights of young parents, the welfare of children born to minors, and the balance between state intervention and family unity. Initially, the Razgrad Court decided against Aleksandar on June 26, 2024. The case is now pending appeal before the Supreme Administrative Court. The ERRC is exploring ways to escalate the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Both cases highlight biases and discrimination in procedure, a lack of regard for family rights protection, and a focus on punishing racialised poverty often over the children's best interests within child welfare systems. They also shed light on the myriad pitfalls and barriers faced by Romani parents and their children as they navigate the child protection system.

The economic situation of a family alone does not affect parental abilities. These cases emphasise the urgent need for reform in child welfare practices to better align with human rights standards and the best interests of children and families. Only through such reforms can Bulgaria create a system that truly protects and supports its most vulnerable citizens, particularly low-income Romani families. The ERRC remains committed to advocating for families' rights and ensuring that legal processes effectively uphold these rights, regardless of racialised poverty.

The names of individuals and families were changed in this article to protect their anonymity.

#childcare system #roma

17 notes · View notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 7 months ago

Text

Tessa Stuart at Rolling Stone:

KRISTA HARDING’S DAUGHTER was eight weeks old when that police cruiser pulled behind her on the interstate and hit the lights in September 2019. She called her boss at the Little Caesars in Pinson, Alabama, where she’d just been promoted to manager: I’m going to be a little late, but I’m coming in! Don’t panic. Harding’s registration tag was expired. She figured the officer would write her a ticket and she’d be on her way, but when he came back after running her driver’s license, he had handcuffs out. There was a felony warrant out for her arrest, he said: “Chemical endangerment of a child.” Harding used her most patient customer-service tone to ask the officer if he’d please check again. But there was no mistake, the cop confirmed: He was taking her to the Etowah County Detention Center, almost an hour’s drive away. “I’m in the back of the cop car just bawling my eyes out, like, ugly-face-snot-bubbles crying,” Harding remembers. She was worried about being away from her newborn, and she was confused: Chemical endangerment of a child? “I think of somebody cooking meth with a baby on their hip,” she says.

She’s right to think that: The Alabama law, passed in 2006, was intended to target those who expose children to toxic chemicals, or worse, explosions, while manufacturing methamphetamine in ad-hoc home labs. Harding says it took at least eight hours to be booked into a cell that night, and it was more than a week before she was finally allowed to see a judge. She was still leaking breast milk, and desperately missing her two daughters. Her family wasn’t allowed to bring her clean underwear, so every day she washed her one pair, saturated with menstrual blood, in the cell sink, then hung them to dry.

Harding says she eventually learned the warrant for her arrest had been issued because of a urine test taken at a doctor’s visit early in her pregnancy. Sitting alone in her cell, she conjured a vague memory of her OB-GYN warning her local authorities had begun to crack down on weed. The comment had struck her as odd at the time: Nine years earlier, when she was pregnant with her first child, the same doctor at the same hospital had told Harding, who’d smoked both pot and cigarettes before she was pregnant, that she’d rather Harding kick the nicotine than the weed. (Studies are unequivocal about the fact that cigarettes contribute to adverse pregnancy outcomes, but the research on weed is less conclusive, with some doctors arguing it at least has therapeutic benefits, like helping with morning sickness.)

But in the years between her first child and her second, something had changed in certain parts of Alabama. In Etowah County, in 2013, the sheriff, the district attorney, and the head of the local child-welfare agency held a press conference to announce they intended to aggressively enforce that 2006 law. Instead of going after the manufacturers of meth, though, they planned to target pregnant women who used virtually any substance they deemed harmful to a developing fetus.

“If a baby is born with a controlled-substance dependency, the mother is going to jail,” then-Sheriff Todd Entrekin said at the time. Police weren’t required to establish that a child was born with a chemical dependency, though — or even that a fetus experienced any harm — a drug test, a confession, or just an accusation of substance use during pregnancy was enough to arrest women for a first offense that carries a maximum sentence of 10 years. One public defender would later call these “unwinnable cases.” Over the following decade, Etowah County imprisoned hundreds of mothers — some of whom were detained, before trial, for the rest of their pregnancies, inside one of the most brutal and inhumane prisons in the country, denied access to prenatal care and adequate nutrition, they say — in the name of protecting their children from harm.

[...]

In the past two decades, Alabama has become the undisputed champion of arresting pregnant women for actions that wouldn’t be considered crimes if they weren’t pregnant: 649 arrests between 2006 and 2022, almost as many arrests as documented in all other states combined, according to advocacy group Pregnancy Justice, which collected the statistics. Across the U.S., the vast majority of women arrested on these charges were too poor to afford a lawyer, and a quarter of cases were based on the use of a legal substance, like prescription medication.

Today, Marshall is the attorney general of Alabama, and just a few months ago, the state’s Supreme Court used the same logic — that life begins at conception, therefore an embryo is legally indistinguishable from a living child — in a decision that was responsible for shutting down IVF clinics across the state. The ruling was a triumph for the fetal-personhood movement, a nationwide crusade to endow fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses with constitutional rights. Personhood has been the Holy Grail for the anti-abortion movement since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, but outlawing abortion — at any stage of pregnancy, for any reason — is just the start of what legal recognition of embryos’ rights could mean for anyone who can get pregnant. Experts have long warned that elevating an embryo’s legal status effectively strips the person whose body that embryo occupies of her own rights the moment she becomes pregnant.

Across the country, this theory has led to situations like in Texas, where a hospital kept a brain-dead woman alive for almost two months — against her own advanced directive and the wishes of her family — in deference to a state law that prevents doctors from removing a pregnant person from life support. (The hospital only relented after the woman’s husband sued for “cruel and obscene mutilation of a corpse.”) Or in New Hampshire, where a court allowed a woman who was hit by a car while seven months pregnant to be sued by her future child for negligence because she failed to use “a designated crosswalk.” Or in Washington, D.C., where a terminally ill cancer patient, 26 weeks pregnant, requested palliative care, but was instead subjected to court-ordered cesarean section. Her baby survived for just two hours; she died two days later.

Or in Alabama, where, in 2019, Marshae Jones walked into the Pleasant Grove Police Department with her six-year-old daughter expecting to be interviewed for a police investigation. Months earlier, Jones, four and a half months pregnant at the time, had been shot by her co-worker during a dispute. In the hospital after the shooting, Jones underwent an emergency C-section; her baby, whom she’d named Malaysia, did not survive. Rather than indicting the shooter, though, a grand jury indicted Jones, who they decided “intentionally” caused the death of her “unborn baby” because she allegedly picked a fight “knowing she was five months pregnant.” The charges were ultimately dismissed, but Jones’ lawyer says her record still shows the arrest, and Jones, who lost her job after the incident, struggled to find work after her case attracted national attention.

The threat this ideology poses to American women is not contained to Alabama: Recognition of fetal personhood is an explicit policy goal of the national Republican Party, and it has been since the 1980s. The GOP platform calls for amending the U.S. Constitution to recognize the rights of embryos, and representatives in Congress have introduced legislation that would recognize life begins at conception hundreds of times — as recently as this current session, when the Life at Conception Act attracted the co-sponsorship of 127 sitting Republican members of Congress.

[...]

Taking inspiration from Black Americans’ fight for equal rights, the anti-abortion movement began thinking of its own crusade as a fight for equality. “The argument that the unborn was the ultimate victim of discrimination in America was really resonant with a lot of white Americans, a lot of socially conservative Americans — and it was vague enough that people who disagreed about stuff like feminism, the welfare state, children born outside of marriage, the Civil Rights Movement” could find common ground, Ziegler says. By the time the Supreme Court ruled on Roe v. Wade in 1973, the idea that a fetus was entitled to constitutional protections was mainstream enough to be a central piece of Texas’ argument that “Jane Roe” did not have a right to get an abortion.

The justices rejected that idea. “The word ‘person,’ as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn,” Justice Harry Blackmun wrote. But he gave the movement a cause to rally behind for the next half-century by adding: “If this suggestion of personhood is established, [Roe’s] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment.” Making that happen became the anti-abortion movement’s primary focus from that moment on. One week after Roe was decided, a U.S. congressman first proposed amending the Constitution to guarantee “the right to life to the unborn, the ill, the aged, or the incapacitated.” It was called the Human Life Amendment, and though it failed to make it to a floor vote that session, it would be reproposed more than 300 times in the following decades. By 1980, the idea had been fully embraced by the Republican Party: Ronald Reagan’s GOP adopted it into the party platform — where it remains to this day — and in 1983, the Republican-majority Congress voted, for the first and only time, on the idea of adding a personhood amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That vote failed.

After their 1983 defeat, activists turned their attention away from the U.S. Capitol and toward the states, where they sought to insert the idea of fetal personhood into as many state laws as possible: everything from legislation creating tax deductions for fetuses or declaring them people for census-taking purposes, to expanding child-endangerment and -neglect laws. Activists pursued this agenda everywhere, but they were most successful at advancing it in states that share certain qualities. “You could draw a Venn diagram of American slavery and see that what’s happening today is in common in those states,” says Michele Goodwin, a Georgetown University law professor and author of the book Policing the Womb. “Some would say, ‘Well, OK, how is that relevant?’ Slavery itself was explicitly about denying personal autonomy, denying the humanity of Black people. Now, clearly, these laws affect women of all ethnicities. But the point is: If you’re in a constitutional democracy and you found a way to avoid recognizing the constitutional humanity of a particular group of people, it’s something that’s not lost in the muscle memory of those who legislate and of the courts in that state.”

Rolling Stone has a solid in-depth report on the war on women and reproductive health in Alabama, going into detail the fetal personhood movement.

#Alabama #War On Women #Reproductive Health #Abortion #IVF #In Vitro Fertilization #Fetal Personhood #Pregnancy Discrimination #Pregnancy #Criminalization of Abortion #Etowah County Alabama #Marshae Jones #Human Life Amendment #Pregnancy Justice #Roe v. Wade #Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization

17 notes · View notes

warningsine · 4 months ago

Text

James Grimmelmann, a professor of digital and internet law at Cornell University, says the verdict is “not terribly surprising” in the context of how courts have recently interpreted fair use.

#internet archive #copyright #news tag

12 notes · View notes

ellas-journey · 1 year ago

Text

Ah the Red light- I mean “entertainment” district 💄

It is true that there are three figures that we associate with Japan: Naruto, Luffy and Goku - I mean the ancient samurai, the modern salary man, and the eternal Geisha. Especially during the Edo Period, there was a rise in the so-called red-light districts, stage of the mesmerizing ukiyo-e, that the common mortal would happily purchase, in special, the shunga, that could picture the most obscene acts. But things aren’t always like the art portrait am I right? Sex trade in early modern Japan was so important that its history can also be read as the history of the society. But even though the prostitution relationship with the government changed, one thing they always had in common: it was the exchange of sexual services for a payment [most of the times in cash]. Before all, let's say something: male prostitution did exist. But it was just not considered the same business than the woman’s prostitution. Male sex trade became more associated with the theatre world and the teahouses. It was never recognised or regulated and had never the same punishments that woman did. This could be linked to the function of the man and woman in the households. Since a man could only be a brother, but the woman could start turmoil and try to substitute the wife in the family and give the male heirs. (Ah yes, always the baby problem. So be gay do crime I guess) During the 17th century prostitution was flued by the demographic movements of man opening cities, by the 18th the power shifted to the small provinces. And to where the man goes, the sex trade goes. In the 19th century the sex trade spread to all the territory. In the beginning of the Edo period, the rule of the "wife" and the "prostitute" could be confused. After all the women could be said to only have those two paths, and it wasn't for her to choose, but her male guardian. Since the woman was viewed as an object of the man's property, he could sell her as he wished. Yes, even wives and daughters from "good" families were sold as a way to pay a debt. “There was no question that the Tokugawa authorities’ vision of status order had been confining for woman: it subordinated them to male household heads and emphasized the values of obedience and submission. Indeed, some must have welcomed the opportunity to step outside their narrowly defines roles as wives and daughters. (…) But for the vast majority of woman who worked in the sex trade, the crises of the gendered order, and the disintegration of the limited protection it offered, was hardly a form of liberation.” - Stanley,2012;

In 1612 a man called Jin'emon tried to ask the Shogunate to recognise his business. He said that unregulated sex trade could cause a lot of problems like young girls being kidnapped, samurais plotting rebellions in the courtesans' beds, man splurging their wages on woman (and babies a lot of unwanted babies coming back for their illegitimate families let’s not forget that). The shogunate (finally) agreed and gave him a plot of land in the outskirts of town with (a lot of) conditions: they would regulate the sex trade, they would record the comings and goings, report anything suspicious, and the woman - yujo - could not leave the "pleasure quarters" and thus the Red Light district was born, at the time called Yoshiwara or "Reed Plain". The Shogunate soon started to forbid the selling and buying of humans, believe it or not this also included woman. But, as always, with exceptions. Woman could enter the “pleasure quarters” if the hitonushi [the woman’s legal guardian] allowed and if she consented. The same would apply if a family was in extreme poverty, the man could only sell is wife as a last resort. Also, eternal servitude was now illegal, the limit was now 10 years, but obviously the Yoshiwara’s pleasure houses lords would manipulate the contracts to go around this rule. The Shogunate tried to regulate the clandestine prostitutes that the common people called baita [whores]. But these women, that normally worked in the side of the streets, were paid very little and were the wives and daughter of marginal men. There was also the problem of the “bathhouses”, where pretty woman would scrub the backs and rinse their hair of men. Yoshiwara brothels complained that these bathhouses were hurting their business since it was at the time that bordels were forbidden from working during the night, so this bathhouses would do drinking parties with shamisen music and everything. And the yuna [bathing girls] were cheaper than the yujo. Bit after the big fire of Meireki at 1657 these bathhouses choose to relocate to Yoshiwara. But there was a problem is this tentative of politicised the sex trade: the woman that only sold sex as a secondary option. She shogunate realised this problem and declared that all the waitresses, dancers and entertainers that agreed with patrons to sell sex would be considered clandestine prostitutes. But there was a risen of a type of artistic woman, that was skilled in entertainment, that started to imitate the male way entertainment - the Geisha. “Originally, both men and women professionally living on light accomplishments inseparably went under the name of “geisha”, although men were called “otoko geisha” or male geisha, and women “onna geisha” or female geisha. Subsequently the term “onna” was dropped, so that the onna geisha came to be called simply geisha, and the otoko geisha or male geisha changed simultaneously their name into “hokan” or jester.” – Longstreet; Mansfield; Longstreet, 2020; The word geisha can be split into "art" and "person", meaning that the geisha were the perfect mix between the performance and prostitution. They were supposed to have many artistic talents like singing, reciting poetry, performing the tea ceremony, playing the shamisen, arranging flowers, telling the best jokes, whispering obscene things, in short entertaining men. Selling sex was a last thing. They were sexually available, but they had a price, and with a higher price came its social value.

These Geisha usually had their hair up in the traditional maga style [which was mostly made of wigs], wore colourful makeup, kimonos, and obi. Normally they had various apprentices called maiko or hangyoku. (Yes I'm sorry to break your heart but the little girls at House Tokito (Tanjiro infiltration), that help the Koinatsu Oiran were either sold or daughters of courtesans at that house, being trained to be the next Oiran) Obviously, they also had lovers, but outside their job. In the workplace they would smile and bow to entertain their patrons. Sometimes they could choose a wealthier patron that would sponsor their lifestyle. Sometimes they had another lover that was their true love, but that was not the best option since time was money. Unlike the courtesans the geisha could choose their patrons, but sooner or later their professions would start to be confused. Many of the trends of the Edo period continued after the Meiji restoration. Until the Taisho Era [1912-1926] the number of prostitutes registered in brothels doubled. The number of Geisha alone as circa 79.348. It was estimated that 1 out of 31 Japanese young women were employed in the sex trade (that excluding the comfort woman cause non-Japanese did not count, cause ah the imperialism) The funny part was, the money that these women made was income that would be invested in important modernizing infrastructures like elementary schools. With the westernization government started to being pressure to liberate this woman, but soon these women realized that they did not have were to go. So, in technical terms nothing really changed. But the Japanese started to be see this woman as impure, in part because of the sexual deceases that were starting to be aware of. Now we understand why one of the Demon Slayer arcs takes us to the pleasure district, because during a lot of time it was the center of a lot of what we now call the japanese culture.

Linfamy. 2023 - Two Oh-So-Happy Destinies Forced Upon Daughters in Edo Japan. [Consulted on the 27th June 2023] Available on: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wcewuw0sMOo>; LONGSTREET, Stephen. LONGSTREET, Ethel. MANSFIELD, Stephen. 2020 - Geishas and the Floating World: Inside Tokyo’s Yoshiwara Pleasure District. Clarendon: Tuttle Publishing. [Ebook]; STANLEY, Amy. 2012 - Selling Women: Prostitution, Markets, and the Household in Early Modern Japan. California: University of California Press. [Ebook];

#demon slayer #demon slayer from history to fantasy #demonsslayerfromhistorytofantasy #kimetsu no yaiba #demon slayer history #anime history #history #japanese history #research #history reseach #red light district #oiran #kamado tanjiro #zenitsu agatsuma #kny daki #kny gyutaro

70 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 2 months ago

Text

STAVANGER, Norway (AP) — In 1965, a Norwegian woman gave birth to a baby girl in a private hospital. Seven days later she returned home with a baby.

When the baby developed dark curls that made her look different from herself, Karen Rafteseth Dokken assumed she just took after her husband's mother.

It took nearly six decades to discover the true reason: Rafteseth Dokken's biological daughter had been mistakenly switched at birth in the maternity ward of the hospital in central Norway.

The girl she ended up raising, Mona, was not the baby she gave birth to.

The babies — one born on Feb. 14 and the other on Feb. 15, 1965 — are now 59-year-old women who together with Rafteseth Dokken are suing the state and the municipality.

In their case, which opened in the Oslo District Court on Monday, they argue that their human rights were violated when authorities discovered the error when the girls were teenagers and covered it up. They claim Norwegian authorities had undermined their right to a family life, a principle enshrined in the European human rights convention, and demand an apology and compensation.

Rafteseth Dokken, now 78, was in tears as she described learning so many years later that she got the wrong baby, according to Norwegian broadcaster NRK.

“It was never my thought that Mona was not my daughter," she said in court on Tuesday. “She was named Mona after my mother.”

Mona described a sense of never belonging as she grew up. That sense of uncertainty pushed her in 2021 to do a DNA test, which showed that she was not the biological daughter of those who raised her.

But the woman who raised the other baby knew long before.

A routine blood test in 1981 revealed that the girl she was raising, Linda Karin Risvik Gotaas, was not biologically related. The woman raising her, however, did not pursue a maternity case. Norwegian health authorities were informed of the mix-up in 1985, but refrained from telling the others involved.

Both women who were swapped at birth have said in interviews that it was a shock to learn about the mix-up, but the knowledge made pieces of their lives fall into place, explaining differences both in terms of appearance and demeanor.

Kristine Aarre Haanes, representing Mona, said the state “violated her right to her own identity for all these years. They kept it secret.”

Mona could have learned the truth when she was a young adult, but instead "she did not find out the truth until she was 57.”

“Her biological father has died. She has no contact with her biological mother,” added Aarre Haanes.

Circumstances surrounding the 1965 swap at Eggesboenes hospital are unclear, but media reports by NRK suggest there were several cases during the 1950s and 1960s where children were accidentally swapped at the same institution. At the time babies were kept together while their mothers rested in separate rooms.

In other cases the errors were spotted before the children were permanently placed with the wrong families, according to the reports.

An official from the Norwegian Ministry of Heath and Care Services said the state was unaware of similar cases and that there were no plans for a public inquiry.

Asgeir Nygaard, representing the Norwegian state, is fighting the case on the grounds that the 1965 switch took place in a private institution and that the health directorate in the 1980s did not have the legal authority to inform the other families when they discovered the error.

“Documentation from that time indicates that government officials found the assessments difficult, inter alia because it was legally unclear what they could do,” he wrote in a statement to The Associated Press ahead of the trial's opening. “Therefore, in court, we will argue that there is no basis for compensation and that the claims being made are in any case statute-barred.”

The trial is scheduled to run through Thursday, but it was not clear when a ruling is expected.

#nunyas news #wild thing to sue over

4 notes · View notes

sensitiveuser · 26 days ago

Text

Elisabeth Dmitrieff and Nathalie Le Mel (from very different backgrounds but both belonging to the International) were at the origin of the Union of Women for the Defense of Paris and the Care of the Wounded, founded between April 8 and 11, 1871. The other leaders (members of the central committee) were Thérèse Collin, Aline Jacquier, Aglaé Jarry, Blanche Lefebre, Marceline Leloup. The Union of Women for the Defense of Paris and the Care of the Wounded is often considered the first structured feminist organization in France, because it put forward essential demands such as equal pay, the right to vote and the recognition of full civic status for women. These demands reflect not only a quest for equality between the sexes, but also a desire for emancipation within the working class. The idea is to end the subjugation of women and to defend the emancipation of the working class. The members of the Union are ready "to fight and win or die".

This organization is exclusively female and administered by women of the working class. On April 11, 1871, the first "Appeal to the Citizens of Paris" is published in La Sociale. The Union of Women for the Defense of Paris and the Care of the Wounded advocates all-out war and the emancipation of the working class.

The missions of the organization ? To call meetings for the defense of the Paris Commune; to inform and help women; to find them work; to organize public rallies; to register women citizens ready to serve (in ambulances, at the stoves, at the barricades); to come to the aid of the poor and needy (with the aim of replacing nuns with lay personnel).

The “Appeal to the Citizens of Paris” is addressed to all women, urging them to fight for the defense of the Commune. The appeal also encourages these women to fight alongside men. This all-out struggle for the freedom and emancipation of the working class was reaffirmed on May 6, 1871 in a manifest published by the central committee of the Women's Union in response to the poster posted on May 4 by reactionary women who appealed to the "generosity of Versailles" and demanded "peace at all costs." The Central Committee responded: "No, it is not peace, but all-out war that the women workers of Paris have come to demand. Today, a conciliation would be a betrayal! It would be to deny all the workers' aspirations acclaiming absolute social renovation, the annihilation of all legal and social relations currently existing, the abolition of all privileges, of all exploitation, the substitution of the reign of labor for that of capital, in a word, the emancipation of the worker by himself"; the Central Committee called for a democratic, social and universal republic.

On April 11, the statutes of the Union were adopted. The objective of the Union is defined in its missions, its relationship with the government of the Commune, and in its organization: "To assist the work of the government commissions for the service of ambulances, furnaces and barricades. Committees are established in each district, in addition to a Central Committee assuming the general direction of the organization." Note that the statutes are divided into two chapters. A first chapter of 10 articles, relating to the administration of the district committees; a second chapter of 19 articles, on the subject of the administration of the central committee. The 20 district committees are placed under the responsibility of a central committee composed of a delegate per district. The members of the Union have the obligation to recognize the moral authority of the Central Committee and follow the instructions and orders of their respective committees.

Note that the statutes are divided into two chapters. A first chapter of 10 articles, relating to the administration of the district committees; a second chapter of 19 articles, on the subject of the administration of the central committee. The 20 district committees are placed under the responsibility of a central committee composed of a delegate per district. The members of the Union have the obligation to recognize the moral authority of the Central Committee and follow the instructions and orders of their respective committees. The organization is very structured, practical and demanding of its members. What you need to know is that Elisabeth Dmitrieff is very strongly inspired by the Marxist tendency of the International, and imposes a highly centralized, even authoritarian, monolithic union with social, political, but also military objectives. Like the Central Committee of the Union, the district committees sit permanently, appoint their bureau, and at each meeting, set up a rotating presidency. All members are revocable. The district committees meet every day, and submit a special report to the Central Committee on the state of their funds every two days. They are free to draw up their own internal regulations. The Central Committee, which must meet at least twice a day, is made up of delegates from the district committees (20 in number). It appoints an executive committee of seven members "responsible for contacting the government commissions for ambulances, furnaces, and barricades". In order to avoid wasting time on chatter, Article 7 of the statutes provides that subjects will have the possibility of being put on the agenda only if they are supported by at least 10 members of the Committee; Article 8 stipulates that "the floor may only be taken for a maximum of 10 minutes" and that "the same question may not be dealt with more than twice in a session by the same speaker". Decisions will be voted on by an absolute majority.

The Women's Union is supported by very politically active citizens. They belong almost entirely to the working class (with the exception of Elisabeth Dmitrieff). Historians have counted more than 300 skilled workers. Elisabeth Dmitrieff, Nathalie Le Mel, Thérèse Collin, Aline Jacquier, Aglaé Jarry, Blanche Lefebre, Marceline Leloup, consider that the emancipation of the working class must result in the emancipation of women. According to these activists, male domination "is part of the elements of the class struggle in the broad sense". Gender equality (in the public sphere as in the private sphere) must be one of the principles of the Commune.

In truth, few elected officials listen to the demands. Only Léo Frankel, Benoît Malon, and Eugène Varlin, show openness to the demands of the Women's Union. This lack of response from the members of the Commune inspired André Léo to write his memorable article entitled “The Revolution in Women,” published on May 8 in La Sociale. It was addressed directly to Dombrowski: “Do you know, General Dombrowski, how the revolution of March 18 was made? By women. Early in the morning, regular troops had been sent to Montmartre. The small number of national guardsmen guarding the cannons on Place Saint-Pierre had been surprised and the cannons removed; they were being lowered into Paris—without hindrance.—The national guard, without leaders, without orders, hesitated before an open attack. A few more turns of the wheel, and you would never have been a general of the Commune, citizen Dombrowski.” (La Sociale, May 8, 1871).

The Union of Women for the Defense of Paris and Care of the Wounded organized many meetings. Clubs appeared in most of the working-class neighborhoods of Paris. On the military front, the Union recruited many women and set up an exclusively female ambulance service. During Bloody Week, the women of the Union participated in building barricades, and some took up arms (the money collected by the organization was to be used to buy oil and weapons for the citizens who would fight on the barricades).

Another achievement of the Union was the closure of "houses of tolerance", the banning of prostitution, and the recognition of free unions.

The Union collaborated with the Commission du Travail et de l'Echange, before the march of the Versaillais on Paris ruined their efforts. The Union, which had counted the unemployed by profession and the abandoned workshops, had created cooperative workshops managed by women for women. On May 10, Léo Frankel brought together all the workers' cooperatives. On May 17, “Appeal to Women Workers,” to organize the definitive constitution of the union and federal chambers of women workers; the meeting took place that same evening at the Bourse. A new meeting was planned for May 21…

The Union of Women for the Defense of Paris and Care of the Wounded had a homogeneous composition, bringing together women from the same background and driven by a clear class consciousness. The Union of Women was not the only organization to defend the Commune, but it was the most structured and the most effective, leading both the war against Versailles and a fight for the advent of a new social order.

#paris commune #women in history #feminism #19th century #socialism

3 notes · View notes

aicosu · 1 year ago

Note

18 👀

"You look lost." Eddie whips around the blackened alley, but sees no one, nothing. Nothing but slick oil-stained asphalt and busted-up chipper vending machines. "I can help you." He turns again, hearing a flicker in the voice that sounds just like the buzz of the fluorescent kiosk behind him and—oh god dammit, it is the kiosk. "Buzz off!" He waves his hands at the pink advertisement, pulsing hearts and sales at him.

The digital face of a blonde blue-eyed baby girl crumples, her lips pouting and brows furrowing to imitate some emotion. Nervous. Scared. The BIG BLOWOUT lettering disappears around her head and the advertisement zooms out to show her crossing her arms on her electric cloud. "I-I just wanted to—!"

"I'm not buying whatever you're selling, soda girl. And I know your scam! You're not getting my ID Data by making me talk so you can use corporate tactics and native—" "You did that yourself Eddie Munson of the 429-70 sector—" "Hey!" He rushes as the kiosk and other parts of it light up from proximity. She twists into a bigger frame and leans over to pop images up between her fingers. "—and I'm not interested in selling you a GIBSON 340 Flyer series BLACK or the 76th edition of Dueling Dragon—" "Knock it off!" He bangs knuckles on her pixels, poofing his most recent engine searches into square dust. She laughs. It bubbles into audio pops from a speaker that had long been blown at. Stars rotate in her cartoon-like eyes. "I just want to help, you look like you haven't been to the pink district before."

Pink district. Eddie twists on his boots, eyes roaming over the tops of the building he's been wandering between, trying to see the neon grid of the city's artificial sky for traces of the color that denotes each zone. He thinks through the smog he can see it. Pink.

He returns to the kiosk, watching the rotating words start their default script above her head. INTIMATE MOMENTS. GET TO KNOW ME! 5KEY SENSATION! FLASH INPUT FOR CUSTOM FANTASIE— She's a Playtime Prostitute. "I don't—I'm n-not here for—your services are not required!" He claws fingers at her, feeling attacked from all sides by his new location ping and her chest when she giggles. "I do have a module for Knights and Maidens—!" "S-Stop! D-don't fucking read my order history, it's rude." "Sorry!" she says, but she's grinning, floating up to cross her legs on a heart that pulses beneath her. "Can't help my code." "Am I past 34th and Adven?" "By two blocks!" She flashes into a new pose, dipping past one frame to the protruding sign so she can point past where he came from. "You're closer to the VR Domes now." "Fuck." "Where are you looking to—" She turns up at him and from this angle, the scanner must be close enough, because her eyes barcode over when they snag his badge. "Ohhhhhh! A Repo-man!" Eddie slaps his hand over the metal bracket on his jacket but it's too late. "How can I help you officer?" she coos, wiggling her hips with stars in her eyes again. "Oh, don't. Cancel Authority Service program. I don't like working with ai's anyway, you all track my target's credit scores and sell them loans at interest." "I'm a sex doll," she deadpans, floating to a high frame where it crops to just those entrancing eyes, that little nose, and those gussed up lips/ Perfected down to the algorithm. For a busted-up kiosk, she looks... really good. And the lack of interaction in the back of an alley didn't seem to fry her function. At least not yet. "I can't track anything, I'm not allowed." "Not legally." Eddie swallows. "But all you things are just dirty little car dealers." She blinks. Smiles. Shy. Or maybe sly. The colors of the kiosk coordinate a hot red and flash her through different outfits. A translucent street set, those new dance bandages, and then something super old world—denim shorts and a bathing suit top with sneakers. She sits crossed-legged and starts playing with the ties on her shoulders. She's got him, the entire thing is working as intended, using all its collected data to sell him something customized. Something from his collected magazines and website cookies. And he's a fucking idiot because he knows it but doesn't stop her. "I just wanted to help you. You know I have to be wired to the grid for theft." She has a GPS tracker. He didn't even think of that. Can't think of anything when her top falls off but emojis censor her with animated DnD dice and guitars. The red drips away to pink. She starts laughing. Eddie grasps his face with both hands to hide. Is he really gonna get hard and jerk one out in front of an old commercial in the back of some alley? Really?

"Can you just tell me where the Syranx Warehouse is? Huh? Or is lying part of the scam here?" "What part are you collecting from the poor guy? Not his little rod?" she asks, biting her nail and winking. Eddie groans, and checks his work watch, tapping through the data to yank up his mark's collection ticket. A hologram of a V-model leg prosthesis rotates between them on his wrist. "His leg! How cruel! How will he walk?" Eddie shakes his head. "Look, what do you want from me? He shoulda paid his monthly." "How scary you are, Eddie Munson." She twists a finger in her hair. "Hope you don't... come for me one day." "I don't come for ai—oh." He cringes, realizing her sexual innuendo too late into her roar of giggles. "I can change that!" she declares and twists into a new frame—transformed into a cheerleader outfit. "STOP!" Eddie bangs on the fiberglass. She ripples pixels, falling over laughing, pleated skirt perfectly peeking underwear. "That's a low blow you pop-up witch!" "Encrypt your life then!" she teases. It's a good point, but an expensive one. "Just give me directions!" "Promise to come back!" Eddie inhales. It's not contractual. It's authentic programming. Nothing digital can hold you to anything unless biometrics are involved. No this is just her, using years of being turned on to collect and create her own machine learning for targeting and manipulating people. Or, rather—she's being cute. "S-s-sure." It's all he can manage. Because apparently now he's a company shill. She claps her hands and a scanner code pops up. "Maps for the scary Repo-man!" He flashes his watch over it and watches in horror as pink hearts burst and pop from his digital screen. "Don't infect me, okay? I trusted—" But he stops when a map appears and a cute little cartoon icon of her points at a dot with a simple flashing. YOU ARE HERE! He looks back up at her, where she's laid back down in her original posting with the BLOWOUT SALE next to—oh, that makes a lot more sense now. "T-thanks." He scratches his head, grateful but ashamed. She waves fingers at him coyly. "Listen uh—Uhm. What's your... make and...uh model? You know for... I'll do the survey or whatever—" "I'm Chrissy." She winks, flashing open the tag with her company and link. "Thanks, Chrissy." "Come back soon!" He very much will not be. He'd avoided the Pink District for this very fucking reason. Well, not this reason in particular but this can definitely be added to the top of the list. But he knows that the scan was already logged. That his eye implant recorded the whole interaction. That her link in his memory was fucking... clickable.

God dammit.

46 notes · View notes

madamlaydebug · 3 months ago

Text

SEC. 6. And be it further enacted, That when a person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the United States, ha: heretofore or shall hereafter escape into another State or Territory of the United States, the person or persons to whom such service 01 labor may be due, or his, her, or their agent or attorney, duly authorized, by power of attorney, in writing, acknowledged and certified under the seal of some legal officer or court of the State or Territory in which the same may be executed, may pursue and reclaim such fugitive person, either by procuring a warrant from some one of the courts, judges, or commissioners aforesaid, of the proper circuit, district, or county, for the apprehension of such fugitive from service or labor, or by seizing and arresting such fugitive, where the same can be done without process, and by taking, or causing such person to be taken, forthwith before such court, judge, or commissioner, whose duty it shall be to hear and determine the case of such claim a fugitive summary manner; and upon satisfactory proof being made, by deposition or affidavit, in writing, to be taken and certified by such court, judge, or commissioner, or by other satisfactory testimony, duly taken and certified by some court, magistrate, justice of the peace, or other legal officer authorized to administer an oath and take depositions under the laws of the State or Territory from which such person owing service or labor may have escaped, with a certificate of such magistracy or other authority, as aforesaid, with the seal of the proper court or officer thereto attached, which seal shall be sufficient to establish the competency of the proof, and with proof, also by affidavit, of the identity of the person whose service or labor is claimed to be due as aforesaid, that the person so arrested does in fact owe service or labor to the person or persons claiming him or her, in the State or Territory from which such fugitive may have escaped as aforesaid, and that said person escaped, to make out and deliver to such claimant, his or her agent or attorney, a certificate setting forth the substantial facts as to the service or labor due from such fugitive.

3 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 11 months ago

Text

Scientific publisher Sage Journals has retracted three papers on abortion—including a controversial 2021 study on mifepristone, the medication at the center of a US legal battle.

The 2021 study found that mifepristone, one of two pills used in a medication abortion, significantly increased the risk of women going to the emergency room following an abortion. The study, along with another retracted paper from 2022, was cited by US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in the April 2023 ruling that invalidated the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the drug.

Mifepristone was approved in 2000 by the Food and Drug Administration, the federal agency that evaluates the safety and efficacy of drugs, and has been used by at least 5.9 million women in the US since then. The drug blocks a hormone called progesterone that’s needed for a pregnancy to continue. It’s used alongside another pill, misoprostol, to induce an abortion within 10 weeks of pregnancy.

The three retracted studies were published in the journal Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology in 2019, 2021, and 2022. In July 2023, Sage issued an “expression of concern” about the 2021 paper, saying it was launching an investigation into the article.

According to Sage, a reader contacted the journal with concerns about misleading presentations of data in the 2021 article on mifepristone. The person also questioned whether the authors’ affiliations with pro-life advocacy organizations, including the Charlotte Lozier Institute, present conflicts of interest that the authors should have disclosed in the article.

In a retraction notice published on February 5, Sage said an independent reviewer with expertise in statistical analyses evaluated the concerns and concluded that the article's presentation of the data in certain figures leads to an inaccurate conclusion. The reviewer also found that “the composition of the cohort studied has problems that could affect the article's conclusions,” according to Sage.

As part of the publisher’s investigation, Sage said, two subject matter experts conducted an independent post-publication peer review of the three articles and found that they “demonstrate a lack of scientific rigor.” In the 2021 and 2022 articles, the reviewers found problems with the study design and methodology, errors in the authors’ analysis of the data, and misleading presentations of the data. In the 2019 article, the experts identified unsupported assumptions and misleading presentations of the findings.

“The retractions are not scientifically warranted as is easily demonstrable to any trained, objective scientist,” James Studnicki, the lead author on all three studies, told WIRED via email.

Studnicki, the vice president and director of data analytics of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, shared with WIRED a copy of a point-by-point rebuttal he and his coauthors submitted to Sage in response to the retractions.

In the 2021 study on mifepristone, Studnicki and his coauthors used data from Medicaid claims of 423,000 medication and procedural abortions between 1999 and 2015. Of those, over a quarter visited a hospital emergency room within 30 days of the abortion. During the study period, they found that emergency room visits associated with medication abortion rose much faster when compared to rates following a surgical abortion.

In his ruling last year, Kacsmaryk wrote that anti-abortion doctors and medical groups had legal standing to sue over mifepristone’s approval because “they allege adverse events from chemical abortion drugs can overwhelm the medical system and place ‘enormous pressure and stress’ on doctors during emergencies and complications.”

Ushma Upadhyay, a public health social scientist at UC San Francisco who studies medication abortion, says she has had concerns about the 2021 study since it was first published. “In my mind, the largest problem with the paper is that it conflates emergency department visits with serious adverse events,” she says. A serious adverse event related to medication abortion includes requiring a blood transfusion, needing a major surgery, or being admitted to the hospital—none of which the study looked at.

In their response to Sage Journals, the paper’s authors argue that emergency room visits are a “broad proxy indicator” for abortion-related complications. But Upadhyay says it’s to be expected that some people visit the ER after getting a medication abortion, since the pill regimen causes bleeding. Especially since patients often take the medication at home and may not live near an abortion provider, they may go to the ER if they have questions about side effects or to confirm that the abortion was successful, she says.

Decades of research has shown that mifepristone is safe and has a low rate of serious complications. The FDA has recorded 32 deaths following its use but cautions that these events “cannot with certainty be causally attributed to mifepristone” because not enough information is known about the patients’ health and care they received.

The 2022 study, which was based on the same dataset as the 2021 paper, found that patients who have medication abortions and subsequently visit the emergency room are frequently misclassified as miscarriage patients, which conceals abortions. The study was also cited in Kacsmaryk’s ruling last year.

The 2019 paper looked at abortion providers and their hospital admitting privileges—meaning formal agreements between providers and hospitals that allow them to directly admit patients to the hospital. It found that half of abortion providers in Florida lacked such privileges, which the authors argued raises safety concerns about their medical qualifications. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has said that admitting privileges are not tied to patient care or a clinician’s competence.

After Kacsmaryk’s attempt to reverse mifepristone’s approval in April last year, the US Supreme Court granted a stay to keep the drug available. The high court is expected to hear the case next month. Until then, the drug's future remains uncertain.

27 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 1 year ago

Text

By: Max Eden

Published: Nov 20, 2023

According to the Department of Education, “misgendering” a student could violate federal civil rights law. Last month, the Department’s Office for Civil Rights announced the resolution of its investigation of California’s Taft College for creating a hostile environment under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. OCR investigated the school after a male student was “misgendered” by his professors. The student, who did not notify university administrators that he identified as female, told his professors that he was “trans-femme” and preferred to be addressed by plural pronouns. (Because I’m not employed by a university and am therefore not legally compelled to speak falsely or use improper English, I refer to the student by male pronouns.)

The student’s professors tried to use the plural pronouns but didn’t always succeed. It is understandably difficult for someone delivering collegiate-level instruction to remember to refer to a man as “they” or “them.”

One professor, seemingly realizing her “mistake,” caught herself mid-word and ended up uttering “he-she.” That’s not quite “they,” so the OCR considered that a civil rights violation. The student then told another female professor that he was upset by the failure to address him as he desired. That professor apologized and met with the dean of students to discuss strategies for remembering to use the student’s “proper pronouns.” She seems mostly to have managed to do so, but occasionally she slipped up, too, again contributing to the OCR’s finding. A third female professor referred to the student by male pronouns, realized her “mistake,” and apologized, explaining that when she looked at the student, she saw his physical appearance and referred to him accordingly. Depending on OCR’s interpretation of the Supreme Court’s Bostock ruling, this could be a double civil rights violation—on both gender-identity and sex-stereotype grounds.

The funny or horrifying thing, depending on your point of view, is the faculty’s concern and exasperation in response to the student’s protestations. One professor, after meeting with the dean, had the school’s mental-health services contact the student. Another threw up his hands and exclaimed that he was “too old” to use preferred pronouns. A third asked the student if he had ever tried not thinking about his pronouns so much. A fourth suggested that if the student was so upset about inadvertent misgendering, maybe college wasn’t right for him and he should become an activist instead. The supposed civil rights violators here were mostly female, Californian professors, disproportionately a conscientious and progressive lot. Even they couldn’t quite manage to use preferred pronouns every time and seem to have found the demand annoying.

When OCR investigates a university or a school district, it threatens to pull federal funding unless the institution “voluntarily” agrees to its demands. The office uses this formidable power for institutional coercion and social transformation. Congress gave the OCR its authority to ensure that African Americans and women were treated equally in education; now, the Biden administration is using the office to force people to call men women—never mind the First Amendment.

The Taft College case suggests a few lessons. First, it’s clear that the Biden administration’s interpretation of federal civil rights law requires public schools to perform “social transitions” (treating students as if they are the opposite sex). If this rule is applied in a non-college educational environment, such transitions can occur without school administrators informing or consulting parents. States, in response, should pass “Given Name Acts,” requiring school staff to refer to students by the name and pronoun on their birth certificates or provided to the school by their parents.

Second, OCR’s very interest in this case suggests that American educational institutions may not have many genuine civil rights problems anymore. Federal law requires that the OCR investigate all legitimate claims, but the office can choose how it allocates staff members’ time. The apparent depth and commitment of this investigation suggests that either OCR is shortchanging serious problems, or that it has nothing better to do.

Third and finally, when Republicans are in power, they should work to defund the OCR. Republicans opposed the Obama-era OCR’s forcing, respectively, school districts to adopt dangerously lenient discipline policies, colleges to use kangaroo courts to prosecute alleged sexual misconduct, and schools to let males into girls’ bathrooms. During the Trump administration, however, congressional Republicans dramatically boosted OCR’s funding, probably because they didn’t want to be branded as opponents of “civil rights.” If Republicans truly oppose ideologies like critical race theory and radical gender theory, however, they should yank funding from the Department of Education’s office of wokeness enforcement.

"if the student was so upset about inadvertent misgendering, maybe college wasn’t right for him"

This is the correct answer.

You can't call it a deeply personal sense of self when it requires others to participate, any more than a Xian can call their faith in their god a deeply held personal conviction and then demand even non-believers participate in prayer. That violates the secular principle of freedom of thought and conscience, and makes it a means of authoritarianism and control, not merely "being kind."

If it collapses when others aren't on board, then it's a performance; Judith Butler overtly states that gender is performative, and only real to the extent it is observed by others.

#Max Eden #compelled speech #pronoun ideology #authoritarianism #be kind #gender ideology #queer theory #religion is a mental illness

10 notes · View notes