#live youth bodily autonomy | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

justinspoliticalcorner · 1 month

Text

Lil Kalish at HuffPost:

The first-ever mobilization of trans voters around a presidential candidate took place on Zoom on Tuesday, as around 1,000 transgender people, including lawmakers, advocates, health care workers and celebrities, logged on to show support for Vice President Kamala Harris’ bid for the presidency. Trans Folks For Harris was one of numerous identity-based webinars to support Harris after President Joe Biden dropped out of the race last month. Over the last few weeks, many LGBTQ+ advocates have embraced Harris, touting her decadeslong record of supporting LGBTQ+ rights, and her decision to make Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who transformed the state into a “trans refuge,” her running mate. This came just after Advocates for Trans Equality released a report showing that 75% of eligible trans voters turned up to the polls in the 2020 presidential election, compared to 67% of the general U.S. population — and that trans voters make up a crucial part of the electorate.

“We know our rights and our progress are on the line, but so is our very sense of belonging,” said Delaware state Sen. Sarah McBride, who was elected as the first openly transgender state senator in the country. If McBride wins her bid for Delaware’s open House seat, she would become the first transgender member of Congress. “We have the opportunity, but more importantly, the responsibility in this election to show a trans young person who fears that the heart of this country is not big enough to love them too, that no matter what extremists say or do, our next president and vice president continue to have their backs,” McBride continued. The Harris-Walz campaign has yet to release any concrete policy plans on civil rights ahead of the Democratic National Convention in Chicago next week, but advocates say Harris and Walz have demonstrated their commitment to supporting LGBTQ+ rights, access to abortion and the rights to bodily autonomy overall. A draft of the Democrats’ platform, which was released in July, outlines their fight to restore reproductive rights, address racial inequalities, and protect democracy.

“It’s a step forward to ensure that trans people, especially Black and Brown trans women, have the representation and the resources they need to live with dignity and pride,” Zahara Bassett, CEO of Chicago trans advocacy organization Life Is Work, said on the call. “We need to make sure that our future is one of equity, justice and liberation for us all.” Harris was one of the first elected officials to publicly back marriage equality in 2004, and she refused to defend Proposition 8, California’s same-sex marriage ban, in 2008. As a prosecutor, she also led the charge to end the so-called gay and transgender “panic defense,” a legal strategy often used to seek a lesser offense for perpetrators of anti-LGBTQ+ violence or murder by claiming that the victim made same-sex sexual advances. In June 2023, Harris became the first sitting vice president to visit the Stonewall Inn, the birthplace of the modern gay rights movement, and the site of the historic 1969 uprising of LGBTQ+ people fighting back against police raids in the New York City bar. And earlier this week, Harris released a video on X outlining how former President Donald Trump vastly restricted LGBTQ+ rights while in office — and how he would do so again if elected. Trump has already promised to roll back several policies, including blocking access to gender-affirming care for minors and rescinding the Biden administration’s Title IX rules that expand protections for transgender students. Trump’s running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, introduced a bill in the upper chamber to criminalize gender-affirming care for trans youth.

[...] Today’s embrace of Harris is in stark contrast to how some LGBTQ+ voters remembered her last bid for president in 2019. Back then, some advocates took issue with Harris’ tenure as a prosecutor for how she pushed for criminal penalties for parents of truant children and which led to the arrest of many Black and brown people. Many also noted how as attorney general, Harris’ office denied an incarcerated trans woman’s request for gender-affirming care. Harris has since apologized and said she takes “full responsibility” for her office’s actions. But still, not all LGBTQ+ voters are convinced. Harris’ support for the Biden administration’s policies towards Israel’s war in Gaza has alienated some of these voters. In the Democratic primaries this year, hundreds of thousands of voters cast “uncommitted” ballots as a form of protest to push for a cease-fire and end U.S. weapons transfers to Israel.

For the first time in American Presidential history, an organized mobilization effort for trans Americans to support Kamala Harris’s Presidency bid has cropped up, featuring a Trans Folks For Harris Zoom call. 🏳️‍⚧️

#Kamala Harris #Transgender Rights #Transgender #LGBTQ+#Trans Folks For Harris #2024 Presidential Election #2024 Elections #Sarah McBride #Zooey Zephyr #Tim Walz

40 notes · View notes

genderqueerpositivity · 1 year

Text

Via The New York Times, the image above is a screenshot of a map which shows abortion bans in the United States, as of 8/23/23.

South Carolina’s new all-male Supreme Court reversed course on abortion on Wednesday, upholding a ban on most such procedures after about six weeks of pregnancy.

The 4-1 ruling departs from the court’s own decision earlier this year to strike down a similar law.

Earlier this year, South Carolina became the only state in the country with an entirely male state Supreme Court; after the only woman on the court was forced into retirement due to her age, our state legislature and governor went into a special overtime session in order to pass a new anti-abortion law, knowing that any further legal challenges would be unsuccessful.

As of today that ban is in effect; people waiting to have abortion procedures this morning were sent home from clinics after the ruling came out.

This is a loss not only for the millions of people living in this state who will now be denied healthcare and their own bodily autonomy, but also for thousands of others who might not be able to travel here from out of state to access care anymore.

We can also be certain that they aren't done; attempts at a total ban will come next, and after that we can be sure that gender affirming care bans and further legal oppression of trans youth will take center stage once again. (I say further, because the sports ban for trans youth is already law, and most people have already forgotten about it.)

The cruelty is the point.

#abortion #reproductive justice #pro choice #abortion rights #news #christian fascism #christofascism #reproductive rights #bodily autonomy #medical freedom

212 notes · View notes

nerdyenby · 1 month

Text

I get most of my news either online or from a newsletter I subscribe to, but I’m feeling pretty good right now about our democratic candidates so I sat down to watch Walz’s debut at the Philadelphia rally and here are the highlights (imo, of course)

“Before I was elected vice president or elected a United States senator, I was an elected attorney general, and, before that, an elected district attorney and, before that, I was a courtroom prosecutor. So in those roles, I took on perpetrators of all kinds: predators who abused women, fraudsters who scammed consumers, cheaters who broke the rules for their own gain. So hear me when I say: I know Donald Trump’s type.” -KH

KH talking about fighting for a future where every American can afford to own a home hit me so hard. Why is that such a fantasy? Why have I never even considered it possible?

I am obsessed with the confidence, this is the energy I need. We have plenty of reasons to be afraid but goddamn did I need someone to stand up and calmly declare that we will be okay, and I am so fucking glad it’s a Black woman.

A history teacher as our next VP <3

Their motif of fighting for the future is so much more potent coming from a woman of color and a man who has dedicated so much of his life to youth and to supporting them and their futures. Like damn, maybe the kids really will be okay. Fighting poverty, securing free school lunches for kids, protecting bodily autonomy, and founding his schools first GSA as a straight white man? I don’t know much about Walz but what I’ve learned so far has earned him a lot of respect in my book.

Fuck, Harris talking about Walz’s background and reputation in his school has me tearing up.

“We will win.” Okay, yeah, I’m crying now. These two make me feel so safe, it’s not fair I’ve never felt this way before.

Friendly reminder that one of our main political candidates does not value disabled lives and will openly say as much. Trump wants us dead, don’t let him win.

“Tim and I have a message for Trump and others who want to turn back the clock on our fundamental freedoms: we’re not going back.” -KH

“After Roe was overturned [TW] was the first governor in the country to sign a new law that enshrined reproductive freedom as a fundamental right.” -KH

“Ultimately in this election, we each face a question: what kind of country do we want to live in? A county of freedom, compassion, and rule of law or a country of chaos, fear, and hate?” -KH

“We love our country, and I believe it is the highest form of patriotism to fight for the ideals of our country.” -KH

“Don’t ever underestimate teachers.” -TW (preach)

“It was my students, they encouraged me to run for office. They saw in me what I was hoping to instill in them: a commitment of common good, a belief that one person can make a difference.” -TW

“Now, Donald Trump sees the world a little differently than us. First of all, he doesn’t know the first thing about service. He doesn’t have time for it because he’s too busy serving himself. Again and again and again, Trump weakens our economy to strengthen his own hand. He mocks our laws, he sows chaos and division, and that’s to say nothing of his record as president.” -TW

“Some of us in here are old enough to remember — I see you down there, I see those old white guys — some of us are old enough to remember when it was republicans who were talking about freedom. It turns out now what they meant was the government should be free to invade your doctors office. In Minnesota, we respect our neighbors and their personal choices that they make. Even if we wouldn’t make the same choice for ourselves, there’s a golden rule: mind your own damn business. ” -TW

“When Vice President and I talk about freedom, we mean the freedom to make your own healthcare decisions and for our children to be free to go to school without worrying they’ll be shot dead in their classrooms.” -TW

“Vice President Harris’s idea: freedom is a ticket, for education to be that ticket to the middle class. Not crippling debt, air that’s clean, water that’s pure, communities that are safe.” -TW

TW: “Donald Trump isn’t fighting for you or your family-” random audience member: “You are!” Walz: *allows himself a breath of a laugh before continuing on just as strong as before*

“I gotta tell you, pointing out just an observation of mine that I made, I just have to say it. You know it, you feel it [the republican candidates] are creepy and, yes, just weird as hell.” -TW

“So we got 91 days. My god, that’s easy. Well sleep when we’re dead! Over those next 91 days and every day in the White House, I’ll have Vice President Harris’s back, every single day, and we’ll have yours.” -TW

This is the broadcast I watched

#they both ate #kamala harris #tim walz #us politics #2024 elections

37 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 2 months

Text

When Sara Tasneem started high school, she dreamed of joining the Air Force and attending law school. Living with her mom in Colorado, she participated in JROTC, attended basketball games and had a boyfriend her own age.

But while visiting her dad in Mountain View at age 15, she was forced into an arranged marriage with a man nearly twice her age. Because her father believed she had broken the rules of her strict religious sect by having a boyfriend, she was married without her consent.

Her dad introduced her to the man who had been chosen for her at a coffee shop one morning. By that night, they were married in a spiritual ceremony in a Los Angeles hotel room. Six months later, she was legally married in Nevada.

From the day of her forced wedding, Tasneem said, her life became unrecognizable. She was withdrawn from school. She was forced to become pregnant with her first child at 16. She was taken out of the U.S. to her husband’s home country for six months.

“I was basically handed to this stranger,” Tasneem said. “All of my reproductive rights were taken from me that night, all of my bodily autonomy was taken from me. My entire childhood was taken from me.”

Tasneem, who is now 43 and lives in El Sobrante, was trapped in her marriage until she was 23, when she was finally able to initiate divorce proceedings after eight years and two children. She had to leave her children with their father while she figured out her next steps but was eventually able to get them back.

In California law, there is no age limit to marry. A minor must get the permission of at least one parent or guardian and approval from a judge to obtain a marriage license or domestic partnership.

Now, Tasneem and other survivors of child marriage are drawing attention to a bill in Sacramento that could ban all child marriages in California by setting the minimum marriage age to 18 — a bill that stalled in a committee controlled by a South Bay legislator.

Tasneem is not alone in her experience. California is one of only four U.S. states that does not set a minimum age for marriage, allowing individuals of any age to marry with the permission of a parent and a judge.

AB 2924, which would strike existing legal language that allows provisions for marriage under 18, was introduced by Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris, D-Orange County, in February.

The bill received opposition from Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Northern California, ACLU California Action and the National Center for Youth Law, which argued that it would drive abusive relationships underground and limit the rights of those under the age of 18 who willingly want to marry.

In April, the bill’s hearing in the judiciary committee was canceled at Petrie-Norris’ request, according to the bill’s legislative history.

However, anti-child-marriage activists blame Assemblymember Ash Kalra, the chair of the judiciary committee, for the bill’s withdrawal, stating that he supported amendments that would gut the bill.

These amendments included banning marriage under the age of 16 but allowing the court petition process for 16- and 17-year-olds and emancipated minors, Petrie-Norris said.

Though she said she believed this would be a “meaningful step” that would have made California’s marriage laws stronger than 37 other states, Petrie-Norris said that she ultimately decided to pause the bill because the survivors she was working with believe there should be no exceptions.

“I have tremendous respect for the lived experience of the survivors and advocates who I was working with on this bill,” Petrie-Norris said. “After considering our options for this legislative session, I decided to pause the bill rather than move forward with a compromise proposal that they do not support.”

Kalra declined an interview request from the Bay Area News Group. ______________________

Was looking for a non paywalled version of this, when I ran across this one

California, a solidly Democratic state, was on track to be the first to pass an absolute ban on marriages for children under 18. But the legislative proposal was met with opposition from liberal organizations like Planned Parenthood, the Children's Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union. The pushback comes out of concerns that imposing an age requirement could set the stage for a slippery slope when it comes to constitutional rights or reproductive choices, specifically that an age requirement could impede a minor's ability to seek an abortion.

Now they worry about slippery slope.

Main article keeps going under the cut, archive link here

No exceptions

A California law passed in 2018 added stricter restrictions for minors to obtain a marriage license or domestic partnership, including separate interviews of the spouses and parents by a judge and family court services to determine if coercion, child abuse or trafficking are a factor, according to its text. The law also implemented a requirement that counties track and report the number of marriages involving minors.

Petrie-Norris’s bill would remove the ability of minors to marry at all, setting the minimum age to 18 with no exceptions. The bill had 20 co-authors across both parties and houses. Petrie-Norris began work on the issue in 2021, she said.

“This was a wildly popular bill,” said Fraidy Reiss, the co-founder of Unchained at Last, which provides direct legal, social and financial services to survivors and those escaping forced marriages and advocates to end child marriage in all 50 states. The organization worked with Petrie-Norris on the bill for more than a year to build a coalition of support, Reiss added.

The U.S. signed onto a United Nations pledge to end child marriage by 2030, but only thirteen states have made marriage under the age of 18 illegal since 2018. According to a 2021 study by Unchained at Last, 300,000 minors were legally married in the U.S. between 2000 and 2018.

California’s child marriages

In 2021, more than 8,000 minors in California between 15 and 17 years old reported becoming married during the previous year, according to Unchained at Last’s analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey. In 2022, the number increased to more than 9,000, according to Unchained at Last. About 86% of these marriages involved underage girls marrying adult men, according to Unchained at Last’s 2021 study.

California state data collected since 2019 has reported fewer than 15 children marrying each year, according to Unchained at Last. Currently, only marriage certificates that are returned to counties with a court order are required to be counted.

The discrepancy in data is interpreted differently by Unchained at Last and the organizations opposing the bill.

The data collection mandated by the 2018 law regarding child marriage is unfunded, and many counties are not complying, Reiss said, leading to inaccurate data. Planned Parenthood, the ACLU and National Center for Youth Law said in a letter of opposition that they believe that the numbers indicate that minors are marrying in spiritual or extralegal ceremonies instead of through the legal process.

Since Unchained at Last was founded in 2011, “more and more” girls under the age of 18 have been seeking assistance, Reiss said.

“We realized there’s almost nothing we can do for someone who is not yet 18,” Reiss said. “The only thing we can do for them is change the law.”

Girls who get married as children often have worse economic and health outcomes. Child brides are more likely to experience domestic violence and less likely to stay in school, according to UNICEF. Pregnant teenage girls are more likely to have complications during pregnancy and childbirth. There are also negative mental health impacts due to isolation from family and friends.

“Child marriage destroys almost every aspect of a girl’s life,” Reiss said, calling it a “nightmarish legal trap.”

The stalemate at the statehouse

ACLU California Action, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California and the National Center for Youth Law wrote a joint letter to Petrie-Norris opposing AB 2924, arguing that a ban on marriage under 18 would drive abusive relationships underground, and limit the rights of minors willingly entering marriages, according to the text.

The three organizations each sent the letter in response to interview requests from the Bay Area News Group.

“We support what we believe are the intentions of the bill, to address the harms of coerced and abusive relationships on young people and protect them from abuse,” the letter reads. “However, we also strongly believe in and support self-determination and bodily autonomy for all people, including young people who are pregnant and/or parenting.”

Petrie-Norris pointed out that the International Planned Parenthood Federation supports legislation setting 18 as the minimum age for marriage.

“Forced child marriage is a practice that strips children of their autonomy, sexual and reproductive freedom, forces them into adulthood prematurely and shields rapists from criminal charges — so I find opponents’ arguments a bit ironic and misplaced — particularly when they have supported the same legislation in other states,” Petrie-Norris said.

The letter cites protections put into place by the 2018 law, including that marriages of minors are screened by a judge and Family Court Services counselor. It also points to California law that considers relationships with a “very young teen” or a “significant” age gap to be child abuse, adding that this should “prevent any such marriage from passing the existing legal test.”

Unchained at Last critiqued the safeguards provided by California law, saying in its “Reality Check” document on child marriage in California that “when an individual is forced to marry, their own parent almost always plays a crucial role in facilitating it.”

Reiss said that allowing abusive parents to marry off their children or allowing children in abusive relationships to marry their abusers provides no benefit to the child.

Tasneem added that a child marrying an adult “in and of itself is abusive because one person is holding power over another.”

The organizations also argue that removing the ability to marry under the age of 18 would have consequences for minors who “willingly enter a marriage,” according to the letter, especially young parents.

“Denying these young people the right to marry — without compelling evidence that it will solve an existing problem — further stigmatizes their circumstances and does not allow them to make health decisions for themselves and their families,” the letter reads.

The opposition letter adds that, because the nationwide right to get an abortion was overturned in Dobbs v. Jackson, it is important to invest “in approaches that expand, not remove, access to care and resources for young people.”

Both Tasneem and Reiss, who spoke about how their own reproductive and bodily rights were taken from them when they were forced into marriage, said that this argument is unfounded and that marriage should be treated as a separate issue from reproductive rights.

Reiss added that 96% of minors who enter into marriage are 16 or 17 years old.

“I’d rather you pass nothing than make it 16 or 17, and then wash your hands and say, ‘Wow, we solved that problem,’ ” Reiss said. “Why would you even bother passing a bill that’s going to help approximately 4% of the people it’s supposed to help?”

The path forward

Tasneem testified about her experience with child marriage in Sacramento in support of AB 2924 and met with Kalra about the bill.

She recalled Kalra being “upset” by her experience with child marriage but said that he told her that she needs to come to the table with Planned Parenthood because they should be on the same side.

“To me, it’s Planned Parenthood that’s standing in the way,” Tasneem said. “I just don’t understand — we really should be on the same side in this situation.”

Tasneem is one of several advocates who has met with Planned Parenthood multiple times about this bill, she said.

“They have kind of seemed to dig their heels in a little bit and made this a little bit more of a political issue versus looking at this as an actual issue that affects children,” Tasneem said.

Petrie-Norris said that the bill will not move forward this year due to the legislative calendar and committee deadlines, but she is “confident that the issue is not going away.”

“I like to believe that there is always an opportunity for compromise,” she said.

Tasneem and other survivors plan to continue to push for change at the statehouse — through legislation and protest. On July 18, Unchained at Last hosted a “chain-in” protest outside Kalra’s San Jose office, dressed in wedding gowns with chains around their wrists, calling attention to the bill and its stall.

“I want to protect the people with the smallest voice in this process, and that’s the minor,” Tasneem said. “Nobody looks out for them — not their parents, not the law, not lawyers, not politicians. Nobody..”

#nunyas news #child marriage

27 notes · View notes

divineintervention-comics · 3 months

Note

When did you first read the myth of Ganymede? And why did you chose to make a comic for this myth?

its a long and convoluted story but im happy to share. in 2015, i was in middle school, i made horror character designs based on the zodiac signs and those later became OCs (i have never read homestuck, everything i know about it was forced upon me by my friends in school). i used the myths as backstories for the characters when they are living constellations. i wanted to make a RPG and they were stars that fell to earth when the gods got too caught up in their bullshit and neglected humanity and the earth and now they have to save the world.

i was immediately attached to Aquarius (who is now Ganymede), he was always an androgynous perpetually dissociated character even before i knew the backstory. i was a teenager myself at this point when i really got into it, and i found the Zeus and Ganymede myth to be disturbing since i was his age. it stuck with me, to the point where i struggled to find the other constellations myths less compelling.

i dont know how to code and didnt know how to make games, i already felt like i was losing it bc its been in production hell since i was 12 and i was 17 at the time. i felt like before i make the game, i should make backstory comics for ALL 12 CHARACTERS (how i thought i would be able to do that when i only cared about 2-3 of the characters in the series who knows). i couldnt stop thinking about Ganymede, i couldnt stop thinking about a story where he is a character and not just an object in the narrative.

in 2020-2021, i made my first draft beta version, it wasnt called "Cupbearers", it was "Divine Intervention: Cupbearer". i just found the myth so compelling in a "i need to make a horror story out of this" way, i needed to cope with my own fears of kidnapping, sexual abuse, human trafficking, loss of bodily autonomy, transformations, immortality, and being stuck through this myth inspired comic.

Ganymede, even as Aquarius, has always been a cathartic character for me, both as a 12 year old and now as a 21 year old. i grow up but he is cursed with immortality, cursed with eternal youth, the world keeps moving on and he will never be able to catch up. stuck in the same spot, never moving forward, never moving backwards, just stuck working for the man who stole his life until the end of time, eternal punishment viewed as a gift by those who bestowed it upon him. how could you be so ungrateful? we gave you a gift. we took you away from everything you've ever known, we've taken away ownership of your body, we've turned you into a beast like us, being tortured by me is a gift, it is a privilege that i chose you, you ungrateful meat-thing.

but he is just a kid, i want to protect him, i want to draw him having fun, i want to draw him enjoying a good meal, i want to see him find any comfort in the horror that is immortality. he's only a kid. just a baby, barely even though puberty, his brain isnt done developing, he had a future, he could have grown up and chose his own life. i think about that a lot.

i just generally have a lot of thoughts, everything i write and draw for this project has a point, it has a purpose, its not just needless suffering i dont write despair. (some zeus x ganymede shipper vagueposted about cupbearers being needless wallowing without purpose bc i dont write fluff fics between a grown man and his child slave)

i really appreciate this ask!!! thanks for asking me about my thought process, i have so much going on in my head and i need to get it out somehow

#cupbearers comic #cupbearers #ganymede #new eva lore just dropped #cupbearers lore

27 notes · View notes

imqueerandadeer · 1 month

Text

I don't think some of yall understand that if you don't vote for Kamala Harris that trans and queer people specifically trans and queer youths lives will be significantly worse if your third part candidate doesn't work out. And guess what we can't help anyone if we all got fucking murdered for being trans and queer.

Atleast Kamala Harris is calling for a ceasefire. atleast shes willing to change her policy's.

Donald Trump wants to futher the war. If he gets elected hes never gonna leave and if he gets elected that affects the whole fucking world.

Vote for Kamala cause shes the best option we have in our current two party system. I would love for 3rd party to be a viable option but it isn't right now. If I lose my human rights and bodily autonomy because you fuckers refused to accept this I'm gonna be pissed. If it becomes unsafe to be myself publicly it is y'alls faults.

#cupids rants #cupids trans rants #cupids political rants #us politics

12 notes · View notes

hyperlexichypatia · 5 months

Note

Hi! Something I’ve been wandering is if there is no point where a brain is truly fully developed, then how do we gage what age should be the age of consent? /genuine I was wandering if you have thoughts on that because it’s something I feel pretty befuddled about

First, I'm sorry this answer is a little late, because I had to think about it a little bit. I think this question, which is a good one, has almost two answers -- one for an ideal youth-topia, and one for our current, ageist, kyriarchical, very-much-not-youth-topia world.

Also, heads up, I'm going to be talking about child abuse in a few paragraphs.

In an ideal world, I think children should begin having some say over their lives and bodies as soon as they're able to express their own opinions, but in conjunction with at least one trusted adult to provide guidance. As the child gets older, the balance should gradually shift over time, with the child's opinion gradually carrying more "weight" over time. Then at some fixed end point, which should be no later than the late teens, the new young adult should have 100% autonomy with no oversight (they can still ask for advice -- which I specify because half the time this comes up, someone asks "What if a young adult wants their parents' advice!" and I have to say "Then they can call and ask, it's not illegal").

An adult will have to make pretty much all the decisions for a baby, because babies don't really know what's what. A toddler's decision-making ability mostly maxes out at picking which toy they want to play with and then crying because actually they wanted the other one. But a school-age child can start having some say in the decision-making process and can practice asking questions at the doctor's office, being included in the conversation, having things explained at their level, understanding things like "I know the shot hurts, but it will help keep you from getting sick later," or "I know you don't like taking pills, but they help your headache go away" or "If the pills don't help your headache go away, say so, and we'll ask the doctor for something that works better." And a teenager can really start taking the lead in their own decisions, with guidance, especially if things like making thoughtful decisions, asking questions, weighing pros and cons, and doing research with reliable sources has already been practiced and modeled over the years. And by the time they're in their late teens, they should have sole final say in what happens to their bodies.

But. All of that is very much the "in an ideal world, youth-topia" answer.

We do not live in an ideal youth-topia. We live in a world where many (I'm being generous and not saying "most") adults in positions of influence over children and young people intend to manipulate or exploit them ("for their own good" or otherwise), and it can be really... extremely... difficult to keep kids from being abused or exploited by parents, families, doctors, capitalists, administrators, politicians, and others.

Most of the arguments I get into are about people wanting to raise the age of majority or some other minimum standard for ""real adulthood"" to some age higher than 18, usually invoking some spurious argument about "the brain."

And I will die on the hill that this is wrong and that 18 year olds should be considered full real adults with full bodily autonomy to do whatever they want no matter how unwise anyone thinks it is -- drink, smoke, take medicine, refuse medicine, have sex, have children, get married, have abortions, get their tubes tied, whatever.

Okay, but then you might say, what about 17 year olds? What about 16 or 15? Is an 18 year old really "more mature" than a 17 year old?

Well, no, of course not. The problem is that the legal status of minors is so absolutely abysmal that, within that legal status, it's hard to asses what "consent," let alone "informed consent," even means. It's not that I think a 17 year old isn't "mature enough" to choose to have surgery, say, but an 18 year old is "mature enough." It's that when you have zero (0) legal rights, having the right to make one (1) choice is really constrained.

Throughout the U.S. -- and I'm only going to be talking about the U.S. here because I can't confidently speak to any other country's laws -- it is legal, to varying degrees (and with even more varying degrees of enforcement), for parents to beat their minor children. It is legal, to varying degrees, for parents to restrict their minor children's movement. To restrict their food. To keep them in conditions barely above prison. To send them to "troubled teen" farms that are literally prison. Even if the mistreatment crosses into some threshold of legally actionable "child abuse," there is no guarantee that the law will be at all enforced. There is no guarantee that the abuse will be stopped. At most, the government will remove the child and place them in a foster home which is likely to be just as abusive if not moreso.

I'm not saying that minors shouldn't have the legal right to make more medical and general life choices than they currently do -- they absolutely should -- I'm saying that in the absence of certain basic physical safety guarantees, a technical on-paper "choice" doesn't mean much.

Like, I just said that I would fight for 18 year olds' right to be sterilized or get married, and also, I'm vehemently opposed to sterilization of minors and firmly support raising the minimum marriage age to 18. That's not because I think decision-making maturity and wisdom magically kick in at the 18th birthday. That's because an 18 year old can leave and file assault charges when their parent says "Sign this consent form or I'll beat you and send you to a prison farm."

So... with that in mind... I do think there are ways to protect minors' right to consent. I think people over 12 or 13 should have to give their own consent for any medical procedure that isn't an immediately life-threatening emergency. And ethical doctors shouldn't perform procedures on people they have reason to believe are being coerced.

As for minors seeking out medical procedures, I think we can look at some contextual questions like: Is the need for this procedure urgent or time-sensitive? I.e. is there any reason it can't wait until the person is older? Can someone interview the young person to try to assess whether they're being coerced? Can the young person articulate the risks or give some indication that their choice is informed? Can they talk about how the medicine/treatment/procedure makes them feel? Do any adults benefit financially from the young person's decision? Are they having an undue influence over the young person? (That isn't just about medical treatment, it's also questions like "Why are child beauty pageants a thing?" and "Why do 7 year olds play American tackle football?") Have they been exposed to other points of view?

Obviously these are all really contextual questions that depend on people in power behaving ethically, which... is a lot to depend on.

So. That's my long answer. I guess.

Final note, mostly I'm talking about medical treatment in general and life decisions in general, but I wanted to quickly mention transition and gender-affirming care in particular. I do support youth gender-affirming care. I didn't always. When I first heard about youth transition, I thought it was a risky thing that young people were going to be coerced into. I thought there would be parents coercing their gender non-conforming children into transitioning to the "other" binary gender and doing surgeries on them before they could object. I was wrong. I know that now, after learning more about how youth transition actually works. Doctors involved in gender-affirming care for youth really seem to be doing it right. They interview the young person. They make sure it's really what the person wants. They go slowly at first. The young person has ample time and opportunity to change their mind. I think other forms of health care for youth (looking at you, psychiatry) (looking at you, weight loss) (looking at you, reproductive health) should model themselves on the kinds of youth-affirming, consent-affirming practices that are standard in youth gender-affirming care.

#youth rights #youth liberation #cw child abuse #medical abuse #medical ethics

29 notes · View notes

neuroticboyfriend · 9 months

Note

Why do you want antinatalist to block you? I agree with pretty much all of your posts, and I really value learning about your experiences. You are opening my eyes to a lot of issues and are a valuable blog on my dash, and I would hate to lose this perspective. But if I am being disrespectful by not blocking you even if I am antinatalist I would hate to do that. Is a subset of antinatalists you meant? Any specific beliefs/behaviours?

For context, I focus my antinatalism on the children, not the terf shit I see... It's about how a child is guaranteed to experience trauma and that they can't consent to being born, so I just think it's unethical to force somebody into existence.

It's an extremely fatalistic and kind of eugenicist outlook on life. The idea that life is not worth living if it contains suffering is something heavily used against disabled people as an argument that we should not exist. It's also very ageist, as part of why this world is so difficult for children is because youth lack many basic rights, like bodily autonomy. Antinatalism also has overlap with the ideology of anti-overpopulation, which is also eugenicist and bigotted.

At the end of the day, instead of seeing the problems in this world and fighting to create a happier, healtheir society for new youth and the adults they will grow into... you just say they shouldn't exist at all. That's fucked up. As hell. It helps no one, and all it does is guilt people for the completely natural desire to have children. And that weighs a lot heavier on marginalized people than it ever will on the powerful, since we're often told we shouldn't have children because we don't deserve to exist.

There is just no way antinatalism doesn't echo and justify bigotted ideas. If you really supported liberation, you wouldn't think the being born is a violation against a human life. And hell, what does that say to suicidal people? Do you really think they wont see the fatalistic attitude of antinatalism and decide they should die because their life isnt worth living because of their suffering? It's all just so fucked up.

#asks #anon #antinatalism #ableism #sanism #eugenics #overpopulation #suicidality #youth rights #ageism

44 notes · View notes

redrikki · 27 days

Text

Teen Wolf Rewatch - Season 1 Review

Season 1 of Teen Wolf serves the same blend of camp, horror, and teenage coming of age drama as my youthful fav Buffy the Vampire Slayer, but by making the monster the protagonist, it changes it up in interesting ways. Scott is a fascinating choice for the lead, not just cause he's a werewolf, but because he's not a hero. He doesn't want to be there, he's only involved in the plot to protect himself from it. He's the victim of people who would be the heroes of monster hunting shows like BtVS and Supernatural or the antihero protagonists of a roaring rampage of revenge film. Making Scott the main puts Teen Wolf into interesting conversation with those other genres and shows.

This season does a good job of setting out the themes that will define the rest of the series. Revenge is an open spiral of destruction. Monster is as monster does. Power is an obligation to act and the pursuit of power hurts everyone including you. Poor communication kills. Violations of characters bodily autonomy and mind makes for compelling suffering.

Returning to season 1 and reminding myself of where Scott started gives me more appreciation for where he ends up. He changes so much! Yes, he's still a dorky sweetheart, but his priorities are radically different. Season 1 Scott is a selfish, immature child. He refuses to give up a sport he loves and worked hard on just because playing endangers himself and everyone around him. He plans to kill a man, not for justice or to protect, but so he doesn't have to live with lycanthropy. That's a far cry from season 6 Scott who gives up college to protect Beacon Hills and tries to save the lives of his enemies. Insert that's growth.gif here.

Hey, you know who else in season 1 is selfish and immature? Literally all of them! Stiles is out here living his Hardy Boys/comic book fantasy with zero thought as to the impact of his adventures on everyone else. Allison is so desperate to be strong she's putting arrows into people over it. Derek is so into his trust issues he alienates everyone who might have willingly helped him by trying to intimidate and manipulate them into it. Lydia is using her "friends" and cutting off bits of herself for just a sliver of validation and do not gets me started on Jackson. They all grow so much from here and I'm looking forward to watching it all over again!

Scott/Allison is central to the season, but I was kind of cold on it until the last episode. As an aromantic asexual, I have been bewildered, bored, and exasperated by teen romance drama since I was a teen. It doesn't help that their relationship isn't based on anything more solid than lust. Scott needs Allison to feel normal and in control at a time when he has none, but he doesn't trust her enough to share what he's going through or respect her enough to make informed decisions about her safety or their relationship. It isn't until the moment in the season finale where he trusts her to help him fight Peter and where she knows what he is and decides to love him anyway that I really started to ship it.

The vibes on this show are impeccable, but the cracks in the writing are already starting to show. There's all these continuity errors. When was the fire? How many died? What classes are the kids in again? And don't even get me started on the timeline. This show desperately needed a show bible, but whatever I guess.

#teen wolf #scott mccall #allison argent

9 notes · View notes

start-where-i-end · 2 months

Note

Separate, pro-consent anon here, wanted to comment on what you two said.

I do not support anti-c positions precisely because of what the other anon said. Who are you, or me, or anyone else going to tell someone what they can and should do with their relationships and their body, especially in this world where we fight against abuses of bodily autonomy?

I am of the crowd that supports such relationships when the younger is informed, consenting, and confident in their beliefs and love. Everybody thinks they know better than the next person on what they should do with said person's life, all the while lacking critical information of their situation and their heart. Isn't this what we were always fighting against as youth liberationists? Why is it suddenly okay to do this when someone's romantic relationships are involved?

While I most likely will never have such a relationship due to the inherent risks that come with it living in this society, which would see me dead and them gaslighted and isolated or abused by psychiatry, I wouldn't ever get in the way or out two people who were brave enough to love each other in this world. While I hate secret relationships due to the nature of enabling abusers, it's literally the only option for people, and people are going to love each other regardless of laws, social attitudes, etc.; they will just find a way around it.

Being "against" those people's relationships is just social conservatism unless you know for sure someone is being taken advantage of or hurt, and aren't just assuming based on arbitrary numbers. It isolates them and creates a worse environment than one which was accepting and allowed them to be open.

-p.s. doing this anonymously not because I don't want you to know who I am, but I'm just afraid to be super open about my contact stance due to the censorship of the pro para community and Tumblr as a whole. I'm sure you could hazard a guess though.

I fear I'm more negative about love than you are.

Love in the contemporary society is a powerful tool of abuse. Loving people are conditioned to feel entitled to their loved ones' lives and wellbeing, and this transcends the taboo lines too, because analyzing the stigma against non-normative relationships doesn't mean you removed all the harmful social baggage you accumulated.

Until we as a society (or at least we as a niche community within the society) stop viewing love as an inherently good thing and a reason to be in a relationship by itself, I won't believe these decisions are informed. This concerns adults too, btw, adults are just less likely to get sucked into a quasi parental dynamic and have it fuck up their formative years.

7 notes · View notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 4 days

Text

Lil Kalish at HuffPost (09.13.2024):

Daniel Trujillo’s first month of junior year has been a “cakewalk.” He’s in two different jazz bands and is a member of his school��s chapter of March for Our Lives chapter, a student-led organization promoting gun control. He dreams of studying music in college. But getting there has not been easy for Daniel and his family ― especially in Arizona, where a barrage of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and rhetoric has threatened their sense of safety. In 2022, state Republicans banned gender-affirming surgeries for minors in Arizona, though those procedures were already rare, and barred trans girls from playing on girls sports teams in schools. (A federal appeals court decision this week stopped the latter law from going into effect.)

Lizette Trujillo, Daniel’s mom, has traveled from their home in Tucson to Phoenix each legislative session over the last six years, taking time off work to testify in opposition to such anti-LGBTQ+ bills. Daniel has joined her on those trips since 2020. “My husband and I are small business owners, and it’s given me the flexibility to devote my life in this really distinct way to fighting the trans legislation in our state. If I clocked the hours of free volunteer time, it’s significant,” Lizette Trujillo told HuffPost. And when they aren’t traveling to the state Capitol, the Trujillo family is focused on cultivating a safe, accepting community in their city. [...] Organizers across the country are sounding the alarm about the high stakes of the November presidential election and the looming threat of Project 2025, the conservative playbook for a second Trump presidency spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation. Project 2025 equates being transgender with pornography, calls for federal government to enforce sex discrimination protections based on the “binary biological meaning of ‘sex,’” and argues that educators and librarians who share materials about trans identity should have to register as sex offenders. In addition, Trump has vowed to roll back Title IX protections for transgender students and criminalize doctors who provide gender-affirming care if he’s reelected. The former president has spent the last few weeks repeating false claims that children are undergoing gender transition surgery at school and without parental consent. This week, he also refused to answer whether he’d veto a national abortion ban. By contrast, Democratic nominee Vice President Kamala Harris has campaigned on the promise of restoring access to abortion and the “woman’s right to make decisions about her own body.” Her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, has been a champion of trans rights in his home state.

A forthcoming Supreme Court case, L.W. v. Skrmetti, will decide the legality of Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for youth. Justices will begin hearing oral arguments next month, and their decision, which is expected next summer, could have sweeping ramifications for the state of gender-affirming health care for trans youth nationwide. Activists argue that the outcome of the election and the court’s decision on gender-affirming care, like its decision overturning the right to an abortion, will affect all kinds of people who are made vulnerable in society. That’s why organizers are working so hard to bring those fights together, under the umbrella of the broader struggle for bodily autonomy — and to do so while also celebrating the beauty of self-determination. Daniel’s story is one of nine about trans and gender-nonconforming young people featured in the American Civil Liberties Union’s new “Freedom To Be” campaign, which launched this week and aims to spotlight two things that advocates say are largely missing from mainstream stories and coverage of transgender youth: joy and intersectional identities. And on Saturday, the Gender Liberation Movement — a new group to help bridge the gap between the trans rights and reproductive rights movements — will hold its first march and festival at Columbus Circle in Washington D.C., one block away from the Heritage Foundation’s headquarters. Daniel and Lizette Trujillo are slated to take the stage at the event, along with trans rights advocate Miss Major and actors Elliot Page and Julio Torres.

“At the heart of this effort is looking at the connections between all of the attacks, particularly from the right, on communities on the margins,” said Raquel Willis, a Black trans activist and writer who co-founded the Gender Liberation Movement with Eliel Cruz, an organizer and communications worker, and others. “We know that restrictions around access to abortion and reproductive justice have been a galvanizing fight for a lot of people on the left, and in queer and trans circles a lot of us have been fighting against restrictions around access to gender-affirming care.” Conservatives often use the same political playbook to target both abortion and trans rights, Willis said.

“The strongest connective tissue between our struggles is bodily autonomy,” she added. Restrictions on reproductive rights go hand in hand with the rollback of LGBTQ+ rights, harsher immigration policy and restrictions on what parts of U.S. history can be taught in schools — and what should be censored, Willis said. Everyone is harmed by anti-trans laws and rhetoric, she added, but especially cisgender women of color and gender-nonconforming women. For example, she pointed to Algerian boxer Imane Khelif, whose recent Olympic win in women’s boxing was heavily criticized by Trump, author J.K. Rowling and billionaire Elon Musk. They falsely claimed Khelif is trans and helped drum up a barrage of online abuse against her.

This past weekend featured a new protest movement called the Gender Liberation Movement that tackles abortion, gender-affirming care, and bodily autonomy.

#LGBTQ+#Gender #Gender Identity #Project 2025 #Protect Trans Kids #Transgender #L.W. v. Skrmetti #Gender Liberation Movement #Gender Affirming Healthcare #Bodily Autonomy

4 notes · View notes

puppypeter · 23 days

Note

Your bottom!Roy posts got me thinking about my secret omega!Roy ABO au, and now I MUST share my vision or I will EXPLODE!!!!!

I'm really fascinated by nontraditional ABO fics, which is why repressed Omega!Roy has me by the THROAT!! The whole political side of the ABO universe when put into a professional sports context is really intriguing to me, and I'm especially interested in seeing how gender politics would play out in a universe where possessing a second sex is the norm.

I'll try to keep my summary as short as possible so I'll boil it down to my key components (*me when I lie):

Omega!Roy presented at Sunderland when he was around 12/13 and thereby had to sign one of the most complex NDAs in youth sport at the time as well as being put on extremely heavy duty suppressants. All that compounded by the scrutiny and isolation of his living conditions at sunderland and the emotional impact of having your body be treated as something shameful to be hidden having an incredibly traumatic effect on someone so young leads me to believe that Roy's 'hardman' persona was a combination of his actual personality and a case of serious overcompensation.

By the time Roy is playing professionally, maybe some sort of Second Sex Protection Lae has been passed which means youre not obligated to reveal your second gender at your work place, leading to Roy hiding his omega status to further his career opportunities. Which surely won't have an effect on the way he views his body at ALLLLL.

Oh, you think Roy is emotionally repressed in CANON?? Omega!Roy is something else entirely. EXTREMELY dysmorphic and sexually repressed, as well as suffering from internalised omegaphobia(?), no wonder he is so tense. My man hasn't had a fulfilling heat in three decades. Add that to his preexisting career struggles from canon and you get a total MESS.

Enter Jamie: THE pinnacle of the Alpha archetype (who, unbeknownst to Roy, is also dealing with a lot of internalised struggles regarding his second sex and what it means to be an Alpha male, combined with his Amsterdam related trauma).

Roy hates him on sight, both for the canon reasons of jealousy and general dislike for his personality and for omegaphobic reasons, meaning Roy resents Jamie's Alpha status.

In season 1, they still have their rivalry, except Oh No!!!!! One day, all this alpha agro posturing in combination with Roy's fluctuating heat cycles as a result of consistent suppressant misuse/his advancing age results in Roy going into heat.

Now Roy's secret is out to the WORST possible person during one of the most fragile stages of his career AND since his stupid omega hindbrain latches itself onto the most eligible Alpha available, Roy is forced to ride out his heat with virile Alpha!Jamie.

Except,,, Jamie is actually,,, really attentive?? And understanding??? And doesn't push boundaries or take advantage of this HUGE blackmail opportunity??? Doesn't take advantage, PERIOD???? And his perception of Roy doesn't seem to change that drastically??? What????

Obviously, this is a slow burn enemies to friends to lovers situation. It's about the emotional vulnerability of having someone care for you at your most fragile and helpless, as well as a journey of self acceptance,,, It's also about extremely kinky topping from the bottom style smut with whiny, desperate to please service top, but I digress.

Could end with Roy revealing his omega status and kind of championing a lot of pro-omega movements in professional sports, or it could be wholly RoyJamie focused. And, not to make this mostly smutty au too angsty BUT: the potential of Jamie being able to relate to Roy's struggle with his bodily autonomy being violated because of his Amsterdam experience? PERFECTION!!

Big takeaway is: nontraditional ABO, older grumpy dominant omega!Roy X younger bratty submissive alpha!Jamie. I need 100k fic NOWWWWW!!!!!

Welp this is going to look like I sent myself an ask cause this is absolutely straight out of my brain what the fuck it's my dream!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YES TO EVERY SINGLE THING YOU SAID!!!! Got lots to say so adding a cut or people will have to scroll loads! But anyone feel free to come shout to me more about it!

Listen I am always out here begging for more roy-centric angst to begin with and for more alpha-omega content because royjamie just fit the bill so well however you look at them (as your idea or as alpha roy/omega jamie or alpha/alpha or omega/omega). It's all about the claiming, the possessiveness, smelling each other and what not lol I love the political element and how that plays into the sports world, especially where they get kids started so young so in general it's already weird seeing such young kids put so much focus on their bodies as a vehicle for success, let alone other people getting involved in their presentation.

But now I want to know your thoughts on if his parents sent him to Sunderland because he was good at footie or because they somehow knew he was likely to turn out an omega (like his grandad, make grandad a male!omega and maybe that was his maternal grandfather and roy's dad - assuming a stereotypical alpha - always hated him for being too caring, too sweet to his own wife and his daughter etc and definitely too soft around roy). I'd say his grandad took him to take him away from that environment but it doesn't work if he brought him to a football club lmao (other option is to make it angst and say grandad was actually an omegaphobic asshole too but I feel bad about that ahah)

Roy's being so young and isolated would play such a massive role, being surrounded just by other kids who might take his spot if he is not good enough and other adults whose only interest is making money off of him becoming successful and who keep making him feel bad for his presentation.

I can see there being protection in place as his career progresses, but I feel like even if legally it's a thing the world of football is still a shitshow (I mean it's not illegal to be gay for example and yet how many players are out? when statistically there's definitely a lot of lgbt+ players - in men's footie)

But I can also see Roy at that point hating that part so much (it's the reason his parents sent him away? his hyper independence make him hate the thought he'd need to depends on someone else? my dude is so fucking touch starved it would probably physically hurt if someone held him in their arms?). And I can see him being a bit passive aggressive towards others omega players at Richmond because they're so chill about it and he's mad they have no idea what it was like for him!! (he'll get there, to where he supports them and is grateful they didn't have to go trough the hell he did)

And lord Jamie being a shitty alpha copy of his own shitty alpha dad (who could not tolerate that omega!Georgie was not a docile little thing but feisty as hell!), brought on by his Amsterdam trauma. James went away when he was little and came back later to a Jamie that was too soft, who presented as an Alpha because maybe it's the dominating gene in the Tartt family but did not behave like one at all, accused of spending too much time with his mother who is far too into omega-rights and equality and has thought him to do things like house chores which for James is 'an omega's job'. But he pulls the acting like a super dad thing and then Amsterdam happens because of him wanting to show what a real alpha should be / what an omegas job is.

I love that you went for the "Roy resents Jamie's Alpha status"!!! He is such a contradictions, hating Jamie because he's a twat of an alpha but also because he (roy) isn't one!!!

Them fighting each other in the locker room is such a hormones fuelled thing regardless lmao I can see maybe some medication Roy is taking for his knee interacting with his suppressants (perhaps because it's not a thing anymore to pay attention to since almost nobody takes suppressants anymore)

Wonder what would happen if Roy hurt his knee as canon but it was someone from another team and it happened because he got distracted as his body was going into some crazy frenzy of unwellness (his first heat after decades would be a painful nightmare) and so now he's at the lowest he could ever be

And let's not forget Jamie has been a fanboy his whole life so even if they were fighting he is genuinely concerned + his alpha instincts of protection and devotion and 'must make myself helpful regardless of the sex of the person' that Georgie instilled in him + this physical pull he feels towards Roy being in distress (you know the whole bonded alpha can feel the distress, what if he feels it even before? or maybe it's just a distressed omega smell although that would out Roy unless it doesn't happen until they've dragged him back to the locker room)

I love sweetheart alpha jamie so much!!! he'd be so caring and make the best service top absolutely and I do want to see the moment it clicks for Roy that Jamie also struggles with his presentation and does not want to be held up to those alpha standards

I do love the idea of him speaking about it publicly and Richmond ending up with an omega assistant coach (there's a lot that can be said about who is what in that coaching staff lol but hey the team is owned by a bad ass alpha female boss, only one in the Prem!!)

"the potential of Jamie being able to relate to Roy's struggle with his bodily autonomy being violated because of his Amsterdam experience? PERFECTION!!" you had to end with the most angst and I love you for it!!!!!!

#royjamie

5 notes · View notes