#which government do you think is more likely to criminalise trans people

[chaseprice]

getting increasingly annoyed at the Online i may need to log off

[yuri-for-businesswomen]

ok i am really sorry about how this may come off and i want to say i'm not like prejudiced against german people, but i often hear about things from germany like women having to try brothels first before getting unemployment, or "sex being a human right for disabled people" (ie they force a prostitute to go "service" a disabled man), and so on, and it kind of makes me skeeved out by german men? where i'm from obvs there is a local brand of misogyny but how accepted is this in your country? how common is it among the men to just think it is normal and okay? would you say the average man there goes to brothels or is okay with it?

no worries! i completely understand where youre coming from.

first off, women do not have to try prostitution or they get their unemployment benefits cut, thats a myth. a brothel owner tried to enforce it but the courts decided that, since the alleged purpose of the prostitution law was to protect prostitutes, not to foster and promote prostitution, the government agency responsible for unemployment is not to advertise brothel ads or help brothel owners find „employees“ which would not make sense in the first place because brothels dont employ prostitutes, they rent out rooms.

secondly, i dont think german men are more (or less) likely to buy sex than men of other nationalities. german men tend to generally be more shy (when it comes to hitting on women/dating) which is not due to virtue but probably because german people are more reserved in general. my french friends say they get harrassed on the street less in germany, for example. but that doesnt make germans less misogynistic.

from a feminist point of view, we have the worst possible mix of liberal and conservative politics: for example, prostitution has been liberalised and legalised 20 years ago - but abortion is still technically criminalised (albeit accessible). women have been excelling in academics - but mothers still take on most of the childcare (resulting in poverty at old age, single mothers being at highest risk of poverty, and women being overrepresented in part time jobs, for example). the conservative part comes from the center right christian democratic party having been in power for most of the time since the end of ww2. the prostitution law is the brainchild of the green party who have been massively influenced by postmodernism and hippie culture. academics are also pretty much divided into these two camps (conservative or postmodernist liberal) and this also influences politics. i think this is reflective of our weirdly ambivalent culture!

in my opinion, the average german person does not have strong opinions on any of this. they care about würstchen and maybe refugees (racism is a more obvious albeit not more or less grave issue here than sexism). the topic of prostitution is not a widely discussed topic at all. which means people dont care enough to stop that green party nonsense like „sex is a human right“ and buying sex being legal (they are by the way also responsible for the new self id law in germany). feminism is just very weak in germany. there are big discussions on „gendering“ and the trans topic, refugees and nazis, and climate change, but weirdly the sex industry and other misogyny is not often discussed. at best we get a halfhearted gender pay gap debate.

i think german men are freaks in private. we have a huge fetish scene in germany, i cant tell you why. germans are known to be very dry, reserved, not fun loving people, but there is an undeniable underbelly of sex pests here, i cant tell you what it is but maybe thats because im too close to it. i would be very interested to hear how other germans but especially non-germans who have been to or maybe even lived here perceive it!

[oidheadh-con-culainn]

Hey, this is about the age of consent post. I don't know how it is where you live, but I know in the US the age of consent doesn't mean "U can't have sex until X age" it means "An adult will go to jail for having sex with anyone under X age." It's not meant to stop teens from screwing each other, it's meant to stop gross adults from screwing teens/children.

first of all i should point out i am referring specifically to a thread where their reasoning was based on their own maturity level at that age, which they seemed to think should be a barometer for the law, regardless of the fact that their experiences are not universal.

secondly idk if the law is actually different where you are but here that is only one facet of it. legally it still means that people under that age are considered to be unable to consent to sex even if both are under that age. while i think it's rare for this to be prosecuted it does limit the resources people have access to if things go bad. criminalising things doesn't make them not happen, it just makes it harder for people to access resources

in some places there's a "romeo & juliet" defense where it isn't subject to prosecution if both are close in age and neither is in a position of power, but that isn't universal (e.g. i think this exists in ireland but i don’t think it exists in the uk, uk law is very much like... it is illegal for people under 16 to have sex, with anyone. just because it’s rare for people to get prosecuted for it doesn’t mean it’s legal!)

but also like. 18 is an adult. i knew people who were fully independent of their parents at 18, working full time and living with a partner. there would be no power differential between them and a 21y/o in the same position. i also knew people at 18 who very much weren't, but there is no universal age of maturity, because people are different. also I can't speak for anyone else but once I got to uni etc, age really stopped coming up in conversations with my peers (because... they were my peers regardless), so if you're expecting people of that age to stick to some 2/3-year age gap for arbitrary legal reasons I reckon it's all gonna get fucked

raising the age of consent to 21 is stupid, infantilising and basically just gives governments another way to hurt queer people (can you really see them enforcing that equally for straight people? dream on). there was also a lot of swerfy stuff on the thread, as you can imagine ("20yos should never do any kind of sex work") which -- again, criminalising it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. it just means those people can't get help when they need it, because they would end up facing legal bullshit themselves. NOT TO MENTION it also sets a precedent for raising age of consent for medical procedures, and let's be real, who would that hurt first? trans people. it's like. half a step from "no sex until 21" to "no hormones until 21". this is not a bullshit "slippery slope" argument, this is a fact, with precedent, that debates about at what age people can make choices about their own body have wider implications, and that when your governments have a vested interest in limiting trans people's access to care (especially young trans people), that's going to be the first thing to be hit by it

so yeah trying to protect young people is important. but this isn't the way to do it. you can't legislate gross people out of existence like this -- all you do is hurt the vulnerable more. what you can do instead is remove barriers to resources and stuff that put young people in a vulnerable position where they might be exploited (including things like jobs and housing, because people get stuck in abusive relationships when they don't have the resources to leave), as well as educate people about healthy relationships and empower them to make their own choices. that way people who aren't ready to have sex at 18? don't have to! the resources part is crucial there -- you need to create a situation where it IS a choice -- but legislation can't do the job of those resources.

now what we SHOULD change is the fact that you can also join the *army* at 16 in the UK, even if you can't be deployed until 18 -- and believe me they advertise HARD to teenagers and do everything they can to convince you it's a good bonding experience :) :) please sign up to learn how to murder :) :) because *that* is fucked up and that *is* the kind of evil you can legislate out of existence, most other countries already have because recruiting teenagers is fucked up

anyway. will not be engaging in any more discourse about this. didn't expect anyone to read the post, was just venting for my own relief

[discyours]

Could you make a list of ur opinions?

I can try, but I never really learned how tumblr works so I don’t know how to make this an actual page on my blog. Once I do figure out how I’ll definitely link to this. I’ll go off the top of my head for most frequently asked/what I think is most relevant, but if there’s anything you’re missing feel free to ask. 

Gender: 

Gender is, in short, the roles that are ascribed to sex. This includes the idea that anyone who is born female is bound to be docile, caring, or even just more likely to like pink. But gender identity also falls under this. Defining a woman as someone who wants to be female is referring to something - an action, a personality trait, a feeling, a thought - beyond sex as what “makes” a woman. Gender is not fake, but it is a social construct and in my opinion it’s a harmful one. Whether deliberately created to oppress women (like is the case with women being expected to be submissive) or originated as a relative accident like with certain fashion trends, gender roles end up restricting women’s freedom. Believing in female liberation means being against, or at least critical of that. 

Gender identity: 

Again, falls under gender but I think it deserves its own answer. I don’t think gender identity is necessarily “fake” either. When people say that they “feel like” a woman rather than a man I don’t think that they’re lying. I may take issue with the wording just like I may expect people to be critical of their own reasoning when they explain that their gender identity is male because the idea of being a man feels right to them whereas being a woman doesn’t, but I do understand how they feel. I relate to the feeling myself and I do think that the average trans man feels differently about this than the average cis (meaning non-trans) woman, however I’m not convinced that this feeling is rigid or innate. 

So I don’t think gender identity is “fake” or complete nonsense, but I don’t think it’s a particularly useful category either. There’s no reason I should be sharing bathrooms with people who have an internal sense that they should be male rather than female over people who lack the ability to use urinals and require trash cans to dispose of menstrual products. There’s no reason for me to share changing rooms with people with similar genderfeels rather than people who have similar bodies to mine and are statistically far less likely to sexually assault me than people with a different type of body. 

In the context of feminism we need to recognise that sex is the category in which women are being oppressed when they suffer FGM, when they’re put into menstrual huts, when they’re denied reproductive freedom, when they’re kept out of government positions because of their unreliable, hormone driven female emotions, when they’re missing out on jobs that an equally qualified man would be accepted for because their employer doesn’t want to risk having to deal with them getting pregnant. Sex, not gender identity. 

Egalitarianism: 

I actually don’t get asked about this much which is a shame because I know that people are thinking it; if it’s just about wanting women to have rights then why not be an egalitarian? Why, unless you hate men and want them to be below women rather than being equal? 

There’s multiple reasons. For one, feminism started as a women’s rights movement and women do not owe it to men to change that as soon as they decided they were done fully opposing it. There would be something inherently disgusting to me about denying women their own movement for their own issues regardless of where I stand on egalitarianism. 

But beyond that, I oppose the idea that we just draw a line at men’s current quality of life and decide that that’s the standard women must be judged against. The idea of it is misogynistic but in practice it’s harmful too; we’ve all seen those “if you want equality then women need to join the draft” and “if we’re equal then can I punch you in the face?” statements. This form of “equality” is still just letting men control the standard for women’s lives. Is still forcing women to fit into a system built by men. 

A lot of egalitarians seem hypocritically focused on equal outcome which I also disagree with. The ratio of men to women that die during physically taxing jobs is hardly any more of an issue than the ratio of men to women that die during child birth. There are biological reasons for these discrepancies (one moreso than the other, but there’s still never going to be an effective way to have a 50/50 sex split in every single job) and compensating for them for the sake of some vague concept of “equality” is pointless. The inadequacies in female-specific healthcare are a big reason to have a movement specifically for women’s rights, to have a movement that can advocate for improvement. Likewise if a lack of health and safety regulations in manual labour disproportionately affects men, that’s a good reason for a men’s rights movement to advocate for improvement (not that either of these can replace non-sexspecific advocacy groups which are also very important). I just don’t believe that women have any responsibility to merge with or be involved in men’s rights movements, considering women have historically always been oppressed by men and men still hold the majority of political as well as financial power. 

Liberal feminism: 

Liberal feminism is often what people refer to as mainstream feminism, but I don’t think it’s right to write off liberal feminism as a whole just because I disagree with the direction that mainstream feminism has gone. In simple terms liberal feminism is just feminism which seeks more individual freedom for women within the current system, whereas radical feminism is focused on class freedom and radically changing the system if not creating a new one altogether. I don’t fully disagree with liberal feminism and in fact I don’t believe any form of feminism that doesn’t at times utilise more liberal solutions has any way of succeeding. Getting more women into our current government without actually overhauling our political system and changing the reasons that women are kept out of government positions is liberal; I still only vote for women when I can, and encourage other people to do the same because when we’re unable to change things completely, it’s better than nothing. 

The reason I lean more towards radical feminism is because I ultimately don’t find liberal solutions to be good enough. I don’t want to regulate the porn industry, I want to abolish it. I don’t believe any amount of regulation or “reclamation” can ever make the sex industry ethical and while completely eradicating it is never going to happen, having that as the end goal at least means that you never stop pushing. The same thing goes for just about all other systems which oppress women; I fundamentally disagree with liberal feminists that giving individual women more individual freedom about whether or not to participate in these systems is ever going to be good enough.  

Sex work: 

I don’t believe that consuming or procuring sex work (ie being a john or a pimp) can ever be ethical as I don’t believe that consent can be bought. If somebody would not have sex with you without being paid, I don’t see that as true consent. There is something inherently coercive about having to choose between not having the money you need or having sex with someone. Coerced sex is not consensual and we all know what non-consensual sex is. 

There may be some people who don’t need the money but do it regardless because they enjoy it/want extra cash, especially in “milder” forms of sex work like camming or stripping. But the reality is that the vast majority of people (90% of prostitutes) who do “sex work” do not want to and would be doing something else if they had the option. Their suffering is more important to me than the enjoyment of the select few who do want to be “sex workers”, and that of the johns they “service”. 

That being said, I support the Nordic model which criminalises the consumption and procurement of sex work but decriminalises actually being a sex worker. This model has been shown to reduces trafficking as it reduces demand, and it doesn’t harm sex workers (who are the ones we’re trying to protect). Sidenote, I hate the term “sex work” as it already goes along with the idea that sex can ever be a job and should be held to the same standards as one when it comes to the ethics of being indirectly coerced by a need for money - however I’ll use it when I need to to explain my stance to people who do use the term. 

Surrogacy: 

I view surrogacy similarly to sex work; as an unethical and unnecessary commodification of women’s bodies which puts their health and safety at risk, and is often indirectly coerced through financial needs. Viewing parenthood as being primarily about who “claims” a newborn rather than who actually carried and gave life to it is inherently patriarchal and sets a terrifying precedent. Pregnancy puts a huge strain on women’s physical as well as mental health, and ending the process with a cheque or a sincere thank you rather than a baby can be mentally devastating, even if you knew from the start that you wouldn’t keep it. It is morally inconsistent that surrogacy is often legal in places where it’s illegal to receive money for giving away an organ or your blood; policies that are in place to avoid turning the poor into a class of kidney-suppliers. The idea of consent magically justifying everything falls way short when the same concept hasn’t been applied to blood donations for aforementioned reasons, and when you’re stuck to a contract. If we’ve agreed that consent to sex does not count if it’s irrevocable, why is surrogacy treated differently? 

Much like with sex work, the demand always far outweighs the supply which means that the few women who sincerely and genuinely want to do this don’t just justify the whole thing. I believe a system similar to the Nordic model should be in place, where there’s no legal repercussions to being a surrogate but where attempting to recruit one is illegal. 

Communism: 

I’m definitely a leftist and radical feminism itself has marxist roots. I recognise that capitalism plays quite a big role in women’s oppression through the barriers that women experience to enter many forms of paid labour, and the unpaid labour that is expected of them. Capitalism also leads to the commodification of women’s bodies through sex work or surrogacy. That being said, the inherently authoritarian nature of communism simply can’t be justified in my opinion. People who are corrupted by power exist under every system, which is why authoritarianism can never be safe regardless of the ideology it’s attached to. Even a “benevolent dictator” will die eventually if they don’t get overthrown first. 

Transmedicalism: 

I view transmedicalism as a harmful ideology. The brain sex studies transmedicalists often link are extremely flawed; incredibly small sample sizes used to draw overreaching conclusions, and a failure to account for neuroplasticity (the fact that your brain’s structure can change over time). Their insistence that transition is the only option for dysphoric people is harmful to all dysphoric/trans people, and often worsens dysphoria while also discouraging the development of alternative treatments. Their claims that all detransitioners were never really trans in the first place and every person who transitioned must’ve secretly been dysphoric regardless of their insistence otherwise are based on no actual fact, just a need for their ideology to make sense. 

[fandomiseverything]

Pros and Con of Countries - Written by two Americans (Who both live in Minnesota)

Canadia

Pros:

Marriage equality (the gays can get married!) (SINCE 2005!!!!) (YEAH!!!!!)

Free healthcare :0

People are truly friendly

Politics are lighthearted and easily run

Higher wages

They have a town called Regina

Money has little windows that when a laser pointer is shined through it, it shows the value on the wall

They hate Justin Bieber

I’m pretty sure Justin Bieber can’t go into Canada? So that’s good (that is good)

Avril Lavigne

AVRIL LAVIGNE (yeah shes great but why is she a pro 2 times) (cuz she’s a clone) (ohyea)

Its a themepark (what) (their money projects the amount on the wall, its monopoly money, its waterproof, and its a scratch and sniff….. Its a themepark)

GingerPale

Rei & Shane (and Rei’s cats)

Canada is one of the most gay-friendly countries in the world

Change of legal sex available in all provinces and territories

under varying rules without sexual reassignment surgery

Tim Horton’s (YEEEEE, now i want tim hortons, ive heard of it never had it, and now i want it) (it’s gooooood. One day we could drive down to Brainerd and get some) (THEY HAVE TIM HORTONS IN BRAINERD????/!111/1/1?1/1?!?!?!?) (ye) (WEEEENEEEEEDDDTTOOOOOGGOOOGOGOOO!!!!11!!!1!11!!!!!, LEAVE IT TO MINNESOTA OR AS WE KNOW IT, SOUTH CANADA, TO HAVE A TIM HORTONS)

Cons:

Higher cost of living

Snow. lots of fucking snow.

Their money??? Is weird???

Consumer choice is low (especially with Netflix. The Canadian library is half the size of America’s)

Environmental impact (they’re one of the top oil producers in the world)

They spell Canadien with an “e” (its Canadian you matherfeker)

Its kinda hard to get into Canada

*Chloe voice* they are not French they just PRETEND to be for ATTENTION. (wow)

A lot of people only speak French (thats pretty much the same for any country, they speak a different language)

How do you speak French (very difficultly, lots of vowels, slightly similar to italian and spanish)

Its a themepark

It doesn’t exist (vtru)

COLD

Sweden

Pros:

It’s very clean. Like, seriously.

Most attractive people in the world

The locals are anti-social

The Gay has been legal since 1944

Right to change legal gender since 1972,

No sterilization required since 2013

Sexual orientation and gender identity/expression protections

Gays can adopt

Gay marriage legal since 2009

the first country in the world to allow transgender people to legally correct their gender

HomO, was the Swedish office of the ombudsman against discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation (i think its a funny name)

after one year of abstaining from sex, gay and bi men can donate blood

Sweden is Europe's most gay-friendly country

Cons

Very high taxes

Can’t ask for directions no one will talk to you :(

The locals are anti-social (so am i)

Germnay

Pros:

Central hub makes it easy to travel to other european countries

Good healthcare

Very active, with fairs and parties

Oktoberfest is pretty lit i guess (you guess?) (I’ve never been to Oktoberfest but my friend from Germnay - fuck you - says it’s great)

Legal drinking age is 16

Rammstein

Furries (i’m not a furry i sWEAR) (are you sure about that??) (i dOnT kNoW)

Legal to be gay  since 1968 East Germany and 1969 West Germany

Gay marriage legal since 2017

Transgender persons allowed to change legal gender without required sterilisation and surgery

Sexual orientation and gender identity protection nationwide; some protections vary by region

Full adoption rights since 2017

gay and bisexual men have been allowed to donate blood, provided they haven't had sex for twelve months

83% of Germans support same-sex marriage

Cons:

Nearly everything is closed on sunday

Legal drinking age is 16

Germans dont get sarcasm

Finland

Pros:

They, unlike the Germans LOVE sarcasm

Very clean air

walk anywhere in nature at anytime

SEALS they have a special breed of seal native to finland

Very clear northern lights

They’re modest?

Extremists

Good heavy metal music apparently

People say they’re kind

Some of the most progressive lgbt laws in the world

Transgender people allowed to change legal gender, but only after sterilization

Sexual orientation and gender identity protections

Gay marriage is legal

Legal to be gay since 1971

one of the most LGBT-friendly countries in the world and public acceptance of LGBT people and same-sex relationships is high (lots of gays!!)

Cons:

CANCELLED, THEY HAVE FAT RARE SEALS

Norway (Richie’s fave country besides Canada)

Pros:

Snow is wet so you can actually do stuff with it (unlike MINNESOTA) (you CAN do stuff with minnesota snow!) (NO YOU CAN’T IT’S POWDERY AND WEIRD) (swhy you wait for wet snow or wait till it melts slightly, cause then its warm and thereswet snow) (NO) (yEEE) >:(

Norwegian elkhounds :0

People seem friendly?

Transgender persons allowed to change legal gender

Sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, intersex status protections

Gay marriage legal since 2009, Gender-neutral marriage has been legally recognized since 1 January 2009

Married and committed same-sex couples allowed to adopt

Gay is legal since 1972

1 year deferral period was implemented, gay and bisexual men can donate blood

generally gay-friendly

Cons:

Shrugs

COLD (VERY COLD)

Russia

Pros:

Furry coats are nice

Furry hats called ushanka

Babushka means grandma but buska means bitch

Vodka

The GayTM, Decriminalised in 1917; Re-criminalised in 1933; Legal since 1993

Legal gender change since 1997

But only after what they call ‘medical procedures’ (idk what they mean by that but i suspect surgERY)

Cons:

No gays allowed

Religion is bAD

Religion is GOOD

THEY CAN’T DECIDE???

ALSO COLD (SO COLD)

Too much snow

They like to destroy things? I saw two Russian guys put a stick of dynamite in the sewer and explode the road? Why? (BAD but thins going boom is fun, but not important things)

Vladimir Putin (yee, but we have sarah palin to watch him) (o shid u right)

Government is weird? You can get killed if you say you don’t like the tsar?

If you gay and live in ‘Murica you can’t adopt from Russia (fuck russia)

Communism I guess (thought you liked communism?) (to a degree. I like the idea of it but it’s also bad? Like you can’t/don’t own anything? Your dog is not your dog it is everyone’s dog? I do not like that my dog is mINE)

No discrimination protections

No recognition of gay relationships

tends to be among the most hostile toward homosexuality

Japan

Pros:

SHIBES!!!!! AKITAS!!!! FLUFFY DOGGIES!!!

Sakura trees :0

Pretty colors

Gay is legal, it was legalized in 1880

Very strict gun laws

Never had a school shooting EVER

2015 opinion poll found that a majority of Japanese support the legalisation of same-sex marriage

sex among consenting adults, in private, regardless of sexual orientation and/or gender, is legal under Japanese law

Cons:

Killer bees (we dont like killer beeeees, NOT THEEEE BEEEEEEEEEESSSS!!!) (the killer bees will kill you in a heartbeat)(bad bees…. , NONONONONONNOTJAPAN) (they only live in the forests tho. I think)(ILIKEFORESTS!!) (me too)

No nationwide recognition of same-sex relationships

No gay marriage

Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands

Pros:

All the gay is allowed

They have their own website you know it’s legit when they have their own website

Government is gay (everything there is gay) (shhhhhhhhhggSTOPITgggg)(NO)

Dingos

Cons:

Im pretty sure you cant permanently live there

It was technically at war with Australia for a while

Dingos (I want,,, to pet them,,, but they will bite me,,,)(i was gonna put them in the cons too if you didnt)

Kangaroos (vdangerous) (they scare me) (THEY SHOULD)

Greece (i like greece)

Pros:

Ruins

Anti-lgbt discrimination explicitly banned (ooo nice)

Food

Ocean!!!!!!! Ocean ocean ocean ocean ocean ocean ocean!!!!!!!!! (SaME)

Goats :0

Male homosexuality has been legal since 1951, female homosexuality has always been legal (nICE)

Hate crimes laws covering all areas incl. sexual orientation, gender identity and sex characteristics

school  sex ed classes include segments on sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, homophobia and transphobia (NICE!!!!!)

Pride has been held since 2005, and has been held in most other moderate sized cities since 2010

Trans people's can legally change their gender without having to undergo sex reassignment surgery (NICE!!!!!!)

GAY CULTURE IS VERY VIBRANT

a 1982 law that legalized civil marriage between "persons", without specifying gender, acted as a test-case for same sex marriage

Since 2005, discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace is prohibited.

A lot of boat traveling

Cons:

Quality of life is kind of falling apart

A lot of animals roam freely, which means LOTS of poop

Goat farmers (whats wrong with goat farmers) (they won’t let me pet their goats :( ) (really…. Thats why this is a con?) (yes. I’m a petty bich) (......) (i like goats. And i want to pet them. If you do not let me pet your goats I will be sad [and kinda mad because I want to love them])

Lots of fucking goat cheese

Too close to Italy (whats wrong with italy???) (too friendly. It’s suspicious) (OMFG SERIOUSLY???) (YOU PUT THE FACT THAT CANADA SPELLS CANADIAN WITH AN “E” IN THE CONS) (thats because it iS A CON!!!!! CANADIAN IS SPEELED WITH AN “A”) (NOT IN CANADA)

The Netherlands

Pros:

quite strict gun laws, not seen as a right, but a privilege (????) (you wanted strict gun laws, they have really strict gun laws, its a privilege to have guns, and only for hunting and target shooting, not for self defence, or for other things at all) (nice!)

Homosexuality legalized in 1811 (holy shid)(yeeee)

Gay marriage legal since 2001 (i was born in 2001, they knew i was coming) (I was born in 2000)

The first country to legalize gay marriage (I approve)

banned discrimination on sexual orientation on the grounds of employment, housing, public accommodations, and more.

Lesbians can get IFV (???)(in vitro fertilization, they implant a fertilized egg so they can carry their own child, instead of just adopting)

Transgender persons allowed to change legal gender, only after a diagnosis but without surgery or hormone therapy

. Amsterdam has frequently been named one of the most LGBT friendly cities in the world

Homomonument, was the first monument in the world to commemorate homosexuals who were persecuted and killed during World War II (this is so cool)

85% of the Dutch population supported same-sex marriage and adoption as of 2013

Cons:

Cold? I think?

Republic of Ireland

Pros:

Ireland (nice pro) (thanks)

first country to legalise same-sex marriage on a national level by popular vote

Affordable for any budget

Entitled to 20 days of leave

Yes, transgender people can change legal gender by self-declaration since 2015

Safe, with few guns

Less police

Lots of pubs

Speak English (this was a pro on a website) (IT IS A PRO I ONLY SPEAK SPANGLISH) (Spanglish) (YES SPANGLISH , DONT BE A DIC) (I can’t be what I don’t have)

Fear nothing and no one

Gay marriage legal since 2015

Low crime rate

Cons:

In a fight with Northern Ireland because they don’t want to be ruled by England but Northern Ireland does. Now Northern Ireland is a separate country.

The potato famine (I like potatos) (exactly)

Bad weather

Less police

Not much of a non-alcohol social scene

Fear nothing and no one

The Philippines

Pros:

Have to be at least 21, and pass a background check to be issued a Possession License for guns

If you’re a foreigner and you have a gun, you’re going to go to prison.

They are poised to make stricter gun laws

LGB allowed in the military

Low cost of living

GORGEOUS!!! IT’S GORGEOUS!!!

The Family Code of the Philippines says that marriage is “a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman,” but The Constitution does not prohibit same-sex marriage

One of the most gay-friendly countries in the world

Is the most gay-friendly country in Asia

Cons:

Can’t donate blood if you gay. You will give them The GayTM. (don’t drink the tap water)

Drug problems

Healthcare problems in some areas

Tagalog is very complicated to learn

Malta

Pros:

Transgender people can change gender with or without surgery

Homosexuality legal since 1973

Gay marriage legal since 2017

ban on anti-gay discrimination in employment

sexual orientation and gender identity protections

the first country in the European Union to prohibit the use of conversion therapy

Cons:

Gay and bi men in Malta are not allowed to donate blood

Though there’s talk to change that law

Poland

Pros:

In Warsaw they have a Hatsune Miku statue

Never illegal to be gay

Transgender persons allowed to change legal gender.

one of few countries where sexually active gay and bisexual men are not legally restricted from donating blood. (give them The GayTM, drink that dam tap water)

Cons:

Apply to high schools

School is weird

Gay marriage is banned (wHAT) (I KNOW! Im sad too) (what if you’re gay married BEFORE moving to Poland) (idk are you planning to get gay married?, also … i dont remember waht i was gonna say) (no i’m just thinking about all the other gays who might move to Poland)

United Kingdom

Pros:

The Queen (YEEEE!!!)

Always legal for women to be gay; decriminalised for men in: 1967 England and Wales, 1981 Scotland, 1982 Northern Ireland

Right to change legal gender since 2005

Gay marriage since 2014, not in northern ireland

All discrimination protections since 2010; some existed since 2003 for sexual orientation and 1999 for gender identity

Tea

Crumpets

Cons:

Under the Gender Recognition Act 2004, transgender people who are married have been required to divorce or annul their marriage in order for them to be issued with a GRC. (??????? wtf????) (ikr, its kind of very mean)

The legislation of gay marriage also does not restore any of the marriages of transgender people that were forcibly annulled as a precondition for them securing a GRC

What time is it? ...ITS SEVEN BONG!! (you know they don’t actually tell time like this, right?) (IDONTCARE)

Still #salty about the Revolution (VERY)

BISCUITS (NO!!) (aka cookies in America) (FUCK BISCUITS)

conversion therapy remains legal in the UK (NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO) (IKR LIKE FUCK THAT)

Rains a lot

France

Pros:

Baguette (noice)

DEPENDING ON THE TIME OF DAY THE FRENCH GO EITHER WAY

Legal to be gay since 1791 (no wonder Lafayette was like how he was)

Transgender people allowed to change legal gender without surgery

Sexual orientation and gender identity protections

Gay marriage legal since 2013

amendment to existing anti-discrimination legislation, making homophobic, sexist, racist, xenophobic etc. comments illegal.

gay and bisexual men in France can donate blood after 1 year of abstinence

Transsexuality declassified as an illness

Cons:

Lots of crime? (from what I’ve heard)

Denmark

Pros:

Gay is legal since 1933

Transgender persons allowed to change legal gender without a diagnosis, hormone therapy, surgery or sterilization

Sexual orientation and gender identity/expression protections

Full adoption since 2010

Gay marriage legal since 2012

Gays in military since 1978

Lesbians can get IFV

Laws against hate speech for seual orientation

Lgbt sex ed and relationships taught in schools

Cons:

Iceland

Pros:

Legal to be gay since 1940

Transgender people allowed to change gender without surgery

Gay marriage since 2010

No standing army

Sexual orientation protections

Both full joint and stepchild adoption allowed

2016, Icelandic President participated in the Reykjavik Pride Parade

the first Icelandic President to attend a gay pride parade

Cons:

No standing army

currently unable to donate blood in Iceland

Though they are wanting to remove the ban

Greenland

Pros:

The GayTM has been legal since 1933

Sexual orientation protection laws

outlawed hate speech on the basis of sexual orientation

Gay marriage and full adoption rights since 2016

Cons:

Cant donate blood

trans people cant legally change gender (fACK YA GENDA RULES)

This is all we got for now, but if anyone has any input or tidbits about these countries that wasn’t listed, that you think is important (especially if you live in said countries, send one of us a message, we’ll add it asap! (most likely me, because im on more often and as such am more likely to check my messages) Sorry for the extremely long post!

[ollyarchive]

Olly Alexander: What you can do to help gay and bi men in Chechnya

By Olly Alexander, lead singer in the band Years and Years

Here in Britain, we have seen real steps made towards equality for LGBT people. However, young people still face family rejection and bullying in school just for being themselves, trans people experience abuse and violence for just being visible and our community continues to be misrepresented in the media. We can’t be complacent, and we also can’t forget about our LGBT siblings in other countries.

In 72 countries, same sex activities are criminalised and are punishable by death in eight.

It makes me sick to think about that statistic. I feel angry, sad, helpless and afraid. People are dying because of who they are. We must remember that equality is not fixed, and in some parts of the world, LGBT rights are actually taking a step backwards.

Men are being detained and tortured in Chechnya

In some cases, the shocking and appalling treatment of LGBT people is only just coming to light.

One example of this is Chechnya, a republic of Russia, where gay and bi men are being detained and tortured.

These men are being starved, abused and murdered, just because they’re attracted to people of the same gender.

A spokesperson for Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov has denied the fact that gay people in Chechnya even exist. He went on to say that if they did, the authorities would not need to do anything, “because their relatives would send them somewhere from which there is no returning”.

This violence must stop. We must see all gay and bi men being detained in Chechnya released safely, and a full investigation into the detention take place. 

Even the Russian journalists who broke the news are now living in fear and hiding after a 15,000-member assembly, including influential Chechen people, called for them to be punished.

International pressure has helped open up an investigation into what’s happening in Chechnya but we need more transparency around the action that’s actually being taken.

What you can do

Over two million people around the world have called for the Russian government to address this humanitarian crisis. In Moscow, the Russian LGBT Network has opened a refuge centre to help those trying to flee Chechnya.

But what can we do to help?

We must make sure that how we support LGBT people facing violence and torture in other countries is effective, and does not put them at further risk.

How to help

1. Be informed about the details of these cases. Keep yourself up to date with international human rights news, and check your sources before potentially sharing ‘fake news’. You can follow LGBT rights group Stonewall’s Twitter feed for the latest updates.

2. Ask the UK government to respond, quickly and effectively, where LGBT people face violence or persecution abroad. You can learn more about this in Stonewall’s election manifesto.

3. Donate now to support victims of the situation in Chechnya

4. Amplify international activists’ sentiment, rather than sharing your own opinions. This is about them, not us.

5. Sign petitions to make your voice heard, like this one from Amnesty International, to call out the Russian government on this crisis

Equality is a basic human right that should never be taken from us simply because of who we are.

Chechnya is just one example of somewhere where LGBT people are completely unable to be themselves without hatred and abuse.

This is happening to LGBT people across the world, many of whom are not protected by law, in fact quite the opposite.

All of these people are our siblings, no matter how far away they might be.

Regardless of how we identify or what our sexuality is, as decent human beings who believe in respect, justice and love, we all have a part to play in securing equality for all LGBT people everywhere.

[ninja-suffragette]

News From The USA -13 Days Later

That’s 20th January - 2nd February 

no look it’s fine, I’ll start with some good(ish) news

Lead Levels in Flint Water Drop, but Residents Still Can’t Drink It - NY Times   24th January 2017

Protest activism and resistance

After 2 Weeks In Office, Trump Faces More Than 50 Lawsuits - NPR    2nd February 2017

Stephanie Murphy files bill that would remove Stephen Bannon from National Security Council - Orlando Weekly and also at Murphy’s own website (Tumblr Link)     1st February 2017

Trump's first days in office spawn dozens of lawsuits - CNN (Tumblr Link)    1st February 2017

“Remember that the spectre of trans women was already a useful wedge issue & get-out-the-vote driver in the 2016 campaign. There’s precedent. We will be used as a weapon and a vulnerability against the rest of you for as long as our opponents know we won’t be protected by the Left “ - Twitter Storm    1st February 2017

Reuters orders reporters to cover Trump like an authoritarian regime: Expect ‘physical threats’ - rawstory  (Tumblr Link)    1st February 2017

  Texas Mayor Jess Herbst Comes Out As Transgender -  Huffington Post (Tumblr Link)     1st February 2017

‘But what if an emergency vehicle needs to get through?’ Protesters in  Minnesota part to make way for fire engine - Facebook   1st February 2017   

The Attorney General of Massachusetts, Maura Healey [x]   (Tumblr Link)

Republican Lawmakers in Five States Propose Bills to Criminalise Peaceful Protest -  The Intercept    19th January 2017

Unverified 'alternative' government accounts target Trump on Twitter - CNN   27th January 2017

I believe RoguePOTUSstaff is a Russian disinformation account - Twitter  30th January 2017

Thread about AltNatParkSer on twitter (you should still take this with a grain of salt. There’s no proof that they are who they say they are).

That goes for RogueNASA too. I’m sorry I know they’re really cool.

In response to the new president’s stances on a range of issues, more scientists are preparing to run for political office - The Atlantic (Tumblr Link)    25th January 2017

“Remember, the present U.S. administration wants you to be overwhelmed...” - Tumblr

Four journalists are facing 10 years in prison and a $25,000 fine after covering inauguration unrest - The Guardian  24th January 2017

UPDATE: LAWMAKERS IN TEN STATES HAVE PROPOSED LEGISLATION CRIMINALIZING PEACEFUL PROTEST  - The Intercept     23rd January 2017  

In Minnesota, Washington state, Michigan, and Iowa, Republican lawmakers have proposed an array of anti-protesting laws that center on stiffening penalties for demonstrators who block traffic; in North Dakota, conservatives are even pushing a bill that would allow motorists to run over and kill protesters so long as the collision was accidental. Similarly, Republicans in Indiana last week prompted uproar over a proposed law that would instruct police to use “any means necessary” to clear protesters off a roadway.

Minnesota Lawmakers Push Anti-Protest Bill to Charge Activists Costs of Policing - Democracy Now    26th January 2017

Black Bloc Participants Rescue Disabled Woman from Police Attack - Youtube (Tumblr Link)      20th January 2017

Standing Rock Protests

Over 70 arrested at Standing Rock as Dakota Access aims to finish pipeline - The Guardian     2nd February 2017

What Trump's Latest Executive Order Means For Standing Rock - Refinery29 (Tumblr Link)    25th January 2017  

Today, Trump signed an Executive Order allowing the construction of both Keystone XL and the Dakota Access Pipeline. - Mark Ruffalo on Tumblr    24th January 2017

Trump, Bannon, White Supremacy, Hate Crimes

Donald Trump administration 'wants to cut white supremacism from counter-extremism programme' - The Independent (Discussion on tumblr)    2nd February 2017      

Pence wants us all to remember president Lincoln for black history month because of course he does - Twitter     2nd February 2017

Jewish people give Muslims key to their synagogue after town's mosque burns down - The Independent   1st February 2017

Donations and an online fundraising campaign have raised more than $900,000 (£717,000) for reconstruction.

At least 17 bomb threats called in to JCCs nationwide in third wave of harassment - Jewish Telegraphic Agency   31st January 2017

The FBI Has Quietly Investigated White Supremacist Infiltration of Law Enforcement - The Intercept (Tumblr Link)    31st January 2017

The psychiatrist who wrote the criteria for narcissism just made an extremely important point about what’s wrong with diagnosing Trump with mental disorders - Refinery 29 (Tumblr Link)    31st January 2017

After Trump Deemed China Foreign Enemy, Anti-Asian Hate Crimes In LA Surged - Huffington Post (Tumblr Link)   27th January 2017

Neo-Nazis slogans and imagery drawn outside 3 Florida Synagogues - Tumblr     23rd January 2017

Trump Just Signed The Order To Build The Wall On The Mexico Border - Buzzfeed  23rd January 2017

Trump wants a border wall — and this sheriff is offering to have his inmates help build it - The Washington Post (Tumblr Link)    20th January 2017

Vicente Fox Quesada’s twitteroff with Donald Trump -   6th January 2017

Alabama found guilty of racial gerrymandering - Think Progress (Tumblr link)    20th January 2017

Trump supporters less likely to support public policies when cued with a black face. (Sociological Images)   December 23rd 2016

Steve Bannon, Trump's Top Guy, Told Me He Was 'A Leninist' Who Wants To ‘Destroy the State’ - The Daily Beast    22nd August 2016

Muslim Travel Ban

Science Solidarity List Offers Labs to Scientists Stranded by Travel Ban - Seeker (Tumblr Link)    2nd February 2017

Hasan Minhaj examines the uplifting public response to Trump’s Muslim ban - The Daily Show (Tumblr Link)    31st January 2017

The Muslim ban has brought the US close to constitutional crisis - The Guardian (Further discussion on tumblr and twitter)     30th January 2017

Meanwhile this statement about the Yates firing is suitably insane - Twitter        30th January 2017

Woman And Her 2 Children Held At Dulles Airport for 20 Hours With No Food - Jezebel    29th January 2017  

ACLU volunteer attorneys working to help people detained in airports  Donate to the ACLU - Twitter  29th January 2017

The Illinois senators are asking for an investigation into the DHS’s execution of Trump’s anti-immigration EO. - (Tumblr Link)    29th January 2017  

We are deeply concerned by [Customs and Border Protection’s] failure to respond to time-sensitive Congressional oversight inquiries and allegations that the agency refused to permit attorneys to meet with detained LPRs at O’Hare and other airports across the country.”

The 1st woman who was held has been let through. Crowds chant USA as she’s reunited with her family -  Hannah VanHuss Davis On twitter (Tumblr Link)   28th January 2017

John Oliver explains how unbelievably through the refugee vetting process is in America -  (Tumblr Link)  Last Week Tonight   20th September 2016

Trump’s Muslim Ban Realized - Tumblr and Twitter     27th January 2017

The White House will publish a weekly list of crimes committed by immigrants - Quartz (Tumblr Link)    26th January 2017

Pro-immigration rallies happening right now in New York City and Washington, DC. We are #HeretoStay! - Twitter       25th January 2017  

Source: Huffington Post

 Other Other Terrible Things Trump’s Trying To Do

Republicans move to sell off 3.3m acres of national land, sparking rallies - The Guardian (Tumblr Link - NSFW blog)    31st January 2017

Congress moves to give away national lands, discounting billions in revenue - The Guardian (Tumblr Link)    19th January 2017

Senate committee approves DeVos for education secretary, sends nomination to full Senate. - The Associated Press on Twitter    31st January 2017 

Trump’s early moves trigger business backlash - Politico   30th January 2017 Fear is rippling across corporate boardrooms from Silicon Valley to Wall Street over the new White House’s erratic approach to policy, with damage mounting from a travel crackdown, trade protectionism and a persistent habit of singling out individual companies for stinging public criticism.

Trump's state department purge sparks worries of 'know-nothing approach' to foreign policy  - The Guardian    29th January 2017

The sudden dismissal of several senior officials has left a gaping hole at the heart of US diplomacy: ‘The machinery is still there, but no one’s in the cockpit’

Judicial branch explainer missing from Whitehouse website - The Hill (Tumblr Link)   29th January 2017

it gained fresh focus Sunday, after a federal judge in New York issued an emergency stay Saturday temporarily halting the removal of individuals detained after President Trump issued an order to ban immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S.   

What “Things Going Wrong” Can Look Like - Medium  (Tumblr Link)   28th January 2017 

Behind closed doors, Republican lawmakers fret about how to repeal Obamacare, 2 - MSN news  (Tumblr Link)  28th January 2017

Katie Rich of SNL was suspended for a tweet she made about Barron Trump ( 23rd January 2017) and while we can talk for an age about all the things that SNL has failed to suspend people over, i think she completely deserves this. There is a lot to focus on right now, don’t put energy into horrible things about Trump’s younger kids. Not that any of you would, obviously.

Trump’s new FCC chief is Ajit Pai, and he wants to destroy net neutrality - The Verge (Tumblr Link)   23rd January 2017

Congress’ First Move Under Donald Trump Is To Make Abortion More Expensive -  Huffington Post  24th January 2017

The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act would make permanent the Hyde Amendment, which denies abortion coverage in health insurance plans for women on Medicaid, military servicewomen, federal employees, residents of the District of Columbia, women in federal prisons, and women covered by the Indian Health Service.

“The Global Gag Rule bans health organizations around the world from receiving US funding if they so much as *mention* abortion...” -Laci Green on tumblr

Trump's global abortion gag rule goes much further than any previous administration - Vox (Tumblr Link)   January 26th

CEOs of Tesla, Uber, and Pepsi Join Trump’s Business Council - NBC News (Tumblr Link)  28th December 2016

The Inauguration

Interior Department Banned From Tweeting After Parks Department Posts Unflattering Images Of Trump Inauguration -  22nd January 2017   (Tumblr Link)   Reverb Press

Anna Rascouët-Paz: ‏Spicer's lies - Twitter    22nd January 2017 

When Camera Angles Matter - Twitter    20th January 2017

Donald Trump Inauguration Draws Much Smaller Crowds Than Barack Obama’s   - The Huffington Post (tumblr link)    20th January 2017

The whole inauguration cake debacle - Twitter, facebook, tumblr and a telegraph link just to show we’re not making it all up     20th-22nd January 2017

In His Inaugural Address, Donald Trump Embraced Anti-Semites’ Slogan “America First” - The Huffington Post (Tumblr link)    20th January 2017

President Trump tells the FEC he qualifies as a candidate for 2020 - The Washington Post (tumblr link)    20th January 2017 

[mountlandme]

RANT AHOY

In short I have a lot of feelinsg about older generations and their views on younger generations

Today my landlady who lives in a 6 storey house (3 bedrooms, an office, two bathrooms, a kitchen, garden, two sitting rooms and a dinning room) in London zone 2 told me her house was small, that things were difficult in the 80s too (she had to get a mortgage while some friends married into money or inherited) and she was from the ‘get up and do it’ generation and hated all the negativity of my generation. That it didn’t matter if people have to move out of london (though was saying yesterday how she would never want to move out of London herself and would hate to be elsewhere).

Its so frustrating to hear how ignorant people can be when they live in little tiny bubbles of people just like them. I’m not saying that people had it easy or didn’t work hard in the past - ofcourse people did, they worked hard and that is how she has what she has now, she and her husband worked hard in jobs that weren’t exactly high earning jobs, they worked hard for many years to have a house which would be a secure place to bring up a family and pay for their retirement. Im not belittling that.

 I’m just saying that no matter how hard you work now if you don’t have parents who have a house, or become mega rich yourself, you aren’t ever going to get a house, and so have no security and no investment for the future. And yes I know that renting is more common in other countries but their rent always seems affordable. My generation are often paying around 70% of what they earn to live in tiny, badly build accommodation with bad facilities that aren’t suited to community or family - this leaves no money to save and everyone is always broke. There is a lack of social housing so there isnt an alternative if you cant make the rent. Thats also a big culture change, and my generation is the one having to go through that trauma of complete change of our reality to the expectations we were given as children.

She did say that it could be that we start trying to see a different type of people on the streets beyond the normal lot. Look out the window, its already happened - people are on the streets already just because they simply dont have the money to live indoors, and what is the normal lot, no one deserves to be homeless ever! Squatting is becoming heavily criminalised so you can’t even get off the streets and into somewhere sheltered, while the streets are being covered in spikes, like humans are pigeons to keep away from your precious walls.

People are being forced away from their support networks and employment opportunities because they can’t afford to live in London (and hell its not much better anywhere else). And yes that is bad to remove people from their family and friends, its easy to say its not a big deal when you own your own house that you can live in until you chose not to. Complete insecurity and being at the mercy of whatever whim may take the person who decides where you live is traumatic!!!!

Oh it will all even out. will it?? If it does it will because people fought to change it, it may look like things just sort themselves out when you dont go outside your own small bubble, but if you did you’d see all the people fighting hard to make the changes. But it might not, and even if it does its destroying lives now!!

How sensitive can people be that they can’t even bare to hear that something might be harder for someone else. It doesn’t diminish the hard work they went through in the past to admit that people work just as hard now, sometimes even harder, for a lot less and that isn’t acceptable!!!

I know doctors who work second jobs to be able to make rent, DOCTORS. I know a nurse who has just been able to get her first mortgage on a property a TWO AND A HALF HOUR commute away from where she works. Shift work is difficult enough without adding 5 hours travelling a day on top of it just for the chance of investing in a home for her future. 

Im not being entitled, it is a failure of society that young people can work themselves to the bone and do ridiculous things just to be able to have a roof over their heads - and some people will do all that and still not have a roof, others wont be able to, they deserve safety and security too, a basic function of society should be that everyone has the means to live safely and in comfort. My generation spend all their time working, and this totally benefits people in power as we dont have any energy or time left to do anything, all the creativity and community movements I do see amaze me as people are doing super human things to achieve them while still affording to live. Its an atrocity that I have multiple friends and their mothers that have to stay with abusive fathers because they can’t afford to leave, that I have friends who have had to submit appeals to show that as disabled, queer, trans teens and young adults of colour they are ‘more vulnerable’ than other homeless youth as all homeless youth a vulnerable so only the most vulnerable can be housed.

Fuck everything. I know I am SO lucky to have parents who own a big house due to my grandad building a good business for himself and his family. Why is it so radical to think that everyone should have that! A house, security, community, stability. And I don’t mean everyone has a change to work hard and build a company that could fund a nice house. I mean .everyone.should.have.a.house. EVERYONE. There should be no one homeless, there should be no one in inadequate, dirty, crowded or too small homes. You shouldnt have to be exceptionally lucky and build a business to have a house, because my grandad worked no harder than others, infact I am 100% sure that others worked harder and have nothing to show for it. If you rely on everyone having a chance to work towards having a reasonable home, then you are sanctioning random selection of who gets homes and who doesn’t, you are saying its okay that some people wont and thats never okay. Everyone deserves a space they can be safe in, be healthy in, build a family and community in. EVERYONE regardless of what they do or dont do, being able to work is not a pre-requisite for being valued, a person may never ‘work’ in the way our government sees work but everyone has something to give, everyone contributes to something bigger than themselves - like family or community. 

[nothingman]

A group of MPs are pushing the government to do more to crack down on exploitation in sex work, and have said that online adverts for sex work should be banned.

However, sex workers have said that doing so will put their livelihoods and safety at risk, and that their voices are being ignored in the debate.

In a Westminster Hall debate brought by Rotherham MP Sarah Champion, which debated tackling demand for commercial sexual exploitation, MPs said that more needed to be done to end exploitation, and voiced their support for a range of proposals including criminalising men who buy sex, and banning online advertising for sex work.

Westminster Hall debates do not discuss legislation, but give MPs the opportunity to debate an issue and to get a response from a government minister.

At present, the government has no plans to change the law around prostitution, while the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn recently told Sky News that a model which "moves the blame and the responsibility onto those who are promoting the sex industry rather than those who are working in it" was a "direction we should think about going."

"Clearly this can't go on," Gavin Shuker, Labour MP and chair of the APPG on prostitution said. "Laws against commercial sexual exploitation are failing, they're failing to prevent trafficking, and they're failing to prevent pimps and those that profit [from the sale of sex]." He added that he was "growing increasingly frustrated" about a lack of action from political parties on the issue.

Shuker said that he viewed the buying of sex as a form of violence against women and girls, and called for the purchase of sex to be banned, saying the role of lawmakers was "to end commercial sexual exploitation, not to manage it."

He was backed by Champion, who said "there nearly always appears to be some sort of control involved" in the sale of sex, and that a ban on online advertising would help towards tackling trafficking and exploitation.

"No-one can give informed consent when they're inherently vulnerable or trapped in a cycle of abuse", she said, adding that looking for sex online is "quick, it's easy and it's highly profitable for the web companies."

However, sex workers and their supporters staged a protest ahead of the debate, saying MPs had failed to understand the issues they were facing.

"We feel completely erased by the proposals that Sarah Champion is putting forward," Molly Gerlach-Arthurs from sex worker advocacy group SWARM told BuzzFeed News. "They are completely at odds with everything we've been saying for so many years.

"We know that if Sarah Champion had spoken to a single sex worker, listened to any sex worker-led organisation in the UK, she would know that banning our advertising platform is just going to drive sex workers further underground, make it impossible for us to screen clients, it's going to kill people. It has killed people in the US. I don't understand why we're not being listened to on this."

In April President Trump signed a bill, a mashup of the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act, or SESTA, and the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act, known as FOSTA, which gave law enforcement officials sweeping new powers to go after internet platforms used by traffickers, including making those platforms liable for the content that users publish. Sex workers say it has had devastating consequences for them.

Stacey Clare from the East London Strippers Collective told BuzzFeed News that "we fundamentally disagree with [calls to ban online advertising] because it won't lead to increased safety for trafficking victims."

She said: "All it really will do is push sex workers off the internet, and push sex work underground, and leave us more vulnerable, and ironically more likely to be coerced and trafficked."

She said the sex workers in the UK had mobilised after seeing the impact of FOSTA/SESTA in the US, adding: "We do not want that here, we will fight tooth and nail to make sure that does not happen here."

She also said that sex workers were competing with politicians in terms of public messaging. "We need to really get this narrative through that sex work is not trafficking and trafficking is not sex work", she said, "and to conflate those two is really dangerous and really unhelpful."

Niki Adams from the English Collective of Prostitutes agreed, telling BuzzFeed News: "If they banned online advertising for sex workers it would be an absolute disaster."

"It would mean that we could no longer advertise and work inside", she said, "and some of us would definitely be forced out onto the street where it's more dangerous.

"But also we would be pushed into the hands of more exploitative bosses, brothel owners and the like, we couldn't screen clients, it's a really crucial function of those online sites... You feel some level of safety when you actually meet up, and all of that will be gone if they ban online ads."

Sex worker Jessa Jones told BuzzFeed News: "it would be an absolute nightmare" if online advertising were to be banned. While she described herself as "a very privileged sex worker," who no longer relied on online platforms, she said: "the people around me, my friends and loved ones, predominantly entirely rely on those platforms to advertise and to make a living.

"Most of them are single mothers", she added, "that's the main message we're getting out there today, they're mothers, they're queer, they're trans, they're people of colour, that's their main platform for making work happen, that's where their money comes from - if they don't have that they can't feed their children all of a sudden, they can't pay their rent all of a sudden, it's going to be devastating."

However, the Labour MPs advocating for changes to the law stood by their position. They were backed by colleagues from opposing parties, including Conservative Fiona Bruce, and the DUP's Jim Shannon, who said that Northern Ireland had led the way by criminalising buying sex in 2015, and that women and girls in England and Wales deserved the same.

Laobur MP Jess Phillips, who read out explicit and degrading comments made by men who had bought sex to MPs gathered for the debate, told BuzzFeed News that there was "no evidence" that banning online advertising would put sex workers at risk.

"I have to take account of the most vulnerable women and the trafficked women", she added.

Champion agreed, saying she had spoken to "literally hundreds" of current and former sex workers.

"I fully respect their right to protest and understand the issues that they're raising" she said. "However, our focus has to be on the most vulnerable and exploited."

Shuker also said he had "spoken with those involved in selling sex even in the last couple of weeks", and added: "It's important that the voices of everyone involved are heard, not just those that are able to come out and protest today."

"Fundamentally the trafficking and exploitation that is ingrained in this trade is being driven by demand and it is an acceptable goal of public policy to seek to reduce it", he said.

A Home Office spokesperson said: "“We are committed to protecting those selling sex from harm and enabling the police to target those who exploit vulnerable people involved in prostitution.

They added: “We recognises the need for research on the nature and prevalence of prostitution before considering any changes, which is why we have committed £150,000 to fund research into the subject, which is being undertaken by the University of Bristol.”

via BuzzFeed News

[fatimakhans12345]

Speech by Minister of State for Europe Michael Roth at the opening of the conference “Time to react – Strengthening the scope of civil society to act”

Speech by Minister of State for Europe Michael Roth at the opening of the conference “Time to react – Strengthening the scope of civil society to act”

-- Translation of advance text --

Ladies and gentlemen,

Barely any issue has been discussed so much in human rights circles as the diminishing space for civil society to act. That initially sounds harmless enough, almost technical. Diminishing space – our first thought is of NGOs which have to wrestle with day‑to‑day organisational problems: the cost of qualified staff is increasing, affordable office space is becoming more scarce, deadlines for project applications are becoming tighter, forms are becoming longer and more complicated.

Yet this phrase actually denotes much more. So much more that sometimes I wonder whether we ought to adapt our choice of words. It isn’t just about organisational problems. It is about oppression and persecution, about massive violations of the human rights of all those who work to promote the rule of law and tolerance, a vibrant democracy and a diverse society.

It is about activists who are being harassed and threatened, imprisoned and abused.

In many countries in the world we have seen in the past few years how new legislation is hindering and hampering the work of civil society. It is being made difficult for non‑governmental organisations to accept money from abroad, and in some cases they are being prohibited from doing so. That is despite that fact that they need these funds to continue their work on the ground.

NGOs are being denounced in law as “foreign agents”, they are even being mentioned in the same breath as high treason – and yet these organisations are actually fighting for quite the opposite: they don’t want to harm their country. They want to improve it and move it forward.

In far too many countries, freedom of opinion, of the press and of assembly is restricted, sometimes citing the public order or “a harmonious society” as a reason, sometimes under bizarre pretexts such as the protection of minors.

Likewise, the independence of the judiciary and the right to a fair trial are being curtailed in more and more countries. In addition, smear campaigns are being launched to defame and criminalise people who courageously stand up for human rights.

At times it seems like a competition: on the one hand we have civil societies throughout the world which are today stronger, more confident and better connected than ever before. At the same time, however, the attempts to silence them are growing ever more perfidious and sophisticated.

We are observing these developments in a large number of autocracies – today we will hear several examples of this – but we are also seeing them in democracies. Yes, even in some EU member states we are unfortunately seeing trends of this nature which continually breach our shared values. We cannot afford to turn a blind eye to this! We need to speak out against it! Those who are engaged in defending human rights need our protection, our solidarity and our support for their courageous, dedicated work.

Lasting stability cannot be achieved without a free civil society and respect for human rights. Unhampered dialogue with the various groups within civil society is in no way a threat to national security. On the contrary, freedom of expression strengthens a society and makes it more resistant.

All this applies to the most diverse representatives of civil society: environmentalists, women’s rights activists, artists, academics, journalists and lawyers.

However, in one area the situation is becoming increasingly dramatic: LGBTI. The concrete situation of lesbian, gay, bi‑, trans‑ and intersexual people is like a seismograph of the general human rights situation in a country. In countries in which the state discriminates against and persecutes people on the grounds of their sexual identity, this generally goes hand in hand with a broad attack on their people’s civil liberties. On the other hand, in states that take a decisive stand against discrimination against LGBTI, we regularly also see progress in the general human rights situation.

It is undoubtedly no coincidence that this discussion keeps flaring up especially with regard to the issue of LGBTI rights. The question of who they love affects a person particularly deeply. A state that has the audacity to encroach on the privacy of its citizens in this essential issue will not accept any limits on its intervention anywhere else.

What is the Federal Government doing specifically to strengthen civil society worldwide? We are working across the globe to counteract the diminishing space for civil society to act and are supporting human rights defenders under oppression through a wide range of projects.

For example, in Northern Russia we are supporting the construction of an LGBTI network by providing courses on legal issues. In Ukraine we are promoting an LGBTI organisation that is using creative approaches to foster tolerance and respect among the general public.

In Nigeria, Côte d’Ivoire, the Baltic region and South-Eastern Europe we are creating opportunities for meetings with LGBTI activists in the premises of our missions abroad and promoting local networks. We send observers into the courtrooms where questionable trials are being held.

And of course we address the issue regularly in dialogue with other governments. Sometimes with clear public words which criticise abuse in no uncertain terms – as was the case recently with respect to the shocking reports on severe breaches of human rights with regard to homosexuals in Chechnya.

In other cases we engage in direct talks behind closed doors. We always proceed as the specific situation requires and in the way that is best for those affected. Because our guiding principle is this: we don’t want to cause any harm to those we desire to protect from violations of human rights.

Shouting through a loudspeaker rarely helps victims of human rights violations in the long term; we are more likely to be effective by engaging in confidential talks. And to this end we need to talk to particularly difficult partners – China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and also Turkey. Breaking off relations, cancelling trips and finger-wagging through our media –anyone who thinks that’s how foreign policy works has got it wrong.

We coordinate closely with representatives of civil society, for they often have a much better idea of what strategy would be most effective in the country concerned. For this we need partners who work persistently and courageously on the issues that concern them. Here in this room are representatives of some of our most important civil society partners in Germany and abroad. Thank you for our good cooperation and for your advice!

In our work for LGBTI rights we continually here pointed criticism. Don’t you have other problems? Is it really worthwhile, really necessary to work for “these minorities”? Why do we need special rights and privileges for minorities?

That is why it is all the more important that we emphasise again and again that we are not calling for minority rights, but for the effective protection of the human rights of everyone – regardless of their background, the colour of their skin, their religion, their gender or their sexual identity. That is not a luxury but the implementation of a principle that we agreed on almost 70 years ago: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” That is the wording of Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. It may be one of the most important sentences that has ever been written.

This is a high aim that is, unfortunately, still far from being a reality even today. However, we do have grounds for optimism. In the past few years we have also seen impressive progress. There are encouraging developments on all continents – whether in South Africa or in Uruguay, in Nepal or in Montenegro.

While it is important to delete discrimination from legal texts, it is even more important to banish it from people’s mindsets. It is gratifying that in many countries public support for LGBTI rights is growing. In recent years I have taken part in Pride Parades in Bucharest and Belgrade. On 8 July I will be in Budapest. Only a few years ago such events would have been inconceivable in these cities.

And where do we stand in Germany? Well, the Federal Foreign Office is not necessarily the place to shed light on German domestic policy.

But we need to view ourselves critically and ask ourselves how we are doing when it comes to implementing human rights. It is part of our self‑image as a globally minded and tolerant ministry that we work to promote greater understanding for and tolerance towards minorities of all kinds. Whether in Berlin and Bad Hersfeld or in Budapest, St Petersburg and Timbuktu.

In Germany, same‑sex couples have been able to enter into a civil partnership since 2001. Since then, much has been achieved. On various occasions courts had to put politicians under pressure. Marriage for all is not available. Not yet. More’s the pity. Now, I’m not giving away any secrets when I say that there are various views on this issue among the coalition parties.

But full equality by opening up marriage to all will also come to Germany very soon. I am confident about this, because although there is not yet a political majority, there is a stable majority in favour of it in society.

We want to use the momentum we can feel here in Germany and throughout the world to support those who are facing opposition in their home countries. Together let us work to make the high standards set down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights a reality throughout the world. For everyone. Let us fight to ensure that the space for civil society’s courageous and important engagement does not shrink any further, but that it can grow. How we can do that most effectively is what we want to discuss with you today.

Thank you very much!

from UK & Germany http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Reden/2017/170601-StM_R_Time_to_react.html?nn=479796

[thelocalrebel]

i.e. a tragedy

What is safe sex? Wearing a bicycle helmet and putting on knee pads? That is probably the answer according to Singapore’s sex education system. Because what’s the point of wearing protective gear when you don’t know that you’re going to cycle head-first into oncoming traffic?

The practice of safe sex is when the parties involved in any sexual activity are taking precautions to protect themselves from getting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Or unwanted pregnancies, with some. In this article, we’ll be covering why safe sex is an important practice or is just good thing in general to be educated on.

It’s important to note that the practice of safe sex is rarely talked about in Singapore, if not never at all. This is because safe sex is commonly associated with those who partake in the act of casual sex and we all know how much that is shunned by many in Singapore. (Like, just ask around about how people feel about sex work. And by that, we mean stigma - but only for said sex workers, and not the clients who engage their services). Prostitution in Singapore isn’t illegal, though there are many limitations to it. For instance, according to Section 146(1) of Singapore’s statute, living on earnings of a prostitute in Singapore is criminalised. The stigma attached to sex workers, especially in Singapore, is that it’s not a “real” job.

To many, sex workers aren’t considered as people with real jobs because to them, sex shouldn’t be something they have to pay for. This is a dangerous assumption as self-entitled people - regardless of gender - will think that they should be able to have sex with whoever they want to, whenever they want. (So, it is really a surprise that Singaporeans tend to believe marital rape is a myth?). Sex workers are perceived to be carriers of diseases, a nuisance, or even people who “don’t know what to do with their lives” - stereotypes that are incredibly harmful because they literally endanger said workers, such as by justifying violence (e.g. physical) against them. Ironic how people want sex but are not willing to pay for it. Sex work is work. Since majority of sex workers are women, most of the violence that they face are also due to misogyny and transmisogyny. Women who work under this industry tend to be looked down upon because of what they want to do with their body...which men unsurprisingly disapprove of. (For more information, check out Project X - a local NGO advocating for the rights of sex workers in Singapore).

Additionally, Singapore society is proudly pro-family - but only if you’re cis and straight - thus safe sex would mean not wanting to get pregnant. In this country, it is highly expected that Singaporeans only have sex after marriage, besides the terrible assumption that every married couple would want to have children.

So why is safe sex so important? Well there is more to it than just unwanted pregnancies. By protecting ourselves during sexual intercourse, it will help us as well as our sex partner from contracting STDs. Prevention, after all, is better than cure.The thing about our country’s sex education is that they do cover the topic of STDs but they don’t teach teenagers how to prevent it other than the common, “stick to one sexual partner and nothing bad will happen to you”. This a preemptive measure to forcibly get youths to be monogamous, get married, and have children. Or as Singapore would put it, “a normal lifestyle” - which happens to be heteronormative national rhetoric. This so-called normal lifestyle only understands abstinence from the conservative viewpoint. If the abstinence approach was to remind youths to have sex only when they are ready and comfortable, then sure. However, the practice of abstinence and only having sex after marriage only makes sex a taboo topic.

Sex education fails to consider people who might be asexual, and/or aromantic. An aromantic person is someone who has little to no romantic attraction towards others. I, myself, am aromantic therefore I do have a number of sexual partners. I can confidently say that the sex education in schools have taught me nothing with regards to having casual sex. I practically had to self-educate myself on different types of contraceptives and understanding the various STDs; on which ones that are curable, which ones that stay with you for the rest of your life, and those you can get vaccinated for.

Abstinence is a concept rooted in religion. Yet, it’s taught in local schools despite the Ministry of Education (MOE) claiming to be secular. In a Facebook page called “SG Sex Ed Fails”, we can see the many instances in which Singapore’s sexual education has proved to be quite religious-cum-conservative with the way they educate their youths regarding sex. An abstinence-only sex education isn’t surprising since it’s funded by the government. Besides the Singapore government, the US government as well as the Malaysian government has funded for “sex only after marriage” programs. MOE also claims that abstinence is the “best course of action” for teenagers. In the screenshot below from MOE’s page, we can see the irony of their teaching approach towards sexual education while allegedly trying to be secular.

Fig. 1: Ministry of Education’s Scope and Teaching approach of sexuality education in schools (src)

The thing with sexual education being against the act of fornication or casual sex is unsurprisingly gendered and links to misogyny. In Malaysia, for instance, it is quite explicit (at least for Malay-Muslims) that women have to “keep” their virginity until they are married. Otherwise, they would be shamed and viewed as impure. In many instances, women who are comfortable with the act of casual sex are slut-shamed and scorned because they are “cheapening themselves” in giving themselves away whereas men who do so are perceived as someone who has “game”.

On top of this, schools barely touch on same-gender relationships and tend to divert the topic by stating that there are legal precautions when one is gay. How then do you teach sexual education to someone whose sexuality is a taboo?

While MOE comes up with the guidelines of sex education in schools, it is ultimately in the hands of schools on how they will carry out such programmes. Perhaps it’ll be good for schools to conduct an anonymous and comprehensive survey for students after every session, just to investigate whether said sex education programme have adhered to guidelines that MOE proudly claims - or more importantly, achieved MOE’s desired aims in holding said sex-ed programs.

Fig. 2: SG Sex Ed Fails Facebook Group (src)

On top of taking a conservative stance with educating teenagers about sex, the sex education also fails to cover the various sexualities as well as gender issues. In this day and age, by still taking a conservative approach towards “sensitive” issues like sex will only show how close-minded the education system is. Avoiding non-cisgendered and non-straight identities in schools will only make students confused about their identity. A student that might be trans may think that they are “not normal” or a boy who is attracted to another boy will think that there is something wrong with him. Not covering these topics in schools or making it a taboo just because of Section 377A will likely make students afraid to speak out, and afraid to come to terms with their gender and/or sexuality. At times, their curiosity will get better of them and they would turn to pornography as an unreliable informative about queer people - which, ironically, is one of the rare few places to see such identities represented. It is also important for cisgendered heterosexuals to learn about gender and sexual identities as ignorance is not always bliss. Their ignorance can - and has - cause harm and manifest as bigotry because they perceive others who are different from them as unnatural.

The irony of abstinence is that it basically tells students to not have sex before marriage with no valid reason. This in itself does not work with most students because as part of their psychosexual development, experimenting with sexuality is normal, thus diminishing what abstinence tried to achieve in the first place. 

Many parents would rather opt their children out of the sex education programmes in school because they feel like they would do a better job at doing so. Parents teaching their own children about sex as a whole can go either way. Though many would argue that it is not the school’s place to teach it, schools should at the very least address the fundamentals of sexual education so that children would be, even the slightest bit, aware. 

Singapore should prevent trying to forcibly mould its people to what is considered ideal in the society. Rather, Singapore should focus on properly educating the youths on what is right and wrong; the importance of practicing safe sex and being responsible when partaking in any sexual activity. And if you ask me, that is of higher priority than trying to get every Singaporean to get married and procreate.