Just saw this UK news article. It seems now that a woman’s past fantasies as well as her “sexual behaviour” are enough to get rapists (or gang rapists in this case) of the hook.
Her just “entertaining the prospect of group sex” was enough for the defendants to be found not guilty, without bothering to look at any issues to do with actual consent.
At our next general election, in a few months time, I will be voting with a spoiled ballot* (i.e. a vote that won’t be counted as valid). And if you agree with my arguments, then I’d urge you to also do the same.
In our First Past the Post electoral system only two parties have a realistic chance of forming the government (Labour and Conservative). Even in the case of no overall majority, the Liberal Democrats will only realisticly be able to choose the governing party, they will still be too weak to actually make a significant impact on policy.
A recent Feministing post on transgender people having sex with cisgender people attracted many negative comments focusing on the “dishonesty” of transgender people.
First of I’d like to say that I completely agree that it is dishonest for a transgender person and a cisgender person to have sex, full-stop. We live in a world where notions of sexual orientation and gender are defined from a cisgender persective. Since transgender people don’t fit neatly into these cisgender definitions, we are always going to be dishonest.
I made a decision a while back to distance myself from me being transgender. I moved to a new city where no people knew my past, and since then have largely remained silent. The only people I told my secret to were in the LGBT community and mostly transgender people at that. And I thought living stealth was what I wanted, but it really handicaps speaking out on any transgender issue. Not least because of the fear of outing myself.
Nick Clegg has suggested further means-testing of Child Benefits and not paying it to middle-class families. Now clearly something has to be done with our budget deficit, but the way the 3 main Westminster parties are talking, you’d think that tinkering with cutting spending in all areas was the only way to go. Certainly can’t have a debate on actually making major changes to the way public services are paid for.
Yet more anti-woman rubbish from the Daily Mail, with Flic Everett comments on a soon to be published book “Why Women Have Sex”. She takes this book’s conclusion that passion and romance aren’t the only reasons women have sex, as proof that women just aren’t meant to be sexual because of our biology. Read the rest of this entry »
For the past 12 years, the Labour government has been intent on letting the city do whatever the hell it wanted. They argued against more regulation of the financial sector since they didn’t want to stiffle that sector of the economy which contributed so much to our GDP. While naturally, the Tory opposition wanted even less regulation.
Too often it seems that any discussion of female sexuality either disregards or ignores transgender women (e.g. here). If being female is defined by having a female gender identity and not biology, then female sexuality can’t reasonably be defined purely in terms of having a vagina either.
