1. bleeder-resistor:


    Nina Hartley came to my university to talk about porn. It was part of a “porn debate” with a pastor. I didn’t really care much about what he had to say, he was a man, and against porn for religious reasons, neither one of those things mean much to me.

    Nina kept claiming […]

    This is especially interesting because another porn actress, Lexi Bloom I believe, did an IAMA/AMA thing over on Reddit and said her experience with the industry was horrendous, that testing wasn’t as thorough as it should be to keep everyone safe, and that she wouldn’t recommend that anyone get into it / wouldn’t have done it if she knew then what she knows now. Around this time, James Deen also did an IAMA/AMA and said testing was very strict and very rigorous and also freaked out about being made to use condoms but yeah.

    I am really disappointed that your question was ignored because these are discussions that need to happen. For as long as there are women (like Lexi Bloom, for example) who have issues with the industry, those issues need to be addressed. I’m happy for the women who enjoy it but the fact that they enjoy it doesn’t cancel out the bad experiences of others. It needs to be acknowledged or it will never change for anyone. Hartley should want to ensure that all women in the industry have experiences as good as hers, not ignore the ones who don’t because the conversation is difficult.

    This argument seems familiar. Because one woman regrets being in porn and doesn’t recommend it doesn’t mean porn is harmful to all women and women should be forbade the option. Akin to the argument made by anti choicers that some women regret having an abortion and they wouldn’t recommend it to anyone and therefore abortions are harmful to all women and women should be forbade the option.

    Making choices for women is paternalistic and unfeminist. If you want to fix porn (and, sure, there is plenty to fix), get into the porn industry. You are not going to change the way porn is made, distributed, or sold sitting in your computer chair somewhere.

    (Source: iamayoungfeminist)

  2. shut-up-james-franco:



    "In 2003 the Free Speech Coalition went to the Ashcroft Supreme Court and basically said that the 1997 Child Pornography Protection Act was too broad. What did that act say? That act said that A) Nobody under eighteen could be in porn and B) Nobody who looked under eighteen.The Free Speech Coalition, the lobbying body of the porn industry, said that that [protection act] limited the free speech of the pornographers and they should be allowed to have women who look under eighteen. The Ashcroft Supreme Court agreed…”

    Dr. Gail Dines addressing porn culture and rape culture’s intersecting roles in patriarchy

    If there is any doubt left in your mind as to whether pornography is “free speech” or “free expression” for anyone other than the pornographers, well, then you’re really trying your hardest not to pay attention.

    This makes me feel so sick.

    How long did this woman work in porn in order to become so knowledgable about the porn industry, I wonder?

    (Source: exgynocraticgrrl, via stfumras)


  3. DC proposing a 24 hour waiting period before getting a tattoo or piercing


    In today’s “Laws no one wants, no one asked for and are completely pointless” news, Washington DC has proposed a 24 hour waiting period before any adult can get a tattoo or piercing. Because we know how many lives tramp stamps have destroyed, right? This makes perfect sense.

    Read more here

    Men might have what they can do with their bodies regulated by the government, too?! For shame! How’s it feel, bro?

  4. quirkyday:


    welp time to change my avatar I think

    Speaking of Ravz, holy hell look how gloriously foxy she is.

    No more hair mustaches for Ravs.

  5. sapphrikah:






    ^ institutionalised misandry ^

    And people want to tell me we don’t live in a matriarchy.

    And what did I say?

    Not but 5 minutes later

    We found the MRA


    Within our data set, the scarcity of observations on females and the preponderance of observations in the plea regime conspire to leave us with an insuFFicient sample size to properly apply FIML to estimate the sentencing determination model separately for females. In the decomposition developed here, we exploit an insight from Oaxaca and Ransom (1994) that allows us to decompose the male-female regime and sentencing differentials without actually estimating the model for females. Rather than comparing weights from a male only and female only model, we instead are able to compare the estimated parameters from the model for males with parameters estimated in a pooled model for males and females.


    In order to abstract from sentencing issues associated with race and ethnicity, we have confined our attention to convicted white males and white females. (p 11)

    Look at their methodology:


    Lastly, they controlled for “aggravating circumstances” like “use of a weapon”, which neglects to account for this:

    Only males commit beating or strangulation homicides;
    women are more likely to stab or shoot their victims. This
    opens women to vastly harsher sentences with legal
    enhancements for use of a weapon in the commission of
    the crime.

    Oh, hey, guess what?

    The average prison sentence of men who kill their
    women partners is 2 to 6 years. Women who kill their
    male partners are sentenced on average to 15 years,
    despite the fact that most women who kill do so in self-
    Currently, women are eight times more likely than
    men to be killed by their intimate partner. ( Rennison and Welchans 2000 ) Estimates of the number of women killed by husbands, boyfriends or former partners range from 1,000 to 4,000 per year
    As many as 90% of the women in jail today for killing men had been battered by those men.
    (Allison Bass, “Women far less likely to kill than men; no one sure why,” The Boston Globe, February 24, 1992, p. 27)
    Currently there are 2,000 battered women in America who are serving prison time for defending their lives against their batterers.
    (Stacey Kabat, Remarks from presentation at Harvard School of Public Health)
    Convicted Survivors -Elizabeth Leonard(Project Muse):
    When a woman survives a deadly assault by her male abuser by using lethal self-defense, she often faces a punitive criminal justice system—one that largely failed to respond to her earlier calls for help.
    In this book, Elizabeth Dermody Leonard examines the lives and experiences of more than forty women in California who are serving lengthy prison sentences for killing their male abusers. She contrasts them with other women prisoners in the state and finds substantial differences. Leonard’s in-depth interviews reveal that the women are slow to identify themselves as battered women and continue to minimize the violence done to them, make numerous and varied attempts to end abusive relationships, and are systematically failed by the systems they look to for help.
    While in jail, these women receive liberal dosages of psychotropic drugs, damaging their ability to aid in their self-defense. Moreover, trials and plea bargains feature little or no evidence of the severe intimate abuse inflicted upon them. Despite a clear lack of criminal or violent histories, the majority of women found guilty of the death of abusive men receive first- or second-degree murder convictions and serve long, harsh sentences. Leonard concludes the book with a discussion of policy implications and recommendations arising from this research.
    And of course, Marissa Alexander, who was denied the protection of the Stand Your Ground law for firing a warning shot against her abuser while pregnant and fleeing for her life, and who is now serving 20 years to life.
    And of course, CeCe MacDonald, who is serving prison time for surviving a hate crime, defending herself against violent attackers who cut open her face with a broken bottle.
    And of course thousands of other women serving sentences who are being misrepresented by the faulty and misleading study above.

    I think OP just got shat on.

    But even if this WERE true and not clearly twisted, the fact that someone in the post proclaimed we live in a matriarchy…

    Reblogging for epic takedown and awesome gif usage.

    (via elementsofchill)


  6. wilwheaton:

    A judge in Tennessee ordered that a 7-month-old baby’s name be changed from “Messiah,” prompting the mother to challenge the ruling.

    Jaleesa Martin and the father of the baby were attending a child support hearing Thursday in Cocke County, Tenn. to settle a dispute over Messiah’s last name. It was there that Child Support Magistrate Lu Ann Ballew took the liberty to hand down a ruling on the boy’s first name, too.

    "The word Messiah is a title and it’s a title that has only been earned by one person and that one person is Jesus Christ," Judge Ballew said, according to t.v. station WBIR. Ballew said the child could go by “Martin DeShawn McCullough,” which includes both the mother and father’s names.

    This judge should be removed from the bench and disbarred.

    Pretty much.

  7. Boom

    (Source: ineedmasculism, via misandry-mermaid)


  8. "At $10 an hour you’d have to work 1,250 hours to cover the UW’s $12,500 tuition (more, once you take out taxes). In a 12-week summer, that’s more than 100 hours a week.

    What really made me feel ancient is that the 1981 UW student guide shows the Med school charged only $1,029 a year back then. Today: $28,040!

    Now, I didn’t go to the UW. But I’m going down Husky memory lane because last week The Seattle Times featured a crop of harried UW students looking rueful and broke. The story said skeptical state legislators often say how “they worked their way through college. And then they ask: Why don’t students do that today?”

    Of all our delusions, we old farts cling to this bootstrap one the most. We worked our way up on sweat and chicken grease, we say. Can’t this generation? What’s wrong with them?

    What’s wrong is that after we got ours, we cut it off for them.

    The reason a summer at KFC could pay for a year of UW med school in 1981 isn’t that we were so hardworking and industrious. It’s that taxpayers back then picked up 90 percent of the tab. We weren’t Horatio Algers. We were socialists.

    Today, the public picks up only 30 percent of UW tuition, and dropping."

  9. bebinn:

    Texas Gov. Rick Perry has called a special session to vote on the omnibus abortion bill, SB5, which was defeated in a spectacular filibuster last night by Sen. Wendy Davis and her fellow Democrats. Over 170,000 people watched the events unfold from their computers as the Republicans’…


  10. rosaedora:

    The amazing thing about Hugo Schwyzer’s public downfall is that he is doing exactly what abusers do, but rather than quietly one on one, he’s doing it in a really public forum.

    He has actually done them all. And he get’s bonus points for following the abusive trajectory of “leftist” men, the ones…