General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMale sexuality will never be legislated (Viagra, rape, misogyny)
The way female sexuality is always under review by mostly male lawmakers. Now, discuss ... men thinkkk that they hold the gates to sex. So don't trample on their god given rights! Child brides, date rape, legislative oppression of the use of contraceptives. We need an Amendment to the Constitution. ERA
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)Miigwech
(3,741 posts)Sorry for my lapse.
stonecutter357
(12,694 posts)tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)No women drafted, volunteers only. Democratic male and veteran.
emulatorloo
(44,096 posts)Unrec for ridiculous untruths and irrational hyperbole.
Additionally Viagra is not analogous to a contraceptives. Viagra is a medication for senior men so they can continue to have a healthy sex life with their partner. The equivalent for senior women would be a topical estrogen so they can continue to have a healthy sex life with their partner. Neither of those medications are illegal nor should they be.
This unhinged sounding nonsense is not the way to advocate for womens autonomy and the ERA.
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)Under current law, which will remain unchanged due to Thursdays 28-39 vote, 16- and 17-year-olds can marry with parental permission and children under 16 can marry if a judge also signs off. The bill proposed by Rep. Melissa Wintrow, D-Boise, would have banned marriage of children under 16 entirely, required a judge to sign off for 16- and 17-year-olds and also limited marriage of older teens to people within three years of them in age, aligning it with Idahos statutory rape laws.
While the number of child marriage has been declining over the past 20 years, from 2000 to 2010 Idaho had the highest per-capita rate of underage marriage out of the 38 states that track the data. Thats according to data from the national group Unchained at Last, which advocates against child marriage. The vast majority involve younger girls and older men.
https://www.idahostatejournal.com/news/local/idaho-house-nixes-child-marriage-ban/article_8993cafc-6da0-5ae6-9c8c-b1fbe4a81458.html
emulatorloo
(44,096 posts)I suggest you take patricia92243s advice below.
Delete this thread, think it through, and write a new thread in support of womens autonomy and the ERA that doesnt rely on bad analogies and untruths.
I wish you good luck and hope it goes well
In the meantime I am going to trash this thread and look forward to the new one.
patricia92243
(12,594 posts)May be self-delete and rewrite post.
emulatorloo
(44,096 posts)roamer65
(36,745 posts)They need to be ENFORCED, for starters.
For example, there should be NO backlogs in rape kits. Just that itself is a travesty.
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)notdarkyet
(2,226 posts)Boycotted males from sex to end ongoing war. It worked. Pick on women, we can withhold sex.
Miigwech
(3,741 posts)RT Atlanta
(2,517 posts)And frankly love the latest effort to shine a bright light on this by Dar'Shun Kendrick here in GA. See recent RollingStone article on her efforts. Make those pasty old white guys have to watch multiple videos of flaccid dicks and fatherless children, also make them carry liability insurance, and legislate matters so that boner pills are only available from 1 dispensary in the most out of the way and inconvenient spot in each state, with hefty fines and jail time for violations (and loss of medical practice license for any MDs prescribing the boner pills).
Also, would love to see the women married to the republican men that sign on and support this kind of shit (because, every other fucking issue in our country has apparently been resolved and we can focus on control matters like this) and simply refuse to participate in any action with the men.
If the guys are supporting those kind of religious infused control issues, then fuck it, they can get accustomed to jerking themselves off.
Rant off....
CousinIT
(9,234 posts)https://www.thenation.com/article/reproductive-rights-and-long-hand-slave-breeding/
The states only question is, Who regulates and how much? If there is an upside to the rights latest, seemingly loony and certainly grotesque multi-front assault on women, it is the clarion it sounds to humanists to take the high ground and ditch the anodyne talk of a womans right to choose for the weightier, fundamental assertion of a womans right to be.
That requires that we look to history and the Constitution. I found myself doing that a few weeks back, sitting in the DC living room of Pamela Bridgewater, talking about slavery as the TV news followed the debate over whether the State of Virginia should force a woman to spread her legs and endure a plastic wand shoved into her vagina. Pamela has a lot of titles that, properly, ought to compel me to refer to her now as Professor Bridgewaterlegal scholar, teacher at American University, reproductive rights activist, sex radicalbut she is my friend and sister, and we were two women sitting around talking, so I shall alternate between the familiar and the formal.
What a spectacle, Pamela exclaimed, Virginia, the birthplace of the slave breeding industry in America, is debating state-sanctioned rape. Imagine the woman who says No to this as a prerequisite for abortion. Will she be strapped down, her ankles shackled to stir-ups?
I suspect, said I, that partisans would say, If she doesnt agree, she is free to leave.
Right, which means she is coerced into childbearing or coerced into taking other measures to terminate her pregnancy, which may or may not be safe. Or she relents and says Yes, and thats by coercion, too.
Scratch at modern life and theres a little slave era just below the surface, so were right back to your argument.
. . .