hotcommunist:

The UK is the only country in the EU to detain refugees/asylum seekers without a time limit on their detention.

Survivors of torture are detained.

People who came to the UK as children are detained.

During detention, they may be obligated to do menial labour for as little as £1 an hour.

It doesn’t matter if you’re traumatised, disabled, mentally ill – you can be detained, even though it is a human rights abuse and actively makes your condition worse.

The women have asked people to tweet/share on social media people holding signs/messages of support using the #hungerforfreedom hashtag, and to sign this petition:

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/grant-demands-of-hungerforfreedom-yarl-s-wood-strikers

There has been almost zero coverage of the strike since it was announced. Please don’t let them be forgotten.

Solidarity with the Yarls Wood strikers!

anarchistcuddles:

ineversurrender:

Kent State University

“The Kent State shootings (also known as the May 4 massacre or the Kent State massacre)[3][4][5] were the shootings on May 4, 1970 of unarmed college students by members of the Ohio National Guard at Kent State University in Kent, Ohio during a mass protest against the bombing of Cambodia by United States military forces. Twenty-eight guardsmen fired approximately 67 rounds over a period of 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis.[6][7]

“There was a significant national response to the shootings: hundreds of universities, colleges, and high schools closed throughout the United States due to a student strike of 4 million students,[10] and the event further affected public opinion, at an already socially contentious time, over the role of the United States in the Vietnam War.[11]

Student strike of 4 million students! Let’s do that again lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings

Bermuda repeals marriage equality, others may follow

anauthorandherservicedog:

gaywrites:

This month, the British overseas territory of Bermuda became the first jurisdiction in the world to reverse a law legalizing marriage equality. Now, experts are worried that other countries and jurisdictions around the world might do the same. 

“This could open the door to undo marriage equality elsewhere,” said Jordan Sousa, founder of Bermuda’s Gay Straight Alliance, one of several local advocacy groups for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights, with 1,200-odd members.

Same-sex marriage has become legal in 26 nations since the Netherlands led the way in 2001. Austria and Taiwan are set to join this list following court rulings on the matter in 2017.

So it came as a surprise to many when Bermuda reversed its decision and introduced a new Domestic Partnership Act that let islanders form domestic partnerships but not marry. The government said gay couples who had wed would keep their status.

Only a dozen or so same-sex weddings have taken place in Bermuda or on cruise ships registered in the territory in the nine months since it became legal. It was unclear how many have gay marriages been canceled as a result of the new legislation.

This is horribly disappointing, and sets such a terrible precedent for other places struggling to accept equal rights. My heart is with you, Bermuda. 

What the hell Bermuda.

Bermuda repeals marriage equality, others may follow

As Women Take Over a Male-Dominated Field, the Pay Drops

skimcasual:

femininewritings:

chamomileyes:

stuffmomnevertoldyou:

It may come down to this troubling reality, new research suggests: Work done by women simply isn’t valued as highly.

That sounds like a truism, but the academic work behind it helps explain the pay gap’s persistence even as the factors long thought to cause it have disappeared. Women, for example, are now better educated than men, have nearly as much work experience and are equally likely to pursue many high-paying careers. No longer can the gap be dismissed with pat observations that women outnumber men in lower-paying jobs like teaching and social work.

A
striking example is to be found in the field of recreation — working in
parks or leading camps — which went from predominantly male to female
from 1950 to 2000. Median hourly wages in this field declined 57
percentage points, accounting for the change in the value of the dollar,
according to a complex formula used by Professor Levanon. The job of
ticket agent also went from mainly male to female during this period,
and wages dropped 43 percentage points.

The
same thing happened when women in large numbers became designers (wages
fell 34 percentage points), housekeepers (wages fell 21 percentage
points) and biologists (wages fell 18 percentage points). The reverse
was true when a job attracted more men. Computer programming, for
instance, used to be a relatively menial role done by women. But when
male programmers began to outnumber female ones, the job began paying more and gained prestige.

This is the stark reality. The pay gap exists not because of women’s “inability” but because they are viewed as inherently less valuable human beings.


That’s it!

This is why teachers and nurses are paid less.

As Women Take Over a Male-Dominated Field, the Pay Drops

icelandlesbian:

leepacey:

leepacey:

hey so it turns out that brian moylan, the journalist who outed lee pace and caused that whole situation, also wrote an article in 2012 titled “I don’t regret outing Anderson Cooper” 

and here’s what brian’s up to now (after lee had to clarify everything on twitter and defend his existence and desire for privacy):

so can we like. get rid of this guy

i’ve been trying to come up with something to add to this but i can’t. i have no words

You can contact W Magazine and tell them what you think of their “journalism” here

Here’s Brian Moylan’s Twitter. Tweet at him. 

In the 1960′s Legally a woman couldn’t

missdreawrites:

systlin:

rivergst:

casper-the-friendly-being:

toooldforthissh–stuff:

shatterpath:

hedwig-dordt:

drst:

gehayi:

galacticdrift:

spikesjojo:

  1. Open a bank account or get a credit card without signed permission from her father or hr husband.
  2. Serve on a jury – because it might inconvenience the family not to have the woman at home being her husband’s helpmate.
  3. Obtain any form of birth control without her husband’s permission. You had to be married, and your hub and had to agree to postpone having children.
  4. Get an Ivy League education.
    Ivy League schools were men’s colleges ntil the 70′s and 80′s. When
    they opened their doors to women it was agree that women went there for
    their MRS. Degee.
  5. Experience equality in the workplace: Kennedy’s
    Commission on the Status of Women produced a report in 1963 that
    revealed, among other things, that women earned 59 cents for every
    dollar that men earned and were kept out of the more lucrative
    professional positions.
  6. Keep her job if she was pregnant.Until the Pregnancy Discrimination Act in 1978, women were regularly fired from their workplace for being pregnant.
  7. Refuse to have sex with her husband.The mid 70s saw most states recognize marital rape and in 1993 it became criminalized
    in all 50 states. Nevertheless, marital rape is still often treated
    differently to other forms of rape in some states even today.
  8. Get a divorce with some degree of ease.Before the No Fault Divorce
    law in 1969, spouses had to show the faults of the other party, such as
    adultery, and could easily be overturned by recrimination.
  9. Have a legal abortion in most states.The Roe v. Wade case in 1973 protected a woman’s right to abortion until viability.
  10. Take legal action against workplace sexual harassment.

    According to The Week, the first time a court recognized office sexual harassment as grounds for legal action was in 1977.

  11. Play college sports
    Title IX of the  Education
    Amendments of protects people from discrimination  based
    on sex in education programs or activities that receive Federal
    financial  assistance

    It was nt until this statute that colleges had teams for women’s sports

  12. Apply for men’s Jobs  
    The EEOC rules that
    sex-segregated help wanted ads in newspapers are illegal.  This ruling
    is upheld in 1973 by the Supreme Court, opening the way for women to
    apply for higher-paying jobs hitherto open only to men.

This is why we needed feminism – this is why we know that feminism works

I just want to reiterate this stuff, because I legit get the feeling there are a lot of younger women for whom it hasn’t really sunk in what it is today’s GOP is actively trying to return to.

Did you go to a good college? Shame on you, you took a college placement that could have gone to a man who deserves and needs it to support or prepare for his wife & children. But if you really must attend college, well, some men like that, you can still get married if you focus on finding the right man.

Got a job? Why? A man could be doing that job. You should be at home caring for a family. You shouldn’t be taking that job away from a man who needs it (see college, above). You definitely don’t have a career – you’ll be pregnant and raising children soon, so no need to worry about promoting you.

This shit was within living memory

I’M A MILLENIAL and my mother was in the second class that allowed women at an Ivy League school.

Men who are alive today either personally remember shit like this or have parents/family who have raised them into thinking this was the way America functioned back in the blissful Good Old Days. There are literally dudes in the GOP old enough to remember when it was like this and yearn for those days to return.

When people talk about resisting conservativism and the GOP, we’re not just talking about whether the wage gap is a myth or not. We’re talking about whether women even have the fundamental right to exist as individuals, to run their own households and compete for jobs and be considered on an equal footing with men in any arena at all in the first place.

I was a child in the 1960s, a teenager in the 1970s, a young adult in the 1980s.
This is what it was like:

When I was growing up, it was considered unfortunate if a girl was good at sports. Girls were not allowed in Little League. Girls’ teams didn’t exist in high school, except at all-girls’ high schools. Boys played sports, and girls were the cheerleaders.

People used to ask me as a child what I wanted to be when I grew up. I said I wanted to be a brain surgeon or the first woman justice on the Supreme Court. Everyone told me it was impossible–those just weren’t realistic goals for a girl–the latter, especially, because you couldn’t trust women to judge fairly and rationally, after all.

In the 1960s and 1970s, all women were identified by their marital status, even in arrest reports and obituaries. In elementary school, my science teacher referred to Pierre Curie as DOCTOR Curie and Marie Curie as MRS. Curie…because, as he put it, “she was just his wife.” (Both had doctorates and both were Nobel prize winners, so you would think that both would be accorded respect.)

Companies could and did require women to wear dresses and skirts. Failure to do could and did get women fired. And it was legal. It was also legal to fire women for getting married or getting pregnant. The rationale was that a woman who was married or who had a child had no business working; that was what her husband was for. Aetna Insurance, the biggest insurance company in America, fired women for all of the above.

A man could rape his wife. Legally. I can remember being twelve years old and reading about legal experts actually debating whether or not a man could actually be said to coerce his wife into having sex. This was a serious debate in 1974.

The debate about marital rape came up in my law school, too, in 1984. Could a woman be raped by her husband? The guys all said no–a woman got married, so she was consenting to sex at all times. So I turned it around. I asked them if, since a man had gotten married, that meant that his wife could shove a dildo or a stick or something up his ass any time she wanted to for HER sexual pleasure.

(Hey, I thought it was reasonable. If one gender was legally entitled to force sex on the other, then obviously the reverse should also be true.)

The male law students didn’t like the idea. Interestingly, they commented that being treated like that would make them feel like a woman.

My reaction was, “Thank you for proving my point…”

The concept of date rape, when first proposed, was considered laughable. If a woman went out on a date, the argument of legal experts ran, sexual consent was implied. Even more sickening was the fact that in some states–even in the early 1980s–a man could rape his daughter…and it was no worse than a misdemeanor.

Women taking self-defense classes in the 1970s and 1980s were frequently described in books and on TV as “cute.” The implication was that it was absurd for a woman to attempt to defend herself, but wasn’t it just adorable for her to try?

I was expressly forbidden to take computer classes in junior and senior years of high school–1978-79 and 1979-80–because, as the principal told me, “Only boys have to know that kind of thing. You girls are going to get married, and you won’t use it.”

When I was in college–from 1980 to 1984–there were no womens’ studies. The idea hadn’t occurred in many places because the presumption was that there was nothing TO study. My history professor–a man who had a doctorate in history–informed me quite seriously that women had never produced a noted painter, sculptor, composer, architect or scientist because…wait for it…womens’ brains were too small.

(He was very surprised when I came up with a list of fifty women gifted in the arts and science, most of whom he had never heard of before.)

When Walter Mondale picked Geraldine Ferraro as a running mate in 1984, the press hailed it as a disaster. What would happen, they asked fearfully, if Mondale died and Ferraro became president? What if an international crisis arose and she was menstruating? She could push the nuclear button in a fit of PMS! It would be the end of the WORLD!!

…No, they WEREN’T kidding.

On the surface, things are very different now than they were when I was a child, a teen and a young adult. But I’m afraid that people now do not realize what it was like then. I’ve read a lot of posts from young women who say that they are not feminists. If the only exposure to feminism they have is the work of extremists, I cannot blame them overmuch.

I wish that I could tell them what feminism was like when it was new–when the dream of legal equality was just a dream, and hadn’t even begun to come true. When “woman’s work” was a sneer–and an overt putdown. When people tut-tutted over bright and athletic girls with the words, “Really, it’s a shame she’s not a boy.” That lack of feminism wasn’t all men opening doors and picking up checks. A lot of it was an attitude of patronizing contempt that hasn’t entirely died out, but which has become less publicly acceptable.

I wish I could make them feel what it was like…when grown men were called “men” and grown women were “girls.”

Know your history.

So this, too, is what they mean saying “make America great again” and/or the good old days.

REBLOG FOREVER.

I am 70. I remember all those things. I was a student nurse from 64 to 67 and we were not permitted to “finish” a bed bath on a male or insert a catheter in a male. Seeing male genitals might cause us “harm” or upset our delicate sensibilities. Imagine when we graduated and were “thrown” to the wolves. Imagine if you were a male patient who had to be the first to be “practiced” on by a graduate nurse. (Ha!) At the school I attended no student nurse could be married. Only one school in my city (Atlanta) would even admit married women and Male Nurses weren’t even thought of. What man would want to be a nurse when he could be a Doctor. In all my training I only remember 3 or 4 Women who were Doctor’s and a very few, (less than 5 or 6) female interns or residents (and this was a teaching hospital) and most of those were OB/Gyns and one was a pediatrician.

When I graduated and was going to get married I wanted to go on birth control pills. You needed to be on them for a least one cycle before they were effective. I won’t go into what hoops I had to jump through to get a prescription from my Dr. (a man, natch) but when i went to the drug store to get the prescription filled I ended up having to get my future husband to “accompany” me so the pharmacist “interview” him and see if it was okay with him for me to be on the pill.

Even when we went to get a marriage license I had to get my Father’s signature and we had to go before a Judge because I was not yet 21 (I was 20 and 9 months).

I could go on and on, getting a credit card in MY name, etc., but I will tell you that WE MUST RESIST.

The number of people I know who romanticize gender inequality is frankly terrifying. A world never existed in which the lives of women were simplified by benevolent men who saw to her every want and need. That was not a thing. A world never existed in which women were all ladies, men were all gentlemen, & everything was some great big cishet fairytale. Feminists aren’t a bunch of upstarts who want to destroy a perfectly wholesome and non-harmful system. Just…look at history. Look at the posts above. We. Must. Resist..

About 8: The State of New York only added No-Fault Divorce as an option in 2010 (!!!)

I want to repeat here. 

This is what they mean, when they say “Old-fashioned values”

When conservatives start waxing lyrical about the ‘good old days’, this is what they mean. They are fully aware how much things blew for women, and they would like to return to that. 

My mother was born in 1950, and she went to a trade school for drafting in her early twenties. It wasn’t a real college because they hadn’t yet opened their doors to women.

My mother recounts the horror of being the only woman in the draftsman course, painstakingly doing her work and having the male teacher take it, along with all the other work from the male students and dangle hers, shaking it, and saying “who wants to grade [My mother]’s work???”

Even if she had right answers, she would fail because the boys who corrected her paper would mark her answers as incorrect.

It was 1972.

Nestlé admits slavery and coercion used in catching its seafood

jeshire-katt:

fickle-freckled-fool:

femoids:

stuff-n-n0nsense:

riseagainphoenix:

From the same company that said water isn’t a basic human right comes an open admission that they are LITERALLY SLAVE TRADERS

Boycott Nestle

It is impossible to boycott Nestlé. They have such a tangled network of wholey owned subsidiaries that they make something like half the processed food sold in American grocery stores under varions other brand names.

Practically the only way to boycott Nestlé is to be a subsistence farmer or not buy any food that isn’t locally produced.

I usually try to avoid Nestle, mainly only when products blatantly say “Nestle” on them because as you said they own a ton of brands you wouldn’t even know they own.

image

Just to give you an idea of how much Nestle owns, and this was in 2012 I highly doubt they haven’t grown in the past 6 years. Source of image: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/27/consumer-brands-owned-ten-companies-graphic_n_1458812.html (snipped the image from this)

This is a fantastic example of why companies don’t actually care about your individual consumption or your product boycotts, too. Even seemingly smaller alternative brands are likely to be owned by bigger companies, usually the same one you’re boycotting. Sometimes even supporting local companies and brands doesn’t escape it – Starbucks owns not just a large amount of coffee chains in the US, but also a great many seemingly-independently-owned coffee shops too to catch anyone who tries to avoid big brands. You can’t rely on your individual consumption to make an impact.

Nestlé admits slavery and coercion used in catching its seafood

chuckleshan:

ksylofonimandariini:

iron-sunrise:

femsaphique:

hey so denmark is most definitely becoming a nazi nation sooner rather than later. they’ve like done some really fucked up shit, but this might be one of the more messed up things i’ve come across from there.

the government is going to have outlined “ghetto zones” in a legal definition, wherein which they are going to have double punishment for any crime.

these areas will be areas with high populations of muslim, immigrant and worker class people. meaning they are planning to give double the amount of punishment to people for living in poorer neighbourhoods with large amount of minority people.

this is a very transparent act. and they are trying to justify it by claiming it’s about maintaining the safety and peace of the country.

but what it really means is… they are not even trying to hide that the police and prison system is about targeting minorities and poor people now… and it will not surprise me if they use this to escalate the en-masse detainments they’ve had.

Well that’s horrifying

Denmark plans double punishment for ghetto crime – BBC

Danish Government: Double Punishments in ‘Ghetto’ Areas – The New York Times

@snowvic …….