Sunday, January 15, 2012

Wow The Spearhead actually (accidentally) offers good advice to men to not rape! :D

I know my policy is MRAs are generally too ridic & irrelevant to give attention to in this blog, but this is different because without meaning to they gave actually pretty good advice to men (because they are only talking to men about hetero encounters) on how not to rape. O:

This is from an article about how to keep yourself safe from false rape accusations by those evil lying women.

And what I find fascinating is that in coming up with a list to avoid "false rape" charges, the MRAs have accidentally created the "don't rape" list! :D

Ignoring the usual paranoia (and that they advocate illegally filming people)... their advice to get clear consent, to make sure she's sober, to not assume consent to activities just because she's into rough sex, is actually the same advice that feminists give to people not to rape...


Is she SOBER? Very inebriated women may claim to want or even demand sex, but it may be wise to see if “that was the alcohol talking”.

Are you sober? Did you leave any of your drinks unattended, or consume any drinks that she bought for you that you didn’t see being made? (The origin of the term “Mickey Finn” comes from a bartender who enabled female thieves at his tavern to drug men’s drinks.)

Are you using Birth Control? Note that while she may claim to be using birth control, it does not automatically mean that she is…shemay normally be on birth control but has forgotten to take it, or is experiencing a false period, or is using a form of birth control with a lower rate of effectiveness. Most of these factors have not legally excused men for having to pay child support, although they should.

Has she verbally consented to sex? It is better to ask “Do you want to make love?” and receive a positive response then to merely assume she’s consenting to sex via body language. Some colleges insist that males must receive verbal consent prior to intercourse, and any sex without it is non-consensual.

Does she display or claim enthusiasm for BDSM (bondage and sadomasochism) activities? As exciting as it may seem, do not permit a barely-known woman to handcuff you to anything (that you can’t break loose from on your own)!

Does she claim to ‘like it rough’? Even if so, that claim does not obligate you to play rough. No matter how insistent she may be, you should not bruise or break the skin.

During foreplay, or before or during coitus, does she ‘tense up’, act frightened or apprehensive? Does she cry? If so, she may have been previously raped or molested. Her sex drive still exists, but she may psychologically equate sex with pain, servitude or dishonor.

Although I'm pretty sure The Spearhead doesn't think any of the above is really rape (or should be considered rape), and they see it as a safety precaution against "false rape" charges, the practical effect of their advice (assuming their readers abide by it) is the same as all the various "don't rape" campaigns.... so... yay! (I'll pretend the rest doesn't exist e_e) Plus, the advice to their members to be responsible for their own birth control too! And strangely, they actually understand rape triggers... I almost want to hug the guy...

If the woman in the situation has in fact not been harmed, try to get a photograph of her (many cellular phones are equipped with cameras ideal for this situation). You may wish to hold up the day’s newspaper within part of the photo to prove the date, unless the camera ‘time-stamps’ its images.

Of course then they say stuff like that and I don't know whether to laugh or laugh and then headdesk. xD (Now I'm imagining a tumblr "men holding newspapers in front of their dates")

But if the MRAs take the above advice (except for the filming ppl w/o their consent thing) I give thumbs up! :D

(It makes sense too, whether they consciously realize it or not, that not committing rape would cut down on rape accusations against you)

Somebody IS a threat to people using the bathroom, and it's apparently Rep. Richard Floyd

The Tennessee congressman who is sponsoring the anti-trans "bathroom harassment bill" says he would "stomp a mudhole" in a trans woman who tried to use a female changeroom near him

FLOYD: I believe if I was standing at a dressing room and my wife or one of my daughters was in the dressing room and a man tried to go in there — I don’t care if he thinks he’s a woman and tries on clothes with them in there — I’d just try to stomp a mudhole in him and then stomp him dry.

Don’t ask me to adjust to their perverted way of thinking and put my family at risk. We cannot continue to let these people dominate how society acts and reacts. Now if somebody thinks he’s a woman and he’s a man and wants to try on women’s clothes, let him take them into the men’s bathroom or dressing room.

Um... who needs protecting from whom? I think we need a "bathroom protection from homicidal congressmen act" >_>

After all, so far I have not heard any trans women threatening to assault cis women in washrooms, however I have just heard a cis congressman threaten to physically assault trans women who are trying to try on clothes or go to the washroom. Sounds like there's evidence my bill is needed, and none for his. xD

Also... if it's okay to assault people we believe are a threat to our safety then, every trans person can assault HIM pre-emptively right?

There IS a side here who is a threat to the safety of others... and it ain't trans people. >:\

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Tennessee Legislature wants to charge trans ppl $50 to go to Washroom World

Tennessee Legislature introduces bill to fine people $50 for using the washroom that doesn't match up with their birth certificate

Sponsored by Sen. Bo Watson (R), the bill (SB 2282) would institute a $50 fine for anybody who does not use the public restroom or dressing room that matches the sex identification on his or her birth certificate:

And of course TN also DOESN'T allow gender changes on the birth certificate. So it's completely and utterly targeting trans ppl, not just ones who don't have GRS.

*sigh* WTF >:O

Of COURSE, I also wonder how this is going to be enforced. Besides, that I don't carry my birth certificate wherever I go, much less when I go to the washroom, is there going to be a guard in front of every washroom now? xD Will it be like the border? "Where are your papers"

And if we're being charged $50 to use the washrooms now... is there going to be a ticket booth? Will there be rides? Maybe we don't need a birth certificate but just a stamp on our hands?

Do senior citizens get a discount? Can you order tickets online? Do they take credit or debit? I don't carry $50 in cash around me at all times... movie theatres allow me to order online.

Can I use a student card for a cheaper fare? What about children? Parents regularly take children into washrooms with them even if they're the "wrong" gender... do children admit free? Or is the fine only $10 for them? Is there a family value pack? Can I get season tickets, so I don't have to pay up every time?

$50 is a lot to go to the washroom, for that I think we should at least demand that TN washrooms not just be the cleanest ever, but have up-to-date arcade games (no games that came out 3 years ago crap), rides and mascots! I want at least a couple good photos with Freshie the Urinal Cake.

I also want my mirrors to be HD with surround sound.

Otherwise, no, I'm not paying $50 to go to the washroom, and neither should anybody else. >:|

(srsly this is F-ed up... ppl are just gonna complain and call the cops at ANY "suspicious" person, and nobody carries their BCs with them -_- so do they take them in until they can check? this won't just affect trans ppl, this will just allow transphobes and assholes to harass ppl who are just trying to go to the washroom >:O )

Edit: My friend raises another unforeseen circumstance:

[20:08] Pazi: Note to self: go to Tennessee. Rack up 50 citations for this. Present birth certificate in court, walk away without paying a dime. Use pro bono legal service to countersue for wrongful prosecution. Profit?

Monday, January 09, 2012

Papa John's employee writes racist slur on receipt to Asian customer... to its credit, Papa John's responds swiftly

Papa John's employee puts Asian customer's name as "Lady Chinky Eyes" on her receipt

When The Huffington Post reached the Papa John's in question for comment, the assistant manager -- who only gave her first name as Marjani -- said she was unaware of the incident.

"I apologize," she said in a phone interview. "I'm sure they didn't mean any harm but some people will take it offensive." She added that she "had an idea of who it was," based on the time of the receipt.

Marjani went on to say that this was the kind of behavior that would result in disciplinary action, but declined to go into further detail on what she planned to do.

Papa John's has yet to respond to the incident in a statement or its Facebook and Twitter accounts, but with such a PR disaster on their hands, they most likely will soon.

UPDATE: Papa John's has responded to the incident on Facebook. A post on its official page reads:
We were extremely concerned to learn of the receipt issue in New York. This act goes against our company values, and we've confirmed with the franchisee that this matter was addressed immediately and that the employee is being terminated. We are truly sorry for this customer's experience.

The company has also addressed the matter on its Twitter feed, tweeting to multiple people that "We have issued an apology, are reaching out to customer & franchise employee is being terminated."

I'm glad Papa John's acted swiftly and fired that employee and gave a good apology :) It's still disgusting that that happened at all though, I can't believe people this is okay to do. Also the assistant manager gave a really terrible response to the Huffington Post. -_- Really?

"I'm sure they didn't mean any harm but some people will take it offensive."

Uh huh. First off, again, intent doesn't matter but I question when ppl say that the person meant no harm... maybe consciously they didn't, because all they were thinking was that it was hilarious and only their amusement mattered, but the hilarity comes at the expense of others... so there's harm... the only reason people can honestly claim "I meant no harm" was cuz they were too busy thinking of themselves and how hilarious a racial insult was to them, that they weren't thinking about the effect on the other person, but the hilarity still comes at the expense of others. So maybe they meant no harm, but they meant a joke where the humour comes FROM harm. -_-

Secondly "but some people will take it (as) offensive." as if it's just the over-sensitive Asian woman who sees this as a problem. Really? Calling an Asian person's appearance "chinky eyes" isn't offensive? As I said, the joke is MEANT to be offensive, the humour comes at the expense of Asian ppl, and mocking our looks. -_-

The comments of course have a nice sampling of awfulness because you can't EVER have a story about racism/sexism/transphobia/ablism/etc online without ppl showing up to let us know we're overreacting and that the poor beset upon offender IS NOT A REAL RACIST/TRANSPHOBE/HOMOPHOBE/SEXIST/ETC but MERELY a jerk. e_e Sure... but they're a racist jerk. It's almost like ppl feel that if you're just a jerk but in your jerkiness you choose racism to insult somebody, it means you're not rly a racist but a jerk -_-

One comment says that it's in poor taste but not racism. What do you need for things to BE racism then? -_- Nething short of "I wanna wipe Asian ppl off the face of the earth" I guess doesn't qualify. xD This isn't even like something you can claim is an accident, like the person who threw the banana at the black hockey player claiming that he JUST HAPPENED to have a banana at hand and wanted to impede him. I find it unlikely and probably an excuse (and even if not they should have been aware of the implications of throwing a banana at a black person) but at least it's possible, even if not an excuse for the harm caused. But "Lady Chinky Eyes" to an Asian person in replacement of their real name on the receipt? xD Yeah... nobody does that by accident.

Study about boys sexual health makes Ami go rawr at society, mainstream entertainment, rape culture and the porn industry

This is a post by my friend, Ozymandias at No Seriously, What About Teh Menz about a study about boys sexual health which highlights the problems boys face in relation to sex education and societal and peer pressure around sex, which we know there's a lot of in our society and manifests differently for boys and girls. :\

It doesn't surprise me that a lot of health care providers focus on girls for condom education and asking for sexual history. There's still a big attitude of "boys will be boys" when it comes to male sexuality, and that it's the girls job to protect herself and I think also because girls can get pregnant, there's more of a focus on that (plus the culture of girls needing to be protected and boys as wild animals that we can't talk to or educate). -_- Hopefully this changes, sooner rather than later. It's not a zero sum game, we should educate both genders as thoroughly (and as early) as possible. >:\ (Traditional ideas of genders, sex and the whole "abstinence first education" crap are definitely not helping and I think definitely playing into a lot of the above issues) I also hope that we as a society push messages that will help boys be more receptive to education about condoms and protection. :) It would also be nice if we included more condom use in our media, as something normal that people do as part of sex, and make it pretty much the default thing. :] Like, it'd be nice to see Bond use a condom.

Also I wish porn would get with the program and have their actors use condoms. I have a friend who works in the porn industry and she expresses regularly frustrations at how, not just the actors don't want to, but that the film producers don't want them to and that there's also a culture among the film producers and directors of ENJOYING putting the woman at risk (she actually said that they have said things to that effect, that they like the idea) and that's just ugh. -_- Plus, not using protection risks STD outbreaks and scares among the porn community, as sometimes happens. :\ And, as I said, I think we really need to normalize the idea of protection and condom use in our pop media and that includes porn because porn is sadly a way a lot of our young ppl (of all genders) learn about sex and sometimes strive to emulate.

The coercion part I find really troubling. As Ozy said they don't say whether it's rape or not. I don't know if the definition they were using was really broad and wouldn't necessarily mean rape (the question may also be broad on purpose because I know a lot of survivors may not feel comfortable calling something rape, but be comfortable calling it coercion) but whether it qualifies specifically as such or not, it's definitely problematic and again a lot of our screwed up media pressures on youth play into this: that sex makes you cool, and that boys SHOULD want it (or they're losers), that boys are sex hungry animals who can't help themselves, that "if it's up it's consent" (I heard this repeated by a lot of my male friends in HS laughing about how men can't be raped, I got >:O as you might expect), and that boys can't be raped (therefore girls don't need to worry about consent, esp as I said, since boys are sex hungry animals (which is an idea that would help SO MANY ppl if we banished it to the phantom zone, it's so insulting to men and used to excuse so many awful things) ). -_-;;

And just RAWR >:\

Neways, hopefully studies like these will help wake up health care providers that they need to not treat it like girls are the gatekeepers of sex, or that boys know not what they do... and also hopefully media stops being so awful about their portrayals of teen sexuality and all the stupid pressures and myths and etc about sex, gender and sexuality -_- And also that the media (including PORN) needs to get its act in gear when it comes to not just "promoting" safe sex but making safe sex a default, normal thing that ppl do rather than just something in educational advertising. >_>

Friday, January 06, 2012

Update on the discrimination against Sudbury Trans Woman by the YWCA

YWCA executive director Marlene Gorman said she can't comment on individual cases. But she said transgender women are not allowed in the shelter.

"Someone who identifies as a transgendered woman would be referred to another safe space,” she said.

Gorman said that policy is currently being reviewed "in terms of how we can best support transgendered women leaving violent situations.”

UGH. I am VERY disappointed in the YWCA now. Rly disappointed and angry. >:O They've always treated me very well, and I've never been told by them when I make use of any of their services or programs that they don't see trans women as women... the group therapy program I'm part of knows I'm trans, and in fact talks about trans women as women and the facilitators made it clear that we are. So... what the hell YWCA? >:O

So am I a woman sometimes only? I'm safe enough in some safe spaces but not others? -_-

I hope that their review of their policies involves consulting with the trans activist agencies and services offered in Ontario. For example, my job is to provide consultation for agencies who want to create trans positive and inclusive policies, but they'd need to want it, and I hope this incident and their "reviewing" (if they rly are) policies leads them to want to seek some help in changing their policies. :) I'd be really happy if they did.

I also have some other ppl to talk to now and see just how far this YWCA policy extends... is it just for that (and maybe some other) shelters or everything? >:|


I hope the HRC hears her complaint. I'm unsure if the Kimberly Nixon vs Vancouver Rape Relief case applies here (b/c that was about employment) but I hope it doesn't b/c the ruling by the judge who overturned the decision in her favour was disgusting (and the logic argued in that case that a reasonable trans woman would have known that she'd be excluded so should not have tried is ugh) but the ultimate decision was that VRR was too small to really hurt her dignity or the trans community, and as BS as that was, at least it shouldn't apply here b/c a) this is about her safety and not about "mere" employment and b) I doubt the YWCA would be considered "backwater" (the literal word used in the judgement) like VRR apparently was.

Ugh... I think she'll win, I just hope YWCA doesn't do the wrong thing and fight her every step of the way, and instead just backs off and re-evaluates their policies. There are services out there that will help them too if they want, make use of them (us... me... >_> )!!!


This is still so disgusting >:O

edit: The article only referred to her as "YWCA Executive Director" but I looked her up, she's only ED of that particular YWCA, so it's possible that it's just the policy of that shelter. I dunno how connected various shelters are under the YWCA umbrella (certain organizations are more arms length than others) but it would explain the disparity in what I've experienced myself, and it would also make it easier to change hopefully :)

Thursday, January 05, 2012

Sudbury YWCA shelter question trans woman on her surgical status, refuses her entry

I just got an email forward from one of my mailing lists about an incident of transphobic discrimination at a YWCA shelter that refused entry of a trans woman b/c she wouldn't disclose whether or not she's had surgery already, and they said if she didn't they can't admit her.


No srsly WTF >:O


On December 29, 2011, Jessica Larabee filed an application with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario alleging discrimination based on gender identity. Jessica Larabee identifies as a transgender woman. On July 8, 2011, Jessica Larabee contacted the YWCA shelter and was denied accommodations because of her gender identity. Sudbury YWCA asked Jessica inappropriate questions about her genitals. YWCA said "If you can’t provide me with the information, I'm not going to be able to offer you shelter, unfortunately". Sudbury YWCA informed Jessica that they could not accommodate her shelter request unless she had complete sex reassignment surgery. Jessica Larabee recorded the conversation. The conversation is on YouTube.

The goal of the human rights complaint is to educate the community and to have the YWCA receive training on trans issues. Transgender and transsexual people are the most discriminated group in society. Discrimination is a big problem and the YWCA need to be held accountable. The human rights complaint has been filed with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario in Toronto. It challenges that the YWCA discriminated against Jessica Larabee and constitutes a violation of her human rights.

Important links to information about the discrimination incident:

This is NOT fucking okay >:O There are shelters and services all over that are making an effort to become MORE trans inclusive, and to eliminate any prejudice like this, whether systemic or individual (sometimes individual intake workers just ASSUME the policy of a shelter, which is why shelters need specific trans policies and training, which is part of my RL work) >:O

ARGH >:|


I hope she wins in the tribunal and sends a msg to the YWCA (I'm v disappointed in them >:| Or at least that branch representing them. I have had only good experiences with them and being accepted even though they know I'm trans.) and all other shelters that this is NOT FUCKING OKAY. >:O

I haven't had time to listen to all the videos posted b/c I need to get going atm, so I may have more commentary later but this is anger mongering >:|

Tuesday, January 03, 2012

Response from Libra Tampons to the petition

Just got this in my email. Presumably it went to everybody who signed the petition. :)

Libra regrets any offence taken to our recent tampon advertisement. It was never intended to upset or offend anyone.

Independent research was undertaken and the advertisement was viewed positively during that testing.

Libra takes all feedback very seriously, and in response to this, we will immediately review our future position with this campaign based on the feedback received. There are no further advertisements scheduled in New Zealand.

The advertisement has not aired in Australia. The advertisement was placed on Facebook however this has also been removed.

The usual "We didn't intend to offend anybody" which is... like a given -_- They never do... that's the issue and reasons for people protesting, to educate the company and society that this IS offensive, and it's not okay. Generally, I dun think most companies or advertising agencies MEAN to be offensive, they think this is okay. And it's pretty obv that they weren't thinking at all about how this ad would look to trans ppl, or were even thinking about trans ppl or cross dressers or etc... they were thinking just of their target audience, and that this would be a funny way to appeal to "real" women. So in fact, lack of intent, makes the protest, petition and noise all the more important, b/c I mean if they INTENDED to hurt trans ppl I doubt yelling at them would change their mind, but this is about education and letting them know to think beyond cis ppl in the future :)

And I'm glad the ads have been pulled and that they haven't been aired v much as it was. :3 Yay! :D

Edit: Reading their "apology" again, I realized they didn't apologize at all -_- They said they regret offending ppl and then made an excuse about how wonderful the ads tested before... e_e But for practical reasons, they DID pull the ads and they DID say that they'd consider their position on these sorts of campaigns in the future, and they were probably scampering to do damage control in the first place, so... it is an acceptable statement and a good outcome. :)

Monday, January 02, 2012

Libra Tampons decides who is a real woman and who isn't >:|

This is an ad for Libra Tampons. I don't think I need to say how transphobic and cissexist and disgusting it is since once you watch it'll be obvious -_-

I'm just... ugh... it aggravates me to a pretty big degree >:| Ugh ugh ugh...

And trans women aren't the only ones dismissed by this ad, because trans men and FAAB genderqueer and agender people pretty much have their identities erased too... >:\ Plus there are plenty of cis women who can't have periods. Remember, if you can't have a period you're not a woman, and if you can, you must be >:| If you forget, Libra Tampons will remind you!

Ugh ugh ugh >:O

There is apparently an online petition. I dunno how much good it'll do, but please sign it anyways. :)