Avatar

what's that ruckus

@ruckusrussell / ruckusrussell.tumblr.com

Avatar

“Questions about happiness generally assume that we know what a happy life looks like. Happiness is understood to be a matter of having a great many ducks lined up in a row — spouse, offspring, private property, erotic experiences — even though a millisecond of reflection will bring to mind countless people who have all those things and are still miserable.

We are constantly given one-size-fits-all recipes, but those recipes fail, often and hard. Nevertheless, we are given them again. And again and again. They become prisons and punishments; the prison of the imagination traps many in the prison of a life that is correctly aligned with the recipes and yet is entirely miserable.

The problem may be a literary one: we are given a single story line about what makes a good life, even though not a few who follow that story line have bad lives. We speak as though there is one good plot with one happy outcome, while the myriad forms a life can take flower — and wither — all around us.”

Avatar

BREAK MY HEART. FUCK YOUR FACE. ALONG WITH BOGUS MEMORIES, SUCH IS LIFE, SUCH A WASTE, A BUNCH OF BOGUS MEMORIES. 

Source: Bandcamp
Avatar

Sadie from G.L.O.S.S. bringing the fucking heat to the shitty, transphobic hipsters in Whirr. 

Avatar

To avoid getting pimples and various blemishes just saw your entire head off

Avatar
reblogged

Amnesty International is “poised to make a serious mistake” that would “severely and irreparably tarnish” the organisation’s reputation. What is the mistake? Listening to sex workers globally and considering adopting apolicy supporting the decriminalisation of sex work.

The past week has seen a battle of petitions and open letters defending and attacking Amnesty’s move. At the time of writing, a petition in favour of decriminalisation, initiated by the Global Network of Sex Work Projects, had 6,191 signatures, while another calling for Amnesty directors to vote against had 5,719. An open letter from the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women opposing decriminalisation was signed by 400 organisations and individuals, including a few celebrities. Another open letter, from the International Committee on the Rights of Sex Workers in Europe in support of decriminalisation, had 1,100 signatories including more than 200 organisations and 900 individuals, many of them current and former sex workers from every continent.

But, whoever “wins” the petition war, this should not be a popularity contest. Nor should Amnesty back down from endorsing a controversial policy, even at the risk of losing members and funding. The organisation survived a much more controversial policy change in 2007 when it advocated for the decriminalisation of abortion (when the pregnancy is the result of a rape or incest). As religious groups called for members to stop donating, to force Amnesty to change its position, the organisation remained committed to its values and voted in favour of the policy.

What should matter to Amnesty’s directors and members is the strong, growing and undeniable evidence collected by academics and international organisations such as the World Health Organisation, Human Rights Watch and the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women that criminalising any aspect of sex work makes sex workers more vulnerable to sexual and other forms of violence, forced rehabilitation, arrests, deportation and contracting HIV.

What should matter even more is the voice of the sex workers themselves, who from every corner of the world are organising – often in the most difficult environments – to advocate for their rights and to change laws and policies that harm them.

Sex worker-led organisations exist in the majority of countries around the world, and their membership reaches tens of thousands in developing countries and emerging economies like India and Argentina. These organisations overwhelmingly support decriminalisation.

Where the Amnesty proposal addresses the experience of sex workers in wealthy countries, it explicitly focuses on the highly marginalised sex workers (often migrants from developing countries) who are most at risk of violence and police abuse.

The figure of the highly privileged sex worker continues to serve as a straw man for opponents of decriminalisation. Pundits agonise over whether sex workers “choose” their jobs or are “forced”, obscuring the simple fact that people continue to exercise agency even in the most difficult circumstances.

Amnesty’s proposal explicitly recognises the “systemic factors and personal circumstances related to poverty, discrimination and gender inequality” that may lead someone to opt for sex work and calls for “employment and educational options for marginalised individuals and groups”. Decriminalisation will help precisely those who don’t have many other options and who will continue to do sex work despite the risks.

What is dangerously missing from opponents’ arguments is that criminalisation itself reinforces both the social stigma and the material conditions that put individuals at risk. Sex workers as well as men who have sex with men, trans people, people who use drugs or migrants – different identities which often overlap – are all made much more vulnerable by being criminalised. Repressive legal frameworks force sex workers to operate underground or in isolated areas where they are vulnerable to rape and murder. Even worse, stigma means that sex workers are viewed by many people as “deserving” of abuse. Changing cultural values and norms so that sex workers are less stigmatised will take decades or centuries – but decriminalisation can be achieved in our lifetime.

Amnesty directors need to stand behind the organisation’s own research and vote in favour of decriminalisation. Sex workers around the world expect – and deserve – nothing less.

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.