"i would kill a pedophile to protect my child" ok but would you teach your child how to say no? even to adults? even to adults you like? would you teach your child the words "penis" and "vulva" and then use them? would you let them ask questions about their body? would you answer them honestly? would you learn how to cope with your feelings when you talk about human bodies, so they don't feel ashamed? would you set a positive example for how you talk about your body? would you tell your child they don't have to hug or kiss anyone? would you tell your family the same? would you stand by them when they refuse to hug someone? even someone you know has never done anything to hurt them? would you let your child avoid food they don't like? would you let you child avoid people they don't like? would you believe them? would you sit in the discomfort of not knowing all the answers and not take it out on them? would you love your child the same if someone did hurt them? would you make them feel valued just as they are? would you let them talk to doctors or nurses in private? would you let them express their feelings? would you show interest in their life? would you let your child say no to you? would you help your child feel safe coming to you when they make a mistake? would you apologize to your child? would you believe them? would you put aside your anger to focus on what would make your child feel safe and loved? would you put your ego aside for your child? would you take your child's concerns seriously? would you listen to your child? would you believe them?

some of you are painfully unaware that part of the whole reason many kinksters are like "what happens in my or someone else's bedroom is no one else's business"

is because people have been arrested and put in fucking PRISON just for having gay sex in the privacy of their own homes. in the United States. this millennia.

if you think i'm joking, look up Lawrence v. Texas (2003). 14 out of the 50 US States STILL had laws on the books criminalizing sodomy--and yes, you could be imprisoned for multiple years and sometimes even life for repeat offenses.

in the years directly leading up to the landmark case, enforcement even in those 14 states varied, but it was absolutely weaponized against queer people, especially when stacked on top of other offenses to make up a longer sentence.

um so anyway, what happens between two or more consenting adults in the privacy of their own homes is none of my OR YOUR business, and i'm not fucking kidding!

filipino cassie sandsmark making some star patches for her jorts 💫

for @arcaneprism via @dcforgaza! thank you for donating <3

On the claim that prostitution is always rape, from Hooker Mentality:

"All work under capitalism involves coercion through the threat of harm and death if we fail to earn money. Coercion negates consent. Sex without consent is rape. It is obvious how this logic would lead someone to the good faith conclusion that selling sex will always be a form of rape, for as long as it occurs under these conditions. I could argue back that selling sex alone doesn’t feel like rape, without some added factor, but I can see why that wouldn’t be convincing when there are plenty of people who were sexually abused as children who would justify their abuse with the same reasoning.

Rather than base my argument on emotion, I urge people to consider the difference between coercion on an interpersonal level and through larger systems such as capitalism. Patriarchy applies coercive forces to women across the globe, who are punished on various levels for not making themselves sexually available to men. Heteronormativity pushes queer people to seek out straight relationships rather than those they otherwise desire. Does this mean that women and queer people are incapable of consent whilst these oppressive systems remain intact? Or do we already recognize rape as a harmful act which occurs between individuals, which these larger systems influence or encourage but do not create by themselves?

To argue that the sale of sex makes something into rape is an argument that sex workers are raped by capitalism. While this might make for a shocking slogan, it is not a useful way to talk about the reality that sex workers face on a daily basis. Sex workers are highly likely to be raped by clients and police and abusive partners alike, and conflating these experiences with bookings that we agree to and organize undermines the meaning of rape."

Get yourself a copy here (US), here (UK), or here (worldwide).

some people are not meant to be in your life forever, no matter how much you care about them. some people are meant to be a moment or a lesson or a story. they all play parts in our life, no matter how long they’re in it.

i dont think whites understand how being white makes literally everything easier.

it effects everything.

being trans is easier when youre white.

being gay is easier when youre white.

being disabled is easier when youre white.

being a woman is easier when youre white.

being autistic is easier when youre white.

oppression is eased when you are white, as you get extra privileges, and your whiteness is seen as a positive characteristic that in some ways counter-balances your other forms of being a minority. whiteness controls everything.

you are automatically way more innocent in your own oppression as a gay, trans, disabled person because of your whiteness.

never forget this.

I've seen this idea several times now passed around that says the dynamic between trans women and trans men is identical to the dynamic between cis women and cis men because the "trans" factor cancels out to just leave women and men.

I just need to make this absolutely clear. Not only is this idea absurd on the face of it, there is no theoretical basis for this at all. It spits in the face of everything we base our understanding of oppression, transphobia, and misogyny on, and is especially a direct attack on the ideas of intersectionality.

This idea is self-serving prejudice/ignorance and nothing more.

Doctors to trans people: are you really sure you want these hormones? I don't think you are. I don't believe you. There are risks, you know? It will change your body. Tell me your entire life story and I'll decide whether you've wanted this for long enough. Oh you didn't know when you were 5 years old? Yikes, ok. I think I'll need you to jump through all these hoops and then we can maybe consider it in...100 years

Doctors to fat people who literally didn't ask: have you heard of this surgery that'll mess up your digestive system, just absolutely fucking mutilate it? Mess with your ability to eat and drink normally? Potentially fuck up your ability to absorb nutrients? Yes, and you don't want it? Are you suuuure? Are you really sure? I'm going to bring this up 1000 more times just to be sure also there's this diabetes drug...

What if I told you that “aromantic people, by and large, are not inherently incapable of feeling love” and “feeling the emotion of love is not required to be a good person” and “it’s an individual person’s choice whether to call something love or not” and “broadening the definition of love is inherently a resistance against amatonormative systems which seek to control the contexts in which love can be expressed” and “both loving differently and not loving at all are valid and vital methods of resistance against those systems” are all compatible statements that can coexist

Too much movement makes your joints hurt and too little movement also makes your joints hurt. This would imply that there's an optimal amount of movement that allows your joints to not hurt. This is a lie.