women are being socially shamed for having sexual boundaries, and men are being seen as the victims of the women who are asserting their sexual boundaries. This needs to change and men who wish to violate women’s boundaries need to be the ones who are socially shamed.
This will only happen, in my view, if we get the message out that it is healthy and good to have sexual boundaries that males can not cross, regardless of how sad they claim it makes them.
THIS 100%^ Stopthisnow is so right. This message should be the core ethos of any organisation that claims to support children, young people and women (or any organisation that wishes not to be dangerously actively or naively or complacently working AGAINST the interests of these groups...)
Yet a quick look at the regulatory capture thread on here or pretty much anywhere on this FWR Board shows so many women posting with daily examples of kids, young people’s and women’s interests, spaces, rights, privacy, safety, dignity being fucked over purely to serve male sexual entitlement and male emotional validation. Often by organisations who consider themselves to be ethical and pride themselves on being inclusive of everyone.
Fuck that.
to everyone on here who is calling these organisations out on this each time, thank you for your energy and time. Keep Your Penis out of the Ladies’!
PS yup that’s looking exactly like the BBC3 logo on the disembodied ‘walking vagina on brown-skinned legs’
(or is it meant to be ‘male genitals in drag’- indicated by the campy shoes and flesh coloured opaque tights?) whatever- If that reductive, women-hating thing is official and licence-fee-funded then that is a whole other new depth of woman- hating vileness from them...
However I might give the BBC the benefit of the doubt and email them to say are they aware that some freelance misogynists seem to have stolen their corporate logo, and placed it on a misogynistic image of women reduced to their genitalia and presented in a stereotypically sexualised dressed up for the general male gaze way with the uncovered legs, eyelashy
no pubic hair cutesy cartoony ‘heart’ presented genital area and ludicrously high heels? Will the BBC lawyers have a legal go at whoever did this thing with their logo on if it wasn’t them?