Amnesty international, women's rights and shon Faye

[Amalfimamma]

Here you are ladies. Read and weep, or laugh

Thanks for the clarification MN.

But I just can't resist it ...

When some people say "Some women have penises, get over it!" such as Riley Dennis is it okay to quote that?

" “Sexual desire and activity are a fundamental human need,” said one footnote in the leaked document. “To criminalize those who are unable or unwilling to fulfill that need through more traditionally recognized means and thus purchase sex, may amount to a violation of the right to privacy and undermine the rights to free expression and health.”"

Sexual activity is only a human need if it is procreative. Recreational sex is not a human need.

There is not a country in the world which does not impose restrictions on recreational sexual activity where it considers the wants (not needs) of individuals if gratified would be damaging to society as a whole.

It is hardly a controversial or outlandish opinion that viewing the hiring of another person's body as a masturbation tool as a normal, mundane human activity diminishes, degrades and dehumanises all of society.

Another thing - I always thought 'goadiness' was referring to winding up other people on the thread - rather than having a bit of banter for a crack (as I was doing) - taking the piss in the abstract out of AI who now seem to be 100% pro penis/anti vag (unless said vag is accepting penis for dollar).

If we now can't say that an organization's stance could be seen to be promoting pedophilia, or could be (mis)used by those who want to do that, then that's a pretty major problem for a parenting board.

It's obvious that the mods are stressed as hell right now, we get that, but honestly the decisions lately have been baffling and are coming across as "everyone panic!". Which when you're under attack is not the way you want to come across, as it will just encourage the people attacking to push harder. If they feel like they've got you running scared then they'll never leave you alone.

Is it that the word pedophilia is now banned, or are they assuming that because this thread is about SF then anything posted about pedophilia here is an attack on trans people? Because Lass's comment wasn't.

It has to be that p word, doesn't it?

Come on, MNHQ. We has this out on a recent thread. Pointing out Amnesty endorses pro-prostitution policies that fail to combat child sex abuse - even more, allows it to flourish - has nothing to do with trans people.

That's just ridiculous.

I don't find Shon Faye funny or comedic at all.

Those who do find Shon funny can you give us all a quote?

I no longer give money to AI. I can't think of one reason why I would want to attend this conference. Is AI still a thing now?

Most sex trafficking victims are initially trafficked as children, and Amnesty has done nothing at all to indicate that it understands this or is taking the issue of trafficking seriously in terms of how that relates to its "sex is a human right" nonsense. There is not enough willing supply to meet demand in terms of the sex industry, so if you endorse that industry then you are indirectly endorsing child sex trafficking even if you swear blind that that's not what you mean, honestly.

And to delete Lass, of all people, for it!

When some people say "Some women have penises, get over it!" such as Riley Dennis is it okay to quote that?

Is this comedy now? Or is it a serious issue? Do they actually believe that women have penises, so big and large that the person they are talking to has to 'get over it'? What like pole vaulting?

"Sexual activity is only a human need if it is procreative",

Can you elaborate? Nobody "needs" to have children, this is also a "want" surely.

lang

I know!!!

Its a travesty...

Do they actually believe that women have penises, so big and large that the person they are talking to has to 'get over it'? What like pole vaulting?

Well, women traditionally weren't allowed to do that because it was meant to be dangerous to our delicate ladybits or some shit like that, so is it our fault that we can't just get over it now?

And there is (should not be) a right to have your own children if you can't find someone to do it with you willingly.

They have a "right to family life" which had been extended to mean reproductive assistance, there needs to be a line at the point this means supply of surrogates.

You can't have a "right" to something that requires the use of someone else's body to achieve, basically. Because that other person has rights too.

Well, women traditionally weren't allowed to do that because it was meant to be dangerous to our delicate ladybits or some shit like that, so is it our fault that we can't just get over it now?

Who didn't allow them to do it though? Was it ladies with lady penises, or was it men who didn't have lady penises? Or was it women with no penises whatsoever? Only delicate lady bits.

Can you elaborate? Nobody "needs" to have children, this is also a "want" surely

It is not a need on an individual level but obviously somebody has to have children.

An extreme example would be a dictatorship passing a law forbidding procreative sex for a specific ethnic group as a means of genocide. A real example is China's one child policy which recognised there was a societal need for procreative sex.

Obviously women have delicate lady bits because to have a baby means either surgical intervention or it goes okay. Obviously having a baby doesn't mean you are a woman. Men can now have babies.

And there is (should not be) a right to have your own children if you can't find someone to do it with you willingly

Are you referring to surrogacy? That is a different subject but the UK has strict rules on that which preclude an unwilling surrogate.

Thanks Lang and Rufus.

Ah I see.

These ideas have been used to try and loosen surrogacy laws so it's good to be clear.

I hope that most counties have laws that preclude forced surrogacy!

I have the same views on commercial surrogacy as prostitution.

The "right to family life" which was meant to cover eg the china example you mention, was extended to say countries should pay for infertility issues and equality in this for gay couples, and then from some quarters there's a push around this meaning loosening up surrogacy laws.

Well its just wrong lass

Countries not counties

lass was deleted

Bloody hell, what's been going on on this thread? I fuck off out to weed the garden and all hell breaks loose.