Pushback at Wi Spa in Los Angeles

[FannyCann]

Well it's all kicking off at the spa. An amazing woman behind the desk standing up for women and telling a man where to take his penis. I fear she will lose her job over this but it's a glorious way to go.

twitter.com/stillgray/status/1408997169344909313?s=21

Erections are completely natural and they happen. Get over it.

You would have to question someone who got an erection at the sight of a child.

I think I would have a huge problem getting over that.

They're involuntary though!

It could be something he's thinking about or an adult he saw earlier.

If you assume it's because of the child that says more about how you think.

Etc etc etc

Push back. Let your No be No and there's a fucking end to it.

Yesssss. The answer is no.

It's quite true that we are more often than not on the back foot justifying things. But we don't fucking have to. We're half the population and the answer is no.

This is the bottom line. The only line.

Let others justify why a women saying no isn't enough.

I agree

I don’t need to explain why I do not want a male in an area considered safe for women and girls

I just don’t is enough

Seems to be enough for a man to say I feel like a women for so much to change for us real women - once again male fucking entitlement is what so much of this comes down to

'Let others justify why a women saying no isn't enough.'

It's the norm in many societies though.

Also, we're emotional unreliable witnesses.

So if that's already something felt by society then...

The arguments are so... I can't understand why anyone buys them.

Eg the only reason men beat women in sport is because women aren't trying hard enough.

I mean just fuck off.

'I don’t need to explain why I do not want a male in an area considered safe for women and girls'

Which leads onto the point that actually very very few people don't know why. Same as very very few people think women in sport don't try hard enough.

Why they don't say WTF...

Not their problem/ not their 'area' (men)
Doesn't affect me (s fair few women)
A deep down idea that men are more important (both sexes)
Seeing the male perspective only and feeling they must be helped (mainly men probably)

Probably others.

It's bizarre.

I think a lot of ordinary people aren't asked what they think
And others see it as a niche LGBT+ Vs feminist argument

The LA Times takes the editorial stance that both exposing your penis to young girls and women and viewing young girls and women whilst they are naked is a moral good for any male that feels like doing it.

www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-07-06/editorial-transgender-spa-customers-have-the-same-rights-as-everyone-else

[quote OvaHere]The LA Times takes the editorial stance that both exposing your penis to young girls and women and viewing young girls and women whilst they are naked is a moral good for any male that feels like doing it.

www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-07-06/editorial-transgender-spa-customers-have-the-same-rights-as-everyone-else[/quote]
As per the title of the link, surely transgender spa customers would have the same rights as everyone else if everyone was required to use the space reserved for their sex?

That was easy.

Oh yikes

'The rights of transgender people to act in accordance with their gender identity is fortunately gaining acceptance in many corners'

What is acting in accordance with your gender identity in this context?

Not explained.

'At the same time, that doesn’t make everyone who feels uncomfortable in such scenarios a bigot. There are women who have been through personal experiences such as sexual assault who might find such a situation intimidating. It could go against the convictions and traditions of observant Muslims and Jews, who have a conservative or orthodox interpretation of gender norms and might themselves feel marginalized for their traditionalist beliefs.'

Ok cool. So vagina owners whether child or adult MAY not like it if they have been sexually assaulted (or are an abused child) or are very religious. Every other woman or girl is fine with it. Okayyyy.

:But no one has an absolute right to feel comfortable all the time. People have a right to use the spa, but that doesn’t include with it a guarantee that they all will feel at ease with everything they see. They might prefer a spa where a certain amount of body covering is required.'

Groovy! Fuck the Korean spa businesses. Women- go elsewhere!

'This doesn’t solve the issue of where offended people go if they want a group experience in keeping with their religious traditions. It shouldn’t be impossible for that to happen, considering the strong constitutional protections in this country for freedom of religion. Future U.S. Supreme Court rulings might well grant faith-based groups the right to set up spas and other accommodations that are in keeping with their beliefs.'

Where have the sexually abused girls and women who have had dodgy experiences gone?

Seemed concerned about them. But. They've dropped away!

'offended'

:In the meantime, customers of public-serving businesses should be prepared to share space with the public, in all our forms, varieties and customs. Antidiscrimination laws stand for the principle that all are welcome, whether we are comfortable or not.'

So mixed sex then?
The issue is 'offence' when a male ambles in to a single sex area? With little girls in?

One more check

Ha cop out.

By the times editorial board.

I'd put money on it being written by a bloke who won't put his money where his mouth is.

Coward.

So in order to visit a spa we can submit to patriarchy in the form allowing penis people watch us naked (women as public property) or we can submit to patriarchy in the form of religion and religious men will allow us a single sex space which they’ll respect and defend from all other penis people (because we’ll be the private property of particular men).

So much of this is about them attempting to shift what's acceptable bit by bit.
I don't know if anyone remembers the ruling in the US a couple of years ago where the judge said that girls have no right to visual bodily privacy? There have been a few court cases similar (referenced in the link below).
I think that previous posters are right. This isn't just about not wanting to see unexpected penis. It's about male people insisting they have the right to be present in places that women and girls are naked.

www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2019/04/09/do-students-have-a-right-not-to-be-seen-naked-by-someone-of-anatomically-speaking-the-other-sex/

It is ongoing pushback on all that the women’s liberation movement has achieved in the past century. The patriarchy wants us back in the place it has designated for us. Subjugation.

That is one reason why businesses, governments and laws are pushing these supposedly progressive policies through so quickly when social change in favour of minorities usually takes decades and is kept in balance with the needs of the majority. Another is money presumably.

Transgender spa customers have the same rights as everyone else
So (all the other) men have the right to be naked in front of women and to see naked women, in these situations, too?

So why not have a unisex area. When you’re butt-naked, no one knows your gender surely?

I thought this particular spa does have a mixed sex area?

It does arabella but it is clothed. No joy there for watching naked girls and women.

So much of this is about them attempting to shift what's acceptable bit by bit.

Yes, it is.

America really has gone properly nuts, hasn't it?

It always has been. But we used to point and laugh (emotional support ponies on planes! Haha!)

Good thread (albeit upsetting).

twitter.com/FemmeLoves/status/1412316271698448386?s=20

This is a thread about why telling girls to “avert your eyes” when they see people with penises in the changing room is so wrong. It is a thread about red flags, and seeing no evil and why most people fail child safeguarding at the very first hurdle.

The sexual abuse of children thrives in the dark. Most abused children have multiple people in their life who “half know” what’s going on. Most people I have told as adults said something like “I had my suspicions.” Many people in authority had the chance to intervene and did not

For example, my father lost his teaching job for inappropriate sexual behaviour with teenage girls. He had three daughters at home, the oldest of which was a teenager. No investigation of his home life was done, he was allowed to retire quietly.

All a child abuser asks is that you politely look the other way. See no evil. Don’t cause any waves. Weesht. Just mind your business, wash your hands of it like Pontius Pilate. After all, it’s only suspicion. He’s harmless. Sure he does loads for the community, avert your eyes.

An abused child cries out to be heard, is desperate to be heard, but the things she has to tell you are horrific. An abused child demands action of you, action which may result in the fracturing of your family and your community. Easier to avert your eyes. See no evil.

I can feel it in me now, still, that desperate need to be heard, seen, believed. The loneliness of not being believed. The absolute betrayal of the adults in my life who should have protected me, and instead, protected the men abusing me. They averted their eyes.

I didn’t need to “tell” what was happening to me. Everybody knew. Instead of taking action, I was labelled a bad kid, a “terrible teenager,” because sexual abuse caused hypersexuality, and led to me seeking out situations in which I could be reabused. I was shamed for their sin.

I just accepted it – ok, I’m the bad guy. I’m a slut, I’m responsible, as a young teenager, for adult men wanting to fuck me. I didn’t have the language or understanding to explain any of it, and even if I had, I would have been blamed instead of helped. I just needed to be seen.

But nobody saw me, they just saw this terrible teenager, this slut, this lost girl who put herself in harm's way, who climbed out of her window and fucked strangers and got falling down drunk and didn't care what happened to her. Nobody really looked beyond that. Avert your eyes.

Averting your eyes is loaded language for abuse victims in another way, though. There’s a defence mechanism called dissociation which involves essentially averting your eyes from your own experience. I went away in my head.

I can remember very little of what I actually did not just when I was being abused, but of all the sex I have ever had with men as an adult. I just went away in my head. I have fractured, broken images, but mostly I averted my eyes, Elvis has left the building.

Victims’ tendency to blame ourselves for what happened is another way to avert our eyes. We can’t look squarely at a person who was supposed to protect us, and accept that they abused us instead. So I went back and forth between the poles of a Hobson’s choice.

My father used to make it feel like the sun was coming out. He sat me on his knee and sat me on his workbench and threw me in the air. I loved him. If he was a bad man, then one of the only bright spots in my childhood wasn’t real, and I had lived without love.

Easier to avert my eyes from evil, literally, to see no evil. Easier to take the shame on myself. Easier to conclude that it was me who was bad, that I deserved it. But if you see no evil, you take that evil on yourself, and live without love either way.

This aversion of the gaze is why abuse victims’ accounts of what happened to them may sound deceptive, even to professional lie detectors. Dissociation, guilt and shame conspire to make truthful narratives sound like lies, full of holes.

It is also why victims so often feel so desperate to speak, to tell the truth about what happened to them, and so desperate to be heard, to be believed. I used to feel like I was in a crowded room, screaming, but everybody just looked the other way.

The first rule of child safeguarding is that if you see a red flag, you have a duty, as an adult, to take action on it. A penis in a women’s changing room is the red flag equivalent of the Kremlin on the anniversary of Lenin’s death.

If you are swinging your dick in the women's changing room, you are not dysphoric. I am married to somebody who lives with dysphoria. If you're dysphoric, you want to hide. This is not a case of a trans person just wanting to get changed. Make no mistake, this is a pervert.

It is already flashing, which is a sexual offence. The men and women saying, without a hint of irony, “avert your eyes” are directly enabling sexual abuse. They are giving a free pass to flashers. They are emboldening perverts. They are feckless, thoughtless cowards.

They are averting their eyes, they are seeing no evil. They are excusing predators and perverts with whatever excuse seems most fitting to them. And they are encouraging others to do the same. I hope they are proud of themselves.

It couldn’t be me. I swore, before I had children, that little people would be safer around me. That I would see red flags and act on them, that I would not avert my eyes, not from what happened to me, and not from adults around me.

I am here, looking the truth in the face, and the truth is that defending flashers, perverts and molesters by saying “it’s a woman’s penis,” and doing it in public, is the exact same energy as moving paedophile priests to different parishes.

It is the exact same energy as failing to investigate the home life of a teacher who has teenage daughters, and has lost his job for interfering with teenage girls at school. It is gaslighting, it is covering up for child abuse. It is a cowardly, polite kind of evil

I will leave you with this. I have done a lot of reading about molestation and grooming, trying to understand what happened to me, and learning how to spot red flags, how to protect children. Of all that reading, one phrase stuck with me.

It was from a prolific abuser of children. He said that even if he didn’t actually get to abuse a child that he was grooming, he would “get her ready for the next guy.” Telling a child just to “avert your eyes” is getting her ready for the next guy.

It is breaking down her boundaries. It is telling her to ignore her feelings and her gut. It is gaslighting her. Child molesters are pure evil and fairly rare, but the kind of craven coward who covers for child molesters and blames the victim are ten a penny.

If you say and do these things, you should know what you are. You are Pontious Pilate. You are seeing no evil. You are looking the other way and allowing the sexual abuse of children on your watch, for woke points. I despise you.