Welcome to my Domain!!! MUAHAHA!

jnemo2012:

daisydeadhead:

excessofcats:

swordofomens:

surfer-rosa3:

carlboygenius:

Hemp is a Sensible, Sustainable, Highly-Industrializable Plant

We should utilize it. Hemp could solve many problems.

END PROHIBITION. It is NOT just about smoking.

YEP.

And you forgot a big one: it is excellent at trapping carbon! Plants pull the carbon dioxide out of the air, turn the carbons into other compounds and release the oxygen, thus cooling the planet.

I’m more interested in ending the Mexican drug cartels’ reign of terror. My people don’t deserve to live in fear.

Its illegal to grow because of what you JUST SAID… think of all the businesses that will be threatened by legal cannabis.  And these businesses already have big lobbyists.  And its lobbyist money that determines votes in congress.  

I think BigPharma is terrified, as well as the Cotton/Polyester industry…  hemp cloth is so incredibly durable and simply doesn’t get holes (unless you determinedly CUT a hole in it).  Amazingly resilient fabric, just like hemp rope, once people start using it, cotton might well be a thing of the past.. or used only for a minority of clothes.  

There are billions at stake, and that is why they are fighting.  Capitalism ruins everything.  

It’s also kind of sad that the only reason marijuana is approaching legalization at all is because rich white men realized they could make a profit off of it.

But seriously when drug lords are thanking the US government for their continued “war on drugs” because we’re keeping them in business, maybe it’s time to rethink our strategy.

lisaquestions:

nevver:

Free Speech

Alt text from xkcd:

I can’t remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you’re saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it’s not literally illegal to express.

lisaquestions:

nevver:

Free Speech

Alt text from xkcd:

I can’t remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you’re saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it’s not literally illegal to express.

appropriately-inappropriate:

queen-nanny:

jaycemonde:

queen-nanny:

jaycemonde:

redressalert:

queen-nanny:

The first evidence of this new policy in action was published last year in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. Four female athletes, ages 18 to 21, all from developing countries, were investigated for high testosterone. Three were identified as having atypically high testosterone after undergoing universal doping tests. (They were not suspected of doping: Tests clearly distinguish between doping and naturally occurring testosterone.)

Sports officials (the report does not identify their governing-body affiliation) sent the young women to a medical center in France, where they were put through examinations that included blood tests, genital inspections, magnetic resonance imaging, X-rays and psychosexual history — many of the same invasive procedures Ms. Semenya endured. Since the athletes were all born as girls but also had internal testes that produce unusually high levels of testosterone for a woman, doctors proposed removing the women’s gonads and partially removing their clitorises. All four agreed to undergo both procedures; a year later, they were allowed to return to competition.

The doctors who performed the surgeries and wrote the report acknowledged that there was no medical reason for the procedures. Quite simply, these young female athletes were required to have drastic, unnecessary and irreversible medical interventions if they wished to continue in their sports.

Many conditions can lead to naturally high testosterone, including polycystic ovarian syndrome or an ovarian tumor during pregnancy, but women with intersex traits tend to have the highest T levels. And it is these intersex traits that sports authorities want “corrected.”

Sports authorities argue that screening for high T levels is needed to keep women’s athletics fair, reasoning that testosterone improves performance. Elite male athletes generally outperform women, and this difference has been attributed to men’s higher testosterone levels. Ergo, women with naturally high testosterone are thought to have an unfair advantage over other women.

But these assumptions do not match the science. A new study in Clinical Endocrinology fits with other emerging research on the relationship between natural testosterone and performance, especially in elite athletes, which shows that T levels can’t predict who will run faster, lift more weight or fight harder to win. The study, of a sample of 693 elite athletes, revealed a significant overlap in testosterone levels among men and women: 16.5 percent of the elite male athletes had testosterone in the so-called female range; nearly 14 percent of the women were above the “female” range.

This finding undermines the idea that sex-linked performance differences are mainly because of testosterone. The authors suggest that lean body mass, rather than hormone levels, may better explain the performance gap. They also conclude that their research makes the I.O.C.’s testosterone-guided eligibility policy for women “untenable.”

Some might argue that the procedures used to lower T levels are simply part of the price athletes must pay to compete at the elite level. But these choices aren’t temporary hardships like training far from home or following a rigorous diet. The required drug and surgical treatments are irreversible and medically unjustifiable. Clitoral surgery impairs sexual function and sensation; gonadectomy causes sterility; and hormone-suppressive drugs have side effects with potentially lifelong health risks.

Moreover, the policy places a disproportionate burden on poor women who may have limited career opportunities and are likely to face enormous pressure to submit to these interventions in order to continue their athletic careers. Under the current policies, more and more female athletes with naturally high T levels will be confronted with these harsh choices — and not just at the elite level. The I.O.C. requires that each country’s Olympic committee investigate cases of female athletes with high T levels before naming them to national teams. Some countries, like India, now apply such policies to all female athletes, not just those competing internationally.

Barring female athletes with high testosterone levels from competition is a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. Worse, it is pushing young women into a choice they shouldn’t have to make: either to accept medically unnecessary interventions with harmful side effects or to give up their future in sports.

Every once in awhile, you’ll read something and it is so horrifying, so undistilled in its blatant misogyny, in the hatred of the female body that it will take your breath away.  The price for stepping out of line (here, by competing; by being an athlete) is literally getting your clit snipped.  Note:  as has already been stated in the article, the ONLY thing that makes people better athletes is lean muscle mass.  But testosterone, being the holy grail of mail fantasticness, is all it takes, right?  Anything males have more of, that’s all we need to know.  

Everyone wants to “normalize” female outliers, one way or the other.

It’s disgusting that nobody seems to be bringing up the transphobic elements in these procedures.

If a doctor or sports committee or some shit tried to do anything like that to me or anybody I knew, they’d find themselves in a dumpster, I fucking swear.

@jaycemonde, seriously, what on god’s green earth does this article have to do with transsexuals?  Maybe no one brought it up BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONNECTION?!?!?

Two great big words. Future Implications. That shouldn’t even need to be explained, especially since if somebody WERE a trans woman they’d end up the subject of a nationwide gauntlet of ridicule and controversy in the news, regardless of whether they still had a dick or not. Especially, once again, because most people don’t consider you to be anything beyond the dangling meat stick between your legs or lack thereof, and anybody who breaks from that norm is made out to be a disgusting freak. These “inspections” are conducted in large because people are afraid of somebody “pretending” to be the opposite sex, which is transphobic and sexist.

Simple.

Fucking.

Logic.

Let me actually provide some simple logic because your post contained none.

First, there is no “transphobic element in these procedures.”  FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION never has, and never will have anything to do with transsexual women.  To the contrary, this action by the IOC is actually in a historically long line regarding the bodies of female women of color, the always already “masculine” of their bodies, and their being treated as freaks by the medical community.

Clearly, you didn’t read the article.  As per usual, we cannot speak about the horror of what happens to gender non-conforming females because, you know, they aren’t oppressed.  Plus, the mention of female specific experience of the world or her body means someone is being transphobic somewhere, call in the guard.  

So let me recap some very important points for you.

(oh and as an aside, seriously, you need to google caster semaya if you want to talk about ridicule)

(1)  THERE WAS NO NEED FOR THIS SURGERY

If a female athlete’s T level is deemed too high, a medical team selected by the sport’s governing bodies develops a “therapeutic proposal.” This involves either surgery or drugs to lower the hormone level. If doctors can lower the athlete’s testosterone to what the governing bodies consider an appropriate level, she may return to competition. If she refuses to cooperate with the investigation or the medical procedures, she is placed under a permanent ban from elite women’s sports…Three were identified as having atypically high testosterone after undergoing universal doping tests.  They were not suspected of doping: Tests clearly distinguish between doping and naturally occurring testosterone.)

Got that?  So three females who had high naturally occurring testosterone had to have surgery to get to a level that basically made the male officials comfortable because, likely, they didn’t look “feminine” enough.   And, apropos of nothing, they had to have their clitoris operated on and removed.  

Further, as the article points out, hormone levels have nothing to do with performance; only lean muscle mass.  So even if these women had high T levels, it is totally irrelevant to their ability perform.  A point underscored by the fact that…

(2)  MALE OLYMPIC ATHLETES WITH LOW T AND, LIKELY, HIGH LEVELS OF ESTROGEN ARE NOT AN ISSUE

and are still performing with male athletes.

(3)  THERE ARE CLEAR GUIDELINES FOR TRANSSEXUAL ATHLETES COMPETING IN THE OLYMPICS

and guess what?  it doesn’t involve forced genital mutilation.  Unless, of course, that is what we are calling SRS now, which wouldn’t surprise me.  

To just nutshell it for you:

gender non-conforming females are literally punished for their appearance and for the effects of T on their bodies.  They are banned from competing if they don’t acquiesce to invasive surgery (see abortion rights, US) and they will have a part of their unrelated anatomy (a part responsible for a large part of their sexual pleasure) removed. 

That is about a specific experience of oppression that females suffer.  This is about a specific experience of oppression forced on female bodies and biology, one that has a lineage.   This isn’t about “future implications” it is about the fact that FOUR FEMALES HAVE BEEN OFFICIALLY GENDER MUTILATED BY THE IOC.  Now.  This just happened.  And probably will continue to.

So maybe, just maybe, we could acknowledge that pain now.  What is happening in this moment.  And instead of dreaming about a possible potential maybe if i squint and looks sideways through a mirror about how this could possibly effect trans women, we could just think about how females are suffering now.  And why.  

What queen said.

The IOC’s actions are misogynistic, but that waste of carbon up these demonstrates that even in other marginalized communities, people simply won’t care if it’s a woman being hurt.

"Here’s something awful—-let me make it all about me never mind those silly women."

We see y’all pull that sneaky nonsense. No dice.

composed-of-wires:

havendancehero:

bigbardafree:

this video is entitled “tumblr feminists” and i prepared myself to get angry before watching it but damn if it isn’t spot on

"What they are really saying is that they hate women. They hate women with opinions who are honest and angry."

I thought this was gonna be cissexist and then it wasnt

fuckyeahfeminists:

Costco CEO Craig Jelinek supports raising the minimum wage.

Costco announced record profits today, averaging $10,000 in profit per employee compared to $7,400 at Walmart. The secret to Costco’s success is paying employees well, providing benefits, and giving them an opportunity to unionize.

So large corporations’ excuses that treating & paying workers well would damage profits are all a crock of shit.

fuckyeahfeminists:

Costco CEO Craig Jelinek supports raising the minimum wage.

Costco announced record profits today, averaging $10,000 in profit per employee compared to $7,400 at Walmart. 
The secret to Costco’s success is paying employees well, providing benefits, and giving them an opportunity to unionize.

So large corporations’ excuses that treating & paying workers well would damage profits are all a crock of shit.

whowasntthere:

aburningrose:

findchaos:

ChaosLife: Homo Hint

Wait, everyone else met Pete the Peacock, right?

This is perfectly perfect in every way.

The HaaaayWarts School for Queerness and Sexuality.