This guy, writing at the Guardian, is under the impression that, not only is feminism about “equality,” but that he should be awarded “full membership” in the “feminist movement.” Why? Because of, apparently, his “remarkable imagination and sense of empathy.”
Meanwhile The Burning Times (apologies for getting the name wrong before, hangs head in shame!) has the Fourth Carnival Against Prostitution and Pornography up. There is also a new blog up called PimpCentre Plus protesting that UK job centres are carrying jobs in the sex industry and these are being offered to young women as young as 17 as potential employment. Some job adverts are even going so far as to recommend applicants apply for tax credits to bolster their earnings. The objection being that both the use of the job centre and the push for tax credits is asking the state to co-fund sex work.
Menstrual Poetry has the Feminism at It’s Finest carnival up too. Including a link to this post discussing how Wangari Maathai became the first African woman to receive the Nobel Peace Prize
Wheelchair Dancer has taken issue (quite rightly) with Stewart Dakers piece in the Guardian about disability and abled-privilege. Dakers, apparently a community development worker although how and why rather confuses me, wrote about his dislike of a disabled woman. But he claimed his dislike of her as a strength, a positive, because it meant, surely, he wasn’t dehumanising her. One of his main criticisms is that she had a child (she note, not the couple which is talking about of which she is one person) and he felt she couldn’t raise the child properly. Why? She has learning disabilities, epilepsy and mild left side palsy. Obviously the presence of disabilities means a person can’t love and care for their child. Anyway Wheelchair Dancer’s response is far more eloquent than mine.
Some things, some examples of human behaviour — and for my taste, this is one of them — are so beyond the pale that they do not merit a pat-on-the-back if you learn how to stop doing them. So, Dakers learns something important, so what? I would argue that not only is his prejudice so ugly it is disgusting, but also that the newspaper’s ablism is not far behind.
And just for the hilarity, Feminist Philosophers takes issue with a post claiming feminists are responsible for enviromental damage. No really it’s worth reading for that roll-on-the-floor-laughing at the stupidity reaction.