,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
It’s 2019, and it is still accepted that men need access to an underclass of women to absorb their sexual aggression theguardian.com/australia-news…
We’re talking about a serial sex offender, one who “remains a serious danger to the community”, and the ‘solution’ is to grant him sexual access to women deemed less worthy? Why should a rapist's sexual urges trump women's basic rights?
Supreme court justice says engaging in “regular sexual contact” (i.e. paying for access to women’s bodies) “should serve as an additional protective factor”. Just not for those women who will be subjected to a serial rapist, but clearly their wellbeing was never a consideration.
Triggers for his offending are boredom, loneliness, and talking to women he does not know. How exactly do we anticipate this playing out for the women he does not know who are expected to sexually service him?
Why do we still accept this misogyny that men have to have sexual access to women on demand, and women must be made available to provide it?
