This is so true. I think I was 6 when I saw my first flasher. I’ve seen several since then. Why some men feel the need to show off their junk, I don’t know. No one wants to look at that thing.
I slugged a classmate who slapped my behind once. He never did that again. We actually became friends and he had much respect for me. I didn’t slap him, I punched him in the nose. Said a few expletives and walked off.
When I was 18 and legally able to drink, a bar manager asked me to give him a blow job to get after hours drinks. He’d called me over to a dark corner. I was drunk. So I went. But I called him out when he flashed me and made the offer. I said I was drunk, not stupid.
I embarrassed him by letting the entire bar know what the terms were to get an after hours drink. Goose Loonies. I warned all my friends and every woman I came across from that point forward.
At my grad party a classmate tried to force me because I was drunk.
I threatened to vomit on him and belted him with a closed fist from my sleeping bag.
My mother’s boyfriend grabbed my breast when I was sleeping. I happen to be one of the rare people who fights first, not freezes in fear. I elbowed him in the side of the head.
As a child I was propositioned to be a prostitute. That was an immediate firm no.
Those are just a few, not all.
Sexual abuse and harassment was expected for girls by age 10 in the 1970’s. If your mom didn’t give you pointers, you were left ignorant and a sitting duck.
What women and girls experience now is not nearly as significant abuse and harassment as what women in 1960’s and 1970’s experienced. It was expected, overt and constant.
You learned to cope with it or you stayed home a lot.
Girls were targeted young. Always reminded that they were the weaker sex and unsafe in a man’s world. There’s a reason you needed a brother, cousin or adult chaperone after dark.
And for perspective, the victim was always to blame. Skirt too short, out alone, smiled wrong way.
What many don’t realize is that in English common law women were at one time the property of the males in the family. You were a virgin or a wife or widow. There was no in between. If a man “defiled” a young woman, her father got out a shotgun and forced her to marry him.
Why? Because she was damaged goods and impossible to marry off for losing her most valuable feature. Naivety, innocence, no experience. Like a brood mare, but without being proven to have reproduced.
That’s what the far right wants to impose again.
Before women were declared persons in Canada and won suffrage, they were a dependent of the head male in the family. A wife or daughter, and occasionally a widowed mother.
None of us suffered that humiliation. It’s taken several generations for women to break into the labour market and receive equal treatment from some other men. But never all.
Millennials should acknowledge the women who fought for their better environment.
Gen X and Boomers paved the way for millennials because we didn’t want our children to grow up with the abuse we endured.
Just like the 1950’s women and girls and the war time women and girls set limits and paved paths for us.
That’s five generations since women were declared persons. Amidst several back lashes from sexist and misogynist patriarchy.
That’s how long social change takes. And we are only partially able to exercise equal rights 100 years later.
Those women and girls who believe society can eliminate sexism and misogyny in this generation are fooling themselves.
It takes generations to change social roles for any identifiable group. Re-education, continued social pressure and support from those who were the oppressor.
That is how change is made. Legislation changes the legal code. That’s the easy part. That happened 100 years ago. Changing attitudes hasn’t been completed yet. Very few men accept women as equals.
When men emote as easily as women, care for their children and elder relatives, perform housework and meal preparation as often as women, then maybe equality will be longer lasting, less resisted and widely supported.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There will be naysayers that mention the job is incomplete. But thousands of FN have safe fresh water because of the Liberal government. More have been completed than remain to be done.
That’s progress. Yes. It’s taken five years. But that’s how bad the problem was.
What most don’t realize is that Singh completely understands the division of responsibility. What he’s doing repeatedly is selling acceptance of nationalization of all authority.
Meaning, he’s promoting autocracy replace the constitution.
People keep stating Jagmeet Singh doesn’t understand section 90 and 91 of the constitution.
He does understand. What he’s doing is recommending the federal government override those sections and impose central authority to get policy implemented.
That’s a big difference.
We must stop mislabeling politicians rhetoric and call it out for what it actually is.
Singh is repeatedly recommending a central overall authority.
But that’s not how Canada is set up. Canada is a confederation of 13 separate authorities. Ten provinces and 3 territories.
If you read through every tweet, you’ll recognize many of the same tactics were used by Harper and CPC that Trump used to damage American democracy. His party was plagued with many of the same kind of scandals and corrupt politicians.
The similarities are uncanny and impossible to miss. A telltale sign that this strategy is planned, coordinated and organized.
If you look elsewhere across the globe, you’ll notice it’s the same story being repeated.
I’m watching the movement build in real time. Radio interviews, network video interviews. Widespread condemnation of Christian prosecution from pastors and Christian Networks. Definitely a martyr complex being built in.
Main theme is God’s commandments and laws supersede secular laws.
Applied outside of Public Health, this poses a significant law enforcement conundrum and legal nightmare.