A map that tracks more than 3,000 Scots women who were accused of being witches in the 16th and 17th Century has been published for the first time.
“The tragedy is that Scotland had five times the number of executions of women. The idea of being able to plot these on a map really brings it home. These places are near everyone.
“There does seem to be a growing movement that we need to be remembering these women, remembering what happened and understanding what happened.”
For insisting on public debate about the real-life risks of a big official tick for self-declared gender change, Murphy has copped a Twitter ban (for “hateful” pronoun crime) and last month Massey University in New Zealand became the latest institution of higher learning to cancel her speaking event, citing “health, safety and wellbeing obligations”; she shifted venues.
Sydney University political scientist Bronwyn Winter, a well-known gender-critical feminist, says she has had to organise local talks and discussions “in a clandestine way” with a video released afterwards.
“I feel like I’m part of the feminist resistance, forced underground — it’s that, or deal with confrontation and the risk of physical harm.”
The Australian asked Human Rights Commission president Rosalind Croucher, Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins, and Anna Brown of the LGBTIQ+ group Equality Australia if gender-critical feminists were entitled to put their views without abuse, threats and claims they were “hateful transphobes”.
The commission issued a short statement, saying it supported “freedom of speech for everyone in Australia, provided that speech does not vilify or incite hatred of a person or group of people”.
The commission did not reply when asked if it agreed with trans activists that it was hate speech to define a woman by her sex, and to warn of self-identified trans status — officially endorsed without robust public debate — as a potential threat to the rights and protections of women.
Ms Brown did not reply to The Australian’s request for comment.
In August, Equality Australia circulated an activist petition calling on Melbourne University to cancel a “transphobic and queerphobic” speaking event on campus — “The future of sex-based rights”, with speakers including lesbian feminist philosopher Holly Lawford-Smith. The petition claimed this talk would put trans students and staff “at risk” and was likely to “attack” their identities. The event went ahead.
A national coalition of women’s and lesbian groups wrote to Ms Brown earlier this month calling on her to speak up “in support of civil and full debate on these critical issues (arising from self-identified trans claims) concerning equality for lesbians and all women”.
The letter says women defending “sex-based rights” are being “routinely no-platformed, vilified, sexually harassed, threatened or bullied into silence.
This week, a bill was passed in the Australia’s Northern Territories which decriminalises every aspect of the sex trade. The bill also gives pimps and punters the right to take women to court for damages if they don’t “complete service” or if they withdraw consent.
Its supporters argued that decriminalisation would help legitimise currently illegal businesses, but why would anyone wish to legitimise businesses that abuse women? In fact, under these laws, illegal prostitution expands, because the eyes of the police are no longer on the industry.
Sex trade apologists claim that legalisation prevents prostitution from going underground; prevents the involvement of underage girls; and reduces trafficking. By referring to prostitution as “sex work”, the punters as “clients”, and the pimps as “managers”, this vile and exploitative trade instantly become sanitised.
There is even a euphemism for trafficking: “migration for sex work”. During the slave trade, a profiteer in the West Indies suggested: “Instead of slaves, let them be called assistant planters and we shall not then hear such violent outcries against the slave trade by pious divines, tender-hearted poetesses and short-sighted politicians.”
I spent time in legal brothels in Australia when researching my book on the sex trade, and found that, contrary to the propaganda, the women are not safe, and only the pimps and punters benefit.
Sex trade survivors are dead against legalisation. “Under legalisation, there is more violence, because the men feel protected and entitled, [and] more trafficking and underage girls, because legalisation creates a warm welcome for pimps,” says Sabrinna Valisce who was prostituted in legal and illegal brothels in both Australia and New Zealand.
Sex is not a human right. The only rights we should be concerned with when it comes to prostitution is the right of women and girls not to be bought and sold.
By The Carter Center’s Human Rights Program In his book “A Call to Action: Women, Religion, Violence and Power,” Jimmy Carter identifies 23 actions to advance the rights of women …
No country allows the sale of human beings, so why is surrogacy still legal? Even if it’s ‘altruistic’, there’s a price to pay.
This week, Sweden took a firm stand against surrogacy. The governmental inquiry on surrogacy published its conclusions, which the parliament is expected to approve later this year. These include banning all surrogacy, commercial as well as altruistic, and taking steps to prevent citizens from going to clinics abroad.
Surrogacy may have been surrounded by an aura of Elton John-ish happiness, cute newborns and notions of the modern family, but behind that is an industry that buys and sells human life. Where babies are tailor-made to fit the desires of the world’s rich. Where a mother is nothing, deprived even of the right to be called “mum”, and the customer is everything. The west has started outsourcing reproduction to poorer nations, just as we outsourced industrial production previously.
In reality, “altruistic” surrogacy means that a woman goes through exactly the same thing as in commercial surrogacy, but gets nothing in return. It demands of the woman to carry a child for nine months and then give it away. She has to change her behaviour and risk infertility, a number of pregnancy-related problems, and even death. She is still used as a vessel, even if told she is an angel. The only thing she gets is the halo of altruism, which is a very low price for the effort and can only be attractive in a society where women are valued for how much they sacrifice, not what they achieve.
According to a report from The Sydney Morning Herald, sources close to the commercial dealings of the station have said that on an annual basis, the boycott could cost the show about $6 million in advertising. The top-rating show typically brings in $12 million a year.
Jones has faced major commercial backlash since he used violent language towards Jacinda Ardern in August. On his popular breakfast program, Jones said that the New Zealand Prime Minister should have a sock shoved down her throat and that she needed a “backhander”.
As the Medusa myth is retold in a patriarchal and male-dominated society, the fact that she was a victim of rape is overshadowed by her terrifying appearance and ability to turn men into stone. This retelling sweeps the original violence against Medusa under the rug to center the violence she commits against men.
Medusa’s name derives from an ancient Greek verb that means “to protect and guard,” which may be a nod to Athena’s attempt to guard and protect Medusa from further abuse at the hands of Poseidon and other men. Athena’s curse was not a punishment for Medusa, but a punishment for the gods and men who intended to harm her. After all, Athena gave Medusa the ultimate power against men: the power to both punish and avoid the male gaze regardless of the rank or status of the man daring to look at her.
Like the other women in these myths, the Sirens have been demonized over time. The Sirens are often described as temptresses who used their song to lure sailors to their drowning deaths, but they were actually a group of girls who lost their companion, Persephone, after she was abducted and raped by Hades. . . . Retold in patriarchy, the story of the Sirens changes to fit its values—instead of illustrating loss and grief in female friendships, the story becomes a cautionary tale of the dangerous, tempting trickery of female seduction.
