Trigger warning for this, as it has some upsetting details…
3 Likes
More details… the Root article seems even shittier, since so far, the claims being made are unsubstantiated?
WTF?
7 Likes
With the huge caveat that this story may not be true at all:
I think she should have known better not because she is a Black woman but because she is a high level public employee. The rules and policies on who can receive a contract from a state agency can be very strict. She was romantically or sexually involved with an attorney she hired for billable hours that are in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. That’s an ethical breach for a public employee.
I’m not seeing any proof it is true. Other outlets are making sure to mention the defendant has no proof. The Root should have made that clear. The only “proof” right now is that Fani Willis was subpoenaed in the guy’s divorce and one of the people she is prosecuting has run with that to claim a romantic or sexual relationship between the two. The defendant has offered no proof and neither Fani Willis or the prosecutor she hired have admitted they are in a relationship. Fani Willis could have been subpoenaed for a lot of reasons that don’t involve a sexual/romantic relationship with one of the parties.
ETA: fizzy beverage of choice for @Mindysan33 regarding the lack of proof. Your choice whether it has booze or not
5 Likes
Sure, but that’s not the tone that the Root article really took… it was very much “a Black woman should know that they’re going to be coming for you, so you need to be squeaky clean”… Very much in the tone of respectability politics rather than pointing at systemic misogynoir that creates a sort of triple consciousness for Black women.
But they didn’t because it seems like they only wanted to shame a Black woman.
10 Likes
Have to agree. The Root really came down hard on someone they claim to like and it was all about her gender. A crappy take on the issue that does reek of misogyny. They could have gone with something like “there is no proof but she’s getting hammered in the press anyway. Because a Black woman always has to be better than any white counterpart” and discussed the racism and misogyny going on.
Edits: sorry, I’m tired 
4 Likes
We can only hope that Michael Harriot takes this on over at the Grio…
8 Likes
Could go in several threads. 
1 Like
after Facebook repeatedly banned ads for the game due to it featuring a “sensitive social issue”.
Women voting is a “sensitive social issue?” WTF?? Can’t afford to offend the folks going after Taylor Swift?
4 Likes
There are right-wing leaders claiming women having the right to vote was a mistake, so they want to take that away. I’m sure those are the same folks who would like to see the legal age changed to 21, and also take more voting rights away from POC.
3 Likes
NGL I had to follow up on that link just to be sure it was actually a satirical suggestion.
For now.
3 Likes
No one had the right to vote in the Bible- you fucking morons.
1 Like
FWIW the author is using a Swiftian reductio ad absurdum argument to point out how batshit and extreme the GOP’s position on abortion is rather than making a serious proposal to repeal the 19th Amendment.
3 Likes
That article was, but it is a serious proposition in some corners of MAGAt land.
Trump supporters tweet #repealthe19th after poll shows he would win if only men vote - CBS News
Kansas student proposed repeal of women’s right to vote | Kansas City Star
The same who would repeal the 26th
THE COLUMN: To Save America, Repeal the 26th Amendment | The Pipeline (the-pipeline.org)
Why It’s Time To Raise The Voting Age Back To 21 (thefederalist.com)
And birthright citizenship
Trump vows to end birthright citizenship for children of immigrants in US illegally | Reuters
Gaetz introduces legislation to end ‘unqualified’ birthright citizenship | The Hill
They will do this given half a chance. Because it is their only hope to retain power.
5 Likes
Our understanding of the extent of the violence, sexual and otherwise, committed on October 7 remains partial and incomplete. While there have been important questions raised about the evidence presented by Israeli advocates, and particularly by journalists from the New York Times, that is not a discussion we directly engage in here. Instead, we intervene in the logic that equates believing Israeli women and opposing sexual violence with justifying and supporting Israel’s disproportionate war in Gaza and increasing violence in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. This logic does nothing to reduce sexual violence or to provide justice and accountability to victims of that violence. Instead, it mobilizes sex exceptionalism and selective outrage to further colonial and racist political systems designed to dispossess and destroy the Palestinian people.
Authors:
Heidi Matthews is an Assistant Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School at York University in Toronto. She researches and teaches in the areas of international law, criminal law, and law and sexuality. She is currently leading an interdisciplinary research project studying colonial genocide. Tanya Serisier is a Reader in Feminist Theory at the School of Social Sciences, Birkbeck College, University of London. She writes and publishes on the cultural politics of sexuality and sexual violence. She is the author of Speaking Out: Feminism, Rape and Narrative Politics.
4 Likes
Nothing new; same old same old:
1 Like
3 Likes
1 Like
