Syndicate
Special Thanks To...
The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
"Access Denied: Sex strike to hit the US"
Submitted by otomo on Wed, 2012-03-14 01:01
Article here. Excerpt:
'Liberal Ladies Who Lunch, a women’s right group that says they strive to turn “America blue, one plate at a time,” is waging a sex strike starting next month that they hope will combat infringements on their personal liberties being waged by conservatives. With women’s rights issues being debated in the mainstream lately by the likes of lawmakers looking to deny the right to choose and commentators deeming pro-choice women as sluts, the strike scheduled for next month seems more than just well timed.
According to the group’s latest call to action, this protest won’t rely on picket signs and chants to get a message across. Instead, Liberal Ladies Who Lunch are asking women to wage a sex strike to “united against the war on women.”
“Why are we taking a stand to protect women's rights in 2012? Because not that long ago a group of brave women took a stand, and in some cases a beating, to give us the right to vote,” explains the group via Facebook, stressing the importance of the American suffrage movement in securing women the right to vote. “Younger men and women may not remember the ‘good old days’ when the only reproductive choice we had was to deny men access to sex. In truth, if we lose our hard won rights to medical care, birth control and pregnancy choice, it won't only affect women. Men will have to go back to the days when they waited for or paid for sex,” explains the group.
To help make a chance, the group is asking like-minded women to align with them for a sex strike starting on April 28 and extending a week later until May 5.'
Their FB page: https://www.facebook.com/LiberalLadiesWhoLunch
And a FB group against this insanity: https://www.facebook.com/groups/291954670873658
- Log in to post comments
Comments
LMAO - Good luck with that!
But seriously, I am not sure, aside from the claims of some of the "ladies" in the "ladies group", that this has a lot to do with men's rights. Here's my thinking and I invite debate on it since, well, I hope we are here for that at least some of the time anyway!
Women have the right, as individuals and collectively, to decide who they will sleep with. Men have the exact same right. Women may make that decision for whatever reason, or reasons. Neither an individual woman or women need justify nor explain her/their reasons. Either she does or doesn't want to have sex with so-and-so. The motivation may be personal or political. It doesn't matter.
Men have the exact same right. Should a man choose to refrain from having sex with someone, he may do so, for whatever reason, and need not explain or justify why. If in either case someone is cajoled into having sex with someone else, it may be an injustice, but probably is nothing that can be identified as anything like that. Most of us for example have been sexually cajoled. In the process, we were not raped. Cajoling is the seeking to influence another person's actions or opinions by an appeal on multiple levels to their interests, but indirect more than direct, largely by flattery or promises. And then there's other kinds of influencing with any number of any other areas in between cajoling and forcing. When it comes to sexual contact, rape is a specific case of use of force or threatened use of force. It isn't "cajoling," it's a serious criminal offense, a crime of person. Cajoling is an entirely different matter.
In the case of these "ladies" they seek to cajole some men (who exactly I am not sure) into doing... what? Wearing lapel pins supporting birth control or abortion or voting rights? I don't know. But they would be cajoling such men, not forcing nor "mind raping" them. Admittedly they would be trying to do so not by flattery but by the refraining from doing something they believe the men want them to do. That would be a kind of cajoling.
That said, they have every right to refrain from having sex with whomever for whatever length of time they care to. And the men they seek to influence have every right to do likewise. And as these "ladies" have every right to sleep with whomever will sleep with them, the men they know have every right to do likewise.
So while they live in their week of celibacy (we assume), let them think on that. In order for a "sex strike" to work, you need to be able to wait an awful long time and have a large number of people (in this case, of "ladies") involved.
As I said in the subject line of this comment, "Good luck with that!"
Sex strike?? Now that is
Sex strike?? Now that is funny! Like Matt, I wish them the best of luck..
Feminists feel everyone is taking away "her" choice such as the choice to use birth control and choice to abort. Often referred to as "war on women".
Why no concern about the taking away an employer's freedom to choose health plans, and taking away a baby's choice to live.
Who's choices are really being limited?
BTW - I do not see this contraceptive legislation as a gender issue. I see it as a conservative vs liberal issue. Do you want the government telling business owners what to buy or not (I don't). As far as the expense or who is paying for the contraceptives, I do not see any big change as this ruling effects very very few businesses. If 'male's paying for females' is the angle of your concern (because most business owners are male) , then I would be just as angry about non-smokers paying for smoker's health care premiums, young paying for old, etc.
A Sex Strike - Really?
These "21st century visionaries" (end sarcasm) are reinforcing the '50's style notion that sex is a prize awarded by women to men as reward for good behavior. And throwing in a heaping helping of male-as-lecherous-sex-maniac stereotyping. Exactly who is going to be influenced by this strike? How quaint.
Waiting for sex and paying for sex
Maybe it's just me--possible--but women still get headaches and still expect men to pick up the tab.
LOL
I have to admit that this is one of the silliest ideas I've heard in a while. Especially considering that the women who are participating in the strike are likely to be the ones men want nothing to do with anyway.
That's like punishing the gardener by pulling all of the weeds out of the garden so he won't have to do it himself.
Evan AKA X-TRNL
Real Men Don't Take Abuse!
Exactly!!!
This is what men have been saying all along. If women don't want to get pregnant, refrain from having sex!! In addition to that, they won't contract STD's either. So the more they show they can abstain from having sex, the more they prove the point of the conservatives, which is to change your behavior, not policy that will fix the 'problems' of women's behavior at the expense of tax payers. No sex, no unwanted babies, no STD's, etc.. The only thing I see in what they are doing is coercing lawmakers at the expense of their husbands. Coercion in marriage is a form of domestic violence. Maybe it's time to implement VAMA.
Bow Wow!
Did you hear the one about the not very attractive feminists who staged a sex strike, because they wanted the federal gov't. to pay for their birth control - then escalated their hysteria by alleging a "War on Women."
The most privileged pampered humans in the history of the earth declared themselves oppressed and demanded more.
You can laugh now if you're not already rolling on the floor at the overt ludicrousness of it all. :-)
End Feminist Pork!
END FEMINIST PORK!!!
I wonder...
I wonder, what would happen if some organized group tried to take away men's reproductive choices? Oh, wait a minute, compared to women men have no reproductive choices. Were those feminists including men's reproductive choices in their sex strike? If not, gee, that's really hypocritical. :-/
Equal Choices For Dads!
too funny...
"So the more they show they can abstain from having sex, the more they prove the point of the conservatives, which is to change your behavior, not policy that will fix the 'problems' of women's behavior at the expense of tax payers. No sex, no unwanted babies, no STD's, etc.."
NOW, that is funny, feminists dupes unwittingly having an "abstinence only" strike in support of conservative beliefs. I hope the cameras are on when Pat Robertson gives them a plaque for their support of religious morality. :-)
Maybe we should praise them
Just maybe MRM's should make a statement of support for these women who are practicing gender equality in their right to choose. They are exercising the exact choice that we call reproductive rights as it applies to men.