Witches VS Patriarchy

1333 readers

1 users here now

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

381

Yep... (lemmy.nz)

submitted 8 months ago by LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone to c/witchesvspatriarchy@lemmy.ca

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 8 months ago

I'm pretty sure we're not supposed to be able to tell them 'no' without being arrested.

[–] grober_Unfug@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not that long ago we had “implied consent“, which meant a woman can’t be raped by her husband.

Let’s see how long it will take to get there.

They are already talking about getting rid of “no fault divorce”.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Stretch goal: let's see how long it takes before they start defending literal teenagers having implied consent, because they're all pédophiles

[–] Semester3383@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

We just haven't taken enough rights yet. We need to also take the right to refuse sex. Right?