Raping Immigrant Women is Now Considered “Sexy”

I have never thought that the Sexploitation industry would reach such a horrifying low but they continually keep surprising me. No woman is spared from the polluted, perverted hands of the sexploitation industry; if they want to continually use words like “empowered” to describe the women that are enslaved in this industry they better explain to all of us how exactly this series called Border Sex Patrol, in which “border patrol officers” (males, of course) would rape “undocumented” Central American and Mexican women who were caught crossing the American/Mexican border, is “empowering” for any woman.  It would be interesting to see them squirm as they try to argue that the porn industry is not racist/homophobic/misogynistic and a series like this is not representative of the entire industry.

Which would be a good argument except that this series was released by one of the biggest porn companies in the world, the corporation is owned by a company called Mindgeek. In the comment section of the article from PolicyMic there are people that are already defending this series in the following quotes:

Damn got me all excited about what sounded like some GREAT new porn and then going on to tell me the website is now inaccessible……what a waste of time…..lol sorry, yeah everyone knows rape is bad but there’s just something great about rape porn. #JustBeingHonest

Don’t like it? Don’t watch it. It is very simple. Do I find it particularly tasteful? No. But I find moralists even more distasteful. This kind of article is why the UK just banned things like bondage, face sitting, whipping, spanking, squirting, etc etc from porn. Fucking ridiculous. Let consensual people do whatever the hell they want on and off camera… it really is none of your business.

Immigrants are not raped because porn was created depicting them being raped. INSTEAD… this porn was created because it ALREADY happens in real life. Fix the real life issues, don’t try to censor porn that you don’t like.

Then don’t watch it. It will disappear. As long as no one is actually harmed and everybody is paid, yeah, you do have to be a prude to want something completely legal that you find personally reprehensible stopped.

I’m sure born again Christians feel the same way about gay porn and with no more moral justification then you have. Stick a sock in it, preacher man, I dumped your kind long ago.

If people seriously think that this type of disgusting garbage is defensible then it says more about how they view women then how much they claim to care about women. This porn series will only justify the act in the rapist’s mind and I think it is inexcusable to use ridiculous arguments in this situation. I honestly don’t care if the women in this series “chose” to do this, what I am more concerned about is what would result from something like this. I suggest that those who are defending this crap think about how the oppressors have used media to justify their hatred against women, LGBT, and people of color for as long as media has existed. I want them to know that media of this type and letting it go abetted HAS consequences.








I Am a Feminist and I Stand With “Jackie”

The magazine known as “Rolling Stone” has come under fire recently for a story that they published about the rape epidemic on college campuses specifically University of Virginia. According to Rolling Stone the reporter who wrote the story, Sabrina Rubin Erderly, who decided that it was best to respect the victim’s wishes and not ask the alleged rapists about their perspective on the allegations, did not do what a reporter was “supposed to do” and that was to ask the alleged rapists for “their side.” Every woman knows that men who have raped a woman will most certainly deny any allegations and spew anti-woman lies about the victim to boot. The concept of respecting the victim did not seem to be enough for those who want to remain “neutral” with rape allegations because they accused the victim of “lying” and then the witch-hunt for “Jackie” began in full force.

Not only did Rolling Stone throw “Jackie” under the bus to save their own asses but they also sent a reminder to all rape victims that if they do not have allegations that are “believable” that woman not only deserves the scorn but she is also a “whore.” Hanna Rosin from Slate reports that trolls and other anti-woman scum, like Charles C. Johnson, are already on the hunt for her and think they have found the “culprit.” She says

If Johnson has his way, the next few days are likely a significant setback for the cause of encouraging women to report sexual assaults. Johnson tweeted Jackie’s full name on Sunday and wrote that he would give Jackie until midnight “to tell the truth” or else he will “start revealing everything about her past.” (It is unclear if Johnson actually knows anything “about her past” or is making idle, but dangerous, threats.) Others are already a few steps ahead of him, posting pictures from Jackie’s Facebook feed—and even her mother’s Facebook feed—and adding nasty captions.

One thing needs to be made clear in the case of rape victims and the trauma that will often result from rape; just because the victim’s story may be contradictory or it may seem like a falsehood that does not mean she is lying. Trauma has a way of messing with the brain and especially the memory. As this report from US National Library of Medicine shows that people who suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder are diagnosed by the following symptoms or signs:

“PTSD is characterized by specific symptoms, including intrusive thoughts, hyperarousal, flashbacks, nightmares, and sleep disturbances, changes in memory and concentration, and startle responses. Symptoms of PTSD are hypothesized to represent the behavioral manifestation of stress-induced changes in brain structure and function. Stress results in acute and chronic changes in neurochemical systems and specific brain regions, which result in longterm changes in brain “circuits,” involved in the stress response.”

With all of this knowledge about disorders on the internet available for everyone with an internet connection to access, one would think that people would start to think that maybe the trauma of that rape has effected Jackie’s ability to recall the rape that has occurred. It seems easier to believe rape myths and to hate women for not conforming to the “perfect rape victim” mold then to accept that rape happens more and goes unreported. It is due to the relentless attack on women who are brave enough to come forward with rape allegations that they crawl back into the darkness they came out of, never to discuss their trauma or even call out the man who raped them ever again. No one would ever doubt the story of a person who was robbed with their windows smashed and their door busted in; so why is it even if a rape victim has all the evidence of the crime committed against her that no one will believe her or that she “asked for it”? Even if she sometimes retracts some details of the rape or even adds a detail that doesn’t mean that a rape did not happen to her. As mentioned before trauma can really affect your brain process and might even affect memories of that traumatic event. Why does no one take that into account when people are discussing rape? Why must anyone be “neutral” when rape happens on a daily business to women and is committed by men? The whole “false rape allegations” have been debunked numerous times in the past and so I will not waste my time in arguing against that point; there is plenty of information available concerning that ridiculous trope.

No woman should be forced to deal with the scrutiny that rape victims are forced to deal with if they ever decide to come forward with allegations of rape. We have seen too many stories of men, who are so obviously guilty, get away with rape and abuse; the victims are left to pick up the pieces that the rapist left behind and try to go on with life, knowing that the rape and abuse they have endured will remain burned into their minds. Even if the reporter did not ask the alleged rapists for comment they still had a responsibility to the victim to respect her wishes and that her humanity (and privacy) deserves to be respected.

The Pro-Sexploitation Lobby and Disabled People

An article (A good one) was recently published of which a disabled feminist discusses the Liberals and their use (would it be right to call it abuse?) of disabled people to defend the sexual exploitation of women in favor of disabled men’s libidos.  This is nothing new with Liberals and their pseudo-analysis of “individual freedom”, sacrificing the needs and concerns of a group of  people, normally the oppressed are the targets, for the minute satisfactions of another group, the oppressors. Unfortunately the commentators, I am betting my savings that they are men, do not seem to understand or even argue the author’s main point about her article. These commentors seem to find it perfectly acceptable to abuse women through paid rape as long as the disabled men are happy. I will closely look at the argument that seems to be most popular with these Neo-Liberals.

I know several sex workers, all of whom chose the profession because of the untaxed income and flexible hours.

Unless this John (Yes, I am saying it) can give the names of these women, I will doubt his assertion that women just “choose” to be in the “sex industry” just for the hell of it. I wish this John can prove that women  get paid more for “having sex” with these men and not live in desolate poverty for their entire lives. His argument in his comment doesn’t even address the disableism that is often used to prove the “usefulness” of  prostitution. You cannot say a statement and then argue that it is factual without any evidence to back it up, that you happen to be male does not make your argument true.

If the first thing you think about when you hear “disabled men are not entitled to sex” is “but those women made a choice!” I am sorry but that is “moving the goal-post.” You are arguing that is not even challenging the person making one argument, you are distracting from the main point. The author of the article argues that saying that disabled people (oops, I mean men) have a “right” to sex by using exploited women because we disabled people are just disgusting things that no person would want to love under normal circumstances as the author writes

The assumption that nobody would ever have sex with a disabled person through personal choice is not only inaccurate, it’s also offensive. An infantilised view of disabled people also contributes to the idea that sex with one of us is wrong or weird, adding to the stigma and prejudice that limit our lives.

The author also argues that the assumption that all disabled people (Men, did it again) need is a sexual partner to be fully human is also insulting to the disabled people and places their worth on how “attractive” they should be as romantic partners albeit through a very narrow scope. This assumption about our “attractiveness” also ignores those who are happily married and have children (though personally I am against the institution of marriage), those who have high paying jobs, or are not shut-ins in some institution where they are fed a diet of horrible hospital-style food and medication. It also makes assumptions that if disabled men are given the option to have “paid sex” with women then they wouldn’t feel so dehumanized or think themselves as less than the Able. If they legitimately believe that feeding into the stereotype of disabled people being sexually unattractive and that only the Able can “help” them will end oppression against disabled people then they would need to re-examine their priorities.

Disabled people do not owe it to non-disabled people to exist so that Liberals can use them as a political crutch. It seems odd that disabled people seem to only be brought up by Neo-Liberals if they are of any use to the Liberal’s selfish agenda; a Neo-Liberal can talk up a storm about ‘freedom of choice’ and ‘human rights’ of the able-bodied and able-minded people but not one sound for the disabled. No discussions about access to education, no programs to get disabled people out of poverty, no discussions about the sexual abuse of disabled women and girls, no discussions about the rampant discrimination that disabled people (whether the disability is physical or mental) often have to deal with to work in society. You will never hear that from any Liberal unless it can increase the credibility or make that Liberal seem charitable.

We are not charity cases and we are not objects to be pitied by those who have never had to live our lives. We are not just things to be used to make a case for the exploitation and abuse of women, especially women in the sexploitation industry. We are not some monolithic group who needs the patronizing and dehumanizing words from the Able to make us look human. The Able most certainly DO NOT have a right to take our terms, such as ableism, and use them against the people who are fighting alongside us. The women who are prostituted also do not owe to the disabled men to exist as a mere service, women in general do not owe it to ANY MAN to be sexually subservient to them. Women should not have to sexually “service” men in an “equal” society; quite frankly I find this to be an equal insult to the women who are prostituted, it is a sad state of affairs when women have to coddle a man’s ego (and his boner) merely because the disabled man and if he does not get what he thinks he is entitled to that he is being “discriminated against” or is “being denied his right.”

Women are denied their right to live a life free of violence and hatred every single day, through various factors and these institutions are created up to make sure women stay in that place. You have to ask only a few former “sex workers” to get the full picture and the pattern that this industry and its CEOs (pimps) follow to keep women subservient and dependent. To use the disabled man’s “right to sex” as an argument for her continued servitude only rubs salt on her psychological and physical wounds especially when the possibility that she was abused as a child are likely. Unless these “pro-sex” Liberals are willing to try to not be obtuse when it comes to their real intentions and how they actually view both trafficked women and disabled people then they shouldn’t speak as if they know about the issues that affect disabled people.

Just because the man is disabled that does not mean he should be allowed special privileges to sexually abuse a woman because no woman finds him attractive; the disabled (including myself) already have plenty of issues to deal with and the right to “have sex” with a trafficked woman, who is in dire circumstances and trying to survive in a patriarchal society, is not one of them. It is not the woman’s job to take the blame for everything that happens to disabled and to alleviate that brief moment of discomfort simply because women are raised to serve men’s every whim and desire.

White People: Missing the Point Since Forever

I guess this should be considered “Dear Defensive White People: Part 2″ since this will cover the same ground as “Dear Defensive White People.” Only this time I want to focus specifically on white people’s reactions to anything related to Indigenous peoples and the issues that are specific to Indigenous people. There are many arguments that inadvertently defend the white-male dominant culture from being rightfully criticized by the oppressed and with many recent incidents of racism in Canada currently in the news, I think some of these arguments should be addressed.

These people are just looking for something to complain about!

Well, they don’t have to LOOK for it, do they? It appears before them without any effort on their part; violence doesn’t even need to be committed against them. All racists need is validation that what they do to people of color and Indigenous people  will be excused and that there are people who will defend his “freedom of speech.” The main problem with this argument is that the arguer is assuming that Indigenous people are emotionally hypersensitive ninnys that need to “get over it.”

My question is, how do you get over something that continues to happen to you and your loved ones a daily basis? How does a group of people that have faced serious trauma for five hundred years or more “get over it” when that trauma is passed down to their children? The arguer (the one who has never experienced this trauma and does not know anyone who does or is) is also insinuating that Indigenous people have some sort of obsession with being the victim of racism all the time; that they enjoy the attention that they get for being victims. This is completely false, no victim of  abuse or trauma will purposefully seek attention just for the sake of getting attention. What Indigenous people are doing is bringing attention to the many facets of society that are connected to the generational trauma that they still experience, and white people dressing up in what is “commonly” associated with Indigenous people (feathers in head-bands, white people wearing war-bonnets) is one of the many things that are connected to that trauma. To demand that they simply “get over it” is erasing how deep the impact of colonialism is and how young people (both white and Indigenous) easily adopt these concepts of domination without an adult telling them that’s it’s wrong.

It’s no big deal! There are bigger things to worry about then what a bunch of cheer-leaders are wearing!

I hate to break it to you (not really) but it is a big deal. It’s a big deal because what those cheer-leaders (and other young people) are wearing is what white people think when they hear the word “Indian.” Never mind that Indians are actually from India and that this is an incorrect term. Those feathers, short “animal skin” skirts, and war bonnets? Those things are what white people think the average Indigenous person wears daily; those images are connected to the narrative of the “noble savage.”

You might have heard of that term, it’s the Indigenous version of the “Magical Negro” in which a person associated with a certain group is denigrated into a cardboard cut-out of what white people perceive to be an Indigenous person. He has no voice of his own, he is a white person’s puppet, a ventriloquist doll if you will. You only have to see films like The Lone Ranger and see some of the criticism of the film to realize that everything that we do has an impact on people. There are big things to worry about and this one of them, if a group of college women can’t even stop to think about how harmful these type of actions are to Indigenous people then not only have we failed as a country but our education is system is a BIG failure. Our education system doesn’t even begin to address the trauma of the genocide against Indigenous people and why it still continues. It still continues because white people as class cannot for the life of them stop for a few seconds and a gain of a bit of empathy for the people who deal with the blunt of our colonialist system.

We can’t have fun anymore without offending somebody!

No one has said that you cannot have any fun. No one said that you are not allowed to play silly games. There is a difference between having fun and being a total asshole to people who have been excluded from even being considered human for generations. Weren’t you ever taught to be nice to others and that includes taking their complaints into account?

Of course, white people are taught that they are the only group of people that matter, that those scary brown people are not human. Don’t trust them! They are thieves, they will hear from their parents and society. The mainstream media just adds shit to the already large pile of shit with their false images of Indigenous people and the history classes which sugar-coat the blood-soaked horror that various Indigenous tribes have suffered. Multiple nations have been wiped out because the British wanted the land that they had at any cost, pox-infected blankets and various tactics have resulted in the death of various Indigenous people. Do you think it would be “fun” to be constantly reminded of how the dominant group views you? Go ahead and have fun but remember that there are other people and not just your group.

You are judging me by my skin color! I am not responsible for what happened in the past! 

Oh, so now you know how it feels to be Indigenous in Canada, yes? You have lost members of your family through racist violence? Have authority figures and government disregarded you and your family and said that you don’t matter because of your skin color? Have you had other people say to you because of your skin color that you are not human? Has any of this happened to you? If your answer is no to all of them then I suggest you actually seek to understand what racism is.

Racism is more then just hurt feelings, it is direct and indirect violence. It is being paid less then your white co-workers. It is being trapped in poverty with no long-term solution being offered by the government. It is police officers beating you up and yelling slurs at you. It is being denied opportunities because of your skin color. It is your female relatives being raped and the court immediately dismissing your case because of various and offensive reasons. Racism is what white people do to make life harder for people of color and Indigenous people and then get upset when Indigenous people and people of color tell them to stop. You are not responsible for what happened in the past but you ARE responsible for the unearned privilege you have because of your skin color. You are responsible for addressing the wrongs that are currently happening to Indigenous people and your reaction to that injustice.  You are responsible for what you will do after addressing the wrongs. You are responsible for your own education in regards to issues that affect Indigenous people.


There are many thing that need to be done to address and ultimately eradicate the racism and colonialism that still continues in Canada in the year 2014. The arguments for the degradation of non-white people are the most accepted and “accurate” arguments in this society; that needs to be stopped. If people want to help with the liberation of Indigenous people, they need to stand behind them and to tell other white people to stop contributing to the oppression.

International Women’s Day: A Reflection

I woke up this morning and suddenly realized that it was International Women’s Day. I want to take a moment to thank all the women that have helped me on my path of becoming a Feminist and helping me realize that my words do matter no matter how much people try to drown out my voice. It has been a long journey to this point, heartache was one of the many things I have experienced when becoming an activist; the pain is not over yet. Several things have happened in the past week up here in Canada that need to be addressed.

Over the few years I have been an activist, I have realized that people who are in positions of power do not want to leave their comfort zone. Marginalized people had to fight tooth and nail to get what they want from those in power and we are still fighting tooth and nail. Indigenous women are still murdered, prostituted, and raped in high numbers and the government refuses to accept any responsibility for their apathy to the suffering of Indigenous women. Just yesterday, Peter Mckay threw down the report to the floor in a fit of childish male-rage; that report contained 16 recommendations that the government suggests would be beneficial for Indigenous peoples. Of course, like any typical Conservative government, the recommendations do not even strike at the heart of the issue of missing and murdered Indigenous women. Instead, there isn’t even a mention about an inquiry into the 800+ Indigenous women that have gone missing which is what the opposition has requested. Events such as these are reasons why women should no longer trust the government, all the government is, is just a bunch of rich white men who abuse their power and authority over the people they rule.

Harper has proven this point for the eight years he has been Prime Minister that he does not care for the people; he has silenced the voices of Feminists and various people who speak out against his crimes and his lack of regard for women’s lives. The Canadian Museum for Human Rights has recently rejected a article about International Women’s day because the article had a section in the article in which the ‘Communications’ at the Museum deemed “unacceptable.” What does this say about Canadians when not even a historian can speak about the government in a way that people won’t like? Can’t anyone criticize a man without being seen as a big meanie and needing to be silenced? This just proves that women need to push harder for a woman-centered society, that the government needs to be taken down and the state abolished. Women (especially women of color and Indigenous women) are still seen as second-class citizens; replaceable baby-makers for the male state to use and abuse, tossed to the side when they grow bored of them.

It is a sobering fact that women’s history is constantly erased on a daily basis, any contribution that a woman makes to society is immediately taken away from her and a man’s name is slapped on it. Women either die or kill themselves because not only is their genius not being recognized but their pain is made illegitimate; we have lost too many women to the death grip of Patriarchy and male violence. Many women that have contributed to the Arts and various pursuits will not be known for these contributions and instead their deaths will be romanticized and remembered as such. These women must be remembered and their legacy must be protected from being erased by the Father-Right; all women must be protected at all costs.

I do not want to see another article or news story about a woman dying in her home or raped by a large group of men; I do not want to see another act of injustice committed against women. This will be an impossibility because the death of women are an everyday occurrence, that doesn’t we give up because it seems impossible. I didn’t want to be the party-pooper on this very important day, though I have a hard time understanding why remembering women’s accomplishments should be relegated to one day, but we have to remind ourselves that there is still work that needs to be done; the liberation of women from male power still needs to be accomplished.

Paul Russell’s Gas-lighting Parade

I cannot believe that a day such as this would come; a day that should be forever remembered by everyone in or out of the internet. This is the day is which a white man whose head is SO FAR up his own rectum that he is having bowel issues. A white man that is SO ignorant and so morally reprehensible that, I dare say it, Naomi Lakritz’s piece on Indigenous people is TAME by comparison.

A writer, by the name of Paul Russell, thought it would be “good journalism” to write the most racist and inflammatory piece in The National Post called Could it be that residential schools weren’t so bad? Yes, you have read that title correctly. Russell is IMPLYING via a rhetorical question that residential schools-those state sanctioned “schools” whose faculty and staff physically and sexually abused Indigenous children- weren’t “that bad.” If I may make the comparison, it is almost like saying that the Holocaust wasn’t “that bad” because the Jewish learned what starving and working in poor conditions felt like or how rape isn’t “that bad” because the woman knows what it’s like the be sexually violated. What is EVEN worse then the title is the content of the piece itself; Russell quotes several letters the National Post has received since they published an article about residential schools and how 4,000 Indigenous children have died in those schools. White people got very upset about the article because it is not “partial journalism” according to them.

“Nice work, National Post, as you continue to dump on the charitable work accomplished by generations of selfless missionaries, physicians, nurses and teachers of the Canadian North,” wrote C. Lutz, of Haliburton, Ont. “[This story] heavily spins out a ‘physical and sexual abuse’ [narrative] as if 150,000 Indian and Inuit children had gained nothing good from taxpayer-provided white education. At least some of them learned enough English and French to, fluently, play the system and bite the hand that had fed them.”

“By today’s standards, 4,000 deaths out of a total of 150,000 students is shocking,” wrote Russel Williams of Georgeville, Que. “But given the period covered, 1870 to 1996, it may compare quite favourably with Canada at large, or Canadian aboriginal communities specifically, for the same period. One must bear in mind that much of this period predates immunization for smallpox, whooping cough, and diphtheria. It also predates penicillin for treatment of TB. Given the above, perhaps the statistic is not as alarming as it first might seem.”

Yes, those Indigenous children sure learned something, alright. They sure didn’t learn astronomy, chemistry, or English. They did learn that they are non-humans because they do not believe in the same “God” as the faculty and staff of these “schools.” They learned to abuse and harm others. Sure, they learned English and French but if they had a choice, which they did NOT have, they wouldn’t be speaking English or French under such terrible and dangerous conditions such as the conditions they were raised in when they were kidnapped by government officials and clergymen. To simply say that they did “great work” at educating these Indigenous children, leaving them confused and afraid of the outside world because their education was sub-par, is simply placing blame on the victims for their own abuse and poor livelihood which is no fault of their own. Russell Williams seems to be under the mistaken impression that 4, 000 deaths is “not a big deal” by that time period’s standards because of TB and other such diseases. Williams never seems to stop and consider the fact that Indigenous people never had to suffer these diseases until the settlers came along, bringing their diseases along with them on their ships. Why was it that these “good people” with all their technology and medicine that they could not treat and cure at least HALF of the children that died? Could Williams also explain the nutrition experiments that were carried out in those schools too, since he seems to know everything about what went down in those schools. Any death at a school should be considered alarming but to Williams, it’s peanuts.

“It was undoubtedly a terrible thing to be taken from your family, but in the early days, the reserves were impoverished and 90% of First Nations people were infected with tuberculosis,” added Michelle Stirling. “It is hard to say if the students got tuberculosis at the residential schools. And until the 1950s, tuberculosis was the leading cause of death of all Canadians.

“I am aware that some people will feel that I am defending the known cases of abuse and cruelty — I do not defend these,” Ms. Stirling continued. “My own father was the victim of the same [abuse] at the hands of his own white Anglo-Saxon teachers at his British boarding school. He used to have his left hand beaten black and blue and tied behind his back because he was left-handed.”

Did Ms. Stirling, in her activity of spewing nonsense from her rectum, stop to think that maybe the government was responsible for the impoverishment in those reservations?  As previously mentioned, Indigenous people were not suffering from TB before white settlers arrived on their land; she provide NO CITATION for her assertion that 90% of Indigenous people were suffering from TB. Did she forget that white settlers INFECTED them with smallpox or is that just some weird accident that happened and it’s all the Indigenous people’s fault for getting sick? The abuse her father suffered from was terrible BUT it does not compare to the pain and suffering that Indigenous children suffered from at the hands of the staff. Children who grew up to be adults trapped in their own version of Hell.

We also heard from a non-native who attended the St. Paul’s Indian Residential School in southern Alberta (the Blood/Kainai Reserve) for six years.

“When so many Canadians rely on publications like the National Post to stay informed on important issues, it is disappointing to see an article like that,” wrote Mark DeWolf of Halifax. “How does this figure compare to the number of First Nations children who died outside of the schools? Over 126 years and out of 150,000 students, the figure is perhaps not so surprising, given the deplorable health conditions on some reserves and high rates of communicable illness. More could and should have been done to ensure the health of these students, but let’s have responsible journalism, not emotional pandering to readers.”

“The last of the Truth and Reconciliation Canada (TRC) national events comes up at the end of March in Edmonton, and I hope to be there,” Mr. DeWolf added. “It will be interesting to see if the media just parrot what native leaders, TRC employees and other aboriginal activists repeatedly say, or if the occasion gives rise to some serious discussion of the schools, the harm they did and the more positive aspects as well.”

How interesting that Mr. DeWolf considers quoting the words of the victims of abuse and oppression to be “parroting”and yet considering the “positive” aspects of this abuse is not given a second thought. Notice that it is “non-natives” who are given a platform to talk about how great residential schools were and that they suffered absolutely no abuse from the staff at those residential schools? Every one of these people seems to think that dying outside of the school would be far worse then dying INSIDE the schools, it’s not like Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, which may I remind Mr. DeWolf stays with you until you die, which resulted from that abuse is a problem or anything! RIGHT?

On Wednesday, we ran a letter that began as follows: “There are many native Canadians who appreciate the benefits of the schools where they received an education that enabled them to cope with life outside the reserves. How about recounting some of their testimonials?”

A few more notes came in after that, each echoing that same point. Here is one example.

“How refreshing to see the letter from Michael Barnes,” wrote Jeannie L’Esperance. “When traveling by plane in the North, I have had people tell me how grateful they were for the training they received in a residential school, which helped them find employment.”

I wish these white people who make such claims can name these Indigenous people that benefited from these schools but then they would actually be caught in a lie. We all know how white people are ALWAYS truthful when it comes to people of color and Indigenous people “benefiting” from their system. None of the victims of those systems are real, they are just the imagination of those silly non-white people! They always want the world handed to them and stuff! The nerve of them asking for justice for the abuse they received!

I ask my readers to not read the comments in the original article for they are far worse then the letters that were quoted in this piece. Read the article at your own risk of high blood pressure and poor mood for the rest of the day, week, month or year. Ignorance and abuse apologism reign supreme in this country of Canada; a country that has been ravaged by colonialism and racism with its original inhabitants fighting to keep their cultures alive. I, as a white ally, can do many tasks for them; bringing awareness of these issues to my fellow white people being one of those tasks. I sincerely hope that the people that were quoted in this piece will finally understand what these victims have gone through but that hope is constantly dashed. I hope they can prove me wrong in that regard.

Personal Statement About Supreme Courts Recent Ruling on Prostitution Law

The Supreme Court of Canada recently ruled the current prostitution laws in Canada as “unconstitutional” and struck them down today. This does not mean that prostitution is officially legal, the government has a year to write up legislation for a new law. For now, the current law still stands but this does not stop the Liberal pro-exploitation crowd for having hopes for full legalization. I consider this recent ruling to not only being a step back but a major fallback for the rights of the most vulnerable women. The women that Liberals tend to (purposefully) erase when prostitution is being discussed.

I want to add that just because prostitution has been around for centuries, it does not mean that it is or should be morally or even legally acceptable. It is like arguing that just because rape has been around for centuries, that means it should be considered morally acceptable or war if we can take the argument farther. Of course, I have no hope for the Harper government to actually consider the fact that women are human and that they will actually consider writing a law that will ensure that women do not have to turn to prostitution to survive in patriarchy. The Harper government couldn’t care less about anyone but themselves and the only reason that the Harper government would even consider such laws is if their reputation is at stake.

When I heard of the ruling, I thought of the women that have been murdered and raped by their pimps and johns. I think of the forty women or so women that have been murdered by Robert Pickton. I think of the young girls who have been prostituted and abused from  a young age. I think of the Indigenous women who have dealt with the hardest blow in their lives when colonialism, racism, misogyny, and other forms of abuse are being drowned out by the Liberal anti-woman rhetoric. Terri-Jean Bedford did not think of these women when she argued for the right to run a bawdy house and neither did the courts.

There is no hope for any progress for women in a male-centered society and the Canadian Supreme Court just proved that such institutions cannot be trusted to make any sound judgement; they proved themselves to be on the side of rapists and abusers and people who profit from that abuse. I sincerely hope that anti-prostitution activists fight against the pro-exploitation lobby because the courts decided that women’s lives were not as important as the personal entitlement of men. This is not about “choice”, this is about the lives of women; this is about the woman’s right to a life without having to endure extreme abuse just to put food on the table.