amino

sounds like you developed depression from medical malpractice and I'm really sorry your doctor was a raging misogynist.

I'm not denying that hormone blend could have made it worse, it just sounds like you'd have developed depression regardless because your chronic pain probably got worse because it went unaddressed and on top of that you also got blamed for it because of your uterus.

I believe being on birth control without informed consent is fucked up, which is maybe what the person above meant by "drugged". what I thought they meant is comparing it to being on psychoactive substances which sounded silly to me.

childism and women being treated like children is a huge issue in medicine, and I'm sorry you didn't get to assert your bodily autonomy.

i hate to burst your bubble but the only people who wanna force women to be sex dolls are the anti-birth control and anti-abortion christofascists. also idk why you're bringing women into it because the original post used gender-neutral language. you don't need to be a woman to need birth control.

there's no lobbying group that I'm aware of promoting an anti-sex ed agenda like you're implying such as "rawdogging is totally fine if you're on birth control, actually". that sounds like something an anti-feminist, an incel or a Christian theocrat would say.

blaming misogynistic violence on birth control makes as much sense as blaming harmful sex attitudes on Big Condom because "this new technology allows you to fuck without worrying about pregnancy".

Handing out endocrine disrupting medication to teenagers is a pretty crazy idea

JK Rowling would be proud.

the ole' "we don't have enough data to let children have autonomy over their bodies"

drugged on hormones lmao? birth control doesn't have psychoactive effects, chill.

on condoms: stealthing is a thing, condoms break, and no single birth control method is 100%. not everyone can afford the risk of pregnancy by relying on a single layer of defense

kids these days, back in my day we just did our disordered eating by pen and paper /j

yeah, you're arguing in bad faith. why would a rapist need a ski mask when most rapes happen in the workplace, in the family or by intimate partners?

no laws doesn't mean no community values. victims either kill their rapist in self-defense or we all gather together to beat the rapist with a stick.

if they hold any position of power, they'd be banned from office forever and stripped of any social capital. if they try to contact their victims again, they're exiled.

but most importantly, we should ask the victim what they want, short of the death penalty or torture.

Those power hungry people who WOULD have become cops just to bully people, are just going to do it without a badge, and we'd find ourselves in a modern wild west. Whoever has the gun, will make the rules. Even the facade of regulation we have now would be gone.

I'm not trying to be rude but this is exactly what's happening rn in the US with ICE agents and their mercenaries.

they're not able to commit the deportations because of a lack of law enforcement, but because laws are inherently racist. this shit started before Trump took power during a "progressive" presidency like Obama's. most people would probably agree he was following the rules of democracy yet he deported the most people.

sorrry, I deleted that lived experience comment because I meant to @ Ryhnoplaz not you.

so we both agree that lynchings are bad. i fail to see how police still existing helps in any way?

the same mechanisms that deputize white people to kill Black people are what leads to justifications of the police existing. the way to solve that is through abolishing hierarchies not by creating more. Black people should have an unconditional right to self-defense against racists and the police still existing is a way to prevent that. their argument is that taking justice in your own hands is harmful because white people/cops always know better than the victim.

also why do we need law enforcement in the first place? the law is inherently arbitrary and is used to criminalize people stealing food to survive and many such things. i think there needs to be a distinction between crime and harm. some crimes are harmless like distributing food and water while some harmful actions like wage theft are not de facto crimes.

lastly, I'd be curious to find out which criminalities you believe aren't caused by socioeconomic factors? i don't see how you could argue for that besides appealing to the human nature fallacy.

even if you believe that humans are inherently violent and untrustworthy (white supremacist propaganda), that would be an argument against more hierarchy and deputizing state violence not for police existing.

frankly it sounds like you don't have lived experience with what it is that police actually do.

police is the definition of mob justice. the police is the armed wing of the state, and solely exists to keep exploitation viable.

ironically, there would be no need for "deescalation" if the state didn't exist because each community could just live peacefully based on mutual aid. once mutual aid gets too popular in a capitalist society, that's when the cops show up to prevent the usurpation of state dominion over all living beings.