ABORT 67 TARGET PRO-CHOICE UNIVERSITIES

ABORT 67 ARE an anti-choice group infamous for their tactic of using large images of aborted foetuses to upset and anger passers by, or as they put it ‘show the truth about abortion’. The group take these graphic images out of context in an attempt to turn people against abortion, and shame women who have had procedures. On the 9th November, Abort 67 came to the University of Bristol, armed with large banners and posters. The university was not a random target; it was targeted as the students’ union has a clear pro-choice policy. The university, along with others around the country, including Sussex and Nottingham, have been targeted as part of an anti-choice university tour. At Bristol we were not warned of Abort 67’s planned visit but managed to throw a quick counter-protest together in order to obscure most of the posters. We created make-shift banners to block Abort 67’s graphic images, including one that had previously been used to advertise student elections. Ninety independent complaints from students were lodged with the police so it is clear that the group are not welcome. Many staff members and students came over to thank us for showing opposition to Abort 67’s disgusting tactics. Distressingly, I saw many young women visibly upset by the images, clutching each other as they walked or shielding their eyes with folders. For Abort 67 this pain is seen as necessary to further their cause, but I was shocked to hear that their ultimate aim was not to make abortion illegal but ‘unthinkable’. The group wants to do this through shaming, intimidation and brainwashing both women and men.

Members of Abort 67 continually attempted to engage us in conversation, which inevitably went round in circles. I told one member that the images were taken out of their medical context; a heart operation would look disgusting if you blew up the image on a massive poster, but that doesn’t mean the operation is wrong. She said that this was different as it was not a ‘life’, when I replied that the image she was showing was not actually a human life yet she said if that was so I shouldn’t be upset by it! A male member of the group told one of our female union officers that having sex was a ‘sin’ and would result in catching S.T.I.s.

The group returned to the University on the 23rd November and claim that they want to make their visits a regular event. We must stop this from happening by continuing to obstruct their demonstrations. Students must not fear being confronted by this divisive and misogynistic group, that claim having an abortion is the most selfish thing a woman can do. Abortions are a legal right in this country and women have the right to have control over their own bodies without fear of intimidation.

http://www.facebook.com/groups/bristolfeminists

QUOTE OF THE MONTH

SOMETIMES – NOT OFTEN, mind – we here at Mutineer H.Q. feel the need to tip our hats to someone in a position of authority. This month, we doff our caps to Jon Gnarr, the awesomely-named mayor of Reykjavik, Iceland, who has been spotted modelling a daring dress and pink balaclava, in solidarity with imprisoned Russian punks Pussy Riot. When asked to address a gay pride rally in Paris, like all good speeches, Gnarr’s was brief and to the point. Taking aim at gay-bashers, he said “Homophobia isn’t a phobia. Homophobics aren’t scared, they’re just assholes!” Couldn’t have put it better ourselves!

BLUE-BLOODED SEX PEST STRIKES IN SWINDON

FROM CORNISH TORIES caught with their fingers in the public purse, we now turn to Swindon, where Councillor Nick Martin has been slapped on the wrist for having his clammy fingers all over the public servants. Well known in the town for being one of the nastier characters amongst the local Tory clique (and believe us, there’s plenty to choose from), Martin is now in hot water over his wandering hands. At a recent social function, Martin – Deputy Mayor and Conservative councillor – was found guilty of inappropriate conduct for rubbing the hair and head of council officer Helen Miah. The married father was also found guilty of passing borderline-pervy comments about Ms. Miah’s haircut. Miah, who described herself as “freaked out” by the incident also told how the Martin ran his hands over her back, commenting “I’ve been dying to do that all night,” while his wife sat only a few metres away. It has since emerged that Ms. Miah had complained previously about the dirty deputy when she saw him touching female council employees inappropriately in 2008. Despite a clear pattern of alleged dirty behaviour, Martin has been let off gently: being forced to attend sensitivity training and write letters of apology. However, thanks to Helen Miah standing up for herself, Martin will at least be placed under heightened public pressure to behave, not to mention the fact that his long-held ambition of stepping into the mayor’s bejewelled boots will now be in tatters.

 

LETTERS BEGIN

Well, it’s our first issue, and we’ve already started receiving fanmail. Or is it hatemail? Either way, that’s progress. This month, Shaun from Bristol takes a strongly worded swipe at the rape apologists clamouring to dismiss serious sexual allegations against sinister-eyed Aussie empire-embarrasser Julian Assange:

DEAR F**KERS,

YOU may well be aware of the ongoing news story of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and allegations of a sexual assault in Sweden. It’s big news right now as the case has been somewhat complicated by concerns that if he faces questioning over the case in Sweden he may then be sent on to the U.S.A. regarding his website leaking a load of really important information that has pissed off America no end. On top of this, Assange has attempted to prove his innocence by trying to run away to Ecuador.

It seems every one who has (but probably shouldn’t be allowed) access to the internet has had their say on what should happen to Assange. This includes everyone’s least favourite Saddam Hussein-stroking, cat impressionist Big Brother evictee, M.P. George Galloway.

When referencing the situation, where allegedly Julian Assange had unprotected sex with a SLEEPING WOMAN, without her permission, saying this was not rape and instead referred to it as “bad sexual etiquette”, saying: “…even taken at its worst, if the allegations made by these two women were true, 100% true, and even if a camera in the room captured them, they don’t constitute rape.”

So I thought I would take this opportunity to speak to you all and say penetrating someone with your penis without express verbal permission IS rape. From the Sexual Offences Act, 2003: “A is guilty of rape when A intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of B (the complainant) with his penis; B does not consent to the penetration; and A does not reasonably believe that B consents.”

It doesn’t matter if you have had sex before, or you were both drunk or they are your wife, girlfriend, partner, fuckbuddy or whatever. It doesn’t matter if they got naked or they “seemed up for it” or “it would ruin the mood”, just fucking ask. “Would you like to have sex with me?” It’s easy, and trust me, there is nothing hotter than when you partner replies “Oh Yes Please!”, so just do it. If you don’t, it’s rape.

And if she or he (yes, it works both ways) say “No”, then it’s no! In fact if they say anything other than “Yes”, then it’s no. Silence means no, “Maybe” means no, “I’m not sure” means no, “You’ve/I’ve been drinking” means no. No persuasion, no complaining, no coercion, no sulking, no forcing. Getting them to say “Yes” through coercion is not consent, it’s rape. So next time you want to have sex, just ask, after all, it’s polite.

Shaun Phillips – Bristol