wocinsolidarity:

Saudi women demand end of male control

Activists say the laws restricting women in the kingdom are not based in religious teachings.

Saudi women activists have petitioned the country’s consultative council to back a demand to curb the “absolute authority” of male guardians over women in the kingdom, a signatory has said.

Activist Aziza Yousef told AFP news agency on Sunday that “rights activists have petitioned the Shura (consultative) Council on the occasion of the International Women’s Day [on March 8] demanding an end to the absolute authority of men over women”.

They demanded “measures to protect [women’s] rights,” in their petition to the Shura Council, she said.

Saudi Arabia imposes a strict interpretation of Islamic law, forbidding women to work or travel without the authorisation of their male guardians.

It is also the only country in the world that bans women from driving, and a woman cannot obtain an identification card without the consent of her guardian.

Laws in the kingdom enforcing such restrictions on women “are not based on religious” teachings, said Yousef.

The petition, signed by 10 female activists, also calls for allowing women to drive.

Three female members of the Shura Council presented a recommendation that women be given the right to drive in October, but the male-dominated 150-member assembly blocked the proposal.

Women in Saudi must obtain permission from a male guardian to perform “certain surgeries” and to “leave the university campus during study hours,” she added.

She cited a recent case in which a pregnant student had to give birth on campus after a women-only university in Riyadh denied access to paramedics.

And a university student died in February after paramedics were prevented from entering her campus because they were not accompanied by a male guardian, a must according to the strict segregation rules in the Muslim kingdom.

The Shura Council is appointed by the king and advises the monarch on policy, but cannot legislate.

" Laws in the kingdom enforcing such restrictions on women “are not based on religious teachings “

something that needs to be pointed out to people who insist Islam is an inherently sexist religion. There’s a difference between a culture and religion.

(Reblogged from faineemae)

:) 

(Source: belleresources)

(Reblogged from kerink)

You Cannot Rest Here

feelinranty:

meeplol:

Have you ever played a video game where you have to sleep to recover? They only let you do it if everything is safe. Otherwise they won’t let you sleep. You’ll get a message, saying “You cannot sleep now, there are monsters nearby.”

Now, remember the last time you just couldn’t get to sleep?

I do.

Don’t you fuckin do this to me

(Reblogged from kerink)
Played 58,179 times

bethjpalik:

ashortgiraffe:

Holocene | Bon Iver

And at once I knew I was not magnificent

Always

Wow

(Source: mxriam)

(Reblogged from bethjpalik)

happilysuffering:

tentacuddles:

happilysuffering:

I cant stop taking pictures of myself. Ff

MATOI RYUKO

image

KIRYUIN  SATSUKI

(Reblogged from thischick25)

vastderp:

vastderp:

This is a classroom lecture by a law school professor and former criminal defense attorney. His main point: Do not talk to the police. Exercise your right to remain silent, especially if you are innocent of the crime for which you are being interrogated. Even if you are certain that, having done nothing wrong, you can’t possibly implicate yourself just by answering a few of the officer’s questions. Yes, you can. 

A little over halfway through, the professor hands the mic over to a police officer, who confirms this, demonstrates how cops manipulate suspects, and in general provides lots of good reasons why you should not consent to speak to the police, under any circumstances.

Three magic phrases: “Am I free to go?” “Am I under arrest?” “I am invoking my right to remain silent.”

In June 2010, the Supreme Court ruled in Berghuis v. Thompkins that criminal suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent. Unless and until the suspect actually states that they are relying on that right, their subsequent voluntary statements can be used in court and police can continue to interact with (or question) them. The mere act of remaining silent is, on its own, insufficient to imply the suspect has invoked their rights. Furthermore, a voluntary reply even after lengthy silence can be construed as implying a waiver.

- Wikipedia

whoops shit i failed to proofread that post enough! It should be: “you should not consent to speak to the police, under any circumstances, if you are a potential suspect in a crime”. I def don’t want to discourage victims from filing reports!

(Reblogged from that-darned-sock)

taco-sasha:

tooloolo:

So I found this

OMFG WHY

(Reblogged from thischick25)

herroharrypotter:

i feel like this summarises modern art

(Reblogged from kandacevalentine)

caivail:

Water Deer, 2014

ink, digital

Cai Vail

(Reblogged from stitchwerks)

trying-to-resonate-concrete:

"I would have preferred this writer explore these ideas" is an opinion.

"This writer has trouble with certain aspects of story-telling" is a criticism.

"This writer sucks and is talentless" is a mean-spirited insult.

"This writer should die" is a vile, shitty thing for which there is no excuse for saying.

Please learn the difference and please don’t pretend you’re doing one of the two former when you’re doing one of the two latter.

(Reblogged from arstotzka-hero)