If you're tired of ridiculous laws, censorship, and book banning in Texas, sign up to join us in our efforts: txftrp.org/volunteer We need every Texan to stand against censorship in their own communities!

Fun fact: When SB13 created LSLACs, it required all committee meetings to be recorded & placed online. This means in the next week or so, we'll all get to listen to what we can only assume was a captivating discussion about why boy unicorns shouldn't have eyelashes. We'll keep you posted!

This is what "parents rights" looks like in TX: 1 mother decides what 8,292 students don't get access to read b/c she thinks boy unicorns shouldn't be pink or have eyelashes. *side note: the unicorn isn't pink, but he does have eyelashes. And to TX legislators: your bad laws are harming our kids.

Pretty Perfect Kitty Corn was challenged on 9/3/25 & removed from all district libraries as is required by law. The LSLAC met on 10/30 & voted to permanently remove the book from the district. This Monday 11/17, Carroll ISD school board will vote on whether to accept the committee’s recommendation.

The complaint is lengthy but worth reading. Our favorite line: "Throughout the story, the main character, a pink unicorn w/ eyelashes & other traditionally feminine features, is consistently referred to as a boy." The mom who filed the complaint asked for the book to be removed from the library.

The law SB 13 created Local School Library Advisory Councils (LSLAC) which gives a group of politically appointed parents (librarians not allowed) the power to hear & vote on all book challenges in a school district. On 9/3/25 a mom in Carroll ISD challenged Pretty Perfect Kitty Corn.

france notoriously didn't have an age of consent until *googles to double check*........ TWENTY TWENTY ONE?????? jesus, get your shit together france. oh and they set it at 15. so.

www.npr.org/2021/05/28/1...

in some cases, a child can be legally forcibly married with their parents' and then LEGALLY BARRED FROM GETTING A DIVORCE. so not only is sexual abuse *literally legal* with parental permission via marriage, but it can become ILLEGAL for a child to flee their abuser.

> either within the united states (where it sometimes is 16 instead of 18) or across the world (i.e., "it's 13 in japan!!!" although i don't think that's actually true? but is often cited by weebs) as a justification for why csa isn't actually inherently bad.

so yes the "non-marriage" age of consent is 18, but realistically if a marriage contract is involved sexual contact between a child as young as 12 can in fact be totally legal--because republicans keep striking down laws banning child marriage. abuse apologists even cite variation in consent laws>

> permission from a parent or judge, and... what's this, did someone make a thread about how conservatives view CSA as a matter of property rights and thus permissible with the approval of the child's "owner"?

bsky.app/profile/riot...

Yes, homelessness is even more deadly and dangerous for children because no one protects homeless children.

I remember learning that rapists’ first victims are often whomever they think society won’t protect — homeless or a prostitute — before they move to more risky targets who may be protected by

ngl i am pretty exhausted with repeating this again and again, every single time there's another republican outed as a sex pest, another youth pastor charged with csam, etc etc etc. i really strongly wanted to just not bother this time because i'm a broken record and i'm tired. but it HAS to click.

sexual violence is THE patriarchal technology of oppression. wherever there is any kind of oppression--colonialism, genocide, capitalism, the state, the police--there is sexual violence as its frontline operative mechanism. the child is THE archetypal object of legitimate disciplinary violence.

we have GOT to stop thinking about this in terms of hypocrisy because that's not what's going on! we NEED to understand why pedo apologia is so rampant in anti-trans pseudoscience, why abuse is so rampant in the home, why child marriage is still legal across the country etc.

when RWers say "grooming" they mean "threatening my patriarchal sexual authority, corrupting my property, damaging my goods." they don't actually mean anything to do with sexual abuse, which they see as perfectly permissible under the right circumstances.

> not considered to be inside any "fence" of anyone's private patriarchal property. in other words, free game, there is no violation, there is no infringement on anyone's property to claim what no one else properly owns.

> are frequently kicked out of the house and MADE homeless by their parents is a way of punishing "tainted, corrupted" property by throwing it away, it's lost its value and is now publicly accessible for abuse. epstein recruited homeless girls, gaetz abused a homeless girl etc--these are children >

> long as it is either with the blessing of the father/husband/master (ed child marriage, which republicans have long fought to protect) or done to a child who is sorted into the category of "public" instead of "private" property--homeless, racialized, etc children. the fact that queer & trans kids>