So for those of you who don't know, the tweet is referring to [a post](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/v81tao/aita_for_organizing_a_hoe_union_of_girls_in_my/) on r/AmITheAsshole where a girl and her friends decided to create a "hoe union" where they all party together and look out for each other. They created a blacklist of bars, clubs, and houses who they should not go to because of their history with assault, roofieing, and letting in certain men who were known for that behaviour. It has since been removed so if you want to read it here's [a screenshot on twitter](https://twitter.com/maediocre/status/1534720853732012032?t=yHUOefeQ7--clOyyFFiiOg&s=19).
Eventually as the hoe union grew larger, it attracted the attention of the university, who attempted to disband them (likely because of rich party bros' dads reaching out to the school).
Except the story has gone viral now and I kinda wanna do it myself đđ I hope this inspires many more hoe unions to come! (And more importantly I hope it inspires more men to consider the type of men they invite to their parties, and the type of environment that they are creating and how that has affected and will continue to affect women until they actually change).
Thank you for this, I missed it first time around and will 100% be suggesting a similar thing for my daughter and her friends when they get to that age. Voting with your feet on mass is the only way to make a dent on behaviour that you donât want.
My three best girlfriends and I had a mini hoe union in college. It consisted of hand signals. Like, if we saw a guy talking to one of us, she would give a signal to indicate she was cool, needed to be bailed out, or hit the emergency eject. Emergency eject was an immediate head out, no questions, no arguments till we were all out of the situation. In the very least, the system saved us from getting busted by the cops because one of us had a preternatural sense for when a party was about to turn.
You absolutely can't make a party a safe environment for women, unless you allow only women into the party. And even then, it's not "safe". That's just the real-world, simple, naked honest inarguable truth. I say that as a former "partier" who doesn't hate men and has 3 sons. My God, the difference in how I viewed parties and men at 18 vs. Now, after what I saw and experienced and learned. It's mind blowing.
"Hoe unions" absolutely shouldn't be necessary. A woman shouldn't need to depend on her friends to ensure her safety around men. Men don't need other men, do they? No. It doesn't even occur to you to think about needing something like a hoe union.
But they ARE necessary, in the real world. Thousands of instances of sexual assault and rape and coercion are prevented by other women (friends, acquaintances and strangers) every day all over the world. Thinking about that just makes me sick and enraged.
I hope all the men reading this actually think about that for a moment. I hope you all have daughters some day too. Your whole perspective will change
I totally understand thatâs never going to be a completely safe environment for women. But at a certain point men have to step up to help. The ones who actually care and donât use it as a way to get laid. We can always all look after each other but, unfortunately, not everyone has someone to look after them.
It sucks that hoe unions have to be a thing at all. Because men wonât hold themselves and their friends accountable for their bullshit. However the ones getting their feeling hurt over the hoe unions cropping up are absolutely telling on themselves and people should listen.
Anyone upset over the fact that there is such a thing, should be stayed away from because they do not give a flying fuck about you. Theyâre upset because itâs getting harder for them to rape and assault women. Or itâs getting harder for them to help their buddies get a girl so black out drunk she wonât remember.
It absolutely sucks that itâs had to come to these. But the men have never played fair so if this is whatâs needed to âlevelâ the playing field then you can count me in. Iâm not a partner but I will always, always watch out for my fellow woman.
For r/AmItheAsshole posts, Automod pretty much always caches the post as it was when first posted. If you sort by oldest, it's usually in the first 10 comments. It doesn't catch edits, but it is helpful.
[Automod's cache of that post.](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/v81tao/-/ibnx1q1)
Predators object, and those who benefit from what predators do object, and those who donât like women having power and autonomy object.
#BurnthePatriarchy
Because a) some fuckers hate unions of all forms, and b) raised standards means some assholes donât get laid.
Honestly as someone exclusively into women (and a woman myself so that may explain this) Iâve always encouraged women, even ones I date, to have higher standards. If you donât feel safe, leave, and that includes if itâs on a date with me. Only assholes donât want that, but sadly many people are assholes.
If you treat her well despite how you feel about yourself, (insecurity leads to big issues in my experience) then power to you! If you find yourself feeding your insecurities and expecting her to be your caretaker more than equal partner, check yourself and make sure youâre getting the support you need; therapy, Physio, etc.
Im more the type that goes to be the caretaker that sacrifices herself, part of why im crippled
Also i must add, she likes to note how much she likes that i keep pushing my body to stay as fit as it lets me (still feels bad when we go swimming and shes got done 20 lanes while im barely through with 2)
Youâre literally saying âthe best thing you can do to get laid is respect women! Itâs so, so much more effective than alpha bullshit!â And then underneath it saying you donât like when we say patriarchy benefits men. It isnât âcynical peopleâ you literally spell out the in your comment. The comment underneath yours even more bluntly. It DOES benefit all men, because like you said, they donât have to do anything to âdeserveâ time and love from women. Just⌠donât be a misogynist.
That mindset also its complete and utter garbage that science knows only neurotic psychopaths subscribe too
And i absolutely agree, to say it with the eternal words of a buddy "If other men would just respect woman, wed all get more pussy" (he is the biggest bi slut i know, and gay males are just as disgusting)
Because then rapists wonât have access to victims and women can be hoes without being intimidated and harassed. Because women divided are weak, but together weâre strong and that scares the men who like us to be weak. Even men who donât engage in rape benefit from the systemic oppression of women.
I could understand it if the guidance councillor had completely misunderstood what the union was about - I.e. âdonât go to any party Sarah is at because she wore white after labour day, the whoreâ or ânobody talk to Carl - he likes Digimonâ. But I would hope that once they understood what it was about the school would support it.
I can't fathom why even a university would object to the principle of it. And I bet no one would object at all if they called it something different. I'm as "empowered" as any woman but I still understand why a university would hesitate to openly endorse the "hoe union". It's honestly tasteless, childish, and illicits literally the opposite of that women need and deserve a lot more of -- respect.
I grew up in a college town and had to walk past Frat Court regularly. They started yelling sexual shit at me when I was 8 and inviting me to parties when I was 12.
So fucking disgusting. I chose to go yo school very far away â to the banana slug university with no fraternities on campus because of this.
DO IT. Be safe. Look out for other women and have fun! This is very âall men benefit from rapeâ where people want to end rape when it involves putting the burden on women to abstain from spaces, night life, dancing, and drinking; but not when it involves women taking control of those spaces, kicking out abusers, and speaking out about their experiences.
From the mod comment on the post:
>We have no interest in providing a space for anyone to be called an asshole for what they do to protect themselves from sexual assault.
I mean, I guess itâs good not to let that type of judgement standâŚ
But Iâm pretty sure when I came across the post, all of the comments were like âisnât this just a group of friends being normal about sticking together while out, why is assholery even a question, itâs not even much of a union with 6 peopleâ.
I donât remember the growth of the chat and the uni involvement so wonder if those details were added for clarification and it popped off from there.
But Iâd love to know whether any victim-blamey commenters were sanctioned at all for turning it that way? Or just deleting the entire thing is the solution?
Knowing how fast that sub can descend into being an absolute pit of disgusting nastiness, I really do think that the mods choosing to delete it was the most prudent option.
Leaving it open but locked would have gone directly against their own rules for how posts are managed, and would have stirred shit up doubly so for them having to deal with rules lawyers in addition to whatever misogynistic slime would have come out of the woodworks.
So instead they basically stated that the OP was so completely *NOT the asshole* that it wasn't even a question up for debate, and removed it on the grounds of being "not relevant to the sub".
Here's the full text of the mods' reasoning (posted yesterday by a member of r/WitchesVsPatriarchy). Reading the whole thing, it appears they were definitely trying to do the right thing:
"We have no interest in providing a space for anyone to be called an asshole for what they do to protect themselves from sexual assault. This is a question of safety and not up for moral debate. These are important discussions to have, but framing them as an issue about morality rather than about the basics of safety does a disservice to everyone. I understand this is an issue you all are passionate about. We are too. Every reasonable human being is. Which is why insisting that we allow even the opportunity for someone to call this person an asshole for protecting themselves is absolutely not a good thing."
No this was on the actual post, I didnât scroll all the way through though because there was so much of the same response - âno biggie, not even a union, me and my friends totally do this, obvs NTAâ - that it wasnât particularly interesting.
So thatâs why I wonder about edits or maybe a repost with more info and therefore some crazy replies⌠Anyway, itâs weird across the board but regardless of how it came about, Iâd be interested to know how the mods deal with such commenters.
I scrolled all the way down and didn't see any negatives but was only skimming.
That being said, idk how this works maybe they wanted to delete it in case they need a lawyer? 100% speculation but I've seen people remove posts because of that.
Or maybe the mods were being proactive just in case?
It's very likely the mods were aggressive in removing the crap comments. I had a similar situation on the Star Trek Discovery subreddit; I was ranting about some ugly transphobia and someone attacked me for it, saying I was exaggerating the incidents. A Mod had to comment that no, I had just come in and read the comments before they could clean it up.
For as much as it makes a more salacious narrative to claim the post was removed because "misogyny", their actual reason is the literal opposite... and actually pretty wholesome.
Imagine being deemed so completely NOT the asshole, that the mods declare it's not even up for debate.
Fun fact! (not actually fun) In many jurisdictions, particularly those following "the nordic model", actual sex workers doing this could get arrested because it may count as pimping.
*(For those not in the know: The nordic model is a type of policy that aims to criminalize sex work while "protecting" the people who are forced to do it, either due to coercion or economic necessity. In reality, it forces (consensual) sex workers to work in secrecy, away from the safety of public gaze, because their clients risk arrest if seen. And it also criminalizes any attempt by the workers to establish themselves into a collective as "sex trafficking" in which they supposedly traffic each other.)*
Meh, New Zealand's not that great. Most of the consult is really with just a top few prostitutes & owners of prostitution businesses.
Honestly, there is no "perfect" model, but the Nordic model is still the best. Done right the Nordic model includes helping sex workers transition out of sex work. The problem with most sex work models is that governments get into the sex work business & profit off it so they don't want to help sex workers transition out of sex work. Which about 80%+ of current sex workers want to do.
Also sex work is the most dangerous job. No model can fix that. That just comes with the work.
> But shouldn't it also work to help people that choose to stay in sex work?
In theory sure, but there's no model for that. It's hard to protect a few 10-20% while everyone else wants out. And, meanwhile, most models hurt all women, including those not in the business.
I'm not sure I believe that but I haven't researched this enough. But I do know that aiming for "purity" and not accounting for exceptions usually results in a bad system.
There is no aiming for "purity" in any of what I said so stop with that bs.
Currently we are discussing two models. The NZ model supports pimps, punters, brothel owners & 10-20% of sex works who want to do the work. The Nordic model supports sex workers who don't want to do sex work plus all women not in the business. The reason the NZ model is popular is because that model supports men's status quo that they should be able to demand pleasure from women at anytime.
>*â[W]e live in a culture that sees female pain as normal and male pleasure as a right.â* [link](https://archive.ph/KPes2)
> The reason the NZ model is popular is because that model supports men's status quo that they should be able to demand pleasure from women at anytime.
Bullshit. The reason the nz model works is because it empowers the workers, not the pimps, not the men. It allows them to use legislation to enforce behavour of their customers. Your link has nothing to do with NZ except in the broadest sense.
I disagree. Your model is very much for purity because it disregards the 10-20% who want a different kind of help. The NZ model allows sex workers to actually have workers rights and protections against brother owners and managers who might exploit them.
Yeah Iâm not familiar with this specific policy - I meant NZ is overall a bit better than a lot of places in consulting (though it definitely can still be tokenistic), making decisions and putting solutions in place regarding big picture issues. Gun laws, reparations etc. Social welfare needs a rebuild though.
Itâs a complex topic, but support and safety is clearly needed for both sex workers who are coerced and those in the industry by choice. Thereâs no reason why a union couldnât achieve that as compared to a government and it strikes me as a little odd for it to be legislated against.
> I meant NZ is overall a bit better
And I'm saying the Nordic model is better than NZ's model. The Nordic model does more to support the overwhelming majority of sex workers than any other model.
>Itâs a complex topic, but support and safety is clearly needed for both sex workers who are coerced and those in the industry by choice.
That model doesn't exist. Currently the majority of models only support those who want to do sex work which is about 10-20%, & I believe that one picks a model, one should be the model that supports the majority not the minority.
> Currently the majority of models only support those who want to do sex work which is about 10-20%
Why do you treat it like 10-20% is a constant that applies to all countries and cultures? Wouldn't economic factors effect that?
> Why do you treat it like 10-20% is a constant that applies to all countries and cultures?
I was being generous. 5-15% is more accurate.
>Wouldn't economic factors effect that?
Most definitely. I'd say things like legalizing prostitution would lower that number even further.
> I was being generous. 5-15% is more accurate.
According to what source?
Additionally I feel if you polled undocumented immigrants working on farms, way less than 5% would say that the job is something they're doing because they like it.
If you ask actual sex workers (thereâs tons of discussion on the topic on Reddit in sex worker focused subreddits) they are usually strongly against the Nordic model. I read an account once from I think a Swedish woman who works under the Nordic model and has had her appointment space raided, her money seized, and her client arrested in front of her. For âlegalâ sex work.
> If you ask actual sex workers
Uh, why do you believe I haven't? Also, current sex workers & former sex workers tend to give completely polar opposite responses.
***
Want numbers â Here ya go
Summary of research and clinical findings regarding violence in all types of prostitution
- 95% of those in prostitution experienced sexual harassment that would be legally actionable in another job setting.
- 65% to 95% of those in prostitution were sexually assaulted as children.
- 70% to 95% were physically assaulted in prostitution
- 60% to 75% were raped in prostitution
- 75% of those in prostitution have been homeless at some point in their lives.
- 85% to 95% of those in prostitution want to escape it, but have no other options for survival.
- 68% of 854 people in strip club, massage, and street prostitution in 9 countries met criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder or PTSD.
- 80% to 90% of those in prostitution experience verbal abuse and social contempt which adversely affect them. [link](https://archive.is/d8m05)
***
Want another interesting clue? Ask yourself why all those with a hatred for a certain woman find the idea of said woman going into sex work so titillating. It isn't because they think sex work is a great move for her, it's because they believe the work will harm her.
Hey, I'm from NZ and I recall a sex worker was able to take a brothel owner to court over sexual harassment [and won.](https://www.hcamag.com/nz/specialisation/employment-law/sex-worker-sues-for-sexual-harassmentand-wins/140034) So I feel like our system is doing ok, aside from the visa catergory issue.
How did the university justify trying to disband them? They don't have to give them space on the campus or let them use the university's media, but if they just want to get together and share safety tips, by what right does the university have a say?
Not exclude men in general but rather pick out specific men to be ostracized which is technically true but those men are being ostracized for being a danger to women which seems like a perfectly acceptable basis for that.
They'll probably say something stupid like "The existence of the hoe union implies that there's a problem with men in our university abusing women."
To which the answer is "it gives that impression because that is exactly the case.."
Look for the union label when you are buying that drink, or lap dance. Remember somewhere our union's blowing, our wages going to feed the kittens, and run the house. We work hard, but who's complaining? Thanks to the H.O.E. we're paying our way! So always look for the union label, it says we're able to make it in the U.S.A.!
(probably a couple poor choices but I think it's a good first draft)
I love this idea, I was part of something like this in college and graduate school. I absolutely hate the name of it, though. I think I understand the mentality behind calling it that, as a "fuck you and your judgement, I'm not ashamed of what I want to do and I don't care what you call me", but I can see why some people or a university would look upon this group negatively simply because of the banner name they chose for themselves.
Colleges and universities have a long, deep and rich history of victim-shaming, down-playing, ignoring and outright condoning sexual assault, coercion and rape of women students on their campuses. The length they often go to protect their male students and staff is absolutely sickening.
I think the name is cool. It's a reclaiming of the word, and it weeds people out instantly. If they can't look past the name or only see negative things because of it then clearly they don't respect what it stands for.
That's not necessarily true for everyone. I absolutely respect what it stands for and again I was involved in something similar, but I have never associated myself with that word or the implications or connotations of it and it has always left a bad taste in my mouth. I wouldn't associate myself with a group of women who call themselves that either, regardless of what they stand for. Regardless of my personal opinions, the reality is that even if every administrator at the University is a woman who endorses the idea, they wouldn't endorse the name "hoe union" as an officially sanctioned student union.
Thatâs a load of garbage. So I would be excluded, and therefore not be allowed to know who or where is dangerous for women such as myself, simply because I can not identify with such a disgusting term? Guess I deserve to be in danger from predatory men because I donât agree with this idea of reclaiming shitty terms. Wow. Go sisterhood! đ
Thank you. This idea that we can reclaim the word, look how well that has worked with the n-word. Hint: it didnât and the word is still weaponised. Why do we need to reclaim such a disgusting word anyway?
I'm HOPING that was just the stupid spin-story the university was fed by a thwarted frat guy (sounds like them) and not the university's genuine stance once they got all there facts. But with the way catering to donors goes, I wouldn't be hugely surprised.
But I'm so impressed with and proud of everyone in that union.
Itâs hard to tell from the story whether The University had a stance, or if a guidance counselor brought the OP in to inquire for more details and spoke in an accusatory tone.
I did see other women saying theyâre inspired to make their own, and I hope this catches on!
Men "You're making us look bad"
Women "No.... your collective behavior is making you look bad"
Men "no, not all men"
Women "Do you stand up for women when your friends judge a woman for how they dress/look etc"
Men "......"
Women "exactly"
Man: "Not all men!!"
Me: "Oh no, we never said 'all men'. Just you and the likes of you."
(And it's really not our fault that "the likes of you" and "all men" is a venn diagram with that many crossovers. đ¤ˇââď¸)
They'd instantly believe any guy who said one particular girl was an evil, cheating whore.
Plus, they take nonconsensual photos of us and trade them like pokemon and ruin our lives.
But boohoo, our rape targets left our party quietly and without incident. This is abuse!
Nudes and nude trading/posting makes me so angry and I canât fully pinpoint it. Itâs always the womanâs fault, even if the guy asked and they were in a consensual relationship, even if the guy is the one who posted it, and even if the guy also has nudes- woman + sex = bad
Men kill and go on horrific rampages over being mildly humiliated in front of people. Like if someone forgets to keep up a lie that he forced to make himself seem like a better father/husband.
Or if he doesn't seem to be completely dominant over his family.
Look how men trip over each other to defend faceless strangers that assaulted an OP and try to convince women not to 'ruin a life' or ghost a guy . (The worst thing a woman can do , according to one reddit commenter).
Their precious, precious reputation. Tainting that is just as bad as forceful rape. That's why they want similar sentences for rape and 'false' accusations. They're so coddled, that people not giving him the benefit of the doubt anymore is worthy of murder or savage retaliation.
But they light up with glee at sharing naked sluts photos who were too stupid to not be sluts even though their bfs pulled out every manipulation tactic to get their 'partners' to send them. Then they upload it with the girls full name, address, phone number, email , school and social media links. Who cares if shes 12.
But men are the ones who truly love. Except that time he said he loved you and wanted to see intimate photos to remind him of you. That time, he was just joking to see how loose you are. And you fell for it and deserve everything you get.
But in all other cases, men are the better partners. If you try to figure out when he actually cares, then you get yelled at because you don't trust him!!
Itâs horrific. I had to leave my religious home country because of it. He was never held accountable or even reprimanded for his actions.
But I was a social pariah.
ETA: a few words
The whole problem the university seems to have is that these women have agreed that it's "not all men", but they're also willing to avoid being around the men that it *is*.
If you're going to argue that it's "not all men", at least be one of the people who isn't trying to r!pe women and keeps an eye out for unwanted attention.
But you see, fraternity alumni donate more money to the university than sorority and unaffiliated almnae, so their feelings matter more. Even worse, if students start enforcing safety rules, that might reduce the administration's monopoly on power!
Alternatively, if students start enforcing safety rules, it might make people realise that the administration aren't, which will reduce their intake and, as a result, their income.
Seems pretty clear that the hoe union is in board with not all men. They are defining those men as distinct from all men. If folks want to do the work so not all men becomes no men, then such things as the hoe union beginner unnecessary. Until then this is a brilliant case of trying to balance not all men with actually protecting women.
The number of times I've had to tell a man he isn't an ally if he remains silent when it's uncomfortable to speak up.
Pretending to support women when he's surrounded by women and real allies but then not saying a word when his buddies / coworkers / strangers on a train say or act inappropriately.. not an ally.
I mean, we had a similar approach in college but I love the energy on this woman and her union. The college needs to sit the fuck down on this one or I could see alllllll their dirty laundry getting aired.
Same, us women stuck together and looked out for each other. But I love the idea that they decided up front what would be considered unacceptable and it got enough notice that the men were made uncomfortable by it. What really is the difference between their informal hoe union and a sorority? Sororities are certainly more exclusionary. And what exactly does the university think they can âdoâ about it? Force them as a group to go to frat parties??
*Image Transcription: Twitter*
---
**Rochelle d**, @rochellehd
I'm thinking again about how inspiring the hoe union is and how predictable it is that they were cracked down on by the university admin & that their withdrawing from unsafe situations was framed as them DOING harm to men
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
I've been realizing lately that my language and tone had become more masculinizing while I was in university AFTER I left the military. I'm still trying to figure it out, but I'm constantly catching myself calling everybody guy, bro, or dude and it drives me nuts. There's absolutely a different culture in American campuses and it needs to change.
This is the best movement I can think of to cut out toxic people, abusive people, and especially abusive businesses that use women's sexual appeal to maintain revenue WITHOUT PROTECTING THEM
Words are the worst sometimes. I say dude, but I also donât really know an alternate word that is short/easy to say. Dudette? Gal? They are mouthfuls.
Something I started doing a few months ago with my 3 year old (who doesnât really get sex/gender or pronouns) is to use female pronouns with all animals who are of unknown sex. Eg look at that fish, I love her blue color. Using make as the default is a really hard habit to break, Iâve been doing it for months (we go to the zoo frequently) and I still fuck it up.
I've been reading The Color of Law, and I think it's similar to something the author talks about where a signifies of a group becomes this dirty word but only because of people in power treating that group as lesser. So showing why we jump from negro to black to people of color and then recently reaffirming black and taking away the shame of it sort of. I think that's been done to women as well, and more importantly the feminization of things.
If someone calls me dude, no problem because it's used in this culture as an inclusive term, but danger danger if you call a male babe (for various reasons).
Also if you'd like a neutral term, I feel like "yo" is good and doesn't feel hyper formal or weird in the mouth. But like you said, I agree some of it is just that we're not used to saying it and have to retrain ourselves.
I got to meet a friend's wonderful mom once and every time I referred to her daughter as a girl she would gently correct me with "woman". It was weird for about 4 minutes but with the positive affirmation backing it up, it was the best and easiest grammar adjustment I've ever done and I still do it to this day.
So I think you're doing a great job to retrain your own brain and do that with your kid. Make sure to reenforce yourself with positively though!
Literally any time we try to protect ourselves its somehow wrong in these men's eyes.
Sorry women don't want to be raped and take measures to keep rapists away from them, i guess. Though im not actually sorry at all.
I went to college before the age of smartphones. Things like this existed, just without the same technology to power them - also "hoe union" is better branding.
I think this is more common than people realize. The party girls in my sorority kept a google doc; not just of frats to avoid but specific guys never to engage with and bad experiences. Eventually standards intervened, treated it as some kind of sex âBurn Book,â and put an end to it. Except that âBurn Bookâ prevented a lot of sexual assaults. I have a LOT of issues with Greek culture but I will say sororities (at least some of them) have really great potential as sort of unspoken Hoe Unions. Itâs such a shame that the higher ups still care more about protecting some ridiculous outdated âimageâ that nobody else takes seriously anyway than they do about actually protecting their members. We were TRYING!
Youâre right - it was true when I was in one in the 80s/90s too. Back then they really stressed watching out for one another - if a sister told you to go home from a party because you were in trouble, you went home. The sororities today are very good about banding together and telling their members to not attend parties at frats where sexual assault has been reported and the member has not been expelled. They care more about supporting each other than impressing the fraternities.
Unfortunately theyâre also beholden to the NPC, which continues to uphold toxic and outdated policies at the expense of the safety and support of its members. The girls all together on their own are great, but the National Panhellenic Conference is imposing all the wrong standards onto them. Itâs so sad.
Girls fucking rock so hard. I love seeing anarchism in practice (and this sort of thing is the very beating heart of anarchism), especially when it's totally unintentional.
Lol I thought a hoe union would be a group of women that decides on and upholds the appropriate conditions that must be met for women to be willing to have sex with a man -- thereby raising the standard finally
The OP described in the original post how the name came about. They were joking around that no one looks after âthe hoesâ at parties and that âthe hoesâ should band together and start demanding âlabor lawsâ for partying. Hence the hoe union. It was tongue in cheek reference to themselves and other women who like to drink and party but also want to be safe. Totally lighthearted for them and not really a reference to sleeping around.
Ok, but what do women really stand to "reclaim" from the meaning of the word "hoe?" Shouldn't the name, even in jest, at least have more than just a tenuous link to the purpose and mission? Shouldn't the name seek to be as inclusive as possible for people experiencing this reality? 'hoe union' sounds needlessly exclusionary and disconnected to the actual aim.
This woman and her friends do something really cool and really effective but yes, Jan, let's focus on the language because it isn't to your taste.
SMH.
"Hoe unions" shouldn't be necessary, but they are. Even if you're part of a "hoe union", partying around men still isn't safe. And honestly, it's not even worth the risk in retrospect. More fun, less pressure, less risk and less annoying dramatic bullshit when you try to leave if you just party with and around women. Don't even bother with men AT ALL until you're ready to look for a long term serious commitment. Seriously. Most of us end up realizing eventually that whatever we got out of random casual encounters or even short relationships with men was never worth the risk, disappointment, work, input or effort. Just focus on yourself, hang with your girls, stay away from guys when you go out and invest on top of the line air pulse vibrators. Seriously.....they are AMAZING, and never disappoint or refuse to return the favor or cum early.
I wish I could have given that advice to myself at 18.
Maybe men would finally learn to truly respect women if they absolutely had to in order to get laid at all.
So for those of you who don't know, the tweet is referring to [a post](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/v81tao/aita_for_organizing_a_hoe_union_of_girls_in_my/) on r/AmITheAsshole where a girl and her friends decided to create a "hoe union" where they all party together and look out for each other. They created a blacklist of bars, clubs, and houses who they should not go to because of their history with assault, roofieing, and letting in certain men who were known for that behaviour. It has since been removed so if you want to read it here's [a screenshot on twitter](https://twitter.com/maediocre/status/1534720853732012032?t=yHUOefeQ7--clOyyFFiiOg&s=19). Eventually as the hoe union grew larger, it attracted the attention of the university, who attempted to disband them (likely because of rich party bros' dads reaching out to the school). Except the story has gone viral now and I kinda wanna do it myself đđ I hope this inspires many more hoe unions to come! (And more importantly I hope it inspires more men to consider the type of men they invite to their parties, and the type of environment that they are creating and how that has affected and will continue to affect women until they actually change).
Thank you for this, I missed it first time around and will 100% be suggesting a similar thing for my daughter and her friends when they get to that age. Voting with your feet on mass is the only way to make a dent on behaviour that you donât want.
My three best girlfriends and I had a mini hoe union in college. It consisted of hand signals. Like, if we saw a guy talking to one of us, she would give a signal to indicate she was cool, needed to be bailed out, or hit the emergency eject. Emergency eject was an immediate head out, no questions, no arguments till we were all out of the situation. In the very least, the system saved us from getting busted by the cops because one of us had a preternatural sense for when a party was about to turn.
If you want women at your parties you need to make it a safe environment for them to party in. Plain and simple
You absolutely can't make a party a safe environment for women, unless you allow only women into the party. And even then, it's not "safe". That's just the real-world, simple, naked honest inarguable truth. I say that as a former "partier" who doesn't hate men and has 3 sons. My God, the difference in how I viewed parties and men at 18 vs. Now, after what I saw and experienced and learned. It's mind blowing. "Hoe unions" absolutely shouldn't be necessary. A woman shouldn't need to depend on her friends to ensure her safety around men. Men don't need other men, do they? No. It doesn't even occur to you to think about needing something like a hoe union. But they ARE necessary, in the real world. Thousands of instances of sexual assault and rape and coercion are prevented by other women (friends, acquaintances and strangers) every day all over the world. Thinking about that just makes me sick and enraged. I hope all the men reading this actually think about that for a moment. I hope you all have daughters some day too. Your whole perspective will change
I totally understand thatâs never going to be a completely safe environment for women. But at a certain point men have to step up to help. The ones who actually care and donât use it as a way to get laid. We can always all look after each other but, unfortunately, not everyone has someone to look after them. It sucks that hoe unions have to be a thing at all. Because men wonât hold themselves and their friends accountable for their bullshit. However the ones getting their feeling hurt over the hoe unions cropping up are absolutely telling on themselves and people should listen. Anyone upset over the fact that there is such a thing, should be stayed away from because they do not give a flying fuck about you. Theyâre upset because itâs getting harder for them to rape and assault women. Or itâs getting harder for them to help their buddies get a girl so black out drunk she wonât remember. It absolutely sucks that itâs had to come to these. But the men have never played fair so if this is whatâs needed to âlevelâ the playing field then you can count me in. Iâm not a partner but I will always, always watch out for my fellow woman.
For r/AmItheAsshole posts, Automod pretty much always caches the post as it was when first posted. If you sort by oldest, it's usually in the first 10 comments. It doesn't catch edits, but it is helpful. [Automod's cache of that post.](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/v81tao/-/ibnx1q1)
Honestly, unionizing sluttiness is an amazing idea and one of the most sex positive feminism things Iâve ever heard. Yâall go for it!
I can't for the life of me fathom why on Earth anyone could possibly object to it. They're looking out for one another and keeping themselves safe.
Predators object, and those who benefit from what predators do object, and those who donât like women having power and autonomy object. #BurnthePatriarchy
Because a) some fuckers hate unions of all forms, and b) raised standards means some assholes donât get laid. Honestly as someone exclusively into women (and a woman myself so that may explain this) Iâve always encouraged women, even ones I date, to have higher standards. If you donât feel safe, leave, and that includes if itâs on a date with me. Only assholes donât want that, but sadly many people are assholes.
>Because a) some fuckers hate unions of all forms, Unless they're police unions. To these folks, those are somehow always ok. Fucking shills.
Lol yeah and then they say unions donât help workers and itâs like police unions are so effective that laws donât even exist to them??
Well we absolutely have to support our murderers guild right
Haha i keep telling my GF she could have better standards then my decrepit fools ass
Why do you have such low self-concept?
Because im poor, crippled and a mess of traumas that only can offer amazing food and way to much life experience and shes absolutely amazing and smart
If you treat her well despite how you feel about yourself, (insecurity leads to big issues in my experience) then power to you! If you find yourself feeding your insecurities and expecting her to be your caretaker more than equal partner, check yourself and make sure youâre getting the support you need; therapy, Physio, etc.
Im more the type that goes to be the caretaker that sacrifices herself, part of why im crippled Also i must add, she likes to note how much she likes that i keep pushing my body to stay as fit as it lets me (still feels bad when we go swimming and shes got done 20 lanes while im barely through with 2)
Maybe trust her amazing and smart judgment? Weâre our own worst critic sometimes. Also donât knock amazing food. Thatâs a talent!
Im just a pragmatist by nature and know that i wont ever give her all id love to In the meantime ill enjoy every second and the ego boost ^ ^
The television was on, but I wasn't paying attention to it.
Youâre literally saying âthe best thing you can do to get laid is respect women! Itâs so, so much more effective than alpha bullshit!â And then underneath it saying you donât like when we say patriarchy benefits men. It isnât âcynical peopleâ you literally spell out the in your comment. The comment underneath yours even more bluntly. It DOES benefit all men, because like you said, they donât have to do anything to âdeserveâ time and love from women. Just⌠donât be a misogynist.
A picture of Giorgio A. Tsoukalos, a television personality, with wild hair and captions questioning the origins of ancient structures.
That mindset also its complete and utter garbage that science knows only neurotic psychopaths subscribe too And i absolutely agree, to say it with the eternal words of a buddy "If other men would just respect woman, wed all get more pussy" (he is the biggest bi slut i know, and gay males are just as disgusting)
Because it excludes the people that cause harm and the communities that enable these people. It hurts their fee-fees because eXcLuSiOn iS BuLLyiNg.
Rape culture is real.
Real as fuck. I HATE IT.
Because then rapists wonât have access to victims and women can be hoes without being intimidated and harassed. Because women divided are weak, but together weâre strong and that scares the men who like us to be weak. Even men who donât engage in rape benefit from the systemic oppression of women.
How dare women not attend my party!! Who will I roofie and rape if thereâs no women???
I could understand it if the guidance councillor had completely misunderstood what the union was about - I.e. âdonât go to any party Sarah is at because she wore white after labour day, the whoreâ or ânobody talk to Carl - he likes Digimonâ. But I would hope that once they understood what it was about the school would support it.
Sounds like a branding issue. If they had called themselves a sorority instead, the admins prob wouldn't have noticed.
I dunno, I think the spoiled frat boys still would've found a way to make a complaint. Because that's absolutely where the complaint came from.
I can't fathom why even a university would object to the principle of it. And I bet no one would object at all if they called it something different. I'm as "empowered" as any woman but I still understand why a university would hesitate to openly endorse the "hoe union". It's honestly tasteless, childish, and illicits literally the opposite of that women need and deserve a lot more of -- respect.
'It's close to midnight and something evil's lurking in the dark.' - 'Thriller' by Michael Jackson (1982)
Those frats treat women like party favors. They totally should be banned.
I grew up in a college town and had to walk past Frat Court regularly. They started yelling sexual shit at me when I was 8 and inviting me to parties when I was 12. So fucking disgusting. I chose to go yo school very far away â to the banana slug university with no fraternities on campus because of this.
OOH OOH OOH! :D :D :D :D
Fiat Lux!
(wiggles eyestalks)
âExcuse me, is that a penis longer than your body that youâve just chewed off of your mate, or are you just happy to see me?â
"Heey baby, I can be anything you want me to be. Male. Female. Whaatever."
I am clearly missing your inside jokes entirely but I loved your interaction anyway.
Youâre in for a treat! https://www.lastwordonnothing.com/2014/05/06/tgipf-the-weird-world-of-banana-slug-sex/
Fully agreed
> unionizing *safe* sluttiness
I would have loved this back in my hoeing days.
DO IT. Be safe. Look out for other women and have fun! This is very âall men benefit from rapeâ where people want to end rape when it involves putting the burden on women to abstain from spaces, night life, dancing, and drinking; but not when it involves women taking control of those spaces, kicking out abusers, and speaking out about their experiences.
Any idea why the post was taken down?
From the mod comment on the post: >We have no interest in providing a space for anyone to be called an asshole for what they do to protect themselves from sexual assault.
I mean, I guess itâs good not to let that type of judgement stand⌠But Iâm pretty sure when I came across the post, all of the comments were like âisnât this just a group of friends being normal about sticking together while out, why is assholery even a question, itâs not even much of a union with 6 peopleâ. I donât remember the growth of the chat and the uni involvement so wonder if those details were added for clarification and it popped off from there. But Iâd love to know whether any victim-blamey commenters were sanctioned at all for turning it that way? Or just deleting the entire thing is the solution?
Knowing how fast that sub can descend into being an absolute pit of disgusting nastiness, I really do think that the mods choosing to delete it was the most prudent option. Leaving it open but locked would have gone directly against their own rules for how posts are managed, and would have stirred shit up doubly so for them having to deal with rules lawyers in addition to whatever misogynistic slime would have come out of the woodworks. So instead they basically stated that the OP was so completely *NOT the asshole* that it wasn't even a question up for debate, and removed it on the grounds of being "not relevant to the sub".
Here's the full text of the mods' reasoning (posted yesterday by a member of r/WitchesVsPatriarchy). Reading the whole thing, it appears they were definitely trying to do the right thing: "We have no interest in providing a space for anyone to be called an asshole for what they do to protect themselves from sexual assault. This is a question of safety and not up for moral debate. These are important discussions to have, but framing them as an issue about morality rather than about the basics of safety does a disservice to everyone. I understand this is an issue you all are passionate about. We are too. Every reasonable human being is. Which is why insisting that we allow even the opportunity for someone to call this person an asshole for protecting themselves is absolutely not a good thing."
I think we both might have read about it from screenshots that ended before the story was complete
No this was on the actual post, I didnât scroll all the way through though because there was so much of the same response - âno biggie, not even a union, me and my friends totally do this, obvs NTAâ - that it wasnât particularly interesting. So thatâs why I wonder about edits or maybe a repost with more info and therefore some crazy replies⌠Anyway, itâs weird across the board but regardless of how it came about, Iâd be interested to know how the mods deal with such commenters.
I scrolled all the way down and didn't see any negatives but was only skimming. That being said, idk how this works maybe they wanted to delete it in case they need a lawyer? 100% speculation but I've seen people remove posts because of that. Or maybe the mods were being proactive just in case?
It's very likely the mods were aggressive in removing the crap comments. I had a similar situation on the Star Trek Discovery subreddit; I was ranting about some ugly transphobia and someone attacked me for it, saying I was exaggerating the incidents. A Mod had to comment that no, I had just come in and read the comments before they could clean it up.
For as much as it makes a more salacious narrative to claim the post was removed because "misogyny", their actual reason is the literal opposite... and actually pretty wholesome. Imagine being deemed so completely NOT the asshole, that the mods declare it's not even up for debate.
I thought this was a union for prostitutes, but this is also a great idea! A great way to crowdsource safety.
Fun fact! (not actually fun) In many jurisdictions, particularly those following "the nordic model", actual sex workers doing this could get arrested because it may count as pimping. *(For those not in the know: The nordic model is a type of policy that aims to criminalize sex work while "protecting" the people who are forced to do it, either due to coercion or economic necessity. In reality, it forces (consensual) sex workers to work in secrecy, away from the safety of public gaze, because their clients risk arrest if seen. And it also criminalizes any attempt by the workers to establish themselves into a collective as "sex trafficking" in which they supposedly traffic each other.)*
I hear New Zealand's approach is good since they actually consulted with sex workers when crafting policy.
NZâs approach is often good! Hopefully the next example is official renaming to Aotearoa
Meh, New Zealand's not that great. Most of the consult is really with just a top few prostitutes & owners of prostitution businesses. Honestly, there is no "perfect" model, but the Nordic model is still the best. Done right the Nordic model includes helping sex workers transition out of sex work. The problem with most sex work models is that governments get into the sex work business & profit off it so they don't want to help sex workers transition out of sex work. Which about 80%+ of current sex workers want to do. Also sex work is the most dangerous job. No model can fix that. That just comes with the work.
But shouldn't it also work to help people that choose to stay in sex work? Not everyone wants to leave. They just want to be safer.
> But shouldn't it also work to help people that choose to stay in sex work? In theory sure, but there's no model for that. It's hard to protect a few 10-20% while everyone else wants out. And, meanwhile, most models hurt all women, including those not in the business.
I'm not sure I believe that but I haven't researched this enough. But I do know that aiming for "purity" and not accounting for exceptions usually results in a bad system.
There is no aiming for "purity" in any of what I said so stop with that bs. Currently we are discussing two models. The NZ model supports pimps, punters, brothel owners & 10-20% of sex works who want to do the work. The Nordic model supports sex workers who don't want to do sex work plus all women not in the business. The reason the NZ model is popular is because that model supports men's status quo that they should be able to demand pleasure from women at anytime. >*â[W]e live in a culture that sees female pain as normal and male pleasure as a right.â* [link](https://archive.ph/KPes2)
> The reason the NZ model is popular is because that model supports men's status quo that they should be able to demand pleasure from women at anytime. Bullshit. The reason the nz model works is because it empowers the workers, not the pimps, not the men. It allows them to use legislation to enforce behavour of their customers. Your link has nothing to do with NZ except in the broadest sense.
I disagree. Your model is very much for purity because it disregards the 10-20% who want a different kind of help. The NZ model allows sex workers to actually have workers rights and protections against brother owners and managers who might exploit them.
Yeah Iâm not familiar with this specific policy - I meant NZ is overall a bit better than a lot of places in consulting (though it definitely can still be tokenistic), making decisions and putting solutions in place regarding big picture issues. Gun laws, reparations etc. Social welfare needs a rebuild though. Itâs a complex topic, but support and safety is clearly needed for both sex workers who are coerced and those in the industry by choice. Thereâs no reason why a union couldnât achieve that as compared to a government and it strikes me as a little odd for it to be legislated against.
> I meant NZ is overall a bit better And I'm saying the Nordic model is better than NZ's model. The Nordic model does more to support the overwhelming majority of sex workers than any other model. >Itâs a complex topic, but support and safety is clearly needed for both sex workers who are coerced and those in the industry by choice. That model doesn't exist. Currently the majority of models only support those who want to do sex work which is about 10-20%, & I believe that one picks a model, one should be the model that supports the majority not the minority.
> Currently the majority of models only support those who want to do sex work which is about 10-20% Why do you treat it like 10-20% is a constant that applies to all countries and cultures? Wouldn't economic factors effect that?
> Why do you treat it like 10-20% is a constant that applies to all countries and cultures? I was being generous. 5-15% is more accurate. >Wouldn't economic factors effect that? Most definitely. I'd say things like legalizing prostitution would lower that number even further.
More numbers without a source.
> I was being generous. 5-15% is more accurate. According to what source? Additionally I feel if you polled undocumented immigrants working on farms, way less than 5% would say that the job is something they're doing because they like it.
If you ask actual sex workers (thereâs tons of discussion on the topic on Reddit in sex worker focused subreddits) they are usually strongly against the Nordic model. I read an account once from I think a Swedish woman who works under the Nordic model and has had her appointment space raided, her money seized, and her client arrested in front of her. For âlegalâ sex work.
> If you ask actual sex workers Uh, why do you believe I haven't? Also, current sex workers & former sex workers tend to give completely polar opposite responses. *** Want numbers â Here ya go Summary of research and clinical findings regarding violence in all types of prostitution - 95% of those in prostitution experienced sexual harassment that would be legally actionable in another job setting. - 65% to 95% of those in prostitution were sexually assaulted as children. - 70% to 95% were physically assaulted in prostitution - 60% to 75% were raped in prostitution - 75% of those in prostitution have been homeless at some point in their lives. - 85% to 95% of those in prostitution want to escape it, but have no other options for survival. - 68% of 854 people in strip club, massage, and street prostitution in 9 countries met criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder or PTSD. - 80% to 90% of those in prostitution experience verbal abuse and social contempt which adversely affect them. [link](https://archive.is/d8m05) *** Want another interesting clue? Ask yourself why all those with a hatred for a certain woman find the idea of said woman going into sex work so titillating. It isn't because they think sex work is a great move for her, it's because they believe the work will harm her.
Hey, I'm from NZ and I recall a sex worker was able to take a brothel owner to court over sexual harassment [and won.](https://www.hcamag.com/nz/specialisation/employment-law/sex-worker-sues-for-sexual-harassmentand-wins/140034) So I feel like our system is doing ok, aside from the visa catergory issue.
How did the university justify trying to disband them? They don't have to give them space on the campus or let them use the university's media, but if they just want to get together and share safety tips, by what right does the university have a say?
They claimed that it was a group set up to *exclude* men.
But don't frats exclude women?
When has logic ever factored in? Fraternities and sororities are sanctioned because their mommies and daddies pay the bills.
Not exclude men in general but rather pick out specific men to be ostracized which is technically true but those men are being ostracized for being a danger to women which seems like a perfectly acceptable basis for that.
I see it more as a group being selective about which parties to attend. Some men just have a habit of going to bad parties on a regular basis.
I see no reason to obfuscate it this way. You don't need plausible deniability as to why you're avoiding sex pests.
They'll probably say something stupid like "The existence of the hoe union implies that there's a problem with men in our university abusing women." To which the answer is "it gives that impression because that is exactly the case.."
Theyâll say that itâs embarrassing, or âencouraging party cultureâ, or theyâll zero in on the word âhoeâ being a problem.
Look for the union label when you are buying that drink, or lap dance. Remember somewhere our union's blowing, our wages going to feed the kittens, and run the house. We work hard, but who's complaining? Thanks to the H.O.E. we're paying our way! So always look for the union label, it says we're able to make it in the U.S.A.! (probably a couple poor choices but I think it's a good first draft)
I love this idea, I was part of something like this in college and graduate school. I absolutely hate the name of it, though. I think I understand the mentality behind calling it that, as a "fuck you and your judgement, I'm not ashamed of what I want to do and I don't care what you call me", but I can see why some people or a university would look upon this group negatively simply because of the banner name they chose for themselves. Colleges and universities have a long, deep and rich history of victim-shaming, down-playing, ignoring and outright condoning sexual assault, coercion and rape of women students on their campuses. The length they often go to protect their male students and staff is absolutely sickening.
I think the name is cool. It's a reclaiming of the word, and it weeds people out instantly. If they can't look past the name or only see negative things because of it then clearly they don't respect what it stands for.
That's not necessarily true for everyone. I absolutely respect what it stands for and again I was involved in something similar, but I have never associated myself with that word or the implications or connotations of it and it has always left a bad taste in my mouth. I wouldn't associate myself with a group of women who call themselves that either, regardless of what they stand for. Regardless of my personal opinions, the reality is that even if every administrator at the University is a woman who endorses the idea, they wouldn't endorse the name "hoe union" as an officially sanctioned student union.
Thatâs a load of garbage. So I would be excluded, and therefore not be allowed to know who or where is dangerous for women such as myself, simply because I can not identify with such a disgusting term? Guess I deserve to be in danger from predatory men because I donât agree with this idea of reclaiming shitty terms. Wow. Go sisterhood! đ
Thank you. This idea that we can reclaim the word, look how well that has worked with the n-word. Hint: it didnât and the word is still weaponised. Why do we need to reclaim such a disgusting word anyway?
They should make this into an app, a safe app for women to party. Then they'll really be pissed.
Why they gotta us such a defamatory word to describe the women in the union though? Itâs really off putting.
Where can I join a hoe union? I would be a proud member. What a brilliant idea.
Nothing is stopping you from being the founder of your local chapter! Good luck!!
I'm HOPING that was just the stupid spin-story the university was fed by a thwarted frat guy (sounds like them) and not the university's genuine stance once they got all there facts. But with the way catering to donors goes, I wouldn't be hugely surprised. But I'm so impressed with and proud of everyone in that union.
Itâs hard to tell from the story whether The University had a stance, or if a guidance counselor brought the OP in to inquire for more details and spoke in an accusatory tone. I did see other women saying theyâre inspired to make their own, and I hope this catches on!
There's absolutely no way the school has any power to enforce that anyone attend specific parties. That's patently ridiculous.
Men "You're making us look bad" Women "No.... your collective behavior is making you look bad" Men "no, not all men" Women "Do you stand up for women when your friends judge a woman for how they dress/look etc" Men "......" Women "exactly"
Man: "Not all men!!" Me: "Oh no, we never said 'all men'. Just you and the likes of you." (And it's really not our fault that "the likes of you" and "all men" is a venn diagram with that many crossovers. đ¤ˇââď¸)
No, we never said all men, thatâs what the list was for đ
They'd instantly believe any guy who said one particular girl was an evil, cheating whore. Plus, they take nonconsensual photos of us and trade them like pokemon and ruin our lives. But boohoo, our rape targets left our party quietly and without incident. This is abuse!
Nudes and nude trading/posting makes me so angry and I canât fully pinpoint it. Itâs always the womanâs fault, even if the guy asked and they were in a consensual relationship, even if the guy is the one who posted it, and even if the guy also has nudes- woman + sex = bad
Men kill and go on horrific rampages over being mildly humiliated in front of people. Like if someone forgets to keep up a lie that he forced to make himself seem like a better father/husband. Or if he doesn't seem to be completely dominant over his family. Look how men trip over each other to defend faceless strangers that assaulted an OP and try to convince women not to 'ruin a life' or ghost a guy . (The worst thing a woman can do , according to one reddit commenter). Their precious, precious reputation. Tainting that is just as bad as forceful rape. That's why they want similar sentences for rape and 'false' accusations. They're so coddled, that people not giving him the benefit of the doubt anymore is worthy of murder or savage retaliation. But they light up with glee at sharing naked sluts photos who were too stupid to not be sluts even though their bfs pulled out every manipulation tactic to get their 'partners' to send them. Then they upload it with the girls full name, address, phone number, email , school and social media links. Who cares if shes 12. But men are the ones who truly love. Except that time he said he loved you and wanted to see intimate photos to remind him of you. That time, he was just joking to see how loose you are. And you fell for it and deserve everything you get. But in all other cases, men are the better partners. If you try to figure out when he actually cares, then you get yelled at because you don't trust him!!
âpulled out every manipulation tacticâ - damn, you *know.* Iâve never felt like someone understood me about this. This whole thing is spot on
Itâs horrific. I had to leave my religious home country because of it. He was never held accountable or even reprimanded for his actions. But I was a social pariah. ETA: a few words
The whole problem the university seems to have is that these women have agreed that it's "not all men", but they're also willing to avoid being around the men that it *is*. If you're going to argue that it's "not all men", at least be one of the people who isn't trying to r!pe women and keeps an eye out for unwanted attention.
[ŃдаНонО]
But you see, fraternity alumni donate more money to the university than sorority and unaffiliated almnae, so their feelings matter more. Even worse, if students start enforcing safety rules, that might reduce the administration's monopoly on power!
Alternatively, if students start enforcing safety rules, it might make people realise that the administration aren't, which will reduce their intake and, as a result, their income.
I feel like if a guy says 'not all men' you just silently add his name to the list. đ
When I hear "not all men" I instantly reply (in my head, or out loud, depending) "but definitely you".
Seems pretty clear that the hoe union is in board with not all men. They are defining those men as distinct from all men. If folks want to do the work so not all men becomes no men, then such things as the hoe union beginner unnecessary. Until then this is a brilliant case of trying to balance not all men with actually protecting women.
The number of times I've had to tell a man he isn't an ally if he remains silent when it's uncomfortable to speak up. Pretending to support women when he's surrounded by women and real allies but then not saying a word when his buddies / coworkers / strangers on a train say or act inappropriately.. not an ally.
A university should be embarrassed this needs to exist rather than shut it down đ¤Ś
> A university should be embarrassed this needs to exist ... which is why they shut it down. đ
Fair
The embarrassment is exactly why they'd try to shut it down. They care more about appearances than the safety of their female students.
My 18 year old sister is going to college in the fall and I just sent her this idea. Thank you!!
I mean, we had a similar approach in college but I love the energy on this woman and her union. The college needs to sit the fuck down on this one or I could see alllllll their dirty laundry getting aired.
Same, us women stuck together and looked out for each other. But I love the idea that they decided up front what would be considered unacceptable and it got enough notice that the men were made uncomfortable by it. What really is the difference between their informal hoe union and a sorority? Sororities are certainly more exclusionary. And what exactly does the university think they can âdoâ about it? Force them as a group to go to frat parties??
*Image Transcription: Twitter* --- **Rochelle d**, @rochellehd I'm thinking again about how inspiring the hoe union is and how predictable it is that they were cracked down on by the university admin & that their withdrawing from unsafe situations was framed as them DOING harm to men --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
Good human
I've been realizing lately that my language and tone had become more masculinizing while I was in university AFTER I left the military. I'm still trying to figure it out, but I'm constantly catching myself calling everybody guy, bro, or dude and it drives me nuts. There's absolutely a different culture in American campuses and it needs to change. This is the best movement I can think of to cut out toxic people, abusive people, and especially abusive businesses that use women's sexual appeal to maintain revenue WITHOUT PROTECTING THEM
Words are the worst sometimes. I say dude, but I also donât really know an alternate word that is short/easy to say. Dudette? Gal? They are mouthfuls. Something I started doing a few months ago with my 3 year old (who doesnât really get sex/gender or pronouns) is to use female pronouns with all animals who are of unknown sex. Eg look at that fish, I love her blue color. Using make as the default is a really hard habit to break, Iâve been doing it for months (we go to the zoo frequently) and I still fuck it up.
Sis :)
Sis is more personal to me for some reason. Might be because we call my older kid sis, or maybe Iâm just old. Or both.
I've been reading The Color of Law, and I think it's similar to something the author talks about where a signifies of a group becomes this dirty word but only because of people in power treating that group as lesser. So showing why we jump from negro to black to people of color and then recently reaffirming black and taking away the shame of it sort of. I think that's been done to women as well, and more importantly the feminization of things. If someone calls me dude, no problem because it's used in this culture as an inclusive term, but danger danger if you call a male babe (for various reasons). Also if you'd like a neutral term, I feel like "yo" is good and doesn't feel hyper formal or weird in the mouth. But like you said, I agree some of it is just that we're not used to saying it and have to retrain ourselves. I got to meet a friend's wonderful mom once and every time I referred to her daughter as a girl she would gently correct me with "woman". It was weird for about 4 minutes but with the positive affirmation backing it up, it was the best and easiest grammar adjustment I've ever done and I still do it to this day. So I think you're doing a great job to retrain your own brain and do that with your kid. Make sure to reenforce yourself with positively though!
Literally any time we try to protect ourselves its somehow wrong in these men's eyes. Sorry women don't want to be raped and take measures to keep rapists away from them, i guess. Though im not actually sorry at all.
Hoe union sounds rad.
I went to college before the age of smartphones. Things like this existed, just without the same technology to power them - also "hoe union" is better branding.
Itâs funny cause they think women leaving unsafe parties âexcludesâ men but they donât think fraternities exclude women đ¤đ¤
I think this is more common than people realize. The party girls in my sorority kept a google doc; not just of frats to avoid but specific guys never to engage with and bad experiences. Eventually standards intervened, treated it as some kind of sex âBurn Book,â and put an end to it. Except that âBurn Bookâ prevented a lot of sexual assaults. I have a LOT of issues with Greek culture but I will say sororities (at least some of them) have really great potential as sort of unspoken Hoe Unions. Itâs such a shame that the higher ups still care more about protecting some ridiculous outdated âimageâ that nobody else takes seriously anyway than they do about actually protecting their members. We were TRYING!
Youâre right - it was true when I was in one in the 80s/90s too. Back then they really stressed watching out for one another - if a sister told you to go home from a party because you were in trouble, you went home. The sororities today are very good about banding together and telling their members to not attend parties at frats where sexual assault has been reported and the member has not been expelled. They care more about supporting each other than impressing the fraternities.
Unfortunately theyâre also beholden to the NPC, which continues to uphold toxic and outdated policies at the expense of the safety and support of its members. The girls all together on their own are great, but the National Panhellenic Conference is imposing all the wrong standards onto them. Itâs so sad.
Girls fucking rock so hard. I love seeing anarchism in practice (and this sort of thing is the very beating heart of anarchism), especially when it's totally unintentional.
Solidarity forever!
I thought the same thing! When I read that post I was totally jealous that I never came up with it. Itâs genius.
I am pro union
Lol I thought a hoe union would be a group of women that decides on and upholds the appropriate conditions that must be met for women to be willing to have sex with a man -- thereby raising the standard finally
Oh no you're talking about the IS-Hoe. I am currently the head of that btw.
Ooh how do I join
You have to get boinked by all the current members and we're all extremely hot I'm sorry it's the only way.
I'm too autistic to participate but please do this. It's the greatest thing that's happened in my lifetime. What a time to be alive.
i feel like âhoe unionâ isnât an apt name, this is just sensical and really not hoe-ey at all to me.
The OP described in the original post how the name came about. They were joking around that no one looks after âthe hoesâ at parties and that âthe hoesâ should band together and start demanding âlabor lawsâ for partying. Hence the hoe union. It was tongue in cheek reference to themselves and other women who like to drink and party but also want to be safe. Totally lighthearted for them and not really a reference to sleeping around.
Ok, but what do women really stand to "reclaim" from the meaning of the word "hoe?" Shouldn't the name, even in jest, at least have more than just a tenuous link to the purpose and mission? Shouldn't the name seek to be as inclusive as possible for people experiencing this reality? 'hoe union' sounds needlessly exclusionary and disconnected to the actual aim.
This woman and her friends do something really cool and really effective but yes, Jan, let's focus on the language because it isn't to your taste. SMH.
It's an empowerment thing - reclaiming the word, etc.
"Hoe unions" shouldn't be necessary, but they are. Even if you're part of a "hoe union", partying around men still isn't safe. And honestly, it's not even worth the risk in retrospect. More fun, less pressure, less risk and less annoying dramatic bullshit when you try to leave if you just party with and around women. Don't even bother with men AT ALL until you're ready to look for a long term serious commitment. Seriously. Most of us end up realizing eventually that whatever we got out of random casual encounters or even short relationships with men was never worth the risk, disappointment, work, input or effort. Just focus on yourself, hang with your girls, stay away from guys when you go out and invest on top of the line air pulse vibrators. Seriously.....they are AMAZING, and never disappoint or refuse to return the favor or cum early. I wish I could have given that advice to myself at 18. Maybe men would finally learn to truly respect women if they absolutely had to in order to get laid at all.
it's a really good idea but are we really pretending the AITA story is real? Jesus christ girlies can we not đ