I completely misunderstood the phrase “gag toy for men“. (Thanks, Jender Parents– for the article; the bad parsing was totally my doing.)
CNN has an article on an important and horrendous thing going on in Iraq: girls and young women being sold into prostitution by their parents. But what do they call it? “Iraq’s Unspeakable Crime: Mothers Pimping Their Daughters”. Yeah. Because we all know men play no role at all in prostitution. The article itself does a good job drawing attention to the many forces producing this situation: a government that is not sufficiently concerned about women; police imprisoning women who speak out; cultural devaluation of women; war; poverty. But the headline makes it sound like it’s just a matter of mothers who are horrible to their daughters. (Thanks, Jender-Parents!)
Careful with watching it though: you may decide to put all your money in an Argentinian bank. (But who knows? Maybe that’s actually a GOOD decision these days.)
By the way, I’d love to have a bit more context for this: Why has this bank, at this time decided to do this? I would think that all banks right now are especially concerned to do things which improve their financial position and avoid things which jeopardise this. So, for example, I find it hard to imagine an American bank taking the risk of boycotts which would come if they ran this ad. Are things different in Argentina with regard to transphobia? Or are things perhaps so bad financially that they’ve decided “if we’re going under we might as well do some good in the world at the same time”? It seems important to know this, as it’s vital to know what can motivate people to go ahead and take a principled stand like this, especially in troubled economic times.