Feminists To The Rescue

The New Blog is UP!

2008-07-09T21:35:00.002-04:00

I just wrote my first post on my new blog, [A] Funny Feminist. It's just an introduction not unlike the post just below this one, in fact. It's still under construction, but I posted a bit about what's to come in the next few days. Hope you enjoy!

I'm Moving!

2008-07-08T18:23:00.002-04:00

After some thought, I've decided to create a different blog. I think I'll stick with Blogger since it seems the easiest to use. It's definitely better than LiveJournal, in my opinion. I've archived all of my posts from Feminists to the Rescue and my old blog, Womb of Doom, that I've written over the past couple of years. There's like 230-something! Put it on your summer reading list.

For the new blog, I'm thinking of going funny. I know what you're thinking. "Emily, you don't have to go anywhere. You're already funny." But I don't think I've used enough of my sense of humor on this blog, and I would like to make that central to my posts. I was thinking of calling it The Funny Feminist, but I know I'm not the funny feminist, nor do I want to be (that's a lot of pressure). So I'm leaning towards [A] Funny Feminist. It indicates that there's more than one funny feminist, and the brackets around the "A" just look stylish to me.

I'm thinking of a few segments. Maybe just "moments." "Segment" implies that it has to be regular, and I just don't think I can commit to that sort of thing. I know I'm keeping "Take Action Fridays" (or whatever day of the week I feel like posting it on). I also have something called "Pro-Life Indeed" in mind to show how pro-lifers don't really give a flying monkey about people's lives at all. I'm also thinking about a call for reactionary sexists to finally accept the radical modern thought of women as people in something I'll probably call "Join Us!" And I'll be posting funny videos of a feminist nature that I happen to find. I'm still not sure if I'll be posting bad news that would be offensive if I poked fun at it. I don't want to completely eliminate those kinds of posts because it's important that people know the horrible consequences of sexism. I'll see.

Hopefully I'll have everything set up in the next week. I created a logo last night. It's just a cartoon picture of myself laughing. I had to make sure I didn't make it look too much like Mikhaela at The Boiling Point! I don't know about in real life, but in cartoon land, we look quite similar. I hope I can put it up, because it's definitely hilarious.

Lastly but not leastly, thanks to everyone who visited and/or commented (you too, misogynoids!). And a very big thanks to Megan for letting me post here! I'll post the link to the new blog once I set up everything, and I hope to see you all there. Peace!

Take Action & Stuff I Forgot to Post About

2008-07-05T14:33:00.004-04:00

Long time, no post. I've been real busy lately. And by "busy" I mean "lazy!" My brother hooked up the Xbox to the HD television, so I've been playing Virtua Fighter 5 all week. You can see the pores on the back of Akira's hand! Exciting, right? Anyway . . . .

Tell Beef Northwest to negotiate with their union workers.

Tell Eagle Industries, which makes military gear, to allow their employees to form unions.

Stop so-called "pro-life" pharmacies. The petition is being sent to the Virginia Board Pharmacies, but anyone can sign.

A federal court upheld free speech rights after two anti-choice propoganda mongers were sued for driving a truck with pictures of what they call aborted fetuses (but we all know are stillbirths) around a middle school. Traumatizing children with propoganda. Pro-life indeed! Somehow I doubt the same court would have upheld free speech rights if someone drove around with a picture of a woman and a man "making a baby," if you catch my drift.

Remember the story of the undocumented teen who got an abortion with the help of a federally-funded Catholic organization in Virginia? A bishop in Virginia apologized for the incident. Guess how many times the young woman was mentioned? Once -- "I join my sadness to yours at the loss of the life of an unborn child whose teenage mother was in the foster care of Commonwealth Catholic Charities." So she only exists in relation to a fetus. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

The Associated Press wonders, "if there are two grooms, who kisses the bride?" Yes, important question indeed *eye roll*. The last sentence of the article says it all: “I just say, ’You may now kiss,”’ said [Rev. Neil] Thomas. “I don’t want to get into all that patriarchal stuff.” :D

Diane Negra of the University of East Anglia in England analyzes the media coverage of troubled women celebrities, such as Britney Spears and Amy Winehouse. “When we use female celebrities this way, we see them failing and struggling, they serve as proof that for women the work-life balance is impossible. Can you have it all? The answer these stories give again and again is ‘absolutely not.”’

And this isn't necessarily feminist, but a woman in China rescued over 100 dogs that were trapped in the rubble after the earthquake. A-dorable!

Does Anybody Know the Real John McCain?

2008-06-27T19:59:00.003-04:00

I'm supposed to send this video to five of my friends, but I'm posting it here because I bet more than five people read this. Right?

Anyway, it's pretty scary how few people know John McCain's record on family planning issues, but it's not surprising, since he's been painted by the media as a maverick. The above video shows the Planned Parenthood team clearing up some misconceptions.

Take Action Friday

2008-06-27T19:47:00.002-04:00

Help increase funding for family planning.

Tell investors in Darfur to stand up for human rights.

Show Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) and members of other human rights organizations your support.

Support Pre-K for every child.

Tell Trader Joe's to ensure that their suppliers follow the law by providing water, shade, and bathrooms to their farm workers.

Candace Parker Dunks Again, and Gets Shit On!

2008-06-26T18:17:00.003-04:00

What's that saying about women having to work twice as hard to get half the credit of men do? It doesn't really matter what the saying is, because Jim Rome expands on it when it comes to Candace Parker who dunked for the second time the other night. She's the second WNBA player to dunk and the only WNBA player to dunk twice.

Look, I like Candace Parker a lot. She’s a class act and a great athlete. But, if all you have to sell is a layup that you’re calling a dunk, that’s not much at all, is it. It’s basketball! People “throw it down”! Why are you giving yourselves credit for something they do in high school all the time? And in local runs down by the beach? And it would be even more impressive if she didn’t go in all alone, late in a blowout, with a smaller, bi-colored basketball.

Look, I’m not looking for her to take off from the free throw line, or to go off the glass through your legs and throw down a “windmill jam”. But, if it’s not too much to ask, I need to know what I just saw is an actually [sic] a dunk. The WNBA…they’ve got to next. And, two people who can dunk! Sort of!

Don't you just love it when assholes make typos? I love it when that happens. Anyway, Jim Rome is an asshole for other reasons. First, he denies that what Parker did was even a dunk. Um, yes it was, mustache. It was obviously a dunk. He further belittles Parker's achievement by pointing out that she made the dunk with a smaller ball, smaller in comparison to what the men play with in the NBA. It doesn't occur to Rome that WNBA players use a smaller ball because they have smaller hands. He believes that it's unfair that WNBA players use a smaller ball than NBA players, but it would be unfair if WNBA used the same sized ball because they wouldn't be able to handle it as well because it's too big. So basically, Rome wants the game to be unfair to women. He also doesn't like the circumstances of the dunk, since the Sparks were winning by a lot of points. But he didn't seem to think that was a problem after the NBA Finals when the Celtics creamed the Lakers in the final game, calling it "a great win for [the Celtics]" and saying that the Celtics were "much better" than the Lakers. Apparently, it's only okay when men wipe the floor with the other team. Finally, he says that he isn't expecting some sort of theatrical dunk, when that's exactly what he's looking for. Call me when you make up your mind, mustache. In the meantime, shut up.

George Carlin 1937-2008

2008-06-23T17:02:00.002-04:00

Chickens are decent people, but George Carlin was anything but. He'll be sorely missed.

So, Maybe There Were No Pregnancy Pacts?

2008-06-23T16:20:00.002-04:00

There's really not much more to say about this. I just think it's sad that this was such a believable story.

Take Action Friday

2008-06-20T20:17:00.002-04:00

Tell your Congressperson to support The TRADE Act.

Urge your Congressperson to increase family planning funding.

Voice your support for same-sex marriage.

Help expand the U.N. arms embargo to all of Sudan.

Tell House leadership to restore affordable birth control.

Feds Investigate Catholic Charity for Helping Teen Get Abortion

2008-06-20T19:26:00.003-04:00

As much as I would love to point out the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church, I think there are more problems with this story than that.

A 16-year-old undocumented immigrant from Guatamala living in Virginia was helped by workers from Commonwealth Catholic Charities get an abortion in January. One of the workers must have posed as the young woman's parent, since Virginia law requires parental consent for minors to have abortions. Four of the workers for the organization were fired, and the federal government is looking into the matter since this organization gets over $7 million a year in federal funding. And thanks to Henry Hyde, federal monies can't be used to pay for an abortion. So what are the many things wrong with this situation? Basically, lots of things could have been done to prevent this.

1. Abortion is illegal in Guatamala in almost all cases. If this young woman was in the United States specifically to obtain the abortion, this wouldn't have been necessary if abortion were legal in her home country.

2. The Global Gag Rule restricts family funding to any clinic or hospital that even mentions abortion. Contraception is the best way to prevent unintended pregnancy and, therefore, abortion. Even though abortion is illegal in Guatamala, she probably wouldn't have been able to obtain contraception because of this legislation.

3. Like I said before, the Hyde Amendment keeps federal funds from being used to pay for an abortion. If not for that law, this wouldn't be a federal crime. If not for that law, a woman's reproductive system wouldn't be under government scrutiny. It's really none of the government's business who has an abortion and under what circumstances, but dead white guys like Hyde still have control over women in America.

4. Virginia has parental consent laws for abortion. There's a possibility that this young woman's parents aren't in the United States. Commonweatlth Catholic Charities has a refugee minors program who came to the United States without their parents. If her parents are in the United States, they're here illegally. Furthermore, she would have had to attend "pre-abortion counseling" designed to discourage her from having the abortion and then wait 24 hours. I'm going under the probably false assumption that she's aware of the restrictions in the first place. And that doesn't even include the possibility that this young woman would be abused or disowned if she told her parents or that she was afraid of being deported. Obviously, the system failed her and she had nowhere to turn.

5. Federal funding shouldn't even be allocated to religious organizations in the first place. That $7 million could be used to support family planning in Virginia.

I'm not going to say that what Commonwealth Catholic Charities did was a noble thing. I am not sure under what circumstances this young woman got the abortion. I am suspect of any organization that provides "crisis pregnancy counseling," since they are in the business of deciding what a woman will do for them and not letting the woman decide what's best for herself. And how do I know that they didn't decide for her that it's best that she get an abortion? It might not even have been this young woman's choice. Hopefully, more details will come of this story so we can keep up with it.

Pregnancy Pacts

2008-06-20T19:01:00.003-04:00

This is pretty creepy. A high school in Massachusetts recently saw a spike in teen pregnancies, 17 in all. It's suspected that about half of them were part of some pregnancy pact where the teens vowed to get pregnant and raise their babies together. Of course, Jamie Lynn Spears was blamed for having the nerve to have a kid. It's funny. First, Jamie Lynn is congratulated for "doing the right thing" by remaining pregnant and having the baby, and now she's being singled out for the same reasons. Those are the kinds of mixed messages that confuse teens and grown-ups alike about how they're supposed to handle their sex lives.

What was never mentioned in the above clip is sexuality education. They talked about the possibility of making contraception available to students, but that doesn't really help when the girls actually want to get pregnant. I also don't agree with the idea that these girls are looking for unconditional love or anything like that. It struck me as kind of odd that these girls were making a pact with other teen girls, so they do have a sense of friendship and togetherness, maybe even sisterhood. It's almost as if they don't even expect any guy they make a baby with to support the kid. That's pretty sad. I think if these young women learned that their worth wasn't measured in how many babies they have and that they're good people in and of themselves, that things like this wouldn't happen.

Who Says Feminists Aren't Funny?

2008-06-17T19:46:00.002-04:00

Planned Parenthood explores what would happen if John McCain became president. It's one of those funny-cuz-it's-true things. It's also one of those horrible-cuz-it's-true things. Weird.

Back Burner Activism

2008-06-17T14:19:00.003-04:00

Since I have science to back me up when I say that sexist jokes are, in fact, not only unfunny but damaging, I don't really give a shit if people label me as a humorless feminist when I say that this advertisement for the Planet Green television network is sexist. It stars Ludacris and Tommy Lee trying to one-up each other when it comes to conservation. At one point Ludacris says:

You know the hotel we're staying at? Remember the hot tub, right? I filled it up with all women instead of water -- saved 150 gallons.

I know that this is supposed to be a joke, but this commercial joins basically everything that PETA does by putting women's dignity on the back burner to promote another cause. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for animal welfare and protecting the environment. But I know how to support these causes without treating women like objects. I recognize that animal cruelty, the destruction of our environment, and the second-class status of women are not mutually exclusive. Is it a surprise that there's a link between domestic violence and animal abuse, or that Mother Nature or Mother Earth gets no respect for everything she does for us (like give us life and provide us with food)? As much as I would love to, I don't really expect Planet Green or PETA to realize that the way we treat women, animals, and the environment intersect and that we can achieve all of our goals much easier if we join forces. But is it really that difficult to go 30 seconds without making a sexist joke?

What Conscience?

2008-06-16T19:46:00.002-04:00

There was a real freaky article in the Washington Post today about so-called "pro-life pharmacies." They're just like regular pharmacies, except they refuse to do everyday pharmacy-type stuff, like fill prescriptions for birth control and emergency contraception and sell condoms. They believe it's in women's best interest to refuse perfectly safe and legal forms of hormonal birth control in order to prevent pregnancy, relieve menstrual cramps, and regulate menstrual cycles. Thanks a bunch! Here's how they neglect their responsibilities:

Pharmacists at eight pro-life drugstores contacted by The Washington Post said they would not actively interfere with a woman trying to fill a prescription elsewhere, but none posts signs announcing restrictions or offers to help women get what they need elsewhere.

"If I don't believe something is right, the last thing I want to do is refer to someone else," said Michael G. Koelzer, who owns Kay Pharmacy in Grand Rapids, Mich. "It's up to that person to be able to find it."

That's contrary to the American Pharmacists Association's Code of Ethics, with guidelines like "A pharmacist promotes the right of self-determination and recognizes individual self-worth by encouraging patients to participate in decisions about their health . . . . In all cases, a pharmacist respects personal and cultural differences among patients" and "A pharmacist avoids discriminatory practices, behavior or work conditions that impair professional judgment, and actions that compromise dedication to the best interests of patients." So while one might say they're simply "trying not to leave our faith at the door," they're doing just that to the responsibilities of their profession and, more importantly, the people they're supposed to serve.

The Ultimate Finishing Move

2008-06-13T16:35:00.002-04:00

This is currently the greatest thing on the Internet, a beautiful mix of presidential politics, media blunders, and Mortal Kombat.

Take Action Friday

2008-06-13T15:47:00.002-04:00

I've been reading like a mofo this whole week for my Multicultural Counseling class, so sorry for the lack of updates. My inbox was filled with take action-y stuff for me to share with all of you. Yay!

Sign the sympathy card for Maria Isabel Vasquez Jimenez, a 17-year-old pregnant farm worker who died of heat stroke recently.

Contact the Men's Warehouse Board of Directors and demand that they keep their Montreal factory open.

Support the United Nations Population Fund Restoration Act.

Say no to warrantless wiretapping.

Tell your Congressperson to help reduce child marriages.

Support the Employee Free Choice Act.

Hillary Clinton's Exit Speech

2008-06-09T18:37:00.003-04:00

Here's the video of Hillary Clinton's wonderful exit speech that she gave on Saturday in Washington, DC. I hope she gets a cabinet position and runs in 2012 (and leave Bill and Terry McCauliffe at home next time). And there were kind of a lot of boos whenever she mentioned Obama. Hmmmm . . . .

Voting for Your Second Favorite: A Fact of Presidential Elections -- and American Idol

2008-06-04T19:30:00.005-04:00

For most liberals, today is a happy day, because Barack Obama has clinched the Democratic nomination (here's the YouTube video of his speech, which I'm listening to now, and it's great). For slightly fewer liberals, it's time to suck it up and vote for the candidate who might be (should be, really) your second favorite. Hillary Clinton supporters, with a crappy economy, slow housing and job markets, an ongoing occupation and war in Iraq, the possibility of more war in Iran, and the nearly 8-year-long erosion of our human and civil rights, it is NOT the time to be bitter and risk having another 4 years of the same by staying home on November 4 or voting for John McCain. Besides, voting for John McCain would make you a gigantic moron. Sometimes, when your favorite gets the boot, you have to vote for your second favorite. This goes for presidential elections and American Idol, and I'm going to compare the two right now (and I'll do a better job than John McCain did).

Season 7 of American Idol ended just a couple of weeks ago, and it showcased fantastic talent that wasn't seen in any of the preceding seasons, except maybe Season 4 when Bo Bice should have won, but Carrie Underwood did. My favorite of this past season was Jason Castro, the dreadlocked, sensitive Colombian folk singer with blue eyes like the -- alright let me stop before I float away. I voted my little fingers off for the guy every week since his first performance and I fell in love with him over and over again, week after week, no matter how much the judges bashed his style. Unfortunately, Team Castro dropped the ball (well, so did Jason), and Jason placed fourth. Many Dreadheads (clever, no?) vowed to never vote or watch the show again. I, like so many other American Idol fans, had a second favorite: The tall, faux-hawked, scruffy Mid-Western rocker, David Cook. And I felt torn between making a statement by boycotting the show and possibly inadvertantly sealing the deal for either baby-faced snooze-fest David Archuleta or screechy diva wannabe Syesha Mercado. I went back and forth -- "I'm gonna boycott!" "No! I have to vote for Cook!" -- for an entire week. It was stressful.

I decided not to watch and not to vote. I was secure in my decision, until I realized something. How successful would my boycott be if I didn't vote and my inaction caused someone that I didn't want to win, to win? Wouldn't that be a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts? Wouldn't it just piss me off even more if neither of the performers that I liked and that I thought deserved to win got voted off? Wouldn't it be just like Taylor Hicks winning all over again? (If you don't know what it's like for Taylor Hicks to win American Idol, just remember how you felt when George W. Bush was reelected. It kind of feels like that).

So at the very last minute on Top-3 night, I voted for David Cook for two full hours, and he made it to the top 2. The next week, I voted for David Cook again. So did a lot of Dreadheads, even those who initially said they wouldn't vote after Jason got voted off. And you know what happened? David Cook won by 12 million votes, and Cook's fans are forever grateful, because they know he couldn't have won without help from the Dreadheads (those Archies play dir-tay.). And overall, the Dreadheads seem very satisfied with David Cook winning, as he was a second favorite of many.

The moral of the story? It can hurt when your favorite candidate doesn't win the grand prize, but if you can help the other guy who shares your views and rocks just as hard, it'll still be much more satisfying than if some boring guy who's the same as everyone else and appeals to the over 60 set wins. Or something like that.

Gigantic Moron of the Day

2008-06-02T20:04:00.002-04:00

I say "of the day" as if I have one of these every day. But this person is probably one of the dumbest people in America right now.

Her name is Koryne Horbel. She claims to be a feminist. After she said this, I have to respectfully disagree:

"I don't care," Horbal said of the possibility that [having loads of people write in Hillary Clinton's name in the November elections] might cost Obama votes. She said she also would not be bothered if the write-in campaign indirectly helped elect John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee. "Let McCain clean it up for four years, and then we can have Hillary run again," she said.

Clean up what? Reproductive rights? Gay rights? Veterans benefits? Iran? If you'd rather have a war mongering, anti-choice, heterosexist asshole in the White House than Barack Obama -- or any liberal other than Hillary Clinton, for that matter -- then you need to hand back your feminist card . . . pronto.

Take Action

2008-05-31T17:31:00.003-04:00

Might as well post again while I'm here.

Defend online freedom in China.

Tell Tyson foods to denounce discriminatory hiring practices.

There's a way to support an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without crazy proclimations from Pat Robertson and weird prophecies from John Hagee. Sign this petition and learn more!

Show your support for permanent marriage equality in California.

Congratulate farmworkers for their successful fight for a pay raise from Burger King.

Thank the presidential candidates for promising to do something about the genocide in Darfur once elected (yes, John McCain too.).

Promote diversity in media ownership.

Tell your Congresspeople to vote for the Save Medicare Act.

Test your reproductive rights knowledge.

What's Important to You?

2008-05-31T17:01:00.002-04:00

I'm on the family computer, which is equally crappy, but at least it doesn't turn off by itself!

Anyway, the band Against Me did another video for their song Stop. It takes place outside a voting booth, and show what people base their vote on, like the war in Iraq, healthcare, immigration, and poverty. It's an admirable attempt, and I think they succeed in almost all of these depictions. It's a pretty great video. Where do they fail? Why, reproductive rights, of course! The director's idea of basing one's vote on reproductive freedom (or lack thereof) is a pro-choicer and an anti-choicer going at it holding signs. I don't know about any other pro-choicers (and trying to speak for the antis will just make my head explode), but my desire for reproductive freedom doesn't really encompass my freedom to hold a "Keep Abortion Legal" sign.

This depiction takes women out of the equation. Ultimately, the loudmouths outside of Planned Parenthood are completely irrelevant to women seeking birth control. There are better ways to illustrate this issue. I mean, they didn't show someone against immigration and someone supporting immigration pointing their fingers at each other and yelling. Instead, there should have been frightened young people walking into the voting booth with a bunch of pro- and anit-choice demonstrators on either side. It would show people how difficult it is for women and men to get birth control and other reproductive healtchare services, which is why people need to vote for these issues in the first place.

On the plus side, they show an interracial gay couple kissing. *thumbs up*

My Computer is Busted

2008-05-28T14:31:00.002-04:00

My computer is acting up. It keeps shutting off by itself. So, I'll probably be posting less frequently (not that I post that frequently anyway) until I get another computer.

Omigod, Omigod, Omigod!

2008-05-25T20:00:00.002-04:00

Meet the Press had four women on the show today! Which means it was a very woman-friendly show with no sexism, right? Maybe? No, not really.

What really bothers me about the role of women in this country is that we're supposed to be really happy with what little we have all the time, and pointing out any completely reasonable negative feelings you may have makes you a real killjoy. Hillary Clinton said this to a reporter for the Washington Post last week:

The manifestation of some of the sexism that has gone on in this campaign is somehow more respectable, or at least more accepted. And I think there should be equal rejection of the sexism and the racism when and if it ever raises its ugly head. But it does seem as though the press, at least, is, is not as bothered by the incredible vitriol that has been engendered by the comments and the actions of people who are nothing but misogynists.

I do think that Clinton has a bit of a point here, although I don't totally agree with it. I think the way people react to being called a sexist ("Pfft. Yeah, right. Whatever.") and the way people react to being called a racist ("What?! How dare you imply that race even exists in order for someone to even make a racist statement to begin with!") doesn't leave any room open for meaningful discussion either way. Neither does getting getting into any oppression Olympics. Anyway, first, Maureen Dowd's response:

I think it's poppycock, really. I mean, Hillary Clinton has allowed women to visualize a woman as president for the first time, in the way Colin Powell allowed people to visualize an African-American. And she dominated the debates, she, she proved that a woman can have as much tenacity and gall as any man on earth. We, we can visualize her facing down Ahmadinejad. But the thing is, Hillary hurts feminism when she uses it as opportunism. And she has a history of covering up her own mistakes behind sexism. She did it with health care right after health care didn't pass. She didn't admit that she was abrasive or mismanaged it or blew off good advice or was too secretive. She said that she was a Rorschach test for gender and that many men thought of a female boss they didn't like when they looked at her. And now she's doing the same thing, and it's very--you know, in a way it's the moral equivalent of Sharptonism. It's this victimhood and angry and turning women against men and saying that the men are trying to take it away from us, in the same way she's turning Florida and Michigan and riling up and comparing them to suffragettes and slaves. And it's very damaging to feminism.

And now, part of an editorial by Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post:

Hillary Clinton isn't going to be elected the first female president--not this year, anyway. The reasons for this outcome have gratifyingly little to do with her gender. ...

The notion that Clinton was the victim of unrelenting, vicious hatred because she is a woman--is it safe to call this reaction overwrought? Clinton managed to win more votes than any primary candidate in either party ever had before. It's hard to square that result with the notion that her candidacy exposed a deep vein of misogyny. ...

From a feminist perspective, Clinton's was not a perfect candidacy. Part of this stems from a fact outside Clinton's control, that her route to power was derivative, the Adam's rib outgrowth of her husband's career. Hillary Clinton had been elected to the Senate, twice, in her own right, but the fact that her road to the White House involved standing by her man, no matter how badly he behaved, made her a flawed vessel for the feminist cause.

And Clinton's least attractive campaign moments came when she took up the gender card and chose to play it as victim instead of a trailblazer. The notion that the male candidates were ganging up on her because she is a woman instead of--remember back when?--because she was the front-runner was silly. The complaint that asking her the first question in debates was evidence of a double standard was even sillier.

Both responses could be summed up in six words: "Look on the bright side, Hil!"

And why not look on the bright side, when people accuse you of rolling back women's rights for having a human gaffe machine for a husband (because Obama's wife never said anything potentially damaging)! I mean, don't you like living in a society where you're judged based on your relationship with your husband? Don't you like people judging your leadership abilities based on your adherence to gender roles? Don't you like people worrying about the inevitable PMS-induced nuclear bomb attack if you become president, despite the fact that you're 60 years old? Don't you like people expecting even a powerful and intellectual woman like you to get back in the kitchen or iron shirts for a living? Don't be such a Debbie Downer!

Arizona Wants to Ban Multiculturalism

2008-05-16T23:50:00.006-04:00

You read that correctly. Arizona wants to ban teaching multiculturalism, whether that be through academic curricula or student groups, at all public schools, universities, and community colleges. But here's the kicker: This ban is an amendment to their homeland security bill. Because if you're not only learning about White people, you're one step closer to flying an airplane into a skyscraper! First, I'll tell you what the bill states. Then, I'll offer you helpful translations.

A primary purpose of public education is to inculcate values of American citizenship.

Translation: Repeat after me, boys and girls -- White is right! White is right! White is right!

Public tax dollars used in public schools should not be used to denigrate American values and the teachings of western civilization.

Translation: Harriet Tubman was a dirty Commie. So was Sacajawea for that matter. You know what? Throw Shirley Chisholm on that list too. And don't even get me started on Bayard Rustin. Oh, who am I kidding? Nobody learns about these people in school anyway.

Public tax dollars should not be used to promote political, religious, ideological or cultural beliefs or values as truth when such values are in conflict with the values of American citizenship and the teachings of western civilization.

Translation: American civil rights movement = political ideology. Europeans coming to a land uninvited (but nonetheless welcomed) and then murdering, raping, and enslaving American Indians and Africans = values of American citizenship.

A public school in this state shall not include within the program of instruction any courses, classes or school sponsored activities that promote, assert as truth or feature as an exclusive focus any political, religious, ideological or cultural beliefs or values that denigrate, disparage or overtly encourage dissent from the values of American democracy and western civilization, including democracy, capitalism, pluralism and religious toleration.

Translation: You can be a lesbian if you want to. Just don't bitch to us about how you have fewer rights than your heterosexual counterparts, and don't even think about learning how to fix that. Not that I'm saying America needs to fix anything . . . . Um . . . go Yankees?

This section does not prohibit the inclusion of diverse political, religious, ideological or cultural beliefs or values if the course, class or school sponsored activity as a whole does not denigrate, disparage or overtly encourage dissent from the values of American democracy and western civilization.

Translation: OK, so you can major in Women's Studies, but you can't talk about America's misogynistic past and present -- especially not the present! I mean, present? What misogynistic present? America has no faults! Never has, never will! U-S-A! U-S-A!

A public school in this state, a university under the jurisdiction of the Arizona board of regents and a community college under the jurisdiction of a community college district in this state shall not allow organizations to operate on the campus of the school, university or community college if the organization is based in whole or in part on race-based criteria.

Translation: Sorry, Black Student Union. Try out for the basketball team instead. Black people like basketball, right? Let me ask Mitt Romney. He's talked to more Black people than I have, and it shows!

But there's something you can do! Even if you don't live in Arizona, you can still contact Arizona's Speaker of the House and tell them what you think.

Start the Weekend Off Right

2008-05-16T12:53:00.002-04:00

If you live in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Indiana, Iowa, Florida, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, or Virgina, at least one of your Senators did not vote in support of the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. So you have to contact them and tell them to change their minds.

Support the REAL Act and comprehensive sexuality education.

Urge President Bush to take action to help the people in Darfur.

Tell Senator Leahy and Congresswoman Lowey that you support increasing international family planning funding.

Tell John McCain to fire the lobbyists who work for dictators and human rights abusers.

Take Action Friday

2008-05-09T14:18:00.002-04:00

Post number 350! Whoo! I don't know if that's an official milestone. Whatev!

Urge your Senators and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to pass S.J. Res. 28, which will end media consolidation

Tell the Embassies in Myanmar to allow aid to reach those who are affected by the cyclone.

Stop Bush from nominating crazy judges.

Urge Congress to invest more in family planning.

George W. Bush: A Special Kind of Asshole

2008-05-06T12:29:00.002-04:00

It takes a special kind of asshole to let your wife decry the inaction of Myanmar's government to the recent cyclone that has killed thousands of people. George W. Bush is that asshole. In a press conference yesterday, First Lady Laura Bush said the followin g:

Although they were aware of the threat, Burma's state-run media failed to issue a timely warning to citizens in the storm's path.

The response to this cyclone is just the most recent example of the junta's failures to meet its people's basic needs.

I wonder if anyone heard the name "Katrina" blowing in the wind. I know I did.

Who Counts?

2008-05-05T22:09:00.004-04:00

Keith Olbermann outlines what kinds of voters count, according to the Clinton campaign. Honestly, if we could harness the power of the Clinton spin machine, we'd be energy independent yesterday.

"D.C. Madam" Killed Herself

2008-05-02T17:17:00.002-04:00

Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the so-called D.C. Madam of a high class prostitution ring that has served government officials, hanged herself yesterday. The article mentions that Brandy Britton, one of the sex workers involved, also killed herself before going on trial. Maybe she didn't want to go through the extra humiliation of being asked invasive and irrelevant personal questions, like how do they serve Washington lawmakers while they were menstruating. Put that on top of the fact that Sen. Vitter still gets to keep his job and never had to go on trial, and now even I kind of feel a bit dead inside.

Stuff to Do and Read

2008-04-27T16:23:00.002-04:00

A mining company in Ghana wants to expand a mine that will destroy low-income housing and schools. Sign this petition telling the company to consider the rights of the people.

The World Food Program is cutting it's food donations to Darfur in half. Tell your Congressperson to support full funding of food in Darfur.

Urge your lawmakers to end abstinence-only education funding.

Life expectancy for women in poor counties decreases.

Multiple Pap and HPV tests are needed to assess one's risk of getting cervical cancer.

Mammograms are effective for early detection of breast cancer at any age.

Trading sex for net neutrality. How does prostitution make the Internet any more neutral?

SELF magazine poll shows nearly 2/3 of women are disordered eaters.

Dan Rather Reports: Wal-Mart & Dalits

2008-04-25T18:28:00.002-04:00

As a Verizon FiOS customer, I no longer have MSNBC, but I do have HDNet. I record Dan Rather Reports every day, and this morning, I watched a heart-breaking episode. The first part of the episode is about tapes that have been leaked of the meetings of Wal-Marts managers. According to Wal-Mart lobbyists, every dollar that is donated by a Wal-Mart employee to Wal-Mart's political action committee is matched by the corporation and put into a trust fund for the employees. I don't know what anyone else thinks, but I find that to be clearly unethical.

The second part is about Dalits in India. Dalits are the lowest citizens of the caste system and are oppressed by Indian society. Even though such treatment is illegal, the caste system is still alive and well. I don't even want to explain how these people are treated. It's absolutely disgusting. But you can watch the entire episode for free here. I have to warn you that this portion of the video is highly disturbing, and I bawled throughout the whole thing. Viewer discretion is advised (I've always wanted to say that).

WTF, John McCain?

2008-04-25T17:20:00.003-04:00

As we know by know, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act failed to get the necessary 60 votes in the Senate. I was pleased to see that several Republicans voted yes, but not enough did. Someone who did not vote at all was Senator and Republican presidential nominee John McCain. Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, who are also running for president, made it to Washington for the vote. Yesterday, I listed John McCain as someone who doesn't give a shit about women because he didn't vote on the Act at all. And because Clinton and Obama are running campaigns just as much as McCain, I can only assume that McCain would have voted "No" had he voted this week, and what a blemish that would have been on his record. Here's McCain's reasoning for not supporting the bill (but not why he was too cowardly to vote at all):

"I am all in favor of pay equity for women, but this kind of legislation, as is typical of what's being proposed by my friends on the other side of the aisle, opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems."

Lawsuits such as Ledbetter vs. Goodyear, perchance? That's the point, jackass. If pay inequity based on gender is illegal, and a company pays any woman less anyway, that is breaking the law, and breaking the law opens you up to a big, fat, well-deserved lawsuit. That was pretty bad, but at least he has hundreds of years of conservative philosophy backing up his reasoning. But why, oh why, didn't he just stop there?

"They [women] need the education and training, particularly since more and more women are heads of their households, as much or more than anybody else. And it's hard for them to leave their families when they don't have somebody to take care of them.

It's a vicious cycle that's affecting women, particularly in a part of the country like this [Kentucky], where mining is the mainstay; traditionally, women have not gone into that line of work, to say the least."

Um, no. More women than men are enrolled in college. And no matter where you go or what your profession, women are making less than men. And maybe more women will become miners once Elaine Chao stops screwing them over.

If you want to take John McCain to school, sign this petition.

Republicans Fillibuster Fair Pay Act

2008-04-24T14:15:00.003-04:00

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act failed to get 60 votes in the Senate yesterday. Here are the Senators that care about women (i.e., they voted YES to fair pay):

Lincoln (D-AR), Pryor (D-AR), Boxer (D-CA), Feinstein (D-CA), Salazar (D-CO), Dodd (D-CT),Lieberman (ID-CT) Hey! How 'bout that!, Biden (D-DE), Carper(D-DE), Nelson (D-FL), Akaka (D-HI), Inouye (D-HI), Durbin (D-IL), Obama (D-IL), Bayh (D-IN), Harkin (D-IA), Landrieu (D-LA), Collins (R-ME), Snowe (R-ME), Cardin (D-MD), Mikulski (D-MD), Kennedy (D-MA), Kerry (D-MA), Levin (D-MI), Stabenow (D-MI), Coleman (R-MN), Klobuchar (D-MN), McCaskill (D-MO), Baucus (D-MT), Tester (D-MT), Sununu (R-NH), Lautenberg (D-NJ), Menendez (D-NJ), Bingaman (D-NM), Clinton (D-NY), Schumer (D-NY), Conrad (D-ND), Dorgan (D-ND), Brown (D-OH), Smith (R-OR), Wyden (D-OR), Casey (D-PA), Specter (R-PA), Reed (D-RI), Whitehouse (D-RI), Johnson (D-SD), Leahy (D-VT), Sanders (I-VT), Webb (D-VA), Cantwell (D-WA), Murray (D-WA), Byrd (D-WV), Rockefeller (D-WV), Feingold (D-WI), Kohl (D-WI)

Here are the Senators who don't give a shit about women (i.e., they voted NO or didn't vote at all):

Sessions (R-AL), Shelby (R-AL), Murkowski (R-AK), Stevens (R-AK), Kyl (R-AZ), McCain (R-AZ -- didn't vote), Allard (R-CO), Martinez (R-FL), Chambliss (R-GA), Isakson (R-GA), Craig (R-ID), Crapo (R-ID), Grassley (R-IA), Brownback (R-KS), Roberts (R-KS), Bunning (R-KY), McConnell (R-KY), Vitter (R-LA), Cochran (R-MS), Wicker (R-MS), Bond (R-MO), Hagel (R-NE -- didn't vote), Ensign (R-NV), Gregg (R-NH), Domenici (R-NM), Burr (R-NC), Dole (R-NC), Voinovich (R-OH), Coburn (R-OK), Inhofe (R-OK), DeMint (R-SC), Graham (R-SC), Thune (R-SD), Alexander (R-TN), Corker (R-TN), Cornyn (R-TX), Hutchison (R-TX), Bennett (R-UT), Hatch (R-UT), Warner (R-VA), Barrasso (R-WY), Enzi (R-WY)

Harry Reid (D-NV) voted NO for "technical reasons" but strongly supports the bill and will bring the bill up at another time. I don't know what those technical reasons are . . . .

Contact your Senators and thank them or tell them you're disappointed, depending on how they voted.

Polygamist Compound, or Fashionista Think Tank?

2008-04-21T22:47:00.002-04:00

I know that's what I've been asking myself ever since I heard about the story about that polygamist compound broke. Thank goodness for those liberal wing-nuts at MSNBC for this gem! Here's some stirring analysis that I'm sure every journalism student looks forward to reporting to the masses someday:

Celebrity stylist and salon owner Ted Gibson thinks [the old-fashioned hairdo] gives off a "homely" impression.

"It says 'I don't really care very much. I really don't have time to worry about the way that I look, because I have 20 children,'" Gibson said. "He's going from wife to wife to wife, so why should I look any better than the other ones?"

I think it says "I'm in a cult, and my husband, who's old enough to be my father and who rapes me every day, makes me look like this. Please get me the hell out of here."

Another Anti-Choice Federal Judge Nomination

2008-04-20T16:47:00.002-04:00

Dubya just doesn't learn, does he?

Bush has nominated another anti-choice weirdo for a lifetime appointment as a federal judge. His name is Robert J. Conrad, Jr., and he's called Planned Parenthood a "radical pro-abortion fringe group." Considering that a whopping 3% of all people who received services from Planned Parenthood received abortions from them, it looks like he's the out-of-touch one. And while the White House says that Conrad is "a highly respected jurist who is widely praised by lawyers and fellow judges alike for his intellect, fairness, and judicial temperament," he actually served on the board of a crisis pregnancy center in Charlottesville. So you have to contact your Senators to reject his nomination.

Things I Forgot to Post About

2008-04-20T12:22:00.002-04:00

Since I've been spending most of the weekend writing my paper on Planned Parenthood, I don't have much time to write in-depth posts about things that have happened this week. So here's some light reading for you.

Leslie Bennett on household chores, child-rearing, and married life. "I admit that my husband helps out more than many men, but here’s another news flash: It isn’t because he’s such a fabulously enlightened being. Left to his own devices, he would doubtless park himself in front of the TV like some sitcom male-chauvinist couch potato while I did all the work. The reason Jeremy “helps” as much as he does (an offensive terminology that itself suggests who’s really being held responsible) is simple: He doesn’t have a choice." It's highly disappointing that, in the right margin of this article, is a little slideshow featuring "31 ways to meet a quality man."

The non-story of the so-called abortion artist leaves people feeling duped. A Yale art student claims to have artificially inseminated herself and then induced bleeding -- and it's caught on tape. "Miscarriage" and "abortion" are thrown around in this article, but no one, not even the artist herself, can possibly know for certain that she was ever pregnant to begin with. And isn't that the point?

One student at King Middle School in Maine was prescribed birth control in the last 6 months. I guess that means the presence of birth control options makes kids have sex without birth control. *rolls eyes*

A sheriff at a women's jail in Oklahoma raped enough inmates to possibly be sentenced to 467 years in prison. But his bail was a whopping $50,000. Hmmm . . . .

Some of the women in that polygamist compound might have given birth at 13. A dirty old man having sex with a 13-year-old = Ewwwwww.

Fun Fact of the Day

2008-04-19T19:30:00.002-04:00

And by "fun," I mean "quite disturbing."

Did you know that the United States is one of the only countries that doesn't provide paid maternity leave? Present company includes Swaziland, Papua New Guinea, Lesotho, and Liberia. Yup. I've heard of some of those countries.

Wow, right? I got that bit of information from this article about women leaving the workforce for maternity leave.

Take Action Friday

2008-04-18T11:55:00.002-04:00

Tell your Senators to support Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. They vote on it next week!

Endorse the Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq.

Urge your Representatives to support the GROWTH Act, which helps women get out of poverty by loaning them money to start their own businesses and by giving them skills training.

Call Bill O'Reilly out on his homophobic bullshit.

My Beautiful (According to the Patriarchy) Mommy

2008-04-16T12:14:00.002-04:00

A new children's book written by cosmetic surgeon Michael Salzhauer seeks to explain to children the process of cosmetic surgery. But what does it really do? Shames mommies.

It features a perky mother explaining to her child why she's having cosmetic surgery (a nose job and tummy tuck). Naturally, it has a happy ending: mommy winds up "even more" beautiful than before, and her daughter is thrilled.

That's a happy ending? I don't know about anybody else, but I thought every little kid believed their mother to be the prettiest woman in the world, and it's not because she adheres to the patriarchal confines of femininity and beauty. This kind of behavior is often modeled by children, particularly daughters, and it can later develop into poor body image and eating disorders. But it's a happy story! Here's more on the book's description:

"My Beautiful Mommy" is aimed at kids ages four to seven and features a plastic surgeon named Dr. Michael (a musclebound superhero type) and a girl whose mother gets a tummy tuck, a nose job and breast implants. Before her surgery the mom explains that she is getting a smaller tummy: "You see, as I got older, my body stretched and I couldn't fit into my clothes anymore. Dr. Michael is going to help fix that and make me feel better." Mom comes home looking like a slightly bruised Barbie doll with demure bandages on her nose and around her waist.

The text doesn't mention the breast augmentation, but the illustrations intentionally show Mom's breasts to be fuller and higher. "I tried to skirt that issue in the text itself," says Salzhauer. "The tummy lends itself to an easy explanation to the children: extra skin and can't fit into your clothes. The breasts might be a stretch for a six-year-old."

The book doesn't explain exactly why the mother is redoing her nose post-pregnancy. Nonetheless, Mom reassures her little girl that the new nose won't just look "different, my dear—prettier!"

So is this book really teaching kids about why women opt for a tummy tuck after pregnancy, or is it merely an advertisement for Dr. Salzhauer's services for the next generation? Now on to the saddest part of the article.

Instead of being uncomfortable about the surgery, [29-year-old mom Gabriela] Acosta says her son actually spoke up about it at a big party. "Did you see her new belly button? It's so pretty!" he said of his mom.

Pretty belly buttons. Yes, I had to read that again too. Because you know your mama ain't shit unless she has the prettiest belly button on the block.

And how many people really believe that Dr. Michael Salzhauer is as buff as the "superhero" cosmetic surgeon called "Dr. Michael" in the story? Someone has issues . . . .

Are They NUTS??? Actually, No.

2008-04-15T23:55:00.004-04:00

If you haven't heard, Randi Rhodes quit Air America Radio last week after being suspended for some sexist comments she made. So from 3pm-6pm, guest hosts have been filling in. And let me say, it's difficult to miss Randi.

This week, actor and conspiracy theorist Richard Belzer is guest hosting, and he had Joshua Kors of The Nation on the show. He broke a story about the US Military denying Iraq War veterans medical benefits, claiming that the physical injuries they suffered in battle were actually due to a Personality Disorder. I know. It doesn't make any sense to us. But it makes perfect sense for a government run by a Republican Commander in Chief, because Personality Disorders are considered preexisting conditions and aren't covered. And the government is saving billions of dollars by doing this. The military has done this more than 5,600 times in the past 6 years. Before you know it, the military will save enough money to pay the richest corporations' tax cuts that John McCain wants to give back -- $1.7 trillion in all! I swear, the most patriotic thing any of these Republicans have ever done is wear a flag pin on their lapels.

Donations for Darfur

2008-04-15T00:22:00.005-04:00

This past Sunday was the National Day for Darfur, and demonstrations took place all across the country. I attended one near my hometown. One of my best friends from the Darfur Rehabilitation Project sent me this information about what good your money can do.

$35 can provide two high-energy meals a day to 200 children
$50 can provide vaccinations for 50 people against meningitis, measles, polio, or other deadly epidemics
$100 can provide infection-fighting antibiotics to treat nearly 40 wounded children
$250 can provide a sterilization kit for syringes and needles used in mobile vaccination campaigns
$1000 can provide emergency medical supplies to aid 5,000 disaster victims for an entire month

Also, I sent my Save Darfur wristbands to David Cook, who is a contestant on American Idol. Hopefully, he'll receive them by tomorrow and wear one on the show. I asked him to wear one and give the other to an influential person of his choosing. So keep your eyes open on Tuesday and Wednesday for the green wristbands. I'm hoping that David Cook's fans (there are officially 876 of us as of today) will see that he cares about Darfur and will learn more about the crisis there and help to end it.

UPDATE: Not tonight . . . . I'm not worried though. They should get there by tomorrow.
UPDATE: Not tonight either, although last year's second runner-up, Eliot Yamin, was wearing a green wristband. I don't think it was one of mine or a different Save Darfur one, though, just a fluke.

Midnight Quickie: Question

2008-04-13T00:11:00.002-04:00

If the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply in domestic military operations, then can that sort of reasoning be used to overturn Roe v. Wade? It seems to me that suspending the Fourth Amendment in this case is a bit of a surprise. It actually sounds like someone just made that up on a whim in order to, I don't know, justify warrantless wiretapping or racial profiling in airports and other transportation hubs. So how can I be be sure that someone won't conclude that the Fourth Amendment has no application when it comes to reproduction?

Update on My Planned Parenthood Presentation

2008-04-12T12:05:00.002-04:00

A couple of days ago I told you that I'm doing a presentation on Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan New Jersey for my Community Agencies class. That's on Monday, April 14. That's just two days before Pro-Life Day, which is next Wednesday. Perfect timing, no?

They're having a so-called "Pro-Life Baby Shower," and people are expected to donate baby items for a local crisis pregnancy center. I kind of want to donate a giant box of condoms.

John McCain on American Idol

2008-04-12T00:25:00.002-04:00

This week, American Idol hosted their second annual "Idol Gives Back" benefit, which raises money for children in the United States and Africa. The three candidates for president taped messages for viewers urging us to give. Now, I've been told more than once to stop talking about politics on the American Idol message boards (I can't help myself -- a Barack Obama/David Cook ticket just can't lose!), but after listening to John McCain, talking politics should be fair game.

American Idol is a lot like a presidential primary election: Except for people who live in Michigan and Florida, their votes actually count.

Technically, no primary votes count. It's not like they're carried over to the general election (and McCain should be glad about that). I just find it hilarious that McCain can talk about Democratic primary votes not counting in Michigan and Florida being bad, but it's just fine and dandy that votes weren't counted in Florida in the 2000 presidential election or in Ohio in the 2004 presidential election. And what about the possibility of votes being switched by those voting machines? I'm sure the Republicans aren't trying to fix that kink any time soon.

Republicans rigging two consecutive presidential elections = Good.

The Democratic candidates not picking up delegates in Michigan and Florida = Bad.

Morning Quickie: Take Action

2008-04-11T11:48:00.002-04:00

Farmworkers in Florida who pick tomatoes for fast food chains are asking to be paid an extra penny per pound. Even though this is Florida, USA we're talking about, these farmworkers still only make on average $10,000 a year and are not allowed to form unions. Other fast food restaurants, like McDonald's, have worked with the Coalition of Immokalee workers, but Burger King refuses to do so. Go give them a piece of your mind.

Tell Jack Murtha "No more funding for the war in Iraq."

Gordon Brown is skipping the opening ceremonies of the summer Olympics in China. Urge President Bush to do the same.

If you think Bush is going to attend the Olympics no matter what we tell him, sign this Amnesty International petition telling him to at least put pressure on China's government to improve human rights.

Tell the House subcommittee to fund international family planning.

Oh, Only 10,000 People Have Been Killed in Darfur? Well, in that Case . . . .

2008-04-10T12:47:00.003-04:00

I kept forgetting to post about this because I've been so busy with schoolwork. Rest assured, I compensate my lack of postings by presenting on feminist topics in my classes. I nailed a presentation that I did for my counselor ethics class. It was about ethical decision making in diagnosing potentially stigmatizing mental disorders, and I based the ethical dilemma off of a transgender child in Colorado that got some bad press from Neil Cavuto and his viewers. On Monday, I'll be presenting on Planned Parenthood for my Community Agencies class. Catholic university and Planned Parenthood -- woo hoo! I'm sure I'm going to get the look once I open up my PowerPoint presentation. You know, the Planned Parenthood look. So that's what I've been doing.

Anywho, human rights organizations and the Sudanese government have been quibbling over how many people have really been genocided* out of Darfur. Human rights groups have been saying that between 200,000 and 400,000 have been killed, but the Sudanese government says that the death toll is less than 10,000. I guess people have to choose between believing the organizations that provide aid to the refugees in Darfur and the government who arms the radical militias that are killing these people. That's a tough one.

But it's not just the government of Sudan that doesn't believe that the violence is so bad after all. Jay Williams, a former Harvard student who helped free thousands of slaves in Sudan, spoke at my college when I was a senior. I had the pleasure of meeting him (because I played an important and hilarious role in getting the college to sponsor the event), and he told us that some people that he talked to didn't believe that such a huge number of people could be killed. They were hesitant to donate money because they weren't sure if hundreds of thousands of people were indeed being slaughtered. Because I guess people have to see the bodies before they wake the fuck up. It's sad.

With that said, the House and Senate are considering appropriations bills this month. Make sure they include critical funding for peacekeepers and aid to Sudan.

*That's not a word, but it should be.

Rush Limbaugh on Feminism

2008-04-03T14:01:00.003-04:00

I don't have MSNBC anymore, now that we've switched to Verizon Fios. So I've been missing my beloved Keith Olbermann every night. The above video is of last night's Worst Persons in the World segment. Rush Limbaugh came in second with this gem about feminism:

[Hillary Clinton's female supporters] think they're owed this, women have paid their dues, they married two or three times, they had two or three abortions, they've done everything feminism has asked them to do.

*gasp* Am I not a proper feminist according to Rush Limbaugh? I'm melting . . . melting. I don't even want to get married or become pregnant. I must be the perfect woman according to Rush then. Now I kind feel like I have to take a shower. Here was Keith's hilarious retort:

That's comedian Rush Limbaugh saying that, after being married 3 times and having had not children. Apparently he has done everything feminism has asked him to do.

Randi Rhodes Gets Suspended for Sexist Comments

2008-04-03T13:40:00.003-04:00

via HuffPo

Air America Radio host Randi "I Don't Endorse a Candidate until the DNC Does (NOT!)" Rhodes has been suspended for calling both Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton "fucking whores." Was it the appropriate action? Of course. So why doesn't Fox News, CNN, and WABC* follow suit? Is it because their conservative commentators are entitled to make racist, sexist, and homophobic remarks? Honestly, as much as these so-called Christians of the religious wrong say they answer to a higher power, they can't even uphold any sort of journalistic integrity. It's like the party of God and personal responsibility has respect for neither!

Anyway, I listen to Randi. I don't think she's funny. She's just on when I'm driving to class. I actually prefer the people who fill in for her once in a while, Stacy Taylor and Sam Seder. I've been listening to her less and less, because she's basically the Rush Limbaugh of the left. But hey, I have to listen to something while I'm driving to school, and it ain't gonna be Hannity.

*That's the radio station that Rush and Sean Hannity have their syndicated talk shows. I'm not sure it's called WABC everywhere.

Flirting Kills?

2008-03-28T23:15:00.005-04:00

I just heard about the murder of Larry King, the out 8th-grader who wasn't afraid to be himself, from a commercial that I saw on MTV. Then, I found this article about it. Here's how it opened:

Larry King was a gay eighth-grader who used to come to school in makeup, high heels and earrings. And when the other boys made fun of him, he would boldly tease them right back by flirting with them.

That may have been what got him killed.

Really? Some bold flirting is what got him killed? Because I thought he got shot twice in the head by a homophobe. Maybe it's the lack of tolerance and downright hate of gay people that got him killed. But I could be wrong.

This is What a Feminist Looks Like

2008-03-25T22:33:00.002-04:00

The Feminist Majority Foundation has this informational video about who and what feminists are. It features both celebrities and regular people (Megan and I are noticeably absent!).

Morning Quickie: Take Action

2008-03-21T11:35:00.002-04:00

Hold Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao accountable for her general lack of care about worker's rights.

Congress is trying to cut payments to Medicare doctors. Tell them not to.

Support the Fair Elections Now Act for public financing of congressional elections.

Demand equal rights for the spouses of gay and lesbian federal employees.

Blog for EC on March 25.

Kick-Ass Old Lady of the Day

2008-03-15T00:05:00.002-04:00

Bernie Garcia, an 83-year-old woman in Santa Fe, New Mexico, fought off three guys who were trying to steal her purse. The three men planned to rob an old woman at a gas station, but they probably didn't plan on getting beat up with the pump.

Reporter: You weren't going to let him get it.
Garcia: No, hell no.

Man, that lady needs to be on television all the time.

Geraldine Ferraro Resigns After Racist Remark

2008-03-12T19:03:00.002-04:00

Yes, and I'm calling them racist because they were racist. Here is the comment she made (and stood by) that caused her to resign:

If Obama were a White man, he would not be in this position. And if he were a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught in the concept.

He's lucky to be what? Black? Being a Black guy is better than being any color woman? Because White privilege doesn't exist? Because the only discrimination that can affect a person is sexism? Because it's OK to call Obama a Muslim and that terrorists will dance in the streets if he's elected, but it's much, much worse to call Hillary Clinton a monster?

It's pretty upsetting when the feminists of the second wave continue to be racist, but we as third wave feminists have to still kiss their asses. That seems to be the sentiment of way too many people who comment at Feministing. It's either that, or it's just more "sexism is worse than racism" or "But Obama does benefit from being Black!" I thought feminists were better than that.

Word, Colbert

2008-03-12T14:44:00.004-04:00

Instead of reading this article from The Atlantic that tells women to settle for any man who'll have them (unless you want to know what it's like to have your head packed in ice while a rabid raccoon chomps at your ankles without actually, you know, doing that), watch the above clip from last night's Colbert and laugh.

Good Ol' Fashioned Clinton and Obama Hate

2008-03-11T19:48:00.002-04:00

Can people be a little bit more creative with the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama bashing? Above is a segment of Real Time with Bill Maher about Hillary Clinton's response to her biggest crisis as she describes in her book (about 5 minutes in):

Bill Maher: Now I don't want to bash Hillary too much, but I just want to add this because we went back and looked at her book. She wrote a book called "Living History," which is her biog- sounds like my sixth grade social studies book, by the way. "Living History," I think was the book I had to study. But we wanted to find out, because she raised this topic of crisis -- what was her biggest crisis? And in her own words she said, "My biggest crisis was Monica Lewinsky," and here's the audio version. This is what she said was her reaction at the moment of her biggest crisis.

Hillary Clinton's audiobook: I could hardly breathe. Gulping for air, I started crying and yelling at him.

Before Bill Maher could even get another sexist word in, Joe Scarborough of all people came to the defense. Seriously, though, this isn't an uncommon "Gotcha!" moment in the media. Maher's talking about the Republican Scarborough sticking up for Hillary, Air America Radio host Randi Rhodes (who always accuses Jon Stewart of stealing her jokes, even though her show airs and The Daily Show is taped at the same time) tried making the same point yesterday: If this is how Hillary Clinton reacts to her biggest crisis, she's obviously not fit to be president. Give me a break. That's how Clinton reacted to that crisis. More importantly, she reacted appropriately to that crisis. George W. Bush reacted to his biggest crisis (and I don't mean the tap going dry at the local tavern) by continuing to read My Pet Goat. Who's unfit to run the country now?

Now on to the Obama hate. Via the Huffington Post, Republican representative Steve King (IA) believes the following will happen if Obama becomes the next president:

The radical Islamists, the al-Qaida ... would be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on Sept. 11 because they would declare victory in this war on terror . . . His middle name does matter," King said. "It matters because they read a meaning into that.

"Hillary Clinton's weak. Barack HUSSEIN! Obama is a Muslim!" Please. It's getting old. Really old.

Women's Only Gym on Harvard Campus

2008-03-10T16:18:00.002-04:00

To accommodate Harvard's devout Muslim women, the university has decided to have women-only hours at one of the campus's gyms. The hours have been set up so that Muslim women can work out without having to worry about men looking at them. One student columnist suggests that men-only hours be provided at the same time as the women-only hours in a different gym. That way, everybody has equal gym time and the Muslim women can still practice their faith freely. Problem solved, right? Well, not so much. A Harvard spokesperson said the general response has been "You're in America. Assimilate or get out." I know, because it's not like religious freedom is in the Constitution or anything.

Michael Smerconish has a problem with the hours too. He says that majority rules, and since only 6 Muslim women have complained, there's no point in inconveniencing other people out of their gym time. But what would be the general response from those male students who have to go to another gym on campus at that time? "Why should I have to walk to a different side of campus just to appease these Muslim women? Poo!" So which is more important? Preserving religious freedom or preserving some guy's usual walking distance between point A and the gym?

Help Save the USF Women's Studies Department!

2008-03-10T16:09:00.003-04:00

So I've been M.I.A. from Feminists to the Rescue for a while. I've been a little busy with putting on the Vagina Monologues and counter-protesting the Genocide Awareness Project and now, trying to save my major's department from being the victim of state budget cuts.

Apparently, the state of Florida has cut the funding for education very severely, and this has had a huge impact on the University of South Florida. Due to these budget cuts, some university bigwigs decided that the Women's Studies Department here at USF no longer deserved to be an autonomous entity, despite the fact that it is the second oldest women's studies department in the nation, having just celebrated it's 35th birthday. They also propose cutting out the Africana Studies department as well, or possibly merging the two disciplines to create what those who oppose the idea lovingly call "The Office of Marginalized Studies" .

Apparently, the provost is going to be making the final decision as far as the budget and the fate of the Women's and Africana Studies departments are concerned. His website is here. The information regarding the budget as well as his contact information is all there.

It would be great to get some e-mails sent to the provost in support of Women's Studies and Africana Studies. We have a petition circling around, but it's a printed document. If we get an online version, I will post it here for others to sign. We are trying to get as many signatures and as much support as possible, of course. Gloria Steinem was actually the first to sign our petition, and Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards also added their names to the list. So please, send an e-mail of support for the USF Women's Studies Department.

Abstinence-Only . . . Dental Hygiene?

2008-03-08T17:25:00.004-05:00

Some abstinence nut was on Dr. Phil on Monday to discuss why abstinence-only education is better than, you know, telling teens the truth. He uses this bizarre toothbrush analogy to emphasize his point:

"Nobody would stick one of these in their mouth. The reason they wouldn’t stick them in their mouth is because they don’t know where they’ve been, what they’ve been doing, or who they’ve been doing it with,” he says. He adds an untainted brush to his illustration. “I have a virgin toothbrush right here. Can you get back in your box and start over? Absolutely. Can you get your dignity back, your reputation back, your innocence back, your self-esteem back? Absolutely. A person can start over.”

So I guess we should change our sexual partners every six months?

Bush Vetos Torture Bill

2008-03-08T14:03:00.003-05:00

President Bush said Saturday he vetoed legislation that would ban the CIA from using harsh interrogation methods such as waterboarding to break suspected terrorists because it would end practices that have prevented attacks.

Let's just get this straight right out of the gate: Waterboarding is torture. It is not a "harsh interrogation practice", it is torture.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Bush often warns against ignoring the advice of U.S. commanders on the ground in Iraq. Yet the president has rejected the Army Field Manual, which recognizes that harsh interrogation tactics elicit unreliable information, said Reid, D-Nev.

So we're going to torture people in order to obtain information that may or may not be reliable, yet Bush still wants to make statements like this:

"This is no time for Congress to abandon practices that have a proven track record of keeping America safe," the president said.

Sorry, sir, but I don't believe that demolishing our moral authority in the world is going to do much to keep Americans safe. It certainly wouldn't keep any captured troops of ours safe when we can't denounce any torture practices that those who have captured them might use to obtain information due to our own use of such tactics. If we authorize the use of torture tactics in order to obtain information, how do we have the moral authority to make sure other countries do the same? And if we don't have that authority, how can we make sure that our troops won't be tortured as well? In that sense, I don't see how we can claim that we're keeping Americans safe, unless we don't count our troops as Americans that need protection, which wouldn't surprise me.

But the administration has refused to rule definitively on whether it is torture. Bush has said many times that his administration does not torture.
The White House says waterboarding remains among the interrogation methods potentially available to the CIA.
"Because the danger remains, we need to ensure our intelligence officials have all the tools they need to stop the terrorists," Bush said.

So apparently Bush won't torture you unless he feels like he needs to. Awesome. I feel so much better now. Here's the link to the full article.

Doggie Racism

2008-03-05T19:41:00.003-05:00

Did you know that black dogs are less likely to get adopted from shelters than dogs of other colors? I know, looking at that picture of my beautiful Black Lab, Diesel, who is black from nose to tail, you'd think everyone would want a big black dog. The weird thing is, I wasn't very surprised to learn that. I've noticed that people are kind of frightened of Diesel when I walk him. I don't know. I guess there's just something about a big black dog that scares people. Wait until my dog hears about this! He'll be outraged.

Was this post just an excuse to talk about my dog? Yes. Yes, it was.

Mike Huckabee Ends His Campaign

2008-03-05T11:06:00.006-05:00

From The Boiling Point!

Boo! We're going to have to wait at least another 4 years for this to happen! Oh, Mike Huckabee. We hardly knew ye.

Actually, I think we knew too much of ye.

Celebrity Feminist of the Day: Reese Witherspoon

2008-03-04T13:08:00.003-05:00

Reese Witherspoon promotes Avon's new empowerment bracelet on The Today Show. Up to $1 million of the proceeds from the bracelets will go to the United Nations Development Fund for Women. Why stop at a million? I don't know, but it's better than nothin'.

Afternoon Quickie: Revirginization

2008-02-28T15:27:00.003-05:00

Is it "quicky" or "quickie?" My spell check just told me "quickie," so I guess that answers that question. A much more philosophical question that has been asked lately is "What does it mean to be a virgin?" What with hymen reattachment surgery and revirginization ceremonies (there's a word that'll keep the spell check busy) that allow people to undo their sexual past, it's becoming more difficult to define virginity and what it means to "lose" it.

Author Brian Alexander discusses the issue of virginity in an article for MSNBC. It's very informative and thought-provoking. There was this one part that nearly made me puke, though. Guess which part, and if you're right, you'll get a cookie. Hint: It's on page 2.

Compromise and Anti-Choice Legislation

2008-02-27T13:39:00.004-05:00

This is a uterus, and she doesn't haggle.

Yesterday, Eric Alterman was talking to Sam Seder about his upcoming book Why We're Liberals. He said that the majority of the country takes the liberal position on almost every issue. One of the issues that the majority of the country doesn't take the liberal position on: Abortion. He said that because women's organizations take a you're with us or against us stance on reproductive rights and put pressure on liberal politicians to do the same, the liberal position on abortion has become "abortion under any circumstances." Alterman says this hurts liberals, because most Americans support some sort of restriction on abortion and vote on this issue, and liberals aren't relating to them. Alterman's solution?

Compromise! Liberal politicians should compromise on this issue to pander to people who only believe in women's reproductive rights sometimes. It doesn't really matter if women's human rights are compromised in the process. Just as long as our Democratic majority lets us have a choice sometimes, it's all good. Of course, there is no pro-life organization that supports abortion under certain circumstances, nor do they support contraception. So, they don't reflect the mainstream, but that's okay.

But what about the ban on so-called partial-birth abortion, you ask? How can anybody not support that, you wonder? And what about parental notification and consent laws for pregnant minors? What's wrong with that? I'll tell you.

First, a lot of people think partial-birth abortion is the name given to an abortion performed during the third trimester and that the ban prohibits abortions during this time because, at this time, the fetus is viable. This is untrue. It's the name given to the procedure of extracting the fetus (intact dilation and extraction), and this procedure can be done in the second trimester as well. And it's the procedure, not third trimester abortions, that are illegal for almost any reason. What does this mean? Viability of the fetus has nothing to do with the ban on partial-birth abortion. I repeat, Viability of the fetus has nothing to do with the ban on partial-birth abortion. Viability begins at around 7 months gestation, but the procedure can't be done at any time.

Second, nowhere in the ban on partial-birth abortion does it say the frequency at which this procedure was ever done. "A moral, medical, and ethical consensus exists that the practice of performing a partial-birth abortion . . . is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited." Actually, if there's a consensus among medical professionals that the procedure is never medically necessary, then there is no need make a special law to ban it. Performing an unnecessary operation on someone is grounds for a malpractice lawsuit, so there was never a reason to pass a separate ban. Also, the ban states that "there are currently no medical schools that provide instruction on abortions that include the instruction in partial-birth abortions in their curriculum." That means that any doctor who has ever performed the procedure did so outside the scope of their expertise, which is malpractice. All of the evidence provided to support a ban is also evidence as to why a ban isn't necessary.

One might argue that, because this procedure is considered unnecessary, banning it is a preventative measure. As we know from the upholding of the ban, however, preventative legislation is not exactly the Supreme Court's thing. Last April, the original ban was upheld, even though it didn't contain a health exception. The reason was because none of the experts could testify that the procedure was ever necessary to preserve the woman's health. If preventing harm was the Supreme Court's number one priority, they would have passed the health exception, just in case.

I was almost not going to say anything about parental notification or consent laws, because the problems with such laws are quite obvious. But because I think a lot of people are in favor of such laws, it's a good idea to share with you why I think these laws are wrong. Since notification and consent are the same in my view, I believe both laws are abortion bans disguised as laws to protect parental rights. However, if preserving parental rights were the objective of these laws, a pregnant minor would need to gain parental notification or consent to remain pregnant and, consequently, give birth. No such law exists anywhere. My smell test for laws like this (e.g., parental consent/notification laws, laws requiring women to see an ultrasound if they're considering abortion) goes something like this: "Would anyone ever consider making a similar law for women who consider pregnancy?" If the answer is no, which it always is, then it's anti-choice legislation.

There are plenty of laws regarding abortion that are designed to protect women and their families. I can sit here all day researching them and telling you why they protect no one. I don't think people realize the implication of these laws. Would those in the "pro-choice middle," those people who believe in choice under certain circumstances, support laws restricting abortion if they realized, like I do, that these laws are leading to a ban on abortion entirely? If they truly want women to have the choice, I seriously don't think so. So I think this idea that most Americans are pro-choice-to-a-certain-extent is kind of misleading. I think it means that most Americans have yet to come around.

Kids? No Thanks

2008-02-27T12:22:00.003-05:00

Because my post about how I can't make t-shirts sparked a discussion about choosing not to have children, I just had to link up to this Reason Magazine article by Ronald Bailey about why people are having fewer (or no) children. I think the subheading says it all.

via Feministing

Afternoon Quicky: Urge Your Senators to Co-Sponsor IVAWA

2008-02-26T12:58:00.002-05:00

You can urge your Senators to co-sponsor the International Violence Against Women Act or thank your Senator(s) for co-sponsoring the bill. NOW makes it so easy!

Today I Learned . . . .

2008-02-25T10:38:00.001-05:00

That I can't make t-shirts for my life. Poo.

Coming Out Feminist

2008-02-18T22:48:00.003-05:00

Sometimes I think it would sit better with people if I came out as a lesbian than if I came out as a feminist. People at least know it's impolite to ask questions or judge when you come out as a lesbian. If you come out as a feminist, you need to do a lot of explaining.

Today in my Counseling and Community Agencies class, one of my classmates came out as gay, and another male classmate came out as bisexual. I, however, felt that the enviornment was too hostile for me to come out as a feminist. My professor mentioned feminist theory, quickly said that the word "feminism" scares her, had one person agree, and rushed to another topic before I could interject. We talked at great length about LGBT issues, and everyone who participated was very nice and honest about their thoughts and how their opinions have changed as they've grown up. So I was wondering why we were talking so much about LGBT issues, about which no one seemed to need a clarification*, but feminism in counseling wasn't talked about at all. Wouldn't it have made more sense to spend more time on the topic that people didn't seem to understand, especially since the topic was quickly dismissed as scary?

So I'm thinking about making a t-shirt this week and wearing it to class next Monday. I'm thinking it's going to say "feminist." on the front and "scared?" on the back. Or maybe "I'm a feminist, and I carry nunchucks." That may or may not be true, but would you risk saying something sexist to me just to find out? I don't think so.

*Someone did need clarification, but didn't ask for it. I just overheard the person in front of me saying this to the person next to her, and it amused me greatly to know that she would rather remain confused than to simply turn around and ask me to elaborate. I asked the professor if it was unethical to not diagnose someone with Gender Identity Disorder, even though they meet all the criteria, just because they have an impairment in social or occupational functioning, but they aren't experiencing clinically significant distress. I gave an example of someone who comes in for depression, is diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder, and then comes out as trangendered. Must I diagnose them with Gender Identity Disorder, even though it wasn't the presenting problem? Does it make a difference if the person is depressed because of the way they are treated for being transgendered? Personally, I wouldn't diagnose someone with Gender Identity Disorder if the only reason they meet the full criteria is because other people ridicule them to the point that it impairs important areas of functioning. People shouldn't be diagnosed simply because someone else thinks they're weird. During the break in class, the person in front of me said, "It would be like not diagnosing someone with Schizophrenia just because that wasn't the presenting problem." I would accuse her of comparing Gender Identity Disorder with a psychotic disorder, but I think my point went way too far over her head for her to make any sort of rational counterargument. So I'll let that one slide.

Glenn Beck on Ugly People

2008-02-17T23:22:00.003-05:00

I just thought this was too funny not to post. I found this on Media Matters when I looked there to see what action they want me to take in order to get Neil Cavuto fired or suspended for his recent public trans hate speech (none, apparently!) But I did find this about Glenn Beck and ugly people. You'd think Beck would be an expert in ugliness, as he's a horrible person. But he just gets it all wrong. This was his response to these surprising reasons you're not having sex:

BECK: Okay. Surprising reason number one why you're not having sex. "You are Glenn Beck." Wait a sec. That's not surprising at all! Who made up this list? *angry fist*

Okay, I just made that up. But you'll forgive me for that once I tell you what he really said.

BECK: I mean, here are some other reasons. "You're ugly." Hello! I'm not a sex expert but I'm -- you know, I'm thinking, you know, you're ugly and, you know, that's a tough one to overcome especially if you're a woman. If you're a guy, that's not hard to overcome. I'm sorry. That's just the way the world is. Have you -- how many ugly guys have hot wives? Take me, for example. I don't know why she married -- I think it was low self-esteem. I do. No, really I think it was low self-esteem. I got in -- you know, you buy when the market is low. You know what I mean? While everybody else is selling, you buy. And I think I got in there right at the right time. Low self-esteem, low, wait a minute, could go a little lower, she might come down to my price. Hang on, OK, sold! Now her self-esteem is going up. And if my income wasn't going up, she would have ditched me long ago.

At any other time, I would be offended at someone assuming a woman marries for the money. I mean, I don't know why anybody marries anybody. However, experiencing Glenn Beck's nonsense makes me believe he's married for reasons other than love. But I think telling everyone in radio land that his wife must have low self-esteem is more demeaning to her than it is to him. It sort of perpetuates this "marry the loser while you can" bull that's been going around lately, and it's just plain woman-hate. But that's not the worst part. No. Beck gets personal.

BECK: Ugly people, if you're a guy, you can get past it. I don't think you can as an ugly woman. I don't -- no, I don't. If you're an ugly woman, I apologize. Oh, you've got a double cross [I think he meant "whammy" here], because if you're an ugly woman, you're probably a progressive as well. Oh, jeez. I'm sorry. Today's just not your day. But you know what? If you believed in God, you'd know that there's going to be another chance for you. You don't have to be ugly in heaven. You're going to be your perfect self, and there will be another perfect somebody waiting for you on the other side.

Oh, I'm sure I won't get any prettier by doing this -- *VOMITS ALL OVER KEYBOARD* Give me a break. You know your religious beliefs are a sham when you try to recruit women who feel badly about their looks to your side by promising them eternal (patriarchy's oppressive view of) beauty. It might be an effective angle, since 80% of women are dissatisfied with their appearance, but is it morally righteous? How the shit would I know? I'm one of those progressive Godless bitches. Besides, I hear the guys in purgatory are, like, sooo much hotter.

You know what I think this calls for? A Leonard Nimoy vs. Glenn Beck cage match.

Seriously?

2008-02-17T13:37:00.002-05:00

This video is immensely disturbing. If you're not a fan of women being forcibly strip searched while screaming for help, do not watch it.

So we've already got police using tasers on people willy-nilly, and now we've got them strip-searching the victims of crimes and leaving them naked in jail cells for 6 hours. That's just great.

For those that did not watch the video, basically what happens is that about 7 police officers forcibly strip a screaming woman, and then leave her in the cell with nothing to cover herself for six hours. She is suing the police department. I just hope she wins.

A Post About Media Matters

2008-02-12T22:56:00.002-05:00

No, I'm not very good at coming up with titles, am I? Anyway, I got an e-mail from Media Matters for America asking me to sign a petition to MSNBC's president, Steve Capus, telling him to basically do something about the sexist statements that have been made lately. As much as I hate sexist statements (especially when the apology for said sexist statements is used in an advertisement), I'm not going to sign this petition. This is some of what Media Matters said to persuade people to sign their petition:

During the past year, three MSNBC commentators have been suspended, reprimanded, fired, or forced to apologize for their sexist and/or racist comments . . . The pattern of sexism at MSNBC doesn't stop there. Last year MSNBC canceled its simulcast of host Don Imus' show for his racist and sexist comments targeting the Rutgers women's basketball players. It was only after a widespread outcry by individuals, employees of the network, and many organizations, including Media Matters, that the network took action.

MSNBC did the right thing by holding Don Imus, Chris Matthews, and David Shuster accountable for their statements. Media Matters even claims some responsibility for these small victories.

But am I the only one who thinks that MSNBC is being held to a higher standard than other news outlets, like FOX News and CNN? When were Bill O'Reilly, John Gibson, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck suspended or forced to apologize on air for any of their disgusting comments? What about Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, and Michelle Malkin? I know that Media Matters spends plenty of time exposing these commentators, but these commentators are never held accountable by their networks' presidents, they are still contaminating our airwaves, and I'm not flooded with e-mails from Media Matters asking to sign petitions about firing them. I think that's the difference between media outlets who take responsibility for what their analysts and reporters say and media outlets who don't. MSNBC is at the very least succumbing to the pressure from viewers, Media Matters, and advertisers by disciplining those who do the wrong thing.

Media Matters, however, wants us to tell MSNBC's president to make sure derrogatory language is never used on the network, which is a promise no one can make. Nobody, not even the Media Matters staff, can promise to completely censor their language. Making this language rare and making sure some action is taken when it happens is the only promise anyone can make. Media Matters isn't asking for too much. They are asking for the impossible.

I can only speculate on why Media Matters is asking more of MSNBC than of other networks. It could be to be fair, that they are not only trying to censor hate speech by conservatives. Of course, hate speech doesn't show party lines, so everyone should be held accountable. However, how one responds to hate speech does cross party lines: Moderates and liberals take responsibility, and conservatives cash checks. Or, because MSNBC has listened to Media Matters in the past, MSNBC might again listen to Media Matters, even their demands are impossible to achieve. Either way, I don't think Media Matters is being fair.

The Justice System Condones Sexual Assault Once Again

2008-02-10T16:27:00.001-05:00

Apparently, it doesn't matter if there were witnesses, if it was videotaped, or even if the person who assaulted you admitted it. You just can't get a jury to convict a man of rape. This goes double if the man is a prominent member of the community. Of course we all know that the closer he is to the patriarchal norm, the better chance of getting out of the charges he has.

But this case is just disgusting.

The verdict had his accuser in tears. "I am shocked, and he even admitted it," the 24-year-old said, referring to Brown's testimony that he tried to push her face into his lap.

So he admitted that he tried to push her face into his crotch, but:

Jurors said they did not believe Brown exerted the force necessary to qualify his actions as sex crimes. Michigan law says a person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct if "force or coercion is used to accomplish the sexual conduct."

Pushing someone is not force? Umm, since when?

One of the jurors is a great guy, too. Check out what he had to say about the whole situation:

Nowles said he and other jurors concluded the accuser and Brown "both made big mistakes."

"They are both stupid," Nowles said. "There is no law against that."

Women are stupid for getting sexually assaulted, apparently.

I'm so tired of having to read these stories of how the justice system is such a let down for women who are victims of sexual assault.

Take Action

2008-02-09T23:58:00.000-05:00

Did you know that if you take action, you will get action from your one true love in 24 hours? Well, that's not true (necessarily), but it will make you feel good.

Bush wants to cut public broadcasting funding? Tell your Congresspeople that you're not having that.

Remind the Afghan government and the State Department that downloading feminist information is not a crime.

Go to RoeAt35.org and tell Dianne Feinstein not to take any of Honaker's bullshit.

Say no to drilling in ANWR, and yes to cute little polar bears. Aw, polar bears.

No Sweat, a clothing company that makes sweatshop free clothing, might be going under. So buy one of their super cool organic tees, and maybe you can help save the company (or at least look as cool as I do).

My Voting Experience

2008-02-05T19:29:00.000-05:00

Feministing has a list of feminists who have endorsed either Sen. Hillary Clinton or Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination. Add Megan and me to that list (Megan for Clinton, and me for Obama)!

Anyway, I want to tell you about my voting experience. Looking back on my voting experience today, it wasn't much different from one of my other voting experiences (November 2006), but I just noticed that it was different this time around. Well, first I'll tell you about what happened in November 2006, which was the first time I voted in person. I'm half Puerto Rican. I have a Hispanic last name, and if I don't look Hispanic, I at least look ethnically ambiguous and can pass from "an Italian on the dark side" to "half Indian." So when I voted in 2006, one of the guys at the voting place was sitting at the end of the table, and he asked me for my driver's license and he spoke to me in Spanish. I don't speak Spanish, but I can understand it when I have to, so I did everything he told me I had to do. I figured he saw my last name on my license and thought I spoke Spanish. End of story. When I went to vote today, one of the women looked at my license and told me that I just have to wait until one of the other ladies was done getting the woman in front of my all sorted out. Fine. The other lady looked at my driver's license and said, "Here, Maria. You can do this one." That's reasonable. I understand that sitting in an elementary school gymnasium for several hours with a few people going to vote here and there can get boring, and maybe Maria hadn't done anything in a while and needed something to do. So she gave Maria, who was sitting at the end of the table, my license. Maria looked at my license, found my name in the book of registered voters in the area, and said "Democratico o Republicano?" And that's when it dawned on me. The person sitting at the end of the table is Spanish-speaking, there to assist the Hispanic voters, even Hispanic voters like me who don't speak Spanish. I understand now. Because I'm Hispanic, I can only speak enough English to pass a citizenship test, but I don't speak enough English to vote without an interpreter. I swear, "Here, Maria. You can do this one" is going to be ringing in my ears for the rest of my life. I should have left the booth without voting and said, "Donde esta, Bill Richardson??? Donde esta mi hermano Mexicano??? Que lastima!!!"

Crisis Pregnancy Believers

2008-02-04T16:21:00.000-05:00

I learned about Crisis Pregnancy Centers by accident at a wellness fair over two years ago at my college. I was president of the campus' Gender Equality Club, and I went to the fair to get some information about reproductive health. I visited all the different booths and picked up informational brochures from each one. One of the booths belonged to Care Net. I got information about their organization and read about it when I got back to my dorm. Needless to say, the information they gave me was false. Even more needless to say, they were unsuccessful in washing my brain. From then on, I knew I had to disect the false information they give to women and further reinforce what I already know about them: They suck.

I kind of like to dissect the language used by the pro-zygote movement. Whether they choose their words wisely or out of a hat, their language is quite telling. In the couple years since I learned about Crisis Pregnancy Centers, I noticed that feminists don't use the word "crisis" to describe an unintended pregnancy. Why is that? I think I found the answer when I was reading the chapter about crisis counseling in my Community Counseling textbook. The chapter provides several definitions of "crisis." Here's one of them.

Crises are personal difficulties or situations that immobilize people and prevent them from consciously controlling their lives.*

Now, is "crisis pregnancy" just a clever term for these centers? One of the fundamental tenets of pro-lifers is that women are thrusted into some sort of altered state of consciousness that makes them unable to make the "right" decision for themselves (in so many words). So maybe the word "crisis" is intentional. Here's something else I read about crises:

Crisis is a danger because it threatens to overwhelm the individual and may result in suicide or a psychotic break. It is also an opportunity because during times of crises, individuals are more receptive to therapeutic influence.*

During times of crisis, individuals are more receptive to any kind of influence. That includes the influence of people who have a certain self-fulfilling goal in mind for you.

Feminists use the term "unintended" for pregnancies that are, well, unintended. Pregnancies aren't a crisis in our view, because we know that, at least for now, we have options. Furthermore, feminists trust women that they know what is best for them and can make their own decisions. Anti-choicers, on the other hand, don't believe in, well, choice. So every unintended pregnancy is a crisis to them (or for them, in the event that they are faced with an unintended pregnancy).

Now if only every woman believed that an unintended pregnancy was a crisis -- before they become pregnant. And, obviously, the best way to turn an unintended pregnancy into a crisis is by rolling back abortion rights. That way, there are fewer options for women, and the fewer the options, the harder it becomes to have control over your own life. And, obviously, the best way to create millions of unintended pregnancies is by demonizing contraception. Anti-choicers in this country have already done both with legislation at the state and federal level and by creating abstinence-only education. If every woman believed they were in a crisis when they become pregnant and don't want to be, they'll be more susceptible to the propaganda of the Crisis Pregnancy Centers. Clever, indeed.

P.S. I just saw an ad for Mike Huckabee. He said he wants to abolish the IRS. Tell New Jersey what else you'd like to abolish, Huck.

*Gladding, S. & Newsome, D. (2004). Community and Agencey Counseling, 2nd. ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

More Perpetuation of the "Grey Rape" Myth. . .

2008-02-01T18:27:00.000-05:00

This article absolutely disgusts me.

Check out these rape apologist gems:

Maybe if she was sober she would never have chosen to sleep with that guy. Maybe he coaxed her into it. But on those terms, is it okay for the girl to then cry rape?

(Emphasis mine)

The article comes complete with rape apologist terminology, apparently. Here's a newsflash for this author: If you're drunk, you can't legally consent. So yes, legally, she can "cry rape". I don't understand why people are so eager to dismiss the terrible behavior of men.

Although this passage here is certainly the kicker as far as every rape apologist tactic known to humankind is concerned. I think the author of this article manages to fit every single one of them in here. Check it out:

Let me paint you another picture. At a frat party, there is a girl scantily clad in a mini skirt (so short, by the way, you can almost see the bottom of her ass), and a tank top with a plunging neckline. She is downing, and subsequently refilling her solow cup of jungle juice. She then picks out a brother who she wants to be her so-called “project” of the night. The two engage in flirtatious conversation and touching. Both are drunk, and it is obvious that she wants him. After an hour of being all over each other he asks her if she wants to “see his room” and she follows him upstairs. They begin to get down to business and in about a minute they are both naked on the frat boy’s bed. He asks if she wants to “you know” and she says “yes.” After he has successfully found and put on a condom he climbs on top of her and the right when he is at the cusp, she changes her mind and says drunkenly “actually…” But being so caught up in the moment, he disregards this as momentary insanity on her part and enters her anyway. Who is really to blame in this situation? Yes, the guy should have stopped when she said no, but didn’t she vehemently send the message that sex was what she wanted? I mean, she even showed up to the party looking like pure sex, so who is really at fault?

Let's see.

1) Only slutty girls get raped
2) If you consumed alcohol it was your fault
3) Men just can't control themselves
4) If you flirt with someone, you have a responsibility to fuck them.

I don't think she missed any of them. There is one vile rape apologist tactic after the next there. I also love the "Yeah, he should have stopped, BUT SHE WAS SUCH A SLUT!".

There are some probably some who are reading this article, thinking that I am siding with the male rapists. Let me preempt those thoughts by saying it is never okay for a guy to make any girl do ANYTHING she does not want to do. A guy should never force a girl to even kiss him. But by the same token, we as girls should not lead a guy to believe that he is going to get more then we are willing to give. We should also not get so drunk off our asses that we cannot make the decision to stop. There is a very fine line in these incidents, and they often become blurry when you mix in alcohol and drugs.

I don't understand why women are held accountable for what men perceive to be our meaning. Why do men get to define what certain "signals" mean? And then get to hold women accountable for those definitions through the use of sexual assault? It's absolute bullshit.

So let me reiterate one more time. There is no such thing as "grey rape". If a woman does not give enthusiastic consent, no matter how she was dressed, how much she had to drink, how much she flirted, where she went with a man, where she was, who she was with, etc., IT'S RAPE. The end.

Take Action Fever!

2008-02-01T18:04:00.000-05:00

Forget Bridial Fever. Catch the Take Action Fever and spend your weekend doing something much better than watching movies with sexist plots on The Hallmark Channel.

Be one of a million strong in Planned Parenthood's grassroots campaign.

Tell the Justice Department to prosecute the private military members who drugged and raped Jamie Leigh Jones.

Urge your Senators to cosponser the Biden-Lugar resolution to send helicopters to peacekeepers in Darfur.

And while you're at it, tell them to pass the Fair Pair Restoration Act.

Shop at Barnes and Noble this weekend, mention code "Bookfair #223842," and part of your purchase will be donated to the Genocide Intervention Network.

Happy 35th Birthday, Roe v Wade!

2008-01-22T15:16:00.000-05:00

I'm just going to be honest. This blog for choice day, there's really not much that I can think of to say that would be profound. I've given the long diatribes as to why I'm pro-choice, last year's post was all about how the argument should be re-framed as being about reproductive justice rather than simply abortion rights, etc., and this year I really don't know what to hit as far as issues concerning choice go.

I guess I could give an optimistic view of everything feminists and pro-choice activists have accomplished for women's choice, such as getting Plan B over-the-counter, some states refusing to teach abstinence-only sex education, the success in overturning South Dakota's abortion ban, and other such pro-choice victories. There have even been pro-choice successes in my community. USF's Feminist Student Alliance held a Rock for Choice event last semester which raised over a thousand dollars for the organization W.O.M.E.N., a group that funds abortions for low-income women in need. There have been many pro-choice victories that the pro-choice and feminist community should be very proud of.

However, there have also been some setbacks and some goals that still have not been met. For example, although we got close, we didn't get to completely overturn the Global Gag Rule. States are still trying to push abortion bans through their legislative bodies, and of course the Supreme Court decided that women shouldn't have the right to protect their health by all means necessary through the decision made in Gonzalez vs. Carhart, complete with an entirely patronizing opinion from Justice Kennedy. These are things that we need to work on, but I think every pro-choice activist knows this.

Another thing that I think pro-choice activists need to work on, and this is somewhat akin to the re-framing of the entire argument, is terminology. I hear the word "abortion" misused so much. Even today in my Natural Sciences class, we were talking about genetic therapy, stem-cell research, and the ethics of IVF. Someone in the class kept referring to the embryos that die due to IVF as "abortions", yet they're not abortions. Abortions are the termination of a pregnancy. The embryos used in IVF practices that die are usually never implanted. The only way they could be part of an abortion is if they implanted and were then subsequently miscarried.

Another friend of mine referred to Plan B and all oral contraceptives as causing "abortions" because the ovum may not be able to implant. However, pregnancy begins at implantation, so it wouldn't be an abortion, it would be a failure to implant. People using the word "abortion" just to mean the death of an embryo is very harmful to women's reproductive freedom, I think, because if anything that a woman does causes such a death, it's suddenly controversial, which also gets into other reproductive justice issues, including the newly released issue of caffeine use causing miscarriages. All of this controversy about women's actions causing the deaths of embryos is very damaging to reproductive freedoms, in my opinion. Should women have this information? Certainly. Should they be expected to lose all agency once they become pregnant? Absolutely not. That is the line that needs to be drawn. Information is a good thing. So is choice.

I guess that's what I'll leave you with. Just remember that information is always good, and so is the ability to make choices after that. That is what needs to be protected, what was set on a path 35 years ago, and what will continue to be fought for and won by feminists and pro-choice activists all across the country, and hopefully, the globe. We need to keep a good balance of realizing our accomplishments, such as what we're celebrating today, but we also need to keep our eye on the prize. I know we'll get it some day.

P.S. While you're wishing Roe vs. Wade a happy birthday, wish Feminists to the Rescue a happy birthday as well!

Blog For Choice Day!

2008-01-22T13:40:00.000-05:00

Here's my Blog for Choice. This year's topic was "Why do you vote pro-choice?" Well, here's why.

Because the Global Gag Rule still exists to hurt women in developing nations, even where abortion is legal.

Because poor women's access to abortion is about as dead as Henry Hyde.

Because a stroke of a pen can make the price of your birth control pills skyrocket.

Because anti-choice presidents appoint people who staunchly oppose birth control to be in charge of family planning funding.

Because 24 states don't require insurance companies to cover birth control.

Because our appointed Supreme Court justices think women need to be protected from themselves.

Because more federal funding goes towards killing civilians in Iraq in one month than preventing pregnancy-related deaths in poor countries for an entire year.

Because pro-choice also means no forced abortions in American territories.

Because crisis pregnancy centers get paid by the government to judge and lie to women.

Because access Emergency Contraception is still limited.

Because birth control costs fewer tax dollars than pregnancy.

Because men's idea of abortion rights is my idea of forced pregnancy.

Because Mike Huckabee would be an even worse president than George W. Bush.

Because pro-choice politicians care about women.

Because I am a woman.

High Girls Are Slutty

2008-01-21T16:45:00.000-05:00

This is one of those Above the Influence commercials. Was I naive to expect the same people who brought you SLOMMING would make an ad that makes sense? Perchance. But this ad isn't just stupid. It's dangerous, because teenagers (who they admit based on the very name of their campaign are influenced easily) might actually be getting the wrong message here.

This ad seeks to tell kids to be above the influence of drugs. What the ad does say, quite intentionally in my view, is that if you're a victim of a crime (in this case, having a naked picture of you sent around to random people without your permission), that's your fault, cuz you were high. Be above the influence of drugs, but don't be above the influence of sending a naked picture of someone to all your friends and telling them to pass it on. In fact, this ad encourages that behavior. I mean, hey, somebody's got to teach those high, slutty girls a lesson.

But this angle isn't old for anti-drug commercials. Jessica Valenti mentions one in the "Blame (and Shame) Game" chapter of her book Full Frontal Feminism. I remember this one well and became extremely pissed off whenever I saw it. This commercial featured a teenage girl on the couch smoking a joint. She progressively gets higher. She's sort of zoned out a bit when a boy around her age sits next to her on the couch and gropes her. The girl says no, but the boy doesn't listen. "Marijuana lowers your inhibitions." The end. Did they mean that your use of marijuana lowers others' inhibitions to the point that they'll assault you? No. They meant that if you're high, someone who knows what they're doing will take advantage of you. And even if you're inhibitions aren't lowered enough to not even know when you don't want to be groped or slept with, tough shit, girly.

And the real kicker: These campaigns are funded by the federal government.

If You Lie, Prepare to Die

2008-01-20T23:20:00.000-05:00

If there's anything young women can learn from the Maria Lauterbach case, it's that if you've lied before, then you're lying if you say you've been raped. And if you might have lied about being raped, then a firey pit is in your future.

Lauerbach's mother, Mary, said that she had a problem with telling the truth, which made her "vulnerable."

"You realize you've lost all your evidence [of the rape] now?" she recalled telling her daughter. "Maria, you have to know you cannot make any false statements because that is one of the worst things you could possibly do. You could ruin somebody's career, and you won't be doing yourself any favors either."

I wonder if she's skeptical about the rape now. I mean, when a pregnant woman ends up murdered, and the man she accused of raping her goes missing . . . what more do you need to know?

Start the Weekend Off Right

2008-01-18T20:23:00.000-05:00

Give Dr. Tiller, a doctor who provides late-term abortion services, some props.

Huckabee promised to meet with the mother of Ryan White, who contracted HIV as a teenager after a blood transfusion. He spent the rest of his short life teaching people that HIV cannot be transmitted by casual contact. (Mike Huckabee didn't get the memo). Make sure Huckabee keeps his promise.

Sign up to Blog for Choice.

Demand equal pay for women from your Senators.

Make sure MSNBC asks the Republican questions what they think about all aspects of reproductive rights, including emergency contraception and sex education, at RoeAt35.org.

Huckabee Tops Himself

2008-01-17T22:14:00.000-05:00

No, I don't mean he killed himself (unfortunately). I mean he went over-the-top, even for him. Here's what he said in an interview with BeliefNet to get himself named Keith Olbermann's Worst Person in the World:

BELIEFNET: Is it your goal to bring the Constitution into strict conformity with the Bible? Some people would consider that a kind of dangerous undertaking, particularly given the variety of biblical interpretations.

HUCKABEE: Well, I don’t think that’s a radical view to say we’re going to affirm marriage. I think the radical view is to say that we’re going to change the definition of marriage so that it can mean two men, two women, a man and three women, a man and a child, a man and animal. Again, once we change the definition, the door is open to change it again. I think the radical position is to make a change in what’s been historic.

Again, Huckabee compares homosexuality to pedophilia and other paraphilias, including beastiality. I have a dog. His name is Diesel. Did you know that if I married Diesel, that would be a heterosexual union? Fascinating, isn't it? If my dog were more well-behaved, he and I would go to a Huckabee rally, and I would ask Huckabee if he, as an ordained minister and a man who respects heterosexual marriage so fucking much, would marry me and my boy dog right then and there. What Mike Huckabee fails to realize is that the difference between a marriage between me and my dog and a marriage between a woman and a man is that the latter union is between two consenting adults. And are all the of-age gay couples who are in committed relationships made up of two consenting adults? Of course. So this issue isn't about "slippery slopes" and whatnot. It's about hate. Mike Huckabee hates homosexuals. Plain and simple.

And I find it interesting that he doesn't consider turning the United States a Christian theocracy a radical idea, but he tells everyone that "[r]adical Islamic fascists have declared war on our country and our way of life." Mike Huckabee may want to protect us from extreme Islam, but he has declared war on our Constitution, which is, in essence, our country and our way of life.

Deborah Tannen on The Colbert Report

2008-01-17T22:03:00.000-05:00

Linguistics expert and professor at Georgetown University was on The Colbert Report last night and talked about how Hillary Clinton is being treated more harshly because she is a woman. It doesn't look like I can embed the video, but you can find it here on Colbert's website.

New Abstinence-Only Rally Song?

2008-01-16T12:48:00.000-05:00

Best American Gladiator Thus Far

2008-01-14T22:49:00.000-05:00

American Gladitors contestant Monica Carlson just beat The Eliminator, the final event on the show, in 2 minutes flat. That's the best time of all 8 contestants, male and female. Kudos!

Very Classy.

2008-01-13T01:57:00.000-05:00

Amanda at Pandagon points out a very sexist comic that was run in the Washington Post. I would say it amazes me that such obvious sexism could run in reputable newspapers in 2008, but I'd have to actually be amazed for that to be true.

Keep Sexism Out of Election Coverage

2008-01-09T21:33:00.000-05:00

Feministing had their 24-Hour Sexism Watch and blogged about sexist statements made in the media about Hillary Clinton. You can make a difference by signing Credo's petition to make this sexist coverage nonexistent. It will be sent to major media outlets including FOX, NBC, The New York Times, and NPR.

Mitt Romney Answers a Question

2008-01-09T13:18:00.000-05:00

via Feministing

Here's a video of Willard answering a question from some asshole in the crowd about the Violence Against Women Act.

Pretty horrifying, yes? But I won't get into the question or Romney's answer. You can read the Feministing post for analysis. Romney just reminded me of someone. But who? Hmmmm . . . .

Who sees those two campaigning together in South Carolina? I do!

Hello Kitty for Boys

2008-01-03T21:00:00.001-05:00

Did you know that Hello Kitty was not for boys? Yeah, I didn't know that either. But it still becomes news when Sanrio makes Hello Kitty clothing geared towards young men. The logo on the new tees and other merchandise is a little strange, but there is something that bothers me more than bad fashion. The cited article starts with the statement, "Hello Kitty is no sexist." First of all, the blue bow in Hello Kitty's hair is still gendered, and the logo is tweaked to look like the opposite of the original "girly" Hello Kitty logo, further perpetuating the view that males and females are opposites rather than compliments or equals. Secondly, there's no privilege that goes with wearing Hello Kitty clothing. Boys and young men were never at a disadvantage because gender roles (patriarchal gender roles) didn't allow them to wear Hello Kitty apparel, and they won't get any extra benefit now that this new line has been launched. If boys felt uncomfortable wearing something "girly" like Hello Kitty, it's because they didn't want to be called a girl or a homosexual by the patriarchy, not the imagined matriarchy.

Crazy Women for America

2008-01-03T20:25:00.000-05:00

Wendy Wright, head honchess* of Concerned Women for America and recent winner of Keith Olbermann's Worst Person in the World award, went on the TV yesterday and said that advocates of comprehensive sex education benefit when kids have sex. I can hear the collective "Um . . . why?" Wright says it's because there's a financial incentive. According to Wright, advocates of comprehenisve sex-ed want teens to have sex because they "benefit when they [kids, teens, people in general, I suppose] have sexually transmitted diseases, unintended pregnancies, and then it leads to them having abortions." Just smile and nod, people. Smile. And nod. I guess Wright doesn't think that treating a STD after having unprotected sex, you know, the kind of sex that people who pledge abstinence and don't know how to use a condom have, doesn't cost any money at all. She also implies that prenatal care is free and that there are no hospital bills after giving birth. It's common sense (and it should be common knowledge) that birth control is less expensive than all those pregnancy expenses. So doesn't the healthcare industry make more money off of people who have unprotected sex and subsequently have babies? Yes, yes they do.

*"Honchess" isn't the official feminine form of "honcho," but it should be.

Happy New Year, New Hampshire!

2008-01-03T01:28:00.000-05:00

New Hampshire has started off the new year right by signing a new ordinance allowing civil unions for same-sex couples.

Good for you, New Hampshire.

Nifty Posters

2007-12-30T02:07:00.000-05:00

I've recently taken to abusing the Stumble Upon feature on my FireFox browser. As such, I've found some pretty interesting things. First, it was the boob mousepads. Now, it's actually some pretty cool feminist/anti-violence activism.

Here's a link to some awesome posters. I think they're really awesome.

:(

2007-12-27T13:53:00.000-05:00

June 21, 1953 - December 27, 2007

Former Pakistani Prime Minister and opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was assassinated today at a rally in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. She was shot in the neck and chest while leaving the rally in her car before the gunman blew himself up, killing another 20 people. Bhutto, 54, was seeking a third term as PM. No word on what group, if any, is responsible for the murder.

Other Icky Products

2007-12-27T00:43:00.000-05:00

On the other hand, at least they make for good "asshole alerts" so that women won't waste their time on misogynistic douchebags.

All I want for Christmas is a non-gendered toy

2007-12-23T00:11:00.000-05:00

This is a good article from NOW's Kim Gandy. In it she talks about how gendered toys for young children are. I know that this is something we've probably blogged about before, but it bears repeating, especially this close to Christmas time.

Georgie Boy At His Finest

2007-12-21T01:56:00.000-05:00

Here at Feministing is an interesting post about George Bush's latest sexist remark, this time in regards to his daughter Jenna.

When talking to People magazine about Jenna's recent engagement, he had this little gem to give out (of course, not to be confused with a diamond hymen, although I'm sure Bush assumes he's giving one of those away as well):

Q: Tell us about your future son-in-law, Henry Hager. Did he do right and ask for Jenna’s hand?
The President: “He kind of sidled up to me and said, ‘Can I come and see you?’ We were sitting outside the presidential cabin here, and he professed his love for Jenna and said, would I mind if he married her? And I said, ‘Got a deal.’ [Laughter] And I’m of the school, once you make the sale, move on. But he had some other points he wanted [to make]. He wanted to talk about how he would be financially responsible.”

I have a couple of problems with this. First of all, what the hell is up with People magazine pimping sexist marital practices? Let's just get this straight: Asking for your girlfriend's hand in marriage is NOT romantic. It is sexist, it disempowers and dehumanizes her, and s a throwback to the days of marriage as a property exchange. All of those things are gross. Ergo, asking for Jenna's hand was not the "right" thing to do by any means.

But Bush's response, while not surprising, was just dripping with the women-as-chattel attitude that he has in most of his dealing with the second sex. Haha, sale of women! Bwahahaha, women as property! Oh man, that's a knee-slapper, Mr. President, and so very original.

It's shit like this that makes me not want to get married - EVER. I'm currently in a committed relationship, and I know that if my boyfriend ever pulled anything like asking for my hand in marriage, the answer from my mom and dad would be "no" (and simply because he asked them, they certainly know me enough to know that I don't go for that shit), and if not, I'd certainly make it clear to him. And even engagement rings are sexist to me. It perpetuates the high-priced whore stereotype. Give women shiny things in exchange for sexual relationships. Not only that, but I don't think I'd ever want a diamond-encrusted leash, either. It's absolutely patriarchy approved, and I can't endorse anything that the patriarchy endorses.

In fact, I think most marriage practices are ridiculous. I'm not even going to touch marriage consumerism and how that feeds into economic oppression, especially of the sexist variety. But the whole "giving away" thing is, once again, a throwback to marriage as property exchange laws. Might as well just add the "and obey" back into the vows. Also, the veil is not something that should be in practice. Why do women have to be faceless and identity-less until their man reveals their face? Is it that their identity is only derived from interaction with a superior male? I believe so! Well, that's the intent within the social context, anyway.

Also, if I were going to get married, I wouldn't want to be "surprised" with a proposal. I think it would be much better if the decision to get married were made by both of us, together and talking about what would be best for our futures, and if we want to be legally bonded or not. The whole thing of the "surprise" looks to be inequal to me. The man is once again the dynamic figure, making the decisions, and the woman basically just goes along with it or does the unthinkable and refuses. I don't understand why a couple just can't come to the decision together.

Yeah. That's my rant on marriage politics. I haven't had a good rant on here in a while, and I've been thinking about sexism in personal relationships, and how it shows up in small doses, for a while. All it takes is one more sexist-haha from Bush and I'm off on a tangent.

P.S. This is nice and ironic:

Q: Would you like to have a White House wedding?

Mrs. Bush: “Of course, a White House wedding would be a lot of fun. But I also know it wouldn’t be very private. And of course we want to do what Jenna wants to do.”

Emphasis mine.

Conservative Christians Are Just As Conflicted

2007-12-20T22:33:00.000-05:00

I just posted about how parents are having trouble breaking the news to the daughters that 16-year-old girls like Jamie Lynn Spears can indeed become pregnant. Shocker, I know. While I was pissed that nobody was too concerned about the fact that Jamie Lynn was living with her 19-year-old boyfriend or about how to talk to teenage boys about safe sex, I think this story has it's high points too . . . from a feminist perspective!
This AP article talks about Jamie Lynn Spears, the real-life pregnant 16-year-old, and Juno, the pregnant 16-year-old played by 21-year-old Ellen Page on the silver screen in the movie Juno. It seems like conservative Christians have to do a little double-talking due to this "onslaught" of pregnant teenagers in . . . places, as if they never existed! Bill Maier from Focus on [a confining view of] the Family had this to say:

It's a double-edged sword in the Christian community. We should commend girls like Jamie Lynn Spears for making a courageous decision to have the baby. On the other hand, there's nothing glamorous or fun about being an unwed teen mother.

I would like to know what's so courageous about deciding to have a baby, or what's particularly glamorous or fun about being a married teen mother. And did Maier think too hard when answering and said "have the baby" instead of "keep the baby" like a good pro-lifer would? I think he might have! What do you say Leslee Unruh?:

When I heard the story, I felt sad at first. Already her life is not the norm of other 16-year-old girls. You have a lot of teens who look at those people as role models. There's a danger of them thinking, 'She got pregnant? I guess I can have a baby too.'

What?! Leslee Unruh said this? Leslee "More babies! We lovebabies!" Unruh? Leslee "Fertility is a gift" Unruh? Leslee "It's a gift to be able to have children" Unruh was sad when she heard that someone was pregnant and nervous at the prospect of other teens wanting babies too? Never thought I'd see the day.

Basically, conservative Christians are in a real spot here. They have to choose between supporting abstinence-until-marriage or birth control, as well as applauding teenagers for having babies instead of abortions (or being on the pill to prevent both, oddly enough) without making it sound like having a baby in your teen years is a good idea. I don't think Maier, Unruh, or any of the other pro-lifers quoted in the article nailed it. Their message goes a little like this: Ladies, don't have sex. Stay virgins until you're married, okay? I mean, you're ladies, not sluts. But if you do have sex, make sure you're not on birth control, because birth control is bad because protected sex doesn't cause babies, and that just ruins our "Sex causes babies" campaign. Chances are, you won't be on birth control, since you've been exposed to abstinence-only education. And since you won't be on birth control, you could get pregnant. If you do get pregnant, go through the pregnancy and birth and either raise the baby or give the baby to someone else. As the old saying goes, there's nothing more responsible than having unprotected sex and becoming a mommy when you're an unmarried teenager without a high school education.

Just Lie to the Children!

2007-12-20T17:37:00.000-05:00

If you haven't heard, Jamie Lynn Spears, kid sister of Britney and star of Nickelodeon's Zoey 101, is pregnant. Lots of 16-year-old girls have been pregnant, as 16-year-old girls tend to have that capability. Now, parents just don't know what to say to their adolescent daughters. I find this worry ironic, since it's Christmastime, and Mary was probably like 12 when she gave birth to Jesus. But we'll celebrate that!

Anyway, like I said, parents are wondering what they should tell their daughters about this particular 16-year-old getting pregnant. I find this stupid for two reasons. First, I was a fan of all those rock bands back in the 90's when I was a kid -- Nirvana, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Blind Melon, Sublime, etc. Nobody's parents asked "What do you tell your children when Kurt Cobain/Hillel Slovak/Shannon Hoon/Bradley Nowell dies of drug overdoses/bullet wounds while they're high?" Nobody asked that! That's because drug use is, unfortunately, a fact of rock 'n' roll life. So why are parents having a fit about what to tell their daughters regarding Jamie Lynn Spears' teen pregnancy, when pregnancy is a fact of life? The second thing that bugs me, as a feminist, is that people are only talking about what parents should tell their daughters, not their sons. Lost in this story is the fact that Spears became pregnant by her 19-year-old live-in boyfriend. The actions of the adults in this situation (the boyfriend and Jamie Lynn Spears' mother) are not being criticized at all! The youngest person in the situation is expected to take most, if not all, of the responsibility.

But back to what parents are afraid of. The above article cites some comments made by regular folks on blogs and message boards about how they're going to deal with this whole Jamie Lynn Spears thing. Here's a good one:

I'm telling the kids 'Zoey 101' has been canceled. I hope Nickelodeon does the right thing and cancels the show. She is a role model for young girls. Looks like she's following in the footsteps of her sister.

So this parent is going to lie to their children. Because lying to kids works so well, especially when it comes to sex. That's why abstinence-only education is so much more successful than comprehensive sex ed. Oh, wait.

Mike Huckabee's Wettest Dream

2007-12-19T22:34:00.000-05:00

Mike Huckabee's spokesperson clarified statements Huckabee made in his 1998 book Kids Who Kill. First, what Huckabee said:

It is now difficult to keep track of the vast array of publicly endorsed and institutionally supported aberrations—from homosexuality and pedophilia to sadomasochism and necrophilia.

So, falling in love and having sex with someone who is the same sex as you is on the same plane as raping children, consensual sex of the kinkier variety (which is bad why?), and banging dead people. Oh, but Huckabee's spokesperson clarifies!

He's not equating homosexuality with necrophilia. He's saying there's a range of aberrant behavior. He considers homosexuality aberrant, but that's at one end of the spectrum. Necrophilia is at the other end.

No way is he saying that homosexuality is like having sex with dead people. That's not it at all.

He was talking about aberrant sexual behavior. Sado masochism and necrophilia are on the further end of the spectrum.

That's like saying any sex is the same. Yes, he considers both aberrant, but no, he does not equate the two in any way.

He was describing behavior. He's not casting judgment on the people themselves. His point is, the culture is becoming more accepting of aberrant behaviors.

He considers homosexual behavior aberrant. But there are degrees of aberrant behavior. He's not saying they're equally as bad. There's a very big distinction there.

So, falling in love and having sex with someone who is the same sex as you is on the same plane as raping children, consensual sex of the kinkier variety, and banging dead people. Thanks for the clarification, dickhead.