Ponderings Coupled with PostSecret

Postsecret has a lot of great images up this week. Many of them have themes consistent with gender/feminist issues. Definitely worth a look.

This one caught my eye:
Not only did the verbal imagery remind me of certain people I know, it is also a very powerful message about the state of rape awareness in this culture.

I've heard too many stories of women who have been raped and don't even know it. It's just more proof of how morphed society's view of sex really is. If sex can be confused with rape, or rape with sex, then something is amiss with our view of sexuality.

All this gray area does is create rape apologists who explain and justify rape (and the subsequent slap on the wrist that most rapists get if they're brought to court at all) with things like "Well, she must have just been teasing him" or "How was he supposed to know she was being serious? Women say 'no' when they mean 'yes' all the time".

This is also why I dislike depictions of sex, be they in books/movies/television, that create a fight-sex mentality. That sex as a struggle is somehow erotic or better than sex that is obviously consensual is not a concept that I'm a fan of.

Now, for risk of being labeled "anti-sex", "frigid", or "prude", allow me to say that whatever one does in their own bedroom is their business (unless its abusive or non-consensual of course).

Still, all the time, trashy romance novels, soap operas, popular F/X television shows, movies, and all different forms of entertainment show sex as some sort of erotic battle. The less consent the better it seems. This attitude also spans every range of taste. And of course, this isn't even mentioning the fact that this is often the main line of defense in rape cases.

Even so, the people who write/direct/create these works don't even seem to buy into what they're presenting (with perhaps the exception of Dennis Leary). Even in these consensual rape fantasies, it's still consensual! So, the only thing that is presented is rape as a violent act of domination, and with that, the line is blurred. What is consent when sex is supposed to be a battle?

It's no wonder people have secrets like the one above. How could anyone ever know if they consented or not when non-consent is often portrayed as consent?

Happy V-Day!

Take Action for Women in Mariana Islands

For those who don't know, Northern Mariana Islands is a US territory located in the Pacific Ocean. You've probably seen "Made in Northern Mariana Islands" on the garment tags of your clothing. Maybe it just said "Made in USA," but it was actually made by indentured servants in the Northern Mariana Islands. Well, Congress is trying to stop the exploitation of these people buy passing labor laws that are equal to those in the US. Here's a disturbing article about the sweatshop conditions women in the Northern Mariana Islands work in and the abuse they have to endure (including forced abortions) just to keep their jobs that was published in Ms. Magazine last year.

Basically, Saipan tricks people, mostly women from China, into working in "America." They pay thousands of dollars to relocate, only to work off their debt in garment factories in Saipan making clothes for Abercrombie & Fitch, Ann Taylor, and other major retailers for $3.00 an hour. Here's a very interesting video I just found that exposes sweatshops in Saipan.

Female Freedom?

My sister sent me this site.

It's pretty crazy. I love the idea, considering it is pretty bad to be a woman and have to pee when there is no bathroom (or hygienic bathroom) around. Still, I have a little bit of a problem with equating women's freedom simply with the ability to be like men. Still, overall I think it's a good thing.

Anyway, I just thought it was crazy. Any thoughts?

Wal-Mart Faces Billion-Dollar Lawsuit for Sex Discrimination

And there's why. As many as 1.5 million former and current female employees of Wal-Mart allege they were paid less and denied promotions because they're women. Now the case is going to trial. Here's a very short article announcing this news, and here's some more detailed information about the case.

Another "Men Are More Logical Than Women" Spouter Offers Himself As Proof Of The Opposite

Check out this guy.

First of all, I want you to know that men have Logic-o-rama. Women, well, we just don't. Estrogen just doesn't come with little logic capsules. Penis = logic. Uterus = emotional and illogical.

Going there would just be beating a dead horse.

It just goes downhill from there. Women get into science classes in college because men are discriminated against. Feminism is a hate movement. There are like a bajillion laws in place that discriminate against men. Feminism like totally wasn't and isn't needed because women would have gotten their rights without it. Science like totally is teh roxzorz.

That, my dears, is the basic gist of it.

My response was as follows (It is only so short because og character restrictions):

But then if we get into your science programs, it would only be because you were discriminated against!! Or are we only to look from the sidelines in skimpy cheerleading outfits? In any case, the invention of the pill came before a court case which made it legal. It's invention would have been meaningless had women not been able to legally use it, and I don't think you change laws in a laboratory. I don't think science gave women the right to vote, either.

In response, I received this:

The first part of your post is irratinal don't want to be a cheerleader? Then don't. You can do what you want to do, didn't anyone tell you that? (btw, I did study science in uni and there was anti-male discrimination).

The second parts are good points, yes there are good changes that feminists have made, but feminism takes credit for all the advances that women have made.. Advances that would not have happened if the science wasn't ready. That was my point.

So by now I'm just laughing. However, while laughing, I constructed what I believe to be quite a clever response to Mr. ArgusEyes.

My comment was just a tad on the long side for YouTube regulations, so I figured I'd just send you a message. I hope such a thing is not too bold. In any case, here is what I had wanted to say before I was denied by ridiculous character restrictions:

The point was not irrational because you didn't get it. The cheerleader comment was a snide remark in reference to first the "men have more logical minds" (yeah right) comment, and secondly, the "man-discrimination". The point was that you say look to science, yet when we do and we beat out the men who also look to science, we're told it's because men are just discriminated against. Therefore, you must not want women to actively participate in science, just watch and ooh and ahh over your manly logicalness (yes, I know that's not a word). If you believe men were being discriminated against, then you must believe that the women who took their places were not as qualified as the men. I saw no explanation for such a belief. Having a special interest in including women isn't discriminating against men. You say that there were 8 women in your class, right? Do you believe they were all inferior to the male candidates they beat out? I mean, if I did try to go into science, wouldn't I just be stepping on all of the men who are better at it than I am? Wouldn't you consider me a black mark on the boy's club of logical thinking? You say all these things in your comment ("You can do whatever you like"), yet it completely contradicts your apparent attitude in your video (If you're in a science class and have excess amounts of estrogen, it's because men are discriminated against and you suck at logic and science). Someone's wringing their hands.

In any case, without feminism, the advances of science would have been meaningless. When epidurals first came out, many people were against them because of the Bible and the whole "pain in childbirth" thing. Therefore, feminism had to step in. Didn't see science doing anything for women that it wasn't doing for anyone else. Science improves the lives of everyone, but it doesn't work in awarding people human rights. That requires social efforts. What you're suggesting is that because science helps everyone, it's been better for women than feminism. I mean, I'm sure scientific breakthroughs in diagnosing and handling Sickle Cell Anemia helped the black community because Sickle Cell Anemia disproportionately affects black people, but it didn't do more for their human rights than the civil rights movement. It just improved their quality of life just like it would have for anyone. Big whoop!

Not only that, but you've changed your story. Is feminism a horrible hate movement or has it had positive changes? Are you saying positive changes can come from hating men and erecting horrible man-hate laws that just keep men down? Come on now. Not only that, but you specifically said that feminism was not needed. Women would have gotten those rights anyway. I see absolutely no evidence of that, and in fact, see evidence in direct OPPOSITION to that. That was also contradicted by your saying that feminism has had positive effects.

So, in conclusion, I think you yourself are proof that perhaps men aren't more logical than women. It was a good attempt at defaming feminism, though. I give you points for creativity at least.

Also, feel free to watch his other videos. Did you know? Women are more sexist than men! Oh the horror!

Well, I Must Have Been Mistaken

I've always thought that calling a prominent woman by her first name was condescending, or that introducing yourself to an important social figure or otherwise superior individual by anything other than your first and last name was disrespectful. I talked about this a few weeks ago here when it came to pundits on the airwaves referring to Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton as simply "Hillary." Well, apparently she doesn't mind it. Her URL is "votehillary.org" And then there's her campaign store. I guess that makes me a bit ol' fashioned.

SD's New But Not Improved Abortion Ban

As if an abortion ban can ever be improved!

Exceptions are going to be made to the abortion ban that South Dakotans voted down last November. Rape and incest will join "life of the mother" as acceptable exceptions to terminating pregnancy. I heard on the radio this afternoon that there are even exceptions to the words "rape" and "incest."

"This year's bill would allow rape victims to get abortions if they report the rapes to police within 50 days. Doctors would have to confirm the report with police and would have to take blood from aborted fetuses and give that information to police for DNA testing. "

I hope young girls who have just begun having their period or older women approaching menopause never get raped, as they're the most likely to not take two missed periods as a sign of pregnancy. "

"In the case of incest, a doctor would have to get the woman's consent to report the crime along with the identity of the alleged perpetrator before an abortion could be performed. Blood samples from fetuses would have to be provided to police in incest cases, too."

Quite disgusting. How far will these pro-lifers go in not only their pursuit of ownership of every woman, but their general distrust of women? Which (at the risk of sounding like Stephen Colbert) brings us to tonight's word:

Pro-life Sentence.

Pro-lifers strive for a world without safe abortion. They want every woman to be forced into pregnancy and like it. They don't care about the tens of thousands of women who die in the world every year from botched abortions. What pro-lifers really want is for all females to have life sentence once they come out of the womb. They want a world where being born female is a life sentence as a sex slave for right-wing politicians, religious zealots, and narcissistic and anti-social personalities everywhere.

And then there's the penalty for illegal abortions: 10 years in prison, which is how much one would get for vehicular manslaughter. Why not life imprisonment? I thought personhood began at zygotehood! This is obvious proof that even pro-life legislators know that a pregnancy is not a person. Anti-choice legislation never protects "the child" or women. It only protects their pathological need to control people.

Since South Dakotans got well more than enough signatures to bring the first abortion ban to voters (you know, the people that this law would actually affect, and not the impotent/post-menopausal state lawmakers), I'm confident that pro-choicers will vote on this law to and win.

Tell Hillsborough County That Victimizing Victims Isn't Okay

Planned Parenthood is having a Take Action! campaign to get justice for the woman who was raped, arrested, denied bond, and then refused her emergency contraception due to a "conscience clause".

Go here to send a letter to the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Department and tell them that arresting the victims of crimes while letting the perpetrators of said crimes go free is not okay, and make sure that they know that employees are supposed to do their jobs and not endanger the health/well-being of female inmates just because they can't keep their theology to themselves.

Blog for Choice Broke the Record This Year!

I just received an e-mail saying that over 500 people Blogged for Choice last Monday for the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. How exciting! You can see all of the blogs that particpated, including Feminists to the Rescue, here.

Times When I Really Love My City

This story truly has it all.

For a little background, Gasparilla is a local pirate festival that happens annually. It usually looks like great fun (besides the night party of "Zomg show me ur boobz!1"), but now I'm not too sure I'll ever be going now that I know that I might get arrested should I get raped while there.

So the story is that a young Tampa student was walking to her car from Gasparilla when a man grabbed her and dragged her away to rape her. When she got away to call the police, they helped her at first but then arrested her because of an outstanding warrant from when she was a juvenile. She was then denied bail and had to spend the night in jail. I am so happy that another woman could spend the night in jail for being a rape victim while her rapist runs free.

Check out this quote from the victim's mother:

"They were more interested in prosecuting her for something that's a paperwork snafu from four years ago, that was juvenile. They were more interested in working on that than finding an experienced rapist," stated the victim's mother.

Absolutely true, from what I've been able to find out about this horrendous case. Not only that, but we have a fundie medical supervisor at the jailhouse who refused to give the victim the emergency contraception that had been prescribed to her. Apparently, she used the religion excuse to try to finish the job of the woman's rapist. The woman's attorney isn't taking many prisoners in his interviews, however, so at least he's on the ball. Check out these pretty powerful words:

"The medical supervisor would not allow her to take the pill because she said it was against her, the supervisor's, religion. So, here we have a medical supervisor imposing her beliefs on a rape victim," claimed the victim's attorney Virlyn Moore. "As a human being, how someone could be so violated by this monster and then the system comes along and rapes her again psychologically and emotionally - it's outrageous and unconscionable."

Preach it, dude. I hope you get this girl a very good settlement. Sew the city for everything they've got and then get the medical supervisor who should have picked "preacher" out of the hat instead of "medical professional" when blindly choosing a career path.

So, let's see:

Woman raped in broad daylight? Check.
Police generally treating her like crap? Check.
Victim punished for being a victim? Check.
Victim denied emergency contraception by Bible beating moron? Check.
Rapist not brought to justice? Check.

Told you it had it all.

Truly I am disgusted by the area in which I live.

Those Wimpy Bitches

In another stereotypical article about women being but maybe not as vain as men (*gasp*, men and women can be multi-faceted AND similar at the same time? BLASPHEMYYY!!!1), I am happy to report that women were once again reminded of how wimpy they are.


Here is said stereotypical article.

The problem that I have with this article is that I'm not quite sure of where to place the blame. Is it the author or is he just the messenger that I really feel like shooting? Take this sentence:

Now ladies, you may be tempted to decry this as further evidence of the wimpification of the American male. Or say that men are the new women.

Now, is this him applying this to women, as if we hate our own supposed inherent characteristics enough to hate men for having them, or is this an actuality? That women will think that men are wimps because they care a little bit about what they look like? I didn't decry a thing in this article other than an overall feeling that femininity was being equated with vanity, wimpiness, and weakness.

Still, I'm not sure who's making this equation. Is it the article's author, or U.S. society in general? Hell, maybe it's both.

Give us presents!

It's Feminists to the Rescue's birthday!

For our birthday, you should sign this petition:

www.licensetochoose.org

Don't Abort Jesus!

I think this photo shows pro-lifer's notion that every fetus (or, judging by the illustration on this poster, 6-month-old infant) is the next Jesus. Here are more photos from a cracked-out pro-lifer fundy, some with ironic captions. Is anyone else disturbed by the number of young children that were there? Pulling your kid out of school to brainwash them is completely irresponsible and a sign of bad parenting.* These kids don't even have to worry about this issue now, since they're not physically mature enough to procreate. Abortion is a heavy issue. Let kids enjoy their quick childhood. These are the same parents that protest Garadsil being given to 9-year-olds because they're not old enough to have sex yet. Oh, the contradictions!


*I would say the same if this were the March for Women's Lives. Honestly, I don't agree with parents bringing their children to any type of rally like this, because it's too complicated for children to really understand. I saw a lot of kids at the rally against genocide in Central Park back in September, and I don't think kids should be exposed to the ugliness of the world at such a young age. When kids are exposed to images of murdered children and dismembered stillborn fetuses (which pro-lifers display on posters as if this is what abortion is, even though most abortions occur when the embryo is between 1/2 and 1 inch in length), they don't see it as a symbol of anything. It's only frightening to them.

Blogging for Reproductive Justice, Blogging for Choice

I like this new term that has popped up within the blogosphere as of late. While i thinnk that "choice" is certainly a perfect term for what I support, I think "reproductive justice" is also accurate, and certainly more powerful. "Reproductive justice" encompasses a lot more than abortion rights. It requires thinking about and fighting for the rights of pregnant women no matter what. It seems as though once a woman becomes pregnant, she loses her personhood status (assuming she had it in the first place) and becomes a broodmare. This fact is one of the reasons why I never want to become pregnant in my lifetime. Being pregnant in this society is humiliating and degrading. People feel as though they can tell you what to eat, what to wear, when to do what, how to give birth, when they can touch you and where, etc. etc. etc. and the list goes on. That's not even the most disturbing part. There are also forced c-sections with no consent given by the pregnant woman. Patronizing attitudes from doctors who think they know so much more and thus have a right to override a woman's right to consenting to a medical procedure. There is so much more than just the choice for an abortion out there, and I think that on this day that commemorates such an occasion for women's rights, a victory day for reproductive justice, that these things need to be discussed.

As for me? I'm still happy that we held on another year. We had some victories and some tough battles this year, but women's freedoms are still here. We are stillholding on to our right to bodily autonomy and integrity, and I am thankful every day that I don't have to worry that one day I might be forced to carry a rapist's baby, or any pregnancy that I don't want to carry. It makes me happy to know that my right to privacy is still legally equal to my boyfriend's, that neither of us will be forced to donate bodily resources at this time. I am happy ot know that I still have sexual freedom, despite the fact that some people would love to punish me for it.

Roe v Wade is a great monument for women's rights. Here's to having it stick around for many generations of women to come.

Happy Blog for Choice Day, ya'll.

P.S. - Fundies have too much money. They're televising the March for (Fetal) Life on two channels.

Roe v. Wade: My Personal Department of Homeland Security

Today is the 34th anniversay of Roe v. Wade, and even these moronic comments by Dubya can't get me down. So I guess this is my blog for choice.

I see Roe v. Wade as a second birthday for all women. January 22nd is a day that I recognize as not only just another day that I'm alive, but it's a day that I know I can live my life without the idea of pregnancy and motherhood plaguing me. Before Roe v. Wade, women were bound by their reproductive systems. A woman's life spanned the distance between her ovaries and vaginal openning. She was judged based on what she did with her reproductive system, what went in it, and what came out (even what doesn't go in and come out). Roe v. Wade has removed this physical burden from women. The mental burden still remains by guilt-trip -- oh, I mean "pro-life" organizations and legislators -- that try to make women feel bad for not wanting children, even before they become pregnant. Post-abortion syndrome was not invented to help women. It's a way to confuse and trick women into keeping their pregnancies, not for their own benefit, but for the wishes of people who don't care about her or her family.

The reason I am pro-choice is quite simple: Women are people. People have lives. People have minds. People have desires. People have other people. People have responsibilities. People are not simply their bodies. People are not the oppressive roles that have been assigned to their gender. Pro-lifers do not believe women are people; they believe they are baby factories. They don't believe that women have minds of their own; they believe that we can be brainwashed by Bible verses and pictures of still-born fetuses that they tell us are abortions. They don't believe that women have desires outside of having babies and raising families. If women don't have this desire, they are abnormal. If they have other desires, they don't matter. Pro-lifers don't consider the lives of a woman's existing children. 61% of women who have abortions are already mothers. They don't believe that these women have responsibilities to these children, or job responsibilities, or responsibilities to their education. Yet, they tell these women that they have to "take responsibility for their actions" and be forced into parenthood, which only inhibits these woman's abilities to take care of their other more important responsibilities that she's actually chosen for the benefit of her life. Pro-lifers believe that a woman's body and sexist gender roles are her destiny from menarche to menopause. Those are the beliefs of the so-called pro-life movement. Doesn't sound like they care about anyone's life, does it?

Women need legal abortion. Whether one would ever get one or not isn't an issue. I feel comfortable and secure knowing that if I ever become pregnant, my pregnancy will be solely my business. It will truly be my pregnancy, not the pregnancy of the government, Care-Net, or of any man who believes if they poke me they own me.

Ha Ha Ha-Ha Ha! *raspberry!*

Few heed Operation Rescue's call for abortion protest

Why Are People Voting For These Guys?!

I'm absolutely tickled when pro-life politicians are open about their backward pro-life views. Then I become horrified when I realize that people actually voted them into office. Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee has been going on various shows promoting his new book From Hope to Higher Ground: 12 STOPS to Restoring America's Greatness. A couple of nights ago, he was on The Daily Show and said, "I'm pro-life, but I think life begins at conception, but I don't think it ends at birth. We have to be concerned about a child's education, healthcare, safe neighborhoods, clean water, the access to a college education. That is pro-life, to care about a child's entire life."* Except if that child is born a girl and grows up to be a fertile woman. While Mike Huckabee is a rare pro-lifer in that he actually cares about children, he's your typical misogynistic pro-lifer who believes a woman's life begins at her ovaries and ends at the vaginal openning. You know, there's a political party that believes all people should live in a clean and safe environment and have an exceptional educational experience without limiting the human rights of women. I'll give you a hint. It rhymes with "Democrat."

Last night, Mike Huckabee was on Hardball with Chris Matthews and had this to say about why he became a Republican.

"I became a Republican as a teenager. And I did it because I believed that we needed a sense of personal responsibility. I believed in lower taxes, smaller government. I believed in the things that I was hearing from people like Ronald Reagan. And as a result of that, I became a Republican out of conviction.
I‘m pro-life. I believe that there are a lot of things that we ought to really preserve."

Personal responsibility? He doesn't want women taking personal responsibility if he's going to force pregnancy on all of them. Smaller government? I wouldn't call a government that inserts their backwards ideology in the lives of every woman small. Preservation? Of what? Your pathological need to control people, to increase the population? Certainly not human rights! When it comes to unwanted pregnancy, the pro-lifer is the only person who actually wants the child. Why doesn't Huckabee have his own kids? Why doesn't he get his wife or whoever pregnant every time a woman has an abortion? He can make thousands of them and pay for every one of them.

Hopefully his book will do horribly and he'll decide against running in '08.

*Click the "Daily Show" link and search for Mike Huckabee to watch the video. His pro-life bull is mentioned in Part 2.

A Sexist Part of Your Complete Breakfast

A commercial for new Strawberry Delight Frosted Mini Wheats begins in a classroom with an original Frosted Mini Wheat on a boy's shoulder and a pink strawberry Frosted Mini Wheat on a girl's shoulder. The orignial mini wheat says to the strawberry one, "What's a cute girl like you doing in a classroom like this?" A classroom like what, I wonder? A gifted math class? The strawberry Mini Wheat happens to be male and isn't exactly thrilled about wearing pink. Strike two! What next? A fat check to Fathers for Life?

Video Game Bitches Ain't Shit

When I'm bored, I often go to AddictingGames.com to play a neat little flash or shockwave game or two. I hadn't been there in a while, and when I went this time, I found a great and wonderful game!

Jack The Ripper!

Because what's cooler than being able to re-enact the awful murders of women? Will there be a serial rapist game next?

Here's the creator's website. Send him an e-mail if you don't think beheading women is very fun.