Links from the Web

Hello readers!

In an effort to get back to our regularly-scheduled programming, I bring you a collection of links from the news and the Internet spectrum for your rage and entertainment. Enjoy!

First up is the personal account of a blogger who regularly experiences "street" harassment on the Metro, which she frames with the goal of giving cis-man readers insight into how scary it can be to be a cis-woman sometimes. I think the cyclist story (read it and that'll make sense) would be scary no matter who you are, but I agree with her overall point.

Next is a great article from RiotsNotDiets on body ambivalence and making room for personal experience in fat activism. Why do I love this piece and link it here? Because it's really damn hard to change a worldview overnight. I grew up in a weight-conscious household in the United States, and to this day- in spite of working very hard- I have trouble shedding the sense of self-worth that I attach to my size, my shape, and my numbers on the scale. It's validating to know that the journey away from fat-hating and body-shaming isn't one I'm taking alone.

Jezebel brings us a great breakdown of Cosmo's latest stupidity in the realm of sex advice. This time, Cosmo decided to foray into BDSM, which is at both heartening and facepalm-worthy. Heartening? BDSM is given so much flak in popular (vanilla) culture, where people routinely confuse it with domestic abuse (warning: this makes my blood pressure spike uncontrollably). Facepalm? The advice is piss-poor and could lead to a lot of people getting hurt. If you're actually interested in learning more about BDSM, check around for classes or "coaches" (read: friendly teachers) in your community. Don't rely on the vacuous hypotheses of Cosmo.

For more blood pressure action, check out another Idiot Moment from the GOP, where Tennessee state senator Stacey Campfield claimed that you can't contract HIV through heterosexual intercourse. I want to know who these people are and what edition of "Medical Jargon for Dummies" they're reading, because they keep spouting the most incredibly stupid- and easily disproven- statements I've ever heard.

HuffPo, managing to overcome its previous problems with publishing bigoted crap, brings us an interesting take on the whole Kristen Stewart/Robert Pattinson relationship drama. I'm not a fan of either of them- I'm reasonably certain that they could be replaced by sock puppets and the acting would improve- but the author makes an excellent point about our slut-shaming culture and the unhealthy obsession we have with cis-women practicing infidelity. As the author notes,

"Almost no one will blame the much-older guy you cheated with, and it might actually make him more famous andhelp his career. Few will care that he was your boss and in a position of authority or that he may have have taken advantage of your youth and relative inexperience. Everything is your fault, and your life will be threatened over it."

Like I said. Worth a read.

In actual news-news, the FBI released its updated definition of rape in January. I'm disappointed that no one's really talked about this on the news, given that the previous definition meant that "rape" could only refer to forcible penetration of the vagina by a penis (seriously), but better late than never! Spread the word and begin celebration!

And finally, if you haven't had a good laugh at this yet, enjoy the awesome side of the Internet as Amazon reviewers flock to Bic's "For Her" line of pens and mock the hell out of it. As disappointing as it is that some marketing team somewhere came up with this idea and then produced it, public backlash is entirely worth it. Suck it, Bic.

Have a wonderful week, readers, and we'll catch you next time!

A Link of Note

In this week's edition of "In the News," we only have one link. That's right. One. A lot of it has to do with the fact that I'm rather drained from two trying weeks at work and can't dredge up the energy to continually traumatize myself with news of hatred and bigotry, but the rest of it has to do with the fact that I'm simply lazy.

So here's a link to a blogger's response to the Chick-Fil-A day-of-support yesterday. Since so many of our readers are Christians in the United States, I thought this article- which is written from what I perceive as being a non-hateful-towards-Christians standpoint- focused on points that might be particularly pertinent here. As probably the least dogmatic Catholic out there, I certainly appreciated the author's attempts to redirect Christian energies away from bigotry and more towards a compassionate and loving world.

My two cents, anyway.

Links and Stories of Note

I've been incredibly confused about my posting schedule on various blogs lately, readers, so please pardon my apparent inability to adhere to anything resembling a timetable. Today I bring you a collection of links and stories I've been gathering for the past several weeks. Some of them are rather out-of-date at this point, having been "resolved" or otherwise become old hat, but I'm leaving them in here because they're a good illustration of the kind of tone American culture has been taking lately. In case the following doesn't make it clear: the tone is decidedly anti-feminist.

First, I bring you an article about a Catholic nun's book on spirituality and sexuality. It's pretty standard fare, since religious scholars and philosophers are always pondering what "the rules" were, are, and should be, but I'm amused by this one in particular because the Vatican condemned it and thus guaranteed its bestseller status (of course). Take that, sex-phobic oppressors!

Next is a victory here in Colorado Springs, that bastion of head-in-the-sand religious conservatism, where one of our school districts has managed to pass an anti-discrimination policy to protect students on the basis of gender identity and expression. This is a HUGE deal, notably because trans students have it rough everywhere but especially in a cis paradise like this one, and the general tenor of debate across the country has been that protecting gender identity and expression is somehow a way of caving to special interest groups. It's nice to have a formal entity stand up to that perspective and grant those protections anyway.

A less victorious link is the proposal to build an anti-abortion monument/glorification centre in Wichita, Kansas. It's designed to incorporate a "wailing wall"- yes, designed after the world-famous wailing wall in Jerusalem- and will cost somewhere in the vicinity of millions of dollars. And you know what? That's a pile of horse shit. Kansas, as a state, has a terrible record with abortion providers (namely, killing them) and providing supportive services for babies born to low-income families. Maybe instead of wasting so much time and money on a glorified hate structure, the church that's behind all this could redirect that energy towards- oh, I don't know- actually doing something to support families with young babies? Increasing access to health care, food, clothing, child care, and information? You know, actually doing Christ's work? The hypocrisy in this is mind-blowing.

Another one in the "ugh" category also comes to us from Kansas. This one is a measure that made its way through the state legislature and permits religious organizations to ignore- yes, IGNORE- anti-discrimination ordinances that violate their beliefs. What does this mean? It means that someone could be fired for being gay. It means that a professor at a university could refuse to acknowledge or educate a trans student. Think I'm exaggerating? Here's the text of the bill. Luckily it managed to avoid passage, but here's something important to remember: religious freedom does NOT mean that a religious organization can stomp all over the civil rights of others. DONE.

Finally, a quick note on the power of the internet: a store undergoing construction in a New Jersey mall put up this sign for patrons, apparently thinking that sexism and sexual harassment are funny. Fortunately, someone complained about it on Facebook and the outrage went viral. The store has since taken down the sign (yay!) but apparently is still managed by people (or being renovated by people) who don't have enough humanity to stop themselves from making such bad decisions in the first place.

That's enough for this week! Tune in for more up-to-date rants and raves next time.

Links of Note

Hello readers, and thanks for your patience with my lateness this week. I managed to land myself with a lovely little virus and spent the weekend feeling like Death was at my door. Dramatics aside, things are back to normal, and I give you some of the links I've been collecting from around the web:

First up is a piece on the new voter registration laws in Florida, which give registration organizations a very limited timetable for filing their new registrees with the state. The stated purpose of the law is to cut back on voter fraud, though how a shorter time frame for verifying an individual's registration accomplishes this purpose is beyond me. Right now the primary impact appears to be that voter registration groups are generally pulling out of Florida, with the result that tens of thousands of potential voters (many of whom are Hispanic, surprise surprise) aren't being registered.

The latest and greatest from Arizona is that Governer Brewer has signed the "show me your whore pills" bill into law. Yes, there have been amendments made to the bill so that female employees have to justify non-medical pill uses to insurance companies, not employers, and in theory there's a grievance process for them to follow should HIPAA be violated, but WHAT. THE. HELL. NO ONE should have to choose between access to contraceptive pills and employment. There's so much stupid in Brewer's decision (and the decisions of all the legislators who made the bill possible in the first place!) that I'm not even sure my head can bring itself down to that level.

In a sweeping move to restrict civil rights, two states- North Carolina and Colorado- have done their part to keep same-sex couples from getting married. The states did it in two different ways (NC did it with a voter-instigated constitutional amendment, while Colorado did it via filibuster and foot-dragging), but the end result is rather the same: someone else decided that we couldn't receive the 100+ legal benefits that come with co-signing a piece of paper. This comic from The Atheist Pig pretty much sums it up:

In a brief bout of sanity, I managed to find an article about a nine-year-old who felt so strongly that the Westboro Baptist Church is wrong that he hastily scribbled "God hates no one" on a piece of notebook paper and held that up to protest. I'm sure there's someone who wants to argue about who wrote the sign and whose idea it was to protest the WBC, but I really don't care. It's a piece of good news in an overwhelming tide of bad.

Speaking of "bad," Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall decided to open his mouth and say that "Sodomy is not a civil right." Ten points out of ten for missing the point, Mr. Marshall, but the sex acts of any given couple aren't on the line today. In fact, they really haven't been on the line since 1996, when Romer v. Evans (517 U.S. 620) made it unconstitutional to legislate against homosexual sex acts (particularly sodomy). What's on the line is the legal right of any two consenting adults to sign paperwork allowing each other to affirm their commitment to and care for each other. DONE. I know many people think gay sex is "icky" (see above comic), but I also know a lot of people think various sex acts between heterosexual married couples are icky too (see: fisting, anilingus, and urolagnia, for example, but bear in mind that these links have pictures) and that plays no role in whether or not those couples can socially and legally affirm their relationship. So get over it.

Finally, I bring you one mom's retort to Time Magazine's recent piece on attachment parenting. Actually, let me rephrase that: it wasn't really a "piece" so much as it was "a biased piece of drivel that somehow managed to be marketed as journalism." Not only did the article display a spectacular level of ignorance about how attachment parenting actually works, but it also decided to pit parents against each other by suggesting that raising children is a competition with some sort of minimum-standards bar. Seriously? Parenting is a hard job. It's dirty, it's exhausting, it's often thankless, and it's a constant guessing game; the last thing any parent needs is to be told that they're not "enough" of a parent for their kids. Go read the retort though. She's actually a parent.

That's all, folks! Tune in again next week for more links.

Links EVERYWHERE!

It has been a very busy few weeks around my house, most notably because I've started a new job and my partner's schedule has changed. We're both adjusting well, but it also means that many of the links I'm sharing today have been scavenged from Facebook and not news sites. With that said...

First up is an article summarizing a meta-analysis of studies on the relationship between (assigned) sex equality and economic and social well-being. Anyone who read "Three Cups of Tea" probably won't be surprised, in spite of recent controversy, because it makes common sense. If approximately 50% of a culture's population is consistently held back, it will hold the culture back. If the culture has sex-based roles and one sex is assigned the task of childrearing, it will hold the culture back if that sex doesn't have access to information. Just saying!

Next is an astoundingly embarrassing piece that somehow made it through HuffPo's editing process and wound up on its UK Politics page. It's a classic example of how oblivion, imperialism, and "one priority at a time" mentalities can lead to incredibly discriminatory material being published. There are so many critiques to be brought in here that my head is on the verge of exploding! Why, oh why, couldn't the article have been a nuanced and respectful bit of dialogue?

Thankfully, Jezebel has come to the rescue with a publication on "hipster" racism, aka racism. In case you had any doubt about what made the last article truly offensive, read this and tell me if it makes more sense.

Check out, too, this wonderful article from the Atlantic Wire that slams the journalism industry for creating the women's niche market. I don't mean that in the sense of alternative menstrual products or other possible meaningful topics- I mean the "How to Ensure You Look Good AND Professional At the Same Time!" crap that gets sold to us as being important. Confused? Read the article.

In a piece of actual news, that idiotic "Don't Say Gay" bill from Tennessee has finally been defeated. One word: HUZZAH!

And finally, because I think sites like this need more love: the Transgender Couchsurfer, which is like the original couchsurfer but very specifically trans-friendly. I highly recommend putting yourself on there if you're trans- or queer-friendly, but I'd also recommend passing it along to friends and family who could also help make the low-budget travel options safe for everyone.

That's all, folks! Catch you next time.

In the News

This week's "In the News" segment is going to be blissfully brief, as it's Good Friday and a lot of my energy is going towards celebrating the culmination of the Lenten season. When I say "brief," I mean it: I have a grand total of three (!) links for you all today. It's not that there isn't more to go on- every time I open up the Daily Mail's homepage and see their "Femail" column I throw up a little inside- but I don't want to make today a froth-at-the-mouth day.

The first link today is a BBC feature on an Afghan practice known as Bacha Posh, wherein parents disguise their daughter as a son when she's in public so she can work and have access to education. It's apparently not uncommon, and as with all adaptations to inequality, some of the daughters find it empowering and others feel robbed of their identities. I feel that the human rights aspect of the piece is a bit skewed- it's gender, not access- but it does highlight the fact that sex-based inequality continues to be a significant problem in Afghanistan. The whole cultural acceptance of the practice is even more fascinating to me in that light.

The second link today, also from the BBC, is a feature on a woman whose daughter was kidnapped and trafficked into sex work ten years ago in Argentina. Susana Trimarco, the mother, has been fighting human trafficking- often at risk to her own life- ever since. She is credited with finding the information needed to prosecute dozens of traffickers and rescue 129 trafficking victims, and she has started a foundation to respond to trafficking throughout Argentina. Wow. A round of applause, folks.

Our final link comes in light of the controversy over Sandra Fluke's Congressional testimony on contraceptive costs, and it's a link to individual cis women's testimonies about their experiences with hormonal contraceptive costs. I think it's a particularly good thing to think about in light of the tone of public debate over contraceptive coverage, and I also recommend looking at Emily's post from Friday.

That's all, folks!

In the News

The past couple of weeks have seen me frothing at the mouth over some of the stupidly offensive and horrifyingly threatening moves that (male) politicians have been making against women in the U.S. This means that you all get treated to a listing of some of these stories while you're reading this compilation of news links, so strap into your rage-machines and be prepared to be infuriated!

We'll start off easy with a piece from Jezebel that reports that the Arizona representative responsible for the atrocious proposal that women (yes, women specifically) should have to report their contraceptive use to their bosses has finally seen a glimmer of light and is rewriting the bill. I'm grateful that the negative feedback around the bill has caused Representative Debbie Lesko to reconsider the violations of HIPAA that she wished to codify, but I'm still mad that she's rewriting the damn thing. It's illegal and inappropriate! It's none of my boss's business if I take pills or use other prescription contraceptives!

Although if I'm no better than a pig or a cow, as some legislators would believe, then I suppose my anger is simply the lowing of a herd animal spooked by the passage of clouds across the sun (or some equally simplistic dismissal of my experiences). Y'know, because animals are forced to carry their foetuses as long as their bodies choose, and get pregnant whenever a stud shares their pen, and die of pneumonia because Nature doesn't make penicillin in hay and OH WAIT A MINUTE. I'm SO sorry that calves and piglets are sometimes stillborn, but if you had an ounce of common sense (or a veterinarian on the premises), you'd know that sometimes animal pregnancies are terminated too! ESPECIALLY when the foetus is already dead! Not to mention the fact that the argument that we should have the same natural restrictions as animals is going to put your car, your house, your woven clothes, and your expensive and advanced medical care in a whole world of "not allowed" anymore because it doesn't happen naturally. I'd include something in here about being a human, and therefore not a cow, pig, or chicken, you sexist little f***, but I don't think you're listening to me to begin with. In case someone IS listening, though, Soraya Chemaly at HuffPo wrote a far more eloquent retort to the War on Vaginas and Their Assorted Internal Counterparts. I suggest you read it.

A wonderful guerrilla campaign has started in response to this war, however, which has me thrilled and empowered all at once. What is it? Knitted and crocheted vaginas, uteruses, and ovaries, all inundating the offices of the members of Congress and state legislatures that are committing the most vicious legal attacks on women's rights. How great is it for a representative or senator to be confronted by a cute and cuddly version of the very thing he's trying to kill? It makes me feel so happy to envision that scene. What a great way to express to Congress et. al. that they're often so obsessed with trying to determine foetal rights that they entirely forget the rights of the living, breathing, functioning, undeniably human women who already exist.

Yashur on The Current Science wrote a wonderful editorial looking at why so many people- men in particular- are so ready to dismiss sexism as being a real problem, even when they're falling all over themselves to change racism, economic inequality, or any other form of discrimination or injustice. The easy answer, of course, is that sexism is both universal and a social order that benefits a lot of people (again, men in particular). It goes further, however, especially in light of the pile ofScheiß that has been heaped on women in the U.S. this week.

Let me take a quick breath to gather my thoughts and cool my temper a little...
In good news, more executives from Susan G. Komen are resigning after last month's funding debacle. It's good news not only because their decision was boneheaded and deserved a shamefaced exit, but also because it demonstrates that popular movements can still have an impact on the forces shaping our country (and, hopefully, the world). We might not be getting very far with Congress, but at least we can teach corporations a thing or two.

After a sixteen-year-old committed suicide in Morocco because she was forced to marry the man who raped her, the country is reconsidering its forced marriage laws. While rape victims aren't necessarily forced into marriage by law in Morocco, the law does permit a rapist to use marriage as a form of exoneration. Let's be real: who wouldn't take that option when facing up to 20 years in prison? I for one stand behind the activists in Morocco who are advocating for an update to penal law in cases of rape.

A free new app is out called the "Circle of Six," which allows people to enter six friends into the app with prewritten texts such as "I need a distraction." The beauty of it? It was designed for a contest to create apps that can help prevent sexual assault. How does this prevent assault, you might say? It gives potential victims the opportunity to request bystander intervention before anything goes wrong. That person might not feel safe asking the potential attacker to stop or leave, but pushing a button to get a friend to come in and provide an easy excuse to get away might be a hell of a lot easier to accomplish. It's not perfect, of course; bystander intervention should also come from the friends of the potential attacker (see the Green Dot Project for ideas). I give this concept major kudos, however, for making it that much easier to intervene in a potentially dangerous situation.

My final piece of news is an article from my home state, New Hampshire, where a push to repeal same-sex marriage was defeated this week. New Hampshire has been the site of some impressive political stupidity recently, I must admit, but this leaves me feeling optimistic that at least some human rights aren't being trampled out of existence entirely. An extra note for fun is that one of the men in the 2010 photo is someone both Emily and I knew in high school, and it's wonderful to know that he and his husband will get to continue to share the benefits and privileges that marriage confers.

That's it for this week, readers. I'm off to cool my heels and knit some vaginas for the lovely folks of Congress.

In the 'News'

Aaaand we're back with another segment of "In the 'News,'" which I'm going to start putting in quotation marks because the links I post aren't always "news" in the traditional sense. More often than not, they resemble snack items for your analytical brains to munch upon. Let the noms commence!

First up, an organization in the UK which supports male survivors of sexual assault has started up a poster campaign to raise awareness that yes, in fact, males and men can be (and are) sexually victimized. It's controversial in the UK, of course, because Heaven forbid we a) talk about sexual assault, b) admit males can be victims and c) admit that any male can be a victim, not just "the gay ones" (sarcasm fully intended). It's about time we started expecting the public to deal with it, though, so I say carry on.

Next, another example of the power of social media (aka The Internet) comes from the Lakota nation, where several youth have put together a video campaign targeting negative stereotypes about Native Americans (and the Lakota community in particular). This is what I love about the Internet: it's so much easier for otherwise-marginalized groups (Lakota, adolescent, rural, etc.) to have an impact on the world.

Another thing I love about the Internet? How much easier it is to connect with people who are willing to show you a new-to-you perspective on the world. An example I bring you today is Christine Miserandino's Spoon Theory, which gives able-bodied people a great tool for building sensitivity (read: empathy) for the factors that have to go into decision-making when your body's resources may be limited. It's a great "a-ha" piece for those of us who can go through our days without having to worry if we'll have the energy to do the things that we often take for granted- like showering.

The downside of getting multiple Internet perspectives is that sometimes you find things that are sad, angering, or traumatizing. One such piece from this week details a doctor's experience with an emergency response to a back-alley abortion. I think this is a very important piece to read, however, because it brings back some truths that have become lost in contemporary abortion debates: abortions are medical procedures that should be done by trained professionals, not random people with card tables or even by doctors with no gynecology experience. We live in a world where not every pregnancy is wanted, let alone safe, and where people will continue to make the choice to terminate their pregnancies. We also live in a world where even the most would-be helpful pregnancy and childbirth support organizations aren't accessible to nearly enough people. I am a pro-abortion-rights feminist for these reasons. I know many readers of this blog are in total disagreement with me, which is fine, but I challenge you: actively help us find solutions for these problems. Don't just sit on your thumbs. Push for legislation that punishes those quacks who attempt abortions without proper training. Donate your time and energy to pregnancy support centers, mental health centers, food banks, childcare centers, and housing projects. Don't hate on someone who makes a different choice than you would or did. And above all, please educate yourself about how abortions work and why sometimes second-trimester terminations are important (hint: if your foetus doesn't develop a renal system, your uterus will literally crush it to death during the second trimester.).

Speaking of stupidity becoming entangled in political debates, Michelle Bachman has come up with yet another gem: instead of death panels for the elderly, Obama's health care laws will create birth panels for the fertile. Wait, what? Her hypothesis, which I suspect originated somewhere on the lunatic fringe, is that a government that makes contraception accessible for financial reasons is a government that's planning to force you to use it. I'm not making this crap up. Go over it with me again. She says that if birth control is free, the government will try to save money by forcing you not to have children. Not only is this a spectacular logical fallacy, but it's also a remarkable demonstration of her terrible grasp on U.S. jurisprudence. If you're too lazy to click the link, I'll summarize for you: the U.S. Supreme Court declared that fertility is, in essence, "a basic liberty."

Finally, a quickie from Polytical raises the issue that some of us face when we realize we're madly in love with someone. Okay, that's a bit simplistic. What it briefly addresses is the disjunction that can occur for the women who were raised on Disney and the subsequent message from our mentors that we didn't need a man to be happy, but who now find themselves in a relationship that's so (positively) powerful and influential that they have difficulty envisioning their lives without that partner. I'll admit- I find myself in that position with my partner today, although I'll save my philosophizing for another day. For now, I leave you with this question: how do you envision yourself (or find yourself) handling that difference in expectation and reality?

In the News

Apologies for missing the last "In the News" segment a couple of weeks ago, dear readers! In the middle of having conniptions about my home state's latest idiocy, Liz Trotta's amazing display of Paglia-ism on Fox, Susan G. Komen's error, and the continued determination from the U.S. government not to get it, I managed to forget to share my outrage with you. Poor things! So here's a nice hefty dose of some of the things that are coming up in the news and attracting my attention.

First up is an interesting editorial that looks at Rick Santorum's chances with (cis) women in the upcoming Presidential election. Santorum has been a thorn in my side ever since he got himself turned into Internet slang, to be sure, but he's been coming up with some gems in recent months that appear to have eclipsed his previous embarrassments. Attempting to reopen national debates about women working outside the home, for example, is a beautiful illustration (at best) of your exact location on the lunatic fringe. Unfortunately, however, with some of the other debates that have been carried out over and bloody over in the past few years (again, see that link about New Hampshire), Santorum might not be entirely alone in his little land of the weird. I'd love to be able to dismiss him as a silly pundit with a need for attention, but I'm not sure we can.

Another male making unsavoury waves in the news is Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former head of the IMF and current scourge of unconsenting women. While he managed to weasel out of the legal fracas his attack on a hotel housekeeper in New York caused, he's popping up again in connection with the Carlton affair- and since this business involves misspent funding and potential pimping, it's less likely to go so smoothly for him. Of course, he's from a country where opinions about sexual assault have been relatively prehistoric, in spite of the best efforts of French feminist activists, but I'd argue that DSK is a symptom that could use treatment anyway.

Also in the scheme of international sex problems comes an article from the Boston Globe that features a discussion of for-sex human trafficking, though it really only focuses on the relationship between Uganda, where women are targeted, and Malaysia, where women are sold. This is a huge issue, and not just in a couple of countries overseas. We live in a world where travel- legal or otherwise- is increasingly easy and people make temporary or permanent trips for all sorts of reasons and especially to find work. One of the first cases I worked in New Hampshire involved a human trafficking ring. The state I currently work in has one of the worst rates of trafficking in the United States. Trafficking isn't always about masked stereotypes running around and grabbing people off the street; it's much more insidious and has deep roots not only in sexism, but in racism and economic oppression as well. If you want to learn more, I recommend taking a look at Half the Sky by Nicholas Kristof. Some of his arguments irritate me- like comparing contemporary trafficking to the trafficking of African slaves in the U.S.- but I think his message is worthwhile.

PHEW. For a breather from the rage-inducement, let's turn to the world of fashion, where a show at London Fashion Week featured models wearing nothing but hats. That's not the interesting part, although nudity is always attention-getting. What makes this story stand out is that the designer had a friend of hers appear in the show, also in the nude, while eight months pregnant (warning: pictures are as naked as the models. Click with caution). The designer, Robyn Coles, states that while her ultimate goal was the press that nudity attracts, she was also invested in demonstrating that hats are an accessory that are independent of shape or size. Also, how often do we see naked people who are so pregnant? I thought I'd share this gem because 1) pregnancy is amazing and 2) we have such a thing about "covering up" the bump once it reaches epic proportions (see, for example, all the snarky comments about Jessica Simpson's and Hillary Duff's continued refusals to don "flowing" maternity wear). Let it hang out!

And finally, a conglomerate of major religions has issued a statement saying that politicians need to stop playing theologians and actually start running the U.S. Okay, okay, I paraphrased that, but that's the gist of what they're saying and I think it's about bloody time someone with authority put on their responsibility pants and did just that. I know that a vocal population of Christians in America have taken it as their religious imperative to convert the globe to Christianity- goodness knows, I'm Catholic, and we hear that all the time- but politics isn't an appropriate venue. By the book, even if not in practice, America is a secular nation. It's not Christian. It's a country that was founded to protect, among other things, freedom of religious expression. We've gotten that wrong repeatedly, I know, and I also know that the Founding Fathers probably didn't think that "freedom of religious expression" included anyone outside the realm of Christianity. But that's not how it's panned out. EVERYONE in this country should feel safe and represented, not only by people but by laws, and when laws are designed around one religious system only then we've failed. It's time to pull our heads out of our asses.

And on that self-righteous note, have a good week everyone!

Links of note

Right- so I've fallen behind in news posts because being "funemployed" means that I spend way too much time on Lamebook and not enough time engaging in important issues. Gotta love it! So here's my attempt to put on my grown-up pants and get back into the swing of things.

First, I've got a heartbreaking piece from Janell Burley Hoffman about fat-shaming and her seven-year-old daughter, which is a quick peek into the challenges parents face when raising their kids in a culture that makes it okay to shame bodies. As a non-parent, I don't have to respond to my young daughter's desire to have a flat stomach, but this piece raises questions for me about my language and what I am and am not modeling for young women in my life. How can all of us be more conscious of our words and gestures so that young girls- young people- don't grow up with the same prejudices and self-loathing that so many of us did?

Along the same lines, Heather Cromarty has a few choice words for the Marilyn memes out there. While I can see how easy it is to reduce Marilyn Monroe to her appearance- that's what we do with famous women, right? Especially the ones who were typecast as sex symbols- it's important to take the time to break down what exactly we're saying when we make the claims we make (especially the ones in these memes).

Next up, an informal study by Becky Chambers raises some interesting points about sex and gender representations and choices in online roleplaying games. My partner was actually the first one to send me this link, and the subject is something we've discussed repeatedly over the course of our relationship (we're both nerds). Basically, it can be summarized as "lots of cis guys like to play female characters in games." What makes this article so cool is that the author gets some feedback as to why, and it's more than just "if I'm going to look at a character on a screen for six hours, I want it to be a hot female." No really, it is. It's a long article, but worth reading as it breaks down not only the responses of the players but also the gendexing of the game developers.

Finally, this piece about Cynthia Nixon's recent remarks on her sexuality left me speechless with awe. The "choice vs. born this way" argument about sexuality has always left me a bit uncomfortable because each side has its openings for bigotry and persecution (nouveau eugenics, anyone?) and it seemed like a waste of energy. Who cares why anyone is or isn't gay? Nixon does a beautiful job of articulating this sentiment and illustrating it with her own experience, so I highly recommend that you check it out. If you're too lazy to click the link, I leave you with this quote:

I understand that for many people it’s not, but for me it’s a choice, and you don’t get to define my gayness for me. A certain section of our community is very concerned that it not be seen as a choice, because if it’s a choice, then we could opt out. I say it doesn’t matter if we flew here or we swam here, it matters that we are here and we are one group and let us stop trying to make a litmus test for who is considered gay and who is not. Why can’t it be a choice? Why is that any less legitimate? It seems we’re just ceding this point to bigots who are demanding it, and I don’t think that they should define the terms of the debate.

That is all.

News of note: late December edition

Hello readers, and apologies for not posting this last Friday as is the normal schedule. As the holiday season gets intense in our house, and I start realizing that there won't be presents under the tree without at least minimal effort on my part, I find myself prioritizing gift-shopping over most other things. That doesn't mean I haven't been paying attention, however, and here are my recent "I spewed tea all over my keyboard!" Internet findings.

First up, a frat at UVM has finally gone too far and distributed a "rapey" survey (Jezebel's terms, not mine) to its inductees. What exactly is a rapey survey, you inquire? It's a survey that asks you who you could rape if you could. No, I'm not kidding. Yes, I just about had a heart attack. There's enough to talk about if the frat had asked who you could "do" if you could, but rape? Why the lack of consent? Check out the full article, because it sounds like UVM has a recent history of problems with a female-unfriendly campus culture.

Along similar lines, a recent study has indicated that 25% of women in the U.S. face severe violence from their intimate partners. As an advocate I'm not overly shocked, but the implication that those are just the women facing severe violence- as opposed to facing the less severe forms such as emotional abuse- means that the problem of intimate partner violence is even bigger than most Americans are likely to realize. Also note: I've linked an article from one of my local newspapers which, while not known for its outstanding journalism, surprised me with its eight-line article. EIGHT SHORT LINES?! No wonder most people know nothing about intimate partner violence.

Also along research lines, let's take a look at another recent study that looked at the demographics of the people having second-trimester abortions. This is new information for a lot of people, mostly because second-trimester abortions are so difficult to have, and I think it tells us a lot about access to contraception, financial support, and the racial economy of women's rights. I don't want to hear about whether you support abortion or not in the comments- more important than that, I think, would be a discussion on how to change our support services for people earlier in their pregnancies so that support isn't so one-sided.

Another one-sided issue right now in Canada is citizenship. A new law bans women from wearing face-covering veils during citizenship ceremonies, with the justification that "we need to know who we're swearing in." The article didn't cite any particular reason for this new law- no reported incidents of falsified identities or anything like that- so I'm hard-pressed to understand what this law is intended to do besides discriminate against someone who chooses to practice that particular form of hijab. Naturalizing in Canada is a three-year process that does provide IDs for prospective citizens. If confirming identity is a problem, why not work with leaders in Canadian Muslim communities to find appropriate ways of checking face and ID prior to swearing in? It's not that bloody hard, people.

I'm exhausting my rage supply now, so I'll turn to two good pieces before signing off. First up is a note that the mayor of Troy, Michigan has been fired from her job with 21st Century Real Estate for a Facebook post that was hateful towards LGBTIQ individuals. I won't post the comment here- it's quoted in the article- but suffice to say that it makes me happy that she's facing at least some repercussions for her atrocious behaviour.

Second up is a great comic that illustrates an important distinction in currently-raging debates over same-sex marriage: namely, that permitting two consenting adults to marry under state or federal law is not the same thing as the state controlling religion and is not the same thing as permitting an adult to marry animals or children. End of discussion.

That's it- I'm signing off to go find myself a cuppa. In the interim, I recommend checking out a couple of other studies that are being analyzed on Jezebel.

In the News

Hello, dear readers, and welcome back to Not Another Wave's "in the news" posts! This week we've got quite a few stories to go over as usual; less usual, perhaps, is the way this week's stories tended to categorize themselves based on subject material or vapidity of the original reporters. Ready? Here we go!

Our first category this week, "Fucking DUH!," is also entirely populated by articles from Britain's Daily Mail (I'd say I should stop looking at the DM, but there's always something there to consider or argue with). The first "DUH" article is one that yet again parades social research results as something novel; this time, that women are better multitaskers than men. When you look at the research, the results are stunningly obvious: cis women with cis male partners often wind up carrying a greater workload at home and at the office, probably at least in part due to the continued expectation that cis women make home and hearth their priority when not at work. Another "DUH" article, also from the DM, reports that children who are abused are more likely to be bullies. REALLY? I had no idea! Why have I even included these things in the news? Mostly because, sadly enough, things like this are still news to people. Though if you had no idea that cruelty to children teaches them to be cruel in return, I'd like to know at what point your cognitive processes stopped evolving.

The next category this week is one I'd like to call "What century IS this?" First up is an article out of a small town in Kentucky, where a tiny church community has decided not to recognize or welcome interracial couples. I'm not sure which part is sadder: that interracial marriages are an issue in the first place, or that the church's decision is the result of a community vote. No, really. People chose this policy. And now that American media has got hold of the story, the community is considering a re-vote. Again, really. I can't bury my face in my palms enough.

The second article for "What century IS this?" also comes out of the U.S., where S. 1253 (the Senate's National Defense Authorization Act) has been written to include a provision permitting the President to use the military to arrest and detain any person believed to have any association with a terrorist organization. This is TERRIFYING. If you're sitting there saying "I don't see the problem," re-check your U.S. history, particularly the 1939-1945 period. We've done this already, and the result was the detention of thousands of Japanese Americans in internment camps for some vague person's sense of security. As a ten-year-old doing a project on the internment camps, I was privileged enough to interview a colleague of my mom who had been interned as a boy. I'd never heard of the internments before, and to this day I remember the sense of abject horror I felt when I learned that we, as a country, had deliberately uprooted, threatened, and starved thousands of people simply because they or their ancestors had come from Asia (yeah, no, the U.S. government didn't try too hard to distinguish between countries). We were fighting the Nazis at the same time, for crying out loud, and denouncing what they were doing to Jewish people. How hypocritical! And now we want to bring this back? Oh HELL no. National security cannot be, and should never be attempted to be, bought by the suppression of a broad category of people. It's inhuman, it's ineffective, and it's disgusting.

Finally, in the "century" category, we've got an article about a woman from Afghanistan who served time in jail for being raped and has been released to marry her rapist. Afghanistan is currently claiming that the marriage portion of this story is by the choice of Gulnaz (the woman's name or alias), which may or may not be true- she gave birth to her rapist's child, and I have no idea what her expectation is for the "proper" thing to do with a child out of wedlock, even one conceived by force- but I'm still wincing over her imprisonment for being a victim. I'll admit that I'm quite ignorant about day-to-day cultural expectations in Afghanistan, and I feel that a quick internet search does a disservice to the complexity of any culture, but I feel like there's something amiss with a government that sees victimhood as a crime.

Our last category today is "Things That Make Me Think." In this group, we find articles that release interesting studies, discuss difficult topics, or are generally fascinating (to me, at least). The first, also from Afghanistan, releases the results of a massive study done in-country to examine maternal mortality. Afghanistan has, for many years, been on the list of countries with terrifyingly high maternal death rates (in 2005, the UN reported a rate of 1,800 mothers dying per 100,000 live births; the U.S. was ranked at 5 per 100,000). This new study, however, suggests that the rate is now below 500 per 100,000 live births- still high, but much better. It also suggests that infant and child mortality is improving as well.

Next up in this category is an article that looks at the disparate impact the U.S. economy's nosedive has had on African American families. I thought this article was worth sharing for the way it focuses on historical factors- for example, the ease African Americans had in finding jobs in the public vs. the private sector during the early 20th century- and their impact on contemporary racial gaps. Race is such a touchy subject in America that finding common ground to discuss racial inequality (and what we can do about it) can be nigh impossible, but I think it's worth trying.

Another interesting article comes out of the BBC in Zimbabwe, where the government is prosecuting gangs of women who apparently roam the countryside in search of men to rape. No, I'm not being facetious. It's unclear what the motive is- current speculation is that there's a ritualistic component in semen collection- but what I wanted to focus on was the victims' experiences with reporting the rapes and pushing for prosecution. Rape is never okay, no matter who does it to whom, and I'm saddened by the pervasive perception that rape is only something that (cis) men can do to (cis) women. This belief appears to be fairly global, too- even the FBI's definition of rape is explicitly gendered ("the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will").

Finally for this category, the good ol' Daily Mail brings us a vapid- but interesting- piece about young (cis) women going out for the evening. The DM's stance is clear from the beginning: these young adults don't respect themselves and are putting themselves in danger, as well as encouraging sexually predatory behaviour from young (cis) men. While most of the women interviewed for the article are quoted in minimally articulate ways, the underlying question (if you can get past the ditzy writing) is an interesting challenge: why do we blame these women for their behaviour (dressing up for attention, which they say they want) when British and American cultures both teach females, from a very early age, to judge their self-worth based on male attention? How much of Manchester's nightlife is the inevitable telos of a culture that minimizes other ways for women to value themselves? Discuss.

Our last article for today is the reiteration of a story that broke earlier this week when Barney Frank announced his semi-retirement. Much has been made of Rep. Frank's career, both for its longevity and what he's done with it, but I feel that it's important to acknowledge- politics aside- that his unswerving attention to the rights of LGBQ Americans has been hugely important in taking another step towards social equality. It's difficult to envision how the battle against the Defense of Marriage Act will go without such a strong advocate in Congress.

That's the news for this week, folks! Tune in again for more news, commentary, ridicule, and exasperation.

Erica's news of the week

Okay kids, this week's "In the News" is jam-packed with the articles I've found while trolling the interwebs for the past twelve days. Get ready for a rollercoaster ride of excitement, disappointment, rage, and fun. Ready? READY!

First up, a rage-note from the New Hampshire legislative panel that's apparently voting to repeal the state's same-sex marriage law. While it looks like such a repeal might not make it past the governor, I'm dismayed that lawmakers can't seem to let this go and I truly don't understand the benefit of yanking peoples' chains where their civil rights are concerned.

Next up is a somewhat fluffier article from the ever-neurotic Liz Jones at the Daily Mail. As she slowly starts writing articles about how her anxiety around weight and her appearance has plagued her for her entire life, she finally starts owning how this is ruining her body in a very real way. I'd feel more sympathy for these articles, however, if her other articles weren't all about how this star's looking fat in these jeggings or this other star has the perfect bikini body. Right now it just sounds like a load of hypocritical tosh.

Next up comes another hypocritical note from the Internet vigilante group Anonymous, which has started shutting down sites that contain or support child pornography. I'm not complaining about their actions, mind you- but I do think it's entertaining that Anon originated from 4chan, a chat site that was famous for its libertarian views on Internet use and child pornography. On another entertaining note, they're supposedly planning to shut down Fox News on November 5th. As of right now the website is still up, but we'll see.

Canada, that paragon of universal healthcare on the North American continent, has just released a study done to see who puts what sorts of drains on the system. Shockingly enough (and yes, that was sarcastic), people who are obese don't appear to require much more from their health care system than their skinnier counterparts. What it seems to come down to is whether a person maintains a healthy lifestyle, weight aside- which prompts my sarcasm filter to drop long enough to scream "SO YOU CAN BE TWIG-THIN AND STILL WAY UNHEALTHIER THAN THE PERSON WEARING 22W JEANS? FUCKING DUH!" Sorry. It's bothered me for a very long time that we've so strongly associated size with health (for women), especially when so many skinny people in the limelight (Gwyneth Paltrow, for example) show off their diets and how frighteningly unhealthy they actually are.

Another one in the "duh" department is a poster campaign against offensive Halloween costumes. If reading that automatically triggers your "relax, it's just a holiday" gene, then maybe you should click the link and reconsider your point. I don't know about you, but if someone decided that dressing like the Irish Republican Army was a good idea, things would get ugly very quickly. Just...don't. Halloween can be a lot of fun without being completely tasteless.

On a completely different note, a district attorney in Staten Island has come up with a new plan for protecting victims of domestic violence: GPS ankle trackers on their offenders. No, wait, hear me out. One of the problems with restraining orders is that they don't work on people who don't care, because they're just pieces of paper, so it's not uncommon for a victim of abuse to get a restraining order but continue to be harassed, attacked, and unfortunately killed by their abuser. While many states have made it a felony to violate a protection order more than once or twice (?!), we still have the problem of a victim not knowing if it's safe to go home tonight or not. With the GPS device, abusers who have already violated their protection orders are being tracked; when they enter the protected zone (i.e. the house or the workplace), the victim/protected party is given a phone call alerting them to the abuser's presence and in turn giving them a chance to get out safely (or not go home yet). HOW AMAZING IS THAT? I wish I had that option for some of my clients.

A quick note from Foreign Policy looks at some of the ways in which the regime change in Libya is impacting relations between sexes. While cultural values around what happens before marriage might not have changed, it is interesting (and important) to note how much a government can affect the ability of people simply to talk to each other.

And finally, of course, is the sinking ship that is Herman Cain's presidential campaign after it was revealed that he's faced multiple complaints for sexual harassment. The news has swung wildly on this over the last few days- the latest being that one of the accusers won't be speaking in public- but it looks like Mr. Cain had a tendency to say and/or do things in the late 90s that, at best, were unprofessional and sketchy. More likely, from my experience, he knew what he was doing and thought he could get away with it. Way to go, sexual harassment panda!

That's it. I'm done. Time to go back to bed and hide from the news for a while.

News on Erica's gaydar

I had a whole bunch of articles that interested me at work this week, but managed to forget to link any of them into my gmail account before I shut the work computer off and left for the weekend. It didn't help that most of them raised my blood pressure in unsexy ways. After the week I had at work, though- which was a succession of frustrating and emotionally draining situations- I've decided it'd be legitimate to make this week's news post focus on happy, LGBTIQ-related stories.

First, Zachary Quinto has joined the list of celebrities outing themselves. While he's remained mum on the subject of his sexuality in the past, he's decided in light of the number of LGBTIQ adolescents committing suicide after being severely bullied that it's time to demonstrate to LGBTIQ youth that life does, in fact, get better. Now, I do have some issues with the "it gets better" movement- namely that it WON'T get better unless people quit their homophobia and bullying, and we also need to focus on getting those people to cut it the fuck out- but it makes me feel a million times lighter and more optimistic to see how many public figures are willing to reach out to the youth whose lives are being ruined.

On that note, Canada has my vote for being the coolest country (yet again). Why? Because its conservative politicians banded together, also in response to a gay teen's suicide, to create an "it gets better" video (which, by the way, is linked in the article). How incredible is that? A political party- a branch of the government- is reaching out to send an official message that we, as a society, need to support LGBTIQ youth. Can you imagine if that were to happen in the States? So many politicians are far too worried about constituencies to care if their message might destroy a life. Go Canada!

And finally, there's been a whole lot of people pushing for a reconsideration of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), particularly now that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is officially an embarrassing, but closed, chapter of our history. As of right now, same-sex couples in the US can use military chapels to have weddings, but only in the states where same-sex marriage is legal. Basically, we're encountering the challenges that we knew would happen with the repeal of DADT: you can now have a partner, or a committed relationship, but you can't give that partner benefits or receive your housing pay to live with them. It's really quite stupid. On the bright side, though, that push for the repeal of DOMA has a number of interesting people behind it- including the linebacker for the Baltimore Ravens, Brendon Ayanbadejo. Now, I don't believe marriage should be a requirement for a committed couple at all. I think the pressure to get married, for anyone, misses the point that it's the relationship(s) you construct that are important, not the socio-legal structure in which they occur. However, I also believe that marriage should be an available option for anyone in a consenting relationship, and thus DOMA needs to fall.

That's it for this week! I feel much happier just having written this post, and I hope you do too. Until next time!

News that gives Erica emotional whiplash

Here's a quick taste, readers, of what's been in the news here these last several days. Some of it is wonderful; some of it is worthy of a double facepalm. Most of all, it illustrates NAW's continued insistence that sexism and discrimination continue to be complex issues that we can't let slide. In order from angriest to happiest:

In France, Tristane Banon's criminal case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn for attempted rape has been dropped due to the evidence available. Under French law, the available evidence would support a sexual assault case but not a rape case, and the statute of limitations for the former is much shorter than for the latter. In effect, Mme. Banon's case disappeared because she didn't speak up soon enough. While DSK now faces a civil suit in New York for the incident with Ms. Diallo this year, and possibly faces one in France from Mme. Banon, this is now two instances where someone who at best displayed extremely dubious judgement about sexual behaviour is walking away from any sort of punishment. And please don't tell me that resigning from the IMF is punishment- if he can't keep it in his pants, whether consensually or nonconsensually, he's not in enough control of himself to run such an important organization.

Next in the list comes from the Associated Press via the Daily Mail, which reports on Dr. Pepper's recent advertising debacle. Or at least I'd call it a debacle, though the public seems more curious than incensed. In essence, Dr. Pepper has started marketing another "lite" version of its soda to men- by claiming that "it's not for women," using violence in TV commercials, and creating a men-only Facebook group to celebrate its exclusive new blend. I'm not sure which makes me angrier: that the advertising promotes aggression, machismo, and "hardness" (no more "dainty tan bubbles" - we've moved on to "gunmetal grey packaging with silver bullets"), all to the exclusion of anything remotely feminine, as being the key to manliness; or that this whole advertising scheme had to go through hundreds of people, from marketing specialists to test groups, before it ever hit the public, and somehow no one thought it'd be a bad idea. In fact, the executive vice president of marketing for Dr. Pepper- who is male, shockingly enough- says that "he's not worried that [women will] be offended by the campaign." Oh really? Dear Dr. Pepper: here's my reaction to that. It looks like two middle fingers.

On a brighter note, Amber Miller has challenged public notions of pregnancy, "handicap," and activity by running a marathon during her last hours of pregnancy. While most people in the West probably think that people who are 39 weeks pregnant should be sitting and relaxing- as may be most comfortable!- Miller's experience is just one of many examples of people legitimately getting physical while pregnant or in labour. I say legitimately because Miller had the all-clear from her doctor before running, and while I don't think pregnancy is a disability, I also think we should acknowledge that it can change a person's ability to be active safely (preeclampsia being a very real concern). But what Miller demonstrates is that the physical dangers of pregnancy don't have to dominate a pregnancy experience- we continue to be whole human beings throughout pregnancy, childbirth, and parenthood.

Finally, three women shared some glory during Nobel Week as they were jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The three- Ellen Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee, and Tawakul Karman- represent efforts made in Liberia and Yemen to achieve equality and justice for women in those countries. There's some controversy around Ms. Sirleaf, who is currently the president of Liberia, but the overall message is pretty cool: women's rights are essential to a lasting peace in any nation. Even better? None of these women represent international aid organizations who are trying to "fix" a given country's attitudes towards women. Instead, they are all fighting to achieve justice in their home countries- something that a lot of Western feminists tend to forget to do. Can you say exciting?

That's all for now, though the news never stops and I generally don't either. Keep your eyes peeled for feminist-related news, and if you have anything that you'd like to see discussed here, please pass the link along to notanotherwave@gmail.com.

News notes of late

Here are a couple of things that've been popping up in the news lately that I'd like to share with more than my facebook page.

First, there's the report of DNA evidence exonerating people who were sentenced to long prison sentences for crimes such as murder and rape. This article from NPR discusses the most recent, a man who has served 30 years in prison for a rape he didn't commit. There's a lot to consider with this story, including the impact that these false convictions might have on the ability of police and jurors to believe a victim or survivor who attempts to identify the person who raped them, but of note to me as well is the fact that the statistics and background provided by The Innocence Project point to racism as a primary factor in the wrong convictions. Is it any wonder that the majority of death-row inmates released in Texas have been Black men?

Second, Justice Scalia had a conversation with California Lawyer, in which he stated that the 14th Amendment doesn't protect women. This shouldn't be too surprising- read any of Scalia's opinions that deal with social justice issues and you'll understand what I mean- but is still troubling. The 14th Amendment was created to rectify the severe injustices that slavery of African captives had wrought, but doesn't specifically state that it applies only to particular types of injustice (racism, in this case). One of my graduate school classmates sided very strongly with the sort of opinion that Scalia expressed here, arguing that applying an amendment intended for racism to sexism diluted and conflated the issues. It was a viewpoint I was new to, and found interesting and not entirely without merit, though I continue to disagree. Not only are the two not separate issues to begin with, and not only did a sex-focused Equal Rights Amendment fail to pass, but the 14th Amendment is also used to seek justice in cases of commerce. COMMERCE. How is THAT not diluting the issues of racism?

Finally, this article about an intersex dog receiving genital restructuring surgery comes to us from the UK's Daily Mail. Apparently, it's imperative that anyone whose sex or gender identity isn't perfectly aligned with cis expectations- even if they're a dog- undergo surgery to change that.

With that, I head off to start my workday. Let us know as you come across noteworthy (for better or worse) news!

Questions in the news (from Erica)

Now that the master's degrees are out of the way, I can finally come back to the bloggosphere and bring you some interesting editorial items that have been catching my attention for the last few weeks! In no particular order, but probably oldest first...

Here's an article about a sex ed campaign in the UK that emphasizes- wait for it- masturbation. The campaign's point is that sexual pleasure is a natural drive of most adolescents, and that instead of expecting teens to be fully abstinent, we should be teaching them to find ways of indulging that don't put themselves (or others) at risk. My two cents? Brilliant idea. While I have no delusions that masturbation promotion will eliminate risky sexual behaviour amongst teens, it'll probably reduce it- or at least give teens to learn about their bodies in ways that don't involve others trying (and failing) to do so for them.

Then, of course, the retirement of Justice Stevens from the U.S. Supreme Court has garnered attention for political pundits everywhere. A lot of this attention, of course, dichotomizes attention to the law and attention to "morality" (however you define that term)- which is a really bad idea. The law COMES from a moral structure, and professes to uphold it. This is a decent editorial that provides an interesting layout of how, exactly, morality and the law often go hand-in-hand for the benefit of people and their civil rights.

Vanity Fair ran an interesting piece on the cost of the Republican Party these days, examining how much money we spend on them to stand around and say "no" when they could be doing something useful for the world. My only complaint about the article? I'd love to see it in a side-by-side comparison with the cost of the Democrats, since while I'm pretty far left in my political leanings, I'm not naive enough to believe that the Republicans are the only ones with bloated staff and benefits.

Here's an interesting post from Ephphatha Poetry, asking us to consider how the media and the public would handle Tea Party (and Conservative in general) behaviour if the racial demographics of its participants were different. I won't waste space by describing it- he's very eloquent- but instead I strongly encourage you to go read it for yourself!

And finally, I'm embedding the YouTube copy of a Lane Bryant ad that's got people all riled up:

What's got them upset, you might ask? Well, since major networks (including Fox, CNN, and ABC News) decided to pull it, many people have been bringing this question to as much attention as possible. The answer, of course, is that the model is plus-sized. It has nothing to do with the relative amount of nudity pictured- not with ads for Victoria's Secret, Viagra, and hell, even just cars on display through the same networks. It's simply the fact that there's a buxom, beautiful woman being displayed. And that makes people angry, apparently.

Happy boobquake everyone!

Recent things of note (from Erica)

As always, apologies for my frequent and extended absences from this blog. Due to personal reasons, I've been too busy and mucked down in my own feelings to be able to focus on anything else, but that's got to stop! So here, to get me back in the game, is a highlight of Things of Note from the past couple of weeks.

First, the Supreme Court of the United States has granted certiorari in the case of the family of Lace Cpl. Snyder, a Marine who was killed in Iraq in 2006, vs. the Westboro Baptist Church. The background of the story is that the WBC- that band of pseudo-Christians led by Fred Phelps- picketed Snyder's funeral and his family decided to sue the WBC for infliction of mental anguish. The case has gone back and forth, with the current ruling holding the Snyder family responsible for paying the WBC's legal fees, but with SCOTUS hearing it...who knows what'll happen? It's going to be an interesting clash between establishing (or extending) a standard of responsibility with freedom of speech and the current laissez-faire interpretation of the First Amendment.

Next up, Melissa at Shakesville has a story about a film that's currently slated to be shown at the Tribeca Film Festival. The film, entitled "Ticked-Off Trannies with Knives," takes the names and stories of real victims of transphobia- trans folks who have been murdered because of their gender identities- and makes up a story about other trans folks seeking vigilante justice. I can understand, to a certain extent, the appeal of such a film. Everyone who's ever been victimized by oppression has, somewhere deep inside them, a streak that would love to exact this form of justice (my streak cheers whenever the rapist gets shot in "Thelma and Louise," even though I'm not at all a fan of guns or gun-related violence). However, with the current status of trans folks in our society and the world in general, featuring a film that exploits the murders of real individuals for the sake of entertainment- and perpetuates the stereotype of trans folks as being crazy and out of control- is a really bad idea, to say the least. Add to that the fact that the production team didn't include any self-identified trans folks, and you've got a major problem of misrepresentation and co-optation. For more information, and to get hints on how to get the Tribecca Film Festival to reconsider screening this film, check out the Facebook group.

Looking for more angering but unsurprising news? Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF), better known as welfare or cash assistance for people raising children, is not providing the assistance it's supposed to for families who are victims of domestic abuse. The way the law is written, adults have a five-year lifetime limit on receiving assistance; victims of domestic abuse are given a grace period in which to receive assistance without it counting towards their limit. Unfortunately, many victims aren't being given their grace period, and many others aren't being given their benefits at all. Why is this a problem, you say? TANF can offer a family financial support when a victim finds herself suddenly single-parenting, unable to work due to safety concerns, or overwhelmed by bills incurred while dealing with the abuse, such as legal or medical fees. Waiving the time limits, moreover, theoretically offers the victim enough time to make herself safe and find a new level of stability without pressuring her to make unsafe choices for the sake of expediency. Want to know what to do about it? Get in touch with the National Resource Centre on Domestic Violence and let them know you want to help make change.

Lastly, nine teens have been charged with bullying, harassment, and statutory rape after a girl committed suicide in Massachusetts. The girl, an immigrant from Ireland, was apparently harassed in school, via phone, and over the internet for three solid months before she killed herself. Shockingly enough, the school isn't facing any charges for negligence or failure to act, even though it admits that four students, two teachers, and the victim's parents all alerted the school to the problem. This is an unfortunate way of highlighting the fact that bullying isn't taken seriously, and is instead treated as some sort of sick rite of passage that adolescents must endure in order to become adults. Bullying is a serious, pervasive problem. I'm glad the community has opted to charge the perpetrators for their crimes and hold them accountable for the ways in which their behaviour had a negative impact on another person's life, but I'm also sickened that the school won't be charged. In a just world, institutions such as schools- environments that are intended to aid the social and academic development of people- would be held accountable when they fail to teach this lesson to their students by permitting such behaviour to continue.

That's it for now, folks. Stay tuned as Emily and I keep this going in spite of it being the end of our semesters!