October 2008 Archives

Cindy Rodriguez from the Allentown Women's Center sent us a picture of this awesome Feministing pumpkin she carved out for the clinic. Thanks for the awesome Feministing-o-lantern, Cindy! You can also check out some of her book reviews on Lesbiatopia.

What are you doing/wearing for Halloween tonight?

Transcript after the jump

One of my favorite things to do on Halloween is to just chill out with my peoples/honey and watch horror movies. I'm a big fan of scary flicks, yet I always run into the obvious - that so many of them are pretty damn sexist.

So yes, I'll admit I've watched some horror films that are a feminist's nightmare - basically those cheesy, old school sexist flicks that are so silly and ridiculous, it's laughable. But I also can't tell you how many times I've had to turn off a movie five minutes in because the glorification of violence against women is so blatant.

Yet every once in a while, I come across a scary movie that actually manages to be sexist-free. I would say one example is The Descent, a scary-ass film with an all-female cast of really strong characters.

So tonight, Jessica and I are getting a bunch of scary movies to watch. Do any buffs have suggestions of some feminist-friendly horror we could get?

Michael Pollan had a fantastic article in the NYTimes magazine earlier this month entitled Farmer in Chief. If you haven't heard of Michael Pollan before, go pick up a copy of the Omnivore's Dilemma immediately. It has been garnering a lot of buzz for a few years now and in that book Pollan does an amazing job of making the politics of industrial agriculture interesting. A large portion of that book focuses on how corn is at the center of almost everything we eat and how the government influenced this change in the national diet.

In Farmer in Chief, Pollan outlines an impressive food policy for the new administration. He explains how everything from farmers markets, to an official definition of the word "food" to who is chosen as the White House chef could make an impact on the global culture of food and the future of climate change. Check out the full piece here. It's long, but worth the read.

Some highlights:

It is one of the larger paradoxes of our time that the very same food policies that have contributed to overnutrition in the first world are now contributing to undernutrition in the third.

The good news is that the twinned crises in food and energy are creating a political environment in which real reform of the food system may actually be possible for the first time in a generation. The American people are paying more attention to food today than they have in decades, worrying not only about its price but about its safety, its provenance and its healthfulness. There is a gathering sense among the public that the industrial-food system is broken.

If any part of the modern economy can be freed from its dependence on oil and successfully resolarized, surely it is food.

More recently, cheap energy has underwritten a globalized food economy in which it makes (or rather, made) economic sense to catch salmon in Alaska, ship it to China to be filleted and then ship the fillets back to California to be eaten; or one in which California and Mexico can profitably swap tomatoes back and forth across the border; or Denmark and the United States can trade sugar cookies across the Atlantic.

Update: Obama actually did reference Pollan's letter, check out his comments here.

Thanks to Mike T for the link

Click to enlarge

I'm super excited to announce that we've revamped our comments section to make them more organized, and more community-friendly. Here are the new functions in comments; let us know what you think!

Threaded comments: This means you can not only reply to the post, but you can reply to a particular comment (like I did above). This will help the conversations to stay more organized.

Rated comments: Similar to recommending posts, this "liked or disliked" function allows readers to put their two cents in about comments as well. I find this really helpful because if you don't have time to read a long thread, you can choose to ignore the comments that got a lot of low ratings from the community and focus on the higher rated ones. I think it's also a great way for the community to help moderate the thread.

Reporting abuse: Speaking of moderating...anyone who is a regular Feministing reader knows that we still have our fair share of problems with trolls. And now that we also have the Community site to moderate, it's become even more difficult to keep track of all the active threads. Here's where you come in. If you see a troll or an abusive comments, simply click on "report abuse." It will immediately send us email with a link to that comment. That email will also tell us what user reported abuse, so abusing the abuse button (heh) isn't possible.

Please let us know how you like the new format... And we're planning on bringing you more new additions to the site in the coming weeks, so be on the look out!

I know we've already covered the ridiculous sexism (and general sexualization of young girls) and racist bullshit that we find from too many Halloween costumes, but I couldn't not point out these this gem today. The above is titled the "Oh No You Didn't Wig." Just....wow.

Obama, responds to the latest manufactured controversy from the McCain camp:

"I don't know what's next. By the end of the week, he'll be accusing me of being a secret communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten. I shared my peanut butter and jelly sandwich."

I thought I'd died and gone to heaven when I read Margaret and Helen's best-friends-for-sixty-years blog, not because they're really old, but because I love old ladies and don't get to interact with them very often. My own grandmothers have passed away, and I don't run into too many blue hairs here in Brooklyn.

If, like me, you're hankering for some old lady interaction, do not stop go, do not collect one hundred dollars, but instead go directly to Margaret and Helen's awesome blog.

When 82-year-old Helen was recently called out by her readers for using foul language when talking about respected government officials, she writes:

New rules:

I will stop calling George Bush a jackass when he stops calling me a terrorist: Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.

I will stop calling John McCain an ass when he stops calling Barack Obama a socialist at every dog and pony show on the Straight Talk Express tour.

I will stop calling Sarah Palin a bitch when she stops calling Obama a terrorist sympathizer. And I will stop calling Sarah Palin a bitch when she stops calling the parts of the country where I don't live more Pro-American than the part of the country where I do live. And I will definitely stop calling Sarah Palin a bitch when she stops acting like a bitch.

And don't miss the FAQs. An excerpt:

Are you for real? Why is that so hard to believe? Now I know what Santa Claus must feel like.

Have you really been friends for 60 years?
Some friendships last a lifetime. We just seem to be living a hell of a long time.

Is this a fake blog?
We got a few scary emails when I first wrote about Sarah Palin so my grandson told me to change our last names on the web page blog. Philpot was my grandmother's maiden name and Schmechtman is actually the name of a bird Margaret keeps as a pet. That bird shits on everything, but she loves him.

Thanks to Luckwouldhaveit for the heads up.

Please add other links in the comments to some of your fave elder bloggers!

Check out this ridiculously sexist Christmas letter that Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann wrote in 2003, in which she reinforces gender norms left and right and tries to pimp out all of her children, even going so far as to post a hypothetical singles ad for her son:

Chick magnate (sic) needs wife to put him through med school, clean house, pay bills and run his life. Must be willing to gamble against onslaught of socialized medicine diminishing return on investment.

To top off the creepiness, she lists one of her daughter's hip measurements, champion's another's "modesty," and calls her son a "female fantasy treasure."

Happy (batshit crazy) Holidays! Minnesotans, are you seriously going to re-elect this woman?

Thanks to Anna Barberio for the heads up.

A bunch of conscientious readers have sent us the link to a really depressing article in today's New York Times about economic differentials for women and men when it comes to health insurance costs--and, no, not just because we're the ones that bear the babies. It reads, "In general, insurers say, they charge women more than men of the same age because claims experience shows that women use more health care services. They are more likely to visit doctors, to get regular checkups, to take prescription medications and to have certain chronic illnesses."

Seriously? Is our health care system so broken that when women actually use it, it discriminates against them? This is deeply troubling. Health care is a human right. Every woman in this country deserves it, and deserves to be charged the same as her male peer for it. And if we're looking at it from a strictly economic stand point, preventative care of the type that these insurers claim women do more of actually saves them money over the long run!

Marcia D. Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center, has it right: "The wide variation in premiums could not possibly be justified by actuarial principles. We should not tolerate women having to pay more for health insurance, just as we do not tolerate the practice of using race as a factor in setting rates."

One more reason to vote people. Check out the candidates' differing health insurance plans: Obama and McCain.

Toni Ann Brodber and our bestie Gwendolyn Beetham have a totally fascinating post up over at Girl with Pen about how the candidates fare on international issues, inspired by The Economists' Policy for Women's Issues recent scorecard on national issues. An excerpt:

The Global Gag Rule (also known as the Mexico City Policy) was a Reagan-era policy that made it possible to deny U.S. funding to organizations that that "provide abortion services or counsel, refer, or lobby on abortion". One of George W. Bush's first official acts in office was to reinstate this policy, which had been repealed during the Clinton Administration. This rule led to the scaling back of reproductive health programs in approximately 56 countries around the world, which, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights, "imperils women's health and lives both in countries where abortion is legal, as well as where it is illegal." Reports on the impact of the Gag Rule on women's lives point to a shortage of contraceptives, clinic closings, loss of funds for HIV/AIDS education, and a rise in unsafe abortions in countries where the rule has been implemented.

According to a survey conducted by RH Reality Check in December 2007, Obama plans to overturn the Global Gag Rule and reinstate funding for UNFPA. McCain supports the Global Gag Rule and voted against repealing it in 2005. He has not addressed UNFPA directly, but, when asked in a town hall in Iowa whether he believed that contraceptives stopped the spread of HIV, McCain responded, "You've stumped me."

Also check out the Gallup poll on who folks around the world want to win in the good ol' U.S. of A.

As you all know, I read A LOT of serious nonfiction. Slap a Samantha Power book or an old political philosophy text in my hand, and I can be happy for a few hours. But sometimes my brain is in overdrive and my schedule is in overwhelm and what I really crave is a good, speedy novel--the kind you can devour in one or two sittings.

I was in that mode recently and had the chance to race through Run by Ann Patchett. With the clouds floating outside the airplane window, I immersed myself in a world of family secrets, long held relational patterns, race, class, and politics. The nice thing about Run was that, while it was a really fast, easy read, it also had some major substance to it.

Essentially it is about a family colored by death and adoption. The former mayor of Boston (a white dude) has one biological child and two adopted children (both black) and is forced to raise them alone after his wife dies. His relationship with the three boys, and later on some surprise characters that come (back) into all of their lives, are the center of the book. Throw in some mystical healings, a few ghosts, and a couple of car accidents and you've got yourself a suspenseful, if not always sophisticated, sociological thriller. My one reservation about this book was that sometimes it felt like the race and class elements played out a little too black and white. It sometimes reminded me of a less evolved On Beauty by Zadie Smith. Which is one of my favorite books ever.

The fall issue of Ms. magazine should be hitting newsstands this week, and I've got an article in it about period-suppressing birth-control pills like Lybrel and Seasonique. (Timely, in light of the approval of a new low-dose version.)

Also, Veronica of Viva La Feminista reviews Yes Means Yes, the anthology edited by Jessica and Jaclyn Friedman that features essays by our own Samhita and Miriam, as well as Jill, Cara, Kate Harding, Latoya, Julia Serano, Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha and a roster of other awesome writers.

The issue also features an expose of crisis-pregnancy centers, a piece on innovative programs for mothers in prison (shout-out to the awesome Beth Schwartzapfel, who reported it), and short fiction by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie.

Unfortunately, articles aren't posted online, so check it out in your local bookstore. Or subscribe here.

And irritates me to no end: When you do a Google search of "Obama," the top related search is "obama citizenship." Wait, it gets worse:

Please tell me everything is going to be okay. Please?

The fabulous National Advocates for Pregnant Women reminds us why voting pro-choice is so important - to all women.

Please pass this video along to your friends and run it on your blog, website, or social networking profile!

Ad appearing on NYC subway, via bxlee.

The folks at Manhattan Mini-Storage, who we just love for their pro-choice ads that caused a ruckus a while back, now have an anti-Palin ad up in New York.

Gothamist has more.

Remember anti-feminist Roy Den Hollander, who is suing Columbia University over its Women's Studies classes? Well the school has struck back, filing a motion to dismiss the suit, saying it "reads like a parody."

Now this is rich. Kevin Burke, a proponent of the invented "post abortion syndrome," writes that the criticism of Sarah Palin "may have a relationship to the collective grief, shame, and guilt from personal involvement in the abortion of an unborn child." Here I thought voters made decisions based on the issues that matter to them - little did I know that women across the country who don't support Palin are simply depressed about all of those abortions we've been having!

Burke gets even classier when he brings Palin's pregnant teen daughter into the mix:

If Bristol Palin had quietly aborted, Sarah Palin would have been spared the politically untimely focus on this very personal family issue. The problem would have quietly gone away. But Bristol, like countless post abortive women, would have paid a high price to protect her mother from the political heat that her pregnancy brings to the campaign. We know from our work with thousands of women who feel pressured to abort for various reasons that she would surely suffer many of the common post-abortion symptoms; depression, promiscuity, drug and alcohol abuse, sleep disorders, and relational problems. But she would have suffered in silence; no one would know her secret. No one would acknowledge that she has reason to grieve or have symptoms after abortion. Sarah Palin would have lost not only her precious grandchild...she likely would have lost her daughter Bristol to the silent ravages of post abortion suffering.

Wow, given that one in three American women will have an abortion in her lifetime - there must be millions of tired, addicted, slutty, depressed, single women running around voting Democrat!

Seriously, conservatives need to get their heads out of their asses - and out of our uteruses. (Sorry, not the best visual.)

Part 2 after the jump.

Via Jack and Jill Politics.

Heart disease is the leading cause of death for American women, but according to Consumer Reports many women could be in danger because of a misdiagnoses:

If you have chest pain, breathlessness or an irregular heartbeat, you'd expect your doctor to check you out for heart disease. But if you're a woman, it's possible that might not happen. Instead, you might be told your symptoms are caused by stress.

A study presented at a recent conference looked at decisions made by 230 experienced American physicians. The study showed that doctors were more likely to put these symptoms down to stress if a woman appeared anxious, or if they knew she had been through stressful events.

When the same symptoms were presented for men, the doctors didn't relate it to stress - and instead indicated that they would send the man to a cardiologist or start him on heart medication. Scary.

It seems pretty widely known that heart disease is not just a health issue that impacts men, so I'm curious as to why the participants in this study were so quick to attribute symptoms to stress. Does it have something to do with the longstanding tradition of labeling women as neurotic? (Just putting it out there...)

For more information on women and heart disease, click here, here, and here. Also check out the Go Red for Women campaign.

Thanks to Meredith for the link.

Samantha Bee on McCain's women's health air quotes. Nails it dead. (Wait until about halfway through the vid.) I love her.

Thanks to all the Feministing readers who emailed me late into the night excited about this segment!

In no particular order.

1. You are expected to dress nice and act a certain way "waiting" to get asked out.

2. You have to play by the rules which generally give men most of the power. (wait till he calls you, don't be too forward, be mysterious-you don't want to scare him off, etc)

3. If you show emotion too early on or too much of it, you are needy.

4. If you don't show enough emotion, you are making the other party insecure forcing them to wield social privilege to silence your daring attempt at independence from self obliteration via coupling.

5. It fetishizes unequal power relations between women. He'll get the tab, he'll get the door as long as he gets the vagina, and that is considered "romance."

6. It makes same sex couples feel "less than."

7. It dictates your interaction in most social settings and social circles, whether you are single or coupled. It is either/or, there is no 3rd identity or in-between.

8. If you have sex too early you ruined it.

9. If you don't have sex early on you are a prude.

10. It is expected to lead to marriage (and if you don't have a ring on your finger you are "on the market.")

Perhaps you've seen the image on the left circulating around the Internets. It's an homage to the image on the right, a '60s antiwar poster featuring Joan Baez and her sisters.

I second Rebecca Traister, who says the newer, Obama-themed poster "Makes me want to put a fist through a wall, put a hammer through my skull and move to France." More specifically, as Renee puts it:

It's not even a new twist on an old theme; as Barack would say, it's more of the same. The idea that women's bodies can and should be offered as a reward for good behaviour has been with us for centuries. It's appearance as a campaign slogan only proves how far we need to progress as women.

I really hate that this props up the idea that there's a "groupie mentality" among young women who support Obama. The poster echoes the insulting argument made by some during the Democratic primary that young women who support Obama don't actually think he has good policy positions or political stances. We just think he's HAWT. And we like that our boyfriends like him!

Look, I understand this poster is supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, retro fun. (Hello, it just oozes "Made in Brooklyn" hipsterrific charm.) And you know what? I'm into retro. Retro fashion? Yes, pls. Retro music and home decor? Yes and yes. But retro politics and political statements? Um, no thank you.

In light of claims that we have reached a place of post-racism, Latoya at Racialicious aptly points out multiple examples of how this is actually untrue. In light of the events of Hurricane Katrina, the Jena 6, the Jersey 4 and the Duke Rape case, all highly public moments where racism proved to be a relevant factor, we can hardly claim to be in a post-racial country.

But the very nature of our conversation about whether or not America is post-racial proves that, in fact, it's NOT. Just look at the competing narratives on the right and the left about what role race has played in this election. Last week I suggested that Colin Powell put his support behind Barack Obama at least partially because of race, whether he said it out loud or not, and that this support is understandable given the history of racism in this country. In response, there were some suggestions that perhaps this act was in itself racist. I want to talk about what comments like these tell us about how we understand race, especially in the context of this election.

Voting for Barack because he is black is considered problematic for two reasons:

The first reason, pushed by conservatives, is that this is somehow reverse racism (despite the clear proof that the McCain campaign is appealing to people to not vote for him because he is black). This reason is firmly rooted in white power, fear and control of this countries government and the potential threat that a black leader is to this establishment. It is just blatant old fashioned racism. I am not sympathetic to this line of analysis.

The second reason, pushed by liberals, is that he is a qualified candidate outside of being black, so we don't want him to be the affirmative action candidate and play into the right wing agenda of calling us "racist against white people." This reason is based in a belief that we are in a potentially post-racist time where we are actually witnessing a "reverse Bradley Effect" in which Americans are so past their racism that they want to prove it by supporting a black candidate.

It is worth noting these contradictions. Take a look at how themes of post-racialism play out in Frank Rich's Sunday editorial:

There are at least two larger national lessons to be learned from what is likely to be the last gasp of Allen-McCain-Palin politics in 2008. The first, and easy one, is that Republican leaders have no idea what "real America" is. In the eight years since the first Bush-Cheney convention pledged inclusiveness and showcased Colin Powell as its opening-night speaker, the G.O.P. has terminally alienated black Americans (Powell himself now included), immigrant Americans (including the Hispanics who once gave Bush-Cheney as much as 44 percent of their votes) and the extended families of gay Americans (Palin has now revived a constitutional crusade against same-sex marriage). Subtract all those players from the actual America, and you don't have enough of a bench to field a junior varsity volleyball team, let alone a serious campaign for the Electoral College.

I agree with Rich and I find most of his argument to be solid, but I do think he is attempting to pull from the post-racist frame. He even makes the "reverse Bradley" argument -- that voters want to vote for Obama because he's black -- later in the piece. But here's my question: Is a "reverse Bradly" possible considering one of the largest liberal messages being pushed right now is that this isn't about race? Aren't there almost certainly other racial factors at play here -- that white Americans are disgusted by the race-related tactics that McCain has pulled and that Obama's blackness isn't very threatening to them?

With these two frames about race, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. On one hand, we recognize the clear and blatant racist attacks that Obama is facing. On the other, we claim not to notice or care that the first black president is actually black. The simple truth is that in fact there are Americans voting for Barack Obama because he is the best choice AND because it is important for us to have a black president. As we said over and over again during the Democratic primary, gender is a factor but not *the only factor* in choosing a candidate to support. The same goes for race.

But this tension -- is race a major factor or a non-existant factor? -- is at the heart of this election, and I don't believe it is proof that we are in a post-racial space. Perhaps we are stuck somewhere in the middle of two different ways of understanding race. It is so important that Barack Obama is elected (and obviously not just because he is black) but let us not forget what this election is bringing out in all of America -- and not just the "real" Americans as defined by McCain and Palin. We must continue to push the way we understand race in American society and push to change the racist conditions these beliefs have created. Saying that we are post-racial or don't see race does not change the actual condition of our country.

My best friend who lives in Oakland, CA called me over the weekend because her neighbor was violently murdered by an ex and stalker whom she had a restraining order against. Everyone knew he was crazy, she had kicked him to the curb, she had done everything within her legal right to stop him from coming near her.

Elnora Caldwell was always clear about what she wanted. And after a turbulent marriage, she wanted nothing to do with Robert Woods. The 46-year-old Oakland woman, a Nordstrom employee in downtown San Francisco known for her impeccable appearance, served Woods with divorce papers several weeks ago, relatives said, and filed for a restraining order. She told her landlord, "I kicked him to the curb."

But police said Woods, a burly weight lifter who once worked for the city of Oakland, did not leave his estranged wife alone.

Woods fatally stabbed her Saturday evening in his black pickup and pushed her out on a road just off Highway 24 near the Orinda side of the Caldecott Tunnel in front of stunned motorists, authorities said.

But see the problem is a restraining order doesn't restrain someone who is psychotic, obsessed or just hates women which is usually at the root of most violence against women. Perhaps if the abusive person is a rational human being, than maybe it would work, but how many abusive people that are capable of taking someone's life are rational?

A quarter of women experience domestic violence and the murder of women via intimate partner violence and homicide is the fourth leading cause of death for women of childbearing age and 1/3 of women murdered are by intimate partners. Yet all of the resources that are available to us do not effectively solve the problem, nor do they save lives. Where were the cops? Why was he not being patrolled or why was he not forced to relocate? Or why was he not put in rehabilitative services, counseling, anything? What does it take to take that kind of action? He has to kill her first?

Sorry to sound so frustrated, but when I had to leave my apt for a stalking incident I too was told that the only recourse I had for a man that lived under me and could get to my front door at any time of day or night, was to file a restraining order. I don't think a piece of paper will actually stop a mentally ill person that hates women from doing what he is planning on doing. That is not how it works.

It is stories like this where theory meets action and I feel so at a loss for how to move forward or what words of solace to even offer. I don't support the heavy policing of communities of color, I don't support increased rates of incarceration and I support rehabilitation for all kinds of offenders, however, given the current conditions of the prison industrial complex, it is difficult to see any of that theory in action. Without policy based support for alternatives to rehabilitation for people committing domestic partner violence, what hope do we have?

My condolences to the family of Elnora Caldwell and the community surrounding her. Our thoughts are with you.

Update: They are considering the death penalty for the murderer.

Sometimes people ask me how I deal with all the anti-feminist, anti-woman craziness. Well, one answer is that I do things like go to ridiculous (but fun in a puffy paint shirt, huge fan button kinda way) concerts. Joey 4-eva.

I am so deeply saddened by the right wing attack on gay marriage in my recently previous home of California. The implications for the potential ban on gay marriage are frightening, suggesting that any union that isn't between a man and a woman will become illegal. It is amazing how much money has been pumped into the Prop 8 campaign, because a few months ago many of us believed the prop didn't have a shot in hell. This video that I found via Amanda uses a play on words to show exactly how discriminatory a gay marriage ban is. They replace gay marriage with "interracial."

Also, this video from Yes on 8 enthusiasts in Oakland via Feminist Law Professors.

Prop 8 is just one piece of legislation to strips away the rights of and harms our gay citizens, it doesn't change harassment or hate crimes. It does however set a precedent of how society sees gay people and a marriage ban would tell us that they are not actually citizens. This has implications and Carolyn Goossen at New American Media takes a look at the harassment of gay teenagers in California.

This just looks really good. Aaronette M. White, an associate professor of psychology at the University of California, Santa Cruz has a book out called, "Ain't I a Feminist? African American Men Speak Out on Fatherhood, Friendship, Forgiveness, and Freedom," that delves into the intersection of race, manhood, sexism, family and feminism. It is a series of in-depth interviews with man who have transformed their relationship with themselves and the women in their lives by embracing feminism. White's main point being, sexism hurts everyone.

For black men, feminism can be a positive force that enhances romantic relationships, friendships with other men, and relationships with children, said White, whose findings are based on in-depth interviews and an extensive written survey administered to each participant. Her subjects, whose identities are not revealed in the book, were hand-selected from a pool of about 50 men, all of whom were self-identified feminists.

"These men have defied the odds," said White, whose book breaks new ground in the empirical study of black feminist men. "Their lives help define what it means to be a feminist and an ethical human being."

Via.

And as her title suggests borrowing from Sojourner Truth's pivotal speech, she calls her subjects the sons of Sojourner because, "they refuse to place race above gender, or gender above race."

This looks like a powerful read, and I appreciate the juxtaposition of black masculinity and feminism as they are usually diametrically opposed. I guess the question begs to be asked, which is what makes this a controversial book on some level, is can men be feminists? I think they absolutely can, but what do you think?

Thanks to George for the link!

Wow. The FBI rounded up 600 adults and rescued 47 children in 29 different cities for sex trafficking of minors.

"Sex trafficking of children remains one of our most violent and unconscionable crimes in this country," Pistole said.

The 47 rescued children ranged in age from 13 to 17, and all but one are female. Of these, Pistole said, 10 had been reported to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Child prostitution has taken on a new urgency in recent years with the growth of online networks where pimps advertise the youngsters to clients. The FBI generally gets involved in child prostitution cases that cross state lines.

A University of Pennsylvania study estimated that nearly 300,000 children in the United States are at risk of being sexually exploited for commercial purposes.

Those are staggering statistics. There is no other demographic data on the youth, but I do wonder what impact the declining economy has had on this issue.

via AP.

Say it with me now, "ANN FRIEDMAN."

Former Ms. magazine editor Elaine Lafferty has been working as a consultant on the McCain campaign (yes, seriously), and has a bone to pick with feminists who dare to criticize Sarah Palin.

For the sin of being a Christian personally opposed to abortion, Palin is being pilloried by the inside-the-Beltway Democrat feminist establishment. (Yes, she is anti-abortion. And yes, instead of buying organic New Zealand lamb at Whole Foods, she joins other Alaskans in hunting for food.[...])

...[L]ike many other Democrats, including Lynn Rothschild, I'm tired of the Democratic Party taking women for granted. I also happen to believe Sarah Palin supports women's rights, deeply and passionately.

M-kay, whatever floats your boat I guess. Never mind that her record indicates quite a different story. But here's the kicker:

Last month a prominent feminist blogger, echoing that sensibility, declared that the media was wrongly buying into the false idea that Palin was a feminist. Why? Well, just because she said she was a feminist, because she supported women's rights and opportunities, equal pay, Title IV--that was just "empty rhetoric," they said. At least the blogger didn't go as far as NOW's Kim Gandy and declare that Palin was not a woman. Bottom line: you are not a feminist until we say you are. (Emphasis mine)

"Empty rhetoric," hmm? That sounds familiar. The anonymous "prominent feminist blogger" is our own Ann Friedman! But it seems that naming Ann is beneath Lafferty - as is bothering to engage with her in-depth look at how Palin's rhetoric does not match her record. Making women invisible: Now that's feminist!

Is it really so hard to name the person whose opinion you're (limply) arguing against? Ann Friedman. Check it out, I can even do it in all sorts of different ways:

Ann Friedman. Feministing. Ann Friedman, Feministing. Ann Friedman of Feministing.

It's like a typing miracle! Say it together, folks: Ann Friedman.

A new birth control pill, called LoSeasonique, has just been approved for sale in the US by the FDA, according to Barr Pharmaceuticals.

Under the LoSEASONIQUE(R) extended-cycle regimen, women take combination tablets containing 0.10 mg levonorgestrel/0.02 mg of ethinyl estradiol daily for 84 consecutive days, followed 0.01 mg ethinyl estradiol tablets for seven days. The regimen is designed to reduce the number of withdrawal bleeding periods from 13 to four per year.

LoSeasonique is a low-dose version of Seasonique, which also reduces the number of periods a woman has.

What do you all think about these period-reducing birth control pills? Anyone tried them?

This year many states are facing a variety of ballot measures. We've heard a lot about the CA gay marriage initiative, and there are initiatives in 14 different states that could affect reproductive freedom, affirmative action, economic security, transportation, education, health care, energy and security (to name a few).

Choice USA, Campus Progress Action and Progressive Future have teamed up with the Ballot Initiatives Strategy Center to create this awesome guide to all these ballot measures, what they would really mean, and how you should vote on them.

So if you live in any of these states: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Maine, Massachusets, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oregon, South Dakota and Washington download the guide and get the facts. Or forward it along to people who do!

From Lynn Paltrow's piece at RH Reality Check:

This summer, the question of abortion and the rights of the unborn once again took center stage as a presidential campaign issue. In August, at the Saddleback Civil Forum, Pastor Rick Warren asked both presidential candidates: "At what point is a baby entitled to human rights?" Senator John McCain's answer, "at the moment of conception," immediately established his anti-abortion bona fides.

But the right answer, as a matter of international human rights principles and simple justice, is: human rights attach at birth, not at conception.This is the only position that ensures that upon becoming pregnant, women do not lose their human rights.

Political candidates of all persuasions should rest assured that to oppose the recognition of human rights before birth is not to deny the value of potential life as matter of religious belief, emotional conviction or personal experience. Rather, it is to recognize the value of the women who give that life.

Right on.

Cross posted at Radical Doula

From the Associated Press:

A contest that would pay $10,000 to an engaged couple, as long as they abstain from premarital sex, hasn't gotten any takers. The deadline for the Marriage for a Lifetime contest is Oct. 31. The prize includes free flowers, invitations and other wedding treats.

Considering 95% of Americans have pre-marital sex, I'm not exactly shocked.

The contest is sponsored by the Marriage Appreciation Training Uplifting Relationship Education (MATURE) project in Georgia, a federally-funded abstinence program. The group is set to receive $455,510 a year until 2011; the money for the contest was to come from those funds. In an economic crisis, it's pretty awesome to see our federal dollars being so entirely wasted.

Monty is starting off the week the way I'd like to - unconscious. More pics after the jump.

Sarah Palin, who called herself a feminist in the infamous Katie Couric interview, is not so sure anymore...

In an interview on NBC Nightly News that aired yesterday, Brian Williams asked Palin: "Governor, are you a feminist?"

"I'm not gonna label myself anything, Brian," said Palin. "And I think that's what annoys a lot of Americans, especially in a political campaign, is to start trying to label different parts of America different, different backgrounds, different...I'm not going to put a label on myself."

You know, this is a flip flop I can deal with. Don't label yourself, Gov. Palin. Especially not as a feminist.

UPDATE: Video of Palin's change of heart after the jump.

A bitch has been working on several campaigns and I am tired as hell!

I've canvassed...phone-banked...blogged...rallied...and there is still so much that needs to be done.

Pause...consider...continue.

Yep, 'tis time for a pre-election Bitchfirmation!

Ahem.

When we're called un-American for doing what this nation's founders did by calling out bullshit and questioning those elected to serve us...

When we're called socialists by people who couldn't define socialism without a Google search an the assistance of an online dictionary if their herd mentality-based lives depended on it...

When they drop dollops of hate in the comment section of my blog as if I've lived damn near 36 years...all of them black...and never been called that shit before...

When they hang up the phone, slam the door or walk away rather than listen and debate...

For all the drama that accompanies campaign volunteering and activism in general...

Go on, y'all!

Go on with your badass volunteer, activist and advocate self!

Because living your values is not copy-writed by any political party...valuing family and community is not the sole property of social conservatives...and patriotism doesn't reside exclusively within the GOP.

Be vocal...because the blood, sweat and tears of millions were shed so that we can do just that.

Be proud...because part of being patriotic is the expectation that we the people speak truth to power.

And be fierce...because all that drama and more is why they call this a struggle.

Yes, I don't know about y'all but I needed that.

And now?

Begin again...

Jezebel: Teen Moms Displeased At Double Standard Glorifying Bristol Palin & Jamie Lynn Spears

Genevieve at UneFemmePlusCourageuse catalogs the pro-rape "flair" on Facebook. (Via)

There have been a series of attacks on gay and trans students at Washington State University. (Via)

Sara calls out Palin for giving domestic terrorists a pass.

Fatemeh wrote An Open Letter to White Non-Muslim Western Feminists.

Chicago Defender: "Domestic Violence Hits Black Women Harder"

Mable F. Yee: How Can 30+ Million Women Be Invisible? (Also see Celina's interview with Mable.)

Religion Dispatches: A Woman Leads Muslim Prayer in Britain For the First Time

A new anti-rape cam