Recently by Vanessa
Did we mention Kathleen Freakin' Hanna of Le Tigre is going to be at our 5 year party this Friday?
You played...you won...and here are the answers to the Feministing Trivia we had on Friday to give donated tickets away to readers.
1. When is the exact date of our anniversary?
April 12th!
2. What are the names of the two women who founded the site with Jessica and myself in 2004?
Lauryn and Hannah.
3. How many posts have we had on the Feministing Community since its launch last year?
Since its launch last June (another anniversary to celebrate!), 3,532 posts (and counting!) have been published on the community site. Woot!
Congrats to all the winners!
We received an email from Catholics for Choice on Obama's appointment of Alexia Kelley to serve as the Director of Faith-based and Community Partnerships at the Department of Health and Human Services - and unlike Kathleen Sebelius' recent confirmation to head HHS, it's no news to be celebrating.
Kelley is the co-founder of the Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG), an organization that not only has publicly acknowledged their opposition to abortion (here's an extensive PDF of their anti-choice history) but also supports reducing access to abortion care. This is a much different tune than the administration's supposed stance on reproductive rights, which is to reduce the need for abortion.) Catholics for Choice President Jon O'Brien says:
"If Ms. Kelley had been appointed to another position in the administration, there might be less reason for concern. However, the Department of Health and Human Services is responsible for providing and expanding access to key sexual and reproductive health services. As such, we need those working in HHS to rely on evidence-based methods to reduce the need for abortion. We need them to believe in men's and women's capacity to make moral decisions about their own lives. Unfortunately, as seen from her work at CACG, Ms. Kelley does not fit the bill."From the beginning, Alexia Kelley directed CACG to ignore the question of access to abortion and reframe the debate in terms of reducing the number of abortions--although polls consistently show that the majority of Catholics support abortion rights. This language around reducing the number of abortions should be a huge red flag to anyone who believes in and seeks to defend a woman's right to choose. While evidence-based prevention methods can go a long way towards reducing the need for abortion, some women will always need access to safe and legal abortion and we must recognize that and ensure public policies support that access."
CACG has seemed to identify themselves in the past as more of a progressive religious organization (although technically nonpartisan), a stand-out among (and even left out of) the other mainstream Catholic organizations in the country. But when it comes to abortion, that's hardly the case. Sarah Posner at TAPPED points out that in Kelley's co-authored book last year, she wrote this on abortion: "Each abortion constitutes a direct attack on human life, and so we have a special moral obligation to end or reduce the practice of abortion to the greatest extent possible." And while the organization and Kelley skirts around the issue of legalization, they've made it clear they're for abortion restrictions.
It's no news that has been a really bad week for the reproductive health world. And this just makes me so much sadder. Maybe Obama thinks appointing Kelley will alleviate the strong tensions right now, conservatives will get off his ass about Sebelius and we'll all reach a "common ground" around the abortion debate that has led the conversation as of late. But I think "'common ground' is pipe dream," as Amanda says, contending that we're not going to eliminate the need for abortions by relieving women's financial problems. (Which is partly what the "common ground" idea supports.) And as O'Brien also points out, CACG even used flawed economic research to push for anti-poverty measures as a way of reducing abortion.
But this is just not going to work, and neither is Kelley if she ends up having control over policies around reproductive health in this country. And it looks like she very well may - according to the Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives website, the department assists faith-based organizations in attaining partnerships with and getting funding from the federal government, which includes family planning grants.
The only comforting part of this appointment is that Kathleen Sebelius will be her boss.
As the big night nears, I can't tell you how frakin' (sorry, I've been on a Battlestar Galactica marathon this week) how excited we all are to celebrate the five year mark of Feministing with our friends, readers, fellow activists and bloggers. (And for those who can't make it, only one week left until you'll never have to see these annoying reminders ever again! Yay!)
For folks coming who haven't bought your tickets yet, keep in mind that ticket prices will go up $5 at the door, so please buy your tickets online ASAP!
So we've been getting tons of donations from folks who can't make it but still wanted to support, and we're using their generosity to give away tickets to folks who want to come but whose wallets might be a little tight to spend the dough. With that being said, we've received donations for 21 free tickets to give away! Thanks so much to our generous donors. Now let the Feministing trivia begin!
The first 21 people who email me at least one correct answer to these questions will get your ticket to come party the night away with us next week. (You don't need to answer every question either!)
1. When is the exact date of our anniversary?
2. What are the names of the two women who founded the site with Jessica and myself in 2004? (Just first names are fine!)
3. How many posts have we had on the Feministing Community since its launch last year? (Whoever guesses a number within a certain range that's close enough to the correct answer will win!)
Recent updates about the photos taken at Abu Ghraib (and being withheld by President Obama) including sexual assault of the detainees is incredibly upsetting, infuriating and fills me with deep shame for being a citizen of a nation whose (previous) administration sanctioned this kind of inhumanity and violence. And these truths are ones that I along with so many others feel must be exposed. Author Tara McKelvey, whose book has accounts from female prisoners of Abu Ghraib, takes on the issue at TAPPED, saying that without the photos it's almost as if the crimes didn't exist:
While reporting my book, Monstering, I heard about an interpreter who had worked at the prison and allegedly raped a 14-year-old boy, and that there was a video or a photograph of the crime that had been recorded by a female soldier. (It wasn't Lynndie England -- I asked her about it.) Military investigators looked into the alleged crime against the boy - but half-heartedly -- and the investigation was eventually dropped. Since there was no photo or video that had been released to the public, it was not a priority.
At the same time, Mark Goldberg at UN Dispatch notes that not a lot of folks are talking in depth about the privacy rights of the detainees who were so brutally assaulted:
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for refocusing "public attention on the torture, humiliation and abuse of prisoners sanctioned by senior Bush administration officials" as Daphne Evitar says. But scanning memeorandum, no one seems to be balancing the rights of victims of sexual abuse with the need to air the previous administration's dirty laundry. (Emphasis mine)
It's so difficult to decide what's "right" in this situation as so many of us are advocates for survivors' rights but also feel that openness is the only way to wake Americans up to the realities of our Iraq policies. I have to say that amidst our horror of these atrocities, my gut feels it would be deeply problematic to ignore the rights of the individuals that these atrocities were perpetrated against.
After everything they have endured, shouldn't detainees be able to decide whether these pictures go public or not? If their privacy rights were violated by these photos being released "for the good of the country," aren't we relying under the same argument pro-torture folks might make for committing these crimes against them?
We're working on getting the ridiculous weight loss ads down, sorry about that folks. (We have to identify specific code for every crappy ad and send it to our ad company.) Thanks for your patience!
This is a good one, folks!
An extra Haskins treat after the jump on "Cougars."
*Possible trigger warning*
While we haven't been the biggest fans of Amazon as of late and their history of selling a rape simulation game (which they did end up banning), it looks like another game involving violence against women seems to have"slipped" past their radar. "Stockholm: An Exploration of True Love" is a game that allows the user to experience,
"...a terrifyingly vivid exploration of Stockholm Syndrome, a psychological condition in which a captive falls in love with her kidnapper. And you play the part of the kidnapper. With a limited number of options, you must figure out how to make her fall in love with you."
This includes using poison gas on the victim, sexually assaulting her and using psychological abuse against her in efforts to make her "love" you. Unbelievable.
Contact Amazon and let them know that profiting off of sexual and psychological abuse is completely unacceptable.
h/t to Jennifer for the heads up.
This is just...wow.
We're a wee late to this; the ad was created by a program which is headed by the Leicester City Council in the UK, and was released by the National Health Service of Leicester. And despite YouTube banning it (not sure why it's up again), NHS Leicester defended the ad, saying that it was merely designed to "shock" and "provoke" younger people.
"We know this film is hard-hitting, but so are the numbers of under-18s getting pregnant in Leicester. The city's Teenage Pregnancy and Parenthood Partnership has been successful in cutting the numbers of young girls getting pregnant," said Tim Rideout, chief executive of NHS Leicester City.
Shock? Yes. Provoke? If they mean "provoke" young people to run away screaming from The Sex, not so much. While the program is pro-contraception and pro-choice, using the same fear and shame tactics as abstinence-only programs have so ineffectively done is not the route to go. (Not to mention it's, ya know, fucked up.)
The kicker is they're starting a "drama series" in June. That should be a hoot.
Just a reminder - we're at the last day of our Feministing retreat and will be back to regular posting tomorrow. Thanks for your patience all!
So we're at our Feministing retreat discussing our comments section, and thought we'd give y'all a poll to take on your participation in comments. Thanks!
