June 2005 Archives

The Equal Opportunities Commission recently found that one million pregnant women in the UK will face discrimination at work within the next five years, reports Reuters.

As we already know that 30,000 pregnant women lose their job every year, 200,000 (almost half of all pregnant women) face some sort of discrimination, including bullying, sacking and demoting. What’s worse is that seven out of ten of these women don’t even report it.

The EOC has called to the government to supply a written standard of maternity rights of pregnant women and their employers.

Crazy shit. What disturbs me is trying to imagine what bullying a pregnant woman entails.

From The New York Post gossip section:

A Christian group calling itself "The Resistance" wants Jessica Simpson to apologize for her "slutty" video of "These Boots are Made for Walking" and re-shoot a clean version. The group objects to Simpson's racy antics in the vid, especially because her father was a pastor and she's a Christian role model. "It's sad to see her whore herself out like this," declares the group's, rep "John Conner" (he won't divulge his real name). "She's a singing stripper." The Resistance has also blasted MTV for "celebrating the homosexual agenda."

Now I’m not into censorship, and I’m definitely not into wacky groups calling women sluts.

But honestly, this video is sooo depressing and terrible. It’s borderline pornographic, complete with Simpson washing (humping) a car in a bikini. I just can’t believe that 13 year-old girls are going to watch this.

Not to mention how Simpson has completely killed Nancy Sinatra’s original.

Then:

You keep playin' where you shouldn't be a playin
and you keep thinkin' that you´ll never get burnt.
Ha!
I just found me a brand new box of matches yeah
and what he knows you ain't HAD time to learn.

Now:

Strut yourself, come on, hey ya’ll come on, come see something, uh huh, uh huh, can’t touch, can I get a hand clap, for the way I work my back.

Tick tock, all around the clock, drop it, push ya tush like that, can I get a Sooey, can I get a Yee-haw!

God help us.

...The Nation on emergency contraception: Plan B for Plan B.

It’s a good background piece on all the FDA/Barr Pharmaceuticals craziness that--as we all know--ended up screwing women out of EC over-the-counter.

And of course an article on EC wouldn't be complete without a mention of everyone's favorite rapist, W. David Hager:

As The Nation first reported in May, an FDA staff member contacted Dr. W. David Hager--a controversial evangelical Ob-Gyn on the panel who voted against Plan B--and requested that Hager write a "minority opinion" to further elucidate objections he raised during the hearings; namely, that wider access to emergency contraception would increase "risky behavior" among girls as young as 11 or 12 [see McGarvey, "Dr. Hager's Family Values," May 30].

Despite an intense lobbying effort by physicians and women's groups, in May 2004 top FDA officials bowed to election-year pressures and denied Barr's application to make Plan B available over the counter. The rejection letter to the manufacturer echoed precisely Hager's concerns about the safe use of the drug by girls under 16.

I love that Hager is "concerned" about teen girls but not so worried about anally raping his wife. Lovely.

We've reported a lot on Walmart over the last year (mostly because they've done a lot of sexist shit). Here's a little cherry on that cake for you:

Womens E-News ran a great story yesterday about Walmart's struggle to break out of its rural, Christian mold and expand into urban areas. Turns out, their discriminatory history is catching up to them, and might actually end up hindering their success in more populated areas of the country. As the article states:

Political battles over proposed Wal-Mart stores in New York City, Los Angeles and Chicago have demonstrated that what's acceptable in Arkansas isn't necessarily embraced everywhere. While the objections focused on the retailer's low wages, hostility to unions and damage to small businesses, the discount giant's antagonists also pointed to its [refusal to stock Plan B] as an issue.

Maybe, in an attempt to conquer more of the American terrain, Walmart will ease up on its anti-contraception stance.

Why is life always a tradeoff?

Don't you love those mornings where you're driving to work, minding your own business, and are confronted with a lovely billboard for Newcastle Beer reading:

NEWCASTLE BROWN ALE: Not Heavy, Never Bitter. Can you date a beer?

Ugggghhhhhhh.

I'm thinking of sending this to Ms.'s "No Comment" page.

Anyone else seen some sexist gems lately?

Writer Ruth Franklin at The New Republic takes on the recent barrage of books on being the bestest Mommy ever, and how hard that is, in The Missing Joy; and I have to say she does a pretty kick-ass job of it.

The article is ridiculously comprehensive, discussing the so-called “opt-out” revolution, the “mommy wars,” work/life issues and more, by focusing on three recent books: Perfect Madness, by Judith Warner; How She Really Does It: Secrets of Successful Stay-at-Work Moms, by Wendy Sachs; and White House Nannies, by Barbara Kline.

At the end of the piece, Franklin argues that it’s time that women just realize (and perhaps accept?) that motherhood is never going to be simple:

It is time to recognize that there is no inherently perfect balance of work and family, and that no amount of intensive parenting can take away the sadness of not being with one's children as much as one would like. Children's needs and desires, and parents' needs and desires, are constantly in flux. If we are fortunate, we will be able to adjust our lives in accordance with them; and like any contortion, it will require some stretching, some groaning, and some pain. The tension that we feel is not the problem afflicting mothers in America today. It is the solution.

Thoughts?

Related: Lynn Harris’ review of A Few Good Eggs: Two Chicks Dish on Overcoming the Insanity of Infertility. Best line ever: With friends like these who needs Sylvia Ann Hewlett?

It just keeps getting better.

In a N.J. abstinence class, kids are being taught the “facts” of life in a way that’s likely to make them morons:

Its main teaching tool is called "The Choice Game," an interactive computer program with fictional teen characters in situations involving sex, drugs and alcohol.

Later in the sequence, Ragana tells her girlfriend she has contracted gonorrhea from T.J.

Nothing worse than a breast-STD.

I understand that abstinence education is about discouraging intercourse, but are they really going to take away heavy petting too? That’s just cruel.

A friend of mine heard about this on Howard Stern’s radio show yesterday. Truly terrifying.

Lil' Markie--a grown man who speaks and sings in a child’s voice scary enough for its own horror movie--put out an album that takes on a number of issues (horrible, horrible sins!). But it’s his gross-out hit, “Diary of an Unborn Child,” that shows the anti-choice movement’s true, certifiable colors.

I can’t even get into how creepy this thing is; you should listen for yourself. So you know what you’re getting into, the first line that the fetus sings is “Why did you kill me Mommy, when God made me special for you?” Nice, huh?

RELATED: Seems MTV is big into singing fetuses as well.

A Scottish professor says that severe cases of anorexia (are any cases mild?) in women may be caused by autism.

Autism, characterised by defects in communication and social interaction, also makes many anorexic patients unresponsive to traditional treatments and may be responsible for anorexia's low recovery rates, according to Professor Christopher Gillberg, of the University of Strathclyde.

"Our research has shown that a small but important minority of all teenage girls with anorexia nervosa in the general population meet diagnostic criteria for autistic disorder, Asperger syndrome or atypical autism. I've seen quite a number of cases where the anorexia has become completely entrenched because people haven't understood that underlying the eating disorder is autism."

Gillberg says that this would explain why traditional forms of treatment used for eating disorders, such as family therapy, doesn’t work for some women.

I’ve known many women with eating disorders, and there certainly is a good amount of obsessive compulsiveness going similar to autistic tendencies. But it’s unclear to me whether that’s the cause or an effect of the eating disorder.

Any thoughts?

What do we think of the new American Apparel advertising campaign? Perverted pornography or a break from rigid "typical (read anorexic)" advertising? American Apparel is a t-shirt/other cotton goods company well known for its very fair labor practices. The owner Dov Charney seems to be a rather complicated character, well mainly he seems like a big pervert, but what do we make of this kinda contradictory politic? His recent hire for their ad campaign is porn star Lauren Pheonix. I was recently in the store and I couldn't get a hold of how I felt about it either?

An SF Gate goes into why...

There is, for example, no silicone. There is no collagen. No Botox. There is no obvious retouching and no major Photoshopping to eliminate bulge or nipple or shiny forehead and there is occasional body flab and stocky leg and there are plenty of "average" (read: nonanorexic) female body types, and as mentioned all the models are amateurs, real women and men, and each is funky and ethnically mixed and unexpected, and Charney even leaves in the red eye and the sweaty lips and the odd angles and there is an air of salty delicious intimate funk to the pictures that makes you go, now this is what T-shirts should really be all about.

Like obviously I see the goods and the bads here. Incidentally, the owner has several pending sexual harassment suits against him probably stemming from his desire for a free and sexually open workplace.

Tell me what you think?

John Ashcroft, not so much.

So it looks like women's breasts are no longer offensive. At least for now.

After more than a three year breast-ban, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has ruled that boobs are back in style:

The “Spirit of Justice” and the “Majesty of Justice,” which loom over the stage in the Great Hall, were blocked from view by curtains installed by the department in January 2002, when former Attorney General John Ashcroft was in office.

The curtains were quietly removed on Friday after a decision by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Justice Department spokesman Kevin Madden said.

In a more controversial decision, Gonzales announced that the Justice Department is starting production on the much-anticipated Statues Gone Wild video series.

Nearly two months after the Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal involving the ridiculous parental notification law in New Hampshire, it has recently rejoined the anti-choice protest debate.

Justices announced yesterday that they are going to consider whether an anti-choice group’s protest outside of a number of clinics 20 years ago may have violated federal racketeering and extortion laws, reports the Washington Post. The most recent ruling on this issue was in 2003, when Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist removed a nationwide ban on protests that intervene with abortion clinic business. Now the appeals court is questioning whether the ban should be renewed on other grounds.

The 1998 ban was passed due to the National Organization for Women and abortion clinics filing suit with a law that actually intends to target organized crime. Due to the blatant effort that anti-choicers made to close down or disrupt clinics (including menacing doctors, harassing patients and trashing the centers), they were to be treated as racketeering.

Rehnquist said in 2003 that because there was no extortion of money at the clinics, the 1998 ban was wrongly ruled. Then the 7th Circuit of Appeal in Chicago renewed the case on the grounds that threats of violence and violent acts (for example, a patient was once beat until unconscious with a protester’s sign) may have been enough to sue under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

The new cases are Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, 04-1244, and Operation Rescue v. National Organization for Women, 04-1352. They will both be addressed later this year.

More servicewomen have been killed in Iraq than in any other overseas action in the past 60 years. Good thing we're keeping women soldiers safe and out of "combat positions," eh?

Even though they are not assigned to ground combat units, 39 female soldiers have been killed in Iraq since March 2003. Four died and 11 were injured this weekend after an ambush in Fallujah. Military officials have said they believe the female troops may have been specifically targeted.

About 11,000 women are currently serving in Iraq. And even with the latest news that record numbers have given their lives in service to this country, some schmucks on the homefront are still focused on their baby-making capabilities.

Take it from Lemoyne Sanders of Jacksonville, NC, whose wife is a field medical corpsman in the Navy:

"You'll never get a woman to be as physically strong as a man," he said, adding: "Women get pregnant. It's just different."

Men die in combat. Women die in combat. I don't see how a uterus makes any difference.

Yesterday's Supreme Court decision in the Castle Rock v. Gonzales case removed responsibility of local police departments to enforce restraining orders that protect domestic violence victims from their abusers.

The case centered on Jessica Gonzales, who had a protective order against her estranged husband. When he kidnapped her three daughters, Gonzales called police over and over and pleaded with them to enforce the order, which ostensibly protected her and her children. But officers wouldn't follow up on her calls for help. In the end, her husband drove himself to the police station and was killed in a shootout with officers there. They found the bodies of Jessica Gonzales' three daughters in the back of her husband's pickup truck.

Who really needed protection here? Apparently not Jessica Gonzales. According to the Court, it's the Castle Rock police department.

Statistics show that protective orders are sought by the victims who need them most. But a two-year study of batterers found that almost half (48.8%) re-abused the victims after a protective order was issued. Police clearly weren't jumping to enforce these orders, even before the Castle Rock decision came down.

The opinion (authored by my personal favorite, Justice Scalia) means that women will not be compelled to seek restraining orders if they know that police don't have to enforce them. And more domestic violence victims will be injured and killed as a result.

UPDATE: Amanda at Pandagon on the same.

Make sure to check out this Detroit Free Press column on Title IX, and new book on the law’s history.

Wall Street Journal editor and reporter Karen Blumenthal, author of Let Me Play: The Story of Title IX, says that when she grew up in the early 70s, “boys were the crossing guards...they ran the movie projectors in class; they got the best playing fields. But with Title IX, all that began to change.”

I knew the “official” background on Title IX, but the real-life story behind the law was news to me:

According to Blumenthal's book, Ann Arbor activist and mother Marcia Federbush was first to file a Title IX complaint. It was against the University of Michigan, which in the early 1970s spent $2.6 million annually on men's sports -- and $0 for women's.

"I wondered whether it was bad for boys to play contact sports because of their delicate external organs," said Federbush.

Priceless. I need this book.

While it may piss me off that some celebrities have more political power than more intelligent and influential minds in this country, I must say that Ashley Judd kicks motherfuckin' ass in the feminist activist department.

Judd testified at a recent Congressional hearing on the urgency to address gender equality in the battle against HIV/AIDS in developing nations. While the hearing was primarily directed towards developing a vaccine, Judd said:

"Having an AIDS vaccine would be of great benefit to women of all ages because it could reduce their chances of becoming infected...As there is not a vaccine to prevent abuse of women, however, there is nothing more important in the struggle against this disease than reversing destructive social norms that endanger women across Africa and in other developing countries.”

As a Global Ambassador for YouthAIDS, Judd has traveled through Africa and Asia to educate especially women and girls about HIV/AIDS. She is also on the Board of Directors of Population Services International.

From Reuters:

A love poem written 2,600 years ago by Sappho, the greatest female poet of ancient Greece, was published Friday for the first time since it was rediscovered last year.

"They seem to have had some sort of society in which they could be in each other's company quite a lot, rather cut off from men," he said. "But they were clearly able to have plenty of fun."

I bet!

Go check out Katha Pollitt’s latest column, If the Frame Fits...

Pollitt takes on the whole “reframing” abortion issue with her usual combination of thoughtfulness and smarts:

In the wake of the 2004 election, Democrats have embarked on an orgy of what the linguist George Lakoff calls "reframing"--repositioning their policies linguistically to give them mass moral appeal. Prime candidate for a values makeover? Abortion, of course.

...Perhaps I'm naïve, but I keep thinking that reframing misses the point, which is to speak clearly from a moral center--precisely not to mince words and change the subject and turn the tables.

Much agreed. I’m especially with Pollitt on the problem of discussing abortion in terms of rape, one of the four ways Lakoff thinks we should be reframing:

...Finally, they should talk about the thousands of women each year who become pregnant from rape: "Should the federal government force a woman to bear the child of her rapist?"

Is it the singling out of rape victims as uniquely deserving, which tacitly accepts the conservative "frame" of abortion as a way for sluts to evade the wages of sin? In fact, most American voters who favor abortion restrictions already make an exception for rape. The ones who don't--the 11 percent who would ban abortion completely--have already framed it to their satisfaction: Yes, the government should force rape victims to carry to term because the "child" should not be murdered for its father's crime.

Abortion isn’t wrong. Period. That’s the only frame we should be using.

Any thoughts?

Sigh.

Jerusalem authorities have said they are banning a gay pride parade planned for next week, saying the event would be "provocative" and set off unrest.

You know what I think is “provocative?” Assholes.

UPDATE: Never mind.

I had no idea it wasn’t illegal; scary.

The central government wants to ban sexual harassment as a draft amendment to a law protecting the rights of women was submitted to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress in Beijing yesterday for first deliberation.

"It is the first time for China to forbid sexual harassment with legislation," said Wu Changzhen, professor with the China University of Political Science and Law, who was also the head of the draft team of the amendment.

Despite the fact that most women in China have been victims of sexual harassment--about 79 percent in one survey--the courts have only received 10 sexual harassment cases since 2001. Talk about an underreported crime!

But I suppose if there was no law forbidding harassment in the first place, there wasn’t really a reason for women to go the legal-route. The ball-kicking route is another story.

GO TO YOUR LOCAL PRIDE PARADE!

Check Jessica's post from yesterday for info in your local town.

What are you waiting for. GO. I am on my way right now to the SF pride!

Check out this interesting commentary on Chicago Sun-Times about the lack of attention paid by the Catholic church to the abuses against women.

Rape is a grievous sin, even spousal rape, especially spousal rape. Date rape is a mortal sin. Physical abuse of a spouse is a grievous sin. So is habitual verbal abuse. Incestuous abuse of daughters, sisters and nieces is a mortal sin. Sexual harassment in the workplace or anywhere else is a mortal sin. Vile sexual "locker room" conversation that demeans women is a serious sin. Job discrimination against women is a grave sin. Contempt for women is a serious sin. Treatment of women like they are sex objects is a serious sin. Sexual exploitation of women is a mortal sin. So too is the practice of the rich and famous of replacing a loyal, faithful wife with a new "trophy wife."

Is there a priest anywhere in the world who would argue publicly that any of these behaviors is not a mortal sin? A bishop? A cardinal? A pope? Then why is there so much silence about them? Surely they are not so naive as to think that such sins are infrequent. Read the survey data, talk to cops, consult with counselors of battered women, if you have any doubts.

What do you think?

She sucks. Rice just got back from the Middle East failing to comment on one of the most volatile and important issues facing the newly developing democracies of the Arab nations--the role of women.

Times online UK reports...

Her admission that there were “boundaries” to the US drive for democratic reform in the region — notably in Saudi Arabia, where she declined to take up the cause of women, who are barred from driving cars — spurred accusations of American hypocrisy.

Because it is hypocritical. But I guess this is how we see democracy develop. By putting the needs of women to the side.

But chatting to reporters as she flew from Riyadh to Brussels, Rice was asked why she had “very pointedly” declined to take a public position on the issue of Saudi women.

“It’s just a line I’ve not wanted to cross,” she replied. “The United States has to recognise that even after democratic processes have taken place, places are not going to look like the United States . . . I think it’s important that we do have some boundaries about what we’re trying to achieve.”

Middle Eastern feminists are outraged.

Her response fuelled complaints by human rights activists such as Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian feminist who won the 2003 Nobel Peace prize. Earlier this year Ebadi accused the administration of “hypocrisy” in its attitude to unfriendly nations such as Iran.

“Given the longstanding willingness of the American government to overlook abuses of human rights, particularly women’s rights, by close allies in the Middle East such as Saudi Arabia, it is hard not to see the Bush administration’s focus on human rights violations in Iran as a cloak for its larger strategic interests,” Ebadi said.

I don't wanna say I told you so, to those of you that have been on my ass for the US foreign policy as being feminist and how much those Arabs have to learn about feminism from us. But wake up, it isn't and it never was. Our motivation for democracy in the Middle East is NOT for the emancipation of women.

One step forward, four steps back.

After fighting for ten years, women's activists will finally have their bill heard at the monsoon session of Pariliment. Newindiapress discusses...

Women activists had objected to many points in the earlier drafts including the exception given to cases where men resolve to violence in self defence. Most of such exceptions are absent in the new Bill.

As a result of the recommendations of the National Commission of Women, several critical provisions have been included. “It has given a broader definition to domestic violence. According to it, a verbal threat to kill will also be considered an abuse. Moreover, single women can also seek protection, which is a very positive factor. Passing the Bill would mean that what has always been considered a private matter would now become a public-social issue,” says Aliyamma Vijayan of Stree Vedhi.

Oh snap!

Ampersand takes on the wage gap and those would argue it doesn’t exist;

Blackfeminism.org points out the gender (im)balance in black America;

ms. musings explains the Disneyification of Feminism;

Pandagon and Bitch.Ph.D. on call out the blaming-the-victim bullshit going on lately;

And the always-prolific Feministe puts this post to shame with a link dump so big it will make you dizzy.

For events in your area this weekend, check out Human Rights Campaign, Interpride and Gay.com.

An enterprising OB/GYN has invented a way for women to give themselves a cervical exam.

Dr. Arthur Fournier's cheap, simple home-testing device can be given to women in developing countries "who for financial or logistical reasons could not - or for social or cultural reasons would not - get a Pap smear."

Women in the U.S. may not love them, but Pap smears are certainly effective in reducing rates of cervical cancer. Since the procedure was adopted 50 years ago, cervical cancer rates in the U.S. have fallen by 80 percent. But the disease has remained the leading cause of cancer death among women in the developing world, where Pap smears are rare because they require a high level of training to collect and interpret, and also violate taboos in many parts of the world.

Fournier's plastic, tampon-like device will cost about 25 cents. It's designed to be inserted like a tampon, rubbed against the cervix and removed. The device's removable tip goes into a small container and is sent off for testing.

Product trials suggested the device is about as effective as a test in a clinic. After several years of testing and development, the at-home Pap smear is set to go into widespread use this fall in South Africa.

As an interesting addition to the discussion about transsexual and transgendered persons being included in women's institutions, an Australian transsexual was just cleared to play in a women's soccer league.

Martine Delaney, who used to compete as Martin Delaney, received approval from Soccer Tasmania this week. She had a sex-change operation more than two years ago. Officials said Delaney was allowed into the league because she is "legally classified female."

"It's not the primary reason I decided to play, but it's given transgender issues some profile — for sure," Delaney told The Associated Press by telephone. "I've had some wonderful reactions. An elderly lady recognized me and walked up to me, grabbed my arm and told me: 'Congratulations, you've done a good thing — go for it, girl!'"

I can’t believe that he ever really had it, but that’s besides the point…

A new survey by EMILY’s List shows that women are turning against the president and the GOP as they grow increasingly unhappier with the war, Bush’s plans for Social Security, and the repeated invasions into “personal or family” decisions.

Last fall, about 48 percent of female voters supported Bush -- 5 percentage points more than in 2000 and 10 points more than for Republican Bob Dole in 1996. But one-third of women surveyed who voted for Bush said they don't intend to vote Republican in the 2006 congressional midterm elections. Women favored Democrats over Republicans for Congress, 43 percent to 32 percent, which, combined with men's responses, would put Democrats ahead, 40 percent to 36 percent.

Anti-choice Republican Sam Brownback used his position on the Senate Judiciary Committee to convene a subcommittee hearing yesterday on Roe v. Wade.

Impeccable timing. A Supreme Court vacancy is looking likely in the very near future, and this was a perfect opportunity for conservatives to get Roe opponents on the record. Although both pro-choice and anti-choice experts testified, Brownback's star witness was Norma McCorvey, the former "Jane Roe" who reversed her abortion stance after converting to Christianity in 1995.

Brownback, who’s rumored to have presidential aspirations in 2008, said the series of hearings meant to "highlight the effect certain Supreme Court decisions have had on American life."

Ken Edelin, associate dean of the Boston University School of Medicine, testified: "If Roe v. Wade were overturned and abortion law authority sent back to individual states, you would end up with a country that would have a patchwork of laws that would put women at great hardship."

Hmmm... Authority to individual states. Patchwork of laws. Women at great hardship. Funny, I thought that's what was happening in America right now, even with Roe in effect.

CNN and CareerBuilder.com put out an oh-so-helpful guide for women on how to earn more money: ask for it.

I agree that part of the reason that women aren’t getting paid what they should be is that they may “lack the confidence to ask for more or because they fail to recognize their own self-worth,” but it’s not the driving force behind the pay gap.

And I certainly don’t know if it warrants a hokey step-by-step guide like this:

Step one -- Explore your beliefs: Miller encourages women to examine their beliefs about why they are not earning as much as they would like. She says that "In many cases your beliefs are what brought you to where you are today."
Miller says that to attain what you truly desire you need to break down negative programming you learned growing up -- those that made you feel that you were not good enough, or strong enough, or intelligent enough.

Step two -- Take care of yourself first: Women are far more likely to think of others first. "I tell women to stop taking care of others and take care of yourself," Miller says.
They may be concerned that the timing isn't right to ask because the company is going through financial difficulties, or may be afraid that it might seem selfish or greedy if they ask for more money. "You have to learn to put yourself first. This isn't about being selfish, it's about getting paid what you are worth."

It goes on with some useful info, but the Oprah-style language is too much for me to bear.

So how much of the wage gap can we really attribute to (blame on) women and their supposed inability to know what their worth?

Big fucking shocker:

USA Today reported that:

Women and some racial minorities are "significantly underrepresented" in the U.S. technology industry, according to a new study from the industry's trade group. Women made up 32% of the tech work force in 2004, a drop from 41% at its peak in 1996. That's largely because of the shrinking number of administrative jobs in the tech industry, the Arlington, Va.-based Information Technology Association of America said.

Niiiice! It wasn't depressing enough that women are underrepresented in the tech industry -- we now have the glorious explanation of a decrease in "administrative" jobs. I HATE being reminded of how many women hold secretarial positions while the men think and make it big.

Grrrrr.

As an update to our post on “john school” and the pics of men on billboards who had been arrested for soliciting prostitutes, it looks like a new strategy in Chicago has been used to humiliate their johns, reports the Chicago Tribune.

The Chicago Police Department have begun to post names and pictures of the men on their new website. By the end of the first day that the site was up, they received more than 47,000 hits. Mayor Richard Daly says the intention is to shame them before their spouses, children, neighbors, and employers. The names of prostitutes have been on the site for some time, but “with little fanfare.” Glad to see they’re up in the popularity contest o’ deviancy. Ugh.

The police plan to update their site every day -- more than 180 men have been posted already. What I don’t understand is how they feel that “shaming” these men (more will always come) can make more of a difference than helping the prostitutes who want to get out of the business.

According to a recent NARAL press release, last night, by a vote of 34-27-1, the NY State Senate passed S.3661 --"The Unintended Pregnancy Prevention Act." This legislation allows a woman (regardless of age) to go directly to a pharmacist to obtain emergency contraception. Now, the women of New York can avoid unnecessary delays in getting birth control.

YAY!

UPDATE: Read more about the bill at BushvChoice.

Formula One boss Bernie Ecclestone made an outrageous comment to Danica Patrick, the Indianapolis 500 star. (For those of you who don't know, Formula One is a type of race car driving unlike that of the Indy 500 -- they have their own drivers, tracks, schedules, and championship).

Obviously race car driving has never been at the center of progressive feminist thought, but check out this blurb from Sports Illustrated:

Patrick received a telephone call from Ecclestone last week during which he congratulated the Indy Racing League rookie for her performance at the Indianapolis 500, but also reiterated remarks he had made during an interview at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, where the U.S. Grand Prix was being held. Among the comments Ecclestone made in the interview and to [Patrick] was that "Women should be all dressed in white like all other domestic appliances."

Classy. Real classy.

According to the Sports Illustrated article, Ecclestone has made controversial remarks about women before. He told Autosport racing magazine in 2000 that women could not compete in Formula One, but if one did, "she would have to be a woman who was blowing away the boys. ... What I would really like to see happen is to find the right girl, perhaps a black girl with super looks, preferably Jewish or Muslim, who speaks Spanish."

Eeeew.

I just love these studies. “Honey, make me dinner; my salary depends on it!”

Married men earn more than bachelors so long as their wives stay at home doing the housework, according to a report on Wednesday from Britain's Institute for Social and Economic Research (ISER).

"However, our research established the wage premium is related to the wife doing the chores," said the academic who teaches at the University of Essex.

Oh please. Anyone--regardless of gender--would be able to concentrate on their career more if they had someone taking care of all their shit at home. This is just a thinly-veiled way of saying that women belong in the home. And if you think I’m being paranoid, check this out:

A marriage might allow a husband and wife to focus their activities on tasks to which they are most suited. Traditionally, this would result in the man concentrating on paid work enabling him to increase productivity and in consequence his wages.

Excuse me, I need to go puke now.

A newly released study has shown that women may be able to take a genetic test to determine the future of their fertility.

While a woman’s fertility drops more rapidly after the age of 37, Dr. Neri Laufer from Haddassah University presented his study at the European Fertility Conference, revealing that women who are able to give birth after the age of 45 have a special genetic profile that protects against DNA damage and early cell death (which both affect the ovaries).

So through a blood sample, it may be possible to tell a woman when she personally will lose her fertility. This is additional to a test that will be able to tell a woman when she’ll be getting the big menopause.

Bill Ledger, professor of reproductive and developmental medicine at the University of Sheffield in England said that the study makes sense, and can be of a great advantage to women who wish to have kids in the future.

“Right around the corner is hormone testing that gives you some idea of how many eggs you’ve got left. Do that when you’re 30, again when you’re 32 and again when you’re 34. Plot your individual graph and if it’s declining you...have a family.”

I thought it was interesting that on the same day that this story’s been posted, the Washington Times came out with an article titled, “Delaying Pregnancy Carries Big Risks”, which discussed the various physical and psychological damage (apparently called the "misery factor") that pregnancy can have on older women. Their study’s take on it was that “The 35-45 range is possible at a cost and motherhood after 45 is ‘only for the healthy and wealthy.’”

Our favorite crazy Congressman-- Rep. Tom Coburn-- is pushing a bill that would require parental notification before minors can get a contraception prescription filled.

The "Parents Right to Know Act" would require federally funded health clinics to notify parents at least five days before dispensing birth control. Parents do not have to consent, but the bill has no exceptions for teens whose parents are estranged or abusive.

"This bill does nothing but put parents back in charge of their adolescent daughters," said Coburn.

Shudder. I'd say this bill does a lot more than that, Tom. Like discourage teens from using contraception. Most teenagers say they would just have unprotected sex if parental notification were mandatory when buying contraception.

If the bill become law, it will affect about 4,400 health clinics nationwide.

A new women’s magazine has recently been launched that deems itself “somewhere in between MAD and Ms.” Hmmm.

Mamacita is a “female waterfront of humor, parody and satire.” There aren’t many magazines out there that are specifically geared towards women’s humor, and this magazine seems to think it can fill the position. (Although the article says that The Onion is a men’s mag, which I think is a load of crap.)

The publication is filled with random humorous stories, editorials, and special features, like “The Adventures of Ubermom: America’s Most Perfect Mom.” They also have a section devoted to Michael Jackson, which I found a bit strange.

Joan Conde is the brainchild of Mamacita, who labeled it “Humor, News and Entertainment for Women Who Can’t Be Fooled.”

Click here to check it out.

As an update on hating newly nominated (by Bush) FDA commissioner Lester Crawford (a known anti-choicer), and loving Senators Hillary Clinton and Pat Murray for blocking Crawford’s confirmation until the FDA comes to a decision on emergency contraception Plan B being sold over-the-counter, NARAL Pro-Choice America is asking peeps to take some action.

While Clinton and Murray are praised for their block, there are still many other democrats that haven’t done jack shit to stand up for our repro rights.

So take some action (it literally takes two minutes) and urge your senators to block this guy’s ass.

Whoa. This article on a random study of smells I just found is quite disturbing.

The study was conducted recently by the Smell and Taste Institute in Chicago, headed by director Alah Hirsch. Their findings revealed that the scent of a grapefruit on a woman makes them seem up to six years younger to men.

How did they discover this, do you ask? Apparently, Hirsch smeared several middle-aged women with broccoli, grapefruit, banana, lavender, and spearmint leaves. Ahhh! Then young men were asked to write down how old they thought the women were. Grapefruit was the only one that made a difference.

While working on my thesis, I’ve been learning quite a bit about research methods and the potential risks of harm that a researcher can impose on a subject, including psychological harm. Smearing older women with broccoli and making them stand in front of younger men to judge their age seems a wee sexist and mortifying to me.

What do y’all think?