http://web.blogads.com/advertise/liberal_blog_advertising_network
Liberal Prose BlogAds Network

September 2005 Archives

Foreign Policy (FP) and Prospect magazine have compiled a list of the world’s top 100 intellectuals, including only 10 women.

Germaine Greer, the feminist and one-time celebrity Big Brother contestant, and anti-globalisation journalist Naomi Klein were among those women to make Prospect magazine's annual list.

The eight other women are Florence Wambugu, a plant virologist from Kenya; Elaine Scarry, an American literary theorist; Martha Nussbaum, a US philosopher; Sunita Narain, an Indian developmental environmentalist; Camille Paglia, an American US critic and feminist; Shirin Ebadi, a human rights activist from Iran; Julia Kristeva, a philosopher and feminist from France, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a politician from Somalia and the Netherlands.

Commenting on the list, writer David Herman criticises its strong male content, querying the whereabouts of the new generation of female intellectuals.

..."This partly reflects the dominance of the male world of strategic studies and policy institutes."

Unbelievable.

Oh by the way, Paul Wolfowitz and Larry Summers made the list. Nuff said.

Posted by Jessica - September 30, 2005, at 01:44PM | in News, Sexism

A judge in Texas recently ordered a 17 year-old girl charged with using drugs to abstain from sex as a condition of her probation. You know, cause drug use and sex go hand in hand. (I wonder how this judge plans to enforce the ruling...weekly vagina checks?)

Apparently Judge Lauri Blake is known for being quite the hater--she has also banned tattoos, body piercings, earrings and clothing "associated with the drug culture" for those on probation and won’t allow lawyers in her courtroom to wear sleeveless shirts or show cleavage.

Sounds like someone needs a gavel removed from their ass.

Posted by Jessica - September 30, 2005, at 12:36PM | in News, Sex

Nice job, asshole.

Democratic lawmakers and civil rights leaders denounced conservative commentator William J. Bennett yesterday for suggesting on his syndicated radio show that aborting black children would reduce the U.S. crime rate.

The former U.S. education secretary-turned-talk show host said Wednesday that "if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose -- you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down." Bennett quickly added that such an idea would be "an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do." But, he said, "your crime rate would go down."

Holy. Shit.

Bennett doesn’t exactly have a stellar reputation to begin with--after writing books about traditional values and such he admitted that he lost millions in casinos due to a gambling problem--but this shit is just insane.

Media Matters has the audio clip.

Posted by Jessica - September 30, 2005, at 11:50AM | in News

Yesterday, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a measure to ensure that pharmacists can’t deny women emergency contraception.

He also vetoed legislation to legalize same-sex marriage.

Sigh.

Posted by Jessica - September 30, 2005, at 10:44AM | in News, Politics, Queer Issues, Reproductive Rights

Hundreds of Pakistani women marched recently, protesting the president’s recent remarks about rape victims.

Protesters carried banners and placards and heard speeches denouncing Pervez Musharraf's comments, made in the US.

...In Islamabad, human rights activist Hina Jillani told the crowds that the president's remarks were an insult to women, and called for an "unqualified apology" from Mr Musharraf.

The rally, held close to the presidential palace and Pakistan's parliament, was organised by the Joint Action Committee, a grouping of womens' groups and human rights activists.

...Many Pakistani women routinely face abuse and rape in a male-dominated society.

Incidents of violent rape have caused outrage in recent years, with victims like Mukhtaran Mai and Dr Shazia Khalid highlighting the issue.

Ms Mai, an illiterate 33-year-old woman, was gang-raped in 2002, apparently on the orders of a village council.

I’m betting there will no apology. Shit, the guy won’t even admit he said it!

Posted by Jessica - September 30, 2005, at 10:29AM | in International, Sexism, Updates, Violence Against Women

Fuckers.

Only 22 senators had the courage to stand up for women's rights when it mattered. NOW applauds those senators who voted to reject this dangerous nominee, and it is unfortunate that the courageous actions of a few are overshadowed by the fall-in-line politics of so many more.

I guess I am finding myself banging my head against a wall as well.

Posted by Samhita - September 29, 2005, at 05:54PM | in News

This does not suprise me at all. Not to be anti-marriage girl today or anything (even though I am pretty anti-marriage), I found this study to be interesting.

Married women are more likely to have sexual problems than married men or single women, research suggests.

Researchers from University College London analysed data from a survey of 11,000 adults, giving a snapshot of what is happening in UK bedrooms.

Juggling caring for small children with maintaining a sexual relationship was highlighted as a problem by many.

Married or cohabiting women were more likely to have problems than single members of their gender, as were mothers with young children at home.

Problems cited by married women included not feeling like they were in control of decision-making in their lives, not using a reliable form of contraception, having small children around the house and not being able to talk to their partner.

David Goldmeier and colleagues, of the Jane Wadsworth Sexual Function Clinic at St Mary's Hospital, London, writing in Sexually Transmitted Infections, said: "Despite its prevalence, sexual dysfunction is often endured in silence.

"Studies in both the US and UK suggest that as many as 54% of women and 35% of men have problems, but fewer than 11% of men and 21% of women seek help."

Again, not a study to be generalized outside its sample population, but very sad. What do we think?

Posted by Samhita - September 29, 2005, at 05:06PM | in Sex

Here our "modern brides" starve themselves to fit into their wedding dresses. In this particular instance, women are being forced to overeat to fit into a beauty image that demands a larger woman.


The traditions of the desert are very much alive in Mauritania, an Islamic republic on the western edge of the Sahara whose people were still almost entirely nomadic when the country gained independence from France in 1960.

Having a voluptuous wife and daughters -- well fed to survive the rigors of a desert lifestyle -- was long a visible sign of wealth and power among the country’s light-skinned Moors. It is still seen by many as a canon of beauty.

But with Lebanese satellite television broadcasting images of flat-stomached girls cavorting on beaches, and more Mauritanians traveling abroad, the vogue is starting to change.

More than one in five women in Mauritania, which straddles black and Arab Africa, were force-fed as young girls, according to a government survey from 2001, the latest available.

“Our society has this vision that a woman has to be fat to be beautiful. It is a canon of beauty,” said Marienne Baba Sy, head of a government commission that deals with women’s issues.

Having a differing sense of beauty outside the thin and white matrix would be nice, but why the force feeding? Why are women world-wide still expected to look a certain way for the male gaze?

Posted by Samhita - September 29, 2005, at 02:57PM | in International

from single mothers and their views on marriage.

via Washington Post...

Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas's new book, "Promises I Can Keep," explains -- in their subjects' own words -- why so many poor women opt for single motherhood.

It's not that they don't believe in marriage, or don't want it for themselves. They "delay" marriage until they think they have a reasonable shot at making it work. What Edin and Kefalas, both Philadelphia sociologists, found in their five-year study of 162 poor black, white and Puerto Rican single mothers is a near total disconnect between marriage and motherhood.

Break it down sisters. This is not to say that the experience of single motherhood is easy or glamorous, but it is complicated. It is also a clear rebellion to norms of hetersexual union/motherhood.

The article doesn't paint this picture so much as get at the notion that the hopes of these women are "magic" in that they are detached from the reality they live. You can't really make an essential statement about this, but most of my single mother friends are quite aware of the condition they are living in. What do you think?

Has anyone read the book?

Posted by Samhita - September 29, 2005, at 02:41PM | in Women of Color

Okay yeah, so when a woman gets drunk and she is sexually assaulted, it is the drunk woman's fault. Get the fuck out.

via BBC...

Are young women putting themselves in danger through binge drinking?

A large proportion of young women are at personal risk after getting drunk, a report by the Portman Group says.

The organisation which is funded by the drinks industry, says that over a third of women had been sexually assaulted while drunk and 34% had had unprotected sex after drinking.

It also found that women are more likely to become more aggressive than men while drunk.

Who are these researchers? Do they think about societal factors affecting their subject pool and blatant gender assumptions in their analysis? This article is a little more comprehensive.

And what is so bad about an agro drunk woman? Not ladylike enough?

Posted by Samhita - September 29, 2005, at 02:33PM | in Sexual Assault

Make sure to check out Rebecca Traister’s take on Commander in Chief and The White House Project’s premiere party. I don't know how she remembers all those frigging details...

By the way, Commander in Chief attracted 16.2 million viewers, the largest audience for a drama series debut on Tuesday night in nearly five years. (And the top-rated show of the night.) Sweet.

Posted by Jessica - September 29, 2005, at 02:05PM | in News, Television

Roberts has been confirmed. Keep an eye out for the locusts.

Posted by Jessica - September 29, 2005, at 12:01PM | in News, Politics


If you don�t know SuicideGirls (where have you been?) here's the deal--it's porn that features "alternative" women. Lots of tattoos and body piercings and the like. It's enjoyed a high-profile reputation as female-controlled and operated. Apparently, that's not necessarily the case.

A group of angry ex-models is bashing the SuicideGirls alt-porn empire, saying its embrace of the tattoo and nipple-ring set hides a world of exploitation and male domination.

...about 30 models have quit, claiming the site's male owner treated them poorly and didn't pay them well.

The women are spreading their allegations through the blogosphere, raising the hackles of the SuicideGirls company, which has until now enjoyed a reputation as porn even feminists can love. It offers burlesque tours, clothes and DVDs in addition to a sprawling online library of naked punk and goth women.

...the woman-friendly reputation of SuicideGirls is being battered. Since its creation in 2001, media outlets have lauded the company's focus on goth, indie and punk models who aren't necessarily big-busted and bikini-waxed. "It wasn't the first alt-porn site to come along, but it was certainly the most widely promoted and probably the most influential," said John d'Addario, editor of the porn blog Fleshbot.

The message of business-side female empowerment hasn't hurt either. "The perception that women had an important/equal role in the administration of the site probably made it more attractive to some people who might not have visited a porn site otherwise," d'Addario said.

Despite what the reputation of the site is, the models who have quit say that SuicideGirls is actually controlled by a man, cofounder Sean Suhl. They claim Suhl treated women badly and didn�t pay them enough.

The site claims that these are just a few women who are spreading lies. I don�t about you, but it seems to me that 30 women are more than just a couple of disgruntled employees. This is super disappointing.

Thanks to Ben for the link.

Posted by Jessica - September 29, 2005, at 11:38AM | in News, Sex, Sexism, Work

Remember Martha Burk, the chairwoman of the National Council of Women's Organizations, and the champion of the Let-Women-Into-Augusta campaign? Well it looks like she's got a new bee in her bonnet: a new ad for the NHL's comeback season.

According to espn.com:

"The spot opens with a quote from Chinese military philosopher Sun Tzu: 'A clever warrior is one who not only wins, but excels at winning with ease.' A bare-chested player sits on a wooden bench in the glow of a candlelit room with a backbeat of drums and rattling sabers. He is approached by a woman in a bra and gauzy robe, who touches his shoulders, asks 'Ready?' and helps him put on his shoulder pads and jersey. She says 'It's time,' and he heads to the ice to the cheers of a man and young boy in the stands. The ad ends with "My NHL, coming 10.05."

Burk claims this ad is sexist and sent "letters of protest to NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and Dick Ebersol, chairman of NBC Universal Sports & Olympics" before the ad debuted this week. She was quoted as saying, "The woman is a sexual ornament, in my view...It's appealing to adult men while trying to masquerade as something for kids. That's deeply offensive to me. As a mother of two sons, they see enough sex and violence anyway. Why put it in warrior terms? That's offensive, let alone the sexism."

The NHL claims the ad is "very respectful of women [because] the woman is a spiritual and physical trainer for the warrior, and his mentor."

Who do you believe? Offended? Not so much?

Posted by - September 29, 2005, at 09:54AM | in Activism, News, Sexism, Sports, Television

Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes is not having the easiest time these last few days trying to convince women that the American way is super-duper.

Yesterday at a Saudi university Hughes got her ass handed to her by a room full of women:

...When Ms. Hughes expressed the hope here that Saudi women would be able to drive and "fully participate in society" much as they do in her country, many challenged her.

"The general image of the Arab woman is that she isn't happy," one audience member said. "Well, we're all pretty happy." The room, full of students, faculty members and some professionals, resounded with applause.

The administration's efforts to publicize American ideals in the Muslim world have often run into such resistance.

...Many in this region say they resent the American assumption that, given the chance, everyone would live like Americans.

Then today, a group of Turkish women confronted Hughes about the invasion of Iraq:

"This war is really, really bringing your positive efforts to the level of zero," said Hidayet Sefkatli Tuksal, an activist with the Capital City Women's Forum. She said it was difficult to talk about cooperation between women in the United States and Turkey as long as Iraq was under occupation.

..."War makes the rights of women completely erased and poverty comes after war -- and women pay the price," said Fatma Nevin Vargun, a Kurdish women's rights activist.

...Hughes, looking increasingly pained, defended the decision to invade Iraq as a difficult and wrenching moment for President Bush, but necessary to protect America.

"You're concerned about war, and no one likes war," she said. But, she said, "to preserve the peace sometimes my country believes war is necessary." She also asserted that women are faring much better in Iraq than under the rule of deposed president Saddam Hussein.

"War is not necessary for peace," shot back Feray Salman, a human rights advocate. She said countries should not try to impose democracy through war, adding that "we can never, ever export democracy and freedom from one country to another."

Love it. There’s just this insane arrogance that goes along with the idea that American women know what’s best for women around the world. Whatever happened to letting women tell their own stories and speak for themselves?

Posted by Jessica - September 28, 2005, at 04:39PM | in International, News, Politics, Sexism

Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit has a pretty fucking warped article up right now at MSNBC, Where the men aren't.

Reynolds says that the real problem with diversity on college campuses is the “dwindling” number of male students. Uh huh.

I looked at some possible answers to this question in a column over at TechCentralStation today, but I continue to wonder why nobody is paying much attention to this issue. Perhaps men lack the sort of identity-politics lobby groups that women and minorities do.

You certainly don't see much in the way of "Men's Studies" and "Men's Centers" to match the Women's Studies and Women's Centers that you see on most college campuses these days.

Will we see that change, as men become a minority on university campuses?

My guess is yes, and that's because -- at least according to a recent New York Times report that's gotten a lot of attention (including commentaries by Richard Posner and Gary Becker), college-educated women are increasingly abandoning their careers for full-time motherhood. Many people doubt whether this is happening to the degree suggested by the Times, and "trend" stories like this should always be taken with a grain of salt, but to the extent it's true it puts colleges in a bind: Where are their rich alumni to come from in the future, if men don't attend and women don't go on to become high-earners?

I see. So colleges should be trying to recruit more men because women are just going to be moms anyway and therefore financially useless?

How many ways can this logic go wrong?

Posted by Jessica - September 28, 2005, at 02:16PM | in Education, News, Politics, Sexism

Hot damn!

Posted by Jessica - September 28, 2005, at 01:11PM | in News, Politics


This story is just nuts.

The University of Iowa has a bit of a controversy on its hands over their pink visitors’ locker room.

Several professors and students joined the call Tuesday for the athletic department to do away with the pink showers, carpeting and lockers — a decades-long Hawkeye football tradition.

Critics say the use of pink demeans women, perpetuates offensive stereotypes about women and homosexuality, and puts the university in the uncomfortable position of tacitly supporting those messages.

"I want the locker room gone," law school professor Jill Gaulding told a university committee studying the athletic department's compliance with NCAA standards, including gender equity.

For decades, visiting football teams playing at Kinnick Stadium have dressed and showered in the pink locker room. The tradition was started by former Iowa coach Hayden Fry, a psychology major who said pink had a calming and passive effect on people.

Yeah, right. I’m sure it has nothing to do with trying to make the opposing team feel like a bunch of girls. (Cause girls are icky!)

Apparently the current pinkness of the locker room wasn’t quite enough:

But as part of the stadium's two-year, $88 million makeover, athletic officials took the former coach's interior decorating ideas to another level, splashing pink across the brick walls, shower floors and installing pink metal lockers, carpeting, sinks, showers and urinals.

Wow. Why don’t they just draw vaginas all over the walls?

Now, I’m sure folks will criticize those opposed to the pink locker room, saying that it’s not a such big deal. But get this: a professor who objected to the locker room on her website got death threats. Over a locker room. Now tell me it’s not a big deal.

Posted by Jessica - September 28, 2005, at 11:32AM | in News, Sexism, Sports

Finally, some good reproductive health news.

A doctor has offered to perform free abortions on hurricane evacuees, saying it may be too dangerous for them to wait until they return home.

Despite protests from abortion opponents, Little Rock Family Planning clinic director Dr. Jerry Edwards said he has already performed six free abortions. The clinic usually charges between $525 and $600 for a first-trimester abortion.

"If we didn't provide it now, they would get it later--a late-term abortion that would give greater risk to the mother's health," Edwards told KTHV-TV in Little Rock.

Kudos to Dr. Edwards for his help.

Posted by Jessica - September 28, 2005, at 10:48AM | in News, Politics, Reproductive Rights


Last night, The White House Project held a special screening of ABC’s new show, Commander in Chief at Caroline’s Comedy Club in New York. I’ll admit it--the show was better than I expected.

Since I don’t want to ruin for anyone who hasn’t seen it yet, all I’ll say is that I was more emotional over it than I wanted to be.

But the real highlight of the night was the party itself. Vanessa and I were having great laughs over the contrived girl-friendly music playing (Shania Twain’s I feel like a woman, some Pink, and Nancy Sinatra), but then they played En Vogue and I had to shut my mouth cause I love me some En Vogue.

What was a little disappointing--but predictable--was that pretty much everyone at the event was over 40. Vanessa and I huddled in a corner with the other young'uns we recognized--women from NCRW, Legal Momentum, and the always-fab Rebecca Traister. We consumed large amounts of wine and laughed at the “presidential” chocolate bars offered at each table (though we consumed large amounts of those as well).

Good times.

By the way, if you’re wondering about the picture, these guys were stationed outside the comedy club to promote their website, BillforFirstLady. The sentiment I understand, the delivery not so much. Why is it that for a woman to be president, a man needs to be feminized?

Pics of Marie Wilson and Gloria Steinem after the jump.

Posted by Jessica - September 28, 2005, at 10:07AM | in Events, Politics, Television

Bush administration lawyers approached the Supreme Court yesterday to reinstate the ban on late-term abortion, arguing that it’s never been “medically indicated” as a safer surgical procedure.

They’re appealing the St. Louis 8th Circuit Court of Appeals decision back in July that struck down the ban as unconstitutional.

“In their appeal to the Supreme Court, the Bush administration lawyers said the lower courts should have deferred to the lawmakers in Washington, not the medical experts who testified in the case.

‘Congress' findings concerning the medical necessity of partial-birth abortion were entitled to substantial deference,’ U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement told the court in Gonzales vs. Carhart.

Five years ago, O'Connor cast the decisive vote to strike down the Nebraska law, saying the government may not regulate abortion in a way that endangers the health of women.

It will be several months before the justices decide whether to hear the case, which is right around the time that Bush’s replacement for O’Conner will probably be on the court. Lovely.

Posted by Vanessa - September 27, 2005, at 04:48PM | in Law, News, Politics, Reproductive Rights

Jeb Bush is offering $2 million for anti-abortion groups in Florida to establish a statewide hotline for "crisis pregnancy counseling."

The money will only be given to groups that "adhere to a strict policy of not promoting, referring or counseling for abortion." I'm sure they'll also throw in some inaccurate information about abortion, just for good measure.

The deadline passed with no bids filed. So now Jeb is considering awarding a no-bid contract.

Because, you know, that $2 million couldn't be used to provide better prenatal care or subsidized child care or anything. Nah, Florida's better off using that money to limit women's choices.

Posted by Ann - September 27, 2005, at 04:34PM | in Reproductive Rights


I wasn't too shocked to find that Hooters restaurant has a statement in their handbook that employees are required to sign stating that -- while harassment isn’t tolerated -- they acknowledge that the concept of Hooters is based on female sex appeal, and that the environment is one where “joking and innuendo based on female sex appeal is commonplace.”

So they don’t dig harassment, but you can’t complain if you’re harassed.

Via The Smoking Gun.

Posted by Vanessa - September 27, 2005, at 03:54PM | in Business, Sexism, Work

So Rumsfeld is busy worrying about the military performing civilian duties, meanwhile the state of Michigan is ceding the power of deadly force and civil immunity to folks like you & me.

The state House of Representatives is considering the creation of a new law allowing people to use deadly force to defend themselves in their homes and cars. The language has a bit of a Wild West flair: "... a law-abiding person who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be, has no duty to retreat, and can 'stand his or her ground' and meet force with force, including deadly force if necessary..."

Gun-hating liberal that I am, I see this as a blanket license to kill. It’s also unnecessary. The courts already, for good reason, give broad latitude to people defending themselves in their homes or vehicles.

But for domestic violence victims, who are not threatened by an "intruder," the courts are less lenient. And as I read it, this legislation could prevent some domestic violence victims from going to prison for killing their abusers in self defense, if they have a protective order.

I'm definitely not suggesting that DV victims would be better off with guns in their homes. But now that the Supreme Court has more or less allowed police to ignore protective orders, the law could provide an incentive for victims to seek court orders against their abusers. A silver lining, if Michigan decides to pass what is ultimately bad legislation.

Posted by Ann - September 27, 2005, at 02:42PM | in Law, Politics, Violence Against Women

While we’re all happy to see Lester Crawford resign from his post as FDA Commissioner, we can’t be too surprised to see that Bush has intentions to replace him with his twin. Sigh.

Bush’s appointee to “temporarily” head the agency is Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach, who - like Crawford - has a reputation for pushing right-wing and anti-choice ideology, says Think Progress.

Von Eschenbach is the director of the National Cancer Institute who altered a fact sheet stating the absence of a link between abortion and breast cancer in 2002. The language was changed to say that the tests disproving the link were “inconclusive.” After a ridiculous amount of uproar and a statement sent by 100 institute scientists, Dr. Evil backed down.

Additionally, not one mainstream news story has acknowledged this guy’s obvious agenda.

Posted by Vanessa - September 27, 2005, at 02:20PM | in Health, News, Politics, Reproductive Rights

The British Medical Journal recently published a study revealing that left-handed people may have an increased chance of developing premenopausal breast cancer. And how much is this chance increased, do you ask? More than twice as likely. Whaa?

Researchers at the University Medical Center Utrecht came to these findings after studying 12,000 women who were born between 1932 and 1941.

So how does left-handedness come into the picture? Apparently, previous studies have suggested that high levels of sex hormones before birth may cause left-handedness. It’s also thought that hormones can trigger changes in the breast tissue that make tumor growth more likely. Put those two random studies together, throw in this new one and whala.

The lefties always get shafted in one way or another.

Posted by Vanessa - September 27, 2005, at 12:25PM | in Health, News

Last night marked Christine’s final post on Ms. Musings. Sniff, sniff.

She wrote for Ms. for nearly three years and is off to new adventures that we wish her well with. While she will be missed as a voice of Ms., she’ll now be on Poppolitics.com, so make sure to check her out there.

Good luck, Christine!

Posted by Vanessa - September 27, 2005, at 10:29AM | in Blogs

I was happy to see that eight families have filed suit in response to the ridiculous intention of the school board from Dover, PA to introduce “intelligent design” to ninth-grade biology class. At the same time, I’m not happy about how intense this load-o’-crap dispute is getting.

The trial is being considered by some as one of the most significant evolution-linked legal battles in two decades.

The families' (and backed by the ACLU) argument is that its teaching in school violates the First Amendment clause specifying the separation of Church and State. Sounds pretty solid to me. On the other hand, the attorney defending the school board argues that “the case is about free inquiry, not about a religious agenda.”

By the way, the school board's attorney is Patrick Gillen of the Thomas More Law Center, which lists one of its core missions as “defending the religious freedom of Christians."

Supporters of “intelligent design” claim that there is a serious controversy in the scientific community concerning the theory versus evolution. Yet the National Academy of Sciences denies this fervently, admitting that while mainstream scientific arguments do occur concerning evolution's specifics, they still support its existence.

Meanwhile, the pro-evolution National Center for Science Education characterized the intelligent design book, “Of Pandas and People” as the beginning of the modern intelligent design movement.

I just don’t understand how a place of science, particularly pro-evolution, could legitimize this theory in any way. Let’s hope this trial ends on a more rational note.

Posted by Vanessa - September 27, 2005, at 08:17AM | in Education, Law, News, Politics, Religion, Theory

I love this shit. The title says it all: Career women abandon sex for IVF.

Yes, us crazy “career women” think the sex is just icky.

Busy career women are abandoning sex and seeking inappropriate IVF treatment to have instant babies, doctors have claimed.

It is estimated that one in seven UK couples have difficulty conceiving. However, many women take up IVF treatment, before they discover this because they are simply too busy or tired to have sex.

Emma Cannon runs the fertility programme at Westover House clinic in London, which has seen a 20 per cent increase in the number of women seeking 'inappropriate' IVF.

She said: "People want everything now. If they can't have a baby now, they want IVF. They think it's no different from putting your name down for a handbag."

You mean I won’t get my kid delivered with my Birkin? Well screw that!

Posted by Jessica - September 26, 2005, at 04:54PM | in News, Sexism, Work


This is the best pic yet of the pro-military folks who held their itty bitty rally this weekend. Classic.

Brought to you by Deanna Zandt at Alternet.

Posted by Jessica - September 26, 2005, at 03:21PM | in News

Women's E-News has an important story today about tracking the number of rapes that occurred in Hurricane Katrina's wake.

The Houston Police Department was originally not dealing with reports of rapes that happened in Louisiana, instead instructing officers to hold reports "for safekeeping until other police jurisdictions are prepared to deal with them." Yeah. Surely the New Orleans Police Department will be making rape reports a priority.

One Superdome volunteer says: "There were so many rape victims, and we had to turn (most) of them away because they had life-damaging, but not life-threatening, wounds."

Rape is already underreported. Add to the mix a chaotic evacuation for a second hurricane and a police department that won't do anything when women do come forward. Now you tell me if we're ever going to have any idea how many women were raped in the chaos following Katrina.

Says evacuee Charmaine Neville (whose story has been floating around the internet): "I found some police officers. I told them that a lot of us women had been raped down there by guys, not from the neighborhood where we were, they were helping us to save people." Crooks and Liars has the video clip.

Posted by Ann - September 26, 2005, at 02:18PM | in Violence Against Women




Commander In Chief
, ABC’s new show about a woman becoming president, premieres tomorrow night. And the feminists are loving it.

The White House Project is having a big premiere party in New York City, while also urging women to have their own house parties celebrating the first episode.

I’ve been apprehensive about this show (or really just the media response to it) from the beginning; it looks like I’m not the only one. Joel Stein at the LA Times started out thinking that the new drama was a little too predictable with the sexism factor:

ABC has started a fake blog about the female president, posing questions no one would ask about a man, such as "Can she balance the duties of the presidency with those of a wife and mother?"

The network has also taken out newspaper ads with political cartoons suggesting that the notion of a female president is ridiculous. In one, Davis wears a military helmet, high heels and a sash across her chest that reads "Commander in Chief." In another, a bunch of fat cats try to bribe Madame President with flowers, jewelry and a fur coat. I was surprised they didn't have one with Davis at the G-8 summit, squealing: "Can you believe it? Shoes from eight different countries!"

Stein does change his tune, however, and recognizes that the show is more making fun of the sexist attitudes about women and power rather than adopting them. Let's hope so!

In any case, I’m looking forward to seeing for myself if the show lives up to the hype.

Posted by Jessica - September 26, 2005, at 01:07PM | in News, Politics, Television


I was really disappointed that I couldn’t be at the peace march this weekend in DC; I hear from friends that it was fantastic. Not to mention it beat the “pro-military” rally senseless in terms of turnout.

Anyone who was there want to weigh in?

Also, Page One News Media has some great pics of the march.

Posted by Jessica - September 26, 2005, at 11:20AM | in News

While it’s pretty clear that we’re fucked on this one, you can still make yourself feel better by letting your senators know what you think of the fiasco.

Also, make sure to check out this excellent statement (assuming you haven’t seen it in a million places already) that a collection of women bloggers have put together in opposition to John Roberts. Kudos, ladies.

Posted by Jessica - September 26, 2005, at 10:52AM | in Blogs, News, Politics

Like being a woman in sports isn’t hard enough without having to worry about a burka.

Women in Iran, even those participating in sporting events, have to cover body contours and hair with long gowns and scarves so that they are properly covered in front of "strange men" in public.

The restrictions make it impossible for Iranian sportswomen, including those in judo, karate, taekwondo and horse jumping, to attend international competitions.

In order to tackle this problem, women's activist and head of Women's Sports Federation Faezeh Hashemi arranges games for Muslim women in which they can compete internationally without being watched by a male audience and TV cameras.

Talk about jumping through hoops. Jeez.

Posted by Jessica - September 26, 2005, at 09:53AM | in International, Sexism, Sports

This is horrifying.

A WOMAN is raped every 10 minutes in South Africa, one is beaten up every six minutes - and seven women are murdered, on average, every day.

This harrowing picture of widespread brutality against women and young girls emerged from the police annual crime statistics released this week.

The police figures show that rape increased nationally by 4% between April 2004 and March 2005. Countrywide, 55 114 cases were reported. Sixty percent of the victims were adult women, and 40% children.

Posted by Samhita - September 25, 2005, at 06:08PM | in International

W00t!

via Detroit Free Press...

Sen. Debbie Stabenow said Friday she will oppose the nomination of John Roberts to become the next chief justice of the United States because she is alarmed by his writings and views on fundamental rights enjoyed by Americans.

Stabenow, D-Mich., said in a statement that Roberts refused to answer many questions during his confirmation hearings about how he would protect constitutional rights. Her review of his writings found that Roberts "argued that the Constitution did not protect workers, voters, women, minorities and the disabled from discrimination."

"I believe that his philosophy undermines our most cherished and fundamental rights, liberties and freedoms as Americans, and for that reason, I will be voting no on his nomination next week," Stabenow said.

Posted by Samhita - September 25, 2005, at 01:34PM | in News


Great.

Women's rights activists in Iraq say rising extremism is restricting their freedom, even as the country prepares to vote on a constitution that is touted as one of the Arab world's most progressive regarding women.

"Women cannot walk freely out in the street," said activist Ban Jamil, who directs the Rasafa Branch of Assyrian Women Union, a local non-governmental organisation in Baghdad.

"Women face lack of respect when they walk uncovered," said Jamil, a Christian, who said women are insulted if they show too much skin or walk in public without wearing the Islamic veil, or hijab, to cover their hair.

She blamed "imported extremist doctrines, which were never experienced in the past" for the new restrictions.

The tide of Islamisation has risen in Iraq as fundamentalist Shiite parties have come to power following the ouster of former dictator Saddam Hussein.

Although not enforced by the newly established laws, which were written under US patronage, a conservative dress code is widely observed in much of the war-torn country.

You can keep reading here.
They also talk about the role of the US government in protecting women's rights. This is such a complicated situation. What do we think about this? I know I have argued before that military intervention/western attempts at hegemonic and market rule brings out fundamentalist tendencies. But now it seems some groups have become dependent on the troops to protect their rights. So what now?

Posted by Samhita - September 25, 2005, at 01:20PM | in International

Hmm.

A group of Dalit women belonging to the barber community have allegedly been paraded naked by upper-caste people in a coastal village on Monday last.

The women’s fault: their husbands refused to wash the feet of bridegroom and members of barati during an upper-caste marriage a couple of months ago.

During marriage ceremonies in Orissa, the bride’s family hires barbers to wash the feet of the bridegroom and the members of the barati on their arrival at the bride’s place.

The men have begun protesting the ceremony and as a result the upper crust responded by harassing the women. I think washing feet is a realy offensive thing for men to have to do to other men, which is why they are protesting. There is also a caste/class implication here, but it is interesting how to get back at the men, they attack the women, aka "their women". Weird.

Posted by Samhita - September 25, 2005, at 01:06PM | in International

Halleluiah! Barely a month after the FDA announced they were (once again) delaying the already incredibly long-awaited decision to allow emergency contraception to be sold over-the-counter, Commissioner Lester Crawford has announced his resignation.

Click here for details.

Posted by Vanessa - September 23, 2005, at 05:54PM | in News, Reproductive Rights

AI strikes again! In a 150-plus page report, Amnesty International released information concerning the police abuse of LGBT people across the nation. They also call out the U.S. for failing to acknowledge these occurrences, which are underreported and have unclear and/or nonexistent policies.

The report, titled, “Stonewalled: police abuse and misconduct against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in the United States” focuses on Chicago, New York, Los Angeles and San Antonio, and surveys the largest 50 police departments in the country, including Washington D.C. regarding LGBT policies and practices. There are also hundreds of recorded testimonies from victims of abuse. Here’s a tidbit of their findings from the survey:

72 percent of police departments said they had no specific policy regarding interaction with transgender people.

31 percent instruct their officers on how to strip search a transgender individual.

Two thirds (66%) of police departments reported providing training on hate crimes against LGBT individuals.

While most departments provide training regarding sexual assault (86%), about half (52%) do not include LGBT-specific issues.

Click here to check out the full report.

Posted by Vanessa - September 23, 2005, at 04:49PM | in News, Queer Issues, Sexual Assault


I’m a bit obsessed with this book I recently got for my birthday, and thought I would share. It’s not insightful in any way, but ‘tis a humorous little booklet to prop on your night stand or coffee table for a good laugh.

“You Say I’m a Bitch Like It’s a Bad Thing” is by Ed Polish and Darren Wotz, who basically took a bunch of 50s and 60s advertising images (another obsession of mine) and added random sayings. My personal favorite is a pic of a little girl saying, “Mommy, when I grow up I want to help smash the white racist, homophobic, patriarchal, bullshit paradigm too!”

You can order it online or go to your local Urban Outfitters, if you have one in your city. I highly recommend it.

Posted by Vanessa - September 23, 2005, at 03:26PM | in Humor

Virginia gubernatorial candidate Jerry W. Kilgore was quoted in 1997 as saying he opposes abortion, but "supports exceptions for rape and incest if the woman reports the crime to police within a week." Cause really ladies, seven days is plenty of time to deal with your dad raping you.

In a news conference organized by Kilgore's opponent, Democratic Lt. Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, three sexual abuse counselors discussed the Republican's assessment that victims of rape and incest should be allowed abortions only if they report the crime within seven days.

"It's not only hateful and cruel, it's also impractical," said Jim McKinley-Oakes, a social wo