Feminism – Page 383

Indiana Abortion Bills

Dr. B. details several of the abortion bills coming through the state legislature.

Yearly inspections of abortion clinics AND declaring a fetus viable at 20 weeks (sneaky, eh?)

Doctors must tell patients that they can see an ultrasound and hear the heartbeat before the procedure.

Considers clinics where abortions are done, outpatient surgical centers. Forcing them to upgrade their facilities.

Requires doctors to offer anesthesia before the procedure for a fetus of at least 20 weeks.

Makes it a felony for a pregnant woman to take meds such as codeine without a prescription (can anyone else see where this one is going??)

Allows employees to refuse to give abortion and birth control pills and health care workers to refuse to participate in abortion procedures.

Requires public schools to incorporate fetal development and information about the health consequences of an early termination of pregnancy into their curriculum.

This is too easy:
1a) Viability can only be determined on a case-by-case basis. No overarching legislature will determine the viability of an individual fetus.

1b) Throwing a perfectly viable measure in with a rather controversial measure is cheap politics. Let the bills survive on their own merit, not because you tacked them on and tried to sneak them past one’s peers and constituents.

2) I doubt this will change as many minds of pregnant women as it will make women feel guilty, punished, and perhaps add to the nonexistent claims of PAS rates.

3) This is a common procedure intended to force financially-strapped abortion clinics to shut their doors because they cannot afford to upgrade their facilities. Abortions can be performed anywhere where proper sanitization can occur. While this bill might seem like a good one, its intentions are not.

4) Sure, fine. But let’s not forget the reasons behind bill no. 2.

5) Standard bill that tries to criminalize drug addiction in the name of “saving the baby.”

6) No worker should be allowed to refuse to dispense medication, especially medication that prevents abortion in the first place. Similar “moral” bills around the country have allowed medical workers to refuse giving medical care to gays and lesbians under the guise of “good conscience.”

7a) The only medical consequence of a terminated pregnancy is the termination of a pregnancy. This is a transparent attempt at making public schools dispense the faulty information “linking” breast cancer and abortion, a link disproven again and again by uninvested science. Because conseling is already required before and after an abortion service is provided, this bill is patently bunk.

7b) Information on fetal development is already a part of the state sex ed curriculum. If you want misleading info on the state educational system, ask a Hoosier Republican politician.

7c) Before we add more to the sex ed curriculum we should reinstate all information regarding safe sex, sexual self-esteem, and the appropriate, scientifically accurate information available so kids can make good choices, not uninformed choices.

Why Do Women Take Women’s Studies?

Rick Dement poses a valuable observation in response to Cleis’ piece on the value of women’s studies. He says:

I actually took more then a few “women’s studies” courses in collage to satisfy social studies credits. The first one I took because I thought that it would be good for me to study that which I clearly had no clue about at 19 years old. I was naively shocked to find out that I would be sharing a classroom with about 30 co-eds (shock quickly faded to glee).

This was a woman’s history class, I also took a women’s literature course and a course on black women. In all cases, I was genuinely surprised that only women took these classes (and not only was I the only white person in the black women’s class I was also, once again the only male). The reason that this surprised me is I really felt that men would get a lot more out of a women’s studies course then women might. I also took a lot of history courses that focused on history from a particular point of view because I learned that normal history courses should really be called the history of war. In addition to Women’s history, I took music history, film history and science history.

But why are woman’s studies course such a estrogen ghetto? Other then a broad based liberal education, which I firmly believe in, what is it that women get out of these courses exactly?

My short answer: I took women’s studies courses in order to glean some context from several issues I had faced in my life. I knew, thanks to the course texts, that some of my more disturbing experiences were not only common but that others were on the streets attempting to make positive changes on behalf of women. In addition, the interdisciplinary work helped me realize that the struggle for safety and opportunity is connected to parallel struggles around the world, nearly all of which stem from a general invisibility that many of these issues suffer from. Everything else sprung from there.

I know ya’ll will have some good answers to this one. Answers welcome in the comments.

Bush’s Sex Scandal

From Nicholas Kristof for the NYTimes:

I’m sorry to report a sex scandal in the heart of the Bush administration. Worse, it doesn’t involve private behavior, but public conduct.

You see, for all the carnage in President Bush’s budget, one program is being showered with additional cash – almost three times as much as it got in 2001. It’s “abstinence only” sex education, and the best research suggests that it will cost far more lives than the Clinton administration’s much more notorious sex scandal.

Mr. Bush means well. But “abstinence only” is a misnomer that in practice is an assault on sex education itself. There’s a good deal of evidence that the result will not be more young rosy-cheeked virgins – it will be more pregnancies, abortions, gonorrhea and deaths from AIDS.

The article includes a link to the Abstinence Clearinghouse where one can buy “Keep It” boxers (stopping just short of “in your pants”), “Chew On This” abstinence gum (great for freshening up right before a hot and heavy make-out session), “I’m Worth Waiting For” temporary tattoos (because nothing says “good girl” like a tattoo), and, I’m not kidding, a “Save Sex for Marriage” sucker.

Whomever designed these products forgot that hormone-riddled teenagers come hand-in-hand with dirty minds.

But back to the scandal:

…there’s some evidence that abstinence-only programs lead to increases in unprotected sex.

Perhaps the most careful study of the issue involved 12,000 young people. It found that those taking virginity pledges had sex 18 months later, on average, than those who had not taken the pledge. But even 88 percent of the pledgers had sex before marriage.

More troubling, the pledgers were much less likely to use contraception when they did have sex – only 40 percent of the males used condoms, compared with 59 percent of those who did not take the pledge.

In contrast, there’s plenty of evidence that abstinence-plus programs – which encourage abstinence but also teach contraception – delay sex and increase the use of contraception. So, at a time when we’re cutting school and health programs, why should we pour additional tax money into abstinence-only initiatives, which are likely to lead to more pregnancies, more abortions and more kids with AIDS? Now, that’s a scandal.

Indeed.

Three Afternoon Reads

Cleis outlines why she disagrees with Dr. Crazy’s “Why Women’s Studies Sucks.”

The NYTimes has an interesting article about the risks Dems run if they don’t tow the line on reproductive rights.

An AIDS activist and mother writes on her LiveJournal about raising a gay son in a homophobic world. In part:

Fag: This is what I heard someone call my little boy today. I didn’t ignore it. I asked. I glared. What did you say? The kid muttered under his breath. Nothing. We walked to the car and he was quiet. He’s a boy who takes everything into himself. When he shares, it’s a gift. It has a meaning beyond what it is…

…So here was my golden boy, born at a time in my life when I was acutely aware of the powers of both love and hatred, chewing his nails in the backseat, trying not to cry. He looked up at me with his giant green eyes. I could tell he was phrasing his question very carefully, as he is such a precise little boy. “I’m not a fag if I don’t want to have a girlfriend, am I?” He was so quiet and serious. I pulled over and turned around to face him.

I wanted to tell him about the time into which he was born, how so many people loved him, how so many people saw him as the sign of a good and hopeful future they might not live to see. I wanted to tell him how the woman who came into my office after he was born wept with him in her arms and kissed him all over. I didn’t take him from her until he was sleeping and her tears had been replaced with a soft smile. “No one has ever let me touch a baby since I was diagnosed,” she told me in Spanish, “He’s so beautiful. Thank you.”

One of the scariest things about being a parent is my fear that my child will be targeted for something that ultimately defines his identity. This short post on parenting and homosexuality is beautiful for its complexity and compassion. Thanks for the link, A.

“Loser” Is Right

I’m too wiped to even touch this one, so I’ll let you guys have at it. Bolds are mine.

Well I may be an unemployed man without a wife or girlfriend still living with my parents despite being over the age of 30, but at least I’m not so stupid as to think that a gorgeous young girl would be the author of a popular libertarian blog. She’d be too busy having fun. The kind of fun found in this post, except it would be happening every night instead of just being a one time event. You guys are so gullible!

Libertarians tend to be ugly because it’s an anti-majority philosophy. People who are attractive have an easy time going through life and derive far too many advantages from the status quo to ever question it. It’s only outsiders, who are usually ugly, who join up with fringe movements.

One thing I learned from this blog is how easy attractive woman have it. When I had a blog as my real self, no one linked to me, no one left any comments, it was as if the blog existed in a vacuum. But things were different for Libertarian Girl. Every day I’d check Technorati and discover new unsolicited links. It was like I had warped into an alternate universe where all the rules had changed. At the rate things were happening, this would have been an A-list blog in a few more months.

It’s funny how there have been some posts in the blogosphere saying that the political blogosphere was a boys club that discriminated against women, as evidenced by how few politics bloggers were women. Boy were they completely off the mark. It’s ten times easier for a woman’s blog to become popular.

This effect no doubt carries over into the real world. Whenever I see an attractive woman with a successful career, I’ll remember the experience of this blog and assume that she didn’t really get there on merit, just her looks.

Let us just take a moment to remember that I, in a very, very small contest, was voted sexiest female blogger – and I didn’t even show cleavage, write about sexual exploits, or something else equally silly. Oh, and that I am a member of several fringe movements. And, despite five years of this, I’m not A-list.

So what’s wrong with me? Oh yeah, the f-word again. Shit!

And this observation was made by a thirty-plus-year-old living in his parents’ basement. A good catch, that one.

via Ilyka Damen

AMWU promotes menstrual leave

Flute here, not Lauren. The Australian Manufacturing Workers Union has put a claim in for 12 days menstrual leave for those women who suffer from chronic problems during their menstrual cycle.

“It’s a tough, hot dangerous job and we believe that this is a sensible claim that’s good for the company because it will improve productivity, it will improve quality and it will improve health and safety.”

So far the talkback on ABC radio this morning is very split even amongst women.

“I work in a male environment and this is the last thing I need”

Another woman said that she used to suffer extreme pain and terrible symptoms and this would have been very good to have had while she was working.
I expect that this will be beat up into a larger issue as usual. The union is not talking about this kind of leave for all women, only those with a medical history. Is this a good thing? Does it add further hurdles for women in the workplace? Is that really a justification for not bringing the idea to the table? Or is it a male idea designed to muddy the waters of women’s issues?

Feminist Books

One of the Other Laurens is looking for feminist books to use for an extra credit project in a women’s studies class. I figured I’d move this question to the top because there are plenty to be recommended.

Excluding uber-academic books, the feminist canon, and feminist fiction, these are from the bookshelf immediately behind me:
• Susan Faludi’s “Backlash” as well as her book about American men, “Stiffed”
• “Body Outlaws,” essays edited by Ophira Edut
• “Pink Think” by Lynn Peril
• Nancy Tuana’s “The Less Noble Sex”
• “Who Cooked the Last Supper?: Women’s History of the World” by Rosalind Miles
• Laura Kaplan’s “The Story of Jane: The Legendary Underground Feminist Abortion Service”
• “SchoolGirls: Young Women, Self-Esteem, and the Confidence Gap” by Peggy Orenstein

Some of these are somewhat outdated but still theoretically relevant or ripe for contemporary criticism.

Many more titles that I can recommend are available if interested, especially if academic or fictional texts are allowed. Any reader suggestions?

Feminism: What It Isn’t

I’m reposting a link to this old entry of mine because I find the anti-feminist attacks at Hugo’s blog so tiresome.

An excerpt:

Frankly, I do know a few “hairy-legged dykes with a vendetta against men” and quite like them, but just as there are stereotypical members of any group, there are many of us that break the mold. Just as I cringe to see women (for example) denied of their individuality, I cringe to see men (corresponding example) denied the same. What the majority of third wave feminists hope to attain is an ideological meeting ground for all genders and both sexes to meet upon, to create greater understanding and compassion for myriad issues, from media representations to court decisions, to corporate measures and standards, and so forth.

Feminists do not want undeserved rights handed to women on a plate. We want equal access to opportunity. This access is affected by so much I think the theories surrounding it deserve more than a black and white take, when we all know that individual experiences are made in shades of gray.

Feminism, generically, purports to see the world through a gender lens. That’s it. And just as most people do when they feel the world is unjust in a particular way, they hope to change the injustice and may act to do so. The other views and layers come in as we begin to see how race, class, religion, upbringing, and geographical location affect how gender is formed over time.

Sounds very threatening.

Feminism, as has been said recently, is not a zero- sum game. A success of feminist movement does not mean that men’s rights are diminished. To believe so assumes that there is a Civil Rights pie and we’re arguing over a limited share.

The moral aggrandizing over the women’s movement’s lack of attention to men’s rights is ridiculous. For decades feminists have not only been explicitly providing examples how the majority of men benefit from the removal of traditional binding gender roles, but I’m afraid that it isn’t up to women to define men’s lives for them.

Isn’t that why the MRM is upset in the first place?

The problem with the blaming and shaming is that feminists are so often accused of man-hating for advocating women’s rights rather than actually hating men. In my experience, there are far more vocal anti-feminists who openly admit their bitterness and malevolence toward women than vice versa. In addition, as Echidne said elsewhere, it seems as though many anti-feminists would hate women whether feminism existed or not.

We are only an easy target for their ire.

Opinions sought from non-trolls

Flute here, not Lauren. I’ve just been speaking at length with my local MP about his position on abortion as it was reported that he is against government funding for it. He said that although he is personally against abortion, he is against any cuts or changes to the system and supports the right to choose. He is for the gathering of more information on the reasons why women chose abortion and tackling those, such as poor financial situation etc. Any comments?

Mother’s time: diary study

I don’t usually do this (Flute here, not Lauren) blogging at the weekend lark, but an interesting study on how parents spend their time was highlighted in one of the weekend newspapers. Here is the newspaper story, and here is the full report. Interesting points include:

Working mothers spend as much “active” time with their children as stay at home mothers.
Whether the mothers work or not, the fathers generally spend less time on household work and looking after the children.

A very interesting read