March 2008 – Page 3

While we’re worrying about Jeremiah Wright…

Perhaps we should be focusing on the fear-mongering and outright lying on behalf of anti-choicers. Amanda tackles the hypocrisy of Wright’s critics — the same people who attack him for repeating inaccurate messages about HIV/AIDS were the primary architects of Bush’s anti-science, deadly HIV/AIDS policies abroad.

And while Wright’s conspiracy theories about where HIV came from are a little whacked out, when you know the history of medical experimentation on people of color, you can understand his paranoia a little better. Heck, even today, people of color tend to receive medical care from lower-skilled professionals, and are more likely to be “teaching subjects” than white people.

None of that is to say that his statements about HIV are correct. But Wright is only Obama’s pastor, and he has never been invited to influence policy — unlike, say, Jerry Thacker, a man who called AIDS a “gay plague” and homosexuality a “death style” and was rewarded with a nomination from President Bush to serve on the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV and AIDS.

And the mainstream anti-choice movement spreads all kinds of lies about HIV/AIDS and other diseases — except they don’t keep it in the pulpit, they bring it into the classroom. A large anti-choice website — prolife.com — “warns” people about condoms, implying that HIV can penetrate microscopic holes in latex and flat-out stating that condoms fail to prevent HIV transmission 31% of the time. The site also says that “one out of every three teenage couples using condoms will become pregnant each year.” They further falsely claim that all STDs can be spread without exchanging body fluids:

STDs are frequently passed through “skin to skin” contact even when condoms are used. This can happen because the bacterial or viral germs that cause many serious STDs (such as human papillomavirus, chlamydia, herpes, and syphilis) do not infect just one place on your body. They may infect anywhere in the male or female genital areas.

So, even if the virus or bacteria isn’t passed through tears or holes in the condom itself, you can still get diseases because condoms don’t cover or protect all areas of the genital region. That means condoms don’t prevent many of the STD infections that take place during sexual contact.

This is what young people are learning from “pro-life” groups. And anti-choice groups are being well-funded by federal abstinence-only dollars to teach this kind of BS in the public school classroom.

But, yes, let’s be upset that Rev. Wright made a ridiculous statement about the origins of HIV to his church. After all, that will have absolutely no effect at all on what people do when it comes to HIV/AIDS prevention, but it’s a tasty news tidbit to bandy about in an effort to make Obama look like a run-of-the-mill crazy/paranoid/racially-divisive black man. Why would the mainstream media take a step back from the headline du jour and instead worry about the millions of people here and abroad who are being told that condoms don’t work to prevent HIV? That won’t have any negative public health consequences, right?

Feministe Feedback: Publishing Articles as a Feminist Man

This week’s question: Are there feminist journals who publish pieces by men?

Currently I’m dating a guy who is a pretty ardent feminist and has written a lot for campus newspapers. He is looking to shop some of his pieces around to different feminist online journals/publishing outlets. I feel absolutely terrible because every journal he’s sent his work to has denied him, stating they only allow works by women to be published, not men. He’s starting to feel like he’s being pushed out of the movement simply for being a man (which I highly doubt), and I have no idea how to boost his morale or help him out. Do you or anyone out there know of feminist online journals or publishing outlets that accept both male AND female authors? I appreciate anybody’s input!

Suggestions more than welcome.

What Hillary Can Teach Lady-Lawyers

This article makes me want to stab something. Registration is required, so I’ll excerpt most of it here. It’s one attorney’s take on what “woman lawyers” (am I the only one that hates when the word “woman” is used instead of “female” in these situations?) can learn from Hillary, and the moral of the story seems to be that Clinton should teach us to take our sexist knocks. The “lessons” Clinton has taught us:

Stereotypes are tough to shake, and they can help and hurt women lawyers. The rap on Clinton, almost from the beginning, was that she was too tough and played hardball — a not altogether undesirable attribute in a president. But then she had her misty moment in New Hampshire, and all of a sudden she’s back in the hunt.

In that case, being warm helped Clinton, but had warmth and likeability been the gist of her campaign, she would have been sunk. Obama has been able to be likeable from the get-go because, as a man, he doesn’t have to prove his toughness.

Women lawyers should follow suit. They don’t have to be likeable or warm or nurturing to get the job done. In fact, for most of them, that would work against them — and their clients’ — interests. But, when the timing’s right, a bit of femininity doesn’t hurt. In fact, it can work greatly to women lawyers’ advantage.

Poverty Has a Woman’s Face

But women are fighting back:

Women Thrive Worldwide has more info on the feminization of poverty. Women like Leticia and Betilde are doing the day-to-day work of surviving, and are helping other women in their communities do the same. But this is not an individual problem, and it shouldn’t be treated like one. World-wide poverty should be a priority for every government — but it should especially be on the radar screen in the richest country in the world.

Intern Auctions in Albany

This is disgusting:

Up until just a few years ago, lawmakers would go “window shopping” for interns at the start of every legislative session. In a practice that went on for decades, the interns would be corraled in a Capitol newsstand, and legislators would take their pick.

The hanky-panky even has its own lexicon: There’s the “Bear Mountain Compact,” which says that what goes on north of the state park just outside New York City stays there. Lobbyists, staffers and reporters who seek to enhance their influence by bedding powerful lawmakers are known as “big game hunters.” And the men who sleep with the women lawmakers are “boy toys.”

“Unfortunately, many of the people who seek public office are flawed people to begin with and the environment in Albany just tends to bring that out,” said Paul Clyne, former district attorney in Albany.

Clyne issued a scathing report in 2004 on the internship program at the Capitol, famously saying he would never let his daughter become an intern. The report led to reforms in the program, including an end to fraternization between lawmakers and interns outside the office.

“There was a lot of hitting on us and boundaries being crossed,” said one young woman lobbyist who was part of that scene for years.

An internship is not a cattle call. And as Digby points out, this is more than just offensive — it’s sex discrimination. And heads should roll.

[T]his truly is beyond the pale and should be a matter for investigation. If politicians who corralled a bunch of women into a newsstand to be chosen for jobs in legislators’ offices based on their sexual attractiveness to the disgusting pigs they were going to work for are still in office today, they should be exposed. That’s not consensual behavior, that’s sex discrimination. This practice apparently went on until 2004, and there’s no excuse for it.

I’m not surprised that extramarital sex goes on in political capitals, where people from far flung parts of the state or the nation are brought together, away from their normal social and private circumstances. It happens in show business too, for similar reasons — fame, power and fortune create a whole bunch of incentives that don’t necessarily exist in people’s everyday lives.

But this article indicates that lobbyists are selling their bodies for political consideration and that lawmakers used the intern pool (at least until recently) as their own private whorehouse. It’s institutional, not personal. That’s called corruption and discrimination and it’s not the same thing as consensual sex between two adults. This is more like some kind of sexual plantation.

“Embracing the gamut of human possibility and to defining for themselves what is normal.”

A pregnant trans man tells his story of discrimination, mockery, hope and family. It’s a short piece, but well worth a read.

The Unsexiest Woman Alive

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’d kill to be as “unsexy” as Sarah Jessica Parker.

I’d say fuck Maxim and their “hottest” lists, but this is actually a pretty useful illustration of how women can’t win when it comes to beauty contests, and how male rankings are used to beat us over the head. SJP is a talented actress and a successful businesswoman. She is, by most standards, a beautiful woman — she’s even played one on TV. And still, a stupid ratings game in a magazine has caused her “significant pain.”

That isn’t a sign of personal weakness on her part; it’s a recognition that “ugly” is one of the worst slurs you can throw at a woman (and especially one whose career largely depends on her being perceived as attractive). Maxim’s Unsexiest award also serves as a way of keeping other women in line — if even someone as famous and lovely as Sarah Jessica Parker isn’t sexy enough (because of her long face? her age? her refusal to stay in the role of the vapid pretty girl? her business sense? her stable personal life?), where does that leave the “real” women who date Maxim’s target audience?

And what does it say to the men who read Maxim, who are supposed to be chuckling at the idea of a successful woman taken down a peg because she’s not hot enough?

Maybe I’m reading too much into a stupid Maxim article — after all, it’s not exactly a magazine known for its intellectual articles or its evolved readership. But it’s this shit that sends the constant message to women that you aren’t good enough, and that where men rate you on the sexy scale is of utmost importance — or that it should even matter at all.

Tasty Blog Bits: Badass Coverage of International Feminisms edition

So I announced two weeks ago that Feministe is going to have a weekly feature highlighting a blog that we read and love, and of course I haven’t followed up on it beyond my initial linkage to Ms. Crip Chick. That all changes now, because I have a graphic. Check it:

Hot, right? So this is going to be a regular Wednesday feature (I’ve even marked it in my calendar). And the blog to be highlighted this week is Black Looks, an incredibly informative, often-updated site focusing on African and African Diaspora women. Sokari, the author of Black Looks, describes her site like this:

I started writing Black Looks back in June 2004 after a number of abandoned blog attempts under different names. At the time I only had a broad idea that I wanted to primarily focus on anything to do with African Women – a very broad term for a whole continent – and the African Diaspora that is socially, politically, racially, culturally, ethnically and sexually diverse. I also wanted to look at human rights, to challenge stereotypes and discuss issues such as gender, sexuality and racism and how these are constructed and manipulated by culture. These are areas that can make people feel uncomfortable because they reach to our core. They often reveal the hidden truths deep within ourselves. Talking about racism and ethnicity and sexuality can be threatening because they require people to consider the possibility that they may have racist or homophobic feelings and attitudes.

I have chosen to write about a range of issues that I have experienced directly or indirectly in my offline life such as gender violence, racism, sexuality, HIV/AIDS and cancer. I view the world as moving further and further to the right with American hegemony contaminating the global space. I wanted to write from a radical and progressive standpoint challenging not only the right but also the liberal community, the so capitalism with a friendly face which is an oxymoron to say the least.

She has tons of good stuff, and if Black Looks isn’t on your RSS feed, add it. In the past few days alone, she’s posted about sex workers from East Africa being denied entrance into a women’s conference in Uganda; class-based organizing in Britain turning racist; and a Cameroonian woman winning a lawsuit against the British government for her horrific treatment while seeking asylum.

Check out Sokari’s site. Next week we’ll highlight another must-read feminist blog, so stay tuned.

Kneecapping

Spot the problems here:

l just spoke with a Democratic Party official,* who asked for anonymity so as to speak candidly, who said we in the media are all missing the point of this Democratic fight.

The delegate math is difficult for Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, the official said. But it’s not a question of CAN she achieve it. Of course she can, the official said.

The question is — what will Clinton have to do in order to achieve it?

What will she have to do to Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, in order to eke out her improbable victory?

She will have to “break his back,” the official said. She will have to destroy Obama, make Obama completely unacceptable.

“Her securing the nomination is certainly possible – but it will require exercising the ‘Tonya Harding option.'” the official said. “Is that really what we Democrats want?”

The Tonya Harding Option — the first time I’ve heard it put that way.**

It implies that Clinton is so set on ensuring that Obama doesn’t get the nomination, not only is she willing to take extra-ruthless steps, but in the end neither she nor Obama will win the gold.

* When I first looked at this story this afternoon, it said that it was a “DNC official.” As in, the people overseeing the primary. Indeed, in the URL, you can see the DNC official reference. But at some point, it changed (though Jake Tapper didn’t correct the story, he just changed it without indicating the change. Bad practice there, Jake). Did Tapper get it wrong? Or did the DNC official ask that the reference be walked back so it looked like just some random party official rather than someone who is overseeing the very process under discussion?

But whether it’s a DNC official or a Party official [ETA: ** or an Obama official; apparently, Obama himself is the originator of the “Tonya Harding” formulation], there are many, many things wrong with this story.

This is What a Feminist Looks Like

In case you didn’t already love America Ferrara, Amy Brenneman, Larry David and Alison Janney enough:

via.