October 2008 – Page 4

When Self Defense Doesn’t Count

A 16-year-old girl has been sentenced to 2 to 2 1/2 years in a juvenile detention center for the manslaughter of a 49-year-old man. This sounds like nothing special until you start to look at the details:

Seated between her attorneys in juvenile court, the diminutive 16-year-old shook her head no Tuesday when asked if she had anything to say before being sentenced for her crime: manslaughter, for killing a 49-year-old man who’d hired her for sex.

The blonde teenager, her hair pulled into a tight ponytail, sat silently through the hourlong hearing, appearing distracted as she glanced around the courtroom. But her path to that point has been anything but quiet.

Tuesday’s proceeding in King County Juvenile Court culminated the girl’s lengthy trip through the legal system, a journey that spans at least three years and involved charges ranging from auto theft to assault to prostitution before prosecutors charged her in the death of Francisco “Noe” Pena last April. In what his ex-wife described as “just one mistake” in an otherwise good life, the recently divorced father of two picked the girl up at a supermarket in Burien and, after buying a bottle of vodka and Crown Royal, brought her back to his home for “a date.”

Though exactly what happened the evening of April 5 remains a mystery, court documents and the girl’s statements indicate that the two drank, then fought over whether she would be allowed to leave Pena’s house. He wouldn’t let her go until they’d had sex, the girl told police, so she stabbed him in the chest with a steak knife.

This story has not been widely reported, but every article I found describes the accusation against Pena as refusing to let the girl leave the house unless she had sex with him. But, you know, we have a phrase for that. Attempted rape. Since Pena’s accused actions involve keeping the girl prisoner in the house, that would also likely fall under the crime of kidnapping.

Of course, we don’t know for certain that Pena is guilty of kidnapping and attempted rape. What we do know is that he broke the law by supplying alcohol to a minor. If the 16-year-old girl was 15 in April when the incident occurred, hiring the girl for “sex” would also mean that he had intent to commit rape of a child in the third degree. If the girl was already 16 in April, his actions still fall under the intent to commit sexual misconduct with a minor in the second degree. Oh, and commercial sex abuse of a minor — a felony.

So let me be even more explicit: even if Pena is not guilty of kidnapping and attempting to rape her consistent with the definition of rape against an adult as opposed to a child, no one seems to deny that he had intent to sexually abuse her.

Be Bold: Wear Red on October 30, 2008

Via Document the Silence:

In October 2007 people all over the United States gathered physically and in spirit to speak out against violence against women of color. Some of us wore red all day and explained that we were reclaiming and reframing our bodies as a challenge to the widespread acceptance of violence against women of color. Some of us wrote powerful essays about why we were wearing red and posted them on the internet. Some of us gathered with bold and like-minded folks and took pictures, shared poetry and expressed solidarity.

This year, on the first anniversary of the Be Bold Be Red Campaign, we invite you to make your bold stance against the violence enacted on women and girls of color in our society visible. In D.C., Chicago, Durham, Atlanta and Detroit women of color will be gathering to renew our commitment to creating a world free from racialized and gendered violence, and this time, we’ll be using a new technology called CyberQuilting to connect all of these gatherings in real time. To learn more about CyberQuilting, which is a women of color led project to stitch movements together using new web technologies and old traditions of love and nurturing, visit www.cyberquilt.wordpress.com.

This letter is an invitation for you and yours to participate in a gathering in your city on Thursday, October 30th that will be webcast to similar gatherings in other cities. We are calling on you because we recognize and appreciate the work that you and the organizations you work with are doing everyday to make this a more loving and less violent world for women and girls in oppressed communities. Please join us on October 30th so that other warriors in this struggle can be strengthened and affirmed by the energy of our collective ferocity!

If you are not located in D.C., Chicago, Durham, Atlanta and Detroit for the webcast, you can still participate by wearing Red on October 30, 2008 and send us your pictures to beboldbered@gmail.com

Also we are asking once again that people wear Red on October 30, 2008 and send us your pictures to beboldbered@gmail.com

As we receive them we will upload your pictures under “Red Pictures Today.”

Also, as well as to share your stories of Red on this website under “Why are you wearing Red on October 30, 2008.”

For more on the events in D.C., Chicago, Durham, Atlanta and Detroit, click over to the Document the Silence website.

Friday Random Ten

It’s Friday, so that means it’s time for the FRT. Set your MP3 player to shuffle and post yours in the comments. And if you want more great tunes tonight, come by the AuH2O show.

First, a song I’ve been obsessed with for weeks now and cannot stop playing on repeat on my way to work:

1. The Fugees – Ready or Not
2. Cat Power – Love & Communication
3. Kaiser Chiefs – Never Miss A Beat (Yuksek Remix)
4. Bob Dylan – One Of Us Must Know (Sooner or Later)
5. Miles Benjamin Anthony Robinson – Who’s Laughing?
6. Mark Lanegan – Driving Death Valley Blues
7. Tom Waits – Russian Dance
8. Neko Case – Fox Confessor Brings The Flood
9. Girl Talk – Overtime
10. Jets to Brazil – Conrad

And one more song I can’t get enough of:

Why Work and Politics Don’t Mix

SCENE: I am helping a client while a TV silently plays the local news in the background. Obama is slated to appear in Indianapolis today and the Indy newscasters are mouthing the pros and cons of an Obama presidency.

CLIENT: Who do you want to win this thing? Obama or McCain?

ME: (lying for the sake of workplace politeness) Oh, I don’t really pay attention to those things.

CLIENT: Oh, sure you do. You’re young, I’ll bet you’re going to vote for Obama.

ME: (avoiding)

CLIENT: C’mon.

ME: Well, actually I voted for Obama last week at the courthouse. (tries to change the subject) It took me longer to find a parking spot than to actually vote.

CLIENT: You know what? (lowers voice) I heard that Obama was born in Kenya. He’s not even an American citizen.

ME: Hm, well I’m pretty sure Obama was born in Hawaii. And actually McCain wasn’t born in the U.S., he was born in Panama.

CLIENT: No way, no way. Plus, I hear Obama is a socialist. And a Muslim. He’s the one that voted for all that bank bailout stuff.

ME: Well, um, kind of but not really. McCain voted for it, and Bush was the one that was really pushing it. Along with a lot of other people. Plus, Obama is a pretty dedicated Christian from what I hear.

CLIENT: Well, whatever. You know who you really shouldn’t vote for?

ME: (cringes) Who?

CLIENT: [Seated Indiana governor, privatization junkie, and GWB lackey] Mitch Daniels. If you want a job in the next five years, you’ll vote that asshole out.

ME: Consider it done. *

Surely I’m not the only one to have inane conversations about politics at work with customers or fellow employees that make you want to put your head through your desk. Share yours in the comments.

_________
* Daniels is competing for the governorship against Jill Long Thompson. Thompson has a good chance of winning the seat and would be the first female Indiana governor. She is a proponent of bringing more manufacturing jobs back into the state in addition to pushing vocational education, both of which are very important to the state’s economy.

An Honest McCain Campaign Slogan: Unequal Pay for Equal Work

James Surowiecki takes on equal pay in the New Yorker — and the article is well worth a read. He recounts the Ledbetter case, wherein Lily Ledbetter worked for Goodyear Tire for years, and in the mid-nineties received an anonymous note telling her that all the men at Goodyear were being paid more than she was, for doing the same work. The case went up to the Supreme Court, and the Court held that the statute of limitations on pay discrimination runs upon receipt of the first paycheck — meaning that you’d better figure out you’re being paid unequally within 180 days of being paid the first time, or you’re out of luck. But the Court did leave the door open for Congress to change the statute of limitations to make the window to sue more reasonable. Congress tried to do just that.

Republicans fillibustered until the bill was dead. John McCain also opposed the bill. In the last debate, McCain argued that the bill would have been a trial lawyer’s dream, because it would mean that they get to file more lawsuits. Well, yeah — that’s kind of the point. If people are being discriminated against, they deserve a fair amount of time to figure that out and take action. 180 days doesn’t cut it. What McCain and other Republicans did was intentionally set up roadblocks to curing pay discrimination.

In essence, they made it clear that they support unequal pay for equal work.

Does the Ledbetter bill matter? It’s true that active discrimination is rarer these days than it once was. But, contrary to what much economic work would predict, racial and sex discrimination is still a powerful force in the job market. Decades ago, the economist Gary Becker showed that “taste-based” discrimination (pure prejudice) could not survive in a truly competitive talent market, because unprejudiced companies would outperform prejudiced ones by hiring smart women and minorities. Yet the introduction of blind auditions at major symphony orchestras, starting in the seventies, has increased by fifty per cent the likelihood of female performers’ advancing—a clear sign that, for decades, orchestras had made bad talent decisions because of their prejudice without being punished. More striking, recent work by Kerwin Charles and Jonathan Guryan, of the University of Chicago, shows that, under certain reasonable conditions, market competition will not necessarily eradicate discrimination. That may be why, they suggest, the gap between black and white wages is widest in the most prejudiced parts of the U.S.—precisely what you’d expect if businessmen could discriminate and get away with it.

Of course, just because the market can’t prevent discrimination doesn’t mean the government should. And so there is a principled argument against the Ledbetter bill: namely, that Lilly Ledbetter was an adult; that if she didn’t think she was being paid fairly she was free to ask for more money or to leave; and that government interference with the idea of what constitutes fair pay is likely to cause more problems than it’s worth. Unlike the current opposition to the bill, this is an honest position to take. But it’s also, for good reasons, a profoundly unpopular one, which is why few Republicans have voiced it. Instead, opponents of the bill have acted like McCain, proclaiming their support for fair pay while doing their best to insure that workers have a hard time getting it. Maybe it’s time for them to give Americans some straight talk and unveil a new slogan: “Unequal pay for equal work.” It may not be catchy, but at least it’s honest.

Another thing to keep in mind when you go to the polls in two weeks.

Joe Biden and VAWA

The Obama campaign has released a new video about the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and Joe Biden’s vital role in ensuring the legislation was passed. It’s good stuff.

I can’t pretend to be the world’s biggest Joe Biden fan, but for all of his other flaws, this is something for which I feel he does deserve our respect. For more on Joe Biden’s commitment to the issue of violence against women, see this post by Erin at BlogHer.

David Sedaris on Undecided Voters:

“I look at these people and can’t quite believe that they exist. Are they professional actors? I wonder. Or are they simply laymen who want a lot of attention?

To put them in perspective, I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. “Can I interest you in the chicken?” she asks. “Or would you prefer the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?”

To be undecided in this election is to pause for a moment and then ask how the chicken is cooked.”

(read it all).

Palin is “Hardcore Pro-Life”

We already knew that, but what I find particularly irritating is how anti-choice activists use Palin’s son as “proof” of her beliefs — and how she buys into it.

Many politicians include their children in their campaigns — I don’t think that’s problematic. I don’t think it’s problematic at all for Palin to say that having a special-needs child has informed her view of what children like Trig need. In fact, I hope that’s actually true, and that she’ll work to create policies to meet the needs of other families who don’t have similar resources. I don’t think it’s problematic for her to say that her pro-life views informed her decision to carry her pregnancy to term. But something about the way she talks about it (and the way Focus on the Family’s James Dobson talks about it) rubs me the wrong way. For example:

Dobson: You may not recall it, but in April, before all of this happened, before you were selected by Senator McCain to be his running mate, I wrote to thank you for welcoming little Trig into this world, your little baby with Down Syndrome. And I just wanted to express to you what a powerful testimony that was to the sanctity of human life. And you wrote me a very gracious letter back and there are just so many parents out there who also admire you for your love and care for that precious child.

Palin: Well, I so appreciated your words and yeah, when we found out I was about thirteen weeks along when I found out that Trig would be born with Down Syndrome. To be honest with you, it scared me though and I knew that it would be a challenge and I had to really be on my knees the entire rest of the pregnancy asking that God would prepare my heart. And just the second that he was born it was absolute confirmation that that prayer was answered with all of us just falling so in love with him. And then this whole new world has been opened up to me since then. I’ve always had near and dear to my heart the mission of protecting the sanctity of life and being pro-life, a hardcore pro-lifer, but I think this opportunity for me to really be walking the walk and not just talking the talk. There’s purpose in this also for a greater good to be met. I feel so privileged and blessed to have been, I guess, chosen to have Trig enter our lives because I do want it to help us in our cause here in allowing America to be a more welcoming nation for all of our children.

He wrote to thank her for having a baby? I thought the appropriate card would have been found in the Congratulations section, but that’s just me.

Having a special-needs child is certainly difficult, and raising children generally isn’t an easy task. But no child should be treated like a showpiece on his parent’s pro-life mantle. And Dobson’s condescending way of talking about Trig, and about Palin’s decision to continue the pregnancy, smacks a little too much of treating him like a Very Special Little Handicapped Thing as opposed to a baby.

The fact is that Palin made the same choice — to give birth — several times before Trig. I’m pretty sure that no one sent her a “thank-you” card for her other children. And I’m pretty sure she doesn’t talk about her other kids serving as “opportunities” for her to demonstrate to everyone just how pro-life she is.

I’ll send Palin and Dobson thank-you cards — and call them “pro-life” without sarcasm or scare-quotes — when they actually start walking the talk and provide preventative services for women who don’t want to become pregnant, and offer a variety of options for pregnant women who want to give birth but may not think it’s possible (financial assistance, daycare, health care, etc). I’ll thank them when they promote policies that make the world a more welcoming place for disabled people — and no, forcing women to give birth against their will doesn’t count. Hell, I’ll stop calling Palin and Dobson raging fucking hypocrites when they do anything life-affirming at all, other than talk about how pro-life they are.

But then, of course, they’d be pro-choice.

Brokers With Their Hands on Their Faces

Just… what it says.

Obama is the way forward for women

However you feel about Catherine MacKinnon — I happen to like her even while I disagree with a lot of her legal goals — her Obama op/ed is awesome.

Women are at a crossroads in our struggle for legal equality as a means to social equality. Having women in politics matters, but it is crucial to have the policies women need. At this moment we risk losing ground gained, but we also have the opportunity to advance. At stake in this presidential election are the federal courts.

Despite inroads, women’s status remains characterized by sex-based poverty and impunity for sexual abuse from childhood on. The next president will appoint scores of lower court federal judges who will have the last word in most cases. One, perhaps three, justices may be named to a Supreme Court that in recent years has decided many cases of importance to women by just one vote. Equality can be promoted in employment, education, reproductive rights and in ending violence against women — or not.

The equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution is stalled. The fate of affirmative-action programs that have helped open doors for qualified women of all races may be vulnerable. The scope of Congress’s power to legislate — key to what a majority of Congress can accomplish for all our people — has become uncertain.

Existing laws essential for women’s economic survival have often been regressively interpreted. Women on average remain poorer than men, largely because of unequal pay. Recently, the Supreme Court held in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc. that plaintiffs must sue as of the first unequal paycheck, when they might not even know that their pay is unequal. Barack Obama supports restoring the rule, followed for decades, that allows suit for all the wage discrimination as of the last discriminatory paycheck. John McCain opposed this in the Senate.

We talk a lot of about the Supreme Court, but as MacKinnon points out, the lower courts are crucial too — and Bush strategically stacked the federal bench with right-wing judges. That’s going to pose long-term problems for our country’s legal system, and it’s going to be further exacerbated if another Republican gets into the White House. Women’s rights are in jeopardy across the board, and this election is a crucial one.

So check out MacKinnon’s op/ed, do what you can to help, and vote.