In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Mansplaining, this time with more lawyers

Here’s a great idea: Invite a bunch of lawyers to an annual meeting of the Bar association. At the meeting, have two panels devoted to female attorneys: One titled “What’s Our Problem?,” featuring lady-lawyers discussing “a changing legal market where competition is tougher and expectations are higher” for women who “are currently in or are looking to re-enter the legal field” (because we leave to have babies!), followed by a panel titled “Their Point of View: Tips From the Other Side,” where “A distinguished panel of gentlemen from the legal field will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of women in the areas of communication, negotiation, mediation, arbitration, organization, and women’s overall management of their legal work.”

Got that, ladies? We’ll start the day by asking “What’s Our Problem?” and discussing all the issues facing us and all the ways we’re sucking in our careers, and then a distinguished panel of gentlemen will tell us how we suck but where we’re also good, and then they’ll fix our problems. I was personally hoping they would also give us a talking-to about office-appropriate attire, but maybe next year.

Now, don’t get me wrong — I’m sure that both panels would have helpful information. I’m sure that the distinguished gentlemen on the second panel are indeed distinguished, and are probably very smart and nice people who do genuinely want to help female lawyers. And female lawyers do face specific challenges in our field. But the Bar association really framed this one poorly. And maybe we would face fewer challenges if it wasn’t always assumed that we’re the ones with the problem.

The Bar association has modified the panels in response to the uproar from female attorneys, because “Unfortunately, the important objectives of this panel have been overshadowed by issues raised as to the topic description and the composition of the panel.” The second, formerly all-male panel now features both men and women. But I still wonder when we can expect the New York State Bar Association to feature a panel of men asking, “What’s Our Problem?” and discussing all the ways that men as a whole could be better at their jobs — whether they’re currently in or looking to re-enter the field — followed by a panel of women explaining it all.

Remembering Dr. King

Martin Luther King, Jr. speaks in a church. He leans forward, eyes gleaming with intensity, a finger pointed with conviction out at his audience.

Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. — Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Today is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.

We still, I should hope it goes without saying on this particular blog, live in a world fueled by racism, white supremacy, and classism. With a lot of the reporting coming out of Haiti this past week alone, that much has been evident. We live in a world where Dr. King’s words are used and abused by those who like to tell us that race does not matter, and that we should all be “colorblind.” And we live still in a world where much of his work and activism — such as his anti-poverty and anti-war work — is ignored because it’s less simple to twist in a way that supports existing power structures, and where only the parts that make those with power and privilege feel good are typically remembered.

But it’s a much better world than it would have been, had it not been for Dr. King and the many, many other activists like him.

In the spirit of remembering that less publicized and less taught work, instead of posting I Have a Dream or I Have Been to the Mountaintop (two obviously phenomenal speeches), I’m posting the beginning of the less recognized speech Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence, a statement against war and about the interconnectedness of social justice struggles that still remains largely relevant, as well as moving and chilling.

The full text of Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence can be found here.

Also recommended are Jay Smooth’s video Ten OTHER Things Martin Luther King Said, and Renee’s post (already linked above) Dr. King: A Legacy Ignored.

Shake it, girl.

So I just saw this commercial during a Jersey Shore commercial break:

Um.

I don’t want to be Dirty Mind Girl, but are they serious?

Posted in Uncategorized

Virginia drivers: order your pro-choice plates today! (UPDATED)

If you live in Virginia and/or have your car registered there, Planned Parenthood needs your help. They’re working to get a pro-choice license plate approved by the state legislature, but in order to do so they need 350 pre-paid orders. You know you want one. Hell, I want one and I live in DC without a car.

Funds generated from the sale will go directly to Planned Parenthood clinics across Virginia and will be used to provide health services like annual gynecological exams, sexually transmitted infection testing, and follow-up care for under- or uninsured patients. Money won’t be used for abortion services, so if you have that one aunt who’s kinda on the fence, you can tell her that – this money will fund the sort of services that support women’s health while helping to lessen the need for abortion.

Visit the Planned Parenthood of Virginia website to see more and to order your pro-choice plates: http://www.ppav.org/keyissues/licenseplate.html

Update: The deadline for ordering your license plate has been moved up. All 350 pre-paid applications must be submitted by this Thursday, January 21, or the legislation will not move forward. So don’t delay!

In entertaining reads today…

This piece on Blago is pretty amazing. I have an odd fascination with Blagojevich, maybe because we share similar roots — we have Serbian-American families; he is the son of and I am the grandchild of immigrant steelworkers; he grew up in a small home in Chicago and my parents grew up in the same place the same way; etc etc. Blago even looks a little like my uncle on my mom’s side (who is incidentally Polish/ish and not Serbian at all).

So I’m interested in Blago, even though he’s a crook and seems to totally lack self-awareness or any sense of his own failings. Or maybe that’s why I’m interested in him — who knows what this guy is going to do or say next? But even if you are not, like your blogmisstress, a connoisseur of fine Blago-related articles, you will want to check this one out.

Friday Random Ten

You know the drill – put your MP3 on shuffle and post the first 10 songs that come up. Friday video:

1. Cat Power – He Turns Down
2. Arcade Fire – Haiti
3. Ting Tings – That’s Not My Name
4. The Avett Brothers – Swept Away
5. Santogold – You’ll Find a Way
6. Les Savy Fav – Reformat (Dramatic Reading)
7. Dirty on Purpose – Leaving
8. Passion Pit – Swimming in the Flood
9. Regina Spektor – 20 Years of Snow
10. Real Estate – Beach Comber

Wyclef Jean’s Yele Foundation.

The True Meaning of Christmas

Oh this made me laugh:

“Dear Amy,

While attending the 4 p.m. Christmas vigil mass at my church this year, I was shocked.

I look beyond the fact that no one dresses up for church and that talking across the pews seems to be a normal occurrence, but what happened this year is beyond me.

During the Holy Communion mediation song (with only 10 minutes left to the service) the women behind me started to breast-feed her baby.”

Pssh. Feeding your baby on the holiday that celebrates the birth of our savior! The nerve.

(Although the Washington Post does seem to be getting a lot of questions about breastfeeding lately, huh?)

I don’t want my tax dollars spent on…

The Center for Reproductive Rights has launched a much-needed attack on the Hyde Amendment — a long-standing law that disallows federal Medicaid dollars from paying for abortion. Hyde is back in the press lately after it was used as the starting point for the abortion “compromise” in the health care bill, which eventually snowballed into the Stupak amendment in the House. Hyde established the baseline rule that abortion should be segregated out from all other medical procedures and not funded with tax dollars, even though the whole thing with tax dollars is that we all pay for things we either don’t like or don’t use, but we also all reap the benefits of whichever social programs we do use, and things like shared roads and fire departments and schools. Hyde, though, is unusual legislation in that it identified a particular (and particularly common) medical procedure and said, “Even though we have this program that helps to pay for medical care for low-income people, we aren’t paying for this one procedure. Poor women can pay for it themselves.”

The impact has been devastating, and it hit women hard long before the latest incarnation of health care reform was on the political map. I used to volunteer for the Haven Coalition, which provided housing for low-income women coming to New York for abortions — before Haven, women were sleeping on subway benches and in parks because they couldn’t afford a place to stay (and I suspect that even with Haven’s volunteer network, many women still do spend their time in New York without shelter). Women come to New York to terminate pregnancies because we allow abortion later than many other nearby (and not-so-nearby) states; for low-income women who rely on Medicaid, affording an abortion means saving and scraping and pawning and borrowing and begging. It takes time. And as they work to get the money together, the pregnancy progresses. There is no single reason why women have second-trimester abortions, but a lot of the stories I’ve heard are some version of “I couldn’t afford it earlier.” Of course, as the pregnancy progresses abortion also gets more expensive. Some states (including New York) cover abortion with state Medicaid dollars, but most don’t. And the federal ban on coverage gives states cover to also refuse to use state funds to fully cover women’s health.

This history came to head when the Stupak Amendment was proposed, but it even set the state for the compromise proposed by Democrats. At no point was there a serious suggestion that the new health care package should cover abortion the same way it covers most other medical procedures. The assumption that abortion coverage was simply off the table is a direct result of the Hyde Amendment.

Thankfully, Hyde is now starting to come under fire. The Center for Reproductive Rights has put out the below video with bloggers and activists (including Jay Smooth, Aimee Thorne-Thompson, Melissa Harris Lacewell, Sarah Seltzer, Jesse Taylor, Amanda Marcotte, Heather Corrina, Allison Kilkenny, Jamie Kilstein, and yours truly) all discussing what we don’t want our tax dollars paying for. You can submit your own video here.

Transcript (thanks Chally!) below the fold.

Read More…Read More…