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

Month: April 2010

Prison Rape: Assault Shouldn’t Be a Part of the Sentence

This guest post is a part of the Feministe series on Sexual Assault Awareness Month. Liliana Segura is a senior editor at AlterNet.org and a board member of the Campaign to End the Death Penalty.

Trigger Warning

“I’ve been raped, physically beaten, extorted, pimped out/sold, intimidated, manipulated, threatened, humiliated, [and] harassed by both officers and inmates,” California prisoner Meagan Calvillo wrote a few years back, in a blunt summary of what happens every day in American prisons. Among transgender people behind bars, her story is not unusual; as Emily Alpert wrote in 2005, “outside of prison, transgender people are among the most marginalized in the United States; inside it, they confound a system that’s ill-prepared to serve them, or even to decide where to put them.”

Cavillo’s experience may sound extreme, but it mirrors that of the most vulnerable prison populations in the U.S. In 1994 in the case Farmer v. Brennan, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a prison official’s “deliberate indifference” to the risk that a trans woman prisoner named Dee Farmer would be raped when placed within the general population of a men’s federal prison violated her Eighth Amendment rights. Yet, “deliberate indifference” remains a good phrase to define the broader attitude towards prisoners who are raped behind bars; among them, transgender prisoners, gay prisoners, young prisoners, prisoners who are locked up for the first time, and prisoners who are mentally ill are often the most targeted for sexual assault by guards and other prisoners alike, their bodies treated as a commodity in the prison power economy. If survivors of sexual assault are routinely silenced in the outside world, those who are assaulted behind prison walls are even more invisible. They are also the least likely to receive sympathy or help from people on the outside.

“Survivors of sexual abuse behind bars experience the same emotional pain as other rape victims,” the staff at Just Detention Inc, the only organization in the country that is “dedicated exclusively” to eliminating sexual assault in prisons or jails, remind us. Yet the ugly reality — familiar to anyone who has ever seen depictions of prison on TV or in popular music, or heard the phrase “don’t drop the soap” — is that prison rape has long been ingrained in the cultural imagination as, at worst, a hilarious punchline about deserving convicts, at best, an indignity that simply comes with the territory.

Read More…Read More…

One of these things is not like the other

Sarah Palin. Michele Bachmann. …Nancy Pelosi?

They are all ladies in politics! Which makes them kind of like sorority sisters (if only I were making up that comparison):

In Minneapolis, Ms. Palin returned the favor, calling Ms. Bachmann “inspiring” and playing to the conservative, pro-Tea Party, largely female audience. Both women adopted a tone that any woman who has ever endured a sorority rush will recognize: aggressive, cheerful, empowered conformity, hostile to idiosyncrasy.

And yet, these G.O.P. B.F.F.’s share an extraordinary — you could even say idiosyncratic — trait with a woman who is not welcome in their club, the Democratic speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

What could it be?!

In reality, though, the three belong to what may be the smallest, most exclusive clique in American politics. The admission requirements are beyond most women, and all men: members must be prominent players in the United States political arena and must have given birth to not one, not two, not three, not even four — but five children, something that presumably gives them more in common than they might like to admit.

What does it say about this country at this moment that, of the small handful of women who have achieved highly visible political roles, three are matriarchs of such very large families? Could it be that the skills of managing sprawling households translate well into holding office? Or that such a remarkable glut of mom cred makes a woman’s bid for external power more palatable to voters? Or are they just related to more voters, which translates into a mysterious edge at the polls?

Whatever forces may be at play, taking a look at present dynamics, any American woman with long-range political ambitions might do well to also look to her nursery.

Needless to say, this was in the Style section and not the Politics section.

The article compares Palin and Bachmann to Romy and Michelle. It condescendingly calls them “GOP BFFs.” Now, to be fair, Palin and Bachmann are intellectual lightweights who do use kind of an “in-group” approach to getting new recruits, so the sorority girl commentary wouldn’t bother me as much on its own — it’s kind of up there with “George Bush is a frat boy” insults. But in the context of this article, which paints (for better or worse) three of the most powerful women in politics as airhead sorority sisters, and that ends with the suggestion that “any American woman with long-range political ambitions might do well to also look to her nursery“? I would say that any New York Times writer who covers politics might do well to look at the issues, and not be so condescending towards female politicians.

Clay and Harold: A Couple Forcibly Separated By Sonoma County

Recently making the rounds is a breathtakingly tragic story of an elderly gay couple that Sonoma County, California allegedly forcibly separated into different nursing homes, before possessing and selling off their property. It’s an incredibly upsetting story, so please be aware of that when making the decision to read further. From the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), which is helping Clay with his lawsuit:

Clay and his partner of 20 years, Harold, lived in California. Clay and Harold made diligent efforts to protect their legal rights, and had their legal paperwork in place—wills, powers of attorney, and medical directives, all naming each other. Harold was 88 years old and in frail medical condition, but still living at home with Clay, 77, who was in good health.

One evening, Harold fell down the front steps of their home and was taken to the hospital. Based on their medical directives alone, Clay should have been consulted in Harold’s care from the first moment. Tragically, county and health care workers instead refused to allow Clay to see Harold in the hospital. The county then ultimately went one step further by isolating the couple from each other, placing the men in separate nursing homes.

Ignoring Clay’s significant role in Harold’s life, the county continued to treat Harold like he had no family and went to court seeking the power to make financial decisions on his behalf. Outrageously, the county represented to the judge that Clay was merely Harold’s “roommate.” The court denied their efforts, but did grant the county limited access to one of Harold’s bank accounts to pay for his care.

What happened next is even more chilling: without authority, without determining the value of Clay and Harold’s possessions accumulated over the course of their 20 years together or making any effort to determine which items belonged to whom, the county took everything Harold and Clay owned and auctioned off all of their belongings. Adding further insult to grave injury, the county removed Clay from his home and confined him to a nursing home against his will. The county workers then terminated Clay and Harold’s lease and surrendered the home they had shared for many years to the landlord.

Three months after he was hospitalized, Harold died in the nursing home. Because of the county’s actions, Clay missed the final months he should have had with his partner of 20 years. Compounding this tragedy, Clay has literally nothing left of the home he had shared with Harold or the life he was living up until the day that Harold fell, because he has been unable to recover any of his property. The only memento Clay has is a photo album that Harold painstakingly put together for Clay during the last three months of his life.

This story instantly reminds me of one that I blogged about last year, regarding Janice Langbehn and Lisa Marie Pond. As Lisa died, her partner of 17 years, Janice, was not allowed to see her in the hospital. Neither were their three children. While the abuse of Clay and Harold extended well beyond visitation rights, this core part of the story is tragically not unheard of. There are certainly many other couples who had their rights similarly violated but did not make the news.

Last week, President Obama issued a directive requiring hospitals to allow visitation rights to patients’ same-sex partners, as well as to other designated visitors. This action was apparently inspired by Janice and Lisa’s story, and Janice’s persistent activism. Obama even called Janice and apologized to her for what she endured. It’s a noble and necessary action, and one that I certainly hope will be enforced effectively.

But it’s too late for Harold and Lisa to spend the end of their lives with their partners. It’s too late for Clay and Janice to say goodbye. It’s also too late for Clay to retain his property, or to get back the months of his life he lost while forcibly confined to a nursing home. And it didn’t have to happen. In a world that treated all people, all partnerships, all love as equal, and in a world that respected LGBT rights, and in Clay and Harold’s case elder rights, it wouldn’t have happened.

I’m at a loss for words, but s.e. smith has much more.

RIP Dorothy Height, Civil Rights Leader

Dorothy Heights, a civil rights and women’s rights activist, died this morning.

I first learned about her in college because of her role as president of the National Council of Negro Women, but after hearing of her death this morning, I’ve learned even more awesome things about her:

She was the only woman on the stage during the “I Have a Dream” speech, and she was there when JFK signed the Equal Pay Act; she worked alongside various Presidents and First Ladies, counseling them on civil rights and human rights issues; she focused on housing, food, education and other social issues during her tenure at NCNW and in working with the YWCA; she was inducted into the National Women’s Hall of Fame; and so forth.

Today, Obama called her the “godmother of the civil rights movement” and I couldn’t help but tear up when I heard that. Here’s hoping that we all remember the leaders of the past as we keep struggling for social justice.

FNTT: The Virgin/Whore edition

Unclear on what this whole FNTT thing is? Read here. Today we bring you trolls who illustrate one of my favorite anti-feminist paradoxes: Feminists are both anti-sex prudes and huge raging whores. Vote for your favorite below the fold.

Read More…Read More…

Bits and Pieces

Ramps are delicious, haters. So is cilantro, but I can’t really blame you for not liking it since that is apparently genetic. But I probably will have a hard time eating dinner with you.

Is it any secret that McDonalds is evil? No, it is not. But encouraging their shareholders to vote against requiring the company to use just 5% cage-free eggs seems unnecessary.

Double Down by the Numbers: Despite our horror at the KFC Double-Down (bacon and cheese sandwiched between two fried chicken “buns”), Nate Silver points out that a lot of fast food is even worse when you look at the calories, sodium and cholesterol. The fact that this kind of variety of processed, terrible-for-you food exists is… terrifying.

Terrorism That’s Personal.

Women in New Media: At the Top or in the Trenches?

Feminism in Photos: via Feministing, this project is pretty rad — a woman asked people to write down what they think about feminism and pose for a picture.

Celebrity Photos Untouched: What’s the motivation? The post is a good one, and I’ll add in that it’s part of the insidious idea that women must be beautiful, but musn’t try too hard to be beautiful (something Amanda writes about in more detail here). I’ll add, though, that even without retouching, female beauty is still very much culturally framed (and realistically situated) as an achievement rather than as a natural occurrence. And it’s a very class-based achievement. Because, yes, some women are born with kinds of maintream American beautiful features that Jessica Simpon and Britney Spears have. But even for those women, beauty takes work and it takes money — a lot of money. Not every woman needs a lot of money or needs to exert a lot of energy to have the kind of skin, teeth, hair and body that Jessica and Britney have; but I’m going to go out on a limb and say that most do. That kind of perfection requires some combination of dermitology, orthodontia, pricey beauty products, cosmetic surgery or more minor cosmetic alterations, professional hair cuts and hair removal, teeth whitening, personal training, and on and on. You can wipe off the make-up and curb the airbrushing, but that still doesn’t make the kind of beauty we fetishize completely “natural.” And that’s part of why we fetishize it — because of the perception that it’s both rare and potentially attainable, if you’re willing to spend enough and work hard enough.

Eesha Pandit is one of my favorite repro justice advocates, and she is awesome as usual on GritTV.

Inside surrogacy tourism in India.

Well this sounds safe.

Militia men will be carrying a bunch of guns into a public park a few miles from the Capitol and the White House today. Why? Because they can!

Almond plans to have his pistol loaded and openly carried, his rifle unloaded and slung to the rear, a bandoleer of magazines containing ammunition draped over his polo-shirted shoulder. The Atlanta area real estate agent organized the rally because he is upset about health-care reform, climate control, bank bailouts, drug laws and what he sees as President Obama’s insistence on and the Democratic Congress’s capitulation to a “totalitarian socialism” that tramples individual rights.

A member of several heretofore little-known groups, including Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership and Oath Keepers — former and active military and law enforcement officials who have vowed to resist laws they deem unconstitutional — Almond, 31, considers packing heat on the doorstep of the federal government within the mainstream of political speech.

I mean, ok. I kind of wonder what the political speech is saying if not “Just a reminder that I can kill you,” but ok. So why today?

April 19 is the anniversary of the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995 and the government’s final confrontation in 1993 with the Branch Davidian cult members in Waco, Tex. But Almond said he chose the date to honor the anniversary of the 1775 battles at Lexington and Concord that began the Revolutionary War, “and that is the only reason.”

Sure, buddy.

FNTT Season 6: the Femocrites edition

Feministe’s Next Top Troll background here, for the uninitated. Today, we have trolls who would like us Feminazis to know that we are totes hypcritical! Because life is really, really unfair to dudes. Vote for your favorite below the fold.

Read More…Read More…