Medicaid Family Planning State Option FAIL

Yesterday, Obama caved to Republicans and facilitated the removal of family planning from the stimulus package. I find myself thinking about many scenes from The West Wing (again):



"This is about getting votes from white men."

I wish Amy Gardner was a real person. (I know we have women like her out there...I'm just feeling mopey right now.)

Planned Parenthood lays it out better than I ever could:

The Medicaid Family Planning State Option is a simple way to make health care affordable for millions of Americans. It would do two important things:

1. It would allow millions of women to obtain basic health care. It would extend safety-net health care coverage for millions of people, including many who are losing their jobs and health insurance in the economic downturn. Studies estimate that 2.3 million low-income women would receive coverage under this provision by 2014, and 500,000 women would be able to avoid unintended pregnancies.

2. In these difficult times, this provision would save states money. State budgets are being squeezed by the economic downturn, just as millions are losing their jobs and health insurance. The Medicaid Family Planning State Option not only would help states extend their coverage, it would generate savings for states and the federal government by expanding access to preventive care.

Please, take two minutes now to help us raise a public outcry.

Call the White House (202-456-1111). Let them know that during this tough economic time, expanding access to basic health care is more important than ever for women and families.

For more details, click here.

Conundrum of the day: Shin Saim-dang's picture on a South Korean bank note

According to the LA Times, the decision to put Shin Saim-dang's picture on the 50,000-won bill is controversial, both because she's a woman and because she is known as the "wise mother."

So...basically...no one is happy. A convenience store worker doesn't want "a woman's face on [his] money." A university student hopes "people don't think she represents women in this culture. She doesn't."

From the LA Times article:

While some applauded the move as an equal rights gesture in a country where men control nearly every facet of society, others say choosing Shin reinforces sexist stereotypes about women's roles.

Known as Eojin Eomeoni, or "wise mother," Shin for 500 years has been a model of both excellent mothering skills and filial piety, according to Bank of Korea officials.

Shin was the mother of seven children, including Yi I, a famous Confucian scholar whose image adorns the nation's 5,000-won note.

The officials point out that Shin was a respected female figure in Korea's Joseon Dynasty, which ruled from 1392 to 1910.

Shin's success in fulfilling her duties as a mother, wife and daughter while succeeding as an artist has brought her great respect in modern-day South Korea, the proponents add.

I don't know enough to have an opinion on this one (hence the heavy quotage), but I thought it was an interesting story. Any thoughts from people with more knowledge on the subject?

The Bright Side: Iceland appoints openly gay, lefty woman as PM

Yay, Iceland! It's only a matter of a bajillion years before a former flight attendant-turned socialist lesbian becomes president in the US. That's right...I think Iceland's a bajillion years ahead of us on that front.

Of course, Johanna Sigurdardottir will only be PM until the general elections in May (the former PM stepped down because he so royally screwed up the economy...or because he was sick...right...that's it). And she's got an economic disaster on her hands...

But still...this is awesome.

RIP "Feminist"?

I'm tired of writing about Palin. Really, I am. But she did pose an interesting quandary for those of us who call ourselves feminists. Because...you know...SHE called herself a feminist.

A Feminist for Life.

That's a feminist who doesn't believe women should have a choice about what they do with their own bodies. A feminist who believes equal rights is being "one of the boys."

For a long time, I've believed that anyone who identifies as a feminist IS a feminist. Who am I to say they're not a "real" feminist? And then Palin came on the scene.

I don't think she would've kept the feminist thing going if it hadn't come out that she was a member of Feminists for Life. But it did, and she took it and ran with it. Smart.

Still, I don't think, as this article suggests, that she killed the word itself by "eliminating the taboo."

I don't want people to be scared of the word. I want everyone who truly believes in equal rights to be able to proudly say that they're a feminist. We don't need a taboo to keep us going. We need people on our side.

And that's what bugs me about Palin. I don't think she's on our side. Obviously, feminism means something entirely different to her. She can call herself a feminist, but a politician who believes "that women certainly today have every opportunity that a man has to succeed, and to try to do it all, anyway" is not someone who is fighting for women's rights. It seems like she just wants to maintain the status quo. And that's not enough.

But the KKK didn't kill the word "Christian" and Palin didn't kill the word "feminist." She can call herself whatever she wants, but she doesn't represent feminism. She doesn't speak for us. And terrorists who call themselves Muslims don't speak for Muslims everywhere.

I'm not, in any way saying Palin is comparable to a terrorist or a member of the KKK, I just think people can use words to describe themselves without changing the definition for everyone.

I don't think Conservative Christians are anywhere near co-opting the word. I think it's still scary, just not AS scary. And that's a pretty good place to be.

Michelle Obama is not ready to call herself a feminist (she "doesn't like labels"). And I think that proves the point. People are still afraid of the word. I would love for that fear to end, but it hasn't.

It isn't time to read the "feminist" obituary, but when that time comes, it will be because it's second nature to believe that men and women should be on equal footing. (That's why we don't call people man-ists.) The death of "feminist" won't come from some female good ole boy, it will come from hard work and revolution. When everyone's a feminist...THEN it will be time to retire the word.

Ding, dong the global gag rule is DEAD!

Some were pissed that Obama didn't lift the global gag rule (which denies funding to any NGO that gives abortions or abortion counseling) yesterday, on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Instead, he did it today. Yesterday, he said the issue was too emotional to make the decision on such a symbolic day. So...one day makes such a difference? I think he just wanted to stand out from the crowd (both Clinton and Bush addressed the rule on January 22nd).

Plus, there's this:

His choice to lift the gag today rather than yesterday, the anniversary of Roe v. Wade decision and the date that both Clinton and Bush made their announcements, is being read as a sign of respect toward antiabortion activists, who staged a large march in D.C. yesterday. That may be true, but it's also true that by making more pro-choice news today, after issuing a very strong statement in support of Roe yesterday, Obama is ensuring that his lift of the gag rule -- which really does change the landscape for international health and family services -- can stand as its own news story, rather than just getting mashed in with the rest of the January 22 "abortion day" news.

You know what? I don't care why he did it today. I'm just ecstatic that he did it. More access and funding for contraceptives, counseling, and education means fewer unintended pregnancies and fewer abortions. And that's what we all want...right? RIGHT?

Soft, Squishy White House Girlz

Ty, Inc., of Beanie Babies fame, released a set of dolls before the inauguration. COINCIDENTALLY, the dolls are two girls with dark skin and dark hair. Also COINCIDENTALLY, their names are "Sweet Sasha" and "Marvelous Malia." Not coincidentally, Michelle Obama is pissed.

The toymaker says they were "inspired by" the Obama girls, but that they chose the names because they are "beautiful." These dolls are not supposed to be exact replicas of the girls.
It's true. I don't think Sasha and Malia have hearts attached to their wrists. And the girls aren't as busty as these dolls since, you know, they're 7 and 10 years old. But this is far from a coincidence. Hey, at least they're not china dolls. Cause...well...plush dolls are pretty tough. Even if they DO have boobs.

Let the exploitation of two little girls begin!

Feminist Freak Out: Ms. Magazine's Obama Super-feminist cover

The stage is set. Tomorrow, Obama will be our President. It's historical and wonderful, and I'm still feeling the chills from that performance of "This Land is Your Land." For the first time in my life, I feel like that song might be true very soon.



So Ms. Magazine decided to get in on the action with a "special Inaugural issue." The cover of the issue has caused a lot of femi-freak. Here it is:



Some feminists are upset at what they feel is a misguided image of feminism. Right. Who wants the President on our side? We want people fighting for our rights, just not the man who beat what this article calls the "real live" Wonder Woman candidate (Hillary Clinton). We're bitter, we're hurt, and we'd rather just sit in our meetings and complain.

And I'm saying, no. That's not what we're about. Feminists are PEOPLE who believe in women's rights. And while I don't think he's a God or a superhero, we want him fighting for us. While The Super-Feminist would make for a boring comic book, it's great in real life. Sure, we haven't broken the presidential glass ceiling, but all women are not feminists (Palin, anyone?). Yeah, yeah...so we don't need men to rescue us. But if that man is President, we need him on our side.

To the Second Wave Feminists who are still bitter about Clinton, who still think of feminism as an exclusive club, I say: Get over it. Wait till he screws something up, then complain. But maybe this time, he'll actually listen to us.

Gawker thinks Palin had a little help

Ugh. Just came across this article over on Gawker.

It asks the deep question: "Where is Sarah Palin in her cycle right now?"

I'll wait for that to sink in.

I know Gawker doesn't pretend to be the highest-brow website, but holy shit. They're actually suggesting that men were more charmed by a woman ON TV because she's ovulating.

Yes, there have been studies (Gawker uses a stripper study, natch) that show fertile women attract men more than those at a different stage in their cycle. But through a television?

Bringing up Palin's period is just a cute way of undermining her as a potential leader. And yes, those last two words make me gag, but not because she's a woman...it's because I'm smarter than she is.

And I'm not that smart.

But tying her charm to her fertility? That's just low...even if it's a joke. A woman's cycle is simply no one else's business. This ridiculous speculation is just a nice reminder of the many stupid reasons people have given in the past for denying a woman a position of power. Namely, PMS.

Palin did exactly what she needed to do last night. I didn't buy any of her bullshit, but a lot of people did. She can spin, volley, dodge like a pro. She's got great memorization skills. And yes...she's fucking charming. She defied everyone's expectations last night and it had absolutely nothing to do with her eggs.

Free Sarah Palin

Campbell Brown goes off on the McCain campaign. I'm assuming the sexism talk is tongue in cheek.

Campbell Brown is a force

My husband saw this interview while I was on the phone. I was wondering why he was cheering so much...



I watch CNN here and there, and lately, Campbell Brown has been catching my eye. She's really good at her job.

On the Media (NPR) had a great segment this week about the media reaction to Palin. The meat starts about 1 minute in:



I'm not sure what the RNC had on their schedule each night as far as issues go, but the only thing I heard was "the media sucks...and so does Barack Obama." Oh, and "we rock" was another strong theme.

Yes, I know that's what conventions are all about - yay us, boo them. But this garbage about the media is tired. Whenever I hear "East Coast liberal media," I want to scream.

Sarah Palin and the media

Great suggestion, Andy. As you can imagine, I have a lot to say about the media.

While Jon Stewart did a great segment on the pundit turn-around for Palin, he didn't address the sexist coverage of Palin.

I just read an article in Bitch Magazine about the sexist analysis of women's voices. This one was centered on Hillary's coverage. And yes, some of the media definitely hit sexist territory during that race. And some of it revolved around her "naggy" voice. But I don't see the vocal mentions as sexist in and of themselves. Obviously I don't, because I mentioned Palin's shaky, accented voice myself.

We evaluate all of our politicians, celebrities, friends on many levels. It doesn't matter if they're a man or a woman, an especially high-pitched voice, a comical laugh, a snort - we notice these things and we comment on them. John McCain's voice is whiny as well. He sounds a bit like Kermit. Am I being sexist?

People have said that Obama is hot. When they say that about Palin, that's not sexist, it's just another method we have of evaluating people. It's unfortunate, but it comes down on both sides.

I can't disagree more with the people who think Palin isn't fit to serve because of her 5 kids. While there are sexist undertones to that point, John Edwards went through the same thing when his wife was ill with cancer and there were 2 little kids in the picture. Of course, it's definitely troubling that his wife had to have a terminal illness before the man was questioned. The sad thing is that I've heard mostly women make the priority argument. My mother even said she seemed like "an opportunist" and that she was "too ambitious." What politician isn't ambitious? What politician doesn't have an ego? If they think they can hold the highest (or second-highest) office in the country, they BETTER have an ego.

As far as the Bristol Palin coverage goes, I feel terribly sorry for the young, pregnant woman. I wonder if she was consulted at all before Palin accepted. They had to know it would get out. It's unfortunate that politicians' families get dragged into the public eye when their mother/husband/wife/father campaign. But the politicians open the floor when they make speeches and talk about their families accomplishments. Democrats and Republicans are free to use their families however they see fit, but the media is not allowed to respond? I don't think either side should bring the families in to it.

Palin's inexperience is getting the same amount of discussion as Obama's. It's just coming from the other side of the aisle.

She did exactly what she had to do at the RNC, but I don't think it changed anyone's mind (for or against). She's playing the folksy card, and she's playing it well. We'll just have to see how many Christian Conservatives are left in the world. If they still outnumber other voters, McCain/Palin will win.

Okay, that just makes me want to cry.

As Gloria Steinem said, "Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It's about making life more fair for women everywhere."

The Daily Show Rocks My World

What's wrong with McCain's Palin choice

1. It undercuts his "no experience" argument against Obama.

2. Liberal and conservative mothers (ex. my mother) will have a problem with a woman with 5 kids (including a 5 month old baby with Down Syndrome who she's still nursing) heading into 2nd-in-line situation with a 72-year-old man. In other words, soccer moms aren't quite sure about this "hockey mom."

3. Sure, he gets evangelicals on board, but people who (for some reason) thought McCain was winking when he said he'd be "a pro-life president" are not so sure it's a joke anymore. He's losing the center.

4. As Kim Gandy said, "Not every woman supports women's rights." Palin belongs to Feminists for Life, an organization that believes "women deserve better than abortion." She believes abortions should be illegal, even for rape and incest victims. She also tried to hire a guy who had been reprimanded for sexual harassment. McCain's choice is offensive to many feminists and Hillary supporters who were actually thinking of giving their vote to McCain (as NUTS as that is).

5. Completely surface and cosmetic: her voice is grating. If she keeps speaking like that, she's going to lose her voice fast. I know it's silly, but that stuff gets to me, whether it's a man OR a woman speaking.

Yes, it's great that there's a woman on one of the tickets, it's just the completely WRONG woman. She just rounds out the McCain ticket and makes the choice easier for centrists everywhere.

Sure, McCain stole Obama's news cycle yesterday, but that's because the media was picking Palin apart. Biden has plenty to pick at, but it's already been done. This woman hasn't been vetted on a national scale yet...and the media only has 2 months to do it. In my opinion? This thing is going to crash and burn.

Domestic Abuse

I posted this at MobLogic, but it seemed appropriate...

Alright, so we all know there's no way Hillary Clinton is going to win the popular vote. So why the hell is she still in the race?

Well, it's because she's an American...no, it's because she's a woman. That's it. As Clinton said (quoting Eleanor Roosevelt, who said): "A woman is like a tea bag. You never know how strong she is until she is in hot water."

Okay, this is actually a good tactic: focus on the female part of the candidate and remind people of the fight to break the glass ceiling. Some people may buy it. And some people might think Clinton is perpetuating the stereotype that women are bad at math.

The numbers...the REAL numbers...don't add up to a Clinton nomination. She's not fighting for equal rights or tea bags everywhere, she's fighting for herself. This is a contest. No one likes the wrestler who keeps fighting after he's pinned.

But in her mind, she's not pinned. She's got Florida and Michigan propping her up. Of course, way back when, Clinton agreed not to campaign in either state and she didn't fight the decision to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates. And if you factor in the fact that Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan...those two states aren't much to pile your hope on.

The Kentucky and Oregon primaries on May 20th will likely push Obama over the 2025 delegate mark. In the DNC's eyes, he would be the nominee. But Clinton is fighting for her two favorite states, which have been left out of that total number. In Clinton's world, the number looks more like 2209.

So maybe May 31st will spell the end for Clinton. That's when the Democratic Party's rules committee hears challenges to it's delegate strip-fest.

And if she hangs on after that, she should leave after June 3, when the primaries are over. If Clinton really respects the American people, thinks our voices matter, she'll drop out then.

But who knows if she will? Something sure has to change. She's loaned her campaign $11 million and Obama's acting like he's already the nominee (by visiting Clinton's best friends, Florida and Michigan, no less). She's redefining the word "win" and he's giving rational explanations for his decisions and actions.

Maybe if she plays up the hard fight, sisterhood, sexism thing, she'll gain some ground. But right now, she's just giving powerful women everywhere a bad name.

"Rape" is a bad word

Well, for the courts at least. Last June, I wrote about a woman who refused to abide by the rules the judge set forth in her trial. The rule she broke? She used the word "rape" in her rape trial.

Sure, it's a powerful word. The judge thought it was too powerful, and that it would sway the jury. So a woman who had been raped was supposed to call this pivotal moment in her life "intercourse" or "sex."

The trial ended in a hung jury (maybe they were confused by all the euphemisms) and Terry Bowen, the woman who is fighting for her right to say "rape," sued. This is what the appeals court had to say (via Feministing):

The lawsuit argued that Lancaster County District Judge Jeffre Cheuvront violated Tory Bowen's constitutional rights in barring her from using certain words during her testimony in the trial, in which she said Pamir Safi sexually assaulted her.

While Cheuvront barred Bowen from using phrases and words like "rape kit" and "victim" in her testimony, he allowed Safi's attorneys to use words such as "sex" and "intercourse" when describing the encounter between Safi and Bowen.

Oh good. So now he'll ban the words "murder" and "robbery" from the courts, right? We wouldn't want to confuse the jury. What about "knife" is that safe to say? How about "he forced me to have sex"? Is that more appropriate?

Language is powerful (as we've seen demonstrated by the Bush years) and this Nebraska judge is abusing this power. This appeals court decision makes me want to scream.

Rape needs to be shoved into people's faces. It's a fact of life that we conveniently ignore. It's a symptom of a much larger problem: men (and sometimes women) in society who feel the need to demonstrate their power. Maybe that's why Jennifer Baumgardner is selling this t-shirt:The only way to start fixing the problem is by talking about it. If we can't even do that in a courtroom, where the hell are we?

This is What a Feminist Commericial Looks Like

Yes, it's a commercial, but how many feminist commercials are out there today? I only wish it was on TV. There are so many people out there with the wrong idea about what feminism is today. You are a feminist as long as you believe in equality for everyone.

I like this commercial, even if it is a little cheesy. It makes me feel all warm inside.

Lindsay Campbell vs. Silda Wall Spitzer

I commented on the site. Here's a little taste. Go check it out on the site. The discussion's getting REALLY heated.

Lindsay and I debate:

Amanda

A couple beefs with your argument:

1. If she hadn't shown up, if she'd been out at under-funded schools, Slida Wall Spitzer would've been attacked, just like she's being attacked now. This is a lose/lose situation for her. Just imagine: "What a bitch! She can't even support her husband as he apologizes to her!" Here's the headline: "Slida Wall Shuns Disgraced Husband." This is all about his career. If he resigns, she can't do all the good it seems she's trying to do. At least not as easily. (She's trying to convince him not to resign - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336688,00.html)
2. What would a visit to under-funded schools do? She'd get press, but for all the wrong reasons.
3. If this was a woman politician and it was her husband standing up there with her, he'd be considered a sensitive, forgiving man. This is how the game is played. It's a silent show of support when someone fucks up.
4. The "downcast eyes" - it looks to me like she was reading his speech along with him. Maybe she helped him write it.
5. In this case, as in the other cases you mentioned, the personal has become political. Slida Wall Spitzer made a personal choice to stand up next to her husband. The implications of her NOT standing up there would've been just as bad.

I like your rage and the discussion it starts, but I'm not going to judge Slida Wall Spitzer for a careful choice she made. Yes, it would've been cool if she had made another choice. Interesting, at the very least. But imagine how many people would've been calling her a bitch if she'd made that other choice. She may have taken the easy, expected way out, but she chose to keep her battle personal by not making any public waves. I can't blame her for that.

lindsaycampbell


"She may have taken the easy, expected way out, but she chose to keep her battle personal by not making any public waves. I can't blame her for that."

Yeah, Amanda, this is the exact part that I find so distressing. If there's no way to keep it personal, then the choice you make can't truly be your own anyway. You have to think about the headlines. And your job and your husbands job. Where is the humanity is all that?

I disagree that the same pressure would be on the husband of a powerful female politician. We've yet to test that out but I think the standard would change.

Amanda

There is no humanity. But it's not Silda Wall Spitzer's fault. It's politics. Games, deception, hypocrisy, it's all in there. Silda Wall Spitzer was essentially doing her job. She could've quit, yes, but she didn't want to. That's her choice.

It's hard to know if a husband would get as much pressure to stand up, but in a world where the positions in this situation were flipped, and Eliot stood next to his wife Silda, I think the reaction would be very different.

MobLogical

This is a little off topic, but the new show I'm blogging for, Moblogic, was born today. The team did an amazing job getting everything together. And Sean Tice blew my mind with his web design. As always, Lindsay is stunning, brilliant, and awesome. (Couldn't think of any more vague adjectives, but she knows I love her.)

Here's a little taste.

Clinton Carnage

Does anyone else think the Clinton’s have adopted a “look over here!” method of campaigning?

Yes, some of it can just be chalked up to dirty campaigning, but just before the last debate, the Clinton camp pulled the whole plagiarism thing.

And now, they’ve come out with this picture of Obama.

As the article I linked to says, Obama wore the clothes after he was presented with them by people from his father’s hometown. Sure, that hometown is Kenya, and the “people” were tribal elders, so the fuck what?

How many times have politicians wore things presented to them for diplomatic and friendly reasons? Plus, yes, this is a part of his heritage.

It’s ridiculous that Clinton (I’m assuming it’s Clinton despite her camp’s denial) is using this to spread the fear that Obama’s a muslim. Playing on the American people’s ignorance and fear is not the way to get me to vote for someone.

But on to my point: does anyone think Clinton’s using this shit to derail the debates? She definitely used the pagiarism in the last one, and I’m sure this picture shit will come up in tonight’s debate.

Why, oh why, can’t debates be about issues. Yes, people vote on character, but personality comes through as they talk about policy. And THAT is Clinton’s problem. That’s why she needs dirty campaigning to win her presidency.

She’s not the first, (anyone remember McCain’s black baby?) and she’s certainly not the last, but damn if this doesn’t just give me more reason to root for Obama.

Not So Fast, Clinton

Jessica at Feministing is right. This is the funniest thing I've read all day.

In an article from The Concord Monitor, Dick (wad) Marple pops a blood vessel over the fact that the 19th amendment does not explicitly say women can be president. That's why his article is called: "Legally, a woman can't be elected president"

It's fucking hilarious. Here's a taste:

Today's feminists believe the election process is an evolutionary process, legalized by common practice and that someday a woman will be president. They are convinced that since women have run for the office, the male-gendered presidential office has been neutered .

Not so. They will be challenged, and a Supreme Court ruling on the language will be necessary. At the very least a constitutional amendment to change the language will be required.

Better be scared, Clinton. Oh, and Obama, you better start looking at the 15th amendment. I don't see anything in there about black people holding office.

Oh well! Guess we'll have to have a Republican! Oops!