Kanye West Blames Himself

Celeb rag Hollyscoop reports Kanye West blames himself for his mom's death after plastic surgery. He got famous, his mom quit her good job to manage his career, wanted plastic surgery, and he picked up the tab. She died a couple hours after the surgery from a "pre-existing coronary artery disease."

I don't think he should blame himself. Our society is in love with/addicted to plastic surgery. His mom didn't have to buckle under pressure to change her face, and he didn't have to foot the bill, but society is culpable too. Society says it's okay to put yourself at risk in order to fit its opinion of beauty. But it's NOT OKAY!!!

Maybe she would have died from this disease eventually. But I guess we'll never know. All because of this stupid scourge we've all decided to accept. No, not only accept. EXPECT.

Diane Keaton's Fucking Personality

She's awesome. I love her. Though it's a little weird that she thinks Diane Sawyer's lips would get her married. C'mon, lady! You don't need good lips or marriage! You're an awesome woman.

target: vagina

People are talking about this:
No one knows if Target intentionally placed the model's vagina right in the bull's eye, but, as most people are saying, it's hard to believe no one noticed.

It's hanging in Times Square.

Get Off My Back!

After all the hoopla about Gloria Steinem's NYT Op-Ed, I got to thinking.

Well, actually, it happened before that. I read her piece and couldn't deny this nagging feeling that Steinem was trying desperately to be relevant again. That's right, I said it.

I am grateful for everything the feminist movement did for women in America. Their minds had to be completely focused on getting women ahead in this country. They had to create opportunities that weren't there in the 60s. And, yes, we're still working to create those opportunities and more today. We're still fighting against sexism and misogyny. Women are stereotyped every day in movies, ads, and politics. But the fight is different now.

Hillary Clinton is just bringing it to the forefront.

The baby boomer generation can't understand why my generation doesn't want to vote for Clinton. The fact that she's a woman (I'm generalizing here) is enough for them. But it's not enough for us. They gave us what we needed to have a voice in politics, society, and culture. Of course, 1st-wave feminism had a lot to do with it too, but they're mostly dead. I wonder what they would think? I think they'd vote for Obama.

If 2nd-wave feminists are still stuck in the 2nd-wave, they're not exactly irrelevant. They're just not exactly in tune with my generation. And yes, that's fine. But stop trying to make us into you. I just wish they'd catch up and get into third-gear. Wouldn't it feel nice to vote for someone you want for president without worrying about their race or gender? Wouldn't it feel nice to accept women who get married, dress up, put make-up on, cook, craft? (Again, generalizing, but the judging kept a lot of smart women out of the movement.)
Now, we can vote for someone who will make the world better for women AND for the poor AND for international relations. We have the luxury of not having to pigeonhole our beliefs. I can hope for equality in every corner of the world and not worry that my all-inclusive nature is counterintuitive to the fight for my gender. So I guess I should say thanks to the 2nd wave. Thanks for giving me the chance to speak my mind and stand up for what I believe in. Just stop telling me what I should think is right. Stop guilting me into making a choice I'm not comfortable with.

In other words, get off my back. Please? And let's work together to make sure we elect a Democrat this year.

Mixed Feelings

Slate V has a clever video out today about Hillary Clinton:


The comparison works well in some ways, mostly in the middle. But it's a little forced and a little offensive. I mean, they're comparing Clinton to a little brat fictional character who, come to think of it, might have been based on Clinton herself. Thoughts?

Hey! Women Can be Sexist Too!

And it's not about the election either! Nope, WSJ article is just random sexism.

The article is about women and tools. (insert funny pic of Chris Matthews or Billy Bush here) Hardware stores are marketing towards women and their nifty notion that they can fix things too! Guess what the color du jour is.
The clever "Ms. Hymowitz" calls this trend "the pinking of home improvement," "the pink hammer brigade," and "the pink hammer revolution."

Newsflash: women have been fixing things for a long time. But advertisers and marketing departments have only just caught on. And everything's going pink-ass frilly. Of course! All women want a pink screwdriver!

According to Hymowitz, if that is her real name, single and divorced women are becoming more self-sufficient out of necessity. Or possibly because they've been called a nag too many times by their "loving" husbands. But watch out, Hym-ey isn't buying any of this "empowerment" shit:

"The only thing to give pause in the pinkhammer revolution is the occasional whiff of ideology that emanates from its leaders. Hang around the movement's Web sites and before long you'll hear rhetoric that implies that learning to install a dimmer switch is not simply a practical means of increasing domestic pleasure; it's a Radical Statement for Women's Progress. "It's more about Empowerment with a capital E," reads the toolgirls.com manifesto. Most of the rhetoric is more Oprahesque heavy breathing than Steinem-style fuming, but it still may not be the most suitable tone to take around people preparing to take up potentially lethal tools. "My true desire is to inspire women to become more self-reliant and confident in their abilities," Barbara K! writes on her Web site. "We all have 'it' within ourselves to do things we never imagined we could."

Well, maybe. But the truth is that while women may want a lovely home, most of them would also like a good man to share it with. You can be sure that, unlike their female counterparts, few single men are spending their weekends restoring the crown molding in their living rooms. Men's domesticity has always been a group affair; they fixed the faucets and built the shelves not for themselves but for their wives and children. Women ought to know that selfreliance isn't everything."

Translation: It's okay to bone up on your handy-woman skills, but make sure you don't do it for yourself. Do it for your future husbands. Imagine how much they'll want to marry you when they see you with that pink hammer! Yeah!

Ugh. I'm gonna be sick.

Wow. Is this Really who we Are?

A friend emailed me yesterday's Democracy Now. I'd heard rumblings about the Gloria Steinem/Melissa Harris-Lacewell head-to-head, but I didn't listen until I got the email from him.

It made me sad. I've never been a huge Steinem fan, but I always thought she had some merit. Maybe second-wave feminists become irrelevant if they stay back there in the second-wave. But Steinem isn't even in the past, she's in some bizarro world. Black women always had a hard time relating to the feminist movement. True, they were discriminated against in civil rights groups, but at least they felt like the group was speaking for them. This is a problem that I hope is getting better.

I think she came off sounding like an idiot. It reminded me of that white woman on Black.White. She's just so wishy washy. Her opinions mean nothing because they change so fast. Harris-Lacewell reminded me of the black woman on the show. She was quick to say how offended she was, rather than just argue her point. Harris-Lacewell, at least, sounded like she had convictions. Steinem sounded worthless and irrelevant. Just my opinion.

Shudder, Shudder

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Presidents Cry...

This is a great list of crying, welling, teary presidents. Here are the good parts:

Hillary Clinton's voice breaks in New Hampshire and we get endless "analysis" of Hillary's mental stability and questions about whether she's "tough enough" to be president. Mitt Romney's have welled up twice in one week, and it didn't lead anyone to question his emotional stability or his fitness for command.

George Washington "was obliged to wipe his eyes several times," according to the account of one Dr. Cogswell, at his heady arrival in New York for his swearing-in as the first President. And Teddy White wrote that "the elegant and controlled" John F. Kennedy had "tears in his eyes" the night he was elected in 1960. [NYT, 1993]

Sitting president William Howard Taft burst into tears on the campaign trail in 1912, exclaiming to a reporter, "Roosevelt was my closest friend."

Bill Clinton shed tears in 1993 at the swearing in of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Former president George H. W. Bush wept openly in 2006.

Can't say that I'm shocked, just nice to have a list. References are through the link. The picture is from the article at Majikthise.

Love the Funny Ladies

Searching on YouTube, found Shayna Ferm. Her CD should be coming out soon. Check it!

Call to Action: Misguided?

I hate Chris Matthews as much as the next person with any intelligence does. But this call to action from Media Matters is a little much.

They want you to tell MSNBC you're sick of him.

Okay, I'm sick of him. But I'm also sick of every other jackass sexist pig out there (cough: Howard Stern, and most people in the White House). He's got the freedom to speak and it's his schtick to be a fucking asshole.

I don't know, but I usually don't like to ask people to shut other people up just because I don't like what they're saying. I wouldn't want anyone to censor me. I'm free to blog all I want about what a deusch he is.

That being said, MSNBC, maybe you should just have a polite conversation with your asshole "pundit." Break it to him gently: women are actually people too! They actually have brains! Even Hillary Clinton!

A New Gateway Drug

The New York Times reports today about "medical spas" at the mall.Disclosure: I hate plastic surgery. I suppose that's no surprise. I do see some merit, you know, like when someone has something on their face or body that prevents them from getting by in the world. But there's no excuse for "cosmetic surgery" (read: unnecessary surgery). Why should anyone feel compelled to put themselves at risk because they want bigger boobs or less wrinkles? I really can't understand it.

The newest trick these "doctors" are using is a spa-like setting, some of which are in malls. You know, so you can get some clothes, shoes, and a tummy tuck. People are drawn to the clean, cool setting and young women handing out brochures outside of the "stores." At least they're not pretending to be doctors anymore (actually, some places are using nurse practitioners instead of doctors). Instead of "medspas" for unnecessary surgery, we should have them for real surgery. Not just for famous people. We should make people feel good before going in for brain surgery. Sorry - end of tangent.

People interviewed in the article attributed the current surge of customers to aging baby-boomers and shows like Nip/Tuck and Extreme Makeover. Nip/Tuck I could care less about. You'd have to be stupid to make life-changing decisions based on a fictional television show. It's equally stupid to base your life on an edited reality show. But it's a little more excusable, I guess. I mean, from what I understand, you do watch ugly people become pretty. But why do we all want to look the same? That's so boring.

Soon, I think, we'll be hearing about a new addiction. Alcoholics and Narcotics Anonymous will be joined by Plastics Anon. Once they've started, people can't stop pulling, tucking, ripping, shredding their bodies. One particular "victim" even calls microdermabrasion her "gateway drug." And it's all because we can't be satisfied with who we are. Blame it on society or media all you want. When it comes down to it, plastic surgery is a choice. To borrow an oldie but goodie: be smart, don't start.

Subway will help your self esteem

I saw this commercial a week ago, and couldn't find it on YouTube.

Thanks, Feministe, for finding it.

Newsflash: Subway can make you fat too! But maybe it's the kind of fat that doesn't need therapy. Do you think that's what they're trying to say? Yeah, I don't think so. Oh, and do I have to mention it was a woman talking to a man?

The real subway pissed me off today too. No service at my stop? I don't care if it's safe or not...get the subway back!

Okay, I'll stop complaining about my personal issues. Back to the commercial.

I love that Subway is trying to be the health-conscious fast food place. And, of course, it's not enough to just be healthy (which, granted, some of their stuff is), they have to guilt you into going there. Well...yeah. Makes sense, right? Pay a little more for a meatball sub at Subway and you won't have to lose your self esteem because of all that weight you're going to gain. It's a magic meatball sub. I think I forgot to mention that.

Subway - either make your food holes completely healthy (and maybe clean them up a little) or shut the hell up and mind your own self esteem.

Man, I miss Evos.

This Washington Post cartoon is SOOOO Funny!

Ha ha ha ha ha! This is hilarious and not at all sexist.

I'm being sarcastic, in case it doesn't read.

You stole my wife!

Women can be stolen legally in Mississippi.

And the Supreme Court couldn't be bothered. Of course the good news is, it's a unisex law that permits

a cuckolded spouse to seek damages for "loss of society, companionship, love and affection," as well as "the loss of sexual relations."

No, wait. NOT GOOD NEWS. People should NOT be able to sue for this kind of thing. Stating the obvious, or so I thought.

Where's the Fanfare?

This AlterNet article does a good job of saying something I've seen a little bit of: Why doesn't anyone care that a woman won the primary?

Here are the facts (from the article):

It turns out Hillary may have the more "historic" win -- if race and gender "firsts" are the yardstick. Technically, Shirley Chisholm takes both "firsts" with a New Jersey primary win in 1972. And Jesse Jackson won five primaries and caucuses in 1984 -- including Virginia, Louisiana and D.C.

On closer inspection, according to Allan Lichtman, professor of history at American University, Chisholm actually won a "nonbinding preference, where no delegates were awarded" against ex-Gov. Terry Sanford. Humphrey, McGovern and Muskie did not compete. As Lichtman put it, "This is the first time in American history a woman won a major contested presidential primary." At the very least, the first time in 36 years a woman had won a primary.

We all know why no one cares. She's not someone you particularly want to be happy for. I know that's a big statement, but that's how I feel. She makes it hard, because she's SUCH a politician. Her speech after her win was wonderful. I'd love to believe that she had "found her voice." But it's gonna take some more convincing for me.

I gotta admit though, a small part of me was extremely excited that this barrier has been broken.

Let's not move backwards

This BBC News story reports that abortion clinics in Spain are on strike. Doctors are trying to change a law allowing abortions only to women for whom the pregnancy poses a risk to their mental health. More restrictions are placed on rape victims and women with malformed fetuses(!)

Dr Roland Ledea, who runs a private abortion clinic in Madrid, told that BBC that "we are now in 2008 and the law was made in 1985 - society has changed a lot".

"I think abortion should be free, depending on the woman that is pregnant, nothing else."

Those Roman Catholics, they do things right. Best of luck to the strikers.

Women and "Children" First

Though this Globe and Mail story carries the offensive title, "Will women or children pick the next president?" there's actually some good stuff there.

Basically, it's another piece about why young women aren't voting for Hillary Clinton. It starts off towing that same, bullshit:

Melissa Haussman cannot wrap her mind around why young women would vote for Barack Obama.

"It disappoints me greatly," said the professor of political science at Carleton University, an American who drove to New Hampshire last week to work on Hillary Clinton's campaign. "Your grandmothers chained themselves to the White House fence so that you could vote."

That's right - guilt us into voting for Hillary, that's great. But, even though the article gets a little condescending, the author, Siri Agrell, makes a good point.

The results of a 2007 survey by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press give the impression that Mr. Obama was tailor-made to woo the youth demographic.

Describing "generation next" - 18- to 25-year-olds who came of age with personal computers, the Internet and the shadow of Sept. 11, 2001 - the Pew Center found that nearly one in five has no religious affiliation, and that the majority are pro-immigration, in favour of same-sex marriage, colour-blind, pro-choice and against the Iraq war.

THIS is why we're not for Clinton. She's for the Iraq War and, more superficially, she doesn't speak to the younger generation. We have the luxury to vote for someone because we WANT THEM AS OUR PRESIDENT. So why shouldn't we use the rights women fought so hard to give us? We want someone who will stand up for women, but it doesn't have to be a woman. I think it's wrong to guilt us into voting for someone because of their gender. Voting for Clinton because she's a woman is as bad as voting for McCain because he's a white man.

Feminist Election Surivival Tips: The Privileged Political Pundit Drinking Game

This deserves a full quote. From Feministing.

Watching campaign coverage can be trying. Especially when the talking heads seem hell-bent on relying on racist and sexist sound-bites in lieu of substantive commentary. So to get your though the hard times, we proudly present ....

• Drink anytime someone refers to Clinton's teary moment in NH as "crying," "sobbing," "weepy," or "contrived."
• Take a drink for every "magical negro" reference to Obama.
• Take one drink anytime someone calls Clinton "shrill" or "screechy."
• Chug one whenever you hear of, see, or read Maureen Dowd. Always.
• Two drinks anytime anyone expresses the sentiment that Edwards is at a disadvantage because he isn't black or female.
• Take a shot when a pundit refers to Clinton as (or implies she is) a nagging bitch or cackling witch.
• Drink for any lamenting that white-dude voters are being ignored.
• Take a healthy gulp every time someone describes Obama as "clean" or "articulate."
• Take two shots whenever someone implies that women only vote with their vaginas.
• Warning: Do not watch Chris Matthews under any circumstances--doing so could induce alcohol poisoning.

Abortion is the Darfur of America...no wait...it's slavery

The San Francisco Chronicle has this gem. Here are some choice quotes:

"The abortion issue is huge. It is the Darfur of America," and it's time to educate the public about it, said Walter Hoye, a Berkeley preacher who founded the Issues4Life Foundation, a recently formed Union City-based organization intent on drafting more African Americans into the fight against abortion...

He compares abortion to slavery and says the fetus has a right to be protected by the Constitution.

"It is not the first time a segment of the community has had their rights denied," Childress said. "It is a civil rights issue because it is dehumanizing and not giving proper status as a citizen. Most people on the opposite side think it is not a person, just like they did during slavery. It is not the first time this country has done us wrong."

There are, of course, other voices of sanity out there (via the same article):

The Rev. Amos Brown, president of the San Francisco branch of the NAACP, said that abortion is not a civil rights issue and that he has no plans to take part in the events.

"San Francisco's top civil rights issues are education, economic empowerment and political engagement," Brown said. "African American students are behind every ethnic group in this city academically. People who are learned and informed do the right thing. If not, they engage in destructive behavior.

"These pro-life people are demagogues and ideologues and are not receiving overwhelming support from the black community."

I don't think I need to say who's side I'm on. This Hoye guy is fucking ridiculous. The guy is nuts.

Chris Matthews is a deusche bag

In case you didn't know already. This is the Hillary Clinton edition:

Chris Matthews, last night: "I will never underestimate Hillary Clinton again."

Chris Matthews, this morning: "The reason she's a U.S. senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner, is her husband messed around ... She didn't win it on the merits."

Also, he apparently PINCHED HER CHEEK!

DEUSCHE!!!

Holy shit. She's going to win.

This is big. How did Clinton pull it off? I really think the truly honest moment helped her. (You know, where she was asked about something that really mattered to her and she realized that a chance she may have forgotten she wanted might be slipping away. NOT where she was asked an innocuous question and fell apart because she was so tired, like some are saying.)

And McCain - that's no surprise. Still not secured to be the nominee, but I think he's going to be.

Still early, but Clinton's win is big...(unless something drastic happens later tonight and Obama takes it - slim chance).

Gloria Steinem's NY Times Article: Obama could never be a woman

Gloria Steinem is pretty cool. Sure, she may have gotten more face time than Kate Millet (right, with Steinem) because she was prettier and not a lesbian, but that doesn't mean she wasn't a powerful voice in the women's movement.

Her voice is out there still, and this New York Times article proves it.

THE woman in question became a lawyer after some years as a community organizer, married a corporate lawyer and is the mother of two little girls, ages 9 and 6. Herself the daughter of a white American mother and a black African father — in this race-conscious country, she is considered black — she served as a state legislator for eight years, and became an inspirational voice for national unity.

Be honest: Do you think this is the biography of someone who could be elected to the United States Senate? After less than one term there, do you believe she could be a viable candidate to head the most powerful nation on earth?

The answer is no. Even aside from the whole race issue, Obama's optimism, his emotional nature, none of that would fly for a female presidential candidate. She goes on with a comparison between Obama and Clinton:

But what worries me is that he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as divisive by her sex.

What worries me is that she is accused of “playing the gender card” when citing the old boys’ club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations...

What worries me is that reporters ignore Mr. Obama’s dependence on the old — for instance, the frequent campaign comparisons to John F. Kennedy — while not challenging the slander that her progressive policies are part of the Washington status quo.

I believe what she's saying is true, but I take issue with her accusations against young women:

What worries me is that some women, perhaps especially younger ones, hope to deny or escape the sexual caste system; thus Iowa women over 50 and 60, who disproportionately supported Senator Clinton, proved once again that women are the one group that grows more radical with age.

This country can no longer afford to choose our leaders from a talent pool limited by sex, race, money, powerful fathers and paper degrees. It’s time to take equal pride in breaking all the barriers. We have to be able to say: “I’m supporting her because she’ll be a great president and because she’s a woman.”

Yes, if I thought she'd be a great president, I would stand proud. But I don't. I'm not in denial or suffering from ignorance, I just don't think she'd be very good. And I won't vote for her just BECAUSE she's a woman.

Stupid Fun

This isn't the best viral video, but it's worth a watch.



Even I could be the belle of the ball in this race.

I don't care about Jessica Alba, but...

she's just lying in this Elle article:
“Contrary to how people may feel, I've never used my sexuality."

Is she serious? And who wouldn't with a body like that? She's not a great actress, she's a hottie. I hate that we glorify people for that, but she's taking advantage of it and more power to her if she wants to use it to do something good for a change (like ACTUALLY act).

But why lie about it? Maybe she thinks she's telling the truth.

But come on...she had to know every blogger in the world would pull up pictures like these.

Hillary Clinton Chokes up and People Freak...

Okay, hasn't happened yet, but tell me the media won't spin this into "Hillary's a weak woman." "Our president can't be so emotional!" "Is she on her period?"

Newsflash, future reporters, she probably doesn't get her period anymore.

Via Newsweek

At a New Hampshire campaign stop, Clinton was asked about being a woman in the world: "How do you do it?"

Clinton answered honestly (1st honest moment in the campaign! Woohoo!):

The media has already asked other democrats what they thought.

Edwards: "I think what we need in a commander-in-chief is strength and resolve, and presidential campaigns are tough business, but being president of the United States is also tough business,"

Obama: "I didn't see what happened," he said, but added, "I know this process is a grind. So that's not something I care to comment on."

I can see why Edwards said this, but I like Obama's answer better. Edwards' answer is just a sign of what's to come. STRONG=MAN.

The Royal "We"

I know this isn't new, but it's still really disturbing.

An LA Times article reports on male anti-abortion activists.

Their new tactic is apparently using the pronoun "we." We had an abortion. I hate it when "we're pregnant" I hate it when "we have abortions." It's got nothing to do with "we."

Sure, "we're having a baby" works. We're in debt. We're having sex. Because those all involve both people. In a perfect world, men and women would be involved in what happens to their progeny, but it's not a perfect world. Bottom line: women will be more affected by a baby. No matter how you slice it. It's a woman's body, she gets final say.

But the reason to read the article is the men they found to interview:

Morrow, the counselor, described his regret as sneaking up on him in midlife -- more than a decade after he impregnated three girlfriends (one of them twice) in quick succession in the late 1980s. All four pregnancies ended in abortion.

Years later, when his wife told him she was pregnant, "I suddenly realized that I had four dead children," said Morrow, 47, who lives near Erie, Pa. "I hadn't given it a thought. Now it all came crashing down on me -- look what you've done."

Does this guy not believe in condoms? What's the deal? "Hadn't given it a thought"?

But here's the really funny/sad one:

Chris Aubert, a Houston lawyer, felt only indifference in 1985 when a girlfriend told him she was pregnant and planned on an abortion. When she asked if he wanted to come to the clinic, he said he couldn't; he played softball on Saturdays. He stuck a check for $200 in her door and never talked to her again.

Aubert, 50, was equally untroubled when another girlfriend had an abortion in 1991. "It was a complete irrelevancy," he said. But years later, Aubert felt a rising sense of unease. He and his wife were cooing at an ultrasound of their first baby when it struck him -- "from the depths of my belly," he said -- that abortion was wrong...

Aubert wonders: What if his first girlfriend had not aborted? How would his life look different?

He might have endured a loveless marriage and, perhaps, a sad divorce. He might have been saddled with child support as he tried to build his legal practice. He might never have met his wife. Their children -- Christine, Kyle, Roch, Paul, Vance -- might not exist.

"I wouldn't have the blessings I have now," Aubert said. So in a way, he said, the two abortions may have cleared his path to future happiness.

"That's an intellectual debate I have with myself," he said. "I struggle with it."

In the end, Aubert says his moral objection to abortion always wins. If he could go back in time, he would try to save the babies.

But would his long-ago girlfriends agree? Or might they also consider the abortions a choice that set them on a better path?

Aubert looks startled. "I never really thought about it for the woman," he says slowly.

Jesus! He didn't even go with that girl to get "their" abortion? And he's never CONSIDERED what her life is like?

No one wants to get an abortion. It's a hard decision that can haunt you, but it's also a hard decision that could be the best decision you make. Yes, it sucks that guys don't get the final say. But it also sucks that guys can't get pregnant.

Huckabee can blame/jail doctors all he wants (we have to protect women from the big scary MALE doctors who just want to abort their precious babies! - another tactic from the "pro-life" crowd), these guys can cry and become alcoholics, but the choice always lies with the woman who has to squirt out the kid. I know it's not fair, but neither is pregnancy.

The United Women's Front

No, it's not a union for the porn industry. It's the first political party made up (almost) entirely of women for women. There are a few issues - the women need men to help them, fund them, etc., but men are not allowed on the national scale.

Via Women's eNews:

"We are not against men," [Suman Krishan] Kant [president of the party] says. "We need men to work with us and we need their support."

However, she draws certain lines.

"Men will not be part of the national committee," says Kant firmly. "Men will be members of state chapters only; but we will have only women at the national level."

The party hopes to correct some of the inequality throughout the country:

India is often called a land of contradictions and that pertains to the status of women here. The national constitution guaranteed women's legal equality in 1950. India also elected Indira Ghandi in 1966, making her the world's second female prime minister after Sri Lanka's Sirimavo Bandarnaike, who took office in 1960.

This past July Pratibha Patil was elected the country's first female president, a mostly ceremonial position that nonetheless leaves India with a female head of state.

Women hold top cabinets posts and at least three states have female chief ministers. Village councils reserve 33 percent of their seats for women.

On the other hand, millions of women live in poverty, illiteracy, malnourishment and ill-health. In November, the World Economic Forum's latest gender gap index put India among the world's 10 most gender-biased economies, with women's participation in the paid work force at 36 percent.

Hey, hopefully they'll do some good.

Abuse is okay. The Qu'ran tells me so.

Picture (right) and story via the The New York Times.

Abused Muslim American women aren't much different from regular abused women, except that their religious text condones the abuse (it's usually public abuse of women that's condoned in the Christian bible.

The current interpretation of Chapter 4, verse 34 in the Qu'ran gives "husbands the right to strike their wives as the final step in an escalating series of punishments for being rebellious."

The problem is widespread. Even more so because within the Muslim community, the abuse is accepted. Even by women. If a woman asks for help, she is usually met with a cleric who offers marriage counseling (WITH the abusive husband) and/or family telling her to suck it up and be obedient.

If an American Muslim woman seeks help at a shelter, her faith is held in question. The article details this woman's story:

After enduring seven years of beatings from her husband, a young Yemeni-American woman recently fled to a local shelter, only to find that the heavy black head scarf she wore as an observant Muslim provoked disapproval.

The shelter brought in a hairdresser, whose services she accepted without any misgivings. But once her hair was styled, administrators urged her to throw off her veil, saying it symbolized the male oppression native to Islam that she wanted to escape.Instead the woman, who asked for anonymity because she feared further violence from her relatives, decamped to the Hamdard Center for Health and Human Services in suburban Chicago, a shelter that caters mainly to Muslim women by not serving pork and keeping prayer rugs handy. Such shelters are extremely rare nationwide, activists say, because Muslim Americans only recently began confronting the issue of spousal abuse.

Do we really need separate shelters for Muslim women? That's really sad. A shelter shouldn't be a place to question someone's beliefs. A woman comes to a shelter seeking help, and that's what she needs. She doesn't need someone to tell her that her entire life is based on something that oppresses her. And this woman filed for divorce, sought help from imams and family, and endured tremendous abuse because of it. The headscarf does not equal oppression for this 29-year old woman. The husband and family do.

It's good that she had a place like the Hamdard Center to go, but it's extremely sad that she needs it. Shelters are hard to start in Muslim communities, because they like to pretend it's not a problem. Well, I guess it isn't if the verse you take literally tells you it's okay.

People are working to change the interpretation, but it doesn't look good. I guess we should feel lucky that Christian and Jewish fundamentalists are a little wishy-washy on the whole literal thing. If I had to leave the city every time I had a period, I would probably have to kill someone.

From Allende's Lips to Blears' Ears

Muslim Women in Whitehall (UK) could get a voice soon. (via the Sunday TImes)

Hazel Blears, community secretary, is requesting a piece of the 70 million pound government fund set up to combat extremism be put towards courses for Muslim women. The courses would teach "confidence building, communication and mediation skills."

"Muslim women will be offered work placements with business leaders and top athletes (?) to imbue assertiveness and leadership and help them to advance their careers. Funding will be available to set up local Muslim women’s groups to provide a “safe space” where they can discuss their concerns."

"Half of all Muslim women have never worked..."

Some people are scared shitless: “The government at first wanted our imams to act as spies on young British Muslims and now they seem to want Muslim women to do the same,” said Inayat Bunglawala, the council’s assistant secretary-general.

Comments below the Sunday Times article reveal a distinct dislike of the "Labor left," which they feel this is a product of.

Sure, Muslim women have basically no rights, but this could give them a voice. Whether they're mothers, laborers, or government workers, this could give them the confidence to fight back. I'm finding it hard to believe anyone could think this is a bad thing.

I've long held the belief that education is extremely empowering. If this actually happens, it will give these women the opportunity to increase their influence and make their voices heard.

Wonder Woman Written by an Actual Woman!

After 66 years, Wonder Woman finally gets a female scribe, adding to a recent increase in comics geared toward women.

The cleavage and underwear stay, though. If she takes that bustier off, she loses her powers...to keep her male audience! Whamo!

Anyway, maybe the Amazons will be cooler.

Now that we're calling some comic books graphic novels, it seems okay to market to the breast-addled sex. "Marketing" meaning writing all-female comics and toning down the helpless female thing a little bit. Though I never got into comics myself, I'm always for toning down misogyny!

It's not gone yet, though...

Isabel Allende is a Goddess

Sure, I haven't loved every one of her books, but this is a great speech. It's worth watching the whole thing. I promise.

From last year's TED conference:

Behind Every Woman...

is her husband's name. Although I don't agree with parts of this NY Times Op-Ed, it's still depressing.

Nepotism isn't always a bad thing. I know from personal experience. But yikes.
Kerry Howley writes:

Like it or not, the road to female advancement often begins at the altar. History books are thick with examples of women who broke political barriers because their family connections afforded them the opportunity.
If you’ve ever wondered why India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Pakistan and the Philippines seem readier to elect women than does the United States, here’s your answer: Societies that value a candidate’s family affiliation, and therefore have a history of nepotistic succession, are often open to female leadership so long as it bears the right brand. Benazir Bhutto, Indira Gandhi and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, among many others, slashed through gender barriers on the strength of their family names.As Jo Freeman, the feminist political scientist, has pointed out, six of the first 14 women elected to Congress were widows of incumbents. Three more were the daughters of politicians...

The first three women to serve full Senate terms all succeeded their husbands. Only with the 1978 election of Nancy Kassebaum, a Kansas Republican, did a woman finally achieve a full Senate term without first following her husband into office. (And Ms. Kassebaum was the daughter of Alf Landon, the former Kansas governor.)

To some voters, Hillary Clinton’s husband provides reassurance that the “calculating” senator from New York won’t degenerate into a feminine hysteric if she is elected to the White House. Yet Mrs. Clinton, the first woman who is a serious contender for the presidential nomination of one of the nation’s two major political parties, still has to work overtime to prove herself non-threatening. She clings to the political center like a life raft and rarely ventures from the shallow waters of establishment predictability.

Dorothy Hamill

Has breast cancer.

Hamill won the Olympic gold in 1976. And though I could care less about ice skating, I've got nothing against her.

Best of luck to her. Hopefully now she can grow out her hair if she wants to.

More opinions on "Reproductive Outsourcing"

I think Feministe does a much better job of saying what I meant about the recent India surrogacy boom. Here's where they really hit it:

If we’re going to do the surrogacy thing — and we already are doing it — then let’s call it what it is: An exchange of money for services. And let’s not pussyfoot around the fact that in a whole lot of service industries, the people providing services are poor, female and brown. Think of housekeepers, fieldworkers, childcare providers, elder-care workers — all of these women use their bodies in the service of others. Many of them are exploited, some are abused, and most are under-paid. But we only go into panic mode when the services provided are sexual.

But the article took it to the next, more important step:

Rich white American women paying poor women of color in developing nations to gestate their children for them seems wrong. I don’t oppose reproductive technologies, but it gets trickier when you’re paying someone in a far less privileged situation to be a human incubator for you. I have to roll my eyes at the way surrogacy is framed in order to fit in with acceptable constructions of femininity — women are surrogate mothers because they love being pregnant, not because they need to make money and pregnancy is a pretty good way to do that. Addressing the poverty issue would require us to actually look at who is getting ahead and at whose expense, and that doesn’t tend to go over so well. Addressing surrogacy as one service industry among many wherein the bodies of poor women of color are used to further the wants of wealthier white people would require us to look at the systematic racisms and inequalities that prop up the entire global economy. And that definitely does not go over so well.

Very nicely put.

"Women Make Great Propaganda"...

Mohammad Hafiz told the AP (via the Huffington Post). It's not what you think. He's a professor at the University of Missouri, who specializes in Muslim extremism.

I've been reading articles on this subject, but this one is wrapped in a pretty bow.

The article is about the recent prevalence of female al-Qaida suicide bombers (2% since May 2005).

That's the thing about extremists. They get obsessed with one thing and forget all the pomp and circumstance. al-Qaida doesn't care that women shouldn't be involved in war according to Muslim taboos. They care that women can get through security checkpoints easily because male security guards are too conservative to give them a good pat-down.

I disagree with any type of extremism. I've always tried to see everyone's point of view, but I can't see how you get to whatever heaven or glory you're looking for by killing people.

Okay, off of my soapbox for tonight.

The article mentions that al-Qaida's use of women as suicide bombers could be an act of desperation. I don't have any primary knowledge or anything, but I don't think so. More women are getting angry or getting "spiritual," and, as Hafiz says, "women make great propaganda."

Planned Parenthood...WHY?

I love Planned Parenthood I used to volunteer for them, I've thought about going to protests with them (too lazy - I know - LOSER!), and I get my yearly exams from them. But I gotta say: this is kind of a crappy commercial:



Sure, it's for MTV and VH1. Maybe that audience will find it funny. I just thought it was going to go somewhere good. "Planned Parenthood Airlines?" Condoms falling from the overhead compartment? And what's with the heart-shaped lollipop? And do we need to have a talk about gay stereotypes?

Just hire me, Planned Parenthood, we'll make some magic. Have you thought about animated condoms?

Damn. Of course. There's something already out there. Mine would be more interesting and more cartoon-y. Promise.


Put him on!

Well, as long as it comes in pink...

It's a Taser party! It started with Tupperware, moved to Discovery Toys, then Pampered Chef, now Tasers! Okay, maybe it's just that my mom is a sucker for these kinds of things. At least I left out Longaberger Baskets.

Since Tupperware, the party sale has been an elusive yet tantalizing occupation for women in all walks of life. And Dana Shafman wants to bring the tradition into the self-defense field. Shafman travels around Arizona and hosts parties where women can hold, test, and buy Tasers. According to Shafman, most women go for the pink taser. "It's a girl power kind of thing," she says.
(Is that dude over on the top right of the picture part of your girl power? I would need a lady showing me how its done at MY Taser party.)

As far as self-defense goes, I think I would shock myself trying to get it out of my backpack or purse. But hey, I guess it's better than SLEEPING WITH A KNIFE UNDER YOUR PILLOW, as Shafman claims to have done!

Hot Toddlers

Via Feministe:

This was spotted in LA:Apparently, these are available for TODDLERS. What the fuck?

I REFUSE to Write About Britney Spears

It's all anyone can talk about.

Was she drunk?

Is she insane?

Was she high?

Is she insane?

Is she dead?

Was she drunk? (Gotta love when FoxNews includes "According to TMZ" in a story)

Forget Kenya and Pakistan. Forget the caucus in Iowa. Let's all watch this woman as her life falls apart. C'mon! It'll be fun!

Seriously. I'm not going to post about it.

Well, it worked for JFK and Lincoln...

...so why not Bhutto? An AP article sheds light on Bhutto's "mixed legacy." Since my Pakistani history is a little shoddy, I'm going to quote the article:

Bhutto's tenure as prime minister certainly helped open doors in Pakistan's male-dominated society, they say. But it was also sullied by the allegations of corruption, dirty politics and unfulfilled promises that have dogged the rule of every Pakistani leader, male or female.

"Yes, of course there was some symbolism in having a women as prime minister," said Aysha Iqbal, a 23-year-old business student in Lahore.

But "she was prime minister because her father was prime minister," Iqbal continued.

There's been Indira Gandhi in India; Sirimavo Bandaranaike and her daughter, Chandrika Kumaratanga, in Sri Lanka; Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia in Bangladesh, and, of course, Bhutto, who twice served as Pakistan's prime minister, between 1988-1990 and 1993-1996.

Every one of them rose to prominence after the death of a male relative — no coincidence in a corner of the world where family often dictates one's occupation, be it as a street sweeper or a prime minister.

In Bhutto's case, she took the leadership of the populist Pakistan People's Party founded by her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who was hanged in 1979 following a military coup. She then led the party to election victory.

"She was our heroine at the time," said Zareen Ahmed, chief of the British Muslim Forum, whose family comes from Pakistan. "We all crowded around the television at our house here and we were all very proud of her. For young women like me, she gave us hope."

Bhutto was young and glamorous, a graduate of Harvard and Oxford who could campaign through Karachi slums as

And, early in her administration, there were advances for women in Pakistan.confidently as she had graced the salons of London and New York.

But Bhutto also picked up all the baggage that came with running Pakistan, a largely impoverished land that was — and still is — in many parts near-feudal.

She became the center of a vast patronage system, dealing in political debts and working with a network of old-timers whose issues became her issues. Overshadowing everything was Pakistan's powerful military and intelligence establishment.

Women's rights took a back seat, and Pakistan remained as corrupt as it had been under her predecessors, perhaps even more so. Her husband, whom she wed in a traditional marriage arranged by her mother, quickly earned the nickname "Mr. 10 Percent" for the tens of millions he is alleged to have taken in kickbacks.

"I think Western feminists want to view Bhutto and the other women leaders as pioneers," said Muneeza Rashed, 38-year-old woman in Lahore.

"But they're not. They're more like throwbacks to the men who came before them. They practice the same kind of old-boy politics. Helping women is secondary for them," she said.

Under Bhutto, most Pakistani women still lived the impoverished, home-bound lives they had lived before. Girls still went uneducated while their brothers were sent off to school. And those women who endured the tragedy of being raped still found themselves contending with laws that discriminated against the victims of sex crimes — laws that would only be changed years later by President Pervez Musharraf, who came to power in a 1999 military coup.

"In many ways women benefited very little under her," said Unaiza Malik, 64, who was born in Pakistan and now works with the Muslim Women's Society in London.

"It's only in death that she will become an icon — in some ways people will look at her accomplishments through rose-tinted glasses rather than remembering the corruption charges, her lack of achievements or how much she was manipulated by other people."

Sorry to quote so heavily, but I was definitely one of those "Western feminists" who didn't know enough about it. Figured I should let the people who know what they're talking about speak.

Hillary Clinton Wants Women to Be Free!

...to vote for her. Here's the interview from today's Today Show:

Hillary claims caucusing is hard for women because "they want to keep their votes to themselves." Talking Points Memo speculated that Meredith Viera wasn't quite convinced. Is Clinton preparing people for a loss?

But here's the other issue. Why wouldn't women feel comfortable at a caucus? They do, according to this article at Women's eNews:

Women made up 54 percent of caucus voters in 2004, and according to an October Register poll, 52 percent of those who consider themselves "likely voters" this year are women, including 62 percent of Democrats.

Among Republicans, men outnumber women 58 percent to 42 percent.

In both parties, Iowa women voted more than their male counterparts by 7 percentage points in the 2004 general election.

So is Clinton bullshitting? Survey apparently says: yes.

Does this mean fetuses are allowed to have guns?

Fetusii? Fetus'? I don't know the plural. Anyway...

Rock on, Veracifier




Does anyone else want to punch Kristi Burton in the face? She's kind of unbelievable.

Yikes

The Washington Post today includes a press release from Temple University.

Apparently, Joanna Maselko, an associate professor of public health at Temple, found (with her team) that women who stay "religiously active" have less anxiety/depression.

Who the hell studies this stuff? Okay, I guess this is my answer. But why?

I don't know much about the logistics of studies, but 718 adults doesn't seem conclusive to me. Men were less likely than women to have this disorder, no matter what their religious habits, and "about 7 percent of the women who were always religiously active could be categorized as having generalized anxiety disorder, compared with 21 percent of those who had ended their religious activities."

Okay, so that looks bad. But there are too many variables here. Maselko explains that the greater prevalence in women is probably because women make more social ties through religious institutions. But the release goes on to say, "Women are two times more likely to suffer from anxiety disorder than men."

So is this a story about mental illness? Gender differences? Society? Or religion? I think religion (or "religious activity") is least likely to account for the findings in this study.

Miss Dairy Farmer, 2008?

This AP article is a little depressing.

Apparently, the number of women farmers in Wisconsin is growing.

The National Agricultural Statistics Service's most recent agricultural census, done in 2002, showed women were the principal operators of 7,353 Wisconsin farms, up about 27 percent from 1997. There was about a 13 percent increase nationally during the same period.

The percentage of Wisconsin's female principal farm operators increased from 6.7 percent in 1997 to 9.5 percent in 2002.

And the trend seems to be continuing:

The University of Wisconsin-Madison College of Agricultural and Life Sciences said there were 1,311 women enrolled last fall and 1,005 men, compared with 796 men and only 353 women during the 1977-1978 school year.

The article mentions the increase of mechanization, the choice to raise smaller animals and produce dairy, and...here's the depressing part...

somebody has to work elsewhere to get health insurance, and often it is the man because they usually can find better paying jobs

The quote is from a dairy farmer in Wisconsin named Diane Grezenski. So women are turning to work that will help their families survive. Nothing new there. Is this just a replay of the past? Women do the jobs men don't want to do/ can't afford to do/ are too busy to do? Is farming becoming "women's work"?

Or is this a necessity of life in Wisconsin? I wouldn't know.

While it's possible this farming trend is a good thing, there's a definite danger that this is just a shift in ideology. Nursing became women's work, teaching did as well. Hell, even farming was during World War 2.

Seriously, what was Rosie the Riveter all about? Get women to work at industrial/agricultural jobs while their men were off fighting in the war. When they come back, go back into your little house hole and be happy. If men get laid off from these elusive jobs with health care, where will they go? Back to farming. And the women will go back to their "happy," sheltered lives. I'm not saying it's the reality, just that it's a possibility.