If you could permanently remove one show from television, what would it be? (Or radio show, book series, etc, if you don't watch television)
I would love to see Man Vs. Food vanish forever. I can't begin to describe how much that show sickens me on so many different levels.
Question of the Day
Kansas Update
This post is now updated
This post has been updated again, 7/01
So back on Monday I posted about Kansas's backdoor method of denying women access to health care.
There are now no abortion providers in the state:
TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) - A Planned Parenthood clinic in Kansas has been denied a state license to allow it to continue performing abortions as of Friday. That means Kansas will become the only state without a clinic or doctor's office performing abortions, at least temporarily.Aid for Women was denied outright without inspection when the center said they would need to renovate. The Center for Women's Health (who also would have needed renovation) canceled its inspection and filed a federal lawsuit. All were in the Kansas City area and, according to this article, the next nearest clinic is in Columbia, Missouri. According to Google Maps, Columbia is--at best, depending on route and coming only from Kansas City (KS)--130 miles away.
[UPDATE] Planned Parenthood Kansas & Mid-Misouri just announced that they received a license to continue operations. So, there is just one clinic in the state of Kansas. Also, a hearing is scheduled for Friday regarding the lawsuit filed by the doctors who run The Center for Women's Health.
[UPDATE II, 07/01] Federal Judge Carlos Murguia has granted the request from Aid for Women and the Center For Women's Health for a preliminary injunction. So, for now, the law is blocked and unenforceable.
[H/T to Steph Harold, @IAmDrTiller]
Georgia & Immigration
Back in May Georgia gov Nathan Deal signed HB 87, sweeping and draconian immigration "reform", into law. A couple weeks later, Deal ordered an investigation into the impact of said law. Apparently forethought is for suckers. Anyway, results were such:
Georgia farmers have been forced to leave millions of dollars’ worth of blueberries, onions, melons and other crops unharvested and rotting in the fields. It has also put state officials into something of a panic at the damage they’ve done to Georgia’s largest industry.So Deal came up with the idea that farmers hire people who are on probation and are currently unemployed. That idea? Not working so well, either:
The first batch of probationers started work last week at a farm owned by Dick Minor, president of the Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association. In the coming days, more farmers could join the program.Well.
So far, the experiment at Minor’s farm is yielding mixed results. On the first two days, all the probationers quit by mid-afternoon, said Mendez, one of two crew leaders at Minor’s farm.
“Those guys out here weren’t out there 30 minutes and they got the bucket and just threw them in the air and say, ‘Bonk this, I ain’t with this, I can’t do this,’” said Jermond Powell, a 33-year-old probationer. “They just left, took off across the field walking.”
In protest of HB 87, the ACLU and others sued the state and received an injunction on two parts this past Monday: one that would authorize police to arrest immigrants and take them to jail and the other that punished people who knowingly transport or harbor immigrants. However, the rest is still scheduled to go forward as of now--and it starts tomorrow. Here, courtesy of the AJC, are the details:
Taking effect Friday:There are other parts taking effect at later dates.
* People who use fake identification to get a job in Georgia could face up to 15 years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines.
* A seven-member Immigration Enforcement Review Board will be established to investigate complaints about local and state government officials not enforcing state laws related to immigration. Spokesmen for Republican Gov. Nathan Deal, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and House Speaker David Ralston said this week that their offices were working on appointing people to this panel.
* Government officials who violate state laws requiring cities, counties and state government agencies to use the federal E-Verify work authorization program could face fines up to $10,000 and removal from office.
* The state Agriculture Department will be directed to study the possibility of creating Georgia's own guest-worker program. Some Georgia employers have complained that the federal government's guest-worker program is too burdensome and expensive.
Yesterday and this morning I read two articles that dovetail nicely with this topic--one very directly related. First (FYI: it's nine pages long): Republican mayor in the South becomes unlikely advocate for immigrants. As Mayor Bridges said: "When I became mayor, I decided I was going to be the mayor for everybody, including people who have no voice otherwise." Second is Slacktivist's Amnesty at the DMV, who notes: "But despite doing something illegal, something against the law, I was never in danger of arrest, because while driving a car with expired inspection stickers is “illegal,” it is not criminal. It’s a civil violation. It’s fashionable these days to pretend that this distinction doesn’t exist — at least when the subject is immigration — but it’s a significant and essential distinction."
The court battles are far from over on HB 87 as both sides promise to keep fighting.
The Road to Hell
Last Friday Judge Tanya Walton Pratt ruled that Indiana cannot defund Planned Parenthood and also suspended part of the recently-passed law that stated that doctors must tell patients that fetuses (at any gestational age) feel pain. Judge Walton Pratt has temporarily upheld the part of the law that said doctors are required to tell patients "life begins at fertilization".
The Indy Star became curious, after the ruling, about just how much input doctors had when it came to drafting the legislation & its subsequent passage. They found what they call "startling answers". Though I'm not particularly startled myself. Doctors were not entirely shut out of the legislative process. The Indiana State Medical Association chose to pass up its chance to publicly weigh in on the abortion bill and took no position on it. And doctors did have some influence on the bill. After hearing testimony from an oncologist with the IU Simon Cancer Center, lawmakers removed a provision requiring doctors to tell patients that abortion is linked to breast cancer.
Of course she didn't! Rep. Sue Ellspermann (R-Ferdinand) who wrote the fetal pain bit said outright that she did not consult any doctors, scientific studies, or scientists. She said that "she had seen video footage 'of the baby (in the womb) shying away from the needle'" and THAT was all the proof she needed. Who needs accurate scientific information when drafting legislation that affects an untold number of women? Not Indiana! And WAY TO GO Indiana State Medical Association. Nice of you to sit this one out. Really.
The Star found strong evidence, however, that medical considerations were secondary at best. In interviews last week, the lawmaker who drafted the fetal-pain clause admitted she had consulted no scientific studies.
There is, of course, more:
Since the law took effect six weeks ago, The Star has learned, doctors at IU and Wishard hospitals stopped offering to terminate pregnancies for about 70 patients, including many with complications that put the patient's health at serious risk or where there was no possibility the fetus would survive. The IU School of Medicine's faculty practice determined that its doctors had to take that step to comply with the law, despite the fact that the law exempts hospitals.
The Family and Social Services Administration is "taking steps" to clarify the hospital exemption but it will take months. Those months are time that women DO NOT HAVE.
The IU doctors are part of a private practice not technically employed by the hospitals, and therefore they do not fit under the language of the exemption.
These doctors -- and likely many others -- had to choose from a limited range of treatment options or send patients out of state for terminations after the law took effect May 10.
The law was aimed at cutting off Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood of Indiana. But the IU doctors feared that if they continued to terminate pregnancies -- even in cases where it was medically advisable -- they would also lose the ability to treat Medicaid clients, who make up a substantial portion of their cases.
[...]
Elizabeth Ferries-Rowe, chief of obstetrics and gynecology for Wishard, said in a letter to The Star that the legislature and Daniels had "tied the hands of physicians attempting to provide medically appropriate, evidence-based care in the setting of routine obstetrics and gynecology" in "a politically motivated move to de-fund Planned Parenthood."
Ferries-Rowe, who described herself as a Catholic, said Wishard continued treating women in mortal danger, such as those suffering from ectopic pregnancies -- when a fertilized egg implants outside the uterus.
But she said she would be unable to terminate the pregnancy of a woman whose amniotic membranes had ruptured at 16 weeks with complete loss of fluid. Under those circumstances, Ferries-Rowe said in an interview, the baby would likely be born so early that it wouldn't survive, and a woman who chose not to terminate the pregnancy would run the risk of sepsis, which can cause permanent organ damage, loss of limbs, brain damage or death.
She said no IU School of Medicine doctor was able to give a patient the option of abortion even in the case of congenital fetal anomaly incompatible with life -- in other words, zero chance of survival.
The consequences of the defunding law were particularly significant for IU School of Medicine doctors because they treat women with high-risk pregnancies who have been referred by other health providers across the state.
When made aware of these consequences, Sen. Scott Schneider (who wrote the defunding amendment) said:
"This was not the intent."
This. Was. Not. The. Intent. I'm sure you, Sen. Schneider, thought you had "good intentions" when coming up with that dreadful legislation (though I profoundly disagree). Well, you know what they say about good intentions, don't you? The road to hell--but you aren't the one being forced to walk down the road you created now are you?
Mitch
Am currently listening to my governor, Mitch Daniels, talk about what a great success privatizing the Indiana Toll Road has been.
An economic success, obviously. For the state.
The Hoosiers who actually use the Indiana Toll Road and now have to pay three times as much for the privilege of getting to work in Chicago because there are no jobs in Indiana can go fuck themselves. Obviously.
Question of the Day
What is a little thing you do to bring yourself comfort?
When I was a kid, I used to rub the corner of my pillow with my thumbnail; this would lull me to sleep almost immediately. These days, it's usually something warm to drink at night.
Wednesday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by Shaxco, makers of genuine Shaxco brand press credentials.
Recommended Reading:
Hanne: (TW for ableist language) Real Women
Malada: My Brother Asked Me Why I'm a Liberal
CBS Local Boston: Disabled People with Service Dogs Turned Away from Restaurant
Geyser of Awesome: If the Beatles Started Today
deliciousnewyork: (TW for erotic imagery on the site) Hipster Trek
Saudiwoman's Weblog: Saudi Women Driving Movement
Sabria: This Hijabi Has a Legitimate Complaint
Leave your links and recommendations in comments....
MYOB, Peasants
It's hard out there for the uber rich. Sure, Obama may be keeping Dubya's tax cuts for the wealthy, and sure, you can fill your coffers while still fucking over the American people, and sure, your money gives you access to an obscene amount of political power, but doggone it, those darn whiny poor people just can't stop picking on you about your grossly huge salary. Can't someone make krajillions of dollars without everyone sticking their nose where it doesn't belong? Huh? Huh? Won't someone help the poor wealthy?
Here’s one financial figure some big U.S. companies would rather keep secret: how much more their chief executive makes than the typical worker.Of course, this has nothing to do with unchecked greed and smokescreening gross inequality.
Now a group backed by 81 major companies — including McDonald’s, Lowe’s, General Dynamics, American Airlines, IBM and General Mills — is lobbying against new rules that would force disclosure of that comparison.
The lobbying effort began more than a year ago. It involved some of the biggest names in corporate America and meetings with members of both parties on the House Financial Services Committee and Senate banking committee.
The companies and their Republican allies in Congress call comparisons between the chief and everyone else in the company “useless.”
Disclosing such comparisons “can mislead or confuse investors,” said Rep. Nan A.S. Hayworth (R[edonkulous]-N.Y.), who filed the bill to repeal the disclosure. “It creates heat but sheds no light.”Ah, I see, it's so we don't get our widdle bwains all confused.
Okay, player.
Blog Note
Posting will be lighter than usual the next two days, as I'm going to be attending the Clinton Global Initiative's CGI America, which is the Clinton Global Initiative's first conference focusing on the US' economic needs.
I'm really excited to be going. I may do some live-blogging and/or live-tweeting, but I'm probably more likely to take a lot of notes and then do a follow-up post afterward. I'm expecting to be absolutely overwhelmed with information, which is pretty much my favorite thing in the world.
In any case, you can follow the happenings on Twitter, or watch the plenary sessions live at the CGI America webcast. Highlights, news, and photos from CGI America will also be shared on the CGI Facebook page.
My governor, Mitch Daniels, is one of the speakers on Thursday. That should be fun. I can't wait to hear about ALL HIS GOOD IDEAS to help the US economy!
On Policing Femininity, and the Right to Be Wrong
This started out as a comment on Kate's post, but it got really long, so…
One of the real problems with feminist policing of expressions of traditional femininity (among many problems, which also include looking suspiciously like a thingy that polices from the other direction), is that it effectively ignores the reality that many feminist women (almost like real humans! wheeeeee!) tend to go through stages where they have different personal relationships with the accouterments of traditional femininity as they move through life accumulating experience and knowledge, and their feminist philosophy changes, deepens, broadens.
Many years ago, I rejected certain expressions of traditional femininity because I was a misogynist, raised in a misogynist culture to hate women (including myself). I was socialized to have axiomatic contempt for the feminine and all its associations with weakness and frivolity and being less than.
I was born into a world in which, given my particular set of personal circumstances and privileges, I was told that I was equal to men from the day I was born—and it was a real shock to me to find out that not everyone agreed. In theory, I was equal. In practice, I was decidedly not.
And the way I first learned to navigate that ego-rattling disparity was to assert myself as an Exceptional Woman. Not like those other women. Certainly not like those radical feminists. I wasn't like them. I laughed at dirty jokes and didn't take three hours to get ready and liked baseball. I was practically one of the boys.
Ugh. Embarrassing stuff.
I thought I was a feminist, but I only understood feminism in the most cursory way.
Then I was exposed to proper feminist theory for the first time—and suddenly I started REALLY LIKING being a woman, and other women, and all things feminine, in a way I had never liked any of those things before. It made me voraciously desirous of feminine things, many of which I'd always liked, deep down, but had rejected, shoving my affections to dark vaults at the bottom of my psychological sea. There they could be forgotten, or at least denied.
But feminism gave me permission to love the feminine, which I'd never had before. And I wanted to wear pink—not ironically—and to be pretty.
I lived on—and my perspective on the world changed, and I changed, and my feminism changed. Some of the expressions of traditional femininity I had embraced started to seem problematic to me. I didn't exactly ricochet back in the other direction, but I certainly felt less disposed toward, less fond of, certain expressions of femininity. Some of them felt, when on my body, on my skin, in my mouth, in my thoughts, like an artifice behind which I was hiding.
I lived on. Change. Etc. My life is not static. My thinking is not static. I interact with new people who introduce me to new ideas all the time. I am influenced by the world around me, which itself changes in ways that affect my thinking. I am influenced by the parts of myself that continue to emerge, and sometimes surprise me.
There has not been any point at which my personal feminism is/was "right" with regard to my expressions and/or rejections of femininity, according to every other feminist on the planet. It is a moving target, even for me, finding some balance between my feminism and my femininity.
All I have learned is not to judge, not to audit—because I have no idea where any other feminist is on her journey. I don't even know where I am on my own.
I don't want to be the police, and I don't want to be policed. What I want is the presumption I'm fumblefucking my way through this thing in good faith, that I don't want to make life any harder for any other person during my time on this rock.
What I want is the freedom to fuck up, and the right to be wrong.
Question of the Day
What food can you just not get enough of lately?
For some reason, after spending the first 37 years of my life relatively indifferent to pineapple—I mean, I liked it and all, but I never craved it and never went out of my way to eat it—I am suddenly desperate to eat fresh pineapple like it's going out of style.
All right then.
Whoooooooooops
Whoops, CNN! Your article is about how companies "must proactively work to create a workplace culture that matches their workplace policies" and create a workplace environment that is LGBTQI-friendly not just "by policies but by the attitudes and behaviors of mid-level managers and co-workers."
But your headline is: "Why gays should come out at work."
Nope!
Enough Is Enough
The brilliant Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) on the floor of the Senate yesterday. To read the full text of the 90-minute speech, go here. To sign the letter (please sign the letter!), go here.
Mr. President, this is a pivotal moment in the history of our country. In the coming days and weeks, decisions will be made about our national budget that will impact the lives of virtually every American in this country for decades to come—and the time is now for the American people to become significantly involved in that debate and not leave it to a small number of people here in Washington.
Mr. President, at a time when the wealthiest people and the largest corporations in our country are doing phenomenally well, and in many cases have never had it so good, while the middle class is disappearing and poverty is increasing, it is absolutely imperative that any deficit-reduction package that passes this Congress not include the horrendous cuts, the cruel cuts, in programs that working people desperately need, that are utilized every day by the elderly, by the sick, by our children, and by the lowest income people in our country, that the Republicans in Congress, dominated by their extreme rightwing, are demanding.
America is not about giving tax breaks to billionaires and attacking the most vulnerable people in our country. We must not allow that to happen.
In my view, the President of the United States needs to stand with the vast majority of the American people and say no to the Republican leadership and make it clear that enough is enough! No, we will not balance the budget on the backs of the most vulnerable people in this country—on our children, on our seniors, on the sick. No, we will not do that. Working families in this country have already sacrificed enough in terms of lost jobs, lost wages, lost homes, lost pensions. The working families of this country are hurting right now. Enough is enough.
But, Mr. President, now is the time to say to the millionaires and the billionaires in this country, and to the largest corporations, who in many ways have never had it so good, that they must participate in deficit reduction—that there must be shared sacrifice, that deficit reduction cannot be based on cutting back on the needs of working families and the middle class, but the rich and large corporations have also got to participate in this process.
Furthermore, it is absolutely necessary, if we are talking about a sensible deficit-reduction package, that we take a hard look at unnecessary and wasteful spending at the Pentagon.
And, Mr. President, let us make it very clear that we will not be blackmailed again by the Republican leadership in Washington who are threatening to destroy the full faith and credit of the United States government so that, for the very first time in our nation's history, we might not pay the bills we owe. That is their threat. We will destroy the record of always paying our bills, never failing to do that, unless they get everything they want.
Instead of yielding to the incessant, extreme Republican demands, as the President in many respects did in last December's tax cut agreement and this year's spending negotiations, the President has got to get out of the beltway. He has to connect with the needs of working families and ordinary Americans, and rally the overwhelming majority of our people who believe that deficit reduction must be based on shared sacrifice, that the wealthy and the powerful and the large corporations cannot continue to get everything they want while we wage a cruel and unprecedented attack on the most vulnerable people in this country.
It is time for President Obama to stand with the millions who have already lost their jobs, their homes, their life savings, instead of the millionaires, who in many cases have never had it so good.
Unless the American people in huge numbers tell the President not to yield one inch to Republican demands to destroy Medicare and Medicaid while continuing to provide tax breaks to the wealthy and the powerful, unless the American people rise up and say enough is enough, I am afraid that what will happen is the President will yield once again, and the wealthy and the powerful will laugh all the way to the bank, while working people will be devastated.
So, today, I am asking the American people that, if you believe deficit reduction should be about shared sacrifice; if you believe the wealthiest people in our country and the largest corporations should be asked to pay their fair share as part of deficit reduction; if you believe that, at a time when military spending has almost tripled since 1997, that we begin to take a hard look at our defense budget; and if you believe the middle-class and working families have already sacrificed enough, I urge you to make sure that the President hears your voice—and he needs to hear it now.
I would urge the American people to go to my Web site, sanders.senate.gov, and sign a letter to the President letting him know that enough is enough…
Ohio News
The Ohio House is currently in session (which you can watch live here). Within the past hour, they've passed two oenerous pieces of legislation, HB 78 (I believe was 64Y - 33N, but I didn't record it) and HB 79 (62Y - 35N).
HB 78 is an appalling, hideous bit of legislation (underlines & strike-outs theirs, not mine):
(A) "Fertilization" means the fusion of a human spermatozoon with a human ovum.
Read the full text here. There are many hoops a doctor must jump through to even do an abortion to save the life of a women--not to mention a shitload of tracking paperwork to be submitted to the Dept of Health.
(B) "Gestational age" or "gestation" means the age of an unborn human child as calculated from the first day of the last menstrual period of a pregnant woman.
[...]
(F) "Medical emergency" means a condition that a pregnant woman's physician determines, in the physician's good faith and in the exercise of reasonable medical judgment, based upon the facts known to the physician at that time, so complicates the woman's pregnancy as to necessitate the immediate performance or inducement of an abortion in order to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to avoid a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman that delay in the performance or inducement of the abortion would create.
(G) "Physician" has the same meaning as in section 2305.113 of the Revised Code.
(H) "Pregnant" means the human female reproductive condition, that commences with fertilization, of having a developing fetus.
(I) "Pregnancy" means the condition of being pregnant.
(J) "Premature infant" means a human whose live birth occurs prior to thirty-eight weeks of gestational age.
(J)(K) "Serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" means any medically diagnosed condition that so complicates the pregnancy of the woman as to directly or indirectly cause the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function, including, but not limited to, the following conditions: A medically diagnosed condition that constitutes a "serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" includes pre-eclampsia, inevitable abortion, and premature rupture of the membranes, may include, but is not limited to, diabetes and multiple sclerosis, and does not include a condition related to the woman's mental health.
(1) Pre-eclampsia;
(2) Inevitable abortion;
(3) Prematurely ruptured membrane;
(4) Diabetes;
(5) Multiple sclerosis.
(K)(L) "Unborn human child" means an individual organism of the species homo sapiens from fertilization until live birth.
[...]
(B)(1) It is an affirmative defense to a charge under division (A) of this section that the abortion was performed or induced or attempted to be performed or induced by a physician and that the physician determined, in the physician's good faith medical judgment, based on the facts known to the physician at that time, that either of the following applied:
(a) The unborn child was not viable.
(b) The abortion was necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman.
(2) No abortion shall be considered necessary under division (B)(1)(b) of this section on the basis of a claim or diagnosis that the pregnant woman will engage in conduct that would result in the pregnant woman's death or a substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman or based on any reason related to the woman's mental health.
You can read the text of HB 79 here, though it simply says: [A]ny qualified health plan as defined in section 1301 of the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," 42 U.S.C. 18021, offered in this state through an exchange created under that act" will not offer abortion coverage for "non-theraputic" abortion.
The House has not yet moved onto the notorious HB 125, the so-called "heartbeat bill". Will keep you updated if/when there is any news on that.
ETA:They did already vote and HB 125 passed 54 - 43. As a reminder: SCOTUS has deemed it is unconstitutional to pass laws preventing abortion before viability.
An Observation
If, as I am routinely accused of being, I actually were constantly looking for things to get mad about, following Judd Apatow and Seth Meyers on Twitter so I could stay on top of everything they're doing would be an excellent idea.
[For Shaker Teaspoon.]
Important News: I'm Packing Nail Polish For My Vacation
A few days ago, Flavia Dzodan let everyone within twittershot know that Julie Bindel's had just written a piece for the Guardian attacking femininity. I'm not going to link to it, because the world would be a better place if people stopped pretending that Bindel has anything to bring to the table.
I'm not going to set up a straw-feminist, but this is hardly the first time I've heard would be progressive ladies bad mouthing femininity.
I'm also not going to claim that feminine women are uniquely oppressed by society. Indeed, society does pressure some women (especially the ones born without penises) to display culturally-accepted levels of femininity. Transgressing these gendered expectations will get you in trouble.
However, those of us who display feminine traits do catch grief from two sides. First, there are folks who argue that femininity is a sign of weakness, in that it's associated with being a woman. Second, there are our supposed allies who argue that femininity is a sign of weakness, in that it shows signs of being corrupted by the patriarchy and corporate interests.
Both of these philosophies of marginalization assume that femininity is an artifice (unlike, say, masculinity), and that femininity is weak.
No, and no.
I am who I am: me. Women come in different flavors (That's what she said!). We are all real. We are all natural. We are all strong.
I'm feminine because that's who I am. If I can't be me, I'm not happy.
My gender expression is about me, not anyone else.
So, I'm going on vacation tomorrow. If you're in Syracuse, don't touch my stuff. My family's going to the mountains*. I'm bringing the nail polish.
Honestly, vacation is one of the few times where I get to do my nails. Most days my nails are pretty ratty looking. I'm frequently "at" work, whether I'm in my office or not. Three or more nights a week I'm busy with roller derby. I tend to our garden. We have a daughter. She makes messes (although to be truthful, my partner does the bulk of the picking up).
I've recently begun to militantly set aside time just to read.
As much as I'd like to end each day with a nice long soak in a clawfoot tub, shave my legs a few times a week, trim and polish my nails, and drift off to sleep (or thereabouts), that's not my reality. Most nights, I take a sleeping pill to quiet my mind, get to bed when I can, and (hopefully) wake up at the last conceivable second, with just enough time to throw on some a t-shirt and jeans, brush my teeth, shave my face, and head out the door.
So, you'll excuse me if I laugh at the occasional assertion that wearing pretty clothes and hair and makeup is work. For me, it's something I get to do if I'm lucky, and it makes me happy.
I'm not denying that society doesn't make the display of femininity a de-facto requirement for a lot of women, for whom these requirements are, in fact, an oppressive burden. And yes, we should continue to fight that oppression.
However, I'm not on board with the idea of replacing one type of conformity with another. Shave your legs. Or don't. Either way, you'll look great. Diversity is beautiful.
*As defined by New Yorkers
Gilded Age News
Whoooooooooooooooooops this is why pretending that global corporations have even the tiniest shred of patriotism is a terrible idea:
Less than three years after receiving $10 billion in bailout money from American taxpayers, Goldman Sachs informed its employees recently that it will fire 1,000 workers in the United States and elsewhere, shifting their jobs to the cheaper Singaporean labor market.Ha ha remember when President Obama nominated Judd Gregg to serve as Commerce Secretary? GOOD TIMES!
...Goldman Sachs has also worked to [inoculate itself from the impending blowback] by hiring former Republican Sen. Judd Gregg (NH) as an "international advisor." It is not unreasonable to assume that Gregg's 26 years in Washington will help the investment firm's attempts to placate critics.
Anyway, over at the Atlantic, Daniel Indiviglio makes the point that Goldman Sachs is eliminating the same sort of jobs here that it's taking to Singapore, where the standard of living doesn't make the reorganization a cost-saving maneuver. So why the move? Well, one issue is the shitty US economy. (You didn't actually think global corporations would stick around and help rebuild the economy they ransacked for profits, did you?) The other is the possibility of tougher regulations. Faced with the terrible specter of being forced to do business with some semblance of responsibility, accountability, and ethics, Goldman Sachs is taking its jobs and going somewhere else.
So this move may be best characterized as a bet against the U.S. economy and a way to escape some new U.S. regulation. Put simply: the U.S. is not the place to be anymore for big banking profits.Awesome.
Seeing Goldman begin to take these steps isn't great news for the U.S. The bank tends to be out in front of the economic trends, as it was with its bet against mortgages in the final days of the housing bubble. If Goldman is right, then the U.S. is going to be in for a rough time over the next decade or so. And other Wall Street firms moving more workers overseas will make matters worse, as the U.S. will lose out on some of its highest paying jobs and the contribution to GDP growth that some lost banking profits would have provided.
The Invisible Hand is hailing a cab.
Photo of the Day
[Women’s football. The team captains greet each other with a kiss.
England, Preston, 1920.
Nationaal Archief, The Netherlands]
This is the opening week of the 2011 FIFA World Cup in Germany.
Quote of the Day
"Physicians must be free to advise and treat their patients based on their medical knowledge and expertise and not have their advice overridden by elected officials seeking to impose their own ideological agenda on others." -- Governor Beverly Perdue (D-North Carolina), on vetoing NC's recent bill that would require an ultrasound and mandatory counseling with a 24 hour waiting period afterward for women needing an abortion.
Rape Is Hilarious, Part Wev in a Neverending Series
[Trigger warning for rape "humor," fat hatred, sexual assault, violence.]
Deeky texted me last night after he saw a new TV spot for the previously discussed upcoming film Horrible Bosses, in which murder and sexual assault are central "comedic" themes. This spot ran during a primetime re-run of NCIS.
"Tool Boss" Colin Farrell tells "Disrespected Employee" Jason Sudeikis, "We've got to trim some of the fat around here." Sudeikis says, "What?!" to which Farrell replies, "I want you to fire the fat people."Yiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiikes.
"Maneater Boss" Jennifer Aniston, who is a dentist, suggests to "Harassed Employee" Charlie Day that they have sex on top of an unconscious female patient. "Let's use her like a bed," she says, to which Day exclaims in response, "That's crossing the line!"
"Psycho Boss" Kevin Spacey tells "Abused Employee" Jason Bateman, "I own you, you little runt," to which Bateman sheepishly replies, "Thank you."
At a bar, with "murder consultant" Jaime Foxx, one of them says, "I guess we're just gonna be miserable for the rest of our lives," and Foxx offers, "Why don't you kill each other's bosses?" Sudeikis says, "That's actually a good idea."
Montage of someone flying out the window of a highrise building; the three men in a car spinning out of control; police cars with sirens blaring.
Cut to Sudeikis and Bateman walking down the street together, evidently discussing the murder plan. "I can't go to jail," Sudeikis says. "Look at me, I'll get raped like crazy."
"I'd get raped just as much as you would, Kurt," says Bateman, in a sort of hurt voice because rape is totes a compliment.
"No, no—I know you would," Sudeikis reassures him.
And, no, the fact that it is a prison rape joke between men does not make it funny. There is nothing funny about prison rape.
Call Time Warner and let them know that you don't think rape jokes, especially rape jokes that suggest rape is a fucking compliment, are funny.If you're on Twitter, you can tweet directly at Warner Brothers Pictures: @WBPictures.
How Now, Brown Cow?
Now that my ass (hip, actually) has celebrated marriage equality in New York on the front page of multiple newspapers, I thought it would be a good time to discuss logical next steps in the fight for justice. Here are three:
1. Keep up the fight for marriage equality
I'm sure there will be challenges to the new New York law that eliminates gender as a consideration for marriage. We need to be ready. Marriage equality is not a reality in most states. The federal Defense of Marriage Act still stands. So, there's plenty of work to be done. Odds are, you'll be hearing about all of this, so I'm going on to point two.
2. Destroy marriage
As more of us enter same-sex enter marriages, I'd like to argue that we've got an even greater responsibility to undermine the institution. I'm not talking about getting divorced or otherwise being in shitty relationships with people we're married to and/or our children. Heavens no. Straight people have been doing that shit for years. Marriage is still going strong.
Contrary to what conservative activists keep saying, the nuclear household of two adults and their children is nowhere near the dominant form of social organization in the world today, let alone historically. There's no reason we should be privileging it today. None. I say this as a happily married lady.
There are lots of good reasons why people get married. I'm afraid that some of them stem from the privileges our society affords married couples. We should give those privileges to all people, regardless of how they choose to organize their affairs.
Here are some proposals of alternate realities that could undermine marriage:
Universal health care- everybody should have access to free health care, regardless of who they're married to. This free health care should include all health care, including stuff like birth control, abortions, services for people undergoing gender transition, prostate exams for trans* women, etcetera.
Fixing visitation rights- everybody should be able to easily designate who can visit them and make decisions for them in an emergency situation.
Fix the US' immigration laws- they're fucked up, yo.
Make birth certificates less shitty- in Wisconsin, where my daughter was born, the only parents that are automatically listed on children's birth certificates are the person giving birth to the child and her (actually hir, but I bet Wisconsin didn't think about that) legally married spouse. That's bullshit. The law should reflect that there are all sorts of ways to raise a child.
Let people define their own households for tax purposes- I see no good reason why people who share income and live under the same roof(s) shouldn't be able to file their taxes in the same way that a married couple does.
These are just a few suggestions. I'm sure if we put our heads together, we can disrupt the marriage narrative in all sorts of ways.
3. Give trans* people equal rights already
Marriage equality does benefit trans* people. When gender isn't a factor in the legality of a marriage, we're less likely to have courts invalidate our marriages. Plus, the law doesn't have to tie itself in knots figuring out whether or not we're in heterosexual relationships.
However, GLBTQ groups have done a lot of pushing for marriage equality, draining resources away from other fights.
Some of us are bitter. I, for one, remember that the Empire State Pride Agenda yanked trans* people out of the non-discrimination legislation that New York State passed in 2002. Nearly a decade later, a gender expression non-discrimination act (GENDA) still hasn't become a reality in New York.
I've been fired from a job for being too queer while living in a municipality with a gender expression non-discrimination law. Trust me, GENDA isn't magic. However, passing GENDA sends a clear message about trans* people's equality under the law. More to the point, continuing to not pass GENDA also sends a clear message about trans* people's place in society. It is not a welcome message.
There's plenty of finger-pointing to go around on the failure of GENDAs to become law. Certainly, organizations dominated by affluent, white, cis, gay men and the occasional lesbian counterpart have not fought particularly hard for us, despite appropriating our suffering for fundraising purposes.
Trans* people have various organizations of our own, but aside from frequently having problems of their own, few people seem to listen to them.
Marriage equality passed in New York because of power politics, plain and simple. Marriage equality didn't just having the polling numbers (GENDA typically polls at least as well as marriage equality), its backers had clout. We had a governor who made marriage a major issue. The media focused on marriage equality as one of the major issues facing New York this year. Combined with the polls, it became clear that Governor Cuomo et al., were prepared to use a vote against marriage equality to destroy their opponents come election time.
Trans* people don't have that kind of clout. Partly, we need to keep educating the public and lawmakers, to keep telling our stories. However, we also need our allies to take our needs seriously. Part of this means that our allies, especially those who claim to fight for "LGBT" rights need to educate themselves. Otherwise, they need to stop pretending to be our partners.
Passing GENDA will, I'm afraid, continue to be a struggle. I don't have a simple strategy for how to do it. First and foremost, a large number of allies need to invest in the fight. After all GENDA is for everybody.
--
These three items are hardly a comprehensive platform for advancing justice (see below). However, it's important to note that only one of them involves promoting marriage. Don't get me wrong, I'm still celebrating our latest victory. However, the fight for equality is far from over.
Phew!
If you were worried that the Obama administration might insist that any deal to raise the nation's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling by Aug. 2 would include an end to former President George W. Bush's controversial tax rates on the wealthy, don't worry! IT WON'T!
The White House, seeking an agreement to raise the nation's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling by Aug. 2, on Monday said it would not insist that any deal include an end to former President George W. Bush's controversial tax rates on the wealthy.See?
The White House said the president is pushing the GOP to agree to eliminate some tax breaks for businesses and loopholes for wealthier taxpayers, but is not seeking to eliminate the across-the-board rates introduced by President Bush. That means taxpayers who earn more than $250,000 annually have gotten a reprieve.It's about time that taxpayers who earn more than $250,000 annually get a reprieve from the unrelenting threat of having to pay slightly more taxes during an economic crisis caused by deregulation of businesses they disproportionately run while the nation is at five wars they disproportionately support!
The entire middle class is a small price to pay for a modern Gilded Age.
Number of the Day
10 million: The number of people currently affected in drought-stricken areas of Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, and Uganda, by the worst drought in 60 years to hit the Horn of Africa following two insufficient rainy seasons in a row.
Food prices have risen substantially in the region, pushing many moderately poor households over the edge, [Elisabeth Byrs, spokeswoman of the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, told a media briefing].The drought, combined with unrest, is resulting in an increased number in refugees, many of whom are malnourished. And because the global economy is fubared at the moment: "UN humanitarian appeals for Somalia and Kenya, each about $525 million, are barely 50 percent funded, while a $30 million appeal for Djibouti is just 30 percent funded."
A U.N. map of food security in the eastern Horn of Africa shows large swathes of central Kenya and Somalia in the "emergency" category, one phase before what the U.N. classifies as catastrophe/famine -- the fifth and worst category.
Child malnutrition rates in the worst affected areas are more than double the emergency threshold of 15 percent and are expected to rise further, Byrs said.
Donate to UNHCR, if you can.Please feel welcome and encouraged to leave other ideas for teaspooning opportunities in comments.
July 7: What Tami Said and Shakesville Host My Planned Parenthood Blog Carnival
The GOP has launched a war on women. The more hyperbolic among them will claim it's a war on murder; the less incendiary will assert it's a war on abortion; the politic will say there is no war at all—just people of good faith fighting for their pro-life principles. But the shade of the spin does not matter. The truth is that the GOP has launched an all-out war on reproductive rights and abortion access, which is a direct assault on women's agency, bodily autonomy, basic legal rights, and very personhood.
Women are the primary target, but, as in any war, there is vast collateral damage: Trans men who can get pregnant and might need access to abortion services; poor men, young men, uninsured men, marginalized men who seek healthcare at clinics like Planned Parenthood that the GOP endeavors to defund and drive out of business.
Indiana is a key battlefield in this fight. In May, conservative legislators voted to defund Planned Parenthood by cutting off Medicaid payments to the healthcare provider. A June 21 segment on The Rachel Maddow Show, in which Maddow spoke with Planned Parenthood of Indiana president Betty Cockrum, laid out the grave consequences of this legislation, happily signed into law by Republican Governor Mitch Daniels:
[The transcript is available here.]
My fellow Hoosier, Tami, underlines what's at stake:
— According to the Planned Parenthood of Indiana website, "all Medicaid patients will need to pay for their own care or access other funding to be seen at Planned Parenthood of Indiana health centers."We know how dire this situation is. We know, because there is no other organization in our state dedicated to Planned Parenthood of Indiana's mission: "To provide comprehensive reproductive health care—confidentially, compassionately, affordably; to protect through prevention—educating honestly and accurately; to support those who need us most—without bias or judgment, without fear, without fail; to ensure that the doors of opportunity remain open for those we serve and their families."
— According to the Indianapolis Star, Planned Parenthood of Indiana has been forced to lay off two sexually transmitted disease prevention specialists, and had to close each of its health centers for one day on June 22.
—Also from the Star, "A total of 85,000 Hoosiers receive services at Planned Parenthood of Indiana's 28 health centers. If the law is allowed to stand, Planned Parenthood will have to close eight centers that serve low-income patients at two Indianapolis locations, as well as in Bedford, Hammond, Michigan City, New Albany, Terre Haute and Muncie."
These diminishing services disproportionately impact women and men who can ill afford it--the poor and marginalized. Last year, the organization performed more than 26,000 pap tests, nearly 30,000 breast exams for clients, more than 50 percent of whom were at or below the poverty level.
We know the truth about Planned Parenthood. We know how important this organization is in the lives of the people it serves. We are those people. We have stories. On Thursday, July 7, we will share them.
Please join What Tami Said and Shakesville for "My Planned Parenthood," a blog carnival devoted to sharing the stories of the women and men helped by Planned Parenthood of Indiana and other Planned Parenthood branches.
What:
Share your personal story of being helped by Planned Parenthood of Indiana or Planned Parenthood in another state. Link your story to why it is important that the organization continue to thrive. We are particularly interested in the stories of Indiana residents, but welcome other bloggers to take part. Planned Parenthood is under attack in states throughout the country, including Kansas, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Texas. We need to hear ALL voices.
When:
All posts should be scheduled to publish by 9 a.m. Eastern, Thursday, July 7.
How:
— Spread the word about this blog carnival through your blog, word of mouth and social media. On Twitter, use hashtag #MyPP. Post the My Planned Parenthood graphic on your blog and link it to this announcement. (See code below.)
— Email whattamisaid@gmail.com or melissa.mcewan@hotmail.com with your intention to participate. Include the name of your blog and its URL.
— Write your post. We may ask you to include a .jpg carnival graphic with information on how to support Planned Parenthood in your post.
— Schedule your post to publish by 9 a.m. Eastern, Thursday, July 7. If you can, send a direct link to your post to one of the email addresses above before July 7. What Tami Said and Shakesville will publish the names and links to all participating blogs in a stub post on July 7.
— Continue to spread the word and direct people to blog carnival posts.
If you are not a blogger, but would like to share your story, send it to one of the emails above and we will publish it on our websites. (Material published on our blogs is subject to our editorial approval.) Be sure to include your home state and a "handle" that needn't be your real name.
We will NOT link to any anti-choice or anti-Planned Parenthood posts. We will verify content at links.
Neither What Tami Said nor Shakesville are affiliated with Planned Parenthood or Planned Parenthood of Indiana. Planned Parenthood is not involved in this effort. Melissa and I are simply two Hoosier women concerned by conservative legislatures' attacks on women and the organizations that serve them, as well as continued distortions about Planned Parenthood's services disseminated by opponents of reproductive freedom and choice.
We hope you will join us in our stand.
If you or a loved one has ever used Planned Parenthood's services, please donate to Planned Parenthood of Indiana, or a Planned Parenthood in your state today.
To embed the above on your own website/blog, copy and paste this code:
To embed the above on your own website/blog, copy and paste this code:
To embed the above on your own website/blog, copy and paste this code:
Question of the Day
What is your favorite kind of vacation?
Do you prefer going somewhere isolated and quiet? Do you prefer to be in the middle of a bustling city which you've never visited previously? Do you prefer squeezing in as much culture or sightseeing or dining as possible, or lying as still as possible on a stretch of beach? Do you prefer staying at home? Do you prefer to travel in a group, with your partner or family, alone...?
I've enjoyed all of the above, at different times.
The Texas House Wants to Be Indiana
I'm sorry, Texas:
The House approved a sprawling health care savings bill Monday that abortion-rights opponents hailed as a historic step toward de-funding Planned Parenthood and limiting abortion. Democrats, though, warned the bill includes permission for Texas to join an interstate health care compact, which they said could lead to a state takeover of the management of elderly Texans' federal Medicare benefits.Meanwhile, in the Regarbagican aspirational state of Indiana, a federal court has put on hold parts of similar anti-abortion legislation, which has had the consequence of causing doctors at Indiana University and Wishard Memorial hospitals to stop offering abortion services, "including in cases where the woman's health was at serious risk and where there was no possibility the fetus would survive," because they're unclear how to comply with the law.
The anti-choicers have evidently figured out that, failing actual criminalization of abortion, they can just create a nightmarescape of confusion about whether and how to provide abortions at all.
[H/Ts to Shakers Harmony and Brian.]
Perfect
Charlie Sheen is reportedly getting a new sitcom in which he will play a character "very similar to the one he played on Two and a Half Men" but "the show will be a lot racier."
Way to go, universe.
Servicemembers Still Being Discharged Under DADT
Despite the fact that President Obama signed legislation to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" 187 days ago (and counting), the Advocate reports today that the Pentagon has confirmed servicemembers are still being dismissed under the policy, because the "certification" loophole has allowed the military to drag its feet on implementing the change.
Outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates is leaving office this week, to be replaced by outgoing CIA chief Leon Panetta, who testified during his confirmation hearing earlier this month that he "will work closely with the Joint Chiefs of Staff to assess whether the elements for certification in the law are met before signing it myself." Which is so vague that it's essentially meaningless.
The can just keeps getting kicked down the road, and, per the Advocate, the discharges continue:
The Pentagon confirmed Monday that more service members have been discharged under "don't ask, don't tell" pending certification of the policy's repeal, with one individual's discharge approved as recently as Thursday.So, basically, the military may not actively ask anymore, but if you tell, you're still getting kicked the fuck out.
A total of four airmen have been discharged under the policy in the last several weeks, Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez confirmed Monday.
...Defense officials had said that the separation approved April 29 was the only such discharge under DADT since late October, when the Defense Department limited authority for discharges to just five senior officials.
But in a statement, Harper confirmed the additional discharges since. "On May 31st, 2011, the Secretary of the Air Force approved discharges of two Airmen under the provisions of 10 USC 654 [the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy]," Harper said. "On June 23, 2011, the Secretary of the Air Force accepted the resignation of an Airman who asked to be separated under the provisions of [DADT]."
Harper said that all four individuals discharged had made voluntary statements regarding their sexual orientation and had asked to be "separated expeditiously."
SCOTUS Strikes Again
Another garbage decision empowering the moneyed class, care of the United States Supreme Court:
The Supreme Court has tossed out an Arizona law that provides extra taxpayer-funded support for office seekers who have been outspent by privately funded opponents or by independent political groups.Welcome to America 2.0: The Corporatocracy.
A conservative 5-4 majority of justices on Monday said the law violated free speech, concluding the state was impermissibly trying to "level the playing field" through a public finance system.
RIP Democracy.
[H/T to Eastsidekate.]
Random Yet Timely YouTubery
Transcript:
Dan: Uh, I'm going to need a couple more weeks on that loan payment...
(Roseanne opens door)
Mike Summers: Hi, I'm Mike Summers, your state representative. How ya doin'?
Roseanne: (unenthusiastically) Great.
Mike: Good, I'm going door-to-door, trying to get to know my constituents.
Roseanne: Oh, door-to-door, huh? That takes a lot of time. Why don't you just go down to the unemployment office and see everybody at once?
Mike: I hear ya. And you're right.We can't let this area's work-force lay idle. That's why bringing in new business is my number-one priority.
Roseanne: How?
Mike: Through tax incentives. See, we're gonna make it cheaper for out-of-state businesses to set up shop right here in Lanford.
Roseanne: So they get a tax break?
Mike: Yeah, that's why they come here.
Roseanne: Well, who's gonna pay the taxes that they ain't paying?
Mike: Well, you... you will. But you'll be working. Good, steady employment.
Roseanne: Union wages?
Mike: Well, now, part of the reason these companies are finding it so expensive to operate in other locations is--
Roseanne: (cuts him off) Soooo, they're gonna dump the union, so they can come here and hire us at scab wages, and then for that privilege...we get to pay their taxes?
Mike: Is your husband home?
Roseanne: Well, he's on the phone tryin' to keep us from losing our house. Hey...let's talk about that. See, we're broke. I can't even afford to buy groceries unless it's double-coupon day.
Mike: Mm-hm. You know, we should talk about that. Oh! But, I have several houses I have to get to before I quit go--
Roseanne: (cuts him off, grabs coat) Oh, hey, great! I'll come with ya. Boy, it's gettin' rough out here Mike.
Daily Dose of Cute
Run around dog park and lie in grass.
Also: Profuse panting. Water. More running around until total exhaustion.
Crawl onto couch after some food and treats.
[Insert additional playtime here, energy permitting.]
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Monday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by Shaxco, publishers of the upcoming memoir, Liss Is My BFF and I Hate Her by Deeky W. Gashlycrumb, as well as the upcoming coffee-table book, Deeks Is My BFF and I Hate Him and Here Are Some Large Pictures I Took of Him Making Stupid Faces Whilst Wearing Neckties, by Melissa L. McEwan.
Recommended Reading:
Jillian: Blago Convicted of Trying to Sell Obama's Senate Seat
Andy: Hillary Clinton Praises NY Victory But Doesn't Endorse Marriage Equality in Remarks at State Dept. Pride Event
Waymon: Troubling Tax Issues for Illinois Civil Unions Arise: Why Separate is Never Equal
Mac: [TW for descriptions of sexual violence; violence; descriptions of PTSD triggers and reactions] I'm Gonna Need You to Fight Me on This: How Violent Sex Helped Ease My PTSD
The Angry Black Woman: [TW for anti-bisexual bias] Dan Savage Strikes Again
Mustang Bobby: In Which I Defend Michele Bachmann
And, relatedly, here's a look at how eminently possible it is to write about what a terrible candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann is in virtually every conceivable way without resorting to sexism, care of Richard Adams: Michele Bachmann launches 'American-centric' presidential bid.
Leave your links and recommendations in comments....
Of Course It Is
[TW: Misogyny and assault]
Just in case you were wondering, after eastsidekate's post, if Supreme Court Justice David Prosser grabbing Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley by the throat in anger was somehow actually her fault, guess what?
You're right.
It's always the woman's fault. Always.
In Which Scatx and I Talk About Some Stuff
[Trigger warning for misogyny and violence. Emails in which we discuss media reactions to the new book by Mara Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls and the Consequences of a World Full of Men, have been shared with Scatx's permission.]
Scatx: I'm sure you are all over this like peanut butter on toast, but just in case: Ross Douthat's newest column, "160 Million and Counting." Why, New York Times, do you pay this man? WHY? Best part: The bottom where it says, "Paul Krugman is off today." I think we can ALL see that.
Liss: Have you seen this one? Jonathan Last in the Wall Street Journal: "The War Against Girls." Very interesting (by which I mean NOT INTERESTING AT ALL) that there are dudes using this book (which is purportedly NOT anti-choice) to make anti-choice arguments. Anyway, I hope men keep talking about this, so they can tell us ladies what to do!
Scatx: Wow—I can't even bring myself to read all of that. Skimming made me want to barf on my shoes. I feel for the author of the book—the WSJ guy makes it clear that she knows that her writing about this will be used by the wrong people for the wrong reasons. Also: The colonialism of this whole thing is so problematic. The blatant disregard for systemic misogyny (which is, you know, a product of systemic misogyny). Seeing abortion as the problem instead of a symptom of larger inequalities and prejudices. I just don't even know how to think through all the elements at play. Of course, there was that new Gallup poll showing that, here in the US, we still love having baby boys more than we love having baby girls, just like in 1941 (when abortion was illegal). I'm sure that won't get the same level of press from anti-choice advocates that they love to give to India and China. GAH!
Liss: There's an article by Ujala Sehgal at The Atlantic that makes the point about cultural double-standards pretty well. And then there's the issue of infanticide, which is being conveniently left out of some of the posts who want to attribute "unnatural selection" exclusively to the West "exporting abortion technology." P.S. Here's another dude talking about it! Wheeeeeeeeeee!
Scatx: I was wondering about infanticide (I have written on it as a historian of the colonial period and remember studying it back when I was going to be a classicist). I just went to a huge women's history conference and was on a panel about it. It was interesting because there is (and always has been) so much infanticide in societies where contraception is limited or unavailable and slut-shaming and/or "bastard"-shaming is rampant. It is obvious to me that even if we were suddenly to all agree that abortion is morally wrong, it will NEVER stop. Nothing in history ever has shown that making abortion illegal will stop it. Nothing. Ever. Not paying attention to that kind of history, that overwhelming and in-your-face reality that we can see across millennia, boggles my brain to no end. The only way to end the boys-over-girls problem is for people to stop thinking that there is something better about boys. That's it.
Liss: Absolutely. And, of course, for us—the collective us, the global us—to stop actually providing material benefits to being a boy or having a boy. Plus all the other stuff that's wrapped up in the gender binary, and in the heterocentrism that hears "it's a boy" and axiomatically thinks "he'll have a wife," and in the poverty and lack of education and void of female role models and religiosity that feed gender prejudices and and and… I see why it's easy to say "damn feminists and their abortion exporting!" becomes such an easy refrain in lieu of embracing a vast challenge with such a complicated array of interrelated solutions.
Scatx: Plus, this bullshit of "we are against abortion to protect GIRLS" is so infuriating. Grown women literally can't be less of this story. Is there ANY other way for them to write pregnant ADULTS out?
Liss: Probably.
[H/T to Shaker Bonny_Swan for the WSJ piece.]
Chipping Away...
Kansas, the state notoriously opposed to women's rights, appears to have found a bureaucratic means to deny women, esp. poor and uninsured women, health care. On May 16th of this year, Gov. Brownback signed a law that targeted abortion providers with special regulations and any clinic which offered the health care service must be in compliance by July 1st or else they will not receive their special operating license. It was ten days later that the clinics received notice that the new regulations were coming. This week they got the most recent listing of medications that must be on hand and room dimension size. Let's not forget all that goes into this: they had to try and be compliant with new regs, get inspected (and perhaps reinspected), and file the paperwork and wait for approval.
One of three abortion providers in Kansas appeared likely to close after being denied a state license to continue terminating pregnancies at its Kansas City-area clinic, and abortion rights supporters feared Friday that the anti-abortion governor's administration will reject licenses for the other two.
I'd call the licensing process "nefarious and sinister". If the license is pending July 1st or later, any abortion performed will be deemed illegal. This an extremely disturbing back-door method of denying women necessary health care. As Ms. Pilate said:
[...]
A lawyer for the Aid for Women clinic in Kansas City, Kan., said Friday that it received a notice that its application for a license had been denied by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment without an inspection. Attorney Cheryl Pilate said the clinic was looking at its legal options but would have to close, at least temporarily.
The clinic received its notice on the same day the leader of a regional Planned Parenthood chapter said inspectors who spent two days at its Overland Park clinic found it will comply with all new regulations. An inspection of the third provider is scheduled for Wednesday. All three are in the Kansas City area.
"We're doomed," said Dr. Herbert Hodes, who performs abortions for the third provider, the Women's Health Center, also in Overland Park.
[...]
The new law requires a separate, annual license for any hospital, clinic or office that performs at least five non-emergency abortions a month, and it requires state inspections, including at least one unannounced visit each year. The health department can fine providers and go to court to revoke their licenses.
Pilate said the health department told Aid for Women its application was denied because it had disclosed that it would need extensive renovations.
Also, she said, the clinic reported the physician who performs abortions is in the process of seeking privileges at an area hospital. The new law requires that a physician have privileges at a hospital within 30 miles.
The department's notice said that for those reasons, "an on-site inspection will not be necessary and will not be scheduled."
Pilate said the clinic couldn't have even obtained remodeling plans or a building permit for renovations by July 1. She called the licensing process "rushed and absurdly unrealistic."
"There are patients with scheduled appointments with few or no other options," Pilate said. "It's going to hurt poor women."
What's the matter with Kansas? The politicians.
Speaking of odious, woman-hating legislation, recall the Ohio "Heartbeat" Bill? If not:
[A]n abortion would be illegal once the heartbeat of a fetus is detected. The bill would require the doctor to find that heartbeat using "standard medical practice," a term not defined.
That bill, HB 125, is scheduled for floor vote tomorrow. There is a rally scheduled for tomorrow morning, if you live in or near the area.
A doctor who violates the law could be found guilty of a fifth-degree felony, punishable by up to a year in prison and a $2,500 fine. The mother could not be charged.
As I said in the Ohio post--GOP: Pro-Fetus; Pro-Forced Birth; Anti-Woman, Anti-Family, Anti-Decency.
Quote of the Day
[Trigger warning for homophobia, sexual violence, Christian Supremacy.]
"There isn't one single civilization that has survived that had openly embraced homosexuality. So you say, 'What's going to happen to America?' Well, if history is any guide, the same thing's gonna happen to us."—Pat Robertson, professional gay-hating wankstain, on his comedy show The 700 Club, after New York enacted marriage equality.
Earthquakes, floods, fire, brimstone, locusts, farts. Do shut up, Reverend Fucky.
I think we need to remember the term 'sodomy' came from a town known as Sodom, and Sodom was destroyed by God Almighty, and the thing that they practiced was homosexual activity, and even they tried to rape angels who came down there, so that's the kind of people they were. But, uh, beyond that, Jesus didn't—when He spoke of Sodom, he didn't say anything about the homosexuality; he talked about just the fact that business was as usual until God decided to destroy it. And he sent an angel down there, and he said to Lot and his family, 'Get out now 'cause I'm gonna destroy this whole area.' So, that's where sodomy came from. We use the term sodomy, and it means Sodom. What's it like? Well, we're heading that way as a nation. In history, there's never been a civilization ever in history that has embraced homosexuality and turned away from traditional fidelity, traditional marriage, traditional child-rearing, and has survived. There isn't one single civilization that has survived that had openly embraced homosexuality. So you say, "What's going to happen to America?" Well, if history is any guide, the same thing's gonna happen to us. [edit] It's not a pretty world we live in right now, and we need all of God's help we can get, and I don't think we are exactly setting ourselves up for his favor.[Via Right Wing Watch.]
Number of the Day
0.1%: How much consumer spending slipped last month in the US.
Consumer spending was flat in May, breaking a string of 10 straight months of gains, as households struggled with rising prices and automakers failed to deliver the models Americans wanted.Well, that's pretty much the noest of all the doys.
When adjusted for inflation, spending slipped 0.1 percent, the Commerce Department said on Monday, falling for a second straight month.
The report, which showed underlying inflation quickening, suggested that consumer spending would offer little support to the economy in the second quarter.
Hey, I've got an idea to stimulate the economy: Legalize same-sex marriage nationally. The average amount spent on a wedding in the US is $25,000, which doesn't even include the cost of a honeymoon or any jewelry that may be exchanged before and/or as part of the ceremony.
Hey, I've got another idea to stimulate the economy: Stop chipping away at Roe. Give women access to affordable birth control and abortion so that they can have the most control over their reproduction possible, which will give them more disposable income.
Hey, I've got yet another idea to stimulate the economy: Amnesty for undocumented workers. Let's offer citizenship to immigrant and migrant workers who don't have it, but want it, providing them easier opportunities to obtain credit, invest, and make large, long-term purchases.
Hey, I've got a fourth idea to stimulate the economy: Legalize weed. Not only would legalizing weed provide new business opportunities for entrepreneurs (and thus new jobs) and create a whole new industry for a legal, taxable product, but it would also eliminate the wasteful spending of extended sentences in for-profit prisons for pot busts.
Et fucking cetera.
I could do this all day. Social justice is inextricably linked to a robust economy. We don't just need progressive economic policies; we also need progressive social policies to empower marginalized people economically as well as legally.
I 
New York
The lovely Ms. Anna, 3, holds a sign with her mom, Shaker Westsidebecca, during a rally Saturday in Syracuse to celebrate marriage equality in New York State. At left in adorbz polka-dot dress is Ms. Anna's other mom, Eastsidekate. Photograph by Lauren Long for The Post-Standard. Posted with the family's permission.So, Friday night, the New York State legislature voted to legalize same-sex marriage in New York. This has already been much-discussed in the Open Threads, but I wanted to offer a dedicated thread for the decision, too.
There was much rejoicing at Shakes Manor Friday night, not only because we are fervent supporters of marriage equality generally, but because we have New York peeps, including family, who are personally positively effected by this decision.
On a personal level, I blubbed my face off.
On a political level, well, I blubbed my face off. But I also observed: "The fact is, in New York tonight, there are Republicans to the left of Obama on marriage equality." This is something that did not escape the notice of the New York Times editors, either. Their editorial "Gay Marriage: Where's Mr. Obama?" is really very good.
Fundamental equality, however, is hardly the equivalent of a liquor law that can vary on opposite sides of a state line. Why is Mr. Obama so reluctant to say the words that could lend strength to a national effort now backed by a majority of Americans?The US is ready for marriage equality. This is the time.
Congratulations, New York.
Here's the Deal About Respect
[Trigger warning for misogyny and assault]
During Clarence Thomas' confirmation hearings, one of the topics of discussion was his history of sexually harassing women. This was an issue for a couple of reasons. First, sexually harassing women is wrong. Second, if you're the kind of privileged asshole who thinks it's okay to violate women's autonomy, there's a good chance that you'll be an abusive and generally fucked-up Supreme Court Justice.
We all know how that worked out.
Poorly.
I'm not going to go all Weiner on you, but permit me to be the nth person to assert that it's pretty hard to trust a man in power who abuses women.
Claiming the privilege to abuse people in one's private life (or public life), and using one's political privilege to abuse people are two manifestations of the same fundamental disease. Violence against women is a political issue, then, not only because HOLY SHIT ABUSING WOMEN IS WRONG, but also because government is, or damn well should be, about people working together to make sure everyone's needs are met. It's about respect.
Sadly, I'm not terribly surprised to hear about the latest case of a governmental leader who cares fuck all about justice abusing women.
Today's example is Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser. You may recall that he just won a hotly-contested re-election bid. You may also recall that he sided with a four-to-three conservative majority in ruling that Republican legislators' secretive and outrageous disenfranchisement of many Wisconsinites was a-okay. Bully for bullying!
This [TW] March,
Prosser acknowledged...that he called Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson a "bitch" and threatened to "destroy" her during a closed-door meeting...Over the weekend, Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley reported that Prosser put her into a headlock during the um, deliberations on the above four-to-three decision.
"In the context of this, I said, 'You are a total bitch," Prosser said. "I probably overreacted, but I think it was entirely . . . warranted". [Emphasis mine.]
If the latest allegations are true, Judge Prosser needs to resign.
If you think my political beliefs are the reason I'm calling for Prosser's resignation, you're right. People who hold public office should be in the business of respecting others. If that's not a succinct description of my political philosophy, I don't know what is.
H/t to Shaker BlueRidge
Two Facts
1. My garbage governor, Mitch Daniels, is still not running for president. Phew.
2. His garbage governance is still being considered a model of Republican leadership to be rolled out in statehouses across this nation. Eek.
By the way, despite Republican's constantly touting the "success" of Daniels' highway privatization scheme, I will just note, as a user of the privatized highway, that I used to be able to drive to Chicago on the Indiana Toll Road for 80 cents. Since it has been privatized a couple years ago, it now costs 3 times that, the quality of the road has significantly diminished, and the toll booths have been automated and all the booth attendants put out of work. SUCCESS!
