Call for Bloggers!

Sharing this so that interested bloggers may participate.

Dear blogger friends,

You’re invited to take part in a Planned Parenthood Blogger Bee!

On Wednesday, Dec. 2, Planned Parenthood will be holding a National Day of Action to lobby the Senate for health care reform that ensures women’s access to reproductive health care. In order to get the word out as quickly and widely as possible, Planned Parenthood is asking bloggers to write about the National Day of Action and the negative impact that the Stupak amendment would have on health care reform if it is included in the final legislation.

Under the Stupak amendment, millions of women would lose benefits that they currently have and millions more would be prohibited from getting the kind of private sector health care coverage that most women have today. It is imperative that women and their allies make their voices heard, so that they do not become second-class citizens in a newly reformed health care system in the United States. The first step will be to make sure everyone has the tools they need to inform themselves and others about the new health care system under the House-passed bill and the Stupak amendment.

We ask that on Wednesday, Dec. 2, you use the key points (after the jump) to inform your readers and spread the message that we will not accept health care reform that leaves women worse off than before.  To participate, send the name and url of your blog and your Twitter name if you have one, to Constance DeCherney at constance.decherney@ppfa.org by 5 p.m. on Tuesday, Dec. 1. If you sign up, your blog will be listed and linked on Planned Parenthood’s Action Center and included in a special Planned Parenthood (@PPact) Twitter List.

For more information on health care reform and the Stupak amendment, visit us at http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/healthreform.

We need to hear from you! Help us protect women’s access to reproductive health care!

Best,

Christie Petrone
Senior Press Officer – Health Care
Planned Parenthood Federation of America

do you take this man (and his name)?

After a heads up from Feministing, I learned that the American Sociological Association put out the results of a recent study showing that about 70% of Americans believe that women should take their husband’s last names when they get married and 50% think it should be a legal requirement. Wow. Although I am not one to put too much stock into polls (I, nor anyone close to me has ever been polled about anything remotely significant so I have no idea where they get these people and their opinions), that’s a large percentage for something so traditional and antiquated. And BY LAW? Why?

I am at that age where more and more of my friends are getting married. I’ve noticed a trend among the women to keep their own last names to the complete exclusion of their husband’s or to take their spouse’s name name in addition to theirs (with and without hyphens). That’s not to say that the majority of women in America don’t take their husband’s names, but maybe it’s a generational thing that not too many of my peers feel obligated to take their husband’s name.

One common characteristic of the women who haven’t totally forsaken their own names is that they are extremely ambitious. Maybe they’ve already accomplished a significant amount in their lives and certainly plan to continue doing so. In my opinion, it’s just not fair to assume (or in the case of any legislation, mandate) I will change my name and erase this identity that has existed for 27 or more years. An identity that has been through a lot and accomplished much more. I agree with Jessica at Feministing when she says

What’s really distressing about this news – Laura Hamilton, the study’s lead author says that when respondents were asked why they thought women should change their last names, “they told us that women should lose their own identity when they marry and become a part of the man and his family.”

Put on your red dress, and slip on your high heels…*

I feel as though I need to begin with a disclaimer of sorts. I am not perfect. Sometimes I hold opposing ideas and views in my mind at the same time, perhaps prompting some to call me a hypocrite. I prefer to quote Walt Whitman, “Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes.” Whatever you call it, it’s what makes me condemn misogyny & violence yet sweat it out to raunchy hip hop music. It’s what makes me speak of feminism and support positive images of women while thinking I like my flight attendants svelte and pretty. Huh? Yeah…

In 2005, Delta Airlines decided to go upscale and hire designer Richard Tyler to create a signature piece to add to their flight attendant [FA] uniform choices. Now, in addition to the slacks, blouses, skirts and blue dresses, female FAs can don a fierce red dress that almost looks too fab for the aisles of a 747. The dress makes a bit more sense when you hear the inspiration behind the design was a time when air travel was a classy affair, not a tiring inconvenience that we show up for in our pajama pants & hoodies (I see yall).

Not everyone was pleased with the new, attention-grabbing red dresses. Recently, the Association of Flight Attendants at Northwest (which includes Delta employees after the merger) filed a compkaint requesting that the red dress be made available in sizes larger than the current max, which is 18, up to a size 28. According to Patricia Reller, vice chairwoman of the grievance committee, “Red is a color that attracts attention and someone, somewhere has made a decision that they don’t want to attract attention to someone in a dress that’s larger than a size 18 … I’m very offended by it.” Reller and crew also have beef with the requirement that FAs who want to wear orthopedic shoes aren’t allowed to wear the skirt or dress uniform of any kind but must wear pants.

Here’s where my opposing thoughts come in. In defense of Reller and the union, the airline is improperly making a judgment call on what’s attractive and/or appropriate without regard to what it actually takes to perform the job. Under the law, there’s the term “bonafide occupational qualification” or BFOQ. A BFOQ basically refers to an employer’s right to discriminate if the criteria upon which the discrimination is based is directly related to the performance of the job. For instance, airlines may institute height requirements for the comfort and safety of the cabin crew and passengers. FAs must be able to reach certain above-head compartments or function appropriately in a small, low-clearance cabin. A size 28 woman in a red dress, however, is no different from a size 28 woman in a blue dress when it comes to pouring Sprite and demonstrating how a seatbelt works.

Could this be another message from society that only “beautiful” women should be seen (and by beautiful we mean size 18 or less)? Is Delta saying that women in skirts/dresses belong in heels because we want to see those shapely calves? God forbid that they’d rather be comfortable on a 6 hour flight and skip the pu

babydaddy/babymama

When speakers use the phrases “baby daddy” and “baby mama” in non-colloquial contexts, do they mock African-Americans or do they embrace one way that the American vocabulary has been enriched by the contributions of African-Americans?  Both?  Neither?

The above query comes from the post “White People’s ‘Baby Daddy’”on the Feminist Law Professors blog and I must admit that I’ve often wondered the same thing – do the terms ‘baby daddy/father’ and ‘baby mama’ take on a different meaning or carry a different connotation when used by white people? I want to say no because I don’t want to think that any particular group has ownership or privilege over certain words. Yet regardless of what I want to believe, I know that’s not true. We only need to look at the ‘nigga/nigger’ debate to understand how a word can have different meaning and impact depending on who is using it. For the most part, Black people own that word and, until recently, have been able to say it without being demonized or called racist. Bridget Crawford continues…

To Congress: Fully fund violence against women prevention

Once again, here’s a way that you can participate in that CHANGE our new president was yapping about as well as help women and families. Please read and contact your elected officials. I will.
Swiped from Ann over at Feministing:

Both statistically and anecdotally, incidents of violence against women increase as the economy falters. As Obama prepares to release his budget, now’s the time to ask him and Congress not to reduce funding for preventing violence against women and helping survivors. According to Women’s eNews:

Congress is currently authorized to spend up to $175 million a year for the program. But the actual allocation of federal dollars is subject to a congressional vote, and lawmakers last year set aside $123 million; over $50 million less than was approved. That was a slight cut from fiscal 2007, when Congress spent $125 million on the program. Women’s safety advocates also want Congress to fully fund the Violence Against Women Act, a broader anti-violence law originally passed in 1994 that provides some funds for domestic violence shelters but also sets aside money for a wide range of other services relating to sexual and domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking. But with an ailing economy curtailing federal revenues from taxes, and lawmakers focused on economic-stimulus efforts, more money for discretionary social programs that combat domestic violence could be hard to come by.

In other words, the tanking economy means there’s a greater need for these services, but less money to provide them. Marcella at abyss2hope writes,

I am asking each US citizen who reads this post to contact President Obama, your 2 senators (or 1 if you live in MN) and your representative and ask them all to support the reauthorization and the funding for the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act. After you contact your representatives, please ask those you know to do the same.

Again, contacted your elected officials HERE.

Women be shoppin’!

At least that’s what Milton Bradley and other game manufacturers must think. I was in Toys R Us earlier this week looking around. Brought back a lot of memories going down the aisles and looking at all the new toys they have. I had to go by the board games and check out the wares. This is what I found…

Monopoly for her

Pink Scrabble

Uno Chic

Princess Chess

Ouija Woman

Jenga Girl Talk!

Twister Pink

Honestly?

They will sell our girls the same old regular shit with a coat of pink paint and make money hand over fist! Worst part about it, if I was a pre-teen, I’d be DYING for that pink Ouija Board! SMH @ gender roles/stereotypes.

16 @ War

It’s hard out here being a woman. Especially a young woman. As I was listening to this song

by Karina Pasian and it put me in mind of this recent study about teenage girls feeling harassed. This is nothing new, hell I could’ve written that song AND conducted this entire study just from the personal experiences of my own and those of my friends. I think any woman could.

90% of teenage girls report experiencing sexual harassment.

Ninety percent of girls reported experiencing sexual harassment at least once. Specifically, 67 percent of girls reported receiving unwanted romantic attention, 62 percent were exposed to demeaning gender-related comments, 58 percent were teased because of their appearance, 52 percent received unwanted physical contact and 25 percent were bullied or threatened with harm by a male. 52 percent of girls also reported receiving discouraging gender-based comments on the math, science and computer abilities, usually from male peers, and 76 percent of girls reported sexist comments on their athletic abilities, again predominantly from male peers.

[...] Older girls and those from a lower socioeconomic background reported more sexism than did their peers. Latin and Asian American girls reported less sexual harassment than did girls of other ethnic groups. Girls who had been exposed to feminist ideas, either through the media or an adult such as a mother or teacher, were more likely to identify and report sexist behavior than were girls who had no information about feminism.

… Frequent sexual harassment may lead girls to expect and accept demeaning behaviors in heterosexual romantic relationships, and sexist remarks.

Just a little food for thought. Chew on that.

- 26 @ War.

Is your Senator hating on FAIR PAY for women?

Well shame on him/her!

We’ve made it past the first vote (if you remember my blog about it last month) and the results weren’t so positive. Now we’re gearing up for round two in the Senate on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which would have a major impact on the lives of women who’ve been subject to pay discrimination. Today, women in this country are still paid only 77 cents for every dollar earned by men! WHAT? And we still have to pay the same gas prices?! Nutso!

With 57 Senators voting in our favor, we are now just 3 votes away from moving the bill forward. Women everywhere need your help to make fair pay a reality.

The National Women’s Law Center is reaching out to Senators in key states who voted the wrong way the first time around. If you live in one of the following states, at least one of your Senators voted against the bill: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Indiana, Iowa, Florida, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, and Virginia. Please e-mail that Senator now.

If you don’t live in one of those states, please forward this eCard to your friends, family, and contacts who do.

Thanks. Be Active, yo. Hold your elected officials accountable to represent YOUR beliefs and YOUR interests!

Alice Walker Speaks My Mind

When I wrote the post trying (incoherently at times) to describe how I felt about Obama, Clinton, Black people and (white) women, I couldn’t really put the words together in an eloquent way. Tell the truth, I didn’t really try. I just wanted to vent. 

Thank goodness there are people out there who have the energy to put these issues into well-crafted sentences. Alice Walker did just that in a piece posted on The Root entitled Lest We Forget: An open letter to my sisters who are brave. I include selected portions after the jump…

Boy, men sure are delicate.

click on the pic for the BIG picture and the rest of the article.

This article from Good Housekeeping has been circulating around the interweb for like, EVER. Still, I can’t help but get a kick out of it. Post it on a messageboard and you’ll see how many people find absolutely nothing wrong with the message put forth in the article/ad. I guess at a certain level, there’s nothing wrong with it if that’s what you’re into. It’s the entitlement of it all that really gets to me. 

If anything, I think men should be offended. They sure seem delicate and sensitive. If I, as a wife, need to tiptoe around my husband because he can’t handle being around all those “work-weary people” everyday, and survive under the burden of strain and pressure placed upon him at his white-collar job, well he’s a loser. If he needs to be coddled and the realities of our family life must be hidden away from him, well he’s a wimp. If he can’t handle the real world, well he’s lame.