<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>UofM Feminist</title>
      <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:22:08 -0600</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/?v=3.33.uthink</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

            <item>
	
         <title>Texas - 1; Polygamist Sect - 0</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/20/us/20polygamy.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin">A Texas judge ruled to put a 14 year-old girl in foster care</a> because her mother was deemed unsuiltable to care for her. When the girl was 12, she was married to the now-jailed polygamist Warren Jeffs with her parents blessing. Way to go Texas - something I never thought I'd say.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/08/texas_1_polygamist_sect_0.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/08/texas_1_polygamist_sect_0.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:22:08 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Time for an update</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>This is a rudimentary attempt to update you on what's been going on around here. As September and October loom, law school applications are consuming my life. I have finished the bulk of my personal statements, but there is always more to do there. I'm also applying to many graduate programs simultaneously, so I'm studying for the GRE and putting together applications there too. Fortunately, those applications aren't due until spring time, which allows a buffer for me to actually do school. My birthday is coming up as well, which brings some added benefits. People may actually consider me an adult now. For a part time job, all I seem to be doing is working, reading, or writing! I plan on applying as early as possible for law school and trying to get grad school applications done early as well. The more options I have the better. My sister is starting college up this year, so she's moving away. It appears that August is going to be more work than play. I'm hoping that my birthday will lighten things up and allow for some awesome get togethers, but we shall see. </p>

<p>School starts in about three and a half weeks and it can't come sooner. I'm so excited for this semester. I'm taking an awesome course about totalitarianism that allows me to read Arendt, Wolin, and Weber again. I'm also taking a course on the biological perspectives on gender and sex which should bring some interesting posts. I'm trying to keep up with the McCain and Obama race, but until the conventions and debates begin, there is little to report. The media appears to be repeating itself. I will be going to an Ani DiFranco concert in October, which will bring a much needed release after all the law school application frenzy. </p>

<p>I'm a little disappointed that I haven't had much time to paint or write [for fun] recently, but hopefully during school, I will find ample time to do so. Somehow, I think no matter how much I study for this ridiculous GRE, I'm not going to do better or worse. The math portion is going to be my bitch, but my vocabulary needs some work, so that is going to be tough. Why is it that one must take such silly standardized tests to even be considered for additional education? Isn't the fact that you graduated, or will be graduating, from college enough? Why does the Political Science department need to know how well I am with math to consider me? Why not just submit your grades and some samples of writing? That seems to be the best way. Unfortunately, this world doesn't seem to be interested in rational solutions. </p>

<p>Next week brings Jahna's birthday, work, an advisor appointment, getting my hair done, payday, visiting my sister, and studying. Here's your homework: please comment with any big words I should know.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/08/time_for_an_update.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/08/time_for_an_update.html</guid>
         <category>Bitching</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:21:46 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Sex Determination at Olympics</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Does anyone else know about this? At the Beijing Olympic Games, if officials cannot determine that a female athlete is not a male, she must undergo 'sex determination.' This has apparently been going on for quite some time. Today, <a href="http://olympics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/27/lab-ready-for-sex-tests-for-female-athletes/">the New York Times</a> reports that the lab is ready for sex testing in China. <blockquote>Experts at the lab, located at the Peking Union Medical College Hospital, will evaluate cases based on their external appearance and take blood samples to test hormones, genes and chromosomes, said Prof. Tian Qinjie of the college hospital, according to the Xinhua news agency.</p>

<p>Gender verification tests emerged in the 1960s when Communist countries in Eastern Europe were thought to be using male athletes in women’s competitions. The tests were used at the Olympics for the first time at the 1968 Mexico City Games.</blockquote><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_verification_in_sports">In 1999</a>, the International Olympic Committee revised the testing to only occur when the female athletes sex was suspected to be male rather than every athlete who competed. The test being carried out in Beijing is the same that has been <a href="http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-07/27/content_8781161.htm">used in previous games.</a> <blockquote> The test aims to maintain fairness of the Games, and to rule out inaccurate test results.</p>

<p>    Experts say test results for about one in 500 to 600 athletes are abnormal.</blockquote>That is quite a large number. Why is it that so many <i>female</i> athletes cannot 'pass' gender tests? The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/">Wikipedia</a> offers some of the controversies: <blockquote>The practice has come under fire from those that feel that the testing is humiliating, socially insensitive, and not entirely accurate or effective anyway. The testing is especially difficult and problematic in the case of people who could be considered intersexual. The genetic tests provide potentially inaccurate results and discriminate against women with disorders of sexual development. Genetic anomalies can allow a person to have a male genetic make-up but be physiologically female.<br />
A commentary published in the Journal of the American Medical Association stated,<br />
"gender verification tests are difficult, expensive, and potentially inaccurate. Furthermore, these tests fail to exclude all potential impostors (eg, some 46,XX males), are discriminatory against women with disorders of sexual development, and may have shattering consequences for athletes who 'fail' a test." </p>

<p>The article also states:<br />
"Gender verification has long been criticized by geneticists, endocrinologists, and others in the medical community. One major problem was unfairly excluding women who had a birth defect involving gonads and external genitalia (i.e., male pseudohermaphroditism).<br />
A second problem is that only women, not men, were stigmatized by gender verification testing. Systematic follow-up was rarely available for female athletes "failing" the test, which often was performed under very public circumstances. Follow-up was crucial because the problem was not male impostors, but rather confusion caused by misunderstanding of male pseudohermaphroditism."</blockquote>I feel as if Judith Butler would have an excellent analysis of this phenomenon. There have apparently been many individuals over the years who have run into trouble with their gender and these absurd tests and have had their medals taken away. Wiki makes a point - what about intersexuals? What about people with ambiguous genitalia? Why is this even an issue? I want so badly to discuss why we have separated the olympics into this bullshit gender/sex binary that just plain-and-simple does not work or separate people into 'boy' and 'girl.' Thoughts?</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/sex_determination_at_olympics.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/sex_determination_at_olympics.html</guid>
         <category>Sexism</category>
         <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:17:10 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Lars and the Real Girl</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Watch this movie. This film was incredibly awkard, funny at times, and heart-warming to the point of tears. I watched it last night with three of my girlfriends, two of which cried when the real doll died. The story of Lars is simplistic yet fantastical. He lives in the garage next to his brother and his wife who live in the house. Lars has a delusional disorder and throughout the process of the movie, he becomes closer to a whole human and slowly allows other people to touch him, something he describes as burning. Although Lars has a condition that hinders his development, he is like many men across the world today. Many men are going online to buy these anatomically correct Real Dolls that function as girlfriends and sex toys. In the movie, the doll, Bianca, is religious and stays in the house with his brother rather than with Lars, so that aspect of the doll is removed for the most part. Lars created Bianca on the internet and then proceeded to give her a history, personality, and friends. The small town came together to help Lars through this apparent transitional period and accepted Bianca as a new member of the town and the church. Their efforts paid off as well as the incredible patience and persistance of one of Lars' coworkers. </p>

<p>The film was absolutely amazing and I would recommend it to anyone. I would also recommend But I'm A Cheerleader! as well. I saw that one on Friday with a room full of ex- Queer Theory students. So funny!</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/lars_and_the_real_girl.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/lars_and_the_real_girl.html</guid>
         <category>Movies</category>
         <pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:09:48 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Take that, Limbaugh</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>For every action, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/27/us/politics/27radio.html?ref=politics">there is a reaction.</a></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/take_that_limbaugh.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/take_that_limbaugh.html</guid>
         <category>News</category>
         <pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 10:59:06 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Oil Spill on Nearly 100 Miles of Mississippi River</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Oh my poor poor river. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/25/us/25spill.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin">Via New York Times.</a></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/oil_spill_on_nearly_100_miles.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/oil_spill_on_nearly_100_miles.html</guid>
         <category>News</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:28:50 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Ron Paul gets his own convention...&apos;cause he can</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Ron Paul is not endorsing John McCain for the Republican nomination. That really isn't a surprise. Apparently, however, <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/22/paul-casts-a-larger-shadow-convention/">Paul is holding his own convention</a>. His initial plan was to hold it at Williams Arena on the UofM campus. Fortunately for him, his attendees have grown so much that he is moving the convention to the Target Center, which holds 18,000 people. The only downside I can see to this is that <i>Tucker Carlson</i> will be here for those wonderful 4 days. I hope for his own sake that I don't see him on the street.</p>

<p>Tix are $17.76 and go on sale on Friday, 7/25/08.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/ron_paul_gets_his_own_conventi.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/ron_paul_gets_his_own_conventi.html</guid>
         <category>Politics</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 21:08:57 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Pregnant Immigrant Jailed Under Illegal Immigration Pact</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/us/20immig.html?_r=1&ref=washington&oref=slogin">I'm really too upset to write about this. </a></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/pregnant_immigrant_jailed_unde.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/pregnant_immigrant_jailed_unde.html</guid>
         <category>News</category>
         <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:13:00 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Quickies</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/us/18census.html?ref=us">As if it was any surprise</a> that the U.S. Census of 2010 wouldn't count same-sex marriages. Even though same-sex marriage is legal in two states, these couples will be classified as unmarried same-sex partnerships. You ask why? <b>Because it violates the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996</b>.</p>

<p>The Netroots Nation, a gathering of liberal bloggers, are gathering in Texas for a four day conference lasting until Sunday. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/us/18census.html?ref=us">If anyone from Fox News happens to appear at the conference,</a> they will have to wear Opinion Media labels. Hehe :)</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/quickie_us_census.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/quickie_us_census.html</guid>
         <category>News</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:56:27 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Democratic oil legislation denied</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>As I'm sure many of you are aware, there is a sincere debate going on in Congress about offshore oil drilling. The <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/us/18cong.html?ref=washington">New York Times</a> reports today that the House republicans have blocked the democratic efforts on oil leases and drilling. Rather than allowing offshore drilling or drilling in domestic areas, democrats attempted to pressure energy companies into drilling for oil on lands they already leased from the federal government. This logical initiative fell short of the margin needed. Opponents argued that the legislation, "which also called on the Interior Department to accelerate leasing in an area of Alaska specifically set aside for drilling, could diminish domestic exploration since it would bar oil companies from obtaining new leases if they were not actively exploring current holdings." I think I missed something here. Isn't it a good thing that companies explore their current holdings before getting new leases? It makes perfect sense to me! In an effort to show that they were not against drilling for oil, the democrats offered this initiative, which republicans are denouncing as a sham. On the other side, democrats are asserting that this legislation will bring immediate relief to Americans and to gas prices, whereas drilling in new areas would take a few years before any effect would happen. "Democrats say oil companies are sitting on 68 million acres they could be exploring. But republicans say many of those sites have proved to be dry holes or are the subject of lawsuits and disputes over federal permits." If it is proven that some of the land is a dry hole, thats one thing. If there are any lawsuits or disputes over permits, then that company probably <b>shouldn't get an aditional permit!</b> Sheesh...</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/democrative_oil_legislation_de.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/democrative_oil_legislation_de.html</guid>
         <category>News</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:12:01 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>McCain: Rape is Funny</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>I know that I am super late on this, but I feel it would be a crime not to post about it. <a href="http://www.feministing.com/archives/009787.html">Feministing</a> has the full story on John McCain's rape joke from 1986. <blockquote>Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, "Where is that marvelous ape?"</blockquote>I could maybe understand if this was a stupid joke made and now he regrets it, but the worst part of the whole thing is that McCain's advisers and managers are arguing that statements like this are <b>what makes McCain authentic</b>. There was no denial of the statement or even any attempt to acknowledge how stupid the statement was. Absolutely awful.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/mccain_rape_is_funny.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/mccain_rape_is_funny.html</guid>
         <category>Politics</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 09:38:26 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Michelle Obama @ BlogHer</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>In case you wanted to talk to Michelle Obama, she will be posting over at <a href="http://www.blogher.com/">BlogHer</a>.</p>

<p>Cool :)</p>

<p>UPDATE: Also over at BlogHer, this Saturday will be a <a href="http://www.blogher.com/who-better-serves-women-you-obama-or-mccain">Q&A session with advisers</a> from both the McCain and Obama campaigns to discuss women's issues. </p>

<p>Way cool :)</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/michelle_obama_blogher.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/michelle_obama_blogher.html</guid>
         <category>Politics</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:38:20 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Rich Fuckers Guilty of Tax Evasion</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>I am absolutely convinced that the owners of this country have found dozens of ways to avoid having to pay anything more than they need to. Do you think the J.P. Morgan family has any issues paying for taxes? Do you think they do? Fortunately, some of the wealthiest in the country have been busted. According to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/17/washington/17tax.html?ref=washington">the New York Times</a>, a Senate report "examined how UBS, the big Swiss bank, and LGT, which is run by the royal family of Liechtenstein, helped wealthy individuals evade American taxes." So the ones who can afford it are finding ways out of helping rebuild our country's infrastructure, keep our fire departments and police deparments staffed, or educating our children. That's heart-warming. The Senate has named only 8 names that were caught to add to the 100 Americans the IRS is currently investigating. There is a growing investigation into the UBS, the world's largest private bank and this is merely an addition to the prosecution. </p>

<p>Don't stories like this make you sad? It makes me want to stop paying taxes altogether. Of course, I still care about the bridge that fell a mere 2 blocks from my home and the fact that my sister and the other Minnesota children aren't getting adequate education. You know, all that important stuff. </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/rich_fuckers_guilty_of_tax_eva.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/rich_fuckers_guilty_of_tax_eva.html</guid>
         <category>News</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 10:02:52 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>McCain on Gay Adoption</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>John McCain's campaign managers are <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/16/us/politics/16mccain.html?ref=politics">putting out fires everywhere.</a> It seems that whenever McCain lets his true colors show and state his own personal opinion, he needs to 'clarify his statements' or his managers need to cover his tracks behind him. People get upset whenever McCain states his opinion; perhaps its because people don't like his opinions. In an interview with the New York Times, McCain said that "he opposed allowign same-sex couples to adopt children. 'I think that we've proven that both parents are important in the success of a family so, no, I don't believe in gay adoption,' he said." First of all, you don't 'believe' in gay adoption. You either support it or you don't. He also said "that he wanted to encourage adoption and make the process easier, but that adoptive parents should be mixed-sex, traditional couples." Rightly so, many civil and gay rights organizations criticized his remarks. In response to these criticisms, Tucker Bounds, one of McCain's campaign spokespersons, said "John McCain could have been clearer in the interview in stating that his position on gay adoption is that it is a state issue, just as he made it clear in the interview that marriage is a state issue...He was not endorsing any federal legislation." Mr Bounds continued stating: "Senator McCain's expressed his personal preference for children to be raised by a mother and a father wherever possible...He recognizes that there are many abandoned children who have yet to find homes. John McCain believes that in those situations that caring parental figures are better for the child than the alternative." So, McCain doesn't believe in gay adoption until people get upset? I refuse to believe that he supports gay adoption at all, even if there are no other options. He wants all the nice white heterosexual couples to take his example and adopt these kids. Regardless of whether or not this is a state issue, the fact that McCain cannot keep his story straight and that he must issue corrections on every personal opinion he spouts off is disappointing and quite upsetting. </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/mccain_on_gay_adoption.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/mccain_on_gay_adoption.html</guid>
         <category>Politics</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 08:40:44 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
	
         <title>Bush wants to make sure anti-choicers aren&apos;t discriminated against</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>According to the New York Times and <a href="http://www.feministing.com/archives/009733.html#comments">Feministing</a>, Bush has decided to completely take over women's reproductive health by forcing clinics not to 'discriminate' against anti-choicers. <blockquote>The Bush administration wants to require all recipients of aid under federal health programs to certify that they will not refuse to hire nurses and other providers who object to abortion and even certain types of birth control. <br />
Under the draft of a proposed rule, hospitals, clinics, researchers and medical schools would have to sign "written certifications" as a prerequisite to getting money under any program run by the Department of Health and Human Services.</blockquote>Commenting on the above post, Ben from Feministing states: <blockquote>The thing about this is that the article is unclear what, if any, requirements there are after hiring. And since it's a bona fide occupational qualification for a nurse or practitioner to provide care uninfluenced by their own personal prejudices, I don't see this lasting very long. It's on extremely shaky legal ground anyway, and seems like a disgusting but pointless symbolic gesture.</blockquote> Lets hope this doesn't last or even get through the front door of congress.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/bush_wants_to_make_sure_antich.html</link>
         <guid>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/englu057/gwss3307/2008/07/bush_wants_to_make_sure_antich.html</guid>
         <category>Feminism</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:06:21 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
