Laugh Break
It's the beginning of the second week,
and it feels like schoolwork is already demanding every waking hour.
in case you're in the same boat,
let's take some time to smile!
January 27, 2010
January 22, 2010
Blog for Choice: What does 'Trust Women' mean to you?
What do I think 'Trust Women' means? There is the simple answer: trusting women to make the right choices for themselves about their own lives.
But I also think there is a more complicated answer, one that touches on the tandem issues that affect the debate over choice today, and reminds us that our work is far from finished.
Trusting women means giving them the chance to make informed decisions, equipped with the knowledge of and access to their options. Without comprehensive sex education and safe, timely access to reproductive health care, the trust we give seems pretty empty. We must remember that giving our trust does not exempt us from the responsibility of ensuring that the resources women need to make their informed decisions are available--and remain available.
In honor of today, the 37th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, I want to take the time to thank all those who put themselves, their lives, and their families on the line to provide women with the option of abortion: clinicians, clinic staff, reproductive health advocates and volunteers.
I have volunteered as a clinic escort in recent years, spurred into action by a stint at a local women's newspaper. My experiences have been eye-opening, which is to say that I have been both inspired and disheartened. I have great respect for the volunteers I have had the privilege of working with and for all the other escorts across the country, many of whom engage in situations more dangerous than I can even imagine.
To learn more about the reality of clinic escorting and the actions of protesters, take a look at a these great resources that provide an intimate look at the experiences of escorts far more brave and far more seasoned than I:
http://everysaturdaymorning.wordpress.com/
http://www.iamemilyx.blogspot.com/
January 11, 2010
What exactly am I paying for?
This entry, found on feministing, originating out of the daily kos got me thinking...being both a supporter, and former employee, of NARAL, I have often felt this certain, well, depressive outlook, towards the actual results of my donations. Having worked not just for NARAL, but for other "progressive" organizations, in their fundraising arms, I became very disillusioned by the ability for such organizations to actually lead to any sort of change. Perhaps the work they do is better than nothing, and maybe it is a result of fighting the good fight, particularly when it comes to women's rights (and human rights in general), but I always feel a knot in my stomach when I see my hard earned money going towards a blanket holiday card sent out by the HRC.
I suppose I don't have any real ideas or solutions when it comes to the fact that now, most people in the United States, are connected to civic engagement through "checkbook memberships," but I do wonder how this conversation can go...if there are ways that we can all support our beliefs (whatever they may be) without just throwing $10 at each month?
December 21, 2009
Rape Culture and Conditioned Gender Roles
Found this through random forum serfing and thought it was amazingly insightful. Hope it gives you all something to think about.
http://fugitivus.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/another-post-about-rape-3/
December 14, 2009
Concerned you're not the perfect girlfriend?
Oh, Natalie Dee, what would I do without you?
http://www.nataliedee.com/121109/the-wait-is-over.jpg
December 6, 2009
In Honor of Returning Home
Over the past four years, I've learned that coming back home is rarely as romantic as a Norman Rockwell piece. Instead, it's messy, hilarious, sobering and charming. It's more akin to a Bloodkin tract.
When I headed back to my hometown in central Illinois for the Thanksgiving weekend, the first thing I noticed was the new LCD community bulletin board. While it seems insignificant, it was a reminder that my town, and the people in it, had changed since I had been there last. Upon return to an old home, all relationships need to be renegotiated. This is exhausting in and of itself. Add the complications of expected gender roles, and you're in for quite a visit.
My return to cornfields was filled with laughter and tension. I reconnected with people I hadn't seen in years and met a good number of new and wonderful people. There were stiff conversations with old friends and long nights with some of my dearest. Still, there were relatives who were more concerned with the size of my ass than my scholastic achievements (who dished out subsequent glares when I shoveled extra pie into my belly). Inevitably, I was asked about my relationship status and why I couldn't keep a relationship together for longer than a week. Thanks, folks! Overall, it was both wonderful and frustrating.
November 23, 2009
What the what? (am I supposed to do with my future)
As I get older, I've been encountering questions of "the future," specifically in regards to career and family more and more readily--be it through my mother's unloading of her dream for me to be able to be a "stay at home mom" on my brother's girlfriend (who she had just met), or through my increasing awareness of the number of facebook friend's replacing their profile pictures with ones of their new babies, or my boyfriend and my discussions about this thing we call the "future."
So, in encountering these questions, I've become more aware of the continued reliance on traditional gender roles as a way that many people understand how a woman makes choices. The idea of a woman in the United States often not having the choice of being a stay a home mom, but instead needing to both work and be a full time mother, is not a new one, nor is the idea of the "super mom"--the mother who doesn't only pursue some impressive career but also does all the things that white, middle and upper-class moms are supposed to do, like bake cookies for their kid's Halloween parties and attend PTA meetings (hell, be the head of the PTA). (I label this classification as such mostly due to a common media portrayal of the Supermom). What is interesting to me, however, is that conversations around these choices and realities that women are often faced with are still seeped in some very old assumptions about women and their proper roles as such.
Continue reading "What the what? (am I supposed to do with my future)" »
November 22, 2009
What is a feminist?
I used to be a biology major. When I decided to change my major to Women's Culture and Health, my guy friend asked me, voice dripping with disgust, "You're not going to become a feminist are you??" I looked at him like he was crazy, "I'm a woman. I'm already a feminist." Of course, as I said when discussing it with my female friends later, I'm not going to start burning my bras anytime soon. But I think feminism has become accepted enough that women don't need to resort to extreme acts to get attention for their cause. I thought a lot about this encounter; are people still afraid of "feminists" because they're afraid of getting burning underwear stuffed in their faces? Or are people simply afraid of women with opinions?
Margaret Atwood asked "What is a feminist?" better than I ever could: "Does a feminist mean a large unpleasant person who'll shout at you or someone who believes women are human beings? To me, it's the latter, so I sign up."
I'm sure I am a feminist. I believe in choice for all. I believe in a woman's right to her body as strongly as I believe in a woman's right to decide how she dresses and what religion she practices or chooses not to.
I am a woman; therefore I am feminist.
November 19, 2009
Feminism and Religion: A Damaged Relationship?
Alright, so I'm sure most of you super-educated feministas read Ross Anderson's Minnesota Daily article a while back ago about Muslims and their supposed disrespect for women; it got half a dozen retort articles at least, not to mention comments. Well, as irksome as some of the perhaps unconscious bigotry in Anderson's piece was, I'm going to make myself a lightning rod for controversy here and say Anderson wasn't totally in the wrong, not about Muslims specifically but about the anti-feminist nature of almost every religion. Note before my little rant starts: educational criticism on my facts and opinions is more than welcome.
We don't need to look very far to find proof of religion-based discrimination against women. In the Catholic religion, women are not allowed to become priests or bishops. In the Muslim religion, women are held to a higher standard of modesty than men by being told to cover their hair and arms. And in the Orthodox Jewish religion, women not only must sit farther from the Torah than men but are often separated from this centerpiece of the Jewish religion by a divider, incapable of touching the holy book when it is carried around the synagogue.
Continue reading "Feminism and Religion: A Damaged Relationship?" »
November 9, 2009
Groomzilla is coming!!!
WC Admin Superwoman Teaona introduced me to the website offbeatbride.com a while ago. I'm normally not a wedding planning junkie (no offense to those that are); I can't even stay in a committed relationship (yes, mom; I admit it). But this site is AWESOME. Indulge in some "wedding porn", and read this hilarious link about the rare but deadly Groomzilla:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/01/fashion/01love.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3
Main site:
http://offbeatbride.com/
November 4, 2009
Maine repeals gay marriage law
Obviously, certain parts of the U.S. and the world are more politically progressive and accepting of same-sex marriage. The New England region is one of these, a region that has made remarkable progress in recent years with the gay-rights movement (New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, and Connecticut all allow same-sex marriage).
Despite the fact that New England is arguably more accepting of gay marriage than any other region in the country, gay-rights advocates suffered a crushing blow yesterday, November 3rd, when Maine voters surprisingly voted to repeal the state's new law legalizing gay marriage. With this decision, Maine became the 31st U.S. state to block same-sex marriage through a public referendum.
Executive director of the gay rights group Freedom to Marry, Evan Wolfson, isn't giving up. Wolfson said that this emphasizes "the fact that we need to continue those conversations and make ourselves visible as families in communities."
Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative Christian group that opposes same-sex marriage, interpreted the decision differently, saying, "It interrupts the story line that is being manufactured, that suggests the culture has shifted on gay marriage and the fight is over. Maine is one of the most secular states in the nation, it's socially liberal, they had a three-year head start to build their organization and they outspent us two to one. If they can't win there, it really does tell you the majority of Americans are not on board with this gay marriage thing." Can't you just hear her spitting out those last few words in disgust? As if being gay were a disgusting disease, the desire to marry a same-sex partner a phase that would pass in time? As Feministing's founder Jessica Valenti says of Gallagher's quote, "The contempt practically drips from the words {gay marriage thing}."
What do I have to say about this? Love is love is love. The idea that anyone should be able to tell you who you can and cannot marry (barring an incestual match) is ridiculous.
For more info, check out this NY Times article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/us/05marriage.html?_r=1&hp
October 21, 2009
Listen to the embryo.
While browsing Feministing, I saw a post about choicekills.com, an extremist pro-life site. As Lori from feministing.com points out, their site is hilarious. Their logo features Judy the talking Embryo--YES, Judy the talking EMBRYO--being stabbed in the womb; adorable! The site also features fake testimonials, compares their creepy logo to the image of Christ on the cross, and hosts a bunch of other B.S. For the love of all that is holy, PLEASE click on the "Listen to Judy, the Talking Embryo" link in the upper right-hand corner.
Check it out, and learn how to avoid the "seduction of choice":
http://www.choicekills.com/
October 6, 2009
Save the boobs?
As many of you probably know, October is breast cancer awareness month. Some of you may be decked out in pink ribbons, t-shirts, and arm bands yourself, as a friend or relative of a victim of breast cancer--Or perhaps you are a survivor yourself.
I'm all for awareness of the dangers of breast cancer. However, some young activists are using some questionable methods of creating awareness and buzz. Many ads feature highly sexual images and themes--Take this advertisement for a Toronto-based charity's event called the Booby Ball: http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehumancondition/archive/2009/10/02/sexy-breast-cancer-ads-provocative-or-patronizing-.aspx
Is this going too far? I think they're right in thinking that these types of ads will generate more attention and awareness to the issue, but the question is whether these ads are in good taste. For instance, in my opinion, I think that they could have nixed the "You know you like them... save the boobs" line and the (albeit censored) flashing scene at the end. Of course, I roll my eyes at the basic concept of the ad, but other than that, I don't have a personal issue with it. However, will a victim of breast cancer, or someone who's lost a mother, a sister, an aunt, a grandmother, a wife, or a daughter to breast cancer feel the same?
October 5, 2009
Do exactly as you're told, all the time, every time.
Today, I woke up a little early for class. Like any responsible college student, I chose to spend my precious extra minutes creeping on Facebook. Checking out my newsfeed, I click on my male friend's girlfriend's profile. Creeping along, I look at her groups, and notice one called, "A List for Women: What Guys Want You to Know." I figured I was in for a laugh, and clicked on the link.
I was disgusted. The description included 100 rules that women apparently need to live by in order to stand a chance at scoring a man. Initially, the "rules" weren't too bad--joking about how football always came first, etc. It was peppered with the typical, gross and mildly degrading guy banter that we've been desensitized to--E.g. "SWALLOW! SWALLOW! SWALLOW!" But as I continued through the group description, they grew increasingly disrespectful and downright outrageous.
One of the first eyebrow raisers was Number 21, which warned women against inviting your significant other to meet your parents before they ask you to meet theirs--because "men do rule relationships." Last time I checked, any healthy relationship was a partnership.
The author/s continued to further degrade women and imply their inferiority. Number 41 explains that "you will never be as good at any sport as a guy." So, sporty ladies, quit while you're ahead--You can never aspire to the athletic greatness of a man. In fact, you're probably better off not speaking at all, because, as Number 56 states, "girls can't do banter, so don't even bother trying. You will just embarrass yourself and us. Leave it to the professionals."
Really, though, it was quite an informative piece of literature. Thanks to Number 81, I now know to "expect abuse whilst on the walk of shame, " because I am a "dirty little slut," and that "if we {men} cheat it doesn't mean we don't love you (88). Women everywhere can rejoice that they are "primarily f*cktoys" (92), then housekeepers (93), and then, lucky us, whatever we fancy (94). I wouldn't get too crazy though, because we should also do exactly as we're told, all the time, every time (34). On the discussion board, one man guaranteed that if women did exactly what they were told, when they were told, how they were told to, there would be a decrease in domestic violence. WHAT?
How fortunate are we that we can do whatever we want, providing we keep a clean house, satisfy our man, and ask first? What's truly disgusting is that while the administrator of the group is a man (or--misogynistic pig, whichever you prefer), the only additional officer is a WOMAN.
Check it out yourself, ladies. If you're feeling particularly feisty, join the group and wreak a little mayhem in the discussion boards.
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/group.php?gid=2220694360.
September 14, 2009
We're Baaaack!
Hello, University Women (and men)! Women's Center Communications Intern speaking. Our Feisty Femmes blog is up and running once again, and in dire need of a makeover and some updates. However, that will have to wait, because we have a controversial topic to discuss.
Today, the Genocide Awareness Project visited the University of Minnesota Twin Cities campus, setting up camp in front of Coffman Memorial Union. This sounds like a positive thing, I'm aware--Someone promoting awareness of genocide in foreign countries? When I heard some of my colleagues discussing their impending arrival last week, I was surprised to hear their negative attitudes in regards to GAP. However, the program doesn't exactly live up to its seemingly positive, proactive title.
The Genocide Awareness Project is a mobile photo-mural exhibit which travels from college campus to college campus, "educating" students on the subject of abortion. GAP is a Pro-Life organization. This in itself is not the issue (Everyone is entitled to their own stance on a controversial issue such as abortion, as well as the right to free speech). I was extremely offended, however, by their educational methods.
The Genocide Awareness Project displays giant, mural-sized pictures of aborted fetuses and places them next to photos from internationally recognized historical genocides--E.g., a photograph of an aborted fetus next to a photograph of a pile of Holocaust victims.
Personally, I find this disturbing and offensive, not only to those who know people who have been touched by genocide or hate crimes, but to humanity in general and victims of any type of abuse. Comparing abortion to the Holocaust? To images of butchered children in Rwanda and Cambodian killing fields? In addition, one sign shows a battered young boy next to a picture of an aborted fetus and asks, "Should government permit child abuse?"
They even go so far as to compare the "destruction" that Planned Parenthood has caused upon this nation to the tragedies of 9/11's terrorist attack and the Empire of Japan's attack at Pearl Harbor. Clearly, a clinic that provides free family planning information and materials is a destructive force of genocide. I'm not trying to start a Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice debate--This discussion is purely focused on the questionable methods chosen by GAP. Keep in mind that, according to the GAP website, the program only visits campuses to which it has been invited by an affiliated campus student group.
Here, check it out for yourself and tell us what you think:
http://www.abortionno.org/gap.html. Did you have a run-in with this organization? Share it! We want to hear from you as well.
Search
Food for Thought
"When we speak we are afraid our words will not be heard or welcomed.
But when we are silent, we are still afraid. So it is better to speak." --Audre Lorde