Misogyny and Sexism in the News [Archive] - Page 2

EnderD_503

07-19-2012, 03:59 PM

Absolutely agreeing with what Admin posted here, but also....this is one of those situations that makes my head spin around and my eyes bulge out, because the people who are playing along and enabling this misogynistic, archaic bullshit...are women!

Until women stop flocking to this kind of thing and playing along, how do we get the rest of society to feel any differently?

Serious question.

The article says visitor numbers have soared since implementing this policy. Those visitors aren't just those who come to oogle, but also the women wearing the mini-skirts and allowing themselves to have water thrown on themselves.

WTF.

People drive me crazy sometimes. :seeingstars:

I can totally see the sentiment behind this and sometimes feel the same way. At the same time, I feel like its so difficult for people to break free of what's been hammered into them since birth.

It's a complicated situation, especially in a world where women's liberation is still being heavily associated with female sexual objectification in the mainstream. Like the whole "Real Housewives of wherever," who reflect this current mentality of "women have achieved equality" (which they have not), "society is no longer patriarchal" (which it is) and so women need to reclaim their sexuality (which I totally support...female sexuality is still constantly shamed in our societies, and labeled in cis-male-centric terms) by promoting female dependence upon cissexed hetero men for financial stability and validation as human beings (hello, what year is this, people?).

So yes, obviously women participating in these kinds of publicity stunts that use female objectification to make money need to start seeing that reality. I was reading in the newspaper maybe a month ago about a drunk driving ad in Nova Scotia, where the mascot for the ad was an animated woman, obviously very sexualised stereotypical hetero "ideal." The organisation put up signs informing drivers that "she doesn't go for drunk drivers" and other slogans, obviously targeting a hetero male population. Again, sad when you use sexual objectification to tell men not to drink and drive. And what does that say about their approach to drunk driving? Women drive drunk as well, yet how often do you see ads like this targeting women? Stereotypes abound. Yes, women need to wake up and see this as not "just the way things are," but at the same time I think its difficult...when you're told your entire life that this is what is appropriate, "natural," your station in society.

So the question then becomes, how does one promote real, inclusive feminism in the mainstream media, in a society based on capitalist ideals that uses the sexual objectification of women to sell products, ideas, services, or even safe driving? And though this instance in particular occurred in China, we cannot, for a second, maintain that China is not also a heavily capitalist nation. In societies like this that promote traditional cissexed hetero male ideas of "success," those who don't fit the bill will always be the ones used by those in power to make a quick buck.

Sometimes its just overwhelming as far as where to even start :seeingstars:

Kobi

07-19-2012, 07:04 PM

EnderD_503

07-19-2012, 10:32 PM

Jo, Ender, you both raise some interesting points. Is tricky stuff with no easy answers.

Feminism, misogyny, sexism, exploitation, objectification are not one size fits all in every situation kind of thing. The definitions, interpretations, perspectives, are as individual as our queer ids can be.

In one way it is frustrating to see the same institutional patriarchial crap as alive and well today as it was in 1973 when Shirley Chisholm said...the emotional, sexual, and psychological stereotyping of females begins when the doctor says, 'It's a girl'."

In another way, we as women have choices now that we didnt have way back then. We have a right to these choices as well as the implications and consequences of them.

The most difficult for me to deal with is the sometimes fine line between what are manifestations of internalized patriarchal bullshit versus what is deliberate, calculated, informed individual choice.

The second most difficult is having the negative stuff being done to women, out there, whether it be in the media, in the workplace, in relationships, in economics, in parenting etc. being replicated within our own community. That just really bites.

I dont have any answers. I just never expected to be dealing with the same stuff and more in my 50's as I did in my 20's. It is discouraging and aggravating and tiring to have to address this over and over and over again.

It's frustrating. Society constantly goes through these phases of becoming more progressive before sending people back 50 years.

I'm not sure it really is a deliberate, calculated, informed choice. How informed is it? Yes, everyone has a right to a choice, but at the same time we can't ignore the social realities that inform that choice. In many ways this parallels the niqab debate in many Western nations...claiming that women have the "choice" and that they shouldn't be permitted to wear the niqab in places like schools and work places. So yes, the woman might have a "choice," but the choice is to defy your upbringing, your family, your culture as you were raised to understand it or be shunned from the rest of society (education, jobs etc.) While perhaps less extreme, the "choice" can be similar for many women in various societies. You are brought up to see yourself a certain way...and if you do something radical according to your culture...no longer subscribe to gendered norms or sexual norms (not talking necessarily about queer/trans community here) you still might have much to lose, if not what little privilege conformity gives you in society.

And what if you don't even question it?

At what point is that "choice" not so much a choice as a reaction to social programming...as is everything. We are all socially programmed and no choice we make is ever divorced from that. It just depends on whether we challenge it or conform to it.

I believe we all should have a right to make a choice except in the instances where it brings direct harm to other human beings. Yet in many respects these choices, as extensions of how these behaviours will affect how these women interact with other generations of women (namely younger women and girls), do do damage.

And if these choices are extensions of upbringing and social expectations, how do societies provide room for them while also making sure that future generations of children are not brought into such a world of gendered social expectations or into a world where it is deemed "the way things are" to sexually objectify half the population based on the sex they were assigned at birth. Where they might have more options to make choices that aren't framed around the ingrained need to focus those choices on the desires of cissexed hetero men.

All I know is the world is seriously too fucked up:|

Kobi

07-20-2012, 10:42 AM

It's frustrating. Society constantly goes through these phases of becoming more progressive before sending people back 50 years.

I'm not sure it really is a deliberate, calculated, informed choice. How informed is it? Yes, everyone has a right to a choice, but at the same time we can't ignore the social realities that inform that choice. In many ways this parallels the niqab debate in many Western nations...claiming that women have the "choice" and that they shouldn't be permitted to wear the niqab in places like schools and work places. So yes, the woman might have a "choice," but the choice is to defy your upbringing, your family, your culture as you were raised to understand it or be shunned from the rest of society (education, jobs etc.) While perhaps less extreme, the "choice" can be similar for many women in various societies. You are brought up to see yourself a certain way...and if you do something radical according to your culture...no longer subscribe to gendered norms or sexual norms (not talking necessarily about queer/trans community here) you still might have much to lose, if not what little privilege conformity gives you in society.

And what if you don't even question it?

At what point is that "choice" not so much a choice as a reaction to social programming...as is everything. We are all socially programmed and no choice we make is ever divorced from that. It just depends on whether we challenge it or conform to it.

I believe we all should have a right to make a choice except in the instances where it brings direct harm to other human beings. Yet in many respects these choices, as extensions of how these behaviours will affect how these women interact with other generations of women (namely younger women and girls), do do damage.

And if these choices are extensions of upbringing and social expectations, how do societies provide room for them while also making sure that future generations of children are not brought into such a world of gendered social expectations or into a world where it is deemed "the way things are" to sexually objectify half the population based on the sex they were assigned at birth. Where they might have more options to make choices that aren't framed around the ingrained need to focus those choices on the desires of cissexed hetero men.

All I know is the world is seriously too fucked up:|

I agree with you. We seem to share a common paradigm. Your words are my words. Your thoughts are my thoughts. Except when they arent. Sometimes, I see things differently when my values, morals, paradigm and life conflict in ways I dont expect. I have to adjust, adapt, make choices, change perspectives etc.

There is a distinct difference, it seems, between theory and real life. Lots of things work in theory. They dont always work in real life or maybe they dont work in quite the way we expect or maybe they work in various ways for ways people at various times. Is confusing stuff.

The "choice" I was referring to involves individual perspective which may be unknown or just plain foreign to me. Take any act as an example. I might see it as sexist and misogynistic. Someone else might see the partiarchy lurking in it but feel the act was an adaptation to conditions. Someone else might not even acknowledge the patriarchy paradigm, thus they see an act as what is expected or their role in life period and they are very comfortable with that. Someone else might see the patriarchy but their behavior is more geared to exploiting the exploitation for their own benefit. Someone else might see something totally different. Thats diversity.

Wish it was simplier but it isnt. The mere fact something is observed will change its properties. That is scientific fact. Funny thing this life can be.

You also said - "Where they might have more options to make choices that aren't framed around the ingrained need to focus those choices on the desires of cissexed hetero men."

We are of the same thinking and paradigm yet I dont limit my perspective to "the desires of cissexed hetero men". To me, it is much broader. It is the appearance or even just the suggestion of masculinity. Social programming runs deep, and there are perks and privileges all along the spectum of real and perceived masculinity.

Being a woman, this never occured to me until I began playing around with how best to word my id so I didnt have to keep explaining it. When I used butch or lesbutchian, I was treated differently. People related to me differently. They flirted with me differently. They "honored" my butchness in ways that were unfamiliar and uncomfortable to me because I am not male id. If I addressed something female i.e. pms, what I said could be miscontrued as a sexist comment rather than a shared female experience - because I wasnt seen as a female. It was a very weird yet enlightening kind of experience.

Of course, now, I just use lesbian and woman. Again, I am treated differently albeit in more familiar and comfortable ways. I am also mistaken for a femme more and this is ok cuz at least I am being seen as a female. And, I dont get as many perks and privileges as I used to. On the other hand, I dont get the feeling people are checking out my crotch anymore either.

Social programming works both ways tho. A femme can say something to me and I dont think twice about it. A male id person can say the exact same thing using the exact words and I want to smack him/hym upside the head. Tricky stuff this programming.

The older I get, the more I appreciate how life teaches us some interesting lessons. It is a journey of creativity not a destination. We are works in progress not a final product. In a lot of ways, it seems to me like we are making it up as we go. Sometimes we do good. Sometimes we dont. Sometimes we do good by accident not intent. Sometimes good intent turns into a unforseen fiasco.

I used to have a lot of answers. Now I have a lot more questions cuz nothing and no one is ever as simple as I would like it or them to be. The older I get, the clearer this becomes.

EnderD_503

07-20-2012, 05:12 PM

I agree with you. We seem to share a common paradigm. Your words are my words. Your thoughts are my thoughts. Except when they arent. Sometimes, I see things differently when my values, morals, paradigm and life conflict in ways I dont expect. I have to adjust, adapt, make choices, change perspectives etc.

There is a distinct difference, it seems, between theory and real life. Lots of things work in theory. They dont always work in real life or maybe they dont work in quite the way we expect or maybe they work in various ways for ways people at various times. Is confusing stuff.

The "choice" I was referring to involves individual perspective which may be unknown or just plain foreign to me. Take any act as an example. I might see it as sexist and misogynistic. Someone else might see the partiarchy lurking in it but feel the act was an adaptation to conditions. Someone else might not even acknowledge the patriarchy paradigm, thus they see an act as what is expected or their role in life period and they are very comfortable with that. Someone else might see the patriarchy but their behavior is more geared to exploiting the exploitation for their own benefit. Someone else might see something totally different. Thats diversity.

Wish it was simplier but it isnt. The mere fact something is observed will change its properties. That is scientific fact. Funny thing this life can be.

You also said - "Where they might have more options to make choices that aren't framed around the ingrained need to focus those choices on the desires of cissexed hetero men."

We are of the same thinking and paradigm yet I dont limit my perspective to "the desires of cissexed hetero men". To me, it is much broader. It is the appearance or even just the suggestion of masculinity. Social programming runs deep, and there are perks and privileges all along the spectum of real and perceived masculinity.

Being a woman, this never occured to me until I began playing around with how best to word my id so I didnt have to keep explaining it. When I used butch or lesbutchian, I was treated differently. People related to me differently. They flirted with me differently. They "honored" my butchness in ways that were unfamiliar and uncomfortable to me because I am not male id. If I addressed something female i.e. pms, what I said could be miscontrued as a sexist comment rather than a shared female experience - because I wasnt seen as a female. It was a very weird yet enlightening kind of experience.

Of course, now, I just use lesbian and woman. Again, I am treated differently albeit in more familiar and comfortable ways. I am also mistaken for a femme more and this is ok cuz at least I am being seen as a female. And, I dont get as many perks and privileges as I used to. On the other hand, I dont get the feeling people are checking out my crotch anymore either.

Social programming works both ways tho. A femme can say something to me and I dont think twice about it. A male id person can say the exact same thing using the exact words and I want to smack him/hym upside the head. Tricky stuff this programming.

The older I get, the more I appreciate how life teaches us some interesting lessons. It is a journey of creativity not a destination. We are works in progress not a final product. In a lot of ways, it seems to me like we are making it up as we go. Sometimes we do good. Sometimes we dont. Sometimes we do good by accident not intent. Sometimes good intent turns into a unforseen fiasco.

I used to have a lot of answers. Now I have a lot more questions cuz nothing and no one is ever as simple as I would like it or them to be. The older I get, the clearer this becomes.

As far as the bolded text, I'm not sure I entirely agree. While spectrums of masculinity or "suggestions" of masculinity might mean something in the queer world, I don't think it means much in the cis, hetero world. When women are told to run around the media in short skirts and wet clothes as a marketing tool, it's not with the "masculine spectrum" in mind. It's not with butches in mind, masculine women or masculine lesbians in mind, not with masculine transmen who are attracted to woman identities in mind, not with masculine gay men in mind, not with bisexuals or pansexuals in mind. It's for the benefit of cissexed heterosexual men. They are 100% the target audience. It's to catch their attention on something capitalism wants them to consume. The world outside queer communities is still heavily reliant on the binary, and in that world there is really only one official masculinity (hence why we discuss it so damned much in queer communities :p), and that is the masculinity of hetero cismen.

That's not me saying that varying perspectives on and responses to masculinity and masculine identities in the queer/trans or lgbtq communities is not valid. It totally is, and I think everyone needs to be aware of the way others might react to them, the way an environment can be made to feel safe or not, inclusive or not. And not only with regards to masculine identities. I think awareness and sensitivity is, more and more, becoming a huge part of those communities. In the rest of the world...not so much.

As far as choice. Yes, again, everyone has the choice and that can be turned into "nothing is right or wrong." But to me, if you have one specific group of people consistently dominating other groups of people throughout human history and dictating acceptable behaviours, practices and ideas and punishing those who don't fall in line...then at some point it's time to think "well gee, I wonder why that is."

The same thing today, there's a reason why the world is still cis, hetero male dominated and why women are consistently put on display and told that's their only real purpose in life.

I agree with you, though, that obviously everyone reacts differently. I was trying to get at that in my first post in response to Jo, but it didn't quite come out well. That's why I'm not a fan of the blame game. Do I think women need to open their eyes and become more aware that this isn't "just the way things are"? Yes! But do I think that not being able to break through a person's upbringing and what's been hammered into them since birth is a reason to blame them? No. Ultimately, society is the problem, and this incessant media and social broken record that claims that feminism has "succeeded enough" and that women can go "back" to being "empowered" through being objectified at every turn.

Obviously it's complicated, and I don't really aim for "theories," so much as trying to work with others to make what ever small changes can be made. But this whole problem is so soaked in to every portion of society. From criminalization, to education, to the workplace, to media geared towards young people, to health care, to personal relationships. I think all you can do is really narrow down the areas of society that have the biggest chance of affecting the way youth grow up in society. So education, health care, the prison system (which should be largely abolished, imo). And hopefully with a change in respect in younger generations, the media will eventually follow. But I don't think its every going to be those with the most power to bring about change that challenge norms..which means we have a long way to go before the media or entertainment industry ever changes with their "Real House Wives of whatever" and reality tv shows telling 8 year olds that they need to dress like Kim Kardashian and be just like her. Fuck, I was looking at this site on infant and toddler "beauty pageants" and nearly vomited. But that's what this shit amounts to, plus a kid that has to grow up thinking that's their only value in the world.

Kobi

07-20-2012, 06:39 PM

Ender, I am thinking we are talking the same thing just from a different perspective.

You referenced how the media caters to a certain target audience when it objectifies women. Agreed.

I broadened the topic to how social programming goes so freakin deep that it cuts across the gender/sexual orientation spectrum.

You would think by this point in history we would have a better handle on things. You would also think after 100 years, the freakin ERA would have passed. In 2012, you wouldnt think the GOP and its religious affiliates, including its female members, would be attacking the basic rights of women with such vengence.

I hear you. I agree with you. Very complex, interdependent, interrelated caca poo. (Forgive me, I am still buzzed from the lemon Pledge.)

DMW

07-20-2012, 07:11 PM

First, i have to admit that i did not read the article, i only read the post.
I should have been more careful.

Secondly,I totally agree that if the women are being used as some tool in a negative and disrespectul way...that it is wrong...and that people should ban the park.

Hopefully, i will get more time and energy to respond more of what has been posted. And read the article before commenting. I am not a troll. But, that is ok if i receive that reputation here. Might just keep me out of trouble.

DMW

07-22-2012, 07:32 PM

After thinking more on the subject,...i definately don't approve of the spraying of the women. The splashing of the women. I personally, would not go to the park just for that reason. Period.

Upon further analysis, i realize that, it really isn't ok to offer discounts to women just to get them to wear miniskirts. The idea that it would attract some people to go to the park, just for that reason alone,kinda grosses me out actually.

My mind didn't go there.
I understand why there is a reason to be upset about it.
It is like the innocence of the world is lost.
It also makes me realize that i should be way more careful with what i post
because what i post could be taken at face value when people don't know me here.

In addition, there was sarcasm in my original statement.
I think... well hell, if they are going to do that... then the women should rise up and make the park offer them a free pass. I realize that i don't condone what the theme park is doing after reading and really thinking about it. Especially, when i put the two together. miniskirts and spraying.
I suppose there is a part of me that was arguing for them too.
Like, what? america is any better.

Also, i am not sayin this to placate anyone here on this site. I believe my mind has changed because i don't like the idea that it is a theme park. I don't go to hooters for the same reason.

what was written here, by the admin, has me thinking...

To answer your question, it *is* misogyny to treat women as "things" rather than people. That goes for marketing tools, non-consensual class-targeted ploys for "free" stuff, and any situation that puts a woman in a position of having her body used to "lure" people to a theme park.

I wonder how this could be non-consensual? the marketing is because it is out there to the public.
However, The women don't have to wear the miniskirts.
Also, the woman do not have to put themselves in that position to be used.

Ultimately, it was the Admins post that got to me...
The idea of women's bodies being used as a tool to increase sales.
Just like hooters. There is no innocence in that really.

I appreciate the post and i learned.

JustJo

07-22-2012, 07:43 PM

And then there is the other big can of worms about male genital circumcision/mutilation. This originated as a religious practice and became the norm (a non-religious practice) in the US. It is automatically done to all baby boys before they go home.....parents are not asked unless something has changed in hospitals. It is now being justified as necessary for health reasons.

Not sure if it's everywhere, but when I had my son almost 15 years ago in upstate New York, it was not automatic and had to be requested if parents wanted a circumcision performed.

JustJo

07-22-2012, 07:56 PM

Jo, Ender, you both raise some interesting points. Is tricky stuff with no easy answers.

Feminism, misogyny, sexism, exploitation, objectification are not one size fits all in every situation kind of thing. The definitions, interpretations, perspectives, are as individual as our queer ids can be.

In one way it is frustrating to see the same institutional patriarchial crap as alive and well today as it was in 1973 when Shirley Chisholm said...the emotional, sexual, and psychological stereotyping of females begins when the doctor says, 'It's a girl'."

In another way, we as women have choices now that we didnt have way back then. We have a right to these choices as well as the implications and consequences of them.

The most difficult for me to deal with is the sometimes fine line between what are manifestations of internalized patriarchal bullshit versus what is deliberate, calculated, informed individual choice.

The second most difficult is having the negative stuff being done to women, out there, whether it be in the media, in the workplace, in relationships, in economics, in parenting etc. being replicated within our own community. That just really bites.

I dont have any answers. I just never expected to be dealing with the same stuff and more in my 50's as I did in my 20's. It is discouraging and aggravating and tiring to have to address this over and over and over again.

Sorry for the delay as I've been out playing rather than reading. :)

Kobi, what I put in red is what really strikes me.

Yes, I want women to be empowered to be whoever they are, present themselves however they want to, celebrate their sexuality....whatever the heck they want.

And....I struggle with this as I look around the world, and think...how much of this is a particular woman presenting herself the way she wants to, and how much is what she feels is expected of her? How much is a woman celebrating, displaying, flaunting, *fill in the blank* her own sexuality, and how much of it is playing into the misogynistic notion that a woman is valued based on appearance, and someone else's version of what that appearance should be?

At the risk of offending, we just came from a day at Disney....during which I turned to Snack and said "I'm glad I don't have a daughter." Not because I value males more....but because I would be at a complete loss as to how to proceed, and what to even think. At that moment, we were in line behind a group of girls, probably ages 14 - 17, mayyyybbbeeeee 18 but I doubt it....all in t-shirts tied up under their breasts, sides slit to show their lacey bras, "shorts" that barely qualified for the name, pierced belly buttons with dangling rhinestones....

Let me be clear....I don't object to any of this when it's an adult woman, and her own choice.

It kills me though to think of what's going on in the heads of these girls, and what standard they are measuring themselves against.

I look at my son, of the same age, who doesn't give a thought (I guarantee you) to his weight, what he's wearing, or how he looks. He is left free to concentrate on his own interests, his school work, his dreams....

I guess I'm at a complete loss. Maybe it's age....I know a lot has changed in my head after turning 50 and spending some time in reflection after my mother's passing. I just feel like we're losing ground....and that the people most commonly fostering the growth of misogyny, here in the US at least, are female.

Kobi

08-10-2012, 05:37 PM

LONDON – The two historic athletes who became the first women to ever represent Saudi Arabia in the Olympic Games have been snubbed by their nation's media and subjected to a campaign of hate.

Sarah Attar ran the 800 meters on the Olympic Stadium track and Wojdan Shaherkani competed in judo earlier in the Games after the Saudi government relented its strict stance on women competing following international pressure.

Attar finished last in her heat and Shaherkani lost her opening bout with both gaining huge worldwide attention. However, back in Saudi Arabia, the approach was very different.

"We were the only newspaper to write about it," said Hahled Al-Maeena, editor of the English language publication Saudi Gazette, in a telephone conversation with Yahoo! Sports. "I believe these girls are heroines and we should celebrate as a nation. Unfortunately, other people do not agree."

A sinister Twitter campaign under the hashtag "prostitutes of the Olympics" originated in Saudi Arabia and was used to aim sexist vitriol at the competitors.

The father of judoka Shaherkani was so incensed that he contacted the country's interior minister to demand action against those who had insulted his daughter. Under Saudi law, punishment for insulting a woman's honor and integrity can be up to 100 lashes.

Attar and Shaherkani were late additions to the Saudi team and did not qualify but were admitted into their events in London under an International Olympic Committee development regulation that seeks to encourage less-established sporting nations.

Even though the women were forced to walk behind their male counterparts at the Opening Ceremony, their presence was seen as a step in the right direction for women's rights in a country where females are still denied many of what would be considered basic human rights in other nations.

However, there is skepticism about the true motives of the decision to allow Attar, a Saudi-American who studies at Pepperdine University, and Shaherkani to compete.

"They allowed them to compete for only one reason," Al-Maeena said. "If you don't send women, then in the future your country will not be allowed to participate [in the Olympics]. It was a wonderful thing to see the girls participate and it made many people proud, but there was also a motive for it.

"I am a believer in a free press, but there was some filthy language used about them and it was sad to see."

The Saudi Gazette received criticism from extremists for hailing the two athletes for their achievements. Meanwhile, every Arabic-language newspaper carried wide-scale coverage of the bronze medal won by the Saudi equestrian showjumping team led by royal member Prince Abdullah al Saud.

Attar and Shaherkani did not talk to reporters after their Olympic competitions. It is hoped that their participation can pave the way for more athletes from countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Brunei, the only three nations to not send any women athletes to Beijing four years ago. All three had female competitors in these Games.

However, there are still cultural restrictions in place in Saudi Arabia that stand in the way of female athletic progress. Al-Maeena's daughter Lina founded a women's basketball team that has traveled to neighboring Jordan to compete, but the squad has been met with heavy criticism.

"It is not easy as a woman who wants to play sport," said Lina Al-Maeena, who petitioned the IOC to allow her basketball team to represent Saudi Arabia in London but was rejected.

"The extremists said we were not acting as a woman should, that we were wrong and immoral and disrespectful. We just want to play the sport we love and empower other women to compete and play and be athletic. The extremists have their own view and it is very difficult to change their mind."

Saudi Arabia's national Olympic committee representative did not respond Friday to requests for comment and to speak to Attar and Shaherkani.

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/olympics--saudi-arabia-media-ignore-historic-olympic-games-of-women-athletes-sarah-attar-and-wojdan-shaherkani.html

Gemme

08-11-2012, 07:27 PM

..."Stand aside. We're men; we do this."

:blink:

Oh, sorry. I know that THIS is MY job. I didn't know it was yours too.

Soon

08-20-2012, 06:29 PM

Kobi

08-20-2012, 07:19 PM

http://www.everydaysexism.com/

The Everyday Sexism Project exists to catalogue instances of sexism experienced by women on a day to day basis. They might be serious or minor, outrageously offensive or so niggling and normalised that you don’t even feel able to protest. Say as much or as little as you like, use your real name or a pseudonym – it’s up to you. By sharing your story you’re showing the world that sexism does exist, it is faced by women everyday and it is a valid problem to discuss. If you prefer to e-mail me at laura@everydaysexism.com I can upload your story for you instead.

Thank you for posting this.

Some forms of sexism have become so commonplace, we tend to forget what they really are and what they represent.

Benevolent sexism is rarely acknowledged. There is an entry on that website where a woman gets on a plane and the nearest masculine person decides it is his right or duty to help her with her carryon bag even tho she didnt ask for help. That is an example of benevolent sexism.

Novelafemme

08-23-2012, 04:08 PM

Lately, I've found myself seriously disheartened at the misogyny in our culture, at the way our culture invalidates the stories and the experiences of women, and at the way sexism and violence against women is talked about either as a thing of the past or an inevitable part of life. It is not a thing of the past and it is not inevitable. We as a culture are constantly making choices that demean and denigrate women, that place us in harms way, that tell us we are "less than."

This is an important essay: http://therumpus.net/2012/08/explicit-violence/

Kobi

08-29-2012, 08:46 PM

The following women are not attractive to Donald Trump: Angelina Jolie ("She's been with so many guys"), Cher ("bad plastic surgery"), Rosie O'Donnell ("big, fat pig"), and now, Arianna Huffington.

On Wednesday, Trump used his Twitter account to call the internet powerhouse "unattractive both inside and out." He went on to attack her marriage, which ended in an amicable divorce.

"I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man-he made a good decision," Trump added in less than 140 characters.

It's not the first time he's publicly judged a successful female media figure by her looks and intimate life, and it probably won't be the last.

Trump's world seems to be divided into three categories. Women he finds attractive. Women he doesn't find attractive. And Men. It's not so different from a Miss USA pageant, only "contestants" like Huffington don't ask to be entered.

It's unclear what exactly prompted Trump's alarmingly inappropriate personal attack. His rep told the Washington Post it stems from her largely op-ed driven publication's "massive and consistently inaccurate reporting on Mr. Trump."

Huffington smartly refused to take the bait and refrained from responding, possibly avoiding another drawn out Trump vs. Barbara Walters feud.

In the past, both male and female columnists at major media outlets have labeled Trump "a sexist dinosaur," with "a legacy of unapologetically gleeful misogyny." These days nobody's wasting words trying to prove that point, when Trump seems to do the job all on his own. Here are some of the gems from the mouth of a modern day caveman:

"All of the women on The Apprentice flirted with me - consciously or unconsciously. That's to be expected."
-From his book How to Get Rich.

"So when he had plenty of money, she liked him…But then after that, not as good, right?"
-In response to an Access Hollywood interview question on Anne Hathaway's split from her jailed ex-boyfriend.

"I'll send one of my friends to pick up her girlfriend and I think it would be very easy."
-On Rosie O'Donnell and his own mysteriously beguiling friends, as reported by The New York Daily News.

"She does have a very nice figure . . . if [she] weren't my daughter, perhaps I'd be dating her."
-On his daughter, Ivanka, during a interview on the The View.

"You look very good, Aubrey, I have to say, Do you mind if I say? Is that sexist?"
-On Aubrey O'Day's boardroom appearance during an episode of The Apprentice.

"Maybe [women] don't know him. Maybe they don't get what is going on."
-On Obama's popularity with women voters, in a recent Fox News interview.

"The early victories by women on The Apprentice were to a very large extent dependent on their sex appeal."
-On women's success on The Apprentice, from How to Get Rich.

"I believe we're all equal except women still have to try harder and they know it. They will do what they have to do to get the job done and will not necessarily be demure about it."
-More on women's success, from How to Get Rich.

"Often times when I was sleeping with one of the top women in the world I would say to myself, thinking about me as a boy from Queens, 'can you believe what I am getting?'"
-On former romantic partners, from Think Big: Make it Happen in Business and Life.

"Beauty and elegance, whether in a woman, a building, or a work of art is not just superficial or something pretty to see."
-On inanimate objects and women, from Trump 101: The Way to Success

"You know, it doesn't really matter what [the media] write as long as you've got a young and beautiful piece of [expletive]."
-On media zen and women's body parts, from a 1991 Esquire interview.

http://shine.yahoo.com/work-money/donald-trump-dumbest-things-hes-said-women-192600474.html

Martina

08-29-2012, 10:09 PM

Not misogyny or sexism but someone protecting his son from it and other miseries.

Dad Wears Dress in Solidarity with Dress-Loving Son (http://www.shewired.com/lifestyle/2012/08/29/dad-wears-dress-solidarity-dress-loving-son)

http://www.shewired.com/sites/shewired.com/files/imagecache/category-featured/stories/dadskirt480.jpg

A German father said that he sometimes wears skirts to support his son, who also prefers to wear skirts and dresses.

Nils Pickert and his family moved from West Berlin to a more traditional village in southern Germany, Gawker reports. After Pickert's son expressed worries that other kids at school would mock him for wearing dresses, his father decided to also don a dress in solidarity.

"I didn't want to talk my son into not wearing dresses and skirts," he said. "He didn't make friends in doing that in Berlin already and after a lot of contemplation I had only one option left: To broaden my shoulders for my little buddy and dress in a skirt myself."

Soon

09-03-2012, 09:59 AM

Campaigners in Egypt say the problem of sexual harassment is reaching epidemic proportions, with a rise in such incidents over the past three months. For many Egyptian women, sexual harassment - which sometimes turns into violent mob-style attacks - is a daily fact of life, reports the BBC's Bethany Bell in Cairo. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19440656)

Kobi

09-05-2012, 03:01 PM

A Boston University task force has concluded that the men’s hockey team is detached from the general campus and that a “culture of sexual entitlement” exists among some players, a mindset the college says contributed to two alleged sexual assaults on campus during the past season.

In unusually blunt fashion, the panel found that the university, from administrators to the coaching staff, did not adequately oversee the team, allowing the culture to flourish.

Oversight of the players was too often left to the coaching staff, the panel concluded, instead of university administrators. “The coaches became their own keepers,” Morrison said. “These should be university issues.”

-------------

This report can be read Here (http://www.bu.edu/president/reports/hockey-task-force/)

I cant decide if this report is unique in the way it is addressing systemic issues or if it is more of the same.

While there is recognition of "entitlement" on a sports teams, of how coaches are not the best supervisors of their players behavior, and how the culture of sports coupled with alcohol and sex can be problematic, it really side steps the misogyny and sexism behind the entire thing.

Kobi

10-04-2012, 12:15 PM

Street harassment is one of the most pervasive forms of gender-based violence and one of the least legislated against. Comments from “You’d look good on me” to groping, flashing and assault are a daily, global reality for women and LGBTQ individuals. But it is rarely reported, and it’s culturally accepted as ‘the price you pay’ for being a woman or for being gay. At Hollaback!, we don’t buy it.

We believe that everyone has a right to feel safe and confident without being objectified. Sexual harassment is a gateway crime that creates a cultural environment that makes gender-based violence OK. There exists a clear legal framework to reproach sexual harassment and abuse in the home and at work, but when it comes to the streets—all bets are off. This gap isn’t because street harassment hurts any less, it’s because there hasn’t been a solution. Until now. The explosion of mobile technology has given us an unprecedented opportunity to end street harassment—and with it, the opportunity to take on one of the final new frontiers for women’s rights around the world.

By collecting women and LGBTQ folks’ stories and pictures in a safe and share-able way with our very own mobile phone applications, Hollaback! is creating a crowd-sourced initiative to end street harassment. Hollaback! breaks the silence that has perpetuated sexual violence internationally, asserts that any and all gender-based violence is unacceptable, and creates a world where we have an option—and, more importantly—a response.

At the core of our model lies the belief that movements start with people telling their stories – and they succeed with people taking action. Before the Internet age, there was only one mic, one podium, one speaker. But now, thanks to the proliferation of blogging and social media, it is no longer the loudest, wealthiest and most powerful who rule the airwaves: anyone with access to their local library’s internet portal can have a voice. At Hollaback!, we leverage technology to bring voice to an issue that historically has been silenced, and to build leadership within this movement to break the silence.

Break the silence: We work with women, girls, and LGBTQ individuals to document in words and pictures, and to literally indicate on a map, where they experienced harassment in public spaces. Doing this provides a forum for individuals to share their experiences and brings attention to this long-ignored issue.

Inspire international leadership: Much of Hollaback!’s power lies in its scalability. To scale effectively, we train young women and LGBTQ leaders throughout the world to use their skills to build a grassroots movement focused on ending street harassment. We train in the application of technology as we also work to ensure that their actions are strategic and high-impact.

Shift public opinion: Our broad-based campaign is designed to reach the public at large by inspiring individuals to take action. We provide educational workshops to schools, universities, and community groups, and engage citizens through traditional and social media.

Engage elected officials: We present collected and mapped data to elected officials and policymakers in areas experiencing high incidences of street harassment and will engage legislators to work with our trained leaders to address street harassment in their communities.

http://www.ihollaback.org/about/

Martina

10-12-2012, 12:51 AM

Malala's classmate: 'Every girl in Swat is Malala. We will educate ourselves. We will win. They can't defeat us.'

First Libyan and now Pakistani regular folks are out in the streets calling for a stop to terrorist attacks in their countries. Heartening

http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/topstory/mritems/images/2012/10/11//2012101193156265734_20.jpg

Kobi

10-23-2012, 09:39 PM

Kobi

10-23-2012, 09:54 PM

NEW ALBANY, Ind. (AP) — Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said Tuesday when a woman becomes pregnant during a rape, "that's something God intended."

Mourdock, who's been locked in one of the country's most watched Senate races, was asked during the final minutes of a debate with Democratic challenger Rep. Joe Donnelly whether abortion should be allowed in cases of rape or incest.

"I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God. And, I think, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen," Mourdock said.

Mourdock became the second GOP Senate candidate to find himself on the defensive over comments about rape and pregnancy. Missouri Senate candidate Rep. Todd Akin said during a television interview in August that women's bodies have ways of preventing pregnancy in cases of what he called "legitimate rape." Since his comment, Akin has repeatedly apologized but has refused to leave his race despite calls to do so by leaders of his own party, from GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney on down.

It was not immediately clear what affect Mourdock's comments might have during the final two weeks before the Nov. 6 election. But they could prove problematic. Romney distanced himself from Mourdock on Tuesday night — a day after a television ad featuring the former Massachusetts governor supporting the GOP Senate candidate began airing in Indiana.

http://news.yahoo.com/mourdock-god-rape-leads-pregnancy-005625738--election.html;_ylt=ArHNl48_EuOpVFWOAwOuGkbNt.d_;_y lu=X3oDMTQ5NWgzNDc2BG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIFNlY3Rpb24gUG9 saXRpY3MgMgRwa2cDNzhmZGVlZDktMTEwOS0zNWE4LWFlOTUtY zRhODAwZGJmZTRjBHBvcwMxBHNlYwN0b3Bfc3RvcnlfY29rZQR 2ZXIDYzNlNWZjYzEtMWQ4ZC0xMWUyLWJkMmQtODEyMTQ2M2EzN zE1;_ylg=X3oDMTM5b24zdjlsBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11c wRwc3RhaWQDYTM4YjBkYWEtM2Q0OS0zNzU4LWJkNzgtZTdhODZ iOGZlZTEzBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xlbGVjdGlvbnMyMDEyB HB0A3N0b3J5cGFnZQ--;_ylv=3

Greyson

10-23-2012, 11:15 PM

SAN FRANCISCO - School administrators and parents are wrestling with how to respond to news that some male high school athletes created a statistics-based fantasy league that awarded points when girls the boys "drafted" were rumoured to have engaged in sexual activity.

Parents at Piedmont High School were notified of the league's existence in a letter and email Friday.

Varsity athletes used the online competition, modeled after fantasy leagues common in major league sports, as a bonding activity for the last five or six years, Principal Rich Kitchens said in the letter.

"Male students earn points for documented engagement in sexual activities with female students," he wrote.

Most of the female students who were drafted into the league weren't aware of the competition, he added.

Officials at the San Francisco Bay area suburban school learned about the game during an assembly on date rape earlier this month. Administrators interviewed students, parents and staff members, but weren't able to identify any participants in the competition, which students referred to as a "Fantasy Slut League," Kitchens said.

http://news.yahoo.com/calif-high-school-athletes-formed-fantasy-league-gave-010058522.html

I was very disturbed when I first read about this in the local news here in the SF Bay Area. The school is in Piedmont. Piedmont is in the East Bay and it is an upper middle class community. It is the same city that the recent assasinated Ambassador to Libya was raised in. Most of these teens come from a very privileged background. I shutter to think of what these young men may grow up to be.

The City I live in now shares a Fire Chief with the City of Piedmont. The city where we live has a public school system where the students do well academically and is very similar to the Piedmont public school system. Apparently money cannot buy humanity, civility or an expectation of decency for young women, girls.

Kobi

10-24-2012, 06:03 AM

I was very disturbed when I first read about this in the local news here in the SF Bay Area. The school is in Piedmont. Piedmont is in the East Bay and it is an upper middle class community. It is the same city that the recent assasinated Ambassador to Libya was raised in. Most of these teens come from a very privileged background. I shutter to think of what these young men may grow up to be.

The City I live in now shares a Fire Chief with the City of Piedmont. The city where we live has a public school system where the students do well academically and is very similar to the Piedmont public school system. Apparently money cannot buy humanity, civility or an expectation of decency for young women, girls.

Unfortunately, some of these young men will grow up to be the leaders, the objecifiers, the rapists, the perpetrators of domestic violence, and the oppressors of future generations of women.

The really sad part is that the premise behind this is not much different from Zuckerburgs thinking when he created facebook.

Martina

10-24-2012, 09:58 AM

I interviewed at that school. I didn't get the job, probably because I don't have that upper middle class sheen. But I don't hold that against them. I got tons o job offers that year. Anyway, I have to say that the administrators seemed like truly decent people. That's not always the impression one gets.

My point is that it is the culture. Upper middle class white male. I bet the school will come down hard on them. I don't believe the implication that the school might be covering up for them though I know that happens. It's not a private school. And it's near Oakland, therefore politically correct by osmosis. Teachers who suspected that there was a cover up would whistle blow, I am sure. So I can't imagine that happening for real.

Soon

11-20-2012, 06:02 PM

How Many More Women Like Savita Halappanavar Should We Tolerate? (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/soraya-chemaly/savita-halappanavar_b_2133938.html?utm_hp_ref=twitter&comm_ref=false)

Kätzchen

11-20-2012, 09:22 PM

Independent Lens (PBS) shared today that they plan on airing a film called The Invisible War and also added a link to an article published by The New Yorker (Four Generals, Four Scandals, and A Sprawling Rape Case).

(LINK) (http://nymag.com/thecut/2012/11/four-generals-four-scandals-and-a-rape-case.html)

I hope to be able to watch this film.
I read the article and took heart that
Gloria Allred is not backing down from
advocating on behalf of the known victims.

Greyson

11-26-2012, 01:37 PM

Kätzchen

11-26-2012, 05:33 PM

Marie Myung-Ok Lee - Marie Myung-Ok Lee is a novelist who teaches at Columbia University and writes for Slate, Salon, The New York Times, and The Guardian

What It Was Like to Be a Woman at Goldman Sachs

For being affronted, I was chastised for having poor social skills, the first black mark in my record (later removed when I challenged it—it actually said in its wording that I was not "submissive" enough).

http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/11/what-it-was-like-to-be-a-woman-at-goldman-sachs/265572/

This article would have been on the hottest ninja-note exchange between me and a former professor and my peers. When I was at the height of a graduate level study, we were investigating corporate culture and breaking the proverbial glass ceiling women often face in corporate culture! I found a few 'best ever' lines, but the one that seems most telling, chilling actually, was the strand of thought where Myung-OK Lee suggests that ... "the place was just too soul-killing for me".

Which, if you ask me, the situation recorded by Myung-OK Lee is probably the most telling feature of any organizational culture where predominant top-down authority is the preferred organizational model: Organizational culture that is rife with proliferate examples of objectification of the subordinate in favor of the superordinate seems to always illustrate the capacity of the machination of unchecked and unchallenged seats of power.

Thanks for the article, Greyson.

Greyson

11-27-2012, 02:05 PM

I put this in this particular thread because I have come to realize just how much negative stuff is out there, embraced and internalized about the female body.

Lindsay Abrams - Lindsay Abrams is an editorial fellow with The Atlantic Health channel. Her work has also appeared in The New York Times.
The 'Wide Open and Unregulated' Marketing of Vaginal Cosmetic Surgery

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/11/the-wide-open-and-unregulated-marketing-of-vaginal-cosmetic-surgery/265526/

Melanie Berliet - Mélanie Berliet is a writer/producer based in New York City. Her work has appeared in New York, Vanity Fair, Elle, Cosmopolitan, Self, Esquire, and McSweeney’s. She worked as a consulting producer on MTV's The Buried Life.

Designer Parts: Inside the Strange, Fascinating World of Vaginoplasty

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/04/designer-parts-inside-the-strange-fascinating-world-of-vaginoplasty/255188/

Kobi

12-01-2012, 04:34 AM

A 14-year-old Afghan girl was beheaded and killed in an attack by two men, one of whom apparently asked her to marry him.

The attack happened Tuesday, a day before new legislation was introduced in Congress calling on the U.S. government to take steps to help protect Afghan women and girls as the U.S. military prepares to exit Afghanistan.

Gasitina, a student, was beheaded in the Imam Sahib district of Kunduz province. The attack was initially reported by local media, and was confirmed by Amnesty International researcher Horia Mosadiq in an email.

The girl was fetching water when she was accosted, according to reports. The men, who have not been identified, were arrested by police. The girl and her parents had refused a marriage proposal by one of the men, according to the Amnesty International report.

This was the 15th deadly attack on a female victim in Kunduz in 2012, the human rights organization said.

"Amnesty International is very concerned about the violations against women in Afghanistan," said Cristina Finch, director of the organization's Women's Human Rights program.

Amnesty reported a similar incident in October, when a young woman was murdered and her throat slashed. In that case, the woman apparently refused to work as a prostitute.

Although it appears such attacks are increasing in frequency, it may be that the world outside Afghanistan is just beginning to hear about them, Finch said.

On Wednesday, Sen. Bob Casey, a Democrat from Pennsylvania, and Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Republican from Texas, introduced the Afghan Women and Girls' Security Promotion Act. If passed in its current form, the bill addresses how women's security will be monitored as the U.S. military withdraws from the country.

The bill also calls for improved gender sensitivity among Afghanistan's national security forces and recruitment of women within the ranks of those forces.

Amnesty International USA's executive director Suzanne Nossel applauded Casey and Hutchison for introducing the bill.

"As the United States military transitions out of Afghanistan, Afghan women's human rights continue to be at grave risk and demand urgent attention," Nossel said in a statement. "The fate of women will be a crucial determinant of that country's prospects for a stable and prosperous future."

In a report on Afghan violence against women, Amnesty International wrote that one of the justifications of the U.S. military going into the country in 2001 was to ensure the protection of human rights, including women's rights.

"More than 10 years after the overthrow of the Taliban, modest advances have been made for girls and women in Afghanistan," the report said. "But much remains to be done. Peace talks between the Taliban, Afghan government and the U.S. jeopardize even these modest gains as the U.S. searches for a quick exit."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/afghan-girl-beheaded-refusing-man-marriage-proposal-185239042.html;_ylt=Apu6W5P4eDlbMChT1Pra1oH9r.l_;_ ylu=X3oDMTUwb3Z1YWtsBGNjb2RlA2N0LmMEbWl0A0FydGljbG UgTW9zdCBQb3B1bGFyBHBrZwM0YjAyNTQ3MS05OWYyLTMwZDEt OWVjMS1iM2M4YzdjOTk0NzcEcG9zAzIEc2VjA01lZGlhQkxpc3 RNaXhlZE1vc3RQb3B1bGFyQ0FUZW1wBHZlcgNiYTM4OGY5Ni0z YjJjLTExZTItOTY4Yy0zY2Q5MmJmZjIwMTY-;_ylg=X3oDMTJ2NTQyc2hwBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRw c3RhaWQDZTZlOGExN2EtZTE1Ni0zNTczLTk2NWUtM2I2NTI0OD Y0ZThmBHBzdGNhdANzY2llbmNlfHBldHMEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl ;_ylv=3

Soon

12-01-2012, 06:28 PM

This week in victim-blaming: 11-year-old gang-rape survivor as seductive “spider” (http://feministing.com/2012/11/29/this-week-in-victim-blaming-11-year-old-gang-rape-survivor-as-seductive-spider/)

Two years ago, an 11-year-old Cleveland, Texas girl was gang-raped by 20 young men. The crime was recorded on cellphones and circulated amongst students at the local school before finally coming to the attention of the police. And since then plenty of allies have stepped forward to rally around the “real victims”: the rapists.

First the New York Times ran an article focused on the terrible strain the investigation had on the community. Forget about the survivor’s trauma: “The case has rocked this East Texas community to its core” and, as one concerned neighbor pointed out, “These boys have to live with this the rest of their lives.” The paper was also criticized for its focus on the young girl’s appearance and friends. Author James C. McKinley, Jr. wrote, based on local gossip, that “she dressed older than her age, wearing makeup and fashions more appropriate to a woman in her 20s. She would hang out with teenage boys at a playground.”

Now defense attorney Steve Taylor thinks that the 11-year-old rape victim, not her assailants, should be punished. As detailed in a Tuesday Chronicle article:

Former Cleveland Police Department Sgt. Chad Langdon, who was the lead investigator on the case, also testified that an 11-year-old – due to her emotional immaturity – legally cannot give consent for a sexual encounter.

Taylor questioned why the underage girl had not been charged with anything for choosing to violate that rule, indicating that she was “the reason” that the encounters happened.

“Like the spider and the fly. Wasn’t she saying, ‘Come into my parlor, said the spider to the fly?’ ” Taylor asked.

Martina

12-01-2012, 06:55 PM

This thread is so disturbing sometimes.

Kobi

12-01-2012, 08:40 PM

Greyson

12-07-2012, 10:11 AM

'Men don't have to worry about being caught': Sex mobs target Egypt's women

By Charlene Gubash, NBC News
Updated at 7:48 a.m. ET: CAIRO

Walaa Al Momtaz doesn’t leave her home for up to five days at a time. The neatly veiled 22-year-old misses her friends at City University, where she studies English and German, but what she faces upon leaving her house defeats her.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/05/15675200-men-dont-have-to-worry-about-being-caught-sex-mobs-target-egypts-women?lite

Greyson

12-07-2012, 10:16 AM

'It pains me': Clinton decries plight of women in male-dominated countries

In an emotional speech as she nears the end of her term of office, Hillary Clinton warned there would be “many sacrifices and losses” before daughters were “valued as sons” across the world, according to reporters traveling with the secretary of state.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/07/15747187-it-pains-me-clinton-decries-plight-of-women-in-male-dominated-countries?lite

Kobi

12-14-2012, 04:11 PM

A Southern California judge is being publicly admonished for saying a rape victim "didn't put up a fight" during her assault and that if someone doesn't want sexual intercourse, the body "will not permit that to happen."

The California Commission on Judicial Performance voted 10-0 to impose a public admonishment Thursday, saying Superior Court Judge Derek Johnson's comments were inappropriate and a breach of judicial ethics.

"In the commission's view, the judge's remarks reflected outdated, biased and insensitive views about sexual assault victims who do not 'put up a fight.' Such comments cannot help but diminish public confidence and trust in the impartiality of the judiciary," wrote Lawrence J. Simi, the commission's chairman.

Johnson made the comments in the case of a man who threatened to mutilate the face and genitals of his ex-girlfriend with a heated screwdriver, beat her with a metal baton and made other violent threats before committing rape, forced oral copulation, and other crimes.

Though the woman reported the criminal threats the next day, the woman did not report the rape until 17 days later.

Johnson, a former prosecutor in the Orange County district attorney's sex crimes unit, said during the man's 2008 sentencing that he had seen violent cases on that unit in which women's vaginas were "shredded" by rape.

"I'm not a gynecologist, but I can tell you something: If someone doesn't want to have sexual intercourse, the body shuts down. The body will not permit that to happen unless a lot of damage is inflicted, and we heard nothing about that in this case," Johnson said.

The commission found that Johnson's view that a victim must resist to be a real victim of sexual assault was his opinion, not the law. Since 1980, California law doesn't require rape victims to prove they resisted or were prevented from resisting because of threats.

In an apology to the commission, Johnson said his comments were inappropriate. He said his comments were the result of his frustration during an argument with a prosecutor over the defendant's sentence.

Johnson said he believed the prosecutor's request of a 16-year sentence was not authorized by law. Johnson sentenced the rapist to six years instead, saying that's what the case was "worth."

http://news.yahoo.com/calif-judge-says-victims-body-prevent-rape-023033459.html;_ylt=AkoNrP8_HPFchVfvbn4eqahtzwcF;_ ylu=X3oDMTRyZzNob2dlBGNjb2RlA2N0LmMEbWl0A01vc3QgUG 9wdWxhciBVUwRwa2cDNGQ2NWJhZmMtODgwOC0zMzcxLWJlNDct NzRlMTMxOGU0NGUzBHBvcwMyBHNlYwNNZWRpYUJMaXN0TWl4ZW RNb3N0UG9wdWxhckNBVGVtcAR2ZXIDYzg3M2E5NDMtNDViMC0x MWUyLWFhZjktNDdmZTllYmU0NTIx;_ylg=X3oDMTFoaTA0amh2 BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdAN1LX MEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3

Gemme

12-14-2012, 05:16 PM

Ugh. I just can't. I just....smh.

Kobi

12-21-2012, 07:59 PM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Sexual assaults reported by students at the three U.S. military academies jumped 23 percent in 2012, underscoring what Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said was a "persistent" problem that required a "strong and immediate response" from the services.

Eighty cases of sexual assault were reported by cadets and midshipmen during the 2011-2012 academic year, compared to 65 the previous year, the Pentagon said on Friday in its annual report on sexual harassment and violence at the academies. The victims were primarily women, although four were men.

It was the third straight year of increases, from a low of 25 in 2009. Prior to that, reported sexual assault cases had fallen regularly from 42 in 2006, when the Pentagon first began tracking the issue at the direction of Congress, the report said.

"Despite our considerable and ongoing efforts, this year's annual report ... demonstrates that we have a persistent problem," Panetta said in a memorandum to the secretaries of the Navy, Army and Air Force.

He said the lack of progress at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland, the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, merited "a strong and immediate response."

Panetta and he asked the services to identify "new ways to advance a climate of dignity and respect" at the academies and report back to him by the end of March.

The findings drew expressions of concern from lawmakers and special interest groups that track the issue. Representative Niki Tsongas said that while the rise could partly be attributed to improved conditions that encourage people to report assaults, they also showed the issue remains a problem.

"Sexual assault remains a persistent and untenable crime throughout the armed forces," she said in a statement. "These numbers are an affront to the educational institutions that are developing our military's future leaders."

Nancy Parrish, president of Protect Our Defenders, said the report "shines a light on the severity and scope of the crisis" of sexual assault in the military.

"There is a culture of high tolerance for rape and sexual predators in the ranks that pervades the military," she said. "Clearly all the reforms that have been announced over many years aren't making a difference."

The academies are implementing programs to try to reduce sexual assaults. At the same time, they are attempting to create an environment that encourages reporting, whether on a confidential basis that enables victims to get care and counseling or an unrestricted basis that also permits full criminal investigation.

Of the 80 cases reported in 2012, 42 were unrestricted, allowing authorities to pursue a criminal investigation with the assistance of the victim. Thirty-eight cases remained confidential and were not investigated, officials said.

The academies investigated 40 sexual assault cases in 2012, 23 from 2012 and 17 from the previous year. Of that number, 11 were prosecuted and punished, including eight suspects who were court martialed. The others were not prosecuted, either because the military lacked jurisdiction or evidence, officials said.

The Pentagon surveys students every two years to assess gender relations at the schools and to get a better idea about the number of sexual assaults that go unreported.

The survey conducted as part of this year's report found that 12.4 percent of women and 2 percent of men had reported unwanted sexual contact during the previous 12 months - statistically unchanged from the prior survey.

Fifty-one percent of women reported experiencing sexual harassment during the previous year, down from 56 percent in the 2010 survey. Ten percent of men reported experiencing sexual harassment, statistically unchanged from the earlier survey.

Unwanted sexual contact ranged from rape or sexual assault, to attempted attacks, forcible sodomy and other types of sexual contact, officials said. Major General Gary Patton, director of the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office, said there was an important correlation between sexual assault and sexual harassment.

"Eliminating sexual harassment is critical to preventing sexual assault," he said, adding that those who experience sexual assault in the past year had also been sexually harassed.

"The solution to this problem is ... creating a nonpermissive environment where sexual harassment, sexist behavior, stalking and these types of behaviors are not condoned," Patton said.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/sexual-assault-reports-jump-23-percent-u-military-182855083.html

Kobi

12-25-2012, 05:24 AM

After working as a dental assistant for ten years, Melissa Nelson was fired for being too "irresistible" and a "threat" to her employer's marriage.

On Friday, the all-male Iowa State Supreme Court ruled that James Knight, Nelson's boss, was within his legal rights when he fired her, affirming the decision of a lower court.

"We do think the Iowa Supreme Court got it completely right," said Stuart Cochrane, an attorney for James Knight. "Our position has always been Mrs. Nelson was never terminated because of her gender, she was terminated because of concerns her behavior was not appropriate in the workplace. She's an attractive lady. Dr. Knight found her behavior and dress to be inappropriate."

For Nelson, a 32-year-old married mother of two, the news of her firing and the rationale behind it came as a shock.

The two never had a sexual relationship or sought one, according to court documents, however in the final year and a half of Nelson's employment, Knight began to make comments about her clothing being too tight or distracting.

"Dr. Knight acknowledges he once told Nelson that if she saw his pants bulging, she would know her clothing was too revealing," the justices wrote.

Six months before Nelson was fired, she and her boss began exchanging text messages about work and personal matters, such as updates about each of their children's activities, the justices wrote.

The messages were mostly mundane, but Nelson recalled one text she received from her boss asking "how often she experienced an orgasm."

Nelson did not respond to the text and never indicated that she was uncomfortable with Knight's question, according to court documents.

Soon after, Knight's wife, Jeanne, who also works at the practice, found out about the text messaging and ordered her husband to fire Nelson.

The couple consulted with a senior pastor at their church and he agreed that Nelson should be terminated in order to protect their marriage, Cochrane said.

On Jan. 4, 2010, Nelson was summoned to a meeting with Knight while a pastor was present. Knight then read from a prepared statement telling Nelson she was fired.

"Dr. Knight felt like for the best interest of his marriage and the best interest of hers to end their employment relationship," Cochrane said.

Knight acknowledged in court documents that Nelson was good at her job and she, in turn, said she was generally treated with respect.

"I'm devastated. I really am," Nelson said.

When Nelson's husband tried to reason with Knight, the dentist told him he "feared he would have an affair with her down the road if he did not fire her."

Paige Fiedler, Nelson's attorney, said in a statement to ABC News affiliate KCRG that she was "appalled" by the ruling.

"We are appalled by the Court's ruling and its failure to understand the nature of gender bias.," she wrote.

"Although people act for a variety of reasons, it is very common for women to be targeted for discrimination because of their sexual attractiveness or supposed lack of sexual attractiveness. That is discrimination based on sex," Fiedler wrote. "Nearly every woman in Iowa understands this because we have experienced it for ourselves."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/dental-assistant-fired-being-irresistible-devastated-151724600--abc-news-topstories.html

Corkey

12-25-2012, 04:54 PM

Can't control himself so she pays. Fucking Patriarchy.

Kobi

01-20-2013, 07:28 AM

BOSTON (WHDH) -- Some local students think they've found a sweet solution to pay for college -- in the form of “sugar daddies.”

A new website aims to match "sugar daddies" with "sugar babies".

While some think it's a great idea to cut down on debt, others aren't so sure.

Students in Boston find themselves under the same crushing college debt load as kids all over the country. Some of them will look for jobs, or second jobs. Others are turning to a website where they can find benefactors advertised as boyfriends.

Answer a couple of questions, post your picture, and you could be just a couple of clicks away from finding a match made of cash.

The dating site “seekingarrangements.com” says its gaining popularity, especially with coeds struggling to pay for school.

“A lot of these girls grew up thinking college is going to be paid for and then when the recession happened they had to use their savings to stay afloat and now there's no college money for those girls,” said Jennifer Gwynn, “seekingarrangement.com”

“Seeking arrangements” lets singles find what they call a “sugar daddy” or “sugar momma.” The company says the average college aged sugar baby gets an allowance of about $3,000 per month -- that's for what it describes as a “mutually beneficial relationship.”

“We really believe this is a better way to pay for school,” said Gwynn.

“Seeking arrangements” claims to have 2 million users, it says 44 percent of them are college students, including some at BU and UMass.

“Given the expense of your colleges it doesn't surprise me that people are forced to end up doing things like this,” said one man.

“Sugar babies” can earn as much as $20,000 per month;more than enough to pay for books, loans, or even tuition.

But to most students, whatever the payout, it isn't worth the price.

“It sounds dangerous. I wouldn't do that. Wouldn't recommend it,” said one woman.

BU and UMass representatives told 7News they were not aware of any of their students participating with the site.

http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/boston/12009626483452/site-matches-single-co-eds-with-benefactors/
---------------------------

Sometimes there just arent any words.

DapperButch

01-20-2013, 08:23 AM

Greyson

01-20-2013, 12:51 PM

My first thought when reading the above article is that gay men have been doing this forever.

The site is set up for all combination of sexes, with sugar daddys, sugar mommas, sugar male babies, and sugar female babies. Straight and gay.

Sorry but the article really pushed my buttons. One of my first thoughts is yet more enabling of spineless "I am too special, smart, talented and beautiful to be expected to live among the mortals."

I live in an area full of well intentioned middle class liberals who are clueless and raised to believe they are open hearted, fair minded and not racist. They could not do an honest day of work or find their way out of a paper bag if their life depended on it.

College fees, tuition are rediculious. Guess what? It has been this way for generations for many. So now that it is in the back yard of the little darlings, it is a problem? Gawd forbid they might have to get a job or take the bus instead of daddy's old car.

DapperButch

01-20-2013, 01:31 PM

Sorry but the article really pushed my buttons. One of my first thoughts is yet more enabling of spineless "I am too special, smart, talented and beautiful to be expected to live among the mortals."

I live in an area full of well intentioned middle class liberals who are clueless and raised to believe they are open hearted, fair minded and not racist. They could not do an honest day of work or find their way out of a paper bag if their life depended on it.

College fees, tuition are rediculious. Guess what? It has been this way for generations for many. So now that it is in the back yard of the little darlings, it is a problem?

Well, when I went to the site I didn't see anything about it being a paying for college type of thing, so it seems to me that the article is making the assumption that this is what the site is mainly used for. But, it is not like I read further into it.

I took a look at the site after I read the article and it seems to be also used as just a regular personals site. Many of the "sugar mommas" make around 40K per year, so I don't see how they plan to spend $1,000-$3,000 for their "sugar male babies". Some of them are also in their 20's.

However, I didn't join the site, so maybe they mention the college thing, I don't know.

Really, this stuff already goes on on personal sites, anyway. People searching for wealthy people to help take care of them. The difference is this site gives one location for those people.

So, for me, when I read the article it pushed my buttons, but when I looked at the site and saw how it was a level playing field between the sexes, it "pushed my buttons less", so to speak.

Greyson

01-20-2013, 01:42 PM

Well, when I went to the site I didn't see anything about it being a paying for college type of thing, so it seems to me that the article is making the assumption that this is what the site is mainly used for. But, it is not like I read further into it.

I took a look at the site after I read the article and it seems to be also used as just a regular personals site. Many of the "sugar mommas" make around 40K per year, so I don't see how they plan to spend $1,000-$3,000 for their "sugar male babies". Some of them are also in their 20's.

However, I didn't join the site, so maybe they mention the college thing, I don't know.

Really, this stuff already goes on on personal sites, anyway. People searching for wealthy people to help take care of them. The difference is this site gives one location for those people.

So, for me, when I read the article it pushed my buttons, but when I looked at the site and saw how it was a level playing field between the sexes, it "pushed my buttons less", so to speak.

Dapper, thanks for digging deeper. I am not against women making ends meet, raising their standard of living, spending their money however they choose among consenting adults. What rubs me the wrong way is when women, men and any other gender believes are entitled to something. Although the article does not speak directly to "entitlement" for me, it pushes that button.

In the media the discussion of entitlement is usually about "minorities." What is glossed over is the reality of middle class, upper middle class and cooperate entitlements. IMO, many are born into it and do not even realize their world is full of entitlement, privlege.

Kobi

01-20-2013, 01:45 PM

My first thought when reading the above article is that gay men have been doing this forever.

The site is set up for all combination of sexes, with sugar daddys, sugar mommas, sugar male babies, and sugar female babies. Straight and gay.

I didnt visit the site to see all the available options. ;)

Some people might see this as an example of capitalism in action, fitting a need that is mutually beneficial to both parties.

Some might see this as an example of human exploitation.

I dunno.

DapperButch

01-20-2013, 01:59 PM

I didnt visit the site to see all the available options. ;)

Some people might see this as an example of capitalism in action, fitting a need that is mutually beneficial to both parties.

Some might see this as an example of human exploitation.

I dunno.

I guess I kind of see it as both. I have mixed feelings about Hooters, too, but seem to lean more towards viewing it is exploitation since it is most often very young women. Of course, the women who work there may be insulted by my feeling that way.

Soon

01-22-2013, 07:22 PM

School Tells 13-Year-Old That She Should Get a Breast Reduction to Combat Bullying (http://jezebel.com/5977748/school-tells-13+year+old-that-she-should-get-a-breast-reduction-to-combat-bullying?commented=true)

"It makes me feel like now you are telling me it's my fault, it's God's fault the way he made her. The lady on the phone said they could transfer my daughter and said her boobs were so large she will always get teased. And the only suggestion she had for me is to have my daughter get a breast reduction," said Jackson.

Greyson

01-30-2013, 04:22 PM

Remembering Civil Rights in 1963, 50 Years On

Posted: 01/27/2013 2:42 pm

In 1963, Pauli Murray was working hard to make Americans aware of an idea she had come up with two decades earlier -- one that influenced people as different from one another as Eleanor Roosevelt and Marian Wright Edelman -- and which would help change the meaning of equality. She called it Jane Crow. Alongside the system of Jim Crow race segregation, Murray argued, there was an equally wrong system of sex segregation. Sex discrimination should be against the law for the same reasons as race discrimination. This was a radical idea at the time. In the early 1960s, there were still laws excluding women from certain jobs (like bartending), and from jury service (unless they volunteered to serve).

In 1963, Pauli Murray was working hard to make Americans aware of an idea she had come up with two decades earlier -- one that influenced people as different from one another as Eleanor Roosevelt and Marian Wright Edelman -- and which would help change the meaning of equality. She called it Jane Crow. Alongside the system of Jim Crow race segregation, Murray argued, there was an equally wrong system of sex segregation. Sex discrimination should be against the law for the same reasons as race discrimination. This was a radical idea at the time. In the early 1960s, there were still laws excluding women from certain jobs (like bartending), and from jury service (unless they volunteered to serve). As Supreme Court Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote in 1961, "woman is still regarded as the center of home and family." The mainstream view, among men and many women, was that restrictions on women were a simple reflection of their essential nature as wives and mothers.

Murray strongly disagreed, and had been developing her contrary view of "civil rights" ever since she graduated first in her class at Howard Law School in 1944, hoping to become a civil rights lawyer for the NAACP. That job never materialized, but by the early 1960s the lawyer/activist found herself at the crossroads of history, as civil rights and feminist groups sometimes worked at cross purposes. Seizing the opportunity, Murray began pushing her view of Jane Crow everywhere. When Congress had to decide whether the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should apply to sex discrimination, she was there, writing a memo that went to every member of congress, arguing that it should -- and it did. When civil rights activists planned the March on Washington, she was there, publishing an open letter that criticized march leaders for appearing at the National Press Club, which excluded women from its central space. When women's rights activists pushed for enactment of the Equal Rights Amendment, she was there, convincing them that they should also look to the civil rights movement's successful use of the existing Fourteenth Amendment. She was a founding member of the National Organization for Women -- and one of its few early black leaders. Among her most important listeners was a young lawyer (now a Supreme Court Justice) named Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In 1971, when Ginsburg convinced the Supreme Court to rule that the Fourteenth Amendment applied to sex discrimination in a case called Reed v. Reed, she placed Murray's name on the brief as the originator of that idea.

Then, as now, there were many who argued that the legacy of the civil rights movement of the 1960s should be restricted to the African American fight against Jim Crow. To most civil rights leaders, women's equality was a different cause with a different history. Murray, however, felt differently. The reason lay in what one of her friends called Murray's struggle as a "minority of minorities." Murray always felt out-of-place as a representative of African Americans -- a person who was supposed to stand in for the aspirations of her entire racial group. She was light-skinned and hailed from multi-racial family, and often found herself on the wrong side of the color lines that were supposed to divide blacks and whites. More importantly, she was a sexual dissenter. Although her own society lacked the words to name it, Murray felt as though she was a man trapped in a woman's body. Although it was the source of intense emotional discomfort, Murray wanted to do the things in life that only men did -- including becoming a black civil rights lawyer.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kenneth-w-mack/womens-rights_b_2562594.html?utm_hp_ref=black-voices&ir=Black%20Voices

Soon

02-05-2013, 05:49 AM

New Jersey Catholic School Makes Girls Swear Not to Swear, Lets Boys Do Whatever the Fuck They Want (http://jezebel.com/5981212/new-jersey-catholic-school-makes-girls-swear-not-to-swear-lets-boys-do-whatever-the-fuck-they-want)

/snip:

Following in the grand tradition of Catholic hypocrisy and misogyny, the girls at Queen of Peace High School in North Arlington, NJ were asked to take a no-cursing pledge on Friday while their male classmates looked on, blinking like the bemused rescue greyhounds the Pope flagellates every time he stubs his toe on a piece of priceless marble statuary.

Greyson

02-07-2013, 05:05 PM

Who You Calling a Female?

Ask Demetria: Before accepting a date, consider how a guy refers to women. It says a lot about him.

By: Demetria L. Lucas | Posted: February 7, 2013 at 12:11 AM

That you are startled by his use of "female" in a nonscientific context implies that you and I may have similar thoughts on the use of the word. To me, it's objectifying women, robbing us of a bit of our personhood. And that makes it sound woefully misogynistic.

That, of course, is a red flag, one that many people don't recognize. The heterosexual man who enjoys sex with women but doesn't actually like women -- or, er, "females," as he might call them -- is initially a bit of an enigma. I believe that calling women "females" is one of his calling cards. Whenever I hear it, it's as if the guy is trying really hard not to say "b--ch."

http://www.theroot.com/views/who-you-calling-female
__________________________________________________ _______________

For me, I feel and think similar to the use of the word "female" when referring to women. I am Trans. This means I have lived much of my life socialized as a woman in many ways. When and if I was ever referred to as a female instead of a woman, I would say something.

I was reluctant because this word is used by many POC and/or others at the lower end of the economic scale. Since I come from both, I was more willing to say something to the use of "female" when referring to a woman. When I was going through my morning reads, I knew I had to post this one.

Soon

02-16-2013, 06:29 PM

American Horror Story: Oscar Pistorius and Misogynist Myth-Making (http://www.thenation.com/blog/172951/american-horror-story-oscar-pistorius-and-misogynist-myth-making#)

Gemme

02-21-2013, 06:57 PM

This lady is pretty neat. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/05/leila-janah-samasource_n_2615636.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl10%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D273197)

I think it's a crock that the automatic theory is that she's just a pretty face and not that she can be a CEO and a model, simultaneously.

Kobi

02-26-2013, 12:48 PM

A University of North Carolina sexual assault victim has been charged with violating the school's honor code and creating a hostile environment for her attacker by speaking out about her ordeal.

The charge came approximately a month after Landen Gambill, a sophomore at UNC—who last spring reported being raped by a student she says is still on campus—filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights. Gambill, as well as others who filed with her—including current and former students, and Melinda Manning, the school's former assistant dean of students—allege that the school had pressured Manning into underreporting sex offense cases.

An email sent to Gambill last week by the school's graduate attorney general—published by Jezebel.com—reads in part:

You are being charged with the following Honor Code violation(s):

I.C.1.c. - Disruptive or intimidating behavior that willfully abuses, disparages, or otherwise interferes with another (other than on the basis of protected classifications identified and addressed in the University's Policy on Prohibited Harassment and Discrimination) so as to adversely affect their academic pursuits, opportunities for University employment, participation in University-sponsored extracurricular activities, or opportunities to benefit from other aspects of University Life.

The matter has been turned over to UNC's Honor Court. If found guilty, Gambill could be subject to a range of sanctions, including probation, suspension or even expulsion.

"This type of gross injustice is unacceptable," Gambill wrote on her Facebook page. "It's important to me that we continue to advocate for the rights of survivors—not just because it affects me personally but because I desperately hope no one has to go [through] anything like this again."

Some of Gambill's supporters have also taken to Facebook and Twitter, changing their avatars to say "I Stand With Landen" and tweeting messages with the hashtag #standwithlanden.

Colby Bruno, managing attorney for the national Victim Rights Law Center, told InsideHigherEd.com the code violation is "outrageous.” For the university "to entertain this as a viable claim is a problem, because it's not,” Bruno said.

The university would not comment on Gambill's case, citing federal privacy laws. But at a board meeting last month, Leslie Strohm, UNC's vice chancellor and general counsel, told trustees "the allegations with respect to the underreporting of sexual assault are false, they are untrue, and they are just plain wrong."

In 2010, the Department of Justice estimated that 25 percent of college women "will be victims of rape or attempted rape before they graduate within a four-year college period," and that schools with more than 6,000 students "average one rape per day during the school year.”

According to New York University's "National Statistics about Sexual Violence on College Campuses," fewer than 5 percent of such cases are reported to law enforcement.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/unc-sexual-assault-rape-victim-honor-code-142933849.html

femmeInterrupted

02-27-2013, 02:55 PM

http://www.vulture.com/2013/02/why-seth-macfarlanes-misogyny-matters.html

Kobi

03-01-2013, 09:36 PM

A former employee at a Christian college has enlisted the help of high-profile attorney Gloria Allred to sue a California school that allegedly fired her for engaging in premarital sex, NBC's "Today" reports. In a bizarre twist, the school reportedly went on to offer the pregnant woman's job to her then-fiance.

Teri James, 29, told the news outlet that she did sign a two-page contract with San Diego Christian College that included a provision agreeing not to engage in "sexually immoral behavior including premarital sex."

"I needed a job in this economy and so I never thought that anything would happen," James explained to "Today."

But James said she was humiliated after being pulled into her supervisor's office last fall, where she was asked if she was pregnant and then was let go. After James lost her job, she claims the school offered a position to her now-husband, even though they were aware he'd had sex before getting married, too.

During a news conference featured in a KTLA report, James said she felt she was treated unfairly.

"I was unmarried, pregnant and they took away my livelihood," James said.

Legal clashes involving teachers at religious schools who've been fired for pre-martial sex are not entirely uncommon.

Last year in Florida, an appeals court ruled that a teacher's case would be moving to trial after the judges decided the school might have fired the womannot because she admitted to getting pregnant while unmarried, but because they didn't want to find a replacement for her during while she'd be on maternity leave, according to Reuters.

And as ABC News previously reported, an unmarried teacher in Texas sought legal counsel after she was fired over her pregnancy. The women offered to expedite her wedding in order to keep her job, but school officials still said "no," claiming the pregnancy violated their definition of being a Christian role model.

The legal waters can get murky, though, when contracts between teachers and religious schools are involved.

After a Catholic school in Ohio fired Christa Dias for becoming pregnant through artificial insemination, the school aruged that she had violated Catholic doctrine and failed to fulfill her contract.

“This is not the classic pregnancy discrimination case in which pretexts must be evaluated and discriminatory intent must be divined,” the school’s attorneys wrote, according to Cincinnati.com.

Dias sued the archdiocese and according to Courthousenews, the trial is set to begin on March 19.

Some teachers, on the other hand, have decided to leave religiously affiliated schools rather than agree to lifestyle contracts.

As Christianity Today reported in 2012, a third of the faculty at the Southern Baptist-based Shorter University decided to quit rather than sign a "lifestyle statement," which condemned drinking in public, sex before marriage and homosexuality.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/01/teri-james-pregnant-woman-fired-premarital-sex-christian-school_n_2790085.html

Soon

03-04-2013, 04:17 PM

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18ggrg4r4ukxjjpg/xlarge.jpg

Kobi

03-10-2013, 09:31 AM

'Nice legs', 'Hey sexy lady', 'Now I know where you live', 'Get in the trunk, bitch'.

For many women and teenage girls these remarks are not a rare but a daily occurrence.

Coupled with lewd remarks and gropings comes a prevailing attitude that this is simply something women should put up with.

And while many might consider such boorish behaviour verging on the criminal as a relic of yesteryear it is a daily blight on the lives of many in Britain today.Laura Bates, 26, set up the project to document the everyday harassment and sexism women are forced to put up with …

Laura Bates was the target of such behaviour and knew it was wrong but didn't know what to do about it. It was only when she shared her experiences with her friends that she realised she was not alone. And that was when she decided something needed to change.

The 26-year-old freelance writer hit upon using Twitter to collect women's stories and empower them and in April last year launched ‘The Everyday Sexism Project’. She invited Twitter users to share their experiences of harassment through the hashtag Shoutingback thereby giving women a modern tool and a platform with which to fight back.

Within five days it had 3,500 tweets.

Women like Melinda Greenacre, 23, who works in advertising stumbled upon the hashtag and decided to contribute.

She said: “Rarely a day goes by without a man making comments, like ‘hey sexy lady’, or ‘get in my car’. Most of the time I brush it off but when it’s at night – then I get scared and feel uncomfortable.”

She, too, knew such behaviour was wrong but had normalised it. It was by taking part in Shoutingback that she knew she should never have put up with it. And her story is not an isolated case.

For Laura it reinforces the reason why she started the Twitter campaign and its associated 'Everyday Sexism Project’ to encourage women to speak out.

The tweets make for sobering reading. Women have documented how men catcall them while walking down the street, touch them inappropriately, follow them home and even threaten them with rape.

They also described the frequency of these incidents. That they happened everyday, regardless of where they were, regardless of the time of day, regardless how drunk or sober they were, regardless of what they were wearing.

One woman described how she was "chased to my door at 11.30pm by two lads who 'Didn't want to hurt me.' I ran faster".

They also showed how aggressive the harassers become upon rejection – a comment such as “Come here” can switch to “You whore, I’ll beat you so hard” within seconds.

The stark reality of these experiences reverberated around the Twitterverse and caused many to sit up and take note of the true extent of sexual harassment in Britain today.

Laura said: “The profile made women feel more confident to speak up about it. When they had said something before they would get a backlash – responses like ‘you’re frigid’ or ‘you can’t take a joke’. There was this idea that the problem did not exist anymore.”

Sexism at work is one of the most common entries.

Laura said: “We’ve had stories of women in IT who answer the phones and the man on the other end say they want to speak to a man because a women won't understand the problem. Another story was a boss telling a women to sit on his lap to get a Christmas bonus.”

But not all of the stories involve adults.

She continued: “Girls in their school uniform have been sexually harassed or touched in the street.”

Having young girls share such traumatising stories with her shocked and upset Laura, but she added: “It doubles my determination to get the information out there.”

The entries also showed sexual assault in public places was a common theme - with many women simply unaware they had been victim of a crime.

She said: “Women would go to bars and clubs and regularly be touched on their a**e, their breast and so on and they had no idea they were being sexually assaulted.”

The definition of sexual assault is it is when someone is inappropriately touched without giving consent - such as a hand on the bottom or leg. Its most serious form is rape.

Many of the women sharing their experiences were naïve and didn't realise that being groped in a bar constituted sexual assault – and most importantly that it could be reported to the police.

Laura, who since launching the project has received death threats and threats of rape from men, said: “When a women is shouted at on the street the silence of people around her says volumes. There was an instance when a women on a bus was cornered at the back by men saying lewd and threatening things to her - no one stepped up and intervened. People just thought these experiences were just part of being a women.”

Laura has since launched another hashtag called ‘followed’ which encourages women to tweet occurrences when she feels she is being pursued. Like Shoutingback, the experiences are common and heartbreaking to read.

So far 20,000 experiences have been shared and the project has had the backing from MP Stella Creasy and ‘Double Jeopardy’ actress Ashley Judd. Recently the project encouraged Twitter users to tweet a supermarket chain to change the display of its magazines after spotting the supermarket stocked science and politics magazines only in the men’s lifestyle section.

The project has seen men also give their support to women and vow to intervene if they witness street harassment or sexual assault.

As International Woman’s Day celebrates its 102nd year Laura is adamant that there is still a need for feminism and projects like ‘Everyday Sexism’.

She adds that what may seem like a harmless catcall on the street can quickly escalate to sexual assault and rape. One in five women over 16 in England Wales have been the victim of a sexual offence.

Laura said: All of these issues are connected and everyday sexism is an underlying factor.”

She added: “The laws that are there to promote equality are not matching up to the reality. It suggests that we have not come as far as we think we have. If we look back to the Jimmy Savile scandal, when the allegations came out a lot of people said ‘thank goodness it’s not like that anymore’ - but we see the same complaints on the projects.”

Laura’s message is clear – as long as these experiences persist, women will keep shouting back.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/international-womens-day-everyday-sexism-shoutingback-laura-bates-171432386.html

Kobi

03-14-2013, 10:58 PM

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Egypt's ruling Muslim Brotherhood warns that a U.N. declaration on women's rights could destroy society by allowing a woman to travel, work and use contraception without her husband's approval and letting her control family spending.

The Islamist movement that backs President Mohamed Mursi gave 10 reasons why Muslim countries should "reject and condemn" the declaration, which the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women is racing to negotiate a consensus deal on by Friday.

The Brotherhood, whose Freedom and Justice Party propelled Mursi to power in June, posted the statement on its website, www.ikhwanweb.com, and the website of the party on Thursday.

Egypt has joined Iran, Russia and the Vatican - dubbed an "unholy alliance" by some diplomats - in threatening to derail the women's rights declaration by objecting to language on sexual, reproductive and gay rights.

The Muslim Brotherhood said the declaration would give "wives full rights to file legal complaints against husbands accusing them of rape or sexual harassment, obliging competent authorities to deal husbands punishments similar to those prescribed for raping or sexually harassing a stranger."

U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice last week touted at the commission - a global policy-making body created in 1946 for the advancement of women - progress made by the United States in reducing the rate of violence against women by their partners.

"All 50 states in our union now have laws that treat date rape or spousal rape as just as much of a crime as rape by a stranger," Rice said. "We cannot live in truly free societies, if women and girls are not free to reach their full potential."

The contrasting views show the gap that needs to be breached in negotiations on the declaration, which this year is focused on urging an end to violence against women and girls. The commission failed to agree a declaration last year on a theme of empowering rural women due to similar disagreements.

WORLD IS WATCHING

Egypt has proposed an amendment, diplomats say, that would allow countries to avoid implementing the declaration if it clashed with national laws, religious or cultural values. But some diplomats say this would undermine the entire declaration.

The Muslim Brotherhood warned the declaration would give girls sexual freedom, legalize abortion, provide teenagers with contraceptives, give equality to women in marriage and require men and women to share duties such as child care and chores.

It said the declaration would allow "equal rights to homosexuals, and provide protection and respect for prostitutes" and "equal rights to adulterous wives and illegitimate sons resulting from adulterous relationships."

A coalition of Arab human rights groups - from Egypt, Lebanon, the Palestinian Territories, Jordan and Tunisia - called on countries at the Commission on the Status of Women on Thursday to stop using religion, culture, and tradition to justify abuse of women.

"The current positions taken by some Arab governments at this meeting is clearly not representative of civil society views, aspirations or best practices regarding the elimination and prevention of violence against women and girls within our countries," said the statement issued by the Coalition for Sexual and Bodily Rights in Muslim Societies.

Michelle Bachelet, a former president of Chile and head of U.N. Women, which supports the commission, said the commission was unable to reach a deal a decade ago when it last focused on the theme of women's rights and ending violence against women.

"Ten years later, we simply cannot allow disagreement or indecision to block progress for the world's women," Bachelet told the opening session of the commission last week. "The world is watching ... the violence needs to stop."

http://news.yahoo.com/egypts-islamists-warn-giving-women-rights-could-destroy-020322994.html

Soon

03-17-2013, 08:04 PM

CNN's Steubenville Coverage Focuses On Effect Rape Trial Will Have On Rapists, Not Victim (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kia-makarechi/cnn-steubenville-coverage_b_2896948.html)

Kobi

03-18-2013, 03:49 AM

JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) — A judge being interviewed for a Supreme Court job jokes that women might enjoy rape. A local official takes a 17-year-old second wife, then quickly divorces her by text message.

Both cases reflect attitudes toward women's rights and safety that have persisted for years in this Southeast Asian archipelago nation of 240 million people. The difference now: Both officials are at risk of losing their jobs.

Women in this social-media-obsessed country have been rallying, online and on the streets, against sexist comments and attacks on women. The response is seen as a small step for women's rights in Indonesia, where the government is secular and most people practice a moderate form of Islam.

http://news.yahoo.com/social-media-gives-indonesian-women-voice-065228116.html

Toughy

03-18-2013, 04:10 PM

I'm so frigging mad at CNN I cannot see straight. Those poor boys will suffer the rest of their lives................SPIT..........fuckers need to stay in jail til they are 21........

I also cannot believe not one single kid....boy or girl... stepped up and stopped this from happening. The little shits were way to busy taking pictures and posting them on-line..........they need some jail time also......it's despicable all around......

A great blog:

http://blackgirldangerous.org/new-blog/2013/3/17/1g5wckiks8gpa0iahe4zc46go4awsu

Greyson

03-19-2013, 09:42 AM

High-skilled immigration debate grows over stark gender imbalance, favoring men for H-1B visas

By Matt O'Brien
mercurynews.com
Posted: 03/19/2013 06:28:07 AM PDT

The long-overlooked disparity is beginning to attract attention on Capitol Hill, where activists demanded Monday that the federal government take a closer look at whether U.S. visa policy discriminates against women.

Corporate hiring practices, outdated U.S. visa policies and entrenched gender discrimination in immigrants' home countries are all contributing to the disparity. The hearing marked the first time this year that lawmakers specifically addressed how reform of the immigration system will affect women.

While the Obama administration came under fire at the hearing for not revealing how many men and women hold H-1B visas, the nation's centerpiece program for highly skilled workers, the data requested by the Bay Area News Group provided the scope of the imbalance: The U.S. Office of Immigration Statistics recorded 347,087 male H-1B visa holders entered the country during the 2011 fiscal year compared to 137,522 women.

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_22819054/high-skilled-immigration-debate-grows-over-stark-gender?source=email

Kobi

03-20-2013, 08:58 PM

Lou Piniella has never been known for his way with words. The ex-manager is a master of the malaprop and his difficulty with the English language caused more than a few press conference chuckles during his skipper days.

What Piniella said while he provided commentary for the YES Network during Wednesday's Red Sox-Yankees game though, was far from funny.

After being asked in the eighth inning about last year's lopsided trade between the Toronto Blue Jays and Miami Marlins, Piniella's apparent initial impulse was to describe it as a sexual assault. And while Sweet Lou never technically used that description, he still completely stepped in it by even saying the word.

Here's a transcription of what Piniella said (via Larry Brown Sports) and here's the awkward audio via Deadspin:

“Well they just, I don’t want to use the word ‘raped,’ but they basically took a lot of talent from the Miami Marlins,” Piniella said. “Toronto will probably be picked to win the (AL East) by a lot of people.”

Here's the thing: Letting the word pass his lips constitutes using it, even if he followed it by saying that wasn't his intention. It's why Piniella — who currently draws paychecks to speak publicly for a living — might want to look into a better filter when describing a trade that was heavy on prospects for pros.

Because, yes, there are words so crude and offensive that they can't be laughed away as humorous misspeak from a crusty old lifer.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/lou-piniella-uses-word-raped-while-discussing-blue-014327041--mlb.html

-------------------------------

Thank you Kevin Kaduk for having the gonads to call this what it is.

DapperButch

03-21-2013, 06:23 AM

http://www.aol.com/video/outrage-after-slain-wisconsin-police-officer-is-denied-a-spot-on-national-memorial/517716722/?icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl3%7Csec1_lnk1%26pLid%3D286675

Somehow I doubt that if this was a male that he wouldn't be included in the National Memorial.

Kobi

04-05-2013, 04:04 PM

President Obama has apologized to California Attorney General Kamala Harris for commenting Thursday on her looks, an aide said Friday.

"He called her (Thursday night) to apologize for the distraction created by his comments," said White House spokesman Jay Carney.

"They are old friends and good friends," Carney said."And he did not want in any way to diminish the attorney general's professional accomplishments and her capabilities."

During a fundraiser in California, Obama praised Harris' work and added that "she also happens to be, by far, the best-looking attorney general in the country." As the crowd reacted, the president said, "It's true! Come on!"

Some commentators criticized Obama for the crack, calling it sexist and demeaning.

Carney pointed out that Obama also described Harris as "brilliant, dedicated, and tough."

The president also "fully recognizes the challenge women continue to face in the workplace and that they should not be judged based on appearance," Carney said.

------------------------

Sigh.

Greyson

04-08-2013, 10:13 AM

News coverage of female candidate’s appearance damages her chance of winning
Posted by Diana Reese on April 8, 2013 at 12:57 am

Even such a neutral description of a female candidate’s appearance can hurt her chances at getting elected, according to a study released today by Name It. Change It., a joint project of The Women’s Media Center and She Should Run.

News coverage that referred to a female candidate as “fit and attractive and looks even younger than her age,” even though it sounded complimentary, hurt the voters’ perceptions of the politician for being in touch and being likeable, confident, effective and qualified. Both negative and positive comments caused damage. The voters whose responses were affected the most by coverage of a candidate’s appearance were independents — and their support often determines the outcome of an election.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2013/04/08/news-coverage-of-female-candidates-appearance-damages-her-chance-of-winning/

Kätzchen

04-09-2013, 04:05 PM

"Allies who bristle at earnest criticism from the members of the community they desire to serve hurt us more than they help,"

-- Kimberly Foster (Founder & Editor of For Harriet)

Link: http://www.forharriet.com/2013/04/the-problem-with-our-so-called-allies.html

femmeInterrupted

04-09-2013, 05:34 PM

http://media-cache-lt0.pinterest.com/736x/43/29/f4/4329f44fcbb1ee5270d2b976284d8a22.jpg

1920s Anti-suffragette's postcard. "Peace at last"

femmeInterrupted

04-09-2013, 05:38 PM

http://media-cache-ec6.pinterest.com/736x/89/86/13/8986134fb8c44d2cad5fc6a5be6cab3b.jpg
The Museum of Sexism. Fantastic posts showing the history of sexism against feminists/suffragettes.

femmeInterrupted

04-09-2013, 05:44 PM

http://media-cache-lt0.pinterest.com/736x/0d/7c/53/0d7c530ad8e7f95b400ff161954cd68a.jpg

femmeInterrupted

04-09-2013, 05:52 PM

femmeInterrupted

04-09-2013, 05:59 PM

http://gawker.com/5994168/nova-scotia-teen-commits-suicide-after-rape-bullying/

Nova Scotia Teen Commits Suicide After Rape, Bullying
Maggie Lange

Rehtaeh Parsons, a 17-year-old from Nova Scotia, died this past Sunday in a hospital, after attempting suicide on Thursday. Her mother stated that a rape in 2011 and subsequent bullying led to her daughter's suicide.

In 2011, Rehtaeh Parsons attended a party where she consumed enough vodka to not remember most of the evening. She recalls throwing up out of a window. Four boys then raped her; one of the boys allegedly yelled, "take a picture, take a picture." According to Rehtaeh's mother, "That picture began to circulate in her school and community three days later."

The picture prompted a torrent of online bullying as well as verbal abuse at her school. When Rehtaeh confessed the incident to her mother a few days later, they called emergency health services as well the police. After a year of investigations, the police told her it was a case of "he said, she said," without enough evidence to press charges. They told the family that though she was underage, the photographs were not a criminal issue.

The family moved from Cole Harbour to Halifax. Leah Parsons reports that her daughter attempted to maintain high spirits, but was depressed:

"Every text, every negative thing she would read to me. It was hard. She tried and she kept trying... She was never left alone. Her friends turned against her, people harassed her, boys she didn't know started texting her and Facebooking asking her to have sex with them since she had had sex with their friends. It just never stopped."

Rehtaeh admitted herself to a hospital in March because of suicidal thoughts. She attempted suicide on Thursday and was taken off life support on Sunday. Parsons has created a memorial page for her daughter, where she wrote:

"She made my life complete. When Rehtaeh was born, I dedicated everything to her and promised her the world. Others in this world took that away from her."

[CBC, image via Rehtaeh Parsons's Facebook Memorial Page]

From her mother: (via Rehtaeh's memorial facebook page)
This page is dedication to my wonderful Daughter who was smart, beautiful, and full of life with a deep compassion to animals. The Person Rehtaeh once was all changed one dreaded night in November 2011. She went with a friend to another’s home. In that home she was raped by four young boys…one of those boys took a photo of her being raped and decided it would be fun to distribute the photo to everyone in Rehtaeh’s school and community where it quickly went viral. Because the boys already had a “slut” story, the victim of the rape Rehtaeh was considered a SLUT.
This day changed the lives of our family forever. I stopped working that very day and we have all been on this journey of emotional turmoil ever since.
Rehtaeh was suddenly shunned by almost everyone she knew, the harassment was so bad she had to move out of her own community to try to start anew in Halifax. She struggled emotionally with depression and anger .
Her thoughts of suicide began and fearing for her life, she placed herself in a hospital in an attempt to get help. She stayed there for almost 6weeks. The bullying continued, her friends were not supportive. She needed a friend and eventually along the way a few new friends came along and a few old friends came forward.
Rae then moved back to Dartmouth, always with the concern of what will be said about her, said to her. Again, she was the one raped…she was the victim being victimized over and over again. One year later the police conclude their investigation to state that it comes down to “he said, she said” they believed the boys raped her but the proof in a court of law was difficult to gather. The photo sent…”well Leah, that’s a community issue!”
The bullying never stopped but she learned to keep her head high and surrounded herself with the ones who truly cared. I will have eternal gratitude for her friends Jenna, Dawid and Mike for the past few months. They are the ones she leaned on for strength and courage.
Just two weeks ago she stopped smoking pot, started looking for work and with the help of one of her teachers and a new therapist she was making progress. When the calming effects of the pot subsided, her feelings of anger began to re-surface and she was struggling.
I will say that she has told me many times that “Mom, although I often feel like killing myself…I could never do that to you because you would be devastated.”
This past week she was having lots of mood swings and her boyfriend Mike and Jenna wore the brunt of it but Thursday April 4th she had a great day, made plans for the weekend etc.
Later that evening she had an outburst, acted on that impulse and locked herself in the bathroom. And to stop any rumours from spreading…. She acted on an impulse but I truly in my heart of heart do not feel she meant to kill herself. By the time I broke into the bathroom it was too late. My beautiful girl had hung herself and was rushed to the hospital where she remained on life support until last night.
This page is to celebrate the Rehtaeh we knew and loved. One of Rae’s pet peeves was that when someone passed away, suddenly they were liked and people cared. She wouldn’t want people who bullied her, talked about her, put negative statuses about her over the past year, and sent awful messages to be on this page.
I know who you are because everyone message was a pain we shared together, there was not much that she didn’t tell me or show me. People were so very cruel to her so if you were one that felt it ok to bully someone in so much pain –STAY AWAY.
Rehtaeh is gone today because of The four boys that thought that raping a 15yr old girl was OK and to distribute a photo to ruin her spirit and reputation would be fun. Secondly, All the bullying and messaging and harassment that never let up are also to blame. Lastly, the justice system failed her. Those are the people that took the life of my beautiful girl.
Rehtaeh stood up for others, showed compassion to animals and people. She was an amazing artist .She made my life complete. When Rehtaeh was born I dedicated everything to her and promised her the world. Others in this world took that away from her.

Kobi

04-15-2013, 10:37 AM

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Francis has reaffirmed the Vatican's criticism of a body that represents U.S. nuns which the Church said was tainted by "radical" feminism, dashing hopes he might take a softer stand with the sisters.

Francis's predecessor, Benedict, decreed that the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), a group that represents more than 80 percent of the 57,000 Catholic nuns in the United States, must change its ways, a ruling which the Vatican said on Monday still applied.

Last year, a Vatican report said the LCWR had "serious doctrinal problems" and promoted "radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith", criticizing it for taking a soft line on issues such as birth control and homosexuality.

The nuns received wide support among American Catholics, particularly on the liberal wing of the Church, as LCWR leaders travelled around the United States in a bus to defend themselves against the accusations.

On Monday the group's leaders met Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Mueller, the new head of the Vatican's doctrinal department, and Archbishop Peter Sartain of Seattle, who has been assigned by the Vatican to correct the group's perceived failings.

"Archbishop Mueller informed the (LCWR) presidency that he had recently discussed the doctrinal assessment with Pope Francis, who reaffirmed the findings of the assessment and the program of reform, " the Vatican's statement said.

The Vatican reminded the group that it would "remain under the direction of the Holy See," the statement said.

It was the nuns' first meeting with Mueller, who succeeded American Cardinal William Levada as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Levada, who retired last year, oversaw the Vatican's investigation of the U.S. nuns.

A statement from the LCWR said the "conversation was open and frank" and added: "We pray that these conversations may bear fruit for the good of the Church".

In April 2012, the doctrinal department criticized the LCWR for challenging bishops and for being "silent on the right to life," saying it had failed to make the "Biblical view of family life and human sexuality" a central plank of its agenda.

The nuns supported President Barack Obama's healthcare reform, part of which makes insurance coverage of birth control mandatory, while U.S. bishops opposed it.

Many nuns said the Vatican's report misunderstood their intentions and undervalued their work for social justice.

Supporters of the nuns said the women had helped the image of the Church in the United States at a time when it was engulfed in scandal over sexual abuse of minors by priests. They were praised by many fellow Catholics and the media for their work with the poor and sick.

Monday's Vatican statement expressed gratitude for the "great contribution" American Catholic nuns had made in teaching and caring for the sick and poor.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/pope-stands-firm-reforming-radical-feminist-u-nuns-153855257.html

Kobi

04-20-2013, 10:33 PM

Kobi

04-23-2013, 09:06 AM

Like the infamous Evolution Campaign, this new Dove promotion is quite compelling. After publishing research showing that 60% of girls drop out of sports because of body-image issues, the company is out with a new ad campaign focusing on adult women's distorted self-image.

In the video, women are instructed to sit down in a room and to answer questions about them. A man asks them to talk about their facial features. Little do they know that they are being sketched by an FBI trained forensic artist.

After the women self-describe with words like: "big jaw", "protruding chin", "fat rounder face," and "pretty big forehead" they are asked to leave the room without seeing the drawing. After, the same women are asked to come back but this time they are describing another woman rather than themselves. The descriptions suddenly get more positive. She has "bright eyes that lite up when she spoke" and a "nice thin chin." The forensic artist uses these descriptions to draw a new sketch of the same women.

When the female subjects are shown the two drawings, they are dumbstruck. The difference between how others see them and how they view themselves is so shocking that some of them are brought to tears.

"I should be more grateful to my natural beauty. It impacts the choices and the friends that we make, the jobs we apply for and the way we treat our children. It impacts everything. It couldn't be more impactful to our happiness" says one of the women.

We spend a lot of time as women trying to analyze and fix the things that aren't quite right and we should spend time appreciating the things that are right" explains another.

Because the video is powerful, it doesn't mean it's perfect. It's true that women are way too harsh on themselves, but this campaign seems to imply that it's somehow from fault of their own. Sure, women should actively avoid self-defeating thoughts about their appearance, but is realistic to exclusively blame women for feeling bad about their bodies? Dove is owned by Unilever, who also owns Axe, a notoriously misogynistic brand that only values females for their sexual currency. It's companies like Axe that promote the idea that women are simply ornamental and to be appreciated for their body. Isn't paradoxical that Axe's marketing strategies feed the insecurities that Dove purports to be countering?

Objectification isn't just something feminists came up with to confuse chauvinistic pigs, it's an actual psychological term. Researchers interested in the topic have shown that "objectification theory" is the process by which a societal focus on the female body as object impacts women’s understanding of their own bodies as defined through external characteristics rather than internal cues. Women come to understanding their bodies through the perspective of an outsider rather than through a process of introspective thought. Because of this mind-set, women tend to be more critical of themselves because they are taught to police their bodies.

It goes without saying that self-objectification is linked to mental problems such as anxiety, body shame, reduced probability for peak motivation and diminished awareness of internal bodily states. Women come to rely on others for validation because that's how they come to view themselves: through others.

Research on self-objectification also explores the extricable link between self-objectification and women's unhappiness. It turns out that the more women self-objectify, the more unhappy they are. Objectification interrupts the state of flow, which is fundamentally necessary in the pursuit of happiness.

Feeling unhappy because of your body. Not being able to see your own beauty until someone else points it out. Does this sound familiar? Looks like the women in the Dove's video are suffering from a mean case of self-objectification! So what's the best remedy for it? According to experts, the best place to start is by reducing the number of images that portray female objectification. If Dove is so committed to their self-esteem campaign, maybe they should start by walking across the hall to whatever ding-bags are creating Axe commercials and tell them to knock it off. Instead of trying to fix women's self-esteem, let's prevent it from being shattered in the first place.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/35593/can-this-new-dove-campaign-make-you-believe-you-re-more-beautiful-than-you-think

Kobi

04-23-2013, 03:06 PM

Reuters) - A New Jersey principal's ban on strapless dresses at a junior high school dance because they would be "distracting" to boys has enraged parents, who called on Tuesday for its reversal on the grounds it violates their daughters' constitutional rights.

The dress code shreds the 14th Amendment right to equal protection since girls for the past six years have been wearing sleeveless fashions to the dance at Readington Middle School in Readington Township, New Jersey, said parent Charlotte Nijenhuis.

Parents petitioned the school board on Tuesday to overturn the policy before the June 12th dance.

The school's principal, Sharon Moffat, said in a letter last month that a "dress with straps" was the only style that would be allowed.

Nijenhuis said she called Moffat to ask why strapless dresses had been forbidden. "She told me, ‘It is because it's distracting to boys and inappropriate','" Nijenhuis said.

Moffat did not respond to a Reuters request for comment.

Another parent, Michelle D'Amico, said she was "livid" that her 14-year-old daughter was being prevented from wearing the same strapless dress that her older daughter had worn six years ago. "It's completely unjust," D'Amico said.

The Readington Township School District said in a statement on Tuesday that it "has a policy regarding dress code which is being universally applied to the school day and school events. We regret that a small number of families are upset by this and we welcome their input and communication."

At least one student, Claudine Nijenhuis, 14, said she planned to defy the ban and press her right to bare arms.

"Basically by saying 'it distracts the boys' you're also saying that it is our fault on how they control their own behavior," the teenager wrote in a letter to the principal. "I will still be attending the dinner dance function, but I will also be wearing a dress with no straps."

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/jersey-parents-demand-girls-bare-arms-strapless-dresses-192227543.html

------------------------------

It is refreshing to see a 14 year old woman who understands and addresses the sexism in this. Maybe it will help the female principal look at her internalized sexism and blaming the victim mentality.

Angeltoes

04-23-2013, 03:25 PM

This is kind of random and may not even fit in this thread, but I'm getting so sick and tired of how acceptable it's become to throw around terms like 'bitch' and 'ho.' I mean, whatever people call each other behind closed doors is perfectly fine in my book. I'm kind of kinky myself, so it's all good. It's just this new way that women are embracing those terms for women in general. I find myself being disgusted on the LGBT News Facebook page to see queer women and gay men using the most derogatory names for women and everybody thinks it's a big joke. I wonder, am I being uptight? I'm pretty sure it wasn't too long ago that those were fighting words. It just feels ugly. I don't know, maybe I'm old fashioned. I feel old to say this, but I do not like it at all.

Kobi

04-24-2013, 07:24 AM

http://media-cache-ec3.pinimg.com/550x/bf/27/54/bf2754f6673eb3a37639b736b2cda20f.jpg

Kobi

04-30-2013, 09:17 AM

CBS Houston sports blogger has come under fire for questioning whether an Oklahoma City Thunder Girl was "too chunky" to be an NBA cheerleader.

Blogger Claire Crawford targeted Oklahoma City Thunder cheerleader Kelsey Williams' looks on the court after the Houston Rockets faced off against the Oklahoma City Thunder in the first round of the NBA Playoffs.

"The Rockets looked terrible in Game 1, but some say they weren't the only bad-looking people on the court," Crawford wrote.

While she conceded Williams was a "pretty blonde," she wrote Oklahoma City fans had criticized her for "having 'pudginess' around her waistline."

"But if she's comfortable wearing that tiny outfit and dancing for NBA fans, then good for her," Crawford wrote. "Besides…not every man likes women to be toothpick skinny. I'd say most men prefer a little extra meat on her bones."

A poll asked attached to his column asked readers what their opinions were on Williams in the Oklahoma City Thunder cheerleader outfit.

Voters could choose from three options. Either they thought Williams had "the perfect look to be an NBA cheerleader," "she could use some tightening up in her midsection," or "she has no business wearing that outfit in front of people."

Williams politely fired back at the post on Twitter.

"To be womanly always, discouraged never," she wrote.

"We wouldn't know what blessings were if we didn't go through trials. Thank you to EVERYONE for the compassion and love today. I'm in awe," she tweeted on April 24.

CBS Houston has since removed the post from its website, but a cached version of the page is still available online.

The Houston Chronicle reported that Crawford was a pseudonym for Anna-Megan Raley, who once blogged for the paper and posted a video of her audition to be a Houston Dynamo soccer team cheerleader. Raley's Twitter accounts, under her name and her alias, Crawford, have been deleted.

This isn't the first time a professional sports team cheerleader has been criticized for her looks.

Former Green Bay Packers cheerleader Kaitlyn Collins took to YouTube to post a video in response to a cruel post where she was called "ugly" and "an eyesore" on an unofficial Chicago Bears Fan page in February.

http://gma.yahoo.com/sports-blogger-chastises-nba-cheerleader-pudginess-164009902--abc-news-topstories.html

---------------

Good example of internalized sexism and misogyny.

Kobi

05-06-2013, 05:25 PM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The officer in charge of the U.S. Air Force effort to curb sexual assault in the military was arrested over the weekend for allegedly grabbing a woman by the breasts and buttocks in a parking lot not far from the Pentagon, officials said on Monday.

Lieutenant Colonel Jeffrey Krusinski, 41, was arrested on Sunday and charged with sexual battery after the alleged incident in the Crystal City area of suburban Arlington, Virginia, officials said.

An Arlington County Police spokesman said the woman fended off Krusinski, who was under the influence of alcohol, and when he attempted to grab her a second time she was able to call the police, who arrived a short time later and detained him.

Krusinski initially was held on a $5,000 unsecured bond. He has since posted bond and been released from the Arlington County Detention Facility, said the spokesman, who confirmed Krusinski's name and arrest but did not have his rank or title with the Air Force.

The Air Force said that Krusinski, whom it identified as a lieutenant colonel, had been removed from his job as chief of the service's sexual assault prevention and response branch after his arrest. The branch is responsible for overseeing the Air Force's sexual assault prevention effort.

News of the arrest came as the Pentagon is preparing to release its annual report on the problem of sexual assault in the military.

A total of 3,192 cases were reported in the fiscal year that ended September 30, 2011, a 1 percent increase in reporting from the previous fiscal year, according to last year's report.

Pentagon officials have said the actual number of sexual assaults, including those that go unreported, is much higher, possibly as many as 19,000 a year.

The Air Force has faced a series of embarrassing sexual assault scandals over the past year. An investigation at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas, that began in 2011 has so far turned up 59 cases of sexual assault of military recruits by drill instructors.

General Mark Welsh, the top Air Force officer, called the scope of the case "stunning" during a congressional hearing earlier this year.

In another case, the top general in charge of an Air Force court martial at Aviano Air Base in Italy overturned the sexual assault conviction of a lieutenant colonel, threw out his one-year prison sentence and reinstated him to duty.

That case has prompted U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to recommend that Congress alter the military justice system to limit the ability of a military commander to throw out court-martial verdicts.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/head-u-air-forces-anti-sexual-assault-unit-223841205.html

femmeInterrupted

05-09-2013, 09:24 AM

http://walkamileinhershoes.org/Walk_Event_Experience/Resources/webbanner72dpi.gif

Each year, an ever-increasing number of men, women and their families are joining the award-winning Walk a Mile in Her Shoes®: The International Men's March to Stop Rape, Sexual Assault & Gender Violence. A Walk a Mile in Her Shoes® Event is a playful opportunity for men to raise awareness in their community about the serious causes, effects and remediations to sexualized violence.

There is an old saying: "You can't really understand another person's experience until you've walked a mile in their shoes." Walk a Mile in Her Shoes® asks men to literally walk one mile in women's high-heeled shoes. It's not easy walking in these shoes, but it's fun and it gets the community to talk about something that's really difficult to talk about: gender relations and sexual violence.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8259/8666258003_27f0a6693e_m.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8494/8280861427_74c5770da1_m.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8345/8280863661_fb4100cabe_m.jpg

http://media.hamptonroads.com/cache/files/images/1069381000.jpg

http://walkamileinhershoes.org/

-----------------------------------------

This campaign, started by a man, is perhaps well intentioned but really irks me. From the red stiletto on the web banner, to the pictures of men in fashionable heels, to the "tips for walking in heels" suggestions, it stinks of stereotypical images and perceptions of women, and of how a woman dresses invites sexual assault.

"A playful opportunity for men to raise awareness in their community about the serious causes, effects and remediation's to sexualized violence." Playful and sexual violence are two concepts that should never be associated.

I find it very sexist. Is it just me?

It's not just you.
I'm very familiar with the work of the White Ribbon Campaign, from which this endeavour sprang forth.

There is something deeply sexist about the message it brings. The 'amusement factor' of watch men tromp down the road in stiletto heels aside, there's something very 'publicity stunty' about the whole thing. Is the best way to bring issues of male violence to women ( sexual or not) by wearing your mother's or girlfriends high heels and assuming that 'walking a mile in her shoes' is going to make a difference? Let's face it, heels on or not, the power imbalance in the gender divide, and the resultant violence and oppression it brings isn't brought to surface by what feels like a well intentioned ally effort, but none the less, is still sexist. The notion that by walking in high heels they have actually 'felt what it's like to be a woman walking through this world' is as ridiculous as a white person donning black face and 'walking a a person on colour through this world' to high light racism and the violence it brings.

My other issue is creating an 'amusing' connection with sexual violence. There is no "humorous light" to sexual assault. There is no brevity and fun to it, during or after. When seen through the lens of survivors, it becomes a disgusting display. Again, the ally-ship is appreciated, but I am left with the feeling that this was and is a 'gimmick'.

Kobi

05-14-2013, 06:12 AM

TOKYO (AP) — An outspoken nationalist mayor said the Japanese military's forced prostitution of Asian women before and during World War II was necessary to "maintain discipline" in the ranks and provide rest for soldiers who risked their lives in battle.

The comments made Monday are already raising ire in neighboring countries that bore the brunt of Japan's wartime aggression and have long complained that Japan has failed to fully atone for wartime atrocities.

Toru Hashimoto, the young, brash mayor of Osaka who is co-leader of an emerging conservative political party, also said that U.S. troops currently based in southern Japan should patronize the local sex industry more to help reduce rapes and other assaults.

Hashimoto told reporters on Monday that there wasn't clear evidence that the Japanese military had coerced women to become what are euphemistically called "comfort women" before and during World War II.

"To maintain discipline in the military, it must have been necessary at that time," Hashimoto said. "For soldiers who risked their lives in circumstances where bullets are flying around like rain and wind, if you want them to get some rest, a comfort women system was necessary. That's clear to anyone."

Historians say up to 200,000 women, mainly from the Korean Peninsula and China, were forced to provide sex for Japanese soldiers in military brothels.

China's Foreign Ministry criticized the mayor's comments and saw them as further evidence of a rightward drift in Japanese politics under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

"We are appalled and indignant about the Japanese politician's comments boldly challenging humanity and historical justice," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said at a daily media briefing. "The way they treat the past will determine the way Japan walks toward the future. On what choice Japan will make, the Asian neighbors and the international community will wait and see."

Asked about a photo of Abe posing in a fighter jet with the number 731 — the number of a notorious, secret Japanese unit that performed chemical and biological experiments on Chinese in World War II — Hong again urged Japan not to whitewash history so as to improve relations with countries that suffered under Japanese occupation.

"There is a mountain of definitive iron-hard evidence for the crimes they committed in the Second World War. We hope Japan will face and contemplate their history of aggression and treat it correctly," Hong said.

Abe posed, thumbs up, in the aircraft during a weekend visit to northeastern Japan.

South Korea's Foreign Ministry expressed disappointment over what it called a senior Japanese official's serious lack of historical understanding and respect for women's rights. It asked Japan's leaders to reflect on their country's imperial past, including grave human rights violations, and correct anachronistic historical views.

Hashimoto said he recently visited Okinawa in southern Japan and told the U.S. commander there "to make better use of the sex industry."

"He froze, and then with a wry smile said that is off-limits for the U.S. military," he said.

"I told him that there are problems because of such formalities," Hashimoto said, explaining that he was not referring to illegal prostitution but to places operating within the law. "If you don't make use of those places you cannot properly control the sexual energy of those tough guys."

Calls to the after-hours number for U.S. Forces in Japan were not answered.

Hashimoto's comments came amid continuing criticism of Abe's earlier pledges to revise Japan's past apologies for wartime atrocities. Before he took office in December, Abe had advocated revising a 1993 statement by then Prime Minister Yohei Kono acknowledging and expressing remorse for the suffering caused to the sexual slaves of Japanese troops.

Abe has acknowledged "comfort women" existed but has denied they were coerced into prostitution, citing a lack of official evidence.

Recently, top officials in Abe's government have appeared to backpedal on suggestions the government might revise those apologies, apparently hoping to ease tensions with South Korea and China and address U.S. concerns about Abe's nationalist agenda.

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga repeated the previous government position and said those women went through unbearable pain.

"The stance of the Japanese government on the comfort women issue is well known. They have suffered unspeakably painful experiences. The Abe Cabinet has the same sentiments as past Cabinets," he said.

Education Minister Hakubun Shimomura said Hashimoto's remark was unhelpful given the criticism Japan faces from neighboring countries and the U.S. over its interpretation of history.

"A series of remarks related to our interpretation of (wartime) history have been already misunderstood. In that sense, Mr. Hashimoto's remark came at a bad time," Shimomura told reporters. "I wonder if there is any positive meaning to intentionally make such remarks at this particular moment."

Hashimoto, 43, is co-head of the newly formed Japan Restoration Party with former Tokyo Gov. Shintaro Ishihara, who is a strident nationalist.

Sakihito Ozawa, the party's parliamentary affairs chairman, said he believed Hashimoto's remarks reflected his personal views, but he expressed concerns about possible repercussions.

"We should ask his real intentions and stop this at some point," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/japanese-mayor-wartime-sex-slaves-were-necessary-042050746.html

femmeInterrupted

05-14-2013, 10:45 AM

Kobi

05-14-2013, 12:05 PM

This is terrible. There is TONS of evidence, including survivor testimonials, that this systemic rape took place. Shame on him!

http://www.amnesty.org.nz/files/Comfort-Women-factsheet.pdf

What was making me speechless was the convenient reframing of what occured in an attempt to make it not only acceptable but necessary.

"To maintain discipline in the military, it must have been necessary at that time," Hashimoto said. "For soldiers who risked their lives in circumstances where bullets are flying around like rain and wind, if you want them to get some rest, a comfort women system was necessary. That's clear to anyone."

That one statement, the attitude and beliefs it suggests is the hallmarks of the patriarchial and paternal bullshit which perpetuates and fuels sexism and misogyny.

To hear someone attempt to dismiss it as "necessary" in 2013 is disturbing. Is also a good reminder why the war on women keeps rearing its ugly head all over the world.

femmeInterrupted

05-14-2013, 12:44 PM

To hear someone attempt to dismiss it as "necessary" in 2013 is disturbing. Is also a good reminder why the war on women keeps rearing its ugly head all over the world.

That's the exact truth of it.
I can't even understand how anyone can NOT SEE that. Especially women.

Kobi

05-15-2013, 05:40 AM

WASHINGTON (AP) — Lawmakers say they're outraged that for the second time this month a member of the armed forces assigned to help prevent sexual assaults in the military is under investigation for alleged sexual misconduct.

The back-to-back Army and Air Force cases highlight a problem that is drawing increased scrutiny in Congress and expressions of frustration from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. Lawmakers said it was time for Hagel to get tough with the military brass.

"This is sickening. Twice now, in a matter of as many weeks, we've seen the very people charged with protecting victims of sexual assault being charged as perpetrators," Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said. "It's an astonishing reminder that the Pentagon has both a major problem on its hands and a tremendous amount of work to do to assure victims — who already only report a small fraction of sexual assaults — that they are changing the culture around these heinous crimes.

"Secretary Hagel needs to act swiftly to re-examine sexual assault services across the department to ensure that these disturbing betrayals of trust are ended," Murray said.

Hagel said he was directing all the services to retrain, re-credential and rescreen all sexual assault prevention and response personnel and military recruiters, his spokesman, George Little, said after Tuesday's announcement that a sergeant first class at Fort Hood, Texas, was accused of pandering, abusive sexual contact, assault and maltreatment of subordinates.

The soldier, whose name was not released, was being investigated by the Army Criminal Investigation Command. No charges had been filed.

Little said Hagel was angry and disappointed at "these troubling allegations and the breakdown in discipline and standards they imply." He said Hagel met with Army Secretary John McHugh earlier Tuesday and ordered him to "fully investigate this matter rapidly, to discover the extent of these allegations and to ensure that all of those who might be involved are dealt with appropriately."

The Fort Hood soldier had been assigned as an equal opportunity adviser and coordinator of a sexual harassment-assault prevention program at the Army's 3rd Corps headquarters when the allegation arose, the Army said.

"To protect the integrity of the investigative process and the rights of all persons involved, no more information will be released at this time," an Army statement said.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., said in a statement he was "outraged and disgusted by the reports out of Fort Hood."

McKeon, noting he has a granddaughter in the Army, said he saw "no meaningful distinction between complacency or complicity in the military's latest failure to uphold their own standards of conduct. Nor do I see a distinction between the service member who orchestrated this offense and the chain of command that was either oblivious to or tolerant of criminal behavior. Both are accountable for this appalling breach of trust with their subordinates."

He called on Hagel to conduct a review of the military and its civilian leadership "to determine whether they continue to hold his trust and his confidence to lead in this area."

Just last week an Air Force officer who headed a sexual assault prevention office was himself arrested on charges of groping a woman in a Northern Virginia parking lot.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a statement his panel was considering a number of measures to counter the problem, including changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and will act on them next month.

"Tragically, the depth of the sexual assault problem in our military was already overwhelmingly clear before this latest highly disturbing report," Levin said.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., said she intends to present new comprehensive legislation on Thursday to overhaul the military justice system by removing chain-of-command influence from prosecution of sex abuse crimes.

"To say this report is disturbing would be a gross understatement," Gillibrand said.

"The sad thing is that this is not a unique case,"Anu Bhagwati, former Marine captain and executive director of the Service Women's Action Network, said in an interview. "Week after week, we're hearing of cases across the branches of military leaders taking advantage of their positions of authority. "

The Pentagon is struggling with what it calls a growing epidemic of sexual assaults across the military. In a report last week, the Defense Department estimated that as many as 26,000 military members may have been sexually assaulted last year, based on survey results.

Of those, fewer than 3,400 reported the incident, and nearly 800 of them simply sought help but declined to file formal complaints against their alleged attackers.

There also is an ongoing investigation into more than 30 Air Force instructors for assaults on trainees at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas, and the recent arrest of the Air Force's head of sexual assault prevention on charges of groping a woman.

An Arlington County, Va., police report said Air Force Lt. Col. Jeffrey Krusinski was drunk and grabbed a woman's breast and buttocks in a parking lot earlier this month. The woman fought him off and called police, the report said. A judge has set a July 18 trial date for Krusinski.

Congressional anger over these incidents and two recent decisions by officers to overturn juries' guilty verdicts in sexual assault cases has precipitated a storm of criticism on Capitol Hill.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., is holding up the nomination of Air Force Lt. Gen. Susan Helms, tapped to serve as vice commander of the U.S. Space Command, until McCaskill gets more information about Helms' decision to overturn a jury conviction in a sexual assault case.

femmeInterrupted

05-15-2013, 08:48 AM

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/02/invisible-war-has-changed-the-conversation-on-rape-in-the-military.html

It's hard to watch, but does a fine job of bringing to light this very issue.

It's not a shocker of course. Already an endemic problem globally, it's easy to see that the culture of machismo and systemic dehumanization in the military has colluded nicely together to form a culture that creates sexual violence AND a culture that denies and covers it up.

It's not a few 'bad apples' that are spoiling the rest of the barrel. The barrel is rotten, as is the ground it stands on. There are still those that deny that or find it ludicrous that there is rape culture. But one only has to peep inside this machine ( or the Catholic Church, for that matter) and see how normalized and pervasive both perpetration and denial of sexual violence is.

Soon

05-15-2013, 01:31 PM

I had a disheartening conversation with a fifteen year old (bright) boy today.

As a class, we were discussing sexual assault/rape/slut-shaming and victim blaming. I brought up a recent story where a young woman in Nova Scotia--Rehtaeh Parsons (http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/04/09/the-justice-system-failed-her-nova-scotia-teenager-commits-suicide-after-being-raped-bullied-mother/)--killed herself after being raped and bullied and harassed in its aftermath.

So, at the end of the class, student comes up to me and wouldn't stop with the argument...."If she was under age I could maybe understand (?) but

....she shouldn't have been there at the party
...she shouldn't have been drinking
...if she hadn't done any of those things, this wouldn't have happened to her..."

Of course, I try to to tell him the onus shouldn't be on women to have to monitor their behaviour in order to avoid/prevent women, and that her behaviour does not negate the rape. That the onus needs to be on men not raping and assaulting. However, he kept INSISTING, but but but if she hadn't done this and that. He was not able or could not (?) see that the discussion shouldn't be on what the victim did or didn't do, but that these men are committing a crime. I told him about consent and lack thereof with intoxication or being passed out, but he kept reverting to the "but if she hadn't done A then B wouldn't have happened to her."

Anyway, it was very frustrating. I am asking if anyone has an article or resource that is simple enough to maybe make him (and others?) in the class understand that the conversation shouldn't be about what these young women did or didn't do prior to being raped. The conversation needs to be about the rapists and raising men to not rape at all. Ever.

So, if you have something--a turn of phrase, an article, anything--that might help these adolescents understand that rape is not about a woman's behaviour, I'd appreciate it.

Sigh. I am still rankled by the conversation.

Thank you.

Kobi

05-15-2013, 01:48 PM

Kobi

05-15-2013, 02:08 PM

Also try a few of these. May or may not work.

http://media-cache-ec4.pinimg.com/550x/b7/b4/1c/b7b41c0f90a12925605b258ee15a826f.jpg

http://media-cache-ec4.pinimg.com/550x/eb/b4/2e/ebb42e3265fa361b9d57d0550bddad0d.jpg

http://media-cache-ak1.pinimg.com/550x/79/58/ad/7958ad8da9447eb1e9f21afc3de280de.jpg

http://media-cache-is0.pinimg.com/550x/56/e9/d5/56e9d5f0ffbf4e2d85015dd9d9693283.jpg

http://media-cache-ak1.pinimg.com/550x/b2/a5/a6/b2a5a6e017c5d85bd5821ed47177bc8f.jpg

Kobi

05-15-2013, 02:27 PM

I like this one too:

http://media-cache-ec4.pinimg.com/550x/08/77/d6/0877d6a3e9a1d3d97621ca2f55d1d36d.jpg

And there is one more good analogy one that I cant find yet.

Kobi

05-15-2013, 02:38 PM

femmeInterrupted

05-15-2013, 06:39 PM

Seems to me, a simple approach might be a more logical format for a potential instant breakthrough. For example.....so if your sister, mother, grandmother are in bed in their own home, asleep, and a man breaks in and rapes them.....they were dressed too provocatively? Shouldnt have been there? Egged him on?

Rape is rape. Adolesents girls are raped, elderly women are raped, nuns are raped, chuldren and babies are raped, men are raped. Fit the lack of logic to the situation.

Pardon my exuberence. I was working on a rape project today. Just spill over.

Found the anaolgy:

http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/550x/d5/8e/90/d58e90ad3b11e4105a2043e81c08137d.jpg

I think it's important to remember that rape is not a crime about sex. It's about power and control. That's why 7 year olds and 77 year olds get raped...Both demographics hardly fit the going standard for 'sexy' in today's society. It is however, a sexualized violence. It's about power OVER. It's about the dehumanization of women and children, the commodification of women and children, and the idea that is so nastily pervasive under the male gaze. Entitlement.

Personally, I don't think your exuberance needs pardoning, although I find myself in the same position often. I think it's O.K. to be passionate about things that require and are deserved of that passion. Violence against women is surely something that everyone SHOULD be passionate about.

I've been doing some research and reading into the gendered nature of anger and outrage. Both natural and appropriate emotions and responses to things that elicit that response. Again, violence against women and social justice comes to mind.

I think as feminists we need to have the discussions around anger, which is problematic in that
A) most examples of anger are that of aggression. It is gendered.
and
B) the notions of what it is to be a woman with anger. We AREN'T supposed to be. We are urged into forgiveness and passivity. We are told that in order to heal we need to let go of that anger. Globally, that's a LOT of women working on reclaiming lives derailed and greatly effected by woman abuse and sexual violation. That's a lot of sisters living lives altered by the reality of sexism, misogyny, racism, heterosexism...

So instead of pushing my anger away, I'm sitting with it, as is sometimes good to do with ALL uncomfortable emotions, because it's there for a reason.

Be passionate! Be angry. Be whatever it takes to feel enough to get active and create change.

Thanks for sharing :)

Kobi

05-15-2013, 07:25 PM

CherylNYC

05-15-2013, 08:36 PM

femmeInterrupted

05-16-2013, 08:55 AM

femmeInterrupted this might explain the reasons behind what we have been talking about. The "survey" was done back in 2012 for netmums. Not sure how valid it is in scientific terms but it does explain some of the reluctance, apathy, shifts....I'm not sure what to call it.

Is it a ME focus as the name implies i.e. personal preferences? Does it feel like internalized sexism to some extent with a dash of identification with the aggressor or Stockholm Syndrome? Does it have some valid points?

Does it address some of the anger and women focus of the previous post?

-----------
http://media-cache-is0.pinimg.com/550x/42/75/3e/42753e1d98873015b49e4c9f39be470f.jpg

http://www.netmums.com/

First off....what the hell is 'Vajazzle'?!

There's just too much to deconstruct here....I keep sighing, which is interfering with my typing! ;)

It is interesting that the scope of 'alright activities' are all about beauty/body modification/image. I'd say that's a tall glass of Stockholm flavoured Kool-Aid.

The parts about motherhood, affordable and quality daycare, maternity leave benefits should have always been important to everyone...not just the women with the babies. This all ties into the unpaid work/labour of women, the creation of 'pink collar' low paid wages (still in most of the helping/caring professions)

Kobi

05-16-2013, 09:56 AM

First off....what the hell is 'Vajazzle'?!

There's just too much to deconstruct here....I keep sighing, which is interfering with my typing! ;)

It is interesting that the scope of 'alright activities' are all about beauty/body modification/image. I'd say that's a tall glass of Stockholm flavoured Kool-Aid.

The parts about motherhood, affordable and quality daycare, maternity leave benefits should have always been important to everyone...not just the women with the babies. This all ties into the unpaid work/labour of women, the creation of 'pink collar' low paid wages (still in most of the helping/caring professions)

Vajazzling: The act of applying glitter and jewels to a woman's bikini area for aesthetic purposes.

Learn something new everyday.

Allison W

05-16-2013, 10:43 PM

On the matter of that FeMEnist thing, I can understand the importance of personal preferences coming up--different people are different and so will have different needs and motivations and will make different choices. But the survey itself is kind of depressing. The answers kind of range from "sad" to "soul-killing." I mean, getting back into the kitchen being the highest priority on the list, vastly exceeding little things like equal pay and more women in positions of power? What is this I don't even.

But I really want to shake down the ones who answered that the big priority of women today should be to reject equality in favour of backwards gender-essentialism and "different rights," and ask them what the crispy fuck "different rights" they are thinking. Because seriously, anything good coming of going down that road isn't even conceivable on paper, let alone in practice. That is serious I-don't-even-want-to-live-on-this-planet-anymore shit.

EDIT: The #1 answer for priorities ("just being a mum") saddened me (primarily due to being at the tippy-top of the list; if it had traded places with one of the other answers, it wouldn't have made me nearly so uneasy), but the #2 priority actually makes sense and I suppose I should clarify that that one didn't make me want to weep tears of blood.

Kobi

05-18-2013, 10:17 AM

A debate by Afghan MPs about beefing up a law to prevent violence against women has been halted amid angry scenes.

Parliament's speaker ended the debate after 15 minutes after traditionalists called for the law to be scrapped.

A law banning violence against women, child marriages and forced marriages was passed by presidential decree in 2009, but did not gain MPs' approval.

Hundreds of people have been jailed under the current law, introduced by President Hamid Karzai.

'Lack of assurance'

The decision to seek parliamentary approval for the law had split women activists.

Some had said opening it up for debate in parliament could pave the way for conservatives to amend it and weaken protection for women - or even throw it out altogether.

One of those against the move was prominent MP Farkhunda Zahra Naderi. She told the BBC after Saturday's events in parliament that her fears had been proved right.

During the debate, mullahs and other traditionalist MPs accused President Karzai of acting against Islamic Sharia law by signing the decree in the first place, the BBC's David Loyn reports from Kabul.

In particular, they demanded a change to the law so that men cannot be prosecuted for rape within marriage, our correspondent said.

One of those who had sought to enshrine the decree with parliamentary approval is leading MP Fawzia Koofi, who survived a Taliban ambush two years ago.

She had worried that if the law did not have parliamentary backing it could be weakened as Afghan leaders attempt to pacify the Islamist Taliban movement.

"There is a lack of assurance that any president of Afghanistan will have any commitment to women's issues and in particular towards this decree," Ms Koofi told the BBC before the debate.

President Karzai has come under fire from women's groups for frequently changing his position on women's rights.

In 2012, he endorsed a "code of conduct" issued by an influential council of clerics which allows husbands to beat wives under certain circumstances.

Ms Koofi and fellow activists have argued that the law is similar to those in many other Islamic countries.

The existing law will now remain in force while further discussions on procedure are held, our correspondent says.

Despite the efforts taken to enhance rights for women and girls in Afghanistan, child marriages remain common and stories of abuse keep coming to light.

Most Afghans still live in rural areas, where poverty, conflict and conservative attitudes are more likely to keep girls and women at home.

-----------------------

Analysis
BBC News, Kabul

Afghanistan's Law to Eliminate Violence Against Women, remains in force. It was signed by President Karzai in 2009 and did not need parliamentary approval.

But nothing is certain in this young democracy, and those who brought it to parliament, led by a potential presidential candidate, Fawzia Koofi, wanted it approved there so it was irreversible. But women activists who feared that debating it would give a platform to the most fundamentalist voices were proved right. Its withdrawal for now puts further progress on women's rights into legal limbo.

There have been hundreds of successful prosecutions under the law - some resulting in jail terms. But changing attitudes in the Afghan countryside will take more than a change in the law, and the failed debate will strengthen the hand of fundamentalists who see the law as opposed to Sharia.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22579098

DapperButch

05-19-2013, 05:11 PM

Just a good article. We have talked here before about masculine privilege and misogyny from butches. Thought others may appreciate the article.

http://www.autostraddle.com/butch-please-butch-with-a-side-of-misogyny-174442/

AND

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-berg/lezbros_b_3290112.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices

femmeInterrupted

05-20-2013, 11:24 AM

http://jezebel.com/florida-girl-faces-felony-for-dating-female-classmate-508849336

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18o99f1rktrf6jpg/k-bigpic.jpg

Kaitlyn Hunt's parents knew their 18-year-old daughter was dating a 15-year-old girl whom she met through classes and varsity sports at the Florida high school the two attended. But when the younger girl's parents learned about the relationship, they had Kaitlyn arrested on two counts of felony lewd and lascivious battery on a child ages 12 to 16. Kaitlyn must now choose whether to go to trial — if found guilty, she'd have to register as a sex offender and could serve up to 15 years in prison — or accept a plea deal of two years' house arrest and one year of probation. The Hunts hope growing publicity will pressure the state to drop her case and focus on protecting and educating teenagers instead of prosecuting them for falling in consensual love.

Steven Hunt told Jezebel in a phone interview that his daughter Kaitlyn, whom friends and family call "Kate," grew close with her 15-year-old former girlfriend through classes and the varsity basketball team the two played on at Sebastian River High School in Sebastian, Fla; the younger girl was a freshman student enrolled in International Baccalaureate courses with upperclassmen, so they were peers in the same social circle. Kate's mother, Kelley Hunt Smith, wrote on Facebook that the two girls hung out with the family at their home and before basketball games. Since Kelley had seen the girl's father at sporting events, she assumed her family knew about and accepted the relationship. Kate had always dated boys, but when she told her mother she was dating a girl, Kelley "didn’t want to make it a big deal," she wrote. "I talked to her about it, and figured it was just a social thing, times have changed and a lot of kids are experimenting, so I didn’t make much of it."

"We knew about her sexual preference for a long time," Steve said. "It wasn't an issue for us."

But it was an issue for her former girlfriend's parents. When the girls' basketball coach found out the two were dating, she kicked Kate off the team and told the younger girl's parents, who told police. That's when Kate was arrested. According to Kelley:

On Saturday February 16th our families world was shattered and our daughters nightmare begun. The police came to our home and arrested my daughter, put her in hand cuffs and we had no idea why. They refused to tell us anything at first because she had turned 18. Kate was ripped out of our arms, terrified, crying hysterically. My younger daughter was there at the time, my husband and myself, we were mortified. They finally told us she was being arrested on “probable cause”. I asked them probable cause of what, they said sexual battery on a person 12-16 years old. My heart dropped, I knew then that it had to have been her girlfriend's parents. These people never came to us as parents, never tried to speak to us, didn’t try to get the school involved to speak to us and tell us they had a problem with the girls dating, not one single word. Instead, they set out their vengeance and had my child arrested on FELONY charges.
Kate, who agreed to cut off contact with her former girlfriend and was subsequently expelled weeks before graduation to boot, has until Friday to decide whether to go to trial or take the plea deal. Her parents don't want her to choose either option.

“The (assistant) state attorney, Brian Workman needs to use taxpayers money to prosecute REAL criminals, not a high school student who has never been in trouble a day in her young life, all because she had a mutual consenting relationship with someone who has bigoted parents,” wrote Hunt Smith. "...they feel like my daughter “made” their daughter gay. They are bigoted, religious zeolites that see being gay as a sin and wrong, and they blame my daughter."

Kate's father said this case highlights glaring problems with age-of-consent laws and sex-education. The age of consent in Florida is 18, but should 18-year-old high schoolers really be responsible for setting boundaries with the 14 to 17-year-olds who take the same classes and participate in the same after-school activities as they do? "There's no education at her school that describes what to do and what not to do within a consensual relationship in terms of age," Steve said. "The fact that this was a same-sex relationship was clearly the motivation factor [behind the arrest]. But this law is ridiculous regardless of whether teenagers are gay or straight."

From the "Free Kate" Facebook page:

The law needs to change, not only to protect Kate, but to protect the millions of teenagers, boys and girls, straight and gay, whose lives are regularly ruined because parents disapprove of their children's sexual choices. We want justice for all 18-year-old high school seniors who have undergone criminal prosecution for exercising poor judgement in their dating life. Such students are not predators. They're just kids. Likewise, we believe the law should not be arbitrarily enforced based on a parent's anger. Parents should be empowered to protect their children, but not at the price of destroying another young person's life forever.
The Hunts have launched a Change.org petition, which has over 52K signatures, and a fundraising site to help with extensive legal fees. "Kate is strong but scared," Steve said. "We hope she gets her freedom soon."

Kobi

05-20-2013, 01:46 PM

This Free Kate story is making me twitch a bit.

Its another of those where, to me, the issue isn't quite as clear cut as these parents might be trying to make it sound.

I'm trying to sort why I am feeling the way I am .

First off, I have a real problem when parents, trying to protect their kid, are wanting to challenge the protection of consent laws for children by turning it into an issue about homophobia and sexual experimentation.

They are also faulting the law for existing, the school for allowing mixed age mingling of students without some parameters of some sort, the school for telling the other parents, the other parents for reporting it to the police, and the district attorney who should spend taxpayers money prosecuting real criminals. Whoa.

We only have the alleged perpetrators parents side of the story. What's the other side?

Second, I don't always get the concept of "legal consent". Somehow on the morning of their 18th birthday, it seems we expect some wisdom and growth was wasn't there the night before.

Third, the parents are giving conflicting stories. The mother is saying her daughter always dated boys but had told her she was dating a girl now. The father says they had known about their daughters sexual preference for a long time. To me, this sets up a credibility issue.

Fourth, the mother indicates she made many assumptions about this. She assumed the other family knew. She assumed the other family accepted it. Why assume? Why not just ask your kid? Was she aware of the differences in their ages and the potential pitfalls?

Part of this is sounding like she wanted to be supportive of her child's developing sexuality but was reluctant or unsure of how to go about it.

Fifth, if these young women are both in the IB program, they are very bright kids, albeit still kids. Did anyone talk to these kids?

Sixth, if this was an 18 year old boy and a 15 year old girl, would I look at it differently?

Seventh, the Free Kate page is postulating the following:

"The law needs to change, not only to protect Kate, but to protect the millions of teenagers, boys and girls, straight and gay, whose lives are regularly ruined because parents disapprove of their children's sexual choices. We want justice for all 18-year-old high school seniors who have undergone criminal prosecution for exercising poor judgement in their dating life. Such students are not predators. They're just kids. Likewise, we believe the law should not be arbitrarily enforced based on a parent's anger. Parents should be empowered to protect their children, but not at the price of destroying another young person's life forever."

This is the same type of rationale I have seen used when male high school athletes have been accused of taking sexual advantage of intoxicated young classmates. Just poor judgment. Shouldn't destroy a young persons life or their potential future athletic career.

I don't know what to think.

Soon

05-20-2013, 05:18 PM

MY DAUGHTER WAS ARRESTED, EXPELLED AND CHARGED WITH A FELONY FOR A SAME-SEX RELATIONSHIP SHE HAD AS A MINOR (http://www.xojane.com/issues/kaitlyn-hunt)

On Saturday, February 16, our family's world was torn apart and our daughter's life turned upside down.

The police came and arrested my daughter, put her in handcuffs and no reason was given at all.

They refused to tell her mother anything at first because she had turned 18.

My daughter was ripped out of her mother's arms, hysterical. The police finally told us she was being arrested on “probable cause." When they said sexual battery on a person 12-16 years old, it was clear what was going on.

It had to have been my daughter's girlfriend's parents.

My daughter, Kaitlyn, was in a romantic relationship with a student at her school who was also a teammate on the basketball team.

She is a high school senior living in Indian River County, Florida.

Until halfway through the school year, she was a student at Indian River High School, where she had been a cheerleader, a varsity basketball player and was busy preparing for a career serving others in the nursing field.

Kate was a popular student who was voted as the student with "most school spirit." Kate's girlfriend was a freshman student enrolled in international baccalaureate courses with upperclassmen and a fellow player on the basketball team with Kate.

While Kate was three years older than her girlfriend, they were peers. But when Kate's girlfriend's parents learned of their relationship, they went directly to the police to press charges without sharing their objections with Kate or her family.

The police taped a conversation between Kate and her girlfriend, which led to Kate's arrest. Kate was interrogated extensively without a lawyer present. I am a former police officer, so she trusted the police and didn't feel she had anything to hide. Kate was eventually charged with two counts of felony lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12-16.

The prosecutor later offered a plea deal of felony child abuse, with two years house arrest followed by one year probation. Today, the girls are 18 and 15.

Kate's girlfriend has taken no part in her prosecution and adamantly denies she is a victim, but the law grants her no rights in this matter. Kate has offered to permanently cease contact and leave the state if charges are dropped, but that offer has been rejected by the prosecutor and the girlfriend's parents.

Before the legal trouble began, Kate was already a target at her school.

After the relationship started, the basketball coach approached her and said, "Kaitlyn, can I talk to you? I heard you have something going on with another female player on our team, and I can't have that kind of drama on my team, I don't allow it and I wouldn't ever. So, I'm sorry, but playing on our team won't work out for you."

Yes, that's right, my own daughter was removed from a sport she loves simply because she was in a relationship with another "student."

Now, it didn't stop there. The girl's mother found out about the relationship, and, as several people told me, the girl's mother said that there's no way her daughter could be gay.

Anyone who knows my daughter Kate knows how wonderful she is.

Kate is an 18-year-old senior about to graduate with an exemplary record at school and home. She has always been a wonderful student, respected and well liked. She has cheered on the varsity cheer team all throughout high school, sung in chorus and was voted most school spirited. She has never been in trouble, ever. She truly is the model student and child.

This relationship occurred when they were both minors, and my daughter's girlfriend's parents waited until she turned 18 to arrest her.

These people never came to us, never tried to speak to us, didn’t try to get the school involved to speak to us and tell us they had a problem with the girls dating, not one single word.

Instead, they set out their vengeance and had Kate arrested on felony charges.

It was Kate's senior year -- she only had a few months until graduation and we wanted her to finish. But the parents petitioned the court and asked the judge to remove Kate from school, even though the judge already ruled Kate could continue school. But this other student's parents feel like my daughter “made” their daughter gay.

My daughter's girlfriend has said from day one, she cares about my daughter, she never wanted her parents to do this, she was 100% consenting and it was by her own choice that she was with my daughter.

She doesn’t want Kate to be punished.

My daughter's life is being destroyed. Kate is deeply depressed, crying all the time and suffering night terrors.

I will do whatever it takes to fight for my daughter.

And I'm finding out that I am not alone.

Internet activist group Anonymous launched #OpJustice4Kaitlyn on May 19 and released a statement addressed to the Indian River County State Attorney's Office that reads in part: "Kaitlyn Hunt is a bright young girl who was involved in a consensual, same-sex relationship while both she and her partner were minors. She has a big future ahead of her and there are people, thousands of people in fact, that have no intention of allowing you to ruin it with your rotten selective enforcement."

How can you help?
First, sign this petition. (http://www.change.org/petitions/assistant-state-attorney-brian-workman-stop-the-prosecution-of-an-18-year-old-girl-in-a-same-sex-relationship)

Second, if you would like to help with the considerable legal fees, you can purchase a bracelet that says "STOP THE HATE, FREE KATE."

Third, if you're a resident of Florida, please contact your state legislators and tell them the law needs to protect high school peers from prosecution.

Find your state legislators here.

Fourth, share this story!

Share with everyone. If you know a high school student, make sure he or she knows the law.

Please -- let's stop the hate. Free Kate.

femmeInterrupted

05-20-2013, 06:22 PM

"This relationship occurred when they were both minors, and my daughter's girlfriend's parents waited until she turned 18 to arrest her.

These people never came to us, never tried to speak to us, didn’t try to get the school involved to speak to us and tell us they had a problem with the girls dating, not one single word.

Instead, they set out their vengeance and had Kate arrested on felony charges.

It was Kate's senior year -- she only had a few months until graduation and we wanted her to finish. But the parents petitioned the court and asked the judge to remove Kate from school, even though the judge already ruled Kate could continue school. But this other student's parents feel like my daughter “made” their daughter gay."

It's also part of the discourse of this case that the younger girl's parents are Evangelical, and had reacted very badly to their daughter being 'gay'.

They have directed their homophobia by creating a difficult situation in that laws need to be prosecuted consistently, regardless of gender and orientation, or it leaves room for being seen an unenforced law.

My thoughts are that had their daughter been dating an 18 year boy, this would not have happened. If, as the father in the above quotation states, the relationship occurred while they were both minors, the Prosecution may have an out if it could be seen as malicious intent of the parents to wait to file charges until she was 18... why the delay in reporting something they were so bothered about. I believe they called it 'sinful'.

I don't know statistically, how many males don't get charged with sexually interfering with a minor female-- but i'm also thinking that this feels like 'selective prosecution' with the younger girl's religious parents fanning the flames. Not long ago, there was overwhelming lament for the 'poor young men' who had raped a girl, having their 'promising futures' tarnished by being held accountable.

This was a consensual relationship that began when they were both minors, the implications of an 18th birthday were only significant to the younger girl's parents, it seems.

femmeInterrupted

05-20-2013, 06:33 PM

http://www.themilitantbaker.com/2013/05/to-mike-jeffries-co-abercrombie-fitch.html
http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/webdr03/2013/5/20/11/enhanced-buzz-19750-1369063628-1.jpg

“P.P.S. You should know your Large t-shirt comfortably fits a size 22. You might want to work on that.”

Kobi

05-22-2013, 09:35 AM

Back to the Free Kate thing again for a moment. There was an Associated Press story yesterday that contradicted some of the earlier stories.

This story said:

"An 18-year-old Florida cheerleader is facing felony charges that she had sexual contact with her underage, 14-year-old girlfriend."

"The two had a consenting relationship that began soon AFTER Kaitlyn Hunt turned 18, and Hunt Smith, Kates mother said she assumed the younger girl's parents knew that."

In addition, it says this:

State Attorney Bruce Colton said the victim's family is not pushing for prison but wants Kaitlyn Hunt to be held responsible in some way.

"One of the reasons this case has gotten people's attention is because it's being publicized as a person being persecuted because she's gay, and that has nothing to do with the case, nothing to do with the law, nothing to do with the sheriff's office filing the charges," Colton said. He said the law is designed to protect younger children from older children who might be more aggressive in starting a relationship.

"The law doesn't make any differentiation. It doesn't matter if it's two girls or two boys, or an older boy and a younger girl or an older girl and a younger boy. Whatever the combination, it doesn't matter."

"It's very difficult under these circumstances when the defendant and the victim do not see what they're doing as a crime, but understandably the law is very clear that when someone is more than four years older than the victim and the victim is under the age of 16, then they cannot give legal consent," said New Jersey defense attorney Gregory Gianforcaro, who has represented victims and defendants on both sides of this issue.

I am still not sure what to think. There is more than one side to any story. Something still feels fishy about this one.

Full story (http://news.yahoo.com/gay-fla-teen-charged-underage-girlfriend-201129018.html)

Kobi

05-22-2013, 02:47 PM

WASHINGTON (AP) — Lawmakers have approved legislation to stem the growing epidemic of sexual assaults in the military.

The bill approved by a House panel Wednesday authorizes changes to military law that would strip commanding officers of their authority to unilaterally change or dismiss court-martial convictions in major cases, such as rape and assault.

Republicans and Democrats backing the revisions believe they will lead to a cultural shift in the armed forces that encourages more victims to step forward.

The bill also would impose harsher penalties on service members found guilty of sexual offenses by requiring that they be dismissed or dishonorably discharged.

http://news.yahoo.com/house-panel-moves-curb-military-sexual-assaults-173033382.html

Kobi

05-23-2013, 12:17 AM

Is a cigar sometimes just a cigar? That debate will remain unresolved, but The Daily Caller can say with confidence that a banana is definitely not always just a banana at North Marion High School near Ocala, Fla.

School district officials suspended North Marion High teacher Jonathan Hampton for three days without pay after he allegedly used a banana to touch a female student on the head during class, reports Ocala.com.

Hampton was teaching an advanced, college-level course at the time. The theme of the discussion that day was the Freudian ramifications of Ken Kesey’s 1962 novel “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.”

According to a May 13, 2013 discipline letter obtained by local CBS-affiliate WKMG, Hampton “rubbed a student’s head and neck area with a banana” while the topic was “cylinder objects, phalluses and/or sex symbols.”

The unidentified student’s parents reported the incident on May 6, some three months after it happened. According to the school district, they complained because their daughter felt uncomfortable. It’s not clear what factors caused them to wait three months to lodge their grievance.

A district representative said that Hampton was suspended because, given the totality of the circumstances, school officials had determined that he made inappropriate use of the banana.

The discipline letter written by deputy superintendent Rick Lankford suggested that other students had complained that Hampton’s college-level coursework has gone beyond community norms with “excessive frequency, causing discomfort to many of your students.”

Some parents and community members side firmly with the school district.

“That is disgusting, very disgusting,” said Dale Johnson, identified by WKMG as a grandmother. “I don’t think he should be allowed to teach kids. You don’t do stuff like that and get away with it.”

Hampton did not speak with local media but his attorney Mark Fiedelholtz did, telling a much different story.

“He doesn’t recall ever touching the student with a banana, but if he did it would be to get their attention,” Fiedelholtz told WKMG.

“There was nothing else to it,” he also said, according to Ocala.com.

The attorney added that no other students had made a complaint at the time or during the three subsequent months about the alleged banana incident.

Hampton has taught at North Marion High since 2007. According to personnel records obtained by WKMG, his work as a teacher has been generally “outstanding.” He was the 2011-12 teacher of the year. In 2009, though, Hampton landed in hot water for negative online commentary about students and fellow teachers.

http://news.yahoo.com/florida-high-school-suspends-teacher-touching-girl-head-153604620.html;_ylt=AqCK5cPTp.s1uaWFPPssm5ryWed_;_ ylu=X3oDMTVxbDAwZW0xBGNjb2RlA2dtcHRvcDEwMDBwb29sd2 lraXVwcmVzdARtaXQDQXJ0aWNsZSBNaXhlZCBMaXN0IE5ld3Mg Zm9yIFlvdSB3aXRoIE1vcmUgTGluawRwa2cDYjRhYjYxZjItMD VkNi0zMjM5LThkNDgtYTIzNmZiZTNmNTdlBHBvcwM1BHNlYwNu ZXdzX2Zvcl95b3UEdmVyAzk2NTJjMWMzLWMzNDItMTFlMi1iMW VhLWFmNzBmMGE0NmU3OA--;_ylg=X3oDMTBhYWM1a2sxBGxhbmcDZW4tVVM-;_ylv=3

Kobi

05-26-2013, 05:56 AM

SARATOGA, Calif. (AP) — One evening last Labor Day weekend, 15-year-old Audrie Pott walked up the driveway of a classmate's home alongside other teenagers. She'd told her parents she was spending the night with a friend. The friend claimed she was sleeping at Audrie's. Instead, the girls were having a party. A classic teenage ploy.

On that Sunday night, she was just another kid pushing the limits as she celebrated the last days of summer, getting drunk with her friends on vodka and Gatorade.

Police and a civil lawsuit outline allegations of what happened next: Three boys came into a room where Audrie had passed out. When she awoke the next morning, her shorts were off. Pictures were doodled on her body with a Sharpie. On one leg was the name of a boy, followed by the words "was here."

Soon Audrie learned about a photograph apparently making the rounds — of an intimate part of her body, taken, a family lawyer says, while she was passed out. "I have a reputation for a night I don't even remember," she wrote in another Facebook message, "and the whole school knows."

Eight days after the end-of-summer party, the sophomore who dreamed of traveling the world took her own life, hanging herself in a bathroom at home. Now the three boys, only 16 themselves, stand charged with sexual battery.

As they buried Audrie, her parents had no idea about an alleged assault, let alone that school officials, alerted by students about the party and the picture, had already gone to the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office, which launched an investigation.

Then the Pott family began getting phone calls. "There was information some of the children had that they felt would be vital for us to find out," Larry Pott said.

The three boys accused in the case were charged in the fall but remained in school (one transferring elsewhere) until April 11, when sheriff's deputies arrested them on charges of sexual battery and distribution of child pornography. Attorneys representing the teens, whose names have not been released because of their ages, urged the public to withhold judgment.

"Much of what has been reported ... is inaccurate. Most disturbing is the attempt to link (Audrie's) suicide to the specific actions of these three boys," said a statement from attorneys Eric Geffon, Alan Lagod and Benjamin Williams. "We are hopeful that everyone understands that these boys, none of whom have ever been in trouble with the law, are to be regarded as innocent."

The Pott family has sued the boys and their families, and filed an administrative claim against the Los Gatos-Saratoga Union High School District, alleging that administrators were slack in responding to bullying against Audrie. "With no assault, with no cyberbullying, Audrie is in art class right now," Larry Pott said at a news conference last month, his voice breaking.

The Potts also have launched the Audrie Pott Foundation to support local music and art scholarships in Audrie's memory, as well as youth counseling. And they are pressing for a change in state laws to stiffen penalties for cyberbullying and assault.

http://news.yahoo.com/girls-suicide-alleged-attack-troubles-town-134103899.html

femmeInterrupted

05-27-2013, 07:49 AM

http://www.theglobalmail.org/feature/its-2013-and-theyre-burning-witches/558/

Belief in black magic persists in Papua New Guinea, where communities are warping under the pressure of the mining boom’s unfulfilled expectations.
Women are blamed, accused of sorcery and branded as witches — with horrific consequences.

*disturbing images contained in the article on the link*

Kobi

06-01-2013, 11:07 AM

SAN DIEGO (AP) — Stacey Thompson had just been stationed at a Marine Corps base in Japan when she said her sergeant laced her drinks with drugs, raped her in his barracks and then dumped her onto a street outside a nightclub at 4 a.m.

The 19-year-old lance corporal was not afraid to speak up.

She reported it to her superiors but little happened. She said she discovered her perpetrator was allowed to leave the Marine Corps and she found herself, instead, at the center of a separate investigation for drug use stemming from that night. Six months later, she was kicked out with an other-than-honorable discharge — one step below honorable discharge — which means she lost her benefits.

Now, 14 years later, she has decided to speak out again, emboldened by the mounting pressure on the Pentagon to resolve its sexual assault epidemic.

She went public with her story Thursday in an exclusive interview with The Associated Press and spoke Friday at a news conference with Sen. Barbara Boxer ahead of next week's Senate hearing on the problem.

"To see that what happened to me 14 years ago is still continuing to happen now, for me that was a big reason why I felt the need to come forward," she said. "I can finally say I have the strength."

Retaliation is part of a military-wide pattern that has prevented countless cases from being reported and investigated, exacerbating the epidemic, according to victims' advocates. A Pentagon report released earlier this month found 62 percent of sexual assault victims in the military who reported being attacked say they faced some kind of retaliation afterward.

Boxer is pushing for a bipartisan bill that would put the cases in the hands of military trained prosecutors and not the chain of command.

"Too many survivors of military sexual assault are afraid to report these crimes because they fear retaliation, and they don't believe they will get justice," Boxer said. "They deserve a system that encourages victims to come forward knowing that the perpetrators will be brought to justice."

Marine Corps and Navy officials declined to comment, saying they do not discuss specific cases.

All branches have been scrambling to implement sexual assault prevention programs and improve their response to cases amid growing outrage over the Pentagon's failure to stem the problem as a string of arrests and incidents of sexual misconduct continue to surface.

As many as 26,000 military members may have been sexually assaulted last year and thousands of victims are unwilling to come forward despite new oversight and assistance programs, according to the Pentagon. That figure is an increase over the 19,000 estimated assaults in 2011.

Only 3,374 of these crimes were reported, resulting in 238 convictions.

"It's an ongoing problem that is not getting better, it's getting worse, as the latest statistics out of the Pentagon show," said Brian Purchia, spokesman for Protect Our Defenders, which has been helping Thompson.

"Unfortunately commanders are conflicted: When a sexual assault occurs on their watch, it reflects poorly on them and that's why it's shoved under the rug. The perpetrators frequently out rank the victims, which is also why there is this bias. They're going to trust people they've known — not an 18 or 19-year-old just new to the service."

Former Marine Capt. Anu Bhagwati said military culture will not change until the military justice system is reformed and service members are given access to civil courts to file suits in cases of retaliation and discrimination.

"There is no outside redress," said Bhagwati, who leads the Service Women's Action Network.

Thompson said she paid heavily for reporting the assault.

The investigator called her a liar, and military authorities checked her hands for needle pricks after accusing her of using drugs. She said she never used drugs. She was reassigned to another unit, removed from her job and told to report to an office with nothing to do.

Then she was kicked out. She continues to suffer from her other-than-honorable discharge, which stripped her of her benefits and she believes has led to her missing out on Defense Department jobs.

"I felt the Marine Corps re-victimized me again after getting raped," said the 32-year-old mother of three.

Thompson said then she shut down, refusing to talk about her rape. She was afraid of men, especially Marines. To this day, she keeps her dog nearby when she showers and sleeps with lights on in her house, even when her combat Marine husband is home.

"That fear is still with me 14 years later," she said.

But the fight is there too. Thompson requested her records in December. She said they showed the drug use allegations against her came from her perpetrator's friends.

She is now appealing her case to the Department of Veterans Affairs and is seeking compensation related to military sexual trauma. After that, she plans to also appeal her discharge status to get it upgraded to honorable.

http://news.yahoo.com/rape-victim-retaliation-prevalent-military-021740188.html;_ylt=Anxp_CKI0XA.Tb0WYfzNC8wmYsp_;_ ylu=X3oDMTIyNmxwOHJsBG1pdANIQ01PTCBvbiBhcnRpY2xlIH JpZ2h0IHJhaWwEcGtnA2lkLTMzMDg4MDYEcG9zAzYEc2VjA2hj bQR2ZXIDNw--;_ylg=X3oDMTBhYWM1a2sxBGxhbmcDZW4tVVM-;_ylv=3

Kobi

06-02-2013, 08:39 AM

NEW YORK (AP) — Sexual assault occurs in myriad settings and the perpetrators come from every swath of U.S. society. Yet as recent incidents and reports make clear, it's a particularly intractable problem in the military, with its enduring macho culture and unique legal system.

The most significant factor, according to advocates, is the perception by victims in the military that they lack the recourses available in the civilian world to bring assailants to justice.

"The military says they have zero tolerance, but in fact that's not true," said Dr. Katherine Scheirman, a retired Air Force colonel with more than 20 years of service in the U.S. and abroad. "Having a sexual assault case in your unit is considered something bad, so commanders have had an incredible incentive not to destroy their own careers by prosecuting someone."

Insisting it takes the problem seriously, the military has put in place numerous policies and programs to reduce the assaults, notably since the 1991 Tailhook scandal in which Navy pilots were accused of sexually abusing female officers at a Las Vegas convention.

Still the problem persists, as indicated in a recent Pentagon report estimating that 26,000 service members were sexually assaulted last year, compared with 19,000 in 2011. Victims reported 3,374 incidents in 2012; there were convictions in 238 of those cases.

"That means there are thousands of felons walking around — free and dangerous — in the military today," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.

Boxer is co-sponsor of a bill that would remove top commanders from the process of deciding whether sexual misconduct cases go to trial. Instead, that decision would rest with officers who are trial counsels with prosecutorial experience.

To advocates for assault victims, that would be a crucial step forward, given Defense Department findings that many victims are of lower rank than their assailants and most fear retaliation if they report the incident.

The missing element is accountability, according to Nancy Parrish of Protect Our Defenders, one of the groups urging changes in the military justice system.

"When military leaders are held accountable for countenancing bad behavior, then you'll begin to see a shift in the culture," she said. "They've proved they can do this with racial integration. Anyone who countenanced racist behavior would be fired."

Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has conveyed the same message, calling sexual assault "a crime that demands accountability and consequences" and describing it as "a serious problem that we must solve."

Outrage over the Pentagon's failure to stem the problem has grown following an embarrassing string of arrests and incidents of sexual misconduct. On Friday, in the latest disclosure, the Pentagon confirmed that the U.S. Naval Academy is investigating allegations that three football team members sexually assaulted a female midshipman at an off-campus house last year.

Some longtime advocates for assault victims say they've grown weary of promises to do better.

"They say they are dismayed, saddened, committed to making change, but all their rhetoric really boils down to is, 'How do we not get caught?'" said Paula Coughlin, who as a Navy lieutenant in 1991 was instrumental in bringing the Tailhook scandal to light.

"There's an environment in the military that says you can get away with it — you don't go to jail if you attack women," said Coughlin.

In the civilian world, positions of power often are exploited by sexual abusers, as evidenced by the many cases involving clergymen, coaches and teachers.

Scheirman, now a physician in Edmond, Okla., said issues of power and control are particularly pronounced in the military.

"Commanders have the power to destroy your career, to make your life a living hell," she said. "Though 99.9 percent of them don't, you can't take that chance. If it was a commander who assaulted you, you'd be delusional to think that if you reported it, any justice would be done."

While precise comparisons are difficult, the Defense Department's recent report suggests that women in the military and the civilian world face roughly the same risk of sexual assault. One crucial difference is that most civilian victims have options, such as going to the police or filing a civil suit, in the aftermath of harassment or assault that aren't available to service members.

"In civilian world, all of these recourses act as a deterrent," said Anu Bhagwati, a former Marine captain who advocates on behalf of assault victims as executive director of the Service Women's Action Network.

In the military, Bhagwati said, "there's no freedom of movement, no right to quit your job, You're forced to coexist with your perpetrator."

Cynthia Smith, a Defense Department spokeswoman, says the military does offer options to assault victims, who can report incidents to a sexual assault response coordinator, a victim advocate, a health care provider or a chaplain.

The contrasts between the military and corporate America are stark to Marene Nyberg Allison, who was in the first class of women at the U.S. Military Academy, graduating in 1980. After six years in the Army, she became an FBI agent, served on a Defense Department advisory committee on women in the military, and is now a senior executive with Johnson & Johnson.

"If I go on a business trip and someone tried to sexually assault me, I could sue them, I could sue the company, I could sue just about everybody," she said. "In the military, you're not allowed to do that."

"At a corporation, no one is asking, 'Does a woman really belong here?" she said. "You see that in the military — this whole idea of 'Do women belong here at all?'"

Steps are being taken.

Two weeks ago, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel ordered the military to recertify all 25,000 people involved in programs to prevent and respond to sexual assault. On Thursday the Defense Department launched a service called The Safe HelpRoom, enabling assault victims to participate in group chat sessions providing support and referrals.

Bhagwati says the biggest strides toward achieving lasting change would be to double the representation of women in the military from the current level of 15 percent and end the exclusion of women from certain units and missions. In particular, she said, more women are needed as officers, so they have the collective confidence to push for change.

"It's hard for women to go against the grain," she said. "It's not a culture that teaches moral courage, as opposed to battlefield courage."

It's also a culture that has been conducive to sexism and the degradation of women, Bhagwati contends.

"At bases overseas, there's commercial exploitation of women thriving around them, women being trafficked," she said. "You can't expect to treat women as one of your own when, in same breath, you as a young soldier are being encouraged to exploit women on the outside of that base."

"We don't condone that kind of behavior," insisted Cynthia Smith. "We work in an environment where we need to treat everyone with respect."

Jessica Kenyon, who served with the Army in South Korea, recalled a pervasive tendency to scapegoat women.

"If there are any problems in the unit — sex, drinking and driving, anything that could possibly be tagged to women being in the unit — it's seen as their fault," she said.

Kenyon said her Army career derailed after she was raped and impregnated by a fellow soldier in 2006. Now 32, she runs online support services for military victims of sexual assault.

"I treat my cases like they are incest survivors," she said. "You're willing to take a bullet for the guy you just met and to have that trust willfully violated makes the sense of betrayal that much higher."

One notable aspect of the Pentagon's recent sexual-assault estimates was the level of male-on-male assaults. Men were the victims in nearly 14,000 of the estimated 26,000 assaults, although women, comprising a small fraction of active-duty personnel, had a higher rate of being assaulted.

"Men need to be encouraged to come forward, so if you ask for help, it's seen a sign of strength, not of weakness," said Paul Rieckhoff, a former Army officer who heads Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.

Allyson Robinson of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, one of the groups which successfully campaigned to let gays serve openly in the military, said repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" has given more male soldiers the confidence to report same-sex assaults.

"Under 'don't ask,' service members who were victims of assault by their own sex could have been accused of being gay if they reported it, and thus lose their careers," she said.

She disputed suggestions from some conservatives that repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" is responsible for an increase in male-on-male assaults.

"Sexual assault is never about sex or sexual orientation," she said. "It's a crime of violence that's about power and domination."

Cynthia Smith said commanders will be the key to any improvements.

"No one should be at risk — male or female," she said. "Commanders are expected to provide the necessary resources or training so that both men and women know where to turn should they have questions or need support."

Dempsey, among others, suggests that the sexual assault problem has been aggravated by the strains of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Professor David Segal, director of the University of Maryland's Center for Research on Military Organization, said such strains are a key factor in the surge of suicides, spousal abuse and other problems in addition to sexual assault.

"The military has been phenomenally stretched over the last decade — it's been asked to do too much for too long with too few resources," he said. "The veneer of civilization is very thin, and the wars have worn it down or cracked it."

http://news.yahoo.com/militarys-sexual-assault-problem-deep-roots-121614939.html

Greyson

06-07-2013, 08:40 AM

Chinese City Of Wuhan Wants To Discourage Extramarital Affairs By Fining Unwed Mothers

The government of Wuhan, the capital of Hubei province with a population of more than 10 million, recently published a draft of its Population and Planned Birth Regulations, one of which specified that an unwed mother who cannot supply proof of the child’s father, or who had a child knowingly with a married man, will have to pay a “child-rearing fee.”

Read more:

http://www.ibtimes.com/chinese-city-wuhan-wants-discourage-extramarital-affairs-fining-unwed-mothers-1290569

Kobi

06-07-2013, 09:06 AM

JACKSON, Mississippi (Reuters) - Mississippi will require doctors to collect umbilical cord blood from babies born to some young mothers, under a new law intended to identify statutory rapists and reduce the state's rate of teenage pregnancy, the highest in the country.

The measure, which takes effect on July 1 and is the first of its kind in the country, targets certain mothers who were 16 or younger at the time of conception. Under the law, doctors and midwives will be expected to retrieve umbilical cord blood in cases where the father is 21 or older or when the baby's paternity is in question.

Samples will be stored at the state medical examiner's office for testing in the event that police believe the girl was the victim of statutory rape. But they will not automatically be entered into the state's criminal DNA database.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/mississippi-aims-curb-teen-pregnancy-umbilical-blood-law-142008317.html

EnderD_503

06-11-2013, 09:16 AM

Kobi

06-12-2013, 02:47 PM

Not every Republican learned Todd Akin’s lesson from 2012 – and Democrats noticed.

This week alone: Sen. Saxby Chambliss blamed sexual assaults in the military on hormones, conservative pundit Erick Erickson credited biology for male dominance in society and Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant said working moms are making kids fail in school.

Democrats and liberal groups are seizing on these comments to reignite their 2012 strategy — rally the base to raise big money and put Republicans back on defense with women voters ahead of the mid-term elections.

“Women voters are paying attention — this week was a big reminder that the GOP assault on women’s rights continues,” said Jess McIntosh of EMILY’S List.

The group, which helps pro-choice women get elected to office, is planning to use Chambliss’ remark in an email blast and social media campaign called “Great Moments In GOP Women’s Outreach.”

Inside the Senate, Democrats are beginning meetings to strategize their messaging on the issue, according to a Senate Democratic aide.

“This is not an issue for Harry Reid or Chuck Schumer to jump into. This is an issue for Patty Murray and Claire McCaskill and the women senators to jump into,” the aide said. “We will take advantage of it, but this is the mold of the Planned Parenthood fight and the Blunt amendment fight. The female senators will take the lead. Part of the advantage of having a large number of women in your caucus is having people who are effective messengers on issues like this.’

Republicans pushed back at the moves, accusing Democrats of politicizing issues like military sexual assault that should be bipartisan.

At the National Republican Senatorial Committee, GOP operatives sought to squash the controversy, trying to head off a rehash of lessons learned from the last election cycle, after which Republicans promised to be more sensitive when talking about women’s issues.

“As a woman, the politicization of sexual assault or rape is offensive in and of itself. This is an important conversation to be had in congressional committees – it shouldn’t be used as a page in Democrat politicos’ playbooks looking to exploit this tragedy for political gain,” said Brook Hougesen, NRSC spokeswoman.

“If Democrats want to debate the ‘war on women’, look no further than the agenda set by Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer,” Hougesen said, turning the issue to the economy. “Women have had a difficult time finding work, and juggling multiple jobs and their personal lives with Democrats controlling the economy and the government for the last five years.”

Still, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is cooking up state-by-state releases calling on possible GOP Senate candidates to condemn remarks from GOP leaders.

“These comments make Todd Akin look moderate. Republicans have offended women across the country,” said DSCC spokeswoman Regan Page. “This was a defining issue in 2012 and will certainly be a problem for Republicans again in 2014.”

The playbook worked well for Democrats in 2012, when they turned controversial comments about rape by then-Senate candidates Akin and Richard Mourdock into a national discussion that contributed to Reid hanging onto his majority.

Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway acknowledged the comments don’t help Republicans with women, but she argues it will be difficult for Democrats to harness electoral victories off of them.

“These unfortunate, untoward completely baseless comments are unhelpful in an environment where the left still seems to be obsessed with a war on women,” Conaway said, who was quick to point out that the 2012 election was really about abortion politics. “Rape is four a letter word, so is debt to many women.”

But Republicans have a lot of explaining to do.

At Tuesday’s Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on military sexual assault, Chambliss appeared to dismiss the severity of the issue when he cited hormones as a factor in the high rate of incidents.

“The young folks that are coming in to each of your services are anywhere from 17 to 22-or-three,” said Chambliss, a two-term Georgia Republican who plans to retire in 2014. “The hormone level created by nature sets in place the possibility for these types of things to occur.”

Erickson stepped into the fray this week by saying on Fox News that “when you look at biology, look at the natural world, the roles of a male and female in society, and the other animals, the male typically is the dominant role.”

And Bryant, speaking Tuesday at a Washington Post forum, blamed poor academic performance among youths on “both parents started working. The mom got in the workplace.”

While Chambliss also said “we simply can’t tolerate” sexual assaults, and he’s a cosponsor of two bipartisan bills that try to deal with the latest spike in violent crimes, the Georgia Republican’s comments nonetheless prompted rebukes from Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz. The Florida Democrat slammed the GOP and argued that their public remarks are a better indication of where the party stands on women’s issues.

For a United States senator or anyone to write off sexual assault and the personal violation of a woman or man to raging the hormones of youth shows just how dramatically out of touch the Republican Party is,” she said on MSNBC.

Sen. Kristen Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), the lead sponsor of legislation that would take prosecution of military sexual assault out of the normal chain of command, during a separate appearance Tuesday on MSNBC, also took aim at Republicans.

“Rape and sexual assault are crimes of violence, crimes of dominance. More than half of the victims are men. These are not crimes of lust. They’re not crimes of romance. They’re not dates that have gone badly,” she said. “They’re not issues of the hook-up culture from high school or hormones, as my colleague said. We’re talking about predators, often serial predators who are targeting their victims in advance, making them vulnerable through alcohol or other means and actually stalking them.”

Even some Republicans looked to distance themselves from Chambliss and other conservatives.

Rep. Martha Roby (R-Ala.) declined to comment Wednesday when asked about the recent remarks from her GOP colleagues.

“You’re going to see a bipartisan effort here today in the Armed Services Committee,” she said just outside the Rayburn Office Building hearing room where the panel held an all-day markup of the Defense Authorization bill.

Votes on several amendments dealing with sexual assault were expected Wednesday.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham conceded Chambliss could have spoken more eloquently about sexual assault but still defended his GOP colleague.

“I think what he was saying is you’ve got a lot of young people in the military and we just have be realistic,” Graham told POLITICO. “I don’t know where you were at 17 to 23. I don’t know how you were. But these are formative years. I know Saxby very well. Anybody knows Saxby is not suggesting that he’s justifying rape.”

To address the issue, Graham said any sexual predators serving the military “need to be sought out and pounded, driven out of the service in such a fashion to deter others.”

The South Carolina Republican also warned about “off-color jokes being told, where there’s an uncomfortable work environment where you’re showing disrespect for your female comrades in arms.”

Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) said Chambliss’ remarks are part of a larger problem with the makeup of Capitol Hill.

“The reason these guys say these things is because they really believe them,” she said in an interview. “When you still have 80 percent of Congress that’s guys, you’re going to have people in leadership positions who think these things. It’s a shame because it really hampers our efforts to make sure we have a system that really works for all the victims of violence.”

Illinois Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowsky said the Republicans’ remarks won’t just hurt them politically — it might also make for trouble in recruiting women to join the armed forces. “Women, particularly women contemplating going into the military, would be very offended and also put off by that comment,” she said. “Because it sounds like it tolerates, it understands that these young men can’t control themselves. That’s just counterproductive and really offensive.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/war-on-women-returns-92303_Page3.html#ixzz2W2M9bZbR

Greyson

06-13-2013, 08:40 PM

Calif. teacher blames job loss on abusive ex

By JULIE WATSON
Associated Press
Thursday, Jun. 13, 2013 - 5:30 pm

SAN DIEGO -- A San Diego-area teacher says she is losing her job for being the victim of domestic violence.

The attorney for Holy Trinity School teacher Carie Charlesworth told The Associated Press on Thursday that she had received a letter notifying her that her 14-year contract would not be renewed because her ex-husband's violent history posed a risk to the school.

"We feel deeply for you and about the situation in which you and your children find yourselves through no fault of your own," Beecher wrote. "It serves no purpose to go through your husband's legal history, except to say that his threatening and menacing behavior has not changed but has actually increased over the past 20 plus years."

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/06/13/5495293/ca-teacher-says-losing-job-because.html

Greyson

06-20-2013, 10:07 AM

SOCIAL JUSTICE

A City of Widows: Pictures From India’s Town for Discarded Women
When a woman’s husband dies in India, she can be subjected to stigma, loss of family and exile to a small city of 4,000 temples.

The Widow At The Door
A widow poses for a picture inside her room at the Meera Sahavagini ashram in the pilgrimage town of Vrindavan in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. Thousands of temples devoted to Krishna make up the town, and devotees come from all corners of the Earth to walk the streets that Krishna walked.

People greet each other on the street by saying “Hare Krishna” (Praise Krishna) or “Radhe Radhe” (the name of Krishna’s favorite wife), and chant Krishna’s name with other believers for hours on end.

It is assumed that if you are in Vrindavan, you are attending to business with Lord Krishna.

But Vrindavan is also home to hundreds of Indian widows.

How did the widows all arrive at this sacred spot? What are they doing here? What does their presence say about India and the treatment of women in general? Click through this photo gallery, and all will be revealed.

http://www.takepart.com/photos/city-widows/a-shadow-of-her-self

Kobi

06-21-2013, 06:27 PM

LONDON – In the first major global review of violence against women, a series of reports released today found that about a third of women have been physically or sexually assaulted by a former or current partner.

The head of the World Health Organization, Dr. Margaret Chan, called it “a global health problem of epidemic proportions,” and other experts said screening for domestic violence should be added to all levels of health care.

Among the findings: 40 percent of women killed worldwide were slain by an intimate partner, and being assaulted by a partner was the most common kind of violence experienced by women.

Researchers used a broad definition of domestic violence, and in cases where country data was incomplete, estimates were used to fill in the gaps. WHO defined physical violence as being slapped, pushed, punched, choked or attacked with a weapon. Sexual violence was defined as being physically forced to have sex, having sex for fear of what the partner might do and being compelled to do something sexual that was humiliating or degrading.

The report also examined rates of sexual violence against women by someone other than a partner and found about 7 percent of women worldwide had previously been a victim.

In conjunction with the report, WHO issued guidelines for authorities to spot problems earlier and said all health workers should be trained to recognize when women may be at risk and how to respond appropriately.

Globally, the WHO review found 30 percent of women are affected by domestic or sexual violence by a partner. The report was based largely on studies from 1983 to 2010. According to the United Nations, more than 600 million women live in countries where domestic violence is not considered a crime.

The rate of domestic violence against women was highest in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, where 37 percent of women experienced physical or sexual violence from a partner at some point in their lifetimes. The rate was 30 percent in Latin America and 23 percent in North America. In Europe and Asia, it was 25 percent.

Some experts said screening for domestic violence should be added to all levels of health care, such as obstetric clinics.

“It’s unlikely that someone would walk into an ER and disclose they’ve been assaulted,” said Sheila Sprague of McMaster University in Canada, who has researched domestic violence in women at orthopedic clinics. She was not connected to the WHO report.

However, “over time, if women are coming into a fracture clinic or a pre-natal clinic, they may tell you they are suffering abuse if you ask,” she said.

For domestic violence figures, scientists analyzed information from 86 countries focusing on women and teens over the age of 15. They also assessed studies from 56 countries on sexual violence by someone other than a partner, though they had no data from the Middle East. WHO experts then used modeling techniques to come up with global estimates for the percentage of women who are victims of violence.

Accurate numbers on women and violence are notoriously hard to pin down. A U.S. government survey reported almost two years ago that 1 in 4 American women said they were violently attacked by their husbands or boyfriends, and 1 in 5 said they were victims of rape or attempted rape, with about half those cases involving intimate partners.

Some experts thought the rape estimate was extremely high but said it may have to do with the definition of assault. The results were from a survey that did not document the claims, which were made anonymously

In a related paper published today online in the journal Lancet, researchers found more than 38 percent of slain women are killed by a former or current partner, six times higher than the rate of men killed by their partners.

Heidi Stoeckl, one of the authors at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said the figures were probably an underestimate. She and colleagues found that worldwide, a woman’s highest risk of murder was from a current or ex-partner.

In countries like India, Stoeckl said “honor killings,” where women are sometimes murdered over dowry disputes or perceived offenses like infidelity to protect the family’s reputation, add to the problem.
She also noted that women and men are often slain by their partners for different reasons.

“When a woman kills her male partner, it’s usually out of self-defense because she has been abused,” she said. “But when a woman is killed, it’s often after she has left the relationship and the man is killing her out of jealousy or rage.”

Stoeckl said criminal justice authorities should intervene sooner.

“When a woman is killed by a partner, she has often already had contact with the police,” she said. Stoeckl said there should be more protection for women from their partners, particularly in cases where there is a history of violence.

“There are enough signs that we should be watching out for that,” she said. “We certainly should know if someone is potentially lethal and be able to do something about it.”

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130620/NEWS11/130629950/-1/NEWS

Kobi

06-21-2013, 06:29 PM

The Supreme Court is poised to release its opinion on an affirmative-action case that could forever change the way public colleges and universities consider race in admissions. But even if, as some predict, the justices issue a broad ruling slapping down the use of race in admissions, an open secret in higher education—that many colleges lower their admissions standards for male applicants—remains unchallenged and largely unremarked upon.

For years, the percentage of men enrolled in college has been declining, with women making up nearly 57 percent of all undergrads at four-year colleges last year, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. While schools are prohibited under the federal Title IX law from discriminating based on gender, some admissions officials have admitted in recent years that male applicants get a leg up from colleges hoping to avoid gender imbalances on campus.

Jennifer Delahunty Britz, the dean of admissions at the private liberal arts school Kenyon College, was among the first to admit this when she wrote an op-ed titled "To All the Girls I've Rejected" in The New York Times in 2006.

"The reality is that because young men are rarer, they're more valued applicants," she wrote, adding that two-thirds of colleges report that more women than men apply for admission. "What messages are we sending young women that they must, nearly 25 years after the defeat of the Equal Rights Amendment, be even more accomplished than men to gain admission to the nation's top colleges?"

Delahunty Britz's acknowledgment opened the floodgates, and reporters began looking closely at schools that admitted a much higher percentage of male than female applicants.

Of course, these gaps don't necessarily mean that women are being discriminated against. It's possible that the male applicant pool is better qualified on average, though that's hard to ascertain when colleges generally resist releasing their admissions data.

The University of Richmond, a private liberal arts school, acknowledged in 2009 that it attempts to keep its gender balance at about 50-50, which meant women's admit rate was about 13 percentage points lower than men's over the previous 10 years. Admissions officer Marilyn Hesser told CBS that men and women had about the same standardized test scores, but that male applicants' GPA was lower on average. (The college's admission rate suddenly became more gender neutral the following year, in 2010-2011, when men's acceptance rate was only 3 percentage points higher than women's.)

The same year, the College of William and Mary, a public institution in Virginia, accepted 39.4 percent of its male applicants and 27.2 percent of female applicants. The school's admissions dean, Henry Broaddus, said men have slightly higher standardized test scores but lower GPAs than women, on average.

Broaddus defended the policy, insisting that William and Mary's female students want the college to to be gender-balanced and that colleges in general risk becoming less attractive to both men and women when the gender balance tips too far toward women.

"Even women who enroll ... expect to see men on campus," Broaddus said at the time. "It's not the College of Mary and Mary; it's the College of William and Mary."

In 2005, some trustees of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill reportedly wondered whether they should instate "affirmative action for men," to counteract the declining percentage of men on campus. (The school is more than 58 percent female.)

The stories prompted admissions consultants who charge $200 an hour to caution on their website that female applicants must try harder. "The best advice we can give female applicants is to follow the same advice we're giving everyone—only more strictly: start your college applications early, apply to an appropriate number and range of schools, and prepare each one of your applications carefully."

Interestingly, none of these revelations prompted a wave of lawsuits, or even much outrage, from feminist organizations or other groups. It's even more surprising because the issue is probably more clear-cut, legally speaking, than race-based affirmative action.

In Grutter v. Bollinger, the 2003 case that set current law around race-based affirmative action, the Supreme Court ruled that in order to achieve a "critical mass" of underrepresented minority groups, colleges can use race as a limited factor in admissions decisions. The court said at the time it believed affirmative action would no longer be necessary after 25 years, an argument the Supreme Court is now reconsidering with Fisher v. University of Texas, a case brought by a white student who was rejected by the university.

Many legal experts expect the court, which is more conservative now than it was in 2003, to rule against UT, which could mean public colleges could have to stop considering race in admissions as a way to increase on-campus diversity.

But with men, there's no "critical mass" argument to make. Men are outnumbered by women on campus, but not so vastly that they can be considered an underrepresented minority. The Constitution does allow for more discrimination based on gender than race. (The courts treat any classification based on race with strict scrutiny; gender-based classifications get a more relaxed degree of review.)

But Title IX pretty clearly forbids any admissions decision that discriminates based on gender, meaning Congress has already made gender-balancing admissions decisions effectively illegal. In the one known case on this issue, plaintiffs challenged the University of Georgia in 2000 for both race and gender admissions preferences, and a federal circuit court found that gender preferences were illegal and struck them down. The school declined to appeal.

Why haven't there been more lawsuits?

Gail Heriot, a conservative law professor at the University of San Diego and a member of the federal U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, said it's partly the murky politics of the issue. Liberal, feminist groups tend to support affirmative action for racial minorities and could be wary of attacking gender preferences for men lest it leads to attacking racial preferences.

Meanwhile, conservative groups that reject race-based affirmative action would rather draw attention to the "boy crisis" they believe harms men than seize the chance to deal a blow to both race and gender admissions preferences.

Heriot began a commission investigation into whether colleges were discriminating against female applicants in 2009, but the eight-member panel voted to end it at the suggestion of a Democratic appointee in 2011. Several schools had refused to hand over their admissions data to Heriot, which made the investigation difficult.

Heriot dismissed the argument that women would rather attend gender-balanced schools, even if it means they had to get better grades in high school than their male peers to get in.

"It strikes me as a very troubling argument to say, 'Gosh, women want to be discriminated against,'" she said. "You're going to have to prove that to me."

She still believes that a case against gender preferences at public schools could win.

"I'm a conservative so I tend to be on the other side of issues from Justice [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg. But I'd be happy to argue this one to her. I think I have a shot," Heriot said.

Meanwhile, admissions officers who do not want to give a leg up to men are left to find other means to attract men to campus. Brandeis University (57 percent female) tried offering free baseball caps to its first 500 male applicants, according to Heriot.

Eric Felix, an admissions officer for the University of San Diego, a small liberal arts school that is 45 percent male, says he tries to encourage qualified men to apply by tailoring applications materials to them, highlighting the school's engineering programs and sports teams instead of the beautiful campus shots sent to women. He also visits all-boys schools and ROTC programs to recruit.

Felix, who said he does not use gender preferences, said male applicants can often make up for their on average lower GPAs through "noncognitive" factors such as leadership roles in extracurriculars. "We're only going to admit students that we feel are successful," Felix said. "Once you get to the nonacademic pieces then men start to shine, because they put an emphasis on extracurriculars."

Felix said that although men might not be an oppressed minority, they are often discouraged from emphasizing academics because they are expected to get a part-time job or join the military. Felix also argued that gender is part of diversity on campus.

"Students need to be able to interact with a diverse population, and part of that diversity is gender," Felix said. "If there's a discussion about rape and sexual assault in court cases [in class] and there's not men to add a voice, that's a conversation that's really missing.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/court-prepares-affirmative-action-decision-softer-standards-men-182205509.html

Soon

06-22-2013, 04:21 PM

Male Fox News guest to female Democratic consultant: “Know your role and shut your mouth”
Bill Cunningham also asked Tamara Holder, "Are you going to cry? (http://www.salon.com/2013/06/21/male_fox_news_guest_to_female_democratic_consultan t_know_your_role_and_shut_your_mouth/)

A finger-pointing political argument on Fox News Channel boiled over when a male conservative talk show host shouted at a woman to “know your role and shut your mouth.”

The man, Bill Cunningham, later asked Fox contributor Tamara Holder, “Are you going to cry?”

Fox on-air personalities on Friday were talking about the exchange on Sean Hannity’s prime-time show the night before. Commentator Juan Williams concluded that Cunningham “obliterated the line” of civil discourse in his argument with Holder. The two had been brought on by Hannity to discuss whether Attorney General Eric Holder — no relation to Tamara — had committed perjury.

Cunningham, sitting next to Tamara Holder in a New York studio, called her “one of the stooges of the left that will always be there to excuse away criminal behavior.” He said she had the “incurable fatal condition of liberalism that caused people like Eric Holder to be the consulary of Barack Hussein Obama.”

He was jabbing a finger at Holder, who returned the favor.

“I really hope that when you speak to a judge, you don’t point your finger in the person’s face the entire time,” she said. “Your finger does not make your point.”

Cunningham is a former assistant attorney general in Ohio whose wife is on the Ohio Court of Appeals. He hosts radio and television talk shows.

“Whose finger is in my face right now?” Cunningham asked.

Replied Holder: “Mine, because I’m telling you to shut up.”

“You shut up!” Cunningham said. “Know your role and shut your mouth.”

Cunningham could not be reached for comment Friday.

It was only three weeks after another exchange on Fox, where daytime host Megyn Kelly said she was offended by a male colleague’s suggestion that children of working mothers don’t fare as well as children with stay-at-home moms. One Fox contributor, Erick Erickson, said that in nature, males were traditionally dominant.

Later, Cunningham repeated his assertion that Holder was a “liberal stooge and an excuse-monger for the Obama administration.”

After Holder paused, Cunningham asked, “What, are you going to cry?”

“No, I’m not going to cry,” Holder said.

Admonished by Hannity at the end of their segment to shake hands, they refused. “I don’t shake hands with trolls,” Holder said.

Things were still smoldering on Friday when Fox returned to the argument. Daytime host Martha McCollum hosted a segment with Williams and Fox contributor Mary Katherine Ham on whether the combatants had gone too far.

“The merits of the argument might be on the Cunningham side,” Ham said, “but I’m on Team Tamara on the comment of knowing your role.”

Greyson

07-06-2013, 02:13 PM

Viewpoints: Injustices against women hidden for too long

By Camille Hayes

Published: Saturday, Jul. 6, 2013

DUBLIN, Ireland – On paper, Martina Keogh's life reads like a tragedy – but don't tell her that. When you meet her in person it's hard to reconcile the facts of her early life, which included her quasi-legal incarceration in one of Ireland's notorious Magdalene laundries, with the warm and funny grandmother she is today. I met Martina on a recent trip to Ireland, when she agreed to talk to me about her experiences in one of the slave-labor workhouses operated by the Catholic Church – with an as-yet-unknown degree of government complicity – from 1765 to 1996.

The Magdalene asylums, as they were formally known, weren't unique to Ireland. They existed in other European countries and there were a few in North America, but Ireland had the largest number and kept them operating longest. The mission of these institutions was ostensibly to rehabilitate women the church deemed morally compromised, like prostitutes and unwed mothers. But that mission, such as it was, was lost in the Irish facilities, which were run as commercial laundries staffed by unpaid inmates and generating profits for the church.

Read more here:

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/06/5547894/injustices-against-women-hidden.html#storylink=cpy

Soon

07-06-2013, 08:05 PM

Mob Sexual Assaults In Tahrir Square Are Escalating
(http://gawker.com/mob-sexual-assaults-in-tahrir-square-are-escalating-685408135)
Tahrir Square was a point of celebration on Wednesday as Egyptians celebrated the ouster of Mohamed Morsi, but for at least 80 women it was a nightmare.

In the last week alone, more than 169 cases of mob sexual crimes were reported in Tahrir Square, The Guardian is reporting. And since last Sunday, at least one woman was raped with a sharp object.

"We call it the circle of hell," one woman said of the assaulting mobs.

According to The Guardian, a typical attack consists of large groups of men who surround a lone woman, ripping off her clothing until she is naked. Soraya Bahgat, a women's rights advocate and co-founder of Tahrir Bodyguard, says that most of these groups of men head into the packed squares with the specific intention of assaulting or raping women.

Soon

07-08-2013, 09:20 AM

BBC's John Inverdale Apologizes Over 'Sexist' Marion Bartoli Comment (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/07/bbc-john-inverdale-sexist-marion-bartoli-comment_n_3557552.html)

LONDON, July 7 (Reuters) - The BBC faced mounting pressure on Sunday to take action against one its most high-profile sports presenters for criticising the appearance of France's Marion Bartoli who won this year's Wimbledon women's singles title.

John Inverdale incensed radio listeners before Bartoli beat German Sabine Lisicki when he asked if people thought her father told her when little that she was never going to be "a looker" like Maria Sharapova so would have to fight harder for success.

The BBC, Britain's publicly funded broadcaster, apologised for the comments after a storm of protests on Twitter, admitting the remark was "insensitive".

Inverdale said on Sunday he had written to apologise to Bartoli and told listeners ahead of Sunday' men's final that he used "a clumsy phrase" about Bartoli in trying to make a point that not all players need to be "6 ft fall Amazonian athletes".

But the apology from the 55-year-old, who has presented BBC shows since the 1980s, failed to calm the fury about his remark made 24 hours earlier and the lack of action taken by the BBC.

"This is appalling. Tennis is one of the worst offenders in sport in terms of the focus on women athletes' looks and the BBC needs to take action," Sue Tibbals, chief executive of the Women's Sports and Fitness Foundation, told Reuters.

"I thought Bartoli was an absolute inspiration, so spirited and gutsy, and she does not deserve these outrageous remarks. This is not a one-off event from this presenter."

A BBC spokesman, however, said the corporation had apologised and so had Inverdale and that there were no plans for further action to be taken.

Bartoli, 28, won the admiration of Centre Court on Saturday when she won her first grand slam title in a straight-sets victory over 23-year-old Lisicki that earned her 1.6 million pounds ($2.4 million) in prize money.

The Frenchwoman, celebrating her success in becoming the first Frenchwoman in seven years to win the coveted Wimbledon women's title, shrugged off Inverdale's comments.

"It doesn't matter, honestly. I am not blonde, yes. That is a fact," Bartoli said in a press briefing late on Saturday.

"Have I dreamt about having a model contract? No. I'm sorry. But have I dreamed about winning Wimbledon? Absolutely, yes."

Twitter users praised Bartoli's dignity as they called on the BBC to act against Inverdale.

Many of the Tweets included the hashtag "Everyday Sexism", which has gathered a large following as people tweet examples of causal sexism in the workplace and public life.

"Isn't it time the BBC woke up to the sexism at the heart of its sport broadcasting?" tweeted feminist blogger Leopard.

"#BBC apology over sexism comments not good enough. suspend #Inverdale & hold enquiry. Sexism is on par with racism," tweeted yvonneridley.

Gemme

07-10-2013, 04:35 AM

Ad for surf apparel and accessories resembles a Carl's Jr. ad (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/roxy-surfing-ad_n_3568031.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl5%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D341887)

I don't even use this company and, from this ad and their FB response to the backlash, I won't ever.

Kobi

07-12-2013, 07:37 AM

http://media-cache-ak2.pinimg.com/736x/aa/05/6a/aa056a5182a1631ed2b262cb2504cd99.jpg

Soon

07-12-2013, 08:00 AM

San Diego Mayor Bob Filner apologizes, admits 'I need help' (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-filner-apology-20130711,0,2262813.story)

SAN DIEGO -- Facing calls for his resignation amid sex harassment claims, San Diego Mayor Bob Filner issued an apology Thursday for his treatment of women and vowed to change his behavior, admitting "I need help."

Filner indicated he will not resign but that "I have reached into my heart and soul and realize I must and will change my behavior." He said he and his staff will take the sexual harassment training offered by the city.

On a DVD given to the media, Filner said, "As someone who has spent a lifetime fighting for equality for all people, I am embarrassed to admit that I have failed to fully respect the women who work for me and with me, and that at times I have intimidated them."

He said he knew that San Diego residents "have every right to be disappointed" in him but asked that "you give me an opportunity to prove I am capable of change, so that the vision I have for our city's future can be realized."

Filner's admission came just hours after an an emotionally charged news conference in which three longtime friends and supporters called on him to resign for what one called "truly reprehensible" behavior toward women.

Although no details were given about alleged sexual harassment, former City Councilwoman Donna Frye and lawyers Marco Gonzalez and Cory Briggs said they will help the women if they decide to come forward and file lawsuits.

Frye, her voice breaking, said the women "are too scared to speak."

Briggs said his message to the women is, "When you're ready to file lawsuits, I'll be standing in court."

"The mayor is in control of the script," Gonzalez said. "The next chapter will largely be defined by his response."

The three said the alleged victims do not want to be in the media spotlight. Briggs asked reporters not to attempt to find out the women's names and interview them.

Frye and Gonzalez said they met recently with Filner. They declined to discuss what took place at the meetings. Gonzalez referred to Filner as "our friend and our ally."

But Frye said, "There are community standards in our society that need to be upheld."

The calls for his resignation are the latest in a series of turbulent events involving the 70-year-old Democrat, who was elected in November after 10 terms in Congress.

On Monday, Filner's fiancee sent an email to friends and supporters, announcing she and the mayor have broken their engagement and ended their relationship. The email from Bronwyn Ingram, whom Filner had referred to as San Diego's first lady, provided no details.

There also have been published and broadcast reports that federal officials are looking into a deal between Filner and a land developer.

The developer donated $100,000 to two of Filner's pet projects — one for veterans, one for bicyclists — allegedly in exchange for Filner dropping his opposition to a land-use project. Filner has since returned the money.

KGTV-Channel 10 has also raised questions about the use of public money for a trip to Paris Filner took to participate in a rally organized by Iranian dissidents. San Diego police went on the trip to provide security for the mayor.

While there has been grumbling in some Republican circles that a recall movement should be mounted against the combative Filner, particularly due to his feud with the Republican city attorney, Jan Goldsmith, the resignation demands signal the first defection from his supporters.

Briggs, Gonzalez and Frye each sent letters to Filner on Wednesday, calling on him to resign.

The letter from Frye, first revealed by KPBS, mentions "credible evidence of more than one woman being sexually harassed by you. Despite past rumors, I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Soon

07-14-2013, 07:08 PM

Man Named Kim Gets Zero Job Offers Until He Adds ‘Mr.' to His Name
(http://jezebel.com/man-named-kim-gets-zero-job-offers-until-he-adds-mr-781786876)
When Kim O' Grady was applying for jobs in the late 90s, he was excited. He writes that he had the relevant qualifications, experience and could also show a successful track record in his chosen career path — unfortunately for him, he also had a name that many people automatically assume belongs to a woman.

The rejections poured in, and he was confused. He was an ideal candidate, and to not even get interviews was very odd. He examined and re-examined his CV and couldn't figure out what was front with it.

Then, he had a thought:

I made one change that day. I put Mr. in front of my name on my CV. It looked a little too formal for my liking but I got an interview for the very next job I applied for. And the one after that. It all happened in a fortnight, and the second job was a substantial increase in responsibility over anything I had done before. In the end I beat out a very competitive short-list and enjoyed that job for the next few years, further enhancing my career.
Gender discrimination — it's a real thing, folks.

Interestingly, I talked to a man named Lauren who writes woman-centric comedy stuff and he tells stories of the exact opposite problem. It's obviously an exception to the rule, but when producers call in someone named Lauren who wrote a spec for "Labia Landia", they do a double take when an old dude walks through the door. Names, am I right?!

Kobi

07-17-2013, 03:16 PM

GULLANE, Scotland (AP) -- Pragmatic yet defiant, the head of the Royal & Ancient issued a Hootie Johnson-like salvo in the latest battleground over male-only golf clubs: The British Open will not yield to pressure over three of its venerable clubs refusing to admit female members.

The way Peter Dawson looks at it, to compare this to racial or religious discrimination is ''absurd.''

At his customary news conference on the eve of the British Open, the R&A chief executive faced a barrage of questions Wednesday about the no-women-allowed membership at Muirfield and two of the other nine venues in the tournament rotation, Troon and Royal St. George's.

He was prepared for the issue, reading from notes that made it clear he believes single-sex clubs do little harm to the game and have largely been targeted by the media, politicians and interest groups.

''Obviously the whole issue of gender and single-sex clubs has been pretty much beaten to death recently,'' Dawson said. ''And we do, I assure you, understand that this is divisive. It's a subject that we're finding increasingly difficult, to be honest.''

One reporter, touching on the racial discrimination that once pervaded the game, asked Dawson what was the difference between a male-only club and one that allowed only whites to join.

''Oh, goodness me, I think that's a ridiculous question,'' he replied. ''There's a massive difference between racial discrimination, anti-Semitism, where sectors of society are downtrodden and treated very, very badly indeed. And to compare that with a men's golf club, I think, is frankly absurd. There's no comparison whatsoever.''

He later added: ''It's just kind of, for some people, a way of life that they rather like. I don't think in doing that they're intending to (bring) others down or intending to do others any harm.''

Dawson disputed any suggestion that male-only clubs stifle the growth of the sport. Still, he knows it will continue to be a point of contention - especially since Augusta National admitted its first female members last year - so the organization that governs golf outside the U.S. and Mexico plans to take it up once the Open is completed.

He wouldn't say what steps might be taken.

''Our natural reaction is to resist these pressures, because we actually don't think they have very much substance,'' Dawson said. ''But I'd like to stress we're not so insular as to fail to recognize the potential damage that campaigns like this can do to the Open championship. And it is our championship committee's responsibility to do what is best for the Open, and to maximize the benefits which the Open brings, not just to golf, but also to the local area.''

The debate has lurked over golf since Martha Burk and her women's advocacy group targeted the home of the Masters in 2002 for admitting only men as members. Then-chairman Johnson famously said the club would not be bullied into accepting women ''at the point of a bayonet,'' even at the cost of cutting loose television sponsors for two years.

Eleven months ago, with no advance notice and an understated announcement, Augusta National invited former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and South Carolina financier Darla Moore to become members. Tiger Woods called the move ''important to golf,'' and now the battle has moved across the pond to the oldest of golf's four majors.

Dawson said the issue will be addressed.

Just not right now.

''When things are a bit quieter, after the championship,'' he said, ''I'm quite sure we'll be taking a look at everything to see what kind of sense we can make of it for the future. But I think right now our concentration has to be on this wonderful event and making it a success.''

Eleven of the 24 questions to Dawson during the half-hour news conference involved male-only clubs or related issues. Most golfers have shied away from the debate leading up to the Open, including top-ranked Woods.

When Rory McIlroy, the world's No. 2 player, was first asked about it Wednesday, there was a long pause and a forced smile before he said, ''Muirfield is a great golf course.''

Later, when someone asked McIlroy if the players had been advised not to comment, he was more forthcoming.

''I just think it's something that a lot of guys don't want to get themselves into because it's quite a controversial issue,'' he said. ''It's something that shouldn't happen these days. It's something that we shouldn't even be talking about.''

Ernie Els said it's ''weird'' that some clubs won't admit both sexes, while Luke Donald said ''we'd love to see these policies be a bit more inclusive.''

''Wherever the governing bodies decide to play a tournament, it's my job to turn up and be ready and play, and that's what I am going to,'' Donald said. ''I think the R&A is certainly trending in the right direction.''

But the leading Scottish politician won't be attending this year's event in protest.

''I just think it's indefensible in the 21st century not to have a golf club that's open to all,'' said Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond, a huge golf fan who played a round with Phil Mickelson last week.

Two British government members - Maria Miller, the secretary of culture, media and sport, and sports minister Hugh Robertson - have also turned down invitations to attend, though Robertson downplayed the impact of his decision.

''I haven't had a call from the R&A saying we are going to change our policy next year, nor would I really expect one,'' the minister said.

Indeed, Dawson said the organization would not give in to political pressure.

''We've been through over 250 years of existence without getting into political comment, and I don't really intend to break that rule here,'' he said. ''We've got politicians posturing; we've got interest groups attacking the R&A, attacking the Open, and attacking Muirfield.''

While conceding that some changes are likely, Dawson made clear he believes the issue has largely been manufactured by those who don't necessarily have the best interests of the game at heart. He claimed there are very few clubs in Britain that allow only one sex, and that half of those are female-only.

''You can dress it up to be a lot more, if you want,'' Dawson said. ''But on the Saturday morning when the guy gets up or the lady gets up and out of the marital bed, if you like, and goes off and plays golf with his chums and comes back in the afternoon, that's not on any kind of par with racial discrimination or anti-Semitism or any of these things.

''It's just what people kind of do.''

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/r-study-male-only-issue-194723109--golf.html
--------------------

Way too many things are coming up that are rendering me speechless these days. Add this to the list.

Martina

07-17-2013, 09:20 PM

Link (http://mysanfordherald.com/bookmark/19344179/article-Zimmerman-s%20cousin%20claims%20he%20sexually%20molested%20h er%20over%2010-year%20period#.UeXsLmHLBwB.facebook)

In a newly released interview with the Sanford Police Department, a female cousin of George Zimmerman claimed he sexual molested her over a period of 10 years.

In the almost 30-minute interview taken in March with the woman, who was dubbed “witness 9” throughout court proceedings, she detailed five specific instances where she claimed Zimmerman touched her inappropriately throughout the years.

The instances would occur when their families were together, she said, and began when she was 6-years-old and he was 8. The woman told police she and her sister were sent to stay with the Zimmermans while her parents moved from Louisiana to Florida.

“He would reach under the blankets and try to do things,” she said. “I don’t know how I didn’t say anything but I didn’t know any better.”

The cousin told police there was also another victim, but through their conversations the second victim has refused to come forward and also said she would deny any allegations.

Over the years she said Zimmerman would continue to touch her inappropriately at family gatherings.

“Every time that we that we would go up there I could just look at him and he would give me a certain look and I would know if it was going to happen when we got together for family gatherings,” she said. “Cause he just got this look in his eye like he was going to.”

The final instance, said the woman, was when she was 16 and Zimmerman was living in his parent’s home in Lake Mary alone. She had come over to see the house, she said. After Zimmerman began massaging and groping her, she ran out of the home. Zimmerman was 17 at the time.

“I just wanted it to stop,” she said. “I didn’t want to have to tell anyone.”

The cousin did eventually tell her parents, who met with Zimmerman at a restaurant in Lake Mary to confront him. At the meeting, she said, he simply sat down said “I’m sorry,” and left.

Since then, she said, she has not seen him at family functions because the family now caters to her.

The reason it took her so long to speak out about his actions, she told investigators, was because she was afraid no one would believe her.

“He was a different person to me. He was very intimidating,” she said. “And the fact that he made everyone love him and he made everyone laugh and be so happy around him – I knew that if I said anything he would just deny it.”

She came forward to investigators in March because she said she no longer had to fear him.

On June 18 Zimmerman’s attorney Mark O’Mara filed a motion to block the public release of the cousin’s statement contending, “The content of this statement is not relevant to the issues of this case, and it would not be admissible in the State’s case in chief.”

O’Mara also stated releasing the statement would lead to widespread hostile publicity which would impair Zimmerman’s right to fair trial.

Zimmerman is currently out of jail on a $1 million bond after being charged with the second-degree murder of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman shot and killed Martin Feb. 26 at The Retreat at Twin Lakes and claims the shooting was in self-defense after Martin attacked him.

O’Mara also filed a motion Monday stating Judge Kenneth Lester should not have ruled to released the statements, since a motion to disqualify him as judge had been filed. Lester’s order to release the statement and O’Mara’s motion to disqualify him were both issued Friday.

However now that the statement has been publicly disseminated, O’Mara said Zimmerman’s defense team will defend him against the allegations.

“Now that this statement is part of the public record, the defense will vigorously defend Mr. Zimmerman against the allegations,” said O’Mara. “In the next several weeks, there will be reciprocal discovery filed regarding Witness #9’s statement.”

In addition to the accusations that Zimmerman sexual molested the cousin, the woman also told investigators in a separate interview that she was afraid Zimmerman may have shot Martin because he was black. It’s widely known in their family, she said, that the Zimmermans are racists.

“Growing up he and his family said that they don’t like black people if they don’t act like white people,” she said. “They like black people if they act white.”

She also told investigators that during a conversation about then presidential candidate Barack Obama Zimmerman’s mother proudly said she was a racist.

Kobi

07-20-2013, 02:01 AM

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — A Norwegian woman sentenced to 16 months in jail in Dubai for having sex outside marriage after she reported an alleged rape said Friday she decided to speak out in hopes of drawing attention to the risks of outsiders misunderstanding the Islamic-influenced legal codes in this cosmopolitan city.

The case has drawn outrage from rights groups and others in the West since the 24-year-old interior designer was sentenced Wednesday. It also highlights the increasingly frequent tensions between the United Arab Emirates' international atmosphere and its legal system, which is strongly influenced by Islamic traditions in a nation where foreign workers and visitors greatly outnumber locals.

Marte Deborah Dalelv, who worked for an interior design firm in Qatar since 2011, claims she was sexually assaulted by a co-worker in March while she was attending a business meeting in Dubai.

She said she fled to the hotel lobby and asked for the police to be called. The hotel staff asked if she was sure she wanted to involve the police, Dalelv said.

"Of course I want to call the police," she said. "That is the natural reaction where I am from."

Dalelv said she was given a medical examination seeking evidence of the alleged rape and underwent a blood test for alcohol. Such tests are commonly given in the UAE for alleged assaults and in other cases. Alcohol is sold widely across Dubai, but public intoxication can bring charges.

Dalelv was detained for four days after being accused of having sex outside marriage, which is outlawed in the UAE although the law is not actively enforced for tourists as well as hundreds of thousands of Westerners and others on resident visas.

Norwegian diplomats later secured her release and she has been allowed to remain at the Norwegian Seamen's Center in central Dubai. She said her alleged attacker received a 13-month sentence for out-of-wedlock sex and alcohol consumption.

Previous cases in the UAE have raised similar questions, with alleged sexual assault victims facing charges for sex-related offenses. Other legal codes also have been criticized for being at odds with the Western-style openness promoted by Dubai.

In London, a spokesman for the Emirates Center for Human Rights, a group monitoring UAE affairs, said the Dalelv case points out the need for the UAE to expand its legal protections for alleged rape victims.

"We urge authorities to reform the laws governing incidents of rape in the country," said Rori Donaghy, "to ensure women are protected against sexual violence and do not become the targets of prosecution when reporting crimes."

http://news.yahoo.com/norwegian-alleges-rape-fights-dubai-jail-sentence-172218759.html

Kobi

07-20-2013, 09:21 AM

KABUL/DEH SALAH, Afghanistan (Reuters) - One of Afghan President Hamid Karzai's main religious advisers will not overturn a decree issued by clerics in the north reimposing Taliban-style curbs on women, in another sign of returning conservatism as NATO forces leave the country.

Just days after the United States launched a $200 million program to boost the role of women in Afghanistan, a senior member of the country's top religious leaders' panel said he would not intervene over a draconian edict issued by clerics in the Deh Salah region of Baghlan province.

Deh Salah, near Panshir, was a bastion of anti-Taliban sentiment prior to the ousting of the austere Islamist government by the U.S.-backed Northern Alliance in 2001.

But the eight article decree, issued late in June, bars women from leaving home without a male relative, while shutting cosmetic shops on the pretext they were being used for prostitution - an accusation residents and police reject.

"There is no way these shops could have stayed open. Shops are for business, not adultery," Enayatullah Baligh, a member of the top religious panel, the Ulema Council, and an adviser to the president, told Reuters late on Friday.

Residents of Deh Salah described the order as a "fatwa", or religious edict, although only senior clerics in Kabul should issue such a binding religious order.

But underscoring opposition to the edict, a mayor was shot dead by a teenaged shop owner while trying to enforce the order, which also barred women from clinics without a male escort, threatening unspecified "punishments" if they disobeyed.

Afghanistan has one of the world's highest infant mortality rates and more than a decade after the U.S.-backed toppling of the Taliban, it still ranks as one of the worst nations to be born a girl.

Under Taliban rule from 1996 until 2001, women were forced to wear the head-to-toe covering burqa and sometimes had fingers cut off for wearing nail varnish.

The decree, signed by a conservative cleric in the area named Zmarai, contained a warning of holy war if authorities tried to block it: "If officials do react to our demands, we will start a jihad."

There is growing fear among many people in Afghanistan that the withdrawal of NATO-led forces and efforts to reach a political agreement with the Taliban to end the 12-year-old war could undermine hard-won freedoms for women.

"LIKE THE TALIBAN AGAIN"

In the deeply conservative, male-dominated country where religion often holds more sway than legal authority, religious leaders have often been a major barrier to women obtaining the rights granted to them under the constitution.

In Deh Salah, home to about 80,000 people, most of them ethnic Tajiks rather that the majority Pashtuns, the main community from which the Taliban draw support, a cosmetic shop owner named Abdullah stood before his business - now hidden behind plywood sheeting - and said clerics were increasingly flexing their muscles.

"They want to bring back the Taliban days. If they have their way they will take control in this district and make life impossible," said Abdullah.

"We are poor people and they have closed me down. I want the government to take action or we are going to have mullahs running the place like the Taliban again," he said.

Shah Agha Andarabi, a doctor, said the rumor of prostitution and adultery in Deh Salah was without foundation and was being used as an excuse by conservative clerics to crack down on women.

"There is nothing going on in these shops and I guarantee that. There was no proof. They just wanted to close these shops to women," he said.

Deh Salah police commander Colonel Abdul Ahad Nabizada also rejected the claims underpinning the decree, but said the mayor who was shot while closing the shops had been frightened into action by the threat of jihad against him if he was deemed to be blocking the edict.

"Everyone here is Muslim. We haven't seen any behavior like they claim in this small city. There were women coming to get their needs in the market and conservative people were against it," said Nabizada.

U.S. aid officials this week announced a $200 million assistance package for Afghan women, to be matched by other international donors allied with the NATO-led coalition in the country, due to end combat operations by the end of next year.

Human rights and women's groups have accused Karzai's government of backtracking on pledges to protect women's freedoms, highlighted by parliamentary opposition to a presidential decree outlawing violence against women.

The government also appointed a former Taliban official to the country's new human rights body, while criminal laws under consideration in parliament would prevent women and girls testifying against family members accused of abusing them.

http://news.yahoo.com/taliban-style-edict-women-spreads-alarm-afghan-district-054400261.html

Gemme

07-21-2013, 04:55 PM

Allison W

07-21-2013, 06:39 PM

This hits a whole lot of -isms for me.

Rape Victim Sentenced to Jail in Dubai (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/19/marte-deborah-dalelv-sentenced-norwegian-rape-dubai_n_3624867.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D346961)

This kind of thing is one of the better arguments I've heard for cultural imperialism. Sadly, we still have plenty of savagery of our own, in our populations of old white male Republicans and ultraconservative Christian patriarchy holdouts.

Kobi

07-22-2013, 08:47 AM

This hits a whole lot of -isms for me.

Rape Victim Sentenced to Jail in Dubai (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/19/marte-deborah-dalelv-sentenced-norwegian-rape-dubai_n_3624867.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D346961)

Dubai pardons woman at center of rape dispute:

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — A Norwegian woman at the center of a Dubai rape claim dispute said Sunday that officials have dropped her 16-month sentence for having sex outside marriage and she is free to leave the country.

http://news.yahoo.com/dubai-pardons-woman-center-rape-dispute-093407907.html

UofMfan

07-22-2013, 05:31 PM

CNN's Victoria Arbiter: Kate Middleton 'Brilliant' For 'Delivering A Boy' On The 'First Time' (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/22/cnn-victoria-arbiter-kate-middleton-brilliant-royal-boy_n_3636328.html)

This woman is a freaking MORON!

Medusa

07-22-2013, 06:20 PM

Yeah, I was grossed the fuck out this morning with all of the talk on the morning tv shows about Kate Middleton's vagina.

I mean, there was some asshole medical correspondent on Good Morning America (I think it was that show anyway?) pontificating about whether or not Kate Middleton would have a C-section or a vaginal delivery.

Who fucking does that? And who the fuck thinks her method of birth is their business???????

girl_dee

07-22-2013, 06:35 PM

in a book i read about Queen Elizabeth, who, upon giving birth to a boy, was praised for "not letting her country down" as if she had some control over it and rose to the occasion.

i am fascinated and nauseated by the whole Monarchy.

UofMfan

07-31-2013, 05:57 AM

Weiner Communications Director Fires Back At 'Slutbag' Campaign Intern, Shoots Self In Foot (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/30/weiner-slutbag-intern_n_3679770.html)

Corkey

07-31-2013, 03:56 PM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/31/texas-adoption-bill_n_3684687.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037

Now, Texas wants women to have adoption course before abortion. And it's a freeking Dem that proposed it!

AtLast

07-31-2013, 06:13 PM

Weiner Communications Director Fires Back At 'Slutbag' Campaign Intern, Shoots Self In Foot (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/30/weiner-slutbag-intern_n_3679770.html)

Me either- then there was Weiner's tantrum about the trust question.

I am sick of this whole thing and the media continuing to give that narcissist all the air time. Going to turn off MSNBC shows if they launch into coverage of him as well.

CherylNYC

08-01-2013, 07:57 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/opinion/krugman-sex-money-and-gravitas.html?emc=edit_tnt_20130801&tntemail0=y

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Can a woman effectively run the Federal Reserve? That shouldn’t even be a question. And Janet Yellen, the vice chairwoman of the Fed’s Board of Governors, isn’t just up to the job; by any objective standard, she’s the best-qualified person in America to take over when Ben Bernanke steps down as chairman.

Yet there are not one but two sexist campaigns under way against Ms. Yellen. One is a whisper campaign whose sexism is implicit, while the other involves raw misogyny. And both campaigns manage to combine sexism with very bad economic analysis.

Let’s start with the more extreme, open campaign. Last week, The New York Sun published an editorial attacking Ms. Yellen titled “The Female Dollar.” The editorial took it for granted that the Fed has been following disastrously inflationary monetary policies for years, even though actual inflation is at a 50-year low. And it warned that things would get even worse if the dollar were to become merely “gender-backed.” I am not making this up.

True, The Sun is a marginal publication, with strong gold-bug tendencies, and nobody would pay much attention if the rest of the right had ignored or distanced itself from that editorial. In fact, however, The Wall Street Journal immediately followed up with its own editorial along the same lines, in the course of which it approvingly quoted The Sun piece, female dollar and all.

The other campaign against Ms. Yellen has been subtler, involving repeated suggestions — almost always off the record — that she lacks the “gravitas” to lead the Fed. What does that mean? Well, suppose we were talking about a man with Ms. Yellen’s credentials: distinguished academic work, leader of the Council of Economic Advisers, six years as president of the San Francisco Fed, a record of working effectively with colleagues at the Board of Governors. Would anyone suggest that a man with those credentials was somehow unqualified for office?

Sorry, but it’s hard to escape the conclusion that gravitas, in this context, mainly means possessing a Y chromosome.

Both anti-Yellen campaigns, then, involve unmistakable sexism, and should be condemned for that reason. As it happens, however, both campaigns have another problem, too: They’re based on bad economic analysis.

In the case of the “female dollar” types, the wrongheadedness of the economics is as raw and obvious as the sexism. The people shouting that the Fed is “debasing the dollar” have been warning of runaway inflation any day now for almost five years, and they have been wrong every step of the way. Worse, they have shown no willingness to admit having been wrong, let alone to revise their views in the face of experience. They are, in short, the last people in the world you should listen to when it comes to monetary policy.

The wrongheadedness of the gravitas crowd, like its sexism, is subtler. But to the extent that having gravitas means something other than being male, it means being what I like to call a Very Serious Person — the kind of person who talks a lot about the need to make tough decisions, which somehow always involves demanding sacrifices on the part of ordinary families while treating the wealthy with kid gloves. And here’s the thing: The Very Serious People have been almost as consistently wrong, although not as spectacularly, as the inflation hysterics.

This has been obviously true in the case of budget policy, where the Serious People hijacked the national conversation, shifting it away from job creation to deficits, on the grounds that we were facing an imminent fiscal crisis — which somehow keeps not coming.

But it has also been true for monetary policy. The Wall Street Journal (news department, not editorial) recently surveyed the forecasting records of top policy makers at the Fed, whom it divided into “hawks” (officials who keep warning that the Fed is doing too much to fight unemployment) and “doves” (who warn that it’s doing too little). It found that the doves made consistently better forecasts, with the best forecaster of all being the most prominent of the doves — Janet Yellen.

The point is that while the gravitas types like to think of themselves as serious men (and I do mean men) who are willing to do what needs to be done, recent history suggests that they’re actually men who are eager to prove their seriousness by doing what doesn’t need to be done, at the public’s expense.

Also, there was a time not along ago when almost everyone in the gravitas crowd, if asked who possessed that mystical quality in its purest form, would surely have answered “Alan Greenspan.” How well did that turn out?

So is Janet Yellen the only possible candidate to be the next leader of the Fed? Of course not. But the case for someone else should be made on the merits — and, so far, that hasn’t been what’s happening.

Kobi

08-08-2013, 04:29 PM

ROME (Reuters) - Italy's government on Thursday proposed emergency measures to combat violence against women after national outrage over a spate of attacks including the burning alive of a teenager by a jealous boyfriend.

Prime Minister Enrico Letta told reporters he was "very proud" of the emergency decree, which toughens penalties and increases protection for victims. It must be approved by both houses of parliament to become law.

Under the decree, after a women has reported an attack she can no longer ask for the case to be dropped, something that often happens as a result of intimidation.

Among other changes, women victims will be continually informed of developments in their case, such as when their attacker's sentence has expired or when he is released from custody.

Cases of violence against women are to be given priority in Italy's notoriously slow justice system and victims will be guaranteed a state lawyer regardless of their income.

"We have not only sent out a signal, we have made radical changes," Letta said.

The decree increases current sentences by a third if violence against a woman is carried out in the presence of a minor, if the victim is pregnant or the perpetrator is a husband, ex-husband or boyfriend.

If the victim is an illegal immigrant she will be entitled to a resident's permit on humanitarian grounds.

No official statistics exist on the number of murders of women in Italy, but Telefono Rosa, a domestic violence support group, said that last year 124 women were killed by men because of their gender, most by current or former partners.

A 2012 United Nations report on violence against women in Italy said more than 90 percent of women who suffered rape or abuse did not report it, and though murders of men by men had fallen, the number of women killed by men had increased.

In May 16-year-old Fabiana Luzzi was burned alive by her jealous 17-year-old boyfriend in southern Italy. The lower house of parliament observed a minute's silence in her memory.

Italy ranked 80th out of 135 countries in the World Economic Forum's 2012 Gender Gap Report, one of the lowest ratings in Europe. The report said it had low wage equality and low numbers of women in senior positions.

http://news.yahoo.com/italy-proposes-measures-combat-violence-against-women-153506443.html

------------------------------------------------

I am speechless again. Only a man could think these changes were "radical" and be proud of them. SMH.

Soon

08-09-2013, 10:06 AM

The Ghost Rapes of Bolivia (http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/the-ghost-rapes-of-bolivia-000300-v20n8?Contentpage=-1)

Cin

08-10-2013, 09:45 AM

Louisiana parish claims incarcerated 14-year-old consented to be raped by a corrections officer

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/07/louisiana_parish_claims_incarcerated_14_year_old_c onsented_to_be_raped_by_her_corrections_officer/

Cin

08-14-2013, 11:58 AM

Raped in Virginia? Prepare to Be Doubted—Until Recently Virginia Police Policy Was to "Assume All Rape Victims Are Lying"
Until last week, Norfolk, VA classified all sexual assault claims as “unfounded” by default

http://www.alternet.org/files/styles/story_image/public/story_images/virgina_rape.png
August 14, 2013 |

The police department in Norfolk, Virginia, was forced to evaluate its sexual assault policy last week following a rape case in which officers did not believe a victim’s story and closed her file while her attacker – a serial rapist - was still on the loose.

According to Think Progress, the 22-year-old rape victim, who reported the sexual assault immediately after her attack, was told by police, “If we find out that you’re lying, this will be a felony charge”.

During the interrogation, the woman was subject to repeated harassment and intimidation by detectives who continuously doubted that the young woman was telling the truth, saying things like:

“You’re telling us a different story than you told…the other detectives. This only happened hours ago. Why can’t you remember?” as reported by PilotOnline.

The woman ended the interview out of frustration after she was fed up with being interrogated. Eventually, police were able to arrest and charge her attacker after he tried to attack three more women near his neighborhood in Virginia Beach.

In response to the mistreatment by the department of the women’s initial allegations, Norfolk police chief Mike Goldsmith apologized and announced there would be a change to police policy toward sexual assault victims, so that officers must now assume rape victims are telling the truth. Officers would also be trained in how to handle victims of rape and undergo training for post-traumatic stress disorder.

The case illustrates a prime example of why so many rape cases go unreported. Classifying rape as “unfounded” essentially means that police do not believe it happened which in turn causes women to feel reluctant about reporting sexual assault cases because of the stigmatization. This can have far-reaching consequences for the victim, particularly in light of the fact that only two to eight per cent of reported rape cases are actually false, according to the National Centre for Prosecution of Violence Against Women.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/rape-victims-virginia-assumed-be-lying

i want to add that it is not true that two to eight percent of reported rape cases are actually false. They are listed as unfounded not false. And unfounded is a far cry from false.

Bruce Gross of the Forensic Examiner is quoted as saying:
"This statistic (unfounded rape) is almost meaningless, as many of the jurisdictions from which the FBI collects data on crime use different definitions of, or criteria for, "unfounded." That is, a report of rape might be classified as unfounded (rather than as forcible rape) if the alleged victim did not try to fight off the suspect, if the alleged perpetrator did not use physical force or a weapon of some sort, if the alleged victim did not sustain any physical injuries, or if the alleged victim and the accused had a prior sexual relationship. Similarly, a report might be deemed unfounded if there is no physical evidence or too many inconsistencies between the accuser's statement and what evidence does exist. As such, although some unfounded cases of rape may be false or fabricated, not all unfounded cases are false."

And of course let us not forget that ever popular with academia euphemism, nonconsensual sex, i'm sure that adds to that percentage of reported rape that is classified as unfounded.

Cin

08-15-2013, 10:21 AM

7 Shocking Ways Colleges Have Trivialized RapeUniversities are some of the worst offenders when it comes to undermining the problem of rape and violence against women.

Apparently “Rape is like football.”

When Annie E. Clark, a student at the University of North Carolina, tried to report her rape, the administrator reportedly said to her, "Well... rape is like football, if you look back on the game, and you're the quarterback, Annie... is there anything you would have done differently?"

http://http://www.alternet.org/gender/7-shocking-ways-colleges-have-trivialized-rape

DapperButch

08-22-2013, 05:46 AM

Don't miss the video

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/20/slanegirl-photo-goes-viral_n_3785741.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

Cin

08-23-2013, 11:03 PM

http://media-cache-ec3.pinimg.com/550x/bf/27/54/bf2754f6673eb3a37639b736b2cda20f.jpg

Raped and Impregnated at 14, Girl Must Now Share Parental Rights with Her Attacker
Rapist's paternity rights locks victim into 16-year relationship with him.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/raped-and-impregnated-14-girl-must-now-share-parental-rights-her-attacker

BOSTON (CN) - A rape victim sued Massachusetts to stop it from subjecting her to "a court-ordered 16-year unwanted relationship with her attacker" by giving him paternity rights over the child born from the rape.

H.T., of Norwood, Mass., sued the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in Federal Court.

"The plaintiff, a rape victim in a state criminal matter, became pregnant in 2009 at age 14 as a result of the crime and gave birth to her attacker's child," the lawsuit states.

"The defendant in the state criminal proceeding, age 20 at the time of the impregnation, was convicted of rape in 2011 and was sentenced to 16 years probation. Conditions of probation include an order that he initiate proceedings in family court and comply with that court's orders until the child reaches adulthood. The plaintiff here seeks to enjoin enforcement of so much of the state court's order as violates her federal rights by binding her to an unwanted 16-year legal relationship with her rapist."

H.T., who recently graduated from high school, says the order forces her to participate in unwanted court proceedings for 16 years with the man who raped her, and to spend money on legal fees.

"Melendez pleaded guilty to rape in September, 2011 (Norfolk Criminal Docket No . CR200900499) and was sentenced to probation for 16 years. As a condition of probation, Melendez was ordered to initiate proceedings in family court, declare paternity as to the child born of his crime, (paternity had already been determined in the criminal case, via DNA testing), and comply with the family court's orders throughout the probationary period. The plaintiff and her mother were adamantly opposed to participation in family court proceedings and repeatedly expressed this sentiment to state officials." (Parentheses in complaint).

In June 2012, H.T. found out that Melendez was seeking visitation rights with the child.

After a family court judge ordered Melendez to pay $110 a week in child support, he Melendez asked for visitation rights, and offered to withdraw his request in exchange for not having to pay child support, according to the lawsuit.

"Melendez had no prior contact with the child and had expressed no interest in the child, but no Massachusetts law forbids the enforcement of visitation rights by a biological father who causes a child's birth through the crime of rape," the complaint states.

The sentencing judge in the state criminal court denied H.T.'s request to order Melendez to pay criminal restitution instead of child support, and release her from any legal proceedings involving him.

Cin

08-27-2013, 03:35 PM

Julian Assange Says Being Anti-Choice Represents ‘Non-Violence.’ Non-Violent for Whom?

by Lauren Rankin

During a recent online Q&A session with Campus Reform, Julian Assange, founder of the government secret-leaking group WikiLeaks, admitted he’s a “big admirer” of former Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) and his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), for what he called “their very principled positions.” He spoke of their commitment to “non-violence,” highlighting the various ways in which he sees that commitment reflected in their political stances, including opposing abortion.

“The position of the libertarian Republican—or a better description, right—coming from a principle of non-violence which is the American libertarian tradition. That produces interesting results,” said Assange. “So, non-violence: well, don’t go and invade a foreign country. Non-violence: don’t force people at the barrel of a gun to serve in the U.S. Army. Non-violence: doesn’t extort taxes from people to the federal Government with a policeman. Similarly, other aspects of non-violence in relation to abortion that they hold.”

He went on to say, “I think some of these positions that are held by Rand Paul, while I can see how they come from the same underlying Libertarian principle, I think the world is often more complex and by taking a no-doubt principled, but sometimes simplistic position, you end up undermining the principle.”

While he seems to suggest there is a contradiction with the libertarian movement and the politics of some libertarians, it is unclear, at least to me, how opposition to abortion is grounded in a commitment to non-violence. Non-violent for whom, exactly?

According to the National Abortion Federation, there have been 6,461 reported incidents of violence against abortion providers since 1977, including eight murders and 17 attempted murders. Abortion providers and clinics have faced numerous bombings, cases of arson, butyric acid attacks, death threats, kidnappings, and more, all from opponents of abortion rights. In 2009, Dr. George Tiller was shot and killed while at church with his family. His convicted killer, Scott Roeder, is heralded as a “hero” in some anti-choice circles.

In 1965, eight years before Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in the United States, illegal abortion accounted for 17 percent of all deaths attributed to pregnancy and childbirth. And today, around the globe—mostly in the developing world—at least 47,000 women die from unsafe abortions each year (roughly 13 percent of maternal deaths worldwide) and many times that number suffer serious and sometimes lifelong health consequences.

It is impossible to quantify how many people in the United States avoid accessing safe and legal abortion care because of fear of harassment and intimidation, but with 5,165 abortion clinics reporting some form of disruption or harassment in 2011 alone, it’s safe to assume that it plays at least a small role; people often avoid accessing the basic reproductive health care to which they have a constitutional right because of virulent hostility from abortion opponents.

What’s that about anti-abortion views being non-violent again?

In a political climate so openly hostile and threatening to abortion rights, one in which states have enacted 43 abortion restrictions in the first six months of 2013 alone, where 37 of the 42 abortion clinics in Texas will be forced to close because of an omnibus anti-abortion bill, where serious legal threats to Roe v. Wade abound every day, women’s lives are literally at risk.

So why are men like Assange essentially telling women to get over the abortion issue and praise Ron and Rand Paul anyway? It’s simple: privilege.

While these white, cisgender men may be able to pick and choose which political positions they like from the Pauls, marginalized groups do not have that luxury. They are essentially asking women and people of color to praise politicians who disdain and combat their very existence. This is not petty partisanship; it is a fundamental lack of respect for who we are as people. A simple look at their political records proves this.

In 2011, Ron Paul sponsored the Sanctity of Life Act, which would define life as beginning at the moment of conception. He has stated that he favors abortion as an option only if a woman is a victim of an “honest rape.” He is listed as the author of some controversial newsletters from the 1980s that featured racism and other types of bigotry. In 1999, he voted yes on HR 2587, a bill that would have banned adoption for gay couples in Washington, D.C. He has run ads that vehemently state his opposition to granting amnesty to undocumented immigrants and has been critical of current efforts to overhaul the nation’s immigration system.

As RH Reality Check‘s Adele M. Stan has pointed out in the past, Rand Paul opposes the 1964 Civil Rights Act because he believes it infringes on private establishments’ rights to refuse service to whomever they deem unfit. Earlier this year, he introduced a “personhood” bill that would give legal recognition to fertilized eggs and effectively outlaw safe abortion care in the United States. He has linked same-sex marriage to bestiality and opposed a bill that would ban workplace discrimination against LGBTQ people in the United States. He publicly opposed the creation of an Islamic community center at Ground Zero and has been accused of running anti-Muslim attack ads.

If, as Assange suggested, “pro-life” libertarians like Rand Paul are the “only hope” for U.S. electoral politics, that doesn’t bode well for women, people of color, or LGBTQ individuals. These aren’t small bumps-in-the-road in an otherwise spotless political record; this is evidence of general disdain for and bigotry against women, people of color, LGBTQ communities, and other marginalized groups. Yet civil libertarians expect us to put aside our partisan squabbles to cheer for these men? Please.

It’s easy for Julian Assange to endorse Rand Paul as “non-violent” when he doesn’t belong to the marginalized groups against which the younger Paul perpetuates violent oppression. Likewise, it’s easy for journalists like Salon‘s David Sirota to belittle reproductive and civil rights activists for their opposition to Paul when his rights aren’t on the line. And it’s easy for The Guardian‘s Glenn Greenwald to say that the elder Paul is “willing to advocate views that Americans urgently need to hear,” when the views of which Ron Paul speaks so often come at the expense of women and people of color.

For those of us on the front lines of the fight for reproductive rights, many of us women, it is both demoralizing and sexist to hear these men scold us for not embracing Ron and Rand Paul more fully. As people who will never need to access abortion care, it is telling that they aren’t more willing to check their privilege and listen to the individuals whose health care and basic reproductive rights are eroding before our very eyes. It is both offensive and absurd to ask that women put concern for something as fundamental as their own bodily autonomy aside in order to commend the very men working to erode it. And it is the embodiment of hypocrisy that Julian Assange, a so-called champion against governmental overreach, lobbies for an end to imperialistic foreign policies while supporting politicians who participate in the occupation of women’s bodies.

These men have the privilege of never having to worry firsthand about accessing abortion care or being disenfranchised because of their skin color. As men who are often heralded as progressive heroes, one would think that they would not only understand and acknowledge their privilege, but advocate for political candidates who embrace women’s and civil rights, in addition to civil liberties and anti-imperialism.

But as we’ve unfortunately witnessed, they largely don’t. They and other civil libertarians like them eulogize the duo for their opposition to drone strikes but remain conveniently silent on their virulent disdain for women, people of color, and LGBTQ people. Yes, it is possible to commend them on certain issues, even if they’re terrible on others. But it seems woefully hypocritical to support politicians who undermine the rights and liberties of people who don’t look like you.

When Julian Assange heaped praise on Ron and Rand Paul while equating abortion with violence, he simply reified what many of us already knew: Too often, civil libertarians like Assange prioritize other issues ahead of our own basic human rights, and then condemn us for being petty and partisan.

If you champion men like Ron and Rand Paul for their anti-imperialism, but casually disregard their bigotry, it isn’t women’s and civil rights activists who are being politically myopic. It’s you.

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/08/27/julian-assange-says-being-anti-choice-represents-non-violence-non-violent-for-whom/

Kobi

08-29-2013, 07:22 AM

Montana judge apologized but said he had no plans to resign after his remarks about a 14-year-old rape victim – and the 30-day jail sentence he handed the perpetrator – sparked outrage.

The case involves a 54-year-old former teacher who raped the teen, who later committed suicide.

District Judge G. Todd Baugh said Wednesday he "deserved to be chastised" for his comments about the victim, who he had said was "older than her chronological age" and had as much control of the situation as the Billings Senior High School teacher who was in a sexual relationship with her.

Baugh, 71, said he stood by his decision Monday to sentence the former teacher, Stacey Rambold, to 15 years in prison, with all of but 31 days of that term suspended. He gave Rambold credit for one day already served.

Baugh, 71, wrote an apology Wednesday in a letter to the editor to the Billings Gazette. He said his comments were demeaning of all women and not reflective of his beliefs.

The judge later told reporters he was "fumbling around" in court trying to explain his sentence and "made some really stupid remarks."

"I don't know how to pass that off. I'm saying I'm sorry and it's not who I am," Baugh said. "I deserve to be chastised. I apologize for that."

Protests Planned
Protesters planned a Thursday afternoon rally outside the Yellowstone County Courthouse to demand that Baugh resign. Organizer Sheena Rice said it's important for the community to show it is not going to stand for victim blaming.

"I'm glad he apologized, but he should have known better as a judge," Rice said. "The fact that he said it makes me think he still believes it."

If Baugh doesn't resign, protesters will try to defeat him in an election in 2014, Rice said.

Baugh was first elected to the bench in 1984 and has been re-elected every six years since then without an opponent. He said he has not decided whether to run again in 2014.

Rambold was charged in October 2008 with three counts of sexual intercourse without consent after authorities alleged he had an ongoing sexual relationship with Cherice Moralez, starting the previous year when she was 14. Moralez killed herself in 2010 at age 16 while the case was pending.

Yellowstone County officials agreed to defer Rambold's prosecution for three years and dismiss the charges if he completed a sexual offender treatment program. The case was revived in December after prosecutors learned Rambold, 54, was kicked out of the program for having unsupervised visits with minors who were family members and not telling counselors he was having a sexual relationship with a woman.

"She wasn't even old enough to get a driver's license. But Judge Baugh, who never met our daughter, justified the paltry sentence saying she was older than her chronological age," the girl's mother, Auleia Hanlon, said in a statement to the Gazette after Monday's sentencing.

"I guess somehow it makes a rape more acceptable if you blame the victim," said Hanlon, "even if she was only 14."

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20729497,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+people%2Fheadlines+%28PEOPLE. com%3A+Top+Headlines%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

Kobi

08-29-2013, 08:43 AM

For years, women have had to pay higher health care premiums because insurance companies have used gender rating — a practice that, as of 2014, will be outlawed by the Affordable Care Act. The provision is one of the least controversial of the health care overhaul. But "Fox & Friends" still couldn't resist debating the issue Tuesday in a gender-baiting exchange (see video below) that's caused a controversy of its own.

“We only have the prostate,” noted Fox News medical contributor Dr. David Samadi, who fanned the flames by arguing that women actually should pay more than men. "Women have the breasts, they have the ovaries, they have the uterus, they get checked in every part."

It was just one of several surreal points raised by Samadi, who is a professor at Hofstra University and chairman of the Urology Department at New York's Lenox Hill Hospital.

Look, it's not bias, I'm not saying this as a man," he said. "They go through a lot of preventive screenings, they give birth, they have the whole mammogram, the Pap smear. Guys, we don't like to go to doctors, right? Seventy percent of health care decisions are made by women. In my own practice, I see it's the women who bring the guys, who say, 'Go get screened.' Otherwise, we would never go."

Host Gretchen Carlson couldn't help jumping in to note that those facts alone should actually earn women a discount (which got her a blank look from Samadi). She looked alternately amused and outraged by every one of the doctor's points, and responded to Samadi's argument that "women live longer" with a sarcastic "Let's just kill 'em off!"

Online criticism of Samadi has been swift, with Twitter commenters calling him an "idiot," "sexist," "stupid," "ridiculous," a "fool," and an "'expert.'"

Slate's Amanda Marcotte noted, "This newfound enthusiasm for strict economic fairness between men and women sadly did not lead Fox to also advocate that men stop getting paid more than women for their work." Marcotte also took Samadi to task for his vague response to Carlson's suggestion that maternity costs be shared since a pregnancy is created with two people, to which he said, "Not always."

"Was he suggesting that the ridiculously small number of pregnancies created in single or lesbian women by sperm donors was justification enough to spare men the responsibility of sharing childbirth costs?" Marcotte asked.

Freak Out Nation took the doctor to task for that sort of "mansplaining," countering his "Not always" comment with "Yes Dr. Dummy, always."

Wonkette offered pitch-perfect Samadi translations, with "Why are women so greedy, with their breast and ovarian cancer costing men all this money?" and "Man, women love going to the doctor like they love buying SHOES, amirite?"

There was a quick response from the National Women’s Law Center, which recently did an in-depth study of gender rating among insurers. "We did the research and the fact is that women are charged more for health coverage simply because they are women," the center noted on its website. "Yes, women access more preventive services, as the commentators point out. But shouldn't all of us get the preventive care we need to get and stay healthy? Why should women be discriminated against for simply going to the doctor?"

Daily Kos was over it. "I am not going to even list off the reasons why this statement made by an actual as-seen-on-teevee-medical-doctor-hi-doctor-nick-expert-guy is stupid, because it does not deserve even that much," read the post.

"Listen, Dr. Samadi, this isn't a kindergarten counting lesson — body parts don't operate under the 'three is greater than one' rule here," wrote Marie Claire blogger Maura Brannigan. "The fight for women's health and empowerment doesn't start in Congress, and it definitely doesn't start in the Whole House — instead, it starts with men like Samadi, who refuse to view women as equal partners, yet alone equal, insurance-deserving citizens."

http://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/fox-s-sexist-comments-on-women-s-healthcare-spark-outrage-172914267.html

Kobi

09-01-2013, 07:39 AM

WASHINGTON (AP) — A midshipman testified Wednesday that she didn’t remember being sexually assaulted by three former Navy football players after a night of heavy drinking, but she said one of the men told her she had sex with him and another accused player.

The woman, who is now a senior at the U.S. Naval Academy, testified for more than two hours at the Washington Navy Yard at a hearing to determine whether the three midshipmen will face court-martial. She described a night of drinking in her room at the academy with a friend before going to the toga-themed party in April 2012 at an off-campus house in Annapolis, Md.

At the crowded party, which took place in what was known as ‘‘the football house’’ because of its association to the team, the woman said she felt ‘‘overwhelmed’’ and ‘‘dizzy’’ from drinking too much.

‘‘I felt like I was going to pass out,’’ she said, noting that she leaned against structural beams in the basement to keep from falling over.

The woman said she spent the night at the house and woke up the next morning without her phone or purse.

‘‘I was really confused, and I noticed my back was really sore,’’ she said.

She also testified that she had consensual sex that Sunday morning with a student at the house who has not been charged.

The woman described feeling troubled by not remembering what happened and asked Tate, who had initially invited her to the party, to come to her room to see what he knew.

The woman also noticed ‘‘lewd comments’’ on Twitter that seemed directed at her and tagged to people she had slept with in the past. She also testified that rumors had spread rapidly that she had had sex with multiple partners at the party.

When Tate came to her room, she testified that he joked about her not remembering and suggested he refresh her memory.

‘‘He told me that we did have sex,’’ she said.

The woman also said she asked Tate if she had had sex with Graham.

‘‘He said yes, and then I was like, ‘I don’t want to hear anymore,'’’ she said.

The woman also described being reluctant to seek an investigation at first.

‘‘Mainly, I was scared,’’ she said. ‘‘I didn’t want to anyone else to get in trouble.’’

She also said she feared her mother would find out and force her to leave the academy.

The woman said she decided to cooperate after hearing rumors that other people, specifically underclassmen, could be blamed.

Her cooperation with Navy investigators included wiretaps.

On cross-examination, Andrew Weinstein, Bush’s attorney, noted that the woman had had a previous sexual relationship with Bush. When asked by Weinstein whether she had ever considered him capable of rape, she said, ‘‘I don’t think that he would.’’

She also said, ‘‘He wasn’t mean to me by any means,’’ during their previous sexual relationship.

The female midshipman also testified that she didn’t remember whether she had sex with Bush that night. Weinstein noted that it was Bush who told her he had told Navy investigators that the two had had sex.

Testimony resumes today.

Kobi

09-02-2013, 08:32 PM

NEW DELHI (AP) — A series of recent high-profile gang rape cases in India has ignited a debate: Are such crimes on the rise, or is it simply that more attention is being paid to a problem long hidden within families and villages? The answer, experts say, is both.

Modernization is fueling a crisis of sexual assault in India, with increasingly independent women now working in factories and offices and stepping beyond the subservient roles to which they had traditionally been relegated. They are also more likely than their mothers and grandmothers were to report rapes, and more likely to encounter male strangers in public.

"We never used to see so many cases of gang rape, and so many involving groups of young, unemployed men," said Supreme Court lawyer Kirti Singh, who specializes in women's issues.

While there are no reliable statistics on gang rapes, experts say the trend, along with the growing sense of insecurity it has brought for women, led to recent outbursts of public anger over the long-ignored epidemic of violence against women.

The silence broke in December, when a New Delhi student was gang-raped on a bus in a particularly vicious attack from which she died two weeks later. A juvenile court on Saturday handed down the first conviction in the case, sending a teenager to a reform home for three years for rape and murder.

The sentence, the maximum a juvenile can face, was widely denounced as too lenient, and the girl's parents vowed to appeal. The other suspects in the case are being tried as adults and could face execution if convicted.

While attacks on women occur constantly across India, often within the home, the brutality and public nature of the New Delhi case left many shocked and shamed. Thousands took to the streets in the capital to express their outrage.

The government, pledging to crack down, created fast-track courts for rape cases, doubled prison terms for rape and criminalized voyeurism, stalking, acid attacks and the trafficking of women.

The Tourism Ministry launched a nationwide "I Respect Women" campaign after a Swiss bicyclist was gang-raped in March in central India and an American woman was gang-raped two months later in the northern resort town of Manali.

Yet another high-profile gang rape last month, against a photojournalist on assignment in Mumbai, renewed public fury and sent the media into 24-7 coverage marked by daily front page headlines and talk shows debating how to make India safe for women.

"There is very clearly a class dimension" that is compounding the sudden outrage, women's rights lawyer Flavia Agnes said.

All five of the accused in the Mumbai attack had little to no education, and three had previously been arrested for theft, Mumbai police said. They lived in the slums near the abandoned textile mill where the woman was raped.

In both the Mumbai and the Delhi cases, "middle-class people identified with these young girls, aspiring professionals, trying to make their mark in a competitive world," said Sudha Sundararaman, an activist with the All India Democratic Women's Association.

Experts say the rapid growth of India's cities and the yawning gulf between rich and poor are exacerbating the problem, with young men struggling to prove their traditional dominance in a changing world.

"These are young men in the cities, without prospects, without hope. They feel rage against those who are perceived to have it," sociologist Sudhir Kakar said.

Cultural stigmas, police apathy and judicial incompetence have long made it difficult for women to even report rapes.

But if modernization is changing the risks women face, it is also giving them the ability to speak up. In the first three months after the December bus rape, the number of rapes reported in the city more than doubled to 359, from the 143 reported in January-March of 2012.

Those numbers, in a city of almost 17 million people, are still seen by experts as far below the actual number of attacks, but the jarring increase in just one year appeared to signal a significant change.

"The biggest change is that women in the middle classes are reporting crimes to police," Kakar said. They are fed up with the landscape of sexual harassment and fear, with the constant barrage of lewd comments and even groping — locally known as "eve-teasing" — and with being told they should stay indoors at night.

"Thirty years ago, even uttering the word 'rape' was almost taboo. That is changing," said Ranjana Kumari, a women's activist with the Center for Social Research. "There are so many cases, each more gruesome than the other, and people have lost patience, especially when no justice is served."

The photojournalist attacked last month stunned the nation by telling local media that "rape is not the end of life" — a groundbreaking statement given that many rape victims are still often dismissed as defiled. Many are shunned by their families, fired from jobs or driven from their home villages. As a result, most rape victims are still thought to remain silent.

"What's wrong with the system?" Supreme Court Justices R.M. Lodha and Madan B. Lokur said in a statement last week, while hearing a petition from the father of a 15-year-old girl gang-raped by three men in 2012, according to Indian media. The girl, who is a dalit, member of the outcast community once known as untouchables, has since been barred from her school in north India, and her mother was killed for refusing to withdraw a police complaint about the crime, according to Press Trust of India.

The court lambasted India's poor record of conviction in rape cases, saying "Why are 90 percent of rape cases ending in acquittals? The situation is going from bad to worse."

http://news.yahoo.com/india-fury-over-gang-rapes-sign-changing-nation-102555774.html

Soon

09-08-2013, 11:17 AM

Company in Texas Fails Hard with Tailgate Decal of Bound Woman (http://jezebel.com/company-in-texas-fails-hard-with-tailgate-decal-of-boun-1272772837)

A marketing and advertising company in Waco, Tex. really wanted to drum up some new business, you know, make a splash. Most likely, there was a strategy meeting at which Hornet Signs’ owner, Brad Kolb, petitioned his crack creative team for some ideas. Maybe someone said tentatively, “We should all wear funny hats, like, everywhere,” but that idea was roundly rejected. Maybe some other someone then said, “Let’s use the INTERNET to, you know, make gifs of cats holding up our signs.” No, no — Hornet Signs needed to show the public how realistic its signs are, how they have depth, contour. Hornet needed to not just interest or entertain people — the company needed to alarm them, to spread panic across the Texas highways, which is how the “woman bounded in the bed of a truck” pickup truck tailgate decal was born.

The decal has attracted nothing but negative attention since local media got wind of it earlier in the week, though Kolb insisted to KWTX, “I wasn't expecting the reactions we got, nor do we condone this by any means. It was more or less something we put out there to see who noticed it.” Condone what, exactly? Violence against women? Kidnap? Rape? Wait, so you’re saying that this tailgate decal — that an employee had to slap on a truck and drive around with to “gauge how realistic [Hornet Signs’] decals are” — isn’t somehow an ad encouraging people to go forth, kidnap, and be prosperous? What you’re really saying, then, is that Kolb is just a sensationalistic asshole who mistakenly believes an image like the one on his company’s tailgate decals is provocative when, really, it’s just a graphic testament to the casual, callous misogyny that tries to assert some kind of ownership over women’s bodies.

By all accounts, Kolb has provoked exactly the reaction he no doubt was looking for: people have noticed, word is spreading, and the police have yet to get involved, although some alarmed Waco citizens have called the authorities (manufactured panic, which, notes The Frisky’s Julie Gerstein, said authorities must LOVE). The decal hit the streets a month ago, and, despite the ire on Hornet Signs’ Facebook page, Kolb claims that the bound-woman decal has done precisely what he wanted it to do, i.e. increase orders for more truck stickers.

That’s how utterly mundane this all is — quite likely, Kolb doesn’t really believe he or the people at his company did a horribly misogynistic thing. They’re just trying to grab some attention so they can peddle some stickers, even if their stunt has been done before, even if the public hates them for it. The stunt’s mundanity, though, is what makes this kind of thing so insidious. This decal is an act of visual violence, evidence of a misogyny that has blossomed like a cancer in someone’s worldview, eroding all empathy to the point where the image of a woman bound in the bed of a truck elicits only dumb snickers of, “Heh, heh — I’ll bet this’ll sell a whole mess of [insert stupid, useless thing that no one wants].”

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18zj1v7yxxpy7jpg/ku-bigpic.jpg

Kobi

09-10-2013, 05:50 AM

LONDON (AP) — About 1 in 10 men in some parts of Asia admitted raping a woman who was not their partner, according to the first large studies of rape and sexual violence. When their wife or girlfriend was included, that figure rose to about a quarter.

International researchers said their startling findings should change perceptions about how common violence against women is and prompt major campaigns to prevent it. Still, the results were based on a survey of only six Asian countries and the authors said it was uncertain what rates were like elsewhere in the region and beyond. They said engrained sexist attitudes contributed, but that other factors like poverty or being emotionally and physically abused as children were major risk factors for men's violent behavior.

A previous report from the World Health Organization found one-third of women worldwide say they have been victims of domestic or sexual violence.

"It's clear violence against women is far more widespread in the general population than we thought," said Rachel Jewkes of South Africa's Medical Research Council, who led the two studies. The research was paid for by several United Nations agencies and Australia, Britain, Norway and Sweden. The papers were published online Tuesday in the journal, Lancet Global Health.

In the new research, male interviewers surveyed more than 10,000 men in Bangladesh, China, Cambodia, Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Papua New Guinea. The word "rape" was not used in the questions, but the men were asked if they had ever forced a woman to have sex when she wasn't willing or if they had ever forced sex on someone who was too drunk or drugged to consent.

In most places, scientists concluded between 6 to 8 percent of men raped a woman who wasn't their partner. When they included wives and girlfriends, the figures were mostly between 30 to 57 percent. The lowest rates were in Bangladesh and Indonesia and the highest were in Papa New Guinea. Previous studies of rape have been done in South Africa, where nearly 40 percent of men are believed to have raped a woman.

Of those who acknowledged forcing a woman to have sex, more than 70 percent of men said it was because of "sexual entitlement." Nearly 60 percent said they were bored or wanted to have fun while about 40 percent said it was because they were angry or wanted to punish the woman. Only about half of the men said they felt guilty and 23 percent had been imprisoned for a rape.

"The problem is shocking but anyplace we have looked, we see partner violence, victimization and sexual violence," said Michele Decker, an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who co-wrote an accompanying commentary. "Rape doesn't just involve someone with a gun to a woman's head," she said. "People tend to think of rape as something someone else would do."

"It's not enough to focus on services for women," said Charlotte Watts, head of the Gender, Violence and Health Centre at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who was not part of the study. She said some programs in Africa based on challenging traditional ideas of masculinity are proving successful.

"It may be that the culture where they grew up condones violence, but it's not impossible to change that," she said

http://news.yahoo.com/study-1-10-men-parts-asia-raped-062455382.html

Cin

09-10-2013, 08:21 AM

Is This The Worst College for Women in the United States?

Rust College is under fire for re-hiring a teacher accused of raping a 16-year-old, who went on to rape multiple students on campus.

A Mississippi college is under intense fire after a student was forcibly raped in the office of a professor with a long and public history of past sexual assault and rape charges.

Courthouse News reported a lawsuit alleging that professor Sylvester Oliver had already lost his teaching license after being accused of raping a 16-year old girl. Yet, he was re-hired by Rust College, where he went on to forcibly rape a student in his office.

The student, plaintiff Jane Doe, is suing Rust College and Oliver in federal court. Doe is arguing that the college turned a blind eye to Oliver’s sexual exploitation of students by concealing his pattern of sexual misconduct and blatantly threatened to fire anyone who assisted in the investigation into her rape.

In her lawsuit, Doe claims that Rust College allowed Oliver to resign after he was accused of having "an inappropriate sexual relationship with at least one female student." Oliver then went to work for a school in Memphis but was fired and lost his teaching license after a 16-year-old girl accused him of rape. Yet, despite the knowledge of the allegations, Rust College re-hired Oliver. Soon after, he forcibly raped Doe in his office.

Doe claims that shortly after her rape she reported it to the college and the Holly Springs Police Department but the college did not fire Oliver. Moreover, she claims that Oliver was not the only male employee of Rust College that has sexually assaulted a student at the historically black liberal arts college.

Doe is seeking compensation and punitive damages for the ordeal. Oliver is currently awaiting trial on criminal rape charged.

Doe’s lawyers from the Cochran Firm, believe there are more victims out there and last week launched a website for the lawsuit: http://www.rustcollegeabuse.com

Since the launch of the website, the lawyers say that more women have come forward to say they were raped, Local Memphis reported.

“A team of investigators have uncovered what we think is a scandalous type of approach to monitoring this type of activity,” said Cochran Firm attorney Sam Cherry to Wreg Memphis News.

http://www.alternet.org/investigations/worst-college-women-united-states

Cin

09-10-2013, 03:14 PM

The six ways we talk about a teenage girl’s age
The idea that a teen can be "older than her chronological age" puts young girls in danger

Last week, Montana District Judge G. Todd Baugh declared a troubled, now dead, 16-year-old girl culpable for her own rape. (The girl was just 14 when the crime occurred.) While in the process of reducing her rapist’s 15-year sentence to 30 days, he explained that the victim was “older than her chronological age,” and “as much in control of the situation” as the 49-year-old teacher found guilty of raping her. After outraged protest and demands that he be removed from the bench, Baugh apologized and has called for a new hearing. This case bears striking similarity to one in the U.K. earlier this summer in which a 13-year-old girl involved was described, including by the judge, as sexually “predatory.”

This happens with dulling regularity, and has for years. One month ago, defense lawyers in Louisiana used similar reasoning in a case involving a juvenile detention guard and a 14-year-old in his care. They argued that the girl had consented to sex with the guard, though she was three years younger than the age of consent in Louisiana.

The language used in these cases demonstrates our confused notions about girls’ ages and what they mean.

An adolescent girl isn’t allowed to be “her age.” Indeed, she doesn’t actually have one age but many that people assess and judge as she goes through her day. When it comes to sexual assault, consent and justice, an individual girl’s “age” is especially a matter of social construction. Society constructs her age in at least six different ways:

First, there’s her chronological age. This is the easiest one, based on a girl’s birthday. Simple enough.

Second, there’s the age her body looks — which, for too many people in and out of the justice system, apparently makes a difference in rape. In 2000, a South Caroline Circuit judge halved a 27-year-old youth minister’s sentence in a case involving a 14-year-old, explaining, that the girl’s body “was [at] an unusual stage of maturity.” But what does this ridiculous consideration of “physical maturation” mean for girls starting puberty at younger and younger ages? That assault of an older-looking 10-year-old is more forgivable?

Third, there’s emotional age. There are 12-year-olds capable of more easygoing conversation, passionate feeling, emotional intimacy and mature deliberation than some 30-year-olds. That does not, however, make them, in any way, the equal of a 30-year-old. These qualities are separate and apart from experience, power differentials, authority, control and consent. Judges generally don’t take emotional maturity into account when adults engage minors in other unlawful activities, and they shouldn’t in cases of sexual assault either. An emotionally and intellectually mature 15-year-old is still not allowed to vote. When a 49-year-old provides a 13-year-old alcohol, does a judge take into account how much the 13-year-old may have wanted to drink, or that the 13-year-old can hold his liquor? We cannot excuse teachers, coaches, priests and mentors from rape prosecution when they assault children in their care. We have legal ages for a reason.

Fourth, there’s commercially profitable age. This is the age at which a girl begins to be targeted for sexualizing products, often but not always based on her appearance. This age has become depressingly young. Girls are saturated with marketing messages about body enhancing products and “fun” ideas about how to look, dress, stand, speak, run, sit, eat, walk, work, sleep, starve, fix their hair, shave, bleach, cut bits off, add bits on and pose so that they are sexy. In other words, so that they are pleasing to boys and men.

Fifth, there’s media age. This is the age at which girls begin to be represented as sexual products themselves, as legitimate sexual targets and as prizes for male heroes. We regularly see 12-year-old girls in media who “look older,” and “looking older” is desirable and lauded. Movies and television portray younger and younger girls as hypersexualized, sexually predatory or somehow complicit in sexual crimes committed against them in gross disproportion to boys, who remain central to narrative, nonsexualized and productive. Girls get a great deal of social sanction for turning themselves into eye candy.

Lastly, there’s the age at which a girl is portrayed as “fair game” for older men. Mainstream movies regularly feature older male actors with much younger female ones. Older women in media virtually disappear after the age of 40, certainly in relation to younger men, but moviegoers don’t think twice about pairing aging male stars like Tom Cruise, Denzel Washington, Harrison Ford, George Clooney with ever younger female costars. This double standard glamorizes double-digit age gaps in romantic and sexual entanglements (not to mention perpetuates sex-based, lifetime wage discrimination in the industry).

Consider the movie “Two Mothers,” a story about two “older” women who fall in love with each other’s sons, in a “taboo sex drama.” It was the “most divisive film to screen at the 2013 Sundance Film Festival.” The movie is based on a Doris Lessing story actually called, “Two Grandmothers.” Compare this to “American Beauty,” which was based on the Amy Fisher story, in which a man falls for his teenage daughter’s friend. American Beauty wasn’t “taboo” and caused no audience outrage. It was described as “poetic and humane.” The “unreliable narrator” of Nabokov’s “Lolita” infuses our media and apparently permeates parts of our judicial landscape.

When you consider the many ages of adolescent girls, it is clear that our cultural imagination encourages boys and men to think of young girls as fair game. By the time a girl is 12, she isn’t even seen as a whole human being, but regarded for her parts. She’s “forbidden fruit,” “a temptress,” “a man trap” and “asking for it.” All she has to do to be targeted sexually is go for a walk. If she wears skimpy clothes, is overly friendly with a teacher, dances with abandon, especially if she’s a girl or young woman of color, she might be blamed for her own assault. This is a male fantasy. And I haven’t even mentioned schoolgirl pornography or designer vaginas.

Not one of these many ways of measuring an adolescent girl’s age excuses predatory rapists — and yet time and time again, they’re used to do just that.

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/04/the_six_ways_we_talk_about_a_teenage_girls_age/

Cin

09-16-2013, 12:20 PM

A Case Study in Awful: The 8 Worst Parts of the Recent Naval Academy Rape Hearing
by Erin Matson, Editor at Large, RH Reality Check

Recently, attorneys defending three former Naval Academy football players against allegations of sexual assault at an off-campus party spent more than 20 hours over five grueling days questioning, taunting, blaming, shaming, and what appears to be re-victimizing a 21-year-old female midshipman.

At one point, the midshipman said she was too exhausted to continue testifying and the commander presiding over the hearing granted her a day off. “This is borderline abusive,” her attorney Susan Burke said upon leaving the Navy Yard that day. Abusive, yes, and sadly all too instructive in how rape culture encourages attorneys, members of the media, and others to turn sexual assault victims into the accused.

The routine process of victim blaming, as illuminated by this Article 32 hearing, serves to silence other sexual assault victims, generate sympathy for rapists, and create doubts that the definition of sexual assault includes anything beyond a stranger jumping out of an alley and raping a sweet, chaste woman wearing modest clothing.

In this case, the midshipman saw social media posts that led her to believe she was raped while drunk. All three defendants admitted sexual contact with the midshipman on the night at the center of the allegations—either to her, or prosecutors. What follows is a look at some of the horrible insinuations, statements, and questions used by defense attorneys to impugn the character of the midshipman, which offer an entry point to talk about and refute rape culture as a whole.

How do you perform oral sex?

Defense attorneys repeatedly asked the midshipman how she performs oral sex. This question is irrelevant, even though one of the defendants has said that he put his penis in her mouth that night. Here’s the deal: It doesn’t matter if a sexual assault victim has had sex, and it doesn’t matter how she (or he) prefers to have sex. People are biologically driven to have sex. Sex is part of normal life. A history or manner of having oral sex, or rough sex, or any specific style of sex, does not mean that you can’t be sexually assaulted orally, or roughly, or in that specific style. There are infinite ways to have sex, minus one: Sex without consent isn’t sex. By definition, it’s rape.

Tell us about your sex life.

Along with repeated queries about how she performs oral sex, the midshipman was asked to describe her sex life in detail. This, like the oral sex question, is also irrelevant and demeaning. Casting the spotlight on a victim’s sexual history in the context of discussing her (or his) rape serves to make others imagine the victim sexually. It serves to degrade her (or him). Sharing your sexuality with others is a personal choice. Being cast in a sexual light can be highly desired, even great, when freely chosen. But painting a sexual picture of someone when they haven’t asked you to serves to shame, silence, and sluttify.

You had sex with him before, right?

The midshipman and other witnesses were called to say that one of the defendants had a history of consensual sex with her prior to the night listed in the sexual assault charges. But this is irrelevant. There is no social role—boyfriend, girlfriend, husband, wife, best friend, casual sex partner, community leader, religious official—that renders a person unable to rape. The only way to not be a rapist is to not rape. Further, consent is never permanent. Consenting to sex once or even 1,000 times is never consenting to future sex. Consent must be given for every single sex act, every single time. Sexual contact without consent is sexual assault.

But you were flirting!

In tandem with conflating and purposefully confusing previous consensual sex with rape charges, defense attorneys suggested that she was flirting that night. The dog whistle hangs rather obviously in the air: She’s a slut, they’re arguing, she wanted it. As nearly everyone who has attempted romantic interaction with another can say from personal experience, the interpretation that someone is flirting with you does not mean that someone has the intent to flirt with you, and vice versa. Heck, let’s even say she was flirting. Flirting is neither a crime nor an invitation to commit a crime. Flirtation never forces rape. Flirtation never excuses rape.

Did you “feel like a ho” the next morning?

This really happened: The defense attorneys asked the midshipman if she “felt like a ho” the next morning. Applying derogatory terms about sex workers to anyone, including sex workers themselves, is a tool of sexual dominance. Questions like these make it so painfully obvious why sexual assault victims can be hesitant to come forward. If you say something, they’ll trash you. They really will.

You must be hiding something.

While being compared to a “ho” and asked to describe how she performs oral sex, the midshipman said that she hadn’t always been totally forthcoming with information. For any sexual assault victim, it’s not hard to fill in the blanks and explain why. When people come forward about sexual assault, the spotlight is put on them, and it is not flattering. Giving rapists a pass and denying that victims have been victimized, or at least making them appear unreasonable, is what rape culture is all about.

“Drunk sex is not sexual assault.”

Defense attorneys said that a blackout state induced by alcohol “is a function of memory. It is not an attribute of capacity.” This argument is to say that a person saturated with alcohol can do anything, they just may not be able to remember it. That is not true physically, legally, or mentally. An extremely drunk person may be too incapacitated, physically, to walk or speak, or too incapacitated, legally, to drive or operate certain equipment. So, too, an extremely drunk person may be too incapacitated, mentally, to consent to sex. It is irrelevant how much, if any, alcohol is involved: The burden to not rape will always be on rapists, not victims. There is no free pass to rape a person unable to offer meaningful, understanding, reasonably aware consent to sexual contact.

What should we take away from this awful hearing?

Defense attorneys painted the midshipman as a “bad girl” in order to raise doubt about the rape charges against the three former Naval Academy football players charged with sexually assaulting her. In so doing, they relied upon sexism and stubborn myths that make it easy for rapists to get away with rape.

The myth that “good girls don’t get raped” is one of the cruelest lies to be found in the intersecting worlds of male dominance and rape culture. It serves to shift the focus of sexual assault conversations from perpetrators to victims. Culturally, we can understand why this happens, even when women, who are more likely to be victimized by sexual assault, participate.

If there were a checklist to follow that means we couldn’t be sexually assaulted, then we wouldn’t have to live in fear of the reality that sexual assault will almost inevitably touch our lives or the lives of people we know. We wouldn’t have to filter online dates with a wary eye, or drink apple juice at the party, or clutch our keys when we walk home at night. We could just not be sluts. Unfortunately it doesn’t work that way, and the practice of victim blaming neither protects anyone nor creates a climate where women can participate freely in public life the same way men can, including taking a keg stand at a college party where football players are present.

In the context of legal proceedings, a negative focus on victims carries an additional punch. The Naval Academy rape hearing is so gut-wrenching because the woman for whom prosecutors are seeking justice was treated as much (or more) of a defendant as the three alleged rapists.

In our legal system, the burden of proof is on the state to prove that a defendant is guilty. It is a flaw in logic, to say nothing of lazy lawyering on behalf of a defense team, to insist that if a victim is proven guilty a defendant is innocent. Unfortunately, this is often the case when men are put on trial for rape allegations, and it’s happening here within the context of the military chain of command presiding over a sexual assault case.

As RH Reality Check‘s Adele Stan has written on the ongoing push to remove the military chain of command from sexual assault prosecutions in the context of this case:

Those who advocate taking the authority to prosecute such cases out of the hands of the commanding officers of those accused of sexual assault say there is little hope that the military’s rape-culture crisis will dissipate until the immediate commanders of the accused are taken out of the picture.

Certainly, rape culture is a terrible beast, and it came out on full display within this brutal rape hearing at the Navy Yard. It’s a vicious lie to insinuate that you can avoid the threat of rape by being a good girl. Good girls can get raped and bad girls can get raped, and every time, it’s rape. Women (and men) can wear miniskirts and flirt and still get raped. Drunk people can get raped. Drunk people can rape. Victims are not the problem.

A decision is forthcoming as to whether this specific case at the Naval Academy will proceed against the defendants, and it’s also up for grabs whether the U.S. Naval Academy Superintendent will be removed from the case. Given an ongoing push on Capitol Hill to better address military sexual assault, it is likely that additional legislative debates about military sexual assault prosecutions will come along on their own timelines. Whether the routine practice of victim blaming within a broader rape culture is allowed to continue, however, is up to all of us. Perhaps this case has been vomit-inducing enough to advance the conversation.

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/09/13/a-case-study-in-awful-the-8-worst-parts-of-the-recent-naval-academy-rape-hearing/

Kobi

10-11-2013, 05:58 PM

ATLANTA (Reuters) - A Georgia Tech university fraternity member has apologized for the "lack of judgment" he showed in writing an email with offensive language, including the term "rapebait," about how to pick up women at campus parties.

The Georgia Institute of Technology student newspaper published the apology on Thursday. It was signed only "Matthew" and the paper's editor did not return a call seeking comment on who wrote it.

"I am deeply sorry for the pain and embarrassment my actions and lack of judgment have caused the students at Georgia Tech and my Phi Kappa Tau brotherhood as well as those who otherwise came into contact with the email," said the letter.

The email was "written as a joke for a small audience that understood the context and that it is not my nor my fraternity's actual beliefs on the subject," the letter said.

Georgia Tech spokesman Matt Nagel said Friday he could not confirm whether the letter writer was the same student who sent the email, which offered frat members tips on how to "succeed" with women by plying them with alcohol at parties.

"If anything ever fails, go get more alcohol," said the email, which signed off with the phrase "luring the rapebait."

In a statement earlier this week, Georgia Tech said it was looking into the incident.

"The Institute does not condone this type of behavior and continues to provide resources and education designed to create a supportive campus environment for all students, even those who exercise extremely poor judgment," the statement said.

Phi Kappa Tau's national office said in a statement that it has suspended the student, pending the outcome of the investigation.

The email is "extremely inappropriate and does not reflect the values of the Phi Kappa Tau Fraternity," it said.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/georgia-tech-fraternity-member-apologizes-rapebait-email-230219118.html

Gemme

10-16-2013, 05:00 AM

Missouri Teen Shunned by Community After Rape (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/14/missouri-teen-rape-community_n_4097879.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl12%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D391583)

Daisy Coleman, Missouri Teen, Shunned By Community After Rape Allegations
By Simon McCormack

A teenage girl in Maryville, Mo., claims she has been repeatedly threatened and harassed after she said she was raped last year by a classmate from a well-connected family.

The Huffington Post generally does not identify rape victims. However, the family confirmed that they wanted to go public with the information.

The Star explains the family's claims of the January 2012 incident:

A high school senior had sex with Coleman’s 14-year-old daughter, another boy did the same with her daughter’s 13-year-old friend, and a third student video-recorded one of the bedding scenes. Interviews and evidence initially supported the felony and misdemeanor charges that followed.
Daisy Coleman was then left on her front lawn, nearly unconscious in the freezing cold.

Nodaway County Sheriff Darren White told the Huffington Post his department presented a "strong case" to prosecutors that then 17-year-old Matthew Barnett raped Coleman's daughter.

He said charges were dropped when Daisy Coleman declined to cooperate with prosecutors.

Melinda Coleman told CNN's Erin Burnett on Monday that White's claims are "absolutely not true," and said the police report from the incident proves it.

"The victims decided they no longer wanted to participate in the case," White told HuffPost. "They gave no deposition or statement and invoked their Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate themselves. The charges being dismissed had everything to do with the victims not wanting to assist in their case."

Prosecutor Robert Rice eventually dropped all charges against Barnett, who said the sex was consensual.

In an interview with the Star, Rice dismissed any suggestion the decision had to do with Barnett's grandfather, a former lawman and four-term state representative in the Missouri legislature. White also insisted to HuffPost that politics played no role in the decision not to prosecute.

Melinda Coleman told the Daily Mail that, after the allegations came to light, her family was continually threatened by residents in the town of 12,000. Her daughter suffered from depression and even attempted suicide.

Daisy Coleman told KCUR, "I just felt like if I'm this ugly on the inside, I might as well look it on the outside,” she said. “You're the s-word, you're the w-word…b-word. Just, after a while, you start to believe it.”

Melinda Coleman eventually decided to move the family back to Albany, Mo. The family had lived in Maryville for three years.

"Basically I was terrified, I wanted to protect my children, I wanted to get them out of there," Coleman told the Daily Mail.

Coleman moved in August 2012. Eight months later, her house in Maryville, which was still on the market, burned down under mysterious circumstances, detailed further in the Star's report.

"On one hand, it would almost be a comfort to think it was an electrical problem that caused the fire," Coleman told the Mail. "But on the other hand, there’s a part of me that really thinks that the fire could be part of all this."

Gawker reports that the accused teen is currently attending the University of Central Missouri and "apparently having a great time" based on a now seemingly deleted retweet:

“If her name begins with A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z, she wants the D."

Raw Story reports that Anonymous has threatened to target Maryville in much the same way the loose-knit "hacktivist" group did in the Steubenville rape case.

"Why was a suspect, who confessed to a crime, released with no charges?" a post from the group said. "If Maryville won’t defend these young girls, if the police are too cowardly or corrupt to do their jobs, if [the] justice system has abandoned them, then we will have to stand for them. Mayor Jim Fall, your hands are dirty. Maryville, expect us."

Gemme

10-17-2013, 04:46 AM

Wolfsong

10-17-2013, 06:34 PM

nm1AfoP4gHM

A military friend of mine forwarded this to me this morning. I love his conviction and wish more people felt this way.

Cin

10-18-2013, 08:51 AM

http://www.alternet.org/why-naked-pictures-arent-harmless?page=0%2C1

A few excepts from the article highlighting the mentality that fosters the rampant rape culture at institutions of higher learning:

a woman filed a lawsuit against Wesleyan University citing a fraternity known on campus as the “rape factory.”

At Miami University of Ohio someone thought it was a good idea hang a poster titled “Top Ten Ways to Get Away with Rape,” which closed with, “If your [sic] afraid the girl might identify you slit her throat.”

A University of Vermont fraternity surveyed members in 2011 with this question: “If you could rape someone, who would it be?”

At USC, two years ago, some boys released a Gullet Report (named for a “gullet,” defined as “a target’s mouth and throat. Most often pertains to a target’s throat capacity and it’s [sic] ability to gobble cock. If a target is known to have a good gullet, it can deep-throat dick extremely well. Good Gullet Girls (GGG) are always scooped up well before last call.”). For good measure they added some overtly racist material as well.

Yale’s Zeta Psi fraternity took photos of members holding up signs reading, “We love Yale sluts.” Another fraternity had fun running around campus singing, “No means yes! Yes means anal!” Meanwhile, the school’s recommended punishment for sexual assault violations was a written reprimand.

Wales’ Cardiff Metropolitan University hung a poster for orientation week events that featured a man wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with the text: “I was raping a woman last night and she cried.”

More excepts: Time to fight back:

Last week at Swarthmore College a pledge posted a photograph on Instagram of his offer to join a fraternity. The picture was of a booklet cover featuring a mosaic of hundreds of naked or nearly naked women. … The fraternity has used this format for several years — but this year, a group of students led by senior Marian Firke protested the use of the photography.

Objectifying girls and women is tightly bound up with suppressing women’s speech. Consider these comments about Firke on the website Total Frat Move in response to the protest: after some throwaway “feminist cunt” ramblings, commenters described her as a “Stupid girl who stick[s] [her] opinions where they do not belong.” Mild enough. But, one commenter went on to say that “somebody needs to send their pledges over to fuck the bitch out of” her. Another, that she “deserved to be face raped so hard that she will be incapable of spewing any more of this bullshit.” The interweaving of violence, objectification and desire for her to shut up are inseparable.

But student activists aren’t shutting up. They have coalesced into a national movement and are taking matters into their own hands. Yesterday FORCE: Upsetting Rape Culture, whose successful faux Victoria’s Secret Consent campaign launched a series of an anti-rape activism pranks, named student recipients of its Consent Revolution Awards at four schools for their efforts to educate their peers. Recently, to great effect, the group created a fake consent-themed Playboy 2013 Top Ten Party Commandments that captured national attention. While these projects may seem trivial or funny, they are, in actuality, deadly serious. So are the efforts of Know Your IX, a student-led coalition created to educate students about their rights on campus, launched earlier this year.

Young men are going to colleges and universities way too comfortable expressing themselves in exploitative, sexist ways that denigrate their female peers and are corrosive to the academic environment. In addition, the notion that rape is a serious crime for which they can be held responsible seems not to have entered their heads.* Somehow we’ve gotten to the point where discussing a person’s “rape potential” is a thing.

*And where would they get an idea like that? Perhaps given the fact that they are not prosecuted and even the universities themselves refuse to take rape seriously calling it non consensual sex (somebody please tell me how this is not rape?) and giving written reprimands as punishment for sexual assault.

Soon

10-19-2013, 07:15 PM

Due to public outcry and the threat of Anonymous, the case is being reopened. I really hope this girl gets a fair shake this time.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/16/daisy-coleman-nodaway-county-prosecutor_n_4110593.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl16%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D392513

I'M DAISY COLEMAN, THE TEENAGER AT THE CENTER OF THE MARYVILLE RAPE MEDIA STORM, AND THIS IS WHAT REALLY HAPPENED
(http://www.xojane.com/it-happened-to-me/daisy-coleman-maryville-rape#disqus_thread)

Soon

10-20-2013, 05:51 PM

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/193slmlx7mnnvjpg/ku-bigpic.jpg

This ad, created for the United Nations Women campaign (which is unfortunately shortened to the UN Women campaign), becomes more devastating when you realize that the Google search boxes are the results of genuine searches, and although the ad-crafting and Googling were all done by Christopher Hunt at Ogilvy & Mather in Dubai, Copyranter points out that some of the automatic results are the same in the U.S.

About the ads, Hunt says:

This campaign uses the world's most popular search engine (Google) to show how gender inequality is a worldwide problem. The adverts show the results of genuine searches, highlighting popular opinions across the world wide web.
The distressing thing about this is that it’s a no-copy-required ad. Or, a found-copy ad. Patriarchal culture filtered through individually misogynistic Google searches has written all the pithy copy required for the world to take a serious look at how generally far away people are from living in a world with true gender equality. So, if this work were to earn a Clio nomination, the patriarchy would be called up on stage to accept with Hunt, right? Obviously, you can’t get the whole patriarchy up onstage (it’s currently filming a new superhero movie), so Statler and Waldorf from the Muppets would have to accept on the patriarchy’s behalf before telling a story about how much they hate political correctness that began, “In my day…”

http://jezebel.com/ad-for-un-women-campaign-duplicates-awful-google-search-1448647030

Martina

10-21-2013, 08:15 PM

Black Boys Have an Easier Time Fitting In at Suburban Schools Than Black Girls
By Aboubacar Ndiaye
(http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/10/black-boys-have-an-easier-time-fitting-in-at-suburban-schools-than-black-girls/280657/)

Though I’m sure my name was a hint, I happen to be black. My parents are West African (Mali and Senegal to be exact), and I was born and raised in France. When I was 13, my family and I moved to a suburban community outside of Atlanta. The school I attended, though relatively diverse for Georgia, was majority white. I had an easy time there. I made friends quickly, a lot of them white. To this day, more than ten years later, my friend circle is still very much white, populated by the people I met at my mostly-white high school, or at my mostly-white university, or in my mostly-white neighborhood. I have always attributed my ability to fit into both multicultural and white environments to my personality and my immigrant's need to adapt to whatever environment I'm in.

But recent research published in the American Sociological Association's Sociology of Education journal shows that my gender (male) was one of the determinative factors in the relative ease of my social integration. In an article published last year, Megan M. Holland, a professor at the University of Buffalo and a recent Harvard Ph.D., studied the social impact of a desegregation program on the minority students who were being bussed to a predominantly white high school in suburban Boston. She found that minority boys, because of stereotypes about their supposed athleticism and “coolness,” fit in better than minority girls because the school gave the boys better opportunities to interact with white students. Minority boys participated in sports and non-academic activities at much higher rates. Over the course of her study, she concluded that structural factors in the school as well as racial narratives about minority males resulted in increased social rewards for the boys, while those same factors contributed to the isolation of girls in the diversity program.

Another study looked at a similar program, called Diversify. Conducted by Simone Ispa-Landa at Northwestern University, it showed how gender politics and gender performance impacted the way the minority students were seen at the school. The study shows that “as a group, the Diversify boys were welcomed in suburban social cliques, even as they were constrained to enacting race and gender in narrow ways.” Diversify girls, on the other hand, “were stereotyped as ‘ghetto’ and ‘loud’”—behavior that, when exhibited by the boys in the program, was socially rewarded. Another finding from her study was that because of the gender dynamics present at the school—the need to conform to prevalent male dominance in the school—“neither the white suburban boys nor the black Diversify boys were interested in dating” the minority girls. The girls reported being seen by boys at their schools as “aggressive” and not having the “Barbie doll” look. The boys felt that dating the white girls was “easier” because they “can’t handle the black girls.”

The black boys in Ispa-Landa’s study found themselves in peculiar situations in which they would play into stereotypes of black males as being cool or athletic by seeming “street-smart.” At the same time, though, they would work to subvert those racial expectations by code-switching both their speech and mannerisms to put their white classmates at ease. Many of the boys reported feeling safer and freer at the suburban school, as they would not be considered “tough” at their own schools. It was only in the context of the suburban school that their blackness conferred social power. In order to maintain that social dominance, the boys engaged in racial performance, getting into show fights with each other to appear tough and using rough, street language around their friends.

In the case of the girls, the urban signifiers that gave the boys so much social acceptance, were held against them. While the boys could wear hip-hop clothing, the girls were seen as “ghetto” for doing the same. While the boys could display a certain amount of aggression, the girls felt they were penalized for doing so. Ispa-Landa, in an interview, expressed surprise at “how much of a consensus there was among the girls about their place in the school.” She also found that overall, the girls who participated in diversity programs paid a social cost because they “failed to embody characteristics of femininity” that would have valorized them in the school hierarchy. They also felt excluded from the sports and activities that gave girls in those high schools a higher social status, such as cheerleading and Model U.N., because most activities ended too late for the parents of minority girls. Holland notes that minority parents were much more protective of the girls; they expressed no worries about the boys staying late, or over at friend’s houses.

Once minority women leave high school and college, they are shown to continue to struggle with social integration, even as they achieve higher educational outcomes and, in certain locales, higher incomes than minority men. Though, as presaged by high-school sexual politics, they were still three times less likely than black men to marry outside of their race.

For the second time in as many sessions, the Supreme Court heard a case about affirmative action last Tuesday. Following last year’s Fisher v. Texas non-decision, the court will now be deciding whether states can ban the consideration of race in college admissions through ballot initiatives as the Michigan did in 2006. Based on the tenor of the oral arguments, some court watchers have predicted that the court’s conservative majority will now take the opportunity to further limit the use of affirmative action in admissions across the nation. As Garrett Epps noted last week, it is nearly impossible to have a measured conversation about affirmative action, an issue that splits even the most ardent liberals. However, there appears to be a general consensus that minority populations benefit from these programs. But very rarely do commentators stop to consider the diversity of that minority population, and even fewer consider what impact affirmative actions programs have on the disparate, intersecting groups who participate in them.

A couple of months ago, Ebony.com editor Jamilah Lemieux started the Twitter hashtag #blackpowerisforblackmen to discuss the little-talked about but deeply-felt existence of black male privilege. Tweets like “#blackpowerisforblackmen because the Black men's problems are the community's problems” and “#blackpowerisforblackmen bc although black women played a pivotal role in the civil rights movement, we're only told about MLK&other blk men” speak to a history of minimizing of the experience of black women. The hashtag, which attracted no small amount of blowback from black males, revealed the dilemma that many black women face: having to combat both racism and sexism. Like the research about the diversity programs, the conversation showed that what we sometimes instinctively think of as “the black experience” is complicated by gender. The ostensible purpose of affirmative action is to increase the presence of minorities in colleges and universities. But as the Supreme Court considers further limiting the scope of such programs, it is important to remember that unless cultural expectations about race and gender change, full educational integration will remain a pipe dream.

This article available online at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/10/black-boys-have-an-easier-time-fitting-in-at-suburban-schools-than-black-girls/280657/
Copyright © 2013 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All Rights Reserved.

Kobi

11-11-2013, 07:55 PM

More grim statistics for future Sheryl Sandbergs and Marissa Mayers

After sixty years of asking a random sample of Americans which gender they prefer to work for, Gallup recently found that both men and women still prefer a male boss over a female boss — a gap that has barely budged in the last ten years.

In a survey of 2,059 Americans from a variety of work backgrounds, 35 percent said they prefer a male boss, while 23 percent said they prefer to work for a woman. 41 percent, meanwhile, volunteered that they don't care either way — the largest percent in the history of the survey.

Since 1953 the gap has narrowed: 66 percent preferred a male boss in 1953, while just five percent preferred a woman, and 25 percent saw no difference.

But, like other aspects of gender imbalance at work, the move toward equal boss preference has lost steam in the last decade. In 2002, 19 percent of Americans preferred a female boss, and 31 preferred a male boss — a similar difference to the one Gallup found today, and one that mirrors the gender wage gap. For comparison, earlier this year, the U.S. Census Bureau said women in full-time, year-round jobs still make 77 cents for every dollar men make — a zero percent change since 2002. Many have been lamenting this fact for the last half-decade, asking why a movement that once seemed unstoppable is apparently stuck in neutral.

The answer for both the wage and attitudes-about-bosses gaps are likely more complicated than run-of-the-mill sexism. One factor for the latter poses a kind of catch-22. When it comes to taking directions from superiors, people may tend to prefer what they know: 54 percent of those surveyed say they currently work for a man, while only 30 percent work for a woman. And the percentage of male bosses grows on the way up the corporate latter, says a Catalyst Census. In 2012, women held only 14.3 percent of executive officer positions at Fortune 500 companies, and just 16.6 percent of board of director positions. One quarter of these companies operated with no women executive officers at all.

This matters because Gallup found that those surveyed who currently work for a woman are more likely to prefer a female boss than those who work for a man. The preference didn't entirely fill in the blank space, but it helped. Gallup puts it like this:

Those who currently work for a woman are as likely to prefer having a female boss as a male one. This is one of the few subgroups of the population that does not tilt in the "male boss" direction. Those who currently work for a man prefer a male boss, by 35 percent to 17 percent. [Gallup]

Still, the polling company is careful to warn against reading too much into the data: "[I]t is possible that workers who initially prefer a female boss are more likely to end up in circumstances in which they have a female boss," it says. But it's not an outlandish proposition: That a world with more female bosses would also be a world with more people who like female bosses.

Clearly, we're still a ways off from such a world. As Sheryl Sandburg pointed out earlier this year in her blockbuster career book, Lean In, some of the stunted progress women are experiencing at the top level might be due to a "likability gap." Studies have suggested that the more promotions, raises, and accolades a woman earns in the workplace, the less likely she is to be liked by her peers and coworkers. Whereas likability and achievement for men are often positively correlated. This argument seems to align nicely with Gallup's findings — maybe people prefer male bosses because they don't yet see female bosses as "likable."

But Gallup's results also suggest that this could change. American workers may see a stronger link between female success and likability when more female bosses are signing more checks.

http://news.yahoo.com/latest-depressing-gender-poll-americans-still-prefer-male-113800543.html

Kobi

12-30-2013, 03:20 PM

http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c9/6a/6b/c96a6b4a49a124a7a7d4fc934c2f5078.jpg

Greyson

12-30-2013, 04:49 PM

http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c9/6a/6b/c96a6b4a49a124a7a7d4fc934c2f5078.jpg

Looks like "college men" are still boys that have not been taught the concept of "No" means no and you are not the prince the adults and society led you to believe you are.

kittygrrl

12-30-2013, 05:59 PM

Looks like "college men" are still boys that have not been taught the concept of "No" means no and you are not the prince the adults and society led you to believe you are.

Greyson, it's positively scarey :( It wouldn't take much to shatter the veneer.

Allison W

12-30-2013, 07:25 PM

http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c9/6a/6b/c96a6b4a49a124a7a7d4fc934c2f5078.jpg

You know, I'm going to ask, do you have a source on this? Not because I think you're bullshitting, but because frankly I wish this were a load of shit and want to hold onto a glimmer of false hope for a few brief moments.

Kobi

12-30-2013, 07:48 PM

You know, I'm going to ask, do you have a source on this? Not because I think you're bullshitting, but because frankly I wish this were a load of shit and want to hold onto a glimmer of false hope for a few brief moments.

It is from Body Wars (http://www.mwsg.org/bodywars.htm) by Margo Maine

Allison W

12-30-2013, 09:19 PM

It is from Body Wars (http://www.mwsg.org/bodywars.htm) by Margo Maine

OK, that's good to know.

From the reviews of the book I found on Amazon, the studies are apparently accurate (according to a student who has access to the studies cited in the book), but an important detail that was omitted in your post is that the book was published in 1999.

This makes me feel a little better. It's still a scary-ish statistic even at fifteen years old, but at least it's describing last generation's college students and not this generation's college students. (Of course, for all I know, if the study were repeated today the results might not be any better--for all that I would hope they would be--but the age of the study is still extremely important.)

Kobi

12-30-2013, 10:31 PM

OK, that's good to know.

From the reviews of the book I found on Amazon, the studies are apparently accurate (according to a student who has access to the studies cited in the book), but an important detail that was omitted in your post is that the book was published in 1999.

This makes me feel a little better. It's still a scary-ish statistic even at fifteen years old, but at least it's describing last generation's college students and not this generation's college students. (Of course, for all I know, if the study were repeated today the results might not be any better--for all that I would hope they would be--but the age of the study is still extremely important.)

Agreed, the age of the study is important. I'm not sure how much of a difference there would be if it were repeated today.

Look at the other stories just on this page about current campus rapes:

- a woman filed a lawsuit against Wesleyan University citing a fraternity known on campus as the “rape factory.”

- At Miami University of Ohio someone thought it was a good idea hang a poster titled “Top Ten Ways to Get Away with Rape,” which closed with, “If your [sic] afraid the girl might identify you slit her throat.”

- A University of Vermont fraternity surveyed members in 2011 with this question: “If you could rape someone, who would it be?”

- At USC, two years ago, some boys released a Gullet Report (named for a “gullet,” defined as “a target’s mouth and throat. Most often pertains to a target’s throat capacity and it’s [sic] ability to gobble cock. If a target is known to have a good gullet, it can deep-throat dick extremely well. Good Gullet Girls (GGG) are always scooped up well before last call.”). For good measure they added some overtly racist material as well.

- Yale’s Zeta Psi fraternity took photos of members holding up signs reading, “We love Yale sluts.” Another fraternity had fun running around campus singing, “No means yes! Yes means anal!” Meanwhile, the school’s recommended punishment for sexual assault violations was a written reprimand.

- Wales’ Cardiff Metropolitan University hung a poster for orientation week events that featured a man wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with the text: “I was raping a woman last night and she cried.”

- Georgia Tech university fraternity member has apologized for the "lack of judgment" he showed in writing an email with offensive language, including the term "rapebait," about how to pick up women at campus parties.

- A Mississippi college is under intense fire after a student was forcibly raped in the office of a professor with a long and public history of past sexual assault and rape charges.

- attorneys defending three former Naval Academy football players against allegations of sexual assault at an off-campus party spent more than 20 hours over five grueling days questioning, taunting, blaming, shaming, and what appears to be re-victimizing a 21-year-old female midshipman.

This is a link to current stats on college campuses:

http://www.campussafetymagazine.com/Channel/Public-Safety/Articles/2012/03/Sexual-Assault-Statistics-and-Myths.aspx

That's from 2012. Does it sound like things have improved?

Allison W

12-30-2013, 11:37 PM

Agreed, the age of the study is important. I'm not sure how much of a difference there would be if it were repeated today.

Look at the other stories just on this page about current campus rapes:

- a woman filed a lawsuit against Wesleyan University citing a fraternity known on campus as the “rape factory.”

- At Miami University of Ohio someone thought it was a good idea hang a poster titled “Top Ten Ways to Get Away with Rape,” which closed with, “If your [sic] afraid the girl might identify you slit her throat.”

- A University of Vermont fraternity surveyed members in 2011 with this question: “If you could rape someone, who would it be?”

- At USC, two years ago, some boys released a Gullet Report (named for a “gullet,” defined as “a target’s mouth and throat. Most often pertains to a target’s throat capacity and it’s [sic] ability to gobble cock. If a target is known to have a good gullet, it can deep-throat dick extremely well. Good Gullet Girls (GGG) are always scooped up well before last call.”). For good measure they added some overtly racist material as well.

- Yale’s Zeta Psi fraternity took photos of members holding up signs reading, “We love Yale sluts.” Another fraternity had fun running around campus singing, “No means yes! Yes means anal!” Meanwhile, the school’s recommended punishment for sexual assault violations was a written reprimand.

- Wales’ Cardiff Metropolitan University hung a poster for orientation week events that featured a man wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with the text: “I was raping a woman last night and she cried.”

- Georgia Tech university fraternity member has apologized for the "lack of judgment" he showed in writing an email with offensive language, including the term "rapebait," about how to pick up women at campus parties.

- A Mississippi college is under intense fire after a student was forcibly raped in the office of a professor with a long and public history of past sexual assault and rape charges.

- attorneys defending three former Naval Academy football players against allegations of sexual assault at an off-campus party spent more than 20 hours over five grueling days questioning, taunting, blaming, shaming, and what appears to be re-victimizing a 21-year-old female midshipman.

This is a link to current stats on college campuses:

http://www.campussafetymagazine.com/Channel/Public-Safety/Articles/2012/03/Sexual-Assault-Statistics-and-Myths.aspx

That's from 2012. Does it sound like things have improved?

No. Usually I try to stick up for my generation, but... fuck it. It's not as though any of this is actually news to me, but it's still depressing.

(However, ideal response to the University of Vermont frat survey: the asshole who wrote it. He probably wouldn't find that so amusing. I doubt many of these young men would if it were something they had to live in fear of.)

Kobi

12-31-2013, 09:03 AM

http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ca/91/ec/ca91ecd4b1f069ec4785441f1a355fe4.jpg

Allison,

This is the mentality I saw back in the 1960's (if memory serves, that is a few decades before you were born). Rape victims back then were interrogated by law enforcement. Their sexual histories, their lifestyles, their clothing, etc were all used to blame the victim for her assault. Plus, she was subjected to describing the assault in detail with questioning as to did she enjoy it? Did she orgasm?

Male privilege and entitlement is alive and well and deeply ingrained in our culture and cultures around the world. And, it is kept alive not only by individual people (men and women) but by institutions like colleges, the military, the workplace, the media etc who cant quite seem to grasp that this isn't ok.

Internalized sexism and misogyny and the privilege and entitlement is part of our socialization from birth. Both males and females are TAUGHT their respective places and the places of their opposites. It's about control and power. It starts at birth and is an exhausting never ending battle.

Isms have been very carefully and deliberately woven into the social fabric of the world. When we have to address sexism and misogyny and the rest of the isms, internalized and externalized, here on the Planet, the insidiousness of it should hit home.

Kobi

01-03-2014, 04:12 AM

The message that women are untrustworthy liars is everywhere in our culture—from TV and music, to politics and religion, says Soraya Chemaly.

Two weeks ago a man in France was arrested for raping his daughter. She’d gone to her school counselor and then the police, but they needed “hard evidence.” So, she videotaped her next assault. Her father was eventually arrested. His attorney explained, “There was a period when he was unemployed and in the middle of a divorce. He insists that these acts did not stretch back further than three or four months. His daughter says longer. But everyone should be very careful in what they say.” Because, really, even despite her seeking help, her testimony, her bravery in setting up a webcam to film her father raping her, you really can’t believe what the girl says, can you?

Everyone “knows” this. Even children.

Three years ago, in fly-on-the-wall fashion of parent drivers everywhere, I listened while a 14-year-old girl in the back seat of my car described how angry she was that her parents had stopped allowing her to walk home alone just because a girl in her neighborhood “claimed she was raped.” When I asked her if there was any reason to think the girl's story was not true, she said, “Girls lie about rape all the time.”

She didn’t know the person, she just assumed she was lying.

Fast-forward three years, again in a car. This time a 13-year-old refused to believe that when the newly appointed pope was 12 he’d written a “love letter” to the girl living next door. The child insisted stubbornly that the woman, now in the news, had to be a liar because the pope, even as a boy, would not have written a love letter.

In both cases, to my children’s bottomless pool of chagrin, I pulled the car over so I could ask the girls why they were so sure that the women’s accounts were not credible. We talked about their assumptions, about who gets to be believed, double standards regarding sex, and how culture portrays women. Fun times with Mom.

No one says, “You can’t trust women,” but distrust them we do. College students surveyed revealed that they think up to 50% of their female peers lie when they accuse someone of rape, despite wide-scale evidence and multi-country studies that show the incidence of false rape reports to be in the 2%-8% range, pretty much the same as false claims for other crimes. As late as 2003, people jokingly (wink, wink) referred to Philadelphia’s sex crimes unit as “the lying bitch unit.” If an 11-year-old girl told an adult that her father took out a Craigslist ad to find someone to beat and rape her while he watched, as recently actually occurred, what do you think the response would be? Would she need to provide a videotape after the fact?

It goes way beyond sexual assault as well. That’s just the most likely and obvious demonstration of “women are born to lie” myths. Women’s credibility is questioned in the workplace, in courts, by law enforcement, in doctors' offices, and in our political system. People don’t trust women to be bosses, or pilots, or employees. Pakistan’s controversial Hudood Ordinance still requires a female rape victim to procure four male witnesses to her rape or risk prosecution for adultery. In August, a survey of managers in the United States revealed that they overwhelmingly distrust women who request flextime.

It’s notable, of course, that women are trusted to be mothers—the largest pool of undervalued, economically crucial labor.

*****

So how exactly are we teaching children that women lie and can’t be trusted to be as competent or truthful as men? I mean, clearly, most people aren’t saying “girls and women lie, kids, that’s just the way God built them.”

First, lessons about women’s untrustworthiness are in our words, pictures, art, and memory. It’s simple enough to see how we are overwhelmingly portrayed as flawed, supplemental, ornamental, or unattainably perfect. It’s also easy to find examples of girls and women routinely, entertainingly cast as liars and schemers. For example, on TV we have Pretty Little Liars, Gossip Girl, Don't Trust The Bitch in Apartment 23, Devious Maids, and, because its serpent imagery is so basic to feminized evil, American Horror Story: Coven.

The lessons start early, too. Take, for example, the popular animated kids movie Shark Tale, which featured the song “Gold Digger,” a catchy tune that describes women as scheming, thieving, greedy, and materialistic. There is no shortage of music lyrics that convey the same ideas across genres. It's in movies, too. Consider, for example, the prevalence of untrustworthy mad women, or the manipulative women of Film Noire, and the failure of most films to even allow two women to be named or speak to one another about anything other than the male protagonists.

But pop culture and art are just the cherry on the top of the icing on a huge cake. The United States is among the most religious of all countries in the industrialized world. So, while some people wring their hands over hip hop, I’m more worried about how men like Rick Santorum and Ken Cuccinelli explain to their daughters why they can’t be priests. I know that there is hip hop that exceeds the bounds of taste and is sodden with misogyny. But, people seem to think that those manifestations of hatred are outside of the mainstream when, in reality, it's just more of the same set to great beats.

Sometimes, however, there’s a bonus, synchronous two-for-one! Delilah, a renowned biblical avatar of female untrustworthiness, made it into the lyrics of JT Money's “Somethin' ‘Bout Pimpin'”:

I got a problem with this punk ass bitch I know
Ol’no good skanlezz switch out ho
An untrustworthy bitch like Deliliah
Only thing she good for is puttin’ dick inside her

In other words:

"Amongst all the savage beasts none is found so harmful as woman." -- John Chrysostom

“What she cannot get, she seeks to obtain through lying and diabolical deceptions. One must be on one's guard with every woman, as if she were a poisonous snake and the horned devil." -- St. Albertus Magnus

“Women were made either to be wives or prostitutes.” -- Martin Luther

“I fail to see what use woman can be to man, if one excludes the function of bearing children.” -- Augustine

While most religious leaders aren’t going around spouting overtly denigrating opinions about women, many, through default and tradition, casually and uncritically expose children to religious texts that are fundamentally misogynistic. I have to believe that most Sunday school lessons are not concerned with deconstructing, say, the creation story, a seminal text in our culture whether you are religious or not. Religious misogyny is tied to institutional power that ends up in children and women being impoverished and dying.

Ideas about women, credibility, legitimacy, authority and—notably—Catholic and Evangelical “priesthood” are important and have deep roots in religious thought and philosophy. And those ideas have contemporary expression (see links): Tertullian: "Women are the devil's gateway." Thomas Aquinas: "As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten." St. Clement of Alexandria: "Every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman...the consciousness of their own nature must evoke feelings of shame." St. John Chrysostom: Women are "weak and flighty...For what is a woman but an enemy of friendship, an inescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a domestic danger, delectable mischief, a fault in nature, painted with beautiful colors?" St. Jerome: "Woman is the root of all evil." There’s Origen, one of Christianity’s greatest thinkers, a man who castrated himself and who considered women worse than animals. And, not to be left out, St. Augustine.

Why focus on these musty, long dead theologians and philosophers? These thoughts are alive and well and have a super long tail outside of religion—think: domestic work, pay discrimination, and sex segregation in the workplace. Every time a young girl can’t serve at an altar, or play in a game, or dress as she pleases; every time she’s assaulted and told to prove it, it’s because she cannot, in the end, be trusted. Controlling her—her clothes, her will, her physical freedom, her reputation—is a perk.

Conventional Abrahamic religious thought cannot escape the idea that we have to pay, as women, with lifelong suffering and labor and be subject to the authority of men lest our irrationality and desires result in more evil and suffering. Until religious hierarchies renounce beliefs and practices based on these theologies, these long-dead men, creatures of their time, might as well be the ones repeatedly showing up in Congress to give their massively ill-informed opinions on women’s health and lives.

Especially in our political lives.

Is it really surprising to anyone that a Santorum staffer said, in the run up to the last election, that women shouldn’t be President because it’s against God’s will? What about the “news commentator” who thinks women shouldn’t be allowed to vote? The Senate candidate who thinks rape is a gift from God? Or the Senator and presidential aspirant who thinks it’s just another form of conception? Or the doctor who thinks women deserve to die for having abortions? How about the nominee for lieutenant governor of Virginia who thinks fetal birth defects are punishment for parents' (read: mothers’) sins? If women die bearing children, so what, that’s what we’re here for.

Even if we insist on not talking about the degree to which legislators' religious beliefs inform their political actions, it is obvious that they do. An entire political party’s “social policy” agenda is being pursued under a rubric that insists women need “permission slips” and “waiting periods.” The recent shutdown? Conservatives holding the country hostage because they want to add anti-abortion “conscience clause” language to legislation. Whose consciences are we talking about? All the morally incompetent and untrustworthy men who need abortions?

It’s no exaggeration to say that distrust of women is the driving force of the “social issues” agenda of the Republican Party. From food stamps and “legitimate rape,” to violence against women and immigration policy. “We need to target the mother. Call it sexist, but that’s the way nature made it,” explained the man who penned Arizona’s immigration law. “Men don’t drop anchor babies, illegal alien mothers do.” I could do this ad infinitum.

The pervasive message that women are untrustworthy liars is atomized in our culture. There is no one source or manifestation. It fills every nook and cranny of our lives.

I find it sad and disturbing that children learn so quickly and normatively to distrust women. Any commitment to parity means challenging the stories we tell them. It means critically assessing the comforting institutions we support out of nostalgia, habit, and tradition. It means walking out of places of worship, not buying certain movie tickets, closing some books, refusing to pay for some music, and politely disagreeing with friends and family at the dinner table. It's not easy. But, really, what's the alternative?

Soraya L. Chemaly writes about gender, feminism and culture for several online media including Role/Reboot, The Huffington Post, Fem2.0, RHReality Check, BitchFlicks, and Alternet among others. She is particularly interested in how systems of bias and oppression are transmitted to children through entertainment, media and religious cultures. She holds a History degree from Georgetown University, where she founded that schools first feminist undergraduate journal, studied post-grad at Radcliffe College.

http://www.rolereboot.org/culture-and-politics/details/2013-11-how-we-teach-our-kids-that-women-are-liars

Allison W

01-03-2014, 01:06 PM

tales of religious sexism and misogyny

And people wonder why I don't like religion.

Kobi

01-11-2014, 12:10 PM

I have seen a sixteen-year-old boy weeping in distress after getting a girl’s pube stuck in his teeth, I hear he was unshaven.

I have seen boys showing each other porn on their iPhones on the train home from school, in bars and whilst strolling along the Champs-Elyséés.

I have had a boy ask me to text him screenshots of porn films because he was on a wifi-free family holiday.

One boy turned to kiss his date in the cinema but not before romantically whispering ‘don’t struggle’.

One friend drunkenly walked off into a park in the early hours of the morning and when a male friend brought her back without ‘trying anything’, he was heralded as being ‘soo nice!’ rather than ‘soo normal!’.

I have friends whose boyfriends have posted naked pictures of them all over the Internet.

I have heard consent described as ‘de-romanticizing’.

I have had a shockingly sober boy say to me ‘Why can’t I just slap my dick on your arse? Doesn’t cost you anything!’.

This just scratches the surface of my store of depressing anecdotes; the most violent of which I won’t go into out of respect for the girls involved.

2014 is not a good year to be a teenage girl. The last of the 90’s kids are growing up and we are starting to see the effects of being raised with the Internet.

For generations before us, hormonal teenage boys looking for sexy images of women had limited options; they could brave the embarrassment of going to the counter and buying Playboy, they could look through their sister’s Cosmo or they could use their imagination.

Porn today has rid itself of the embarrassment-factor by embracing the anonymity of the World Wide Web; Playboy isn’t really considered to be porn anymore, the real stuff lives in your phone, on your laptop, your tablet; it is available anywhere, anytime at the touch of a button.

In fact this very website receives a steady stream of hits that result from someone googling some combination of ‘housekeeping porn’ + ‘sex’, ‘lesbian’ and/or ‘rape’.

As you read this, somewhere there is an eleven-year-old boy curiously typing ‘porn’ into Google, probably hoping to see some big boobies. Fast forward a couple of years and he is masturbating to a video of a crying woman who is being tied down, simultaneously penetrated by three men, spanked, and being called a whore. Young boys are being de-sensitized to violence and the more they consume, the more abusive, the more graphic the porn has to be to excite them.

The most popular type of porn is called ‘Gonzo’ which is essentially wall-to-wall abusive sex. There is no foreplay or romance; it is literally hardcore sex from the first to the last frame. The sex is almost always violent; spanking, gagging, anal fisting and choking are commonplace. A very popular image is a close-up of the woman’s face with tears streaming down caused by her being choked whilst performing oral sex, directors like to make this obvious by making her wear lots of mascara; for dramatic effect.

There is no way that this could not have a profound effect on the consumer’s psyche specifically on their attitude towards women. Most boys make no secret of the fact that they watch and enjoy such porn, watching it in groups in the presence of girls or brashly and explicitly describing their fantasies.

Girls know boys watch porn and girls know what porn stars are; they are hairless, they have hourglass figures and they never say no. And so a massive amount of pressure is placed on girls to live up to this. Shaving pubic hair is painful and unsanitary (it leaves hundreds of minute cuts which increases the risk of STDs). And yet girls as young as 11 are doing it.

The porn industry is the primary source of sex ed for the boys who will grow up to be the decision-makers, thinkers, writers, husbands and fathers of tomorrow. A brief overview of what they are being taught/brainwashed to believe;

1.
That it is their birthright as males to have sex with whichever female they want when they want regardless of consent or age.

2.
That the only way to have good sex and the only way to be masculine is to be aggressive, forceful and violent

3.
That they must always be in control and always want to be in control

4.
That their pleasure comes first and foremost

It hardly needs stating what kind of pressures and expectations this puts on girls and women. They have to be living breathing sex dolls and they have to love it. The porn industry is women abuse.

http://www.bad-housekeeping.com/2014/01/08/violence-teenagers-and-gonzo-porn/

---------------------

Very sad. And we wonder why there is a rape culture and rape mentality?

Kobi

01-11-2014, 12:13 PM

The bride wears white, is handed from man to man – and then loses a major part of her identity. Why do Australian women still put up with these patriachal customs – and how come I feel too embarrassed to ask them?

It has become my Muriel moment. I find myself standing in the back pews of church watching a dear female friend led down the aisle on her father’s arm, blubbering uncontrollably through my MaxFactor. But these are not tears of joy, of nostalgia, or even envy. These are tears of despair. Of confusion.

Another comrade has fallen. Another secular, strong-minded, sexually-liberated, independent Gen-Xer is giving up her name to a man before God in an alabaster scene straight out of Bride to Be magazine and all I can think is, “all John Howard’s dreams have come true”. And why? Oh, because he wanted me to.

This week, the European Court of Human Rights overturned an archaic Italian law which prevented children from adopting their mother’s surname, deeming the rule "patriarchal", "discriminatory" and a "difference of treatment between men and women". And yet, faced with a range of choices, it seems that Australian women are overwhelmingly volunteering to maintain this patronymic practice, choosing their husband’s name not only for their children, but for themselves.

A 2013 survey found that around 82% of married Australian women still assume their husband’s surname, while around 90% of children are registered in their father’s names. Taken alongside other stock wedding practices, from white frocks to paternal giveaways, these figures reflect the resilience of patriarchal customs in marriage between Australian men and women; a consent to inequality which is baffling.

Across the country, women are getting married later and older, with more cohabiting and bearing children beforehand. We are more inclined to be university-educated, professional, property-owners. We overwhelmingly support same-sex relationships and profess a belief in the need for greater gender equality. And yet, when it comes to our weddings, most of us still appear happy to insert politically-correct clauses about the right to same-sex marriage into our ceremonies, then proceed to throw out our lifelong identities, retrofit the trappings of virginity and be handed from man to man.

It's depressing not to recognise half your Facebook friends list because their names have changed overnight. They have been cast off for the happy tags of "Mrs X", as if to proclaim “forget who I was before – I am now loved, wanted and owned by a MAN!”

So why do I feel unable to ask why? It is testament to both the strength of these norms and current weakness of feminist debate in Australia that even amongst our closest friends it feels taboo to discuss frankly customs which many of us find exclusive, offensive or regressive.

It is not that I don’t celebrate the union of loved ones. I don't think my female peers have dropped their principles or their IQs, and I don't regard their husbands as anything other than enlightened gender-egalitarians. But for all symbolic purposes, it seems that supposed allies in the struggle for female equality are drifting back half a century on a sea of Tiffany.

The choice to marry is deeply personal. But when publicly performed, it becomes a statement of implied social values and virtues. And when we are asked to participate in this ritual, to bear witness and to endorse it even in the face of our disagreement, the least we can ask for is an explanation.

When (another) Australian Prime Minister is doing his best to roll back women’s rights, to peddle exclusive family values and remove women from power and public life in exchange for an antediluvian scene where “an enormous number of women simply [do] housework”, the need for this justification is all the greater. When feminism seems increasingly to have become a dirty word, every battle counts - the symbolic ones no less.

As some in same-sex relationships seek to enter, and thereby alter, the inherently prejudicial institution of marriage, it is possible that greater scope will open to challenge and reshape its gendered norms. But in the meantime, the take-home message of marriage in Australia seems still to be very much "man and wife". So when myself and my fellow naysayers do finally pluck-up the courage to spit the figurative penis-straw and ask why we are continuing to swallow it whole, I will expect a damn good answer.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/10/marriage-feminism-weddings

Allison W

01-11-2014, 03:19 PM

article about porn getting really creepy

Very sad. And we wonder why there is a rape culture and rape mentality?

Not gonna argue the porn industry isn't going into creepy-ass places, but it occurs to me that rape culture and rape mentality long predate easily available pornography. I'm actually sort of inclined to think that the present state of the porn industry is more of a symptom of the culture than a cause per se, though frankly, that's frightening enough.

Kobi

01-15-2014, 04:22 PM

After losing all major statewide races to Democrats for the first time in 24 years, Republicans in Virginia are pushing to replace a moderate GOP congressman with a candidate so conservative that he doesn’t even believe that spousal rape should be a crime.

On Wednesday, Mother Jones pointed out that state Sen. Richard H. “Dick” Black, who is running to take over retiring Rep. Frank Wolf’s seat, had fought against making spousal rape a crime because the woman was “sleeping in the same bed, she’s in a nightie.”

Democrat Shawn Mitchell had uncovered the 2002 video of Black talking about spousal rape for an attack ad during the 2011 campaign for Virginia state Senate.

I do not know how you could validly get a conviction of a husband-wife rape, when they’re living together, sleeping in the same bed, she’s in a nightie and so forth,” Black says. “There’s not injuries, there’s no separation or anything.”

The ad notes that between 2002 and 2010, there were 800 reported incidents of spousal rape in Virginia.

In 2001, Black asserted that emergency contraception was “baby pesticide” and he recently compared the Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion to the Holocaust.

“When I hear discussions about this, I hear very mild comments about choice and reproductive rights and things of this sort,” Black said in a speech on the 2013 anniversary of the Roe v. Wade ruling. “But I recall back to the days of Nazi Germany, there was a place called Auschwitz. ”

“You know it’s quite easy — and from where we look back on history, we say, ‘Why didn’t the Germans do something? Why didn’t they rise up? Why didn’t they take action?’” he continued. “But they were helpless before their government just as we are helpless before our government.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/15/virginia-gop-candidate-spousal-rape-isnt-a-crime-if-she-is-wearing-a-nightie/

Kobi

01-16-2014, 03:02 PM

Swedish judge has defended his acquittal of a rape suspect in much-criticized case in which it could not be proven the 27-year-old knowingly acted against the woman's wishes, despite her saying no.

"I knew the moment I took on this case that there would be an outcry if there was a not-guilty verdict," Lund district court judge Ralf G. Larsson wrote in an op-ed published on Tuesday on Sveriges Televison (SVT) debate website SVT Debatt.

Larsson underlined that if the suspect had not intended to rape the woman, he could not be convicted of rape.

"If the thought had not occurred to him, that she did not want to have sex with him, then he didn't have any intention to do what he did," the judge wrote.

"He should have been acquitted. That's how the rule of law works and that's how the rule of law should work if I'm going to be a part of the justice system."

He further elaborated that there were parts of the plaintiff's and the suspect's versions of events that testified to the man refraining from certain acts on the insistence of the woman.

"The woman had made very clear to the man at least six times that she did not want to do what he wanted to do," Larsson wrote. "For example, oral and anal sex came up, and at each such incident the man did not proceed with what he wanted to do."

Larsson went on to argue that no judge in Sweden should feel pressured by potential media fallout in difficult cases.

"If what is happening right now in mass and social media has the potential to scare less experienced judges, we're on a dangerous path," Larsson wrote.

The ruling has caused outrage among many Swedes, with protests planned for the weekend, most likely in Stockholm, the Skånska Dagbladet newspaper reports.

The alleged rape took place in the man's apartment after the two, who did not know each other previously, met at a restaurant. While both agree that the evening included consensual kissing, the two had different views about what happened when the man initiated intercourse.

"I expressed very clearly that I didn't want to, so there was no way he could misunderstand me," the woman told investigators. She explained, however, that the man became more aggressive as her protests increased, adding that he "seemed to like it".

The woman screamed so much and so loudly that she eventually lost her voice while the man continued. At one point, he covered her nose and mouth so she couldn't breathe and slapped her in the face, Metro reported.

While the woman told investigators she "expressed very clearly" that she didn't want to have sex, the man told the court that he was convinced the woman was into rough sex, saying he received "very clear signals" that she enjoyed what he was doing.

However, the court ruled it had not been proven that the 27-year-old had acted with intent to act against the woman's wishes, a ruling that left many observers seething.

"Hey! What do you think about putting together a 'Kärrtorp-massive' demo (peaceful), outside/near parliament say next week where we are in the thousands to demand better sex crimes legislation? Mutual consent Act NOW!" Swedish journalist Cissi Wallin wrote via Facebook.

According to critics, the Lund court ruling sets a dangerous precedent that allows the assailant the right to define rape.

http://www.thelocal.se/20140114/swedish-judge-defends-dominant-sex-rape-aquitall

Kobi

01-17-2014, 06:00 PM

If you were live-tweeting NBC’s broadcast of the Golden Globe Awards on Sunday, you saw it. You couldn’t miss it. Ronan Farrow, son of Mia Farrow and Woody Allen and commentator at MSNBC, tweeted: "Missed the Woody Allen tribute–did they put the part where a woman publicly confirmed he molested her at age 7 before or after Annie Hall?"

Farrow’s bald indictment of his estranged father has been retweeted more than 12,000 times. The reference is to his sister, Dylan, adopted daughter of Farrow and Allen, who asserted Allen molested her. A judge found the evidence of molestation inconclusive and Allen has always denied the charge.

Dylan Farrow’s alleged molestation was revealed after Farrow discovered naked photos of another of Farrow’s children, Soon-Yi Previn, then 18, in Allen’s possession. Allen, who is 35 years Previn’s senior, had been having a sexual relationship with Previn while in the relationship with Farrow.

Farrow and Allen had been partners for 12 years at the time Farrow discovered the naked photos of her daughter. Allen had been Previn’s stepfather since she was the same age as Dylan was when she was allegedly molested by Allen.

Previn, 43 and Allen, 78, have now been married for 22 years. They have no children.

The incest story was an ugly coda on what was otherwise a glitzy, boozy, fun-filled evening. Many others have commented on the Twittersphere about Ronan Farrow’s raw declaration and the story of Allen’s past has become the news–not the Cecil B. DeMille Lifetime Achievement Award he was given for his dozens of films.

As Oscar-winner Susan Sarandon noted the day after the Golden Globes on Twitter: "Couldn’t watch the tribute to #WoodyAllen last night after having read this"

The plethora of comments on Ronan Farrow’s tweet and Mia Farrow’s link to the Vanity Fair story Sarandon also tweeted were in stark contrast to the effusive tribute actress Diane Keaton gave as she accepted the award for Allen who never attends award ceremonies.

Keaton focused not just on Allen’s work as a director and screenwriter, but on Allen’s relationships with women in film, explaining, "It’s kind of hard for me to wrap my mind around the fact that 179 of the world’s most captivating actresses have appeared in Woody Allen’s films. And there’s a reason for this. And the reason is, they wanted to. They wanted to because Woody’s women can’t be compartmentalized. They struggle, they love, they fall apart, they dominate, they’re flawed. They are, in fact, the hallmark of Woody’s work. But what’s even more remarkable is absolutely nothing links these unforgettable characters from the fact that they came from the mind of Woody Allen."

I first wrote about Woody Allen’s problem with little girls back in 1992 for the Philadelphia Inquirer. My then-editor and I had discussed what lines had and had not been crossed, what was and was not "acceptable." We both agreed Allen’s films were brilliant (I still rank Manhattan as one of the top ten best American films), but I took a harder line on Allen and his "girl problem."

Allen’s relationship with Soon-Yi was incest. Mental health professionals and social workers backed me up. When your relationship to a child is one of parent, and you have sex with that child, it’s incest.

Woody Allen isn’t the first child predator to have been feted by Hollywood. There’s a long tradition of this, going back as far as silent pictures. Charlie Chaplin, the big screen’s biggest star of the Silent Era had four wives–aged 17, 15, 25 and 18 when he married them. When the Allen scandal first broke in 1992, Chaplin’s scandalous behavior was revived.

And then, of course, there was Roman Polanski, who was arrested for the rape of Samantha Geimer. Geimer was 13, Polanski, 43 at the time he was convicted. Rather than face jail time, Polanski fled the country and has lived in lavish exile from America ever since, continuing to make films and win awards. In 2009 he was put under house arrest in Switzerland, but attempts by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to have him extradited to the U.S. were unsuccessful and in 2010 the Swiss released him from house arrest. He remains on an Intepol list, however.

When extradition was being argued, actors and directors in Hollywood spoke out in support of Polanski, including out lesbian actress, director and producer, Jodie Foster, who starred in Polanski’s 2012 film, Carnage.
Woody Allen was among 100 filmmakers and actors who signed a petition for Polanski.

In an open letter, Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein was adamant as he demanded that "every U.S. filmmaker to lobby against any move to bring Polanski back to the U.S." Weinstein argued that "whatever you think of the so-called crime, Polanski has served his time."

Well, no. He served 42 days before he was freed on bond and fled the country. That’s hardly serving one’s time. Nor was it a "so-called" crime. Rape is real. Conversely, Geimer, whose memoir The Girl was published in Sept. 2013, has lived her entire life in the shadow of her rape by Polanski.

In recent years former child stars, Allison Arngrim of Little House on the Prairie and Corey Feldman, one of the biggest child stars of the 1980s, have talked about their experiences with pedophiles in Hollywood. Feldman, who also spoke for his late friend and fellow child star Corey Haim, has said abuse of child actors is "rampant" in Hollywood, but the industry turns a blind eye to it.

As it did Sunday night when it honored Allen with one of its most prestigious awards.

What do we do when famous men, including talented geniuses like Allen and Polanski, rape?
Excuses get made, certainly. Mia Farrow has been described as a jealous, vindictive woman when she really was simply a protective mother. Ronan Farrow’s remarks have been addressed in a somewhat more tempered fashion, but still blame his mother for poisoning his perception of Allen.

Yet there is Soon-Yi Previn: evidence. While she was not a blood relation to Allen when he began his affair with her when she was a teenager, he only knew her in one capacity: as his step-daughter. He had presumably bathed and dressed her when she was a young girl. He had most certainly seen her naked as his step-daughter as she and her siblings were in the house.

Neither Previn nor Allen has ever acknowledged when the affair began, but it likely began prior to her turning 18.

As for Polanski, no argument can be made that supports his acts, despite Weinstein’s (who has children of his own), Foster’s (also a mother), Allen’s and others’ impassioned pleas for clemency.

It also doesn’t matter what Polanski’s victim might say about forgiveness or it having been a long time ago or that the media has hurt her more than Polanski did. Rape is a crime and the transcripts are clear: Geimer was raped vaginally and anally and also orally. No one gets a free pass on rape.

If the guy down the street did it instead of a famous director, we wouldn’t even be discussing it. Whoopi Goldberg would not have said of that guy what she said of Polanski on The View after Polanski’s arrest in Switzerland.

"I know it wasn’t rape-rape. It was something else but I don’t believe it was rape-rape. He went to jail and when they let him out he was like, ‘You know what, this guy’s going to give me a hundred years in jail. I’m not staying.’ So that’s why he left."

Later in the same program Goldberg continued, "We’re a different kind of society [now], we see things differently. Would I want my 14-year-old having sex with somebody? Not necessarily, no."

Except the 13-year-old Geimer didn’t have consensual sex with the 43-year-old Polanski. The transcripts are clear on this point. Polanski gave her champagne and Quaaludes, put her in a hot tub and then raped her.
Yet there were Goldberg and Foster defending the rapist while also dismissing the victim.

And therein lies the problem for so many people. Our perspective is skewed by genius and celebrity. As comedian Chris Rock famously said on Oprah about the black community’s response to Michael Jackson’s alleged pedophilia, "We love Michael so much we let the first kid slide."

And also Chaplin, Polanski and Allen.

But some, like Mia and Ronan Farrow, are not as willing to dismiss the rape of children by adult men. Mia Farrow, whose humanitarian work with UNICEF and other organizations in places like Darfur, on behalf of children, is world-renowned, was named one of the most influential people in the world by Time magazine. She has four biological children and has adopted 11, many with special needs. She is a renowned champion for children’s rights.

In the Vanity Fair article from last October, Mia Farrow speaks candidly about the crimes she alleges Allen committed against her and her children. It’s harrowing detail from a woman whose best work on screen was all done with Allen. And in that same article Dylan Farrow speaks for the first time about the sexual abuse.

On CBS’s The Talk on Jan. 13, co-host Sharon Osbourne said Farrow’s family had suffered greatly because of Allen. But only a few minutes later she went on to excuse Polanski.

In 2012, my partner took me to dinner and a film on my birthday. We went to see the film version of the Tony Award-winning play God of Carnage by French playwright Yasmina Reza. I was a fan of her work and I was excited to see the film version, Carnage, starring Jodie Foster.

I didn’t realize until the end credits that the film had been directed by Polanski.

I wrote about how disconcerted I was in Curve (Living Our Politics, Brownworth, Victoria A.//Curve, May 2012, Vol. 22, Issue 4, p28) and how much I struggled with this issue of the art versus the acts of the artist.
I’m still struggling.

How do we–especially women and survivors of rape, incest and sexual assault–contextualize the work of genius rapists? Can we? Should we? While Chaplin was making some of the greatest films the world had known or would know, he was also having sex with girls. Not women, girls. Girls he had access to solely because he was a great film star and director.

Polanski had access to Geimer because he told her mother he was going to shoot photos of her for French Vogue. He wasn’t some creepy guy down the block, he was a Holocaust concentration camp survivor and one of the most acclaimed directors in the world. But two years prior to his being charged with the rape of Geimer, Polanski had an affair with Nastassja Kinski, during the filming of Tess. She was 15.

Michael Jackson built a pedophile’s paradise on the Neverland Ranch. What child wouldn’t want to be a guest there? What parent would deprive their under-privileged child that dream? How many children did he molest?
Allen had access to Dylan and Soon-Yi because they were the children of his partner, Farrow. But in Manhattan, the then-45-year-old Allen is in love with the then-17-year-old Mariel Hemingway’s character, a high school student. That’s just the plot, of course, but he dumps the adult woman played by Keaton for the pubescent Hemingway.

As he later would Farrow for her teenage daughter.

I would like to have clear-cut answers. But I never stopped listening to Michael Jackson and I’ve taught Chaplin for two decades in my film classes. Allen’s Manhattan and Polanski’s Chinatown will forever be on my top-ten list of greatest American films and Keaton’s right–Allen does indeed present fully realized female characters, like those in Hannah and Her Sisters. Polanski’s Repulsion is, I believe, one of the best films of the 1960s and possibly his own greatest film and a deeply compelling accounting of a woman’s sexual trauma.

When I look at the filmographies of these men, I don’t see the faces of their victims, I see the genius of their work.

That unsettles me. What if my own rapist were an artist of merit and had never been prosecuted for the assault that nearly killed me? What would I think of the work then? Conversely if all these other parents are able to distance themselves from these directors’ crimes against children, why can’t I?

And then there’s this: In 2004, when Polanski sued Vanity Fair for libel in a case unrelated to the Geimer rape, his prime witness was...Mia Farrow. He won the lawsuit.

It’s not just these men, these rapists and pedophiles, either. It’s their supporters. What of those who called for Polanski’s release and those who supported Allen’s award? Do we boycott their work as well? Foster is a lesbian icon yet her best friend is the anti-Semitic Mel Gibson and she said she would work with Polanski again. Numerous women signed that petition for Polanski. Actress Debra Winger was nearly in tears as she pleaded for Polanski. And even as she decries what happened in her own family, Farrow remains in touch with Polanski.
Would we feel differently if these men had served time in prison? Would there be a sense that the victim had received justice? Or would it be just as confusing as it is now?

Some argue that the art itself is recompense to the victims. Perhaps a film like Polanski’s The Pianist tells a story so profound about human suffering during the Holocaust that it makes a difference. And no doubt an attorney could argue that Polanski’s own internment in a concentration camp was penance enough for one lifetime–mitigating circumstances.

But doesn’t this all argue again that the guy down the street who rapes a child goes to jail while wealthy artists not only go free, but reap rewards for their work while never being held accountable for actual crimes? Living in Gstaad for the decades since he raped Geimer has not been the same as a jail sentence for Polanski. And just because Chaplin and Allen married their victims doesn’t make them any less victims.

I can appreciate the brilliance of films like Manhattan or Chinatown. What I can’t do is pretend their auteurs’ crimes don’t matter. Nor should the various academies. There would be some measure of accountability in not giving Oscars and Golden Globes to such men. A small gesture toward their victims, but a statement that those victims matter, irrespective of canon or genius. The only way to make the crimes stop is to stop rewarding their perpetrators. For now that seems to be the only recourse we still have.

http://www.shewired.com/opinion/2014/01/17/op-ed-when-hollywood-excuses-famous-men-who-rape

Kobi

01-19-2014, 12:31 AM

To Montanans, Missoula is a college town of about 68,000 with a laid-back, hippie vibe. But elsewhere, Missoula is also known as the "rape capital" of the country.

Between January 2008 and May 2012, Missoula police received more than 350 sexual-assault reports, including multiple cases of assault allegedly committed by University of Montana football players. The US Department of Justice found that city officials did not adequately handle all of these reports—going so far as to charge that police were using "sex-based stereotypes" to discriminate against women who reported rape. Last month, the Justice Department proposed an agreement that would require the Missoula County Attorney's office to make a number of changes. The DOJ recommended adding two or three new staff positions, including an advocate for victims; ramping up training for county supervisors and prosecutors; and collecting more data on sexual-assault cases, including feedback from victims. Last week, the county's chief prosecutor rejected the offer and told the feds to take a hike, insisting they have no authority to tell his office what to do.

"The DOJ is clearly overstepping in the investigation of my office," Missoula County Attorney Fred Van Valkenburg tells Mother Jones. "The Missoula Police Department and our office have done a very good job of handling sexual-assault allegations regardless of what national and local news accounts may indicate."

Missoula's rape problem rose to national attention when six members of the University of Montana football team, the Grizzlies, were accused of committing, attempting, or helping cover-up sexual assault between 2009 and 2012. In March 2012, facing scrutiny over how it was handling assault allegations leveled against athletes, the university fired its football coach and athletic director. In May 2012, Attorney General Eric Holder said he was launching a federal investigation into whether Missoula officials and the university were discriminating against female rape victims, noting he found the allegations "very disturbing."

In May 2013, the Justice Department released findings from its investigation, indicating officials in Missoula were indeed discriminating against female victims in sexual-assault cases. For example, according to the Justice Department's report, one Missoula detective allegedly told a woman who said she was vomiting during her sexual assault—she was allegedly raped by several people—that "she might have had a case if if she had been unconscious during the rape rather than merely incapacitated." In another case where a woman reported vaginal and anal rape, a detective reportedly asked her why she hadn't fought harder, saying, "Tell me the truth—is this something we want to go through with?" (Van Valkenburg says, "Both our office and the police are very much aware of what is necessary to legally prove that a woman who is incapacitated by alcohol and/or drugs did not consent to a sexual act. Local prosecutors fully understand these issues.") The Justice Department also determined that the Missoula attorney's office provides "no information" to local police as to why it declines to prosecute sexual assault cases and police are "frustrated" with the "lack of follow-up and prosecution." (Missoula Police Captain Mike Coyler says, "As a general rule, I disagree with this.")

The month it released those findings, the Justice Department entered into agreements with the University of Montana and the Missoula Police Department to beef up resources to combat rape. (Lucy France, legal counsel for the university, says that she disagrees with the Justice Department's findings that the university discriminated against victims and botched investigations, but "we agreed to work to continue to improve our responses to reports.") Last month, the US Attorney for Montana proposed that the Missoula County Attorney's office enter a similar agreement to ensure that it responds to sexual assault without discrimination. In response, Van Valkenburg wrote in a January 9 letter that his office would commit to help the police department and the university meet their commitments—but he wouldn't make the Justice Department's recommended changes to his office.

"Missoula County Attorneys Office does not need to enter into an agreement with DOJ to protect victims of sexual assault, [we have] actively assisted victims for years," Van Valkenburg wrote, arguing that the two federal statutes that the Justice Department cites—one of which deals with gender discrimination—do not legally justify imposing changes on his office. The prosecutor is correct that the Justice Department can't force recommendations on the office, says Christopher Mallios, an attorney adviser for AEquitas, which receives funding from the Department of Justice to help local prosecutors better handle sexual-violence cases. But he adds, that if the Justice Department is able to prove civil rights violations in court, a judge could enforce them. Van Valkenburg says that his office is already meeting many of the Justice Department's demands, and even if he had the funding, he wouldn't add the three new staff members the feds want, because they'd represent "a duplication of services" provided by other city units. Van Valkenburg says if the Justice Department doesn't back off in the next two weeks, he will take the issue to federal court.

"I'm not aware of another case where a prosecutor said we would rather litigate and go to trial than make some changes," Mallios says. And other experts say the prosecutor's response is unusual: "No prosecutor wants to admit that they have shortcomings, especially on such a sensitive issue," says Sarah Deer, who worked for the Justice Department's Office on Violence Against Women in the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. "But there is a culture in some offices that sexual assault is sort of overstated or victims tend to lie. That might be what's going on here—a culture of indifference."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/01/montana-rape-investigation-prosecution

Kobi

01-19-2014, 11:53 AM

During a debate over an anti-abortion bill currently advancing in Congress, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) suggested that Republicans support restricting access to abortion because it will ultimately benefit the economy if women have more children. Goodlatte noted that carrying pregnancies to term “very much promotes job creation.”

Goodlatte made the comments while presiding over a committee mark-up of the “No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act,” or HR 7, on Wednesday afternoon. That legislation would dramatically restrict women’s access to affordable abortion care by imposing restrictions on insurance coverage and tax credits for the procedure. Goodlatte, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, advanced HR 7 by scheduling it for a full committee mark-up on Wednesday.

Explaining his support for the measure, Goodlatte made both a moral and an economic case for anti-choice laws. “I would suggest that it is very much the case that those of us in the majority support this legislation because it is the morally right thing to do but it is also very very true that having a growing population and having new children brought into the world is not harmful to job creation,” he said. “It very much promotes job creation for all the care and services and so on that need to be provided by a lot of people to raise children.”

In reality, denying women autonomy over their reproductive lives is not a wise economic policy. Without access to affordable family planning services, women are less likely to be able to finish their education, advance their career, or achieve financial independence. The low-income women who end up carrying unwanted pregnancies to term end up slipping deeper into poverty and struggling with long-term mental health issues. That ends up impacting the social safety net, putting a greater strain on the Medicaid program. In fact, the Guttmacher Institute estimates that every $1 invested into family planning programs yields more than $5 in savings for the U.S. government.

The Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee have expressed fierce opposition to HR 7. On Tuesday, the female committee members wrote a letter to Goodlatte criticizing him for deciding to advance the bill.

“As we urge Congress in 2014 to consider legislative action that would meaningfully address the economic insecurity currently facing millions of women and families, the Judiciary Committee’s first action to mark up legislation that would harm women’s access to reproductive health care is truly dispiriting,” they wrote. “We strongly oppose this sweeping anti-choice bill.”

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/01/15/3168601/congressman-births-job-creation/

Allison W

01-21-2014, 05:34 PM

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) is an awful person who says awful things

Deceit at its finest. More children born into poverty is beneficial for the people he serves, which is to say, wealthy corporate masters and not the people at large. More poor workers creates more competition for what few jobs exist, thereby creating a race to the bottom in which jobs increasingly are awarded to the lowest bidder. Lather, rinse, and repeat until 99% of America lives in poverty and the 1% has all of their money.

So he's killing two birds with one stone: he's trying to simultaneously subjugate women for being women and poor people for not being rich. I cannot think of many fates he could suffer that would be as horrible as he deserves.

Kobi

01-21-2014, 05:40 PM

Deceit at its finest. More children born into poverty is beneficial for the people he serves, which is to say, wealthy corporate masters and not the people at large. More poor workers creates more competition for what few jobs exist, thereby creating a race to the bottom in which jobs increasingly are awarded to the lowest bidder. Lather, rinse, and repeat until 99% of America lives in poverty and the 1% has all of their money.

So he's killing two birds with one stone: he's trying to simultaneously subjugate women for being women and poor people for not being rich. I cannot think of many fates he could suffer that would be as horrible as he deserves.

Originally Posted by Kobi View Post
Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) is a fuckie fuck face

Kobi never called Bob Goodlatte a fuckie fuck face. Kobi is much better with words and would never resort to such childishness.

I have enough issues with the stuff I DO say. Let's not put words in my mouth. ;)

Allison W

01-21-2014, 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by Kobi View Post
Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) is a fuckie fuck face

Kobi never called Bob Goodlatte a fuckie fuck face. Kobi is much better with words and would never resort to such childishness.

I have enough issues with the stuff I DO say. Let's not put words in my mouth. ;)

All right all right I fixed it

Soon

01-22-2014, 05:06 AM

After historic tennis win, Eugenie Bouchard answers the most sexist question in post game interview (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/celebrity-news/the-a-list/after-historic-tennis-win-eugenie-bouchard-answers-the-most-sexist-question-in-postgame-interview/article16426373/?click=tglobe#dashboard/follows/)

Who cares that Eugenie Bouchard became the first Canadian to advance to the semi-finals of the Australian Open last night? Apparently the most important thing is that she would like to date Justin Bieber.

Moments after knocking out Ana Ivanovic in a hard-fought three-set upset, Bouchard faced the double standard of the sports world head-on as the courtside interviewer Samantha Smith pointed up at a clutch of men in the stadium known as the Genie Army.

“You’re getting a lot of fans here,” noted Smith, a former British tennis champ. “A lot of them are male, and they want to know: If you could date anyone in the world of sport, of movies – I’m sorry, they asked me to say this – who would you date?”

Blushing like the teenager she is, Bouchard giggled and replied: “Justin Bieber.” As members of the Genie Army booed their displeasure, Bouchard looked at the camera and added: “Justin, if you’re watching … um: Hey!”

While Bouchard took the question good-naturedly, plenty of fans were offended on her behalf, venting their displeasure over Twitter.

“RIDICULOUS,” declared Katarina Williams, a sports reporter based in New Zealand. “Was there nothing tennis-related she could’ve actually asked instead?” Rick VanSickle, an Ontario wine writer declared: “Bizarre question to ask an athlete after historic tennis win.”

(Meanwhile, plenty of fans – primarily men – also took to Twitter to criticize Bouchard for her choice in men.)

If Bouchard was offended by the question, she didn’t show it. In a postmatch interview with the New York Times on Tuesday, she elaborated on her desire to meet Bieber.

“Don’t worry, it’s going to happen,” she told reporter Ben Rothenberg. “Yes. But I think I need to do something bigger to get his attention, like win a Slam, something like that. I won’t even have to do anything, and maybe he’ll just reach out, and we’ll tweet or something like that.”

Soon

01-22-2014, 04:21 PM

Parents Hope Their Sons Are Geniuses and Their Daughters Aren't Fat (http://jezebel.com/parents-hope-their-sons-are-geniuses-and-their-daughter-1506826763)

Another reason to feel bad for today's little girls: one day, the straight ones will grow up to face a dating selection consisting of doted upon nightmare boys raised by parents who used the power of the internet to validate their sneaking suspicion that their lil' All Star might be a genius. Meanwhile, the girls' parents used Google to determine whether or not their little princesses were fat. If the children are the future, the future is fucked.

According to Google analytics examined by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz at the New York Times, parents are two and a half times more likely to Google "Is my son gifted?" than they were to search for "Is my daughter gifted?" This despite the fact that, across the country, young girls do better in school than boys. They weren't particularly worried if their daughter was stupid, either; although parents tended to seek out confirmation that their son was the Alpha Boy, the One, the Luke Skywalker or the Harry Potter or the Jen from The Dark Crystal or whatever, they also were more likely to turn to Google to discover if their son was stupid, or slow, or behind in school than they were for their daughters. But they were still much more likely to think he was a genius.

Not that parents weren't worried about their little sugar/spice/everything nice concoctions; Stephens-Davidowitz notes that when it comes to daughters, parents are quite concerned that they might be — Quelle horreur! — fat or ugly. In fact, people were twice as likely to search for "Is my daughter overweight" than "Is my son overweight," despite the fact that childhood obesity is more prevalent in boys than it is in girls. They were also more likely to ask Google if their daughter was ugly, because that's a thing that Google knows. (Googling "Is my daughter ugly?" should automatically send an alert out to local child protective services, tbh.)

Most depressingly, Stephens-Davidowitz noted that there was no correlation between geographic distribution and tendency for internet users to want their sons to be geniuses and their daughters to be beauty queens; both the reddest of the red states and the crunchiest of the granola states took to Google to ask the same things for their offspring.

As Amanda Marcotte notes at Slate, this might not just be because parents are Part Of The Problem; it may be because parents understand the reality of the world where we live. And parents, for the most part, just want what's best for their kids; they want them to succeed, to be happy, and to be treated with respect by their peers. Men can achieve that by being intelligent. Women have an easier time if they're hot. Overweight women, or women who aren't conventionally attractive, are much less likely to be given a leg up in work (or in life) than women who are thin or conventionally attractive. Men, on the other hand, can get away with looking a lot sloppier. It's just like that episode of Tyra where she walked around in a fat suit secretly filming people be mean to her.

There's also the possibility that parents have a narcissistic stake in their children's social success. Asking Google "Is my son gifted?" can easily be a query with its own projected self-assurance, and corresponding confirmation bias. Kids, after all, are the result of parents combining their genes, and there must be nothing more disturbing to a person convinced that they're awesome than having to face their totally unremarkable DNA staring them back in the face, rocking their world with bland averageness, or worse, below averageness. Or maybe I'm just biased myself for having spent too much time dodging Brooklyn's herd of McLaren strollers.

But this also hints that as much as self-proclaimed progressives wantto exist in a world where looks don't matter to the point where they can be ignored, they still matter. None of us exist outside of the context of the society where we live, which is why the concept of being "color blind" or "gender blind" is false to the point of silliness. We're not individual entities free of baggage; we are baggage. No matter who we are, and where we live, it's impossible to escape the pervasive message that women are more valuable when they're more decorative and men are more valuable when they're the ones doing the thinking and deciding. And we don't need Google to tell us that.

Kobi

01-23-2014, 03:42 PM

Mike Huckabee says Democrats make women feel helpless to control their libido by offering government-sponsored birth control.

The onetime presidential candidate and former Arkansas governor told the Republican National Committee during a speech Thursday that they can’t allow liberals to frame the debate any longer.

“I think it’s time Republicans no longer accept listening to the Democrats talk about a ‘war on women,’” Huckabee said. “Because the fact is, the Republicans don’t have a war on women. They have a war for women.”

He said Democrats convinced women they were victims, but Republicans wanted to empower them.

“Women I know are outraged that Democrats think that women are nothing more than helpless or hopeless creatures whose only goal in life is to have a government provide for them
birth control medication,” Huckabee said. “Women I know are smart, educated, intelligent, capable of doing anything anyone else can do.”

Huckabee made similar remarks Sunday during his Fox News program.

He said the Republican Party, which kicked off its annual winter conference by sending participants to the March for Life, stands for the equality of women.

“If Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing them for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of government, then so be it,” Huckabee said.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/23/huckabee-dems-say-women-cant-control-their-libido-without-birth-control-from-uncle-sugar/

-------------------------------------

I see the GOP has been advised to reframe the war on women to the war for women.

Allison, you might be clairvoyant. I am a leetle closer to calling someone a fuckie fuck face.

Kobi

01-24-2014, 11:07 AM

Conservatives are attacking Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis (D) for misrepresenting her background, in particular the hardships she faced as a young single mother. But one Texas Republican is defending Davis' record, saying the gubernatorial candidate wouldn't be subject to the same criticism if she were male.

On Sunday, a Dallas Morning News article pointed out some discrepancies in the stories Davis has told -- including when she was divorced from her first husband, how long she lived in a trailer and how she paid for law school. In response, conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh have labeled her a "genuine head case" and claimed she had a "sugar daddy."

Some pundits have even suggested that Davis was a negligent parent for leaving her children with her second husband while she attended Harvard Law School in the early 1990s.

Becky Haskins, a Republican who served with Wendy Davis on the Fort Worth City Council, told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on Tuesday that Davis was a hard worker who did what she needed to do for her daughters.

“If this involved a man running for office, none of this would ever come up,” Haskins told the Star-Telegram. “It’s so sad. Every time I ran, somebody said I needed to be home with my kids. Nobody ever talks about men being responsible parents.”

“They wouldn’t be talking about Wendy if she weren’t a threat," Haskins added.

Davis' main Republican opponent in the Texas governor's race, state Attorney General Greg Abbott, accused her of “systematically, intentionally and repeatedly deceiv[ing] Texans for years about her background."

Davis has admitted that she was 21 when she divorced her first husband, not 19 as previously stated. (She was 19 with a baby when the two were separated.) She has also acknowledged that her second husband paid for a portion of her education.

In a Monday release from her campaign, Davis responded to Abbott's attacks with defiance.

"[The attacks] won’t work, because my story is the story of millions of Texas women who know the strength it takes when you’re young, alone and a mother," Davis said in the release. "I’ve always been open about my life not because my story is unique, but because it isn’t."

And in an email to her supporters sent Tuesday, Davis said, "You’re damn right it’s a true story."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/22/wendy-davis-attack_n_4645187.html

Kobi

01-24-2014, 04:18 PM

*****Trigger Warning*****

“Ignore the barrage of violent threats and harassing messages that confront you online every day.” That’s what women are told. But these relentless messages are an assault on women’s careers, their psychological bandwidth, and their freedom to live online. We have been thinking about Internet harassment all wrong. (http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/women-arent-welcome-internet-72170/)

Kobi

01-24-2014, 04:52 PM

http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/9f/b7/44/9fb744e436b46ab8c967b97ae485951f.jpg

"In a survey of high school students, 56% of the girls and 76% of the boys believed forced sex was acceptable under some circumstances. A survey of 11-to-14 year-olds found that 51% of the boys and 41% of the girls said forced sex was acceptable if the boy, "spent a lot of money" on the girl; 31% of the boys and 32% of the girls said it was acceptable for a man to rape a woman with past sexual experience; 87% of boys and 79% of girls said sexual assault was acceptable if the man and the woman were married; 65% of the boys and 47% of the girls said it was acceptable for a boy to rape a girl if they had been dating for more than six months."

This is from an internet conference from Harvard Law School that was held back in 2002. I cannot track down the study itself.

Even tho it is 12 years old, it still surprised me. It is a mindset that I expected back in my generation of the 60's and 70's.

Interesting reading tho. Access course here. (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/VAW02/ccandc.html)

Kobi

01-27-2014, 10:49 AM

This word describes so much of what we see in the cultural and systemic treatment of trans* women in our culture and ties in so clearly with feminism, and yet it’s not a word that many people know about or understand.

You may have heard of transphobia: the discrimination of and negative attitudes toward transgender people based on their gender expression.

And you’ve likely heard of misogyny: the hatred and denigration of women and characteristics deemed feminine.

Transmisogyny, then, is the confluence of these – the negative attitudes, expressed through cultural hate, individual and state violence, and discrimination directed toward trans* women and trans* people on the feminine end of the gender spectrum.

Who Is Vicitimized by Transmisogyny?

Transmisogyny targets transgender and transsexual women – male-to-female (MTF) people who were assigned a male gender at birth, but have transitioned to identify as women.

Transgender women are not the only people who experience transmisogyny.

Trans* people who do not necessarily identify as women, but who present feminine characteristics and/or identify along the feminine end of the gender spectrum are also on the receiving end of transmisogyny.

Transmisogyny is all about the hatred of the feminine, and it is not limited toward only those who identify as women. It includes transfeminine and feminine-identified genderqueer people, as well as many others who are feminine-of-center but were not assigned a female gender at birth.

So for the purpose of simplicity and brevity in this article, I will use the term trans* women (the asterisk used to mark inclusivity of those who are not necessarily transgender, but are also not cisgender) to refer to all people victimized by transmigogyny; when specifically referring to transgender women, I will use that terminology.

Why Does Transmisogyny Exist?

Transmisogyny is based in the assumption that femininity is inferior to masculinity.

It relies on an understanding of all those qualities that are associated with ”femaleness” and devaluing them, viewing them as less than those qualities associated with “maleness” and therefore as deserving of hatred, mockery, and violence.

This sounds a whole lot like sexism, doesn’t it?

Why should there be a specific word used to describe the experience of trans* people who are specifically feminine? How is this different from sexism and transphobia?

Trans* women experience a particular kind of sexist marginalization based in their unique position of overlapping oppressions – they are both trans* and feminine. They are devalued by society on both accounts.

Trans* people experience transphobia, or cissexism, due to a cultural and systemic obsession with the gender binary: the idea that there are two types of people – men and women – who are born, raised, and naturally associate with that gender and its accompanying characteristics. Our cultural and political institutions are based on this premise.

Transmisogyny reflects a hatred of those who do not fit easily into either side of the gender binary.

Trans* women are not always easily categorized, and for people and institutions whose understanding of gender relies deeply in the repressive gender binary, this is confusing, transgressive, and for some, worthy of hate.

The response to the existence of those who challenge the social understanding of gender, then, is extreme oppression and marginalization of trans* people of all gender expressions.

Trans-Femininity and Sexism

Our society is steeped in the notion that women and characteristics coded as feminine are inferior to men and those qualities coded as masculine.

In our sexist society, being a woman automatically places you in a position of less value.

But to give up one’s “important” position as a man, choosing (as trans* people are perceived to do) to be a woman and to be feminine, in a way, poses a fundamental threat to male superiority and may be seen as a rejection of the “superior male identity.”

Trans* women are not only a reminder to society that gender categories are not fixed, but also that womanhood and feminine gender expression is not something to be ashamed of.

In this way, understanding transmisogyny is absolutely imperative to our work as feminists, and makes clear just how integral trans* issues and rights are to our work around gender.

Not only is transmisogyny steeped in sexism, but the resulting oppression is parallel to what cisgender (those who identify with the gender of which they were assigned at birth) women face: physical objectification, over-sexualization, stereotyping, policing of bodies, a discrimination on all levels of society, and individual and systemic acts of violence.

The Violence of Transmisogyny

Transmisogyny rears its ugly head in many ways and on all levels of society.

We see it, for instance, in violence on an individual level.

Hate crimes against trans* people are disproportionately and tragically high, and the majority of this violence victimizes trans* women.

In fact, over half of all anti-LGBTQIA+ homicides were perpetrated against transgender women. And while we’re talking statistics, it’s important to note that nearly three-quarters of those homicides targeted people of Color.

We see transmisogyny in state violence as well.

1 in 5 transgender women (21%) has been incarcerated at some point in her life. This is far above the general population, and is even higher (47%) for Black transgender people.

According to the National Center for Transgender Equality, trans* people experience disproportionately high rates of poverty and homelessness caused by discrimination in jobs and housing, but they also experience greater incarceration rates, largely due to gender profiling by the police.

Gender is policed, quite literally by police officers who target, arrest, and often harass trans* women for looking “different” and therefore, “disorderly.” Trans* women of Color, in particular, tend to be perceived by police through racialized and gender stereotypes framing them as highly sexual and as criminal.

Trans* women are consistently targeted and arrested for being involved in sex work, even if they have no association with this work.

There have been many instances where trans* women, most often trans* women of Color, have been arrested for carrying condoms.

In New York, where having a condom on you can be used as evidence of involvement in sex work, trans* women are being profiled, searched, and arrested for being a trans* woman at the wrong place at the wrong time.

There’s also direct violence at the hands of police: A 2012 study by the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs found that transgender people across the U.S. experience three times more police violence than cisgender people.

And nearly half of trans* people who reported hate crimes to the police experienced mistreatment from them while asking for help.

Trans* women experience abuse after being arrested as well, when they are most often forced to reside in men’s prison facilities, experiencing extremely high rates of sexual and physical violence – a study by the Department of Justice found that 1 in 3 are sexual assaulted in prison. In response, many prisons place trans* women in solitary confinement for extended periods of time “for their own protection.” (Meanwhile, solitary confinement is considered a form of torture.)

In the Media

While trans* men are generally ignored and made invisible by American media, trans* women are exoticized, their existence perceived as shocking and newsworthy. They are mocked, over-sexualized, and fetishized.

Trans* women are given an extremely two-dimensional portrayal in the news, where they are most often reported on in association of a hate crime. In these reports, their gender is consistently portrayed as confusing and illegitimate, appearing in countless headlines like this one: “Man Dressed as Woman Found Dead.

Our media portrays trans* women in archetypes – as the weak victim of a crime, or as the evil villain; as the mentally unstable character, or as the manipulative one.

They are often pathologized and sexualized, portrayed as someone manipulatively hiding their transgender identity to trick a man into engaging with them sexually or romantically.

They play countless television roles as sex workers.

They are shown as unattractive; they are the butt of jokes, their desire to be feminine mocked, their motives for transitioning questioned.

And while it is difficult to find complex and honest portrayals of trans* women characters on television, it is even more rare to find an authentic and respectful portrayal of a trans* woman of Color (though we have see a few recently, like the great Laverne Cox in Orange is the New Black).

In Queer and Women’s Spaces

Sadly, transmisogyny is also very present in LGBTQIA+ spaces, where trans* women, particularly trans* women of Color, are marginalized within an already marginalized group.

The mainstream LGBTQIA+ movement has been called out many times for excluding trans* people, and there is a pervasive sexism in the movement as well as in social spaces, that promotes transmisogyny and a denigration of feminine qualities.

Masculine privilege, like white privilege, does not disappear once one is in a queer space, and trans* women have been accused of “hurting the movement” due to the visible transgression of many of society’s norms involved in being a trans* woman.

And although it should be the last place where transmisogyny is present, sadly, we see it often in cis-women’s spaces.

Trans* women are excluded from many domestic violence shelters and other crisis spaces that exist in response to violence against women in our society.

Trans* women continue to be excluded from many women-only spaces and feminist events, while some “feminists” continue to speak out against the very existence of trans* women, arguing that they are not “authentic” women and that they are “hurting the movement.”

Trans* women have called these groups and spaces out, creating inclusive spaces in the meantime, citing that they experience sexism and homophobia in very real and concrete ways, and yet are excluded from the spaces which were created in response to these oppressions.

What Can We Do?

Transmisogyny, like sexism, is pervasive and structural, but it also exists in our everyday experiences. Once you understand it, you begin to notice it in personal interactions, on television, and in social movements and political campaigns.

Call it out! Name it for what it is. Transmisogyny, like, sexism, goes unnoticed too often because it is so entrenched in our sociocultural and political understanding of gender. Educate others about this issue.

And most importantly, don’t be afraid to call out other feminists or gay rights advocates for transmisoginistic words and actions. These are the spaces we need to make more inclusive.

It is so important that we work together to find a solution to the problem of transmisogyny’s existence in our movements and that we always act in solidarity with our trans* sisters.

If our movements seek to eradicate transphobia, homophobia, and sexism, then we must place transmisogyny, located at the intersection of these oppressions, at the forefront of our fight.

http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/01/transmisogyny/

Kobi

01-31-2014, 02:56 PM

There’s this fun thing we’ve been talking about for months and years and decades now, and despite continued conversations and critiques of this behaviour, it rages on… We call it trashing or tearing down or sometimes we call it a witch hunt. And it seems particularly popular in feminist circles. It’s not only a successful way to silence women, but the behaviour is sure to go unchallenged by the masses. (Misogyny never goes out of style!)

If you’ve been the focus of said trashing, you’re likely familiar with the ways in which others readily and willfully misrepresent your words, thoughts, arguments, and life in order to silence you and beat you (virtually, verbally, metaphorically) into submission. An odd preoccupation for the “feminist” movement, to be sure.

Feminist blogger, Glosswitch wrote a post about some of these issues recently, after a tweet of hers was twisted around into an excuse to intimidate and bully her, because, SURPRISE! It’s the internet and it’s de rigeur to hate women on the internet. (The internet isn’t very original).

I do hope you’ll read the post in its entirety (no skimming) because, while I will quote her liberally here, I’m not sure I will quite do her arguments justice.

Glosswitch gets at a lot of key issues at play regarding the toxicity that exists in online feminism, but what it comes down to, it seems, is woman-hating:

Right now I’m done with the female social code that commands me to express shame at myself, assume good faith in cruel people and deny my own qualities just so that my presence isn’t too disruptive.

Beyoncé brought the words of Nigerian writer, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, to the masses in her track, ***Flawless, and I think those words are apt: “We teach girls to shrink themselves, to make themselves smaller. We say to girls ‘You can have ambition, but not too much’.”

Indeed, women are supposed to take up as little space as possible — girls learn not to speak up in the classroom, we learn to literally shrink ourselves, physically, by dieting and fetishizing thinness, we are forced to take up as little space as possible on public transit and, more generally, in public spaces (we are even warned to stay out of public places, lest we be assaulted). We’re not supposed to speak up, stand out, say what we really think, or be proud of our accomplishments or success — in fact, we aren’t supposed to be successful and, if we are, we should feel as though we don’t deserve it and know we will be punished for it either way. To be lady-like is to speak without certainty or to not speak at all. So I can’t help but wonder why it’s become acceptable, among certain feminist circles, to tell one another to shut the fuck up or to focus our efforts on silencing other women.

Glosswitch points to a trend in certain feminist circles that’s bothered me for some time. It seems as though we are expected to divulge every single horrific trauma we’ve experienced, every personal moment of oppression or abuse, every single problem/illness/addiction/struggle we might have faced or currently be facing, publicly and via bullhorn, before we are acknowledged as credible or worthy of a voice. Without this outpouring of every-single-horror it is assumed we’ve experienced nothing but diamonds and champagne. Do I need to tattoo “working-class” on my forehead in order to avoid being called “rich” or “classist?” Because I don’t want to. Women shouldn’t have to tell the entire world every gory detail of their stories in order to have a voice. Many women are not in a position to do this, even if they wanted to. (Consider that many abused women, for example, fear for their lives and, as a result, could never speak publicly about their experiences.) Glosswitch points out that, when we don’t engage in this practice, we are seen as deserving of abuse and assumed to have had the privilege of avoiding experiences that few women been lucky enough to avoid. Do we truly believe every woman should divulge her struggles with addiction, poverty, mental illness, or assault in order to be able to speak? Or her history as an abused or prostituted woman? Placing this demand on women by devaluing their voices and experiences should they choose not to divulge, is unacceptable.

Glosswitch notes:

I think, again, this is related to misogyny and visibility and to the idea of women such as me, who don’t succumb to the pressure to create a tragic narrative out of their own twitter bio, as shameless interlopers who deserve a kicking.

She notices, as I have, the way certain feminists have used this routine as a way to privilege their voices and position themselves as “better” or more deserving of a platform than other feminists:

I think a skim through the twitter bios of a number of white feminists who consider themselves “more aware” than so-called media feminists makes the continuation of this misogynist impulse glaringly obvious. I don’t list my depression, my mental health history, my sexual history, my precise attitude towards gender, my family background in my bio. But I could. I know the lingo I’d use. It would make me more than “just” a woman, but that’s why I don’t do it. Being a woman who defines herself by her actions and words should be enough.

In reality, this is silencing. And it’s also misogynist. To silence and shame and vilify other women in order to move your career forward or to build a platform is not a particularly feminist behaviour. Neither is telling a woman she has no right to speak. Neither is bullying and harassing women who do dare to speak. Throwing women under the bus in order to shield yourself from misogyny or to get cookies is cowardly. And believe me, treating other feminists as though they should be perfect people (said “perfect” behaviour is decided by a few, mind you) will only make you fearful, as you will become too scared to say anything of consequence, lest someone treat you in the same way you have behaved towards others. Women don’t need to feel more ashamed or more afraid to speak up than they already do. They don’t need to be told to shut the fuck up. That internalized monologue already exists within us and we fight it every day.

Glosswitch points out that this particular form of woman-hating is often represented as educational, as an exercise in “privilege-checking”:

We don’t allow [feminists] mistakes. We are grossly, rampantly misogynist about them but this form of misogyny is supposed to be corrective, humiliating the privilege out of them.

She points out that there is a long tradition of punishing women who get out of line and who refuse to go along with the status quo and notes that this punishment is reserved for women, not men:

It’s feminists who have the nerve to put honesty before radical posturing who are unsettling. Those who genuinely claim space, which is then written off as “privilege” (because what is a woman doing there?). Such women might actually make a difference. So into the bridle they go.

The “bridle” she refers to is a contraption used centuries ago to punish women deemed “rude,” “riotous,” or “troublesome” — attributes that are commonly and historically ascribed to feminists.

There’s an air of superiority from those who busily seek to ruin and silence other feminists: “We’re doing it right; she’s doing it wrong.” By pointing our fingers elsewhere we keep ourselves safe from attack. It seems pretty clear, though, which white feminists are using valuable ideas like intersectionality to advance their own careers and gain popularity, without an ounce of interest in movements towards ending oppression and with little understanding of structural inequality.

As a white feminist, I would say it is easier – much, much easier – to play along with this. You get to enjoy the privilege of being white and appear superior to the “mere” white feminists who just don’t “get it”. There’s an absurdly careerist edge to this. If you view feminism not as a movement for social change, but as the route to a media career you’ve got to admit it’s a competitive arena. Using other people to play at being the best white intersectional feminist has been seen by some as a gap in the market. Donning the metaphorical tin hat to shout down “bad” peers is a USP. When you boil it down, such “feminists” are arch capitalists, seeking to commodify not just feminism but the exclusion and lived experience of others. It is emotionally manipulative and disgracefully self-serving, but it doesn’t involve laying yourself on the line. You get to be a privileged white woman without looking like one.

Rather than working against privilege, though, this tearing down and this vilification of other-feminists-not-you! reinforces it, Glosswitch argues:

It is easy but morally untenable, insofar as it uses ideas of intersecting oppressions, not to offer context and understanding, but to reinforce privilege by the back door and to silence dissent. I think of it as a form of privilege laundering. I think it is an example of white people exploiting the narratives of women of colour and it sucks.

Attacking women in order to get cookies is a pretty low form of feminism. There are few who will challenge the sport of misogyny. I see feminists throwing women under the bus in order to ally with more powerful liberal white men all too often, under the guise of “intersectionality” and I wonder if they see how deeply misguided they are in their imagined work towards liberation. (Allying with men who work to silence and slander women? You’re doing it wrong.) But maybe it’s not about female liberation after all… maybe it’s just about the cookies…

But now I am on the other side of that imaginary, exploitative privilege line, I see other benefits to approaching feminism not as liberation, but as a self-interested cookie hunt. I didn’t appreciate at the time how much I shielded myself from misogyny by putting the “bad” white feminists out in front.

It’s just too easy. We all know, full well, that we will receive endless support if we hate on feminists. “Virulent hatred of feminists? We got you.” – The internet. It doesn’t make you brave, it makes you boring.

Let me be clear (not that I think my words won’t be ignored and manipulated as they so often are, despite how clear I am) and say that I am not discouraging critique and difficult conversations. But shaming, silencing, manipulation, defamation and vilification, combined with faux-progressive white-lady (of course the white bros love to do this too, don’t forget) posturing, does not encourage either critique or conversation.

I can’t imagine this summary quite articulates the arguments Glosswitch puts forth, but her righteous anger towards many of the “Twitter feminists” who pat themselves on the backs for being “better” than whomever is Twitter’s current punching bag, felt justified. “How dare you have a platform!” it says, “How dare you speak with confidence.” “How dare you speak about your life and your experiences.” “You clearly haven’t learned how to properly perform femininity and you will be punished.”

None of you have the right to tell me what my own words mean, to tell me what my thoughts are, to reconstruct my words and reality without my consent. None of you have the right to damage my mental health, make me doubt my capacity to think, to make me feel unable to trust anyone because of the whispering and distortion that follows. None of you have the right to do this just because I’m a feminist and, if flawed, nonetheless a bloody good one too. None of you has the right to expect perfection from me. None of you have the right to place the scold’s bridle on me, to shame and silence me because I don’t fit in with your hackneyed, conservative misreading of revolution.

In our desperation, we’re looking to escape misogyny by participating in it. We all know that trashing feminists will get you far, but know how transparent and destructive this behaviour is. Know that attacking other women is really about your privilege as it works to protect you from the wrath of a culture that abhors and punishes women who step out of line.

Glosswitch coined the term “misogofeminists” to describe “women (and allies) whose primary form of feminist activism is trashing other women.” And along those lines I’d like to point out what should be obvious, but seems not to be these days: if your “activism” consists primarily of witch hunts and concerted, vicious efforts to silence women, you are doing misogyny, not feminism.

http://feministcurrent.com/8540/woman-hating-by-any-other-name/

Kobi

02-10-2014, 11:42 AM

Trigger warning for sexual assault and strong language.

Between 20-25% of women and 3% of men will experience an attempted or completed sexual assault in college. A girl has roughly the same chance of being sexually assaulted during college, one in four/five, as she does of getting the flu during an average year.

Given these statistics, virtually any college town could be called a college rape capital. Everyone knows that, on campuses especially, alcohol is often a factor. Eighty percent of cases reported (which is only 5% of the total estimated number) involve alcohol. What they are less likely to know is how frequently alcohol is used by rapists; that despite a reduction of rape nationally, sexual assault rates on campuses have not changed in 50 years; and that the Center for Public Integrity has documented widespread victim-blaming and repeated institutional failures. All of this is true 27 years after a family whose daughter was raped and murdered in her college dorm room in 1986 founded the Clery Center for Security On Campus.

So, this is the environment in which the Daiquiri Factory, a bar in Spokane, Washington (a city with at least 10 colleges and universities) recently decided to name a drink "Grape Date Kool Aid." Because punny allusions to a people being sexually violated are so witty. Last weekend, more than 100 people gathered to protest the name and ask that rape be treated seriously. What the hell is wrong with feminists? Can't we give it a rest? Instead of changing the name of the drink, the bar announced, in so much lie-back-and-enjoy-it logic: "We just think everyone simply needs a little daiquiri therapy."

The thing about the bar, however, is that it probably understands its prospective customers all too well. A whole lot of teenagers arrive at college thinking that dehumanizing women and making light of sexual assault is a source of status and entertainment. Take, for example, the young man who wrote this email at William and Mary a few weeks ago:

There's beer to be drunk, porn to view, and sluts to fuck. Let me reiterate that last point: sluts are everywhere... That vagina needs you. Never mind the extremities that surround it, the 99% of horrendously illogical bullshit that makes up the modern woman, consider only the 1%, the snatch." He didn't stop there because apparently that wasn't clear enough. "See some riding boots? Some uggs? A hideous pair of rain boots without a cloud in sight? Now, raise your gaze from the footwear up, allow your eyes to wander from the feet up the long and slender legs of the lesser sex until finally you arrive at God's greatest gift: the box.

This puerile drivel was titled "Life, love and pussy." After this email, framed as a "Save the Sluts" community service project, was leaked, the fraternity that he belonged to issued an apology and outlined disciplinary actions. The administration issued statements and this past week held a town hall meeting, attended by an estimated 700 students, to discuss rape culture.

William and Mary is not unique in any way. While the student there wrote about women as manipulable, inert sex toys, stripped of voices and autonomy, he did not explicitly mention rape as many of these students, in examples spanning the past few years, did:

A group of male students at Georgia Tech received an email signed "In luring rapebait" instructing them to, among other things, grab women "on the hips with your 2 hands and then let them grind against your dick."

At Miami University of Ohio someone thought it was a good idea hang a poster titled "Top Ten Ways to Get Away with Rape," which closed with, "If your [sic] afraid the girl might identify you slit her throat."

A University of Vermont fraternity surveyed members with this question: "If you could rape someone, who would it be?"

At USC boys released a Gullet Report ("gullet" defined as "a target's throat capacity and it's [sic] ability to gobble cock. If a target is known to have a good gullet, it can deep-throat dick extremely well.) For good measure they added some overtly racist material as well.

A woman filed a lawsuit against Wesleyan University citing a fraternity known on campus as the "rape factory."

A Yale fraternity took photos of members holding up signs reading, "We love Yale sluts." Another fraternity had fun running around campus singing, "No means yes! Yes means anal!"

At Amherst, a fraternity had t-shirts made depicting a woman wearing only a bra and a thong. She was bruised and had an apple stuffed into her mouth, bound to a split and being roasted over a fire. The caption read, "Roasting Fat Ones Since 1847."

Nor is this limited to the United States:

The Durham rugby club was reprimanded last Fall for playing an "It's not rape if..." drinking game on campus. They'd already been prohibited from playing competitively after members dressed up like Jimmy Savile, a popular media figure who molested more than 1,000 victims.

At St Mary's University in Canada, more than 80 students sang "Y is for 'Your sister,' O is for 'Oh so tight,' U is for 'Underage,' N is for 'No consent,' G is for 'Grab that ass,'" during an orientation event.

At Wales' Cardiff Metropolitan University a poster for orientation week events featured a man wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with the text: "I was raping a woman last night and she cried."

These are just examples of rape as entertainment, and not of actual rapes and their botched investigations or damaging and tragic effects. Occidental, Emerson, the University of North Carolina, University of Connecticut, Yale, Dartmouth, (and Swarthmore itself) are all currently involved in very public Title IX complaints for allegedly mishandling sexual assault cases, mishandling that creates environments of institutional tolerance for rape and hostility against victims. Many more are grappling with how to avoid the same and manage an environment where 18-year-olds arrive with ideas that are unpalatable to a pluralistic and civil society.

Boys arrive at schools thinking that they can discuss women's "rape potential" with impunity for a reason. As a matter of fact, they feel that rape banter and worse, like posting rape videos online, are ways to gain status. The notion that rape is a serious crime for which they can be held responsible seems not to have entered their heads.

In the United Kingdom, the toxic and sexist expression that permeates schools is euphemistically called "lad culture." What do we call ours? I'd suggest "Boy Crisis," but that's already taken and people are super busy trying to make sure that we create elementary schools that "let boys be boys" so that our pronounced gender gap in self-regulation is maintained instead of eliminated. But, whatever, moving right along.

What will it take for our mainstream culture to teach children that it is unacceptable to talk about and treat other human beings in these ways? There are ways for boys to express their masculinity, create fraternal bonds and explore their sexuality that do not turn girls and women into "boxes," "gullets," "snatches," "pussies," "asses," and "sluts." I know I didn't have to write those words. If they feel assaultive, that's because they are assaultive. This is very obviously hostile and demeaning to women because they are women.

The amazing thing is how much resistance there is to challenging these behaviors on the basis of their misogyny. Neither of the two William and Mary statements, for example, used the words sexism or misogyny, instead opting for "derogatory," "hostile" and "unacceptable," generalized words that are part of our unwillingness to confront the problem at hand. When boys having a "bit of fun" are confronted with objections they and many adults around them seem genuinely shocked and feel as though their "rights" are being challenged. It's too rich.

A few months ago at Swarthmore College, a fraternity pledge posted a photograph on Instagram of his offer to join a fraternity. The picture was of a booklet cover featuring a mosaic of hundreds of naked or nearly naked women. The fraternity had used this format for several years, but this year a group of students led by senior Marian Firke protested the use of the photography. Swarthmore's dean of students agreed with protesters and took steps to address their concerns. Firke was assailed online by men who, after some throwaway "feminist cunt" ramblings, described her as a "Stupid girl who stick[s] [her] opinions where they do not belong," suggested that "somebody needs to send their pledges over to fuck the bitch" and said that she "deserved to be face raped so hard that she will be incapable of spewing any more of this bullshit." This is an abuse of speech that is discriminatory and meant to silence. It does ZERO to support the principles that free speech is meant to protect and enhance and, indeed, definitively degrades them.

As with the William and Mary email, no one at the Swarthmore fraternity advocated or suggested rape. But anyone who thinks that emails and photographs like these do not increase tolerance for rape, create a hostile educational environment for girls and women on campuses and negatively impact their ability to move freely and attend to their studies is deluding themselves. Additionally, not only do these words and media normalize sexism and violence against women, but they endanger boys and men by perpetuating myths that only girls and women can be sexual assault victims.

This could not be simpler: If we want campuses to be safe places for everyone, and if we want male students not to become "accidental rapists," we have to teach little boys and girls that women, as a class, are worthy of respect and have rights, something that is not happening now. At the very least, as a first step, if we have make treating rape like a joke socially unacceptable.

Girls may no longer be scrawling the names of serial rapists on the walls of bathroom stalls in school libraries, but yet, here we are, living with unsafe college campuses and a culture where young men -- and no small number of women -- think rape is funny. There are many initiatives to change campus culture. Some are based on consent, others on sex ed and others on forcing schools to fulfill their obligations to all students equally. There is a thriving Know Your IX national movement and President Obama just announced the creation of a task force to help universities develop best practices for dealing with sexual assault on college campuses. It is as clear as mid-summer Arctic daylight that our "teachable moments" have to happen way before people get to college.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/soraya-chemaly/why-are-so-many-boys-leaving-high-school-thinking-rape-is-funny_b_4759742.html

Kobi

02-26-2014, 02:13 PM

h_Yg2monvw4#t

The film is called, ‘Anita’ and is due for release on March 21, 2014. It was directed by Academy Award-winning filmmaker Freida Mock. In the trailer we see Joe Biden, John McCain, and several other familiar faces who or may not appear favorably to the new viewing public.

The documentary not only gives a fresh account of the Hill/Thomas hearing 22 years later, it also honors a woman who was more than scorned for speaking out against sexual harassment. We are indebted to Hill, as her trial set the stage for new laws protecting women (and men) from sexual and gender discrimination, on and off the job.

Talking about it wasn’t the only thing women did. Within five years, the number of EEOC complaints for sexual harassment doubled. And after realizing their lack of representation in Congress, the following year a record number of women ran for new seats in the House and Senate – and won. It was called, ‘The Year Of The Woman’.

Kobi

02-27-2014, 11:59 AM

http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/1b/f7/be/1bf7be96b180517f85a4476860ded2fd.jpg

Gemme

03-01-2014, 05:55 AM

silkepus

03-01-2014, 06:36 AM

Teacher Sentenced to Just 30 Days in Jail for Rape (http://www.aol.com/article/2014/02/28/teacher-sentenced-in-rape-case-spends-just-30-days-in-jail/20840812/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmaing15%7Cdl6%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D449185)

This is for the rape of the girl in Montana who commited suicide and from the judge who said she 'appeared older than her chronological age' and that, at 14, she had just as much control of the situation as the rapist.

First, blaming and shaming the victim and now an absolutely pathetic sentence. Disgusting.

Thats vile! Its as if the life og young girls mean nothing to the law. Also who cares if a girl acts older than her age. Young girls learn early on how to imitate women she is still a child. And even if a child says yes its the adults job to say no. And if she appeared older how in the world can that be her fault? I looked older than my age at fourteen too. You cant controle how old you look. Urgh. I want to smash things. He should get life and so should the f%@! judge!

Gemme

03-06-2014, 04:50 AM

Passenger Tells a Female Pilot Flying is No Place for a Woman (http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2014/03/05/passenger-tells-a-female-pilot-flying-is-no-place-for-a-woman/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D450972)

There is a whole list of people you're smart not to tick off: a state trooper who pulled you over. A surgeon just before your operation. Your boss when asking for a raise. Oh, and the aircraft pilot you're trusting your life with while traveling.

But that's what a WestJet passenger in Canada did on a routine flight from Calgary to Victoria, British Columbia. Someone by the name of David left a note claiming that a pilot's chair was "no place for a woman" and left it for Captain Carey Smith Steacy, a commercial airline pilot with 17 years of experience, according to CTV News. Addressed to the captain and WestJet, the note, a photo of which is available online at Imgur, scrawled with many misspellings and grammatical errors on a small napkin, read that the "cockpit of airlier is no place for a woman" and that "being a mother is the most honor." The note went on to say that there was a shortage of mothers, not pilots.

At the end of the note was a reference to a Biblical verse from Proverbs, according to the site KingJamesBibleOnline.org: My son, forget not my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments. (It is little known that the Old Testament held a specific prohibition against women flying commercial aircraft.)

The front of the note ended with the thought, "I wish WestJet could tell me a fair lady is at the helm so I can book another flight!"

Metro had an image of the reverse side in which David wrote, "In the end this is all mere vanity," added "not impressed," and signed it "respectfully in love."
“"I just couldn't believe there are still people in this country that think like that," the pilot told Metro. "It just shocked me."

Steacy, who already is a mother, posted an image of the note on her Facebook page and added a response to the passenger, according to the Metro report. She first corrected him on terminology -- it's a flight deck and not a cockpit -- and then "I respectfully disagree with your opinion" and that "there are no places that are not for ladies anymore."

Reportedly, the passenger was asking the flight attendants whether Steacy had enough flight hours to safely handle the craft.

Steacy also wrote that David was "more than welcome to deplane when you heard I was a 'fair lady.'"

In a statement to Metro, WestJet said that it takes "enormous pride in the professionalism, skills and expertise of our pilots and this note is very disappointing."

Kobi

03-06-2014, 07:09 AM

Massachusetts’ highest court has ruled that a man accused of secretly snapping photos up a woman’s skirt on an MBTA train did not break the law.

So-called Peeping Tom laws protect people from being photographed in dressing rooms and bathrooms when nude or partially nude, but the way the law is written, it does not protect clothed people in public areas, the court said. The SJC ruling went on to suggest that the act in this case should be illegal, noting other states including New York and Florida have explicit laws criminalizing public upskirting.

Under the law, the state has to prove five criteria:

That the defendant willfully photographed, videotaped, or electronically surveilled; the subject was another person who was nude or partially nude; the defendant did so with the intent to secretly conduct or hide his photographing activity; the defendant conducted such activity when the other person was in a place and circumstance where the person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy in not being “so photographed”; and the defendant did so without the other person’s knowledge or consent.

The SJC decision says a woman on the MBTA “wearing a skirt, dress, or the like covering these parts of her body is not a person who is ‘partially nude,’ no matter what is or is not underneath the skirt by way of underwear or other clothing.”

Prosecutors argued that a person has a right to privacy beneath his or her own clothes. But justices ruled that because the alleged incident occurred on a public trolley, there is not a reasonable expectation of privacy. They noted that while the prosecution’s “proposition is eminently reasonable,” the current writing of the law that Robertson was charged under does not cover that particular circumstance.

“Because the MBTA is a public transit system operating in a public place and uses cameras, the two alleged victims here were not in a place and circumstance where they reasonably would or could have had an expectation of privacy,” a draft of the ruling stated.

Prosecutors said after the ruling that they planed to take the matter to the Legislature and request a re-write to the current state law.

“Every person, male or female, has a right to privacy beneath his or her own clothing,” Suffolk County District Attorney Dan Conley said. “If the the statute as written doesn’t protect that privacy, then I’m urging the Legislature to act rapidly and adjust it so it does.”

The ruling of the Supreme Judicial Court is contrary to the spirit of the current law,” DeLeo said. “The House will begin work on updating our statutes to conform with today’s technology immediately.”

Senate President Therese Murray says she is “stunned and disappointed” and the Senate “will act swiftly.”

Women riding the MBTA say they are outraged by the decision.

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/03/05/mass-high-court-subway-upskirt-photos-not-illegal/2/

Kobi

03-14-2014, 12:55 PM

Tens of thousands of Americans are pressuring Dartmouth College to strengthen its sexual assault policies, citing the fact that a student was sexually assaulted on campus after her name appeared in a “rape guide” published on a student-run website.

Nearly 50,000 people have signed onto a petition spearheaded by the women’s advocacy group UltraViolet asking the prestigious school to “take action immediately to curb the sexual assault crisis” on campus.

“Student groups have asked the school to list expulsion as the punishment for rape in the student handbook and to block access to the ‘rape guide’ website on campus. But school authorities haven’t taken any of these recommendations seriously,” UltraViolet’s petition notes. “Usually, stories like this get little attention from the news media. But if all of us speak up, Dartmouth won’t be able to hide.”

Dartmouth is currently under federal investigation for potential violations of Title IX, the federal gender equity law that requires universities to ensure a safe learning environment for students. A group of Dartmouth students and alumni have also filed a Clery Act complaint alleging that administrators have failed to accurately report incidences of sexual violence and hazing on campus.

More recently, the college made national headlines after an anonymous individual posted a “rape guide” on the student site Bored at Baker, which is not technically affiliated with the college but which requires a Dartmouth email address to participate. The post gave explicit instructions for how to find and rape a particular female student — tips like “just casually drink with her now and then,” “prove you’re not a dangerous person,” and “she’s easily persuaded; keep on going.” The subject, who was referred to as a “whore,” was identified by name. At the end of February, just weeks after the post was first published on Bored at Baker, the female student said she was raped at a fraternity party at Dartmouth.

And this isn’t the first time that Bored at Baker has been the subject of controversy. Last spring, Dartmouth canceled classes after several students received rape and death threats on the student site. Those students were targeted on Bored at Baker because they interrupted a campus event to protest their administration’s lackluster response to incidences of rape, racism, and homophobia. Afterward, they told ThinkProgress that Dartmouth officials chose to punish them for creating a disruption rather than working to crack down on rapists.

Karin Roland, the campaign director for UltraViolet, told ThinkProgress that the situation at Dartmouth has reached a boiling point — and it’s now possible to harness that frustration to push for real policy reform.

“Dartmouth has had a problem with rape and sexual assault for decades. They have a long history with this issue, and student groups on campus are finally fed up and are leading the charge,” Roland said. “With the help of an online network of members at Ultraviolet to capture the grassroots outrage, we can really make change on this right now.”

This isn’t the first time that UltraViolet has used its online network to leverage change in this area. The group has been working with student activists to combat rape culture for the past year, supporting campus-led efforts to reform the way the U.S. Department of Education handles Title IX enforcement. When President Obama decided to convene a task force on sexual violence on college campuses, UltraViolet gathered stories and suggestions from their members, particularly sexual assault survivors, to help inform that work.

These issues certainly aren’t new, but the power to organize online is giving a louder voice to feminist activists who want to hold public officials accountable for their actions.

“Women are really fed up with rape being excused. I think that’s true on campuses, I think that’s true in our justice system, I think that’s true at the high school level, and I think that’s just becoming true across the country. The ability to connect over online networks has really empowered women to stand up and do something,” Roland pointed out. “If you look at everything from the reaction to Todd Akin’s legitimate rape comment, to Steubenville, to Dartmouth, you can see that women aren’t putting up with it anymore.”

Dartmouth has refuted UltraViolet’s allegations that the administration doesn’t take rape seriously, maintaining that the college has worked to increase the support and prevention resources for issues of sexual assault.

“It is important to note the anonymous author of the post on a privately hosted website referred to in the petition was identified and faces Dartmouth’s disciplinary process,” the school’s Assistant Vice President for Media Relations, Justin Anderson, said in a statement. “Further, we investigate every instance of sexual assault that is brought to our attention and offer multiple levels of support and resources to every survivor. Every day we work to make our community better and safer.”

That’s not good enough for the student activists on the ground who are driving UltraViolet’s activism.

“Survivors and students are speaking out on the ground, in addition to 500,000 UltraViolet members who have their backs,” Roland told ThinkProgress. “As Dartmouth has been dragging their feet to respond, more women have been assaulted. We’re still not seeing action, and we’re not going to stop speaking out until we do.”

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/03/14/3404111/dartmouth-rape-culture-petition/#

Happy_Go_Lucky

03-14-2014, 05:32 PM

Skymark Airlines came under fire from the cabin crew’s labor union, which said the super-short skirt—with a distinctively swinging ‘60s look—barely covers wearers’ thighs.

“We’re concerned that the design of this uniform may cause problems,” including sexual harassment, the Japan Federation of Cabin Attendants said in a statement.

“The airline is saying the uniform is meant to attract more customers, but this shows the company is treating women like a commodity,” it added.

Comments posted on the union’s website said attendants would not be able to carry out their duties effectively owing to fears about leering stares or customers shooting pictures up their skirts with a mobile phone.

The airline, which disputes the union claims, plans to introduce the uniform as a temporary promotion for the launch of domestic routes its Airbus A330 planes in the spring.

The carrier could not be immediately reached on Tuesday.

But last week, Skymark president Shinichi Nishikubo told reporters: “We won’t impose the uniform on any of the cabin attendants who refuse to wear it.”

“It is disappointing that the outfit designed in part for the ad campaign is being seen in a distorted way,” he added.

© 2014 AFP

http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/mini-skirt-turbulence-at-skymark-airlines

Happy_Go_Lucky

03-15-2014, 07:57 AM

http://www.dailydot.com/lol/naked-lets-date-user-mom-blackmail/

As you can guess, dating apps require a certain amount of finesse. But while the nuances of app-based dating culture might be a little tricky to understand, one thing seems pretty clear: Don’t send someone a picture of your junk unless she explicitly asks for one.

One female Let’s Date user found a quick and easy solution to the unwanted dick-pic problem. Tumblr user aheartbeatchanged was chatting with a guy about the weather when this appeared:

“F**k no,” she replied. “I don't need to be disrespected by someone I don't even know."

“Relax,” he wrote back. “It’s only my c**k.”

Things escalated quickly, and, well... see for yourself:

At this point, the smartest thing would’ve been for Trevor to apologize and vanish forever. Especially since he’d just given someone a naked photo that could potentially be, you know, posted on Tumblr for 60,000 people to laugh at and reblog.

Oh yeah. She went there.

As of Sunday night, aheartbeatchanged hasn’t heard back from Trevor’s mom. What she has received is more than a hundred messages from Tumblr users, ranging from supportive to... more poorly worded insults: “If you had/get some good dick (which you obviously haven't/don't) you wouldn't be such a grammar nazi and prude.”

He and Trevor would probably make great friends.

Update: Let's Date writes to clarify that "while the users may have met on Let's Date, the inappropriate photo was not sent via Let's Date as the app's messaging platform does not allow users to send pictures to each other, they are only able to send text."

Photo via Guys With iPhones

Happy_Go_Lucky

03-15-2014, 11:23 AM

Recently, the news and the Internet have been abuzz with stories about Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg and pop star Beyoncé Knowles and their mission to ban the word “bossy” as it applies to girls and women. Their campaign makes sense. It’s no secret that in America, attributes praised in men are often vilified in women. Where a man is bold, confident, daring and a real “go-getter”, a woman is aggressive, bitchy, cocky or a “ball-breaker”. In other words, assertive girls and women get called “bossy”.

Little girls who emerge as natural leaders on the playground are discouraged from being “bossy”. Where little boys might be encouraged to seize the reins of whatever game or activity in which they’re engaged, little girls are scolded to “share”, and “let so-and-so take control, now”. It’s as if being a natural leader is a bad thing, a threat to their femininity. Or worse, a girl’s assertiveness emasculates the boys around her.

Labelling anyone with a negative description like “bossy” damages their self-esteem. And it just isn’t fair. It isn’t fair to squash a girl’s natural leadership skills so that she isn’t labelled as aggressive. Yet while I agree with the thesis behind Ms. Sandberg’s and Ms. Knowles’ campaign, I believe that another term should be eliminated as well. I want to destroy, once and for all, the myth of the “Angry Black Woman”.

Just like the “bossy” label, the Angry Black Woman (ABW) label diminishes and trivializes the experiences and feelings of Black women. If every time a Black woman asserts her rights she gets pigeon-holed as an ABW, her voice is silenced. No one hears her.

The exception, of course, is when Black women speak out for issues that affect men, too. Our outrage is fine as long as we’re marching for civil rights or protesting new voting laws which seek to disenfranchise minorities. Our wrath is justified when we decry the modern day lynching of our young Black men under the Stand Your Ground laws. When we’re rallying against these injustices, our tears are celebrated, held up as emblems of the struggle: grieving mothers, clutching the photographs of our slain sons. But the moment we speak up for ourselves, we become the Angry Black Woman.

http://www.forharriet.com/2014/03/ban-bossy-and-reject-angry-why-we-must.html

*Anya*

03-15-2014, 11:46 AM

Happy_Go_Lucky

03-15-2014, 04:58 PM

A disagreement over the discovery of the cause of Down’s syndrome has resurfaced in France more than 50 years after the findings were published.

The dispute erupted again at the French Federation of Human Genetics' (FFGH) seventh biennial congress on human and medical genetics in Bordeaux at the end of last month.

Paediatric cardiologist Marthe Gautier, who was involved in the experiments that led to the identification of the extra copy of chromosome 21 — the cause of the syndrome — was due to relate her role in the discovery when two bailiffs arrived with a court authorization to record the session. The FFGH then decided at the last minute to cancel Gautier's presentation

http://www.nature.com/news/down-s-syndrome-discovery-dispute-resurfaces-in-france-1.14690

Speaking of men stealing women's work product.....

Happy_Go_Lucky

03-16-2014, 06:03 AM

http://www.buzzfeed.com/caitlincowie/what-happens-when-you-replace-the-women-in-ads-with-men

Commercials tend to show women in provocative poses no matter what product is being sold, so we decided to recreate three of them with men.

Kobi

03-17-2014, 01:48 PM

FORT BRAGG, North Carolina (Reuters) - A U.S. Army general at the center of a rare court-martial of a top military leader was cleared of sexual assault charges on Monday, but admitted to mistreating a junior officer during their inappropriate sexual relationship.

Brigadier General Jeffrey Sinclair pleaded guilty to several lesser military criminal offenses as part of an agreement with the government that dismissed the most serious allegations against him.

The 27-year Army veteran said he knew the female Army captain with whom he had a three-year extramarital affair was enamored by his rank, and he led her on despite knowing he would never divorce his wife.

When he realized his subordinate was emotionally committed to the affair in a way he was not, he flirted with other women and was cold to her in hopes she would become angry enough to break off their secret liaison that spanned two war zones, Sinclair told a judge.

"I failed her as a leader and as a mentor and caused her harm to her emotional state," the one-star general said.

Though vindicated of charges that he forced the captain to perform oral sex and engaged in "open and notorious sexual acts" with her, Sinclair's decorated military career is almost certainly over.

Sinclair's attorneys will argue during the sentencing phase on Monday that he should avoid jail time and be allowed to retire at a reduced rank in keeping with how officers in similar cases have been treated.

The lawyers say Sinclair's case is one of the first courts-martial of a general in nearly 60 years and was fueled by political concerns at a time when the U.S. military is grappling with how to handle rising sexual assault in its ranks.

"Clearly what General Sinclair did was wrong, but it certainly had the appearance that he was being the scapegoat for the bigger sexual assault problem that the military's going through," said Morris Davis, a retired Air Force colonel and former chief prosecutor for terrorism trials at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who is not involved in the case.

TRIAL HALTED BEFORE PLEA

Sinclair, a 51-year-old married father of two, has remained on active duty at the sprawling base at Fort Bragg after being stripped of command in southern Afghanistan in May 2012 as a result of the criminal allegations.

His trial was already under way this month when a judge ruled that politics appeared to have improperly influenced the Army's decision to reject an earlier offer by Sinclair to plead guilty if the charges of coercive sex acts were dropped.

The former lead prosecutor in the case resigned after military leaders refused to dismiss the sex charges despite concerns about the key accuser's credibility. The new chief prosecutor said the government did not doubt the woman's underlying allegations.

The judge last week allowed Sinclair to renew his plea offer, and the general's attorneys announced on Sunday that a resolution to the case had been reached.

The agreement called for the government to drop the sexual assault charges involving the captain, as well as two additional charges that could have required Sinclair to register as a sex offender.

The identity of the captain, a military intelligence officer, is being withheld by Reuters due to the nature of the charges.

Sinclair pleaded guilty to maltreating his accuser, using his government credit card for personal purposes related to the affair and using demeaning language to refer to female staff officers.

He admitted to calling a female major "a red-headed troll" but told the judge he was joking when he said "I'm a general, I'll say whatever the fuck I want."

Sinclair also faces punishment after pleading guilty this month to having an adulterous affair, asking junior female officers for nude photos and possessing pornography on his laptop while deployed in Afghanistan.

He could have been sent to prison for life if he had been convicted of the sexual assault charges, but now faces a far less severe maximum sentence.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/sex-assault-charges-dropped-rare-court-martial-u-154520589.html

Kobi

03-20-2014, 09:08 AM

FORT BRAGG, N.C. - An Army general who carried on a three-year affair with a captain and had two other inappropriate relationships with subordinates was reprimanded and docked $20,000 in pay Thursday, avoiding jail time in one of the military's most closely watched courts-martial.

Sinclair, the former deputy commander of the storied 82nd Airborne Division, was believed to be the highest-ranking U.S. military officer ever court-martialed on sexual assault charges, but earlier this week those charges were dropped when he pleaded guilty to inappropriate relationships with the three women.

Sinclair smiled and hugged his two lawyers in the courtroom. Outside the building, he said "the system worked" and all he wanted to do now was "hug my wife and sons."

As part of the plea deal, Sinclair's sentence could not exceed terms in a sealed agreement between defense lawyers and military attorneys. The agreement, unsealed Thursday, called for Sinclair to serve no more than 18 months in jail, but the judge's punishment was much lighter.

Prosecutors did not immediately comment.

In closing arguments, prosecutors argued Sinclair should be thrown out of the Army and lose his military benefits, while the defense said that would harm his innocent wife and children the most. The two sides also offered contrasting arguments about the seriousness of the misdeeds that felled the general.

"It's not just one mistake. Not just one lapse in judgment. It was repeated," said prosecutor Maj. Rebecca DiMuro. "They are not mistakes. We are not in the court of criminal mistakes. These are crimes."

The defense had called a host of character witnesses this week to laud Sinclair as a selfless leader in hopes of getting a lenient punishment.

After both sides finished, Judge Col. James Pohl adjourned the hearing until Thursday. Sinclair's sentencing comes as the military and Congress grapple with sex crimes in the ranks.

Prosecutors did not ask the judge to send Sinclair to jail, even though the maximum penalty he faced on the charges to which he pleaded guilty is more than 20 years.

The judge could have dismissed Sinclair from the Army, which would have likely wiped out his Veterans Administration health care and military retirement benefits.

The general also pleaded guilty to adultery - a crime in the military - as well as using his government-issued credit card to pay for trips to see his mistress and other conduct unbecoming an officer.

Sinclair had been accused of twice forcing the female captain to perform oral sex during the three-year affair.

The Army's case against Sinclair started to crumble as questions arose about his primary accuser's credibility and whether military officials improperly rejected a previous plea deal because of political concerns.

A military lawyer representing Sinclair argued that his wife, Rebecca, had made a significant investment in the Army herself by holding leadership positions in organizations that helped soldiers' families. Maj. Sean Foster said Rebecca Sinclair and the couple's two sons would be hurt the most if the general lost benefits.

"These three are the only truly innocent people in this case," he said.

Sinclair broke down in tears multiple times during Wednesday's hearing.

When a letter from his wife was read aloud, Sinclair buried his head in his hands, appeared to cry and dabbed his eyes with two tissues.

In the letter, Rebecca Sinclair says she hasn't fully forgiven her husband but doesn't want the Army to punish him and his family further with a significant reduction to his pension and other benefits.

"Believe me when I tell you that the public humiliation and vilification he has endured are nothing compared to the private suffering and guilt that he lives with every day," writes Rebecca Sinclair, who hasn't attended her husband's hearings.

Jeffrey Sinclair broke down at several points as he read a statement to the judge, pausing to collect himself. He apologized to his family and the women with whom he admitted inappropriate relationships.

"I've been frustrated and angry, but I don't have to look any further than the mirror for someone to blame," he said, noting the hearing came exactly two years after the captain came forward with allegations on March 19, 2012.

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20140320/PC1610/140329976/1356/brig-gen-jeff-sinclair-fined-reprimanded-in-sex-case

---------------------

So much for the rhetoric about the military being serious about dealing with sexual assaults and indiscretions.

Yes, General, "the system worked". For YOU. The good old boys, once again, managed to discredit his accuser, get charges dismissed, and gently slap you on the wrist.

The system, once again, did not work for the women you exploited and assaulted.

EnderD_503

03-20-2014, 03:23 PM

Happy_Go_Lucky

03-25-2014, 04:06 PM

One of four gubernatorial candidates introduced to California Republicans recently is a registered sex offender who spent more than a decade in state prison, convicted of crimes including voluntary manslaughter and assault with intent to commit rape.
Glenn Champ, 48, addressed hundreds of GOP delegates and supporters Sunday at the site of the state party's semi-annual convention. Introduced by party chairman Jim Brulte and allotted 10 minutes, Champ spoke in between the main GOP candidates, former U.S. Treasury official Neel Kashkari and state Assemblyman Tim Donnelly of San Bernardino County.
Champ, a little-known political neophyte from the Fresno County community of Tollhouse, did not directly mention his criminal past during his speech but said, "In my life, I've been held accountable because of my stupidity. I do not want anyone else to be enslaved because of their lack of knowledge."

Champ's rap sheet is lengthy. Court records show that in 1992, he pleaded guilty to carrying a concealed firearm. In 1993, he was convicted of two counts of assault with intent to commit rape and as a result was placed on the state's sex-offender registry.
In March 1998, he accepted a plea deal on a charge of loitering to solicit a prostitute; later that year, he pleaded no contest to a voluntary manslaughter charge after hitting a man with his vehicle, for which he was sentenced to 12 years in state prison, according to court records.

In March 1998, he accepted a plea deal on a charge of loitering to solicit a prostitute; later that year, he pleaded no contest to a voluntary manslaughter charge after hitting a man with his vehicle, for which he was sentenced to 12 years in state prison, according to court records.
In an interview Friday, Champ acknowledged his criminal record, which was reported by KMJ radio in Fresno.
Champ said the assault case "was just for picking up some underage prostitutes" and resulted in a 90-day jail sentence. He said he turned his life around after the incident.

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-glenn-champ-20140322,0,1243785.story#ixzz2wk6M8QGY

Happy_Go_Lucky

03-25-2014, 04:26 PM

http://d1o2xrel38nv1n.cloudfront.net/files/2014/03/Screen-Shot-2014-03-25-at-12.17.12-PM.png

Kobi

03-26-2014, 08:38 AM

Rennie Gibbs’s daughter, Samiya, was a month premature when she simultaneously entered the world and left it, never taking a breath. To experts who later examined the medical record, the stillborn infant’s most likely cause of death was also the most obvious: the umbilical cord wrapped around her neck.

But within days of Samiya’s delivery in November 2006, Steven Hayne, Mississippi’s de facto medical examiner at the time, came to a different conclusion. Autopsy tests had turned up traces of a cocaine byproduct in Samiya’s blood, and Hayne declared her death a homicide, caused by “cocaine toxicity.”

In early 2007, a Lowndes County grand jury indicted Gibbs, a 16-year-old black teen, for “depraved heart murder” — defined under Mississippi law as an act “eminently dangerous to others…regardless of human life.” By smoking crack during her pregnancy, the indictment said, Gibbs had “unlawfully, willfully, and feloniously” caused the death of her baby. The maximum sentence: life in prison.

Seven years and much legal wrangling later, Gibbs could finally go on trial this spring — part of a wave of “fetal harm” cases across the country in recent years that pit the rights of the mother against what lawmakers, health care workers, prosecutors, judges, jurors, and others view as the rights of the unborn child.

A judge is said to be likely to decide this week if the case should move forward or be dismissed. Assuming it continues, whether Gibbs becomes the first woman ever convicted by a Mississippi jury for the loss of her pregnancy could turn on a fundamental question that has received surprisingly little scrutiny so far by the courts: Is there scientific proof that cocaine can cause lasting damage to a child exposed in the womb, or are the conclusions reached by Hayne and prosecutors based on faulty analysis and junk science?

The case intersects a number of divisive and difficult issues — the criminal justice system’s often disproportionate treatment of poor people of color, especially in drug prosecutions; the backlash to Roe v. Wade and the conservative push to establish “personhood” for fetuses as part of a broad-based strategy to weaken abortion laws. A wild card in the case — Mississippi’s history of using sometimes dubious forensic evidence to win criminal convictions over many years — could end up playing a central role.

Prosecutors argue that the state has a responsibility to protect children from the dangerous actions of their parents. Saying Gibbs should not be tried for murder is like saying that “every drug addict who robs or steals to obtain money for drugs should not be held accountable for their actions because of their addiction,” the state attorney general’s office wrote in a brief to the Mississippi Supreme Court.

But some civil libertarians and women’s rights advocates worry that if Gibbs is convicted, the precedent could inspire more prosecutions of Mississippi women and girls for everything from miscarriage to abortion — and that African Americans, who suffer twice as many stillbirths as whites, would be affected the most.

Mississippi has one of has one of the worst records for maternal and infant health in the U.S., as well as some of the highest rates of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease and among the most restrictive policies on abortion. Many of the factors that have been linked to prenatal and infant mortality — poverty, poor nutrition, lack of access to healthcare, pollution, smoking, stress — are rampant there.

“It’s tremendously, tremendously frightening, this case,” said Oleta Fitzgerald, southern regional director for the Children’s Defense Fund, an advocacy and research organization, in Jackson. “There’s real fear for young women whose babies are dying early who [lack the resources to] defend themselves and their actions.”

Those who share such worries point to a report last year by the New York–basedNational Advocates for Pregnant Women (NAPW) that documented hundreds of cases around the country in which women have been detained, arrested and sometimes convicted — on charges as serious as murder — for doing things while pregnant that authorities viewed as dangerous or harmful to their unborn child.

The definition of fetal harm in such cases has been broad: An Indiana woman whoattempted suicide while pregnant spent a year in jail before murder charges were dropped last year; an Iowa woman was arrested and jailed after falling down the stairs and suffering a miscarriage; a New Jersey woman who refused to sign a preauthorization for a cesarean section didn’t end up needing the operation, yet was charged with child endangerment and lost custody of her baby. But the vast majority of cases have involved women suspected of using illegal drugs. Those women have been disproportionately young, low-income and African American.

Lynn Paltrow, the executive director of NAPW, said that decisions to arrest and charge women often have political and moral overtones and are mostly based on unproved or discredited notions about the effects of prenatal drug exposure.

The U.S. Supreme Court has established stringent rules limiting the use of unproved science in legal proceedings, but these often fall by the wayside in fetal harm cases, Paltrow said. She said that women are typically convicted based on evidence that would be demolished by lawyers with the time and resources to effectively refute it in court – lawyers, say, for pharmaceutical companies whose drugs are challenged in court as being unsafe.

“If a pregnant, drug-using woman were a corporation, her case wouldn’t even get to trial because the rules of evidence require that there be science to prove causation,” Paltrow said.

The quality of the science is very much an issue in the Gibbs case.In a motion to throw out Hayne’s autopsy report, defense lawyers have claimed that that the medical examiner misinterpreted toxicology results and failed to explore alternative causes of death.

Those claims are not the first time Hayne’s work has come under attack. Indeed, Hayne — who effectively served as Mississippi’s statewide medical examiner from the late 1980s to 2008, eventually performing 80 to 90 percent of the autopsies in the state annually — has been a hugely influential and controversial figure in the criminal justice system there for years.

In litigation (much of it by the Mississippi Innocence Project) and news reports (many of them by Radley Balko, now of the Washington Post), defense lawyers and other medical examiners have accused Hayne of being sloppy, exaggerating his credentials, and leaping to conclusions that sometimes had no basis in science. At least four murder convictions based on Hayne’s evidence — one involving an innocent man sentenced to death for the killing of a three-year-old girl — have been overturned since 2007.

Despite having failed to complete his certification test by the American Board of Pathology, Hayne not only practiced for two decades in Mississippi and nearby states, but by his own estimate he performed as many as 1,800 autopsies a year (the National Association of Medical Examiners recommends that a single doctor conduct no more than 250). Mississippi stopped hiring Hayne in 2008, but he continues to testify in cases that he handled before then.

In their court filing, Gibbs’s lawyers cited a capital murder conviction of a 14-year-old boy that the Mississippi Supreme Court overturned because of what it called “scientifically unfounded” testimony by Hayne. That case involved both the prosecutor and the judge handling the Gibbs prosecution. (To read more about Hayne, go here, here, and here.)

Prosecutors have yet to respond to the filing by Gibbs’s lawyers, and they did not return a telephone call from ProPublica seeking comment. But they have vigorously defended Hayne in other cases where his methods and conclusions have been called into question.

Hayne also didn’t respond to a request for an interview.

Michael V. Cory Jr., a Jackson attorney, represented Hayne in a defamation suit against the Innocence Project, which had criticized his work and record. The national organization paid Hayne $100,000 as part of a settlement in that case. Cory said many of the claims against Hayne are unfounded.

“Given the number of autopsies he’s performed, there’s certainly going to be some errors,” Cory said in an interview last week. “But a lot of the criticisms don’t turn out to be fair. Just because he’s been criticized in some cases doesn’t mean there’s any inherent unreliability in his findings. Certainly Dr. Hayne would want the truth to come out.”

Gibbs’s lawyers would not provide many specifics about her background or the events leading up to her baby’s death. The records make this much clear: Gibbs, pregnant at 15, tested positive three times for marijuana and or cocaine during her pregnancy. She then missed several doctor’s appointments.

In November 2006, 36 weeks into her pregnancy, Gibbs ended up in the emergency room at Baptist Memorial Hospital in Columbus, where “fetal demise” was diagnosed and labor was induced. A urine test on Gibbs again detected the presence of cocaine and marijuana. By the day after Samiya’s delivery, Hayne had noted that the probable cause of death was homicide.

Gibbs’s lawyers spent the first several years trying to persuade the Mississippi Supreme Court to throw out the murder charge. (Gibbs, now 23, has been out on bail for much of the time.) They filed their motion to exclude Hayne’s testimony last year.

Expert witnesses hired by the defense claim that the toxicology results didn’t actually support Hayne’s findings. Although Samiya’s blood showed traces of benzoylecgonine, a cocaine byproduct, cocaine itself was “not detected,” according to the lab that did the tests. Kimberly Collins, a forensic pathologist in Atlanta associated with Emory University, said in an affidavit: “It is impossible to conclude from the very small amount of benzoylecgonine that the stillbirth was caused by cocaine toxicity.” Two other defense experts concurred.

The experts maintain that there were other problems with the findings as well. Hayne, they say, did not order tests to rule out infection or fetal abnormality, two common causes of stillbirth. Hayne said that Gibbs’s placenta was normal, but closer examination, the defense experts assert, showed the presence of blood clots — a sign that the baby’s oxygen supply had been cut off. (In a 2011 study by a consortium of researchers around the U.S., 24 percent of stillbirths were caused by blood clots or other placenta abnormalities.)

The experts said cocaine has been linked to one kind of devastating outcome — placenta abruption (when the placenta pulls away from the uterus), which can lead to stillbirth. That was not present in Samiya’s death.

In Gibbs’s case, the evidence pointed to “umbilical cord compression” as the likeliest explanation for Samiya’s death, the defense experts said.

At the same time, Gibbs’s attorneys are challenging the very notion that cocaine exposure in utero causes widespread fetal mortality or serious, long-lasting harm in children. The idea dates back to the 1980s and ‘90s, when the crack epidemic led to fears about a generation of developmentally impaired “crack babies.” And it has gained a kind of credence over the years as OB/GYNs, parenting sites, and many others have urged women to avoid all kinds of substances during pregnancy — everything from tobacco and wine to raw-milk cheese, sushi and hair dye.

But the concerns about cocaine have proven to be “wildly overstated,” said Deborah A. Frank, a pediatrician and researcher at Boston University School of Medicine who has participated in numerous studies on the topic over the past two decades.

“There is no consistent association between cocaine use during pregnancy and serious fetal harms, birth defects, or serious long-term physical or developmental impairments,” Frank wrote in an affidavit. “There is no convincing evidence that prenatal cocaine exposure is more strongly associated with fetal harm or developmental deficits than exposure to legal substances, like tobacco and alcohol, or many other factors.”

Frank and other researchers said they have been trying to set the record straight for years, but their arguments have rarely had a hearing in court, Paltrow said. Defense lawyers — often public defenders — don’t have the resources to hire experts to challenge prosecutors, and they may not even realize what the science actually says. It’s not unusual for women to plead guilty in such cases to avoid the risk of losing at trial — and getting a longer sentence. (Indeed, at least two mississippi women are believed to have pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the early 2000s, Gibbs’ lawyers said.)

“For a whole host of reasons, women should not be prosecuted for this sort of thing,” said Robert McDuff, one of Gibbs’ lawyers. “But if they are going to be, it needs to be based on scientific research and analysis that is more reliable than what we have now.”

Cory, Hayne’s lawyer who also does criminal defense work, acknowledged that, “In the criminal justice system, where the stakes are higher, the resources are not there to challenge the science. The judge, who is the gatekeeper, has to use the information they have. You get some crazy results in criminal cases. Science where there is no consensus gets admitted as if there was consensus.”

Gibbs’ attorneys are hopeful that the judge in their case may yet throw out the depraved-heart murder charge. Meanwhile, one thing the evidence does suggest: “Incarceration or the threat of incarceration have proved to be ineffective in reducing the incidence of alcohol or drug abuse,” the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology’s Committee on Health Care for Underserved Women wrote in 2011.

Moreover, the committee determined, pregnant women who fear the legal system avoid or emotionally disengage from prenatal care — the very thing that might help assure that they give birth to healthy babies.

“Drug enforcement policies that deter women from seeking prenatal care are contrary to the welfare of the mother and fetus,” it said.

http://www.salon.com/2014/03/22/a_terrifying_precedent_woman_to_be_tried_for_murde r_for_giving_birth_to_stillborn/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

Happy_Go_Lucky

03-29-2014, 07:49 AM

Bridget Kelly, the Chris Christie aide directly implicated in the BridgeGate scandal, sent out a statement today slamming the credibility of the report released this week and slamming the “editorialized comments” of the man leading the investigation.

In particular, Kelly’s statement takes serious issue with several references to her relationship to another Christie ally in the report. Rachel Maddow called out those parts of the report as “slut-shaming” last night, and Kelly’s statement calls them out for blatant sexism
http://www.mediaite.com/online/bridget-kelly-fires-back-at-venomous-sexist-remarks-in-bridgegate-report/

As I was listening to Christies self-appointed lawyers at their press conference the other day exonerating Christie from all wrong doing in the bridge lane closure fiasco, "of course" I thought. He has the tax payer money to investigate HIMSELF. BUT THEN, it took a gloomy and sinister turn when the attorneys were not so subtly reassuring us that Christie is innocent of all charges because Ms. Kelly is/was a scorned woman. My WTF line on my forehead had a workout.

Happy_Go_Lucky

03-30-2014, 07:03 AM

A “men’s rights” organization has objected to a pair of free self-defense classes for women in Glendale, California, violate the equal protection clause of the Fourth Amendment, the Glendale News-Press reported on Thursday.

The classes, which have been organized by the city’s Commission on the State of Women, will be offered on April 9 and 16 at local facilities as part of Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

But National Coalition for Men President Harry Crouch stated in a March 13 letter (PDF) to commission chairperson Denise Miller, City Attorney Michael J. García and the course instructor complained that men were being excluded from the sessions
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/28/mens-rights-group-claims-free-self-defense-classes-for-women-are-sexist/

Posted sans comment. Running out of spit.....:hammer:

Kobi

04-01-2014, 01:54 PM

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/e7/23/2d/e7232d640d09ffb3687153113339f930.jpg

Kobi

04-04-2014, 08:18 AM

CNN) -- I really am speechless, which makes it that much harder to write this column. After everything I've seen covering modern parenting over the past several years, I kind of feel like nothing can really surprise me anymore.

Oh how wrong I was, because when I heard what Boomer Esiason said, the former football star and now CBS NFL analyst and radio host, I thought he had to be joking.

Did he really suggest that New York Mets second baseman Daniel Murphy should have encouraged his wife to have a C-section, which is major surgery, so that he wouldn't have to miss Opening Day?

Murphy's wife went into labor, so he flew to be with her, missing the season's first two games. Major League Baseball allows a player to miss up to three games for paternity leave.

During a conversation on his radio show with co-host Craig Carton, Esiason, a father of two, said he would never have done what Murphy did.

"Quite frankly, I would have said C-section before the season starts," said Esiason. "I need to be at Opening Day. I'm sorry. This is what makes our money. This is how we're going to live our life. This is going to give my child every opportunity to be a success in life. I'll be able to afford any college I want to send my kid to because I'm a baseball player."

What about family, Esiason? What about not scheduling a major surgery that takes up to four weeks or longer to recover from (I should know; I had two unplanned C-sections!) just to avoid missing the first two games of a 160-plus game season?

For his part, Murphy, whose wife ended up having a C-section, is shrugging off any criticism of his decision.

"That's the choice of parents that they get to make," said Murphy. "That's the greatness of it. You discuss it with your spouse, and you find out what you think works best for your family."

Not surprisingly, outrage in social media to Esiason's remarks was pointed solidly in one direction.

"There are so many reasons this is so wrong," said a mother on my Facebook page, who had three C-sections, none of them by choice.

"He has no idea what in the world he is talking about," she added. "(A C-section) is no walk in the park for mom or dad, whether you are a baseball player or not, whether you are in the off season or not."

Another woman, also on Facebook, cited what she called "the lack of sensitivity and sophistication" around these issues of gender and reproduction. "I also think (despite what he says), if it were (his) wife, he would not feel the same way."

Don't show me the money, said Sue Scheff, a parenting advocate and author, on Facebook, criticizing Esiason for suggesting that money should be more important than family. "Games happen a lot. How often is the birth of your child?" she asked.

"Easy for him to say, he'll never have to have one," said a man, who did not want to be identified, referring to a C-section.

Esiason made his comments during an exchange with his co-host, who thought Murphy should have gotten back to work once the baby was born instead of taking an additional day of paternity leave. (Another WFAN radio host, Mike Francesa, also took issue with Murphy being out for two games.)

In Esiason's defense, his first comments when the subject came up were that Murphy had "legal rights to be there if he wants to be there."

As a football player, he's also coming from the mindset of his sport and how key players haven't traditionally missed one of the season's games for a birth, noted @heymatt on Twitter. In fact, Baltimore Ravens quarterback Joe Flacco's wife gave birth one hour before game time in September, and Flacco played that game against the Cleveland Browns.

But what got under people's skin, more than anything, was the idea of suggesting that a wife have major surgery to accommodate her husband's sports schedule.

"Major surgery should only be used when medically advised, not for convenience," said @elia_eltringham, also on Twitter.

C-sections may be scheduled because of the estimated size of the child and the age of the mother, or if a mother had a prior C-section, doctors say. Some women have chosen to have them because of fears of incontinence after a vaginal birth.

Nearly a third of births are currently done by C-section, which is a significant jump from the 20% of deliveries resulting in C-sections in 1996, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Dr. Lillian Schapiro of Atlanta said she has seen a movement away from scheduled C-sections in her practice.

"I would say a few years ago, there was more of a trend to have scheduled C-sections, and now there is much more a move back to allowing nature to run its course, and people wanting to have a more natural experience," said Schapiro, an ob/gyn doctor affiliated with Piedmont Hospital in Atlanta.

Dr. Lynn Friedman, an ob/gyn with Mount Sinai Hospital in New York and one of my doctors during my pregnancies, said her practice also hasn't seen a rise in elective C-sections.

"A purely elective (C-section) ... someone who just says 'I don't want to labor,' I mean, that's not that common, and that's really still very much discouraged," said Friedman.

"For someone to say 'my career is something that would make my wife schedule a section' ... I think in the 21st century ... that's really still a very sexist thing to say, and I think a ball team should understand that their player should be with his wife. I mean, I just think that's grotesque."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/04/living/boomer-esiason-c-sections-paternity-leave-parents/index.html?sr=sharebar_facebook

Kobi

04-04-2014, 08:30 AM

Boomer Esiason "Apologizes" For Comments On Murphy’s Paternity Leave

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) – WFAN co-host Boomer Esiason says he’s reached out to the New York Mets and is “truly sorry” for “insensitive comments” made earlier this week regarding second baseman Daniel Murphy’s paternity leave.

“I just want to say again on this radio show that in no way, shape or form was I advocating anything for anybody to do. I was not telling women what to do with their bodies. I would never do that. That’s their decision, that’s their life and they know their bodies better than I do. And the other thing, too, that I really felt bad about is that Daniel Murphy and Tori Murphy were dragged into a conversation, and their whole life was exposed. And it shouldn’t have been.

“And that is my fault. That is my fault for uttering the word ‘C-section’ on this radio station. And it all of a sudden put their lives under a spotlight, and for that I truly apologize. I tried to reach out to Daniel yesterday through intermediaries over there at the New York Mets, and to his credit, he answered all of his questions yesterday. I’m sorry that he had to go through that. No man should have to go through that. And certainly Daniel Murphy, who we both admire much as a baseball player as anybody else — and all I can say is that I truly, truly, feel terrible about what I put them through. So for that I certainly apologize.

“I spoke with (Mets public relations chief) Jay Horwitz yesterday and was texting back and forth with (COO/co-owner) Jeff Wilpon, and I think Daniel — I can’t speak for Daniel — I think he wants to put everything behind him, he wants to try to play baseball, he wants to try to become a dad, he wants to try to do all the right things in life, and he has every right to do that. And again, like I said, I apologize for putting him and his wife in the midst of a public discussion that I basically started by uttering insensitive comments that came off very insensitive. And for that I apologize, and that’s really all I can do.

“The other thing I do want to say is that my friends — our friends — over at the March of Dimes also reached out to me yesterday. And I immediately called them back and talked to them, and they kind of re-educated me on their mission statement. And you and I (co-host Craig Carton) have been a part of the March of Dimes luncheon for many years, and I go back all the way to 1994 with them, and they were very gracious in re-educating me and making me understand what their mission statement was. And I agree wholeheartedly in their mission statement.

“I can only hope that people understand that my comment — my flippant comment — wasn’t made in any way, shape or form to insult anybody. But obviously it did. And for that I am truly sorry.”

He added: “Again, I just want to reiterate one more time that if I in any way, shape or form insulted anybody, that was not my intention. My flippant remark was insensitive. I’ll leave it at that. And again, I feel terrible for the Murphy family, because what should be the greatest time in their life turned out to be somewhat of a firestorm that I personally put them into. And for that hopefully they can find forgiveness in their heart.”

“My deep apologies to both Daniel and Tori Murphy for creating an intrusion into a very sacred and personal moment in their lives, and that’s the birth of their son, Noah. Daniel is the Mets’ second baseman, whose brief paternity leave led to a flippant and insensitive remark that I sincerely regret.

(In the) meantime, I’m very grateful to my many friends over at the March of Dimes who graciously reached out and re-educated me that if a pregnancy is healthy, it is medically beneficial to let the labor begin on its own rather than to schedule a C-section for convenience. In fact, babies born just a few weeks early have double the risk of death compared to babies born after 39 full weeks of pregnancy. As their promotional campaign says, ‘Healthy babies are worth the wait.’ And as I proud father, I couldn’t agree more.”

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/04/04/boomer-esiason-apologizes-for-insensitive-comments-on-murphys-paternity-leave/

Happy_Go_Lucky

04-05-2014, 05:54 PM

Maxim model Paulina Gretzky doesn't play professional golf but she is engaged to PGA tour star Dustin Johnson and has two famous parents, hockey great Wayne Gretzky and actress Janet Jones Gretzky.

That apparently was enough for Golf Digest to put her on its cover. It was also enough to irk players on the LPGA Tour, the New York Times reports.

"We don’t get respect for being the golfers that we are," two-time major winner Stacy Lewis said, according to the paper. "Obviously, Golf Digest is trying to sell magazines. But at the same time you’d like to see a little respect for the women’s game."

Seven-time major winner Juli Inkster seemed to feel the same way. "It’s frustrating because it’s Golf Digest; it’s not Sports Illustrated’s swimsuit issue. I think they should maybe recognize some of the great women golfers that we have," she said, according to the Times

http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/assets_c/2014/04/Paulina-Gretzky-on-cover-of-Golf-Digest-thumb-350x459-132023.jpg

So, WTF is it Golf Digest? Christina Kim, a REAL LPGA player doesn't fit your image?
http://www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/LPGA+State+Farm+Classic+Round+Two+33Yh6lXcRHtl.jpg

Golf Digest, last I saw, you are a GOLF magazine, not Maxim, not Playboy. There are real, life women golfers whom you could choose to be on the cover. How fucking unsurprising this is to me. BOO!

Note: I, Happy_Go_Lucky played competetive golf as well as taught for many years. When I played, as well as the awesome other female players, the LAST thing we were concerned about is how fuckable we could make ourselves for the dudes.

Happy_Go_Lucky

04-05-2014, 08:21 PM

Dear Golf Digest. Did you consider these LPGA members to be on the cover?

http://forums.steroid.com/attachments/anabolic-lounge-off-topic-discussion/120170d1328993985-lets-talk-golf-90177163_crop_650x440%5B1%5D.jpg

http://espn.go.com/i/magazine/new/hot_jennifer_rosales.jpg

http://www.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Na-On-Min.jpg

http://cdn.thesandtrap.com/0/08/525x525px-LL-08f11707_vbattach773.jpg

These women REALLY are golfers.....Damn!

DapperButch

04-05-2014, 09:28 PM

Happy-Go-Lucky. There is no link to an article I can see. Maybe this is just your commentary?

As an aside to everyone, it is hard to find links to the articles posted unless you put them at the top of your post. :glasses: Also, I think that all posts should have links, even just photos. Used to be standard here.

Just my two cents.

Happy_Go_Lucky

04-06-2014, 06:30 AM

http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2014/04/whats-paulina-gretzky-doing-on.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more-sports/paulina-gretzky-golf-digest-cover-fire-article-1.1746710

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/paulina-gretzkys-golf-digest-cover-132635952.html

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2017469-golf-digests-paulina-gretzky-cover-creates-enormous-buzz-and-controversy

Kobi

04-08-2014, 11:18 AM

House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy has asked for a column he penned for Breitbart California to be removed from the site in the wake of a sexist ad controversy. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was depicted in a poster for the news site's launch on her hands and knees in a bizarre, punk-inspired "street art" homage to Miley Cyrus. Democrats, including Pelosi, have blasted the ads as “foul, offensive and disrespectful to all women.”

McCarthy topped the bill of Breitbart California’s conservative contributors from the state, the jewel in the crown of a list that includes Fox News host Greg Gutfield and Rep. Tom McClintock. But it appears that McCarthy, the third-ranking House Republican, is standing in solidarity with Pelosi at the expense of the outlaw conservative credibility attached to Breitbart. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a frequent contributor to Breitbart News, promoted the news site last week, and wrote, “Breitbart California will only help our party evolve, not die” and called on California Republicans to “[e]volve, adapt or die.”

Speaking to the Los Angeles Times about the images, McCarthy spokesman Matt Sparks said, “We didn’t condone them. We thought it was the right thing to do to ask for the column to be removed.” Another spokesman, Mike Long, told ABC News, “The images are inappropriate. We requested that Whip McCarthy’s piece be taken down.”

Breitbart’s defense largely revolves around the argument that Democrats do the same thing to Republican women all the time. After the ad controversy swelled into frothing Internet outrage on Monday, Breitbart’s Matthew Boyle compared the Pelosi ad to a 2013 Saturday Night Live skit in which Michelle Bachmann was depicted by none other than Miley Cyrus (her again), writhing around with Taran Killam’s perma-tan, tank top-wearing John Boehner in a political parody of the video for her song, "We Can't Stop."

“Cyrus herself raunchily depicted Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) in a Saturday Night Live skit touching her crotch while writhing on the ground, shaking her backside in tight shorts, and sticking out her tongue and licking people with a gay, hypersexual John Boehner,” Boyle writes, which makes us wonder which is more offensive to Breitbart: Cyrus as Bachmann, or a gay Boehner.

http://news.yahoo.com/breitbart-unapologetic-sexist-ads-cost-top-gop-congressmans-163759600.html;_ylt=A0LEVxO2LURTlDgAyDxXNyoA;_ylu= X3oDMTByMG04Z2o2BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dG lkAw--

The Ads (http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-California/2014/04/07/Welcome-to-Breitbart-California)

Kobi

04-09-2014, 05:34 PM

Senate Republicans blocked a vote on Wednesday to open debate on the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would hold employers more accountable for wage discrimination against women. The Senate voted 53 to 44 to move forward on the bill, falling short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster.

The bill would prohibit retaliation against employees who share their salary information with each other, which supporters say would eliminate the culture of silence that keeps women in the dark about pay discrimination. It would also require the Department of Labor to collect wage data from employers, broken down by race and gender, and require employers to show that wage differentials between men and women in the same jobs are for a reason other than sex.

All Republicans present and one Independent, Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), voted against proceeding to debate the bill. All Democrats and Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) voted in favor.

"At a time when the Obama economy is already hurting women so much, this legislation would double down on job loss, all while lining the pockets of trial lawyers," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said before the vote. "In other words, it's just another Democratic idea that threatens to hurt the very people that it claims to help."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) criticized McConnell's caucus for opposing the bill.

"Are they so repulsed by equal pay for hardworking women that they'll obstruct equal pay for equal work?" he said Wednesday before the vote. "I'm at a loss as to why anyone would decline to debate this important issue."

The bill is part of the Democrats' larger policy push, ahead of the November election, to increase economic security for women, which includes proposals to raise the minimum wage, allow workers to earn a certain amount of paid family and sick leave and expand affordable childcare and pre-Kindergarten for working parents.

"This is not just an issue of fairness," President Barack Obama said in a speech on Tuesday. "It’s also a family issue and an economic issue, because women make up about half of our workforce and they’re increasingly the breadwinners for a whole lot of families out there. So when they make less money, it means less money for gas, less money for groceries, less money for child care, less money for college tuition, less money is going into retirement savings."

U.S. Census Bureau data shows that women who work full-time earn an average of 77 cents for every dollar men earn in a year. When you compare women and men with the same education and experience levels working the same jobs, the pay gap shrinks, but there is still an unexplained gap of 7 to 9 percent, economists estimate, suggesting persistent pay discrimination against women.

Most Republicans in Congress object to all of the Democrats' proposals related to women's economic security. Senate Republicans have blocked the Paycheck Fairness Act twice before, claiming that it will only result in more lawsuits against employers. GOP lawmakers slammed the Paycheck Fairness Act again on Tuesday, calling it "condescending" to women.

"Many ladies I know feel like they are being used as pawns, and find it condescending [that] Democrats are trying to use this issue as a political distraction from the failures of their economic policy," Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-Kan.), the GOP conference's vice chair, said Tuesday at a press conference.

Equal pay advocates expressed their dismay after Wednesday's vote, suggesting the consequences will be felt in November.

"Today's vote is a disappointment for women and families across the United States. Considering the impact of the gender pay gap, it's mystifying that the Senate can't even agree to debate it!" said Lisa Maatz, the vice president of government relations at the American Association of University Women. "That's what happened today –- GOP senators essentially filibustered equal pay for women. Given the size of the gender voting gap, Republicans are foolish to cede this issue to Democrats."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/09/paycheck-fairness-act_n_5118254.html

Kobi

04-10-2014, 07:39 PM

Children in Iraq could be legally married before the age of nine under sweeping legislation tabled on Tuesday that introduces new religious restrictions on women's rights.

As almost its last act before elections at the end of the month, the Iraqi parliament looks likely to pass new marital rules for its majority Shia community with a draft law criticised by human rights activists as "legalised inquality"

The legislation has been approved by the governing coalition in an effort to attract support from Shia Muslims in the April 30 vote.

Current Iraqi law sets the legal age for marriage at 18 without parental approval and states girls as young as 15 can be married only with a guardian's approval. It does not allow for special provisions according to sect.

But the legislation, known as the Jaafari law, introduces rules almost identical to those of neighbouring Iran, a Shia-dominated Islamic theocracy.

Ayad Allawi, a former Iraqi prime minister, warned on Tuesday that approval of the law would lead to the abuse of women. "It allows for girls to be married from nine years of age and even younger," he said. "There are other injustices [contained in it] too."

While there is no set minimum age for marriage, the section on divorce includes rules for divorces of girls who have reached the age of 9 years.

Marital rape is condoned by a clause that states women must comply with their husband's sexual demands. Men are given guardianship rights over women and the law also establishes rules governing polygamous relationships.

Hanaa Edwar, a well-known activist and head of the charity Al-Amal ("Hope" in Arabic), has campaigned against the law as a setback for women's rights in a country that has struggled since the 2003 invasion.

"It turns women into tools for sexual enjoyment," she said. "It deletes all their rights."

Human Rights Watch, the US-based organisation, has issued a plea for the Iraqi government to abandon the legislations.

"Iraq is in conflict and undergoing a breakdown of the rule of law," Basma al-Khateeb, a women's rights activist, said in a Human Rights Watch report. "The passage of the Jaafari law sets the ground for legalised inequality."

Supporters of the draft, named after a Shiite Muslim school of jurisprudence, say it simply regulates practices already existing in day-to-day life. Officials said there has been a surge in under 18s being married off since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/10753645/Iraq-ready-to-legalise-childhood-marriage.html

Kobi

04-22-2014, 12:18 PM

According to Wharton professor Katherine Milkman's new study, released on Tuesday, professors are less likely to want to mentor female and minority students. Especially in fields that lead to the most lucrative careers.

Milkman explained her research on NPR's Morning Edition. To determine how professors respond to different students looking for mentoring, Milkman and her colleagues Modupe Akinola and Dolly Chough created fake student emails with names that are representative of different genders and racial groups. These "students" emailed professors at top universities to see if they could meet about their work. Professors were more likely to respond, and respond positively, to white men. Even female and minority faculty are more likely to help the white guys. Milkman explains,

" There's absolutely no benefit seen when women reach out to female faculty, nor do we see benefits from black students reaching out to black faculty or Hispanic students reaching out to Hispanic faculty."

Faculty bias is particularly entrenched in areas of study that lead to the best-paying jobs, like the natural sciences and business. "The very worst in terms of bias is business academia," Milkman says. "We see a 25-percentage-point gap in the response rate to caucasian males versus women and minorities."

It's this kind of bias that explains why women excel in college but still reach a glass ceiling in their careers, especially in business. Women currently hold 60 percent of bachelor's degrees in the U.S., but that achievement isn't reflected in the number of women excelling at Fortune 500 companies. Next fall, more Latinos will be enrolled as freshmen in the University of California system than whites for the first time. But white students, especially males, will still have an easier time finding a professor to help them transition from college to career.

In her now-legendary advice book on women and careers, Lean In, Sheryl Sandberg has an entire chapter titled "Don’t Ask Anyone to be Your Mentor." She advises that women seek answers to questions from a variety of people in the office, instead of focusing on finding one mentor. But college is a time when it would be great to have one professor dedicated to helping you with your academic and career development. When female and minority students put themselves out there, ask for help, and get no response or a negative response, it's got to be frustrating. No wonder women tend to have less confidence once they get out into the workforce.

http://www.thewire.com/culture/2014/04/professors-are-less-likely-to-mentor-female-and-minority-students-especially-in-business-school/361047/

Kobi

04-24-2014, 06:12 AM

The Navy has reassigned a former commander of the Blue Angels, its acrobatic fighter squadron, and is investigating allegations that the elite team of pilots was a hotbed of hazing, sexual harassment and other forms of discrimination, documents show.

The Navy announced Friday that it had relieved Capt. Gregory McWherter, a two-time commander of the Blue Angels, of duty for alleged misconduct. At the time, the Navy did not describe the nature of the accusations or provide other details except to say that the case remained under investigation.

But an internal military document that a Navy official inadvertently e-mailed to a Washington Post editor states that a former member of the Blue Angels filed a complaint last month accusing McWherter of promoting a hostile work environment and tolerating sexual harassment. The complaint described an atmosphere rife with sexually explicit speech, the open display of pornography and jokes about sexual orientation.

The Navy officer is the latest in a string of senior military commanders to come under investigation for sexual misconduct or other misbehavior. Congress and the White House have grown especially frustrated at the Pentagon’s struggles to police sex crimes and harassment in the ranks.

The Navy appeared to move swiftly after the former Blue Angels member filed the complaint March 24 with the Navy inspector general. The complaint alleged that McWherter encouraged or allowed sexual harassment and lewd activity to occur when he commanded the Blue Angels during two stints between 2008 and 2012.

McWherter did not respond to e-mails seeking comment. Late Wednesday, in response to a request for comment, the Navy confirmed the circumstances that led to the probe. The Navy also released a statement from Vice Adm. David H. Buss, the commander of Naval Air Forces, who said, “We remain fully committed to accountability, transparency, and protecting the integrity of ongoing investigations.”

According to McWherter’s biography, which the Navy has removed from a public Web site, he is an alumnus of the Citadel and graduated from the Navy’s famous “Top Gun” fighter pilot school in 1995.

The Blue Angels are a flight demonstration team that performs daring maneuvers at air shows and before large crowds at other public events. It is a major honor for pilots selected to join; the Navy treats the squadron as a valuable recruitment tool and a vivid symbol of its aviation firepower.

The commander of the unit is chosen by a panel of admirals and serves as the Blue Angels’ lead pilot.

Although the investigation has not been completed, Navy officials decided that the preliminary findings warranted taking action. McWherter was fired from his new job as executive officer of Naval Base Coronado near San Diego. He has been temporarily reassigned to other duties.

Summaries of the complaint and investigation are contained in a five-page internal document, labeled “official use only,” that was drafted by Navy public affairs officers in anticipation of media coverage.

The document included talking points and prepared quotes attributed to Navy admirals, expressing concern about the gravity of the case. The material was being assembled in the event that further details of the investigation became public.

McWherter was a commander highly regarded by many in the Navy. He was brought back to lead the Blue Angels for a second stint in 2011 after the unit was temporarily grounded that year for performing a dangerous barrel roll too close to the ground during a show in Lynchburg, Va.

Upon leaving the team in November 2012, he told the Pensacola (Fla.) News Journal that he had no regrets.

“If being with the Blue Angels was the last time I fly a Navy plane, that’s a pretty good way to go out,” he said.

In the face of several ethics scandals over the past 18 months, the Pentagon has repeatedly pledged to hold commanders accountable for their actions. At the same time, however, the military has tried to suppress details about many embarrassing episodes.

For example, the Army announced in June, without elaboration, that it had suspended its top general in Japan for allegedly mishandling a sexual assault case. On Tuesday, after obtaining a copy of the investigative report under the Freedom of Information Act, The Post disclosed that the general was given a plum job at the Pentagon even though he had violated regulations by failing to refer the sexual assault complaint to criminal investigators.

In January, after obtaining another batch of investigative documents, The Post reported that the Pentagon had disciplined three other generals for personal misconduct.

One was found guilty of assaulting his mistress. A second joked in e-mails that he sexually gratified himself after meeting a member of Congress whom he described as “smoking hot.” The third kept a bottle of vodka in his desk and was investigated for having an affair, according to the documents.

At the same time, it appears that some military leaders have become highly sensitive to the issue and are quick to launch investigations at any hint of sexual impropriety or ethical misbehavior in the ranks.

In February, the Army announced it had suspended a brigade commander at Fort Carson, Colo., and in a highly unusual move, would not allow him to deploy with his soldiers to Afghanistan. Again, Army officials did not divulge what had prompted the decision.

A copy of the investigative report in that case, however, shows that the commander was suspended after three female soldiers alleged that he had made insensitive comments during a meeting to discuss sexual assault policies.

The commander, Col. Brian Pearl, was later cleared of wrongdoing and allowed to join his troops in Afghanistan. A copy of the investigative report was first obtained and published Tuesday by the Gazette newspaper of Colorado Springs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/navy-investigates-ex-blue-angels-commander-after-complaint-he-allowed-sexual-harassment/2014/04/23/be42211e-cb0f-11e3-95f7-7ecdde72d2ea_story.html?Post+generic=%3Ftid%3Dsm_t witter_washingtonpost

Gemme

04-30-2014, 06:01 PM

Montana Teacher Re-Sentenced for Rape of 14 Year Old (http://www.aol.com/article/2014/04/30/ex-montana-teacher-stacey-dean-rambold-to-be-re-sentenced-in-rap/20878231/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmaing9%7Cdl23%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D470605)

Teacher Rape Case

By MATTHEW BROWN

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) -- A former high school teacher who served one month in prison after being convicted of raping a 14-year-old student faces more time behind bars after the Montana Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that his original sentence was too short.

Justices in a unanimous ruling ordered the case of Stacey Dean Rambold assigned to a new judge for re-sentencing.

The decision means Rambold must serve a minimum of two years in prison under state sentencing laws, Yellowstone County Attorney Scott Twito said.

The high court cited, in part, the inflammatory comments of the sentencing judge, District Judge G. Todd Baugh, who drew wide condemnation for suggesting that the victim shared some responsibility for her rape.

Baugh said during Rambold's sentencing in August that the teenager was "probably as much in control of the situation as the defendant." He later apologized.

Rambold was released after fulfilling the original sentence last fall and is expected to remain free pending his reappearance in state District Court.

The defendant was a 47-year-old business teacher at Billings Senior High School at the time of the 2007 rape. The victim, one of his students, killed herself while Rambold was awaiting trial.

Rambold's sentence had been appealed by the state Department of Justice.

Attorney General Tim Fox said the Supreme Court's decision had "rebuffed attempts to place blame on a child victim of this horrible crime."

Under state law, children younger than 16 cannot consent to sexual intercourse.

Rambold's attorneys insisted in court filings that the original sentence was appropriate, and cited a "lynch mob" mentality following a huge public outcry over the case.

Like Baugh, they suggested the girl bore some responsibility and referenced videotaped interviews with her before she committed suicide. Those interviews remain under seal by the court.

Rambold attorney Jay Lansing was traveling and not immediately available, his office said.

The family of victim Cherice Moralez issued a statement through attorney Shane Colton saying the court's decision had restored their faith in the judicial system. The statement urged the family's supporters to continue working together to keep children safe from sexual predators.

During last year's sentencing hearing, prosecutors sought a 20-year prison term for Rambold with 10 years suspended.

But Baugh followed Lansing's recommendations and handed down a sentence of 15 years with all but 31 days suspended and a one-day credit for time served. Rambold was required to register as a sex offender upon his release and to remain on probation through 2028.

After a public outcry, Baugh acknowledged the sentence violated state law and attempted retroactively to revise it but was blocked when the state filed its appeal.

The Supreme Court decision did not specify what sentence would be more appropriate. That means Rambold potentially could face even more time in prison.

County Attorney Twito said he would consult with attorneys in his office and the victim's family before deciding how much prison time prosecutors will seek.

The case will likely be assigned to a new judge sometime next week, Baugh said Wednesday. He said he was not surprised by the court's decision.

The judge sparked outrage when he commented that Moralez appeared "older than her chronological age."

Her 2010 suicide took away the prosecution's main witness and resulted in a deferred-prosecution agreement that required Rambold to attend a sex-offender treatment program.

When he was booted from that program - for not disclosing a sexual relationship with an adult woman and having an unauthorized visit with the children of his relatives - the prosecution on the rape charge was revived.

During August's sentencing, the judge appeared sympathetic to the defendant, fueling a barrage of complaints against him from advocacy groups and private citizens. It also led to a formal complaint against Baugh from the Montana Judicial Standards Commission that's now pending with the state Supreme Court.

Justices said they intend to deal with Baugh separately. But their sharp criticism of the judge's actions signals that some sort of punishment is likely.

"Judge Baugh's statements reflected an improper basis for his decision and cast serious doubt on the appearance of justice," Justice Michael Wheat wrote. "There is no basis in the law for the court's distinction between the victim's `chronological age' and the court's perception of her maturity."

Baugh, 72, was first elected in 1984. He has said he deserves a public reprimand or censure for undermining the credibility of the judiciary and plans to retire when his six-year term expires at the end of the year.

He was unsure when the Supreme Court would act on the complaint against him.

"I expect at some point to appear before them, but don't know when," he said.

The leader of a women's group that filed one of the complaints against Baugh said Wednesday's high court decision gave advocates only part of what they want.

"The other part of the victory will be when something is done about Baugh," said Marian Bradley, president of the Montana chapter of the National Organization for Women.

Kobi

04-30-2014, 10:10 PM

Two weeks ago more than 230 Nigerian girls were kidnapped from their school by a local terrorist group, and as the search wears on, the Guardian reports, families are starting to lose hope.

As Smart News wrote earlier, the perpetrators are assumed to be part of a group of militants that calls itself Boko Haram, a terrorist organization tied to Al Qaeda. The group's name translates to “western education is sin.” Boko Haram has been on a campaign against schools around Nigeria, though the group's targets also include markets, churches, mosques and other public places.

It's been 14 days since the girls went missing and no progress has been made on tracking their whereabouts, either by the military or by groups of machete-wielding parents searching through the countryside. The search for the kidnapped girls also has been muddled by misinformation. In the immediate wake of the kidnapping, says BuzzFeed reporter Jina Moore, the Nigerian military claimed to have found and freed the girls and captured one of the terrorists involved—a claim that was proven wrong and ultimately retracted. And, according to a report by Voice of America, the Boko Haram terrorists are threatening to kill the girls if the search operations aren't called off.

Northeastern Nigeria has been in a state of emergency for a year, writes the Guardian. The school from which the 234 girls (from 15 to 18 years old) were kidnapped was the only one still open in the region. The girls had been called back to class to sit an exam.

Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/two-weeks-234-abducted-nigerian-schoolgirls-are-still-missing-180951236/#7cX5AGF4T3mgbw3p.99
-------------------------------------

Kidnapped Nigerian schoolgirls taken as brides by militants, relatives told
Relatives say they have been told of mass weddings involving insurgents and some of the girls abducted two weeks ago

For two weeks, retired teacher Samson Dawah prayed for news of his niece Saratu, who was among more than 230 schoolgirls snatched by Boko Haram militants in the north-eastern Nigerian village of Chibok. Then on Monday the agonising silence was broken.

When Dawah called together his extended family members to give an update, he asked that the most elderly not attend, fearing they would not be able to cope with what he had to say. "We have heard from members of the forest community where they took the girls. They said there had been mass marriages and the girls are being shared out as wives among the Boko Haram militants," Dawah told his relatives.

Saratu's father fainted; he has since been in hospital. The women of the family have barely eaten. "My wife keeps asking me, why isn't the government deploying every means to find our children," Dawah said. The marriage reports have not been confirmed officially, and rely on eyewitnesses.

The 14 April abduction of the girls – students aged between 16 and 18 who were sitting a physics paper at their school, one of a handful in troubled Borno state that had opened specially for final exams – shocked a nation inured to violence during a five year-insurgency.

Desperate parents launched their own rescue attempts in the 60,000 sq km Sambisa forest where the girls were being held. Security sources told the Guardian that at least three rescue attempts had been scuppered.

This week, former prime minister Gordon Brown, the United Nations' special adviser on girls' education, will visit Nigeria to launch a campaign to raise funds and awareness of the schoolgirls' plight. "We cannot stop terrorism overnight but we can make sure that its perpetrators are aware that murdering and abducting schoolchildren is a heinous crime that the international authorities are determined to punish," he said.

Reports of the mass marriage came from a group that meets at dawn each day not far from the charred remains of the school. The ragtag gathering of fathers, uncles, cousins and nephews pool money for fuel before venturing unarmed into the thick forest, or into border towns that the militants have terrorised for months.

On Sunday, the searchers were told that the students had been divided into at least three groups, according to farmers and villagers who had seen truckloads of girls moving around the area. One farmer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the insurgents had paid leaders dowries and fired celebratory gunshots for several minutes after conducting mass wedding ceremonies on Saturday and Sunday.

"It's unbearable. Our wives have grown bitter and cry all day. The abduction of our children and the news of them being married off is like hearing of the return of the slave trade," said Yakubu Ubalala, whose 17- and 18-year-old daughters Kulu and Maimuna are among the disappeared.

The parents are planning a mass rally on Saturday to lobby the government for official updates rather than having to rely on reports from local people.

Nigeria's armed forces face an uphill battle against the insurgents, who operate in small, mobile units and are drawn from communities that spill across the country's porous desert borders. Near daily aerial bombardments have been halted as ground troops have poured into the forest in search of the girls.

"We are trying, but our efforts are being countered in a way that it is very clear they are being tipped off about our movements. Any time we make a plan to rescue [the girls] we have been ambushed," said an artillery soldier among a rescue team announced by presidential decree over the weekend. In one clash, he said, 15 soldiers were killed by the insurgents.

"We know where these girls are being held in the forest, but every day we go in and come out disappointed. Definitely somebody high up in the chain of command is leaking up information to these people," said the soldier, whom the Guardian was able to reach three times during shift breaks. Nigeria's president, Goodluck Jonathan, said in 2012 that Boko Haram had secret backers among government and security officials.

Another soldier deployed to Borno state said: "In my 13 years of service, I have never been in terrain this big and tough. There is desert and there is forest – you cannot imagine how difficult both of them are."

He said there had been intelligence reports of the militants moving groups of girls to Marte – a known training camp – and to the Gwoza hills, a range of caves and valleys spanning the border with Cameroon.

The kidnappings have sparked debate on whether foreign intervention could help stabilise Nigeria. Officials have long ruled out such a move.

Nelson Uwaga, a representative at an official conference set up by presidential decree to discuss national unity as Nigeria celebrates a century of nationhood, said: "If countries can help us by way of arming our people through modern surveillance equipment, for defence and all that, it will be most welcome. [But] what the Boko Haram is doing is not a formal kind of fight but a guerrilla kind of fight, and it is only the local people that will tell you how to fight it."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/29/kidnapped-nigerian-schoolgirls-marriage-claims

Kobi

05-01-2014, 03:08 PM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Reported sexual assaults in the U.S. military jumped 50 percent last year, the Pentagon said on Thursday, and officials welcomed the spike as a sign that a high-level crackdown has made victims more confident their attackers will be prosecuted.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said the jump in reported sexual assaults to 5,061 in the 2013 fiscal year from 3,374 the previous year, was "unprecedented."

He announced six new directives to expand the fight, including an alcohol policy review and an effort to encourage reporting by male victims. Men are thought to represent about half of the victims of military sexual assault but made up only 14 percent of the reports that were investigated.

"We believe victims are growing more confident in our system," Hagel told a Pentagon news conference. "Because these crimes are underreported, we took steps to increase reporting and that's what we're seeing."

Despite increased focus on the issue over the past year, the military has continued to face embarrassing incidents in which officers have been accused of tolerating sexual misconduct and even encouraging it, rather than fighting the problem.

Critics said the Pentagon's numbers on increased reporting demonstrated little improvement in the proportion of cases going to trial or the percentage of convictions.

A total 484 cases went to trial in the 2013 fiscal year that ended on September 30 and 370 people were convicted of an offense, the report said. That compared with 302 trials the previous year and 238 convictions.

"You can't tell me that only one in 10 cases are worthy of going to trial. That's like saying 90 percent of those who come forward are lying," Representative Jackie Speier, a California Democrat, told Reuters in an interview.

Speier and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a New York Democrat, have led a push to remove prosecution of sex crimes from the military chain of command and put it in the hands of specialized prosecutors. The effort was narrowly defeated earlier this year, but Thursday's report revived calls for its consideration.

"Today's report is deeply troubling and shows the scourge of sexual assaults has not been brought under control and our current military justice system remains broken," Gillibrand said in a statement.

Other lawmakers saw progress. Senator Claire McCaskill, who worked on legislation to develop a more forceful military response to the problem, said the increased reporting was encouraging.

"We know that the majority of survivors, both military and civilian, choose not to report their assaults," the Missouri Democrat, a former sex crimes prosecutor, said in a statement. "This data suggests that the number of brave men and women in uniform choosing to pursue justice is increasing."

Sexual assault is vastly underreported, and a separate military survey conducted in 2012 concluded there were some 26,000 sex crimes in the military that year, from rape to abusive sexual contact.

The survey is conducted every two years, so there was no survey with the annual report this year to use as a basis for projecting total sex crimes in the services.

The figures last year provoked outrage and led to a broad effort across the military to crack down on sex crimes and sexual misbehavior. But despite the push, a number of high-profile officers are being investigated for their actions.

The Navy said last week it was investigating allegations of misconduct by Captain Gregory McWherter, the former commander of the Blue Angels precision flight squadron. He was accused of allowing and sometimes encouraging "lewd speech, inappropriate comments, and sexually explicit humor," the Navy said.

Major General Michael Harrison also was recently disciplined for failing to take appropriate action in response to sexual assault allegations while commander of U.S. Army forces in Japan. He had been suspended from the post last June when the allegations were made.

Army General Martin Dempsey, the highest-ranking military officer, told defense bloggers earlier this month that the department had a limited window of opportunity to demonstrate it could deal with the sexual assault problem.

"If it occurs that after a period of very intense and renewed emphasis on this that we can't solve it, I'm not going to fight it being taken away from us," the military's press service quoted him as saying.

http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-due-announce-50-percent-jump-reported-sex-111510864.html

Kobi

05-01-2014, 03:15 PM

The U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) released today a list of the higher education institutions under investigation for possible violations of federal law over the handling of sexual violence and harassment complaints.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in all education programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance. In the past, Department officials confirmed individual Title IX investigations at institutions, but today's list is the first comprehensive look at which campuses are under review by OCR for possible violations of the law's requirements around sexual violence.

"We are making this list available in an effort to bring more transparency to our enforcement work and to foster better public awareness of civil rights," Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Catherine E. Lhamon said. "We hope this increased transparency will spur community dialogue about this important issue. I also want to make it clear that a college or university's appearance on this list and being the subject of a Title IX investigation in no way indicates at this stage that the college or university is violating or has violated the law."

As with all OCR investigations, the primary goal of a Title IX investigation is to ensure that the campus is in compliance with federal law, which demands that students are not denied the ability to participate fully in educational and other opportunities due to sex.

The Department will not disclose any case-specific facts or details about the institutions under investigation. The list includes investigations opened because of complaints received by OCR and those initiated by OCR as compliance reviews. When an investigation concludes, the Department will disclose, upon request, whether OCR has entered into a resolution agreement to address compliance concerns at a particular campus or found insufficient evidence of a Title IX violation there.

The list of institutions under investigation for Title IX sexual violence issues will be updated regularly and made available to the public upon request by contacting OCR or to media by contacting the Press Office at press@ed.gov.

Releasing this list advances a key goal of President Obama's White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault to bring more transparency to the federal government's enforcement activities around this issue. The Obama administration is committed to putting an end to sexual violence—particularly on college campuses. That's why the President established the Task Force earlier this year with a mandate to strengthen federal enforcement efforts and provide schools with additional tools to combat sexual assault on their campuses.

As part of that work, the Education Department released updated guidance earlier this week describing the responsibilities of colleges, universities and schools receiving federal funds to address sexual violence and other forms of sex discrimination under Title IX. The guidelines provide greater clarity about the requirements of the law around sexual violence—as requested by institutions and students.

All colleges, and universities and K-12 schools receiving federal funds must comply with Title IX. Schools that violate the law and refuse to address the problems identified by OCR can lose federal funding or be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice for further action.

Under federal law, sexual violence refers to physical sexual acts perpetrated against a person's will or where a person is incapable of giving consent -- including rape, sexual assault, sexual battery, sexual abuse and sexual coercion.

OCR's mission is to ensure equal access to education and promote educational excellence throughout the nation through the vigorous enforcement of civil rights. OCR is responsible for enforcing federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination by educational institutions on the basis of disability, race, color, national origin, sex, and age, as well as the Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act of 2001.

http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-list-higher-education-institutions-open-title-i

------------------------------------

The list of institutions being investigated can be found at the end of the article. Follow the link Dapper ;)

Kobi

05-05-2014, 03:48 PM

By the end of Sexual Assault Awareness Month, two key questions were on the table for those who not only are aware of rape but would like to end men’s violence against women.

First, do we live in a rape culture, or is rape perpetrated by a relatively small number of predatory men?

Second, is rape a clearly definable crime, or are there gray areas in sexual encounters that defy easy categorization as either consensual or non-consensual?

If those seem to be tricky, or trick, questions, don’t worry. There’s an easy answer to both: patriarchy (more on that shortly).

This year’s Sexual Assault Awareness Month in April was full of the usual stories about men’s violence, especially on university campuses. From football-obsessed state schools to elite private campuses, the reality of rape and rape culture was reported by journalists and critiqued by victim-survivors.

But April also included an unexpected debate within the anti-violence movement about the appropriate boundaries of the discussion about rape and rape culture.

“In the last few years, there has been an unfortunate trend towards blaming ‘rape culture’ for the extensive problem of sexual violence on campuses,” wrote the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, or RAINN, in a letter offering recommendations to the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault (see the government’s final report). “While it is helpful to point out the systemic barriers to addressing the problem, it is important to not lose sight of a simple fact: Rape is caused not by cultural factors but by the conscious decisions, of a small percentage of the community, to commit a violent crime.”

RAINN expressed concern that emphasizing rape culture makes “it harder to stop sexual violence, since it removes the focus from the individual at fault, and seemingly mitigates personal responsibility for his or her own actions.”

Feminists pushed back, pointing out that it shouldn’t be difficult to hold accountable the individuals who commit acts legally defined as rape, while we also discuss how prosecuting rapists is made difficult by those who blame victims and make excuses for men’s violence, all of which is related to the way our culture routinely glorifies other types of men’s violence (war, sports and action movies) and routinely presents objectified female bodies to men for sexual pleasure (pornography, Hollywood movies and strip clubs).

Meanwhile, conservative commentators picked up on all this, using it as a club to condemn the always-demonizable feminists for their allegedly unfair treatment of men and allegedly crazy critique of masculinity.

I’m a man who doesn’t believe feminists are unfair or crazy. In fact, I believe the only sensible way to understand these issues is through a feminist critique of — you guessed it — patriarchy.

Rape and rape-like behavior

Before wading into the reasons we need feminism, let’s consider a hypothetical:

A young man and woman are on a first date. The man decides early in the evening that he would like to have sexual intercourse and makes his attraction to her clear in conversation. He does not intend to force her to have sex, but he is assertive in a way that she interprets to mean that he “won’t take no for an answer.” The woman does not want to have sex, but she is uncertain of how he will react if she rejects his advance. Alone in his apartment — in a setting in which his physical strength means she likely could not prevent him from raping her — she offers to perform oral sex, hoping that will satisfy him and allow her to get home without a direct confrontation that could become too intense, even violent. She does not tell him what she is thinking, out of fear of how he may react. The man accepts the offer of oral sex, and the evening ends without conflict.

If that sex happened — and it’s an experience that women have described (see Flirting with Danger by Lynn Phillips and the companion film) — should we describe the encounter as consensual sex or rape? In legal terms, this clearly is not rape. So, it’s consensual sex. No problem, right?

Consider some other potentially relevant factors: If a year before that situation, the woman had been raped while on a date, would that change our assessment? If she had been sexually assaulted as a child and still, years later, goes into a survival mode when triggered? If this were a college campus and the man was a well-known athlete, and she feared the system would protect him?

By legal standards, this still clearly is not rape. But by human standards, this doesn’t feel like fully consensual sex. Maybe we should recognize that both those assessments are reasonable. In short, rape is a definable crime that happens in a rape culture — once again, both things are true.

What is patriarchy and why does it matter?

Patriarchy is a term rarely heard in mainstream conversation, especially since the backlash against feminism took off in the 1980s. So, let’s start with the late feminist historian Gerda Lerner’s definition of patriarchy as “the manifestation and institutionalization of male dominance over women and children in the family and the extension of male dominance over women in the society in general.” Patriarchy implies, she continued, “that men hold power in all the important institutions of society and that women are deprived of access to such power. It does not imply that women are either totally powerless or totally deprived of rights, influence and resources.”

Feminism challenges acts of male dominance and analyzes the underlying patriarchal ideology that tries to make that dominance seem inevitable and immutable. Second-wave radical feminists in the second half of the 20th century identified men’s violence against women — rape, child sexual assault, domestic violence and various forms of harassment — as a key method of patriarchal control and made a compelling argument that sexual assault cannot be understood outside of an analysis of patriarchy’s ideology.

Some of those feminists argued that “rape is about power not sex,” but other feminists went deeper, pointing out that when women describe the range of their sexual experiences it becomes clear there is no bright-line distinction between rape and not-rape, but instead a continuum of sexual intrusion into women’s lives by men. Yes, men who rape seek a sense of power, but men also use their power to get sex from women, sometimes under conditions that are not legally defined as rape but involve varying levels of control and coercion.

So, the focus shouldn’t be reduced to a relatively small number of men who engage in behavior we can easily label as rape. Those men pose a serious problem and we should be diligent in prosecuting them. But that prosecution can go on — and, in fact, will be aided by — recognizing the larger context in which men are trained to seek control and pursue conquest in order to feel like a man, and how that control is routinely sexualized.

Patriarchal sex

If this seems far-fetched, think about the ways men in all-male spaces often talk about sex, such as asking each other, “Did you get any?” From that perspective, sex is the acquisition of pleasure from a woman, something one takes from a woman, and men talk openly among themselves about strategies to enhance the likelihood of “getting some” even in the face of resistance from women.

This doesn’t mean that all men are rapists, that all heterosexual sex is rape or that egalitarian relationships between men and women are impossible. It does mean, however, that rape is about power and sex, about the way men are trained to understand ourselves and to see women.

Let me repeat: The majority of men do not rape. But consider these other categories:

Men who do not rape but would be willing to rape if they were sure they would not be punished.
Men who do not rape but will not intervene when another man rapes.
Men who do not rape but buy sex with women who have been, or likely will be, raped in the context of being prostituted.
Men who do not rape but will watch films of women in situations that depict rape or rape-like acts.
Men who do not rape but find the idea of rape sexually arousing.
Men who do not rape but whose sexual arousal depends on feeling dominant and having power over a woman.
Men who do not rape but routinely masturbate to pornography in which women are presented as objectified bodies whose primary, or only, function is to provide sexual pleasure for men.

Those men are not rapists. But is that fact — that the men in these categories are not, in legal terms, guilty of rape — comforting? Are we advancing the cause of ending men’s violence against women by focusing only on the acts legally defined as rape?

Rape is rape, and rape culture is rape culture

Jody Raphael’s book Rape is Rape: How Denial, Distortion, and Victim Blaming Are Fueling a Hidden Acquaintance Rape Crisis points out that if we use “a conservative definition of rape about which there can be no argument” — rape as an act of “forcible penetration” — the research establishes that between 10.6 percent and 16.1 percent of American women have been raped. That means somewhere between 12 million and 18 million women in this country today live as rape victim-survivors, if we use a narrow definition of the crime.

Because no human activity takes place in an ideological vacuum — the ideas in our heads affect the way we behave — it’s hard to make sense of those numbers without the concept of rape culture. A rape culture doesn’t command men to rape, but it does make rape inviting, and it reduces the likelihood rapists will be identified, arrested, prosecuted, convicted and punished. It’s hard to imagine any meaningful efforts to reduce, and someday eliminate, rape without talking openly and honestly about these matters. But RAINN argues that such denial is exactly the path we should take.

Why should we fear talking about the socialization process by which boys and men are trained to see themselves as powerful over women and to see women as sexual objects? Why should we fear asking critical questions about all-male spaces, such as athletic teams and fraternities, where these attitudes might be reinforced? Could it be a fear that the problem of sexual assault is so deeply entwined in our taken-for-granted assumptions about gender that any serious response to the problem of rape requires us to all get more radical, to take radical feminism seriously?

This does not mean all men are rapists, that all male athletes are rapists, or that all fraternity members are rapists. It does mean that if we want to stop sexual violence, we have to confront patriarchy. If we decide we aren’t going to talk about patriarchy, then let’s stop pretending we are going to stop sexual violence and recognize that, at best, all we can do is manage the problem. If we can’t talk about patriarchy, then let’s admit that we are giving up on the idea of gender justice and goal of a world without rape.

It’s easy to understand why people don’t like this formulation of the problem, given that anything beyond a tepid liberal, postmodern feminism is out of fashion these days and radical feminist analyses of male dominance are rarely part of polite conversation. Sometimes people concede the value of such an analysis, but justify the silence about it by claiming, “People can’t handle it.” When someone makes that claim, I assume what they mean is “I can’t handle it myself,” that it’s too much, too painful to deal with.

That’s not hard to understand, because to confront the reality of rape and rape culture is to realize that vigorous prosecution of the small number of men who rape doesn’t solve the larger problem.

If anyone still doubts that rape culture exists and is relevant, how else would we explain the Yale University fraternity members who marched on campus while shouting sexist chants, including “No means yes, yes means anal,” as part of a 2010 pledge event?

Everyone recognizes the mocking reference to the anti-rape message, “No means no,” which expresses women’s demand that men listen to them. These Yale men reject that. The second part of their chant — “Yes means anal” — states that women who agree to sex are implicitly agreeing to anything a man wants, including anal penetration. This will make sense to anyone who is aware of the prevalence of anal penetration in today’s pornography marketed to heterosexual men. In those pornographic scenes, women sometimes beg for that penetration and other times are forced into it, but the message is the same: Men’s pleasure is central.

In this one chant, these men of Yale — one of the most elite universities in the United States, which produces some of the country’s most powerful business and political leaders, including five presidents — clearly express a patriarchal view of gender and sex. Their chant is an endorsement of rape and an expression of rape culture.

Is a feminist critique of rape and rape culture a threat to me as a man? I was socialized in a patriarchal culture to believe that whatever feminists had planned, I should be afraid of it. But what I have learned from radical feminists is that quite the opposite is true — feminism is a gift to men. Such critique does not undermine my humanity, but instead gives me a chance to embrace it.

http://wagingnonviolence.org/feature/rape-rape-culture-problem-patriarchy/

Kobi

05-07-2014, 03:18 PM

An Indonesian woman who was gang-raped by men accusing her of having extramarital sex may be caned publicly for violating Islamic law, an official said Wednesday.

The 25-year-old widow said she was raped by eight men who allegedly found her with a married man in her house. The men reportedly beat the man, doused the two with sewage, and then turned them over to Islamic police in conservative Aceh province.

The alleged attack occurred early Thursday in Lhokbani, a village in East Aceh district.

The head of Islamic Shariah law in the district, Ibrahim Latief, said his office has recommended the widow and the married man be caned nine times for violating religious law, pending an investigation. Its preliminary finding was that the two were about to have sex at that time, but Latief contended they violated Shariah law by being in the same room together. He said they also admitted they had sex earlier.

Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation of 240 million people, has a policy of secularism but allows Aceh, a predominantly Muslim province on the northern tip of Sumatra, to implement a version of Sharia Islamic law.

Police have arrested three of the eight men and are hunting for the others.

East Aceh police chief Lt. Col. Hariadi said those arrested are being questioned on charges of rape. One of the accused is a 13-year-old boy, who would be charged as an adult but prosecuted in a closed-door trial.

Latief said the eight could be caned for raping the woman, but "it will be too lenient if they just received the same punishment of nine strokes."

The criminal charge of rape carries a maximum penalty of 15 years.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/gang-raped-indonesian-woman-faces-public-caning-23619038

Kobi

05-14-2014, 06:17 PM

It's only April, but it looks and sounds like October. More than $80 million has been spent on political advertising in only about a dozen Senate battleground states.

About half that amount is targeted at women.

"We have allowed ourselves to be branded [in] a way I do not feel is representative of who we are as Republicans," says Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., of her party's negative reputation on women's issues.

Many ads aimed at women take the most obvious approach: Republicans putting their female candidates front and center; Democrats attacking Republicans for waging a war on women.

But there's more to it than that, says Republican ad-maker Ashley O'Connor.

"Women process information differently than men," O'Connor says. "So much of political advertising focuses on conflict, and facts and figures, and I think that we're already starting to see, when reaching women voters, there's just new techniques need to be used, and a different tone, and more storytelling."

O'Connor singles out an ad aired by Monica Wehby, a pediatric neurosurgeon seeking the Republican nomination for Senate in Oregon. In the ad, a woman tells the story of Webby operating on her daughter.

"Dr. Wehby was going to open her back and reconstruct my daughter's entire lower spine," the woman says. "She just hugged me and kissed my forehead, and she said, 'It's going to be OK, sweetheart. I've got her, and I am going to see you in a couple of hours.' "

"This is a 60-second ad and it's not particularly issue-driven," O'Connor says of the spot. "It sort of goes to this point that when talking to women, I don't think you necessarily have to be delivering factual information to move them. I think connecting with their heart and really trying to build emotion is more effective."

That may sound a little sexist, but appealing to emotions is what all effective advertising does. And the fact that Republicans are trying to do it is the biggest new development in political ads aimed at women.

Aiming For Tough, But Not Harsh

In a typical Republican superPAC ad from 2012, for instance, a man intones a list of Democrats' alleged failings over a soundtrack of ominous music: "Family incomes down, 40 percent living paycheck to paycheck, and Obamacare's new tax on middle-class families."

This year, the GOP has ditched the baritone narrator, the scary music and the facts and figures. Instead, the party is doing what Democrats have been doing for many years: using softer voices and more personal stories.

A Republican superPAC ad running this year features a woman who narrates in a conversational tone: "People don't like political ads. I don't like them either. But health care isn't about politics. It's about people. It's not about a website that doesn't work ... It's about people, and millions of people have lost their health insurance. ... Obamacare doesn't work."

Elizabeth Wilner, senior vice president with Kantar Media, praises the ad.

"It's a very clean ad," Wilner says. "The tone of the ad, her tone, is very sympathetic and very easy on the ears. It's a new kind of attack ad, and it is not a harsh ad in any way, but the message itself is very tough."

Endorsed By Wives, Moms And Daughters

There are other trends this year that both parties hope will appeal to women. Family members are everywhere in ads, especially moms and daughters.

In a Florida special election to fill the seat vacated by Republican Rep. Trey Radel, candidate Curt Clawson's mother appears in an ad to endorse her son. In the same race, Paige Kreegel's wife criticizes "nasty" campaign ads.
Democrats have an urgent problem this year: how to get their most reliable female supporters to become more reliable voters.

In Iowa, the children of Monica Vernon, also running for Congress, promise their mom "will never stop working for the middle class."

Not only is the content of the ads changing, but so are the places in which they appear. Jim Margolis, a veteran Democratic ad-maker, says it's no longer enough to air an ad on daytime TV, or even the nightly news, to reach women.

"We are using data and analytics to try to determine what are the actual programs that women are watching, Margolis says. "And to try to determine, as well, what are those issues, for that particular group, that are going to be the most resonant, that they're going to find the most compelling."

Wherever women are digitally, Margolis says, political ads will find them. A woman who is a Democratic target voter in a Senate battleground state might see campaign ads all day online.

"When you log on in the morning to check the weather, there's a pretty good chance that somebody is going to be talking to you right there," he says.

Your browsing history can say a lot about you, Margolis says, including your gender, interests and issues that matter to you.

The Shoot-'Em-Up Approach

These new ways of targeting women voters, with content tailored to women's concerns, are becoming common. But there's always an exception to the rule. Take the much-imitated ad in which a male politician attacks — literally — the IRS code or a piece of legislation passed by President Obama.

This week, that macho format was adopted by Republican Joni Ernst, a pistol-packing mama running for Senate in Iowa. Ernst already earned attention for an ad about her experience castrating hogs. In the new ad, Ernst rides a Harley to a gun range, and fires off six shots at a target.

"Joni Ernst will take aim at wasteful spending," the narrator says. "And once she sets her sights on Obamacare, Joni's gonna unload."

It seems that even the shoot-'em-up TV ad has achieved gender equality, for better or worse.

http://www.npr.org/2014/05/10/311189075/easy-on-the-ears-gop-ads-adapt-to-reach-women-voters

Kobi

05-18-2014, 06:21 PM

When it comes to talking about women, "saying what you mean" and "meaning what you say" don't always have much in common. Words like "b*tchy" and "slutty" are clearly sexist and meant to insult, but even seemingly neutral adjectives have become euphemisms for "uniquely female character flaw."

Used by both men and women, these words are the linguistic equivalents of wolves in sheeps' clothing, often disguised as flattery while used to subtly undermine the woman being described. It's time to strip them down.

Below is a brief compendium of adjectives that are often used to describe women -- and what they really mean:

Bossy: Has on one or more occasion suggested that someone, man or woman, has made a factual error. (Related, know-it-all)

Clingy: Describes a woman who insists on responding to a partner's cues of romance, intimacy and commitment by reciprocating them.

Cold: Used to describe a woman who does not smile enough, or whose resting face does not suggest joyous contentment.

Crazy: Attributes women's behavior to an error in reason independent of speaker's actions, thereby dismissing her feelings as irrational, "while simultaneously absolving ... men from responsibility." A label most women seek to avoid at all costs.

Cute: Used among men when referring to an attractive woman whose intellectual and comedic allure happen to be more pronounced than her conventional sex appeal.

Exotic: Mainstream media's preferred adjective for a non-white female who is also beautiful.

Feisty: Feisty is sassy with a better resume. It's essentially results-based sass, invoked to acknowledge the achievement and/or ambition of a woman, while also warning against it. Remarkably useful to misogynists, "feisty" implies enough aggression to diminish a woman's accomplishment without completely dismissing it. (Related, sassy)

High-maintenance: Wears makeup and/or requires regular attention from significant other. (Related, low-maintenance)

Intense: Applies to women who express their feelings, opinions and expectations freely, and politely excuse suitors not up to matching them.

Laid back/chill: Deeper implication than "casual or relaxed in manner." Often a celebration of a woman's ability to sublimate the emotional excesses of her gender. A woman who is "chill" reacts to her male friend or partner's questionable behavior the way he wants her to -- usually, not at all. Related to the "cool girl" as referenced in Gillian Flynn's Gone Girl.

Low-maintenance:
1. Used to describe a woman willing to repress her own needs in order to make no demands on her current or desired partner.
2. A woman who is not interested enough in said partner to make demands. (Related, high-maintenance)

Peppy/Bubbly: Describes an attractive woman with nicely-balanced serotonin levels. Use patronizingly when referring to women whose friendliness and enthusiasm you find annoying.

Perky: Identifies a well-rested, usually petite woman.

Prude: A woman who doesn't engage in whatever romantic or sexual encounter a man has suggested. Use liberally when said woman is not excessively apologetic about her lack of sexual experience or interest therein.

Pushy: Most recently, used to describe a remarkably accomplished woman whose high standards and willingness to insist on them aggressively just kinda rubs colleagues the wrong way. (Related, bossy)

Sassy: An adjective used to describe a woman with a personality. (See, personality: broad spectrum of verbal behavior spanning "is not clinically mute" and "enjoys humor," all the way to "expresses an opinion.") Serves to attribute a woman's comedic or intellectual superiority to a specifically feminine trait rather than actual competence. Related, sassy black woman: Describes self-reliant African-American woman with strength of character. Close association with "angry black woman."

Sweet: Used to indicate a general lack of sass or feistiness. Frequently serves to co-opt a woman's kindness in order to present her as intellectually inferior.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/16/words-to-describe-women_n_5309853.html?ir=Women

Kobi

05-24-2014, 11:43 AM

WHEN terrorists in Nigeria organized a secret attack last month, they didn’t target an army barracks, a police department or a drone base. No, Boko Haram militants attacked what is even scarier to a fanatic: a girls’ school.

That’s what extremists do. They target educated girls, their worst nightmare.

That’s why the Pakistani Taliban shot Malala Yousafzai in the head at age 15. That’s why the Afghan Taliban throws acid on the faces of girls who dare to seek an education.

Why are fanatics so terrified of girls’ education? Because there’s no force more powerful to transform a society. The greatest threat to extremism isn’t drones firing missiles, but girls reading books.

In that sense, Boko Haram was behaving perfectly rationally — albeit barbarically — when it kidnapped some of the brightest, most ambitious girls in the region and announced plans to sell them as slaves. If you want to mire a nation in backwardness, manacle your daughters.

What saddens me is that we in the West aren’t acting as rationally. To fight militancy, we invest overwhelmingly in the military toolbox but not so much in the education toolbox that has a far better record at defeating militancy.

President Obama gives the green light to blow up terrorists with drones, but he neglects his 2008 campaign promise to establish a $2 billion global fund for education. I wish Republicans, instead of investigating him for chimerical scandals in Benghazi, Libya, would shine a light on his failure to follow through on that great idea.

So why does girls’ education matter so much? First, because it changes demography.

One of the factors that correlates most strongly to instability is a youth bulge in a population. The more unemployed young men ages 15 to 24, the more upheaval.

One study found that for every 1 percentage point increase in the share of the population aged 15 to 24, the risk of civil war increases by 4 percent.

That means that curbing birthrates tends to lead to stability, and that’s where educating girls comes in. You educate a boy, and he’ll have fewer children, but it’s a small effect. You educate a girl, and, on average, she will have a significantly smaller family. One robust Nigeria study managed to tease out correlation from causation and found that for each additional year of primary school, a girl has 0.26 fewer children. So if we want to reduce the youth bulge a decade from now, educate girls today.

More broadly, girls’ education can, in effect, almost double the formal labor force. It boosts the economy, raising living standards and promoting a virtuous cycle of development. Asia’s economic boom was built by educating girls and moving them from the villages to far more productive work in the cities.

One example of the power of girls’ education is Bangladesh, which until 1971 was (the seemingly hopeless) part of Pakistan. After Bangladesh gained independence, it emphasized education, including of girls; today, it actually has more girls in high school than boys. Those educated women became the backbone of Grameen Bank, development organizations like BRAC and the garment industry.

Likewise, Oman in the 1960s was one of the most backward countries in the world, with no television, no diplomats and radios banned. Not a single girl attended school in Oman. Then there was a coup, and the new government educated boys and girls alike.

Today, Oman is stable and incomparably better off than its neighbor, Yemen, where girls are still married off young and often denied an education. America is fighting Al Qaeda affiliates in Yemen and Pakistan with drones; maybe we should invest in girls’ schools as Bangladesh and Oman did.

Girls’ education is no silver bullet. Iran and Saudi Arabia have both educated girls but refused to empower them, so both remain mired in the past. But when a country educates and unleashes women, those educated women often become force multipliers for good.

Angeline Mugwendere was an impoverished Zimbabwean girl who was mocked by classmates because she traipsed to school barefoot in a torn dress with nothing underneath. She couldn’t afford school supplies, so she would wash dishes for her teachers in hopes of being given a pen or paper in thanks.

Yet Angeline was brilliant. In the nationwide sixth-grade graduation examinations, she had the highest score in her entire district — indeed, one of the highest scores in the country. Yet she had no hope of attending seventh grade because she couldn’t afford the fees.

That’s when a nonprofit called the Campaign for Female Education, or Camfed, came along and helped pay for Angeline to stay in school. She did brilliantly in high school and is now the regional director for Camfed, in charge of helping impoverished girls get to school in four African countries. She’s paying it forward.

Educating girls and empowering women are also tasks that are, by global standards, relatively doable. We spend billions of dollars on intelligence collection, counterterrorism and military interventions, even though they have a quite mixed record. By comparison, educating girls is an underfunded cause even though it’s more straightforward.

Readers often feel helpless, unable to make a difference. But it was a grass-roots movement starting in Nigeria that grabbed attention and held leaders accountable to address it. Nigeria’s leaders perhaps now realize that they must protect not only oil wells but an even greater treasure: the nation’s students.

Likewise, any of us can stick it to Boko Haram by helping to educate a girl. A $40 gift at Camfed.org buys a uniform so that a girl can go to school.

We can also call on members of Congress to pass the International Violence Against Women Act, which would elevate the issue of sexual violence on the global agenda.

Boko Haram has a stronghold in northeastern Nigeria because it’s an area where education is weak and women are marginalized. Some two-thirds of women in the region have had no formal education. Only 1 in 20 has completed high school. Half are married by age 15.

Obviously, the situation in the United States is incomparably better. But we have our own problems. It’s estimated that 100,000 girls under 18 years old in the United States are trafficked into commercial sex each year. So let’s fight to #BringBackOurGirls in Nigeria but also here in the United States and around the world.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/11/opinion/sunday/kristof-whats-so-scary-about-smart-girls.html?_r=0