“Little Beauties: Ultimate Kiddie Queen Showdown”

Cripes:

Move over Miss America! The Little Beauties are coming to town! They’re gorgeous, they’re talented, they’re six-years old and with the helping hand of eager moms, determined pageant coaches, fabulous spray tan artists and “flipper” (fake teeth) makers, not to mention a couple of Pixie Sticks for energy, these girls are taking the stage at pageants all over the Southeast U.S for the chance to win cash prizes and crowns!

Little Beauties: Ultimate Kiddie Queen Showdown is a one-hour documentary special that will take a light-hearted look into the wonderful world of children’s beauty pageants through the eyes of four, precocious six-year old girls. This documentary reveals the humor and love behind an American tradition; the always colorful characters on the pageant circuit; and the “sparkle” it takes to win a crown.

Six. These girls are six years old. There are some clips from the show here and here and here and here and here.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on “Little Beauties: Ultimate Kiddie Queen Showdown”

A Movie That Really Deals With Abortion

Unlike what’s coming out of Hollywood recently, a new Romanian film, 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days, really does deal with abortion. It won the Cannes Palme d’Or last year, and it now starts its run in the United States. The New York Times has an excellent review of the movie today. Here’s an excerpt:

In”4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days,”a ferocious, unsentimental, often brilliantly directed film about a young woman who helps a friend secure an abortion, the camera doesn’t follow the action, it expresses consciousness itself. This consciousness : alert to the world and insistently alive : is embodied by a young university student who, one wintry day in the late 1980s, helps her roommate with an abortion in Ceausescu’s Romania when such procedures were illegal, not uncommon and too often fatal. It’s a pitiless, violent story that in its telling becomes a haunting and haunted intellectual and aesthetic achievement.

You may already have heard something about”4 Months,”which was awarded the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival last year, only to be shut out from Academy Award consideration a few weeks ago by the philistines who select the foreign-language nominees. The Oscars are absurd, yet they can help a microscopically budgeted foreign-language film find a supportive audience. And”4 Months”deserves to be seen by the largest audience possible, partly because it offers a welcome alternative to the coy, trivializing attitude toward abortion now in vogue in American fiction films, but largely because it marks the emergence of an important new talent in the Romanian writer and director Cristian Mungiu.

Ironically, while seeing Juno a couple of weeks ago, I saw a preview for this film.   It looked incredibly powerful and I hope to get to see it on the big screen.

– David S. Cohen

Share
Posted in Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on A Movie That Really Deals With Abortion

Larry Flynt and Dennis Kucinich

Huffpo essay about their relationship here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Larry Flynt and Dennis Kucinich

National Association of Women Lawyers Writing Competition

NAWL has establisted the annual Selma Moidel Smith Law Student Writing Competition to encourage and reward original law student writing on issues concerning women and the law. Here are the rules.

I’ve served as one of the judges for this competition in the past.   The quality of the submissions vary widely.   If you are a law student who has written a paper that might meet the requirements, go ahead and submit it!   Just make sure to watch the page limits and other requirements.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminists in Academia | Comments Off on National Association of Women Lawyers Writing Competition

The Price of Pampering

Two months ago New York Magazine ran an article called “A Stranger’s Touch,” about the growth in the “spa industry” in New York.   Here’s an excerpt:

I don’t want to be moralistic about beauty, to scorn women for wanting massages:right now, I could use one myself. A pedicure may not be a necessity, but it’s benign; if workers were better paid and treated as worthy of respect, if the hours were fair, their labor might be regarded as a kind of artistry. Prostitution might be one analog to spa work, but there is another: child care, another female-centered profession that requires tremendous emotional skill and physical intimacy. Like spa work, it is often underpaid and exploitative:not because it is intrinsically humiliating, but because it is coded as feminine and therefore invisible, undervalued.

The article makes the point that the “spa industry” in New York is staffed mostly by women of color who are born outside of the United States and who have limited economic means.   They work long hours and receive low wages.  

In  the corner of  Wall Street where I used to work, mailroom workers and junior lawyers alike used their lunch breaks/”down time” to get a $6 manicure at a nearby nail salon.   The all-female clientele was white, black, brown and English-speaking.   The all-female staff was Korean.    Very few  of the salon workers spoke English.  

One woman interviewed for the New York Magazine article hypothesized that the “spa industry”  has grown quickly in response to a break-down in family relationships.   Where women used to have sisters or mothers who would style our hair or even give a pluck to that singularly persistent hair, the explanation goes, increasing numbers of women outsource that activity.   I’m not sure that this is a complete or even satisfactory explanation, but the facts are undeniable:   the “spa industry” is a structure that allows some women to  benefit from the economic exploitation of other women.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Race and Racism, Women and Economics | Comments Off on The Price of Pampering

Just Because You Are A Paranoid Feminist Doesn’t Mean The Sexists Aren’t Out To Get You, Sciences Edition.

Fresh evidence here.

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminists in Academia | Comments Off on Just Because You Are A Paranoid Feminist Doesn’t Mean The Sexists Aren’t Out To Get You, Sciences Edition.

Hah! Been there.

By which I mean, here.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on Hah! Been there.

CFP: National Council for Research on Women’s “Hitting the Ground Running”

The National Council for Research on Women has issued this CFP/conference announcement for its “Hitting the Ground Running” Conference, co-Sponsored by The Center for the Study on Gender and Sexuality at NYU:

Please join leading scholars, researchers, advocates, and policy makers from across various disciplines and fields June 5-7, 2008 at the Kimmel Center at NYU for our Annual Conference. Share information and resources; learn about cutting edge and emerging research on women, gender, and girls; and strategize about ways to work across communities and fields of study.

This year’s conference themes will center around where women can have the most impact in the 2008 Presidential election and beyond, including research and policy issues that will need to be addressed with a new administration; challenges women in the academy confront:backlash, shrinking budgets, corporatization, conservative social pressures:and what can be done to counter them; and the implications of the intersections of race, class, gender, ethnicity, sexuality, nation, generation and other markers of difference for feminist scholarship, leadership, and activism, nationally and globally.

Deadline for Call for Papers and Presentations: February 15, 2008.

More information is available here.

-Posted by Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Call for Papers or Participation, Upcoming Conferences | Comments Off on CFP: National Council for Research on Women’s “Hitting the Ground Running”

More Evidence That Christopher Fairman’s Thesis Was Correct

From The Consumerist:

Fed up with a change in flight patterns that made them sleep in bed at night with earplugs, one Philly couple decided to paint “FUCK YOU FAA. NO FLY ZONE” and a symbol for “no planes” on the top of their roof. Note: in real life, it says “fuck” but the newspaper photoshopped it to just say “FU.” Homeowner Michael Hall said they had tried to lodge complaints with the FAA noise-complaint hotline over 20 times, but whenever they called, an answering machines would apologize for not being able to take their message as the mailbox was full.

To learn more about Fairman’s scholarship on this issue go here or here.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Sociolinguistics | Comments Off on More Evidence That Christopher Fairman’s Thesis Was Correct

Still More Humorless Feminism

This time it’s Zuska on:

Undergraduate Men and Their Oh-So-Funny Rape Jokes

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Feminist Blogs Of Interest | Comments Off on Still More Humorless Feminism

Danielle Holley-Walker on NPR!

Feminist (and University of South Carolina) Law Prof Danielle Holley-Walker talks about her primary blog, SCBlackPress, and the upcoming SC Democratic Primary on the NPR program”News and Notes”hosted by Farai Chideya. You can listen to the broadcast here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Feminist Blogs Of Interest, South Carolina | Comments Off on Danielle Holley-Walker on NPR!

News in Brief: Same Melody, Different Words

This is really a variation on the theme of yesterday’s post.

For some months now the House of Lords in the UK has been debating legislation that revamps British law about assisted reproductive technology (ART). (Indeed, it was in the course of this debate that the “twins-got-married” story surfaced.) There are a number of different provisions, but a lot of the coverage has focused on the parentage status of lesbian and gay couples using ART.

The bill, as it stands now, would automatically recognize the civil partner of a woman who gave birth via donated sperm as a parent. This is entirely consistent with the presumption that the husband of a woman who gives birth is a parent. But it is still a striking move. There’s a slightly different provision for parentage for gay men who are using surrogacy, but it too allows both to be declared parents of the child.

These particular provisions have generated quite a lot of opposition. That’s where the “twins who marry” stuff came from. And the particular point of contention seems to be the lack of a father in lesbian mother families. (There’s no mention in the coverage I’ve read of a corresponding concern about motherless children in gay male families.) So again, it comes down to gender. Two parents are not enough if they are not of specified genders. An amendment to include language affirming the “need for a father” was ultimately rejected in the House of Lords, 164-93.

Interestingly, this debate transpires in the UK, where anonymous sperm donation is no longer permitted. A law enacted in 2005 provides that children born through use of donor sperm must be able to identify the donors of genetic material when they turn 18. Critically, however, although the donors may not be eternally anonymous, it is explicitly stated in the statue that they will have no financial or legal obligations with respect to the child. In other words, the identified donors are not parents. It is crucial to consider these two principles together–donor identification with clear law on lack of parental status.

One final note–one of the articles I linked to earlier (the one from the Pink News) contains a long excerpt from a floor speech delivered by Lord Carlile. He spoke in support of lesbian parents (including his own daughter.) It’s a lovely speech and worth a read.

Julie Shapiro (cross posted in Related Topics)

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminism and Technology, LGBT Rights | Comments Off on News in Brief: Same Melody, Different Words

“Race and Gender in Presidential Politics: A Debate Between Gloria Steinem and Melissa Harris-Lacewell”

Video and transcript here, at Democracy, Now!

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on “Race and Gender in Presidential Politics: A Debate Between Gloria Steinem and Melissa Harris-Lacewell”

BYU study about pornography and college students

I’m not entirely comfortable with the way it focuses on women, but here are two excerpts from this overview:

… Researchers at Brigham Young University conducted the study with college students and their parents from six schools across the country. Nearly half of the female students, 49 percent, said viewing pornography is an acceptable way to express one’s sexuality. Only 37 percent of the dads agreed. The study, titled”Generation XXX: Pornography Acceptance and Use Among Emerging Adults,”will be published in the January issue of Journal of Adolescent Research.

“Even in the absence of personal use, it seems young women’s attitudes are being influenced by the proliferation of pornography,”said the study’s lead researcher Jason Carroll, an associate professor at BYU who studies the transition to adulthood.”These women are part of a rising generation that is deeming pornography as more acceptable and more mainstream.”

The study found actual use of pornography far more prevalent among male students, with 48 percent of men reporting viewing pornography at least weekly compared to only 3 percent of women. The study also found that one in five young adult men view pornography every day or nearly every day. …

… During the past 12 months, on how many days did you view pornographic material (such as magazines, movies, and/or Internet sites?

Every day or almost every day

  • Young men: 21.3%
  • Young women: 1.0%

1 or 2 days a week

  • Young men: 27.1%
  • Young women: 2.2%

2 or 3 days a month

  • Young men: 21.0%
  • Young women: 7.1%

Once a month or less

  • Young men: 16.8%
  • Young women: 20.7%

None

  • Young men: 13.9%
  • Young women: 69.0%

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on BYU study about pornography and college students

C.U.N.T.?

From TPMmuckraker:

…That’s the stroke of genius from the man whom Tucker Carlson insists on calling “legendary Republican strategist Roger Stone” every time he appears on his show (twice this month). The Standard explains that Stone is “trying to tap into deep-seated sentiments about Clinton that pundits and rival candidates can’t articulate.”

There is, nonetheless, a valuable lesson here. Stone walks the Standard‘s Matt Labash through how he set up his 527. All that’s needed is a name. He chose Jeff “Noodles” Jones, a local bartender/DJ in Miami, to serve as the group’s chairman. It doesn’t matter that Noodles doesn’t have much of a clue about anything — in fact, that’s the point. As long as he doesn’t have a criminal record (a mistake Stone almost made when selecting a chairman), he’s OK. Voila! Attack group. Stone explains:

“A 527 doesn’t have a wife,” Stone explains. “It doesn’t have a brother-in-law who knows a lot about politics, or a union president who calls and doesn’t like the color of the suit, or bimbo eruptions. It’s the perfect candidate, because it has no personal characteristics.”

No personal characteristics indeed. The group’s IRS filings are studiedly anonymous, disclosing their purpose as”To educate the public about the importance of moral character and integtiry [sic] in those who hold public office.”…

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on C.U.N.T.?

Two New Carnivals

52nd Carnival of Feminists at Figure: Demystifying the Feminist Mystique.
10th Carnival of Radical Feminists at Femtique: a feminist critique of pop media.

Share
Posted in Carnival time!, Feminist Blogs Of Interest | Comments Off on Two New Carnivals

News in Brief–European High Court on Lesbian Adoption

This week the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the regional authorities in France acted improperly when they refused to allow a single lesbian to adopt a child. (That first link is to the actual opinion of the court, but here is one to a much briefer news account.)

While France allows single women to adopt, it had denied the request of this particular woman, who just happened to be a lesbian. France contended that the denial had not be because she was a lesbian, but rather because of the lack of a”paternal referent.” In other words, the problem was there would not be a father.

I won’t discuss the opinion in any detail. It’s rather long and complicated. But consider the rationale advanced by the state. Not only is parenting gendered, but that is a good and necessary thing. In the view of the French authorities (and they are hardly alone in this) a male parent and a female parent do different things and you need to have one of each in order to properly raise a child. It isn’t simply an assertion that two parents are better than one or that a stable couple is better able to raise children than is a single parent. It is the specific genders of the parental figures that matter.

I highlight this for two reasons. First, it’s further evidence that parenthood is deeply gendered. (I talked about this earlier, though I don’t think that proposition was terribly controversial.) Second, some people are deeply invested in the gendered nature of parenting as a political matter. Their position isn’t simply that parenthood is gendered, but more importantly, that it should be gendered. There’s a world of difference between describing what is and asserting that it should be that way.

The article also makes clear that the ideological commitment to gendered parenthood is a critical concern for lesbians and gay men particularly. Indeed, as the focus of conservative action against lesbians and gay men has expanded from anti-marriage to anti-parenting, arguments about appropriate gender roles and parenting have moved more to the fore.

-Julie Shapiro (cross-posted at Related Topics)

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, LGBT Rights | Comments Off on News in Brief–European High Court on Lesbian Adoption

Margaret Cho Says: “Let She Who Is Without Period Stains Throw The First Tampon”

Here at the HuffPo.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Sociolinguistics | Comments Off on Margaret Cho Says: “Let She Who Is Without Period Stains Throw The First Tampon”

More Evidence That Joe Francis Is An Idiot

From here:

Oklahoma winemakers Girls Gone Wine is suing Mantra Films in response to a cease-and-desist letter from the “Girls Gone Wild” producers.

“The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has already said, ‘There’s no issue here. They can co-exist,'” said Martin Ozinga, attorney for Girls Gone Wine.

At issue is whether the three women behind the wine brand can keep their already trademarked name. Girls Gone Wine has been trademarked since February 2007.

“We will crush them,” “Girls Gone Wild” founder Joe Francis told a reporter from jail in Reno, Nev. “This is blatant trademark infringement. It just backs up everything that people have tried to do to me over the last few years to take advantage of me and we’re tired of it.”

The women went to federal court after getting a letter in July from a Mantra Films attorney demanding they “immediately cease and desist any and all use” of the winery’s name. The letter explained Mantra Films was prepared to take legal action if the women kept using the name.

The women struck first, reportedly so the issue could be resolved in court in Oklahoma rather than California.

“It always makes your gut clinch when you get that kind of thing,” owner Michelle Finch said. “We’re hopeful that it will all work out. If not, we’ll just deal with that, too, if it ever comes. We’re here. We’re here to stay.”

Finch, 44, said she doesn’t think anyone would confuse her business with the DVD-selling business.

“We certainly hope we never are. We don’t get people walking in the door looking for anything but wine,” she said.

The company behind “Girls Gone Wild” has had to deal with this before, all over the world, said its general counsel, Michael Burke.

“It happens all the time,” Burke said. “Mantra Films has spent several hundred million dollars over the last 10 years advertising its name endlessly on TV to build up the image that ‘Girls Gone Wild’ is a fun, party environment and these women are taking a free ride on all that advertisement and name recognition.”

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law | Comments Off on More Evidence That Joe Francis Is An Idiot

Will Any of the Candidates End Hyde?

Henry Hyde is dead. We have a Democratic Congress that should continue at least through the next election cycle. And, with massive discontent with the current Republican President and the party generally, we have a strong likelihood that a Democrat will win the Presidency. But, will any of the Democratic Presidential candidates end the Hyde Amendment?

In case you aren’t familiar with it, the Hyde Amendment is a yearly restriction that prohibits federal Medicaid dollars from paying for abortions except in certain limited circumstances (varying over the years to include rape, incest, and/or a threat to the life or physical health of the woman). Some states, via legislative enactment or state court order, require state funds to pay for poor women’s abortions, but most do not. So, most poor women throughout the country are left to scrape together money for an abortion out of funds that would otherwise go to food, clothing, shelter, or caring for their children or, if they can’t get the money, continue their pregnancy against their wishes.

The three remaining viable candidates for the Democratic nomination have all stated their opposition to the Hyde Amendment. Their statements on the issue in response to a reproductive health questionnaire are below. But, I would like to see this issue be more prominent in the debates and in their speeches. If they care about poverty and if they care about women’s health, they have to care about ending the Hyde Amendment and pledging to make ending it a priority upon becoming President. Especially given the particular party alignment we could have in 2009 — a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress, something that has only held true for 6 of Hyde’s 30+ years — it would be a massive wasted opportunity if Hyde continues.

Here are the candidates’ statements responding to this question: “[Do you] support the Hyde amendment? Under what circumstances [do you] believe that Medicaid should cover abortions (all pregnancies, life- or health- threatening pregnancies, pregnancies that are a result of rape or incest, extreme fetal malformation)?”

Clinton: No. Senator Clinton does not support the Hyde amendment. She believes low-income women should have access to the full range of reproductive health care services.

Edwards: I oppose any effort to restrict abortion as an option for women who depend on the government for their health care needs. I support public funding of abortion services for low-income women. While in the Senate, I voted against restrictions on funding for abortions for federal employees and District of Columbia residents.

Obama: Obama does not support the Hyde amendment. He believes that the federal government should not use its dollars to intrude on a poor woman’s decision whether to carry to term or to terminate her pregnancy and selectively withhold benefits because she seeks to exercise her right of reproductive choice in a manner the government disfavors.

– David S. Cohen

Share
Posted in Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Will Any of the Candidates End Hyde?

This Blog Cracks Me Up

The irony does not escape me.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Blog Administration, Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on This Blog Cracks Me Up

“Saudi Arabia to lift ban on women drivers”

Hey, it’s a start. Via Feministing.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Sisters In Other Nations | Comments Off on “Saudi Arabia to lift ban on women drivers”

“An Open Letter from American Feminists”

From here:

Columnists and opinion writers from The Weekly Standard to the Washington Post to Slate have recently accused American feminists of focusing obsessively on minor or even nonexistent injustices in the United States while ignoring atrocities against women in other countries, especially the Muslim world. A number of reasons are given for this supposed neglect: narcissism, ideological rigidity, reflexive anti-Americanism, fear of seeming insensitive or even racist. Yet what is the evidence for this apparently now broadly accepted claim that feminists don’t support the struggles of women around the globe? It usually comes down to a quick scan of the home page of the National Organization for Women’s website, observing that a particular writer hasn’t covered a particular outrage, plus a handful of quotes wrenched out of context.

In fact, as a bit of research would easily show, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of US feminist organizations involved in promoting women’s rights and well-being around the globe–V-Day, Equality Now, MADRE, the Global Fund for Women, the International Women’s Health Coalition and Feminist Majority, to name some of the most prominent. (The National Organization for Women itself has a section on its website devoted to global feminism, on which it denounces a wide array of practices including female genital mutilation (FGM), “honor” murder, trafficking, dowry deaths and domestic violence). Feminists at Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the United Nations have moved those organizations to add the rights of women and girls to their agenda. Feminist magazines and blogs–Ms. magazine, Feministing.com, Salon.com’s Broadsheet column, womensenews.com (which has an edition in Arabic)–as well as feminist reporters and commentators in the mainstream media, regularly report on and condemn outrages against women wherever they occur, from rape, battery and murder in the US to the denial of women’s human rights in the developing or Muslim world.

As feminists, we call on journalists and opinion writers to report the true position of our movement. We believe that women’s rights are human rights, and stand in solidarity with our sisters who are fighting for equal political, economic, social and reproductive rights around the globe. Specifically, contrary to the accusations of pundits, we support their struggle against female genital mutilation, “honor” murder, forced marriage, child marriage, compulsory Islamic dress codes, the criminalization of sex outside marriage, brutal punishments like lashing and stoning, family laws that favor men and that place adult women under the legal power of fathers, brothers, and husbands, and laws that discount legal testimony made by women. We strongly oppose the denial of education, health care and equal political and economic rights to women.

We reject the use of women’s rights language to justify invading foreign countries. Instead, we call on the United States government to live up to its expressed commitment to women’s rights through peaceful means. Specifically, we call upon it to:

–offer asylum to women and girls fleeing gender-based persecution, including female genital mutilation, domestic violence, and forced marriage;

–promote women’s rights and well-being in all their foreign policy and foreign aid decisions;

–use its diplomatic powers to pressure its allies–especially Saudi Arabia, one of the most oppressive countries in the world for women–to embrace women’s rights;

–drop the Mexico City policy–aka the “gag rule”–which bars funds for AIDS- related and contraception-related health services abroad if they provide abortions, abortion information, or advocate for legalizing abortion;

–generously support the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), which supports women’s reproductive health including safe maternity around the globe, and whose funding is vetoed every year by President Bush;

–become a signatory to The Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the basic UN women’s human rights document, now signed by 185 nations. The US is one of a handful of holdouts, along with Iran, Sudan, and Somalia.

Finally, we call upon the United States, and all the industrialized nations of the West, to share their unprecedented wealth, often gained at the expense of the developing world, with those who need it in such a way that women benefit.

List of signatories and information about signing here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on “An Open Letter from American Feminists”

Oy.

This. Not for the squeamish.

Share
Posted in Women's Health | Comments Off on Oy.

Something Funny From Sparkle*Matrix

Here.

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on Something Funny From Sparkle*Matrix

Upcoming Conference: “Working From the World Up: Equality’s Future”

March 14-15, 2008

University of Wisconsin Law School, Madison, WI

A New Legal Realism Conference – Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the Feminism and Legal Theory Project

Sponsored by: The University of Wisconsin Law School, the Institute for Legal Studies, the Feminism and Legal Theory Project at Emory University, and the Wisconsin Women’s Law Journal/Wisconsin Law Journal of Gender and Society.

Dates: March 14-15, 2008 at the University of Wisconsin. The conference will begin on Friday afternoon and end with a dinner session. Panel sessions will continue all day Saturday, ending around 5:00 p.m.

Location: Sessions will take place at the Pyle Center, 702 Langdon Street, Madison.

Conference Overview: We are at a historic juncture in the progress of race and sex equality in American life, with the election of the first woman Speaker of the House of Representatives and the first Presidential race in which female and African-American candidates have a serious chance of capturing the White House. This conference aims to honor the institutions and the people who have theorized sex and race in ways that have helped to change the world, and to forge the future of the study of race and sex equality in the law. In short, it will be an opportunity to reflect on the key concepts of the past, so as to better understand the future.

A schedule of speakers will be available shortly.

Click Here for Conference Registration

Hosted by Victoria Nourse, Burrus-Bascom Professor of Law, and Jane Larson, Voss-Bascom Professor of Law, at the University of Wisconsin Law School, and cohosted by Martha Albertson Fineman, Robert W. Woodruff Professor of Law and Director of the Feminism and Legal Theory Project at Emory University, and the editorial staff of the Wisconsin Women’s Law Journal/Wisconsin Law Journal of Gender and Society.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminists in Academia, Upcoming Conferences | Comments Off on Upcoming Conference: “Working From the World Up: Equality’s Future”

Upcoming Conference: “Feminist Theory & Economic Vulnerability”

Feminist Theory & Economic Vulnerability

March 7-8, 2008

University of Colorado Law School

For a schedule of speakers, click here.

A registration forms will be available soon.

This workshop, co-sponsored by the Feminism and Legal Theory Project and the Colorado Law School, will explore a range of disciplinary perspectives on the concept of economic vulnerability.

The basic premise underlying the move toward vulnerability is that our current ways of defining who is entitled to legal protection and state subsidy and support are rapidly becoming inadequate, perhaps even irrelevant. Political alliances and analytical categories organized around race, gender, disability, sexuality, and class have proven limited and often divisive. Although post-modern fear of essentializing makes us wary of generalities, both theory and politics require some appeal to the universal. The concept of vulnerability has the potential to unite across differences. This workshop will focus specifically on the economic aspects of vulnerability and the role of the state and globalization in structuring economic vulnerability in the twenty-first century.

To see the original call for papers, click here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminists in Academia, Upcoming Conferences | Comments Off on Upcoming Conference: “Feminist Theory & Economic Vulnerability”

Some Thoughts on the Non-Abortion Film Trilogy

Without specifically intending to do so, I finished the non-abortion film trilogy this past weekend. What’s that? It’s the trilogy of movies from the past year in which the female lead character gets pregnant, clearly is in a situation in which many, if not most, women would get an abortion, but doesn’t. First came Waitress, then Knocked Up, then the Academy-Award nominated Juno. I call them non-abortion rather than anti-abortion because their messages are not at all anti-abortion (although Juno is the closest, see below), but rather the characters just don’t get one and then the movie moves on to dealing with the pregnancy. And, as those stories go, all three are enjoyable.

But what’s going on that we have this story line recurring so frequently? I’m certainly not the first to note it, and it’s been the case on prime time television as well, but it’s troubling that the most common medical procedure for women (over 1.2 million per year) gets pushed aside in situations that clearly call for, at the very least, very serious consideration of it. In Waitress, the main character is in a terribly abusive marriage and, as a result, is trying to get out on her own but has very little money. In Knocked Up, the main character gets pregnant after a one-night stand with a cartoonish buffoon of a man and the pregnancy threatens her developing career. In Juno, the main character is a savvy sixteen year old with no intention of keeping the child. I don’t have empirical data, but I think many, if not most, women in those situations would opt to have a safe, legal abortion. And it’s not like the movies made the completely appropriate point that the procedure is difficult to obtain because of the increasing number of legal roadblocks and decreasing number of providers.

What’s the answer? With abortion numbers at a thirty year low, the movies could just be a reflection of the fact that fewer women are getting abortions. But, I doubt that. It’s probably a combination of fear over the political ramifications of showing abortion in a mainstream American movie and the fact that getting an abortion would not allow for the same story development throughout the pregnancy.

Paradoxically, as a movie, I enjoyed Juno the most even though it was the movie that was the most repulsive politically. The title character actually goes to an abortion clinic but is dissuaded from having the abortion because of the comments of a protester outside the clinic. Given the movie’s nominations this morning, I have no doubt that this scene will be a rallying cry for anti-abortion activists nationwide. I can hear them outside clinics now: “Do what Juno did! Turn back and let someone adopt your baby!”

Thank you Hollywood.

– David S. Cohen

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on Some Thoughts on the Non-Abortion Film Trilogy

A Picture of A Disgusting Photographer

Can you spot him?

Photo from a rather sexist celebrity site.  

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminism and Technology | Comments Off on A Picture of A Disgusting Photographer

It’s the 35th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Blog for Choice Day

Here’s what might happen if it is overturned:

More state-by-state information here.

See also blogs such as RH Reality Check and the Reproductive Rights Blog.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Reproductive Rights, Women's Health | Comments Off on It’s the 35th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Research Suggests Blogging Safer Than Skydiving

From here.

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on Research Suggests Blogging Safer Than Skydiving

In Front of the SC State House Dome, Underneath the Confederate Flag, Attending a Martin Luther King Day Rally, Noticing That the Only Woman Who Got To Speak Was Hillary Clinton


2008 King Day At The Dome. That’s where and how I spent the morning. Video excerpts here. Billed as “A Statewide March and Rally for Justice and Equity,” the substantive speaker program was as follows:

“Welcome and Opening Remarks” by Dr. Lonnie Randolph, President of the S.C. State Conference of the NAACP. “Greetings” by Quentin T. James, President of the SC NAACP Youth & College Division. “Remarks” by The Honorable Roy Romer, Former Governor of Colorado, representing Strong American Schools. “Presentation of the NAACP National President” by Reverend Nelson B. Rivers, III, NAACP Chief of Field Operations. “Remarks” by NAACP National President & CEO Dennis C. Hayes, Esquire. “Remarks” by Floyd A. Keith, Executive Director, Black Coaches and Administrators. “Greetings” by The Honorable Leon Howard, Chairman, S.C. House of Representatives District 76.

NOT ONE WOMAN SPEAKER…

.. until the Candidates for U.S. President spoke. First went Barak Obama, and he gave a great, inspiring speech about the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, and about hope, and unity, and working togther to solve the nation’s problems. And then John Edwards spoke, and he too gave a great speech about the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, and about helping poor people, and about making sure that every American had access to healthcare. And then Hillary Clinton spoke. And she also began by invoking the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, AND THEN SHE GAVE TRIBUTE TO CORETTA SCOTT KING, AND HER LEGACY, something no one else had yet done, and something that would have gone undone had Hillary Clinton not been on the program. And she too gave a great speech about improving this country.

–Ann Bartow

Barack Obama, John Edwards, and Hillary Clinton address the King Day at the Dome rally on January 21, 2008.

UPDATE: Photos of the rally in this post are from here. At the bottom is a picture of the protesting pro-flag asshole contingent nearby, of which there were only about ten nasty, angry people, thankfully.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, South Carolina | 15 Comments

Pink to Soften the Social Justice Message?


– Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on Pink to Soften the Social Justice Message?

Meet the Sexism

Meet The Press

Guests on today’s “Meet the Press With Tim Russert” were historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jon Meacham (Newsweek), Peggy Noonan (Wall Street Journal), Tom Brokaw (NBC)  and Michele Norris (NPR) (L to R, above).   Below is an excerpt from the transcript from  the show:  

MS. NOONAN: Can I say, on the campaign trail, one of the things I find jarring the past few weeks is that Hillary Clinton is the first major party woman running for president of the United States. She is a woman. She’s running for president. She’s running for head of the United States, chief executive officer. And she has to send her husband out to yell at the neighbors? It’s like she’s, she’s saying, “You go out there, you fight for me. My husband’s going to tell you off!” There’s something strange, jarring, unbecoming and even unfeminist about it.

MS. GOODWIN: I doubt that she’s sending him out. I think he’s going out on his own.

MS. NOONAN: You think he’s just on his own. Oh, my goodness, it’s her campaign. If she didn’t want him out there wagging his finger, turning red and arguing with reporters and bringing a level of temper and heat to the proceedings, if she did not want that, I’m sure she would stop it. And if she cannot, we should all just stop and take a breath.

The full transcript is here.

Goodwin’s comments are disingenuous and Noonan’s are sexist.   President Clinton is not “going out on his own;” his participation in the campaign is planned (although not necessarily scripted to the word).  

And Noonan criticizes Senator Clinton for doing what the male candidates do: having a spouse assist in campaigning.   That’s hardly the same as sending one’s husband to fight one’s battles.   Noonan’s real objections are that President Clinton is popular and Senator  Clinton is still in the race.

I must add that I was as jarred by Professor Goodwin’s plastic surgery as I was by her comments.   I long for the day when  a mature woman can retain her natural face and her authority.  

Hat tip to Allison Cappella.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Meet the Sexism

Mother/Father, Noun/Verb

There’s a comment posted on an earlier entry that raises an excellent point, one worthy of a bit of discussion.

I’m concerned in this blog with parentage–with who is a parent. That means who is a mother and who is a father. But “mother” and “father” are verbs as well as nouns. The way we use those verbs tell us a lot about gender and parenthood.

This is hardly a new observation, but it is worth bearing in mind here. Used as nouns, a female parent is a mother and a male parent is a father. As a verb, “to mother” a child means (according to one dictionary source) “to give birth to.” I think the second definition given is actually the more common usage of the verb: “to watch over, nourish, protect maternally.” The same source says “to father” is variously “to procreate” or “to create, found or originate.” So mothers nurture while fathers create.

It’s a commonplace now to say that men can mother, of course. I do not doubt that they can and do. What that means is that men as well as women can watch over and nurture children. (Indeed, it seems to me that mothering is generally what all parents do.)

Can women father a child? It’s not common to think so. That’s fairly odd if you think about it. Look back at the definition of “to father”–to procreate, to create, to originate. In the ordinary course of conception, does the man have more to do with the creation of a child than the woman? It hardly seems so to me. And yet the language tells us he (alone?) creates the child. We simply do not say “she fathered a child.”

Does this matter? Well, notice that fathering is a discrete and isolated act rather an an ongoing performance. It takes place at a specific time and is then concluded. You father a child by engaging in act that leads to procreation. Once you’ve done that, you are done with fathering. A man may later choose to mother a child he initially fathered, but he cannot keep fathering it. In sum, our language tells us that a single isolated act typically makes a man the father–a parent– of the child.

And women? While women obviously participate in acts of procreation, too, they do not thereby father children. They do not become fathers (or parents) by virtue of the act. Instead, motherhood is the product of long-term performance of the role of mother, typically starting with pregnancy.

All of which reinforces my conviction that parenthood is deeply gendered, so much so that it is sometimes hard to see its gendered nature. We may use the gender-neutral word “parent” to include both mothers and fathers, but when we do so we obscure significant differences between the experiences and capacities of men and women.

–Julie Shapiro (cross-posted at Related Topics)

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law | Comments Off on Mother/Father, Noun/Verb

Women and Norwegian Corporate Governance

This AFP  article reports on Norwegian legislation that requires public companies to have corporate boards that are approximatley 40% female as of Jan. 1, 2008 or else close up shop. No companies appear to be at risk for non-compliance.

Call it a target, quota, or part of Norway’s social fabric.   I am sure there will be plenty of feminist studies showing that this law is good for Norwegian business.   My questions tend toward the less economic:   What are the day-to-day emotional consequences of this type of law?   Will women (and the men who work with them) wonder if they were chosen for their gender, not for their abilities?    Does such a rule cause women to be taken less seriously than their male counterparts?   Are the women who fill these corporate boards those with profiles most like men’s?  

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Sisters In Other Nations | Comments Off on Women and Norwegian Corporate Governance

Photographs and Contextual Integrity

From the NYT:

Several gay adult Web sites have posted photographs of teenage water polo players from several high schools in Southern California, a newspaper reported.

Some of the pictures, of boys as young as 14, were displayed next to photos of nude young men and graphic sexual content, an Orange County Register investigation found.

Parents, coaches and school officials were alarmed, and parents said some of the boys were traumatized and sought counseling.

”These kids don’t look at what they do as shameful,” said Joan Gould, an international water polo official and a spokeswoman for a group of Orange County water polo parents. ”For someone to come in and take what these kids are doing and take it out of context and exploit these images, these kids and their schools, because you can see the school name on the caps, is just horrible.” …

There is certainly a lot of underlying homophobia going on here, and I don’t mean to minimize that, but I think it is true that whoever you are and however it happens, having your image sexualized without your consent stinks. Remember Allison Stokke?

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Feminism and Technology | Comments Off on Photographs and Contextual Integrity

The United Arab Emirates May Allow Female Judges

According to the this article in the Middle East Times, women in the UAE will soon be allowed to become judges.   According to UAE official Mohammed bin Nakhira al-Dhaheri, “at present the law states that only a Muslim man is entitled to assume the position of a judge.” The Minister failed to specify an exact date when the law will be changed. Additionally, this article from Reuters notes that the planned change would make the UAE the second Gulf Arab country that allows women to become judges.

In the U.S. context, scholars contest the impact that gender has on judicial decisions.   Compare David W. Allen & Diane E. Wall, Role Orientations and Women State Supreme Court Justices, 77 Judicature 156, 165 (1993) and Thomas G. Walker & Deborah J. Barrow, The Diversification of the Federal Bench: Policy and Process Ramifications, 47 J. Pol. 596, 613-15 (1985).  

If the law in the UAE does change, that country will provide  an interesting testing ground for theories about the role of gender in judicial decision-making.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Firsts, Legal Profession, Sisters In Other Nations | Comments Off on The United Arab Emirates May Allow Female Judges

“on being a public defender: reasons prosecutors make me scream”

Interesting if depressing post with this title at Woman of the Law.

Share
Posted in Legal Profession, Uncategorized | Comments Off on “on being a public defender: reasons prosecutors make me scream”

“Supreme Court First: A Female Special Master”

From The Blog of Legal Times:

The Supreme Court today quietly helped shatter a glass ceiling you may not have known existed by appointing the first female special master in the Supreme Court’s history. She’s Kristin Linsley Myles of San Francisco, litigation partner in the firm Munger, Tolles & Olson and a former law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia. Myles could not be reached for comment.

She was named special master in the case of South Carolina v. North Carolina, which comes to the Court under its original jurisdiction. That little-known category of cases involves disputes between states, in which the dispute goes to the Supreme Court first, not last, and without the factfinding or review of any lower court. As a result, the Court appoints a special master to review facts, hear testimony, and report to the Court with recommendations, which the justices accept, reject or modify. The Court has been naming special masters since 1791.

Via Ms.JD.

Share
Posted in Firsts, Legal Profession, South Carolina | Comments Off on “Supreme Court First: A Female Special Master”

Judge Who Helped Found the Charleston School of Law and Serves on its Board of Advisors (Even Though It Is For Profit!) Denied New Term Due To Sexist and Racist Remarks …

… according to this account in The State. Below is an excerpt:

A U.S. magistrate judge accused of making disparaging sexist and ethnic remarks was not reappointed Friday by the state’s U.S. District judges, according to sources familiar with the matter.

Federal Magistrate Judge George Kosko of Charleston, whom the judges did not reappoint for an eight-year term, refused comment Friday afternoon after a three-hour meeting of the state’s federal judges at the Matthew Perry federal courthouse in Columbia.

Kosko met with the judges during their closed meeting. He left the meeting before the vote and waited outside. About two hours later, the judges adjourned. Kosko was informed of the vote, sources said.

Chief Judge David Norton of Charleston presided over the closed judges’ meeting that decided Kosko’s fate. Before the meeting, he said he would make public the meeting’s results. He did not, and would not comment afterward.

Federal Clerk of Court Larry Propes, who was in the meeting, also declined comment.

Kosko is a founder of the new Charleston School of Law and serves on its Board of Advisors.

It is highly unusual for federal magistrates not to be reappointed to their $155,756-a-year posts, one of the most desirable and high-paying government jobs around.

Magistrates are junior judges to the state’s higher-ranking federal judges, who make approximately $169,300 a year.

Magistrates are appointed to eight-year terms by the state’s federal judges, who serve life terms.

Kosko, who has ties to former U.S. Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., was in the final year of his first term.

Magistrates issue search warrants, hear initial criminal proceedings, set bail and perform a variety of other judicial duties.

In recent months, a magistrate’s screening committee received and investigated allegations of inappropriate comments made by Kosko about women and Asians, sources said. …

A wikipedia page for the Charleston School of Law reports: “The five Founders were Judge Alex Sanders (a former president of the College of Charleston and former Chief Judge of the South Carolina Court of Appeals), Ed Westbrook, Judge Robert Carr (a federal magistrate judge), Judge George Kosko (a federal magistrate judge), and Ralph McCullough.” Given the for profit nature of the enterprise, its “founding” by two sitting judges is quite perplexing. Of course, the wikipedia page may be in error about this, as it also curiously states: “Infamous South Carolina playboy [redacted name], is in the class of 2009. He is rumored to have toned down his exploits since his Wofford College days, for which a dorm was named in his honor.”

Still, one has to assume Canon Five applies even to judges in South Carolina

–Ann Bartow

Update: As 0f 1/22/08 The CSOL’s wikipedia entry has been edited to remove the joking comment. It also touts a 69.9% bar passage rate without any mention of the SC bar fixing scandal.

Update 2: Obviously the part about the “infamous playboy” was a joke, and I incorrectly assumed the name was from a law school case or hypo. Turns out it was a real person who says he was the victim of a practical joke, so I redacted his name at his request. Good reminder that the accuracy of any given wikipedia entry should not be assumed, to put it mildly.

Share
Posted in Academia, Law Schools, Race and Racism, South Carolina | Comments Off on Judge Who Helped Found the Charleston School of Law and Serves on its Board of Advisors (Even Though It Is For Profit!) Denied New Term Due To Sexist and Racist Remarks …

Women and Social Security

Joan Entmacher, the Vice President for Family and Economic Security at the National Women’s Law Center, testified earlier this week before the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Women and Social Security.   Ms. Entmacher suggested, among other reforms,  lowering the number of years of work required for higher social security benefits and allowing a surviving spouse to receive a larger percentage of the couple’s social security benefit. Ms. Entmacher’s complete testimony is available here.

The House Ways and Means Committee has important jurisdiction over federal revenue measures generally, trade and tariff legislation, Social Security programs, and U.S. bonded debt.   Can you name  5  members of the Committee?   I couldn’t.   Check your own knowledge against this list.   In any case, we can’t name 5 women on the committee — because there aren’t.

-Bridget Crawford

 

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Women and Economics | Comments Off on Women and Social Security

Handy For Emergencies

From here.

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on Handy For Emergencies

“Female Shoes Are Finally Here!”

Gravity Defyers.

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on “Female Shoes Are Finally Here!”

Lemon Fresh?

If the ad graphics don’t look like a female body part to you, just keep walking and pretend you never read this.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on Lemon Fresh?

“Ben Tillman Statue in South Carolina”

In many respects it’s worse than the Confederate flag that flies nearby on the SC Statehouse grounds. Al Brophy has the story here, at the Legal History blog.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Race and Racism, South Carolina | Comments Off on “Ben Tillman Statue in South Carolina”

“Bella Abzug” by Suzanne Braun Levine and Mary Thom

Bella Abzug: “How One Tough Broad From the Bronx Fought Jim Crow and Joe McCarthy, Pissed Off Jimmy Carter, Battled for the Rights of Women and Workers, Rallied Against War and for the Planet, and Shook Up Politics Along the Way.”

Review in The Nation here. Via Law Poet.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Firsts, Recommended Books | Comments Off on “Bella Abzug” by Suzanne Braun Levine and Mary Thom

Because women are not autonomous beings capable of using their own judgment to choose a candidate on any basis other than gender.

Because women routinely make their voting decisions based entirely on spite, or vengeance, or some other emotion.

Because a woman’s vote is never an actual vote for or against anything, but always just a reaction to what the real (read: men) voters think. (See? You were right, hon. Everything IS always about you!)

More here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | 3 Comments

Because women are not autonomous beings capable of using their own judgment to choose a candidate on any basis other than gender.

Because women routinely make their voting decisions based entirely on spite, or vengeance, or some other emotion.

Because a woman’s vote is never an actual vote for or against anything, but always just a reaction to what the real (read: men) voters think. (See? You were right, hon. Everything IS always about you!)

More here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | 3 Comments

Because women are not autonomous beings capable of using their own judgment to choose a candidate on any basis other than gender.

Because women routinely make their voting decisions based entirely on spite, or vengeance, or some other emotion.

Because a woman’s vote is never an actual vote for or against anything, but always just a reaction to what the real (read: men) voters think. (See? You were right, hon. Everything IS always about you!)

More here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | 3 Comments