Maybe Lucia Whalen should also get a beer?

Caller in Gates Case Says She Didn’t Mention Race
By KATIE ZEZIMA

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. : Lucia Whalen, whose 911 call led to the arrest of the Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. at his home, made her first public comments Wednesday, saying at no time did she ever mention race to the responding police officer.

Ms. Whalen’s statements contradict the police report filed by Sgt. James Crowley, who said Ms. Whalen told him outside Mr. Gates’s home that she had seen”what appeared to be two black males with backpacks”on the porch of the yellow single-family house.

Ms. Whalen said that the only words she exchanged with Sergeant Crowley in person were,”I was the 911 caller.”She said that he responded,”Stay right there.”

Ms. Whalen, 40, her voice cracking, said she was deeply hurt by the reaction to the incident on July 16. She said she and her family had been the target of threats, which led her to speak out.

“When I was called a racist, I was the target of scorn and ridicule because of things I never said,”she told the reporters gathered in a park here at midday. She added,”The criticism hurt me as a person but also hurt the community of Cambridge.”

On Monday, the Cambridge police released the tape of Ms. Whalen’s 911 call in which she told the dispatcher she had”no idea”if two men : who turned out to be Professor Gates and his driver : were breaking into the house, repeatedly mentioning that they might live there. She said that the two men pushed a door in with their shoulders, and that she was unsure”if they live there and just had a hard time with their key.”

Ms. Whalen did not mention the men’s race until a dispatcher asked her if they were black, white or Hispanic.

“There were two larger men,”she said in the audio released Monday.”One looked kind of Hispanic, but I’m not really sure,”she said, adding that she did not see what the second man”looked like at all.”

Ms. Whalen also told the dispatcher that she called 911 on behalf of an elderly neighbor who saw the men trying to get into the house.

On Wednesday, she said she hoped that with the tapes out,”people can see that I tried to be careful,”adding that she never thought that her words”would be analyzed by an entire nation.”

She said that she had been the target of threats but that, after reflection, she would make the same call again.

“I respect the Cambridge police as well as Professor Gates and I hope my decision to speak out does not add any controversy to what has been a difficult situation,”she said.

The Cambridge police have stood by their report and could not be immediately reached for comment.

The disorderly conduct charge against Professor Gates was dropped, and he and Sergeant Crowley plan to meet with President Obama for a beer at the White House on Thursday.

Ms. Whalen, who works at Harvard Magazine, said she was not asked to join the men at the meeting. Her lawyer, Wendy Murphy, who accompanied her to the news conference, said her client should go if asked.

“The three highly trained guys who acted badly are getting together for a beer tomorrow at the White House, and that’s a good thing,”Ms. Murphy said.”The one person whose actions were exemplary will be at work tomorrow here in Cambridge.”

Of course, if she isn’t there at the White House beer bash   it will be that much easier for the men to blame the whole episode on her I guess.

–Ann Bartow

ETA: NYT account here. I’m not sure Whalen’s actions were “exemplary” but it seems to me she should be included in the conversation about the incident.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Race and Racism, Sociolinguistics | 1 Comment

Hawkins on “Doctors as Bankers”

Jim Hawkins (Houston) has posted to SSRN his working paper “Doctors as Bankers: Evidence from Fertility Markets.”  Here is a portion of the abstract:

In a variety of medical contexts, doctors play a prominent role as bankers, lending directly to patients or arranging for patients to obtain loans from third party lenders. This Articles offers evidence of this activity from fertility markets based on an empirical study of virtually every fertility clinics’ website in the United States and on interviews with key market participants. ***

Despite the prevalence of this conduct, the law does not generally regulate doctors as bankers. Patients are largely left unprotected by current regulations, but they face significant problems when doctors act as bankers. Patients, vulnerable to their physicians’ suggestions, often uncritically accept financial advice from their doctor. Instead of shopping of the best loan, they take the loan their doctor selects for them. But, doctors face a conflict of interest when choosing which lender to recommend because different lenders charge physicians different amounts when patients pay with loans. Also, patients are often left confused when doctors present piecemeal information about lenders, and patients end up taking out loans with unfavorable terms.

In light of these problems, I offer a potential regulatory framework to regulate doctors acting as bankers. I suggest that regulations should require doctors to disclose the basic loan information that the Truth in Lending Act currently requires that lenders disclose. ***

The full article is available here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Reproductive Rights, Women and Economics | Comments Off on Hawkins on “Doctors as Bankers”

“I Was A Teenage Feminist”

null

More here! Via.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, If you're a woman, Sociolinguistics | Comments Off on “I Was A Teenage Feminist”

Hang in there Bar Exam takers…

null

Share
Posted in Academia, Bloggenpheffer, Legal Profession | Comments Off on Hang in there Bar Exam takers…

The Science of Sexism

Abstract of new evo psych study based on yearbook photos taken in 1957 of graduates of Wisconsin high schools:

“Physical attractiveness has been associated with mating behavior, but its role in reproductive success of contemporary humans has received surprisingly little attention. In the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study (1244 women, 997 men born between 1937 and 1940), we examined whether attractiveness assessed from photographs taken at age ∼18 years predicted the number of biological children at age 53–56 years. In women, attractiveness predicted higher reproductive success in a nonlinear fashion, so that attractive (second highest quartile) women had 16% and very attractive (highest quartile) women 6% more children than their less attractive counterparts. In men, there was a threshold effect so that men in the lowest attractiveness quartile had 13% fewer children than others who did not differ from each other in the average number of children. These associations were partly but not completely accounted for by attractive participants’ increased marriage probability. A linear regression analysis indicated relatively weak directional selection gradient for attractiveness (β=0.06 in women, β=0.07 in men). These findings indicate that physical attractiveness may be associated with reproductive success in humans living in industrialized settings.”

Now here’s how it got reported by the TimesOnlne:

“FOR the female half of the population, it may bring a satisfied smile. Scientists have found that evolution is driving women to become ever more beautiful, while men remain as aesthetically unappealing as their caveman ancestors.

“The researchers have found beautiful women have more children than their plainer counterparts and that a higher proportion of those children are female. Those daughters, once adult, also tend to be attractive and so repeat the pattern.

“Over generations, the scientists argue, this has led to women becoming steadily more aesthetically pleasing, a”beauty race”that is still on. The findings have emerged from a series of studies of physical attractiveness and its links to reproductive success in humans. …

… Women may take consolation in the finding that men are subject to other types of evolutionary pressure.

Gayle Brewer, a psychology lecturer at the University of Central Lancashire, said:”Men and women seek different things in their partners.

“For women, looks are much less important in a man than his ability to look after her when she is pregnant and nursing, periods when women are vulnerable to predators. Historically this has meant rich men tend to have more wives and many children. So the pressure is on men to be successful.””

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Science | 1 Comment

A browser-based clone of Civilization.

That would be the game discussed here. Which runs Internet ads like this:

null

null

Learn more about the game here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Technology | 1 Comment

Rosenblum on “Feminizing Capital: A Corporate Imperative”

Feminist Law Prof Darren Rosenblum has posted to SSRN his article, “Feminizing Capital: A Corporate Imperative.”  Here’s the abstract:

The economic crisis has upended the divide between the public sector and the corporate world, as governments engage in mass intervention in the private sector. This crisis has exposed the need for new leadership in the corporate world. Gendered understandings of economic relations have surfaced – some argue that testosterone encourages excessive greed in boom cycles and fear in bust cycles, or that women can help clean up the mess. This Article explores capital’s Achilles heel – the exclusion of women from its leadership ranks – and one innovative remedy for this shortcoming. Despite a plethora of political representation quotas for women throughout the world, only Norway has instituted a quota to integrate women into corporate leadership. Passed in 2004, the Corporate Board Quota forces all publicly-listed companies to repopulate their boards to reflect a forty percent floor for either gender by the deadline of January 1, 2008, upon penalty of dissolution. This draconian penalty induced all covered corporations to comply. Norway’s dramatic intervention to feminize capital reflects a public/private symbiosis in which the public norm of gender equality infuses private efforts, even as private goals such as economic growth drive public policy. Relying on studies that showed the advantages of a broader pool of corporate leadership, Norway succeeded in transforming its corporate boards. Gender balance has increased and we await the results with regard to corporate performance. Such novel economically and socially optimal remedies for entrenched inequality support the rising purchase of a public/private symbiosis. Although U.S. jurisprudence eschews quotas, the economic crisis has begun to diminish free-market proponents’ fear of public intervention. The CBQ’s novel interaction between the public and private sectors heralds the beginning of a broader conversation about the relationship between effective corporate governance and gender.

The full article is available here.  It will be published in the Berkeley Business Law Journal.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Legal Scholarship, Women and Economics | 1 Comment

Urine-competent if you are female?

null

Click thumbnail below for larger version:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us

QuickPost

null

Click thumbnail below for larger version:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us

QuickPost

The photographs are the female and male instructions for collecting urine samples for medical testing, featured in the bathrooms of a medical lab. Note the contrast in how specific male anatomy is referenced whereas a woman is instructed to “spread yourself,” how men are presumed to know how to not “soil” themselves whereas women are specifically instructed to remove certain items of clothing, and how the female instructions are much longer and presume less competence overall.

–Ann Bartow, via a friend.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Medicine, If you're a woman, Sociolinguistics | Comments Off on Urine-competent if you are female?

Where are the Women? Not in 77 GEORGE WASHINGTON LAW REVIEW, NO. 3, APRIL, 2009, that’s for sure.

GWLRbannerTOC.gif

The George Washington Law Review, Issue 77:3 (April 2009)

Articles

Matthew I. Hall, The Partially Prudential Doctrine of Mootness, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 562 (2009) [PDF]

Anthony J. Colangelo, “De facto Sovereignty”: Boumediene and Beyond, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 623 (2009) [PDF]

Colloquy
Beyond the ‘Races’: Re-examining the Relationship Between Federalism and Corporate Governance

William W. Bratton, Unentrapped, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 677 (2009) [PDF]

Lawrence A. Cunningham, The New Federal Corporation Law?, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 685 (2009) [PDF]

M. Todd Henderson, Two Visions of Corporate Law, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 708 (2009) [PDF]

Robert B. Ahdieh, The (Misunderstood) Genius of American Corporate Law, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 730 (2009) [PDF]

Notes

Christopher Carlberg, Cooperative Noncooperation: A Proposal for an Effective Uniform Noncooperation Immigration Policy for Local Governments, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 730 (2009) [PDF]

Andrew Croner, A Snake in the Grass?: Section 798 of the Espionage Act and Its Constitutionality as Applied to the Press, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 766 (2009) [PDF]

Evan Mayor, The”Bong Hits”Case and Viewpoint Discrimination: A State Law Answer to Protecting Unpopular Student Viewpoints, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 799 (2009) [PDF]

Christopher Meeks, The Pollution Delusion: A Proposal for a Uniform Interpretation of Pollution in General Liability Absolute Pollution Exclusions, 77 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 824 (2009) [PDF]

************

The June 2009 issue doesn’t feature many women authors either.

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminist Legal Scholarship, The Underrepresentation of Women | Comments Off on Where are the Women? Not in 77 GEORGE WASHINGTON LAW REVIEW, NO. 3, APRIL, 2009, that’s for sure.

CFP: Conference on”Violence and Vulnerability”

CALL FOR PAPERS: Conference on”Violence and Vulnerability”
Emory University, Atlanta Georgia – November 12-14, 2009

“Violence against women both violates and impairs or nullifies the enjoyment by women of their human rights and fundamental freedoms… In all societies, to a greater or lesser degree, women and girls are subjected to physical, sexual and psychological abuse that cuts across lines of income, class and culture.”
:Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, paragraph 112

This Conference is designed to break open the traditional approaches to gender violence and to consider how violence in various forms is experienced across society and its institutions. We begin with the premise that we need a better and more complex understanding of the relationship between individual and collective acts of violence and the organization of societies. We are concerned with how the state acts in conjunction with religious, cultural, social, and economic institutions to both alleviate and perpetuate the vulnerability of individuals to violence. What is the relationship between institutional arrangements and instances of violence? We are particularly interested in comparing the different approaches of these institutions and exploring the diverse perspectives on violence reflected in disciplines such as law, medicine, public health, anthropology, political science, ethics, and religion.

In addition, we are interested in considering what are the best ways to approach the wide-spread societal problem of violence in its various forms. Are there benefits to asking how and why violence happens from a societal, rather than an individual, criminal justice, perspective? How would a society designed to eliminate domestic violence look? How can we distinguish the”domestic”from the public manifestations of violence and what are the consequences of doing so? What are the various forms of”public”violence and how do they interact with violence in it”private”forms? What are the responsibilities of society and its institutions, including religious, cultural, and educational institutions, to prevent violence? Are there ways in which these same institutions are implicated in fostering violence?

Violence against women is understood as a global phenomenon. According to the United Nations Population Fund:

“Gender-based violence both reflects and reinforces inequities between men and women and compromises the health, dignity, security and autonomy of its victims. It encompasses a wide range of a wide range of human rights violations, including sexual abuse of children, rape, domestic violence, sexual assault and harassment, trafficking of women and girls and several harmful traditional practices.”

As this quote suggests, the use of”gender”to modify violence tends to channel discussion into an individualistic, legalistic mode, emphasizing victimization and the abuse of women by men. Thus, most of the work on gender violence has focused on the law, improving the security sector, and finding forms of punishment that will deter violence. While this pattern of male on female violence is prevalent, it does not exhaust the full range of our collective and universal vulnerability to violence. In particular, this focus excludes the significant violence that can be perpetrated by the state and its institutions on both men and women. It also fails to realize that criminal and human rights laws built around the principle of punishment can provide only a partial, often ineffective, response to violence in its many and varied manifestations.

The phenomena of gender-based violence transcends dichotomous categories often used to characterize states (such as”developed”or”developing,”or”strong”and”unstable”) and it also transcends recognized cultural divisions (such as religious or cultural and ethnic traditions). While violence against women may be”universal”in this regard, we can learn a great deal from exploring how violence is perpetrated, justified and addressed across different societies and within distinct legal and political cultures. How does gendered violence manifest itself differently in different cultural contexts? What can we learn from looking at gender-based violence (broadly conceived) in cultures that are very different in terms of religious traditions, economic status and legal frameworks for gender equality? How do different states and civil society respond to gender violence and what are the effective methods that can transfer well to other societies?

This conference will bring together scholars, activists and practitioners to consider these and other questions. It will begin with a luncheon on Thursday November 12th and conclude the afternoon of November 14th

Send presentation proposals to Martha Albertson Fineman (mlfinem@emory.edu) and Sita Ranchod-Nilsson (srancho@emory.edu) by July 31, 2009.

Working drafts (however rough) will be due October 15, 2009 – in time for them to be copied and distributed prior to the Conference. The ability to read the working drafts prior to discussion greatly increases the value of the discussions.

This conference is co-sponsored by the Emory University’s Vulnerability Project (Race and Difference Initiative) and Institute for Developing Nations.

Share
Posted in Academia, Acts of Violence, Call for Papers or Participation, Feminists in Academia, From the FLP mailbox, Women's Health | 2 Comments

“EA has a new way to annoy its own models: give out prizes for Comic Con attendees who commit acts of lust with their booth babes. Also, if you win, you get to take the lady out to dinner! This is going to end well for everyone involved.”

null

From Ars Technica, where the associative article reports:

… At Comic Con, if you commit “an act of lust” with an EA booth babe and take a picture, you could win dinner with said babes, as well as a great big pile of prizes related to the upcoming Dante’s Inferno. That’s right, the babes won’t just get the standard behavior and awkward advances:if someone is really obnoxious, they get rewarded for it, and then you get to see them again socially!

Technically you’re only supposed to take a picture to be entered, but I can’t even start to imagine how people are going to get creative with this one. I hope they gave their models a can of mace or, better yet, an actual mace. Or maybe just a few sharpened sticks. Going into that throng, in a thong, with prizes being awarded for lustful actions being enacted upon you? Dear Lord. …

Share
Posted in Coerced Sex, Feminism and Technology | 1 Comment

Equal Rights Amendment Going Nowhere. Again.

I barely even noticed the reintroduction of the Equal Rights Amendment on Tuesday, July 21, 2009 by Representative Carolyn Maloney.   The full text of the bill is here.   Its core is quite simple:

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of sex.

Remember that the ERA passed in Congress in 1972 and missed ratification by 3 states in 1982.   And it wasn’t just social conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly who opposed the ERA.   Several well-regarded liberals did, too (see here).   The bill was reintroduced in 2007 by House and Senate Democrats as the Women’s Equality Amendment (WaPo coverage here).

According to Jane Mansbridge (in Why We Lost the ERA, 1986), the equal protection cases of the 1970’s rendered the ERA as largely symbolic:

By 1982, the Supreme Court had left the ERA only two important potential roles. First, the Amendment could have acted as a symbol of the nation’s commitment to women’s rights – a symbol that would probably have had important practical effects both in encouraging legislators and judges to take this mandate into account, and in encouraging citizens to bring civil suits demanding their rights. Second, the Amendment could have committed the American government to particular substantive applications of the general principle of equal rights that a majority of the still traditional, still ambivalent, still sexist American public would not have voted for in a referendum.

So what is different now than in 1982?   Plenty, in terms of the legal advancement of formal equality claims.   And for most Americans, formal equality seems to be “equality enough” (or enough equality).

I don’t perceive a groundswell of support for an ERA on symbolic grounds.     The House resolution honoring Michael Jackson has a better chance than this bill.   My prediction is that it will go nowhere.   Again.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law | 1 Comment

E. Lynn Harris Dead at 54

From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (here):

Atlanta author E. Lynn Harris died Friday at age 54 during a west coast book tour.

In a statement to the AJC, Alison Rich, Doubleday executive director of publicity said:”We at Doubleday are deeply shocked and saddened to learn of E. Lynn Harris’ death at too young an age. His pioneering novels and powerful memoir about the black gay experience touched and inspired millions of lives, and he was a gifted storyteller whose books brought delight and encouragement to readers everywhere. Lynn was a warm and generous person, beloved by friends, fans, and booksellers alike, and we mourn his passing.”

A cause of death was not immediately known. Further inquiries were directed to the Los Angeles coroner’s office.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Chutes and Ladders, Feminism and the Arts | Comments Off on E. Lynn Harris Dead at 54

Government Document Specialist’s “Open Letter to White House Council on Women & Girls”

Beth Harper, Government  Publications Reference Librarian at University of Wisconsin’s Memorial Library,  has published an “Open Letter to the New White House Council on Women & Girls re: Federal Government Websites for Women.”  The letter is a review of websites including the Library of Congress’  Women’s History Month site; USA.gov; the Department of Labor Women’s Bureau site; Social Security Information for Women site; and the Department of Health and Human Services’  Women’s Health site.

Ms. Harper critiques the websites and offers suggestions for their improvement.  Here “Open Letter” is available  here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminist Legal Scholarship | Comments Off on Government Document Specialist’s “Open Letter to White House Council on Women & Girls”

Frank Rudy Cooper on “Race and Essentialism in Gloria Steinem”

Feminist Law Prof Frank Rudy Cooper (Suffolk) has posted to SSRN his essay, “Race and Essentialism in Gloria Steinem.”  Here is the abstract:

This short essay was solicited for the 20th Anniversary Critical Race Theory Workshop in 2009. It celebrates Angela Harris’s trail blazing essay, Race and Essentialism in Feminist Legal Theory.  Harris argues against essentialism, which is the idea that we can identify characteristics of identity groups that describe their fundamental experiences and interests. This essay analyzes an important moment in the 2008 Presidential campaign. Just before the New Hampshire Democratic primary, which was predicted to effectively knock Senator Hillary Clinton out of the field, famous feminist Gloria Steinem published an editorial entitled “Women Are Never Frontrunners.”  The editorial contends that a woman could never succeed on front-running Senator Barack Obama’s credentials and that Clinton was being harmed by sexism. This essay argues that Steinem’s editorial exhibits essentialism. Applying masculinities studies theory to the campaign shows that masculinity played a more complicated role for Obama than simply being an advantaging factor. Rather, because of his particular masculine identities, Obama had to simultaneously avoid the stereotype of the angry black man and face criticism for being too feminine.

The full essay is available here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Race and Racism | Comments Off on Frank Rudy Cooper on “Race and Essentialism in Gloria Steinem”

Health reform hits abortion wall

With congressional committees having entered the phase of proposing specific legislative language for health reform, an old problem has resurfaced: health reform and abortion rights are on a collision course.   I refer to it as an old problem because it is one of the issues I dealt with when serving in the Clinton administration during the last effort to achieve universal coverage. We struggled then to devise mechanisms that would preserve choices for both sides. The threat to the overall reform effort never became visible, though, because reform crashed for other reasons before public attention focused on that level of detail.   The good news this year is that we seem to be far enough along that abortion has become a meaningful concern.

There are three contexts in which inclusion of abortion is relevant: the structure of a public option plan, the basic benefits package that all private group health insurance plans would have to include, and the use of public subsidies to defray premium costs for low-wage workers and others who need assistance. In each case, conservatives frame the question, as a recent NY Times  article did, as the use of public funds to finance programs that include access to abortion.

That framing hides some harsh realities.   One is that if a basic benefits package barred coverage for abortion, women who now have coverage through their workplace (or other) health insurance would lose it. That would amount to a massive cutback in access to choice for tens of millions of women. Here’s the way the issue should be framed, straight out of my notes from 1993:

  • It is essential to maintain the existing coverage and access to services that women now have under private health insurance plans; and
  • The basic benefit package design must include all pregnancy-related services that are medically necessary and/or appropriate.

You can expect that most reporting of this debate will treat it as one more example of how the crazy wild card issue of abortion screws up rational political deliberation.   It goes deeper than that, though. The abortion problem in health reform exemplifies the way that sexuality-related questions privatize our political discourse. And, like the Hyde Amendment with which it resonates, it’s a morality debate that is likely to get resolved by a compromise deal cut on the backs of the poor – specifically, inscribed on the bodies of poor women. No public funds for abortion involves a tiny number of dollars (the 1993 estimate was that abortion services accounted for 0.3 per cent of the average insurance premium), but the amount looms large for the individual woman who needs it.

Nan Hunter – cross posted at hunter of justice

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Health reform hits abortion wall

In Memoriam: Frank McCourt

To my knowledge, Frank McCourt did not spend a lot of time thinking about animal issues.   However, he was the first person who taught me to care about writing and to appreciate the power of language.   He did that as he did everything : with a twinkling eye and a raft of good stories.

Every Friday, we used to read the NY Times restaurant review in class.   He used to say:”If you can write well about food, you can write well about anything.”   Mimi Sheraton was the food critic back then and she wrote marvelously about food.   Mr. McCourt loved reading her columns aloud and his delight in her prose was itself utterly delightful.   To this day, I still read the restaurant column every week even though I don’t live in NYC and can’t remember the last time I actually went to a restaurant it reviewed.

Mr. McCourt also taught me to write only about things I really care about.   He always said,”If it doesn’t interest you, what makes you think it will interest me?”     Back then, I didn’t think animal issues were important.   But I do now and were it not for him, I don’t know that I would be teaching and writing about them.     So, I like to consider Mr. McCourt an animal advocate by proxy.

In any case, he was a truly wonderful teacher.   I will miss him and I wish him safe travels.

Frank McCourt:  1930-2009.

–David Cassuto

(cross-post from Animal Blawg)


Share
Posted in Academia, Chutes and Ladders | Comments Off on In Memoriam: Frank McCourt

Kornhauser on “Gender and Capital Gains Taxation”

Marjorie Kornhauser (Arizona State) has posted to SSRN her paper, “Gender and Capital Gains Taxation.”  Here is the abstract:

Most countries grant capital gains preferential treatment under their income tax laws by either excluding them from taxation or taxing them at a lower rate than wage or interest income. Although this preference is not uncontroversial, few people question it on grounds of gender. Nevertheless, gender issues exist. Most obviously, men as a group benefit more from the preference than women because they generally have more capital gains than women. Moreover, a major justification for the preference is that it increases economic growth by encouraging investments. However, to the extent it does so, it can have a disparate impact on men and women because economic growth can affect men and women differently. More subtle gender differences also exist. Empirical evidence suggests that attitudes and behaviors regarding financial decisions, including capital gains, are gendered. Women, for example, being more risk averse than men, may have fewer capital gains because they invest in fewer risky assets, which are the type of assets that produce the biggest capital gains. Risk aversion could produce this result even if men and women value economic growth equally, but it is possible that women do not value economic growth per se as highly as men do. They might value economic security and steady income more than men and therefore prefer less volatile investments that produce ordinary income, such as certificates of deposits, to riskier investments that produce capital gains.

This essay explores the relationship between gender and capital gains taxation, an analysis that generally has been absent from debates about capital gains. Although it briefly looks at disparate impact due to disparities in economic situations, it concentrates on differences in attitudes and behaviors relative to capital gains. The essay’s limited space permits only an introduction; a fuller discussion awaits not only more space, but more data.

The full paper is available here.

I have long admired Professor Kornhauser’s work on gender and taxation.  This is a thought-provoking addition to the field.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Legal Scholarship, Women and Economics | Comments Off on Kornhauser on “Gender and Capital Gains Taxation”

More “How to strip for your husband”

more how to strip for your husband volume 2. Record cover. At... on Twitpic

Click image for clearer version and source info.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on More “How to strip for your husband”

On being an “Air Hostess” in the 1950s

Share
Posted in Feminism and the Workplace | Comments Off on On being an “Air Hostess” in the 1950s

Is Lap Dancing Prostitution?

Over at  The Right Coast, Tom Smith makes a good observation  here.   He reads the Rhode Island legislation [against indoor prostitution, previously blogged here and here] as far from”flawed”: he suggests that it is carefully crafted to permit lap dancing.   I agree that lap dancing is outside the scope of the legislation.

This inspires a follow-on question.   Is lap dancing prostitution?   If prostitution is selling (or buying) use of a body for sexual pleasure, then I suppose the answer is yes.  Yet I follow this statement with the admission that I have extremely well-educated, seemingly polite and law-abiding male friends who freely acknowledge enjoying lap dances.   These men say they have never paid for intercourse (massages with so-called”happy endings”are another story, though).  I cringe at the idea of both the lap dance and paid intercourse, but I admit that I cringe a little less at a lap dance.   Why?  Maybe because I know so many men who have received them that it seems”normal”?  Because I don’t want to be the prissy one with”old tired ethics”raining on the boys’ parade? (Hat tip to Ariel Levy’s work.)  Surely that’s no theoretical defense of lap dancing.

So why might some people – Rhode Island legislators included, it seems –  judge a lap dance more acceptable (or less offensive) than paid intercourse?  Is it because the health and safety risks to the woman are lower with a lap dance than with intercourse?   After all, lap dances typically are done in full view of others who can enforce a no-hands rule.

I wonder if the different attitudes toward lap dancing and prostitution are influenced by an unarticulated belief that the roles of exploiter and exploited are reversed in the lap dance scenario.   In other words, might a permissive attitude toward lap dances rely, at least in part, on the belief that those men who receive a lap dance  lack a certain power and that those women who perform lap dances  wield a certain power?  If so, is that assumption correct?

-Bridget Crawford

(cross-post from publicsquare.net)

Share
Posted in Coerced Sex, Women and Economics | 6 Comments

“Making Space for Indigenous Feminism”

I stumbled upon  Making Space for Indigenous Feminism, a  2007 book edited by Professor Joyce Green (Political Science, University of Regina).  It is a collection of essays  by Indigenous women from Canada, the USA, Sapmi (Samiland), and Aotearoa/New Zealand.

In a review published at 24 N0. 1 Can. J.L. & Soc’y 134 (2009), Jennifer Koshan (Calgary) says this about the book:

Overall, Making Space for Indigenous Feminism is a ground-breaking book for its authors’ efforts to collectively engage with and contribute to feminist theory and practice. There will no doubt continue to be debates about the relevance and utility of feminism for Indigenous women pursuing legal strategies. By informing that debate, Making Space for Indigenous Feminism makes major headway in explaining the intersections between feminist and Indigenous theories and practices, and the contributors have carved out a unique space for Indigenous feminism(s) in doing so.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Race and Racism | Comments Off on “Making Space for Indigenous Feminism”

Advice About Feet Sweeping and Taxes

Read.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Feminist Blogs Of Interest | Comments Off on Advice About Feet Sweeping and Taxes

Lani Guinier and Susan Sturm, “Trial by Firefighters”

From the NYT:

STANDING on the steps of the federal courthouse in New Haven, the lawyer Karen Torre reveled in her clients’ victory in a recent case before the Supreme Court. She anointed her clients : the white firefighters who scored well on a promotion test :”a symbol”for millions of Americans who are”tired of seeing individual achievement and merit take a back seat to race and ethnicity.”

But the Supreme Court’s 5-to-4 decision last month : that New Haven should not have scrapped the test : perpetuates profound misconceptions about the capacity of paper-and-pencil tests to gauge a person’s potential on the job. Exams like the one the New Haven firefighters took are neither designed nor administered to identify the employees most qualified for promotion. And Ms. Torre’s identity-politics sloganeering diverts attention from what we need most: a clear-eyed reassessment of our blind faith in entrenched testing regimes.

New Haven used a multiple-choice test to measure its firefighters’ retention of information from national firefighting textbooks and study guides. Civil service tests like these do not identify people who are best suited for leadership positions. The most important skills of any fire department lieutenant or captain are steady command presence, sound judgment and the ability to make life-or-death decisions under pressure. In a city that is nearly 60 percent black and Latino, the ability to promote cross-racial harmony under stress is also crucial.

These skills are not well measured by tests that reward memorization and ask irrelevant questions like whether it is best to approach a particular emergency from uptown or downtown even when the city isn’t oriented that way. The Civil Service Board in New Haven declined to certify the test not only because of concerns about difference in scores between black and white firefighters but also because it failed to assess qualities essential for firefighting.

As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg noted in her dissent, tests drawn from national textbooks often do not match a city’s local firefighting needs. Most American fire departments have abandoned such tests or limited the multiple-choice format to 30 percent or less of an applicant’s score. In New Haven, the test still accounted for 60 percent of the score. Compounding the problem, insignificant numerical score differences were used to rank the firefighter candidates. …

Read the entire piece here.

On a related note, for research documenting gender based performance differentials on AP tests, go here. The paper suggests that AP tests can be formulated to favor students of one gender over the other.

–Ann Bartow, NYT article via Danielle Holley-Walker

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminism and the Workplace, Feminist Legal Scholarship, Feminists in Academia, Race and Racism | 3 Comments

Sotomayor Redux–Is Regina Benjamin Too Fat to Be Surgeon General?

Just as Judge Sotomayor was pilloried for her appearance, questions about whether Dr. Regina Benjamin is too fat for public office have begun to circulate.  An analysis of this really troubling trend here.  And yes, I get that the Surgeon General is all about promoting health.  But healthy women come in lots of shapes and sizes.

–Leigh Goodmark

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Feminism and Medicine, Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Sotomayor Redux–Is Regina Benjamin Too Fat to Be Surgeon General?

Sonia Sotomayor: Everything the Republicans Could Hope For . . . Except Her Race and Gender

The Republicans really are showing their stripes these days, aren’t they?

We have a Democratic President who has a background as a progressive activist.   We have a Democratic Senate, now with 60 votes.   And yet, instead of nominating someone to the Supreme Court in the mold of William Brennan, Thurgood Marshall, or William Douglas, President Obama has nominated someone who is moderate on business issues, moderate on criminal issues, has no record on abortion, and was first appointed to the bench by a Republican, President Bush (the first).   Her rulings reflect that she has no ideological axe to grind, and she has agreed with her Republican colleagues on the Second Circuit in constitutional cases close to 90% of the time.   At best for progressives, it appears she’s going to just be another David Souter.

The bottom line here:   Sonia Sotomayor is as good as the Republicans could have hoped for given the circumstances (that they lost the last Presidential election and have only 40 members in the Senate).

So what’s the fuss about?   There are two possible theories here.   First, they are worried that her 17 years as a lower court judge mask her true identity as a precedent-destroying liberal activist.   And it’s true, of course, that Supreme Court Justices have more liberty with the law than lower court judges do.   But, I have a hard time believing that Judge Sotomayor has hidden her true feelings for so long on so many cases.   After all, judges like Rosemary Barkett, Stephen Reinhardt, and H. Lee Sarokin have no trouble showing their liberal credentials while sitting on a lower court.

Second, the Republicans making a stink about this just aren’t comfortable with a woman of color on the Supreme Court.   After all, in every other respect, she’s the best they could hope for given the current political climate.   Yet they’re making her out to be some judicial nightmare.   Their obsession with her “wise Latina” remark makes this all too obvious.   And their almost complete disregard for her judicial record other than Ricci, the case she voted against the white firefighters, makes this even clearer.

President Obama could have nominated someone the Republicans would have had a legitimate policy concern about.   But Sonia Sotomayor is not that person.   Which makes their race- and gender-based uproar that much more transparent.

– David S. Cohen

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law | 2 Comments

What is Prostitution, Anyway?

An interesting aspect of the Rhode Island legislation [against indoor prostitution, previously blogged here]  is the General Assembly bill’s definition of prostitution. A person is guilty of prostitution when such person”engages or agrees or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee.” Section 11-34.12. “Sexual conduct”means”sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, any digital intrusion or intrusion by any object into the genital opening or anal opening of another person’s body, or by the stimulation by hand of another’s genitals for the purposes of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of either person.” Section 11-34-1.1 [sic]. The Senate bill does not define prostitution.

Legislative drafting is a difficult because language is an imperfect means of communication. But I doubt that sponsoring Representatives Joanne M. Giannini, Elaine A. Coderre, Helio Melo, Al Gemma and Deborah A. Fellela intended to draft legislation that is flawed on its face. Notice what is not defined as”sexual conduct”–genital stimulation with objects; fully-clothed, non-manual bodily stimulation (look, no hands!) … the list goes on. Furthermore, what constitutes a”fee”? Does”paying”someone with groceries, dental services, an apartment constitute payment of a fee under this statute?

If this legislation is to be successful, Rhode Island legislators must define prostitution more carefully.

-Bridget Crawford

(cross-post from publicsquare.net)

Share
Posted in Coerced Sex, Women and Economics | 1 Comment

In which Lindsey Graham calls Sonya Sotomayor a bitch, South Carolina style

When I listen to this clip it sounds like Sen. Graham, who is a graduate of the University of South Carolina School of Law, is pulling what I call the “Dark Mysterious Forces” maneuver. Of course he’s not saying she has a poor judicial temperament, but Dark Mysterious Forces compel that conclusion, and require that he bring this to her attention. He also invokes “fairness” to signal that he is being fair, and it would be uncollegial to suggest otherwise. If I close my eyes it sounds like I am at a faculty meeting.

–Ann Bartow

ETA: A post at Media Matters claims “Nets silent on sexism of anonymous quotes Graham used.” Really? What about this or this or this or this or this?

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Sociolinguistics, South Carolina | 4 Comments

Ave Maria School of Law claims law professors on its faculty are ministers.

From the National Law Journal:

A Michigan trial judge will decide that next week in a controversial employment dispute involving Ave Maria School of Law, which is trying to declare law professors as ministers to avoid a wrongful termination suit from proceeding.

In the latest twist to the two-year-old suit filed in state court by a three former professors, Tom Monaghan, the school’s founder and financier, filed a motion last month claiming that the law professors are “ministerial.” Therefore, he argues, because the school is a religious institution, the administration over these minister-professors is exempt from civil trial court under the “Establishment and Free Exercise of religious clauses of the First Amendment.”

Monaghan also claims that the institution is eligible for “ecclesiastical abstention,” requiring courts to “abstain from inquiring into, or interfering with, governance of the religious institution.”

Read the whole thing here.

Via.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Academia, Justice?, Law Schools | 1 Comment

Where Are The Women? The Virginia Law Review’s latest symposium issue features 15 authors, 12 of them male.

VOLUME 95            JUNE 2009          ISSUE 4

Virginia Law Review 95:4 (June 2009)

Symposium Issue: The SEC in a Time of Discontinuity

The SEC in a Time of Discontinuity: Introduction to Virginia Law Review Symposium

Joel Seligman

ARTICLES

The Race for the Bottom in Corporate Governance

Frank H. Easterbrook

Redesigning the SEC: Does the Treasury Have a Better Idea?

John C. Coffee, Jr. and Hillary A. Sale

Top Cop or Regulatory Flop? The SEC at 75 Jill E. Fisch
Commentary On Redesigning The Sec: Does The Treasury Have A Better Idea? Steven M.H. Wallman
Securities Law and the New Deal Justices A.C. Pritchard and Robert B. Thompson

ESSAY

The Securities Laws and the Mechanics of Legal Change

Barry Cushman

ARTICLES

Coping in a Global Marketplace: Survival Strategies for a 75-Year-Old SEC

James D. Cox

Treatment Differences and Political Realities in the GAAP-IFRS Debate

William W. Bratton and Lawrence A. Cunningham

The SEC, Retail Investors, and the Institutionalization of the Securities Markets Donald C. Langevoort

ESSAYS

Whither the SEC Now?

Brian G. Cartwright

A Requiem for the Retail Investor?

Alicia Davis Evans

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Academia, Law Schools, The Underrepresentation of Women | Comments Off on Where Are The Women? The Virginia Law Review’s latest symposium issue features 15 authors, 12 of them male.

Law Protecting Clinic Buffer Zone Upheld

From the Feminist Daily News:

The US 1st Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Massachusetts law on Friday, allowing a 35-foot safety buffer zone between protesters and abortion clinic entrances. The law, established in 2007, protects clinic patients and staff from harassment.

Five anti-choice protesters originally filed the lawsuit on the grounds that the safety zones violate their right to free speech. In 2008, US District Judge Joseph Tauro rejected their request and they filed the most recent appeal.

The Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled that the law does not infringe on protesters’ free speech rights and applies to all protestors no matter their viewpoint. The law is described as “content-neutral,” reported the Boston Globe. The ruling also stated that the law “represents a permissible response by the Massachusetts Legislature to what it reasonably perceived as a significant threat to public safety.”

“For too long, patients and staff had to endure in-your-face screaming and harassment just to get to doctor’s appointments,” Angus McQuilken, vice president of public affairs for the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, told the Boston Globe in 2008 after the original suit was filed. “This 35-foot zone is more than reasonable.”

The opinion in McCullen v. Coakley is accessible here.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Feminism and Law, Feminism and Medicine, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Law Protecting Clinic Buffer Zone Upheld

Suzy, Check the Clutch

The title of the post on Salon.com is “Jack Welch to women:  Work and family don’t mix.”   The Salon post refers to this WSJ article which begins, “Former General Electric Co. Chief Executive Jack Welch has some blunt words for women climbing the corporate ladder: you may have to choose between taking time off to raise children and reaching the corner office.”   It continues, “Mr. Welch said those who take time off for family could be passed over for promotions if ‘you’re not there in the clutch.'”

Andrew Leonard, the Salon.com post author, makes the point that Mr. Welch’s commentary, if true, is a harsh message for both genders, but that Mr. Welch’s comments seem to apply only to women. That’s because more women than men take time off to raise children.

For more background on the context of Mr. Welch’s comments, see here.

H/T Marc D. Schwarz

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and the Workplace | Comments Off on Suzy, Check the Clutch

California’s Rejection of the Reasonable Battered Woman Standard: Is it Based Upon an Objectionable and Offensive Straw Man?

In its recent opinion in Jefferson v. Kernan, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California  referenced the opinion of the California Supreme Court  in People v. Humphrey, 921 P.2d 1 (Cal. 1996). In Humphrey, a wife appealed from her voluntary manslaughter conviction based upon the shooting death of her husband. That conviction came after the jury partially rejected her self-defense defense. It also came after the judge instructed the jury, inter alia, that

Evidence regarding Battered Woman’s Syndrome has been introduced in this case. Such evidence, if believed, may be considered by you only for the purpose of determining whether or not the defendant held the necessary subjective honest [belief] which is a requirement for both perfect and imperfect self-defense. However, that same evidence regarding Battered Woman’s Syndrome may not be considered or used by you in evaluating the objective reasonableness requirement for perfect self-defense.

The California Supremes thereafter reversed, finding, inter alia, “that evidence of battered woman’s syndrome is generally  relevant  to the reasonableness, as well as the subjective existence, of defendant’s  belief in the need to defend, and, to the extent it is relevant, the jury may  consider  it in deciding both questions.” The court, however, was quick to point out that

we are not changing the standard from objective to subjective, or replacing the reasonable “person” standard with a reasonable “battered woman” standard. Our decision would not, in another context, compel adoption of a “‘reasonable gang member’ standard.” Evidence Code Section 1107  states “a rule of evidence only” and makes “no substantive change.”…The jury must consider defendant’s situation and knowledge, which makes the evidence relevant, but the ultimate question is whether a reasonable  person,  not a reasonable battered woman, would believe in the need to kill to prevent imminent harm.  

California state and federal courts have often repeated this language, and the Eastern District of California  followed suit in Jefferson v. Kernan. But do these opinions make sense?

Continue reading

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Courts and the Judiciary | 1 Comment

Sort yourself out!

Via Marge Twain.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Sexism in the Media, Sociolinguistics | Comments Off on Sort yourself out!

Pharmacists are obliged to dispense the Plan B pill, even if they are personally opposed to the “morning after” contraceptive on religious grounds, a federal appeals court ruled last week.

The LA Times reported:

… In a case that could affect policy across the western U.S., a supermarket pharmacy owner in Olympia, Wash., failed in a bid to block 2007 regulations that required all Washington pharmacies to stock and dispense the pills.

Family-owned Ralph’s Thriftway and two pharmacists employed elsewhere sued Washington state officials over the requirement. The plaintiffs asserted that their Christian beliefs prevented them from dispensing the pills, which can prevent implantation of a recently fertilized egg. They said that the new regulations would force them to choose between keeping their jobs and heeding their religious objections to a medication they regard as a form of abortion.

Ralph’s owners, Stormans Inc., and pharmacists Rhonda Mesler and Margo Thelen sought protection under the 1st Amendment right to free exercise of religion and won a temporary injunction from the U.S. District Court in Seattle pending trial on the constitutionality of the regulations. That order prevented state officials from penalizing pharmacists who refused to dispense Plan B as long as they referred consumers to a nearby pharmacy where it was available.

On Wednesday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the injunction, saying the district court was wrong in issuing it based on an erroneous finding that the rules violated the free exercise of religion clause of the U.S. Constitution. …

The Ninth Circuit opinion in STORMANS, INC. v. SELECKY can be accessed here.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminism and Medicine, Feminism and the Workplace, Reproductive Rights, Women's Health | Comments Off on Pharmacists are obliged to dispense the Plan B pill, even if they are personally opposed to the “morning after” contraceptive on religious grounds, a federal appeals court ruled last week.

South Carolina’s state govt is only the fifth most dysfunctional state govt in the nation

At least according to this article, which claims the six states with the worst leadership are:

6. California
5. South Carolina
4. Alaska
3. Illinois
2. Nevada
1. New York

I’m sure the fact that we have the fewest women in state government in the nation is only a coincidence.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, South Carolina, The Underrepresentation of Women, Yep, sarcasm. | 13 Comments

Laura J. Murray, “Reproductive Technologies: Flesh, Paint, Text”

How do you know a reproduction if you see one? Read Laura Murray’s essay here at No More Potlucks.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Feminism and Law, Feminism and Technology, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Laura J. Murray, “Reproductive Technologies: Flesh, Paint, Text”

NYC now has Jane Jacobs Way, named for the famed author-activist who changed the course of urban planning in the 1960s.

From this NYT story:

Ms. Jacobs, who died in 2006, lived between West 11th and Perry Streets at 555 Hudson Street and immortalized the”sidewalk ballet”of that block in her book,”The Death and Life of Great American Cities.”As of Tuesday morning, when the street sign was unveiled (only halfway at first), the single block will be connected to Ms. Jacobs formally, as well as through the lore of New York City and urban planning classes.

The NYT also published this photo:

null

The naming of public venues is a scholarly interest of mine.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Feminism and the Environment, The Underrepresentation of Women | Comments Off on NYC now has Jane Jacobs Way, named for the famed author-activist who changed the course of urban planning in the 1960s.

“The Education of Sonia Sotomayor”

That is the title of this essay at the WaPo written by one of Judge Sotomayor’s Princeton profs. Below are a couple of excerpts:

… Had I known in the spring of 1973 that this hesitant freshman from the Bronx would be nominated to the Supreme Court 36 years later, I would have taken detailed notes on our conversations and filed them away in anticipation. Unfortunately, all I have are my memories. But Sonia made a strong impression. She was not the best student I taught in my seven years at Princeton — though she certainly was high on the list — but she was the one who took greatest advantage of the opportunities there and emerged most transformed by her experience. …

… By her senior year, Sonia was ready to write about the most important Puerto Rican leader and issue of the 20th century: Luis Muñoz Marin and the status of Puerto Rico. Her thesis was extremely ambitious and one of the longest I have supervised, but it was the best paper she had ever written.

I read it again recently, and I would still give it an A. It is clearly conceptualized, solidly researched, incisively analyzed, persuasively argued and very well written, with pithy summaries of her arguments that she could still be proud of today — whether in a published article or a judicial opinion.

Since her nomination to the Supreme Court, however, a couple of marginal phrases in her 178-page paper have been taken out of context by critics, particularly her mention in the preface of her “bias toward independence for Puerto Rico.” What she actually wrote was that her thesis would not reflect that bias, and that unlike most studies of Muñoz Marin, her examination of the commonwealth he founded would not be colored by her own preferences.

Moreover, I must take responsibility for her mention of a “bias.” I taught Sonia that people often have strong opinions on issues that they care enough about to research, but what is critical is that they recognize those biases and set them aside. That is what Sonia did in her senior thesis. I still think it is a best practice for a student — or a judge. …

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminism and Law, Feminism and Politics, The Underrepresentation of Women | Comments Off on “The Education of Sonia Sotomayor”

Where Are The Women? The latest issue of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy has one named woman author out of twenty-three?

From here:

Volume 32, Number 3 – Summer 2009

THE GEORGE W. BUSH ADMINISTRATION: A RETROSPECTIVE
Reflections on Events and Changes at the Department of Justice John Ashcroft 813
National Security and the Rule of Law Michael B. Mukasey 831
The”Bush Doctrine”: Can Preventive War Be Justified? Robert J. Delahunty & John Yoo 843
Public Bioethics and the Bush Presidency O. Carter Snead 867
Speaking Up For Marriage William C. Duncan 915
Faith-Based Initiative 2.0: The Bush Faith-Based and Community Initiative Stanley W. Carlson‐Thies 931
The Bush Administration and America’s International Religious Freedom Policy Thomas F. Farr & William L. Saunders, Jr. 949
Unfinished Business: The Bush Administration and Racial Preferences Roger Clegg 971
A Measured Approach: Employment and Labor Law During the George W. Bush Years William J. Kilberg, Jason Schwartz & Joshua Chadwick 997
False Premises: The Accountability Fetish in Education Martha Derthick & Joshua M. Dunn 1015
ESSAY
The Constitution as the Playbook for Judicial Selection Orrin G. Hatch 1035
ARTICLES
Measuring Meta-Doctrine: An Empirical Assessment of Judicial Minimalism in the Supreme Court Robert Anderson IV 1045
Testing the Boundaries of the First Amendment Press Clause: A Proposal for Protecting the Media from Newsgathering Torts Anthony L. Fargo & Laurence B. Alexander 1093
Reconsidering the Felony Murder Rule in Light of Modern Criticisms: Doesn’t the Conclusion Depend Upon the Particular Rule at Issue? David Crump 1155
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
Imperfect Minimalism: Unanswered Questions In
Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., 128 S. Ct. 1396 (2008

1187
“Wholly Foreign to the First Amendment”: The Demise of Campaign Finance’s Equalizing Rationale In
Davis v. Federal Election Commission, 128 S. Ct. 2759 (2008

1197
Squaring the Circle: Reconciling Clear Statutory Text with Contradictory Statutory Purpose In
United States v. Whitley, 529 F.3d 150 (2d Cir. 2008)

1211

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminism and Law, The Underrepresentation of Women | Comments Off on Where Are The Women? The latest issue of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy has one named woman author out of twenty-three?

“”Make Her Say (Poke Her Face)”: Un-conscious Hip Hop, Oral Rape and the Silencing of Women”

That’s the title of this essay at Celie’s Revenge about a very misogynist song. Here is an excerpt from the introduction:

As a female listener, one willing to allow herself to really hear this song’s words and take them to heart, the message was painfully clear: women like dick; we like it violently shoved in our faces, and, according to Common at least, we want oral sex forced upon us, however brutally men see fit to give it. We even enjoy having a man’s penis shoved down our throats, pushed up our mouths, literally rammed through our faces so far and with so much force that a penetration of the internal matter of our skulls occurs, i.e. the man hits”brain”with his dick. According to Common, Kanye and Kid Cudi, some women enjoy this kind of brutal, body punishing oral sex; they can learn how to beg, not only to be used as receptacles for men’s semen, but to be violated to the point of physical injury.

The brutal lyrics are here. Here is a video featuring the song:

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Feminism and Culture, Feminism and the Arts, Sociolinguistics | Comments Off on “”Make Her Say (Poke Her Face)”: Un-conscious Hip Hop, Oral Rape and the Silencing of Women”

Body of Eridania Rodriguez Recovered in Office Air Duct

Eridania Rodriguez died at work.

The 46-year old woman was killed on Tuesday, July 7, 2009 during her evening custodial shift at 2 Rector Street in Lower Manhattan.  Her body was found Saturday stuffed into an air duct.  Her hands and mouth were bound with tape.

According to the NY Times (here), “Ms. Rodriguez’s family said she had been afraid of a former worker in the building who had been fired but kept returning.”

The American Institute on Domestic Violence reports here that approximately 1.7 million women are the object of workplace violence each year.  The leading cause of women’s death in the workplace?  Homicide.

Apparently, the videotapes from 2 Rector Street are inconclusive at this point.  So much for top security in buildings around Ground Zero and business centers across the country.

Eridania Rodriguez was killed at work.

Noone should have to risk her or his life to earn a living.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Women and Economics | Comments Off on Body of Eridania Rodriguez Recovered in Office Air Duct

Laura Ingalls Had Hairy Pits and So Did Pa

Remarking on Sacha Baron Cohen’s smooth appearance as Bruno, the New York Times reports here on a survey of grooming habits among men at the University of South Florida.  80% of those men surveyed reported their  below-the-clavicle hair removal — mostly from the chest, abs, back and pubic area.

The internet ad from Gillette, below, leaves no doubt about the target audience for its media campaign.  One of the tag lines is, “You might say when there’s no underbrush, the tree looks taller.”

My unscientific, unrepresentative ad hoc data gathering tells me that my previous take (here) is partially correct.  Male depilation remains more common among the young and the gay (and the young gay) than the over-40, heterosexual crowd.  But the ads from Gillette and others are causing me to reconsider aspects of my previous analyses.

I used to think that white women’s practice of hair removal was embraced, at least in part, because the effect was to exaggerate gender differences between white women and white men (see here and here).  (For Ann’s take on related aspects of the topic, see herehere and here.)  I need to complicate my analysis now that men, too, are getting the media message that hairless is better.  Both women and men are being to encouraged to shave (ok, by companies that sell shaving products).  Does this indicate some larger cultural move toward de-emphasizing gender?  I doubt it.

So why would their own hairlessness appeal to men?  I suspect that it is decidedly not because men want to look like women . . . although many wouldn’t mind looking like Michael Phelps or Lance Armstrong.  Rather, hairlessness — obtained naturally or by grooming — is a sign of youth (the pre-pubescent look), body-consciousness (I can see those abs glisten!), self-care (when you trim your nails, trim your hairs) and other-regarding (how thoughtful of you to anticipate that I wouldn’t like hair up my nose — wait a sec, did you assume I’d be visiting this part of your anatomy on a first date?).

A marketing technique will be a sure winner if it appeals to men’s desire to feel, um, large.   There’s a reason that  Trojans don’t come in size “small.”

The hairless look?  Shows off a guy’s “equipment,” in Gillette’s lexicon.  But for most female fans, Pa Ingalls was appealing with the beard (in the Garth Williams illustrated books) and without it (in the TV series with Melissa Gilbert).

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | 1 Comment

15 plaintiffs lost their lawsuit against the Vancouver Olympic Games Organizing Committee when the British Columbia Supreme Court ruled that the decision to exclude their sport is out of the organizing committee’s control.

From the Salt Lake City Tribune:

… “No one wanted to go to court over this, but we had no choice,” Deedee Corradini, president of Women’s Ski Jumping-USA, said in a statement. “It’s terribly disappointing, but the experience and effort was important.

“We did everything possible, followed the rules, grew the sport, held world championships and the IOC remained opposed to including women in ski jumping,” she added. “We won’t give up until women’s ski jumping is in the Olympics, but it’s unfortunate this legal effort failed and they won’t be in 2010.”

The women had argued that being excluded from the Olympics violates Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which prohibits gender discrimination in government services.

But the Vancouver Olympic Games Organizing Committee — known as VANOC — argued that it’s not controlled enough by the government for the charter to apply to it. It also argued that the IOC decides on which sports are allowed in the Olympics, and the IOC isn’t governed by Canadian law….

…Ski jumping is the only sport in the Olympics in which women are not allowed to compete alongside men.

As noted in this post, it is a sport in which women can outperform men, which makes the discrimination that much more reprehensible. If you doubt sexism is driving the opposition, watch this:

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminism and Sports, The Underrepresentation of Women | 2 Comments

CFP: First Amendment Meets Cyber-Stalking Meets Character and Fitness

From the AALS Section on Women in Legal Education, this call for papers:

The First Amendment Meets Cyber-Stalking Meets Character and Fitness

2010 AALS Annual Meeting
New Orleans, Louisiana

Cyber-harassment has made its way to the legal academy, in part by way of the Auto-Admit debacle implicating law students and in part by way of other similar situations.  The resulting dialogue has raised legal issues related to ethics, gender equality, freedom of speech, and internet regulation and liability.   Some legal scholars say that on-line attacks by law students, prospective law students, or lawyers, while noxious, constitute protected speech that should not be penalized.  Others say that on-line attacks can raise sexual harassment or civil rights concerns given that the conduct often targets women.  Still others say that outrageous on-line conduct by law students, prospective law students, or lawyers raises character and fitness concerns, particularly when the conduct is overtly racist or gendered.

Discussion about these issues is complicated by internet anonymity and evolving internet-related case law, and more questions are raised than are answered.   Is it a problem when gender- or race-specific comments are made on the internet by law students, prospective law students, jurists, or lawyers?  What, if anything, should be done in response to this conduct by law schools, bar examiners, or state disciplinary counsel?  More generally and not specific to law students or lawyers, should cyber-harassment be addressed by legislation, litigation, regulation, or prosecution?  How?

On January 9, 2010, at the AALS Annual Meeting, the AALS Section on Women in Legal Education will present a program, co-sponsored by the AALS Section on Defamation and Privacy, titled  “The First Amendment Meets Cyber-Stalking Meets Character and Fitness” to discuss some of these issues.  As part of this program, there will be a panel discussion with confirmed panelists including Brad Wendel (Cornell University School of Law), Jack M. Balkin (Information Society Project, Yale Law School) and Deborah L. Rhode (Stanford Law School).

This call for papers solicits papers, essays, or paper proposals on any related topic, to be presented as part of this program at the AALS Annual Meeting.  Acceptable paper topics might be related to, for example, law and gender, internet or computer law, civil rights, criminal law, intellectual property, defamation or legal ethics.

How to Submit: If you are interested in presenting a paper as part of this program, please submit either a paper proposal or a draft paper by  September 10, 2009, to Professor Elizabeth Nowicki, Chair of the AALS Section on Women in Legal Education, at  enowicki@tulane.edu.  Presenters will be notified by October 10, 2009.

Papers which are already accepted for publication may be submitted.  All participants will be responsible for their own travel and conference registration expenses.

What a great program topic!

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Call for Papers or Participation | 1 Comment

“Woman Suffrage in Iowa” at Blanden Memorial Art Museum

20th Century Woman Suffrage Poster

“Woman Suffrage in Iowa: 90 Years After the ‘Winning Plan'” is a current exhibition at Blanden Memorial Art Museum in Fort Dodge, Iowa.

The image of the poster at left, featured in the Blanden exhibit, derives from an original painting by Evelyn Rumsey Cary (American, 1855-1924).  The text reads “Woman Suffrage” and  “Give Her the Fruit of Her Hands and Let Her Own Works Praise Her in the Gates.”  The latter comes from Proverbs 31:31, and was well-known to woman suffragists.  Elizabeth Cady Stanton, for one, used it in her private diaries (see, e.g.,  here).

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and the Arts, Feminist Legal History | Comments Off on “Woman Suffrage in Iowa” at Blanden Memorial Art Museum

How to Stop Indoor Prostitution? Ask a Law School Dean

Both chambers of the Rhode Island State legislature have passed bills to”crack down”on otherwise-legal indoor prostitution in that jurisdiction.  Both bills aim to penalize both prostitutes and johns, but neither bill comes close to offering any meaningful protection for women.  In the General Assembly version (here), a person found guilty of selling or buying sex faces a jail sentence of up to 6 months and a $250 fine.  For repeat offenders, the penalty goes up to 12 months in jail and a $500 fine.  The principal difference in the Senate version (here) is that the Senate bill imposes liability on landlords who knowingly permit prostitution on the premises and fail to”make reasonable effort to halt or abate such use.”

If Rhode Island were serious about stopping prostitution, the legislators should take a lesson from former Villanova Law School Dean Mark A. Sargent.  Sargent  has been implicated as a customer of a prostitution ring in Devon, Pennsylvania.  (For coverage of that story, see  here,  here and  here.)  Apparently Mr. Sargent was”patronizing”a prostitute when the house was raided by police on November 25, 2008.  Mr. Sargent abruptly stepped down from his post at Villanova (for”personal and medical reasons“) on June 29, four days before the Philadelphia Inquirer published the story detailing Sargent’s involvement.  This suggests that Sargent did not resign until he got word that the story would go public. Sargent likely thought, with good reason, that he would suffer no repercussions from being caught.  After all, the legal system usually punishes the female prostitutes, not the johns.

Want to stop prostitution?  Publish the names of the customers.

-Bridget Crawford

(cross-post from publicsquare.net)

Share
Posted in Coerced Sex, Feminism and Law, Law Schools | Comments Off on How to Stop Indoor Prostitution? Ask a Law School Dean

NYU Law hires homophobic bigot to teach, wait for it, human rights law.

Leiter has the details.

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminism and Law, Law Schools, Law Teaching, LGBT Rights | 2 Comments

“The Biden Curve”

Is Sarah Palin really dumber than Joe Biden? Or is something else going on? From the WSJ:

*************

Over the weekend, as we noted yesterday, Vice President Biden said that if Israel decides it needs to take military action against the Iranian nuclear-weapons program, the U.S. will not “dictate” otherwise. A reader points out that Sarah Palin, who ran against Biden in last year’s election, said much the same thing in a September interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson:

Gibson: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?

Palin: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don’t think that we should second-guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.

Gibson: So if we wouldn’t second-guess it and they decided they needed to do it because Iran was an existential threat, we would cooperative [sic in ABC transcript] or agree with that.

Palin: I don’t think we can second-guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.

Gibson: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right.

Palin: We cannot second-guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.

Palin reiterated the point in a later interview with CBS’s Katie Couric.

This column agrees with both Biden and Palin and is glad to see that the bipartisan consensus recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself appears sturdy. But we suspected not everyone would be so consistent, so we went back to see what people had said about Palin.

Matthew Yglesias, who when he was young drew much praise for his thoughtful and fair-minded commentary, wrote a blog post titled “Palin: If Israel Wants to Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran, That’s Okay With Me”:

Palin reiterated her absurd view that the President of the United States shouldn’t “second-guess” Israeli policy under any circumstances.

Palin is okay at repeating various “pro-Israel” buzzwords, but she can’t run away from the fact that her underlying position on this topic is stupid.

So when Biden said the same thing, did Yglesias call it “absurd” and “stupid”? Well, is the pope Italian? Here’s what he wrote yesterday:

This is being read by some .  .  . as a “green light” for an Israeli attack. .  .  . I think the most straightforward reading of what Biden said is rather different, he’s trying to distance the United States from any possible Israeli military action by making it clear that what Israel does or doesn’t do is decided in Israel rather than in Washington.

The main problem with this, I think, is that probably nobody’s going to believe it. Already you see many Americans taking Biden’s statement that the U.S. doesn’t control Israeli policy to “really” mean that the U.S. is encouraging Israel to attack.

When Palin says it, it’s stupid. When Biden says it, he gets graded on a curve: The problem is that other people are too stupid to understand the deep subtlety of Biden’s thinking.

(by James Taranto)

************
See also. As I have noted, I am not a fan of Sarah Palin. I disagree with her about many things and I didn’t vote for her ticket. But I think the abuse being heaped on her for resigning her Governorship is disproportionate to whatever her crime is supposed to have been. Shouldn’t the people who are vilifying her for stepping down be GLAD that she will leave office, rather than so very angry at her?

I imagine many women reading this would like to believe that what happened to Sarah Palin can’t ever happen to them. We’re smarter! We have advanced degrees from prestigious universities! We talk in complete sentences, with verb/subject agreement! But if you were paying close attention to the campaign, I’d bet deep down you felt a little flash of recognition and maybe even some empathy for Palin at least once. Mine came when she blinked in stunned silence after being asked which magazines she read. I know my teaching subject areas pretty well and I’m usually reasonably diligent about preparing for class, but once in a while, a question from a student that I should be able to answer easily, completely stumps me. Luckily for me I’m not generally on camera when that happens, and I can either take a minute to regroup, or promise to address the query at the next class meeting. Generally the answer comes to me about five minutes after class has ended.

If I had to unexpectedly answer a question about which magazines I read, I might stumble too. I used to subscribe to the New Yorker but now I just pick it up at bookstores from time to time. I currently subscribe to The Atlantic but I don’t read every issue cover to cover. I read the NYT Sunday Magazine online most weeks but does that really count as a magazine? Etc., etc. It would take me a while to formulate the answer to that question just as an ordinary person. If I was a politician running for office, I’d also be worried about what “messages” I was sending. If Palin had said she read something like Glamour she would have been mocked for that. If she said she read The Economist she would have been challenged to name specific stories from previous issues, and accused of lying if she couldn’t. There wasn’t any way to answer that question that couldn’t lead to trouble. So she froze, and I thought “Ouch, been there.”

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Law Teaching | Comments Off on “The Biden Curve”

If you need a good laugh…

Go here. Then observe the referenced unicorn in action here. My money is on “pustule.”

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on If you need a good laugh…