“Iraq’s Unspeakable Crime: Mothers Pimping Daughters”

From Time magazine:

She goes by Hinda, but that’s not her real name. That’s what she’s called by the many Iraqi sex traffickers and pimps who contact her several times a week from across the country. They think she is one of them, a peddler of sexual slaves. Little do they know that the stocky auburn-haired woman is an undercover human-rights activist who has been quietly mapping out their murky underworld since 2006.

That underworld is a place where nefarious female pimps hold sway and where impoverished mothers sell their teenage daughters into a sex market that believes females who reach the age of 20 are too old to fetch a good price. The youngest victims, some ages 11 and 12, are sold for as much as $30,000, while others can go for as little as $2,000. “The buying and selling of girls in Iraq, it’s like the trade in cattle,” Hinda says. “I’ve seen mothers haggle with agents over the price of their daughters.” (See pictures of Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein.)

The trafficking routes are both local and international, and most often connect to Syria, Jordan and the gulf (primarily the United Arab Emirates). The victims are trafficked either illegally on forged passports or “legally” through forced marriages. A married female, even one as young as 14, raises few suspicions if she’s traveling with her “husband.” The girls are then divorced upon arrival and put to work. (See Iraq’s return to normality.)

Nobody knows exactly how many Iraqi women and children have been sold into sexual slavery since the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003. There is no official number because of the shadowy nature of the business. Baghdad-based activists like Hinda and others estimate it to be in the tens of thousands. Still, it remains a hidden crime, one that the 2008 U.S. State Department’s Trafficking in Persons report says the Iraqi government is not combating. Baghdad, the report says, “offers no protection services to victims of trafficking, reported no efforts to prevent trafficking in persons and does not acknowledge trafficking to be a problem in the country.”

While sexual violence has accompanied warfare for millenniums and insecurity always provides opportunities for criminal elements to profit, what is happening in Iraq today reveals how far a once progressive country (relative to its neighbors) has regressed on the issue of women’s rights and how ferociously the seams of a traditional Arab society that values female virginity have been ripped apart. Baghdad’s Minister of Women’s Affairs, Nawal al-Samarraie, resigned last month in protest of the lack of resources provided to her by the government. “The ministry is just an empty post,” she told TIME. “Why do I come to the office every day if I don’t have any resources?” Yet even al-Samarraie doesn’t think sex-trafficking is an issue. “It’s limited,” she said, adding that she believed the girls involved choose to engage in prostitution.

That’s a view that infuriates activists like Yanar Mohammed, who heads the Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq. “Let me take her to the nightclubs of Damascus and show her [trafficked] women by the thousands,” she says. To date, the government has not prosecuted any traffickers. And for the past year it has prevented groups like Mohammed’s from visiting women’s prisons, where they have previously identified victims, many of whom are jailed for acts committed as a result of being trafficked, such as prostitution or possessing forged documents. ….

Read the entire article.   I’m uncomfortable with the author’s decision to highlight the fact that “mothers” are selling their daughters. I don’t doubt that it happens, but nothing in the article suggests that “mothers” or even women are doing the majority of the trafficking. The recent UN Report I blogged about reported that a disproportionate number of women are involved in human trafficking, not only as victims, but also as traffickers, which the report framed as “former victims have becoming perpetrators.” According to the report:

The data gathered on the gender of offenders in 46 countries suggest that women play a key role as perpetrators of human trafficking. In Europe, for example, women make up a larger share of those convicted for human trafficking offences than for most other forms of crime.

That more European women than men were convicted of trafficking doesn’t prove more women are engaged in it. But the fact that many female “former victims,” unable to exit the trade, cut the best deals for themselves they can under the circumstances by becoming pimps so that they no longer have to sexually service men shouldn’t be   surprising.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Coerced Sex, Feminism and Law, The Overrepresentation of Women | 2 Comments

Coupon Clipping

Here’s a post that will encourage you to use coupons, and here’s a related post that will encourage you to girlcott Whole Foods. Which I already do, largely because there isn’t one within 100 miles of where I live, but hey, now I have another reason.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Women and Economics | Comments Off on Coupon Clipping

Let Them Eat Quiche

null

Tomorrow the International Law Society at my law school hosts its annual fund raiser. It’s an all you can eat lunch comprised of donated homemade ethnic foods.

Here are the University-related fundraisers I’ve already contributed to this academic year: the law school’s student scholarship fund, the University’s “Family Fund,” the Public Interest Law Society auction, the Loan Forgiveness fund, the Black Law Students Association, Women In Law, OutLaw, the Intellectual Property Law Society, the Entertainment & Sports Law Society, the “V-Day Monologues” fundraiser for a local women’s shelter, and I hosted a pizza party for my First Year “advisees” and bought snacks for students to eat during exam week last semester. And I’ve given a lot of professional lawyer time, to good people related causes that I keep confidential. I also performed a stand up comedy act at the Talent No Talent show, it too was a fundraiser but that was so much fun I really shouldn’t count it here.

But back to the International Law Society. They wanted me to contribute food for tomorrow’s fund-raising lunch, preferably vegetarian food, since several faculty members and a number of students do not eat meat, and they did not have this covered. So tonight I made six broccoli spinach quiches. This required a trip to the grocery store to purchase: two dozen free range eggs, a half gallon of BGH free milk, six pre-made “all vegetable” (no lard) pie crusts, three large organic broccoli florets, a giant package of organic baby spinach, garlic cloves, soy “baco” bits, balsamic vinaigrette, seasonings, and a whole bunch of shredded mozzarella, cheddar and parmesan cheeses. Took about an hour to prepare, 40 minutes to cook, and then I wrapped the quiches in aluminum foil and stuck them in the fridge. I’ll have to get up extra early to deliver them to the folks who will coordinate re-heating and the actual lunch.

I do all this crazy stuff largely because I love my students. You would too, if you knew them.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Academia, Law Schools, Law Teaching, South Carolina | 1 Comment

Suzanne Kim on “Marital Naming/Naming Marriage”

Feminist Law Prof Suzanne A. Kim (Rutgers-Newark) has posted to SSRN her article, “Marital Naming/Naming Marriage: Language and Status in Family Law.”  Here is the abstract:

What’s in a name? Based on current family law and policy debates, the answer would seem to be: a whole lot. Controversies over labels and naming in family law plainly manifest the view that the language we use to describe family law institutions and the people in them matters deeply. Puzzling, then, is the current prevailing view of marital naming practices. Despite formal legal equality between women and men regarding names, women almost universally still adopt their husbands’ last names upon marriage. Research suggests that this practice may even be on the rise among college-educated women, who typically have been more likely than other women to keep their names. Why is the persistence of marital name-changing relevant today? Today’s discussions of family law abound with the assumption that language, in the form of names and labels, is deeply meaningful from a status perspective. The same-sex marriage debate is a key area in family law in which most agree that language bears status effects. Despite this firmly held assumption, the status effects of language in the marital names context are largely ignored. This article fills this gap in current family law scholarship by identifying the gender hierarchy dynamics inherent in the current marital naming regime, which aspires to gender equality and theoretically operates by choice. This article situates marital naming practices, in a novel way, in connection with the debate over “naming marriage” in the same-sex marriage debate. In drawing connections between marital naming and naming marriage, this article also makes an important contribution to family law scholarship by providing an explicit account of how language plays a critical yet unexamined role in reflecting and reinforcing hierarchy within marriage and beyond.

The full article is available here.  Suzanne weaves some connections between same-sex marriage and opposite-sex marriage that I hadn’t considered before.  I look forward to reading this piece in more detail.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Legal Scholarship | Comments Off on Suzanne Kim on “Marital Naming/Naming Marriage”

“Where to Now?”

The WaPo published a long article about women in politics here. You should definitely read the entire thing, but I’ll give you my brief take away: Women who are able need to either run for office or support the heck out of other women who are doing same, because the misogyny they will face is monumental. I don’t have the correct temperament to be a politician, but I know a LOT of extremely talented women who do, so my mission is clear!

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on “Where to Now?”

Bacon Watch

null

Via.

Share
Posted in Baconpheffer | Comments Off on Bacon Watch

“Female Merit Badges” were designed by artist Mary Yaeger to represent female rites of passage and the many physical manipulations women undergo to achieve cultural ideals of beauty.

null

null
null
null
null

Homepage here. Via, by way of here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Feminism and the Arts | 1 Comment

Should Title IX Apply to the Media?

Title IX, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination by recipients of federal funds has had, among other things, a tremendous effect in equalizing the funding and status of women’s collegiate sports.   The Women’s NBA would not exist uconnwere it not for Title IX creating a pipeline of excellent collegiate female basketball players.   Many people, myself included, feel that women’s college basketball is much more fun to watch than men’s because the women do old fashioned things like pass the ball and play like a team, whereas the men’s game is all about individual ball hogging, dunking and general show-offery.

So I was more than usually annoyed at the New York Times’ Sports section NCAA Vanderbilt Maryland Basketballyesterday when it ran stories about the NCAA Basketball tournament draw – printing only the men’s bracket.   In past years they featured more prominently the men’s bracket, but covered the women’s bracket as well.   This year, they didn’t even bother to print the women’s draw.   Cost saving?   Probably.   Sexism?   Surely.

But this injury was horribly compounded when Rachel Maddow did the same thing last night with her (annoying, sorry) sidekick Kent Jones.   They finished off the hour with their usual fluffy banter, covering the men’s and not the women’s draw – each picking their favorites for the men’s final four.   Rachel Maddow too?   Oy – what has the world come to?   Should we amend Title IX to cover the media?   Seems we must.

So here it is and you can see it bigger here:

09womens_bracket

– Katherine Franke

Share
Posted in Sexism in the Media | 5 Comments

Happy St. Patrick’s Day!

null

Share
Posted in Academia | Comments Off on Happy St. Patrick’s Day!

Krawiec on “Price and Pretense in the Baby Market”

Feminist Law Prof Kim  Krawiec has posted to SSRN her essay  “Price and Pretense in the Baby Market,”to be published in  Baby Markets: Money, Morals, and the Neopolitics of Choice (forthcoming Cambridge University Press 2009).  Here’s the abstract of the essay,  

Throughout the world, baby selling is formally prohibited. And throughout the world babies are bought and sold each day. As demonstrated in this Essay, the legal baby trade is a global market in which prospective parents pay, scores of intermediaries profit, and the demand for children is clearly differentiated by age, race, special needs, and other consumer preferences, with prices ranging from zero to over one hundred thousand dollars. Yet legal regimes and policymakers around the world pretend that the baby market does not exist, most notably through prohibitions against baby selling – typically defined as a prohibition against the relinquishment of parental rights in exchange for compensation.  

This Essay explores the costs of societal pretense that legal baby markets do not exist. Those costs include scarcity, foregone opportunities to address market failures, an inability to develop regulations designed to further particular public policies unlikely to be advanced solely through the goal of profit-maximization, and the promotion of rent-seeking. This Essay focuses specifically on the rent-seeking problem, arguing that, although frequently defended by those who contend that commercial markets in parental rights commodify human beings, compromise individual dignity, or jeopardize fundamental values, bans against baby selling (at least as currently written and enforced) serve little purpose other than enabling anti-competitive behavior by the most economically and politically powerful baby market participants.

Full essay available here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Legal Scholarship, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Krawiec on “Price and Pretense in the Baby Market”

What Third-Wave Feminism Brings to Animal Law

Third-wave feminists reject what they perceive as a perennial”victim”stance in feminist thinking.   (For more on third-wave wave feminism, see here).   More colloquially, third-wave feminists might say that (some) subordination is in the eyes of the beholder, not the beholden.   You may think that image/word/action is subordinating me but that doesn’t mean that I feel subordinated.   Indeed the subordinated may be the one doing the subordination.  

Third-wave writing so far appears to be methodologically constrained by its self-regarding, first-person narrative.   I have not yet read any specifically denominated third-wave feminist work that speaks to animal issues at all.   So I speculate in asking how might third-wave analysis extend to animal law?   In the animal-rights context, what are the implications of third-wave feminism’s rejection of victimhood?

At an initial level, one might think that this joining of third-wave feminism to animal law would lead to an embrace, not a rejection, of a human dominance paradigm.   If third-wave feminists reject the idea women are (always) victims, then surely they would reject the idea that animals are (ever) victims.   Extending third-wave feminism might leave us with no room for an anti-cruelty stance, for example.   I do not believe, however, that the third-wave feminist rejection of a dominant/subordinate binary necessarily extends in this direction.   My instinct is quite the opposite.  

Any attempt to apply third-wave feminism to the animal law clarifies that the third-wave critique must be limited to circumstances in which the being typically understood as subordinated possesses situational authority and autonomy.   To claim, for example, that performing in a strip club is an act of ironic liberation, not oppression, requires at least two conditions precedent.   The performer must have the meaningful ability to engage in other paid employment and she must have reasonable assurances of bodily integrity as long as she engages in the strip-club work.

Animals are not liberated strippers hiding in plain sight.   They cannot speak.   They cannot exercise economic power as we understand it.   They have limited, if any, situational authority.   Third-wave feminists have not yet grappled with animal rights, but when they do, they likely will embrace those rights, not seek to diminish them.

-Bridget Crawford  

(cross-post from Animal Blawg)

Share
Posted in Feminism and Animal Law | 1 Comment

Robson Reviews Robert L. Tsai’s “Eloquence and Reason”

Over at the Law and Politics Book Review, Feminist Law Prof Ruthann Robson reviews Robert Tsai’s book Eloquence and Reason, Creating a First Amendment Culture.  Robson points out a noticeable absence from Tsai’s work:  

My most serious misgiving about ELOQUENCE AND REASON, with its subtitle, CREATING A FIRST AMENDMENT CULTURE, is evinced by another quotation; this one is about totalitarianism attributed to Hannah Arendt (p.128). My apprehension is not connected to the accuracy or the substance of the statement, but to my realization that Arendt is the sole woman invoked in ELOQUENCE AND REASON, apart from a few mentions of Justice O’Connor and a handful of citations in the notes. The absence of women is noteworthy; it has been quite some time since I found myself hunting through a book of contemporary legal theory looking for any reference to any woman. Moreover, the lack of feminist theorizing on gendered speech and linguistics, as well as on specific aspects of the First Amendment including sexual speech and discriminatory speech, left me wondering whether women were to be included in”Creating a First Amendment Culture.”  

Robson’s full review is here.  

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law | Comments Off on Robson Reviews Robert L. Tsai’s “Eloquence and Reason”

Billie Jean King, “No person should be discounted by their sexuality”

Tennis.com features this interview with Billie Jean King, who was “outed” in 1981 by a former lover.  Here are some highlights/soundbites from the interview:

“No person should be discounted by their sexuality or any other reason. You just don’t do that to other human beings. We’re all human. And it’s very important we treat each other the way we want to be treated.”

“The LGBT community is very important to me. If I’ve helped in a very small way, I’m very happy about that.”

On the lack of “out” gay male players, “We need straight people, particularly in the male arena, to support the gay guys. They have to. And if they stand up for us, that’s how we gain acceptance. We need our friends, or brothers and sisters, especially if they have influence. Federer and Nadal and those guys have to say we don’t care. Once the influence starts to talk like that, it makes a huge difference.”

Without Billie Jean King, the entire landscape for women and girls in sports would be far less developed than it is today.  The cultural impact of her 1973 “Battle of the Sexes” against Bobby Riggs? Astounding.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, LGBT Rights, Sexism in the Media | Comments Off on Billie Jean King, “No person should be discounted by their sexuality”

Columbia J. Gender & Law Symposium, “Gender on the Frontiers”

symposium-poster-1

Don’t forget about the “Gender on the Frontiers” Symposium, upcoming on April 10 at Columbia Law School.   Feminist Law Prof speakers include Linda Fentiman (Pace), Tony Varona (American) and Rebecca Tushnet (Georgetown).  A more readable version of the program from Katherine Franke is here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Upcoming Conferences | Comments Off on Columbia J. Gender & Law Symposium, “Gender on the Frontiers”

SPEAK! THE WOMEN OF COLOR MEDIA COLLECTIVE HAS RELEASED A SELF-TITLED DEBUT CD

Information here.

null

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Race and Racism | Comments Off on SPEAK! THE WOMEN OF COLOR MEDIA COLLECTIVE HAS RELEASED A SELF-TITLED DEBUT CD

Prop 8 Justice: Will/Should the California Supreme Court Abolish Marriage?

The arguments before the California Supreme Court raised many hard questions, but one that particularly intrigued me was one to which the Justices frequently returned: What did Proposition 8 really do, after all?   Did it overturn the Marriage Cases – the California Supreme Court case that found it unconstitutional for the State of California to limit the institution of marriage to one man and one woman, and in so doing held that sexual orientation was a suspect classification?   All the parties agree that it didn’t – at least not entirely.     But what did Prop 8 do, and how did it impact the rights of same sex couples that were secured in the Marriage Cases?

The formal question presented in the Prop 8 case was whether Proposition 8 amended or revised the California Constitution, but the question that interested the Court most was whether, and if so how, Proposition 8 diluted or diminished the rights of same sex couples in so far as California provided formal legal equality to same sex couples when it created Civil Unions, and Prop 8 did not alter the suspect class status granted to lgbt people in the Marriage Cases.

ronald-georgeChief Justice Ronald George started off the questioning on this very issue.   He asked Shannon Minter why he maintained that all or most of the holdings of the Marriage Cases were superseded by Prop 8.   The Chief Justice returned to this question almost 3 hours later when Minter was arguing in rebuttal to Kenneth Starr’s argument.   The Chief Justice put to Minter:   “I find it remarkable that you are conceding far greater impact and effect of Proposition 8 in removing rights extended to same-sex couples than did Mr. Starr [who gave] it a far more limited interpretation … eliminating the designation, eliminating the nomenclature but not disturbing the Court’s recognition of very important rights [for same sex couples].”     Justice Joyce Kennard pressed the same issue to Minter:   “What Prop 8 did was take away the label of marriage and its applicability to same sex couples.   But left in tact the Court’s holding in the Marriage Cases … and the majority constitutionalized the [civil union] aspect of the case.   Is it still your view that the sky has fallen in as a result of Proposition 8, and that gays and lesbians are left with nothing?”

These are the hard questions for the challengers of the constitutionality of Proposition 8:   If same sex couples have all of the same formal rights and benefits of marriage when they become civilly union’ed – did Proposition 8 merely deny them the “nomenclature,” the “designation,” the “name,” the form of marriage?   If so, what kind of constitutional harm is that?   And let’s be clear, the answer to the question is as much a political/ethical one as it is a formal/legal one.   By that I mean, we’re in the domain of symbolism and cultural meaning here in demarking the salience and weight of the injury that is Prop 8.

So is marriage more than a word?   Did the justices of the California Supreme Court simply not “get it” when they asked why Prop 8 didn’t just deny same sex couples a word, a label, the nomenclature of marriage?  dignity The plaintiffs in the Prop 8 case insisted that the fight is not simply over a word.   It is a fight for dignity and respect.   They claim and indeed insist that denying the label marriage to the unions of same sex couples is an insult, a degradation, and a dignity harm.   Yet to do so is to take for granted that marriage is something sacred, something to be honored and something that dignifies those who earn its blessings.   It is to argue from within a normative universe whose values you take for granted and embrace.   And it is to base your legal arguments on the legitimacy of those values – the recognition of the harm alleged in the Prop 8 case depends on it.

Two alternatives to this position are possible.   One more legal, the other more political.   The first is, as Nan Hunter pointed out in her blog, that the Marriage Cases could require that the Court deny the nomenclature of marriage altogether since it is no longer available as a Constitutional matter to same sex couples after the passage of Prop 8.   As Hunter notes, the Court held in the Marriage Cases:

Whether or not the name ‘marriage,’ in the abstract, is considered a core element” of the right to marry, “one of the core elements … is the right of same-sex couples to have their official family relationship accorded the same dignity, respect and stature” of the family relationships of heterosexual partners. By reserving the traditional, well-understood term “marriage” only for straight couples, the court said, it violated the equal protection rights of same-sex couples.

Now that California’s voters apparently have taken the word “marriage” off the table as an option for both kinds of relationship categories, the court has the opening to do something bolder and certainly more interesting than ruling that same-sex couples must be allowed to marry. The court could rule that California has to come up with some other label and treat both heterosexual and same-sex couples the same.   In other words, the official label for the legal status must be the same for everyone, whatever that label is.

On this reading, Justices George and Kennard’s focus on the “mere nomenclature” of marriage as a label or a name was presaging a decision in which the mere label would be denied all couples, not just same sex couples.   If, as their questions implied, it’s not such a big deal to be civil union’ed instead of married since the rights are the same, that should hold true for straight and gay couples.     The gay community would be blamed (along with the California Supreme Court) for having destroyed the institution of marriage, when in fact it was the proponents of Prop 8 who accomplished this mean feat.   That sort of outcome would be legally sound, but politically explosive, surely.

The more likely outcome of the case is that a majority of the Court (a larger majority than in the Marriage Cases) will hold that Prop 8 merely amended, not revised, the California Constitution, because the equality rights of the plaintiffs were not substantially diluted by the language of the proposition, rather they were merely denied the label, a word.   This outcome would present us with a political challenge that some, though I’m afraid not most, of the lgbt community might seize – taking a step outside the universe that reveres marriage.     In this scenario, the disestablishment of marriage would not be the consolation prize, but rather the affirmative goal of our political and legal projects.   I’ve blogged before about the virtues of disestablishmentarianism when it comes to marriage.   On this view, “marriage equality” is a thin conception of justice, indeed.

Here’s my worry:   [continue post here]

– Katherine Franke
Cross posted from the Columbia Law School Gender and Sexuality Law Blog

Share
Posted in LGBT Rights | Comments Off on Prop 8 Justice: Will/Should the California Supreme Court Abolish Marriage?

More about academic bullying…

here at Minding the Workplace, where there is also a post about workplace bullying generally. Via.

Share
Posted in Academia, Law Teaching | Comments Off on More about academic bullying…

Flash Drives That Look Like Tampons

null

Via. Available here (scroll down).

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | 1 Comment

Thinking S-L-O-W-L-Y

 

Is it just me, or is there something a little odd about the similarity between the “slow-sex movement,”described here, and the slow-food movement?   (The latter is now organized into”Slow Food,” a non-profit that seeks “to counteract fast food and fast life, the disappearance of local food traditions and people’s dwindling interest in the food they eat, where it comes from, how it tastes and how our food choices affect the rest of the world.”)  

Is it just the names that sound the same, or is there something related about savoring women’s bodies and savoring food?   Or women learning to savor their own pleasure, and to take pleasure in food, instead of abusing themselves with it?  

I’ll have to think slowly about this one.

-Bridget Crawford

(cross-post from Animal Blawg)

 

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Feminism and the Environment, Women's Health | Comments Off on Thinking S-L-O-W-L-Y

“An Ohio city court says it will only accept new case filings from people who bring their own paper.”

Yeesh. The Columbus Dispatch reports:

A Morrow County court is going BYOP: Bring your own paper.

The Municipal Court that handles civil, small claims, criminal and traffic cases won’t accept new case filings starting Monday because it’s almost out of supplies and has no money to re-order.

The court has just enough paper to handle hearing notices and other documents for pending cases, but not new ones, Judge Lee W. McClelland said.

“Basically, unless they want to provide paper, we can’t process anything,” he said.

The judge sent a memo explaining the problem to local government and law-enforcement officials this week. He said that the county hasn’t yet paid the bill for basic supplies the court ordered and had delivered back in November. The purchase orders sent to the county auditor were returned, “indicating that no funds were available to pay them,” McClelland wrote.

Morrow County Sheriff Steven R. Brenneman received McClelland’s memo. He doesn’t understand how a court can refuse to take legal charges.

“We are going to do our job, and if we make arrests or issue citations, we’re taking them to the court,” Brenneman said. “Whether the court accepts them, I guess that’s something they’re going to have to deal with.”

McClelland also announced that his court, like many other Morrow County government offices hit with budget cuts, will switch to a four-day workweek and be closed on Friday starting the week of March 30. The court will operate 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Thursday.

Several agencies already have volunteered to bring in enough paper to process their own Municipal Court filings, McClelland said.

“They’re still going to issue tickets, and the court is going to be open to take pleas,” McClelland said. …

Share
Posted in Justice?, Legal Profession | Comments Off on “An Ohio city court says it will only accept new case filings from people who bring their own paper.”

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Publishes New Report on Human Trafficking

From StopVAW:

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)  has just completed a new report on human trafficking. The report begins with a global overview on legislation, the criminal justice response, trafficking patterns, intra-and-international flows, and monitoring. The UNODC also highlights the situation of a variety of countries from all regions of the world.

The report found that sex trafficking accounts for 79% of all forms of human trafficking, with forced labor the second most common at 18%. Worldwide, 20% of victims are children, but the number increases to almost 100% in some countries.

Although the number of states signing onto the UN Protocol against Trafficking in Persons and convictions against traffickers are increasing overall, two out of five countries included in the report have not had even one conviction.

At the report  release, the Executive Director of UNODC, Antonio Maria Costa said,”many governments are still in denial. There is even neglect when it comes to either reporting on, or prosecuting cases of human trafficking.”(Cited in: UNODC Report on Human Trafficking Exposes Modern Form of Slavery, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, last accessed 16 February 2009.)

A full copy of the report is available here (PDF, 292 pages).

Compiled from: UNODC Report on Human Trafficking Exposes Modern Form of Slavery, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, last accessed 16 February 2009; Global Report On Trafficking In Persons: Executive Summary, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, February 2009 (PDF, 9 pages).

Share
Posted in Academia | Comments Off on United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Publishes New Report on Human Trafficking

U.N. BIBLIOGRAPHY ON TRAFFICKING IN HUMAN BEINGS

Here.

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Coerced Sex, Feminism and Law | Comments Off on U.N. BIBLIOGRAPHY ON TRAFFICKING IN HUMAN BEINGS

Polikoff Nominated for Judy Grahn Award

Feminist Law Prof Nancy Polikoff (American) has been nominated for The Publishing Triangle’s Judy Grahn Award for Lesbian Nonfiction for her excellent book Beyond Straight and Gay Marriage.  The Judy Grahn Award honors the American writer, cultural theorist and activist (b. 1940) best known for  The Common Woman  (1969) and  Another Mother Tongue  (rev. ed., 1984). It recognizes the best nonfiction book of the year affecting lesbian lives.  

The winner will be announced on May 7 at the    Tishman Auditorium of the New School for Social Research in New York City.  

This is a great and well-deserved honor for Nancy’s work!

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Legal Scholarship, LGBT Rights | 1 Comment

Childbirth Song

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer, Yep, sarcasm. | Comments Off on Childbirth Song

null

Via.

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer, Legal Profession | Comments Off on

“J’accuse, or, I got yer class warfare right here, pal.”

Yes, another great post by Historiann!

Share
Posted in Feminist Blogs Of Interest, Women and Economics | Comments Off on “J’accuse, or, I got yer class warfare right here, pal.”

Kimberly D. Phillips, “My Body is a Sacred ‘Garment’: Does the First Amendment Protect Clothing Designers Who Work Naked?”

The abstract:

A Warner Brothers employee, Ms. Lyle, sued the writers of the TV program, Friends, for sexual harassment because the writers used sexually explicit coarse and vulgar language during their script writing sessions for the show. In the Supreme Court of California’s majority opinion regarding the suit (Lyle v. Warners Brothers Television Productions, 132 P.3d 211 (2006)), the majority held, among other things, that the plaintiff’s sexual harassment claims were not supported by the facts because the discussions of the Friends writers were not “aimed at Lyle or other female employees” or “severe or pervasive” enough to constitute sexual harassment.

Further, the court concluded that the Friends writers did not treat women differently from men; both sexes were on the receiving end of the writer’s crude jokes, comments, drawings, and behavior. Basically, the court considered the sexual conduct as a necessary part of the Friends writers’ job; because the Friends show was a sexually explicit TV program, writing for the show was necessarily going to involve the writers discussing sexual words and conduct, including their own sexual conduct.

While the majority declined to consider whether the writers’ crass words and conduct was protected by the First Amendment right of free speech; the concurring opinion tackled this issue with vigor, stating the case was more about free speech rights than sexual harassment. The judge in the concurring opinion opined that creative speech, used to create an employer’s constitutionally protected work product (i.e., books, movies, television programs), is protected under the First Amendment, and can never create a hostile work environment unless the speech was directed at the plaintiff. If the speech was directed “at or about” the plaintiff, then the offending speech is not protected as creative expression under the First Amendment, and the court could then analyze whether such offending speech was sexually harassing speech.

In a more recent case, Mary Nelson, among several other female employees, filed suit against, Dov Charney, the founder of the avant guard clothing manufacturing company, American Apparel, claiming that he sexual harassed her during her employment with his company. Mr. Charney and his attorney subsequently argued, during media interviews, that his vulgar and coarse language (as well as his meetings with the plaintiff in his underwear) would be protected by the First Amendment as creative speech used to create a constitutionally protected work product (fashion instead of TV scripts) via the Lyle v. Warner Brothers Television Productions case.

Nelson’s case against Charney eventually went to arbitration. Accordingly, this paper will examine whether the First Amendment creative speech/expression protection, articulated by the court in the concurring opinion of Lyle, would have protected Charney’s actions and speech had Nelson’s case against Charney not been arbitrated.

Downloadable here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminism and the Workplace, Feminist Legal Scholarship | Comments Off on Kimberly D. Phillips, “My Body is a Sacred ‘Garment’: Does the First Amendment Protect Clothing Designers Who Work Naked?”

A Farewell to the L-Word

Here, at Feminist Spectator.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, LGBT Rights | Comments Off on A Farewell to the L-Word

Not Very Discriminating?: Court of Appeals Of Michigan Erroneously Affirms Summary Judgment Order In Employment Discrimination/Retaliation Appeal

The recent opinion of the Court of Appeals of Michigan in Syrowatka v. County of Washtenaw, 2009 WL 529213 (Mich.App. 2009), affirmed a trial court order granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s claims for employment discrimination and retaliation under the Michigan Civil Rights Act.  It is my contention that the opinion was horribly misguided.

Unfortunately, the  Syrowatka opinion is short on facts, but I think that we can glean from it that the plaintiff, Lesia Syrowatka, worked as a business analyst and then as a records supervisor for the Washtenaw County Sheriff’s Office  before her employment was terminated in 2003 as part of a budget reduction plan.  Syrowatka claimed, however, that her firing was based upon her gender and complaints that she raised about unequal pay for women. As support for these claims, she alleged that  Undersheriff Herbert Mahony made “various statements” expressing gender discrimination.  For instance, Syrowatka

testified that she met with Mahony in the fall of 2001 to ask him about parity for the women who worked in the records office and to inquire about why she was brought in at a lower pay step than the commanders. [Syrowatka] testified that Mahony responded by telling her that women will always be paid less than men. [Syrowatka] admitted, however, that other women in the records office were making more than some of the women and that there were also men who were making more money. [Syrowatka] conceded that she wanted everyone to earn the same pay and that the problem with pay disparity did not exclusively involve pay differences between men and women, but also differences between what women in the same department earned. Nonetheless, [Syrowatka] believed that there was a pay disparity that was partially gender-based. She also testified that she submitted something in writing to defendant related to the pay disparity.                

Syrowatka also “testified that Mahony referred to her as an ’emotional female,'” although the opinion does not indicate in what context(s) he made that statement. Continue reading

Share
Posted in Courts and the Judiciary, Feminism and the Workplace | 1 Comment

“Women Are Heroes”

Interesting account of a global photography project here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Sisters In Other Nations | Comments Off on “Women Are Heroes”

Old-Timey Sexism

t2235-med

-Tony Varona

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on Old-Timey Sexism

The Choice Quandary – A Response to Bridget Crawford

Imputing a lack of agency to sentient beings of whatever type makes for a difficult row to hoe.   In the animal community there are many who feel strongly that domesticating animals is ethically wrong since it involves involuntary servitude.   Thus, the practice should be phased out.   Since most animals bred for a domestic existence could not exist on their own, this would, of course, mean phasing out the animals as well.

This position raises all sorts of interesting issues.   For example, the same Marxian critique that Professor Crawford cites could cut either way.   One might argue that choosing to portray companion animals as involuntarily enslaved reflects an androcentric conception of class relationships and denies the domestic animals their right to exist.   One could conversely maintain, that the act of keeping the animals reflects a lack of class consciousness borne of false consciousness.

More quandaries present themselves.   Abolitionists might say that in addition to the ethical problems inherent to domestication, practical reality also militates for the institution’s demise.   Billions of animals suffer and die each year in agriculture and countless millions of unwanted companion animals die in shelters.   This wholesale slaughter should not stand.   And, since it results directly from our misguided and exploitive relationship with animals, if the relationship goes, so too will the exploitation.

The counter-argument might propose that exploitation need not be inherent. As Michael Pollan among others has argued, there exists a potentially symbiotic relationship between humans and domestic animals.   In other words, animals and humans co-evolved into mutual reliance.   One might further note that exploitation is subjective in its very essence.   If one doesn’t feel exploited, how can one be exploited?   And that leads to the query: what do the animals feel about their situation?   Putting aside the factory farm situation where it would be hard for any rational person to argue that the animals benefit or enjoy their torment, we cannot know what the animals feel.   It’s the dilemma of Wittgenstein’s lion: If the lion could talk, we could not understand him.

So what do we do?   I think about this stuff all the time but feel less certain every day about the bounding principles of the discourse.   In other words, I do not know what is right.   However, I remain confident that certain things are wrong.   Factory farming, vivisection, gratuitous cruelty, etc.   Maybe we could agree to get rid of the obviously wrong while continuing to talk about the not so obvious stuff.

All this by way of circling back to the high heels issue.   Is there choice there?   I feel like there is because there exists both the potential for choice and the language through which to express it.   I say this cognizant though I am of the argument that language is itself a tool of the oppressor and thus inherently constrains choice.   Still, I maintain that — though imperfect — language in its present form can express a feminist perspective.   Not so for the lion’s perspective.   Or the chicken’s.   Or that of   any other non-human.   And that’s what makes speaking for the voiceless so darn hard.

– David Cassuto

(cross-post from Animal Blawg)

Share
Posted in Feminism and Animal Law | Comments Off on The Choice Quandary – A Response to Bridget Crawford

False Consciousness Theory in Feminism and Anti-Speciesism

In recent weeks, I have had a series of engaging conversations with my colleague, friend and Feminist Law Prof  David Cassuto, an animal law theorist.  I admit to knowing little about animal law.  I nevertheless am fascinated by what I perceive (at least initially) as  similarities in the themes and methodologies of feminist theorists and anti-speciesist theorists.  

Both feminist legal theory and anti-speciesism make use of the concept of the Marxian false consciousness, described here by Engels in his 1893 Letter to Mehring:

Ideology is a process accomplished by the so-called thinker consciously indeed but with a false consciousness. The real motives impelling him remain unknown to him, otherwise it would not be an ideological process at all. Hence he imagines false or apparent motives. Because it is a process of thought he derives both its form and its content from pure thought, either his own or his predecessors’.

From the feminist perspective, the false consciousness critique is typically use to devalue (as”inauthentic”) a choice made by another.     The example I use in teaching this concept to students is a woman’s statement”I like wearing high heels.”   Her feminist critic might say,”You think wearing high heels is your personal preference, but you have been conditioned by an androcentric society to want to wear high heels, because that is what men like and benefit from.”   (Note to self: If CBS News broadcasts”Tips on How to Navigate High Heels”here, shouldn’t this be an indication that it heels aren’t functional footwear?  See related posts by Ann here, here and here.)

Between and among anti-speciesists, the imagined exchange might go something like this.  

Person A:”I choose to have a fish as a pet and I think there is nothing wrong with that because it makes me happy and it makes the fish happy.”  

Person B:   “You think it is ok to have a fish as a pet because society has conditioned you to think that it makes you happy and makes the fish happy, because that is what a speciesist society likes and benefits from.”

The argument, in both feminism and anti-speciesism, is that when the chooser chooses a pre-chosen choice, that choice is less authentic, valid, worthy of respect than a choice that is not pre-chosen.   But if we embrace the implications of the Marxist critique, then there shouldn’t be any intellectual room for an unchosen choice.   In other words, the critique itself arises out of culturally constrained circumstances that shape the critique.   The self-righteous tone  of the false consciousness claim is especially problematic for feminists, for whom choice is a dominant value.   Choice can double back.   If I chose my choice, even if my choice was pre-chosen, the choosing is what matters, not the choice.   Yikes.

-Bridget Crawford

(cross-post from Animal Blawg)

Share
Posted in Feminism and Animal Law | 8 Comments

Criminal Charges for an Accused Cyberbully

Raphael Golb has been charged with one felony count of second-degree identity theft, plus four misdemeanor charges related to his online sock-puppeting and bullying activities.

null

The Chron reports:

The son of a prominent Dead Sea Scrolls scholar was arrested on Thursday on charges of identity theft, criminal impersonation, and aggravated harassment relating to a complex online campaign designed to smear opponents of his father’s theories.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office alleged in a statement released on Thursday that Raphael Haim Golb, 49, son of Norman Golb, a professor of Jewish history and civilization at the University of Chicago, used dozens of Internet aliases to “influence and affect debate on the Dead Sea Scrolls” and “harass Dead Sea Scrolls scholars who disagree with his viewpoint.”

Raphael Golb’s alleged base of operations was the Bobst Library at New York University, one block away from his home. According to the district attorney’s office, Mr. Golb acquired access to the university’s computers by virtue of his status as an alumnus and a donor to the university’s library fund.

The office contends that Mr. Golb impersonated and harassed Lawrence H. Schiffman, a professor of Hebrew and Judaic studies at New York University and a leading Dead Sea Scrolls scholar, by creating an e-mail account in Mr. Schiffman’s name and using it to send e-mail messages in which the sender admitted to plagiarism.

Mr. Golb also allegedly supplemented that campaign to discredit Mr. Schiffman by sending letters to university personnel accusing Mr. Schiffman of plagiarism, and by creating blogs that made similar accusations. Two blogs, each with a single entry, accuse Mr. Schiffman of plagiarizing articles written by Norman Golb in the 1980s.

As to how the identity of the accused cyberbully was uncovered:
Continue reading

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminism and Technology, Sociolinguistics | Comments Off on Criminal Charges for an Accused Cyberbully

“Corrective Rape” of Lesbians in South Africa

The Guardian had a chilling story yesterday about what is horribly being called “corrective rape” in South Africa.   The details are very tough to read, but the story is important to know about:

The partially clothed body of Eudy Simelane, former star of South Africa‘s acclaimed Banyana Banyana national female football squad, was found in a creek in a park in Kwa Thema, on the outskirts of Johannesburg. Simelane had been gang-raped and brutally beaten before being stabbed 25 times in the face, chest and legs. As well as being one of South Africa’s best-known female footballers, Simelane was a voracious equality rights campaigner and one of the first women to live openly as a lesbian in Kwa Thema.

Her brutal murder took place last April, and since then a tide of violence against lesbian women in South Africa has continued to rise. Human rights campaigners say it is characterised by what they call “corrective rape” committed by men behind the guise of trying to “cure” lesbian women of their sexual orientation.

Now, a report by the international NGO ActionAid, backed by the South African Human Rights Commission, condemns the culture of impunity around these crimes, which it says are going unrecognised by the state and unpunished by the legal system.

The report calls for South Africa’s criminal justice system to recognise hate crimes, including corrective rape, as a separate crime category. It argues this will force police to take action over the rising violence and ensure the resources and support is provided to those trying to bring perpetrators to justice.

– David S. Cohen

Share
Posted in LGBT Rights, Sisters In Other Nations | Comments Off on “Corrective Rape” of Lesbians in South Africa

New Female Condom Approved by FDA

Earlier this week, the FDA approved a “second-generation” female condom.  Health Day News reported on it  here:

The Female Health Co.‘s FC2 Female Condom has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the company said Wednesday. The product helps protect women against pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

The second-generation condom is similar in design and performance to the FC1, except that it is made of a synthetic rubber called nitrile and costs about 30 percent less, the company said. The FC1 was approved in 1993.

The FDA approval of the FC2 will allow the U.S. Agency for International Development to distribute the condoms via global HIV/AIDS programs, the  Associated Press  reported.

The first-generation FC1 has been distributed by United Nations agencies in 142 countries, the wire service said.

A fact sheet on female condoms is here.  The new female condoms are less expensive and made of a different material than the “first generation” female condoms.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Women's Health | Comments Off on New Female Condom Approved by FDA

Anthropornography

The design firm  Süperfad  has created an unusual ad for  Durex condoms, a brand of  SSL International plc.   The video – one of the”virals”on You Tube – shows pastel-colored condom balloon animals simulating all sorts of human-like sexual activity.   The still shot (above) hardly hints at the video’s content.   The video link is  here.   The video is not one to watch at work.   Don’t watch it if you’re easily embarrassed.   And don’t watch if you are offended at the possibility of others finding humor in balloons made to look like animals made to act like copulating humans.

I saw the video after a friend posted it to his Facebook page, with the comment that it was one of the”most hilarious”condom ads he had ever seen.   I was at home – alone – when I blithely clicked”play”to watch the video.   I immediately started having nervous laughter.   The sounds, the images, the”Get It On”slogan – all funny, right?   I’m not so sure now.   At one level, my nervous laughter expressed,”I can’t believe someone was brash enough to make an ad like this.”   At another level, my nervous laughter expressed embarrassment, as in,”I can’t believe I’m watching this.”   And at still another level, my nervous laughter expressed some discomfort with what I’ll call anthropornography.

If anthropomorphism is the attribution of human characteristics, behaviors and feelings to inanimate objects or animals, and pornography is graphic sexual imagery intended to arouse (thanks,  American Heritage), then anthropornography is the depiction of inanimate objects or animals engaged in human-like sexual behavior, where the primary purpose of the depiction is the viewer’s arousal.

Why do people find the ad hilarious?   I’m not sure.   I’m having nervous laughter right now.

-Bridget Crawford

(cross-post  from Animal Blawg)

Share
Posted in Feminism and Animal Law | Comments Off on Anthropornography

Buy Smaller Sized Eggs?

null

“Buying large eggs is cruel, shoppers told”:

It might make a larger omelette but a bigger egg isn’t necessarily a better one : and it certainly doesn’t make the hen that laid it very happy.

That is the view of the chairman of the British Free Range Producers’ Association, who says that if you want to be kind to hens, you should eat medium, not large or very large, eggs.

“It can be painful to the hen to lay a larger egg,”Tom Vesey, who keeps 16,000 hens on 45 acres at Dingestow, Monmouth, told The Times.”There is also the stress, which is a big problem as it takes more out of hens to lay large eggs. It would be kinder to eat smaller eggs. Whenever I go to the Continent people eat medium-sized eggs yet here the housewife seems to be wedded to large eggs.”

He also suggests people would do better eating a breakfast of two medium-sized eggs rather than one large one.”I prefer medium eggs,”he said. They taste better, are less watery and don’t run off the plate.”Mr Vesey, who says he is determined to change egg-shopping habits, insists that farmers only produce large eggs because they receive more for them from supermarkets. The average price for 12 free-range eggs paid to a farmer is 77p for medium, £1 for large and just over £1 for very large.

Mr Vesey has been criticised by industry chiefs for raising the issue in The Grocer but animal welfare experts say his argument is valid. Phil Brooke, of Compassion in World Farming, said:”Selectively breeding hens for high productivity, whether larger eggs or larger numbers of eggs, can cause a range of problems such as osteoporosis, bone breakage and prolapse. We need to breed and feed hens so that they can produce eggs without risk to their health or welfare.”…

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | 1 Comment

“The Powder and the Glory”

null

PBS will soon air a documentary about the cosmetics industry:

The Powder & the Glory tells the story of two of the first highly successful women entrepreneurs in America, Elizabeth Arden and Helena Rubinstein. One hundred years ago these women immigrated to the United States and, starting with next to nothing, created what is today the $150 billion global health and beauty industry.

Although they lived and worked only blocks apart in New York for over 50 years, the two women, by design, never met! Their competition drove them both to great creativity and success.

Their competing companies defined the business of beauty, making cosmetics both newly respectable and, finally, indispensable. Along the way they developed many advertising and marketing techniques that became part of the business landscape, and they themselves became household names, cultural icons, and two of the world’s wealthiest women.

They both influenced and were influenced by the major movements of the day in art, style, and women’s roles:

* When the close-up became a staple in the movies, makeup became au courant
* Their salons were showcases of modernist design
* They helped usher in the “new woman” of the 1920s–young, independent, and in every way equal to men
* Throughout their careers, they supported women’s empowerment and rights

Their accomplishments continue to be relevant to both women and men in business today. This is an inspiring story about perseverance, genuine creativity, and continual reinvention to meet the changing needs and demands of consumers and society. When they started their businesses, makeup was used mostly by prostitutes and performers, and businesses were run mostly by men. They changed all that, and they transformed us.

I’m a lot less enthusiastic about make-up than the filmmakers, but it sounds interesting to watch.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on “The Powder and the Glory”

South Carolina House considering “sovereignty” legislation that its author says “walks right up to the door of secession.”

The text of the bill, reprinted below in italics, is available here.

A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO AFFIRM THE RIGHTS OF ALL STATES INCLUDING SOUTH CAROLINA BASED ON THE PROVISIONS OF THE NINTH AND TENTH AMENDMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.

Whereas, the South Carolina General Assembly declares that the people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State, and shall exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right pertaining thereto, which is not expressly delegated by them to the United States of America in the congress assembled; and

Whereas, some states when ratifying the Constitution for the United States of America recommended as a change, “that it be explicitly declared that all powers not expressly and particularly delegated by the aforesaid are reserved to the several states to be by them exercised”; and

Whereas, these recommended changes were incorporated as the Ninth Amendment, where the enumeration of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, and as the Tenth Amendment, where the powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people; and

Whereas, the several states of the United States of America, through the Constitution and the amendments thereto, constituted a general government for special purposes and delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving each state to itself, the residuary right to their own self government. Now, therefore,

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:

That the General Assembly of South Carolina, based on the above principles and provisions, hereby declares by this resolution, that any act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States, or Judicial Order by the federal courts which assumes a power not delegated to the government of the United States of America by the Constitution and which serves to diminish the liberty of any of the several states or their citizens shall abridge the Constitution. The General Assembly further declares that acts which would cause such an abridgment include, but are not limited to:

(1)     establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the states comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that state;

(2)     requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law;

(3)     requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of eighteen other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law;

(4)     surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government;

(5)     any act regarding religion, further limitations on freedom of political speech, or further limitations on freedom of the press; and

(6)     further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition.

Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the United States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and each member of the South Carolina Congressional Delegation.

It was reported favorably out of committee two days ago. An interview with the sponsor, Rep. Michael Pitts, is below:

Via.

As this blogger asks: “What’s so important about right now and about the 9th and 10th amendments that we need to drop everything and have a concurrent resolution about how South Carolina (on behalf of every other state that is too busy) affirms ‘the rights of all states … based on the provisions of the ninth and tenth amendments to the United States Constitution.’?” The same post observes:

For how long have they been planning this concurrent resolution? Why are they passing it now? Aahhh. They’re having a backlash against President Barack Obama. They think he’s a socialist who’s going to tell them what to do, and they want everybody to know that they do not support anything that President Barack Obama wants to do.

Sure, they’ll take the stimulus money. Our state legislators will take money from anybody and everybody who’ll give it to them. But they’re not going to say thank you. In fact, they’re apparently in a big hurry to say the opposite. Forcefully but quietly, so that everyone who they want to know knows and everyone who they don’t want to know has no idea.

South Carolina has a lot of great people, and a lot of terrific things to offer, but some very strange things happen here too.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, South Carolina | 3 Comments

Water Bottle Fountain

null

Photo taken at   the College of Charleston in Charleston, S.C. by Joan Perry.

Share
Posted in Feminism and the Environment, South Carolina | 1 Comment

“A record number of workers filed federal job discrimination complaints last year, with claims of unfair treatment by older employees seeing the largest increase.”

From Yahoo News:

… The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said Wednesday it received more than 95,000 discrimination claims during the 2008 fiscal year, a 15 percent increase over the previous year.

Charges of age discrimination jumped by 28.7 percent : with 24,582 claims : while allegations based on race, sex and retaliation also surged to record highs.

“The EEOC has not seen an increase of this magnitude in charges filed for many years,” said the commission’s acting chairman, Stuart J. Ishimaru. “While we do not know if it signifies a trend, it is clear that employment discrimination remains a persistent problem.”

With the economy in recession and companies shedding millions of jobs, labor experts suggested that older workers may have suffered a disproportionate hit. Federal laws barring age discrimination cover workers 40 and older.

“The economy is in meltdown mode and from the point of view of the company, if you lay off an older worker, the cost savings to you are much greater than if you lay off a younger worker,” said Eileen Appelbaum, visiting scholar at the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Allegations of race discrimination remained the most frequently filed complaint, accounting for 33,937 charges, or 35.6 percent of all filings last year. That was an 11 percent jump from 2007.

Retaliation was the second most frequent complaint, up 22.6 percent from the previous year. Sex discrimination complaints rose by 14 percent.

The agency says the overall surge could be due to a variety of factors, including economic conditions, increased diversity in the work force, greater employee awareness of the law and the EEOC’s focus on systemic litigation.

And the number of claims could rise even further, said EEOC spokesman David Grinberg. Since the current data is through Sept. 30 of last year, the numbers may not fully reflect the impact of the recession.

Once a claim is filed, the EEOC has 180 days to investigate. If the agency finds merit, officials usually try to reach a voluntary settlement with the employer. If no settlement is reached, the EEOC or the worker may file a separate lawsuit.

In fiscal 2008, the EEOC filed 290 lawsuits, resolved 339 lawsuits and resolved 81,081 private sector charges.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminism and the Workplace, Women and Economics | 1 Comment

“Cable, Satellite Providers to Push Pay-per-View Porn”

So reports Advertising Age in an article with the subtitle “Huge Profit Potential in Down Economy Prompts Promotional Efforts.” It suggests that “professional” pornography will soon become cheaper and easier to access, and even more ubiquitous generally.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Coerced Sex, Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on “Cable, Satellite Providers to Push Pay-per-View Porn”

CFP: Being a Mother Academic

From the FLP mailbox, this call for contributions to an edited volume:  

Demeter Press is seeking submissions for an edited anthology, edited by Andrea  O’Reilly and Lynn O’Brien Hallstein, to be published in 2011. The idea for the  collection emerges from recent conversations at the ARM and Brandeis symposium,  “The Maternal Wall in Academe: Academic Mothers and Strategies of Resistance and  Empowerment.”   This volume will explore academic mothers’ experiences from both  narrative and theory. While previous collections such as PhD Mama and Parenting  and Professing examined being a mother academic from narrative or”lived  experience”and others, Journal of the Association for Research on Mothering  issue on Mothers in the Academe, explored mother academics’ experiences from a  theoretical perspective, this is the first collection to do so incorporating  both narrative and theory. The anthology will explore how both research and  narrative can inform contemporary understandings of academic motherhood,  particularly in regard to strategies of resistance and empowerment.

Proposals should strengthen the dialogue among academic motherhood, intellectual  ideas, and personal narrative. The anthology will explore the topic of Being a  Mother Academic from a variety of perspectives and disciplines. We welcome  submissions from scholars across disciplines.   Articles will be 15-18 pages  long, while narratives will be 8-12 pages long.

Topics can include (but are not limited to):  the maternal wall, “opting out”, mentoring and modeling, being a professor  mother, work-life balance, negotiating or resisting the maternal wall, single  mothers and academic work, graduate student mothering, being a mother on the  tenure track, being a pregnant professor, maternity leave and academic  mothering, poverty and academic mothering, juggling mothering and academic  expectations, intersections between feminism and academic mothering, being an  academic artist and mothering, race and academic mothering, academic job  searches and mothering, teaching and mothering, sexuality and academic  mothering, male organizing principles and academic mothering, the academic  schedule and mothering, fertility and academic mothering, challenging  assumptions about academic mothers, ethics and academic mothering,”having it  all”as academic mothers, adoption and academic mothering,   networking,  strategies for surviving academic mothering, class and academic mothering, race  and academic mother mentors, social reproduction and academic mothering,motherhood closet; being out as a mother, second/third shift in the home,academic culture and mothering, maternal pedagogy, myth of ideal worker/ideal  mother, intensive mothering and academe,   unboundedness of mother work and  academic work, childcare, fathering,   trailing spouses,   academic couples,  biological clock, university policies and mothering, timing and spacing of  children,   perceptions of mothers in academe, discrimination avoidance,  discrimination against mothers in academe, motherhood penalty,”price of  motherhood”, adjunct work, benefits of motherhood on teaching and research.

Abstracts due by June 01, 2009.  Final accepted submissions due June 01, 2010.

Potential contributors interested in submitting abstracts to this edited volume are invited to  submit proposals to Lynn O’Brien Hallstein at lhallst@bu.edu  and Andrea O’Reilly at aoreilly@yorku.ca

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminism and Families | 1 Comment

Freeman’s Masculinist Claim

Charles Freeman, Obama’s choice to lead the National Intelligence Council, gave an interview to NPR today.  Asked whether he was surprised at the opposition to his (potential) leadership, Freeman replied, “Public service isn’t for sissies.”  

Separate and apart from the question of whether Freeman was the right person for the job, I was disappointed to hear him describe “public service” (and the criticism that comes with it) as the exclusive domain of the “manly man.”  

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Freeman’s Masculinist Claim

CFP: “Feminism, Law, and Masculinity,” September 11 – 12, 2009 Emory U. School of Law

The Feminism and Legal Theory Project is preparing for a conference on Feminism, Law, and Masculinity. This workshop will explore the relevance of masculinities studies to feminist legal theory and activism. We have long struggled, both within and without the academy, to understand how law defines the feminine by articulating, constructing, and regulating women and the female body. Similarly, and more broadly, feminisms have focused on the place of gender in the construction of social relations that too often fail to protect the interests of women. This work notwithstanding, the place of masculinity has received relatively little attention. We hope to facilitate social and cultural resistance to assertions of hyper-masculinity, particularly those that arise in response to feminism itself.

WORKSHOP ORGANIZERS
Martha Albertson Fineman
Emory University School of Law
Michael O. Thomson
Keele University Law School

SUBMISSIONS PROCEDURE
Please email a paper proposal of several paragraphs length by March 30, 2009 to:
mfineman@law.emory.edu
m.o.thomson@law.keele.ac.uk
*********
The organizers will duplicate and distribute working paper drafts prior to the Workshop. Selected papers will be due August 12, 2009.

WORKSHOP DETAILS
The Workshop begins on Friday afternoon at 4 PM with a panel discussion in Room G575 of the Law School, 1301 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA. There will be a reception and dinner that evening in the Atrium on the 3rd floor of the Law School. All interested participants are welcome. Saturday there will be two or three panel presentations, ending at 5 PM.

More info here!

Share
Posted in Call for Papers or Participation, Feminists in Academia, From the FLP mailbox, Upcoming Conferences | Comments Off on CFP: “Feminism, Law, and Masculinity,” September 11 – 12, 2009 Emory U. School of Law

Paralysis and Child Pornography?

Doug Berman at the Sentencing Law and Policy blog has two posts about cases in which defendants in child pornography cases received lesser sentences because they were paralyzed, here and here. Dan Filler has some related comments here at The Faculty Lounge. There seems to be an underlying assumption that paralysis means the offenders pose no ongoing danger to children. But does it? It may mean that the offenders are less likely to engage in physically coercive sex with children. But it wouldn’t stop them from continuing to provide a market for child pornography, which incentivizes its creation and distribution. And it wouldn’t stop them from trying to manipulate children into sexual activity. And it wouldn’t prevent the man who admitted to who admitted to secretly videotaping young girls who used his bathroom from doing so again. The articles Berman links to suggest that the real reason the prosecutors do not want to imprison these men is that providing necessary medical care would be expensive.

–Ann Bartow

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

Title IX Blog Twofer

This post talks about how after one university eliminated football for financial reasons, it cut women’s sports as well to achieve “equality” of opportunity.

This post – well, here’s an excerpt:

… In the early 80s [in Philadelphia], a girls’ basketball coach, Lurline Jones, said that girls should have a city championship like the boys who had been playing a city championship since 1938. (The championship was a match-up between the Catholic League and the Public League.) So Jones filed a Title IX lawsuit charging discrimination against the girls who wanted to play their own championship. The archdiocese of Philadelphia decided just to cancel the City Title championships rather than fighting the lawsuit or hosting a championship for the girls.

Let me reiterate–the archdiocese cancelled the boys’ championships. But Jones got all the crap. …

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminism and Law | Comments Off on Title IX Blog Twofer

Ariel Levy Update

Here, at Historiann.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | 1 Comment

Case and Nussbaum v. Posner

Listen to a podcast of critiques of Posnerian jurisprudence by U. of Chicago law professors Mary Ann Case and Martha Nussbaum right here, with a response by Posner. Neither Case nor Nussbaum drops the f-bomb, but the prospect must have been tempting.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminism and Law, Feminist Legal Scholarship, Feminists in Academia | Comments Off on Case and Nussbaum v. Posner