The World Economic Forum has released its annual Global Gender Gap Report.

From Jezebel:

The World Economic Forum has released its annual Global Gender Gap Report and everyone from Matthew Kirdahy at Forbes to Kate Pickert at Time to Laura MacInnis at Reuters are all over the unsurprising news that the Scandanavian countries do better than the U.S. at gender equity : and the surprising news is that the Philippines, Lesotho (pictured), Mozambique and Moldova do too.

Read more analysis about the strengths and weaknesses of the report via the internall inks above, and here.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Sisters In Other Nations, Women and Economics | Comments Off on The World Economic Forum has released its annual Global Gender Gap Report.

Law Student Writing Competition – National Association of Pregnant Women

From the FLP mailbox, this announcement of the NAPW Law Student Writing Competition:

Issues of concern to pregnant and birthing women have often been missing from discussion in law school courses and among reproductive rights activists. Thanks in large part to public education efforts by writers, filmmakers, and community activists, there is an unprecedented amount of attention and momentum surrounding the rights of pregnant and birthing women. To advance these efforts further, NAPW has developed two writing contests. NAPW and numerous Co-Sponsors and Supporters (to be announced) hope that these contests will leverage the enthusiasm and creativity of a new generation of feminist legal scholars and spark critical thinking about the need to address childbirth and birthing rights as constitutional and human rights issues.

The first contest asks for a critical analysis of the absence of birthing rights issues from gender discrimination and feminist jurisprudence textbooks and curricula (in fact, none of the top three casebooks used in law school courses dedicated to gender and the law address the issue of childbirth or midwifery).

The second contest asks students to develop legal theories that can be used to challenge policies banning pregnant women from having a vaginal birth after a prior caesarean section (VBAC). This topic will encourage students to address a growing problem that has received very little attention from the feminist legal community both in academia and within the leading women’s rights legal advocacy organizations.

More info available here.   There is a $1,000 first prize.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Law Teaching, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Law Student Writing Competition – National Association of Pregnant Women

Rights of domestic violence abusers to own guns being considered by the Supreme Court

The case is U.S. v. Hayes, and the Court has been asked to rule on a Justice Department appeal asking for clarification of the federal law that criminalizes gun possession for people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence. Via Sentencing Law and Policy, here are the facts:

In 1994, [Randy Edward] Hayes pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor battery offense under West Virginia law, in the magistrate court of Marion County, West Virginia (the “1994 State Offense”). The victim of the 1994 State Offense was Hayes’s then wife, Mary Ann (now Mary Carnes), with whom he lived and had a child. As a result of the 1994 State Offense, Hayes was sentenced to a year of probation.

Ten years later, on July 25, 2004, the authorities in Marion County were summoned to Hayes’s home in response to a domestic violence 911 call. When police officers arrived at Hayes’s home, he consented to a search thereof, and a Winchester rifle was discovered. Hayes was arrested and, on January 4, 2005, indicted in federal court on three charges of possessing firearms after having been convicted of an MCDV, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 922(g)(9) and 924(a)(2).

More details, and links to the pleadings and amicus briefs here.

The L.A. Times reported on Monday’s oral argument as follows:

Congress in 1996 sought to strengthen the laws against domestic violence. Before, only persons convicted of violent felonies in such situations lost their rights to own a gun. Going a step further, lawmakers adopted an amendment to take away gun rights for those who had a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” on their records.

Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.), the amendment’s sponsor, said he was closing a loophole. In domestic violence cases, local prosecutors often agree to have defendants plead guilty to a misdemeanor assault or battery, which usually calls for less than a year in jail, he said.

“There is no reason for someone who beats their wives or abuses their children to own a gun. When you combine wife beaters and guns, the end result is more death,” Lautenberg said in the Senate before the amendment was enacted.

But last year, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia cast doubt on the law’s reach. Its judges decided the federal gun ban did not cover misdemeanor convictions involving assault or battery at home. Instead, it said the federal ban applied only to those convicted under a state’s domestic violence law.

That would make the federal gun law “a dead letter in two-thirds of the states,” according to the government’s lawyer. Saharsky said most states do not have misdemeanor laws specifically targeting domestic violence.

Justice Antonin Scalia was unswayed by that argument. “People are governed by the law that is passed, not by the law that Congress intended to pass,” he said. He and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said the law as written appeared to apply only to domestic violence measures, not the more common laws against assault and battery.

Scalia wrote the 5-4 opinion in June which held for the first time that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual’s right to have a gun. He said then that the decision did not shield criminals who committed serious crimes with a gun.

But during Monday’s argument, Scalia said possessing a gun was “lawful conduct,” and a wife-beating charge lodged against a West Virginia man was “not that serious an offense.”

The government lawyer shot back that the defendant “hit his wife all around the face until it swelled out, kicked her all around her body, kicked her in the ribs. . . . ”

“Then he should have been charged with a felony,” Scalia interjected, “but he wasn’t.”

That article also notes that The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence “said a ruling for Hayes ‘could re-arm thousands of convicted domestic violence abusers,’ and noted that about 14% “of all police officer deaths occur during a response to domestic violence calls.   If re-arming people convicted of domestic abuse puts police in danger, maybe some of the Justices will at least find that compelling. Scalia doesn’t seem to worry much about the actual victims, as reflected by the bolded portion of the excerpt above. Every year between 1,000 and 1,600 women die at the hands of their male partners. These states and the Brady Center’s view of the case can be found here.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Feminism and Law | Comments Off on Rights of domestic violence abusers to own guns being considered by the Supreme Court

Objectifying and creepy commercial for Spykee, the wi-fi spy robot.

Here.

Share
Posted in Sexism in the Media | Comments Off on Objectifying and creepy commercial for Spykee, the wi-fi spy robot.

“Power & Sex: America’s War on Sexual Rights”

Faye Wattleton, Katha Pollitt, Dagmar Herzog and Lynn Paltrow

moderated by Michelle Fine

How will the new administration handle the feminist agenda? Obama’s victory and the vote against abortion bans in Colorado and South Dakota brought some sexual rights back from the edge of a political precipice, but others remain in the balance. Join scholars, journalists, and policy makers to talk about America’s ongoing war on sexual rights. Participants include Dagmar Herzog, author of Sex in Crisis: The NewSexual Revolution and the Future of American Politics and Professor of History, Lynn Paltrow, Executive Director of National Advocates for Pregnant Women, Nation columnist Katha Pollitt, and Faye Wattleton, Director of the Center for the Advancement of Women. Discussant: Rosalind Petchesky, author of Sexuality, Health and Human Rights and Distinguished Professor of Political Science. Moderated by Michelle Fine, Distinguished Professor of Psychology at the Graduate Center, CUNY.

Monday November 17th

at 7:00pm

Elebash Recital Hall

The Graduate Center, CUNY

365 Fifth Ave (btwn 34th & 35th)

FREE AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

No registration. Please arrive early for a seat. 212-817-2005

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Upcoming Lectures | Comments Off on “Power & Sex: America’s War on Sexual Rights”

Brand New Blog by Lolita Buckner Inniss: “Ain’t I a Feminist Legal Scholar Too?”

Find it here!

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminist Blogs Of Interest, Feminists in Academia, Race and Racism | Comments Off on Brand New Blog by Lolita Buckner Inniss: “Ain’t I a Feminist Legal Scholar Too?”

Malcolm M. Feeley and Hadar Aviram, “Where Have All the Women Gone? The Decline of Women in the Criminal Justice Process”

Abstract:
This project sets out to refute the common criminological assumption that women have always constituted a negligible percentage of those subjected to the criminal justice process. Using a variety of primary and secondary datasets drawn from dozens of European courts, we prove that, in the 17th and 18th century, women constituted a significant proportion of criminal defendants all over Europe, particularly in large, urban areas. Female percentage then dramatically declined over the 19th century. This general tendency transcends local explanations, and cannot be fully accounted for by any traditional historical explanation. We suggest that the decline of women in the criminal justice process reflects the shift in patriarchal patterns before and during the industrial revolution; during this period, women were removed from the public sphere, the labor market and the control of their communities and confined in the private sphere of the home, where their opportunities to commit crime decreased, their socialization into feminine roles increased, and the state’s willingness to draw them into the public sphere for criminal trial declined. This pattern can be incorporated into two broader theoretical explanations: Elias’ process of civilization, and Foucault’s rise of disciplinary structures. We conclude by suggesting the project’s value for criminology, feminist scholarship and the dialogue between history and sociology.

Downloadable here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminist Legal History | Comments Off on Malcolm M. Feeley and Hadar Aviram, “Where Have All the Women Gone? The Decline of Women in the Criminal Justice Process”

A Silver Lining in Prop. 8?

Since the passage of California’s Proposition 8, there have been protests  across California. I received an e-mail yesterday from a former student about planned protests across the country. Yet, the brunt of the anger at the passage of this ban on same-sex marriage and reversal of the California Supreme Court’s decision in In re Marriage Cases  seems to be directed at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints  for its vocal support of the measure. Some have even  urged the IRS to reconsider the church’s tax exemption–a topic about which I received a call from a reporter yesterday.

A lesbian and gay rights group in Utah, however, sees the silver lining in the church’s support for Proposition 8 and plans to leverage it to their advantage with some constructive legislative proposals. A  New York Times  story today is reporting that Equality Utah, with the help of lesbian and gay members of the Utah legislature, plans to introduce a five-part legislative agenda to advance lesbian and gay rights in Utah that is based on the statements that the church made in defense of its support of Proposition 8:

“But leaders of the rights group here, Equality Utah, said statements made by Mormon leaders in defense of their actions in California : that the church was not antigay and had no problem with legal protections for gay men and lesbians already on the books in California : were going to be taken as an endorsement to expand legal rights that gay and lesbian couples have never remotely had in Utah, where the church is based.”

As part of this legislative agenda, the group does not plan to overturn Utah’s so-called defense of marriage act in full, but will seek to strike out the portion of it that bans same-sex unions that are the equivalent of marriage. According to the Times  story, they are also planning legislation that would “expand protections for same-sex couples in health care and hospitalization decisions, housing and employment and in inheritance issues in probate court.”

-Tony Infanti

Share
Posted in LGBT Rights | Comments Off on A Silver Lining in Prop. 8?

What Will Whiteness Mean in the Obama Years?

Two interesting essays: This one (from whence I borrowed the title for this post) at Diary of an Anxious Black Woman, and this one, entitled Propositioning Privilege, at WoC PhD.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Race and Racism | Comments Off on What Will Whiteness Mean in the Obama Years?

Jennifer S. Hendricks, “Instead of ENDA, A Course Correction for Title VII”

Here is the beginning:

The LGBT community may soon win a legal victory that has been decades in the making: passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). As passage of the bill becomes more likely, debates about how much to compromise for that victory have become increasingly important. The current version of ENDA represents a series of compromises that should now be reconsidered.

After years of failed attempts to add”sexual orientation”to Title  VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, ENDA’s proponents decided they would have a better chance with a stand-alone bill stripped of several of Title  VII’s protections: they gave up disparate impact claims and affirmative action as a remedy for proven discrimination. Most recently, Representative Barney Frank, the Act’s sponsor, agreed to remove protection for transgendered people in order to win passage in the House.

Less than a year later, a federal court showed Representative Frank the risks of compromise. In September 2008, the D.C. district court held in Schroer v. Billington that transgender people are already protected by Title  VII’s ban on sex discrimination.This decision would have been less likely if ENDA had passed last year because the enacted version would have excluded gender identity claims. Moreover, the current version of ENDA has the potential to do real harm not only to transgendered plaintiffs but also to lesbian, gay, and even straight-identified plaintiffs whose claims are based on sex stereotyping.

This Essay proposes a revision of ENDA that would avoid those harms and at least leave the door open to gender identity claims.

Read the entire essay here or download it here (PDF).

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, LGBT Rights | Comments Off on Jennifer S. Hendricks, “Instead of ENDA, A Course Correction for Title VII”

“Boobs for Burma: Can Sex Sell Human Rights?”

Great post at The Feminist Underground that will make you angry, but in a productive way. It’s a pretty fantastic blog generally so you might want to check out other posts there too.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Feminist Blogs Of Interest, Sexism in the Media | Comments Off on “Boobs for Burma: Can Sex Sell Human Rights?”

Best Wedding Dance Ever

Here. It starts getting good about 1:30 in…

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on Best Wedding Dance Ever

Good Reads

I Really Have to Stop Reading My Spam E-mail

Wassup With the Pink Patch?

Hummus

Two parter:
Why White Comics Don’t Get Barack and Why Black Comics Must Get Barack.

Share
Posted in Links | Comments Off on Good Reads

Rethinking Faculty Recruitment

Instead of the traditional Faculty Recruitment Conference, what if the AALS coordinated a matching program à la medical school residencies?   My talented colleague Karl Coplan made this suggestion during a recruiting break today.   I have initial thoughts on what such a system might look like:

1.   Candidates complete the FAR form, and forms are made available to schools, as usual.

2.     Based on the paper record only, a school generates a list of candidates it would like to see”in action.”

3.   Candidates prepare a 15-minute talk on a topic of their choice.

4.   At a 2- or 3-day conference similar to the FRC, candidates give their 15-minute talks at designated times in designated rooms.   Representatives from faculty recruitment teams all attend the presentations of those candidates in whom they are interested.   The presentations are digitally recorded and made available on-line for faculty members at schools that cannot or do not attend the live presentation.

5.   Based on the candidates’ presentations, a school narrows its list of preferred candidates.

6.   Candidates make a list of schools whose invitation for further interviews they would accept.  

7.   Through a centralized program, faculties and candidates go through an”initial match”process.   Each school receives up to, say, 10″matched”candidates for every one position the school has open, assuming there are 10 candidates who indicate an interest.  

8.   Candidates make traditional campus visits/job talks, etc. at their”initial match”schools.

9.   After all campus visits are complete, a school’s faculty votes to make (or not make) offers to the”initial match”candidates and ranks them in order of preference.   The school must indicate what salary, teaching package, research support, etc. it will offer to a particular candidate.   That information is made available the candidate.

10.   Based on the campus visit and any additional information provided by a school, each candidate ranks the schools from which he or she would accept an offer, if given.  

11.     Through a centralized program, there is a”final round match”that pairs faculties and candidates in a way that maximizes the number of matches for participating schools and candidates.

12.   Absent extraordinary circumstances, a candidate should (must?) accept the offer of the”final match”school.

The main beneficiaries of a matching system would be schools that historically have difficulty in recruiting their first, second, or even third-choice candidate.    Might  women of all colors and other”outsiders”fare better under a matching system, too?    If (and that’s a big if) one could demonstrate the first n number of offers by law school tend to go to candidates from non-“outsider” groups, then the remaining pool will contain a greater percentage of “outsider” candidates than the initial pool did.  Assume that  a faculty fatigues  after its first few offers are rejected (“We couldn’t possibly go with our fourth choice!”).  The faculty might decide to  make no hires at all.  If so, then the candidates in the pool with the increased percentage of “outsider” candidates is more under-employed than they would have been had the faculty filled the slot it initially planned to fill.  A match program would minimize faculty fatigue and increase efficiencies in hiring, defined as slots being filled by candidates that a faculty deemed desirable, although perhaps not first-preferred.

Could this system ever work?  

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Academia, Law Schools, Law Teaching | Comments Off on Rethinking Faculty Recruitment

Women Put Obama In Office: Will His Appointments Reflect This?

Women’s votes made all the difference, and Obama could not have won without us. See also, see also.

Unfortunately, the majority of women also voted in favor of Proposition 8 in California, although in somewhat smaller numbers than men. We don’t get everything right. I hope we were correct about Obama. Here are a few preliminary concerns I have:

1. His choice of Rahm Emmanuel as his Chief of Staff. Veronica expressed hope back in June that he would not become Obama’s replacement in the Senate. Unfortunately, he will become Obama’s Chief of Staff.

2. The possibility that Larry Summers will become Secretary of the Treasury. Even some of the Supposedly Liberal Doods are having trouble with this one.

3. Joe the Biden. Though as long as Obama stays safe and healthy, he will do less damage as Vice President than he did in the Senate. See also, see also.

–Ann Bartow

ETA: Only about 1 in 5 of the potential appointees named here are women.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Women Put Obama In Office: Will His Appointments Reflect This?

AutoAdmit Lawsuit Update

Here, from Leiter.

Share
Posted in Academia, Sociolinguistics | Comments Off on AutoAdmit Lawsuit Update

Love-Hate at the Faculty Recruitment Conference

I  simultaneously like and dislike  the Faculty Recruitment Conference.   I like meeting people, reading the scholarship of professors-to-be; talking to candidates about their interests in teaching and scholarship; seeing friends from other faculties; spending time with my current colleagues (ok, most of the time); finding myself in an elevator with a scholar whose work I admire, but I’ve never met in person, and wondering how I can introduce myself without sounding like an academic stalker (I’m thinking that “May I please have your autograph?” would be a little too much, right?).  

What I dislike is the runway that is the hotel lobby and bar — nervous candidates trying to look busy during the day, appointments committees rehashing interviews (sometimes too loudly) during evenings.   I can’t  help the flashbacks of prior years’ less-than-stellar interviews (some as interviewer, some as interviewee).   And I’ve never been a fan of the conference hotel and its (apparent) custom  of allowing  used dishes, trays and cutlery to accumulate in the hallways outside interview rooms.   Blech.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Academia, Law Schools, Law Teaching | Comments Off on Love-Hate at the Faculty Recruitment Conference

Joan MacLeod Heminway and Sarah White, “WANTED: Female Corporate Directors (A Review of Professor Douglas M. Branson’s No Seat at the Table)”

Abstract:
In his 2007 book No Seat at the Table, Professor Douglas Branson aptly describes how patterns of male dominance inherent in the legal structures of corporate governance reproduce themselves again and again to keep women out of executive suites and boardrooms, and then he offers a practical way to break this cycle of dominance-through paradigm shifting. A central value of Professor Branson’s book derives from this thesis, as well as his use of nontraditional empirical data and interdisciplinary literature (in addition to more traditional decisional law and legal scholarship) to support the positions he takes. Moreover, No Seat at the Table is an invaluable resource because it collects in one volume varied research materials and related information at the intersection of women and corporate boards and because it offers further support for diversification of boards of directors as part of the overall effort to strengthen corporate governance practices and promote more productive, efficient, and trustworthy corporations.

This review is designed to explore these strengths-and a few related weaknesses-in Professor Branson’s approach. Specifically, the review highlights three key strengths of Professor Branson’s work: his thorough and useful report of 2001 and 2005 proxy data from public company filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, his account of the effects of tokenism in the boardroom, and his analysis of the obstacles women face in climbing the rungs to the top of the corporate ladder. The review then evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of his proposed paradigm shifting as an effective way to procure female advancement to executive ranks and board positions. Finally, the review examines the potential shortcomings of Professor Branson’s observation and suggestion that the differences between men and women are inconsequential and should be minimized and, further, how these statements (when taken out of context) conflict with his efforts to keep women in the pipeline toward upper management.

Downloadable here!

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminist Legal Scholarship, Women and Economics | Comments Off on Joan MacLeod Heminway and Sarah White, “WANTED: Female Corporate Directors (A Review of Professor Douglas M. Branson’s No Seat at the Table)”

Mary Lily Research Grants – Duke University

The Sallie Bingham Center for Women’s History and Culture, part of the Rare Book, Manuscript, and Special Collections Library at Duke University, announces the availability of Mary Lily Research Grants for research travel to our collections.

The Sallie Bingham Center documents the public and private lives of women through a wide variety of published and unpublished sources. Collections of personal papers, family papers, and organizational records complement print sources such as books and periodicals. Particular strengths of the Sallie Bingham Center are U.S. feminist movements, women’s prescriptive literature from the 19th and 20th centuries, girls’ literature, zines, artist’s books by women, gender & sexuality, and the history and culture of women in the South.

Mary Lily Research grants are for undergraduate and graduate students, faculty, and independent scholars conducting research using collections held by the Sallie Bingham Center. Grant money may be used for travel, photocopying, and living expenses while pursuing research at the Rare Book, Manuscript and Special Collections Library. Applicants must live outside of a 50-mile radius from Durham, NC. The maximum award per applicant is $1,000.

The deadline for application is January 30, 2009, and recipients will be announced in March 2009. For more information and the application form, please visit this site.

Applicants are encouraged to contact the Center’s research services librarian before submitting:

Kelly Wooten
kelly.wooten@duke.edu
(919) 660-5967
http://library.duke.edu/specialcollections/bingham

Share
Posted in Academia | Comments Off on Mary Lily Research Grants – Duke University

Update on California Prop. 8

The ACLU, Lambda Legal, and the National Center for Lesbian Rights have filed a suit challenging the validity of recently passed California Proposition 8. They have asked for enforcement of the ban on same-sex marriages to be stayed pending the resolution of their challenge, which alleges that Proposition 8 is invalid because it is a constitutional revision rather than a constitutional amendment. (N.B.: They describe the difference between a revision and an amendment on p. 15 of their petition as follows: (1) a constitutional amendment “seeks to elaborate or improve upon existing constitutional principles,” while (2) a constitutional revision “seeks to change the ‘underlying principles’ upon which the Constitution is premised.”) As a constitutional revision, they argue, the ban on same-sex marriage cannot be enacted through the initiative process, as it was, but, under the constitution, must be considered and passed by supermajorities of both houses of the legislature prior to being submitted to the voters or to a constitutional convention. Because Proposition 8 did not follow the more deliberative process prescribed for constitutional revisions, they argue that it is invalid.

This argument, which apparently has been successful in the past, calls to mind an article by  Carlos E. González, Popular Sovereign Generated Versus Government Institution Generated Constitutional Norms: When Does a Constitutional Amendment not Amend the Constitution?, 80 Wash. U. L.Q. 127 (2002). In that article, Gonzalez, focusing on the federal constitution, argues that not all constitutional provisions are created equal:that there may actually be a hierarchy of constitutional norms based on the democratic legitimacy of their source. As a result, Gonzalez argues, certain constitutional provisions might be immune from repeal by a later amendment. I’m not sure that this article would be of particular help to those litigating this case, but, if any of them (or their friends or colleagues!) are reading this post, they might want to give a glance at Gonzalez’s article.

-Tony Infanti

Share
Posted in LGBT Rights | Comments Off on Update on California Prop. 8

Remember When Kozinski Called For The Investigation Into His Porn Site? Looks Like Something Fishy Is Going Down.

From Bloomberg News:

San Francisco Court Puts Kozinski Complaint on Hold (Update1)
By Cynthia Cotts

Nov. 5 (Bloomberg) — An ethics committee of the federal appeals court in San Francisco issued an order to stop an investigation of a lawyer’s complaint alleging misconduct by Alex Kozinski, the court’s chief judge.

Cyrus Sanai, a Los Angeles attorney, accused Kozinski of putting pornography on a public Web site and revived allegations that the judge broke into a computer security system in 2001 and disabled porn-detecting software.

The ethics committee, officially the Ninth Circuit Judicial Council, on Nov. 3 directed that Sanai’s complaint be put on hold because “no exceptional circumstances” exist to warrant a transfer to a Philadelphia committee looking into an earlier complaint about Kozinski’s sexually explicit Web postings.

“It’s appalling,” Sanai said yesterday in an interview. “It is a transparent effort to shield Judge Kozinski and the other subjects of the complaint from meaningful investigation.”

Cathy Catterson, a spokeswoman for the San Francisco court, didn’t respond to a phone call and e-mail seeking comment.

Robert Heim, a lawyer at Philadelphia-based Dechert who is heading the investigation of Kozinski’s Web postings, didn’t respond to a phone call and e-mail seeking comment.

About a dozen of the images Sanai found on Kozinski’s Web site featured naked women, some in sexual activities. In footage supplied to Bloomberg by Sanai, one woman performs fellatio bent over backward, and scores of Asian women ride male partners in synchronized group sex.

Humorous Intent

The images were intended to be humorous, according to a friend of the judge.

Sanai filed two previous complaints against Kozinski.

The allegations that Kozinski breached court security were raised by Ralph Mecham, former head of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts in Washington, in a 2007 letter to a federal committee on judicial ethics.

In June, after the Los Angeles Times reported that Kozinski kept sexually explicit material on a Web site called Alex.Kozinski.com, the judge asked his court to investigate. The San Francisco ethics committee transferred the matter to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who assigned the investigation to Anthony Scirica, the chief judge of the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia.

The Philadelphia court hired the Philadelphia-based law firms Dechert and Morgan Lewis & Bockius to conduct the inquiry.

At the time, all parties said any related complaints should be investigated in Philadelphia.

Transfer of Complaints

The San Francisco ethics committee informed Roberts in June that “any pending complaints, or new complaints that may be filed, relating to this matter are included in this request for transfer,” according to court papers.

Roberts directed Scirica’s court to rule on “any pending or new complaints relating to the same subject matter” as the June complaint.

The Nov. 3 order raises more questions than it answers, according to Arthur Hellman, a University of Pittsburgh law professor who specializes in federal judicial ethics.

“Reading the order, there is a strong inference that the Judicial Council made this decision on its own and did not consult the Third Circuit,” Hellman said.

Mecham, the retired court administrator, expressed surprise that the San Francisco committee didn’t forward Sanai’s complaint to Philadelphia.

“I think that’s a direct violation of the chief justice’s directions,” Mecham said yesterday in an interview.

Emphasis added by me. So much for the thorough investigation that I never expected to see happen anyway.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Legal Profession | Comments Off on Remember When Kozinski Called For The Investigation Into His Porn Site? Looks Like Something Fishy Is Going Down.

Canadians Seem Very Happy About Obama’s Victory

Spent yesterday in Sumter, South Carolina doing voter protection, but today I am in Canada, and everyone here I’ve spoken to is thrilled about Obama replacing Bush as US President. No more wars, is the fervent hope I keep hearing most. Had a weird debate with a cab driver about whether Michelle Obama looks like Condoleeza Rice. He said yes; I don’t see it. He was an immigrant from India and had a lot of opinions. He questioned me closely about the Electoral College and recommended we switch to a Parliamentary form of government. I’m giving talks tomorrow and Friday, so again with the light blogging.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Blog Administration, Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Canadians Seem Very Happy About Obama’s Victory

Early morning after: ballot initiatives and progressive House candidates

Since you write the blog you want to read, I decided to concentrate last night on the ballot initiatives and down ballot races that I thought progressives would be most interested in.   What strikes me the morning after is how Americans still seem almost genetically incapacitated when it comes to venturing much past the middle of the road in the left direction. There’s the sheer joy of seeing an African American become president.   And then there are these decidedly mixed results:

Ballot initiatives

Huge loss – CA Prop 8, ending marriage rights for same-sex couples and repudiating that state’s supreme court decision granting equality, was adopted. Although not all votes are in, the LA Times has just declared Yes on 8 the winner, apparently because the lead is greater than the remaining number of votes to be counted.

Probable win – CA Prop 4, which seeks to impose barriers on teenagers seeking abortion, has only 48% support, with 95% of precincts counted.

Loss – FL Amendment 2, amending that state’s constitution to bar both same-sex marriage and arguably a civil union-type status, won the 60% majority it needed.

ARK Loss – The proposal to amend the state constitution to ban adoption by gay couples was adopted.

AZ Loss – The ballot initiative to amend the state constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage was adopted.

WON !! COL constitutional amendment to define life as beginning at the moment of conception was defeated.

Still too close to call – votes are virtually tied on a COL ballot proposal to end affirmative action.

NEB Loss – A proposal to end affirmative action policies has passed.

WON !! SD constitutional amendment to restrict abortion choice DEFEATED.


Progressives running for House seats –

WON !! COL 4 – Betsy Markey v Marilyn Musgrave. Although the Republican national committee  cut Musgrave loose from funding more than a week ago, a massive amount of outside money has flowed into this race, making the two sides together recipients of the  third largest amount of out-of-district donations of any House race in the country, at least as of last week.  Why? Musgrave has been the standard bearer for a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, and so the dollars have flowed in. Now she’s gone.

WON !!- FL 24 – Suzanne Kosmas won this district near Orlando, one of the fastest growing areas in the state.

WON!!   IL 11 – Debbie Halvorson, endorsed by EMILY’s List, opened up a blue beachhead in a heavily Republican downstate IL.

Loss MINN 3 – Ashwin Madia is an ex-Marine Corps lawyer and Iraq War vet with strong progressive values, committed, e.g. to repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Madia’s brother is reportedly gay, and he got lots of gay support.

Loss MINN 6 – Michelle Bachman, the anti-choice, anti-gay voice of out-state, was heavily favored to win re-election.   Then she appeared on “Hardball” in October and declared that liberals were anti-American.But she has squeaked through.

Loss –   NY 26 – Alice Kryzan, was running in a district just west of Rochester with tons of feminist, union, progressive endorsements, trying to expand the Dems’ position in upstate.

Loss – OH 2 – Dem Victoria Wulsin failed to take the seat away from Jean Schmidt. A Republican has held this seat since 1975.

Loss – OH 15 – Mary Jo Kilroy, the Dem who was running to replace Steve Silvers, was accused of being a socialist because she has worked on the staff of the Columbus Free Press, a progressive local newspaper.

Loss – SC 1 – Linda Ketner, a businesswoman from Charleston and out lesbian, was trying to unseat Republican Henry Brown to represent the Charleston-Myrtle Beach coastal strip in Congress.

Loss – VA 10 -Judy Feder, a long-time and devoted advocate of universal health care, was making her second effort to take the seat away from Republican Frank Wolf.

Nan Hunter – cross posted at hunter of justice

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, LGBT Rights, Race and Racism, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Early morning after: ballot initiatives and progressive House candidates

Congratulations to Bev Perdue, North Carolina’s first woman governor!

Charlotte Observer account of her victory here.   Excerpts below:

Lt. Gov. Bev Perdue rode a national tide of Democratic support Tuesday to become the first female governor of North Carolina.

Perdue, who has held office in Raleigh for nearly a quarter century, was propelled into the governor’s office despite a sweeping drive across the state and the nation for new faces and change. …

Perdue’s victory makes her the 30th woman to serve as a governor in the United States. She rarely spoke about the possible precedent but won in a state that didn’t officially pass the constitutional amendment giving women the right to vote until 1970. In the 19th century, the first bill allowing women to vote was sent to the state legislative committee on insane asylums.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Firsts | Comments Off on Congratulations to Bev Perdue, North Carolina’s first woman governor!

Because in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.

To my friends and colleagues who rejoice this morning, with an extra special shout out to Susan Kuo and Danielle Holley-Walker: Yes We Did.

As Tony Infanti has already noted, there is still a lot of work to do. But for a few more hours at least, before I am overloaded with a host of pitched oberservations about What It All Means, I’m going to put my rampant cynicism aside and be grateful for the impending end of an administation that did not serve this country very well at all.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Because in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.

An Excellent Day for Dems Is Dampened by Results on Anti-LGBT Ballot Measures

I spent most of the day yesterday (as soon as I got out of class early in the morning!) doing election protection work here in my home state of Pennsylvania. I was so thrilled to be just a little part of a historic moment yesterday and to see Obama’s victory speech last night before I went to bed.

When I woke up this morning, however, things were not looking so great on the ballot measures affecting the LGBT community. As of now (6:45 a.m.), CNN is projecting that Arizona Prop. 102 and Florida Amendment 2 will both pass–by wide margins, 56% and 62% yes votes, respectively–and add bans on same-sex marriage to those state’s constitutions. CNN is also projecting that Arkansas’s Initiative 1 to ban same-sex couples from adopting or serving as foster parents will also pass–again, by a wide margin (57% yes votes). Right now, California Prop. 8 has not been called, but the yes votes are leading the no votes 52%-48% with 87% of the precincts reporting. I’ll be keeping my eye on this one during the day and will blog the results when I see them as a follow-up to this post.

By way of a tax aside, I was happy to see that Massachusetts voters are projected to reject the proposal to repeal that state’s income tax by a wide margin (70%-30%). That’s good news for anyone who cares about social justice, not just tax folks.

Update: Both the Los Angeles Times and the San Francisco Chronicle are predicting that California’s Prop. 8 has passed, with 95% of the precincts now reporting. This is a horrible set back and one that will continue to haunt us for some time, as the state will now have to figure out what to do with (i.e., honor or nullify) all of the marriages entered into by same-sex couples over the past several months. The question arises because the amendment simply states, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” Nowhere is it mentioned whether this amendment is prospective or retroactive in effect. (For further discussion of this ambiguity, check out this segment from NPR featuring UC-Berkeley law prof Jesse Choper.) If interepreted to be of prospective effect only, the amendment could create two classes of same-sex couples in the state: one who was able to and did marry in the window between June and November and who will continue to enjoy the benefits of marriage, and another who is now (and for the foreseeable future will continue to be) barred from access to the benefits of marriage.

-Tony Infanti

Share
Posted in LGBT Rights | Comments Off on An Excellent Day for Dems Is Dampened by Results on Anti-LGBT Ballot Measures

Early Election Returns

As Obama is now slated to become the next President of the United States, it appears that voters in South Dakota and Colorado have voted down the anti-choice ballot measures that were up in their states.   Now we just have to wait for California’s anti-choice provision and anti-marriage provision.   If they lose, this will be an amazing night for the left and feminism.

– David S. Cohen

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Early Election Returns

Valerie Frankel, “Thin Is The New Happy”

From the publisher:

You’ve heard the phrase”the mirror is not your friend.”For Valerie Frankel, the mirror was so much more than”not a friend.”It was the mean girl who stole her lunch money, bitch-slapped her in the ladies’ room, and cut the hair off her Barbie.

If you’re like 99.9 percent of women, the war you wage with yourself over your body image begins at the ripe age of eight, and the skirmishes are fought for the next eight decades. Sometimes you don’t even know when you’ve won. (How many of us have taken out a photo from high school and thought,”Hey! I looked great:why didn’t I know it?”) This book is for anyone who has spent most of her life on:or thinking about being on:a diet. It’s for anyone who ever wished for candlelight in dressing rooms. It’s for anyone who has ever owned a pair of”fat pants.”In short, this book is for anyone who ever felt good or bad about themselves based on how they look.

Valerie Frankel, like most women, has spent most of her conscious life on a diet, thinking about a diet, ignoring a diet, or failing on a diet. At age eleven, her mother put Val on her first weight-loss program. As a teen, she was enrolled in Weight Watchers (for which she invented creative ditching methods). As a young woman, her world felt right only when she was able to zip a certain pair of jeans. Not wanting to pass this legacy on to her own daughters, Valerie set out to cleanse herself of her obsession. Thin Is the New Happy is the true story of one woman’s quest to exorcise her bad body-image demons, to uncover the truths behind what put them there, and to learn how to truly love herself. It’s a poignant, hilarious, and all-out honest account of one woman’s struggle with body image:the filter through which she’s always seen the world:and the way she ultimately overcame it.

The author maintains a blog here. Jezebel has an interesting interview with the author here.

Share
Posted in Recommended Books | Comments Off on Valerie Frankel, “Thin Is The New Happy”

If the Election Was Run by Dogs

10. Vote tabulation has to be restarted every time someone spots
a squirrel.

9. Lots of growling whenever someone mentions that McCain is a vet.

8. Entire election thrown into chaos when it’s alleged that thousands of voters *appeared* to throw ballots into box but actually just hid them behind their backs.

7. Voters even more easily distracted by butterfly ballots.

6. Spaying and neutering drastically reduces number of pregnant chads.

5. “Exit Polling” just a fancy name for butt sniffing.

4. In Pit Bull County, hand counts are taken literally.

3. “Mr. Candidate, please respond to the question: Do you wanna go to the park? Huh? Huh? Wanna catch the ball?”

2. No difference at all: Either way, you end up with a steaming pile of democracy!

1. Finding ballots too confusing? Time to put voter to sleep.

Adapted from a list found at Top Five.

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on If the Election Was Run by Dogs

Well, hopefully…

I’ll be doing “voter protection” work tomorrow so blogging will be light.

Share
Posted in Blog Administration | Comments Off on Well, hopefully…

How does one juggle breast feeding and landing a law teaching job? Advice needed!

I’m writing for advice on an issue peculiar to female law profs and I was hoping that I could post a question on Feminist Law Profs seeking advice.

Specifically, I am on the legal teaching market this year and I have an infant son at home who is still breastfeeding exclusively. He’s coming to DC [for the FRC] with me this week and my Mom’s driving over from [Metropolis] to watch him while I interview. The problem could arise in theory if I am invited back to campus by any school: what to do about breastfeeding or pumping at a callback? All options seem horrendous to me (bringing husband and baby to callback at my expense or separating myself from my son and nonetheless requesting that time to pump be built into my tight interview schedule); they all seem to undercut my credibility in my mind. I’m really hoping that someone who reads your blog may have dealt with this issue before and I’m curious as to the perspective of feminist law profs who haven’t dealt with this themselves.

–Candidate X

NB from Ann: Candidate X is known to me (and I think she is terrific, FWIW!) so if anyone would rather respond by e-mail, send it to me and I’ll forward your advice along to her.

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminism and Families, Feminists in Academia, Law Schools, Law Teaching | Comments Off on How does one juggle breast feeding and landing a law teaching job? Advice needed!

Another Overview of William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (the TVPRA)

This is the Statement of Jessica Neuwirth, President of Equality Now, to the New York City Council 6/11/08:

I want to start by thanking the New York City Council for this opportunity to testify on the subject of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (the TVPRA).   My name is Jessica Neuwirth, and I am the President of Equality Now, an international human rights organization working for the protection and promotion of the rights of women and girls worldwide.   Equality Now has been deeply involved in the fight against sex trafficking for more than fifteen years, and is a member of the Steering Committee of the New York State Anti-Trafficking Coalition, which advocated successfully for the passage of a strong state law against human trafficking here in New York.   The issue today is whether or not we will see similarly strong legislation at the federal level.   We need your help.

In December of 2007, by a vote of 405-2, the House passed a bill that reauthorized the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, the TVPA.   This bill, HR 3887, creates a coherent and comprehensive legal framework for the criminal prosecution of human trafficking and addresses some of the problems with the TVPA that have greatly limited its effectiveness in the prosecution of sex trafficking.   Today I am going to talk about the particular difficulties in prosecuting sex trafficking cases – Equality Now focuses primarily on sex trafficking as most victims of sex trafficking are women and girls.

The TVPA has not been an effective tool for law enforcement in sex trafficking prosecutions over the last seven years since it was passed because the “force, fraud, or coercion” requirement in the law is very difficult to prove, even when the conduct does constitute force, fraud, or coercion. Such prosecutions rely heavily on victim testimony, which puts a huge burden on victims, who are afforded little protection under the law.   In addition to being under direct threat themselves, trafficking victims often have family back in their country of origin under threat; these and many other kinds of coercive pressure, which is very real and very frightening, often prevents them from testifying.   Brutalized by rape and violence, passed from trafficker to trafficker, and sold again and again in prostitution, these women are often broken by the force that has been used against them – it would be a grave injustice to mistake their submission for consent. It is not consent but it makes force, fraud and coercion very difficult to prove.

In the six years after the TVPA passed, less than 70 cases of sex trafficking were successfully prosecuted – 70 cases over six years.   The Justice Department has reported more than 70 cases of sex trafficking – it has reported thousands of cases.   Most of these cases are cases they have brought under the Mann Act because the Mann Act does not require proof of”force, fraud or coercion.”It merely requires proof that the trafficker moved a person across state lines for the purpose of prostitution.   These are cases that the Justice Department has itself identified as trafficking cases, and what the House bill does is to integrate the Mann Act into the TVPA to give us a consolidated and comprehensive legal framework.   It also removes the interstate transport requirement – this requirement is not in the TVPA, which defines”sex trafficking”as”the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining a person for the purpose of a commercial sexual act.”   This is the definition in Section 103(9) of the TVPA passed in 2000. In 2000, however, the Congress limited the criminal prosecution of trafficking to what is called”severe forms of trafficking”and that is where the force, fraud and coercion requirement came in.   We believe the federal government should be prosecuting all sex trafficking, not just severe forms of sex trafficking, and in doing so it will be much easier to prosecute severe forms of sex trafficking as well for the reasons I have mentioned.   The House bill retains force, fraud and coercion as an aggravated sex trafficking offence.

The [Bush] Department of Justice has expressed concern that there are inadequate resources to address anything but the most severe forms of sex trafficking and consider anything else to be”unnecessary and a diversion from Federal law enforcement’s core anti-trafficking mission.”1 The Department of Justice further claims that its”record during the last six years demonstrates its success in investigating and prosecuting trafficking and related crimes and in convicting and securing appropriate sentences for traffickers.”2 These statements, and the views of the Department of Justice as expressed regarding H.R. 3887, indicate that the Department of Justice believes it is doing an effective job in combating human trafficking.   We strongly disagree.

The Justice Department and no doubt even some of the advocacy groups you will hear from today want us to keep sex trafficking and prostitution separate.   They do not want to recognize the overlap between sex trafficking and prostitution.   While it is true that not all women in prostitution have been trafficked, it is also true that all sex trafficking victims are trafficked into prostitution. The pimps who buy and sell these trafficking victims are part of the global sex trafficking distribution network.   Yet there seems to be a reluctance to identify these pimps as sex traffickers – the question is why?   Critics of the House bill claim that the bill”federalizes prostitution”.   It does no such thing.   The crime of prostitution is nowhere in the bill.   The House bill recognizes that many pimps are sex traffickers and integrates the crime of pimping into the sex trafficking legislative framework, that is a reflection of reality – not only the reality of sex trafficking but even the reality of the Justice Department’s sex trafficking cases to date. It is not the enormous expansion of the TVPA that the Justice Department claims.   As I quoted earlier, the TVPA definition of sex trafficking is not limited to cases of force, fraud or coercion.

There is no reason in public policy or otherwise to protect pimps who are buying and selling women from the scope of federal jurisdiction, especially as it is the current federal pimping law that is currently being used in most sex trafficking cases.   The House held hearings and understood this.   The bill it passed, championed by Representative Carolyn Maloney, is strong and will really aid us in the struggle to end sex trafficking.   We would like to see the Senate bill reflect the same strength and it is our great hope that New York’s senators, particularly Senator Schumer who serves on the Judiciary Committee, will help us. …

Learn more here, here, here, and here.

The two Senators bottlenecking the legislation in the Senate are Sam Brownback and   Joe Biden. If Biden gets elected to the Vice Presidency, maybe the Act can finally move forward. Here’s hoping. Just about twenty minutes ago I got an e-mail advertising “Wide choice of fine Russian girls for any taste are available here.”

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Coerced Sex, Feminism and Law, Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Another Overview of William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (the TVPRA)

College Papers Back Obama, 63 to 1

Story here. Note that the Daily Gamecock is part of the 63.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Academia, Feminism and Politics, South Carolina | Comments Off on College Papers Back Obama, 63 to 1

Worst.

Remember this? It definitely made me appreciate this.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Sexism in the Media | Comments Off on Worst.

Number of Women Guests Scheduled For Today’s Political News Shows…

Zero.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Sexism in the Media | Comments Off on Number of Women Guests Scheduled For Today’s Political News Shows…

Synchronized Presidential Debating

This is cleverly done.

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer, Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Synchronized Presidential Debating

Can you spot the Feminist Law Prof in this portion of a photo of the 1991 Harvard Law Review?

On the far left is Jim Chen, Feminist Law Prof and Dean of the University of Louisville School of Law. On the far right is Georgetown Law Prof and widely cited copyright law scholar Julie Cohen. That guy in the middle should look familiar too. Via. The full picture can be seen here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Can you spot the Feminist Law Prof in this portion of a photo of the 1991 Harvard Law Review?

Crime, Punishment, Race and Child Pornography

Doug Berman asks: Is there an ivy-leaguer exception to federal child porn charges?

Share
Posted in Coerced Sex, Feminism and Law, Recommended Books | Comments Off on Crime, Punishment, Race and Child Pornography

Found: Squirrel

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on Found: Squirrel

WSJ Survey: “Women Lead in Cutting Spending”

Well, freakin’ duh.

The survey findings didn’t surprise Manisha Thakor, author of”On My Own Two Feet,”a female-focused personal finance guide.

“[The spending cutback] is a very rational response,”she says.”Women live seven years longer than men. We earn less –79 cents on the dollar. We move in and out of the workforce. Women are more likely to be worried because we realize that we’re the ones holding the bag at the end of the day.”

Share
Posted in Women and Economics | Comments Off on WSJ Survey: “Women Lead in Cutting Spending”

More Coverage of the FBI Freeing Sex Trafficked Children, But Arresting Likely Victims Over 18

From CNN:

… In the three-day operation, which began Thursday night, the FBI, along with local and state law enforcement agencies, took the 46 girls and one boy — all of them U.S. citizens ages 13 to 17 — into protective custody.

“Operation Cross Country II” involved efforts in 29 cities and resulted in the arrest of 73 pimps and 518 adult prostitutes, the FBI said.

Those arrested could face federal or state charges, depending on their alleged activities.

FBI Deputy Director John Pistole said some of the alleged sex traffickers were working in networks of six to 10 pimps.

“Sex trafficking of children remains one of our most violent and unconscionable crimes in this country,” he told reporters.

Authorities said some of the alleged prostitutes were found at casinos and truck stops. Others were advertised on the Internet. …

Those “adults” were under the control of pimps, so at least some of them are likely to have been in a coercive situation.   Arresting them is counterproductive and cruel. See previous post about this here.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Coerced Sex, Feminism and Law | Comments Off on More Coverage of the FBI Freeing Sex Trafficked Children, But Arresting Likely Victims Over 18

Women Pay A Lot More Than Men For Health Insurance, Even When Childbirth Isn’t Covered.

NYT story here. Below are a couple of short excerpts:

… Insurers say they have a sound reason for charging different premiums: Women ages 19 to 55 tend to cost more than men because they typically use more health care, especially in the childbearing years.

But women still pay more than men for insurance that does not cover maternity care. In the individual market, maternity coverage may be offered as an optional benefit, or rider, for a hefty additional premium.

Crystal D. Kilpatrick, a healthy 33-year-old real estate agent in Austin, Tex., said:”I’ve delayed having a baby because my insurance policy does not cover maternity care. If I have a baby, I’ll have to pay at least $8,000 out of pocket.”

In general, insurers say, they charge women more than men of the same age because claims experience shows that women use more health care services. They are more likely to visit doctors, to get regular checkups, to take prescription medications and to have certain chronic illnesses. …

… Humana, for example, says its Portrait plan offers”ideal coverage for people who want benefits like those provided by big employers.”For a Portrait plan with a $2,500 deductible, a 30-year-old woman pays 31 percent more than a man of the same age in Denver or Chicago and 32 percent more in Tallahassee, Fla.

In Columbus, Ohio, a 30-year-old woman pays 49 percent more than a man of the same age for Anthem’s Blue Access Economy plan. The woman’s monthly premium is $92.87, while a man pays $62.30. At age 40, the gap is somewhat smaller, with Anthem charging women 38 percent more than men for that policy. …

… in Dallas or Houston, women ages 25 to 29 pay 39 percent more than men of the same age when they buy coverage from the Texas Health Insurance Risk Pool. In Nebraska, a 35-year-old woman pays 32 percent more than a man of the same age for coverage from the state insurance pool.

… In Iowa, a 30-year-old woman pays $49 a month more than a man of the same age for one of Wellmark’s Select Enhanced plans. Her premium, at $151, is 48 percent higher than the man’s.

Historiann has a post addressing this here, and she in turn links to this post at Anglachel’s Journal.

The National Women’s Law Center, being the awesome entity that it is, has a detailed report compiled already, entitled “Nowhere to Turn: How the Individual Health Insurance Market Fails Women.” The report notes in its Executive Summary:

Buying insurance in the individual market is very different from getting health insurance through an employer. Women who get health insurance from their employer are protected by several important federal and state laws. For example, most employers cannot charge their employees different premiums for their health insurance. And employers must include maternity coverage in the health insurance that they provide to their employees. In contrast, states are left to regulate the sale of health insurance in the individual market; and in the vast majority of states, few if any such protections exist for women who purchase individual health coverage. Furthermore, those seeking health coverage in the individual market are often less able to afford insurance without the benefit of an employer to share the cost of the premium. …

… NWLC found that the individual insurance market is a very difficult place for women to buy health coverage. Insurance companies can refuse to sell women coverage altogether due to a history of any health problems, or charge women higher premiums based on factors such as their gender, age and health status. This coverage is often very costly and limited in scope:and it often fails to meet women’s needs. In short, too many women face too many obstacles obtaining comprehensive, affordable health coverage in the
individual market:simply because they are women. …

The report discusses in detail the following findings:

1. Women often face higher premiums than men. Under a practice known as gender rating, insurance companies are permitted in most states to charge men and women different premiums.

2. It is difficult and costly for women to find health insurance that covers maternity care. The vast majority of individual market health insurance policies that NWLC found do not cover maternity care at all. A limited number of insurers sell separate maternity coverage for an additional fee known as a”rider,”but this supplemental coverage is often expensive and limited in scope.

3. Insurance companies can reject applicants for health coverage for a variety of reasons that are particularly relevant to women. For example, it is still legal in nine states and D.C. for insurers to reject applicants who are survivors of domestic violence. Insurers can also reject women for coverage simply for having previously had a Cesarean section (C-section).

4. While both women and men face additional challenges in the individual insurance market, these problems compound the affordability challenges women already face.

–Ann Bartow

NB:   If Barack Obama wins the election, it is going to be because a majority of women voters believe he will right by us and our sisters:

Health insurance is one area of many in which he will need to act decisively, to justify our faith in him.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Women's Health | Comments Off on Women Pay A Lot More Than Men For Health Insurance, Even When Childbirth Isn’t Covered.

“Girls Costume Warehouse”

A satiric Halloween classic.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on “Girls Costume Warehouse”

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | 2 Comments

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on