Losing the War on Teen Pregnancy?

Obscured in the hoopla surrounding Sarah Palin’s personal family values is the fact that we are losing the war on teen pregnancy and trapping another generation of the most vulnerable women and children in poverty. After dramatic successes in the nineties, teen births are rising and rising most, not for those who like the Palins have the resources to support their grandchildren, but for those families who cannot support the children they already have.

The figures had been heartening. Teen pregnancy and birth rates fell dramatically during the nineties. Between 1991 and 2005, overall teen pregnancies declined by thirty-four percent. The most promising news was the decline in teen births to the most vulnerable mothers. African-Americans experienced the steepest drops with a 42 percent decline among adolescents between the ages of 15 and 19 between 1991 and 2002, and an even greater decline (an astonishing 52%) among African American girls in the 15 to 17-year-old age group.

Abortions also fell during the same period, and commentators of the right (abstinence promotion) and left (contraception) competed to claim credit. The results are now in. John Santelli, in the American Journal of Public Health, reported that 86% of the drop in teen pregnancies were the result of more effective contraception; 14% from greater abstinence. Moreover, the success rates in different groups came from different sources. For whites, pregnancies, abortions and births all dropped. Greater abstinence clearly played a role. For African-American and Latina women, however, abortion rates remained high, and a number of studies, including those by the Guttmacher Institute, confirm that poorer women are at greater risk from coercive sexual encounters, unplanned pregnancies, and less effective access to contraception. Moreover, the results vary regionally. A New York Times editorial in January of 2008 emphasized that”[a]lmost two-thirds of the decline in the total number of abortions can be traced to eight jurisdictions with few or no abortion restrictions :. . . places . . . that have shown a commitment to real sex education. . . . These jurisdictions also help women avoid unintended pregnancies by making contraception widely available.”

This progress, however, has not been maintained. Teen births have begun to edge back up. The largest increases have been for those teens with the least resources – African-Americans between the ages of 15 to 19. Moreover, even in the prosperous nineties, the unintended pregnancy rate for women of all ages rose 29% among women living below the poverty level even as it fell for everyone else. Since 2002, contraceptive use for the country as a whole has fallen, driven in particular by higher rates of non-use by low-income women of color.

These figures are a tragedy. Studies show the worst prospects for children born to very young mothers. Women who wait until their mid-twenties to give birth experience less depression, more stable families, and healthier offspring. Moreover, we know what works from global experience with family planning efforts. Comprehensive sex education that provides support for abstinence and contraception produces the greatest declines in pregnancies and abortions, and school-based efforts have the biggest payoff for poor teens who studies find are the most likely to lack information from other sources.

In the seventies, consensus existed that reducing teen births offered the most effective anti-poverty strategy. In the current round of the culture wars, the poor have dropped out of sight as the most extreme views have been cynically used as wedge issues to eliminate the possibility of compromise, and undermine support for programs sensitive to needs of the Americans most at risk. The result guarantees that, indeed, the poor will always be with us.

June Carbone

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Losing the War on Teen Pregnancy?

No on California’s Prop. 4 mandating parental notification

… Californians will soon be voting on a ballot measure that would endanger teens by mandating parental notification 48 hours in advance of a minor terminating a pregnancy, this is Prop. 4.

By now, you’ve probably read all about the measure: how it will put teenagers in real danger, how the alternative family member notification and judicial bypass are unreasonable, and how medical experts, research, and the experiences of states with similar laws all discredit this measure. Now, you can watch our new videos about Prop. 4’s failures here.

Our new ad, “Room,” highlights the reality that Prop. 4 puts teens in real danger, while Jane’s Journey shows the complexity of the judicial maze that teens would be forced to navigate if they can’t talk to their parents. I wanted you to be one of the first to see the video and share it with your readers.

After you’ve read and watched what we have to say, you can read what others have been saying. Our press section contains all of the editorials written against this ill-conceived measure. By raising your voice in opposition to Prop. 4, you’ll be joining newspapers like The Santa Barbara Independent, Santa Cruz Sentinel, San Francisco Chronicle, Sacramento Bee and The New York Times. Visit this site to read them all.

Sincerely,

Kathy Kneer
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Guest Blogger, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on No on California’s Prop. 4 mandating parental notification

The “Culture War” re: Prop. 8 in California

As a native of Oakland, California, this video makes me really sad. As much as I love California, I don’t think I could stomach being there right now.

–Sharon Sandeen

Share
Posted in Feminism and Families, Feminism and Law, LGBT Rights | Comments Off on The “Culture War” re: Prop. 8 in California

The 1,500 year old “Angel Oak Tree” near Charleston, SC

Via. More photos here.

Share
Posted in South Carolina | Comments Off on The 1,500 year old “Angel Oak Tree” near Charleston, SC

“Red Sex, Blue Sex: Why do so many evangelical teen-agers become pregnant?”

That’s the title of this New Yorker article by Margaret Talbot, which mentions Feminist Law Profs Naomi Cahn and June Carbone prominently, as you can see in the excerpt below:

Among blue-state social liberals, commitment to the institution of marriage tends to be unspoken or discreet, but marriage in practice typically works pretty well. Two family-law scholars, Naomi Cahn, of George Washington University, and June Carbone, of the University of Missouri at Kansas City, are writing a book on the subject, and they argue that”red families”and”blue families”are”living different lives, with different moral imperatives.”(They emphasize that the Republican-Democrat divide is less important than the higher concentration of”moral-values voters”in red states.) In 2004, the states with the highest divorce rates were Nevada, Arkansas, Wyoming, Idaho, and West Virginia (all red states in the 2004 election); those with the lowest were Illinois, Massachusetts, Iowa, Minnesota, and New Jersey. The highest teen-pregnancy rates were in Nevada, Arizona, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Texas (all red); the lowest were in North Dakota, Vermont, New Hampshire, Minnesota, and Maine (blue except for North Dakota).”The ‘blue states’ of the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic have lower teen birthrates, higher use of abortion, and lower percentages of teen births within marriage,”Cahn and Carbone observe. They also note that people start families earlier in red states:in part because they are more inclined to deal with an unplanned pregnancy by marrying rather than by seeking an abortion.

Of all variables, the age at marriage may be the pivotal difference between red and blue families. The five states with the lowest median age at marriage are Utah, Oklahoma, Idaho, Arkansas, and Kentucky, all red states, while those with the highest are all blue: Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Jersey. The red-state model puts couples at greater risk for divorce; women who marry before their mid-twenties are significantly more likely to divorce than those who marry later. And younger couples are more likely to be contending with two of the biggest stressors on a marriage: financial struggles and the birth of a baby before, or soon after, the wedding.

There are, of course, plenty of exceptions to these rules:messily divorcing professional couples in Boston, high-school sweethearts who stay sweetly together in rural Idaho. Still, Cahn and Carbone conclude,”the paradigmatic red-state couple enters marriage not long after the woman becomes sexually active, has two children by her mid-twenties, and reaches the critical period of marriage at the high point in the life cycle for risk-taking and experimentation. The paradigmatic blue-state couple is more likely to experiment with multiple partners, postpone marriage until after they reach emotional and financial maturity, and have their children (if they have them at all) as their lives are stabilizing.”…

Read the whole article here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Families, Feminism and Law, Feminist Legal Scholarship, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on “Red Sex, Blue Sex: Why do so many evangelical teen-agers become pregnant?”

The “Opt Out Revolution” 5 Years Later

On Friday, October 24, 2008, Lisa Belkin was the keynote speaker at a conference at Pace Law School on “Women and the Law: How Far We’ve Come and Where We Need to Go.”  I was a fan of Belkin’s “Life’s Work” column for the New York Times (she now blogs for the Times at Motherlode: Adventures in Parenting).  Today marks the fifth anniversary of the publication of Belkin’s “Opt Out Revolution” article:  

[I]t’s not just that the workplace has failed women. It is also that women are rejecting the workplace.

I say this with the full understanding that there are ambitious, achieving women out there who are the emotional and professional equals of any man, and that there are also women who stayed the course, climbed the work ladder without pause and were thwarted by lingering double standards and chauvinism. I also say this knowing that to suggest that women work differently than men — that they leave more easily and find other parts of life more fulfilling — is a dangerous and loaded statement.

And lastly, I am very aware that, for the moment, this is true mostly of elite, successful women who can afford real choice — who have partners with substantial salaries and health insurance — making it easy to dismiss them as exceptions. To that I would argue that these are the very women who were supposed to be the professional equals of men right now, so the fact that so many are choosing otherwise is explosive.

As these women look up at the ”top,” they are increasingly deciding that they don’t want to do what it takes to get there. Women today have the equal right to make the same bargain that men have made for centuries — to take time from their family in pursuit of success. Instead, women are redefining success. And in doing so, they are redefining work.  

Time was when a woman’s definition of success was said to be her apple-pie recipe. Or her husband’s promotion. Or her well-turned-out children. Next, being successful required becoming a man. Remember those awful padded-shoulder suits and floppy ties? Success was about the male definition of money and power.

There is nothing wrong with money or power. But they come at a high price. And lately when women talk about success they use words like satisfaction, balance and sanity.  * * *

The workplace needs women. Not just because they are 50 percent of the talent pool, but for the very fact that they are more willing to leave than men. That, in turn, makes employers work harder to keep them. * * *

Women started this conversation about life and work — a conversation that is slowly coming to include men. Sanity, balance and a new definition of success, it seems, just might be contagious. And instead of women being forced to act like men, men are being freed to act like women. Because women are willing to leave, men are more willing to leave, too — the number of married men who are full-time caregivers to their children has increased 18 percent. Because women are willing to leave, 46 percent of the employees taking parental leave at Ernst & Young last year were men.

Looked at that way, this is not the failure of a revolution, but the start of a new one. It is about a door opened but a crack by women that could usher in a new environment for us all.

Belkin’s article still provokes strong responses five years later.  It is true that the article looked at a tiny slice of elite, economically privileged white women.  It is true that there are parts of the story that aren’t told (remember it’s only one Magazine article,  I tell myself).  My own reactions to the article are mixed:  I know some stay-at-home JD/MBA moms, so I recognize part of the world Belkin describes.  But my own sense is that she overstates the lived experience of workplace change. 46% of those E&Y employees were men, but how long was the average male leave compared with the average female leave? Did the men taking leave play golf every day for two weeks (as my former law firm colleague did)? How were the male leave-takers treated when they came back to work?  What were their on-going parenting responsibilities? A year later, when someone had to get home at 6:00 p.m. to relieve the babysitter, my guess is that it wasn’t the male E&Y employees 46% of the time.

Yes, workplaces have changed.  Yes, change happens in subtle ways.  I am persuaded by Alison Stein’s account in “Women Lawyers Blog for Workplace Equality” (blogged here).  But workplaces haven’t changed enough.  Real equality still eludes us — all of us who don’t resemble the undiscriminated-against ideal male worker with a stay-at-home wife — on so many levels.  

It was not that long ago (um, ok, yes it was) when the older girls in my grade school were singing Helen Reddy‘s “I Am Woman.” I remember thinking women wouldn’t “need” that song in the future.  I remember thinking we wouldn’t need cars, either.  We’d all have George Jetson-like space vehicles that were powered by air (courtesy of my childhood imagination).  I assumed the  21st century would be so different from life as we knew it then.  But we’re here and it’s not.  

I don’t sing Helen Reddy any more, and whether I drive or take the train, my transport still emits carbon multi-oxides that can’t be good for anyone.  

But still we hope.  

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Feminism and Families, Feminism and Law, Legal Profession | Comments Off on The “Opt Out Revolution” 5 Years Later

Dolls No Longer On The Market

“Growing Up Skipper”

One of the most controversial dolls in 1975, just about every newspaper in the U.S.A. carried a story about her, some women’s groups & a few parents wrote to complain, but with sales expected at 1 1/2 million, the doll must go on to market.   She’s 9″ tall, long platinum or reddish blonde hair, curled end flip. “She’s Two dolls in One,” when you turn the left arm she grows a modest bust line, slimmer waist and becomes 3/4″ taller. (turning the arm back again reverts to the previous shape doll).   Included are a red headband, red body suit, blue collar, blue scarf, red socks, red flats, white platform shoes, two red, white plaid skirts, one short, one long.

“Happy Family Midge”


http://images.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/photos/2002-12-24-midge-set.jpg

The pregnant version of Midge, which pops out a curled-up baby when her belly is opened : has been pulled from Wal-Mart shelves across the country following complaints from customers, a company spokeswoman said Tuesday.

“It was just that customers had a concern about having a pregnant doll,” Wal-Mart spokeswoman Cynthia Illick said. [Ed: linked article from 12.24.2002]

See also. “Baby Laugh-A-Lot” was pretty strange. And an odd and surely discontinued Tarzan action figure is featured here.

–Ann Bartow

ETA: More doll blogging here.

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on Dolls No Longer On The Market

Dems play both sides of abortion politics in congressional races

Two contrasting views of the Democratic Party’s use of the abortion issue in this year’s election have emerged in recent press reports.   When one reads them together, a fascinating picture emerges of how the Dems are deploying and funding anti-choice messages in the conservative House districts that they hope to pick up from Republicans while simultaneously playing up pro-choice messages in districts where that works for them. Pragmatic or just smarmy?

The strategy is pretty clear: say whatever works on the social issues in order to capitalize on the wave of anger and frustration bordering on desperation that is about to sweep Obama into office and possibly change the face of Congress. And hey, I’ve got no desire to stand in the way of that.

Realistically, this is American politics: each of the two parties has a dominant position on issues related to sexuality, gender and reproduction, but neither is willing to forego inclusion of (a few) candidates who take opposite positions. There’s nothing new in this; in fact, what’s new historically is how ideologically coherent the two parties have become.   Leftists have been proclaiming, since time began, it seems, that there’s no real difference between the two parties.   At some meta level, as in how the two and only two political parties will function in a superpower post-capitalist state, that’s correct.   But it’s also true that for most of the post-WWII period, the conservative southern Dems had far more in common with conservative midwestern Republicans than with the northern wing of their own party, etc. (And frankly, that’s the source of a lot of the “good old days, cross-aisle friendships” that DC blowhards like to reminisce about.) By comparison, today’s Dems and Republicans are models of philosophical coherence.

So it’s bemusing but not surprising to see the Dems chase votes with whatever abortion argument plays in the home district, as these two articles, from today’s N Y Times and the current American Prospect, so unwittingly illustrate.

The New York Times

[Montgomery, AL Mayor Bobby] Bright is one of a dozen anti-abortion Democratic challengers the party has recruited to run for the House this year and has aggressively supported with millions of dollars and other resources in culturally conservative districts long unfriendly to the party.

That is the highest number of anti-abortion candidates the party has fielded in recent memory to run either for open seats or against Republican challengers, according to party strategists and a leading anti-abortion organization. It is a strategy that that has received little attention in an election year dominated nationally by a grim economic picture and an unpopular president….

…[T]his year, the party has not only gone to great lengths to recruit such candidates, it has also provided them significant financial backing, underscoring a new pragmatism within the party, said Kristen Day, the executive director of Democrats for Life, an anti-abortion group.”This is the year that pro-life Democrats have received the most support from the party in Washington,”said Mrs. Day…

The American Prospect

… this year, Democratic political operatives have been surprised by the success they’ve had in deploying pro-choice messages. Congressional campaigns from New Jersey to Nevada have picked up on the trend, and outside groups spreading the word are not just usual suspects like NARAL and Planned Parenthood, but also the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC).

“We didn’t use it as much in 2006. Voters then were really focused on Iraq and the economy,” says Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster who is working on several House and Senate races this year. “I was surprised, honestly. You think the economy and nothing else will break through, but this is breaking through.”

Lake points to a number of factors that are making the issue key this cycle. It’s a presidential year, and the president’s choice of Supreme Court justices (the next president could nominate several) are deeply important at a time when court-watchers anticipate several challenges to Roe. This message is aimed squarely at moderate and independent women whose more conservative views on other issues have often trumped their pro-choice beliefs. In previous years, it hasn’t seemed possible for one or two judicial appointments to tip the scale in favor of overturning Roe, but that changed during the Bush years….

+++++

Nan Hunter, cross-posted at hunter of justice

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Dems play both sides of abortion politics in congressional races

Federal Appeals Court to Hear Argument in Virginia’s Abortion Ban Case on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 at 8:15 a.m.

From The Center for Reproductive Rights:

Oral argument will be heard at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case Richmond Medical Center for Women v. Herring.

The Center for Reproductive Rights will be arguing against Virginia ‘s”Partial Birth Infanticide Act,”which would outlaw the most common abortion methods used during the second trimester. Last May, a three-judge panel of the court declared the law unconstitutional. The full appellate court will review that decision at the request of the state attorney general’s office.

Stephanie Toti, a staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, will represent the plaintiffs, Richmond Medical Center for Women and Dr. William G. Fitzhugh, who brought the suit on behalf of themselves, their staffs, and their patients.

In 2007, the Supreme Court ordered the Fourth Circuit to re-evaluate the constitutionality of the Virginia ban after it upheld a federal ban aimed at a particular method of second-trimester abortion. That ruling came in Gonzales v. Carhart, a case brought by the Center. The appellate court struck down the Virginia law, finding that it was substantially broader than the federal law, exposing physicians to the risk of criminal prosecution and imprisonment for using the safest and most common method of second-trimester abortion. Shortly after the 2-1 decision, Virginia asked the full court to rehear the case. Virginia ‘s statute is part of an ongoing campaign by the anti-choice movement to eliminate women’s personal decision-making about whether to have an abortion, and to make doing so even more difficult. In fact, in June 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit struck down Michigan ‘s third attempt at a broad ban on methods of abortion. The court characterized the law as pushing every boundary that the Supreme Court imposed in Gonzales v. Carhart.

–Ximena Ramirez

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Guest Blogger, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Federal Appeals Court to Hear Argument in Virginia’s Abortion Ban Case on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 at 8:15 a.m.

“Yes We Carve”

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer, Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on “Yes We Carve”

Does Your Frozen Broccoli Have Faces In It?

Somebody’s did!

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on Does Your Frozen Broccoli Have Faces In It?

Let Them Eat Cake!

Via.

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on Let Them Eat Cake!

Hoochie Magazine

I came across the blog for  Hoochie, “a feminist magazine created by and for the Boston University community (while remaining unaffiliated with Boston University).”  Their on-line Body Image Issue is available here.  There’s lots on the blog and in the magazines — images, stories, articles — that might spark discussion among older (yes, admit it, we are) feminists about the meaning of “feminism.”  More conversation among feminists of all ages is something I value. Noone should have a monopoly on “feminism’s” meaning or leadership. I liked the students’ work!  Check it out.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Blogs Of Interest | Comments Off on Hoochie Magazine

Because Presidential Elections Are All About Hotness and Sexual Availability?

For Democrats?

Via. Note that at the bottom it says “Sarah Palin is not a woman’s choice.” Well guess what, neither is this stupid, condescending and offensive poster. See also.

And for Republicans?

Via. Yo Republicans, your complaints about the sexism directed at Palin lose a lot of credibility when you engage in it yourself.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Sexism in the Media | Comments Off on Because Presidential Elections Are All About Hotness and Sexual Availability?

Intro to Feminism

Echidne of the Snakes is featuring a series of blog posts about   why feminism still is needed.   The series so far:

1.   The Right to Go Out
2.   The Planet of the Guys.   Oh, and of the Gals, Naturally.
3.   Our Father Who Art in Heaven

The first post inspired a long discussion at Shakesville.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminist Blogs Of Interest, Links | Comments Off on Intro to Feminism

Robert Jensen, “Porn’s Dirty, Dangerous Secret”

Below are the first couple of paragraphs from his essay:

There are a finite number of ways that human bodies can be placed together sexually, and as one pornography industry veteran lamented to me at the annual trade show, “they’ve all been shot.” He sighed, pondering the challenge of creating a sexually explicit film that is unique, and mused, “After all, how many dicks can you stick in a girl at one time?”

His question was offered rhetorically, but I asked: How many?

Probably four, he said; simultaneous oral, vaginal, and double-anal penetration was realistic. Another producer later in the day told me he had once worked on a film that included a double-anal/double-vag scene — a woman being penetrated by four men at once. He said the director had a special harness made to hold the woman for that scene. In contemporary mass-marketed heterosexual pornography, it’s unexceptional to see a standard DP (industry slang for “double penetration,” with two men entering a woman vaginally and anally at the same time) with oral penetration.

Whatever the number, theoretical or routine, the discussion reminds us that pornography is relentlessly intense, pushing our sexual boundaries both physically and psychically. And, pornography also is incredibly repetitive and boring.

Jensen also writes later in the essay that “in a patriarchal society in which men are conditioned to see themselves as dominant over women, such cruelty and degradation fit easily into men’s notions about sex and gender.” He reports:

When I offer this critique to men who are avid consumers of pornography, they often tell me that I’m wrong, that they watch gonzo and don’t see the kind of cruelty and degradation that I am describing. They tell me that that there’s no cruelty in a woman is being penetrated in aggressive fashion by three men who call her a whore throughout the sex. They tell me that when five men thrust into a woman’s mouth to the point she gags, slap a woman in the face with their penises, and ejaculate into her mouth and demand that she swallow it all, there’s no degradation.

Of course they don’t see the degradation. They hold the Glenn Greenwald view that it is all “fiction.” And that the women “wanted it.” They deny the humanity of the women being subjected to this treatment. Did the women consent to everything that happened to them? Who knows? Who cares? Pornography production is unregulated. There are no health and safety officers on site during filming. No one wants to know. Large corporations make billions of dollars off the porn industry, and they like things just the way they are.

As poor a job as government inspectors sometimes do at keeping factory workers safe, it’s hard to imagine them finding unprotected anal sex with multiple strangers simultaneously, or the forced consumption of vomit or feces, within the range of acceptable on the job risks. Yet any women who complain to the police about maltreatment afterward, potentially braving threats of violence for doing so, may be written off as liars, schemers, or folks suffering from mental illness or “buyers remorse.” I’m grateful to Robert Jensen for being brave enough to tell hard truths about pornography. He will doubtlessly be excoriated in many corners for doing so.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Coerced Sex, Feminism and Law | Comments Off on Robert Jensen, “Porn’s Dirty, Dangerous Secret”

CFP: Freedom Center Journal

From the FLP mailbox, this message from the Call for Papers:

The Freedom Center Journal (“FCJ”) is a joint scholarly publication of the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center and the University of Cincinnati College of Law.   The purpose of the FCJ is to foster discussion and debate about the scope and nature of freedom, broadly defined.   The FCJ pursues its mission by publishing interdisciplinary works by a broad range of scholars and students on, among other things, issues of race, class, gender, sexuality, and religion.
 
Our inaugural volume includes new scholarship by Angela Harris, Alfred Brophy, Margaret Montoya, Christine Zuni Cruz, Courtney Cahill, Kevin Noble Maillard, and other prominent legal scholars.
 
Submission information:
 
Issue One of Volume Two of the Freedom Center Journal will focus on the issue of immigration/migration.   We are interested in all facets of immigration/migration including, but not limited to, the impact of gender, race, class, and sexuality on the immigrant experience; examination of the reasons certain people migrate to certain places; examination and discussion of current immigration laws in the United States; historical analyses of particular migrant patterns; and modern day slavery and its connection to migration.
 
Paper proposals (in the form of abstracts) are due by December 1, 2008.   Responses to proposals will be sent on December 8, 2008.   Please also note that final drafts based on accepted proposals must be completed by March 2, 2009.   Please address any inquiries to either of the co-editors-in-chief, Katie Weber or Damaris Del Valle, at UCLawFCJ@gmail.com.
   
Finally, if you would like to be added to a call-for-papers mailing list, please send the following information to UCLawFCJ@gmail.com:
Put “Call for Papers List Serve” in the Subject Heading
In the body of the e mail include:  Name; Title (Associate Professor, etc.); Affiliation;     Area of Study; E-mail address where you would like information to be sent.

The Journal’s faculty advisors at Cinncinnati are Feminist Law Prof Verna Williams, Feminist Law Prof Kristin Kalsem and Emily Hough.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Call for Papers or Participation | Comments Off on CFP: Freedom Center Journal

Report by “Women’s Voices, Women Vote” – “The Disparate Impact of the Economic Crisis on Unmarried Women”

Income:

  • Unmarried women earn only 56 cents for every dollar that married men make. [Center for American Progress, 4/25/08]
  • According to analysis of data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics for individuals 25 to 61 years old, female-headed households have twice the likelihood – 13.5% – of seeing a 50% greater drop in their income than male-headed households’ probability – 6.6% – of such a drop. The probability of a major income drop for female-headed households has risen in the last two recessions. [“Taking a Toll: The Effects of Recession on Women,”Prepared by the Majority Staff of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, 4/18/08]

Jobs

  • Single mothers’ unemployment rate rose from 6.7% in March 2007 to 7.1% in March 2008 – eclipsing the national average. [“Taking a Toll: The Effects of Recession on Women,”Prepared by the Majority Staff of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, 4/18/08]

Retirement Security:

  • Single women estimate needing a median amount of $500,000 by the time they reach retirement. However, more than one-third report that they have saved less than $25,000 for retirement, while only one in 10 report having saved more than $100,000. Only 69% of single women who work full-time report that their current employer offers them a 401(k) plan. Sixty-four percent of single women who work part-time have no retirement benefits offered to them by their employer. [Ninth Annual Transamerica Retirement Survey, 9/17/08]

Savings

  • Female-headed households are at a distinct disadvantage in recessions because they have fewer savings to draw upon. In an analysis by Harvard Professor Mariko Chang of the net worth of all unmarried women, he found that their median net worth was $12,900 – less than half the $26,850 for unmarried men. He found that the wage gap is the primary cause of this inequality of wealth – accounting for 39% of the disparity for never-married households and 18% of the disparity for divorced households. [“Taking a Toll: The Effects of Recession on Women,”Prepared by the Majority Staff of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, 4/18/08]

Bankruptcy:

  • Single women are the most likely demographic group to file for bankruptcy and comprise 40% of all bankruptcy filings. Single women with children are even more likely to file for bankruptcy, at an estimated rate of 21 out of every 1000 families. [Dunleavey, M.P. ,”Seven Ways to Fight Off Bankruptcy,”MSN Money]

Poverty

  • More than half of all poor adult women – 54 percent – are single with no dependent children. Twenty-six percent of poor adult women are single women with dependent children [“The Straight Facts on Women in Poverty,”Center for American Progress, 10/08]

Housing:

  • About 43 percent of single women were using more than 30 percent of their income each month on housing payments, compared to the 30% of unmarried men and 25% of married couples who were spending more than 30 percent. [Joint Center on Housing at Harvard University]
  • Single women have been among the fastest-growing groups of homeowners in recent years. In Baltimore, single women accounted for 40% of home sales in 2006, twice the national average. Nearly half of these mortgages were subprime, according to the National Community Reinvestment. [New York Times, 1/15/08]

To download a PDF version of this report, Click Here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and the Workplace, Guest Blogger, Women and Economics | Comments Off on Report by “Women’s Voices, Women Vote” – “The Disparate Impact of the Economic Crisis on Unmarried Women”

Announcing the Animal Blawg

Feminist Law Professor David Cassuto (Pace), together with Professor Luis Chiesa (Pace) and JD candidate Suzanne McMillan have started the Animal Blawg (tagline “Transcending Speciesism Since October 2008”).   Here’s the description of the blog:

This blog’s scope is intended to be broad, encompassing both legal issues affecting animals and legal issues reflecting animals’ situations. It purports to examine current case law and statutes, as well as the ethical and jurisprudential issues arising from how animals are treated in one of any number of situations. Thus, it presents not only substantive information, but also food for thought.  

Animal law in the United States has grown over the last couple of decades from a virtual unknown to being one of the fastest-growing areas of legal scholarship and practice. It is now offered on the menu of every Ivy League law school in the nation. Judges increasingly find themselves presiding over cases involving issues of animal treatment, and demand is rising for lawyers who handle such cases. Increasingly, animal law is taken seriously in the professional world, making it ever more important for law students and practitioners to familiarize themselves with its basics and stay abreast of its developments.

The term”animal”in this context refers to all non-human animals, thereby encompassing animals kept by humans as companions, as well as wild animals, animals used in the entertainment sector, animals living in zoos, animals used in medical research, animals used for cosmetic procedures, and animals raised and killed for meat, milk, wool, feathers, silk, eggs, fur, hair, skin and other body parts.  

Various members of the animal law community will be invited to blog on this site, and we look forward to including you in these very important and exciting conversations!

Welcome to the blogosphere, Animal Blawg!

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Blogs Of Interest | Comments Off on Announcing the Animal Blawg

“Feminists for Obama”

If McCain and Palin win, Women Lose. Eleanor Smeal, President of Feminist Majority, says, “Obama/Biden are running on the strongest platform for women’s rights of any major party in U.S. history”.

That’s why Feminist Majority launched www.FeministsForObama.org, a side-by-side comparison of the Democratic and Republican nominees on four major women’s issues: Violence Against Women, Abortion and Contraception, Women and Work, and Breast Cancer and Health Care.

McCain on Breast Cancer

October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month.   You deserve to know where the candidates stand: http://www.feministsforobama.org/Issues_breastcancer.htm

McCain voted against funding breast cancer research if it meant taking away from military funds.   Breast cancer affects all women, even the 370,000 women currently serving in the US Armed Forces.   Since breast cancer attacks 1 in 8 women, that means 46,250 members of the US military will deal with breast cancer.   And John McCain voted NO.   It is not a niche issue, it’s America’s issue.

He voted against a bill that changed the course of breast cancer research.

Watch the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RFrEzQAOvM

McCain on Violence Against Women

October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month.   You deserve to know where the candidates stand: http://www.feministsforobama.org/Issues_domesticviolence.htm

Senators Obama and Biden have sponsored and supported legislation, including funding, to reduce violence against women and to assist women survivors of domestic abuse.   Biden authored the federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).   Obama cosponsored the reauthorization of VAWA and authored legislation on violence against women as an Illinois State Senator.

Not only did McCain vote NO on VAWA, but he also failed to co-sponsor VAWA reauthorization although many Republican and Conservative Senators did.

Watch the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RFrEzQAOvM

Quick Facts

Did you know Senator McCain opposes the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act?   The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would restore a woman’s right to fight pay discrimination in court.

Did you know Senator McCain has ducked questions on contraceptive insurance discrimination as recently as July 2008?

Visit www.FeministsForObama.org to read more.

–Dorothee Royal-Hedinger

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Guest Blogger | Comments Off on “Feminists for Obama”

Wikipedia and Feminism

As of this past September, Wikipedia has been cited by U.S. courts almost 300 times,   according to Lee Peoples’ new article, The Citation of Wikipedia in American Judicial Opinions. It’s frightening to think that judges are according wikipedia so much authority, given how little oversight most entries get. Many entries on feminism have been written or edited by people who are actively hostile toward feminists, but they prevail because they seem to have a lot of free time and the few feminists who enter the wikifray seem to get driven out or edited into oblivion.   To take just one example, the entry about Melissa Farley has been heavily edited by a rabid pornography proponent who sometimes uses the pseudonym Iamcuriousblue. He also shows up numerous times in the edits to the Catharine MacKinnon entry and virtually every place feminism is mentioned. That any judge, or anyone generally, would think these accounts of feminism are unbiased or authoritative is truly scary.   See generally. (“If an admin has a political or personal agenda, he can do a fair amount of damage with the special editing tools available to him. The victim may not even find out that this is happening until it’s too late. From Wikipedia, the material is spread like a virus by search engines and other scrapers, and the damage is amplified by orders of magnitude. There is no recourse for the victim, and no one can be held accountable. Once it’s all over the web, no one has the power to put it back into the bottle.”)   Here’s another example.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Technology, Sociolinguistics | Comments Off on Wikipedia and Feminism

Man-Lovin’ Shoes

From the October 21, 2008 edition of the Chronicle of Higher Education:

Sixty-three fraternity members from Centre College donned identical red pumps and hobbled en masse through downtown Danville, Ky., last week as part of “Walk a Mile in Her Shoes,” a nationwide effort to raise awareness about violence against women, to raise money for the cause, and to encourage discussion by injecting a little levity into a deadly serious topic.   About 100 other fraternity members in sensible footwear joined the walk, which was organized by the college’s interfraternity council.

The full article is here (pay site – sorry).   The full name of the official campaign is “Walk a Mile in Her Shoes:  The International Men’s March to Stop Rape, Sexual Assault & Gender Violence.”   More information is available here.   I think that this is an example of very creative, 21st century  activism with a large dose of media saavy.   Fraternities at Ohio State and Wyoming have held similar events. Great idea!

-Bridget Crawford

 

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Coerced Sex, Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on Man-Lovin’ Shoes

Welcome to the Blogosphere, Constitutional Law Profs

Feminist Law Profs Nareissa Smith (Florida Coastal) and Ruthann Robson (CUNY), together with Steven Schwinn (John Marshall), have launched the Constitutional Law Prof Blog.  Here’s an excerpt from their announcement:  

We are proud to announce a new blog.   The Constitutional Law Prof Blog is the newest member of the Law Professor Blogs Network, sponsored by Thompson West.  ***  

Our blog began on October 5, 2008.   In that short time, we have already logged 907 visitors.   We hope you will join our readership as well.  

While there are a number of blogs that discuss Supreme Court news and related issues, this blog is unique in its focus on making teaching and scholarship easier for the constitutional law professor.   Moreover, we do not limit our reach to the Supreme Court.     We address issues of constitutional law arising in Congress, the executive branch, lower federal courts, state and local courts, and anywhere else they may occur.  

Readers of the blog will be treated to book reviews, analysis, research, and much more.     Regular features include:

  •  The Sunday Reader – a look at legal scholarship you may want to incorporate into your teaching or scholarship
  •  The Saturday Evening Review – an analysis of law review articles that are useful in teaching con law concepts  
  •  The Teaching Assistant – a compilation of stories from around the web that raise constitutional law issues

Please visit the blog and spread the word!

Welcome to the blogosphere, Constitutional Law Profs!

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Blogs Of Interest | Comments Off on Welcome to the Blogosphere, Constitutional Law Profs

Target Women: Cleaning

Cleaning as a substitute for romance? Here.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on Target Women: Cleaning

Catharine MacKinnon’s Endorsement of Obama

Professor Catharine MacKinnon’s editorial endorsing Barack Obama appears in today’s Wall Street Journal (of all places!).   It is titled “Obama is the Way Forward for Women: Abortion Rights and Equal Pay Are at Stake in the Election” and focuses largely on the way the next President will affect the law of women’s rights.   Some excerpts:

At stake in this presidential election are the federal courts.   Despite inroads, women’s status remains characterized by sex-based poverty and impunity for sexual abuse from childhood on. The next president will appoint scores of lower court federal judges who will have the last word in most cases. One, perhaps three, justices may be named to a Supreme Court that in recent years has decided many cases of importance to women by just one vote. Equality can be promoted in employment, education, reproductive rights and in ending violence against women — or not.

***

Positions on women’s rights do not divide neatly along conventional political lines, nor is abortion their sole template. As Justice Sandra Day O’Connor demonstrated, conservatives can oppose sexism they see in operation, including forms of violence against women that some liberals do not see as such. Reaching across ideology can win legal arguments, but who judges those arguments, at this moment in time, could make or break women’s equality in law, hence in life, for generations. An Obama presidency could restore that balance in fairness that ideological appointments by past administrations have upset, and that Mr. McCain has committed to continue.

Neither presidential candidate has taken a position on all of these issues. But the decision, in Mr. Obama’s words, on “what kind of America our daughters will grow up in” could not be more urgent. At stake is nothing less than whether women will be, finally, equal.

– David S. Cohen

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Catharine MacKinnon’s Endorsement of Obama

Is District of Columbia v. Heller like Roe v. Wade?

Two federal judges apparently think so. From the NYT:

Two prominent federal appeals court judges say that Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion in the case, District of Columbia v. Heller, is illegitimate, activist, poorly reasoned and fueled by politics rather than principle. The 5-to-4 decision in Heller struck down parts of a District of Columbia gun control law.

The judges used what in conservative legal circles are the ultimate fighting words: They said the gun ruling was a right-wing version of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that identified a constitutional right to abortion. Justice Scalia has said that Roe had no basis in the Constitution and amounted to a judicial imposition of a value judgment that should have been left to state legislatures.

Comparisons of the two decisions, then, seemed calculated to sting.

“The Roe and Heller courts are guilty of the same sins,”one of the two appeals court judges, J. Harvie Wilkinson III, wrote in an article to be published in the spring in The Virginia Law Review.

Similarly, Judge Richard A. Posner, in an article in The New Republic in August, wrote that Heller’s failure to allow the political process to work out varying approaches to gun control that were suited to local conditions”was the mistake that the Supreme Court made when it nationalized abortion rights in Roe v. Wade.”…

Read the rest here.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law | Comments Off on Is District of Columbia v. Heller like Roe v. Wade?

“U.S. suicide rates appear to be on the rise, driven mostly by middle-aged white women, researchers reported on Tuesday.”

Short article here.

Share
Posted in Women's Health | Comments Off on “U.S. suicide rates appear to be on the rise, driven mostly by middle-aged white women, researchers reported on Tuesday.”

CFP Succotash: critical reflections on the 2008 U.S. Presidential campaigns

Eds. María Ochoa, Alvina Quintana, Myra Mendible, Barbara K. Ige
We seek papers that provide a variety of critical frames for the many, indeed thousands, of exchanges–––formal and informal, analytical and reflective–––that are brought about and sustained by the 2008 campaigns for U.S. President and Vice President. We welcome political, social, and cultural reflections, critiques, and analyses that have stakes in current discussions by, for, and about U.S. women of color feminist and transnational/postcolonial feminist discourses within and outside of the United States.Possible topics include, but not limited to:

• Mis/appropriations of feminism as a label, project, agenda
• Re‐alignments and alliances across racial/ethnic lines
•”Mainstreaming”of identity politics
• Reconstituting whiteness as a political entity
• Mommy Wars: Hillary, Sarah, Michelle, and their daughters/sons
• Body politics: the visual representation of candidates
• Battles for/among voters of color, particularly Latinas/os and Blacks
• Invisible constituencies: Asian, Pacific Islander, American Indian, Middle East populations
• Out of the rainbow, on to Main Street: LGBTG matters
• Youth/campus activism
• Discourse analyses: the presentation of candidates, platforms, ideas
• Transnational analyses: thinking global, acting local
• Rhetorical strategies or frameworks
• Exploitation of nativist, racist, sexist sentiments
• Militarism/diplomacy
• Social constructs of rights, entitlements, and privilege
• Cross‐dressings: the cooptation of language and signifiers
• Faith based activism: clerics and congregations
• It’s the economy, stupid: just don’t talk about poverty or poor people
• All in the family: constructs, illusions, visions
• Circuits of information, dissemination, disbursal of news
• Re/Framing of international perspectives regarding the United States
Submission Guidelines
• Deadline for abstracts: October 31, 2008
• Deadline for first draft of completed pieces: January 30, 2009
• Deadline for final draft: April 1, 2009
• Send 300‐500 word abstracts outlining the intent and scope of the paper, and where appropriate, author’s theoretical, empirical, and/or methodological framework and one‐page bios to: <succotash.info@gmail.com>
• N.B. Abstracts and bios will be utilized in the book prospectus.
• Submittal format: Please save all work in MS Word format using Times New Roman, 12‐point font size and double‐spaced. Papers should adhere to Modern Language Association (MLA) style guidelines, APA style, or law review Bluebook citation format. Papers should be 15‐25 pages plus references. If you have additional questions, please e‐mail: <succotash.info@gmail.com>

Share
Posted in Call for Papers or Participation, Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on CFP Succotash: critical reflections on the 2008 U.S. Presidential campaigns

Gay, Married and Testate in Queens

In Queens, New York, the executor of a gay person’s estate must follow different procedures than the executor of a straight person’s estate, so says The Honorable Robert L. Nahman, in a decision issued last month.

Because of the uncertain validity of same-sex marriages in New York, Surrogate Nahman ruled, the parents of a decedent survived by a same-sex spouse have standing to contest the decedent’s will, even though the parents of a decedent survived by an opposite-sex spouse would not have standing.

To give context to Surrogate Nahman’s ruling, consider the statutory background.   Under New York law, a decedent’s “distributees” are entitled to be served with process in a probate proceeding.   NY SCPA 1403.   In other words, “distributees” have standing to contest the will.   Who is a distributee?   According to NY EPTL 1-2.5, a decedent’s “distributees” are his or her intestate takers.   Who are they?

  • If the decedent is survived by a spouse and issue, the spouse and issue, are the decedent’s intestate takers.
  • If the decedent is survived by a spouse and no issue, the decedent’s intestate taker is the spouse.
  • If the decedent is not survived by a spouse or issue, the decedent’s surviving parent(s) are the decedent’s intestate takers.

NY EPTL 4-1.1.   Ordinarily, this means that if a decedent is survived by a spouse, then the parents are not parties to the probate process.   But at least for now, in Queens County (NY), different rules apply to same-sex surviving spouses.   In the case of the Estate of Alan Zwerling (reported in the New York Law Journal on September 9, 2008) Surrogate Nahman declined to admit Mr. Zwerling’s will to probate, until his parents were served, even though the petitioner (the nominated executor, the decedent’s brother) submitted a copy of the decedent’s marriage certificate from a ceremony in Ontario, Canada.   The decedent was survived by his spouse.

Surrogate Nahman reasoned that “the validity of same-sex marriages has not been definitively determined by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department (see Funderburke v New York State Dep’t. of Civ. Serv., 49 AD3d 809 [2008])” and therefore the only way “to ensure that the decree in this proceeding is final and not subject to a subsequent jurisdictional attack” was to make Mr. Zwerling’s parents parties to the proceeding.  

It is hard to know whether the Surrogate’s decision is motivated by an abundance of caution, or whether it sets up a direct challenge to Governor David Patterson’s directive that New York state agencies must recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions.   In this particular case, citing Mr. Zwerling’s parents may (or may not) make any difference; it could be that they have no objections to the probate of Mr. Zwerling’s will.   But if they do, the probate of Mr. Zwerling’s estate will be delayed and more expensive than if Mr. Zwerling had been survived by an opposite-sex spouse.   The law should not countenance that sort of fundamental unfairness.

-Bridget Crawford
 

Share
Posted in LGBT Rights | Comments Off on Gay, Married and Testate in Queens

Lawyers’ Salaries: Mommy Penalties, Daddy Bonuses, and Pure Gender Effects

Even among highly educated professionals, there is a persistent difference in the salaries of men and women. Untangling the reasons for that difference is quite difficult, and it involves as a threshold matter trying to figure out whether there are factors other than gender that explain why women earn less than men. Some studies have suggested that the difference in salaries is not in the first instance about the gender of the worker but about the worker’s status as a parent or non-parent. Some empirical research, for example, has found that men with children earn more than everyone else in their fields but that there are no detectable differences among women with children, women without children, and men without children.

I recently finished a draft of a paper (available here) in which I looked at the results of two surveys of graduates of the University of Michigan Law School from the classes of 1970 through 1996. These surveys were developed by Richard Lempert, David Chambers, and Terry Adams, who used the data from the first survey to study the effects of race on lawyers’ careers in their fascinating article: “Michigan’s Minority Graduates in Practice: The River Runs Through Law School,” 25 L. & Soc. Inquiry 395 (2000). Professor Lempert and his co-authors administered a follow-up survey that gathered information about gender and parental status; and they allowed me to use their data for the empirical analysis summarized in my draft paper.

Most of my paper is focused on technical matters of survey techniques and econometric analysis. For those who find such matters tedious or worse, the most direct discussion of the statistical results is in the introduction and conclusion and on pp. 30-32. My tentative results confirm the “daddy bonus” that others’ have found in other studies, with the range of estimates suggesting a 15-20% salary advantage for fathers. Unlike previous studies, however, I also find a strong suggestion that women with children endure a “mommy penalty,” earning perhaps 10-15% less than the childless (and thus 25-35% less than fathers). I also find some weaker statistical support for the hypothesis that childless women earn less than childless men, with my estimates suggesting an 8-9% difference disfavoring women.

The wonderful thing about empirical research is that every interesting set of results demands further study. Can my results regarding the salary losses for mothers and childless women be confirmed by further research? Although I also look at differences such as part-time status, the ages of children, and whether the children are living with the lawyer-parent, what other evidence should be taken into account in future studies?

Perhaps a more intriguing question is why the salary disadvantages against women and in favor of men largely show up through parental status. (Parenting itself still tends to be characterized by massive differences in gender roles, of course. Even if all of the difference in salaries between men and women were mostly about differences in child-rearing, therefore, this would simply relocate the question of how sexism continues to affect women and men differently.) Because this draft is mostly a technical discussion of empirical results, I speculate only briefly on the reasons for the daddy bonus, offering three possibilities: fathers feel the need to work harder to bring home more bread for the family, men wait to become fathers until their salaries are high enough to support a growing family, and (my cynical favorite) fathers shirk childcare responsibilities by hiding in the office and incidentally raising their salaries.

Fortunately, the surveys from which I drew my data are now being superseded by an even larger study of Michigan law graduates, with more detailed questions and more respondents from more graduating classes. This will allow researchers to use “panel data” techniques and other sophisticated methods of searching for statistical relationships.

Because I plan to be one of those researchers, I would be especially interested in readers’ suggestions (either on the Comment board or via email: nbuchanan@law.gwu.edu) regarding both how to improve and refine the regressions and how to explain the results. The best way to analyze empirical issues is to analyze data from as many angles as possible, so I will be very appreciative of any constructive suggestions.

-Neil H. Buchanan

[Cross-posted from Dorf on Law (here) with permission. – ed.]

Share
Posted in Legal Profession, Women and Economics | Comments Off on Lawyers’ Salaries: Mommy Penalties, Daddy Bonuses, and Pure Gender Effects

“Girls’ Books” and Financial Hard Times

Over at slate.com, Erica Perl recalls her favorite books from childhood:

The first time I heard the word  recession, I was 10 years old. It was 1978, and my parents, like everyone we knew, were cranky and stressed out about gas shortages and rising food prices. One of the ways I coped was by burying my nose in books and discovering kids who had it worse than I did. Like Ramona Quimby, whose dad got fired and took up residence on the couch. And Laura Ingalls, whose dad kept hitching up the wagon to drag his bonneted brood to the middle of nowhere. Many of the books I discovered during the late ’70s featured themes of economic hardship that made my circumstances seem manageable by comparison:a happy coincidence, I thought at the time. Looking back, I’m not so sure this was an accident. A review of popular American children’s books of the past century reveals a recurring theme in the children’s publishing industry: When times are tough, cue the stories about times that were even tougher.

The full article is here.  Perl looks at 2008, with the release of the movie version of Kit Kittredge: An American Girl, noting that “plot points in the movie include lost income, foreclosure, and rationing.”  Apparently Ramona Quimby is headed for the big screen, too, and a stage version of Little House on the Prairie is likely bound for Broadway. Perl’s point: in financial hard times, stories of harder times are “in” in children’s literature.

Without more data, I’m not willing to embrace Perl’s thesis.  After all, the company that brought us the American Girl series got its traction in the late 1980’s/early 1990’s — which weren’t all bad financial years.  And Ramona and Laura…they’ve been popular forever.  My question for those more knowledgeable of children’s literature is whether there is a gender angle to the “financial hard times” narratives and books marketed specifically to girls?  

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on “Girls’ Books” and Financial Hard Times

Brava to ACLU’s terrific new president

This weekend the ACLU elected my wonderful former colleague, Brooklyn Law School Professor Susan Herman, as its new president.   There are many things to love about Susan: her integrity, her intelligence and her wisdom, among others.   Susan’s recent scholarship has centered on the Patriot Act and other Bush era horrors. At Brooklyn,she teaches constitutional law and criminal law as well as a seminar on terrorism and civil liberties that routinely produces a long student waiting list. The ACLU chose well, and we can all celebrate that such an immensely important organization will be led by such an immensely principled and gracious woman.

Nan Hunter – cross posted at hunter of justice

Share
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Brava to ACLU’s terrific new president

Happy Birthday, Ntozake Shange!

From brittanica.com, this short bio:

Shange attended Barnard College (B.A., 1970) and the University of Southern California (M.A., 1973). From 1972 to 1975 she taught humanities, women’s studies, and Afro-American studies at California colleges. During this period she also made public appearances as a dancer and reciter of poetry. Her 1975 theatre piece  For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Suicide/When the Rainbow Is Enuf  quickly brought her fame. Written for seven actors,  For Colored Girls  is a group of 20 poems on the power of black women to survive in the face of despair and pain. It ran for seven months Off-Broadway  in New York City, then moved to Broadway and was subsequently produced throughout the United States and broadcast on television.

Shange created a number of other theatre works that employed poetry, dance, and  music  while abandoning conventions of plot and character development. One of the most popular of these was her 1980 adaptation of  Bertolt Brecht‘s  Mother Courage,  featuring a black family in the time of the American Civil War.

 Happy Birthday to Ntozake Shange!

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on Happy Birthday, Ntozake Shange!

“Topless Sarah Palin lookalike contest”

In Vegas. Via. Because sexualizing Sarah Palin is a great way to disparage her. See also, see also, see also, most revoltingly of all, see also.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Sexism in the Media | Comments Off on “Topless Sarah Palin lookalike contest”

Women for McCain

Comedian Katie Halper has made a compelling spoof video entitled “Women for McCain.”   It’s worth watching and sending to anyone you know who cares about women’s rights but also might be thinking about voting for McCain:

Women for McCain

– David S. Cohen

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Women for McCain

A Great Loss

I just learned that today a recent graduate of our law school was killed. She was a terrific person, and her parents are two of the finest people I know, period. I wish the blogosphere was the kind of place where I could post the details, and be confident that anyone who contacted the grieving family in response would do so appropriately and with good intentions. But of course I can’t.

I need to go have a good cry about this, and then figure out what if anything I can usefully do to help the family. Blogging here by me may be sparse for a few days. I’d like to close this post with something profound, but my brain isn’t working very well right now. Peace to you all.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Blog Administration, South Carolina | Comments Off on A Great Loss

“Baylor University is being called ‘the poster child for SAT misuse’ after the student newspaper revealed an unusual practice: paying admitted freshmen to retake the SAT and offering large financial rewards for those whose scores go up by certain levels.”

That’s the first line of this article in Inside Higher Ed. Via Historiann, who adds the usual colorful commentary and illustrations that make her so popular around these here parts. Of course here in law school land, we are witnessing similar shenanigans. (Last link via Leiter.)

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Academia, Hackery | Comments Off on “Baylor University is being called ‘the poster child for SAT misuse’ after the student newspaper revealed an unusual practice: paying admitted freshmen to retake the SAT and offering large financial rewards for those whose scores go up by certain levels.”

The Sexual Exploitation of Women Dramatized and Documented

Trade is a movie that dramatizes sex trafficking. The movie’s web site asserts:

The practice of slavery in the US is something most people think ended with the 13th Amendment in 1865, but in recent years it has returned in an even more virulent form. Fueled by the collapse of the Soviet Union and other eastern European countries, new technologies like the internet, and sieve-like borders, the traffic in human beings has become an epidemic of colossal dimensions. The State Department estimates that as many as 800,000 people are trafficked over international frontiers each year, largely for sexual exploitation. Eighty percent are female and over fifty percent are minors. Many people in this country push this atrocity out of their minds, believing that it only occurs in faraway countries like Thailand, Cambodia, the Ukraine and Bosnia. The truth is that the United States has become a large-scale importer of sex slaves. Free the Slaves, America’s largest anti-slavery organization estimates that at least 10,000 people a year are smuggled or duped into this country by sex traffickers.

If you need evidence that Trade is based on real events, you can watch this extremely alarming and explicit news report.

Both links via Heart, who says:

We document and document and document the enslavement of girls and women for the purposes of rape. Below is a news video made of men in the act of this rape. It goes on and on and on anyway, day in, day out, and has for thousands of years. Undoubtedly the rapists in the film below would say they went to”prostitutes”and”paid for sex,”although, in fact, they have raped enslaved, kidnapped girls or women. Undoubtedly the rapists and pimps depicted here have mothers, wives, girlfriends, daughters, sisters, granddaughters, yet, they rape and brutalize and torture. Undoubtedly these men, if confronted, would say,”What? They got paid for it.” Because in their disordered, messed up minds, paying a woman means she can not be raped or tortured or brutalized. She sold whatever human rights she might have had, so far as they are concerned, for twenty bucks, thirty without a condom.

It won’t even begin to solve everything, but one step that will offer help rather than arrest to trafficked women, and will increase resources to combat trafficking of all varieties, is passage of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (H.R. 3887).

It is being opposed by the Bush Justice Department, which has a particularized objection to”wasting money”on the adult victims of sex trafficking, who are seen as less worthy of help than victims forced to work in other industries, due to the sexualized nature of their servitude.

As I also blogged earlier, when (now SLED Chief) Reggie Lloyd took over as South Carolina’s US Attorney, he began investigating whether women arrested for prostitution in South Carolina had been trafficked, and if there was evidence that they had been, they were neither jailed not deported. If H.R. 3387 was passed, every state would be required to adopt the same, far more humane approach. Bringing federal law enforcement into the mix will lead to better and more consistent application of trafficking laws, and hopefully reduce the number of “freebies” that local police often demand from prostituted women.

All trafficked women deserve humane treatment; working as coerced prostitutes does not”contaminate”people or make them less worthy of compassion or assistance. Those who would consign trafficked people to sex slavery, arrest and/or deportation should be challenged vigorously. As a recent NYT article noted in pertinent part:

The legislation provides federal funds to local trafficking task forces made up of prosecutors, law enforcement officials and social service groups. The social service groups are supposed to help identify victims and then provide them with the guidance and support they need to rebuild their lives.

According to federal estimates as many as 17,000 people : most of them women and children : are brought into this country and forced to work in brutal and inhumane conditions, often as prostitutes. The 42 federally funded task forces that have been set up have only been able to identify a small fraction of those victims.

There are many reasons for this. Traffickers are experts at moving people around without being detected. They also train the women they exploit to fear the police. The task forces are often understaffed, with too few investigators to do the job effectively. That needs to change if the country is going to get at this problem.

Prosecutors are also having a hard time making cases against traffickers and pimps. Even victims who are not too terrified to testify, must meet a very difficult standard. They must prove that they did not consent to become prostitutes and did so because of”force, fraud or coercion.”

The House reauthorization would help prosecutions by adding the Mann Act’s somewhat easier-to-prove standards that calls for prosecution of pimps who”persuade, induce, entice”women into prostitution. The Senate should add that language as well.

I’ve done legal work for women who were forced into prostitution by poverty and substance abuse. They have really hard lives, and the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act will not be a panacea, but it will help some women, and it will not harm any unless they are pimps. See also.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Coerced Sex, Feminism and Law, Sisters In Other Nations | Comments Off on The Sexual Exploitation of Women Dramatized and Documented

Teen boy gives lifeguard a Pepsi in exchange for the opportunity to sexually assault an unconscious woman?

Via. Two other ads in the series are below:

ETA: Details about these ads by the agency that created them for Pepsi is available here. And, see also. And, see also.

For another example of sexist advertising by Pepsi as part of its “Pepsi Exchange” series, go here, and here.

Share
Posted in Sexism in the Media | Comments Off on Teen boy gives lifeguard a Pepsi in exchange for the opportunity to sexually assault an unconscious woman?

CFP: Women, Equality and Fiscal Policy: Gender Analysis of Taxes, Spending and Budgets

Call for papers for workshop on :

Women, Equality, and Fiscal Policy:

Gender Analysis of Taxes, Spending, and Budgets

   

Context and purpose of the workshop:

The political economy of women is deeply affected by gender differences: women’s incomes are, over their lives, lower than men’s, yet women work longer hours in both paid and unpaid work, and are expected to perform significantly larger shares of caregiving than men.   In contrast, men’s incomes are consistently higher beginning shortly after entering the paid labour force, and women’s demands for equality have not yet resulted in much change in the allocation of underpaid, unpaid, or caregiving work.   Nor is this situation changing for the better: standard gender equality indicators make it clear that women have been losing ground to men on all these issues since the early 2000s.

 

Over the last 25 years, the role that governmental taxation and spending functions play in reproducing women’s gender disadvantages has become increasingly visible.   Examination of core issues, such as the relationship between women, caregiving, and poverty; barriers to women’s empowerment; and the gendered allocation of unpaid and precarious work, have revealed important links between specific tax and expenditure measures and the status of women.   However, as contemporary governments increasingly look for ‘magic tax wands’ to solve economic, social, and political problems, it has become obvious that politically-palatable gender-specific measures such as the Canada Child Tax Benefit or the Universal Child Care Benefit are not adequate to effect any genuine change in the status of women.

 

At the same time, the negative gender impact of recent changes to basic tax structures : changes in the definition of the tax base; moving from the individual to the adult couple as the tax unit; replacing progressive rate structures with flattened rates; and dramatic changes in the overall tax mix : have gone largely ignored even as these changes have exacerbated hidden fiscal barriers to women’s equality.

What is striking is that these dynamics have not gone unchallenged.   Women have repeatedly spelled out the shortcomings of specific tax and benefit provisions, have articulated their needs in detail, and have shared their visions of genuine equality in every available venue.   To date, however, no government in Canada has addressed the fundamental structural biases that are built into existing fiscal instruments.   Indeed, virtually every important fiscal change over the last three decades has intensified gender regressivity, not reversed it.   Fundamental changes such as the enactment of express income splitting and tax subsidies for women’s financial dependency, shifts from progressive income taxation to consumption-based taxation, and dramatic cuts to personal and business tax rates all systemically have bolstered men’s after-tax incomes at the expense of women’s after-tax incomes.

 

This workshop brings together experts in tax law and policy, women’s studies, economics, fiscal sociology, development studies, and political science.   This workshop has two goals:   to further the cross-disciplinary documentation and analysis of the gender impact of fiscal instruments, and to examine the use of gender budgeting tools to eliminate gender-regressive fiscal policies at all levels of government.

 

Call for papers:

This workshop invites experts in gender studies, social and public policy, tax law, economics, accounting, development studies, and political science to address fiscal measures from gender perspectives, and/or to discuss methodological, theoretical, comparative, or empirical approaches that are useful in gender analysis.  

 

Date and location of workshop:

The workshop will be held at Queen’s University Faculty of Law, Kingston, Ont. on Saturday, March 7, 2008, from 9 am to 4 pm.   There will be an informal reception the evening before, and a dinner on the Saturday for those who will be remaining in Kingston on Saturday evening.   Information on accommodation will be provided to those who request it.

 

Submitting paper topics:

If you are interested in presenting a paper at this workshop, please email your paper topic and a short (one paragraph) description to Kathleen Lahey at kal2@post.queensu.ca.   This can be sent any time until approximately Dec. 1, 2008, and your participation will be confirmed within 10 days of receipt of your topic and description.

 

The purpose of this workshop is to bring those whose work concerns gender analysis of tax and spending law together in a working session; therefore all those indicating an interest will be welcome to present.   Attendance without presenting a paper is also welcome.

 

Travel funding:

At this point, only limited seed funding for this workshop has been received. When submitting your topic, please indicate whether you would be able to obtain institutional support to attend, or whether you could attend only if you receive funding from Feminist Legal Studies Queen’s. Special funding to assist students who wish to attend will be sought.

Share
Posted in Call for Papers or Participation, Upcoming Conferences, Women and Economics | Comments Off on CFP: Women, Equality and Fiscal Policy: Gender Analysis of Taxes, Spending and Budgets

Against Mandatory Guardasil Vaccinations

Read:The State Can Violate Women’s Bodies if They Want  to

At WoC Phd.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Women's Health | Comments Off on Against Mandatory Guardasil Vaccinations

“Number of women, minority attorneys at big firms ticks up : but not in partnership ranks”

The National Law Journal Reports:

The number of women and minority attorneys at major U.S. law firms is creeping up, but those groups remain significantly underrepresented in the partner ranks.

That finding comes from a new report by the National Association for Law Placement (NALP), which analyzed 2008 demographics from firms in 46 cities.

Minority women remain the most underrepresented group among law firm partners, according to the report. They currently make up 1.88% of partners at law firms. By contrast, the report found that minority men make up 4.21% of partners, and women overall account for 18.74% of partners.

The report highlights the difference in the number of minority women partners from their numbers in the associate and summer associate category.

Minority women made up 12.99% of 2008 summer associates and 10.74% of all associates, which is more than four times their representation among partners.

Read the entire article here.It notes that the cities with the highest number of WoC law form partners include Miami, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Jose, and Austin, Texas.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Legal Profession, Race and Racism, The Underrepresentation of Women | Comments Off on “Number of women, minority attorneys at big firms ticks up : but not in partnership ranks”

Why Women Should Control Wall Street

So last week when I received my TIAA-CREF statement (like many professors, I assume) you might have heard me scream from Milwaukee.   But now I have a better idea–I should be running the market!   Tim Harford, a columnist for the Financial Times and author of The Logic of Life:  The Rational Economics of an Irrational World explained last week on NPR that men are too hormonal to be running Wall Street.   Yes, let me repeat that, men are too hormonal.   As Mr. Harford explains,

There’s a former Wall Street trader who is now a researcher at Cambridge University in the UK. His name is John Coates. What he told me was that when he ran a trading desk in Wall Street during the last dot com boom and bust, he found that his traders were exhibiting almost physical symptoms of mania. So they were punching the air. They were yelling. There was – not to put too fine a point on it – there was more pornography floating around in the office. This is of course is a very masculine, macho environment. But what John Coates also noticed was that the few women who were on the trading floor didn’t seem to be affected.

Looking into this, he discovered that this sort of behavior is actually really common in many male animals. What happens is, you have, say, two gorillas or two stags fighting each other. One of them wins. They get a surge of the hormone testosterone. It makes them aggressive. It makes them take risks. And that goes on for several days. And then one day, effectively they are suffering from testosterone poisoning. These traders are basically suffering from exactly the same symptoms as rutting stags.

Ari Shapiro, the NPR reporter then follows up with the next logical question,  “So we should put women in charge of Wall Street, is that  what you’re saying?”   Mr. Harford replies,”Well, that’s a possibility, assuming that women want to be in  charge in Wall Street, yeah.”   This, of course, leads to the question of who actually wants to be in charge of this mess.   But, in fact, some limited studies demonstrate that when women serve on corporate boards, the companies do better.   See Conglomerate for more on this conversation.

So,  the lesson for my pension fund advisors–I hope you have a mix of men and women making investment decisions and I also hope you are investing in companies with a mix of men and women on the board.   (I also hope that  my next quarterly statement is an improvement!)

–Andrea Schneider

Cross posted at The ADR Prof Blog.

Share
Posted in Feminism and the Workplace, Women and Economics | Comments Off on Why Women Should Control Wall Street

“Female Fighters” – an account of a female battalion of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK.

Here. Via Screaming Into the Void.

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Feminism and Politics, Sisters In Other Nations | Comments Off on “Female Fighters” – an account of a female battalion of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK.

Scott on “Surrogacy and the Politics of Commodification”


 Elizabeth Scott (Columbia) has posted to ssrn her article “Surrogacy and the Politics of Commodification.”  Here is the abstract:

This essay examines the changing social and political meaning of surrogacy contracts over the twenty years since this issue first attracted public attention in the context of the Baby M case in the 1980s. In the protracted course of the Baby M litigation, surrogacy was effectively framed as illegitimate commodification – baby selling and the exploitation of women. This framing can be attributed to a moral panic generated by the media, politicians and a coalition of interest groups opposing surrogacy – primarily feminists and religious conservatives. The framing of surrogacy as commodification had far reaching effects on legal regulation. In the post-Baby M period, lawmakers in many states moved to prohibit or severely restrict surrogacy arrangements. In recent years, however, the framing of surrogacy as commodification has been replaced to a large extent by a more benign characterization which emphasizes the useful service provided by surrogates to childless couples. Further, over the past decade, regulators increasingly have focused on the goal of reducing uncertainty and providing procedures to efficiently establish the parental status of intended parents.

This essay seeks to explain these changes. Several factors have been important: First, hostility to surrogacy has declined because the moral panic has dissipated as many of the predicted harms have not been realized. Further, advances in in vitro fertilization (IVF) have expanded the use of gestational surrogacy, which is less readily framed as commodification and thus, more palatable than traditional surrogacy. Finally, the interest group dynamic has changed: Women’s groups have withdrawn, plausibly because the kinds of arguments made against surrogacy increasingly were adopted by anti-abortion advocates. These conditions have contributed to a political climate in which lawmakers have adopted a pragmatic approach, regulating with a goal of minimizing the social cost of surrogacy.

The full article is available here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Legal Scholarship, Women's Health | Comments Off on Scott on “Surrogacy and the Politics of Commodification”

This will give you a bit of a laugh.

Here.

ETA: The best part is at the very end.

Share
Posted in Bloggenpheffer | Comments Off on This will give you a bit of a laugh.

“The latest in the Mmm, Sexy Pink Breast Cancer! Save The Boobies Awareness sweepstakes…”

Read a deconstruction here at Hoyden About Town. And don’t miss the associated comments thread!

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Sexism in the Media | Comments Off on “The latest in the Mmm, Sexy Pink Breast Cancer! Save The Boobies Awareness sweepstakes…”

Women and High Heels

Today’s WSJ reports that in response to demand from women, fashion designers are making heels higher and higher, some up to 7 inches (yes, you read that correctly).   The shoes can cost up to $1500.   Some of the shoes are so unstable that models (yes, models!) were crying backstage at fashion shows because they were so nervous about wearing them. Not surprisingly, women (including models, who walk in these things for a living) fall all the time in these shoes, often breaking or spraining their ankles.   Women also report back problems and other health issues. Yet the thrust of the article is clear: many women will pay for these shoes and  want to  wear these shoes.

I know the WSJ isn’t interested in portraying women in a good light, so they didn’t interview the zillions of women who wouldn’t be caught in shoes like this.   And yes, the fashion industry is misogynist (they want to make money off women hurting themselves, literally). But still. Some of this rings true and it is depressing. The article quotes mostly professional women defending their choice to wear very high skinny heels (often to business meetings).   I know I’m probably preaching to the choir here, but I truly can’t understand this.   I mean, 5, 6, 7 inches? Why would you cripple yourself like this? Why is being unable to walk (or run) “sexy” if you are a woman? Why is putting yourself at physical risk “sexy” if you are a woman?

-Kathy Stanchi

ETA: See also this, this, this, this, this, this and this.

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture | Comments Off on Women and High Heels

“Islamic law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases.”

That’s the first sentence of this article from the online version of the London Times. It reports in part:

The government has quietly sanctioned the powers for sharia judges to rule on cases ranging from divorce and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence.

Rulings issued by a network of five sharia courts are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system, through the county courts or High Court.

Previously, the rulings of sharia courts in Britain could not be enforced, and depended on voluntary compliance among Muslims.

It has now emerged that sharia courts with these powers have been set up in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester with the network’s headquarters in Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Two more courts are being planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, said he had taken advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996.

Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case. …

The article additionally notes:

… There are concerns that women who agree to go to tribunal courts are getting worse deals because Islamic law favours men.

Siddiqi said that in a recent inheritance dispute handled by the court in Nuneaton, the estate of a Midlands man was divided between three daughters and two sons.

The judges on the panel gave the sons twice as much as the daughters, in accordance with sharia. Had the family gone to a normal British court, the daughters would have got equal amounts.

In the six cases of domestic violence, Siddiqi said the judges ordered the husbands to take anger management classes and mentoring from community elders. There was no further punishment. …

Via Reclusive Leftist, where Violet writes:

I suppose the defenders of this policy argue that it’s okay because the Muslim women have to”voluntarily”submit to the authority of the sharia courts before the rulings are handed down. But it makes no sense : absolutely no sense : to talk about women under the thumb of patriarchal domination”voluntarily”submitting to their own oppression. As a rule, women and girls in a patriarchy lack the social, financial, and psychological autonomy to buck masculine rule. Dig it: that’s how patriarchy works.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Feminism and Religion, Sisters In Other Nations | Comments Off on “Islamic law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases.”

Racism, Sexism and Political Blogging

A McCain supporter is getting well deserved censure for posting a picture of Obama paired with the image of a noose, with the words “asphyxtiation, the Fucking Solution.” You can read about it and see the image here. This is just odious. (Via Pam’s House Blend, where there is more analysis.) The blogger responsible tried to justify this act by citing violent imagery directed at Sarah Palin, such as this image of her getting punched in the mouth.

To make a trite and obvious (one would hope) point, one wrong doesn’t justify another. I wish everybody would ramp down the hate, and stop trying to leverage race or gender against Obama and Palin.   Neither can be winning over undecided voters. It seems like some folks are using the election as an excuse to hate.

–Ann Bartow

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics | Comments Off on Racism, Sexism and Political Blogging