Ms. Magazine: The Clinic Across the Street

I don't always read Ms. magazine but will pick it up if something catches my eye. This years Fall issue is out and I quickly became absorbed in one of the cover stories about crisis pregnancy centers. A Crisis Pregnancy Center (CPC) is not an abortion clinic and it does not provide abortions. They do not refer women to places that provide abortions.

These aren't medical centers. Women are encouraged to make sure they are pregnant before making any decisions by coming in to take a free pregnancy test. They offer counseling, ultrasounds and adoption placement. Most CPC's set themselves in a helpful, caring and supportive light. They are run by Catholics, Anti-Choice groups and some are operated by well know anti-abortion extremists. The clinics don't say that they aren't abortion clinics but they will advertise "abortion alternatives"

In Wichita, Kansas, Dr. George Tiller was the provider of abortions at the Women Heath Care Services clinic. Dr. Tiller was shot multiple times by anti-abortionists who eventually succeeded in murdering in 2009. Tiller was killed while serving as an usher at his church.

My problems with CPCs are not particularly complicated. These are misguided, often federally funded groups that go so far as to lie in order to convince women not to have abortions. I obviously think pregnant women should be able to have every option available to them and that they should be given honest factual information. I'm sure that some CPCs don't lie to women outright but I'm also sure that they don't all tell the truth. Given the fact that they are more determined to just get women inside of their centers as opposed to providing them with quality care.

Let's look at what the names of some CPCs. Here are a few examples; First Concern, A Woman's Concern, Friends of the Unborn, Another way, A New Life, Life Saver and my favorite, Heartbeat. One CPC in Ghent, New York goes by the name We Care. Also in New York and many other states is a CPC called Birth right.

One CPC in Alaska states that while abortion may seem like the easiest way to take care of an unplanned pregnancy, "Most women who struggle with past abortions say they wish they had been told all of the facts before making their choice.” These places claim that abortion is the quickest and easiest decision to make when finding out you are pregnant unexpectedly. They also claim that moral and spiritual traumas await you if you decide to have an abortion. The contradiction of pushing "factual information" as well as biased and unfounded "truths" becomes very clear when reviewing the way CPCs advertise themselves as a caring, non judgmental place to turn to in a time of need. The CPC in Alaska tells you that while abortion seems like an easy choice (which it isn't) "most relationships don't survive an abortion". They assure that you could be making the biggest mistake of your life and not only that, you are going to be shunned by the societal stigma of being an abortion patient.

While there are states that have legal buffer zones that protect women entering clinics from being harassed by protectors many of them do not. Violence is not surprising when tensions are so high and so close. In Kansas, there exists a CPC directly across the street from one of the only late term abortion clinics in the country. Men and women calling themselves sidewalk counselors will often berate and ridicule women entering these clinics. One man can be heard shouting such disgusting things as "Mommy, I don't want to die, please don't kill me Mommy. I'll be a good child." This would be the extremist anti-abortionist Eugene Frye. This man has been arrested many times for super gluing clinic doors shut and defended Dr. Tillers assassin as a "justifiable homicide."

Legislators at all levels have begun to note how CPCs operate in deceptive advertising. Some places have succeeded in getting laws passed requiring truth-in-advertising standards. Some places are legally required to post in English and Spanish that they do not provide abortions or referrals or birth control. The organizers behind CPCs are not complying without a fight and some Catholic organizations have claimed freedom of speech and or religion infringements.

Violence follows extremists in every regard. The "solders" of the anti-abortion army are no exception. These people have planned clinic bombings, trespassed, committed acts of vandalism, attempted and succeeded in committing murder and what incites me is that they do so in the name of "protecting life."

Woman are some of the most staunch anti-abortionists and the numbers increase when religion is a factor (which it frequently is).When it come to males the reasoning is often faith based as well. I will say is that men are absolutely entitled to voice their opinion in terms of what they think about abortion. But you may not decide it; only if they have sired the fetus should they object to a woman's choice to abort because ultimately it remains the choice of the women. However you look at it no man has any experience with the potential of bearing the entire physical consequences of an unwanted pregnancy and because of that the majority of anti-choice men should mind their own damn business. They can read about, research, perform, object and even witness an abortion but you will never need one and you will never know what it feels like. Crisis Pregnancy Centers are a dangerous instrument of extremists and a wealth of federally funded misinformation. Women should be wary of where they turn for facts should they find themselves unexpectedly pregnant.

The Feminist Majority Foundation runs a campaign to expose fake clinics. Check out feministcampus.org

Big Girls and Crying

The 2008 election was a historically significant one in several ways. Looking back is Rebecca Traister author of "Big Girls Don't Cry: The election that changed everything for women." A writer for Salon.com, Traister provides a thorough linear narrative of what was going on behind the scenes during her time on the campaign trail writing pieces for Salon. Traister starts out as an open minded supporter of John Edwards but by primary day the women who walks into the voting booth ends up struggling with who she is going to pull the lever for.

The book focuses primarily on Hillary Clinton. Michelle Obama and Sarah Palin serve as bookends to the recounting of the fiercely fought battle for the Democratic nomination. What is obvious from the beginning is that the examples of media sexism are applicable across the board. Double standards, sexist innuendos, gender stereotypes; it's all there and it applies to all three women.

As November 2nd draws near the obvious news is that Obama has not lived up to expectations. Of course during the election is wasn't necessarily about who was more experienced or who would have the highest approval ratings two years in. Hillary Clinton had to undergo a radical transformation to even be considered as a candidate for the Democratic nomination. Women who hated her when she was first lady may have had a change of heart when she moved from the outspoken spouse that people were threatened by to the more well-behaved feminist Hillary. Her long term supporters felt alienated as she became a poster child for bipartisan cooperation.

Even if you followed the election closely this book has something you didn't catch in it. We are still living through the ramifications of the elections outcome and in hindsight it is easy to see that the 2008 election did change everything for women. What we got wasn't all positive and on the whole the problems for American women are getting more intense and more divided. Sarah Palin is not the only Republican women who has claimed that Feminism doesn't mean you need to trust other women to make there own choices.

Traisters book provides excellent insight and does so with an even handed logical mind set. Her book flows and is easy to read without becoming boring. I suggest this book for supporters of Clinton and Obama. There is also something for the Kucinch supporter, the fans of Edwards, Michelle Obama and many others. Traister gives assurance that women will undoubtedly shatter the presidential glass ceiling and that it is only a question of when.

Was the 90's our Feminist glory days? Part I.

I served coffee to Susan Faludi Saturday morning and was inspired to talk about the current state of Feminism.

I found Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women when I was a teenager. I had only briefly pondered the chronology of how Feminism went from one extreme to the other between the 1960's to modern day. As a girl growing up in the 90's it seemed to me that Feminism had happened and while the mid 80's seemed like America was still trying to get the aftertaste of the prior decades out of its mouth, the 90's was when a more global Feminism began to take shape. I grew up when there was less focus on particular issues within Feminism. The cultural aspect of woman's rights were more apparent than the biological aspect. The first two waves had overarching themes that drove a particular issue to the forefront. The third wave of Feminism is about conflict and the reaction to the topics of the first and second waves. I hope to follow this post with a more in depth exploration of 90's Feminism and what is meant when the term "Post-Feminism" is used.

Faludi followed Backlash with Stiffed: The Betrayal of the American Male in 2000. She most recently authored The Terror Dream: Myth and Misogyny in an insecure America in 2008. She lives in Cambridge Ma. and is very polite to her albeit quirky coffee servers.

Women hating Women, (The A word part II)

If there was ever a time to be worried about your reproductive freedom the time is now.

If religion is your bases for your opinion on Abortion then you need to factor in two things.

Number one, separation of Church and State. Your religion can guide your political opinion and give you your political affiliation however, not if your religion takes away the personal physical rights of another good old American human being. You have freedom of religion, an extended right upon being an American citizen (at least for now). What anyone else does with their uterus is absolutely none of your fucking business. There are a lot more women who get an abortion than those who make up the self proclaimed "Anti-Life" population. You think it's murder? Fine, don't have one. You think it's taking one of Gods precious angels? Fine. Say a prayer for me. You don't want your tax dollars to go toward a foreigners life saving abortion in Sub Saharan Africa? I don't want my tax dollars going toward military campaigns killing civilians in Afghanistan that I have nothing against.

Secondly,

If you are against legal abortion then you are for the death of women by botched abortions. There have always been and will always be unwanted pregnancies. Take away safe abortions because you think it is murder and you sign the death warrant of countless women who will not be ruled by their reproductive organs. If women who choose themselves over their unborn fetus deserve the risk of death than the "pro-life" movement has an inherent conundrum. Worry about the babies who are born into crippling poverty and inadequate care. The quality of life doesn't matter at all to the pro-life, just that they enforce their way of life on others.

I'm a _______Feminist!

The phrase "I'm not a Feminist but..." is one of the most frustrating things I can ever hear coming out of someones mouth. The problem with this phrase is obvious. If you have to insert the word but after saying you're not something then odds are you have a problem with the word and not the ideology.

Part of the problem is within the overarching collection of what I call (blank)_______Feminism. Blank Feminism as I define it refers to the individuals who for all intensive purposes are Feminists (men or women) and are so turned off by the dozens of different "types" of Feminism that in their mind what they believe about Feminism is skewed by societies inability to accept overall gender equality (or in some cases neutrality).

Without going into extensive research on woman's history, the ability to define what kind of Feminist you are isn't incredibly important. As in every movement, Feminism was divided from the onslaught. Further categorization comes only after the initial realization that a collective consciousness exists among dissenters of the status-quo.

The wikipedia definition of Radical Feminism says it considers the male-controlled capitalist hierarchy as the defining feature of woman's oppression and the total uprooting and reconstruction of society as necessary to achieve equality. Yes, I agree with that. I also think that gender equality is impossible while society is restricted by biological reproduction. If we don't need to reproduce naturally then I don't see why we keep doing it. Yes, that is a marginalized opinion even within the sect of Feminism deemed radical. So it goes.

You are a Feminist, if you need to say otherwise feel free to borrow the phrase (blank)______ Feminist and insert whatever you need to in order to feel okay about it.

Some things to check out:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/06/feminism-gender1

http://feminist.org/news/newsbyte/uswirestory.asp?id=12661

http://bitchmagazine.org/post/mad-world-the-most-sexist-ad-in-america

Tucker Max revisited

So tomorrow is the big day. I planned on taking a rare Saturday off in order to avoid the possibility of running in to Tucker Max at Porter Square Books but of course that wasn't possible. I am working a short 7-12p shift and then high-tailing it on out of there straight across the parking lot to the treadmill at my woman's only gym.

Though I still think out right protests are not the way to go in order to display contempt for the bottom feeding misogynist chauvinist that is Tucker Max, I have been further disheartened since writing last.

I think of young teenage boys who pick up either of Max's books, see him glorified as a huge prick and then go on thinking it's cool to be an asshole because you get laid all the time.

I admit that I have no sense of humor. I also don't think he writes well or about anything interesting. This is my opinion.

On his website he is asked why he thinks some people think he hates women. Here is the response:

"Of course not; quite the opposite, I love women. Everything I do is to impress women. Without women, I wouldn’t get out of bed in the morning. Plus, half my fans are women. If I hated women, so many women would not like me, nor should they. The people who think I hate women or call me misogynist are the ones who haven’t read or engaged my writing, and are just looking for a bogeyman to attack" (http://www.tuckermax.com/about/faq/)

Unfortunately, liking women (liking to screw them) and respecting women are entirely different entities. He could respect women without liking them but the stories about them and their pathetic existences are all about humor and marketability. If no one bought these stories or visited his website he still wouldn't respect women but he also wouldn't be lauded for his efforts to tell the world about what he can get them to do.

Free speech is free speech, you can't have it both ways.

This is one of those times when I wish (at least a little bit) that you could.

Get your book, face or breasts (not in the store of course but I'm sure you could work something out with Max) signed tomorrow at 2:00pm at Porter Square Books, 25 White St. Cambridge Ma. 02143.

Ines Sainz and the New York Jets-Part I

Women sportscasters have never been taken seriously. Couple that with the fact that they are not all the same in skill or appearance and you can begin to see at least one of the inherent problem.

For one view on women sportscasters take the fans who runs Hogwild.net; "For the most part, these women are articulate and knowledgeable about sports. But for the most part, us men don't care."

Male sportscasters can be knowledgeable and ascetically pleasing without drawing attention away from their commentary or interviews. In most areas in society men are judged on skill first and appearance second if at all. Women, not so much. If Sainz had worn a burlap sack she would still be considered attractive right? Then why are people saying that she asked to be insulted because her jeans were too tight.

Sainz isn't just attractive mind you. Other words used to describe her include smoking hot, babe, sizzler and those are just the nice ones. Really this is a lose lose situation for her no matter what she does. I don't know whether she is a stand up sportscaster or not but the deck is stacked against this women whether she knows her shit or not. Can you say that she is doing her job to the best of her ability? I don't know. Is she a respected member of the sports media and all they stand for? I doubt it. Women weren't even allowed equal access to post game interviews until a court decision in 1978.

What I do know is that any women who is above average looking instead of just regular looking on one level it all comes down to how much society can blame her because of what she was wearing. But don't worry, Sainz seems relatively okay with the incident. First she says she was harassed, then she says she wasn't harassed, says she was offended, then she says she wasn't offended and so on and so forth. The media is already placing blame on those man hating feminists blowing the whole situation out of proportion. Maybe they did. For all we know Sainz is the one to blame for looking "sexy" enough to throw those male athletes into a tizzy. Boys being boys, right? We can't expect a group of adult men to be able to control themselves in the locker room, especially baited with a women whose behind I am told has its own fan club, that would just be too much to ask. Isn't it?

My solution to this is simple. Move interviews out of the locker rooms period. In terms of professional attire we have my second solution, create a dress code for sports reporters.

If women are excluded from equal access to do their job then the problem lies in where they are trying to gain access, the locker room. It may not be fair but it clearly isn't the same thing to ask me how I would feel if a male reporter came to visit me in my woman's only gym locker room to ask me to give a quote on the days step aerobics class. That just goes to show that gender stereotypes hurt both men and women. If the fraternal culture, apparently so alive in today's locker rooms is that integral to professional male athletic teams than they need to argue that fact and conduct all interviews somewhere else. They should be able to keep their teams "boys only club" as women can opt for a girls only locker room (not that women can join male professional sports at all) as long as they don't discriminate against the sportscasters who happen to be female.

Spike.com rates Feminists on "Cuteness"

Can Feminists be cute? Spike.com sure thinks that Feminists can be cute and in order to prove it they made up a comprehensive list of the top seven (usually it's top ten but we are talking about Feminists and should count ourselves lucky that they found seven)cutest, yes, cutest Feminists.

First, we should be thanking them for answering the age old question that asks "Can intelligent women be easy on the eyes too?"

Second we should praise the clear display of class by Spike.com for ranking these cutesy she-devils on yup, you got it, "inner beauty"

So, who had the honor of gracing the list of cute Feminists? Third-wave Feminist Jennifer Baumgardner, U.K. activist Kat Banyard, New York Sen. Kristen Gillibrand, Feminist porn star Nina Hartley, author of "The Beauty Myth" Naomi Wolf, Jezebel's Jessica Coen and Nicole Kidman.

Does anyone know why Nicole Kidman is on that list? I'm confused.

Does anyone see a women on this list that isn't white? No.

Sure, it's really nice of Spike.com to put anything promoting these ladies accomplishments up on their web site and acknowledging that Feminism is still a thing when some young women today would rather be called a c*#t instead of the dreaded F word.

And now for the but. BUT, this is a really idiotic thing to do. This is a really irritating and unnecessary thing to do in a really obnoxious way.

"Oh, how super that women who act like people have these cute little ideas about equality."

So, white traditionally beautiful independent women thinkers can still go ahead and sleep well at night. It's okay ladies, Spike.com thinks you have (inner) beauty and brains.

Wow.

http://www.spike.com/blog/top-seven-cutest/99982?page=1&numPerPage=1

Filler up

Writing my review on Cabaret at the Oberon starring Amanda Palmer is taking a lot longer than expected. Instead of forcing a sub-par piece I will continue to fine tune it. In the mean time I wanted to share some cool and interesting things going on in the next few weeks.

1. Park(ing)Day Friday September 17th 2010.
Park(ing) Day is a simultaneous but independent world wide demonstration that transforms metered parking spaces into temporary outdoor public spaces. Participants sign a license agreement to use the trademark on parkingday.org but otherwise the rest of it is up to you. Participants conceptualize and design their own space and invite the public to join them in enjoying the temporary "park". What's the whole point? Well as stated by the founders of this 2005 DIY experience; "The mission of PARK(ing) Day is to call attention to the need for more urban open space, to generate critical debate around how public space is created and allocated, and to improve the quality of urban human habitat … at least until the meter runs out"! Cool.

2. The Big E
Not that I would drive to West Springfield for this only but I grew up right across the bridge and have many a fond memory of times spent at the Eastern States Exposition. This year the dates are September 17th-October 3rd. If fairs are your cup of tea you should really check out New England's biggest one. Granted it comes with all of the bad things about fairs (spending a ton of money, other people's children, looking at one hundred kinds of cowboy hats, cowboy boots, engraved jewelry, leather stalls, tacky outfits, bad Christmas gifts to be, bad pop music headliners and product demonstrations that are downright frightening) but the fair does also have games and rides, animals (cows!), crazy delicious Maine baked potatoes, a strip of buildings devoted to each New England State (Vermont=ice cream and cheese!)and of course a giant slide, fudge, candy apples and perhaps most importantly Fried Dough! Check out the specifics, http://www.thebige.com/ese/index.asp.

3.Union Square Fluff Festival-September 25th, 3-7p Union Square Plaza
Yes, it's true. Fluff was invented in Somerville by a man named Archibald Query. Though that happened in 1917, Fluff festival is only in its fifth year celebration. Go join the fun and don't forget that this years homage goes out to the Whoopie Pie.
Oh and if you are super excited about that marshmallowy goodness, What the Fluff? has its own facebook page too. Rain date is the same time on Sunday, 9/26.

The only thing we have to fear is that crazy pastor in Flordia burning the Qur'an.

You must have heard by now, Pastor Terry Jones of Florida plans to host something he is calling "International Burn a Koran Day" on September 11th. Jones was kicked out of the last congregation he led because he used the church till to pay for his own expenses but don't let that fool you into thinking this Pentecostal pastor isn't on a mission that he has been called to by God himself. Though everyone from local to national politicians, army generals and embassies from foreign countries have spoke out rejecting the demonstration, Jones has insisted that he and his 50 person congregation will continue their plan to burn one of the most holy and revered text in the world.

Do I think he's crazy? Absolutely. Jones stated on CBS "We are definitely probably insulting all Muslims," um, yeah, you think?

Jones is not phased by offending roughly 22% of the world population because in his mind "The fact that we offend them is the lesser of two evils." You see, Jones argues that because radical Islam is going to eventually take over America we have to be even more radical in defending our American way of life from Islamic zealots. What did pastor Jones say about endangering the lives of American soldiers in Afghanistan? "We understand what the general is saying, and I'm sure that it has somewhat some truth to it."

The most upsetting thing about this display comes from another quote from Jones CBS interview. He states, "We think it's time to turn the tables, and instead of possibly blaming us for what could happen, we put the blame where it belongs - on the people who would do it," he said. "And maybe instead of addressing us, we should address radical Islam and send a very clear warning that they are not to retaliate in any form."

Oh, okay. So we burn the holy text believed to be verbatim the word of God taught by the holy prophet Muhammad and then we just tell the rest of the world that they better not do anything about it. Even if we could prevent retaliation directed at America in general, the many soldiers and American diplomats scattered through the middle east are already being targeted because of Pastor John's inability to make any damn sense.

This so-called congregation reminds me more of a cult than of a group of 50 passionate Pentecostals fighting evil. Do I think this falls under the category of exercising the right to free speech? Yes, but just as much as shouting "fire" in a crowded theater falls under the good old first amendment. This time however, inciting a stampede of panicked movie goers seems a lot more amusing than furthering an agenda of violent intolerant hate. If you want to endanger yourself to make a statement then that is one thing. Taking on the role of a hateful, ignorant, crooked pastor who wants to send a message to the Islamic world while hiding behind the constitution and the FBI while safely in wherever the fuck Florida USA, is a completely different and much more gutless action.

Could we send Pastor Jones a basket full of snakes and a pitcher of red kool-aid? Maybe some white nikes? Perhaps the good pastor just needs a distraction to realize how bat-shit crazy it is to light any book, especially one with such loaded dangerous ramifications on fire to make a statement about the dangers of radical religious intolerance.