feminist blogs

Just to add to what Jessica posted two days ago about the Michigan Supreme Court decision, the University of Michigan is trying to find ways around the decision.

After a lower court ruled that the gay marriage ban applies to benefits, some universities switched their benefits programs so that they were available not to domestic partners but to “other eligible individuals,” a category that would include many gay partners, but would also include others who live with but are not legally related to university employees. For example, the University of Michigan’s criteria include joint residence for at least six months, some joint financial ties such as checking accounts, and no legal relationship or marriage between the individuals involved.

After the Supreme Court decision Wednesday, the university immediately asserted that its new benefits are not domestic partner benefits and are thus not covered by the ruling. Further, the university said it had eliminated domestic partner benefits after the lower court’s decision. “The university believes all current benefit offerings are in full compliance with Michigan law. The university cares deeply about recruitment, retention, and maintaining a healthy workforce and we design our benefits with these principles in mind,” the statement said.

This is why these kind of referendums (like the 2004 ballot measure that created the MI law) are so insidious. I wonder how many of the people who voted against gay marriage would agree that same sex couples should be denied access to each other's health care.

Thanks to Rose for the link

Via Choice Words

Sad to say that 77 year old Dr. Sue Johansen will be ending her Oxygen network show this Sunday evening.

Best quote ever:

77-year-old Sue said, "It's been part of my life and I just love it. I'm going to miss writing scripts. I'm going to miss having to read books. I'm going to miss playing with sex toys."

Who wouldn't love having a grandmother who says things like that? We'll miss you Dr. Sue.

It's May Day. This holiday of sorts has a long history:

At its national convention in Chicago, held in 1884, the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions (which later became the American Federation of Labor), proclaimed that "eight hours shall constitute a legal day's labor from and after May 1, 1886." The following year, the FOTLU, backed by many Knights of Labor locals, reiterated their proclamation stating that it would be supported by strikes and demonstrations.

In the past few years, because of the seriously anti-immigrant climate, May 1st has been a day for HUGE immigration rallies and marches. This year these marches are happening again, despite some violence on at a rally last year in Los Angeles.

Many people have been reiterating this for a long time, but in light of recent discussions, I want to make it clear: immigration is a feminist issue. It's a human rights issue. The abuses that have been going on as of late: immigration raids, jails being used as detention centers, families being separated, matter a lot to me, as the child of immigrants and as a feminist.

So in honor of May Day and the immigration rights movement here is some suggested reading:

The Unapologetic Mexican
Why Immigration is a Matter of Reproductive Justice
An Anti-Trafficking Activist's Agenda
ACLU Immigrant rights work
WOC PhD has a good post up with events and a video about immigration myths

This is by no means comprehensive. Please add your links in the comments.

Last week, the three NYPD officers charged with murdering Sean Bell in 2006 were acquitted of all charges. I don't have much more to say on the issue than has already been said, but I wanted to make sure this news was acknowledged here at Feministing. Ann has a post up about it at TAPPED, comparing the case to the situation of Amadou Diallo and Jack at Angry Brown Butch has some interesting things to say about what it means find justice in this case.

I saw one of my favorite writers this weekend at Politics and Prose in DC. She's a Young Adult fiction writer named Sarah Dessen, and she happens to be from the town where I grew up. We even went to the same high school (although a lot of years apart). When I was a kid I read a lot--and much of it was young adult fiction. There are a lot of books in that genre, but what I love about Sarah Dessen is that her books have substance. Her characters (almost all of whom are young women) are strong, independent, smart and interesting. She tackles real issues, like divorce, intimate partner violence and substance abuse, but without it feeling forced or like a public service announcement. You might know her work from the Mandy Moore movie, How to Deal (which is based on two of her books combined).

I still read her new books as they come out, even though I'm much out of her target audience age. While I still enjoy them, I do wish they had more to say about things like race and sexual orientation. While Sarah does a good job of portraying women from a variety of socioeconomic backgrounds, the main characters of the books are generally straight and white. Kind of like the town we grew up in.

Did you read YA Fiction growing up? Who were some of your favorite authors?

In honor of the Reproductive Justice Week of Action that Jessica posted about last week, I wanted to share a few of my own thoughts about RJ as well.

In my day job, I work at the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, whose work is based on the principles of reproductive justice (RJ). I spend a good amount of my time talking to people about reproductive justice, usually with the Latina/Latino men and women that we work with. I really like the framework because I think it provides us with a wholistic and broad-based way of bringing in all the issues we care about, through a feminist lens.

When I talk about RJ, I talk about it as being about people's right to create the families they want to create. The work that we do as part of the reproductive justice movement is all about ensuring people's right to create these families (when and how they want to create them), and that can encompass A LOT of different issues. For example, there are the obivous ones, like reproductive health care access. You can't create the family you want if you don't have access to things like birth control, abortion and prenatal care. It also encompasses things like immigration status, socioeconomic conditions, job security, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, race and discrimination, spirituality, environmental conditions.

Each of these issues has an impact on our ability to create the families we want to create, and therefore must be a part of the repro justice movement. It's a philosophy that emphasizes the intersectionality of the many social justice issues, and I'm a big fan.

Via Political Wire:

"A 60-foot phallus created by vandals on the grassy slopes beneath the Idaho governor's mansion has been fig-leafed over by work crews on their second try," the Idaho Statesman reports.

"The grassy graffiti appeared in July after someone applied extra-strength weed killer. Officials said at the time it was too late in the growing season to attempt to remove the image."

It's old news, but still pretty hilarious. I just wonder what message they were trying to send.

I know I don't. And it's not the duck lips speculum exam, or the awkwardness of sitting half naked in a rough paper gown, or the oh-so-personal questions they ask you. I just moved to a new city, so I had the fun job of trying to find a new provider (not that I had found one I liked in my last city either). Many of you are probably familiar with the process. First you have to ask around to everyone you know for a recommendation of someone good. Then once you've collected the references, you have to call all of those providers (maybe after you've googled them to see what other random people have to say) and see if they accept your insurance. Talk about rejection. Then, if you're lucky enough to find someone, you have to wait who knows how long to make an appointment. So fun, and we haven't even gotten to the gyno's office yet!

I know I was nervous from the moment I got in my car (in which I had to drive 45 minutes to get to someone who accepted my insurance). It was a little absurd really, I was kind of sweaty and my heart was pounding. For all the writing and advocating I do for sexual health and reproductive rights, I was a mess. Maybe it was the uncertainty of the whole experience, not knowing if the provider was going to be friendly, totally dismissive, or just rude. I've had all of those experiences and never been truly satisfied with a provider. I know that being queer adds a whole other level to it (why aren't you on birth control?!?) but I'm sure some of you straight women have similar feelings.

Then there is the part where you try and squeeze in all those questions that have been accumulating over the past year. What about this? Is this normal? How can I treat this? I've had a variety of experiences in terms of response to my questioning (and I always have A LOT of questions) but in most situations the provider always feels super rushed, which doesn't put me at ease. What if I forget something?

For a lot of these reasons, I choose to see a midwife (a nurse midwife actually). Did you know you can go to a midwife for regular gynecological care? You can. It definitely made things better, but not perfect.

What have your experiences been with gynecological care?

Cartoon from Natalie Dee

The title of this post is in honor of the fact that I learned yesterday that Fran Drescher has an organization called Cancer Schmancer. For serious.

Anways, Amanda over at Pandagon blogged about this today too, but it was just too ridiculous to pass up. One of my all-time favorite books, Fun Home by Alison Bechdel (if you haven't read it, GO PURCHASE NOW) is being censored by a group of students at the University of Utah. Because Alison is so freaking great, her response to this news was "awesome!"

"This sort of bullshit will pretty much permanently fuck up any attempt of feminists to start a reasonable discussion about why so many men are attracted to a flavor of pornography that is as much, if not more, about humiliating and hating women as it is about getting men off. Which is not even all porn, but certainly doesn’t encapsulate novels like this. Hell, we’re stuck in definitional hell, with the right wingers defining porn as “any material that portrays sexuality in a way that I don’t approve of”, and most everyone else in liberal land defining it as, “sexually explicit materials designed to sexually arouse the reader/viewer”, and radical feminists defining it as “photos and videos where the humiliation and pain of the woman is considered an essential part of the erotic experience for the viewer”. Which is, to be fair to radical feminists, the majority of the material available through your internet channels or “Girls Gone Wild” videos. I’m not getting into the discussion of censorship from feminists, since it’s a red herring, since the number of feminists willing to talk censorship is a minority of a minority."

Yea, what Amanda said.

Ann posted the original Advocate story in the feminist roundup, but there has been a lot of press around this story since then. I will post something longer with my thoughts after I see the Oprah interview, but for those of you who are interested, tune in tomorrow. You can see the preview here. From Oprah's site:

Thomas is 34, happily married and…pregnant. Our cameras capture it all—the ultrasound, inside the nursery and more. How is this possible?