Links of Interest: Weekly Reading

Babies born with disabilities or deformities are punishment from God for having an abortion.

After a century of hmming and hawing, Hawai'i is going to maybe allow abortion, sorta.

It is NATIONAL EATING DISORDER AWARENESS WEEK. Eating disorders are prevalent among young women today, and you need to support those who are battling the disorder, and believe me, the battle is never fully won.

Jessica Valenti: Equality is an illusion

February is also National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Protection Month.

New Health Care Plan from the White House, but it does not look promising, lacking the public option, and still has harsh restrictions on abortion. Ugh.

Use 'em or lose 'em ladies: why you better have babies. while you are still 'young'

Shoulda put a ring on it: how the college abstinence movement is positing itself as "pro-woman"

Should you even have to ask if the rape is the victims fault?

Bill in Florida would make abortion punishable by life in prison.

What's in A Name?

I feel so out of the feminist loop! I've been sick for about a week now, and sleeping through just about everything, including one of my favorite episodes of Buffy last night (Lovers Walk) while the SO was over. I've been going through tons of blogs to catch up, and am seeing a lot of things I would like to write about, but I had the idea for this blog a few days ago, and I'll be damned if I don't write it.

So, what is in a name? I like to think that you are your name, and your name is you. They are two separate things, but at the same time, they are interconnected. I choose to go by "Nikki" even though my given name is "Nicole" because I feel that "Nikki" suits me better. When I write a paper (or a blog) I put my name on it. My name is something that I own, even though it was given to me. I have to take care of it, I am responsible for it, and I can do with it what I please. For the most part, of course.

Now, where does my name come from? My father supplied my last name, and together, (mostly) my mother and father compromised to give me my first name and middle name. I remember ordering class rings in high school, and wanting my full name engraved on the inside. My mother told me I should only get my first and middle names engraved because "my last name will change later." Turned out to be a moot point since I never got my class ring, but, I was astounded at her assumption that 1.) I will get married and 2.) I will change my last name.

First, what a heinous heterosexual patriarchal assumption. Second, yes, I did set her straight, so to speak, on the fact that I have no intentions of getting married. (Oh, but when you meet the right person...) Second, why does the female have to change her name?

Because in taking away part of a persons name, you are taking away part of their identity and supplanting it with a pre-packaged set of norms that comes with this new name. In the novel "The Natural Daughter" the one character is referred to as "Martha" for the entirety of her single-hood. It is written in third person omniscient, so it would be written: "Martha did this/Martha said that/et al." When she gets married, she is no longer referred to, even by the narrator, as "Martha" but instead as "Mrs. Morley." She lost her identity. She ceased to have her old personality, and is now a carbon cut-out of wife-dom (well, at least until Fanny comes along, and she gets kicked out, but that is another feminist rant for another feminist day).

Change a persons name, and you change, or seek to change who they are. I know the whole females changing their last name comes from women being property, first of their father, and then of their husband, but it is more than that. I like my name. It sounds great, and people who know me have known me by the name I have now. If I wanted to write a book, or do something that has my name attached to it, it would be under my name as it is now. How much of a hassle would it be to have to ret-con books/papers/articles/speeches to reflect a married name? It is too easy for a woman to change her name, and all too difficult for men to do it, if, for instance, a man wanted to either take the name of his spouse, or do a hyphenate name. Add in the fact that some of those seeking to change their name may be gay or lesbian or trans-gendered, and you have a ton of problems. (side note: bisexuals - if they are marrying someone of the opposite sex with have the problem of het couples, visa versa for if they are marrying someone of the same sex).

In media/literature, names have been associated with identity, and given importance. In one of my favorite films of all time, "Spirited Away" a girl has her name taken from her, and in that act, she becomes a servant to an evil spirit, and befriends a creature called "No Face." In this film, knowing a persons name gives you power over them. You take away their name, and you take away who they are. In the "Earthsea" cycle, you are given a name at birth, and then another name, which only you and the person who gave it to you know, and then a name everyone knows you by. By knowing somethings true name, you have power over it, and that is how magic is done, by calling something by its true name. You guard your own secret name to make sure no one has power over you. A name is a precious thing, and by taking part of it away from someone, say, by demanding they change their name at marriage, you are taking a part of that person away, and by giving them a new name, you are putting yourself in a position of power over them. By the male demanding that his spouse take his name, he is giving his spouse a loaded word, an identity that is part of his own, and expecting and demanding that this person live up to the connotations and associated precedents that last name comes with.

This is asking far too much of a person, and is far too selfish.

Links of Interest

Feministing: Georgia Right to Life Using Racialized Gender Narratives to Garner Support - You see, THOSE DAMN ABORTION FREAKS ARE THE REAL RACISTS! Obviously, giving black women the ability to control their bodies is eugenics.

RaceWire: Race and LGBT Health: Coloring in the Gaps - "To the extent that communities of color have developed movements around health care equity—advocating for more clinics in underserved areas, for example, or demanding better language access for immigrants—LGBT people of color face the dual political hurdles of alienation from their own racial and ethnic communities, and from a mainstream LGBT rights movement that orients its public image toward middle-class whites."

Feministing: 40 Days for Anti-Choice Harassment - "Today marks the start of "40 Days for Life," a campaign of escalated harassment outside targeted reproductive health clinics." Religion - once again - becomes a weapon against the freedom of women.

The Feminist Texican: On Gender, Rape, and Media Narratives - Discussing the media treatment of a rape case in NYC involving a man and several NYPD officers. Potentially triggering, and maddening.

ReadWriteStart - Why We Need Tech Events For Women - "In a tech community that often identifies as a meritocracy, we asked three event organizers why the industry needs female-centric events."

Links of Interest

Cheney doesn't like DADT.

Jody Howard died. She helped get women safe abortions pre-Roe

I love Nancy from "The Line." I saw her at AU last semester. She had an amazing V-Day. Click here to read about it.

valentines day. and gender roles. duh.

Planned Parenthood needs you.

Nukes and Men

The Cold War officially ended in 1989. This makes me incredibly proud to say, as an 88 baby, that I lived through and survived part of the Cold War. Seriously, I want to make shirts. But, moving along, the Cold War ended, and this sorta made all those nuclear deterrence theorists a little pissed. Firstly, because suddenly all these nuclear tension dissipated without any clear indication of if nuclear deterrence actually worked. Crash course in nuclear deterrence: when both nations have nukes, you gotta make sure the other nation knows you have them, and that you will use them if you are attacked. This is called "mutual assured destruction" - you must assume that the enemy is a rational actor and that your enemy is not willing to sacrifice their population. So, knowing the consequences of a total nuclear war. This leads to internalized deterrence, where an actor deters themself even when no threat is present, because this actor fears for the consequences of starting a nuclear war. So, even if we knew the Soviets didn't have Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, or nukes that could make it the states, and we did, we still self-deterred because we feared the consequences, nuclear or not.

When it comes to nuclear war, you need to have ride-out capability, or the ability to take an attack, recover, and attack the enemy in a short amount of time, you have to have second-strike capability, or you have no deterrence at all. If you cannot launch a second attack, than there is nothing deterring the enemy. The conservatives of the time wanted to take it further. They thought we should be able to fight and prevail (they didn't like the word "win") in a nuclear war. These conservatives thought that we were falling into this sense of internalized deterrence, and that the Soviets were not, and this was dangerous. To the conservatives of the time, nuclear weapons were ensconced in the ideal of masculinity at the time. They feared that the Soviets wouldn't even have to threaten us in the future, and they saw this as weakness. General MacArthur of WWII fame, the pinnacle of manhood at the time, said "do not take counsel with your fear" in reference to the liberals hesitance to want to wage nuclear war. So, liberals got labeled as "girly men" (because the worst insult you can make to a man is to call him a girl, because being a girl is the worst thing you can be.)

Europe saw the lack of ICBM's as bad for them. Because if it came to nuclear war at this time, that war would be fought in Europe, and neither the US nor the USSR would have to suffer any lasting damage, they would just have to clean up the military bases they had in Europe. Europe really championed "broad deterrence" which is where you use the threat of nukes to prevent ALL types of war, not just nuclear war. Europe really didn't want a war, of any kind, fought on their soil. And what did America do? We called them girls! A bunch of sissies! At this time, masculinity was represented by willingness to use nuclear weapons. You weren't a man unless you were willing to launch a nuclear weapon and kill thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people in the most brutal way possible. That is what made men men. So, Europe was made up of girly men. Until Europe said "You know what. I don't trust either the US or the Soviets with their nukes, so we are going to make our own. That way, if they launch a nuke on our soil, we can launch one back, and take the war to their homelands, where this conflict belongs." The Europeans wanted what is called "power of escalation." They did not want a limited regional war fought on their soil, they wanted the power then to expand the war. So, then they became men.

I find it fascinating that to this day conservatives still think that being a man must involve the willingness to kill thousands of people. I wonder if they are trying to compensate for something. Like the author of this article critiquing a scientific study linking masculinity to conservative values. The author of this article himself had his own masculinity threatened by a study, and came to a very "traditional masculinity" defense of his behavior. Hmmm.

Links of Interest

Pro-choicers are preventing unplanned pregnancies. Anti-choicers are causing it - Jessica Valenti. I love this woman.

Youth unemployment is rising, even for youth with college degrees, and especially for young black and latino americans. These recessionary lows could have long-term effects on the potential earning power of an entire generation of young workers.

Whoops, so I guess the first female president of Costa Rica really doesn't like women. She's against abortion, the morning after pill and same sex marriage. Oh noez. Having a vagina doesn't mean you are not a part of the patriarchy.

Alexis Hutchinson will only be discharged instead of court martialed for refusing deployment on the grounds that her son would be left uncared for. Again, can you say more punishment for women who are single mothers? As Samhita at Feministing said Amazing, if she left her child with no care, she would be demonized as a neglectful mother. She stays with her child to care for him and now she was lying and using him as a ploy to get out of her job. You are hearing the same familiar tones of racialized narratives around working class motherhood that play out over and over in stories about motherhood."

The hate crimes bill is supposedly a conspiracy to eradicate the Christian faith. So, a bill that says it is a crime to kill someone because they are homeless or gay is going to destroy the Christian faith? How? Is it a big part of the Sunday celebrations to gather the congregation, and find some gays and homeless people to hunt? Hmm. How inconsiderate of us LGBT peeps to ruin your fun. Sorry, we didn't mean it. Please, continue discriminating against us, beating us, and killing us.

Who is a Feminist?

I am sure everyone has heard of Lady Gaga, and almost everyone has seen her video "Bad Romance." Gaga herself says the video is supposed to show "how the entertainment industry can, in a metaphorical way, simulate human trafficking -- products being sold, the woman perceived as a commodity." While I am hesitant to link the music business with something like human trafficking (I spent all last semester pouring over international treaties and conventions on human trafficking, it is an ugly ugly business, where many women and children are raped, beaten, abused, and deprived of any sense of humanity, and an issue more people need to recognize), I can agree with her when she says that the "industry" does commodify women. Is Gaga a feminist? She has certainly stated her belief that the "industry" is misogynistic when she came out and said "I find that men get away with saying a lot in this business, and that women get away with saying very little . . . In my opinion, women need and want someone to look up to that they feel have the full sense of who they are, and says, 'I'm great.' " Further, she spoke at the National Equality March last October, and put her voice to the LGBT cause. But, does that make her a feminst?

What exactly does it take to be a card carrying member of the feminist movement? At one point, Laura Bush called herself a feminist. And I will give the lady props. She is part of a party that systematically seeks to oppress women, and calling herself a feminist, which is an ugly word in the Republican party, must have taken guts. She said this in relation to her own pet cause, which is educating women. She said during the campaign that she did not want Roe v. Wade overturned. She said she thought to limit the number of abortions in the country, and that she thought it should be done by abstinence sex education. But I hear the groans of "but she is married to George W. Bush! The king pin of undermining a woman's right to choose!' Yes, yes she is. Maybe she married him for love, and maybe she lashes out against his decisions in private. I mean, you can marry someone oh whom does not share your political beliefs. (I couldn't do that, but I know plenty of people who are in long term relationships with people who have different beliefs.) But she is educated, she earned her masters degree, and she truly believes that education is an "equalizer," to use her terms. I agree with that. We really need to vamp up our education system, because a high school diploma from one high school is not equal to that of another high school. That seems feminist enough.

Another lady of the Republican Party, Cindy McCain, wife of Senator John McCain, has aligned herself with the LGBT movement, posing for the NoH8 project. She has a masters degree, started and ran a non-profit that helped get medical personnel to the scenes of disasters and wars, When she married John McCain she pushed to keep their finances seperate, which I think is majorly feminist.

So, as of now, we have Cindy McCain, Laura Bush and Lady Gaga applying for application in the feminist club. Wow. So, what decides if women are feminist? I've talk to my mother a lot about this, who does not identify as a feminist. But she thinks women should get equal pay, for equal work, and has constantly been that "bitch" in her job who will call out the supervisors and managers of the company she is contracted to work for when they give raises to the male "chefs" and then cut her benefits. She thinks women have a right to affordable birth control and contraception, even if she believes that abortion is morally wrong, she still does not want to see the choice taken away. But she is not a feminist. She abhors rape culture and thinks that the worst thing in the media right now is the victim blaming of girls. She thinks a woman should wear what ever she wants to wear, and not be accused of "asking for it." She thinks that stricter laws need to be in place against domestic violence, and hates the police because they often show up and accuse the victim, saying they deserve it. But she is not a feminist. Now, she is a little weary on the gay rights thing. But she has been getting better at it since she learned that her daughter is one of those queer people. She has been asking a lot of questions about it, and still doesn't want the word marriage attached to it, but she is more accepting of it. But she is not a feminist. Why? Because she still wants men to open doors for her, and she still wants dad to pay for the date. (Although, when her and my father were dating, they ALWAYS went dutch. And now that they are married, they share finances, so in effect, even if dad is the one handing over the cash, both of them are still paying). I try telling her that you can be a feminist and still have a guy open a door for you. It's called being polite. She opens the door for anyone who are using a walker, and for persons who have their hands full, it's a polite thing to do. But she seems to think that by being labeled as a feminist, no one can ever do anything nice for her. Ever.

Some people think being a feminist has to do with reproductive options. Some people think it has to do with equality of opportunity. Some people see it as strictly equality. Some people see it as a humanist thing. What is feminism? My co-blogger identifies as feminist, and is a man. I know that feminism is more than a woman's problem, because the societal confines that constrict women work against men, too. Just as women are pigeon holed into the madonna/whore dichotomy, men are similarly confined to a heavily negative manly man/girly man dichotomy. I hate the fact that "girly" is seen as an insult, but as it stands, men are constantly forced to prove their masculinity, which is detrimental, even if they are the sole beneficiaries of this thing we call "patriarchy." So, if feminism is more than a woman's issue, should it be called feminism? Feminism has expanded to take on all sorts of societal ills, including but not limited to - fighting racism, fighting classism, fighting able-ism, fighting sexism, fighting homophobia, fighting for health care reform, and a plethora of other things. Find any other feminist blog and you will find a wide range of these issues discussed on a very regular basis. So, what is feminism? Who gets to be a feminist? I realize we are not all perfect, and that we all slip up sometimes, and that at times, even well respected feminists disagree on an issue. (Look at Taylor Swift, who writes her own songs, manages her own business, which is a feminist thing to do, yet writes songs about waiting around for Romeo, which is very much not a feminist thing to do. Feminist bloggers are always disagreeing about how to handle this problem). But what issues are so core to our cause that we cannot afford to disagree on them? Which issues are so important, that if you don't have the same stance as the rest of the community, that you can't join the community?

And what about the women we know are feminists, but refuse to use the label? Can we, as a community, label them as feminists? What would these women's reasons be for not wanting to embrace a the feminist label? Should we even be using a "label"?

No, I am not going to answer these questions for you. But, I will direct you to lady gaga's video.