-
BlogHer Ad Network More from BlogHer Advertise here BlogHer Privacy Policy -
"In my heart, I think a woman has two choices: either she's a feminist or a masochist." --Gloria Steinem
-
Apr
24
Why We Need to Stop the Democratic Infighting
Filed Under Democrats, Republicans, assholes, class and economics, discrimination, legislation, misogyny, parenthood, patriarchy, politics, pregnancy, sexism, work | 12 Comments
Because John McCain is a misogynist nutbag. As are his fellow Republicans.
Yesterday, Republican Senators successfully filibustered — that’s right, not just voted against but fucking filibustered — a bill that would provide those who have been the victims of discriminatory pay with more legal recourse. In other words, they filibustered a civil rights bill. Because Republicans have so learned the error of their prejudiced ways.
Republicans said the proposal to ease the time constraints would prompt more lawsuits and lead to litigation over outdated cases. “This debate today is not about allowing, favoring or supporting discrimination,” said Senator Johnny Isakson, Republican of Georgia.
[. . .]
Mr. McCain, who was campaigning in Louisiana, skipped the vote but told reporters he would have opposed the bill since it could contribute to frivolous lawsuits harmful to businesses.
Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, accused Democrats of unfairly trying to paint opponents of the bill as unsympathetic to victims of salary discrimination. “The only ones who will see an increase in pay are some of the trial lawyers who bring the cases,” he said.
Um, what exactly, Senator Hatch, is being unfairly represented? Victims of unfair pay discrimination need a recourse, and you are actively denying it to them. You’re openly protecting companies who have a history of discrimination. And you are allowing, favoring or supporting discrimination, Senator Isakson, by refusing to hold those corporations who have engaged in it responsible for their actions. This is pretty fucking simple.
John McCain didn’t show up to vote — but did support the “it would provoke lawsuits” argument (um, assholes, that’s the point), and had this to say:
“They need the education and training, particularly since more and more women are heads of their households, as much or more than anybody else,” McCain said. “And it’s hard for them to leave their families when they don’t have somebody to take care of them.
“It’s a vicious cycle that’s affecting women, particularly in a part of the country like this, where mining is the mainstay; traditionally, women have not gone into that line of work, to say the least,” he said.
Oh, I see: so Senator McCain, you’re going to start supporting flexible work schedules and reduced working hours for both parents? You’re going to promote men taking a more active role in child-rearing and support social services that help women with child care? You’re also going to support those who are genuinely stuck in low paying jobs because a lack of educational opportunity with resources, and work to improve school systems and economic equality?
Um . . . no. McCain supports the “free market” — the very same free market that allows employers to discriminate against women, racial minorities, the disabled and LGBTQ individuals. He’s just using an opportunity to remind everyone that women belong back in the kitchen with a child on each hip. He also needed to point out that women are only paid less is because we just can’t stop popping out the kiddies, are uneducated and don’t do equal work — even though the Ledbetter case shows that this argument is a bunch of shit.
Below the jump, what I think of McCain and the Senate Republicans (all but six of whom voted to block the measure).
Popularity: 18% [?]
Apr
16
The Cost of Unwed Parenting?
Filed Under bigotry, class and economics, parenthood, patriarchy, politics, religious fanaticism, reproductive justice, sexism, social conservatives, stereotypes | 14 Comments
There have been previous attempts to calculate the cost of divorce in America. But the sponsors of the new study, being released Tuesday, said theirs is the first to gauge the broader cost of ”family fragmentation” — both divorce and unwed childbearing.
The study was conducted by Georgia State University economist Ben Scafidi. His work was sponsored by four groups who consider themselves part of a nationwide ”marriage movement” — the New York-based Institute for American Values, the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, Families Northwest of Redmond, Wash., and the Georgia Family Council, an ally of the conservative ministry Focus on the Family.
”The study documents for the first time that divorce and unwed childbearing — besides being bad for children — are costing taxpayers a ton of money,” said David Blankenhorn, president of the Institute for American Values.
”We keep hearing this from state legislators, ‘Explain to me why this is any of my business? Aren’t these private matters?”’ Blankenhorn said. ”Take a look at these numbers and tell us if you still have any doubt.”
Scafidi’s calculations were based on the assumption that households headed by a single female have relatively high poverty rates, leading to higher spending on welfare, health care, criminal justice and education for those raised in the disadvantaged homes. The $112 billion estimate includes the cost of federal, state and local government programs, and lost tax revenue at all levels of government.
Wait, an assumption? That can’t be right, can it — that they based a study on prejudice and stereotypes rather than facts? *Rechecks who funded study* Oh.
Hey folks, you want to know what doesn’t cost society a damn dime? Domestic violence, child abuse, alcoholism, drug addiction, compulsive gambling, kids growing up in a house with two parents who hate each other, kids growing up in a house with parents who are always angry and bitter, depression, stress-induced/agitated health conditions, and a general understanding that people can’t expect or deserve happiness. Why not go back to the good old days?!
Popularity: 17% [?]
Apr
7
Anti-Choicers Are Furious Because Obama Cares About His Daughters
Filed Under 2008 election, Democrats, abortion, anti-choice extremism, misogyny, parenthood, paternalism, patriarchy, politics, pregnancy, religious fanaticism, reproductive justice, sex and sexuality, sexism, slut-shaming, social conservatives, women’s health | 48 Comments
You’ve probably already read about Barack Obama’s statements regarding teen pregnancy and the outrage it has inspired in forced-birth proponents. Amanda has already wonderfully skewered the reaction. This is what Obama said:
“When it comes specifically to HIV/AIDS, the most important prevention is education, which should include — which should include abstinence education and teaching the children — teaching children, you know, that sex is not something casual. But it should also include — it should also include other, you know, information about contraception because, look, I’ve got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at the age of 16. You know, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.”
I mean, really, with all the talk about sex not being anything casual and engaging in sex is a “mistake,” it would seem that Obama is pandering enough to the religious right “sex-is-bad-mmkay?” crowd. But no, instead he has made them very, very angry. Honestly, I think they’re pissed because of his reasonable assertion that telling kids not to have sex doesn’t mean they’re going to listen. But in typical “the liberal made a reasonable point — quick, make everyone look over here!” fashion, they’re screaming and hollering about how Obama said that babies are punishment. They also claim that his comments were about abortion, which is blatantly false, even if the comments he made do easily carry over and most likely influence his pro-choice views.
Popularity: 21% [?]
Apr
4
“News” Organization Files Offensive “Report” on Trans Issues
Filed Under LGBTQ issues, assholes, bigotry, gender, homophobia and transphobia, media, parenthood, pregnancy, reproductive justice | 8 Comments
By now, you’ve probably heard of Thomas Beatie, the transgender man who is pregnant with his first child. With the exception of the original Advocate story, written by Beatie himself, pretty much all coverage I’ve seen has been extremely obnoxious and sensationalized. Thomas and his wife Nancy say that they came out with the news on their own so that they could have some say on the framing of the media coverage — and one would assume they also have at least some interest in trans rights — but they seem to have underestimated the media.
Yesterday, Beatie was on Oprah (did anyone see it? how did it go?), and so coverage is now even more intensified. Though I’m sure that there are less credible news sources reporting much more offensively, this shit from MSNBC pissed me the fuck off:
Pregnant “man” tells Oprah: “It’s a miracle”
That’s right, according to MSNBC, Beatie who has lived as a man for many years, is legally recognized as a man and is legally married to a woman is now a “man.” You know, can’t let those trans folk get to uppity by acknowledging their legal rights or showing them any basic respect.
Maybe if MSNBC wanted to somehow clarify how a man could be pregnant in their title, if that was so very important to them, they could have used the phrase transman or transgender man, rather than trying to illegitimatize his entire identity with the scare quotes? Ah, but then fewer people would be drawn to click on the link, wouldn’t they?
Then there’s this lede for a related video report: “Is it true? Is it possible? Thomas Beatie of Bend, Ore., says “yes” to both questions, claiming he’s five months pregnant. But is his claim real, or a hoax? KTVZ reports.”
Nothing like getting people to make you some money off of ad viewings by using a teaser that suggests a person’s major life event might be a “hoax.” Also, if you watch the video, you’ll see a reporter harassing Beatie’s neighbors and then feigning surprise when they won’t talk to her or express their support. Also, while intruding on their lives, uninvited with a microphone and camera, they decide to wag a finger at the paparazzi camped outside of Beatie’s home for their completely inexcusable crime of . . . intruding on the neighborhood uninvited with microphones and cameras.
Hey MSNBC, are you getting a good view of my middle finger?
You can contact MSNBC at letters@msnbc.com. They ask that you include the URL of the story you’re responding to in the body of your email.
Popularity: 14% [?]
Apr
4
Maximum Sentence
Filed Under courts gone crazy, parenthood, patriarchy, violence against women and girls | 4 Comments
Cesar Rodriguez has received a maximum sentence for the manslaughter of seven-year-old stepdaughter Nixzmary Brown. Nxzmary died of child abuse syndrome, specifically from blunt impact to the head with subdural hematoma. It followed years of abuse at the hands of her stepfather who beat her, starved her (she weighed 36lbs), tied her to chairs, apparently left her naked during/after beatings (i.e. almost certainly committed some form of sexual abuse), and forced her to urinate in a litter box. After a very ugly and disturbing trial, the judge did the right thing. Emphasis mine:
As he faced the judge about to sentence him for causing his 7-year-old stepdaughter’s death, Cesar Rodriguez said he was sorry. He said he loved his stepdaughter, Nixzmary Brown. He said he would serve his time. Still, Mr. Rodriguez said Thursday before a packed courtroom in Brooklyn, “I can honestly say that I’m being accused of something I did not do.”
Mr. Rodriguez’s assertion carried little weight with Justice L. Priscilla Hall of State Supreme Court. She sentenced him to the maximum term — 26 1/3 to 29 years in prison — for his role in the beating death of Nixzmary in 2006. The minimum was 15 years.
Mr. Rodriguez, 29, who was convicted last month of first-degree manslaughter and unlawful imprisonment, will be in his 50s before he is eligible for parole.
The sentence brought some comfort to prosecutors; they had charged Mr. Rodriguez with second-degree murder, which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison, but had to settle for the manslaughter conviction. Several members of the deeply divided jury have said that although they deplored Mr. Rodriguez’s conduct — he admitted beating Nixzmary daily in the final weeks of her life — they could not agree that he had shown “depraved indifference,” the standard for second-degree murder, in causing her death.
[. . .]
In her plea for the maximum sentence, Ms. Dwimoh reminded the judge that Mr. Rodriguez had a record of bad behavior. She noted that he was discharged from the Army in lieu of court-martial for sending sexual pictures of himself to a minor; that he was convicted of assaulting a relative; that he was charged with assaulting a U.P.S. driver; and, recently, indicted on charges of trying to smuggle homemade knives into his cell at Rikers Island.
“There is no end to Cesar Rodriguez’s violent ways,” she said.
Ms. Dwimoh also urged Justice Hall to consider Nixzmary’s five siblings. No sentence, she said, “could bring their sister back to them or the loss of the innocence of their childhood.” She said that Javier, Nixzmary’s older brother, had told prosecutors Wednesday that “he has prayed that when Cesar gets out of jail he is very frail and weak so that he can’t hurt any other children again.”
Rodriguez’s lawyers are still engaging in disgusting antics, including trying to have the verdict overturned, accusing the prosecution of withholding evidence (with no basis that I’ve seen reported), and outrageously claiming misconduct by the jury who somehow managed to find that this fuck did not have “a depraved indifference to life.”
I still find it utterly outrageous that Rodriguez managed to receive only a manslaughter conviction. But I do take some comfort in knowing that he will not be eligible for parole for 26 years. The sad, innocent hope of Nixzmary’s brother Javier is moving and distressing, but against the odds, I hope with him.
Popularity: 11% [?]
Mar
18
Breaking: Nixzmary Brown’s Stepfather Convicted of Manslaughter
Filed Under courts gone crazy, misogyny, parenthood, patriarchy, violence against women and girls | 18 Comments
Cesar Rodriguez – stepfather of Nixzmary Brown, the 7-year-old girl who was subject to persistent physical abuse that eventually killed her – was convicted of manslaughter.
A jury in Brooklyn acquitted Cesar Rodriguez, the stepfather of 7-year-old Nixzmary Brown, of second-degree murder Tuesday, but convicted him of a lesser charge, first-degree manslaughter, for fatally beating her as punishment for stealing a snack and jamming his computer printer with toys.
The lower charge carries a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison; second-degree murder carries a possible life sentence.
The verdict, reached on the fourth day of deliberations after an eight-week trial, brought an ambiguous end to the first trial in one of the most horrific child deaths in the city’s recent history, one that triggered an overhaul of the city’s child welfare system. Nixzmary’s mother, Nixzaliz Santiago, is to be tried later on murder charges.
The difference between second-degree murder and first-degree manslaughter is subtle. In convicting Mr. Rodriguez, 29, of first-degree manslaughter, the jury determined that Mr. Rodriguez had caused Nixzmary’s death by recklessly engaging in conduct that created a grave risk of serious physical injury. To find him guilty of second-degree murder, the jury would have had to determine that he acted with “depraved indifference to human life.”
During the eight-week trial, Mr. Rodriguez’s main lawyer, Jeffrey T. Schwartz, told jurors that though Mr. Rodriguez, who admitted beating Nixzmary regularly, was a child abuser, he was not a killer and that he never thought any of his beatings would cause Nixzmary’s death.
How, exactly, the jury felt that the man who beat his stepdaughter to death – after keeping her tied to chairs, forcing her to urinate in a litter box and feeding her so little that she weighed about as much as your average 4-year-old – did not, without a reasonable doubt, have a “depraved indifference to human life,” I do not know. But apparently, they did.
I have written about this case, and particularly the trial, with disgust. This has been over both the murder of a 7-year-old girl and the defense attorney who defended him by claiming that Nixzmary was a troublemaker who just had to be tied to chairs, and wasn’t actually at an unsafe weight. The guy has been defended by others who think that he is just doing his job, and hey, might have even been using a repulsive defense in order to increase the chances of conviction while not appearing as though he had failed to vigorously defend his client. But interestingly enough, he has repeatedly called for a mistrial, accused the prosecution of “cheating” (with no explanation that I found) and is now promising to appeal the decision instead of convincing his client of the absolute truth, which is that he got a better deal than he deserved and anyone could have reasonably expected.
In the end, I don’t really think that 25 years (assuming that he gets a maximum sentence) is enough. But I am glad to see that this guy’s ass will be going to prison. No one should be allowed to treat anyone this way, particularly a child, and get away with it.
What do you think about the verdict?
Popularity: 21% [?]
Feb
8
Child Murder Trial Takes Another Disgusting Turn
Filed Under WOC issues, assholes, courts gone crazy, misogyny, parenthood, patriarchy, violence against women and girls | 11 Comments
Remember Nixzmary Brown? The 7-year-old girl who was beaten to death by her stepfather, only to have his defense lawyer argue that the emaciated child who was regularly tied to a chair and forced to use a litter box as a restroom was “a little Houdini” who couldn’t be disciplined and apparently had it coming to her? As the trial wears on, it turns out that the story gets worse. Unsurprisingly, since it seems to me that the more horrifying and repulsive a story is, the more likely there are to be additional terrifying details still waiting to come to light.
As it turns out, even the outlandish and nauseating excuse that Nixzmary was being punished for eating a tub of yogurt while literally starving to death is a scientifically disprovable lie. The whole story is a sham, because by the time that the stepfather says the beating occurred, Nixzmary was already dead.
Seven-year-old Nixzmary Brown slipped into unconsciousness more than 13 hours before her stepfather and mother sought medical help for her, a medical examiner testified Thursday at her stepfather’s murder trial.
For more than seven hours of that time, the doctor said, Nixzmary was dead.
The timeline offered in State Supreme Court in Brooklyn by the medical examiner, Dr. Barbara A. Sampson, contrasts with the accounts that the stepfather, Cesar Rodriguez, gave the authorities on Jan. 11, 2006, the day that Nixzmary’s body was found in her family’s apartment in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn.
In his written and videotaped statements, Mr. Rodriguez described an evening of shopping at Target on Jan. 10, followed by snacks for Nixzmary’s five siblings, a confrontation with Nixzmary over a container of yogurt or pudding that had disappeared, and another confrontation over a computer printer that Nixzmary confessed to jamming. This was followed, Mr. Rodriguez said, by a punishment session in which he beat Nixzmary, then held her head under a running tub faucet. When he left her naked on a bedroom floor, she was awake and moaning, he said.
According to Dr. Sampson, the city’s first chief deputy medical examiner, who presented the results of Nixzmary’s autopsy on Thursday, none of that could have happened when Mr. Rodriguez said it did.
Nixzmary, Dr. Sampson said, lost consciousness around 2:30 p.m. on Jan. 10, from a blow to the right side of her head sustained two days earlier.
“At least several hours before her death she was not receiving oxygen,” Dr. Sampson said, describing a microscopic exam of the girl’s brain cells.
“She was unconscious at least several hours before she ultimately died,” she said. Nixzmary died between 8 and 9 p.m., Dr. Sampson said.
This would make Mr. Rodriguez’s efforts to resuscitate Nixzmary — which he said he began briefly before sending his wife to summon help around 4 a.m. on Jan. 11 and was still doing when paramedics arrived — pointless, said Ama Dwimoh, the lead prosecutor.
“Cesar Rodriguez was doing C.P.R. on a dead body,” she said.
Here is what I know: when a man creates a story about beating his child, running her head under cold water and leaving her moaning and naked on her bedroom floor, when he says that all of this occurred because she ate a tub of yogurt while weighing half of a normal child her age and uses it as a defense over that child’s death, I’m not sure that I can handle knowing the truth.
Popularity: 50% [?]
Feb
6
Maryland School District Violates Pregnant Students’ Rights
Filed Under abortion, anti-choice extremism, discrimination, education and schools, misogyny, parenthood, pregnancy, reproductive justice, slut-shaming, women’s health | 28 Comments
A school district in Maryland has instituted a policy of informing parents of a student’s pregnancy regardless of that student’s wishes.
A revised regulation that directs Howard County school officials to notify parents when students reveal they are pregnant has drawn criticism from health experts who say it violates a young woman’s right to privacy and jeopardizes health care.
The policy and accompanying procedures appear to be among the strictest in the region.
Health experts say that students’ willingness to seek care will decline.
“There’s no question this will have a chilling effect on kids coming forward,” said County Health Officer Peter Beilenson. “It’s going to slow down health care.”
Howard’s policy “really pushes the issue of informing the parents, when state law says minors have the right to make decisions independent of the parents,” said Deborah Chilcoat, an education and training specialist for Planned Parenthood of Maryland and co-chair of a county coalition on adolescent sexuality and reproductive health. “It’s not going to be in the best interests of young people in Howard County,” she said.
And here’s the thing: the new rule isn’t only ill-advised, stupid and potentially dangerous. It’s also pretty clearly against the law.
Maryland’s minor consent law, which applies to those younger than 18, says teenagers do not have to inform parents to receive health services, including pregnancy testing, contraceptives and treatment for sexually transmitted infections.
[. . .]
“We wanted to make it clear: If the student does not tell the parents, the school system will advise the parents,” Aquino said. “Parents have a right to that information.”
Mark Blom, the system’s general counsel, said school health offices should not be regarded as clinical settings, where the state’s minor consent law would apply.
Ah, I see now. We’re working under the ridiculous assumption that fundamental rights end the minute you walk into school. And while I am totally cool with minor infringements, like restricting speech insofar as to disallow hate language (i.e. racial, sexual, gender and religious slurs), I do think that one’s health care rights are a little bit different. Because, strangely enough, while I think that schools have some duty to protect their students, I also think that teenagers are people.
Popularity: 50% [?]
Jan
17
Misogynist Excuses For Killing Women Now Extend to 7-Year-Olds
Filed Under assholes, courts gone crazy, misogyny, parenthood, violence against women and girls | 24 Comments
Meet the defense attorney who makes the prosecutor who called gang rape of a ten-year-old “childish experimentation” look good. Warning: graphic descriptions of extreme child abuse follow after the jump:
Read more
Popularity: 27% [?]
Jan
9
“The Darfur of America” (or not)
Filed Under WOC issues, abortion, anti-choice extremism, assholes, bigotry, courts gone crazy, human rights, misogyny, parenthood, pregnancy, race and racism, reproductive justice, women’s health | 16 Comments
Following the trend of increasingly manipulative and stupid arguments against abortion comes this story about African-American anti-choice activists calling the high rate of abortions among black women “the Darfur of America.” Because where’s the fun in protesting if you can’t pointlessly and falsely pit against each other two groups who already have a lot of justifiable tension and negative history? The only thing more underhanded, dishonest and obvious than making abortion a men against women issue is to make it a whites against blacks issue. As if we don’t have enough issues in this country that actually are.
Saying they are faced with a civil rights crisis that demands immediate attention, African American anti-abortion advocates will hold three events in the Bay Area later this month in an aggressive push to combat the high number of abortions among black women.
“The abortion issue is huge. It is the Darfur of America,” and it’s time to educate the public about it, said Walter Hoye, a Berkeley preacher who founded the Issues4Life Foundation, a recently formed Union City-based organization intent on drafting more African Americans into the fight against abortion.
Issues4Life has organized the events to coincide with the Jan. 22 anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, Martin Luther King Jr. Day on Jan. 18 and Black History Month in February. All three events will feature Alveda King, the niece of the slain civil rights leader.
[. . .]
“We want to create opportunities to dialogue on issues concerning life, and abortion is the leading cause of death in the African American community,” Hoye said. “It is a moral issue as far as the church is concerned, and we want to strengthen the African American leadership.
“We have always taught abstinence. That is Christianity 101. But when people decide to have sex outside of marriage, we want to do other things like post-abortion counseling, anger management, day care and recovery programs.”
Hoye said he sees a problem with abortion clinics located in black neighborhoods and says people should be just as concerned with them as they are homicides, liquor stores and genocide in Africa.
You know, I’m used to the Roe anniversary being used by the wingnuts, but seeing Dr. King’s holiday exploited in this way bothers me. I don’t know what his personal views on abortion were. A web search only pulled up anti-choice comments from his niece. But no matter what his opinion on abortion, I can’t see him supporting his namesake day as a chance not only to exploit tensions between white and blacks, but also to pit the black community against itself.
BFP’s short but profound statement made the point for me:
I’m not sure what is more offensive–the comparing of abortion to actual systematic genocide of black human beings, or the idea that if abortion in the black communities is genocide, black women are consequently cast as those who are committing genocide against their own people.
Popularity: 15% [?]
Nov
19
On lamenters of black pregnancy
Filed Under WOC issues, abortion, assholes, bigotry, class and economics, discrimination, education and schools, media, misogyny, parenthood, patriarchy, pregnancy, race and racism, reproductive justice, slut-shaming, stereotypes, women’s health | 8 Comments
So some asshole named Will Okun — the male kind of asshole, meaning the kind of asshole who never has to worry about being pregnant unless he co-stars in a bad movie alongside Danny Devito — has written some opinion piece in the NY Times lamenting pregnant black teenagers. He never does specify race, but it’s heavily implied that he is talking about black teens from his extended bio and work with black teens, the photographs accompanying the article, the mention of poverty and dropping out of school and the fact that black women have the highest teen pregnancy rates.
It happens too often. A female student approaches my desk, says “Mr. Okun?”, and and whispers the two words no adult wants to hear from a teenager: “I’m pregnant.” I want to scream, I want to cry, I want to shake her with anger. What have you done? Life is not hard enough already? Is it over, have you given up? What about finishing high school? What about college? What about your own dreams? What about enjoying the last of your own childhood? How can you parent a child when you are just a child yourself? How will you support your baby, how will you support yourself? Where is the man, will he be here next year? Will I see you and your baby coldly waiting alone for a city bus that will not come? Ple