ap moves in this weekend, b joins her in a month. So much excitement, we cannot handle it.
7.31.2008
pic of the day: yay edition
ap moves in this weekend, b joins her in a month. So much excitement, we cannot handle it.
7.24.2008
beyond reproductive freedom: violence against women and controlling our bodies
Not that victim blaming or lack of response to sexual assault claims are really that uncommon, but lately, it seems there have been quite a few instances of both. The variety of the following stories really illustrates the spectrum of how women's bodies and privacy are constantly being violated.
This widely publicized story of a doctor who, during surgery, put a temporary tattoo on a female patient below the underwear line has received a lot of response. Not surprisingly, the woman's choice to sue the doctor has been talked about very negatively. The general feeling is that she should suck it up and take a joke. Ah, another silly feminist, anti-humor rant, right? Except that during surgery on a herniated disk, you're on your stomach and there really is no reason for your doctor to have you turned over, let alone be pulling your panties down. Personally, if I were going into surgery where I was going to be put completely under and had a male doctor, I'd be slightly worried about what was going to happen, and something like this just proves that fear justified. One blogger has a really good analysis of how being nice and having a sense of humor does not necessarily equal complacency when it comes to defending autonomy over our own bodies.
Sexual assault on college campuses has long been a significant issue, especially at larger institutions with a large fraternity/sorority culture. While sometimes claims against perpetrators of said abuse is taken as a serious threat to not only the victim's well-being, but also to the well-being of an entire student body, often when the accused of if a certain importance to the college or university, it becomes a different story. Recently, the University of Iowa has come under heat for its potential cover-up of an assault on a female student by two football players. The student was encouraged not to report the incident to police and nothing was done about the incident by the school for three weeks. One of the accused was even allowed to move in down the hall from the victim. This kind of "celebrity" protection college athletes get for criminal behavior is a familiar story, and creates hostile and dangerous environments for all students on campuses. The woman at UW actually had enough courage and, it seems, family support to report her rape to the authorities, but was still refused justice due to the player's status as one of the football team's most valuable. This brings up another issue: once a woman who has been assaulted actually reports it, which is so often not the case, what happens to her, the evidence, and the accused?
Sarah Tofte wrote a very good column in Tuesday's Washington Post about rape kits and what happens to them after they are performed on women. While states are given federal grants to pay for these kits (they run about $800 each and are free for victims), often the money goes unspent and evidence is shelved, sometimes forever. So, first a woman goes through the emotional and physical pain of being assaulted. If she is able to go to the ER, she is still often refused a kit, and then sometimes, nothing is even done with the kit. I know that in West Virginia, ER workers used to have to obtain a prosecutor's permission before being able to do a rape kit. This is absurd, especially when you think about the fact that many assaults happen in the middle of night and on weekends. By the time someone could get a prosecutor to sign off, the evidence was gone or unusable. State law has changed and now the only thing needed to perform a rape kit when a victim comes to the ER is her consent. From my training as a rape crisis advocate, many ER workers don't know about this change, forget, or simply don't care. Often, the advocate has to step in and get the nurse to do a rape kit, which is so ridiculous.
It really is sad how much we have to fight to prove that it is we, and we only, who control our bodies. And when this autonomy is violated, why is it our fault? And why is it so hard to get someone to care, pay attention, and do something about the accused?
This widely publicized story of a doctor who, during surgery, put a temporary tattoo on a female patient below the underwear line has received a lot of response. Not surprisingly, the woman's choice to sue the doctor has been talked about very negatively. The general feeling is that she should suck it up and take a joke. Ah, another silly feminist, anti-humor rant, right? Except that during surgery on a herniated disk, you're on your stomach and there really is no reason for your doctor to have you turned over, let alone be pulling your panties down. Personally, if I were going into surgery where I was going to be put completely under and had a male doctor, I'd be slightly worried about what was going to happen, and something like this just proves that fear justified. One blogger has a really good analysis of how being nice and having a sense of humor does not necessarily equal complacency when it comes to defending autonomy over our own bodies.
Sexual assault on college campuses has long been a significant issue, especially at larger institutions with a large fraternity/sorority culture. While sometimes claims against perpetrators of said abuse is taken as a serious threat to not only the victim's well-being, but also to the well-being of an entire student body, often when the accused of if a certain importance to the college or university, it becomes a different story. Recently, the University of Iowa has come under heat for its potential cover-up of an assault on a female student by two football players. The student was encouraged not to report the incident to police and nothing was done about the incident by the school for three weeks. One of the accused was even allowed to move in down the hall from the victim. This kind of "celebrity" protection college athletes get for criminal behavior is a familiar story, and creates hostile and dangerous environments for all students on campuses. The woman at UW actually had enough courage and, it seems, family support to report her rape to the authorities, but was still refused justice due to the player's status as one of the football team's most valuable. This brings up another issue: once a woman who has been assaulted actually reports it, which is so often not the case, what happens to her, the evidence, and the accused?
Sarah Tofte wrote a very good column in Tuesday's Washington Post about rape kits and what happens to them after they are performed on women. While states are given federal grants to pay for these kits (they run about $800 each and are free for victims), often the money goes unspent and evidence is shelved, sometimes forever. So, first a woman goes through the emotional and physical pain of being assaulted. If she is able to go to the ER, she is still often refused a kit, and then sometimes, nothing is even done with the kit. I know that in West Virginia, ER workers used to have to obtain a prosecutor's permission before being able to do a rape kit. This is absurd, especially when you think about the fact that many assaults happen in the middle of night and on weekends. By the time someone could get a prosecutor to sign off, the evidence was gone or unusable. State law has changed and now the only thing needed to perform a rape kit when a victim comes to the ER is her consent. From my training as a rape crisis advocate, many ER workers don't know about this change, forget, or simply don't care. Often, the advocate has to step in and get the nurse to do a rape kit, which is so ridiculous.
It really is sad how much we have to fight to prove that it is we, and we only, who control our bodies. And when this autonomy is violated, why is it our fault? And why is it so hard to get someone to care, pay attention, and do something about the accused?
7.23.2008
revisited: mccain is a dumbass
Raging Red has a nice, link-filled post about what an idiot the Republican party nominee really is. There's also a nice compilation here of some of McCain's many blunders related to his supposedly superior foreign policy experience. Still not convinced that no one in their right mind should vote for this guy? What about the fact that with rape, sexualized violence, and military coverups horrifically prominent in the US Forces, the guy who thinks rape is funny wants to be the commander in chief. Gross.
7.17.2008
we can have fun, too
Just so no one gets too worried about mine and ap's stress levels, check out some of these great sites that continually make me laugh.
Man Babies!!
Please never buy any of these for your baby.
FAIL!
John was kind of a weirdo.
Man Babies!!
Please never buy any of these for your baby.
FAIL!
John was kind of a weirdo.
fear-mongering doesn't work if you don't make any sense, idiot
You can talk freedom of speech all you want on this issue, I have no problem with some asshole using his own money to BE COMPLETELY STUPID. That said, can someone please remind him that Bush was president during 9/11?? Ok, thanks, that is all.
7.16.2008
there probably shouldn't even be a foreign policy debate
So we all know that McCain's big thing against Obama is to say he's not experienced enough, especially with foreign policy matters. With the debate raging about US presence in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, you'd think we'd want our future president to at least know which countries still exist in the world. Yea, well, guess which one doesn't. Seriously. I'd rather have someone with slightly fewer years experience as long as he is somewhat aware of what is going on outside his precious US borders.
just in case you need more proof that we have a huge struggle ahead of us
If you've been keeping up with the comments on our recent post regarding racism, you probably have developed a picture of where ap and I come from. Responding in the comment section has really fired me up lately (yea, because I'm not already in a somewhat perpetual state of anger at society, but whatever) and there have been a slew of articles, studies, and posts on other sites regarding what it is like to be a woman in this world. Read on.
- Wait, you mean after someone is subjected to catcalling, objectification, or sexual harassment, they don't just get over it? Huh...weird.
- Um, ew.
- The amount of control some people want to have over my body is seriously disturbing...
- ...because it can lead to this. Tissue anyone?
7.15.2008
picture of the day
Just read the comments under the previous post to know why this is my pick for today. Sorry, but in the end, that's pretty much the way ap and b think about the world.7.08.2008
I wanted to make sure to write a post about what happened to me on Sunday night while I was out. It was disturbing, but rewarding in the end, and speaks a lot for the work society has made but also still has ahead of us.
Sunday two of my girl friends and I were out at a bar in Charleston, WV. All three of us are friends with the bartender, as well as an "off-duty" bouncer who was there. Both of these men were sitting and talking with us; when the bouncer and my friend would go outside to smoke (yay smoking ban!!), I would generally accompany them. On one of these occasions, the bouncer happened to give me a hug, for which he is well-known around town for doing. While this was happening, a man who had been in the bar and who knew my friend through work (but did not know her well) was watching from afar. As I would later find out, this man was not okay with a black man hugging a white woman.
After returning to the bar, the bouncer joined some of his friends and left us to continue talking at our table. The man from outside returned as well, and after seeing that I was not with the bouncer, used it as an opportunity to voice his opinion. This came in the form of some very offensive statements, beginning with the question, "Are you really okay F------ a black guy?" This not only offended me because of the obvious racism, but also because to him, a woman hugging a male at a bar is presumed to automatically lead to sex. He continued along this line of questioning, and also mentioned things like that just not being "right". He showed immediate disgust when I told him that I really saw no problem with the scenario he was presenting. My friend wasted little time in sternly telling him that it should not matter one's race in any type of relationship, whether it be platonic or intimate. When he continued to make offensive statements, my friend left to alert the bartender of the problem. He then alerted the owner of the bar, who was there at the time.
The offender had walked away by this time, and my friend and I went on to discuss the situation. After some time, we started to leave the bar only to find the exit blocked by what turned out to be a very satisfying sight. The bartender, owner, bouncer, and three of the other patrons were calmly confronting the man and explaining why what he said was not okay. They informed him that he needed to leave and not come back. One should also understand that the owner and bartender were white men and the bouncer and other patrons black men. While I was incredibly surprised, offended, and saddened at the remarks that were said, the sight of this group coming together to peacefully defy the remarks and actions of this man was relatively moving. I have been in bars in Charleston where offenses, albeit generally sexist ones, are overlooked because the person is a [well] paying customer. That was not the case in this situation; further, it illustrated the power of approaching such situations with words rather than punches.
Sunday two of my girl friends and I were out at a bar in Charleston, WV. All three of us are friends with the bartender, as well as an "off-duty" bouncer who was there. Both of these men were sitting and talking with us; when the bouncer and my friend would go outside to smoke (yay smoking ban!!), I would generally accompany them. On one of these occasions, the bouncer happened to give me a hug, for which he is well-known around town for doing. While this was happening, a man who had been in the bar and who knew my friend through work (but did not know her well) was watching from afar. As I would later find out, this man was not okay with a black man hugging a white woman.
After returning to the bar, the bouncer joined some of his friends and left us to continue talking at our table. The man from outside returned as well, and after seeing that I was not with the bouncer, used it as an opportunity to voice his opinion. This came in the form of some very offensive statements, beginning with the question, "Are you really okay F------ a black guy?" This not only offended me because of the obvious racism, but also because to him, a woman hugging a male at a bar is presumed to automatically lead to sex. He continued along this line of questioning, and also mentioned things like that just not being "right". He showed immediate disgust when I told him that I really saw no problem with the scenario he was presenting. My friend wasted little time in sternly telling him that it should not matter one's race in any type of relationship, whether it be platonic or intimate. When he continued to make offensive statements, my friend left to alert the bartender of the problem. He then alerted the owner of the bar, who was there at the time.
The offender had walked away by this time, and my friend and I went on to discuss the situation. After some time, we started to leave the bar only to find the exit blocked by what turned out to be a very satisfying sight. The bartender, owner, bouncer, and three of the other patrons were calmly confronting the man and explaining why what he said was not okay. They informed him that he needed to leave and not come back. One should also understand that the owner and bartender were white men and the bouncer and other patrons black men. While I was incredibly surprised, offended, and saddened at the remarks that were said, the sight of this group coming together to peacefully defy the remarks and actions of this man was relatively moving. I have been in bars in Charleston where offenses, albeit generally sexist ones, are overlooked because the person is a [well] paying customer. That was not the case in this situation; further, it illustrated the power of approaching such situations with words rather than punches.
b's random links
- McCain doesn't = Bush? Ya sure?
- Because getting tested for HIV is such a sin
- American track and field finally getting exciting again
- Holla we want pre-nup, we want pre-nup, yea
- Checks and Balance
7.03.2008
which applies to you?
Today I signed on to my facebook account, only to have a very interesting message waiting for me.
"Which applies to you?" was the headline. It went on to say something like, "Your mini-feed is confusing. Please select which applies to you." My choices were "Barrie edited her profile" or "Barrie edited his profile."
My instant reaction was to laugh out loud because I thought it ridiculous that the ambiguity of my name had even stretched to the facebook realm. Then, I began to wonder if facebook was confused because my gender is not listed on my profile, thus it didn't know which pronoun to use. Or, I thought to myself, what if normally when one does not list their gender on their profile, facebook assumes gender based on a name and mine was not clear? These thoughts, of course, began to make the obie in me a little disturbed.
First, it said my mini-feed was confusing, because I guess beforehand it would report things as "Barrie edited their..such and such" (I always wondered why it was doing that...). This is a lame attempt at gender neutrality because it's grammatically incorrect. "Their" implies more than one person. So, to be grammatically correct, one must use either the male or female pronoun. Herein lies the problem with a gender binary. What about those that feel as though they identify with both or neither? Not only does facebook force one to choose between only male and female if they wish to list gender (unlike the "religious views" section, one cannot write in an option not listed under gender), but if one opts to leave this section blank, they are later forced to clarify so their mini-feed is not grammatically incorrect or "confusing". One may argue here that facebook is asking for gender, not sex. Yet, forcing me to choose between "her" or "his" (yes, it gives me the option, which, arguably, is a step in the right direction), signifies to the world that you must be one or the other, even if it is letting you choose the one with which you identify. I am reminded of my days in class back at Oberlin, where we were asked to introduce ourselves (name, major, hometown, etc) on the first day, and many would take the time to tell people with which pronoun they identified. But there were still only two choices.
Having gone to a college that required at least one gender neutral bathroom per floor in dorms, had an annual event called Drag Ball, and was one of a handful of schools to begin offering coed dorm rooms recently, breaking the traditional system of gender dichotomy is important. Facebook, which some may call an unimportant aspect of pop culture, is a leading social networking site with incredible power to disseminate information and set standards for such things as gender identification.
This is obviously a very complicated issue: what are the differences between gender and sex? how can one not identify with either "her" or "him? how can one identify with both? where do we begin in changing this in mainstream society?
A discussion on the implications of asking one to choose between only two options (public restrooms, filling out forms, sports teams, etc) is required in pop culture before we can make any changes. Maybe getting facebook to make some changes would begin a much-needed awareness.
"Which applies to you?" was the headline. It went on to say something like, "Your mini-feed is confusing. Please select which applies to you." My choices were "Barrie edited her profile" or "Barrie edited his profile."
My instant reaction was to laugh out loud because I thought it ridiculous that the ambiguity of my name had even stretched to the facebook realm. Then, I began to wonder if facebook was confused because my gender is not listed on my profile, thus it didn't know which pronoun to use. Or, I thought to myself, what if normally when one does not list their gender on their profile, facebook assumes gender based on a name and mine was not clear? These thoughts, of course, began to make the obie in me a little disturbed.
First, it said my mini-feed was confusing, because I guess beforehand it would report things as "Barrie edited their..such and such" (I always wondered why it was doing that...). This is a lame attempt at gender neutrality because it's grammatically incorrect. "Their" implies more than one person. So, to be grammatically correct, one must use either the male or female pronoun. Herein lies the problem with a gender binary. What about those that feel as though they identify with both or neither? Not only does facebook force one to choose between only male and female if they wish to list gender (unlike the "religious views" section, one cannot write in an option not listed under gender), but if one opts to leave this section blank, they are later forced to clarify so their mini-feed is not grammatically incorrect or "confusing". One may argue here that facebook is asking for gender, not sex. Yet, forcing me to choose between "her" or "his" (yes, it gives me the option, which, arguably, is a step in the right direction), signifies to the world that you must be one or the other, even if it is letting you choose the one with which you identify. I am reminded of my days in class back at Oberlin, where we were asked to introduce ourselves (name, major, hometown, etc) on the first day, and many would take the time to tell people with which pronoun they identified. But there were still only two choices.
Having gone to a college that required at least one gender neutral bathroom per floor in dorms, had an annual event called Drag Ball, and was one of a handful of schools to begin offering coed dorm rooms recently, breaking the traditional system of gender dichotomy is important. Facebook, which some may call an unimportant aspect of pop culture, is a leading social networking site with incredible power to disseminate information and set standards for such things as gender identification.
This is obviously a very complicated issue: what are the differences between gender and sex? how can one not identify with either "her" or "him? how can one identify with both? where do we begin in changing this in mainstream society?
A discussion on the implications of asking one to choose between only two options (public restrooms, filling out forms, sports teams, etc) is required in pop culture before we can make any changes. Maybe getting facebook to make some changes would begin a much-needed awareness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
