August 27, 2012
You guys… if ever there was a sign from God(dess)… I think this is it.
(image via UniteWomen.org)

You guys… if ever there was a sign from God(dess)… I think this is it.

(image via UniteWomen.org)

July 7, 2012

Tribute cover, or “I can’t believe we still have to fight over the same shit” cover?

newsweek:

Columbia Journalism Review’s July/August cover pays tribute to Newsweek’s 1970 “Women in Revolt” cover.

(via huffingtonpost)

June 17, 2012
Lisa Brown, Michigan Lawmaker, To Help Perform 'Vagina Monologues'

Lisa Brown, you a BAMF!

May 24, 2012
Policies at Religiously Affiliated Hospitals Create Conflicts for Ob-Gyns, Study Finds

Hmmm… you don’t say…..

teddytutson:

Thirty-seven percent of ob-gyns at religiously affiliated hospitals have faced a conflict with their employer about religiously based policies on patient care, according to a study published in theAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. At Catholic hospitals, 52% of ob-gyns have experienced such conflicts, the study found.

May 14, 2012
How the ‘war on women’ quashed feminist stereotypes - The Washington Post

Great piece by Rebecca Traister.

… The image of the feminist as a mirthless, hirsute, sex-averse succubus is a friendly-fire casualty of the Republican “war on women.” It’s a grave loss to conservatives, who have used this faithful foot soldier as a comfortably grotesque stand-in for the real people whose liberties they have sought to conscribe: women.

In activism, an image problem becomes a structural problem: Twisted but resonant stereotypes make women hesitant to identify with the movement to expand their rights. And if women won’t organize and advocate on their own behalf, the work of anti-feminists is done.

But the recent Republican incursions against women’s rights have been extreme enough to make women finally see beyond the wraith, to recognize that this battle is in fact about them. As presidential candidates sparred over birth control and state legislatures enacted punishing restrictions on reproductive rights and opposed equal-pay protections, newly vocal feminists resisted publicly. By doing so, they transformed the stereotype, putting youth, sex and humor on the side of the long-denigrated women’s movement. Conservatives such as Limbaugh, Foster Friess and Rick Santorum, dealing in sexual censoriousness and musty utterances, suddenly looked like the sexless relics of a bygone era, while the women shouting back at them presented a new, cool model of feminism — young, funny, socially nimble and appealing enough to tempt young men from the Citadel.

April 24, 2012
"Hello! What is this, 1962? It’s being debated – it has no traction in the world. None of us are out there saying, ‘Gee, should you be able to buy the Pill or should you not be able to buy the Pill?’ All of this is an attempt in a rapidly changing age to put the genie of freedom back in the bottle and guess what? It does not work. We are accustomed to living a certain way. Our daughters take certain things as bedrock. And a couple of guys in Washington arguing about this? Or Presidential debates? They’re not going to change that."

— Anna Quindlen on contraception [full interview here] (via nprfreshair)

(via nprfreshair)

April 24, 2012
Gender Equality: Is There a War on Women?

Boom. Word.

suzaneraslan:

Like a male friend of mine said, “If I ever catch myself being sexist, then I remind myself that she is someone else’s daughter.”

If we remind ourselves that all women are mothers, daughters and sisters, and give them their due respect, our society will be a much better place.

This blog post was a generally thoughtful list of media personalities getting called on the carpet for making misogynistic comments about female political figures and the use of female objectification in advertising. And then it took a turn for the paternalistic and outright sexist in the last two lines quoted above. 
In the current war on women there are multiple fronts to be fought — there’s obvious misogyny (that is, comments or actions that convey or are born out of a hatred of women), objectification (which may not be necessarily hateful, just strips a woman or women of their personhood), and then there is the subtle archetypal “mothers, daughters, sisters” argument which ALSO strips us of our personhood. 
By having to remember that I am someone’s daughter in order to respect me, you’ve taken something over which I have absolutely zero control and have reduced me to nothing but the relationship that I have with another human being, and, let’s be honest, you’re not talking about how I am my mother’s daughter… You’re reducing me to my relationship to another man in order to have respect for me, and I hate to break it to you, but I don’t have a great relationship with my father and find it repulsive to be defined by that relationship. However, even if you count my mother and both of my stepparents, I have signed hundreds more paychecks in my time than I have birthday cards— why don’t you remind yourself that I have been somebody’s boss?
Though my brother wouldn’t view it this way and I certainly don’t (and again, “sister” isn’t about a woman’s relationship to another woman, but is always the man viewing another woman through the relationship he has with his own sister), I have technically only been HALF of a sister, whereas I have taught dozens of children and adults. Why not remind yourself that I am somebody’s teacher? 
Not to add more fuel to the misogyny fire for my promiscuity, but I’ve been a sexual partner to more men and women than I have parents and siblings, and had much more agency in choosing those individuals than I did in picking my family! You’d never remind yourself that I was somebody’s sex partner, but why not? At least I had something to do with that! 
The “daughter, sister, mother” argument is not women-hating, but it IS extremely sexist and only furthers the madonna-whore paradigm— family relationships are sacred and sanctified, while anything that is sexual or powerful and applied to women is immediately negative, dirty, and evil. Having to remind yourself not to call Hillary Clinton a “slut” or a “bitch” or a “dyke” because she’s Hugh Rodham’s daughter or Hugh (the II) and Tony’s sister completely bypasses her myriad accomplishments as a human being. How about not demeaning a woman who has been First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State based on those accomplishments and not the fact that she has brothers and a father? (There’s no need to put in here that she is a mother, as she isn’t a mother to sons, and therefore unidentifiable by the diminutive “mother” as understood by a sweetly demeaning patriarchy.) 
Until we are judged by the content of our character instead of the content of our underwear, even if that judgment comes dressed as Donna Reed and Patty Duke instead of a ball breaking demon or a cutesy little devil in stilettos, then you, sir, haven’t caught yourself being sexist and changed your thinking, you’ve just put it in a new dress. 

April 10, 2012
Fierce.
destroythegop:

gardensgrey:

“And so what we’ve done is to force the Republicans and their conservative allies to reveal their true agenda. They don’t just want to wage a war on choice, they want to wage a war on contraception. They are against family planning. In the 21st Century, they want to prevent women from having access to the tools they should have to determine their own reproductive futures.
And I think it’s important to continue pointing that out. We cannot let them hide behind their positions without making it clear what their real agenda is. Because the fact is, today, the United States has one of the highest unintended pregnancy rates in the industrialized world. Half of all pregnancies are unintended and nearly half of those end in abortions.
Anyone truly committed to reducing the need for abortions should be committed to doing whatever it takes to reducing unintended pregnancies—regardless of politics and regardless of ideology.
And we know who’s paying the price for these policies–women around the world suffering because they no longer have access to reproductive care; women right here at home who want to plan their families and who want to prevent unintended pregnancies but no longer have access to contraception.
This is not just an affront to women’s rights—it is an affront to human rights, to our most fundamental values as a nation.”
Hillary Clinton, 2007

Love ya, Hill.

Fierce.

destroythegop:

gardensgrey:

“And so what we’ve done is to force the Republicans and their conservative allies to reveal their true agenda. They don’t just want to wage a war on choice, they want to wage a war on contraception. They are against family planning. In the 21st Century, they want to prevent women from having access to the tools they should have to determine their own reproductive futures.

And I think it’s important to continue pointing that out. We cannot let them hide behind their positions without making it clear what their real agenda is. Because the fact is, today, the United States has one of the highest unintended pregnancy rates in the industrialized world. Half of all pregnancies are unintended and nearly half of those end in abortions.

Anyone truly committed to reducing the need for abortions should be committed to doing whatever it takes to reducing unintended pregnancies—regardless of politics and regardless of ideology.

And we know who’s paying the price for these policies–women around the world suffering because they no longer have access to reproductive care; women right here at home who want to plan their families and who want to prevent unintended pregnancies but no longer have access to contraception.

This is not just an affront to women’s rights—it is an affront to human rights, to our most fundamental values as a nation.”

Hillary Clinton, 2007

Love ya, Hill.

March 30, 2012
CREEPIEST ACCURATE COVER EVER!!
destroythegop:

nefariousnewt:

keepyourboehneroutofmyuterus:

rhrealitycheck:

As Planned Parenthood so appropriately phrased it: Does this make you uncomfortable?

And there was this tweet to @TexasObserver about this cover:

One reader’s impression: RT @amyvrwc: This cover is absolutely disgusting…it’s not satire, it’s crass and partisan.

To which I responded:

.@TexasObserver @amyvrwc The state of TX is forcing dildos into people’s vaginas w/out their consent. THAT is actually crass and disgusting.


If that photo doesn’t scare you, I don’t know what will.

CREEPIEST ACCURATE COVER EVER!!

destroythegop:

nefariousnewt:

keepyourboehneroutofmyuterus:

rhrealitycheck:

As Planned Parenthood so appropriately phrased it: Does this make you uncomfortable?

And there was this tweet to @TexasObserver about this cover:

One reader’s impression: RT : This cover is absolutely disgusting…it’s not satire, it’s crass and partisan.

To which I responded:

.  The state of TX is forcing dildos into people’s vaginas w/out their consent. THAT is actually crass and disgusting.

If that photo doesn’t scare you, I don’t know what will.


March 30, 2012
Razing Arizona

The Arizona bill, (HB 2036), passed in thestate Senate on Thursday and will now go before the house. Like the proposals before it, Arizona’s legislation is modeled on the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” designed by the National Right to Life Committee. And like the other bills, it states that abortion would be banned 20 weeks into a pregnancy. But reproductive rights advocates point out that Arizona’s law would actually be more restrictive than others, as the bill states that the gestational age of the fetus should be “calculated from the first day of the last menstrual period of the pregnant woman.”


Liked posts on Tumblr: More liked posts »