What We Missed

Breaking news: more than three dozen House Dems have signed a letter to Nancy Pelosi firmly pledging to vote against the bill if it contains an anti-abortion amendment.
Fifty women who called themselves the Lioness group became the first female graduates of Iraq’s police officer training academy.
MIT economists find yet another way to argue that environment, not innate ability, determines how well girls do in math class.
The much-celebrated microfinance site Kiva’s one-on-one matching practices are called into question.
“You couldn’t stop Stupak. But you can stop Pitts.”
Fiorina’s campaign stoops to new lows in fight against Boxer. Ugh.

Join the Conversation

  • Roja

    http://www.daylife.com/photo/04nJ7cxcM9er3
    “Women involved in Iran’s “One Million Signatures Campaign” accept a 2009 Glamour Women of the Year award during the magazine’s annual award show in New York November 9, 2009. The campaigning women joined U.S. first lady Michelle Obama, British fashion designer Stella McCartney and nine others on Monday to be honored as “Women of the Year”.”

  • zombierat

    Oh wah wah. You cannot be a feminist and be against women having control of their own bodies.
    Know what I’m tired of? Women like you who pull a persecution act because, oh noes, everybody is mean to me because I want to force them to carry ANY pregnancy to term! Why can’t I be a feminist too?
    Bodily autonomy is a basic principle of feminism, and as far as I’m concerned neither I nor anybody else owes you any kind of consideration or welcome to the ‘club’.
    And are you going to reply to people who took down your bizarre rape victim caveat? And would you mind explaining why, when you say you’re pro-life, a fetus that is there due to a rape is worth less than a fetus that’s there due to consensual sex? Surely in your logic, they’re both babies who don’t deserve to be murdered?
    The fact that you back down and say “Oh, I’d let rape victims have an abortion.” shows that you understand on some level that being made to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term is harrowing, seeing as this caveat is not based on the worth of the fetus but purely on the feelings of the woman. You’re not even following your OWN logic.
    You’re not a feminist. End of.

  • zombierat

    This comment has been deleted because it violates our comment policy.

  • JosephLillo

    You mean like the people who are upset about their money going to arts endowments? “Oh, you want your share back? Here it is, and don’t you just love the jingling sound it makes?”
    As noted by ScottRock before, the bill didn’t even mention abortions except for preserving the status quo on them, and the Stupak amendment is regressive in this regard.

  • alixana

    And if a male Senator had done the same thing, asking to be called “Senator” instead of “sir” and adding a wry comment that he worked really hard to earn the title…would there be ANY kerfluffle? Would anyone have commented on it at all?

  • Gopher

    Not only that but you cant put a baby up for adoption without the fathers permission. That happened to a friend of my mothers. Her daughter wanted to put her baby up for adoption but couldnt because the father wouldnt sign the contract. He is a very irresponsible person and the girl (she was 16) did not want to give it up to him. She was forced to keep it and the baby who had been staying at the adoptive parents house had to be given back. quite a debacle. The daughter is very unhappy today and cannot seem to get her life together. All at a time when most young adults are going to college and having fun.

  • katemoore

    Must you play the “you’re not a feminist” card? You’re not the Feminism Police.

  • katemoore

    What the fuck? There is a COLOSSAL gap between expressing anti-choice views online, regardless of whether you or I may disagree them, and bombing people.

  • katemoore

    A lot of these comments are making me very, very angry.
    So somebody’s anti-choice and you disagree with that. That’s fine. But those are NOT grounds to say she isn’t a feminist or, for heaven’s sake, accuse her of shooting and/or bombing people. I’d say these statements are personal attacks, except they go beyond that. They’re downright slanderous, and you all know better.

  • 73666673

    I am not anti-choice, I am pro-choice, but I still think that women should be held accountable for their actions, and that abortion should not be viewed as a ‘one size fits all’ solution to unwanted pregnancy.
    If what you say is true about adoption, there should be a push to change it. There shouldn’t be huge obstacles in place stopping women from giving up their baby for adoption.

  • jane

    Why are we feeding trolls?

  • 73666673

    I don’t consider baldness or similar ailments to be a disease either, and I don’t care if they are covered by insurance or not. If there was public funding for something like baldness, I would be very upset.
    You make a really good point about pregnancy and influencing health. I shouldn’t have left that aspect out of my reasoning. Still, I think this is an exception, and if public funding was available only for a few women it could be broadened to cover those would have negative health implications from being pregnant.

  • Lily A

    Nobody is saying that abortion is “a one size fits all solution to unwanted pregnancy.”
    All we’re saying is that abortion should be a safe, legal, and affordable option for women who choose it.

  • FTWomen

    Nope. It doesn’t “help” women buy them, unless you mean indirectly by lowering healthcare costs for everyone. The bill (excluding Stupak) would have simply allowed insurance plans to coverage abortion if they choose, which is the way things are now.
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/aug/07/abortion-and-health-care-reform-bill/

  • cattrack2

    I’ve always liked Boxer, voting for her when I could, and contributing to her PAC when I couldn’t. I saw her deliver that comment & I was ashamed for her. Is anyone really surprised that someone in the military uses the terms, “ma’am” and “sir”??? And, yes, it would be equally smug arrogant, and condescending coming from a male. I’m frankly surprised that its coming up this late because at the time I saw the comment I don’t recall any uproar. I wouldn’t support Fiorina, but I’m glad to see this getting the treatment it deserves. I’ve been disappointed with Boxer the last 18 mos.

  • zombierat

    Feminism is a political movement for equality and women’s rights; it is not a social club.
    There are some beliefs and actions that are against the interests of feminism. Attempting to deny women the right to control their own body is one of them.
    I am well aware and accepting of the fact that there are many feminisms and womanisms. THIS, though, the right to control my own body is an issue on which I will give no quarter and do not think anyone else should.
    What’s ridiculous is denigrating people who say “Hey, you’re not a feminist if you deny women the right to control their own body and put the rights of a fetus above theirs!” as trying to be the ‘feminism police’.
    Letting anti-abortion sentiments being accepted as feminism is utterly stupid and dangerous. I do not feel the need to be polite to “pro-life feminists” or to make them feel accepted. They SHOULDN’T feel accepted, because their views work against women’s rights and equality.

  • zombierat

    No. I do not accept this.
    Being against women’s right to control their own bodies is anti-feminist. Again, feminism is NOT a social club, it is a political movement with basic tenents. Winning the right of women to control their bodies, to decide when they will have babies, was a major feminist issue, and a major victory in places where it has been achieved.
    You cannot be a pro-life feminist, and I will not say otherwise just to be ‘nice’. It’s not a personal attack and it’s not slanderous. The commenter in question is anti-abortion and espoused some ill-informed and abhorrent views on the subject. I was not attacking her by saying she’s not a feminist; I’m making a statement based on her political beliefs.

  • Brittany

    Thank you, Katemoore. My first comment was about me not feeling comfortable supporting abortions. It was not vicious or slanderous, but it turned into a flame war as I had suspected.
    I should know better by now than to state that I’m pro-life. :I

  • JesiDangerously

    Ok, I agree with you in theory. I believe that abortion rights are a cornerstone of feminism. However, it is not helpful to tell Brittany that she isn’t a feminist, not just yet. Not until all other avenues of explaining the importance of abortion rights have been exhausted.
    For all we know, Brittany is brand spanking new to feminism. I know when I first started out, I said some pretty un-feminist things. Like “I hate women, it’s their fault that people think they’re stupid because they’re all so vapid and petty.” Yeah, I actually said that shit while still thinking I was a feminist.
    There is a lot of growth that comes with signing up for this whole womens’ rights movement. Brittany may have never considered both sides of the issue. Or, she may have considered being pro-choice but has not yet reconciled that with her religious beliefs. Maybe instead of telling her she should take her toys and go home because she can’t play with us anymore, we should extend an olive branch and share with her what we know about abortion rights and how important they are to us.

  • zombierat

    Yes, because pro-lifers are so persecuted.
    You espoused anti-abortion views on a feminist blog and tried to claim the title feminist. You were offensive, talking about how it’s not YOUR problem if “some girl” gets pregnant. You trotted out tired anti-choice arguments and you were viciously attacked, your views were criticised and rightly so. Deal with it.

  • katemoore

    To me, the belief that women are equal to men and should be treated as such and an agnosticism about when life begins are not, and should not be, mutually exclusive. One is, most would agree, a large part of the definition of feminism. The other is a philosophical position that some people are not comfortable making. That does not preclude them from being feminists.
    And what’s ridiculous is making the statement “Hey, you’re not a feminist!” Because that’s policing. Period. You do not control the distribution and the revocation of Feminist Cards.

  • katemoore

    So, hypothetically speaking (before you accuse me of being a proto-bomber), what happens if somebody does believe, deep in her heart, that life begins at conception? Many religions and philosophical belief systems have this as a central tenet. (And I’m agnostic, so don’t you dare play the religious-zealot card on me.) And suppose this person believes, deep in her heart, that women should have equality and that misogyny is wrong.
    Which belief is supposed to take precedence? Why can’t a person believe both things? And what gives YOU the right to make sweeping statements about someone’s personal belief system, one that she’s likely thought long and hard about?

  • Miriam

    Folks this thread has gotten out of hand and is beyond moderation. I’m shutting it down.