Posts tagged women
Posts tagged women
It is not enough for one to simply say they support women’s equality, either in the present or as a future goal. One must fight for women’s equality in practice; to create the conditions in the here and now, in our institutions, schools, workplaces, organizations, for women’s concrete emancipation from male oppression. This includes complete and total autonomy over one’s own physical body in all matters sexual, reproductive, medical, and otherwise; as well as complete and total parity in power and control over the various institutions in which we exist and operate.
In a word, genuine democracy and gender equality are inextricably linked.
- Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog - Frequently Answered Questions
- Feminist Literature (Tumblr)
- Feminist texts written by women of color (Tumblr)
- fuckyeahfeminists (Tumblr)
- grrrlpower (Tumblr)
Racism, Race, & Culture
- Institutional/Structural Racism Within a Context: A Historical Glimpse at the Concept of “Race”
- Definitions - Racism Free Ontario Initiative
- Different Forms of Racism
- What is a Microaggression? What are Racial Microagressions?
- Appropriation vs. Appreciation
- A Look at the Myth of Reverse Racism
- Who are People of Colour? Why can’t I use the term “coloured”?
- Colourblindness: Colorblind Ideology is a Form of Racism
- The Angry Eye (YouTube)
- Racialicious (Tumblr)
- ladyatheist (Tumblr)
Sizeism & Body Positivity
- Truth Behind Fat: References
- Obesity, Health, and Metabolic Fitness
- Don’t You Realize Fat Is Unhealthy?
- Diets Don’t Work, But…
- Reality vs. Relativism
- THE HAES MANIFESTO (pdf)
- Fat Acceptance FAQ
- redefiningbodyimage (Tumblr)
GSM (Gender & Sexuality Minorities)
- Project Queer (Tumblr)
- Trans* Awareness (Tumblr)
- Trans Etiquette 101: No Offense, But That’s Offensive (Tumblr)
- Cissexism, Transphobia, & Cissupremacy. (Tumblr)
- So what’s a genderqueer, eh? (Tumblr)
- Gender Neutral Pronoun Blog
- The Spoon Theory written by Christine Miserandino
- Ableist Word Profile
- Don’t Support Autism Speaks
- I’m Autistic, But Autism Speaks Doesn’t Speak for Me.
- An Autistic Speaks About Autism Speaks
- Why I am against Autism Speaks (Tumblr)
- Checking Your Privilege 101 (pdf)
- Male privilege checklist (pdf)
- White Privilege Checklist (pdf)
- Binary-Gender Privilege Checklist
- Cis Privilege Checklist
- Heterosexual privilege checklist (pdf)
- Checklist of Neurotypical Privilege
- Christian Privilege Checklist
- Christian Privileges in American Society: Hidden Ways Christians are Privileged
- Privilege even in veganism
- Vegan Privilege
and this is the reason why i stopped saying that
More implications of being a woman in America.
Court: Texas can cut off Planned Parenthood funds
August 21, 2012
A federal appeals court ruled late Tuesday that Texas can cut off funding for Planned Parenthood clinics that provide health services to low-income women before a trial over a new law that bans state money from going to organizations tied to abortion providers.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans lifted a federal judge’s temporary injunction that called for the funding to continue pending an October trial on Planned Parenthood’s challenge to the law.
State officials sought to cut off funding to Planned Parenthood clinics that provide family planning and health services to poor women as part of the Texas Women’s Health Program after the state’s Republican-led Legislature passed a law banning funds to organizations linked to abortion providers. No state money goes to pay for abortions.
The appeal’s court decision means Texas is now free to enforce its ban on clinics affiliated with abortion providers. Planned Parenthood provides cancer screenings and other services — but not abortions — to about half of the 130,000 low-income Texas women enrolled in the program, which is designed to provide services to women who might not otherwise qualify for Medicaid.
The ruling is the latest in the ongoing fight over Texas’ efforts to halt funding to clinics affiliated with abortion providers. The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has said that the new state rule violates federal law. Federal funds paid for 90 percent, or about $35 million, of the $40 million Women’s Health Program until the new rule went into effect. Federal officials are now phasing out support for the program.
Gov. Rick Perry has promised that Texas will make up for the loss of federal funds to keep the program going without Planned Parenthood’s involvement. State officials have said ending the program would result in more unplanned pregnancies that would cost the state much more than self-financing the program.
In a statement, Perry called Tuesday’s ruling “a win for Texas women, our rule of law and our state’s priority to protect life.”
“Texas will continue providing important health services for women through this program in spite of the Obama Administration’s disregard for our state law and unilateral decision to defund this program,” the governor said.
Perry’s office referred questions about continued funding for the Women’s Health Program to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, which said it would move to begin enforcing the ban.
Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, said the case “has never been about Planned Parenthood — it’s about the women who rely on Planned Parenthood for cancer screenings, birth control and well-woman exams.”
“It is shocking that politics would get in the way of women receiving access to basic health care,” Richards said in a statement.
The case began when Planned Parenthood sued, saying the new Texas law violated its rights to free speech. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott countered by arguing that lawmakers may decide which organizations receive state funds.
A federal judge in Austin ruled in May that the funding should continue pending the trial on Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit, saying there’s sufficient evidence the state’s law is unconstitutional.
But the three-judge appellate panel disagreed, unanimously finding that Planned Parenthood was unlikely to prevail in future arguments that its free-speech rights were violated.
Abbott cheered the decision Tuesday, noting that it “rightfully recognized that the taxpayer-funded Women’s Health Program is not required to subsidize organizations that advocate for elective abortion.”
“We are encouraged by today’s decision and will continue to defend the Women’s Health Program in court,” Abbot said in a statement.
The ruling comes as conservative groups across the nation try to pass and enforce laws to put Planned Parenthood out of business and make getting an abortion more difficult. Earlier this year the same court upheld a new Texas law requiring doctors to perform a sonogram and provide women with a detailed description of the fetus before carrying out an abortion.
Richards said the decision left Planned Parenthood “evaluating every possible option to protect women’s health in Texas.”
Unacceptable. Free abortions on demand & without apology!
For women, NYPD Stop-and-Frisks are even worse
August 8, 2012
Street stops by the New York Police Department are about as effective for women as for men—that is, they turn up very few guns—but as The New York Times illustrates in a Tuesday report, they often feel a lot more intrusive.
As The Times’ Wendy Ruderman reports, The NYPD’s policy is gender-blind, unlike the TSA’s, which requires a same-gendered officer for pat-downs, so women who get stopped as part of New York’s controversial stop-and-frisk program often find male officers’ hands running along their waists, groins, and armpits (areas where training guidelines say weapons are often hidden) and sometimes rummaging through their purses. This creeps many women out, for example in the case of a woman who was stopped while police were looking for a male rape suspect, according to Ruderman:
“They tapped around the waistline of my jeans,” Ms. Pope said. “They tapped the back pockets of my jeans, around my buttock. It was kind of disrespectful and degrading. It was uncalled-for. It made no sense. How are you going to stop three females when you are supposedly looking for a male rapist?”
That does sound pretty unpleasant, especially when you consider how few guns officers find through stop-and-frisk. “Last year, New York City police officers stopped 46,784 women, frisking nearly 16,000. Guns were found in 59 cases, according to an analysis of police statistics by The New York Times. While the number of women stopped by officers in 2011 represented 6.9 percent of all police stops, the rate of guns found on both men and women was equally low, 0.12 percent and 0.13 percent, respectively,” Ruderman writes. Street stops, which are heavily criticized for unfairly targeting people of color, have decreased this year as the city has faced extra scrutiny.