Reblogged from nostanding-justdancing
SAGE
Columbia's Student Association for Gender Equality: Bringing a cross-cultural perspective to gender dynamics
In Brazil, sex with a child under the age of 14 is considered violent, and classified as rape… except a recent ruling decides that child prostitutes don’t count.
“Whether they were mature enough to consent had to be decided with reference to their wide sexual experience, not just their age.”
Disgusting.pr
A court in Brazil decides that some children are less equal than others
A Wisconsin law that made it easier for victims of wage discrimination to have their day in court was repealed on Thursday, after Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) quietly signed the bill.
The 2009 Equal Pay Enforcement Act was meant to deter employers from discriminating against certain groups by giving workers more avenues via which to press charges. Among other provisions, it allows individuals to plead their cases in the less costly, more accessible state circuit court system, rather than just in federal court.
In November, the state Senate approved SB 202, which rolled back this provision. On February, the Assembly did the same. Both were party-line votes in Republican-controlled chambers.
SB 202 was sent to Walker on March 29. He had, according to the state constitution, six days to act on the bill. The deadline was 5:00 p.m. on Thursday. The governor quietly signed the bill into law on Thursday, according to the Legislative Reference Bureau, and it is now called Act 219.
Walker’s office did not return repeated requests for comment.
State Sen. Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay) and Rep. Christine Sinicki (D-Milwaukee), the authors of the Equal Pay Enforcement Act, criticized Walker on Thursday for not informing the public of his actions on SB 202.
“We are finally starting to see progress here in Wisconsin, yet like their counterparts across the country, Legislative Republicans want to turn back the clock on women’s rights in the workplace,” said Hansen.
Women earn 77 cents for every dollar that men make. In Wisconsin, it’s 75 cents, according to the Wisconsin Alliance for Women’s Health (WAWH), which also estimates that families in the state “lose more than $4,000 per year due to unequal pay.”
Business associations lobbied in support of SB 202, according to the state’s Government Accountability Board. Groups like Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, and the Wisconsin Restaurant Association all backed a repeal.
Sara Finger, executive director of WAWH, said that the repeal was a “demoralizing attack on women’s rights, health, and wellbeing.”
“Economic security is a women’s health issue,” she said. “The salary women are paid directly affects the type and frequency of health care services they are able to access. At a time when women’s health services are becoming more expensive and harder to obtain, financial stability is essential to maintain steady access.”
I’m sorry, what century is this again?
(via le-kif-kif)
Why is it that after a few weeks of outrage, our collective memory seems to have amnesia?
People have gotten angry, but this issue has not been resolved, and we cannot let it be forgotten.
Went to get my taxes done and they insisted on performing a transvaginal ultrasound. This is getting out of hand.
And I’ll use this as a reminder that we are on day 53 (FIFTY THREE) here in Texas of actual forced transvaginal ultrasounds before abortion. So, this is funny but it also reminds me that here in Texas actual people are being forced to endure this procedure without being able to consent to it.
Join SAGE tomorrow night, Wednesday the 7th at 8pm in Hamilton 609 for our next meeting! Come for crazy cool discussion and more! And eat free food as well =D
The topic will be “Obarnard” responses: elitist, sexist, or something else?
Obama decided to speak at the Barnard Commencement this year, and all of a sudden bwog is full of comments such as “Barnard is full of academically inferior students that are able to use OUR campus, take OUR classes, and are stereotypically easy to get in bed. We feel like we worked our asses off to get here, and it’s annoying as f*** that Barnard can get the milk for free, so to speak.” and the lovely “While you guys were perfecting your deepthroating techniques and experimenting with scissoring and anal play, we were learning Calculus (usually by sophomore year of high school).” And how do you interpret Barnard President’s statement that this “probably is 19-year-olds writing at 4:30 in the morning”? And PrezBo’s belief that comments like those above “reflect the views of hardly more than just a few people”?
Bwog, the Spec, the New York Times, Jezebel and many more have already picked up this story, but what do you think?
Illegal abortion doesn’t mean less abortions, it just means less safe abortions
(via keepyourbsoutofmyuterus)
Rush Limbaugh calls Sandra Fluke a slut and a PROSTITUTE for wanting the government to have insurance cover contraception. In another section, he says she should repay the government by posting sex tapes online. We already knew Rush was horrible, but this is inexcusable. Boycott Rush Limbaugh. Send letters or tweets to ads sponsoring him! Say no to this blatant, proud, disgusting display of misogyny and sexism. Reblog if you agree.
Go to this page for a list of Rush Limbaugh sponsors:
http://leftleaningliberallady.blogspot.com/2012/03/list-of-rush-limbaugh-show-sponsors.html
As always, post comments and responses as well.
-Danielle
(Source: youtube.com)
I see this, and I laugh. But OF COURSE I do! Who wouldn’t? It’s absurd. How could this kind of “permission slip” be anything more than a stand-up comedian’s slapstick parody of the way things were back in the olden days?
Today is International Women’s Day.
Today, the Senate defeated the Blunt Amendment in a 51-48 vote, which would allow employers to refuse to cover health services because of “religious” or “moral” objections. Considering the broadly problematic implications of such a bill (wherein an employer could arbitrarily decide he was morally against pregnancy and decide your health insurance shouldn’t pay for it for example), it’s hard to understand why this proposal was only stopped from becoming law by 3 members of the Senate. Even Republican Senator of Massachusetts, Scott Brown, a supposed “moderate” (who voted to support women on the front lines of the military) voted for the bill.
How is this possible?
Let’s take a little walk down memory lane:
Back in 1965, the U.S. Supreme Court case Griswold v. Connecticut struck down one of the last remaining Comstock laws, the state bans on contraception. They were finally realizing what an important part of American values it represented.
1965 is also the year that President Lyndon B. Johnson signed The Voting Rights Act into law banning literacy tests as prerequisites for voting. People used to think literacy tests were necessary to retain the moral character of America. Why should people who can’t read well enough be trusted to vote? Why should women who choose to work at a religiously-affiliated institute be allowed to make their own decisions about their personal health care?
Back to today….This week, Rush Limbaugh said that wanting the government to pay for contraception is equivalent to demanding the government pay for sex, and therefore equivalent to being a prostitute (He also said that women should pay the govt back by posting sex videos online).
I’m trying to wrap my head around this national discourse, but I’m having trouble seeing how taking American back 50 years is helpful to the Republicans when 66% of Americans want birth control to be covered by insurance. I’m having trouble seeing how being active chauvinists helps the Republicans retain female supporters. I’m having trouble seeing how they can conceive of Republican women not supporting women’s rights.
And really, what are we doing talking about contraception in 2012??? Why this Republican war on women? Why are Republicans pursuing policy that is not only misogynist, backwards, and anti-American, but also intrinsically counter to their own Republcan values (keep the govt out of my vagina please)?
At the beginning, I said all I could do was laugh. That’s what these past couple weeks have seemed like. Just one big joke, and we’re waiting for the punch line. However, the situation is actually quite serious, and the comedians are all just laughing at the absurdity. But enough is enough! Why aren’t we demanding that these people step down from office? Why don’t we have a legal system in place to combat such blatant sexism, especially in those who have the power to change laws that affect everyday Americans?
Do Americans care? IF we care, what are we going to do about it?
-Danielle
If Mitt Romney and a few Republican senators get their way, employers could be making women’s health care decisions for them.
