Women break records to make up 20% of U.S. Senate

Congratulations women and congratulations Barack Obama!

Let’s get these numbers up to 50%. Obviously, all female politicians aren’t pro-choice, including Senators. With so few women allowed into power, it can be easier for women to achieve with an anti-woman agenda (See Sarah Palin.) But the more women we get into government proportionally, the more supportive the government will be of women. It’s pretty impossible for a country with women in only 16% of power positions to be pro-woman.

About those losses, Richard Mourdock (“And even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen”) Todd Aiken (“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”) Joe Walsh (“With modern technology and science, you can’t find one instance…there’s no exception for the life of the mother”) perhaps the Republican party should reconsider its policy and start treating women like human beings.

via RH Reality Check

Madeleine Albright’s letter to me

Margot —

If you’re reading this email, you’re a woman, or you care about someone who is.

This year, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, and the backers behind their ticket are not running on what one would call a pro-women agenda. They are running on a platform of paternalistic, outdated, chauvinistic ideas — and in practice those ideas are genuinely harmful to women.

Here’s what women can expect if Romney-Ryan and the Republicans win:

A repeal of Obamacare and the free preventive screenings it covers. A return to discrimination against women by insurance companies. No support in the fight for equal pay for equal work. Supreme Court justice nominations based on radical ideology.

Every election is important, but I think this one will truly define what America is about.

I’m calling on you today because you are one of the people who can make the difference in this election. Democrats like us must, with no exceptions, speak up for women, for our children and grandchildren.

This election will be close, and your donation of $375 or more is crucial to this fight:

https://my.democrats.org/Womens-Rights

This election is ours to win or lose — and a win for Mitt Romney and Republicans is a big loss for America’s women.

Thank you for your help.

Sincerely,

Madeleine Albright

For my thoughts on a Romney presidency and sex discrimination read here.

In November, are you voting for embryo rights or human rights?

Richard Mourdock, a Republican running for Senate in Indiana, said yesterday that when a woman becomes pregnant by rape, “it is something that God intended.”

USA Today reports:

Asked whether abortion should be allowed in cases of rape or incest, Mourdock said during Tuesday’s debate, “I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God.”

Of course Mourdock “struggled” with the rape/ incest/ life of the mother abortion exceptions that some pro-life Republicans support. If you believe that the embryo has human rights, no abortion exception makes sense. If abortion is murder, you can never justify that murder, regardless of how that embryo came into being. That’s just logic.

You’d think, logically, at the very least, pro-life candidates would be fighting like hell to make sure all women have access to contraception so at least raped women would have a better chance of not getting pregnant.

Mitt Romney, who is pro-life, is trying to differentiate his position from Mourdock’s controversial statement. Unfortunately, it’s Romney’s position, which, on a good day allows three abortion exceptions, that is, once again, unclear, inconsistent, and illogical. If you are pro-life, embryo rights must supersede women’s rights. Eventually, Romney will admit that.

Forcing a raped woman to give birth affects her economic well-being

Richard Mourdock, a Republican running for Senate in Indiana, said yesterday that when a woman becomes pregnant by rape, “it is something that God intended.”

Regardless of God’s will, can we at least all agree that forcing a raped woman to give birth radically affects her economic well-being?

Pregnant women need health care. What if the raped woman is lower-income? How will she afford her monthly and then weekly ob-gyn visits? What about the cost of the birth? What if she has a c-section? What if she has an ectopic pregnancy? What if she hemorrhages during the birth? If she has a job, how much maternity leave will she get? Will she be able to stay at her job when she has a baby to take care of? How will she afford childcare? What about her child’s education? Will she be able to send her child to a safe school with good teachers? How will the raped woman afford health care for her child?

I am so sick of Republicans who are against reproductive rights, health care that covers contraception, and adequate funds for public education claiming that they care about improving the economy and jobs for everyone. Clearly, the only economy and the only jobs Republican policies support are those of high income males. Romney’s economic strategy comes down to this: If male breadwinners do well, America will do well. So if your financial health depends on a rich guy, Romney may be your candidate. But if it doesn’t, or if you’d rather is didn’t, consider voting for Obama in November.

‘health of the mother has become a tool for abortions anytime under any reason’

Republican rep Joe Walsh is running for congress in Illinois. Last night, he told reporters that there should be no abortion exception for the life of the mother.

Of this inane statement, Planned Parenthood writes: “This is exactly why politicians have no place in a woman’s personal medical decisions.”

Not long ago, Rep. Todd Aiken said: “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

Who do you think should have the legal right to advise women on health choices: doctors or politicians?

‘Socially liberal, fiscally conservative’ and ‘women’s issues’ make no sense

In this week’s debate, Romney refused to say he will support the Lily Ledbetter Act for equal pay but promised to get women home from work in time so they can “make dinner.” He lied about taking initiative in seeking out women candidates for high power jobs and refused to fess up to his promise to defund Planned Parenthood.

At least, in the VP debate, Paul Ryan was honest about his views against reproductive rights. I can respect that. But Mitt Romney is a liar and that terrifies me about any possibility of him becoming president.

Obama, on the other hand, talked in the debate about Lily Ledbetter which he signed into law. More importantly, he told Americans: “These aren’t women’s issues, they are family issues.” He discussed how it’s crucial for women’s wallets that contraception is covered by healthcare plans.

That connection should be obvious.

One more time: contraception is an economic issue and a health care issue for women. Reproductive rights are not a “single issue,” in some separate “category.”

What is there that is confusing about this? Not only is contraception used to treat all kinds of medical issues, but pregnancy is a medical issue. What is there that people don’t get about the physical dangers of pregnancy? Is the argument that contraception is preventative health care so, therefore, women shouldn’t get it covered? All kinds of preventative health care are covered by insurance. In fact, America’s whole medical system is moving towards focusing on prevention. Is it that sex is optional behavior, so if you get pregnant, it’s your fault? But if you go skiing and break your arm, you get treated and covered. It doesn’t matter that you “opted” to go skiing.

It all comes down to this: Women’s bodies are different than men’s bodies and as such, have different needs. Refusing to cover contraception is sex discrimination and no health insurance company should be allowed to refuse to cover medical care based on gender.

Obama gets that. Mitt Romney doesn’t give a shit.

Last night, On CNN’s “Outfront” host Erin Burnett talked about a “shocking” new Gallup poll where 39% women said that abortion was the number one issue for them in the presidential election. Apparently, this poll is shocking because women have been saying that the economy is the most important issue.

Once again: reproductive rights are an economic issue.

Here is my letter that I posted to Obama before the debate:

Dear Obama,

Please talk about women tonight. You didn’t, even one time, in the last debate.

If you get asked about the role of government again tonight, please be more eloquent and passionate. Please point out Mitt Romney’s hypocrisy: he claims to support small government when he wants to get involved in the most intimate and private parts of women’s lives. Clearly, he doesn’t care about small government; he cares about big business.

Mr. President, please explain to Americans tonight that reproductive rights, including choice and birth control, are economic issues. Please say that if women don’t have access to basic health care, which, of course, for female bodies must include contraception, it makes it much harder to get or hold a job.

Please tell Americans that we can’t talk about jobs for women, or the economy improving for women, without securing basic reproductive rights.

Please explain to Americans that if embryo rights supersede human rights, women have no rights at all.

Obama said all of this in the debate and more.

Whereas when “women’s issues” come up on any TV show, talk radio program, or political speech, Republicans keep saying that all women care about is jobs. Abortion is a “single-issue,” important to a minority of “single-issue voters.”

But there are no jobs, there is no economy for women without reproductive rights. That would be like asking men, if you don’t have human rights, what are your thoughts on health care? What do you think about education? What about foreign policy?

It makes no sense.

The whole “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” category makes no sense either. For women, for families, and therefore, you’d think, for men: fiscal issues are “social” issues. Mitt Romney is “socially conservative,” and therefore, “fiscally” his policies are really bad for women. And for families.

Perhaps, if families are structured around a male breadwinner with a large income who has the support of a stay-at-home mom who wants lots of kids, Romney’s categories and policies apply. But how many families in America fit that description in 2012? How many parents want their kids to grow up in and into replicating that model?

It comes down to this: the political categories created and enforced by power structures dominated by men are anachronistic and no longer apply to Americans as they are currently structured in polls and so many debates. All issues are “women’s issues.” That should be obvious to any President of the USA. Reproductive rights are human rights, because, once again: if embryo rights supersede human rights then women have no rights at all.

Romney’s lie about women

Here is Romney’s lie from last night’s debate:

 “And so we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet. I went to a number of women’s groups and said, ‘Can you help us find folks,’ and they brought us whole binders of women.”

Here is what happened:

“Following the election, MassGAP [Massachusetts Government Appointments Project] formed committees for each cabinet post in the administration and began the process of recruiting, interviewing, and vetting women applicants,” said Marissa Szabo, associate director of the Massachusetts Women’s Political Caucus, which founded MassGAP. “Those committees selected top applicants for each position and presented this information to the administration for follow-up interviews and consideration for appointment.”

Just one more thing and I am done here, because I have got to get back to Fairyland and my book. Hillary Clinton has got Obama’s back. Like so many times in the past, I am amazed by what a brilliant politician she is. And her husband, of course. You could be cynical about all this, but I like that she knows exactly what to do. I hope this means she is running in 4 years. I want this kind of political mind to be president.

Malala update and call for justice for women and girls around the world

From the AFP:

The 14-year-old Pakistani girl shot in the head by the Taleban was in a stable condition in a British hospital Tuesday as well-wishers from around the world left her messages of support.

Malala Yousafzai “remains stable”, according to doctors monitoring her at the specialist Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham, central England, which treats British soldiers wounded in Afghanistan.

“She spent a second comfortable night at the hospital and continues to be cared for,” the hospital said.

Malala was shot on a school bus in the former Taleban stronghold of the Swat valley last week as a punishment for campaigning for the right of girls to an education, in an attack which outraged the world.

Malala’s story is getting international attention, but please remember that this kind of violence against girls and women happens around the world EVERY SINGLE DAY. Here’s just one story from today’s news that I pasted below. Yet, these crimes and human rights violations against girls and women rarely even make headlines. Please stop calling gender apartheid “a cultural issue.” Don’t be a passive bystander. Do something to stop the violence and donate money today, 100% of your donation will go to help women and girls around the world.

Afghan girl beheaded for refusing prostitution: police

Posted on 2012-10-17 21:14:32

HERAT: Afghan police have arrested four people who allegedly tried to force a woman into prostitution in western Afghanistan and beheaded her when she refused, officials said Wednesday.

Mah Gul, 20, was beheaded after her mother-in-law attempted to make her sleep with a man in her house in Herat province last week, provincial police chief Abdul Ghafar Sayedzada told AFP.

“We have arrested her mother-in-law, father-in-law, her husband and the man who killed her,” he said.

Gul was married to her husband four months ago and her mother-in-law had tried to force her into prostitution several times in the past, Sayedzada said.

The suspect, Najibullah, was paraded by police at a press conference where he said the mother-in-law lured him into killing Gul by telling him that she was a prostitute.

“It was around 2:00 am when Gul’s husband left for his bakery. I came down and with the help of her mother-in-law killed her with a knife,” he said.

Abdul Qader Rahimi, the regional director of the government-backed human rights commission in western Afghanistan, said violence against women had dramatically increased in the region recently.

“There is no doubt violence against women has increased. So far this year we have registered 100 cases of violence against women in the western region,” he said, adding that many cases go unreported.

“But at least in Gul’s case, we are glad the murderer has been arrested and brought to justice,” he said.

Last year, in a case that made international headlines, police rescued a teenage girl, Sahar Gul, who was beaten and locked up in a toilet for five months after she defied her in-laws who tried to force her into prostitution. (AFP)

 

Candy Crowley changes the pose of the moderator

Post-debate, Candy Crowley told CNN that she altered her position on the floor as moderator. She was supposed to sit, but she decided to stand. “I have a bad back,” she said. But there was another reason. Crowley watched Jim Lehrer and saw how he was seated lower down than the candidates. “He looked like he was in an orchestra pit,” she said. In that position, “You’re not on the same level.” She thought that made it harder for Lehrer to keep control of the debate.

There was so much internet chatter before the debate about how all the teeth were taken out of the moderator. Crowley didn’t let happen, in no small part because she took control of her pose.

Anyone who reads Reel Girl knows I spend a lot of time analyzing the poses of males and females, real and imagined, actors and politicians, kids and grown-ups.

Poses matter and women know this from a lifetime of being led into idiotic, submissive poses and watching the stupid, idiotic poses other women get led into. Crowley was alert, prepared, and took action when she had the power to alter her position. She kept control of the debate.

Nice job, Crowley, and thank you to three teen girls from New Jersey for advocating to get the first female moderator in 20 years to moderate a presidential debate.