ProgressWomen

courtesy of National Women's Law Center

This week is National Women’s Health Week — a time for women to remind ourselves to put our health first. Some politicians are determined to put women’s health first, too — first on the chopping block.

Opponents of the health care law are dead-set on finding ways to undermine it. And, if they win, our health will be undermined, too.
For generations, women have overcome obstacles, exceeded expectations and fought for equality. We fought discrimination in the health insurance market, where women have been considered a pre-existing condition and denied health coverage due to a previous Caesarean section or a history of domestic violence or rape. We fought to end the discriminatory practice of insurance companies charging women more than men for health coverage, simply because we are women. And we won: the health care law finally ends these odious practices.

But opponents of the health care law are working to take our victories away. We must stay vigilant to ensure these victories stay in place for generations to come. Watch the new video from our I Will NOT Be Denied™ campaign, and then share it with your friends, family, and co-workers.

Thank you for working for quality, affordable health care for women and their families.

“Name It. Change It.” works to end sexist and misogynistic coverage of women candidates by all members of the press—from bloggers to radio hosts to television pundits. 

by Siobhan “Sam” Bennett, President/CEO of She Should Run and NameItChangeIt.org

Today, I am proud to introduce a new resource: the Name It. Change It. Candidate Guide to Sexist Media Coverage.  This guide encourages women to run for leadership positions and helps them navigate the difficult path to the top in ” a highly toxic media environment, which often negatively affecting their campaigns.”

Just one sexist remark can damage a woman’s campaign. The Name It. Change It. candidate guide aims to equip women candidates, campaign managers, political consultants, and communications staff with the tools to succeed despite sexist comments from media.

As the 2012 election season begins, we have our work cut out for us. Name It. Change It. will not stand by as pundits, radio hosts, bloggers, and journalists damage women’s political futures with misogynistic remarks.

To do your part in identifying and ending sexist media, check out the Name It. Change It. candidate guide and become familiar with the ways the media is sexist so you can spread the world and stop it.  Name It. Change It. identifies three levels of sexism: “just plain sexism,” “really damn sexist,” and “severe sexism.”  The words become more derogatory as they change from knocking down her wardrobe and attitude to using hateful words like “slut,” “prostitute,” or “fascist feminist.”

Can you think of anyone who likes to call women “sluts” or “whores” in the media and is clearly a media sexist?

To learn more about Name It. Change It. visit NameItChangeIt.org : a non-partisan project of WCF Foundation, Women’s Media Center, and Political Parity, in conjunction with She Should Run, which can be accessed here.

It’s time to take a look at Rush Limbaugh’s actions not just in regards to Sandra Fluke but over the past few years.  It is the time for the FCC to consider taking his hateful sexist comments off the air.

(CNN) – Ironically, the misogyny Rush Limbaugh spewed for three days over Sandra Fluke was not much worse than his regular broadcast of sexist, racist and homophobic hate speech:

– Female Cabinet members are ”Sex-retaries.”

-- “The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies.”

– The National Organization for Women is “a bunch of whores to liberalism.”

– [Said to an African-American female caller]: ”Take that bone out of your nose and call me back.”

These are just a few samples from the arsenal of degrading language Limbaugh deploys on women, people of color, lesbians and gays, immigrants, the disabled, the elderly, Muslims, Jews, veterans, environmentalists and so forth.

Limbaugh doesn’t just call people names. He promotes language that deliberately dehumanizes his targets. Like the sophisticated propagandist Josef Goebbels, he creates rhetorical frames — and the bigger the lie, the more effective — inciting listeners to view people they disagree with as sub-humans. His longtime favorite term for women, “femi-Nazi,” doesn’t even raise eyebrows anymore, an example of how rhetoric spreads when unchallenged by coarsened cultural norms.

At least this most recent incident has turned a spotlight back on the vile, damaging statements Limbaugh has been promulgating for years. His sponsors are dropping him; his stations have begun to follow suit.

Clear Channel’s Premiere Radio Networks Inc., which hosts Limbaugh’s program, has defended his recent comments.  If Clear Channel won’t clean up its airways, then surely it’s time for the public to ask the FCC a basic question: Are the stations carrying Limbaugh’s show in fact using their licenses “in the public interest?”

Individual radio listeners may complain to the FCC that Limbaugh’s radio station (and those syndicating his show) are not acting in the public interest or serving their respective communities of license by permitting such dehumanizing speech.

The FCC takes such complaints into consideration when stations file for license renewal. For local listeners near a station that carries Limbaugh’s show, there is plenty of evidence to bring to the FCC that their station isn’t carrying out its public interest obligation. Complaints can be registered under the broadcast category of the FCC website: http://www.fcc.gov/complaints

This isn’t political. While we disagree with Limbaugh’s politics, what’s at stake is the fallout of a society tolerating toxic, hate-inciting speech. For 20 years, Limbaugh has hidden behind the First Amendment, or else claimed he’s really “doing humor” or “entertainment.” He is indeed constitutionally entitled to his opinions, but he is not constitutionally entitled to the people’s airways.

It’s time for the public to take back our broadcast resources. Limbaugh has had decades to fix his show. Now it’s up to us.   Read more here from CNN.

By Hannah Levintova - Mother Jones

As Republican lawmakers have pushed ever more intrusive and expansive uterus-related legislation, some of their colleagues across the aisle have fired back with intentionally and equally ridiculous counterproposals. From mandatory rectal exams for guys seeking Viagra to prohibitions on sperm-stifling vasectomies, most of these male-only provisions have, unsurprisingly, flopped. But they’ve scored big as symbolic gestures, spotlighting the inherent sexism of laws that only regulate lady parts.

Some of the tongue-in-cheek ideas introduced across the country:

Delaware: By an 8 to 4 vote, the Wilmington, Delaware, city council recognized the personhood of semen because “each ‘egg person’ and each ‘sperm person’ should be deemed equal in the eyes of the government.”

Virginia: As the state Senate debated requiring transvaginal  ultrasounds for women seeking abortions, Sen. Janet Howell proposed  mandating rectal exams and cardiac stress tests for men seeking erectile  dysfunction meds. Her amendment failed by just two votes.

Georgia: Responding to a Georgia house bill banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, Rep. Yasmin Neal wrote a bill outlawing most vasectomies because they leave “thousands of children…deprived of birth.”

Ohio: A bill introduced by state Sen. Nina Turner would compel men to get psychological screenings before getting prescriptions for impotence meds. “We must advocate for the traditional family,” Turner said, “and ensure that all men using PDE-5 inhibitors are healthy, stable, and educated about their options—including celibacy as a viable life choice.”

Illinois: State Rep. Kelly Cassidy proposed requiring men seeking Viagra to watch a video showing the treatment for persistent erections, an occasional side effect of the little blue pill. As she explained, “It’s not a pretty procedure to watch.”

Missouri: Protesting the legislature’s vote to reject Obama’s contraception coverage mandate, nine female lawmakers cosponsored a bill restricting access to vasectomies except for men risking death or serious bodily harm. “In determining whether a vasectomy is necessary,” the bill reads, “no regard shall be made to the desire of a man to father children, his economic situation, his age, the number of children he is currently responsible for, or any danger to his wife or partner in the event a child is conceived.”

Oklahoma: When a zygote-personhood bill came before the state Senate, Sen. Constance Johnson penned an amendment declaring that ejaculating anywhere outside a woman’s vagina constitutes “an action against an unborn child.” Bonus: Johnson also suggested  that any man who impregnates a woman without her permission should pay a  $25,000 fine, support the child until age 21, and get a vasectomy, “in  the spirit of shared responsibility.” In response to the same bill, state Sen. Jim Wilson proposed an  amendment requiring the father of an unborn child to be financially  responsible for its mother’s health care, housing, transportation, and  nourishment during pregnancy.

Texas: Contesting a bill mandating sonograms before abortions, Rep. Harold Dutton unsuccessfully offered three amendments in a row. The first would have required the state to pay the college tuition of  children born to women who decide against an abortion after seeing a required ultrasound image. The second would have subsidized the children’s health care costs until age 18. When that failed, he lowered the age to 6. That didn’t fly, either.

CONGRATULATIONS TO JAMIE CROCKETT, STUDENT AT UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI’S SCHOOL OF JOURNALISM FOR BECOMING A FINALIST. 

WE LOVE HER VIDEO…YOU WILL TOO!  WATCH IT HERE.

On November 16, 2011, the Women’s Media Center invited girls ages 14-22, to create a 1- 5 minute video for our first annual Girls State of the Union (#GSOTU) video contest. Like the President’s report , the Girls’ State of the Union sums up the condition of the country—with a special emphasis on the welfare of girls.

From California to the Carolinas, diverse young women and girls articulated their unique visions for change. They aptly demonstrated superior problem-solving skills, creativity, and thought leadership, and reinforced the important role girls play in our union. Contest participants communicated their “State of the Union” in many ways including amplifying their voices using art, music, multimedia, and poetry to add personal flair.

Our distinguished group of new media and celebrity judges, including actresses Kyra Sedgwick and Marisa Tomei, will select the final winner of the contest during the first week of February. We will be announcing the winner on our website and our #SheParty Tweet-up  on Wednesday, February 8^th between 3PM and 5PM EST.

In honor of Women’s History Month, the Women’s Media Center will arrange for the winner to travel to Washington, DC between March 17-19, 2012  to deliver her address, receive top-notch media training, and star in a video about the Girls’ State of the Union.

We are so proud of every girl and young woman who participated in the contest. We salute you!

Congratulations to our six fabulous finalists:

Shree Bose : Ft. Worth, TX

Samantha Crisp :Chapel Hill, NC

Jamie Crockett :St. Louis, MO

Shira Gorelick:  Livingston, NJ

Diedra Shores:  Memphis, TN

Adora Svitak :  Redmond, VA

Three Maplewood Richmond Heights Middle School students are stepping up and speaking out for the issues they believe in—even if adults won’t listen.

By Lindsey Toler – Maplewood Richmond Heights Patch

Eighth graders Maja Eernise, Lucy Miller and Symphonie Cameron Read

Meet the fourth wave of feminism.

They may only be 14, but the more eighth-graders Maja Eernise, Lucy Miller and Symphonie Cameron learn about the world, the more they speak up for change.

This week, the Maplewood Richmond Heights Middle School trio released a political commercial promoting gay rights. It asks viewers to speak out against bullying and advocate for gay marriage.

“It is something that we all care about deeply,” Miller said. “We’ve all seen how this issue has affected not just us but the country as a whole. We wanted to speak out about it.”

The foundation for their political beliefs is simple: all people are created equal.

“There are people in our community and around the world, everywhere you go, that are against homosexuality,” Eernise said, “but at the end of the day, we’re all people, and we should look at each other as equal beings and not look down on someone for their beliefs or homosexuality.”

The girls haven’t had to go far to hear about gay rights issues. Same-sex marriage dominated the headlines this summer as New York became the sixth state to allow gay people to marry, and the It Gets Better anti-bullying campaign videos are viral on YouTube.

But at the middle school, the girls say, the issue isn’t touched on enough. That’s why they made a video, Eernise said.

“If students talk about it, other students will want to listen to us,” she said.  The hardest part of being a 14-year-old activist is getting adults to listen.

“They tend to disregard my ideas and thoughts because of my age, which is infinitely frustrating,” Miller said. “Even if I’m making valid points, they still disregard everything I’m saying because I’m 14. It’s still something I struggle with.”

The girls said their families have been supportive of their opinions and beliefs, but the debates come when they talk to their parents’friends. ”Usually, when adults try to discourage me because of my age, I try to share my point and my true interest in it,” Cameron said.

At the middle school, the girls said, they haven’t seen instances of gay bullying. But they do hear students use derogatory slurs. And when they hear it, they speak up.

“I’m not one to keep my mouth shut,” said Miller, whose friends laughed in agreement. “I’m definitely very outspoken.”

The girls agree that sexism is the biggest social issue they face—especially discrimination in sports and unwanted heavy petting. Eernise said boys her age disregard girls’ sports because they aren’t “masculine” enough.  ”They think we can’t handle the pressure and how much stronger they are than us,” she said.

Miller said she sees sexual harassment in her school’s hallways, especially when boys are being too “touchy-feely” with girls who don’t want that kind of attention. ”I see a large amount of petty sexual harassment, but still sexual harassment, that goes unnoticed because … .” Lucy pauses and Eernise picks up the thought for her: “Because it’s ‘normal’ at our school.”

Alex Pepin, the girls’ social studies teacher, calls the trio “a very talented group of girls” and said she is impressed with the maturity they showed in their gay rights commercial.

“As much as people are like, ‘Oh they’re middle schoolers, they don’t know,’ they are passionate about these things,” Pepin said. “They are at the age where all these—gay rights, abortion, are you a Democrat, are you a Republican, do you even care—all those things are starting to come out and take shape in themselves. It’s nice to be able to give them a medium to let them get that out there somehow.”

http://maplewood-brentwood.patch.com/articles/eighth-grade-girls-speak-out-for-gay-rights#youtube_video-8844311