YOU MAY ALSO LIKE:
Let me start off by wishing everyone (who has a dad), a very Happy Fathers’ Day. Now that my heteronormative wishes have gone through, let me get right to the point. Celebrating Mothers and Fathers on separate days is straight up offensive. Do mind the pun. Having specific days dedicated to either mothers or fathers assumes that all families conform to “traditional” and “heteronormative’ lifestyles and does not acknowledge the fact that there are many families who do belong to these strict structures. LGBT families are an example that may come directly to mind. Imagine how offended (and hurt) members of such a family would be on Mothers or Fathers’ Day, feeling left out and marginalized from society, not able to take part of all the festivities that people like to organize around such holidays. It’s enough to look at any magazine around said holidays for a member of an LGBT family to feel the amount of insensitivity thrown at him/her/them. But LGBT families are not the only ones who suffer on such holidays. A similar situation applies to single parents as well as parents raising orphans or adopted children. And the list goes on. Therefore, I believe Mothers’ Day and Fathers’ Day should be abolished and replaced by Parents’ Day, celebrating all parents around the world, no matter their background. Parenthood is not restricted to any age, relationship status, gender, sex, sexual expression, etc. In this age of political correctness, when will Mothers’ Day and Fathers’ Day be ruled insensitive?
PS: National Parents’ Day is celebrated in the US on the fourth Sunday of every July. Though the intention of its establishment in 1994 (during Clinton’s administration) was not to be politically correct, I think such a case must be made loud and clear.
“Together we can end HIV stigma, but we need to be able to TALK ABOUT IT. Share this graphic to continue the conversation and encourage your network of friends to speak up!”
A dangerous development in Myanmar is largely going unreported. Recently, local authorities announced their support for the enforcement of a two-child limit for Rohingya Muslims. While not an official policy of the central or state government, the policy has been implemented on a grass-roots level. The most recent public endorsement for this policy comes from Immigration Minister, Khin Yi who stated that Rohingya families of 10-12 children are “not good for child nutrition. It’s not very easy for schooling. It is not very easy to take care of the children.” While details of this discriminatory practice are recently reaching the international community, some believe this policy has been in effect for years, possibly decades.
This stateless, minority group primarily lives in one of Southeast Asia’s poorest regions, Rakhine state. They have been excluded from Myanmar’s 1982 Citizenship Act which recognizes 135 ethnic groups. Bangladesh has also disowned the Rohingyas and denied them refugee status, although they migrated from Bangladesh between 1824 and 1948. The two-child policy is aimed at controlling unrest between Buddhists (the majority in Myanmar) and Muslims. As a result of increasing violence, stricter policies have been placed on the Rohingyas, risking the spread of wider anti-Muslim sentiment. More worrisome is the belief that the child restriction is a form of ethnic cleansing.
Health experts fear this policy could encourage unsafe abortions in Myanmar, where abortion is illegal except in cases of maternal life.[1] Women that already have two children who become pregnant might have an illegal abortion in order to avoid fines or incarceration. Vickie Hawkins, Deputy Head of Mission of Myanmar’s Doctors Without Borders divisionv often sees “Women coming in [the] clinics with infections and medical complications because they have had unsafe abortions”. Doctors Without Borders operate in Maungdaw and Buthidaung townships where there are the largest Rohingya populations in the state. Journalists are not allowed to visit either town, making it difficult to access correct information and rally the international community behind this issue.
The UN and other human right organizations have condemned Myanmar’s unofficial policy, arguing it violates international law and harms women’s mental and physical health. While family planning is an issue that should involve both parents, this policy attacks women’s autonomy over their bodies. In addition, this ban circumscribes the construction of Myanmar Buddhist families onto the Rohingya population. Forcing cultural and ethnic norms onto groups has never worked and will only intensify the animosity between Myanmar’s populations.
Source: Reuter’s. “Myanmar Minister backs 2-child Policy for Rohingyas”
As a follow up, to my post about CPCs in Louisville, here are a few tips about distinguishing CPCs from real clinics.
Crisis pregnancy centers, or pregnancy resource centers, disguise themselves as medical facilities, but usually have no licensed doctors, nurses or counselors. They often appear under “Abortion Alternatives,” and may have names similar to abortion clinics nearby in order to confuse patients into entering their buildings instead of the real clinics.
Once you enter a CPC, their mission is to prevent you from getting an abortion at any cost. They will use misleading language, delay tactics, emotional manipulation, intimidation, and outright lies to either persuade you against abortion or to make you miss your appointment. The worst part? It’s all completely legal and funded by federal dollars.
CPCs do their best to appear as legitimate abortion clinics, so how can you tell which is which? Here is a list of red flags for CPCs:
- The words “crisis” or “resource” appear in the center’s name
- Their ads use language like “Pregnant & Scared?”
- They offer free pregnancy tests and ultrasounds
- When asked if they provide abortions or contraception, they will not give a direct answer
- The waiting room has biased pamphlets, sometimes with graphic pictures labeled as abortions
- They attempt to make you feel guilty about considering abortion
- They offer baby items, such as diapers and formula
- They downplay the effectiveness of contraception and emphasize abstinence
- They emphasize the dangers of abortion (Fact: fewer than 0.3% of patients experience complications requiring hospitalization)
- They discuss the false connections between abortion and breast cancer, infertility, or mental illness, often referred to as post-abortion stress syndrome
- Regardless of how you talk about the pregnancy, they refer to “your baby,” the “preborn child,” “post-abortive women,” and say that you are “already a mother.”
Crisis Pregnancy Centers: An Affront to Choice
A list of licensed abortion clinics in the United States can be found on the Abortion Assistance Blog.
Source: http://bebinn.tumblr.com/
Just in case women didn’t have enough to deal with Repro-Justice wise, there are also fake abortion clinics to contend with in addition to pro-life hecklers.
I’ve always known about CPCs (Crisis Pregnacy Centers), but I never knew just how horrible they could be until now.
There have been reports of a couple of fake clinics in downtown Louisville, KY. These clinics are right next to a genuine one – EMW Women’s Surgical Center on Market street.
Tumblr user thisgingerisback reports, “…this place is seriously a nightmarish hell-hole for any unsuspecting women tricked by the anti’s [sic]. They assure you this this the abortion clinic, they get you inside, and then offer you food and drink—which of course, means that once you realize your mistake, you can’t run next door and catch your actual appointment, since you need to fast.
Women have come out of this building crying, and on a few rare occasions, without their pants. They take you to a back room for an ultrasound, have you remove your pants, and then begin lecturing you on the sins of aborting. They do not give you back your pants until you have listened, and a few women tricked this far refused to listen and stormed out furious, ashamed, and in their underwear…”
Signal boost, spread the word, give everyone you know a heads up.
Reposted from Feminists-At-Large and the Voice.
I used to consider myself “transiently pro-choice,” mainly because I didn’t know enough about the issue to restrict anyone’s rights, but I certainly wasn’t comfortable with abortion.
Then things started to change as I came to college and, through my studies, came to some startling realizations about women’s health.
I felt that way before I developed a greater understanding of healthcare in America, particularly the fact that millions are uninsured and underinsured. Not only that, but also that it is easier in this country to get insurance for Viagra than for birth control.
It was before I understood sex and how much easier it is to be sexually irresponsible than responsible. It is not easy to take one pill at the same time every day, especially when your insurance plan does not cover contraceptives. I was “transiently pro-choice” before I had ever taken Plan B, placed that second pill on my tongue and realized that to some I was now a “murderer.”
Most importantly, it was before I understood the meaning of choice. “It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.” If Dumbledore said it, then it must be true. However, there are no identical choices, and not everyone has the same opportunities or resources, not everyone has bootstraps or even boots with which to pull themselves up.
But most of all, it was before I delved into the field of Global Health.
Internationally, 222 million women have an unmet need for family planning. For those who pretend that statistics about women’s issues are in some way fabricated or exaggerated, women with an “unmet need” are those who are sexually active, and are not using any method of contraception, but either do not want to become pregnant or want to delay their next pregnancy.
Over 40 million women have abortions annually. 40 million. And nearly half of them are unsafe. 47,000 women die from complications due to unsafe abortion every year. 47,000. Not to mention the 8.5 million others who suffer serious medical complications from unsafe abortions. 13 percent of maternal deaths are attributable to unsafe abortions. Women drink turpentine or bleach, insert haphazard herbal mixtures into their vaginas, penetrate themselves with hangers or chicken bones, and jump from roofs or fling themselves down stairs because they don’t have access to abortion services.
This is what is known as a preventable cause of death. This is on us. We can’t ascribe these deaths to the long Latin names of communicable diseases. These women do not die of natural causes. These women die because of us, namely bad governance and worse laws. These women die because lawmakers ignore science and statistics, and they ignore history. Policymakers are more concerned with the life of a fetus than the life of its mother.
These policies cannot be categorized as “third world problems.” Less than two weeks after Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) claimed that in abortion “there is no such exception as life of the mother [...] with advances in science and technology,” Savita Halappanavar became a martyr to the cause, dying because despite pregnancy complications and her inevitable miscarriage, she was denied an abortion in a Dublin hospital.
Criminalizing abortion is not a tradeoff. Save some fetuses, lose some women; there are no winners. Rather than decreasing abortion rates, it merely decreases the proportion that are performed in a safe, sanitary manner. Western European countries, home to some of the most liberal abortion laws, have the lowest abortion rates globally, with an estimated 12 per 1,000 women of childbearing age annually. Whereas regions with highly restrictive abortion laws have rates two to three times that, at 29 per 1,000 and 32 per 1,000 in Africa and Latin America, respectively.
How one can call oneself “pro-life” while striving to criminalize abortion is one of the greatest health paradoxes known to humankind. If pro-lifers want to save lives they should take a leaf out of South Africa’s book. The country has the lowest abortion rates in the continent due to the liberalization of its laws in 1997, which led to a decrease in abortion-related deaths by 91 percent in the first five years.
Another way to save lives is to financially support mothers and women of childbearing age, which decreases abortion rates even in developed countries.
However, the most direct way to prevent abortion-related deaths, both those of the mothers and those of the fetuses, is to make modern contraceptive methods affordable and accessible. Approximately 80 percent of unintended pregnancies in developing countries can be attributed to unmet need for contraceptives. Even here, we have much to gain from improving access to contraceptives. A recent study performed in St. Louis, surveying over 9,000 women, showed that providing a variety of free contraceptives decreased teen pregnancy rates from 34 to 6.3 per 1,000 women, and abortion rates dropped from between 13.4-17 to between 4.4-7.5 per 1,000 women.
Contraceptives, not restrictive abortion laws, save lives.
On Wednesday, the highest court in El Salvador denied an abortion to a woman with a pregnancy that is so high-risk that doctors say it could kill her. Beatriz, 22, is carrying a 26-week fetus with anencephaly, a birth defect that means part of the brain and skull are missing and that the baby will almost certainly die at birth. Beatriz’s doctors say the abortion is necessary for Beatriz’s health and perhaps to save her life. But by a vote of 4–1, the Salvadoran judges ruled that in light of the country’s absolute ban on abortion, “the rights of the mother cannot be privileged over those” of the fetus.
El Salvador’s complete ban on abortions has become relatively rare worldwide, as the first map below shows. Keep scrolling and you will see enormous variation in how countries (and states in the U.S.) regulate abortion and birth control. Our main sources of data for these maps are the United Nations, the Guttmacher Institute, the Population Reference Bureau, the National Conference of State Legislatures, and Harvard University’s Center for Population and Development Studies.
The maps reflect continuing change: Uruguay recently legalized first-trimester abortions, and courts in Columbia, Brazil, and Argentina have begun to allow them in certain cases. Meanwhile in the United States, Republican-led statehouses have been tightening restrictions since the 2010 election. It’s the largest wave of legislation in the decades since Roe v. Wade.
Whenever abortion is the topic of a conversation, especially when spoken of as a choice that someone wants to make for whatever reason that’s personally valid to them, there is always someone who pops up and says, “Adoption is an option too!” You know, as if that thought never occurred to anyone ever or it’s some kind of a magical word to rid one of an unwanted pregnancy. I witness it all the time on my STFU Pro-Lifers blog through the large amount of messages I receive on a daily basis, but yesterday a self-proclaimed pro-choicer shared that familiar, derailing insight you hear from anti-choicers. Granted, she had her own personal experiences with abortion and adoption. I made sure that she knew how appreciative and grateful I was to her for sharing those experiences with me. But it was something she said that really bugged me. There were a few sentences subtly expressing privilege and ignorance.
“It isn’t that hard to find someone to adopt a baby…”
She also mentioned the baby she gave up for adoption was blonde haired and blue eyed. It’s another discussion that makes it clear how important it is to be intersectional. She was speaking solely as a white woman in her experiences with adoption. She somehow gained an adoption lawyer at no personal cost to her. Adoptive parents quickly lined up for this white blue eyed baby. And the parents the girl chose to adopt her baby paid for her one year of school tuition. She was happy with her decision, and that’s great. I’m happy for her. Anyone would be.
But for the part about how “easy” it is to get someone to adopt a baby… well, I quickly and politely corrected her. She thanked me and then told me that she loves my blog. The matter was settled. It still bugs me though, and it’s not so much the person but the original line of thinking shared by so many people. You hear things like that all the time. Oh, you’re pregnant and don’t want to be? But there are tons of people out there who can’t have children! You should consider adoption!
I guess no one told them that less than 2% of our entire population actually adopts, and when they do adopt, the less than 2% tend to favor the able-bodied, young, emotionally sound, sibling-less, white baby. [source] And really? Agreeing to the idea of an adoption won’t make an unwanted pregnancy go poof! There are still nine, agonizing months of a condition that was never consented to. I mean, most pregnancies are already really difficult for those who do it willingly. There are tons of complications that arise during those three, brave trimesters. I can’t even begin to imagine how traumatic it is for those who desperately don’t want to be pregnant but were forced to remain so.
Don’t want to raise a child? Fine! Adoption is definitely an alternative to parenthood. Just keep in mind that abortion is an alternative to a pregnancy. That’s how it works. Don’t talk to me about how there are tons of people in the world who can’t have children. No one should be forced into being a brood mare for someone else. No one owes their body to anyone else.
As pro-choicers, it’s inherent in our very name that we celebrate choice whether it be parenthood, adoption, or abortion. We keep in mind that our lives are individual, and the same can be said about our choices.
Just yesterday, the Supreme Court of El Salvador handed a young woman a death sentence by denying Beatriz “permission” for an abortion needed to save her life.
Beatriz is 22. The mother of a 1-year old boy. She has lupus. Kidney malfunction. And her doctors say she will likely die if the pregnancy continues. But, there is still hope for Beatriz.
There are a lot of forces out there trying to misinform the public, especially the youth, when it comes to reproductive/sexual health and rights. One of the biggest groups out there is called Live Action. When you look up Live Action on Google, they’re listed as a non-profit pro-life organization. According to them, they are a “youth led movement dedicated to building a culture of life and ending abortion.” They claim to do undercover investigation in clinics to prove and document “illegal, inhuman, and gruesome” practices and share it on social media sites. To this organization, abortion is:
An enterprise built on destroying pre-born children for money leaves few rules unbroken. But the abortion industry’s corruption goes deeper than most people would think: from threatening women’s lives with dangerously bad medical advice, to protecting child sex-trafficking rings, to covering up statutory rape, to actions even more heinous. Live Action’s undercover exposés document these many abuses, so the whole world can see the horrors going on right in our backyards – and paid for with our tax money.
The above statements were taken right off of the home page of their website. Now despite their best efforts to intentionally misinform the public about abortion and Planned Parenthood services, people have caught on. One of the many people to call out Live Action’s lies is a YouTube vlogger named Cristina Rad who is popular on the Internet for her commentary on her atheism, gender politics, and casual ideas of social justice. The Live Action video she tackled and is most popular for is called We are the Youth. You can watch her video response here. I would definitely recommend ignoring the Live Action video and go straight to Cristina’s response, especially since Cristina actually cites some statistics in her description.
It’s beyond a YouTube vlog debunking Live Action videos though. Media Matters, “a research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the Media,” lists hoax after hoax created by Live Action. Even Slate, a major online magazine on politics and culture, has recently come out with a video that reveals how Live Action’s deceptive editing is intentionally done to frame doctors and clinic staff. The video that Slate chose to analyze has unfortunately already been promoted and aired on TV news (if you really count Fox News as news at all–countries with laws against lying on the news certainly don’t) and commentary programs after the Kermit Gosnell incident. But Slate’s video is worth the view, because they go through all the raw footage that Live Action leaves out and reveals what Live Action didn’t want the average viewer to see.
Seriously! Click the link below to watch!
What if all the empathy that transpired in the speeches and talks of policy makers I listened to today at the Women Deliver pre-youth conference could immediately be converted to action? This is the question I asked myself during my reflection on the pre-youth conference that ok place on the 27th May 2013 in Kuala Lumpur.
Passion, enthusiasm, and determination were perceptible in the way the policy makers I listened to and spoke with today spoke about how painful, frustrating, and humiliating the consequences of inequalities that exist in today‘s world are. But does this mean these people have finally heeded to the call of social activists to act now for inequality to be eradicated? Only time will tell as youths will be keeping a keen eye on these people to ensure that all the promises they will make this time around are kept and within the minimum possible time frame.
“The biggest risk to the continuity of humanity is inequality“, declared UNFPA‘s deputy Director; Kate Gilmore during an intervention at the Women Deliver pre-youth conference. Conscious of this, it is unavoidably true that, by delivering on their promises to not only reduce but eradicate inequalities and injustices of every nature, policy makers will be contributing to the continuity of humanity. Therefore by failing to deliver for Girls, women, and Youths, policy makers of this generation will be committing a crime that present and future generations will not pardon.
But well, we the youths of this generation won‘t sit arms folded to see you commit such heinous crimes, because our silence-that of Girls, Women, and Youths is a roar that will degenerate into something worse if not listened to.
Bingo?
50years is worth celebrating no doubt, but what do Africans have to celebrate the African Union for ? Economic growth ?,political independence ? social progress ?,or technological advancement ? An answer to this will depend on which side of the board one finds his/herself. There is no doubt that strides have been made in some of the mentioned above areas, but if there one area in which the African Union has woefully failed is in the area of the empowerment of girls, women, and youths.
In a write-up to mark this day titled : The Africa We Want to See,the current chairperson of the African Union commission, Nkosazana Nzuma amongst other things talks of this being an opportunity to take stock of Africa today,its assets, capabilities,opportunities , and challenges. She is definitely right and inorder for the African Union not to become mere words as feared by Ahmed Ben Bella, Africa through the African Union and its people must deliver for its main assets which is its people- especially girls, women , and youths. The time is for African girls, women, and youths is now ! I am utterly convinced that the African delegates and other stakeholders at the 3rd Global Women Deliver conference will make cristal clear and that concrete actions will be taken to ensure that the plight of the African girl,woman , and youth takes central stage in the various policy formulation and implementation processes accross our beloveth continent ;Africa.
Mississippi Could Soon Jail Women for Stillbirths & Miscarriages?
On March 14, 2009, 31 weeks into her pregnancy, Nina Buckhalter gave birth to a stillborn baby girl. She named the child Hayley Jade. Two months later, a grand jury in Lamar County, Mississippi, indicted Buckhalter for manslaughter, claiming that the then-29-year-old woman “did willfully, unlawfully, feloniously, kill Hayley Jade Buckhalter, a human being, by culpable negligence.”
The district attorney argued that methamphetamine detected in Buckhalter’s system caused Hayley Jade’s death. The state Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments on the case on April 2, is expected to rule soon on whether the prosecution can move forward.
If prosecutors prevail in this case, the state would be setting a “dangerous precedent” that “unintentional pregnancy loss can be treated as a form of homicide,” says Farah Diaz-Tello, a staff attorney with National Advocates for Pregnant Women, a nonprofit legal organization that has joined with Robert McDuff, a Mississippi civil rights lawyer, to defend Buckhalter. If Buckhalter’s case goes forward, NAPW fears it could spur a wave of similar prosecutions in Mississippi and other states.
Mississippi’s manslaughter laws were not intended to apply in cases of stillbirths and miscarriages. Four times between 1998 through 2002, Mississippi lawmakers rejected proposals that would have set specific penalties for damaging a fetus by using illegal drugs during pregnancy. But Mississippi prosecutors say that two other state laws allow them to charge Buckhalter. One definesof manslaughter as the “killing of a human being, by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another”; another includes ”an unborn child at every stage of gestation from conception until live birth” in the state’s definition of human beings.
The cause of any given miscarriage or stillbirth is difficult to determine, and many experts believe there is no conclusive evidence that exposure to drugs in utero can cause a miscarriage or stillbirth. Because of this, prosecuting Buckhalter opens the door to investigating and prosecuting women for any number of other potential causes of a miscarriage or stillbirth, her lawyers argued in a filing to the state Supreme Court—”smoking, drinking alcohol, using drugs, exercising against doctor’s orders, or failing to follow advice regarding conditions such as obesity or hypertension.” Supreme Court Justice Leslie D. King also raised this question in the oral arguments last month: “Doctors say women should avoid herbal tea, things like unpasteurized cheese, lunch meats. Exactly what are the boundaries?”
http://reproductiverightsunsw.tumblr.com/post/50247350365
Wow! How time flies. I can’t imagine I am year older (again), thought I this morning when I received an SMS from a friend I have long lost sight of. It read thus; “Happy Birthday and many more years” This is a classical birthday message that anyone will send to a friend or even an unknown person, you might be thinking. But this is not the case for me because unlike in the previous years when I will just receive these messages and file, I have this year decided to carefully study these Birthday messages before filing or even deleting and as well carefully look through all the Birthday messages I have been sent at each one of these occasions.
Though written in different styles and strongly influenced by the nature of my relationship with the sender of the birthday message, there is a wish that was omnipresent in all the messages: Wishes of Good Health; which is what my friend’s, “Many More Years” in the above extraction from his birthday wish message to me seeks to express The result of this crazy study revealed to me how much Cameroonians care about their health.
The health of the average Cameroonian, like that of any normal human being in the world, is very important to him/her. What would vary might be the approach to ensuring that they stay healthy and maintain an equilibrium that is necessary for them to live a life worth living. Important as being healthy might be to Cameroonians, they are not unaware of the barriers to staying healthy. Talking about barriers to staying healthy in Cameroon, if you ask any Cameroon what the greatest barrier to staying healthy is, you would likely hear him/her answer ‘ACCESS’.
While it is clear from all indications that access to health is a stumbling block to Cameroonian’s staying healthy, it should be noted that even where these health facilities are available, users complain bitterly of the quality of the services rendered. Thus, it is common place to see a health practitioner sarcastically questioning a teenage girl about the reason for her pregnancy and making fun of her pregnancy by using very insulting and violent language. Worst still, it is common place to get a health practitioner who openly discusses results of the medical test of his/her patients without any sense of guilt or fear. The judgmental nature and lack of confidentiality in Cameroon’s health services is so widespread and across all spheres of society that a government minister recently declared that a journalist who had been tortured to death while in detention had died of HIV/AIDS.
With judgemental attitudes like these from health professionals and lack of confidentiality, no wonder an ever increasing number of pregnant teenagers refuse to go for prenatal checkups. To stay clear of insults and other traumatizing language and behaviours, they thus decide to stay at home with the risks that this carries.
It is high time the quality of health services in existing health facilities be improved so that patients, especially young persons, can have the best possible experience and not be afraid, for instance, to get an HIV test because they are not sure the results will remain between them and the health professionals.
The quality of health services, though often ignored, is an important factor in reinforcing the access of young people in particular and society at large to health facilities and should be considered as such by policy makers and health professionals. The availability of health facilities that have little or no consideration for the quality of the services offered creates more problems than it solves.
As government leaders, policymakers, healthcare professionals, NGO representatives, corporate leaders, and global media outlets gather in Kuala Lumpur to attend the Women Deliver 3rd Global conference to hold from the 28th-31st May 2013, it is my greatest desire that the quality of health services as they are now be carefully studied and appropriate action taken to make them less judgmental, more efficient, and more youth friendly.
Melissa Harris-Perry’s Panel looks at Elizabeth Smart’s recent comments on abstinence-only sex education and whether the policy is effective.
WATCH IT HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty_MA_mrow8
You could qualify for FREE birth control (what better way to celebrate National Women’s Health Week?). Find out here and spread the word to your lady friends.
“Sadly, real or perceived controversy keeps schools from providing young people with the information and skills they need to become sexually healthy adults. Just like other topics taught in school, sexuality education should be developmentally appropriate, sequential and complete.
Irrational fear – the cultural belief that teaching young people about sex will cause them to have sex – keeps administrators and educators from doing what they know is best: providing young people with developmentally appropriate, sequential and honest sex education. Never mind that 30 years of public health research clearly demonstrates that when young people receive such education, they are more likely to delay sexual initiation, and to use protection when they do eventually become sexually active, than those who receive no sex education or learn only about abstinence. Withholding information about sex and sexuality will not keep children safe; it will only keep them ignorant.
Ninety-five percent of all Americans have sex before marriage. About half of all young people begin having sex by age 17. Providing a foundation of quality sex education is the only way to ensure that young people will grow into sexually healthy adults. It can augment what children learn at home and combat misinformation learned from peers or found on the Internet. Porn is not the best way for teenagers to learn about sex, but it will fill the vacuum when sex education is politicized and withheld from our classrooms.
Quality sex education should start in kindergarten. Early elementary school students need to learn the proper names for their body parts, the difference between good touch and bad touch, and ways in which they can be a good friend (the foundation for healthy intimate relationships later in life). Fourth- and fifth-graders need information about puberty and their changing bodies, Internet safety, and the harmful impact of bullying. And seventh-, eighth- and ninth-graders are ready for information about body image, reproduction, abstinence, contraception, H.I.V. and disease prevention, communication, and the topic they most want to learn about: healthy relationships.”
*This is a long post. Just a heads up! Grammatical errors and misspelled words are inevitably bound to show up, as well as the extreme use of the words, awesome, FIERCE, amazing, radical and inspiring.
From April 12- April 14, I had the amazing opportunity to attend the 27th Annual CLPP Conference at Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts. This was my first time visiting Massachusetts and attending CLPP Conference, so needless to say, I was extremely blessed and excited to be in a safe space to discuss abortion rights and reproductive justice (RJ)!
If you don’t know what CLPP Conference is, let me copy and paste the mission for you, so you can read about how awesome it is!
CLPP(Civil Liberties and Public Policy program) Conference is held every year to create a welcoming space for RJ activists!
“CLPP’s annual conference connects activists from across the U.S. and internationally to build a stronger movement for reproductive justice and social change. We support intergenerational dialogue, encourage youth leadership, and foster cross-movement collaborations. Through plenaries, workshops, panels, and trainings, speakers will highlight successful examples of activism and illuminate how struggles for reproductive and sexual rights are intricately linked to movements for economic, social, gender, and environmental justice.”
Reading that description just got me juiced to write this blog! I have not had much time to reflect on my trip (the reason why this blog is so late) due to school and personal life, but I am just as excited as when I got on the plane to go, so let me give you some amazing highlights from my trip!
Day 1: My six hour red eye flight from SFO to New Jersey to Connecticut has left me feeling groggy, tired, and in need of stimulants! Luckily, I consumed two cups of coffee before I headed out to begin day 1! After picking up the rest of the Advocates crew, we headed out to Hampshire College! The weather was rainy, windy, and the crisp air was not a fan of my sun tinted California skin. East coast weather was not a fan of me and I was not a fan of it either! We remained civil to one another for most of the trip, so it did not ruin my time at CLPP Conference!
After our bellies were fed and we checked into our hotel, we headed to Hampshire College. To be honest, I was a bit deterred upon arrival because I was not accustomed to being at such a small, liberal, privileged campus in the middle of what looked like a scene from a Twilight movie. I also was not fond of the lack of people of color at a reproductive justice/abortion rights conference, which I felt was necessary in such a big, popular space. I ended up giving them the benefit of the doubt, since it was the first day after all.
I helped set up our vending table for the 1 in 3 Campaign (if you don’t know what 1 in 3 is, check it out: 1in3campaign.org). I also got to chat with a few other vendors and hung out with my sistahs! Unfortunately, due to my jet lag, I did not attend the Abortion Speak Out that night, which I deeply regret. I hope that my other sistahs who attended will give you better details on that portion of the conference. I apologize, I teased you with my banter about the weather and small talk. Let’s move on to Day 2….
Day 2: The next day, I felt refreshed and ready to attend workshops! But here are some highlights in the form of quotes from the Opening Plenary:
“I could be killed for doing this work. I face that w/ full knowledge, knowing I’m going to be held + supported by this community”- Anonymous
“In many countries, if you ask a crowd “raise your hand if you know someone who’s died from an illegal abortion” every hand goes up” – Anonymous
“Fuck off Human Rights Campaign” – 16 year old FIERCE QUEER, Trish Bryant
“When we talk about reproductive justice we must also talk about immigration.” – Sonia Guinansaca
“As we continue to build in solidarity and continue to say fuck them…” -Monica Raye Simpson
These lovely gems pumped me up and got me out of my seat praising my fellow RJ sistahs (unbeknownst to them that they are, my sistahs) for their inspiring, unapologetic, FIERCE, words of wisdom and truth! MMM! I just got excited all over again!
Let’s go on to workshops, shall we?
Unpacking Oppressions: Liberation through Media Making:
This workshop gave me life! I truly believe that youth have the power and tools to create and gain acknowledgement through popular social media tools to spread RJ messages more than ever before. The first facilitator, Jamia Wilson, used her journalistic expertise to tell attendees that mainstream media is not the end all be all to spread news. Other sources of media, such as tumblr, youtube, blog sites, etc. have become more advanced at creating a steady platform that gains widespread audiences so much, that mainstream news has caught wind of RJ issues. For example, alternative media helped push the Planned Parenthood situation into becoming national news because RJ activists got upset and took to their blogs! Of course the event spiraled into a lot of negative feedback from Fox News and other conservative outlets, but it went on to show that we do have a voice and a platform to engage audiences about what we stand for.
During the second half of the workshop, Colorado queer youth activists, Trish Bryant and Eleanor Dewey, engaged the audience by telling us the story of how they have created their own media in order to spread the voices of queer identifying youth of color in Colorado. Using little resources, they bought a camera, tripod, and editing equipment and made their own documentary because they felt that queer youth did not have any positive images in the media. I cannot express to you how empowering this was for me. Seeing young people take matters into their own hands to create positive images for the next generation really inspired me to create videos on my own. I am also a new fangirl of 16 year old, Trish Bryant, who is just way too cool and more bad ass than I will ever be. She is a fan of bell hooks. Enough said.
*I forgot the name of this workshop:
Facilitators, Steph Harold and Poonam Dreyfus-Pai presented their research thesis, called Reading Women’s Lives. During this study, they observed a group of women in book clubs, who read a book about abortion stories and discussed their findings. They found that these women were affected and transformed by storytelling, which is crucial in framing abortion rights. This small group setting and reading material allowed a safe space for women to tell their abortion stories, whether they were pro-choice or pro-life. As I am training to be a peer counselor for an after-abortion hotline, I have realized that having a space to express your thoughts and feelings around abortion is necessary. We must validate and put a name to people’s individual experiences. Abortion should not be seen as a political stance. It is an individual experience and people have the right to tell their stories and put a face to the experience in a public space if they choose to.
At Your Cervix: A Self-Exam Workshop:
Lauren Mitchell, facilitator, taught us how to perform a self pelvic and breast exams. I was quite nervous to attend this event because I am extremely sensitive to graphic material. Lauren was an amazing teacher and taught us step by step instructions. Although I don’t think I will be performing any self-exams soon, I did find this workshop to be empowering in the sense that women have the right to learn and explore their bodies. I also got a free speculum! 
Day 3: I will keep this quick because I’ve already written enough!
The Revolution Starts with Me: Incorporating Self-Care and Preventing Burnout: This workshop was the perfect ending to a lovely weekend. For many activists, such as myself, it can be difficult to practice self-care when you are out trying to educate, empower, and uplift others folks. In my personal life, I struggle with aligning school, activism, and work into an organized manner, which leaves me tired and listless at the end of the day. Facilitators, Adaku and Nicole, started the 90 minute workshop off with meditation. After our relaxation session, we went on to discuss reasons why we are burned out and how it is easy to forget about our body temples. While our work is never done, we can take a break to go out dancing, take naps, go running, and eat healthy. We do not have to feel guilty about saying no or eating ice cream. We deserve it! We compiled a list of self-care tips, which I have found extremely useful. Bubble baths and my India Arie pandora playlist are officially a weekly thing for me. 
To sum it up, CLPP Conference has changed me. I love life changing conferences! Being around such radical people has led me to check my privilege, change my dialoguem share my stories, and provide a listening ear to those who need it the most. CLPP Conference created a safe space for me to promote the work I do in the Bay Area, establish a network of women I can lean on, and take what I have learned and put it into practice. There were more POCs being represented at CLPP than the years before, from what I heard, which was great! Being a women of color in the same space as Eesha Pandit Monica Ray Simpson and Miriam Zoila Perez (to name a few) was life altering!
Amherst, you were hella cold, but you were good to me. That six hour flight was totally worth it.
Thank you to Advocates for Youth and Trina Scott for giving me the opportunity to attend CLPP Conference 2013! I am ever so grateful!
« KO! KO! KO! », shouted the crowd .Mind you, they weren’t participating in a boxing match, neither were they at a musical concert, they shouted KO! in response to the health officials that took turns in sensitizing the crowd of more than 5000 that gathered at the Douala Place du Gouvernement to participate in the 9KM sensitization Walk that was organized by the Cameroon’s Coalition of Businesses for the fight against HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Tuberculosis and better known by its French acronym CCATSIDA, Cameroon’s Ministry of Public Health, and other stakeholders (local and international) in the fight against Malaria this Saturday 20th April 2013.
Being a participant, I could not help but be marveled at how engaged fellow participants were as we criss-crossed the streets of Cameroon’s most populated town. Young and old, and from diverse horizons, one thing united this people; that Malaria be kicked Out of Cameroon.
This passion and demonstrated in the endurance of the participants all through the alertness of their footsteps and the smile on their faces, could not however stop me from asking myself fundamental questions around the strategy for the fight against Malaria in my country. Thus, when one of the thousands of spectators that had amassed at streets corners shouted, “Where are condoms?”, there was an outburst of laughter from the crowd, I began asking myself what might have prompted this spectator to ask the question he did. As I thought about this, my eyes fell on the logo of the Cameroonian Coalition of Businesses for the fight against HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Tuberculosis and on the T-Shirt of the participant ahead of me, my answer was here. The words AIDS on this coalitions logo prompted the question from this spectator.
AIDS and its prevention methods are better known in Cameroon than Malaria and its means of protection. This is paradoxical given that Malaria kills in Cameroon and Sub-Saharan Africa than HIV/AIDS. Mind you, I am in no way saying that resources (human and material) should be shifted from the fight against HIV/AIDS, which is causing havoc in Cameroon especially amongst youths, to the fight against Malaria. The point I am trying to make is that the fight against Malaria, HIV/AIDS, and Tuberculosis has for long been done as though they were isolated.
It is true that a person that has Malaria or Tuberculosis is not automatically an HIV/AIDS patient, but most often people suffering from HIV/AIDS in Cameroon are victims of the Malaria and tuberculosis given the milieu in which they live and the little means they have to survive on.
I have for long being convinced that an effective fight against Malaria cannot be done in an isolated manner but must be inclusive; taking into consideration the vectors of the disease in various communities in Cameroon. A dirty environment provides good breeding grounds for Mosquitoes especially the female Anopheles mosquito, through which Malaria is spread, the fight against Malaria must start from there. If a clean environment is achieved through mechanism through efficient urban development and poverty reduction strategies, Malaria will be made history. After all, isn’t it common knowledge that prevention is better than Cure?
In Cameroon and I guess is the case elsewhere in the world, a change from a dirty and crowded environment to a cleaner environment is the main indicator that a person has emerged from poverty. This is so because people who could barely afford 3 meals a day will have little time to think about the environments in which they live talk less of women in this bracket going for prenatal consultation or even having time to take their infants to the hospital when they are sick. Thus, despite the bed-nets distribution campaigns that have been organized all over Cameroon and despite the fact that Malaria treatment is free for children and pregnant women in Cameroon, Malaria killed more than 3000 people most of whom children.
Without an efficient attack on poverty, which is fertile ground for poor living conditions, I am afraid our walk and much talk on the fight against Malaria will be in vain. For Malaria to be kicked out of this country, we must not only walk on occasions like those organized to mark the World day for the fight against Malaria, we must truly walk the talk on the fight against Malaria daily, by launching an immediate assault and poverty. Because Malaria is the consequence of a dirty environment which is its self a glaring consequence of poverty.
The two years I spent serving as a health volunteer with the Peace Corps in West Africa were some of the most formative years of my life. They fostered my sense of independence and resourcefulness, solidified my career and life goals, and taught me to question injustices, particularly those injustices that jeopardized the sexual and reproductive health and rights of young women and girls and placed them at an educational, economic, social, and political disadvantage. I never imagined that one day I would find myself questioning injustices faced by Peace Corps volunteers themselves.
More than 210,000 of us have served in the Peace Corps since its founding 52 years ago. As anyone can attest, Peace Corps volunteers provide an invaluable service to our country and the countries in which we serve, but we often do it at risk to our own safety and security. Over the past decade, more than 1,000 volunteers have experienced sexual assault. Women—who comprise more than 60 percent of the 8,000 currently serving volunteers—should never have to face the tragedy of a sexual assault, but if they do, they should be able to access comprehensive health care and support services. Yet, Peace Corps volunteers are now one of the only groups of women who receive their health care through the federal government who are denied coverage for abortion services in the cases of rape, incest, or life endangerment.
We must change this outrageously blatant discriminatory policy! Join me in demanding health equity and fairness for Peace Corps volunteers!
Denying volunteers a basic health care benefit that is extended to all other federal employees—including the Peace Corps employees who work with these volunteers—is grossly unfair and denies thousands of volunteers access to vital health services. Women serving our country deserve equity and fairness in access to health care, consistent with other areas of federal law.
Fortunately, Senators Lautenberg, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Boxer, Murray, Warren, and Murphy introduced the Peace Corps Equity Act (S. 813), which would repeal this inequitable restriction on women’s health and allow the Peace Corps to provide the same coverage for abortion care—in cases of rape, incest, and life endangerment—as employees covered under other federal health plans currently receive.
Please contact your Senators today to urge their support for the Peace Corps Equity Act!
No woman should face life endangerment because she cannot access a medical procedure that is safe and legal in the United States.
In solidarity,
Janine Kossen
Director of Public Policy and Returned Peace Corps Volunteer
“I also came to realize that the focus on personhood ignores the fact that a zygote, embryo, or fetus is growing inside of another person’s body.”
| — | Libby Anne, “How I Lost Faith in the ‘Pro-Life’ Movement” |
This is really important to consider. You absolutely can advocate for a zygote, embryo, or fetus. But understand that in doing so, it subsequently infringes on the rights of the person this being resides in.
Giving a fetus personhood is not equality. No one currently has the special right of using another’s person body without constant consent.
Earth Day is more than appreciating the way in which trees grow from nourished soil— though that is a refreshing sight. It’s a day to be reminded of our relationship with the planet and how we have the power to make it an even better place to live and breathe. However, the quality of the air that fills our lungs and bodies can almost be suffocating.
You see, even in the most frequented of places, breathing can be risky. Take nail salons, for example. Getting manicures and pedicures are a regular beauty regimen for many women. The strong fumes of nail products are as unpleasant to smell as they are for your health. Nail salons aren’t only a place for customers to prepare for a glamorous occasion; they are a site of environmental injustice.
There are thousands of chemicals in nail salon products, the vast majority of which have never been tested for safety. The three that advocates are working the hardest to remove are dubbed the “toxic trio”— toluene, formaldehyde, and dibutyl phthalate. These ingredients have been found to cause cancer, infertility, miscarriages, birth defects, wheezing, coughing, skin rashes, headaches, and dizziness. Once emitted into the air, toluene, which is a volatile solvent, has the power to impact, even worse, damage our reproductive and central nervous systems. Formaldehyde is known to cause cancer, skin irritation, coughing and wheezing. Finally, the last coat for a sheer finish for manicures involves dibutyl phthalate, which causes reproductive harm. This all leaves women with the unfair choice between their health and working to support themselves and their families.
Most nail technicians are Asian American women; Vietnamese women make up the highest percentage of technicians, followed by Korean women. There’s an unbreakable connection between the environment and our health and, unfortunately for many women, income level and immigration status can create heightened vulnerability to environmental harm. Most nail salon workers are immigrants with limited English proficiency and low levels of education, so their occupation choices are very limited.
So why isn’t the government protecting women from these toxins? Unfortunately, the law that “regulates” the cosmetics industry was passed in 1938 and has not been updated since. Therefore, it does not address the myriad of new, dangerous chemicals that have come into use since then. Moreover, it allows the industry to self-regulate. A panel of industry representatives, called the Cosmetics Ingredient Review Panel, is charged with oversight. Further, regulatory agencies that should be able to do something about this don’t have the authority to do so. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cannot pull products off the market or even demand that products be clearly labeled with all their ingredients.
The National Asian and Pacific American Women’s Forum (NAPAWF), as part of the National Healthy Nail and Beauty Salon Alliance (The Alliance) are pushing for justice within nail salons. They have urged beauty supply companies to come clean about the ingredients presented in their products, are advocating for the Safe Cosmetics Act, and are working with federal agencies on this issue.
Until we are able to get these toxins off the market and out of our salons, here are some suggestions for safety:
1. Purchase nail care products that do not contain the “toxic trio.”
We can’t be too sure that all ingredients are posted the label. If you want to stay safe, contact the companies directly to ensure your products are clear of toluene, formaldehyde, and dibutyl phthalate
2. Pay attention to which nail and beauty brands are being honest with their consumers
When an urgent letter was distributed to a pool of nail and beauty companies, some responded with honest answers while others didn’t respond at all.
3. Learn about best practices for making salons safer work places.
For more information on safe and healthy nail salon practices, you can check out and share the following resource, which has been translated in Vietnamese and Korean: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/dfe/pubs/projects/salon/index.htm
On this Earth Day, yes, hug a tree, take a deep breath, and give thanks to this planet. But also remember the people who are most affected by environmental injustice, including nail salon workers. One day, I hope nail salon workers can take a nice deep breath in their work spaces, knowing that it’s safe to do so.
For more information and references:
http://nailsalonalliance.squarespace.com/storage/WVE.NailSalon.Report.pdf
http://napawf.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/working/pdfs/issuebrief_nailsalon_updated.pdf
http://napawf.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/working/pdfs/Toxic_Trio_nail_report2009.pdf
The American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Reproductive Rights have filed a lawsuit to block an Arkansas law banning abortion care after 12 weeks from going into effect.
Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe had vetoed the extreme measure in March, citing concerns that it violated Roe v. Wade and that subsequent legal challenges would prove “very costly to the taxpayers of our state” as the “costs and fees [of defending an unconstitutional law] can be significant.” The Legislature overrode Beebe’s veto in March.
The suit seeks a preliminary injunction against the law, which is set to take effect in July.
“This law is one of the most dangerous assaults on women’s health that we’ve seen in decades,” said Rita Sklar, executive director of the ACLU of Arkansas. “We may not all agree about abortion, but we can all agree that this complex and personal decision should be made by a woman, her family, and her doctor, not politicians.”
And not just women, of course. Everyone is entitled to reproductive/sexual healthcare and rights.
Read more here: http://www.salon.com/2013/04/17/arkansas_abortion_ban_faces_legal_challenge/
When debating whether a fetus’s “right to life” trumps a woman’s “right to choose” — or whether the news media has paid enough attention to the trial of a Philadelphia doctor who allegedly killed seven babies born alive during late-term abortions, as well as a pregnant woman — Americans are bitterly divided on abortion. Before abandoning facts for rhetoric, let’s tackle some misunderstandings about this procedure’s history and impact.
Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-abortion-rights/2013/04/18/bd53c884-a5e5-11e2-b029-8fb7e977ef71_story.html
Social justice and environmental justice have a very direct
correlation. The environmental movement and the feminist movement both
advocate for the health of humanity, but in different ways. There are
many subject matters that exemplify this intersectionality.
For example, the way people use and abuse nature can easily be
compared to how society uses and abuses women.
Toxic Chemicals. We clearly need to do something about how easy it is
for major companies to slowly pollute our bodies and our earth. There
are over 84,000 chemicals in popular consumer products and only 200
have been tested. When chemicals even are tested it is primarily on
men, so these companies clearly do not care about the effect they are
having on women’s bodies. Some of these chemicals are made from toxins
that pollute our water and air. Many of these chemicals have been
shown to cause infertility, low sperm counts, sexual dysfunction,
miscarriage, and different types of cancer. Not to mention women use
personal care products far more often than men and are therefore more
negatively affected. Here at ETSU we’re celebrating Earth Day with a
festival and a young man best summarized it when he said “unnatural
chemicals don’t make natural beauty.”
Not everyone can afford ridiculously expensive so-called “natural
organic” personal care products to keep themselves and their children
healthy. In addition, toxic waste dumps are disproportionately located
near minority communities. Women of color are targeted by systematic
racist beauty standards convincing them to buy hair relaxers and skin
lightening creams with chemicals that have severe damage potential.
For example, the chemicals found in common African-American hair
products are known endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs). EDCs are
linked to a range of reproductive health issues, like premature
puberty, gynecologic cancer, and birth defects. Look at who is hurting
the most by toxic chemicals. This is clearly a social justice issue
activists need to rise up against.
Quick Fact: 80% of federal transportation funds go to highways while
only 20% goes to mass transit. Not only does this hurt inner city
communities, but it’s a contributing factor to global warming.
Reproductive Justice. You know what’s really hurting our resources?
Overpopulation. People are using up far more than they need to and it
is growing out of control. If reproductive health options were more
readily available this would alleviate a great deal of that
environmental strain.
Here is a quick review on what the Toxic Substances Control Act is and
why we need it to be updated. This site also helps teach you on how
you can help.http://www.saferchemicals.org/resources/opinion.html
Find out what is in your cosmetics:
http://safecosmetics.org/article.php?list=type&type=33
Wake up to the threat of toxic chemicals!
www.rhtp.org/fertility/ToxicZombie.asp (Many resources used in the
writing of this blog were obtained from this site.)
“Toxic Combination: Fact Sheet on Toxic Chemicals and Reproductive
Health”—Center for American Progress:
http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2010/04/pdf/toxic_combination.pdf
“Women of Color are at Greater Risk for Toxic Chemical
Exposure”—Women’s Voices for the Earth:
http://www.womensvoices.org/about/why-a-womens-organization/
Photo Credit: Sacramento Earth Day
Crossposted from Everyday Feminism
Today is Earth Day.
It’s a day that many of us associate with recycling and celebrating trees, wildlife, and rivers. And as a recreational tree-hugger, I can appreciate those traditional connotations of Earth Day.
But today’s environmental issues run much broader than just our waterways and forests.
Examining environmental issues with a feminist lens enables us to see the intersection of gender, socio-economics, and the environment.
The exploration and study of this intersection is formally referred to as eco-feminism.
Although no single definition of it exists, I would define it as a feminism that works to examine how environmental degradation and climate change impact communities and community members based on their socio-economic status and gender.
It’s important that the valuable intersectional perspective of eco-feminism doesn’t get lost amidst the green frenzy on Earth Day.
Natural disasters and resource shortages hit impoverished communities first and worst. With women making up an estimated 70% of those living below the poverty line, they are most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and environmental degradation.
Women living in developing nations tend to be natural resource managers as the gatherers of food, water and firewood. And from a young age, girls traditionally assist their mothers with this work.
As resources become scarcer with decline in the environment’s health, girls are attending less and less school to be able to dedicate more time to finding water, or simply because school fees are no longer available as crop cycles become less predictable.
You can imagine the cycle of poverty that this spawns.
As primary natural resource managers, these women are especially well-equipped to lead environmental mitigation and adaptation efforts.
But due to traditional and patriarchal gender roles that devalue unpaid work like childcare and water retrieval, women’s specialized knowledge in smart and effective climate change adaptation is typically not respected or taken into consideration in most community decision-making processes.
In our own backyard, low-income communities and communities of color bear the greatest burden of environmental injustice.
Take Mossville, Louisiana as an example.
The small, rural, and predominantly African American town became the site of the highest concentration of vinyl plastic manufacturers in the US, in addition to housing a coal-fired power plant, oil refineries and other chemical production facilities.
Together, these facilities produce more than 4 million pounds of carcinogenic toxic chemicals that end up in the soil, air and water of Mossville. This community’s exposure to these toxins has resulted in grave health impacts, from high incidences of asthma to a cancer epidemic.
It is not a coincidence that these toxic plants were built in a lower-class community of color and not a place like downtown Washington, DC, a place populated by people of privilege and significant socio-political power.
Mossville, Louisiana is a clear cut incidence of environmental racism.
Another alarming instance of environmental and social injustice happening right before our eyes has to do with toxic chemical exposure.
Mounting scientific evidence reveals that chemicals in our air, water and everyday products—from our furniture to our personal care and cleaning products—are harming our reproductive health and fertility.
This is frightening news for those of us that are planning big spring cleaning extravaganzas or like to paint our nails every few weeks.
But what about if you clean houses for a living or work in a nail salon? Your exposure to toxic chemicals is likely to be constant and severe.
Women of color and immigrant women are overrepresented in professions that entail extreme and dangerous exposure to toxic chemicals.
Again, it’s not a coincidence that low-income women of color are disproportionately burdened by toxic chemicals through their jobs, and the eco-feminist lens helps illuminate this reality.
The eco-feminism lens is helpful in addressing environmental issues because it allows us the unveil oppressive societal structures – like racism, sexism, and classism – that play a significant role in the health of the environment and who is most impacted by this health declining.
So from now on, when you’re discussing recycling with your friends, don’t just think about where your un-recycled items will end up.
Dig deeper and consider which communities tend to live near the landfills in which non-recyclable waste is dumped.
Then dig even deeper and consider how living near the landfills may impact their health and wellbeing and if they are likely to have access to health insurance or not when it comes time to address these health impacts.
That is the beauty of the intersectional nature of eco-feminism.
With eyes wide open to the importance of justice issues on Earth Day, let’s take action in support of legislation that would make the 84,000 chemicals in commerce today safe for use by all consumers, but most importantly, communities that are disproportionately harmed by toxic chemicals.
Tell your Senators that you support the Safe Chemicals Act!
Normal
0
false
false
false
EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
sacramentoearthday.net
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:”";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”,”serif”;}
A line of men in sweatshirts and jeans, baseball caps pulled down, snakes through desert brush in the hidden camera footage. The voice-over in this Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) film describes the actions of the “illegal aliens,” “They walk, but some get tired. A few sit and snack. Likely the snack packages will become litter… … more people, more paths, more trash.”
No one likes litter, especially those espousing to be environmentalists. The narrative of this film (you can find it here) is easy to follow. Immigrants = trash = ruined wildlife = environmental disaster.
It’s a simple argument to pull apart; consumption levels of people in America are astronomically higher than those of our southern neighbors and historically the U.S. accounts for a disproportionate amount of carbon emissions. Upon entering the U.S. one doesn’t immediately increase their consumption; factors of class and wealth are much better indicators of consumption. Since the Environmental Justice movement took off in the early 1980s, more and more immigrants and people of color have contributed their voices and values to the fight for the environment and climate. In short, immigrants aren’t the problem.
While easy to write-off as conservative propaganda, this film unfortunately represents a resurgent trend: racist, anti-immigrant rhetoric posing as values of the environmental movement. Let’s trace the connections from this film to the environmental movement. CIS is funded by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which John Tanton, the originator of what the Center for New Community (CNC) calls the “John Tanton Network,” founded. The Network is a web of inter-connected anti-immigration, pro-English, and nationalist groups that share funding and leadership. Tanton works directly with the Weeden Foundation, a major environmental funder, has sat on Sierra Club committees, and calls himself, “a strong conservationist and leading advocate for the environment”. Is this the leadership we want?
The good news is groups such as Center for New Community are calling out this trend and asserting what it really means to be an environmentalist. In a nation of immigrants, our generation is more open-minded than any to come before us on the issues of race, and immigration. We will be alive in the year 2050, when it is projected there will be no clear ethnic or racial majority in the United States. It’s up to us as young activists to call out this ruse when we see it and stand with our allies for immigration reform and environmental justice.
The voices of immigrants and people of color are absolutely essential if our generation is to achieve environmental and climate justice. Messages of hate and racism have no place in our movement. Communities are already fighting back against the false messages of Tanton and his cronies. Check out this CNC video highlighting youth in the Bronx who took the fight right to the offices of the Weeden Foundation:
Or read CNC’s report “Race, Migration and the Environment.”
By April Grayce Dunlop for The Black Sheep Journal
To not have children and act thoughtfully towards the Earth are perfectly valid life decisions on their own, but claiming that not having kids is the best thing we can do for the health of the planet threatens reproductive rights and climate justice. This misled moralistic approach to denouncing procreation is exactly the platform of an emerging group of women who self-identify as GINKs- Green Inclinations, No Kids. Their main stated motivation in being “child-free by choice” is to reduce their “carbon footprint.” An article shared and widely “liked” on the GINK Facebook page states that, “To insure that the reduction of emissions in the developed countries is not cancelled by increases from the developing world, we must slow the growth rate of our human family.”
Drawing this connection between population control and environmental health encourages reproductive rights policies aimed at low birth rates instead of bodily autonomy. Blaming climate change on large families and “overpopulation” distracts us from the people responsible for massive environmental destruction – such as oil companies, polluting factories, and militaries to name a few. To lessen one’s harmful impact on the environment is an admirable goal, but the individualist frame of GINKs hugely limits their potential for change.
Often, the financial burden of raising kids ($234,000 for each child’s lifetime according to the GINK article) is posed as the most urgent reason not to have any. The cost of feeding, clothing, and housing children undeniably takes a chunk of parents’ paychecks. A GINK WordPress blogger says household clutter is an eyesore of families with kids – “stuff” increases 30% when you have a toddler. But how much of that financial drain and “stuff” is necessary and how much of it is the result of rampant consumerism? Families who make more money spend more money on their children. A 2008 USDA study found that “total family expenses on a child through age 17 would be $210,340 for households in the lowest income group, $291,570 for those in the middle, and $483,750 for those in the highest income group.” Not spending money and resources on children leaves you with more for yourself, sure, but how many of the child-free by choice are living lavish lives and how many get by with the bare minimum?
In addition to the environmental motivations, paradoxically, many material benefits are cited as reasons to be childless. The dream life depicted as an alternative to child-rearing includes luxurious vacations, all the sleep you could want, and a fancy house free of fingerprints on the glass. This presumes, of course, that everyone’s life could be like this if they didn’t reproduce. It is telling that the photo on the GINK manifesto on greenprophets.com is a flat, white stomach with a bit of long blond hair hanging at the side. Beyond the obvious fat-shaming implications of this, it makes me wonder how many women “choosing to be child-free” are white, upper-middle class, and/or college-educated. All types of people decide not to have kids, but it’s hard to imagine GINKs are representative of diverse backgrounds and socioeconomic status when “traveling the world, running my business, getting massages, getting pedicures and manicures, working out with my trainer, enjoying great dining experiences and enjoying life to the fullest” is depicted as the non-parenting life.
Perhaps childrearing wouldn’t be “too expensive” if our economic structures and public spaces accommodated raising children in families that didn’t fit the mold of a couple with one high-income-earing parent and a full-time caregiver. To encourage people to forgo having children due to the cost reinforces it as a privilege for middle to upper class people – and an irresponsible choice for lower class folks. Instead of examining our buying practices, inadequate wages, price inflation, and the need for publicly supported childcare, the GINK approach relies on individual choices as the solution to systemic problems.
Many people choosing not to have children for the benefit of the planet do not identify (openly, on the internet) as GINKs, but the rhetoric is similar and equally precarious. A Seattle Times columnist, Sharon Pian Chan, voiced her support for not having kids as “the most important thing [she] could do to reduce [her] carbon footprint.” She cites a 2009 study by Oregon State University that calculated the emissions impact of each new child in the United States to be 9441 metric tons of carbon dioxide – which is five times the emissions of a child born in China. It is important to acknowledge the national differences in pollution, but fearing non-U.S. countries’ rapidly increasing emission rates should signal us to take a critical look at our own country’s policies and practices. Instead of interpreting high individual emissions rates in the context of a larger pattern of production and consumption, the GINK framework shifts the focus to a micro level. From that vantage point, it is easy to overlook the magnitude of change needed on corporate and institutional levels to halt environmental damage soon enough to be meaningful.
No matter how many light switches we turn off when we leave the room, pounds of food scraps we dutifully compost, and hours spent on public transit instead of driving an SUV, the Earth will still be under violent attack. The GINK ideology may be well intentioned, but evades the root causes of climate change and unintentionally humiliates mothers who are less than totally enthusiastic and prepared to have kids. Reproductive freedom must necessarily include the freedom to have – or not have – children. Encouraging women to sacrifice their right to do what they want with their body for the “greater good” stirs up guilt in individuals that is widely disproportionate to their personal impact. We need collective action- not individual shaming- to effectively address the global environmental crisis.
Restrictions Will Force 40-
Year-Old Abortion Clinic To
Close This Weekend
Last week, Virginia’s Board of Health voted to finalizeunnecessary regulations that will force many of the state’s abortion clinics to shut down. Those new restrictions — which are known as the Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers, or TRAP laws — are already having their intended effect. Hillcrest Clinic, which opened to the public just nine months after the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalized abortion services, will be closing its doors this weekend.
As advocates for young people’s sexual health and rights, many may not think of us as having a stake in the immigration reform game. But in fact, it’s quite the opposite. The health and wellbeing of young people both within and outside our borders, regardless of immigration paperwork, is of the utmost importance to our organization. While we may not take a stand on every issue in immigration reform, there are a few that rise to the top—some of which were included in the Senate’s Gang of Eight bill, and others which were left out.
The Good
In 2010, Advocates for Youth stood strong with DREAMers (undocumented youth) across the country and had our hearts broken when the Senate voted down the DREAM Act, which would have given young people who arrived in the United States as children a pathway to citizenship. In the current bill, DREAMers who arrive to the United States before the age of 16 and who have completed high school in the United States can apply for a Registered Provisional Immigrant (RPI) status and move more quickly through the process to become citizens. There is also no age cap to this provision.
Currently, those who apply for asylum in the United States have one year to do so. The current bill would lift that extremely short deadline which would help reduce the burden of those needing asylum in the United States, many of whom identify as LGBT and are coming from countries that persecute these communities.
Many of our families have had members who were deported for low-level offenses, simply because they were without papers. As a result, they are barred from re-entering the United States for extended periods of time, even if they have children here who are citizens. The current bill gives those who have been deported with family still in the United States the ability to apply for RPI status.
Too often individuals, and especially those who identify as LGBT, have been abused in immigration facilities. This bill would provide training and resources on appropriate use of force, individual rights, and cultural sensitivity.
The Bad
Because of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), same-sex couples do not receive the same benefits of heterosexual couples when it comes to sponsoring a spouse from another country. The Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) would have resolved this situation, but unfortunately it was left out of the bill.
For those that gain RPI status, they will not have access to public benefits like Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program or food stamps. For the 11 million undocumented people who now will have a pathway to citizenship (yay), that 13-year process could mean no access to healthcare during that time (extra boo). We’ve already had long discussions around the Affordable Care Act about what it means to go without healthcare (from awful health outcomes to additional costs being placed on hospitals), and especially those who would be given RPI status should be able to access the healthcare they need to lead healthy lives.
There is a lot more good and a lot more bad, but these are the issues we’ll be watching closely.
This past Wed. was the Reproductive Health Lobby Day 2013 in Columbus, OH, sponsored by a coalition of groups including: Planned Parenthood, Naral Pro-Choice Ohio, the National Council of Jewish Women, and the Ohio Advocates/Advocates for Youth. Though I arrived late due to classes and a long drive, I was able to meet with Representative Ron O’Brian’s legislative aide Chad Aronson and Senator John Ecklund in order to urge their vote against Substitute House Bill 59. I, along with nearly one hundred others (mostly women to my eye), were fighting the Bill’s efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, move federal TANF grant money to “crisis pregnancy centers,’ and in a last-minute addition, ban comprehensive sex education programs and “gateway sexual activities” in Ohio schools.
Let’s take a quick step back here and review these points: 1. Defund an organization which is utilized by 1 in 5 American women for pregnancy tests, pap smears, access to birth control, cancer screenings, etc. An organization that is staffed by medical professions and who competes vigorously for its funding; winning it because they are the best in their field. 2. Moving federal grant money to a loose-knit collaboration of “crisis” centers, some of which are centered in RVs and moveable homes, with clear and overt religious affiliations and questionable to no real medical credentials or authorities. 3. Banning all comprehensive sex ed programs and “gateway sexual activities. . .” This is the kicker for me. Apparently the word “sex” drowns out the words “comprehensive” and “education,” words which I feel in most academic setting (vs. something silly or illegal) are generally considered most excellent. Further, “gateway sexual activities” are not defined. This could mean holding hands, kissing, cuddling, overt flirting; hell, watching certain TV shows with sexual content (which in today’s pop culture is ubiquitous) could be considered a “gateway” to the terrible and unnatural acts of “sex.” Note, however, that the legal age of consent for a minor is 16, halfway through one’s high-school career. Concurrently, it has been statistically proven by a number of studies that comprehensive sex ed programs lower rates of unwanted pregnancy, STD/STI transmission, and sex in general for high-school aged students (I can gladly provide links if needed). Abstinence-only programs have no such support and leaves kids (since a truly comprehensive program will start education in primary school) to search the internet or use TV shows and/or peers as sources of information. Many of these sources are NOT vetted and may have misleading, incomplete, or wrong (and potentially dangerous) information. In a similar vein, these “crisis pregnancy centers” make one’s reproductive health and family planning efforts into a “crisis” while many (at least 47% according to a Naral survey) offer little to no information on the connections between pregnancy and mental health issues, the very option of abortion, or forms of contraception beyond the natural “rhythmic” method.
Returning to the specifics of my experience: the meeting with Rep. O’Brian’s legislative aide (who was quite dashing and exceedingly polite) went over very well and I believe O’Brian voted against the Bill in the vote earlier today. The meeting with Senator Ecklund was a bit more rushed and came out with a more neutral answer but I think he will lean towards against. He did, however, bring up the issue of abortion immediately upon hearing the words “family planning centers” and claimed that he personally believes all abortions are wrong. Note that this issue has NOTHING to do with the issue of abortion and that only 3% of Planned Parenthood’s budget is allotted for abortions. Note also that Senator Ecklund was savvy enough to recognize that his District is highly divided on the issue, allowing him the ability to abstain on the issue. Upon hearing of the House’s approval of Substitute House Bill 59 I decided to send Senator Ecklund this email:
I just wanted to take a moment to thank you via email for meeting with me and Judith Pindell on Wed., April 17th regarding Substitute House Bill 59. I also wanted to utilize this medium to reiterate my concern for House Bill 59 and my urging for you to vote against it when it comes to the Senate. I realize that the Bill has passed through the House and it is my greatest hope that the Senate will show a better understanding of the terrible ramifications this Bill will have for women and their families across the State of OH.
Furthermore, while I believe the comprehensive education addendum to the Bill was removed by the House I would like you to know that my colleagues and I at the College of Wooster are at this time preparing a comprehensive sex ed program for all Wooster students next year. Ohioans should not have to wait until college, if they can afford college, to learn the dos and don’ts of safe sex practices in a safe, knowledgeable, and empowering way. I know that you will make the right choice, now and in the future.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
It is my sincere hope that he and the rest of the Senate vote against this backwards, outmoded Bill. It is 2013, everybody. . .come on already!
- Justin
Among both pro-choice and anti-abortion activists, the story of the abhorrent conditions and Kermit Gosnell’s actions at the Women’s Medical Society clinic in West Philadelphia brought feelings of anger and sadness as it lit up Facebook and social media. People expressed outrage not only at the death of Karnamaya Mongar, a Nepalese refugee who died after receiving an overdose of a sedative at the hands of Gosnell’s staff, but also at the failure of officials to close Women’s Medical Society and revoke Gosnell’s license, and at the media for failing to give the story the attention it deserves. (To read a more complete story, read this article at The Atlantic, one of the first news outlets to cover the case)
I agree that people should feel outraged. They should feel outraged for all of the reasons listed above, and they should feel outraged because no woman, no person, no girl should ever have to face the conditions that Gosnell’s patients did. This situation could have been prevented if the United States guaranteed every woman’s right to safe, affordable, legal abortion. Unfortunately, it does not.
One of the most shocking aspects of the story were the fetuses found stored in jars and refrigerators in Gosnell’s office. Many of the fetuses were over the age of 24 weeks, the cut-off for legal abortion in Pennsylvania. One question that has not been asked is why? Why were these fetuses aborted so late? The most likely answer: these poor women did not have access to an abortion any earlier than that. Even if they realized they were pregnant at 8 or 10 weeks, it could have easily taken them 3 months to save up the hundreds of dollars they needed to afford an abortion. This is yet another example of why there should be funding to pay for abortions for those women who cannot afford them.
Another question: why did these women go to Gosnell’s office? Why did they not leave when they saw the terrible conditions? The answer: they had nowhere else to turn. There are four abortion providers in Philadelphia, and in 2008, there were only 50 total abortion providers in the entire state of Pennsylvania. 46% of Pennsylvania women live in a county without an abortion provider. Even if a women or girl could have gotten transportation to see a different provider, it could have taken weeks to get an appointment, after the weeks it took her to raise the money. In addition, Pennsylvania law states that a woman must receive state-directed counseling that includes information designed to discourage her from having an abortion, and then wait 24 hours before the procedure is provided. This is why clinics cannot be closed, why providers must be able to continue providing safe, legal abortions, and why these restrictions must be removed.
Gosnell’s case should be receiving publicity. Not only does it show the terrible situations in which women who are exercising their right to have an abortion find themselves in all too often thanks to restrictive legislation, but it shows what will happen if abortion becomes illegal.
I would also like to use Gosnell’s case to shine light on another pervasive problem that threatens women’s and girls’ lives around the world: unsafe abortion. In 2008, 21.6 million unsafe abortions took place worldwide; only 360,000 of these occurred in developed regions. As a result of these unsafe abortions, 47,000 women in developing countries will die; only 90 will die in developed regions. Complications from pregnancy, including unsafe abortion are the leading cause of death for young women ages 15 through 19. Among those who survive the procedure, many suffer from post-abortion sepsis, hemorrhage, and genital trauma.
As in the case of Gosnell’s patients, we must ask ourselves: why? Why do 3 million girls between the ages of 15 and 19 receive unsafe abortions? Why are over 21 million unsafe abortions performed annually? One major barrier is the legality of abortion. Only 15% of developing countries permit abortions on request, and only 39 percent of women live in a country where it is available upon request. In 4 countries, abortion is not permitted under any circumstances, even to save the life of the mother. In addition, many of these countries have additional restrictions on abortion like those we see in the United States. Even if abortion is legal, women may have to go through a waiting period or receive an endorsement from several doctors or specialists. In developing countries where physicians are few and far between, this can make the process nearly impossible.
Several other issues restrict women from accessing safe and legal abortion care. Many countries have failed to make provisions for abortion services, often due to social and cultural beliefs. Women are often uninformed of their right under the law, or they cannot afford the services. Abortion services are often not well distributed throughout the country, they are insufficient to meet the demand, or they are of poor quality.
Sound familiar? Women cannot afford services? Abortion services are not well distributed throughout the country? The United States is quickly going down a dangerous path that leads to unsafe abortions, far more than those seen in Gosnell’s clinic. In the United States and in other countries, women must have the right to choose, and the right to a safe, legal, affordable abortion. That should be the discussion around the Kermit Gosnell case. That should be why people are outraged.
While Boston College is against adult students at the college using and having access to condoms my college LOVED when the student government gave out condom flowers on Condom Day.
I am one part of my college’s Undergrad Student Governments Health Programming Board. Our campus has a health clinic like many other college campuses however, a lot of students do not know about it. In an effort to get more of my peers to know about the clinic and to be more mindful of the sexual health I decided to make condom flowers for Valentine’s Day and give them away to students.
A few weeks back I listened attentively to ‘SOS Doctor’, one of the best health programs that be on Radio in Cameroon. As I listened, I got very happy at the great job that Dr. Dion Grace, a member of the National AIDS Control Committee of Cameroon was doing to educate Cameroonians on anti-retroviral drugs. She eloquently and insightfully answered every one of the questions that were posed to her by listeners who called-in and am sure her intervention in the program was a timely one. Everything was fine until when a listener called-in to ask what is it that could be done to reduce stigma on people who are on anti-retroviral drugs. Dr. Dion as usual gave a very insightful answer to this question going as far as citing the example of Ivory Coast where the drugs are put in anonymous packages so that they can be taken by patients without fear of stigma by the people around them. She went ahead to cite cases where some special containers of various doses is been used in some countries to reduce stigma. This was quiet interesting to know, but when she started advising people on anti-retroviral that they could tell people around them that they are taking vitamins or pills in order to avoid stigmatization I grumbled the following to myself: Do I have to be so ashamed of my status that I have to lie to others?
I have no statistics on this but I can assure you that having to lie on your HIV status is the order of the day in Cameroon especially amongst young people to avoid stigma and discrimination. Well, this to an extend is understandable given that People Living With HIV/AIDS(PLWHA) are considered as being punished by God for either their sisns or those committed by their family. But when telling a lie to avoid stigma is a behaviour that is reinforced health professionals, I have reservations and clearly doubt how efficient this approach could be.
I am utterly convinced that a problem can only be solved if its root cause(s) is/are carefully tackled. As a young person living in a society where most PLWHA are young persons, I compare telling a lie on your HIV/AIDS status to survive to deliberately refusing to tackle the problem from it’s source and launching an attack on its leaves instead.
To reduce stigma in the most sustainable way possible, education rather than lies is required.Young People, their families, and the communities in which People on anti-retroviral drugs have to be educated on the dangers of stigma and on the importance of accepting PLWHA. Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations’ Secretary-General, vividly spelt out society’s responsibility to PLWHA when he declared that, “We can fight stigma. Enlightened laws and policies are key. But it begins with openness, the courage to speak out. Schools should teach respect and understanding. Religious leaders should preach tolerance. The media should condemn prejudice and use its influence to advance social change, from securing legal protections to ensuring access to health care.”
Lies do nothing but contribute in amplifying the myth around HIV/AIDS in the Cameroonian society. People on anti-retroviral drugs do not need to lie on their status to survive stigma, they need to accept themselves as they are and deserve the care and protection that every other human being is due by the society in which they live.They deserve to live a real life and not a life of lies.
Thanks to Advocates For Youth, I had the privilege and pleasure of attending the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health’s National Advocacy Weekend for 5 days this past March. As I packed my bags and boarded the plane that would take me from Ithaca, NY to Washington DC, I had no clue as to the intense intellectual, emotional, and passionate environment I was about to step into.
This year’s Advocacy Weekend was focused on the inclusion of immigrant women’s health care in immigration reform. Immigration policy directly affects an immigrant woman’s access to health care. According to the NLIRH website, the majority of female immigrants do not have healthcare coverage. State legislatures continue to introduce legislation that would restrict non-citizens’ access to basic public health programs, including prenatal care. Immigrant women are less likely to receive adequate reproductive health care, including cervical and breast cancer screening and treatment, family planning services, HIV/AIDS testing and treatment, accurate sex education and culturally and linguistically competent services.
Reproductive Justice tells us that these services are essential for women to have the basic human rights to dignity and self determination. It was under this belief that over 50 activists from across the country joined together. We represented the full spectrum of american latina identity- some of us were undocumented, others were second and third generation citizens. Our command of English and Spanish differed, but we were united in our conviction, and most of all in our support of one another.
Yo te apoyo. This is one of NLIRH’s campaign slogans, and it was this sentiment that was most felt throughout the weekend. As we learned about the intricacies of immigration reform and of it’s intersections with Reproductive Justice, we were free to voice our personal experiences and frustrations. People spoke of very personal obstacles- young motherhood, the pain of familial disruption by deportation, the inability to be seen by a doctor for a cyst in the breast- openly and honestly, and were always received with respect and the assurance that they had in their power the ability to create change.
At the rally for Immigrant Women on Sunday, speakers shouted, “We are on the right side of history!” to a church full of applause. I clapped and shouted right along. It was only later that I questioned the assurance I felt that this is true. I suppose I feel that I am “on the right side of history” when I am working with people who sound least like a history textbook.. People who choose not to simplify and sterilize an issue, because they are not afraid to admit to and confront the complexity and diversity of it. People who gain collective power through their willingness to admit to vulnerability, to the need to support and be supported in their struggle.
For more information about the issue of Immigrant women’s access to healthcare, and how it is affected by immigration policy, check out:
The Economic Effects of Granting Legal Status and Citizenship to Undocumented Immigrants
Are you a young person (14-24 years old) who is:
In the post-2015 development agenda, we must focus on reducing inequality, which has widened both within and between countries. Thus, it is important that we must also accelerate the social, political, and economic inclusion of marginalized groups, especially women and girls and young people – whom United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon gave a nod to the importance of women, who “hold up half the sky,” and of young people, “the very face of our future.”
Still, one crucial ingredient went without mention: sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). The inclusion of SRHR and access to family planning completes the jigsaw puzzle of a just sustainable world and in the roadmap to development.
To understand why, consider the lives of the women who sell dried fish in my province – Leyte, in the Philippines. The women of Leyte are on the front lines of an unfolding environmental crisis. The Gulf they depend on for their livelihood has been ravaged by overfishing and the destruction of coral reefs, forests and mangroves. Where fishers once reeled in up to 50 kilograms a day, the average has now dropped to just 0-5 kilograms, barely enough to feed a family.
Climate change has disrupted the weather, making it too unpredictable to dry fish under the heat of the sun. It produces the lowest quality of their dried fish product and the result, for the women of Leyte, is a substantial loss of income.
Large families are still the norm in Leyte, where most women have more than four children. Many would like to prevent or delay having another child; one in three births is unwanted or mistimed. But too many lack access to family planning and reproductive health services and information.
High fertility and declining income forces families to make painful choices. In many cases, one or two or even more of the children will be the “sacrificial lamb” who goes to work so at least some of their siblings can go to school. Most of these young people who are out-of-school have no option but to do hard labor or enter the service of being a household helper since they have no diploma that can guarantee them to find a job in a company or even in the government.
With lack of economic opportunities, women and young people have no choice but to engage in sex work. In a society that does not recognize sex work as a decent respectable profession, they are vulnerable to abuse, exploitation, and sexually transmitted infections. They end up getting married, having children at a very young age and at the time when young women reach the age of 20, they already have 2-3 children.
Most parents – especially mothers – want their children to finish school, since access to quality education can end the cycle of poverty. My own grandmother, who was widowed at the age of 33, struggled to make ends meet so that all of her four children could finish college and provide a promising future for their own children.
Climate change and resource depletion will eventually affect all of the world’s people. But it is already gravely affecting the dried fish sellers in Leyte. There are efforts under way to help. The Green Climate Fund will finance climate adaptation in developing countries, and much can be done to promote better land use, reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and secure rights for indigenous people. Under the administration of President Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III public and private partnerships flourished in an effort to finance infrastructure and social services to address the needs of the marginalized and the poor.
These policy measures are necessary and strategic, but they are not sufficient. To make a powerful lasting impact in the lives of the women and young people of Leyte, we must ensure that SRHR and family planning are included in efforts to address climate change and promote sustainable development.
Family planning and SRHR is a potential game changer. Women and young people who are empowered to make choices about childbearing are healthier and more resilient. They are more likely to invest in their children’s education; they and their children are less likely to be poor.
We can just imagine a better world if the estimated 215 million women who now lack access to contraception were able to plan their families. Imagine if we unleash the potential of 600 million adolescent girls, by ensuring their access to education, opportunities, and rights. In fact, imagine if every one of the planet’s three billion young people were empowered with rights and opportunity. Imagine that those young men and women are able to make informed choices to stay healthy and free of HIV; to marry if they choose and raise healthy, happy families. Imagine breaking the cycle of poverty and gender-based violence that has haunted humanity for generations and generations.
In my country, women’s rights movement had its historic victory with the passage of the Reproductive Health Law or RH Law. The enactment and implementation of the RH law in the Philippines is a huge victory for women and young people. However, the struggle is not over. A few days ago, the Supreme Court of the Philippines issued a temporary restraining order or better known as status quo ante order for 120 days, allegedly to allow petitioners to argue its constitutional merits and/or demerits of the law.
Such delaying tactics hijacks the future of women and young people. In a global inclusive development framework, we must first guarantee basic human rights for women and young people. Ensure that we end gender-based violence; economic opportunities, give greater participation of women and young people in the decision-making and political process; provide access to clean, safe, and potable water; and stand-up against child marriage.
We must build a sustainable economy that is inclusive, not divisive; sustaining, not depleting. But most of all, we must ensure provision of basic social services such as comprehensive sexuality education for young people, women and youth-friendly health services, and family planning not only for married couples but also for every women and young people .
This week, in Bali, young people have demanded that we must be put at the heart of development. “Young people should be involved in writing the High Level Panel’s recommendations to the UN General Assembly. Young people in all our diversity must occupy a meaningful space in our new development agenda. We refuse to be an afterthought. It is only with our voice and involvement that the post-2015 agenda will be a success (Bali Youth Multi-stakeholder Meeting Communiqué).”
In the post-2015 development agenda, we must focus on reducing inequality, which has widened both within and between countries. Thus, it is important that we must also accelerate the social, political, and economic inclusion of marginalized groups, especially women and girls and young people – whom United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon gave a nod to the importance of women, who “hold up half the sky,” and of young people, “the very face of our future.”
Still, one crucial ingredient went without mention: sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). The inclusion of SRHR and access to family planning completes the jigsaw puzzle of a just sustainable world and in the roadmap to development.
To understand why, consider the lives of the women who sell dried fish in my province – Leyte, in the Philippines. The women of Leyte are on the front lines of an unfolding environmental crisis. The Gulf they depend on for their livelihood has been ravaged by overfishing and the destruction of coral reefs, forests and mangroves. Where fishers once reeled in up to 50 kilograms a day, the average has now dropped to just 0-5 kilograms, barely enough to feed a family.
Climate change has disrupted the weather, making it too unpredictable to dry fish under the heat of the sun. It produces the lowest quality of their dried fish product and the result, for the women of Leyte, is a substantial loss of income.
Large families are still the norm in Leyte, where most women have more than four children. Many would like to prevent or delay having another child; one in three births is unwanted or mistimed. But too many lack access to family planning and reproductive health services and information.
High fertility and declining income forces families to make painful choices. In many cases, one or two or even more of the children will be the “sacrificial lamb” who goes to work so at least some of their siblings can go to school. Most of these young people who are out-of-school have no option but to do hard labor or enter the service of being a household helper since they have no diploma that can guarantee them to find a job in a company or even in the government.
With lack of economic opportunities, women and young people have no choice but to engage in sex work. In a society that does not recognize sex work as a decent respectable profession, they are vulnerable to abuse, exploitation, and sexually transmitted infections. They end up getting married, having children at a very young age and at the time when young women reach the age of 20, they already have 2-3 children.
Most parents – especially mothers – want their children to finish school, since access to quality education can end the cycle of poverty. My own grandmother, who was widowed at the age of 33, struggled to make ends meet so that all of her four children could finish college and provide a promising future for their own children.
Climate change and resource depletion will eventually affect all of the world’s people. But it is already gravely affecting the dried fish sellers in Leyte. There are efforts under way to help. The Green Climate Fund will finance climate adaptation in developing countries, and much can be done to promote better land use, reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and secure rights for indigenous people. Under the administration of President Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III public and private partnerships flourished in an effort to finance infrastructure and social services to address the needs of the marginalized and the poor.
These policy measures are necessary and strategic, but they are not sufficient. To make a powerful lasting impact in the lives of the women and young people of Leyte, we must ensure that SRHR and family planning are included in efforts to address climate change and promote sustainable development.
Family planning and SRHR is a potential game changer. Women and young people who are empowered to make choices about childbearing are healthier and more resilient. They are more likely to invest in their children’s education; they and their children are less likely to be poor.
We can just imagine a better world if the estimated 215 million women who now lack access to contraception were able to plan their families. Imagine if we unleash the potential of 600 million adolescent girls, by ensuring their access to education, opportunities, and rights. In fact, imagine if every one of the planet’s three billion young people were empowered with rights and opportunity. Imagine that those young men and women are able to make informed choices to stay healthy and free of HIV; to marry if they choose and raise healthy, happy families. Imagine breaking the cycle of poverty and gender-based violence that has haunted humanity for generations and generations.
In my country, women’s rights movement had its historic victory with the passage of the Reproductive Health Law or RH Law. The enactment and implementation of the RH law in the Philippines is a huge victory for women and young people. However, the struggle is not over. A few days ago, the Supreme Court of the Philippines issued a temporary restraining order or better known as status quo ante order for 120 days, allegedly to allow petitioners to argue its constitutional merits and/or demerits of the law.
Such delaying tactics hijacks the future of women and young people. In a global inclusive development framework, we must first guarantee basic human rights for women and young people. Ensure that we end gender-based violence; economic opportunities, give greater participation of women and young people in the decision-making and political process; provide access to clean, safe, and potable water; and stand-up against child marriage.
We must build a sustainable economy that is inclusive, not divisive; sustaining, not depleting. But most of all, we must ensure provision of basic social services such as comprehensive sexuality education for young people, women and youth-friendly health services, and family planning not only for married couples but also for every women and young people .
This week, in Bali, young people have demanded that we must be put at the heart of development. “Young people should be involved in writing the High Level Panel’s recommendations to the UN General Assembly. Young people in all our diversity must occupy a meaningful space in our new development agenda. We refuse to be an afterthought. It is only with our voice and involvement that the post-2015 agenda will be a success.”
In the post-2015 development agenda, we must focus on reducing inequality, which has widened both within and between countries. Thus, it is important that we must also accelerate the social, political, and economic inclusion of marginalized groups, especially women and girls and young people – whom United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon gave a nod to the importance of women, who “hold up half the sky,” and of young people, “the very face of our future.”
Still, one crucial ingredient went without mention: sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). The inclusion of SRHR and access to family planning completes the jigsaw puzzle of a just sustainable world and in the roadmap to development.
To understand why, consider the lives of the women who sell dried fish in my province – Leyte, in the Philippines. The women of Leyte are on the front lines of an unfolding environmental crisis. The Gulf they depend on for their livelihood has been ravaged by overfishing and the destruction of coral reefs, forests and mangroves. Where fishers once reeled in up to 50 kilograms a day, the average has now dropped to just 0-5 kilograms, barely enough to feed a family.
Climate change has disrupted the weather, making it too unpredictable to dry fish under the heat of the sun. It produces the lowest quality of their dried fish product and the result, for the women of Leyte, is a substantial loss of income.
Large families are still the norm in Leyte, where most women have more than four children. Many would like to prevent or delay having another child; one in three births is unwanted or mistimed. But too many lack access to family planning and reproductive health services and information.
High fertility and declining income forces families to make painful choices. In many cases, one or two or even more of the children will be the “sacrificial lamb” who goes to work so at least some of their siblings can go to school. Most of these young people who are out-of-school have no option but to do hard labor or enter the service of being a household helper since they have no diploma that can guarantee them to find a job in a company or even in the government.
With lack of economic opportunities, women and young people have no choice but to engage in sex work. In a society that does not recognize sex work as a decent respectable profession, they are vulnerable to abuse, exploitation, and sexually transmitted infections. They end up getting married, having children at a very young age and at the time when young women reach the age of 20, they already have 2-3 children.
Most parents – especially mothers – want their children to finish school, since access to quality education can end the cycle of poverty. My own grandmother, who was widowed at the age of 33, struggled to make ends meet so that all of her four children could finish college and provide a promising future for their own children.
Climate change and resource depletion will eventually affect all of the world’s people. But it is already gravely affecting the dried fish sellers in Leyte. There are efforts under way to help. The Green Climate Fund will finance climate adaptation in developing countries, and much can be done to promote better land use, reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and secure rights for indigenous people. Under the administration of President Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III public and private partnerships flourished in an effort to finance infrastructure and social services to address the needs of the marginalized and the poor.
These policy measures are necessary and strategic, but they are not sufficient. To make a powerful lasting impact in the lives of the women and young people of Leyte, we must ensure that SRHR and family planning are included in efforts to address climate change and promote sustainable development.
Family planning and SRHR is a potential game changer. Women and young people who are empowered to make choices about childbearing are healthier and more resilient. They are more likely to invest in their children’s education; they and their children are less likely to be poor.
We can just imagine a better world if the estimated 215 million women who now lack access to contraception were able to plan their families. Imagine if we unleash the potential of 600 million adolescent girls, by ensuring their access to education, opportunities, and rights. In fact, imagine if every one of the planet’s three billion young people were empowered with rights and opportunity. Imagine that those young men and women are able to make informed choices to stay healthy and free of HIV; to marry if they choose and raise healthy, happy families. Imagine breaking the cycle of poverty and gender-based violence that has haunted humanity for generations and generations.
In my country, women’s rights movement had its historic victory with the passage of the Reproductive Health Law or RH Law. The enactment and implementation of the RH law in the Philippines is a huge victory for women and young people. However, the struggle is not over. A few days ago, the Supreme Court of the Philippines issued a temporary restraining order or better known as status quo ante order for 120 days, allegedly to allow petitioners to argue its constitutional merits and/or demerits of the law.
Such delaying tactics hijacks the future of women and young people. In a global inclusive development framework, we must first guarantee basic human rights for women and young people. Ensure that we end gender-based violence; economic opportunities, give greater participation of women and young people in the decision-making and political process; provide access to clean, safe, and potable water; and stand-up against child marriage.
We must build a sustainable economy that is inclusive, not divisive; sustaining, not depleting. But most of all, we must ensure provision of basic social services such as comprehensive sexuality education for young people, women and youth-friendly health services, and family planning not only for married couples but also for every women and young people .
This week, in Bali, young people have demanded that we must be put at the heart of development. “Young people should be involved in writing the High Level Panel’s recommendations to the UN General Assembly. Young people in all our diversity must occupy a meaningful space in our new development agenda. We refuse to be an afterthought. It is only with our voice and involvement that the post-2015 agenda will be a success.”
Boston College Students for Sexual Health (BCSSH) is a group of students that has been acting as an independent organization since 2009. The dedicated students that are a part of this group work solely through grants and volunteerism, as they are not officially recognized by the university.
BCSSH operates to distribute materials, resources, and information regarding sexual health to the Boston College community. Apart from their sexual health trivia nights, condom distributions on city property, and other efforts, they pride themselves in the management of Safe Sites. These Safe Sites are dorms across campus that contain male and female condoms, lubricant, and information on sexual health and wellness. Any student in need of these materials can visit a Safe Site and receive these resources, no questions asked.
Recently, students whose rooms were designated as Safe Sites received emails from the Dean of Students Paul Chebator and the Director of Residential Life George Arey, along with other university officials. The email threatened the students to cease distributing resources from their dooms or they would “be referred to the student conduct office for disciplinary action by the university.”
BCSSH has responded with a media frenzy, garnering support from organizations like Advocates For Youth, the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, and has received attention from media outlets ranging from BC newspapers to The Boston Globe and CNN.
The group has even received legal counsel from the ACLU, with their representatives saying that Boston College is infringing upon the student’s rights with their threats.
BCSSH has started a petition for students, faculty, and relatives to sign in support of sexual health resources on campus.
In addition, they have a solidarity statement for individuals outside of the BC Community to sign in order to show their support.
I have had the incredible opportunity to work with this awe-inspiring group of people for some time now and have been incredibly moved by their activism. On behalf of the cause for Sexual Health, please consider signing the solidarity statement and writing a letter of support. Any and all questions or letters can be sent to lennoxchelsea@gmail.com.
“Put molly all in her champagne, she aint even know it. I took her home and I enjoyed that, she aint even know it,”
These are some of the lyrics to a new Rick Ross song titled, “You Don’t Even Know It”. What’s “molly” you ask? Well that isn’t the focus here. The focus is the fact that Ross is endorsing date rape. Between the Steubenville trials, current trends in abortion rights and this, it’s like women woke up one morning to an alternate, utterly sh*tty universe, and things have been going steadily downhill ever since.
The song contains all of the things I don’t like about mainstream rap – references to all the possessions amassed, superior status and ownership of whatever geographical location the rapper in question hails from. And so you can understand when I say that it’s a lot scary to slip those two lines in there like they mean nothing and then just carry on. “Blah blah diamond-encrusted rims…blah blah blah *insert trendy alcoholic beverage*…blah blah blah guns and drugs…blah blah blah It’s totally okay to have sex with a woman without consent…blah blah blah…”
You would think that with the current focus on sexual assault and the fact that one of the Steubenville rapists is black, other black men would try just a little to present a non-rapey image; if just to show that unconscionable assault isn’t par for the course. But nooooooo. Rick Ross, because he is a famous rapper, thinks he is entitled to everything because he has money, and that women are disposable. Shame on you Rick Ross. Shame! Women have dealt with degradation and sexualization in hip-hop for ages and we are still in the process of trying to make people understand that all those things aren’t cool. This however, is on a whole ‘nother level of vile, disrespectful and repugnant. Rappers and hip-hop artists call women b*tches and hos in their lyrics, use scantily-dressed women as props and slaves to their money and then turn around to sing about how much they love their mothers. Really?
Women, being the awesome, no-nonsense people we are, are RAGING and have started a petition asking Mr. Ross to issue a pubic apology. Basically, we’re getting real tired of your sh*t and you crossed a MAJOR line. There are a couple floating around which you can find if you do a Google search. Feel free to tweet angrily at him.
If you haven’t heard already, the law makers in North Dakota are pushing for another anti-choice bill. This time it’s an abortion ban on the basis of personhood. If passed, this would effectively give fertilized eggs all the rights of U.S. citizens. And it would cut off abortion care completely. Beyond abortion this bill would also charge doctors who damage embryos in any way with criminal negligence. It also prevents doctors from being able to perform in vitro fertilizations. Now you might be thinking an unconstitutional bill like this couldn’t possibly get passed by Senate or the House, but it did. Shockingly, it passed the House by a vote of 57-35 and it’s currently making its way to the Governor’s desk.
The state’s recent six-week abortion ban is already in direct violation of Roe v. Wade and will bring about several legal costs for taxpayers when challenged. This next measure of a total abortion ban will surely cause North Dakota to face the same results, costing the state more than they bargained for. And how will they pay for these litigations?
During a recent debate between Senator Margaret Sitte and Dr. Kristen Cain about the abortion restrictions and pending abortion ban, Senator Sitte accidentally lets something slip. When asked if these bills will cost taxpayers possibly millions, Senator Sitte unintentionally admits that there are outside interests behind the unconstitutional abortion bans who are willing to spend those millions to make sure people in North Dakota will not have access to reproductive healthcare and rights. Watch as Senator Sitte tries to lie her way out of it.
Watch the debate between Senator Sitte and Dr. Cain!
This abortion ban won’t be a law until Governor Jack Darlymple of North Dakota signs it, and it’s unclear if he will or won’t.
To contact Governor Jack Darlymple:
Office of Governor
State of North Dakota
600 East Boulevard Avenue
Bismarck, ND 58505-0100
701.328.2200: phone
701.328.2205: fax
Two personhood bills — Senate Bill 2303 and Senate Concurrent Resolution 4009 — have already passed the Senate, and the GOP-controlled House is expected to take them upsometime this week. But if North Dakota successfully enacts a total abortion ban, there will be serious consequences for the state that extend even beyond women’s reproductive freedom. Here are five ways the state will suffer under personhood:
1. There will be fewer doctors in the state available to provide medical care. In a historic move for the North Dakota Medical Association, the nonpartisan organization has come out againstpersonhood. The group points out that the anti-abortion measures go too far to “interfere with the physician practice,” and they suspect it will be harder to find qualified medical professionals willing to practice in North Dakota if the state imposes so many complicated restrictions on doctors. Some doctors have already testified before state lawmakersto say they will leave North Dakota if the abortion bans pass.
2. Maternal health care will be compromised. Doctors could becharged with criminal negligence if anything happens to an embryo — which could prevent them from making quick decisions that could help save women’s lives. The tragic case of Savita Halappanavar, a woman who died after being denied an abortion in a Catholic hospital because her doctors were reluctant to provide care that could get them in trouble with the law, highlights the serious consequences of state lawmakers coming between a woman and her doctor.
3. Women could be forced to resort to illegal abortion procedures.Under a personhood law, women will end up resorting to dangerous “backroom” abortions, one former pediatrician warned North Dakota lawmakers last week. That Fargo-area doctor did his medical training before Roe v. Wade, when women were dying of bacterial infections after botched abortion procedures — and he warns that the passage of the proposed personhood measures would pull North Dakota back into “the stone age of medicine.” There’s evidence to back up that claim. According to the Guttmacher Institute, the legality of abortion hasabsolutely no correlation to abortion rates around the world, because women will continue to seek to terminate pregnancies regardless of the law.
4. Women won’t be able to use in vitro fertilization to try to have a family. Ironically, in addition to compromising medical procedures for the women seeking to terminate a pregnancy, personhood measures also place restrictions on the women who are trying to get pregnant. “These bills will stop the practice of in vitro fertilization in this state,” Dr. Stephanie Dahl, an obstetrician-gynecologist and reproductive medicine specialist in Fargo, explained to lawmakers. Doctors wouldn’t be able to perform any procedure that carries the risk of damaging some embryos, so women would be forced to travel to South Dakota or Minnesota for in vitro treatment, a six-week process that requires multiple sonograms and up to 12 visits to the doctor.
5. The state will become embroiled in expensive lawsuits. North Dakota’s six-week abortion ban already runs afoul of Roe v. Wade, and will certainly invite several costly legal challenges. A total abortion ban would lead to similar consequences. Two personhood bills were recentlystruck down in Oklahoma, suggesting that the courts won’t take kindly to North Dakota’s push to restrict women’s constitutional rights, either. Nevertheless, even the self-proclaimed “fiscally conservative” Republicans in the state are willing to defend their abortion bans on the state’s dime.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/19/1738321/north-dakota-suffer-personhood/
Kansas House rejects rape and incest exceptions for abortion
Kansas House members on Tuesday gave first-round approval to sweeping new restrictions on abortion after refusing to add exceptions that would allow victims of incest or rape — including children who are raped — to get late-term abortions.
— Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas and Kierra Johnson, Beyond Choice: How We Learned to Stop Labeling and Love Reproductive Justice
We are all aware, where we are from, where we shaped ourselves, the place where we spent those juvenile nine months. Its uterus or mother’s womb that structured us and capacitatized us but the place of origin of life has been a reason for silence pain for many women. Fallen Womb! Or commonly, stated as uterine prolapse. It’s condition such that the uterus descends downward from its normal position in pelvis cavity, eventually coming out of the vagina. In medical terms, the falling of womb, when the muscles of pelvis are strained to a point where they can no longer support the positioning of the uterus. Uterine prolapse is widespread chronic reproductive problem amongst Nepali women. The problem of uterine prolapse is not associated with mortality rather it is linked with the morbidity and degradation of quality of life of women. This problem exists throughout the nation and contributing highly in degrading the women’s quality of life. Prolpase of uterus is progressive condition that has occurred from early adolescence to post menopausal state of women.
As per the reporting of WHO its global prevalence is between 2 to 20 percent among women of reproductive age group. Different studies in Nepal have shown that 30 to 40 percent of women are reported to suffer from this problem just after the birth of their first child.But in case of developed nations its women of menopausal age are normally afflicted by this condition.
Uterine prolapse may develop for number of reasons. Apparently, anything that stresses the stomach ligaments may lead to the prolapse of womb. Mainly during the menstruation and delivery may result the condition. In the rural setting where the resources are scarce and the liability of procuring the basic things remains in the domain of women. The burden of works as well depriving them from their basic rights driven by the patriarchy and feudal system in the women is other main circumstance.
It’s preventable and curable both having high important in dealing this problem. But government of Nepal is responding in different way. The act of government shows that the one and only remedies for falling of womb is the surgery. Due to which women are compelled to face more complication. In the budget of last fiscal year government had announced to have surgical treatment of 12,000 women. Although the government plans for such targets notable that they don’t have such human resources and technical strength to meet the goal. So private organization bid for that and earn Rs. 20,000 per surgery. Whenever the private organizations win the bid they sort out the specific time and move for the health camp in the assigned district. Such money minded orientation of government action motivates the clinician to concentrate on quantity of surgeries rather than quality. The basic criteria of surgery is also out of look concentrating on the fact of quick earning throwing a women’s womb. If a patient comes for basic health check up, she/he needs to be informed about her health status, going on complication and further remedial steps. Ignoring the ethical issue on health in case of women they are neither informed about the degree of prolpase nor the surgical steps being taken. Every surgery must be followed with the counseling regarding the dietary compliance, post operative rest and probable chance of infection. But it’s the only theoretical guidelines merely practiced in case of uterine prolpase surgery humiliating their reproductive health rights. This is the tacit fact of Nepalese health Scenario as well; the target oriented biding system to cope with the problem of Uterine Prolapse. This had led to a condition in countryside that some of the village remains replete with families having minimal single female member having hysterectomy. This how, the donor driven numerical targets oriented programs are forcefully introducing pathologies in our community; in the name of enhancing health status and development.
So it’s now the responsibility of state to be out of this arch of donor driven privatized health system. The instant steps to be taken is mainstreaming of the problem in health care system addressing it from the level of health policy including it in essential health care services. Training of health workers and providing round the year surgical services in district hospitals rather than promoting seasonal camps. UP issues should be incorporated in the relevant academic curricula and government should deliver more sustained and explicit messages drawing attention on the problem through the means of its influence. Need for conducting the regular monitoring and research on contributing factors and impact study of intervention is next must to be done. Last but of high importance indicating UP as a consequence of Gender Based Violence and as a violation of reproductive right as part of commitment in national and international level strongly advocates for alleviation of this problem.
The issue of bidding a women’s uterus is a new angle on how women’s bodies are exploited and abused irreparably for financial gains and how this is cloaked as legitimate, meted out by supposedly “trusted” government and private institutions.
The war against women continues in Texas. It seems as if the attack against women’s health will not stop. Recently, Texas State Senators Deuell, Campbell, and Schwertner introduced Senate Bill 537. This bill also known as the “Back Door Abortion Ban” is an attempt to restrict a women’s basic right to living a healthy life. Under the guise of safety and more regulation, Senate Bill 537 would in fact not improve safety of abortion care, but instead place medically unnecessary requirements on health centers such as becoming licensed Ambulatory Surgery Centers (ASCs).
These requirements would force all but five women health centers that offer abortion services to shut down in the state of Texas. This would have a devastating impact on thousands of women, especially low income women. Low-income women and women of color who live in the rural parts of Texas do not have access to the necessary resources to protect themselves and live a healthy life. To attain a basic cervical cancer screening sometimes they need to take time off work and travel miles to go to the nearest health clinic.
My mother and myself are prime examples of this. We both do not have health insurance because we cannot afford it. My mother lives in South Texas and has traveled to Mexico to consult a doctor. She only goes to the doctor when about once every two years because she cannot afford losing a day of work, paying doctor visits, and buying prescribed medicine. I am a fourth year student at the University of Texas at Austin. I do not have my yearly check ups due the inability to afford health care insurance. It is difficult, frustrating and stressful living each day without health care and hoping you do not get sick and continue to work or pursue a higher education.
Texas has the highest percentage of women who are uninsured [1]. Also, Texas ranks one of the top ten highest rates of women having cervical cancer. Yet, the 2011 Texas Legislature cut 66 percent of family planning funds. About 300, 000 fewer women will now receive health care[2] . Unfortunately, Texas State legislature does not support women’s health. Every year, the state of Texas is limiting a women’s basic right to living a healthy life.
SB 537 is another example of the Texas State Legislature trying to limit women’s health rights in Texas. However, we will not let that happen because we decide what is best for our future. Young leaders in Texas such as myself working with the Young Women of Color Leadership Council with Advocates for Youth, Katy Waters Vice-President for Voices for Reproductive Justice at the University of Texas at Austin and organizations such as NARAL Pro-Choice Texas, and Planned Parenthood are working hard to make sure our communities are aware of what the Texas State legislature is doing. Through advocacy, lobbying, community outreach, petition drives, and speak outs at the Texas State Capitol we are making sure to create conversations with our families and friends All women in Texas deserve access to HIV tests, birth control, safe and legal abortions. Women’s health is not a just a women’s issue. It is an inclusive problem that affects everyone. Family planning cuts and closing down of abortion clinics will affect mothers, wives, daughters, husbands, sons and the list continues.
Simple actions such as following bills that may affect women’s lives and what is going on at the Texas legislature online at http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Home.aspx or signing online petitions such as opposing SB 537 online https://secure.ppaction.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=15903 to hold our political leaders accountable are ways communities can speak up.
[1] Guttmacher Institute. State Facts About Title X and Family Planning: Texas.http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/title-X/TX.html.
[2] Legislative Budget Board. http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/
She came to class. Her eyes were looking down. She straightly went to last sit of the class and stay there quietly. Teacher started teaching. Class went on.
Yes, I have seen many of my friends acting this way in class. I had always wondered why those girls stay quite. What is the reason behind there awkwardness? But my curiosity does not use to be expressed. Sometimes I felt, when boys can freely play and shout, why they are not allowed to do so? These questions also use to strike my mind during my adolescences. Ya, I was curious then about SEX, about sexual ORGANS, there performance. But, I had no guts to ask and other people and other people had not reason to inform me.
Later, I knew mensuration was the cause for their awkwardness then. They used to be tensed and afraid with loads of pain on their body. I sometime also felt that ‘It was kind of diseases’ because at one side nobody used to talk about it and other side girl used to feel shy and problematic.
Now, when I realize it, I question myself, why don’t people talk about it, why girls feel afraid if it is not disease, why they feel shame if it happens to all female. I feel surprise.
As others problems this problem is also rooted with society. Now, when I thought to talk about this issue, I am afraid. Because for society what I talk may be vulgar. But, till when, till when we will be staying backward and act silently and see our female friends and sister faced problem through their bodily change. Now, it is time for us to act against this kind of discrimination. Now, it is time for us to embrace and support her when she feels awkward by mensuration. Now, the time is to Change.
BREAKING: North Dakota legislature passes nation’s most restrictive abortion law, bans all abortions after 6 weeks
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/15/1724911/north-dakota-six-week-heartbeat-ban/
One State. A Country worth of Disappointment.
12 is the new 20
If you’ve been following any news about reproductive health recently, you may have seen a thing or 12 about Arkansas. Just a reminder: Arkansas passed the most restrictive abortion law in the country, banning abortion at 12 weeks of pregnancy. There are a few factors to note about this piece of legislation and what it means for the future of anti-abortion policies throughout the states.
The bill was actually vetoed by Governor Mike Beebe (D) and his veto was overridden by the Republican-controlled legislature (shout out to the Beebe for trying!). Its sponsor is Republican Senator Jason Rapert (self-identified tea partier), who actually submitted a bill to ban abortions at 6 weeks but decided to retract since the only way to know anything about a fetus at 6 weeks is with a transvaginal ultrasound (and he didn’t want to feel the heat Virginia felt when they tackled that issue). The final approval of the bill was surprisingly unemotional, with consideration taking just a few minutes and with no one refuting, pushing back or making a statement against the decision. Mere moments that would potentially put hundreds of women at risk. Mere moments that put Arkansas at the center of the abortion rights movement. Mere moments that pushed fetal heartbeats and 12-week bans as a possible and passable policy option. This is unsettling, to say the least.
Fetal Heartbeat is the new Fetal Pain
Interestingly, what we’re seeing now are certain old school anti-abortion leaders worried that this new wave of (tea party-inspired) radical anti-abortion activism is only going to push abortion ban policies to federal courts, get struck down, and actually just REINFORCE Roe. And they’re right. While we’re on the topic, let’s just revisit the Supreme Court and Roe v. Wade for a moment, which states that women have a constitutional right to an abortion until the fetus is viable outside the womb (24-26 weeks into the pregnancy).
Abortion bans, at 12 (fetal heartbeat) or 20 weeks (fetal pain), are being argued in court because, get this, they actually ARE unconstitutional. Just last week, a federal court struck down Idaho’s 20-week abortion ban. Luckily, the Center for Reproductive Rights and the American Civil Liberties Union have challenged the 12-week ban in Arkansas and are hopeful they will strike down the legislation before it comes into effect.
But that doesn’t mean this new wave of anti-abortion activists and elected officials won’t continue to introduce legislation like wildfire. Nebraska started this trend with a 20-week ban in 2010, which prompted five more states to follow suit in 2011 (Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, and Oklahoma), and then three more in 2012 (Arizona, Georgia, and Louisiana). Thus far, Arkansas is the first state this year to approve an abortion ban.
Let’s Back up…What’s with the numbers? These measures are premised on the idea that fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks of gestation and have a detectable heartbeat at 12 weeks, and should therefore be afforded state protections. Well actually, in 2005 the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) published a statement that, after rigorous scientific review, states that “fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester.” And, as of a statement released in the summer of 2012, there have been no new studies since that have changed this dominant view of the medical profession. And that’s just the opinion of the entire medical profession and rigorous scientific review. No big deal.
But the real point is that 20-week bans, 12-week bans, and whatever ban that occurs before viability are straight-up unconstitutional. We can see this doesn’t seem to stop radical anti-abortion crusaders, which is the worrying part. And the questions we must ask ourselves as abortions-rights activists: What number is next? What state is next?
Actually, we have the answer to that last question. Drum roll please….. NORTH DAKOTA. Yup. A similar ban is under consideration in North Dakota RIGHT NOW. In the light of recent events in Arkansas, this bill may be all the more likely to pass. Other states that have introduced similar heartbeat bans during the current legislative session include Ohio, Kansas, Texas and Alabama. Be on the lookout for actions to plug into in the near future.
BUT FOR REALSIES…. Arkansas takes the cake on worst reproductive health policies this week. And that 12-week abortion stuff above? That’s not the end of it. Earlier this month, they also passed a law that limits abortion coverage in the state’s upcoming health exchange. Oh, and if Senator Rapert didn’t feel like he had done enough passing the nation’s most restrictive abortion ban, the next day he co-sponsored a bill designed to strip Planned Parenthood of all state and federal financing. Wow, Arkansas. Just… WOW.
I’m feeling a bit underwhelmed with the state of states these days. But I can’t end this on such a negative note. There HAS been some good coming out of the states, right? Right.
Shout out to…. ILLINOIS! Why?! Well a few things.
On the local level:
The Chicago Board of Education recently passed a policy that mandates a set amount of time be spent on sex education in every grade, beginning in kindergarten. In addition, for the first time, sex education instruction in Chicago will cover sexual orientation and gender identity. CHEERS to Chi-Town for getting that all young people deserve the right to lead healthy lives and access to complete and accurate information.
On the state level:
This week, HB 2213, passed through the House Education Committee, which seeks to remove the barriers to school attendance, safety, and completion among young parents, expecting parents, or survivors of domestic or sexual violence. This “Ensuring Success in Schools” Act is now on its way to the House floor for debate. One step closer to ensuring the rights of pregnant and parenting teens!
Also, this week, Illinois’s comprehensive sex education bill (HB 2675) passed out of the Human Services Committee and is heading to the House floor, which requires that if sex education IS taught, then the curriculum needs to be comprehensive, medically accurate, and age appropriate. One step closer towards a more comprehensive approach to sex education!
And to continue on the shout-out train, major props to our friends over at the Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health (ICAH) for all their advocacy work and youth mobilization on both of these statewide efforts! Young people and sex education for the win!
Curated by Diana Thu-Thao Rhodes, State Strategies Manager, Advocates for Youth
Last week I posted a blog responding to the New York City Human Resource Administration’s Teen Pregnancy Prevention Campaign. With much hard work, The New York Coalition for Reproductive Justice has launched its No Stigma! No Shame! Campaign in response to the Human Resource Administration’s,“Think Being A Teen Parent Won’t Cost You?”campaign. A collective of women of color, teen parents, community organizers, young people and myself have organized this campaign. We need you help with this push back. We are standing up and letting people know that our young people, especially young parents deserve better!
We ask that you stand with us and sign on listing your affiliation, organization and state. Please send that information and sign on at nyc4rj[at]gmail[dot]com. Support us in getting the word out and pushing for a teen pregnancy prevention campaign that DOES NOT shame and blame teen parents, particularly teen parents of color.
To find the Sign On Letter please visit nyc4rj.tumblr.com
Here are ALL the ways you can support the “No Stigma! No Shame!” Campaign (via Nicole Clark Consulting):
1. Stand with us and sign on to our letter by contacting Jasmine Burnett, founder of NYC4RJ, at nyc4rj[at]gmail[dot]com. Please listyour name, any academic or professional affiliations, and state. Your information will be added to this letter, and this letter will be sent to Robert Doar, commissioner of HRA’s Department of Social Services, and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
2. Join us on social media! Follow NYC4RJ on Twitter (and follow our hashtag #NoStigmaNoShame ) and like the NYC4RJ Facebook page to keep up with the latest updates on the No Stigma! No Shame! Campaign.
3. Share the opinion blogs posts from other bloggers about the HRA campaign. Check out these responses from Miriam Perez, Natasha Vianna, Gloria Malone, myself, and Brittany Brathwaite.
4. Share this blog post and the NYC4RJ No Stigma! No Shame! Campaign sign-on letter with others and encourage them contact Jasmine Burnett to sign on with their support.
This sign on letter is just the beginning. We plan to incorporate a campaign that infuses policy advocacy, arts, and education that will make sure that all teens in New York City are able to make the best decisions for their health and lives. Support us in getting the word out and pushing for a teen pregnancy prevention and parenting campaign that DOES NOT shame and blame teen parents.
A fellow Amplify Blogger, Twittersister and founder of TeenMomNYC.com, a website offering support and incite of the day to day life of what it means to be a teenage mother, recently posted a blog (like many of us) about the New York City Teen Pregnancy “Prevention” Campaign that launched last week by the NYC Human Resources Administration. Reading through my newsfeed last night, I caught a glimpse of her responding to the hateful comments she was receiving on this particular blog post. This morning, I decided to visit her blog for myself. There were a whopping 38 comments attached to what I thought was a brilliantly written blog laced with veracity and Gloria’s situated knowledges as a teen parent. I guess the others did not think so. Let me first say that I was not a teen mother and I cannot, will not and do not wish to speak from that perspective. However, I am a young woman of color who was born and raised in a hypersegregated medically “underserved” area, attended sub-standard schools, and was in and out of kinship care my entire life. All of these experiences influence my analysis of this situation (outside of my work with young people and pregnant and parenting teens).
This blog is also not meant to come to anyone’s rescue (we advocates/activists are not saving teen moms from these egregious, shameful ads) because they do not need us to rescue them or step in and give them a voice. These brave young women already have them! This is to show my solidarity with them and express why I feel so strongly about the attacks on them. As if the ads were not enough, you have people offering their empty “advice” on their blogs, ranging from “been there, done that” to “you should have kept your legs closed.” Uhh no that’s not about to happen. So you want to come for teen moms? Let me come for your train of thought. Allow me to deconstruct your notions of young people and teen pregnancy prevention.
Wait, be patient, love yourself!
I recommend young people keep a journal of their childhood that way when they grow up and catch a sudden case of dementia when it comes to sexuality and sexual activity they can “remember” their teen years. An “older wiser woman” commented that there is in fact no positive side to teen sexual activity. Hmmm well that’s strange considering teens are pretty much still keep having sex (something has to be positive there). While we all hope that young people delay sexual activity, lets face the music TEENS ARE HAVING SEX! Just because young people make decisions to have sex, doesn’t mean we don’t love ourselves. I’m pretty sure we’d love ourselves more if society showed us some love too!
I didn’t know lived in a society in which CULTURE does not play a significant role in how we raise our children!
An anonymous added that young people have an “unlimited” amount of resources including our moms, aunts, sisters, friends… Okay, so where I come from my family doesn’t talk about sex. Outside of the fact that most parents don’t feel comfortable talking to their kids about sex, I know first hand that some families are not about to talk about sex! As a person of the African Diaspora, sex was not talked about in my house. I was told not to get pregnant, but NEVER how to go about preventing pregnancy. And when I did receive some ‘sex education”, it definitely didn’t apply to me. No one met me where I was. No one wanted to speak my language. Then and now youth need Culturally and Linguistically relevant (along with medically accurate, age-appropriate) sexual education. Because all that other stuff…Ain’t nobody got time for that!
Just close your legs that way we don’t have to provide you with comprehensive sexual education, access to birth control and all the other things you need to lead healthy lives!
Telling someone to keep their legs closed is not okay! First of all opening your legs does not cause pregnancy (if that was the case I’d be with child every time a rode a bike, danced, and did jumping jacks.).Secondly, most women don’t get pregnant by themselves unless we are talking about the Immaculate Conception. The notion of “keeping your legs closed” is not only sexist and misogynist but just plain ignorant. And lets think about resources, is birth control accessible? I saw comments on other blogs about the Affordable Care Act and how teens could purchase birth control on their parent’s health insurance because it would be free. Well some insurance companies, have these cool things called EOBs (Explanation of Benefits). They basically tell you all the stuff you just got done at your doctors visit. Until we get that fixed I don’t know how accessible Birth Control under the ACA is for young people. That’s the ish I don’t like!
Society doesn’t owe you anything its all about “choice.” (This is where you laugh hysterically.)
Oh please. This kills me because some people are so scared of the word “choice.” It kills me because people throw around the word choice and “decision making” when we aren’t really handing out the tools for young people to make choices. Yes society has a responsibility to equip young people with these tools, but that does not excuse the fact that young people have individual responsibilities too. We contribute to society (so stop acting like you don’t know). We don’t need shaming ads to tell us that parenting is hard. We don’t need people telling us that we are WIC/EBT/Medicaid/Government Assistance users and that the older generation needs not be responsible for us. Well last I checked Social Security and Medicare are government programs and every McDonalds minimum-wage check goes to fund the older generation.
If you are going to come for young moms, young people, young people of color I just ask one thing….. COME CORRECT or go home.
“The story of women’s struggle for equality belongs to no single feminist nor to any one organization but to the collective efforts of all who care about human rights” Gloria Steinem
Today, International Women’s Day, let us remember women and girls around the world who are not as free as some of us are. Being a foreign national, I can speak on this lack of freedom. Although I was born in to modern times, decades after it was thought a waste to educate the girl child, in my culture, there are still inequalities. Men are still the heads of households, and there are still tasks and behaviors designated to specific sexes.
This year, the theme of IWD is “The Gender Agenda: Gaining Momentum”. It focuses on celebrating the achievements of women thus far, while remaining hopeful about new progress on all fronts. Women have come so far through the years, but there is still much to do. There is still a great gap in gender equality, and there is an assault on our rights. Can you believe that in 2013 there are still arguments about what rights we have to our bodies? Can you believe that congress would pay for an old dude to have sex but won’t pay for women to protect themselves against pregnancy or save their own lives when necessary? Can you believe that in this day an age, women are killed for trying to empower themselves an others? That an Oscar host can stand up in front of thousands of people and make jokes about rape?
This International Women’s Day, take a stand for something you believe in. Donate to an organization that supports women’s rights, attend an event to show your support for women’s rights, highlight an important woman who has done much for the movement and effect change by supporting efforts to help women around the world.
While browsing through my twitter page I came across an ad directed at teen mothers in NYC. While seeing this ad disgusted me; I was a little relieved that I had not seen it person in my city, Brooklyn. Not only is this ad extremely offensive (the Post calls it a “Tad” offensive), it has racist, classist and sexist undertones. The ad I saw featured a beautiful brown girl with big brown eyes and read “Honestly Mom… chances are he won’t stay with you. What happens to me?” It also quoted a statistic that 90% of teen parents do not marry each other. While this statistic can be shocking to most it also seems to continue to push the agenda of marriage and “nuclear” families among young people, something I wish this country would have let go of in the 1976 Reagan “Welfare Queen” era.
After further research, I discovered that this ad was part of a larger campaign created by the NYC Human Resources Administration. For an agency with the word “resources” in its name, it appears that they do not know how to use them very well. Especially considering the fact that the United States is preparing to undergo sequestration and they thought it wise to use government funding to disseminate disturbing, stigmatizing and shameful ads about teen mothers. Also considering the fact they are a “Human Resources” agency, I would think funds would be better allocated to real initiatives to help young mothers, such as creating real job opportunities for young moms and working with other agencies and organizations to provide childcare so that young women could support their families. It is resourceful to create life-size ads that basically say “Mom you suck for having me.”
While NYC has taken steps to improve the lives of young parents, like closing Pregnancy Schools after advocates insisted these institutions were in violation of Title IX, this initiative seems backwards. This is the same city responsible for the Living for the Young Family through Education program which provides free childcare around the city to help teen parents graduate from high school. In addition to these efforts, the NYC Department of Education mandated Comprehensive Sexuality Education in schools in 2011 to decrease the rate of teen pregnancies, HIV and STIs among young people. However, many of the youth that I work with in Brooklyn still report receiving little to no sex education even after the mandate was placed into effect. Having grown up in Brooklyn my entire life and having never received formal sexual education, I know they are telling the truth.
So if you think scare tactics and shameful ads are going to work, think again. In fact it is just making the situation worse. I’m mostly concerned with who the agency talked to before creating these controversial ads. It definitely was not teen parents!! I wonder how agencies feel they can solve a problem without consulting the people on the ground and the young people with the “situated knowledge.” As a millennial of color, research shows that although my peers would like to decrease the rate of teen pregnancies, they also feel that society has a responsibility to provide young parents with the necessary resources and opportunities to lead healthy lives.
Lastly, I think these ads should be taken down, and the funding for this so-called Teenage Pregnancy Prevention Initiative should be redirected to organizations working to provide real comprehensive sexual education, access to contraception, teen parenting programs, affordable childcare and job opportunities for young people. Education, inclusion and empowerment is how we solve real issues not by attaching stigma to young people, especially young women!
SEE COMPLETE IMAGE:
http://stfuprolifers.tumblr.com/image/44301669632
Anti-choice activist Jill Stanek recently published online the name and photo of a woman who passed away following a late abortion at the Maryland clinic of Dr. Leroy Carhart. The name and picture of the woman, I’ll call her Marie, along with information about her job, marriage, and pregnancy were soon all over the internet. Protesters plastered Marie’s picture on signs and marched outside Dr. Carhart’s clinic and held a “vigil” outside the emergency room where she was treated. Internet commentators characterized Marie’s husband, parents, and sister, who traveled with her from out-of-state for the three-day procedure, as everything from bad Catholics to killers. Beyond being immoral, unethical and unbelievably cruel, making the family’s tragedy public without their consent was likely illegal.-See more at: http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/02/28/unethical-cruel-and-likely-illegal-anti-choicers-make-familys-tragedy-public-without-their-consent/#sthash.qKSJmEww.dpuf
The Arkansas Legislature has approved the earliest abortion ban in the nation.
And it’s now up to Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe to decide what to do next. If he vetoes the bill, his veto could be overridden by a simple majority in the Republican Legislature as it was earlier Thursday on a similar 20-week abortion ban bill.
The Arkansas Senate gave final approval Thursday morning to the Human Heartbeat Protection Act, which would ban abortions at 12 weeks into pregnancy if a heartbeat is detected, with exceptions for cases of rape or incest, to save the life of the mother or for a lethal fetal condition. The bill now goes directly to Beebe.
Through “fetal pain” laws, other states have begun approving abortion bans at around 20 weeks into pregnancy — such a ban became law in Arkansas with the veto override early Thursday — but this bill would go further, turning Arkansas into the only state to ban abortions that early in a pregnancy.
Abortion rights groups immediately urged Beebe to reject the bill. “This extreme legislation would insert politics into women’s personal medical decisions, and we urge Gov. Beebe to veto it immediately,” Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, said in a statement.
“Lawmakers in Arkansas are placing women’s lives on the line by passing the most severe ban on access to safe, legal medical care this country has seen in recent years,” said Talcott Camp, deputy director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project.
In vetoing the 20-week ban on Tuesday, Beebe said the bill violated Supreme Court precedent that establishes states cannot limit abortions before viability. That was one of 10 “fetal pain” laws that have been enacted in 10 states, based on the assertion that the fetus can experience pain after 20 weeks. Cases have been filed against such laws in Arizona and Georgia.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/arkansas-legislature-passes-12-week-abortion-ban-88245.html
I have had an abortion. Most people who know me know that. I’m very open about it and fervently pro-choice. I had to start my piece like this, so you’ll understand where I’m coming from. I’m not writing this post out of malice, but for educational purposes. I haven’t been able to find any other pieces on this subject, so maybe I’m wrong. If I am I would appreciate any readers to provide me with some cold hard medical facts. Okay?
Before my abortion I had a transvaginal ultrasound. This was in mid-2011, so before TVUs got famous. When I saw the device I was wary and my reaction was something along the lines of “woah what’s that? Do I have to have that because I don’t want it.” The woman said yes it was necessary for the procedure and she’s sorry. She didn’t say it was required by law or whatever, but that it was necessary. She didn’t show me the ultrasound or talk about it or even offer to. The whole thing was over in about two minutes. I had a surgical abortion at nine weeks and I was assured this was needed for my procedure.
Then eventually the TVU law proposals starting arriving and I was incredibly confused and hurt. Had something wrong been done to me? By that clinic? That clinic that saved my future? That clinic I was eternally grateful to? That clinic that advertises “comprehensive reproductive services in a supportive, nonjudgmental, knowledge-based environment?” That clinic that boasts that it has “the most experienced clinic staff in the region?” That clinic which is part of the National Abortion Federation?
All of these activists were and still are posting images of ultrasound wands with captions like “up mine? Up yours?” and talking about TVUs being a violation and comparing them to rape. This was/is really upsetting to me. I felt weirdly betrayed by my savior clinic. So I called them. I just briefly asked why they do TVUs and the clinic worker said because it was needed for the procedure. I felt pretty satisfied with that answer.
Of course I think this mandatory TVU legislation is terrible and wrong. It’s unethical for legislators with no medical expertise to be putting this into law. Since when are bills about medical procedure? Those are two entirely different fields. Where are the laws going into detail about thermometer or blood drawing procedure? Why is abortion any different? Why would a bill by those with no medical degree be dictating what practitioners do? Also, are states competing for the most ridiculous TVU bill? Now apparently there are bills requiring two TVUs.
Honestly I have not take part in this debate because it made me uncomfortable. The anti-choice side was clearly wrong, but for the first time I also felt the pro-choice side was wrong. They weren’t being outraged about the right things. They weren’t being outraged about why specifically this legislation was terrible instead they were just proclaiming TVUs were terrible. I don’t know why I’m talking in past tense. This is still going on. So, pro-choice activists are proclaiming that what is in some clinics vital to abortion is a violation and basically a desecration of human rights. They’re starting to sound like the anti-choicers to me. I mean what if legislators start listening? What if they start believing TVUs are a violation and try to ban them? What does that mean for the clinics that use them? Will abortion access become more difficult and expensive? Are these pro-choicers hurting the movement?
I’m working on expanding my knowledge. Nowhere on prochoice.org does it say TVUs are “medically unnecessary” like so many pro-choicers are claiming. This week I asked my abortion clinic for more in depth reasoning into their usage of TVUs. This was their response:
“There is no mandated law in TN that requires a vaginal ultrasound although they are trying to pass a law currently to require an ultrasound 24 – 72 hours before an abortion with the sound of a heart beat, verbal description of the u/s picture and a copy of the picture given to the patient. Here at [name removed] we routinely perform a vaginal ultrasound for patients who may be under 12 weeks and an abdominal ultrasound for patient who may be over 12 weeks. Because a patient can have missed a period and not be pregnant or can have a period and be pregnant, (it is possible to have periods all the way up until delivery) until we do an ultrasound we do not know for sure her gestational age. An accurate gestational age supports providing the best possible care for our patients. We do not however show her a picture, hear a heartbeat (which we don’t have the equipment for) or describe the u/s to the patient unless she requests it.”
Basically I’m demanding more education on this issue for everyone. Because honestly I’m offended that my supposed allies are telling me I was violated. It almost feels like they’re belittling rape. Why is it so difficult to find resources on this? Why can’t I find other articles with this viewpoint? Is it the abortion stigma? Are women not talking about it because they don’t feel comfortable talking about their abortion? Are abortion providers not coming forward so that they don’t disclose their profession and put themselves at risk? I’m concerned and I demand more information.
This is a post by a fellow blogger called BrashBlackNonBeliever. These are her words and feelings about how “pro-life” advocates use PoC, specifically Black women and children, to further their agenda. Some of it will be edited for language censorship.
“I am beyond f****** SICK of these so-called “pro-life” advocates using Black women and children to further their agenda.
Those conservative assholes don’t give a F*** about us when we’re walking this earth, but I’m supposed to believe they give a f*** about Black babies? I’m supposed to believe these motherfuckers actually care about pregnant Black women?!
They don’t give a f*** about Black families in the hood, struggling to live.
They don’t give a f*** about the single Black mothers doing everything they can for their kids.
They really don’t give a f*** about the Black parents on welfare.
No, to them, we’re nothing but welfare queens and wh**** who never should have spread their legs.
Our children are nothing but drug dealers, thugs, or future drug addicts and prostitutes who need to be put down like dogs.
That is, until one of us gets pregnant and they need a new face for their “pro-life” campaign.
Then our babies are “precious children.”
Then they pretend to be worried about the future of the Black race.
Only then do we need to protect ourselves against “extinction” by never having abortions.
Only then do they care oh so much about racism and they seek to warn us about how racist Planned Parenthood and abortions are.
Well I, for one, am completely fed up with their BS. I can see right through them. They don’t give a f*** about Black people and they never have.
Stop using Black bodies as props and pawns.”
http://stfuprolife.tumblr.com/post/43324196733/brashblacknonbeliever-i-am-beyond-fucking-sick
“When I introduce the concept of reproductive justice to new audiences, at lectures or workshops, I always frame it in the same way. I use a really simple exercise, where I draw a stick figure on a piece of butcher paper, or an easel, or a chalkboard. Then I ask the question: “What things in this person’s life will impact their ability to create the family they want to create?” Usually it takes a few minutes for the audience to get going, but within five or ten minutes the result is a stick figure with many, many issues written in bubbles around them. Things like religion, money, environment, language, race, gender, sexuality, laws, incarceration end up surrounding the person.
This activity is a pretty decent illustration of my definition of reproductive justice—it’s working to build a world where everyone has what they need to create the family they want to create. And that work requires incorporating and taking into account all of those items written in bubbles on the diagram, as well as many we probably leave out. Almost always this exercise results in “ah ha” moments, and it’s had a striking universality—from using it with college students to using it in Latina immigrant communities on the border. Reproductive justice is an easier concept to explain in ten minutes than in a two-word soundbite, like pro-choice, but that additional context also allows for so many more of the issues and challenges or our every day lives to be made visible and explicitly included in our work.”
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/02/08/communicating-complexity-reproductive-justice/
“I suspect it’s difficult for men to imagine a world in which their bodies have long been inextricably linked to their value as an individual, and that no matter how encouraging your parents were or how many positive female role models you had or how self-confident you feel, there is an ever-present pressure that creeps in from all sides, whispering in your ear that you are your body and your body defines you. A world where, from the time of pubescence on, you can feel the constant and palpable weight of the male gaze, and not just from your male peers but from teachers and sports coaches and the fathers of the children you baby-sit, people you’re supposed to respect and trust and look up to, and that first realization that you are being looked at in that way is the beginning of a self-consciousness that you will be unable to shake for the rest of your life. Even if they are never verbalized, the rules of bodily conduct for females become clear early on: when school administrators reprimand you for the inch of midriff that shows when you lift your hands straight in the air or youth group leaders tell you that the sight of your unintentional cleavage is what causes godly young men to fall, you learn that your body is dangerous and shameful and that it’s your responsibility to cloister it in a way that is acceptable to everyone else. You learn that your body is a topic of public debate that everyone is entitled to weigh in on, from a male classmate telling you that those jeans make your ass look huge to the male-dominated United States Congress dictating the parameters that rape must fall within to be considered legitimate. To be a woman, and to live life in a woman’s body, is to be held to a set of comically paradoxical standards that make you constantly second-guess yourself and jump through a million hoops in pursuit of an impossible perfection.”
Momma’s Hip Hop Kitchen To Host Event Encouraging Dialogue Around Educational Inequality
Who: Momma’s Hip Hop Kitchen is an annual event designed to showcase female artists and use hip-hop to raise awareness around social issues.
What: This year’s event, titled ‘No Limits…Knowledge is Power!’ features female educators, students, activists, DJs, emcees, b-girls, poets, visual artists and dancers who will convene to advocate for comprehensive sexual education curriculum in all school districts, smaller class sizes and educational opportunities for all children.
When: Saturday, March 2nd, 2013, from 2pm-5pm ET
Where: Hostos Community College Main Theater
450 Grand Concourse at 149th Street
Bronx, NY
Media RSVP and Interview Requests: Kathleen Adams, mhhk@mhhk.org
For more information visit:
About MHHK:
Momma’s Hip Hop Kitchen (MHHK) is a multifaceted hip hop event designed to showcase women artists, especially women of color. MHHK serves as a social justice community-organizing platform that educates and empowers women of color on issues that impact their lives, including HIV/AIDS and reproductive justice. Our mission is to create a dynamic interactive exchange and safe space for all women of color to express themselves through art.
###
(See link: http://stfuprolife.tumblr.com/post/42021609348/all-states-except-oregon-now-limit-abortion-access)
The above graph lists all the states and their abortion restrictions. Although, Roe v. Wade gives people the right to abortion, Planned Parenthood v. Casey gave states the right to limit access to abortion without posing an “undue burden.” Even though the World Health Organization has already declared that a restriction or limitation of safe, legal, and accessible abortion leads to a decrease in health for people, specifically women (although we all have the understanding that it’s not just women who are affected by this).
Some states have less than a handful of clinics that can even provide these services and some states simply have unreasonable restrictions that prevent people from getting the healthcare they need. This forces people to travel, sometimes out of their means, to get an abortion. Others seek more dangerous options. Until this changes, there are some things that are helping people right now.
There is a particular page that I have been supporting on my own site (ST*U, Pro-Life) called the Abortion Assistance Blog. This is how it describes itself:
A collection of abortion funds, individuals willing to provide transportation and/or lodging before and after your appointment, and other resources.
This blog is intended to be a resource for people of all genders, races, sexualities, and abilities. If you are offering help, but not willing to help someone based on one of those categories, please say so. Everyone deserves to be safe and supported.
This blog has several links, providing help and information. It lets readers know how they can help or where they can find help. Many people go on the blog leaving contact information or simply letting others know that they could provide transportation, lodging, or monetary support. I recommend to everyone to check it out and share.
It’s just not enough to just say that we support reproductive/sexual health care and rights anymore. It never has been.
One Billion Rising
Valentine’s Time’s Day has always been a weird holiday for me for lack of a better word. This Valentine’s Day, February 14, 2013 I decided to do something different, something I will never forget – I attended One Billion Rising. The event was put on by Girls For Gender Equity (GGE) Youth organizers, a Brooklyn-based intergenerational grassroots organization dedicated to promoting the physical, psychological, social and economic well-being of girls, women and their communities. GGE partnered with the Brooklyn YWCA and Vibe Theater Experience, a performing arts organization that empowers teen girls through the creation and production of original performances.
Many others and I were invited to Strike, Dance and Rise with millions of women across the globe to demand an end to gender-based violence. I had no idea what that meant or how that would look when I RSVPed for the event. After leaving the event, I realized that the element of what we were doing could not be imagined but instead must be lived.
What I wasn’t planning to see was the large variety in ages present in the room. The youngest of us RISING, STRIKING and DANCING was seven years old. The room was filled with middle schoolers, high school youth organizers from GGE and the Sadie Nash Leadership Institute, adult organizers, and older women who were residents of YWCA.
SIS Practicing for One Billion Rising Dance at the Alumnae Reunion
After a game of GGE’s rendition of BINGO we were invited to learn the One Billion Rising Breaking the Chains Dance. Always taking the opportunity to get some aerobic exercise I decided to join in. After the umteenth step I decided it was better for me to take a seat and watch. I watched teenagers teaching both children and older women this dance. When someone missed a step complete strangers in the audience were there cheering them on. I even observed two teen women who had never met each before that day helping each other learn the steps. I highlight this because as an organizer who works with bullying and horizontal hostility, I can’t express the significant value of seeing two young women join hands to break the chains that seek to restrain them from achieving their potential to succeed in this world.
After dancing we were invited to share words on why we RISE today. Women and men of all ages took the floor to speak on why they were present. A young woman from Vibe Theater Experience spoke about wishing she could be there for a friend who had bruises “that were so strategically placed” in seventh grade. She expressed that she listened to everything her friend was saying, but not was she wasn’t saying. A resident of YWCA rose for her friend that died at the hand of her abuser in 1973. She made it a point to tell us “that sometimes we have make it our business.” Participants rose for their sisters, their mothers, their classmates and their friends. One of the youngest to rise was in middle school. She rose to commemorate the third anniversary of her sister who was killed by her boyfriend. Another middle schooler talked about being bullied in school and how that affected her. She left us with an important message about finding our space and how not only do we have to be there for each other but for also for ourselves. She said, “I have my room, and there I’m not nerd, I’m not geek, I’m just my beautiful self.” As a person who is at least twelve years older than her, those words still resonate with me and touched the 10-year old in me growing up in Bed-Stuy Brooklyn. Exactly one day after the Reauthorization of Violence Against Women Act was passed in the Senate, it is extremely clear that violence against women is very well alive and present right here in Brooklyn, NY. Like Natalie Gyte, I was skeptical about coming together for yet another Eve Ensler movement to “dance” away violence. Gyte says that the movement does not acknowledge the “root causes” of violence like patriarchy and the control and subjugation of women’s bodies. I argue that my experience with One Billion Rising did in fact address a major issue that leads to the maintenance and perpetuation of gender-based violence –Silence!
This event was a space where no one’s experiences were dismissed or discounted. I do not know a space where 10-year olds can stand in front of complete strangers and voice their reasons for rising against violence. I don’t know of many spaces where women of different colors, creeds and ages feel that their experiences are validated, seen as authentic and an integral part of what we need to move forward. A space where our elders murmur in agreement with a teenager in a pair of Jordan XIII’s when she talks about racing up a flight of stairs in her junior high school prom dress and ringing all the doorbells in attempt to save a friend involved in sexual exploitation and domestic trafficking. So no this was not a space where women just “danced”! It was a space were we worked collaboratively, shared impromptu teachable moments, cried, laughed, took up space and demanded that our voices be heard. It was the space, where some of us did not have to speak because of our sisters shared our stories, although we had never met before. We were somehow singing the same song, in our own voices, each taking a different verse but always in harmony. My experience in breaking the chains was a divine moment in breaking the silence that Audre Lorde says will not protect [us]! It was the energy in that room that caused us to rise in voice, in song, in movement (a first language for some), in love, in vision and in solidarity.
Nearing the end of the event I convinced our birthday girl, a beautiful bright-eyed seven-year old to cupid-shuffle with me. It was while I held her hand to kick, kick when I realized why I do this work. Brushing a tear away from my face and walking it out, I realized that she is why I go hard in the paint everyday so that girls like her can live in communities free from violence. Where young black girls voices and experiences are validated. Where she has complete control over her body and the right to lead a self-determined healthy life!
“It is our Duty to fight….It is our duty to win. We must love… and support each other. We have nothing to lose but our chains.”
- Assata Shakur
Where we share all of our emotions. About all of the states.
Just say NO to… Abortion?!
It’s basically the mantra of anti-choice lawmakers across the country and one that they’re now espousing inside the classroom. Currently there are two similar bills, one in Montana (HB 239) and one in Texas (HB 1057), that prohibits a school district from allowing any abortion services provider to teach sex ed in schools. And of course, by abortion providers, they really mean Planned Parenthoods.
The bill in Texas was just introduced last week, and includes a ban on “any entity or individual that performs abortions or an affiliate of an entity or individual that performs abortions” from providing human sexuality or family planning instruction. Talk about a case of the scarlet letter (“A” for abortion, in this case). The motive behind this piece of legislation is clearly to ensure any organization that is either a Planned Parenthood or any individual and/or entity that affiliates with Planned Parenthood is not welcome in Texas classrooms. It even reinforces stigma against abortion providers themselves, by actually banning individuals that perform abortions inside the classroom. This lawmaker (and so many others) simply does not want a more comprehensive conversation about sex education, including contraceptives, even when the Lone Star State has the fourth highest teen birth rate in the country. The bill would also put an “opt-in” requirement for sex ed, meaning all students must obtain a written consent form from a parent or guardian to even be able to sit in the classroom.
Montana is in the same boat, except it’s just further along in the process. On Wednesday, February 6, the House passed a bill (HB 239) that would, like Texas, require parental permission before students can attend sex education classes (“opt-in”) and also ban any “person, entity… affiliate or agent” that is a provider of abortion services to offer, sponsor, or furnish any course material on sex ed. The definitions are broad enough to, again, be harmful to local Planned Parenthoods or any organization that affiliates with the group, that has a stake in sex ed curriculum.
And to round out the “don’t you dare affiliate with anyone who dare say the A-word” news in the states, we turn our head to North Dakota, where two researchers who were granted federal funds to evaluate a local sex education program had their funds frozen from the University’s president (North Dakota State University) because they had signed an agreement to work with Planned Parenthood. While he justified his actions because of a (vague and contested) 1979 state law that prohibits any federal funds being used by entities that provide or refer abortions, the real reasons seems to be political pressure more than anything. Once anti-Planned Parenthood legislators caught wind of the grant and made comments about cutting the University’s funding if it dared move forward with accepting the grant, NDSU president peculiarly decided to freeze the funds (and without conferring with the researchers OR anyone from faculty leadership), making the announcement on a local conservative talk radio show.
Texas, Montana, North Dakota FAIL.
Now here are some other states and my emotions about them.
North Dakota vs. South Dakota = STALEMATE
Apparently, the Dakotas have gotten together and decided they want to make it as hard as possible for women to have any type of access to abortion. North Dakota’s Senate just passed a Personhood Constitutional Amendment initiative on Thursday that would amend the state’s constitution to give legal rights and protections to human embryos. YUP, you read that right, the state’s CONSTITUTION. If it passes the house, North Dakota voters will decide on it in the 2014 elections. And then South Dakota decides to hop back on the anti-abortion bandwagon and introduced a bill that would redefine the 72-hour waiting period as to not include weekends or holidays, which could drastically eliminate access to safe abortion for women – especially since there is only one comprehensive women’s clinic that provides abortions in the entire state. So yeah… neither state wins this round this time around. Sorry, Dakotas. Better luck next time.
And the winner is…
…Colorado!
The state’s House Health, Insurance, and Environment committee passed a comprehensive sex ed bill last week (HB 1081) that would define sex education in the state as having to be age appropriate, culturally sensitive, evidence-based, and include positive youth development. It also creates a grant program and a cash fund to ensure the implementation of comprehensive sex ed programs throughout the state. Legislatively, it’s only part-way there (and there are Senate challenges ahead), BUT we should all give a round of applause for Colorado ‘cause they are on their way.
But the real winners are the activists who told their representatives why comprehensive sex education is important. Big high-fives go out to Colorado Youth Create’s youth activists, Scarlett and Adrian, who were the only high school students testifying during the hearing. Listen to their awesomeness HERE!
Do you have any rants or raves about things going on in YOUR state? Or maybe you live in one of the above states? Please share all of the feelings in the comments section below!
Curated by Diana Thu-Thao Rhodes, State Strategies Manager, Advocates for Youth
Hey ladies! Valentine’s Day is upon us, the day when those of us who choose to celebrate get beautified for our Valentines.
But are the products you’re using to express your beauty harming you in the long run? Many of the products we use on our face, hair, and even in the bedroom may contain toxic chemicals that can accumulate in our bodies and cause adverse health effects.
We all know that long, luxurious locks are coveted by women all over the world, but at what cost? Hair straighteners, such as relaxers and Brazilian keratin treatments, contain toxic chemicals such as formaldehyde. Yes, the embalming agent is used to straighten your hair. Ever wonder what that funny smell was and why it lingers even after you wash?
I’ve always despised the smell but I just wrote it off as the price of beauty (because beauty is pain, right? But it shouldn’t have to be dangerous!). Formaldehyde is still in your hair when you get under the dryer and also when the hair stylist runs the flat iron through it. All that heat releases the formaldehyde gas into the air to be inhaled, which can cause allergic reactions and in some instances, asthma.
But that’s not all. Top makeup brands and fragrances, like perfume and cologne, have heavy metals and hidden chemicals in them which have been associated with cancer and reproductive health issues. Many women don’t leave the house without their makeup and their “smell good” as I like to call it, myself being one of them.
The scary part is that these chemicals are not required to be listed in the ingredients. The same companies that are making these products are the ones that regulate them. There are no definitions for what “herbal” or “organic” means on our cosmetics. Some products claiming to be herbal contain components of crude oil. The FDA is not authorized to test these chemicals and the government is often not aware of the chemicals being used.
So how do we protect ourselves?
There are various websites that allow you to search for the cosmetics you use every day and rate their safety. One way that I cut down on my chemical intake is by “stretching” my perms. I will go up to twelve weeks without a perm. This means I only get about four perms a year. I do this by being sure to moisturize my hair every night and choosing hair styles that call for a lot of volume or curl.
Another way is that I only wash or “co-wash” my hair every week or so. For Black women, our hair does not produce an overload of oils to where it is necessary to wash every day. When we do, it is actually stripping our hair’s precious oils and adding toxic chemicals instead.
If you have a date in the bedroom this Valentine’s Day, there are many personal lubricants that are safe for use. However, be weary of scented and warming lubricants. They often contain chemicals that negatively affect your immune and reproductive systems.
On this Valentine’s Day, be mindful of what you’re doing to your body. In order to look your best you have to feel your best and the best way to do that is to keep it toxin free.
If you’re interested in learning more and taking action on this issue, check out the Toxic Zombie education and activism toolkit. And make sure to email my co-worker, Sara Alcid at salcid@rhtp.org if you’d like to get more involved in the campaign!
http://www.fundabortionnow.org/explore/by_state
(oldie but goody)
Roe v. Wade guaranteed abortion as a legal right across the country. A separate decision two decades later, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, guaranteed states’ rights to limit access to abortion, so long as it did not pose an “undue burden” on the woman.
States have, over the past four decades, made no short use of that latter right. Only one state, Oregon, has not layered additional restrictions on top of the Roe decision. At the other end of the spectrum is Oklahoma: With 22 abortion restrictions, it has more than any other state. The chart below, courtesy of Remapping the Debate, has the full list. You can also gohere for an interactive version of the graphic, which will let you look at what type of restrictions each state has set.
SOURCE: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/31/all-states-except-oregon-now-limit-abortion-access/#
Text message conversation:
Friend: Becca!
Me: Haaaaaaaay!
Friend: What up!
Me: Chillin. You?
Friend: I gotta talk to you but I’ll text you in a bit….
oh man. this might be big.
Friend: Yo!
Me: What’s up ma?
Friend: Nothing what up?
Me: How was school?
Friend: Good!
Me: Thassssssswhatsup!
Friend: Fo sho! So Umm I gotta talk to ya…
breathe, Rebecca, breathe.
Me: What’s up?
Friend: So umm I kinda need something… From you..
Me: What?
Friend: Lol… Take a guess.. “be protected”
Me: For you?
no, Rebecca, for her cat. of course it’s for her. get it together!
Friend: Mhm.. Lol
Me: Is this something you want?
Friend: Not that I want, I need it. “stay protected” lol you have them…
Me: Yes I know, but have you and _____ talked about this? And have you had time to think about what you want?
Friend: Yes
Me: Okay, I had to ask. I trust you and I’m glad you asked me. Is there a certain time you need it by?
Friend: I don’t need it soon. Whenever you can (:
Me: Okay, well I want to make sure you have them for protection when and if you need them. I assume you haven’t talked to your mom about this?
why, Rebecca? why are you making assumptions? have you learned nothing from your social work classes??
Friend: We’ve had the “talk.”
Me: Ight lil’ ma. If you have any questions just ask
Friend: Ight I will (:
aww.
This was a conversation between a friend and I from a couple of weeks ago. If you can’t tell by the coy wording, we are talking about condoms and sex. Looking back on the conversation I wish I would have just said condoms and sex instead of “it.” What can I say? I was caught off guard. I have known this friend of mine all her life. She is a special person to me, and I consider her to be a little sister, especially since I don’t have any younger siblings. I have always been very open and honest with her, hoping that she would return the favor by trusting me, and I’m glad she did.
Back when I first began my activism with sex education and sexual health, I asked my middle/high school aged cousins and friends about the type of sex ed they were receiving in school. Some were a little embarrassed and tried to laugh my questions off, while others were straight forward and told me that they don’t remember learning anything, but that so and so was pregnant and had to leave school for a bit. No matter which way the conversation went, I always ended it with something like this, “I just want you to know that I will always be here for you, if you ever need anything. I’m in college, and I remember my years in high school; I know sex happens. I can’t tell you how to live your life, but I can tell you this, if you choose to have sex you should respect yourself and your partner by using protection.” I didn’t want to come off as preachy by telling them what to do, but I wanted to get a message across.
When I started having sex I had no formal education and had to research everything online. You can imagine how amazing that process went. I feel that I knew more than some of my peers because I knew that you could get pregnant “even if he pulls out,” and that you can’t get pregnant by having oral sex. However, I didn’t know that oral/anal sex are still sex, so condoms should still be used.
I have always had a great relationship with my parents, but in high school I was scared to talk to them about sex. Growing up in a devout Catholic household might have that effect. I wasn’t scared of them, but I didn’t want them to judge me or get angry. I didn’t know how to approach them. Now, things are much different. My parents are very much aware of the work that I do, and they respect me for it. While there is one particular issue we don’t see eye to eye on (I’m pro-choice, they are pro-life), we still respect each other and love each other. I often joke with my mom and tell her we will probably run into each other at a rally but will be on opposing sides. She rolls her eyes and responds with something like, “estas loca,” and I tell her to pray extra hard for me.
I love my parents, family, and friends. I’m glad that my relationships are always strengthening and growing thanks to the big questions and conversations that allow for both parties to gain trust. These conversations are important, not only for the obvious reasons like preventing pregnancy, STI’s, or HIV, but also to have healthy relationships with the people you love or care about.
by Hannah McClure Baron
In reproductive justice and abortion advocacy I found myself supported and excited talking to other activists, women who have had abortions, and like-minded friends. We passionately discussed the need for legal, affordable, and accessible abortions and our arguments were well-researched and coordinated. Together, in an encouraging and personal as opposed to confrontational and political climate, we could comfortably and confidently discuss abortion activism because we shared the same basic goals and values of legality, affordability, and accessibility. Yet, all too often, while I was seeking signatures for petitions, in conversation with people on the fence about abortion, or talking with those who challenged the need for making abortions affordable and accessible, I would begin to stutter and become nervous, or ineffective in attempting to articulate my arguments and respond to theirs. I took my comfort within the activist community for granted and I trembled in situations where my activism was really needed.
A close friend of mine pointed out that the language most commonly used in the public abortion debate, Pro-choice vs. Pro-life, is problematic and can be self-defeating for abortion advocates. Walking together she asked me, “Linguistically, what is the logical opposition to pro-life?… Pro-death?” Alternatively, would the logical antithesis of pro-choice be pro-no choice… pro-restriction? The alternative position to Pro-life seemed to have a way scarier and negatively charged image than any alternative to Pro-choice. I recognized that I needed to reconceptualize the abortion debate and understand what abortion advocacy is outside of the Pro-choice – Pro-life reigning framework in order to fully understand my own commitment to abortion activism and be an effective advocate for legal, safe, affordable, and accessible abortions.
The rhetoric of the conventional abortion debate is misleading. Loyal to our hyper-polarized political arena, advocating for abortion within the dichotomous Pro-choice – Pro-life framework does not indicate clearly enough what abortion is really about: a woman’s right to personal decision-making, self-determination and her right to health. Abortion supporters definitely do not identify with the logical linguistic opposition to pro-life, and the label pro-choice understates the importance in this political and moral debate that it is a woman’s decision to become a parent or not in her decision to have an abortion. The polarized language of the abortion debate cultivates a Pro-life political position that uses sensationalism to its advantage and a Pro-choice position that too often conceals the primacy in abortion advocacy of making access to and affordability of abortion independent from political intervention: the need to overturn current laws that restrict federal dollars from making abortion affordable (the Hyde Amendment). Without political interference, we want to strengthen and improve all women’s health and close the gaps of health inequalities by making abortion affordable and accessible in professional safe and sanitary settings. Additionally, in the Pro-choice-Pro-life framework, the word choice is trite and abortion is not a trivial choice; using the word decision as opposed to choice emphasizes how a woman is being responsible in deciding the best plan for her health and future in deciding whether or not to end her pregnancy or become a parent. Recognizing the incongruity of the Pro-Choice label with the movement’s vision, Planned Parenthood has just recently dropped the Pro-Choice label in advocacy for the right to an abortion, and instead has shifted the focus of the movement on the personal circumstances of an individual woman and her decision-making. Abortion is about responsible decision-making and allowing a woman to make the personal decision for her own health and for the health of her family, and contingently the health of our society.
Free from the Pro-choice – Pro-life bind, I confidently respond to opposition to abortion (i.e. “abortion is murder)” by emphasizing that having an abortion reflects an individual woman’s responsible decision (not merely an everyday choice) to become a parent or not, and although each person can act differently in his or her own personal life, we should not put unjust limitations on a woman’s right to determine her own family and be healthy. Furthermore, when confronted with the argument “Why should I have to pay for someone else’s mistake?” I stress that abortion access and affordability is integral to women’s health and needs to be included under the umbrella of all maternity care coverage. A woman’s decision to end her pregnancy in the best interest of her health and her family should not be restricted by financial constraints and unfair differences in insurance coverage. One in three of us has an abortion in our lifetime. We cannot continue to uphold a debate with rhetoric that gives power to political interference in a woman’s decision to have an abortion. We need to shape the discussion of a woman’s right to make informed decisions with the support of legal, safe, affordable, and accessible abortion coverage and care.
Click on the image to play! Test your knowledge!
Remember in 2011, when Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) introduced the Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2011 (aka. PRENDA) to ban abortions on the basis of race and sex selection? Remember when Rep. Franks attempted to use two iconic freedom fighters and language from the Civil Rights Movement to mask this bill as a step towards equality? Remember in 2012 when Republicans made a last-minute change in the bill, dropping the “race selection” language, and voted on PRENDA, positioning it as an anti-discrimination bill? In reality, we all knew it was a thinly veiled attempt to further place restrictions on abortion, specifically aimed at women of color and specifically, targeting Asian-American women across the country. But mainly, do you remember in May, 2012, when activists across the country like YOU contacted their Representatives about this outrageous piece of legislation, and the House killed the bill, 246-168?
I remember it too. And while only four states – PA, IL, AZ, OK – currently have sex-selective abortion bans in state law (Arizona’s 2011 law is the only one to include a “race-selection” restriction), we are seeing other states jump on this bandwagon.
PRENDA may be dead in Congress, but continues to rear its ugly head elsewhere. In Virginia, Representative Robert Marshall (R) introduced HB 1316, a bill that, if passed, would criminalize doctors who perform an abortion that is being sought on account of the sex of the unborn child.
Let’s break this down. AGAIN.
Sex-selection is widespread in certain countries, especially those in East and South Asia. It’s a practice that occurs due to cultural and entrenched gender bias, and unequal value placed on men and women. Abortion opponents have framed sex-selective abortion bans as a way to ensure this practice does not occur in the United States (there’s inconclusive evidence that it actually does), while claiming to save the lives of thousands of little girls. On the surface, this bill purports to further gender equity, but what it really is doing is chipping away at abortion rights. Further, it places an unnecessary and discriminatory burden on women of color, especially Asian-American women, who find themselves needing to access reproductive health care.
Every woman’s choice to have an abortion is a private matter, not a decision the government (state or federal) should interfere with. Banning abortion is NOT the way to end sex selection – it’s simply a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a disingenuous strategy to limit women’s access to abortion. Period.
Currently, HB 1316 is sitting in the Committee for Courts of Justice, and will be heard TODAY. If you live in Virginia, I urge you to take action and contact legislators on the committee to ensure this bill’s lifespan ends soon.
This election, I was proud to work with many young people to engage our communities and campuses in the issues that impact us. One issue that engaged many young women in Ohio this election was access to healthcare, especially pregnancy related services, such as pre and post-natal care, maternity care, and abortion care. 65% of 18-24 year olds believe abortion should be legal all or most of the time, which is higher than any other age group. I am lucky to have employer-funded health insurance that allows me to access a full range of preventive services, including all pregnancy related services.
Sadly, not all women – even women with insurance – have access to these services. Current law unfairly limits insurance coverage for abortion for women with government-funded insurance. This is because federal dollars are withheld from covering a woman’s abortion except in limited circumstance.
It seems unfair to withhold insurance coverage or try to influence a woman’s decisions about whether to end a pregnancy just because of the type of insurance she has. These are decisions best made by a woman, her family, faith and doctor, not politicians.
These laws also put the lives of women at risk. When a woman is pregnant, it is important that she has access to safe medical care. Providing insurance coverage insures she will be able to see a licensed, quality health care provider.
Even if we don’t personally agree with abortion, it is unfair to restrict insurance coverage, or try to influence a woman’s decision about whether to end a pregnancy, just because she has government-funded health insurance.
I care about women in Ohio, which is why I supported Barack Obama and Sherrod Brown. Both pledged that they would work to ensure all women have access to essential reproductive health care services.
Women and youth voters played a huge impact in Obama’s win this year. Not only did young people, 18-24, turn out for the president in 2008, they continued to turn out for him as they aged, now in the 25-29 year age bracket. This demonstrates how important issues such as insurance coverage for abortion are to this generation.
Now my generational must hold Obama accountable to his commitments. That includes urging President Obama to submit a budget to Congress without unfair restrictions on coverage for abortion care. Obama Administration, take note that Ohio women will be watching to see if you live up to your commitments to women’s healthcare.
Political Info and Laws in Brief
Executives
- Governor Rick Snyder (R) is anti-choice.
Legislature
- The Michigan House is anti-choice.
- The Michigan Senate is anti-choice.
ANTI-CHOICE LAWS
Abortion Bans
Michigan bans a safe abortion procedure and has unconstitutional and unenforceable criminal bans on abortion.
Details »Biased Counseling & Mandatory Delay
Michigan has a partially unconstitutional and unenforceable law that subjects women seeking abortion services to biased-counseling requirements and mandatory delays.
Details »Counseling Ban/Gag Rule
Michigan prohibits certain state employees and organizations receiving state funds from counseling or referring women for abortion services.
Details »Refusal to Provide Medical Services
Michigan allows certain individuals or entities to refuse to provide women specific reproductive-health services, information, or referrals.
Details »Restrictions on Low-Income Women’s Access to Abortion
Michigan restricts low-income women’s access to abortion.
Details »Restrictions on Young Women’s Access to Abortion
Michigan law restricts young women’s access to abortion services by mandating parental consent.
Details »Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP)
Michigan subjects abortion providers to burdensome restrictions not applied to other medical professionals.
Details »PRO-CHOICE LAWS
Contraceptive Equity
Michigan law requires health-insurance plans that cover prescription medication to provide the same coverage for contraception.
Details »Low-Income Women’s Access to Family Planning
Michigan provides certain low-income women increased coverage for Medicaid-funded family-planning services.
Details »Protection Against Clinic Violence
Michigan law protects women seeking reproductive-health care and medical personnel from blockades and violence.
Details »
OTHER RELEVANT LAWS
Post-Viability Abortion Restriction
Michigan restricts post-viability abortion.
Details »83% of Michigan counties have no abortion provider.
*an issue that does not affect *just* women.
Source: NARAL
The Gulabi gang is a group of women vigilantes active across North India. It is named after the pink saris worn by its members. The group was founded as a response to widespread domestic abuse and other violence against women. Gulabis visit abusive husbands and beat them with bamboo sticks. In 2008, they stormed an electricity office and forced officials to restore the power they had cut to extract bribes. The Gulabis have also stopped child marriages and protested dowry and female illiteracy.
When I attended the One Voice Summit in Washington D. C. on November 16-19, 2012, I didn’t know how they were going to fill one hour, much less three days with information about how the environment and reproductive health were related.
After attending the conference, I learned how the world is acutely affected by our reproductive choices through population control, sustainability, and resource consumption and how we are affected by the environment we live in. The reproductive system is one of the most easily affected by its environment. In one instance, an umbilical cord was found to contain approximately 287 industrial chemicals. We’re being exposed to more chemicals at an earlier point in our lives and it’s affecting how we reproduce. Phthalates, BPA, and PAH are in the air we breathe and the everyday items we use. These chemicals have been linked to premature births, endometriosis, genital abnormalities in boys, sperm damage, reduced sperm count, and hormone disruption, to name a few.
Needless to say, this is some pretty serious stuff. When I arrived home, I was determined to change my lifestyle and start living more eco-friendly. Although I had recycled before, I became even more rigorous about recycling and making sure nothing recyclable was being thrown away. No receipts, no water bottles, no cans. Though this was a good beginning, I still found myself surrounded by toxic chemicals. I swapped out cleaning supplies for white vinegar, began leaving my shoes at the door, avoided plastic like the plague, and looked up my personal care products using cosmeticsdatabase.com. It’s so easy to change a few simple things in your lifestyle that can cause a world of difference in your toxin intake and your carbon footprint. There’s even an app for that. The free GoodGuide Mobile app allows you to scan the barcode of an item and find out its health, environment, and society scores, combining them to give you an overall rating. It’s so simple, even my mom can do it.
As a result of this conference, I found out more than I ever thought possible about how environmental issues and reproductive issues go hand in hand. It caused me to reevaluate my choices. I don’t reach for bottled water anymore. I make sure that I know what my products have in them. This conference made me want to research the things in my life that I took for granted. Because of that, I’ve become an organic gardener. I’m attempting to change my life, it’s true. But, I’m also attempting to change the world. And it’s the easiest thing I’ve ever done.
After 14 years of struggle, the Reproductive Health Bill has finally been passed into law!
Philippine President Benigno Simeon Aquino III quietly signed the bill into law last December 21, 2012, four days away before Christmas – for me the best Christmas gift for Filipino women and youth especially us RH advocates who were tireless in our efforts to lobby, dialogue, march on the streets and campaign for the passage of the RH Bill into a law. The new law will now be called as Republic Act 10354 or the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health of 2012. Owing to the controversy of the law, the Office of the President only confirmed it today after persistent rumors were circulated widely in the internet.
The road for passing the RH Law was not easy. Strong opposition coming from the Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines has long delayed the passage of the law. Way back then, legislators from Congress and Senate under the administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo were dominated by conservative Anti-RH representatives. A few like Representatives Edcel Lagman and Janette Loreto-Garin in Congress and Senators Pia Cayetano and Miriam Defensor-Santiago have continued the fight despite of the overwhelming hostility of their peers to the RH Bill. Mrs. Macapagal-Arroyo herself promoted an abstinence-only program during her 9-year tenure as president.
Ever since I was involved with RH advocacy back in 2009, I have observed that our movement has grown bigger and stronger. Young people have become more involved and have since been in the forefront of the movement. Women especially mothers have aired out their concerns of having a limited options for them in status quo. The deaths of 11 Filipino women a day due to pregnancy and child birth complications according to UNFPA makes the bill a necessity if not urgent. Celebrities like Tony Award winning actress Lea Salonga, singer songwriter Jim Paredes, Health Secretary Esperanza Cabral, reality-show actors Tom Rodriguez and Princess Lieza Manzon, and even enlightened Catholic priest like Fr. Joaquin Bernas have lent their name and prestige in promoting awareness and discourse on the issues of the RH Bill.
The administration of President Aquino bolstered our hopes that the bill will become a law when at the very start of his election campaign; he promised that he will support the RH Bill. Although there were times when he seems to be bowing to the pressure of the Catholic Church, his determination to deliver his election promises equaled with our vigilance to hold him accountable to his promises triumphed at the end of the day. It would be the second time in Philippine history that the government defied the Catholic Church since the Rizal Law which makes me feel happy that a government like President Aquino can stand up for the general good and welfare of the Filipino people.
Not talking about the Anti-RH does not give justice to the struggles and the gain we had right now. I admire their equal eagerness for the RH Bill NOT to become a law. They have their own reasons to oppose the bill and I respect it. Some of it may sound absurd just like how Senator Sotto reasoned out that “since we ban plastics, why are we legalizing condoms”. In a controversial measure like RH Bill, we have expected a lot of opposition to it. Although opposition to the bill can be a major obstacle, we welcome them because it sparks discourse and intellectual discussion which benefits the people at the end of the day for it guides them in making their own informed decision.
Women willpower: RH sponsors Rep Janette Garin (1D, Iloilo) and Sen Pia Cayetano hold a copy of the reconciled version of the RH BILL following the latter’s adoption by the bicameral conference committee on the last day of session last week. Photo taken on December 19, 2012 at the Senate plenary. Courtesy of Senator Pia Cayetano’s Facebook Page.
At the end of the day, an inevitable showdown of numbers happened. Last December 12-13, the members of the House of Representatives having reached a quorum decided to vote on whether or not to terminate the Period of Amendments for the bill and pass it for the Second Reading. Pro-RH gained the needed 109 votes to pass the bill for second reading during the first round of voting. A close fight ensued as the second round of voting was declared. With 113 votes for the RH, 104 against, and 4 abstain the bill was passed for Second Reading.
Finally, on December 17, both Senate and House of Representatives voted in their respective chambers with 13-8 in the Senate in favor of the bill and 133-79-7 in the House of Representatives in favor also of the bill. Then a Bicameral Conference Committee convened to reconcile the RH Bill versions of the two chambers of Congress. After its ratification, it was presented to the President for his signature. At this point, even if Mr. Aquino does not sign it, it will become law after 15 days.
By the way, it may not be the perfect RH Law that one aspires about because of some compromises that it had to give such as teaching Comprehensive Sexuality Education not compulsory in private schools among others but hey, it is still an achievement. Priority is given to teaching it to public schools where the bulk of students go to get their education. We can remedy that. What is more important right now is to be involve in crafting the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the RH Law which will serve as guide on how the law will be implemented and of course, the full implementation of the law when it take effect.
After celebrating our RH Law victory, let’s move forward and act for the passage of the Anti-Discrimination Bill and the Freedom of Information Act in the Philippines!
Georgia HB 954, also known as “Women As Livestock,” passed. The bill caught national attention after State Representative Terry England (R) came to the bill’s defense and shared his thoughts a few months ago, “…if farmers have to ‘deliver calves, dead or alive’ then a woman carrying a dead fetus or one not expected to survive should have to carry it to term.”
Because that worked so well with Savita Halappanavar, right? And we thought the GOP couldn’t be any more openly misogynistic.
At first this bill criminalized all abortions after 20 weeks, regardless of health conditions. After weeks of negotiation the bill was revised in a way that an exemption will be made for medically futile pregnancies or if the health of the pregnant person is in danger. The revised bill still neglected to make an exemption for pregnant people with mental illnesses. So, those suffering with mental illnesses will still be forced to continue their pregnancy. The bill still has no exemptions for rape or incest.
According to Ms. Magazine and the bill itself:
In order for a pregnancy to be considered “medically futile,” the fetus must be diagnosed with an irreversible chromosomal or congenital anomaly that is “incompatible with sustaining life after birth.” The Georgia “fetal pain” bill also stipulates that the abortion must be performed in such a way that the fetus emerges alive. If doctors perform the abortion differently, they face felony charges and up to 10 years in prison.
And this “fetal pain” bill is just based on this silly notion that fetuses feel pain at 20 weeks, even though doctors and scientists keep coming up with new studies that the nervous system of a fetus does not register pain until much later in the third trimester–one of many sources being The Journal of the American Medical Association. But whatever point of the pregnancy the fetus feels pain is actually not an issue for me. Pain, sentience, and/or personhood of the fetus, etc, none of that matters to me in this discourse for reproductive health care and rights. Pregnant people continue to be erased from this conversation, and I’m done with that. We need to stop participating in this erasure of people who are actually affected by these restrictions. The focus of the conversation should always be about choice and the people who can make one. Actuality should always come before potentiality. And remember, no one–whether it’s a fetus, a child, or a grown adult–has the right to another person’s body without constant consent.
I post this with the understanding that this issue does not affect only women or all women. I post this with the hopes that we all continue this fight for reproductive health care and rights.
Sources:
http://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/en-US/display/20112012/HB/954
http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2012/03/31/at-11th-hour-georgia-passes-women-as-livestock-bill/
Description:
The two sides of the abortion debate in America literally face one another in this documentary from filmmakers Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady. In Fort Pierce, Florida, a women’s heath care center is located at the corner of 12th and Delaware. On the same corner, across the street, is another women’s heath care center. However, the two centers are not in the same business; one provides abortions along with a variety of other health services, while the other primarily offers counseling to women considering abortion, urging them to keep their babies.In 12th and Delaware, Ewing and Grady offer a look inside both offices, as pro-life counselors give women a mixture of concern and disinformation about terminating their pregnancies and the pro-choice medical staff struggles to work under the frequent threat of violence against them. The film also examines the handful of protesters who stand outside the abortion clinic, confronting both patients and staff as they enter and exit.
See the movie: http://stfuprolife.tumblr.com/post/38560890103/because-some-followers-have-asked-about-this-i-am
Congress Passes Amendment to Lift Abortion Ban on Military Rape Survivors
Washington, D.C. – Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, applauded Congress for supporting a provision sponsored by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) that would lift the ban on women in the military using their health insurance for abortion care in cases of rape or incest. Now, the bill makes its way to President Obama’s desk to be signed into law.
The Obama administration already has voiced its support for lifting the ban on sexual-assault survivors using their health insurance for abortion care.
“Sen. Shaheen and retired military leaders advocated tirelessly to end this discriminatory policy,” Keenan said. “Protecting those who serve our country is an American value. There is no better time than now for President Obama and Congress to remind the country of their commitment to protect and support our servicewomen by signing this bill into law.”
The Shaheen amendment has widespread support ranging from retired military officers to former Secretary of State Colin Powell to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.
This ban is one of two unfair restrictions on women’s access to safe abortion care. Looking to the future, NARAL Pro-Choice America also urges lawmakers to repeal the ban on military women using their own money for abortion services in situations beyond sexual assault at overseas military hospitals.
NARAL Pro-Choice America is a longtime leader in advocating for servicewomen’s reproductive rights and has been working with lawmakers and other allies for more than 15 years to repeal this unfair abortion-coverage ban. Nearly 89,000 of the organization’s member activists have taken action to support lifting the ban.
Source: http://stfuprolife.tumblr.com/post/38574104159/congress-passes-amendment-to-lift-military-abortion-ban
H.B. 5711, the Michigan omnibus anti-abortion “super bill” passed last week during the lame duck session of the state legislature, is a hefty 80-odd pages worth of restrictions and regulations on abortions, providers, clinics, and medical practices. It was overwhelmingly passed by both chambers of the legislature, but how many even knew what they were actually voting for?
Emily Magner of Social Work Advocacy Coalition of Michigan, shares a story onEclectablog of her late November meeting with one local legislator, state Senator Howard Walker, who voted in favor of the bill. A bill which as of the end of November he couldn’t even be bothered to read.
e went on to talk specifically about how this bill will harm Michigan women, disproportionately women living in rural areas like ours. After we brought up a few of these points he put up his hands and said that he couldn’t really speak to those topics … he had not read the bill.
In front of him was a one paragraph synopsis I assume was from the Right to Life special interest organization who drafted the bill.
Howard Walker had not even bothered to read it.
We spoke with him for 20 minutes, the whole time he was dismissive, misinformed, and rude. When his handler told him, “5 more minutes,” I told him that I would never ask him to change his beliefs on abortion, I would protect his right to believe whatever he wanted, but I did want him to consider the harmful implications that this legislation would have on women and consider his ethical obligation to his field to leave his personal views at the door.
Before I could finish my sentence, he waved his hand dismissively and interrupted, “THIS ISN’T ABOUT WOMEN! THIS IS ABOUT PROTECTING FETUSES!”
Republican Governor Rick Snyder has less than two weeks to decide whether he is just as dismissive of women as Senator Walker is or whether he will veto the bill.
Source: http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/12/17/michigan-politician-on-hb-5711-this-isnt-about-protecting-women-its-about-prote-0
Talking about young people in the part of the world where I come is already a sensitive issue and adding ‘rights’ which is another very explosive issue to this makes advocacy for the placing of youth rights at the heart of development a very difficult but not an impossible task. Behind these words lies the fears, doubts, and optimism of a participant at the just ended International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD)-Beyond 2014 Global youth Forum (GYF) which held from the 4th to the 6th December 2012.They are also the words that come to my mind whenever I think about this forum and the impact its outcomes will have on the future of young people and therefore our world as a whole. The fruits of the optimism raised and the hopes re-enkindled by the ICPD-Beyond 2014 GYF not only in the young persons that attended this event but above all in the lives of the millions of young persons that are marginalized, down trodden, and persecuted because of their gender, age, political choices, and sexual orientation, will no doubt become reality as youths irrespective of their social status, religious beliefs, and gender have been empowered and energized by this forum. With most of the recommendations from the ICPD-Beyond 2014 GYF urging governments, international bodies, and civil societies to recognize the rights of all young persons especially the marginalized, suffering and persecuted(the girl child, sexual minorities, rural dwellers, the uneducated) and establish an enabling environment for the potentials of every young person to be unleashed and his/her dreams fulfilled, the forum is ended but has opened an avenue for youths to claim what is theirs and take their places in decision making cycles in their various countries. Enlightened, empowered, and inspired by the passion and enthusiasm I witnessed in Bali, the following words came to my mind in the evening of the 6th of December as the forum ended: ‘What happens when it comes time to part? Well you know how when you’re listening to music from another room and you’re singing along, because it’s a tune you really love, when the door closes, or a train passes, and you can’t hear the music anymore, but you sing along anyway?’ Just like the song described in this scene from the movie, ‘Music from Another Room’, the journey towards achieving youths rights might have begun long ago, Bali marked a new beginning in this fight for the rights of young people in all their diversity to be recognized and respected in the society where they live.
Young Women of Color Leadership Council member, Januari Mckay, is a 2012 Mayor’s Community Service Award recipient. Januari was recognized with the Advocate Award for HIV/AIDS. This award recognizes a Washington, DC resident who has demonstrated exemplary commitment to HIV/AIDS education and prevention through volunteerism and service. Through her efforts as a member of the Young Women of Color Leadership Council and her volunteer work with many organizations in the District, Januari has devoted countless hours to addressing the HIV epidemic in our Nation’s capital, especially among women of color. As the first young woman of color to receive this honor, she is a role model for the young people she works with and exemplifies what hard work and dedication is.
Earlier this week, Januari was honored at a ceremony where Mayor Vincent Gray spoke about the importance of community service and the vital role volunteers play in improving our communities and the lives of others. Januari’s humility, dedication and selflessness in all of the work that she does for her community is truly inspiring. Januari represents the amazing work young people are capable of doing in addressing HIV/AIDS in our communities. We all have potential to be amazing leaders in our communities to create change, regardless of our age, so we must get out and make it happen!
A follower submitted this tidbit to my STFU, Pro-Life blog.
source: http://stfuprolife.tumblr.com/post/37790625281/rebloggable-as-requested
WHAT THE MICHIGAN ANTI-ABORTION BILL REALLY DOES
SOURCE: http://www.michnow.org/memo_hb5711analysis.pdf
The Republican-controlled Michigan Senate now has before it a draconian anti-abortion clinic bill designed to make the
full range of reproductive health services, including abortion care, inaccessible for Michigan women. The bill passed
the Michigan House in June. The most potentially dangerous, expensive, and degrading provisions in HB 5711 would:REQUIRE DISPOSAL OF “FETAL REMAINS” LIKE A DEAD BODY
– Michigan will become the first state in the nation to
require any woman who seeks an abortion or miscarries to decide how she will dispose of the “fetal remains.”WHAT THIS REALLY DOES:
At 10 weeks: A woman must pay for a funeral home to transport fetal remains and to decide amongst burial,
cremation, or interment. Current law requires the products of conception to be hygienically incinerated.HB 5711, if passed,
Misleads women into thinking of the fetal issue as a person and abortion as murder.
Traumatizes and shames women at a difficult time and adds unnecessary expense to an abortion.At 20 weeks: Additionally, either the physician or the coroner must file a Death Certificate, a public record which
may be reported in the local newspaper and remains permanently on file with the State. HB 5711, if passed,
Robs women of their right to privacy and potentially makes miscarriage and abortion public.
STOP DOCTORS FROM PERFORMING ABORTIONS – Doctors who would perform more than five abortions a month in the office (or who meet other criteria) must do so only in a licensed freestanding surgical facility and buy $1 million in liability insurance.WHAT THIS REALLY DOES:
Makes providing abortion services prohibitively expensive for doctors so that they will give up the practice.
The requirements for surgical facilities won’t make women safer, the insurance is not currently available in
Michigan and, even if it were, it would likely be prohibitively expensive and make the cost of abortion beyond
the reach of most women. Current laws adequately protect women and should be enforced.RESTRICT FREE SPEECH IN THE GUISE OF PREVENTING “COERCION” – Doctors must verify that patients have been “screened” about whether they were coerced into seeking an abortion.
WHAT THIS REALLY DOES:
Makes parents, spouses, and others subject to lawsuits for counseling a woman about making informed
choices, while frightening doctors from providing abortions for fear of legal action.END THE TELE-MEDICINE OPTION
– The new law would prohibit doctors from dispensing safe medication abortions or emergency contraception drugs such as Ella through telemedicine protocols. The bill even requires that medication abortions be performed at a licensed freestanding surgical facility!
WHAT THIS REALLY DOES:
Adds physical and financial barriers that discourage women from exercising their legally-protected rights
without making them any safer.
Makes abortion unavailable to women in underserved areas, which includes more than 83% of Michigan
counties.
WHAT THESE LAWS ALSO DO IS DISCOURAGE GOOD DOCTORS FROM PRACTICING IN MICHIGAN- Dr. Michael Allswede of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists tes9fied against the bill, arguing that his organization knows the bill will make it harder to recruit doctors to practice in Michigan. Studies show Michigan could lack as many as 4,500 doctors by 2020, and this legisla9on would make matters worse.
Contact your Senator and Governor Snyder and tell them to reject HB 5711.
See www.michnow.org for contact informa2on.
*this does not affect just women
**This issue is not just about women’s health, it’s about every single person who could be affected by an attack on reproductive rights and health.**
Source: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/12/07/1300361/curves-founders-against-womens-health/
The latest filings from Karl Rove’s American Crossroads show a last minute contribution of $1 million received just days before the election (10/29/12) from Gary Heavin — the co-founder of Curves International Inc., which calls itself “the world’s leader in women’s fitness.”
Curves, a chain of women-only fitness center franchises, claims nearly 10,000 locations in more than 85 countries. Heavin and his fellow co-founder, his wife Diane, sold Curves International to an private equity firm in October, but they remain prominently featured on the company’s website. The Heavins say they “share a passion for and commitment to women’s health and fitness.” But his massive donation to the right-wing super PAC is only the latest in a long pattern of their efforts
in support of policies that undermine women’s equality in the workplace and restrict women’s access to health care services.American Crossroads spent $91 million to elect Mitt Romney over President Obama. Romney refused to endorse key pro-women legislation including the bipartisan Violence Against Women Act, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and thePaycheck Fairness Act, but backed reinstating the “global gag rule” on even discussing abortion as a family planning option and supported the infamous Blunt Amendment to allow employers to deny health benefits that go against their personal views. Crossroads also worked to help far-right extremists like Todd Akin, Richard Mourdock, and George Allen. Much of the American Crossroads attack strategy focused on criticizing Obamacare and those who backed the effort to expand health insurance access to all Americans.
In addition to helping fund American Crossroads, the Heavins also combined to give $92,400 to the House and Senate Republican campaign arms, $2,500 to Texas Governor Rick Perry (R), $30,800 to the Republican National Committee, $7,300 to Romney’s campaign, and $2,500 to House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) in 2012.
And this past election isn’t the only time that Curves and the Heavins have worked against women’s reproductive rights. Gary Heavin pledged hundreds of thousands of dollars for controversial “pregnancy crisis centers” that try to talk women out of abortions and have been accused to providing false information. They also made large donations to abstinence-only education programs — programs which often misinform and make teens more likely to engage in risky behavior and become pregnant. Curves also pulled its funding for the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation over its objection to the charity’s funding for Planned Parenthood’s breast cancer screening services. In a 2004 editorial, Mr. Heavin attacked Planned Parenthood’s sex education literature, writing “I have a 10-year-old daughter. I would absolutely not allow her to be exposed to this material. I don’t want her being taught masturbation and told that homosexuality is normal.”
That anti-choice and anti-LGBT stance was further demonstrated when Curves partnered with the American Family Association — a group that has been identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a “hate group.” They joined for a 2009 healthy recipe contest and sold a Curves fitness CD on the AFA’s website. Gary Heavin has also been an outspoken enthusiast for televangelist Pat Robertson, who has blamed natural disasters on same-sex marriage equality and blamed 9/11 on abortion, the separation of church and state, and civil liberties groups.
source: http://livealifethatscompletelyfree.tumblr.com/post/37576455829
Michigan Lawmakers Are Trying To Sneak Extreme Abortion Restrictions
Source: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/12/06/1294861/michigan-lawmakers-are-trying-to-sneak-through-extreme-abortion-restrictions-in-lame-duck-session/
Women’s health advocates confirm that Michigan lawmakers are likely to revive on Thursday an omnibus anti-abortion bill that sparked widespread protests after it passed the House this summer, in addition to a host of other restrictive abortion legislation they hope to force through the current lame duck session.
As Michigan’s current attempt to pass anti-union legislation dominates the coverage surrounding the state legislature, lawmakers are using the opportunity to revisit anti-abortion measures they hope to slip through before this session ends. Since five anti-choice state legislators lost their seats in last month’s election, this may be the best time for the legislature to advance their far-right agenda — despite the fact that the majority of Michigan residents support legal access to abortion. On Thursday afternoon, the state senate may consider multiple anti-abortion bills that aim to:
1) Regulate abortion clinics out of existence. HB 5711, the massive 45-page legislation that sparked amassive outcry when the House considered it in June, contains additional and unnecessary regulations for abortion providers. HB 5711 would subject any facilities that perform 6 or more abortions per month to burdensome regulations that could be so costly that they force clinics to close their doors, an indirect method of targeting abortion providers.
2) Limit abortion access for women in rural areas. HB 5711 would also place restrictions on telemedical abortions, which provide essential health services to women in rural areas who often lack any access to nearby abortion doctors. Even though telemedical procedures have been proven to be safe and effective, Michigan lawmakers seek to require doctors to be physically present to administer abortion services.
3) Impose further guidelines for the disposal of fetal remains. Michigan already has regulations in place to instruct medical professions about how they must dispose of fetal remains, but HB 5711 wants to go a step further, requiring fetal remains to be treated in the exact same manner as dead bodies. Doctors would be forced to fill out death forms and make arrangements for the fetal remains’ cremation or burial,imposing an emotional burden on the women whose pregnancies end through a medical miscarriage. No other state handles fetal remains at 10 weeks in the same way as it handles dead bodies.
4) Prevent private insurance companies from covering any abortion services. A trio of companion bills — SBs 612, 613, and 614 — would work together to ban the health insurance exchange that Michigan will set up under Obamacare from covering abortion, as well as ban private insurers from covering any abortion services under their general insurance plans. Currently, 87 percent of Michigan’s insurance plans include abortion care in their benefits packages. If private insurers elect to cover abortions, they have to do it as a separate rider, which often ends up being more costly for women.
5) Allow doctors to refuse to perform abortion services because of their personal beliefs. SB 975, which passed the Michigan Senate’s Health Policy committee earlier this week and is now up for a full vote, is a sweeping “license to discriminate” bill that would allow medical professionals to deny health services based on their personal beliefs. It would allow doctors to refuse to provide HIV treatment, vaccinations, or abortions to any of their patients simply based on their “conscience.”
Preliminary reports from women’s health advocates on the ground in Michigan suggest that the Senate has already passed SB 975, and is likely to pass SBs 612, 613, and 614 this afternoon. But Thursday’s push doesn’t represent the only step that Michigan lawmakers have taken during this year’s lame duck session to push through anti-choice legislation. Just a few weeks ago, state legislators also considered establishing a tax credit for fetuses past 12 weeks’ gestation, a dangerous step toward endowing fetuses with the same rights as U.S. citizens.
Sadly, we’ve all grown used to the idea that nothing gets through the U.S. Senate these days without the support of at least 60 senators. Procedural tricks and a misuse of the filibuster rule has ground legislation to a near halt in the years since President Barack Obama took office. But when it came to a vote to ensure that disabled persons have the same rights as anyone else—including the right to avoiding pregnancy or terminating unwanted ones—even 60 votes wasn’t enough.
The Senate voted 61 to 38 to ratify the United Nations Rights of Persons with Disabilities Treaty, which stated “nations should strive to assure that the disabled enjoy the same rights and fundamental freedoms as their fellow citizens,” according to the Associated Press. The treaty was modeled after the Americans with Disabilities Act, but anti-choice activists rallied against it, claiming it “sacrifices the most vulnerable—the disabled and the unborn—all in the name of population control,” according to Bradley Mattes, president of the International Right to Life Federation.
Although anti-choice activists claimed concern that the treaty, if ratified, could expand access to abortion and somehow impede their efforts to overturn Roe v. Wade, many of those who voted against the measure, such as Utah Sen. Mike Lee, pointed to fear of losing United States “sovereignty” as their reason for opposing the treaty.
Source: http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/12/04/anti-choice-senators-block-convention-on-rights-persons-with-disabilities-treaty
Amplify is a project of Advocates for Youth. Terms of Use. Disclaimer.
