Recently in Violence Against Women Category

This past weekend, I attended the annual No Violence Against Women conference at Hunter College, this year presented by the US national committee of UNIFEM, the United Nations Development Fund for Women, and the National Council for Research on Women. The conference was one-and-a-half intensive days of lectures, panels and breakout sessions about the various manifestations of violence against women and girls around the globe. It wasn't what you'd call an enjoyable time, but it was certainly educational, and attendees had the chance to listen to and ask questions of activists, policymakers and other key players devoted to the elimination of gender-based violence.

I was particularly pleased to hear from Mallika Dutt, founder of Breakthrough, an organization that uses arts and culture to address human rights issues. Apart from being an impressive public speaker, Dutt, a lawyer by training, co-founder of Sakhi for South Asian Women and former Program Officer for Human Rights at the Ford Foundation in New Delhi, is just an incredibly impressive woman. She spoke on Saturday to a rapt audience about the need to reframe women's rights as human rights, and about the need for government and legislative support for the great work that NGOs are doing on the ground around the world.

Breakthrough is best known for its work on domestic violence in India, and particularly for its Bell Bajao ("ring the bell") campaign. Dutt screened several of the TV ads for us on Saturday, and they're quite remarkable. I encourage you to watch them, though as you might expect from an anti-DV campaign, they come with a trigger warning.

Dutt says that the campaign has a remarkably high recall rate, meaning that viewers who have seen it are very likely to remember seeing it, and to remember its message. Which is good news for Breakthrough, and for all of us. Here's an example of the simple, apparently effective brilliance of the Bell Bajao campaign.

It's really something. As Dutt explained on Saturday, the campaign was created pro bono, and much of Breakthrough's airtime is provided pro bono, too - Breakthrough doesn't have the kind of money it deserves. And of course, no matter how memorable it is, it's only one campaign. It's not an end to domestic violence, which will require widespread cultural and legal change. As Dutt said: "Is it enough? Absolutely not. Is it a beginning? Absolutely yes."

An article in this month's Essence (available only in print, not online) gives me pause. Veronica Chambers' "I'm Her Mother, Not Her Nanny" tells a Black Latina's testimony about the frustration of being misidentified as the nanny of her biracial child.

Veronica explains her experiences of racism:

I have to deal with strangers who treat me as if I were a hired hand. It angers me because when someone asks something so ignorant, I'm reminded that even under the leadership of this historic Obama administration, there are many people who only see me as a dark-skinned woman in a position of servitude.

Veronica has every right to be properly identified as the mother of a child she helped bring into the world. Also, feelings of anger and frustration are perfectly legitimate given the history of African American women being forced to serve as caregivers to white families while neglecting their own children. However, Veronica expresses unnecessary condescension towards a perfectly legitimate occupation as she describes her pain.

A local news station in Donna Texas reports on a piñata store that is selling piñatas of topless women, some with stripper poles between their legs. The report says that the piñatas are popular for bachelor parties.

You can't see the actual piñatas very well in the video since they have the fuzzy grey strip covering their breasts, but they look pretty characteristically pornographic, big breasts and long blonde hair.

I think I'm more disturbed by the act of breaking open the piñata woman, and the violence that that invokes, than I am disturbed by the nudity. Piñatas are traditionally filled with candy, tied to a tree or hanging from the ceiling, and broken open by people swinging sticks at them, blindfolded.

I had piñatas at my parties as a kid, but they were never of women--usually animal shapes. I definitely understand the cultural significance of piñatas in the Latino community, but this takes symbolic violence against women a bit too far.

The news story doesn't mention the violent aspect of the piñatas, just the passers-by and their children being exposed to these naked women hanging in the shops.

These "stripper" piñatas are a far cry from the traditional ones, shaped like a seven-pointed star.

*Trigger Warning*

This is actually really stressful to watch, even thought i know it is a dramatic interpretation but it is amazing to see how people react to abusive situations. ABC's new show "What Would You Do?" set up a series of couples acting out being in a abusive relationship. The way strangers react is totally heart wrenching.

Until you see they change one variable-the women's clothing. In the second set of scenarios no one comes to aid the women.

I am befuddled. As mentioned on Jezebel, this is not exactly the most scientific experiment, but it is really interesting that no one came to the aid of the women when they were dressed "provocatively." The underlying belief is that if women are perceived as sex workers, read "slutty," they were in some way asking for it. This assumption transcends race, since apparently in the first take less people were willing to step in with the black couple as opposed to white, but some people finally did. In the second video no one helps either woman.

These videos are really upsetting to watch, subject to multiple variables and staged. But I appreciate the overall sentiment and maybe that is what viewers need to think about dominant perceptions of domestic violence and the rightful time and place to intervene.

This is a guest post by Adrienne Maree Brown. It was originally published at The Luscious Satyagraha.

There is a protest at 1pm today at Wayne State Law School to demand Eric Holder launch a federal probe into this situation.

there is no justice. not for aiyana stanley jones.

there is punishment, and perhaps accountability. someone to point towards, many people, a trail of blame, stories, mistakes and tears.

but there is no justice.

i'm just home from a vigil for aiyana. i don't like to go to these things because they make me feel too raw and hopeless. my partner, however, knew that we had to go and make sure aiyana's story was told. so here it is: she was alive yesterday, 7 years old. she went to bed on a couch in a first floor room with her grandmother last night. in the wee hours of the morning, cops raided her house. a man outside the house shouted that there were kids inside. a man on the second floor of the house was a suspect in the murder of a 17-year-old last Friday.

the police threw a "flash bang" through the front window. it blinded everyone inside; it lit aiyana on fire.

the news reported a tussle with the grandmother, during which the firearm discharged. everyone in the family says there was no tussle, that the grandmother was throwing herself over the baby when aiyana was shot in the head.

what do you call the blinded, terrified groping of a grandmother who knows her grandchildren are in the room, blasted from safety and sleep into chaos and danger, whose granddaughter is on fire? how do you comfort a man like aiyana's father, which was forced to lie face down in his daughter's blood by the same police officers who killed her?

More, including Adrienne's bio, after the jump.

A really interesting study is coming out of a joint effort from the Universities of Washington and Houston showing that men who engage in domestic violence think it's okay because they believe it's a common occurrence. On top of that, the more they overestimate that it's common behavior, the more they engage in abusing their partner. Via Futurity:

"Men who engage in violent behavior justify it in their mind by thinking it is more common and saying, 'Most guys slap their women around so it is okay to engage in it.' Or it could be that misperceptions about violence cause the behavior."

Neighbors says these men overestimated by two to three times the actual rates of seven behaviors ranging from throwing something at a partner to rape. Details of the study will be published in the journal Violence Against Women.

"Another way of looking at this would be wearing a red shirt. If you think everyone is wearing a red shirt then it is okay for you to wear one too. Or if you wear a red shirt you might overestimate the number of other people who are wearing red shirts," he explains.

The work is the first to document overestimation of intimate partner violence by batterers and is consistent with findings about a variety of other harmful behaviors such as substance use, gambling, and eating disorders. This line of research looks at social norms, or what is considered to be appropriate and inappropriate behavior in society.

I think this is really what the crux of this problem is: social norms. I think this study could a serious piece of evidence correlating to how violence against women is normalized -- through TV shows, movies, advertisements, and everything else around us -- and the cues that potential abusers take from it.

Reading the news over the weekend about the funeral of Yeardley Love, the 22 year old lacrosse player that was beaten to death, I couldn't help but think about the role that privilege has in silencing, ignoring or perpetuating intimate partner violence. The man arrested for the crime? Her boyfriend, 22 year old lacrosse player George Huguely.

Lacrosse is considered an elite sport, perhaps not the most sophisticated sport, but it is played and supported by more privileged members of the sports community, be it those race privileged or class privileged and generally more of the former. The majority of the coverage of this case has focused on how this incident is a tragedy, but hasn't totally made the connection between feelings of entitlement and instances of intimate partner violence.

This isn't the first time a college lacrosse team has been in the spotlight for potential involvement in beating, raping or abusing a woman. If we think back to the Duke rape case a huge part of that case prior to the charges being dropped was the role that entitlement played in how the story was told and the assumptions people made about not only how privileged people conduct themselves, what behavior they are entitled to and of course how the university responded.

Similarly, it appears the UVA's failure to effectively address the reality that Love's death was in fact due to intimate partner violence makes one think they too are trying to obscure the reality that domestic violence is a problem among white, middle class, college students as well.

Last week Amanda Hess pointed out that UVA's response to this potential act of intimate partner violence with releasing information of how strangers could attack you is essentially ignoring the root of the problem,

UVA police have instructed students how to avoid and/or respond to the following: An attack on the grounds of the university. Getting hit by a car. A late-night street attack. An attack by an unknown intruder. An attack through the window. An attack by a prowler. An attack by a peeping Tom. An attack by a suspicious filmmaker.

Police believe that Love was killed by a more likely suspect--a man she knew. In general, women, and particularly young women, are more likely to be killed by someone they know than by a stranger. So why hasn't UVA included any information here about domestic violence?

You can see the full statement by UVA police chief over there as well. UVA's response shows us something that is a fundamental part of how intimate partner violence is understood. Outside of flat out denying that it happens, violence against women is considered something that happens outside of your own privileged community and something that happens when you are walking down the street, most likely by someone who is not a member of your community. However, statistics tell us otherwise. According to research put out by the Center for Disease Control in 2009, each year, women experience about 4.8 million intimate partner related physical assaults and rapes. This statistic surpasses the possibility that the majority of violence against women happens outside of their own community, but quite the opposite. As long as we obscure this possibility moving to healing and community based solutions will stay out of our reach.

This is a fairly grim statistic found by the Urban Indian Health Initiative in a study released this week titled Reproductive Health of Urban American Indian and Alaska Native Women (pdf).

From the report introduction by Sarah Deer (Muscogee Creek) Assistant Professor,

Advocates for Native women may not be surprised by many of these findings, but this report confirms what many have been saying for years: Native women continue to be socially, economically, and physically marginalized by a society that doesn't prioritize and sometimes doesn't even acknowledge the realities of their lives. This report also makes crucial connections between violence and health. Violence against Native women is a public health crisis, and the urban experience has not received the same degree of attention as that on reservations and rural tribal communities.

Amnesty International found a similar statistic a few years ago which found that Native Alaskan women were 2.5 times more likely to be sexually assaulted in their life. This new study further compounds this evidence and makes clear the role that violence plays in the lives of these women. Evidence this quantifiable indicates a systemic problem with lack of resources, cycles of crime, lack of legal attention or resources and lack of health services.

The study also found trends in how Native Alaskan women are using sterilization for birth control. Via the Associated Press,

Another finding that stunned researchers was the rate at which women chose sterilization -- 34 percent -- compared with whites at 20 percent. Also prevalent among young Native women between the ages of 15 and 24 was the use of the injectable long-lasting hormonal contraceptive Depo-Provera, which researchers say can cause weight gain. That's a possible health risk for American Indians and Alaska Natives, who are three times more likely to die from diabetes.

If Native Alaskan and Indigenous women are being sexually assaulted, often before the age of 15, at a rate 2 times the national average then it is an epidemic, it is a health crisis and it is an extension of systematic violence that can't be ignored.

Related:

An Indigenous Perspective on Palin, Oil and Alaska
Palin Unpopular Among Indigenous Alaskans
An Open Letter to Sarah Palin
Biden vs Palin on Indigenous Issues
Palin's rural advisor quits.

I'm reprinting an email (with permission, of course) that I received from Rutgers student Jess Trusiani about something that happened last night at the school's Take Back the Night march. I felt that it was important to post, especially in light of ladychrist's Community post about the police harassment at DePaul University's march. This shit is why we need Take Back the Night.

I'm a rape survivor and this was my second Take Back The Night. Last year's Take Back The Night at Rutgers meant the world to me. I was in denial about my three sexual assaults for a long time. Being able to get up there and tell my story really showed me how far I had come. It was pretty upsetting to have these jackasses act this way this year. But we didn't let it ruin our night. I'm really not sure what their intentions were but it definitely proved to me even more just how important Take Back The Night is.

Here's what happened:

I'm not entirely sure how many guys it was. I think it was about four. They were at the rally at Cooper Green and appeared supportive. They had bandannas covering their faces which I had assumed was a form of protest. I thought maybe it symbolized being forced to remain silent about abuse. No one really questioned it.

The rally finished at Cooper Green and we marched down George Street saying the usual Take Back The Night chants. When we reached the Starbucks on George Street and chanted, "No more silence, no more violence," I almost got hit with a trash bag. My friend and I looked over on the side of the street and the guys with the bandannas were laughing and tossing trash bags at the marchers.

If that headline doesn't convince you why immigration is a feminist issue, I honestly don't know what will.

Amnesty International reports that six out of 10 women and girls experience sexual violence as they cross through Mexico hoping to come to the United States. Rape is so common, in fact, that some smugglers allegedly demand women get contraceptive injections before the trip so they do not become pregnant after being assaulted.

The report says that "many women migrants are deterred from reporting sexual violence by the pressures to continue their journey and the lack of access to an effective complaints procedure."

Amnesty International's full report, Mexico: Invisible victims. Migrants on the move in Mexico [pdf - English] [pdf -Spanish].

To take action, click here.

Related: For those of you who have Yes Means Yes, our very own Miriam's essay - "When Sexual Autonomy Isn't Enough: Sexual Violence Against Immigrant Women in the United States" - deals with this issue.

Via UN Dispatch.

Trigger warning

Transcript after the jump

The UN has created a campaign to raise awareness of, and take action against, sexual violence against women - specifically as it relates to conflict. Learn more at StopRapeNow - and send the link along to your friends!

via the f word

Tenured Radical has a really interesting post up about the latest anti-choice law in Oklahoma that requires women to undergo an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion.

If, in order to obtain a perfectly legal abortion, a woman must permit herself to be penetrated by an ultrasound probe -- in whatever way, or for however long, the technician and doctor wish to do so, that seems to me to be what statute 21-114 of the Oklahoma Criminal Code defines as rape by instrumentation. This act (putting an object in a vagina, anus or mouth against that person's will) is explicitly defined as rape in the first or second degree.

Coercing a woman into being raped with an object, for whatever reason, is, in fact, rape: this was first established in State v. Rusk (1979), which transformed the legal and popular view of what counted as forced sex by defining as rape any unwanted sexual intercourse, even if a man believed that a woman ought to give it up in return for the drinks and dinner he had purchased earlier in the evening. And by the way? Although it has been technically invalidated by Lawrence v. Texas (2003), Oklahoma still has a sodomy statute on the books too.

What do you think?

New Hampshire republican gubernatorial candidate Jack Kimball - a survivalist who calls Glenn Beck an "American hero" - compared paying taxes to being raped at a recent Tea Party rally.

[Kimball] drew cheers with an anti-tax message. He decried the state's taxation of business while criticizing its relatively low level of services.

"I don't mind paying my fair share, folks," he said. "I don't think any of us do. But I do mind when I'm raped. It's awful."

Yeah, rape is awful - which is why it's so disgusting that Kimball thinks that using the term as some sort of casual colloquialism and comparing it to paying taxes is just fine and dandy. Let him know that it's not.

Susannah Breslin, the writer who called feminism "cultural roadkill" has now taken it upon herself to mock the shit out of a very serious term: trigger warnings. You know, because it's so uncool and passe to care about rape victims.

Her post on True/Slant today begins by calling us folks at Feministing self-victimizing, angry man-haters (*yawn*), setting the tone for this oh-so-expert account of contemporary feminism. What follows is joking banter about Feministing and other blogs' use of trigger warnings with seemingly no knowledge of what they're actually for:

I've noticed as of late a new addition to their bloggy style, which is the inclusion of the phrase, often IN ALL CAPS or TOTALLY BOLDED, which announces incoming SCARY content with a "TRIGGER WARNING." WTF is a "trigger warning"? Yeah, I had to look that one up myself. Thankfully: Google.

According to Yahoo! Answers (which, BTW, is a great place to turn if you're worried that having sex while pregnant could result in a pregnant fetus), a trigger warning is: "A warning placed in the title of an e-mail or post to let possible readers know that the content might trigger (or upset) them." This seems different than the more widely used "spoiler alert," which is used if you've seen a movie that other fanbois haven't, and you want to reveal the ending, but you don't want all your fanbois to freak the fuck out.

After some in-depth research (like, half an hour, maybe?), I was able to conclude that, for whatever reason, the feminists are all over their TRIGGER WARNINGS, applying them like a Southern cook applies Pam cooking spray to an overused nonstick frying pan. It's almost impressive, really. I guess the idea is that blog posts are TOTALLY SCARY, and if you are EASILY UPSET, if you see a TRIGGER WARNING coming, you can look away REALLY FAST, or click elsewhere, so you won't, you know, FREAK THE FUCK OUT.

But what's funny about her "research" is that she happened to not find the second and third google results I came up with when searching, "trigger warning," which are pretty clear explanations about how the language is used for survivors of trauma. I guess she missed these?

Actually, I don't think she missed them at all. My guess is that Breslin knows exactly what trigger warnings are, but was intellectually dishonest about it so she could have the opportunity to make fun of feminists as irrational knee-jerks rather than come clean about trigger warnings' real purpose: to help lessen the pain that sexual assault and trauma victims have gone through.

This is shitty journalism at its best. And I don't know about you, but I'll take being sensitive to survivors over too-cool-for-school feminist bashing any day.

A huge, heartfelt thanks to Shakes for coming to our (and survivors') defense. Jill also has more.

Trigger warning
As some of you may already know, April is Sexual Assault Prevention and Awareness Month. As the month goes on, you'll probably be hearing a lot about sexual assault, both online and off. If you're on a college campus, you might be attending, or even organizing an event. If you are, I tip my hat to you. If you're not, get on it! One of the most important parts of raising awareness of and preventing future assaults is humanizing it, connecting the statistics and the abstract concepts with a name and a face and a story. To do that, we need as many people as possible to publicly demonstrate that they care about ending sexual assault, to come out this month and show that they're not silent bystanders, but engaged citizens who won't tolerate sexual assault in their communities. Last April, I was lucky enough to meet with a woman who's on a global mission to humanize the problem of rape and sexual assault, and who's committed to helping women all over the world recover from their own assaults.

In 1998, Linor Abargil was raped and almost murdered in Milan, Italy, where she had been working as a model. Six weeks later, she was in Seychelles, representing Israel in the Miss World competition. She won. Immediately after the rape, Linor went to the Italian police who, in cooperation with Israeli authorities, began working to apprehend the rapist, an Israeli citizen. Almost as soon as she was crowned Miss World, the Italian press got wind of what had happened to Linor, and "overnight I became the face of rape victims around the world," Linor says. In the weeks and months that followed, the rapist, an Israeli travel agent to whom a homesick Linor had gone to for help getting a ticket out of Milan, was arrested and sentenced with sixteen years in jail.

"During the trial," Linor writes, "I had to relive the events, and face the rapist's denials. I advised other women not to be afraid of reporting their rapes, and to seek punishment for the perpetrators. As a result, there was an increase in the rate of rape victims reporting the crime in Israel." More than a decade later, Linor remains committed to her belief that no woman should be ashamed to report or speak openly about being raped. She has teamed up with Cecilia Peck, the award-winning producer of Shut Up and Sing, to make a documentary about her experience in Milan, and about her efforts to encourage other rape survivors to come forward and tell their stories.

Trigger warning.

A young burn patient named Zahara sits with gauze over her face to keep the flies off. Zahara never admitted to setting herself on fire.

The Whitney Biennial has an unprecedented gender balance this year, an exciting new development. It comes as no surprise, then, that subject matter like this is part of this year's show. American photojournalist Stephanie Sinclair has a devastating documentary photography series titled "Self-Immolation in Afghanistan: A Cry for Help." Since 2005, over 700 women have set themselves on fire in Afghanistan. According to Planet, most incidents were caused by repeated abuse, fear of their husbands and petty household disputes. Echoing intersectionality, Sinclair explains:

You know, it was one thing to show the horrific response these girls have to their lives, but I felt in order to deal with that responsibly, I needed to look at the reasons why this was happening. What was so bad that would cause a woman to set herself on fire?

One common denominator I noticed is that many of these girls were married at a very, very young age, almost prepubescent. The more I work on the issue of child marriage, the more I realize it's really related to most of the country's gender issues, from maternal mortality to trafficking to self-immolation. This project actually spurred a lifetime project on the issue of child marriage.

Thanks to a reader for the heads up.

The Plain Dealer in Ohio is reporting that Cuyahoga Juvenile Court Judge Alison Floyd has ordered at least four teenage girls, all victims of sexual assault, to submit to lie detector tests.

It is unclear from her orders what Floyd's intention was in having victims take polygraph exams or what questions would be asked of them.

"The situation made no sense to us," the mother of a 16-year-old victim said in a message relayed through Cleveland Rape Crisis Center Director of Advocacy Ashley Hawke.

"I believe even more damage was done by the judge letting the perpetrator know she was ordering the victim to take the polygraph. He apparently took this to mean the judge did not believe her and he used this to tell their peers that the judge did not believe her and was ordering her take a lie detector test," the mother wrote.

"It felt like the blame was back on her and she was being victimized, by not only him [again], but by the system as well." (Emphasis mine)

Exactly. And I have to wonder how many robbery victims Judge Floyd orders to take lie detector tests. I'm guessing none. By making these young women submit to polygraphs, the judge is sending a very clear message: I don't trust you, the system doesn't trust you, and you won't find justice here.

The office of prosecutor Bill Mason has filed briefs asking the judge to stop ordering rape victims to take polygraph tests, arguing that Floyd doesn't have authority over victims and that the orders violate Ohio's rape shield law.

In the meantime, you can find Judge Floyd's contact information here.

Hiram Monserrate, who was expelled last month from the New York State Senate after being convicted of a misdemeanor assault against his girlfriend, lost his bid to regain his seat last night. José R. Peralta won the special election in a landslide, with 66 percent of the vote compared to Monserrate's 27 percent.

The political issue that received the most attention in this special election was the divisive topic of same-sex marriage, which Peralta supports and Monserrate opposes. Monserrate tried to create a David-and-Goliath narrative for his campaign, painting himself as the political outsider oppressed by entrenched power in Albany. As opposed to a former elected official who lost his seat because he was convicted of brutally assaulting his girlfriend.

Monserrate's campaign seemed like a long shot. But special elections, with their typical low voter turn outs, can lead to surprising results (Scott Brown in Massachusetts anyone?). Turn out was apparently high for a special election, and thankfully voters kept Monserrate out of office.

After removing the word "reckless," this appalling bill has been signed by Governer Gary Herbert in Utah. The language of the bill was edited but originally proposed that "reckless and unintentional" death of a fetus would be criminalized, as in, a miscarriage.

Gov. Gary Herbert signed into law Monday a bill that would allow a woman who arranges an illegal abortion to be charged with criminal homicide.

The new law is in response to a case last year where a 17-year-old pregnant girl paid a man $150 to beat her in hopes of inducing a miscarriage. A judge ruled there was no law on Utah's books allowing the mother to be charged with a crime.

This language isn't really much better. Instead of recognizing that it could only be the most oppressive circumstances that would lead a young woman to have someone beat her in hopes of inducing a miscarriage, and therefore creating legislation that protects young women, they legislate against women.

Today, March 10, is the National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers. The many health care professionals who make abortion access a reality by providing counseling, scheduling appointments, and assisting with or performing abortions are doing necessary work despite immense stigma and hatred, and they have my heartfelt thanks.

Today is also the anniversary of the 1993 assassination of Dr. David Gunn, the first abortion provider killed in the U.S. because of his job. This past year we lost another provider, Dr. George Tiller, to antiabortion violence. The threat of violence is constant for many providers and, in a year when a provider was assassinated for the first time in over a decade, that threat is on everyone's minds. Yet doctors, nurses, therapists, and other clinic staff keep going to work, because they know the legal right to abortion means nothing if everyone is too afraid to perform the procedure.

The National Abortion Federation (where I work part time) is collecting names, messages, and photos showing appreciation for abortion providers. Head on over to there site to express your thanks and support.

Spoiler Alert: This is less a review than an analysis, so if you haven't read the book, I wouldn't read this post.

I was truly intrigued when a couple of feminist buddies emailed and asked if I'd read The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, a book I'd also seen on both my mom and dad's nightstands over the holidays. They all claimed that one of the characters was a feminist heroines of sorts, and that the book, overall, had a surprisingly feminist bent.

I just finished this 600 page whopper and I feel conflicted. On the one hand, I can totally see how Lisbeth Salander--detective, hacker, and general badass--is basically a feminist avenger. She has so much power--tracking down information that other people can't get, punishing sexual predators and misogynists in unexpected and vicious ways, and not giving a shit about conventional femininity.

On the other hand--at least in this first book in the series--she doesn't seek very capable of getting her own emotional needs met or being authentic in relationships. She's obviously been through some real shit, so she's in a place of figuring out how to feel safe in the world, which leads to some seriously violent and escapist behavior. I don't blame her for this. It makes sense as a first step toward transformation, but I think her full realization as a feminist heroine would look different--less scared, less reactive, more emotionally courageous.

I also thought that it was interesting that the book has gotten so popular despite it's truly gruesome content. Altogether, the trilogy had sold more than 12 million copies worldwide. It was disturbing, and while I understand that it's a novel, and as such is technically imaginary, the horrific crimes described are the kinds of things that happen to women throughout the world. It's not a classic detective novel, in this way. There's obviously an underlying political and sociological analysis on the part of author Stieg Larsson, who died in 2004, but fought racism and right wing extremism throughout his life.

The news has been unfolding piece by piece on the latest scandal in the New York State Governor's office.

Governor Paterson took over when Eliot Spitzer resigned after his own scandal, and now some are calling for his resignation as well.

While the investigation is still ongoing, it appears that Governor Paterson may have played a role in the cover up of domestic violence charges against his aide, David Johnson. Johnson is accused of abusing his girlfriend last Halloween. There are recordings from 911 conversations, in addition to testimony from her and her lawyer during her legal proceedings against Johnson.

Johnson has been fired without pay, and Paterson announced Friday that he has withdrawn his bid from the upcoming Governor's race. An investigation has begun into the incident and what role Paterson's administration may have had.

Governor Paterson has admitted that he called and spoke with his aides girlfriend, allegedly one day before she was to appear in court in the proceedings to press charges against Johnson. From the NY Times:

The lawyer, Lawrence B. Saftler, said that the conversation lasted about a minute and that the governor asked how she was doing and if there was anything he could do for her. "If you need me," he said, according to Mr. Saftler, "I'm here for you."

These allegations are extremely serious. Intimidating a survivor of domestic violence, attempting to interfere with legal proceedings, possibly in order to avoid political scandal or protect an employee.

Considering New York State's recent history with domestic violence and those in government, this shouldn't be taken lightly. There are others who believe that the State's budget crisis is reason enough to keep Paterson in office, to avoid the chaos and insecurity that would come from transitioning leadership.

If these allegations turn out to be true, then I would see Paterson having no choice but to step down. The question is how long will the investigation take before we can confirm Paterson's exact involvement.

In a strange twist of irony, Gov. Paterson's wife is actually a domestic violence counselor.

Like several of my co-bloggers, I am of the anti-violence, de-escalation, anti-incarceration and anti-police industry camp. I think generally increased penalties on criminal behavior supports and reinforces more criminal behavior. I believe that a just criminal justice system is one that is fair, protects the interests of the people and is built through community organizing.

Having said that, my political beliefs about prisons, policing and law enforcement are often taken to task on the issue of domestic violence, stalking and other forms of harassment and assault. Calling the police may not always help, restraining orders are hard to obtain and even harder to enforce. But it is still an option that many women choose and one of the only that are available to them.

It is with this same ambivalence that I think about this law in France that will most likely pass, garnering unanimous support. Men who have a court order to stay away from their ex-partner will be electronically tagged and if they violate their court order police will be notified immediately.

The proposal is part of a draft law on conjugal violence. It has cross-party support and is expected to pass easily.

According to the government, around 160 women in France are murdered by their husbands or partners every year.

Parliament is also considering outlawing psychological violence in the home, because it is seen by many as a precursor to physical violence.

It is rare for the left and the right in France to agree on anything, says the BBC's Hugh Schofield, so the near unanimity in parliament behind this law comes as something of a novelty.

Everyone agrees that domestic violence is bad and getting worse.

Awareness on behalf of the government of the epidemic of violence against women is a good thing and will lead to more legislation that supports the rights of victims. Also, I think if I were one of these women, this would put my mind at ease on some level, knowing that police are being proactive about enforcing court orders. On the other hand, this is still part of the same cycle and system of violence. If someone wants to get to you, a bracelet that alerts your parole officer may not always stop them.

So while I am in support of this kind of legislation (even though the idea of "tagging" has a bit of a post-apocalyptic cyber realm thing going on with it), I think it should be paired with anti-violence and rehabilitation therapy and trainings to create long-term solutions to violence.

February is Teen Dating Violence Awareness Month. In honor of the month, and of the 15th anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act and the establishment of the Office on Violence Against Women as part of the Department of Justice, DOJ had a blogger call last week.

This was a first for the DOJ, and definitely indicative of the new outreach strategies of this administration. I'm entirely sure who was on the call, but some of my favorite feminist bloggers asked questions.

The call focused on the efforts of OVW and DOJ to combat Teen Dating Violence. They have an emphasis on online harassment and specifically mentioned "sexting" and cell-phone based harassment.

They also mentioned that Obama's budget for 2011 includes a "29% increase in funds specifically targeted to address sexual assault and violence against women."

They are running this website, Love is Respect, as part of the campaign to combat Teen Dating Violence.

A small study of middle school students in Glasgow revealed that the majority of them said it was justified to hit a woman if she had an affair or failed to have dinner ready on time. Via BBC:

The research involved 89 primary seven children at five Glasgow primaries.

The 11 and 12-year-olds were questioned in depth about their attitudes and aspirations towards gender roles and behaviour.

They were asked to consider whether or not a man was justified in punching his partner when he found out she had had an affair.

Nearly all of the children thought that the woman deserved to be hit.

In another scenario, about 80% of the children said a man had cause to slap his partner because she did not have the dinner ready on time.

The researchers also said the girls involved were more aware of expectations to get married and have children and to curtail their careers in the process.

Whether or not the students in this study were serious in their contention that violence against women is okay, or simply thought it would be funny to answer "yes" to these questions, you still find yourself with the same result: that violence against women continues to be normalized among youth. And that's really unsettling.

This study performed in London finds that a larger percentage of women feel that women should take responsibility for when they have been raped and the circumstances that caused the rape.

One third felt that provocative dress or returning to the attacker's house to have a drink makes a victim deserving of some blame for the rape, according to the survey, which was reported by BBC News.

The online survey of more than 1,000 people in London, called Wake Up To Rape, found that more than half of both men and women said that in some instances, the victim should take responsibility for a rape. The survey participants, who ranged in age from 18 to 50, included 712 men and 349 men, according to BBC News.

Some 71 percent of the women who said they felt some rape victims should take responsibility said the victims were accountable for the crime if they'd gone to bed with the attacker. Only 57 percent of the men felt that way, according to the survey.

Well we already know that victim-blaming is a no-no and not just because it is unfair, but because it doesn't take into consideration the ways that attitudes on rape and women's sexuality are full of assumptions about the ways women are supposed to "preserve" their own sexuality and assumptions that certain men just "act that way" so it is on us to protect ourselves from their potential inclination to rape. Victim-blaming fails to take into consideration the role that negative attitudes on women's sexuality shape predominant understandings of rape.

But sadly, this study doesn't surprise me. Fear of sexual assault has forced women in many instances to internalize negative assumptions about their own sexuality. It is hard to suggest that woman are uniquely more sexist than men but perhaps they have internalized the belief that to protect themselves from rape they have to act and dress a certain way to avoid the potential threat. So while this attitude smacks of victim-blaming, part of why a study would show that a disproportionate number of women feel that women are to blame is because they believe on some level, they might be to blame for their own potential assault, a narrative that sexism has embedded into the heads of women. This is not to suggest that women shouldn't be held accountable for unjust attitudes on sexual assault, but instead to find an explanation for why women would believe such a depressing myth.

As an update to yesterday's What We Missed that called attention to the horrendous Facebook group, "Kill Your Hooker So You Don't Have to Pay Her", one of our readers alerted us to this: Apparently, everyone's speedy organizing has resulted in the group changing their name (and link) to make it seem as if the group doesn't exist anymore. But oh, does it still.

Let's keep reporting it until this group is gone permanently. Great online organizing, all!

UPDATE: It looks like the group changed its name again, but we can't seem to find it. If anyone finds it, email me with the link so I can switch up the link again. In the meantime, Carnal Nation finds that there are 232 Facebook groups that contain the words, "dead hooker."

UPDATE TWO: The group is back up at the link it was before.

File this one under: it's about damn time.

State Senator Hiram Monserrate, a Democratic representative from Queens, was expelled last night from the New York State Senate by a vote of 53 to 8 after he was convicted of a misdemeanor assault for slashing his girlfriend's face with a broken beer bottle and then dragging her through his apartment lobby. There is a video of the incident caught by the lobby security cameras.

I say it's about damn time, because the incident that had him expelled occured last December, although he wasn't convicted until November.

Monserrate also garnered attention last June when he and another Democrat switched parties, aligning themselves with the Republicans and subsequently creating a one month legislative deadlock in the NY State Senate.

He is vowing to appeal the expulsion and stated last night:

"I know that my behavior has brought unwelcome discredit to this chamber, and for that, I am deeply sorry," he said. "But, as Rev. Jesse Jackson once said, 'God isn't through with me yet.'"

God may not be through with you yet, Monserrate, but the NY State Senate sure is.

These kinds of stories leave me completely baffled at the competency of the judicial system. (Warning: Story may be triggering.) Via the Curvature, we find a horrendous case where three judges refused a woman protection from her ex-boyfriend in fear of her and her son Wyatt's life -- not a month later, the man murdered the 9-month old boy before he committed suicide.

In the midst of a custody battle between Katie Tagle and Stephen Garcia, Tagle was trying to get supervised visitation with Garcia. She then requested an emergency restraining order against him after he sent her a text message threatening to kill her and her son. When Tagle didn't have hard proof of the texts for Judge Debra Harris because her phone was off, the emergency order was denied and a hearing was set. At the hearing, Judge David Mazurek not only denied the restraining order, but completely dismissed the fact that Garcia admitted he had physically attacked her and said they should "work together":

"If I grant the restraining order, how do you think that's going to help with respect to you two being able to raise Wyatt together or work together to make sure Wyatt grows up happy and healthy?" the judge asked, according to the transcripts.

"I kind of get an idea of what's going on," Mazurek said. He denied the restraining order, saying, "I don't think that Mr. Garcia poses a threat to Ms. Tagle." Mazurek went on to suggest Tagle might have ulterior motives for alleging domestic violence. "I get concerned when there's a pending child custody and visitation issue and in between that, one party or the other claims that there's some violence in between. It raises the court's eyebrows because based on my experience, it's a way for one party to try to gain an advantage over the other," he said, according to the transcripts.

A day after the hearing, Garcia sent Tagle an email with a "story" about their relationship in which there are two endings: one with the woman returning to the man, and the other with the man killing their child. After rushing to Mazurek with the email, he then gave Tagle a restraining order. But alas, a third judge, Judge Robert Lemkau, refused to uphold the order 10 days later and forced Tagle to give Wyatt to Garcia for visitation. Wyatt was killed nearly two weeks later.

Check out the details to see exactly how this all went down. But when it comes down to it, there were three judges, and multiple incidences of violence as well as threats of murder. Just what is there to question? Cara has some great thoughts on this and the larger issue of a system that perpetuates the notion that women simply can't be trusted.

Yesterday, the International Violence Against Women Act (IVAWA) was re-introduced to both houses of Congress. The bill was introduced last year, but never came to a vote. Sen. John Kerry, Rep. Bill Delahunt, Kerry Kennedy and Larry Cox of Amnesty International have a piece in Politico:

IVAWA will support innovative programs that challenge public attitudes and cultural practices that perpetuate and condone violence against women and girls. In settings where women are prevented or discouraged from seeking justice, IVAWA will support training for police and judicial officials on countering violence against women and respecting the rights of victims. It will allow long-term prevention efforts such as increasing women's economic security, expanding access to jobs and education, and engaging men to change behaviors and attitudes. Societies in which women are able to live and function in relative safety, empowered to realize their aspirations and move their communities forward are healthier, better developed, and more stable. Societies that take measures to deter discrimination and violence against women are better equipped to root out terrorism, less prone to conflict, and therefore more secure.

It's no news that the bill's passage would be a huge step in the right direction in addressing systematic violence against women and girls across the globe. So take action and make sure that happens.

UPDATE: You can also sign the IVAWA petition at Women Thrive.

I had stopped watching Family Guy a while ago because it felt like there was some sort of "joke" about rape or violence against women in every episode. But recently I thought I would give the show another shot, because I used to find it hilarious. I really wish I hadn't.

(Some folks may not want to watch the video clip; it's actually pretty upsetting.)

Transcript below the fold.

I just don't get it, truly. How is this funny? Are we supposed to suspend disbelief and forget that this how rape happens quite fucking often because it's a cartoon bull doing the raping?

I've written this before, but I think it bears repeating - there isn't anything edgy about rape jokes. Rape jokes and mocking violence are mainstream; that shit is the norm. And while Family Guy creator Seth Macfarlane has never given a real answer as to why the show has so many rape jokes, I imagine it's because he and the show's other writers somehow think it's controversial. But all they're doing is upholding the status quo. That, and ensuring that I'll never watch another episode of Family Guy again.

Related: What's so funny about rape?

A groundbreaking study has been released on a form of abuse that's largely left by the way side, though prevalent among intimate partner violence cases -- reproductive coercion. From the Family Violence Prevention Fund's (FVPF) release:

[Y]oung women and teenage girls often face efforts by male partners to sabotage their birth control or coerce or pressure them to become pregnant -- including by damaging condoms and destroying contraceptives. These behaviors, defined as "reproductive coercion," are often associated with physical or sexual violence. Conducted by researchers at the University of California Davis School of Medicine and the Harvard School of Pubic Health, the study also finds that among women who experienced both reproductive coercion and partner violence, the risk of unintended pregnancy doubled. (Emphasis mine)

FVPF has been covering the issue of reproductive coercion for quite some time, but never has there been quantitative research conducted on the relationship between intimate partner violence, reproductive coercion and unintended pregnancy. In short, this hard proof brings the issue to the forefront.

Additionally, "What this study shows is that reproductive coercion likely explains why unintended pregnancies are far more common among abused women and teens," says Jay Silverman, the study's senior author. The researchers and FVPF call not only for more awareness around this issue, but for reproductive health clinics to screen their patients for violence and pregnancy coercion.

FVPF President Esta Soler says, "If we are serious about reducing unintended pregnancy in this country, we have to do more to stop violence and abuse, and help victims."

The Family Violence Prevention Fund is looking to collect stories of survivors of reproductive coercion and control, including pregnancy promotion. If you are a survivor and are willing to share your story, please email them.

Apparently, getting arrested for abusing your spouse will do amazing things for an actor's career. From the New York Post:

Sheen's comedy series, "Two and a Half Men" is back in the No. 1 spot.

Monday night's episode, the first time the show has aired since Sheen was jailed for allegedly putting a knife to his wife's throat, drew 11.1 million viewers to watch a rerun of the hit CBS comedy. That was enough to make it the most-watched program of the evening, according to preliminary ratings.

Incredible. As Broadsheet recently pointed out, Sheen has a long history of violence against women yet continues to do incredibly well career-wise. In fact, with his $825k per episode salary - he may be the highest paid actor in television right now. 

It appears that when it comes to television, violence against women still doesn't matter.

This speech was given by Audacia Ray at the International Day To End Violence Against Sex Workers event at the Metropolitan Community Church in NYC this evening. It is being cross-posted here with permission from Audacia's blog Waking Vixen.

Last April, while I was at the grocery store shopping for the meal I was cooking for the first crop of Speak Up sex worker media trainees, my phone buzzed and I got a message that a sex worker from New York had been found dead - bound and shot in the chest - in a hotel in Boston. The message was from a fellow sex worker who urged me to spread the word around and encourage other sex workers I know to be extra-diligent with their screening. Sex workers look out for each other - the community was responding to each other and the news media before the media even understood the developing story.

The case was big news for a few weeks, as the so-called Craigslist Killer went on a bit of a spree and then was revealed to be a clean cut Boston University medical student. Everyone freaked out about the dangers of internet prostitution, which led to Rhode Island legislators getting outraged over the little-known fact that indoor prostitution was legal in the state - and so began a successful campaign to recriminalize prostitution there. All in the name of protection of sex workers.

On that night back in April, I was supposed to be putting the finishing touches on a media training and advocacy workshop for sex workers that I'd poured a lot of time, energy, and resources into. But for an hour, all I could do was slump down on my kitchen floor and cry for Julissa Brisman, a sensual masseuse my age, and think - that could have been me.

There are a lot of different projects that sex workers and our allies must work on to ensure our rights: we must work to reduce stigma and encourage the general public to think of us as multi-faceted human beings; we must work to ensure our legal rights and protections not just from potentially violent clients but from law enforcement officers and the legal system; we must work to gain greater access to nonjudgmental health care services and providers who are educated on our needs; we must create culture and tell our stories to each other and the world at large; we must defend ourselves against people who supposedly have our best interests in mind yet won't listen to our statements of needs; we must challenge bad health policies and distribution of funds at the local, national, and international levels; and last but not least - we must create networks of emotional and spiritual support so we can stay strong and continue to do this very exhausting work. But it's hard to do even a sliver of that essential work when we are being killed, silenced by hate and fear and a deep and dangerous assumption that we are expendable, that no one will care when we do not come home.

The night that reports of Julissa's death reached me, I watched a flurry of messages roll through my email inbox and get posted online that said things like "Be careful out there!" and "Girls, do your screening!" And though I'm a strong believer in personal agency and safety and we all know that there are things that sex workers can do to stay safe, sane, and healthy - it's not Julissa's fault that she was killed. Taking safety measures and being on the defensive is a band aid, it is not a long term solution. We cannot stop violence against sex workers by ourselves. We need the support and participation of a culture that sees us as human beings - we are your mothers, sons, cousins, friends - who are worthy of living lives of dignity that are free of violence.

Today is the International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers.

Audacia Ray, prominent activist and writer has this to say about the day:

December 17th is the annual International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers, a day on which sex workers and their allies gather at vigils around the world to mourn our dead and bring attention to the continued acts of violence and injustice faced by sex workers. It's a tough event, but a necessary one - because sex workers are so stigmatized, they are often disrespected in both life and death. Our community must come together to memorialize those who have been taken from us, and support each other in the ongoing fight for justice and rights.

Actions to commemorate the day are taking place across the country. Audacia also has a video up on her blog from last year's actions, which you can see here.

Jimmie Briggs, an amazing journalist and organizer, that I got to know at the national conference of feminist men a month or so back, just let me know that applications are now open for his massive undertaking: Man Up, Young Leader's Summit. In his words:

Delegates will leave the summit with a blueprint to create or scale-up self-designed projects addressing violence against women in their own communities. We will support their plans over the next five years with small seed grants, regional summits, technical support, and strong network development. These delegates will pave the way to what will become a global, youth-led movement to stop violence against women.

Man Up's message is: "Violence against women is not just a women's issue, it's everyone's issue." Gotta love that.

With regards to the title of the campaign, which I can imagine some in our community might take issue with, I believe that Jimmie sees it as a reclaiming of the old masculine norms, represented by a phrase like "man up." He has also talked about the difficulty of branding an event intended for a truly international audience. How do you pique the interest of teenagers in Cambodia, Cameroon, and Kentucky all at once?

The deets:
WHO: To be eligible, applicants must be age 18-30 and live in any of our 50 Man Up countries. Four delegates per country will attend the summit together with renowned human rights leaders, educators, artists and athletes.
WHERE: Johannesburg, South Africa
WHEN: summer 2010 on the occasion of the World Cup

Apply here.

From CNN: Rape victims offer advice to today's college women

Some of the advice is good - like pointing out the inadequacies surrounding campus policies on sexual assault. Some of the advice gives me pause - like telling young women not to binge drink. (I don't think you should binge drink either, it's bad for you - but if someone rapes you, it's not because you've been drinking, it's because the other person is a rapist.) I also think it's great that the article is encouraging survivors to get help.

But seriously, what about the menz?!

Where is the article directed at young men in college giving the advice on how not to rape their peers? Where are the warnings to men not to drink, since in so many campus rapes, it is the perpetrator who has been drinking?

That is an article I would really like to see.

A 14-year old boy in Contra Costa County, California is going to be tried for raping a 12-year old girl in the stairwell of a middle school. The police and prosecutors say they have enough evidence to proceed with a criminal case. Why, then, is a school supervisor speaking out (somewhat in defense of the principal and vice-principal, who were suspended) saying that what happened wasn't a rape but just a case of "hormones gone wild"?

"They're calling it a rape when it wasn't really a rape," Portola Middle School Site Supervisor Mustapha Cannon told reporters Tuesday morning. "When this is all over with I want to see if I can get a public apology for my principal, who is my friend, and my vice-principal, who is my friend who aren't at work right now. Some kids are not as popular as other kids. You have a girl that's not as popular as some of the girls. You have a guy who is not as popular with some of the guys and the girls. It was hormones gone wild." (Emphasis mine)

Seriously? Maybe there's another school official who should be suspended. It scares me to think that there are people out there - people who have control over children's lives - who could be so dismissive towards sexual assault and straight-up victim blame in this way.

**Spoiler warning!**

So I saw the latest Twilight movie, New Moon, this weekend.*

I was prepared for the manipulative relationship between the protagonist Bella and her sparkly vampire bf Edward. I was prepared for not-exactly-feminist messages about centering your life around men. I was prepared for seriously awful acting and dialogue (the Academy really needs to institute a "Best Unintentional Comedy" Oscar category -- it would be a tight race between New Moon and Terminator Salvation).

However, I was not prepared for the way the movie portrays physical relationship violence, particularly in Native communities. For all the talk of Edward's abusiveness throughout feminist blogworld, I've seen much less written about domestic violence as it relates to the film's competing love interest, Jacob Black -- a 16-year-old Quileute boy who can turn into a werewolf.

At one point in the movie, Bella meets Emily, the fiance of one of Jacob's fellow werewolf-men. As she turns to put a plate of giant muffins on the table, we see that she has a massive scar on one half of her face:

After breakfast, once Jacob and Bella are alone in the car, Jacob explains that Emily's soon-to-be husband lost his temper "for a split second," became a werewolf, and mauled her. (Earlier in the film, he has told Bella that this whole turning-into-a-werewolf-when-you-get-angry thing is actually a genetic trait carried by many men in his community.) He explains that he's worried that he's bad for Bella because he doesn't know if he can control his own anger.

It's more than a little problematic for New Moon to portray violence as an endemic trait among Native men. Yes, domestic violence is a very real problem in American Indian communities. According to Sacred Circle, Native women are more likely to experience violence than any other U.S. population. A full 64 percent of American Indian women will be physically assaulted in their lifetime. They are also stalked at more than twice the rate of other women. But to imply that this is a result of Native people's genes rather than related to other issues such as drug and alcohol abuse, or centuries of racism and marginalization, is inexcusable. (See Latoya's post on Jacob Black for more on Twilight's treatment of Native communities.)

This theme of uncontrollable tempers and violence is also disturbing in the context of the film's Edward vs. Jacob set-up. Bella's options, as New Moon portrays them, are essentially to become a blood-sucking monster by marrying the patronizing, emotionally manipulative Edward or to risk her safety by choosing the patronizing, possibly physically violent Jacob. Oh how I wish for a third option: Emily and Bella bake muffins for each other and find fulfilling lives that are centered on them, not men with fangs. Sadly, I'm guessing that's not where Eclipse, the next book/movie in the series, is going to go. Maybe I need to start writing feminist fan-fic.

* Yes, I knew going in that this was not a triumph of feminist cinema. But given what a major pop-culture phenomenon Twilight is, especially among tween girls, I do think it's important for feminists to engage with it, not bury our heads in the sand and pretend it's not happening.

Rana Husseini is a Jordanian journalist and author who has devoted her career to exposing and ending the horror of so-called honor crimes. The practice of killing women whose behavior - real or imagined - threatens to stain the honor of their families is one that takes place all over the world. According to Husseini, so-called crimes of honor are"identified in different ways according to culture, religion, social practices and gender relations." Husseini has focused her reporting and advocacy efforts on Jordan and on other Arab nations, where the practice is most pervasive.

Her book, Murder in the Name of Honor, was released in the US this October, and if I were to make a required feminist reading booklist, it would be right near the top. Husseini has spent fifteen years reporting on and working to end so-called honor crimes. In this book, she tackles the problem from every conceivable perspective, talking to politicians, police officers and judges, and well as to parents who have ordered the deaths of their daughters and women who have survived attempted so-called honor killings. It is gripping, disturbing and crucial reading.

Husseini is a fearless feminist, a woman who doesn't let anything - not even death threats - stop her from defending women's rights. It was a privilege to be able to interview her.

And now, without further ado, the Feministing Five, with Rana Husseini.

Last week ABC canceled Adam Lambert's scheduled appearance on Good Morning America after he *shock* *gasp* kissed another man during his 11pm performance at the American Music Awards. But the network is going ahead with an interview with Chris Brown, who beat his then-girlfriend Rihanna (the link is to a New York Post story - the publication has a terrible track record on a lot of issues, and even they seem bothered by this move).

Does ABC understand the statement this choice makes? Their actions say that a man who is known to have abused a woman deserves a chance to tell his story, but a man who who has kissed another man and received simulated oral sex from a man in a theatrical performance does not. Basically, this programming decision suggests the network thinks it's worse for them to be associated with gay male sexuality than with a straight male perpetrator of relationship violence.

Regarding the cancellation of Adam Lambert's appearance, an ABC insider told the New York Post:

"He was not canceled over a gay kiss. He showed himself to be unpredictable on live TV."

I'm particularly disgusted by the explanation for why ABC is giving Chris Brown access to such a public platform:

The top ABC insider added: "Chris Brown's interview was booked way before Adam Lambert took to the stage. It is to give him a chance to respond to Rihanna's interview..."

ABC has at least decided they will not give Chris Brown the chance to perform a song. Of course, a performance would have just been the most obvious way the appearance served as an advertisement for Chris Brown's music. He still gets the platform of an interview on a major network, which will now also be shown on 20/20, to put himself in the public eye.

Adam Lambert, on the other hand, lost his chance to promote his career on ABC the moment he locked lips with another man during his AMA performance. Lambert actually has some valuable things to say to a mainstream TV audience about reaction to his performance. His voice should be heard in this moment, but ABC is more comfortable tacitly supporting the homophobes who want Adam Lambert silenced.

You can contact ABC to let them know how you feel about this decision here.

Since ABC won't give him the chance to speak on their network, let alone perform again, I'm including the music video for Adam Lambert's "For Your Entertainment" after the jump (hey, isn't that the guy he kissed at the AMAs rubbing up on Glambert toward the end of the video?)

Today is the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. It's been officially celebrated since 1999 when the United Nations general assembly adopted this resolution formally acknowledging the day.

November 25th was picked as the date in commemoration of the murder of three Mirabal sisters in the Dominican Republic. The sisters were assassinated by the Trujillo dictatorship because of their work in opposition to the regime. The assassination led to uprising which forced Trujillo to step down.

Today also marks the first of sixteen days of activism to end violence against women which ends with Human Rights Day.

Charming. Video from Media Matters.

Via Broadsheet.

You know, we've written about police brutality and taser violence before...but this just beats all.

*Strong trigger warning*

I'm sorry, but how the fuck could a game titled, "Hit the Bitch" be anti-violent?

Apparently the game was created by a Danish anti-violence organization, and allows the user to use either their mouse or hand (through the webcam) to hit this woman virtually enough times to the point where she is so bloody and bruised that the screen tells the person they're a "100% Idiot" and gives some information about intimate partner violence. I don't really care what words you throw out after the game is over - the main message is the game and that message is straight up glorifying violence against women. Jill has more.

If you think this campaign is more damaging that it is advocating, email the organization that created the game and tell them so.

This is the kind of story that makes you wonder about the basic goodness of people.

A group of past and present University of Sydney students set up a ''pro-rape'' page in the sports and recreation section on Facebook, describing themselves as ''anti-consent''.

The male students, mostly from the elite, all-male St Paul's College, initially ensured the ''Define Statutory'' group had an open, public profile, and proudly displayed their membership on their personal Facebook pages.

Both the commander of the NSW Police sex crimes unit and the head of the NSW Rape Crisis Centre condemned the site, describing it as ''grooming perpetrators of sexual violence''.

And people have the nerve to argue rape culture doesn't exist...

Outside of the general horribleness of this story, Hortense at Jezebel asks a really great question: Why would Facebook allow this group to exist for so long?

This is a social networking site that refuses to let women post pictures of themselves breastfeeding, mind you, but it's okay to make a "hilarious" pro-rape group in the "Sports and Recreation" category? The group was public, by the way, accessible to anyone and visible to all. Interesting, isn't it, that in the eyes of Facebook, a woman shouldn't be allowed to show her breasts while feeding her child, but it's perfectly acceptable for men to make a highly public "sport" out of rape.

A new report from the Parents Television Council, Women in Peril, found a 120% increase in depictions of violence against women on television since 2004. (In the same time period, violence that occurred irrespective of gender only increased by 2%.)

Cumulatively, across all study periods and all networks, the most frequent type of violence was beating (29%), followed by credible threats of violence (18%), shooting (11%), rape (8%), stabbing (6%), and torture (2%). Violence against women resulted in death 19% of the time. Violence towards women or the graphic consequences of violence tends overwhelmingly to be depicted (92%) rather than implied (5%) or described (3%).

Even more disturbingly, there has been a 400% increase in the depiction of teen girls as victims of violence.

The report notes that the portrayals of violence against women, especially young women, "with increasing frequency, or as a trivial, even humorous matter, the networks may be contributing to an atmosphere in which young people view aggression and violence against women as normative, even acceptable." (Emphasis mine)

h/t Sociological Images

We'll have more to say on this once the full interview is up, but for now, check out this moving excerpt of Rihanna's interview with Diane Sawyer.

Really interesting choice, huh? I covered that she would be in Glamour on Tuesday, but didn't discuss that they had made her Woman of the Year.

Glamour Magazine chose her as one of their "Women of the year." Although the article does not go into depth about her experience of domestic violence or any treatment she may have received, she does openly discuss the shame and isolation she endured...

...Many women who have suffered from domestic violence also feel that same sense of loss and loneliness. The shame women feel from choosing an abusive partner and feeling that they "allowed" it to happen can also contribute to not seeking help. Sometimes when women do reach out for support from their families or friends, they feel judged and retreat more.

Women who find themselves with abusive partners typically do not have media hounding them day and night after their abuse is reported to authorities. They also do not have the public scrutinizing their involvement and reactions.

I can understand that Glamour chose to do this because it brings to light the issue of violence against women, but it seems a little soon and potentially exploitative of her story. As the article asks, I have to wonder if this was her choice and part of her healing process or created by her PR team to support her upcoming single? And hours before her 20/20 interview tomorrow, MTV is airing an interview with Chris Brown. The media spectacle of it does give me pause.

In other news, his new tour is doing lousy. Wonder if it is connected to his "anger issues?"

In response to the constant objectification of women, the recent gang rape of a 15 year old girl in Richmond, CA, the unjust incarceration of Sara Kruzan and even the highly publicized violence faced by Rihanna, conscientious rapper and activist Jasiri X has put out a track that discusses the injustice and inhumanity of these crimes.

Love it. Lyrics after the jump.

Lynn Hecht Schafran and Jillian Weinberger of Legal Momentum (a women's legal defense and education fund) say that recent reports from the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) underestimate the number of rapes among persons with disabilities and women.

Schafran and Weinberger point specifically to two reports, Crime Against Persons with Disabilities (2007) and Female Victims of Violence (2008), arguing that the methodology for both were flawed.

Crime Against Persons with Disabilities, for example, excluded institutionalized people with disabilities - a huge omissions considering that sexual assault and abuse happen at extremely high rates in institutional settings. Schafran and Weinberger also note that the statistic in the report related to reporting abuse to the police is only "based on 10 or fewer sample cases."

Female Victims of Violence - which showed that rape rates have decreased significantly recently, has similar methodological problems.

Earlier this year, Rihanna became the center for a media spectacle after being attacked by then boyfriend Chris Brown and having pictures of her released. Brown has made several public appearances, "apologizing," and defending himself. But Rihanna hadn't made a peep, it was just continual speculation about whether it was her fault (!) or if they had gotten back together.

Well, Rihanna is speaking out now. She will be on the Today Show this Thursday, along with 20/20 this Friday and is featured in the December issue of Glamour. Some bits of her interviews have been released and she is putting forth the words of a confident, young woman that got the support she needed to deal with this painful and humiliating situation.

Speaking to "Good Morning America," the singer will send the message, "This happened to me. ... It can happen to anyone," according to excerpts of the interview released on Tuesday (November 3).

Rihanna, 21, also reportedly tells Diane Sawyer that the attack by Brown was especially difficult because of how she felt about him before the incident occurred. "He was definitely my first big love," she said in an interview that will continue on Friday night's "20/20."

The singer also opened up for the December issue of Glamour magazine, describing how she coped with the aftermath of the assault. "I went to sleep as Rihanna and woke up as Britney Spears," she said in the Women of the Year issue, out on November 10. "That was the level of media chaos that happened the next day. It was like, 'What, there are helicopters circling my house? There are 100 people in my cul-de-sac? What do you mean, I can't go back home?' "

Check out Ann's newest column at Tapped, titled The Polanksi Paradox, on some of the drawbacks to taking legal action with respect to violence against women.

It's understandable, given the prevalence of violence against women in this country, to want to push for big, systemic solutions to the problem. That is the premise on which VAWA was based. But the deeply personal nature of this crime is what makes such a broad response inherently problematic. Many observers were shocked when Rihanna chose not to press charges against Brown. The woman who, as a child, was raped by Polanski later said that she wished prosecutors would drop the case. This may be hard to accept for those of us who saw the photos of Rihanna's bruised face or read the damning testimony from Polanski's trial, but these women have a right to decline to get involved with the justice system. Violence against women is a public scourge, but respecting survivors' wishes must be paramount.

Go read the whole thing.

Yesterday was the The National Day of Action Against Police Brutality, and guess what went down in Brooklyn? Yes, just that. From a reader:

This morning at 11:30am a young woman was having an altercation with about 8 folks from the nypd at the R/M 25th st stop in bklyn. After it was over and she was on her way to the turn style, they came back to arrest her. When she resisted, they tasered her. Clearly, I don't know the background, but she was one, unarmed, woman and the tasering was undeniably excessive.

This is breaking news, so I don't know if anyone is organizing around this incident, but please use the comments section as a place to link folks to that work if and when it happens!

Related posts:
Police Taser Disabled Man for Not Leaving Bathroom
Obama on Skip Gates
Understanding the Dialogue Around Lovelle Mixon
Understanding the Dialogue Around Lovelle Mixon Part II
Justice for Oscar Grant-Please spread widely!
Justice for Oscar Grant: Update on Fruitvale BART Protest

*Content is triggering*

This story speaks for itself. From the free Sara Kruzan action page at change.org:

"Life without parole means absolutely no opportunity for release," said Senator Yee. (of California) "It also means minors are often left without access to programs and rehabilitative services while in prison. This sentence was created for the worst of criminals that have no possibility of reform and it is not a humane way to handle children. While the crimes they committed caused undeniable suffering, these youth offenders are not the worst of the worst."

"As a society we've learned a lot since the time we started using life without parole for children," said Elizabeth Calvin, a children's rights advocate with Human Rights Watch. "We now know that this sentence provides no deterrent effect. While children who commit serious crimes should be held accountable, public safety can be protected without subjecting youth to the harshest prison sentence possible."

Watch. Listen. Weep. Take Action.

Also, read our previous coverage on prisons.

When Kathy Cleaves-Milan's live-in boyfriend abused her she did what society is always telling abused women to do: she reported him to the police. And what did she get for bravely doing "the right thing?" She go evicted.

A day after she told police that her live-in boyfriend had brandished a gun and promised to end both of their lives, the managers of her Elmhurst, Ill., apartment complex served her with eviction papers for violating the terms of the lease, citing the criminal activity she had reported to police.

"I was punished for protecting myself and my daughter," Cleaves-Milan, 36, said.

Cleaves-Milan's lawyers are suing the company that owns her apartment building, alleging that her eviction was a form of sex discrimination - based on her gender and status as a DV survivor. And get this:

A representative of the company said the eviction wasn't solely about the domestic violence but also involved Cleaves-Milan's ability to afford the rent if her boyfriend moved out -- an assertion Cleaves-Milan strongly rejects.

If that's was really the case, should Cleaves-Milan should have stayed with her abusive boyfriend in order to pay the rent? This is why women don't - and often can't - leave abusive relationships.

The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) bans victims who live in public or subsidized housing from eviction, but the law concerning private landlords is not as clear.

Sandra Park, a staff attorney in the ACLU Women's Rights Project says that this "forces women into a situation where they have to choose between reaching out for safety or staying in their homes."

For more information on employment and housing rights for victims of intimate partner violence, click here.

Via Feminists for Choice.

Picture via Chicago Tribune.

Michael Kimmel is an author, teacher and activist, and is widely acknowledged as America's most prominent and prolific scholar on masculinity. Kimmel is the author of a staggering number of books, including Men Confront Pornography, The History of Men, The Gendered Society and Manhood in America (noticing a theme?). Most recently, Kimmel's book Guyland examined the lives of young American men. To write it, Kimmel interviewed hundreds of men between the ages of 15 and 25, using their words and his expertise to draw a frightening picture of young American manhood today. Luckily, Kimmel has a one-word solution to the problem: feminism.

Kimmel lives in Brooklyn with his wife, Amy Aronson, with whom he frequently co-writes, and their 10-year-old son Zachary, a budding male feminist. He is a Professor of Sociology at SUNY Stonybrook, where he teaches on gender and masculinity, and has taught and lectured all over the world. He is also a frequent contributor at The Huffington Post. And as if all this wasn't impressive enough, last year he was brought in as a consultant on gender politics during the production of Feministing's favorite TV show, Mad Men.

And now, without further ado, the Feministing Five, with Michael Kimmel.

Just when you think that insurance companies can't get any lower than scum on this whole pre-existing condition mess, think again. As we've posted before, several states allow for domestic violence to be listed as a pre-existing condition. Some recent data (also in the link) reports:

An informal survey by the House Judiciary Committee in 1994 found that half of the 16 largest insurers in the country considered domestic violence in deciding whether to approve health coverage. The Pennsylvania insurance Department reported a year or so later that nearly one out of four insurance companies factored in domestic violence when deciding whether to issue or renew policies.

Ryan Grim at Huff Po has updates on the measures that some state reps have taken to stamp out this kind of discrimination. He also sums the issue up here:

Under the cold logic of the insurance industry, it makes perfect sense: If you are in a marriage with someone who has beaten you in the past, you're more likely to get beaten again than the average person and are therefore more expensive to insure.

In human terms, it's a second punishment for a victim of domestic violence.

I wonder what else we don't know that counts against us as women. Talk about a double disadvantage. The good news? Democrats have vowed to ban on the practice in the health care reform legislation.

This guy is pretty awesome. After leading police to a man wanted for sexual assault and battery in the UK, Lloyd Gardner was told he was being given 10,000 pounds as a reward. Instead of taking the money, he gave it to the survivor:

He spotted two women he knew on the film - and they led police to rapist Jakub Tomczak.

Mr Gardner said he did not deserve the reward and hoped the cash would help the woman rebuild her life.

"It was a difficult decision to make because it is a lot of money and it would have been very helpful but I didn't feel like a deserved it at all."

The 48-year old survivor suffered a skull fracture and severe brain damage from the attack.

Considering the history of the UK agency that is supposed to give reparations to rape survivors, it feels hopeful to know we have folks like Gardner on our side.

I mentioned in a What We Missed post two weeks ago that an organization based in DC had decided to close it's doors after the DC government slashed their budget almost completely. A group of volunteers and founders from the almost ten year old domestic violence organization (one of the biggest in the District) got together to try and save WEAVE. And save they did!

I am very, very excited to tell you that it's official... we have saved WEAVE!

On the morning of September 30th, the Board of Directors officially voted to keep WEAVE open. This is a long-term commitment not just a temporary reprieve. Every dollar of the more than $85,000 you helped the team behind the SaveWEAVE.org effort raise was pivotal in convincing a consortium of foundation funders to make a significant investment that will keep WEAVE going in the coming months.

All in all, more than 700 gifts were made to SaveWEAVE.org in just 10 days! This campaign has truly been one of the most amazing things I've ever been a part of and I cannot thank you enough for being part of it, too, by making a gift and helping us get the word out. Every one of you has a special place in WEAVE's history for helping us make sure that domestic violence survivors still have WEAVE to turn to.

We have all been overwhelmed by the breadth and depth of support WEAVE has. This proves that WEAVE is viable and is necessary in our community. WEAVE has had to make some changes in order to stay strong and continue to pay a key role in the community. Unfortunately, that has meant some lay-offs of staff and the transfer to SAFE (another domestic violence organization in DC) of a very long-standing program that WEAVE adopted in the early 2000s that helps people file the necessary paperwork to seek court-ordered protection orders. WEAVE is very grateful to SAFE and so many other partner organizations that were willing to help during this tumultuous time.

I know the work of WEAVE in the DC community and chipped in what I could to this campaign. I'm really happy to know that the larger community values their work as well, and as tight as times are, folks were willing to chip in. Their struggles are still ahead of them, as $85,000 does not replace the budget of a large organization, but hopefully we can ensure women in DC still have access to their import domestic violence support and services.

If you still want to support WEAVE, they are continuing their push to raise money.

But that doesn't mean the rate of rapes in this country still isn't really high.

USA Today reports that FBI data shows that the rate of reported rapes in the U.S. has gone down considerably.

The FBI estimates 89,000 women reported being raped in 2008 -- 29 women for every 100,000 people. That's down from a high of 109,062 reported rapes in 1992 -- 43 women for every 100,000 people. Data for 2009 are not yet available.

"We have seen reform in how police work with victims, gather evidence and investigate rape; we've seen increased awareness of the crime, and we've seen better prosecution," says Michael Males, senior researcher for the Center on Juvenile & Criminal Justice in San Francisco. "Hospitals now have rape kits that they didn't have 40 years ago" which make it easier to collect an attacker's DNA and other evidence of a crime.

Okay, I'm glad - really glad - that the number of reported rapes have declined. (Thanks, feminism and VAWA!) But there are still over tens of thousands of women a year who are reporting being raped - imagine how many more are not reporting their assaults.

And even if we have made inroads in terms of police and rape kits (though even that is debatable), the culture that condones and excuses rape is far from gone.

Males says in the USA Today piece that today, "you don't see the nightmarish trials of the 1960s where a woman's reputation would be brought into question and people would conclude she deserved it." But the thing is...we really do see that kind of victim-blaming. All the time.

So while, we should thank feminism for the small victories surrounding sexual assault legislation and policy - let's continue to fight the rape culture that makes this country such an unsafe place for women.

You don't even have to watch, and you know it's going to be good.

This post reminds me why Amanda Hess at The Sexist is quickly becoming one of my favorite bloggers.

Update: Apparently Feministing love for Hess runs deep. My bad.

I had to post a link to the new movie, Precious:

I am halfway through Push, the book by Sapphire that the movie is based on. It is not often that so many issues women face are embodied in one character. From racism, sizism, sexual violence, domestic violence, welfare issues, colorism, ablism, and many, many more -- this is the ultimate feminist primer! I am not quite sure what to make of how Precious' mother's character, played by Mo'Nique, is being framed as the "monstrous matriarch." On one hand, giving her villainous character, it seems fitting. On the other hand, what does it mean that the black single mom has once again gotten this branding? This is especially interesting considering the villainous male characters in the story that seem conspicuously absent from this trailer.

On another note, I posted earlier this week about Tyler Perry. He is serving as an executive producer of this film, alongside Oprah. Again, I think we can log some progress points for Perry on this one. It will be important to see what, if any, the trade offs will be.

But, after all, I'm just a cautious optimist. Preliminary thoughts?

I am totally floored to read about the attack against Tasha Hill, an African-American woman in Morrow, Georgia, which occurred last week in a Cracker Barrel -- all in front of her 7-year old daughter. My heart goes out to her as she pursues justice. But it seems she might have two fights on her hands: trial by law and trial by media.

CNN's coverage of this event by Rick Sanchez on Thursday was on the shady side. To be totally honest, I really don't watch him that much to know whether he is an ally or an enemy. My suspicion first rose, though, when he framed this piece of news as something that he had been twittered, blogged and e-mailed about.

I wasn't sure if this was simply standard protocol, an innocent appeal to plug CNN's new media. But given that the event happened a week ago and he was just reporting it now, it felt like the media had to be lobbied by readership that demonstrated that there was a growing demand for this news story. And only after this demand was quantified was this black woman's story important enough to cover.

Then, I almost dropped my Miso soup when he started the interview asking the survivor if she "provoked this incident."   This man called her the N-word and the B-word, punched and kicked her several times and she can be asked if the crime was provoked??!!!??   I made a second attempt to assume best intent. Perhaps, this was also a protocol Sanchez was upholding to frame the event from both sides. But because of this framing, Tasha Hill's lawyer, Kip Jones, remained on the defensive throughout the interview clarifying more than once that she did not provoke this attack. Not once did anyone state that attacks of this nature cannot be provoked. That there is no justification for racism and sexism and certainly none for the violence that historically and increasingly accompany these isms.

So I ask, are these simply protocols? Or is there some underlying truth about these protocols that coincide with the reality that a Black woman has survived this crime?

Can we be surprised? Via the Frisky, according to Bill Maher, choking a woman is A-OK if she's an annoying, promiscuous publicity whore, right?

Said Maher:

New rule: stop acting surprised someone choked Tila Tequila! The surprise is that someone hasn't choked this bitch sooner.

And I don't give a rat's ass what actually happened with San Diego Charger Shawne Merriman that night; where the charges are true or not, it doesn't make jokes about violence against women acceptable. It's never acceptable.

Sam Riche/AP Photo

*Possible trigger warning*

Many of you have probably heard about the arrest of former GOP lawmaker and one-time gubernatorial candidate Steve Nunn, whose ex-girlfriend was shot and killed on Friday. Hours later, Nunn slit his wrists.

While Nunn (who survived) is pleading not guilty to the charges made - he had a domestic violence order against him by victim Amanda Ross and found with a gun at the scene of his suicide attempt - his lawyer Astrida Lemkins is saying that the issuance of the domestic violence order this past winter "caused all the problems":

"It caused Steve Nunn to lose his job, reputation and drove him to slit his wrists," she said.

"If there does turn out to be a relationship between the death of Amanda Ross and Steve Nunn, it is not because the DVO failed, but rather because the DVO was issued," said Lemkins.

Lemkins said Ross should have also been held accountable for her role in the domestic violence incident.

"Things are not black and white," she said. "There's a lot of gray in there."

Um, what? Whatever Steve Nunn has done to himself and to Ross is absolutely no fault but his own - to place any blame on a woman who was not only a victim of abuse but has no opportunity to defend herself (because, you know, her life was taken from her) is inhuman.

Furthermore, blaming the DVO made against him after he repeatedly beat Ross and implying that if he did kill her, that could have been avoided sounds pretty damn similar to threats used to keep women in abusive relationships; in other words, if she hadn't went to the authorities and caused trouble, she would be alive right now.

There are just no words for this kind of offense.

h/t to reader Katie

Incredibly disturbing news from the SEIU blog:

[I]n DC and nine other states, including Arkansas, Idaho, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wyoming, insurance companies have gone too far, claiming that "domestic violence victim" is also a pre-existing condition.

For more information, read the National Women's Law Center report, Nowhere to Turn: How the Individual Health Insurance Market Fails Women.

Related: A cartoon from Mikhaela Reid

UPDATE: In April, Arkansas prohibited insurance discrimination against DV survivors

Mark Whicker, a sport columnist at The Orange County Register, had a terrible idea for an article: use the imprisonment, systematic rape, and forced pregnancy Jaycee Dugard was subjected to by Phillip Garrido as an excuse to talk about moments from the last 18 years of sports that Whicker wanted to rant about. Then, Whicker actually wrote this article. Someone actually approved it. And the Orange County Register actually published it. In case you needed evidence of the institutionalization of rape culture.

It doesn't sound as if Jaycee Dugard got to see a sports page.

Box scores were not available to her from June 10, 1991 until Aug. 31 of this year.

She never saw a highlight. Never got to the ballpark for Beach Towel Night. Probably hasn't high-fived in a while.

She was not allowed to spike a volleyball. Or pitch a softball. Or smack a forehand down the line. Or run in a 5-footer for double bogey.

Now, that's deprivation.

Can you imagine? Dugard was 11 when she was kidnapped and stashed in Phillip Garrido's backyard. She was 29 when she escaped. Penitentiary inmates at least get an hour of TV a day. Dugard was cut off from everything but the elements.

How long before she fully digests the world she re-enters? How difficult to adjust to such cataclysmic change?

More than that, who's going to explain the fact that there's a President Obama?

I'm sorry, how does any of this, including Obama's presidency, matter in comparison to the hell Dugard was put through by Garrido? In what world is missing events in sports history the relevant "deprivation" Dugard experienced? How can a person write a sentence like this: "I know you've had trouble digesting all this so far, but they also built a basketball arena at USC. Honest to God." You think the building of a basketball arena will be hard for this woman to digest? Seriously Whicker, how clueless are you?

Unsurprisingly, Whicker and The Orange County Register got a lot of negative, outraged feedback on the article. So Whicker issued an "apology."

It was not my intention to do so. But it's obvious that I miscalculated the effect the column on Jaycee Dugard, and the events that she might have missed during her captivity, had on those who read, buy and advertise in our newspaper. ...

I'll try to earn back the trust of those customers in my future endeavors.

Whicker is sorry he lost the paper paying customers and probably advertisers? That's what he apologizes for? There's no overstating how messed up Whicker's priorities are. You know we live in an overwhelmingly oppressive patriarchal and misogynist world when Garrido can imprison Dugard for eighteen years and enough people can fail to understand the weight of the sexual and reproductive violence she experienced that both the original article and subsequent "apology" could be published.

Mark Whicker can be contacted at mwhicker@ocregister.com. Contact information for plenty more people at The Orange County Register responsible for the publication of these articles can be found at this page.

h/t to Vanessa's friend Mary Alice.

Previously: Friday Feminist Fuck You: Philip Garrido

Inappropriate nicknames are turning bizarre assaults into hilarious encounters on college campuses.

At Georgetown University yesterday morning, an unknown man revived a year-long series of assaults between GWU, Georgetown, and American University in which he breaks into women's apartments near campus, lies down next to or on top of them while they sleep, attempts to enter them with his hand, then runs away when they scream. This earned him the nickname "The Georgetown Cuddler."

This March at the University of California, Berkeley, a man targeted young women wearing dresses and skirts, and attempted to penetrate them with his hand before running away. Many of the assaulted students were en route from frat or sorority parties on Piedmont Avenue, and the man was dubbed the "Piedmont Poker," and the "Digital Penetrator," after the police report for "digital penetration."

News coverage of assaults has varied results; it can empower women by condemning the violence, but can also heighten fear in the discussion of diminished personal safety. It is possible that these inappropriate nicknames could serve as coping mechanisms for some students to alleviate their fears. Monikers can turn horror into humor. But in the long run, they diminish the seriousness of the situation.

When someone "cuddly" has "surprise sex" with or "pokes" women, reporting it as such excuses the attacker, dismisses violence as acceptable, and condescends to survivors.

The Sexist took this on in Feburary.

That is more or less all Chris Brown could say in this teaser of his Larry King interview when discussing his feelings about attacking his ex-girlfriend Rihanna.

It's like he completely disconnects himself from that person who did what he can't even publicly say he did. Tracy from Broadsheet hits the nail on the head in her sum-up of what this guest appearance seems to be: convincing the public that he is a good boy who would never do such a thing, that he still loves Rihanna and doesn't even remember brutalizing and threatening to kill her (despite prior incidences), and in other words, he's talking the same talk most abusers do but imploring America - not Rihanna - to forgive him.

Ugh.

UPDATE: A reader alerted us to Brown clarifying that he does, in fact, remember the attack.
Approximate transcript after the jump.

Josh Phillips and Rachel Griffin make one heck of a team. The pair met at Central Michigan University, where they were both members of Sexual Aggression Peer Advocates, CMU's sexual assault education and prevention group. Today, they're taking the mission of that group off campus and all over the country.

Dr. Griffin is an Assistant Professor of Speech Communication at Southern Illinois University. Griffin's written works, including her doctoral dissertation, address the intersection of gender and race.

Phillips is the founder of East Coast Walkers, a group of CMU students who, in the summer of 2008, walked from Miami to Boston to raise awareness about sexual violence. His book about the experience, 1800 Miles, comes out this fall. The Walkers blogged about their trek along the way, and one entry, written from South Carolina, filled me with hope:

"Something remarkable keeps happen on this trip: our restaurant bills disappear. We will stop in a small mom and pop diner, the waitress will undoubtedly inquire what we are doing, and an eavesdropping patron will sneakily pay our tab as we devour whatever food is on the table. It must be magic..."

It's not magic, but something better: it's a sign that Phillips, Griffin and the East Coast Walkers are not alone in wishing and working for an end to sexual violence.

Phillips and Griffin regularly team up to speak about sexual violence, and to teach workshops on awareness and prevention. Their team approach works well, Griffin says, because when they're addressing a crowd on the topic of sexual violence, "there are people who can hear Josh who can't hear me and vice versa."

And now, without further ado, the inaugural Feministing Five, with Rachel Griffin and Josh Phillips.

Ann already mentioned this video - made by a group of young people in Chicago discussing rape culture - but I wanted to make sure we posted it as well...

Transcript after the jump.

*Trigger Warning*

Because being raped isn't traumatic enough, let's throw in some blame shame. Via Hartford Courant.

The woman allowed Fricker to go through her wallet and told him to take it, but Fricker demanded she take off her clothes. He then sexually assaulted her for several minutes while he pointed the gun at the children and threatened to sexually assault one of them. The attack stopped when another car pulled up and the woman screamed. Fricker fled and was arrested three days later in White Plains, N.Y.

In the civil suit, the woman claims Fricker had been in the hotel and garage behaving suspiciously days before the attack and on the afternoon of the attack, but the hotel failed to notice him, apprehend him or force him to leave, the Stamford Advocate reported. The suit also claims that during the attack security personnel did not see Fricker or stop him.

The hotel claims in their special defense that the hotel had not been notified about Fricker and that his acts were unforeseen and beyond their control, the newspaper reported

Thanks to Jaclyn for the heads up.

The responses to the recent Pennsylvania shooting speaks volumes about how we view (or ignore) misogyny.

In the aftermath of George Sodini's horrific crime, I took some solace in the fact that the media was covering the crime as one targeted towards women. (Something they failed to do several years ago when similar shootings occurred.) And this weekend, I was even more heartened - and not at all surprised - to see Bob Herbert of The New York Times link the shooting to our culture's hatred of women:

We have become so accustomed to living in a society saturated with misogyny that the barbaric treatment of women and girls has come to be more or less expected.

We profess to being shocked at one or another of these outlandish crimes, but the shock wears off quickly in an environment in which the rape, murder and humiliation of females is not only a staple of the news, but an important cornerstone of the nation's entertainment.

Yet despite the links being made in the mainstream media, and the numerous bloggers and reporters who have shown that Sodini had ties to the "pick up artist" community and probably would have fit in well with the "Nice Guy" sect as well - some people are aghast that anyone would link Sodini's crime to a larger culture of misogyny.

Take, for example (and this is just one of many), conservative anti-feminist blogger Cassy Fiano - who after a roundup of feminist blogger responses to the shooting, writes:

...To say that it is a "culture-wide problem" because America is apparently just still so misogynistic is ridiculous and wrong. And feminists know that. Most men do not harbor secret fantasies of forcing women to have sex with them whether they want to or not, nor do most men dream about enacting violence against women. Yet it doesn't keep feminists from labeling men this way.

What I think it boils down to is that feminists no longer have anything to fight for. And so, a movement that once was dedicated to fighting for equality between sexes has now resorted to slandering all men as angry, violent, women-haters in order to further their own feminist agenda. George Sodini is a sick, evil man who I hope rots in hell for what he's done. And while I don't think feminists are evil, they should still be ashamed of themselves for exploiting a tragedy of this nature in order to continue to smear men.

I genuinely find this kind of reasoning completely fascinating. Calling feminists opportunists and conflating cultural criticisms with man-bashing seems to serve only one purpose - denial. (And some head-patting from misogynists, of course - but that's a post for a different day.) Seriously, I have often wondered why anti-feminists spout what they do. The only answer I've been able to come up with is denial, and an extreme desire to believe that if they're not one of those women (feminists, sluts, etc) then they will be safe. If they can separate themselves from the reality of most women's lives, and the terrifying culture that is misogyny in America, then somehow they will be immune to it all.

Carleton University is being sued by an assault victim who says the school failed to have adequate security measures in the building where she was attacked. In response, Carleton has said that the student didn't keep a "proper lookout" for her own safety and should have locked the door to the lab where she was working.

Erik Halliwell, president of the Carleton University Students' Association, says, "We're quite saddened that it seems the university has viewed this sexual assault in a pretty dismissive manner."

Trigger warning and spoilers ahead

Via Lisa at Sociological Images, we're introduced to Deadgirl - a lauded movie making the independent film circuit. Oh yeah, and it's about kidnapping, rape and necrophilia. Good times!

As if the posters weren't enough to give you pause - you really have to love the tagline "You'll never have anything better" and the sideways mouth-as-vagina - the synopsis reveals just how horrifying this movie actually is.

On Tuesday, George Sodini opened fire in a gym outside Pittsburgh, killing three women at injuring at least ten others. It was a crime he had planned for months - and it was a crime that targeted women.

The New York Post has published the full text of Sodini's blog (read with caution), where - in addition to racist ramblings - he writes about his disdain for women and his plan to kill them.

Time is moving along. Planned to have this done already. I will just keep a running log here as time passes. Many of the young girls here look so beautiful as to not be human, very edible.

...I dress good, am clean-shaven, bathe, touch of cologne - yet 30 million women rejected me - over an 18 or 25-year period. That is how I see it. Thirty million is my rough guesstimate of how many desirable single women there are. A man needs a woman for confidence.

This isn't the first gender-based misogynist shooting in recent years - in 2006 a gunman went into an Amish schoolhouse (also in Pennsylvania), sent the boys outside and opened fire on a dozen girls, killing three. That same year in Colorado, a shooter sexually assaulted six female high school students he had taken hostage, before killing one of them. When these shootings happened, the only person making the misogynist connection was Bob Herbert at The New York Times.

I'm at least glad to see that the mainstream media is reporting this as a crime against women. The Christian Science Monitor even discusses misogyny as a factor in the crime (can't remember the last time I saw that word in a mainstream news outlet):

While the gender-equality movement has made strides in the past century when it comes to some of the more blatant forms of societal misogyny, such as banning women from academic and professional settings, misogyny persists in American and other cultures around the world, according to historians.

"This killer fits into a long pattern of males who harbor hatred towards all women, the image of 'woman,' and towards individual real women, and who take out their frustration on a female scapegoat," says David Gilmore, an anthropology professor at Stony Brook University in New York and author of "Misogyny: the Male Malady."

It's also important to remember that Sodini's crime is not so different from the misogynist violence that women face every day. As Amanda writes:

George Sodini was angry at the entire world of "desirable" women for not up and volunteering to have sex with him, and every day anonymous men around the country and world beat, rape, and even kill women because said women were also considered insufficiently compliant, often to unstated demands that women were supposed to just anticipate and fill without complaint.

As ill as Sodini may have been (and it seems clear from his blog and videos that he was indeed sick), we can't separate this from the larger culture of misogyny and sexism. And also like Amanda, I find it disturbing - and downright frightening - to see how similar Sodini's writing is to a lot of MRA/NiceGuy ramblings we see so often online. Anna at Jezebel even finds some bloggers in the "pick up artist" world who say if women would have just fucked Sodini, he never would have killed.

So yes, let's continue to talk about this horrible shooting as a crime against women. But let's also make sure that we're discussing this not as an isolated crime - but as one part of an incredibly dangerous, culture-wide problem.

More at The Pursuit of Harpyness, WIMN's Voices, and Feministe.

Image via Jezebel

Larry King Live will be doing an interview with Chris Brown this Wednesday, after he was denied by Oprah,

After being turned down by Oprah, Chris Brown is planning to give his first interview since the assault this coming Wednesday on CNN's Larry King show.

According to radaronline.com, he will be formally sentenced on that day and his team is hoping to snag an interview with Larry King immediately afterwards. During the interview, he plans to apologize again and finally talk about the night he assaulted Rihanna. His handlers believe that King will allow Chris the opportunity to get his apology across without facing "brutal questioning".

(h/t Jaclyn Friedman)

Interesting choice of words there, "brutal questioning.." It is clear that Oprah has no love for Chris and I think this show that she dedicated to domestic violence explores that,

I am glad she took a stance and denied him access to her audience with his bullshit plea for us to accept his apology.

I feel I have to continue writing about this story because it continues to boil my blood, so apologies for all the airtime. Last week, I got in an argument with a well known male writer about the way that people were dealing with Chris Brown's apology. The argument revolved around comments left on his facebook page by young men calling Chris Brown "a bitch" for apologizing and a series of comments by young women about how they bought the apology and felt sorry for Chris. I was not shocked by these reactions, but was struggling to find a way to talk across this difference. With the men, I had zero patience and frankly, if you ever think it is OK to hit a woman, under any circumstance, you and I share a world view so vastly different, that I don't know where to begin.

Furthermore, I can't say if these women are drawing from personal experience or they just believe Chris Brown, but I know what it doesn't mean. I don't know what is it like to be in a (physically) abusive relationship, but I know what it means to be around violence or to have it be normalized in the world around you. I know what it is like to live in a world where violence against women is so normalized, that you end up defending the person that hurt you. It is interesting that a facebook comment would create this much turmoil for me, but it did, I was deeply saddened by the comments.

A violent world hurts us all. But I still struggle with the lapse in dialogue that seems harshest along racial and class lines. How do we talk across the difference in experiences with violence to build a broad based anti-violence movement and effectively centralize the needs and voices of those most affected by violence in their lives and their communities? And how do we even begin to tackle the kind of sexism embedded in the statement that Chris Brown was a "bitch" for apologizing. Saying, "they don't mean it like that," or "he would never hurt a woman," is really not good enough.

Related:
On Chris Brown's Public Apology
Black women's bodies, voyeurism and Rihanna
Beyond Chris Brown and Rihanna: An interview with Elizabeth Mendez Berry
The media reminds us, famous women have no right to privacy.
Rihanna and Chris Brown might be getting back together, allegedly.

California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger - making last minute cuts to the budget - eliminated all of the state funding for domestic violence shelters. That's right - all of it.

Although the state Legislature submitted a budget with a 20 percent reduction to the $20.4 million the state provides to agencies that offer domestic violence services, Schwarzenegger slashed the funding by 100 percent Tuesday.

For Catalyst, which relies on state funding for nearly 35 percent of its operating budget, the affect will be "devastating," Executive Director Anastacia Snyder said.

"We're still in shock," Snyder said Wednesday afternoon. "We were bracing for the 20 percent cut, but did not believe the governor could, with a clear conscience, cut 100 percent of funding for services that keep women and children safe and alive."

If you're a resident of California, please click on Stop Family Violence's action alert to urge lawmakers to reinstate funding for the programs that save women's lives. If you're not in CA - pass this on to someone who is! You can also post the following message to your Facebook account, or tweet it: CA Gov Eliminates funding for Domestic Violence Programs. Lives will be lost. You can help! CA residents click http://bit.ly/3jKQSo

Stand up comics say rape "is the new black."

I'm a big fan of stand up comedy. (Wanda Sykes and Margaret Cho, swoon!) I like dirty jokes, controversial comics and dark humor. What I don't think is funny, however, is this:

[Comedy festival] Fringe 2009 also welcomes back Aussie standup Jim Jeffries, whose jokes include: "Women to me are like public toilets. They're all dirty except for the disabled ones." Jeffries tells me: "You can't do a joke these days about black or Asian people - and rightly so - [but] you can do rape jokes on stage and that's not a problem." Why does he think rape is now less of a taboo than racism? "I don't write the rules," he says. Nor, it seems, does he seek to challenge them. [San Francisco comedian Scott] Capurro told me, with some distaste: "For a lot of comics, it's OK to talk about raping women now. That's the new black on the comedy circuit."

I guess I shouldn't be surprised. From Family Guy to Seth Rogen, folks joking about rape and violence against women seems to be the oh-so-hilarious thing to do. (Though of course, it's hardly a new trend.)

What I truly don't understand is how anyone could possibly think that joking about rape is being edgy or somehow fighting against the mainstream - which seems to be what the comics in this Guardian article are arguing. They say they're taking taboos head-on. But the thing is, rape jokes and mocking violence against women are mainstream. They're not a taboo at all - they're the norm, sadly. So all of these comedians giving themselves a pat on the back for being sooo controversial - when all they're doing is upholding the status quo - really fucking irk me.

Because if their rape jokes were actually challenging the mainstream, they'd be subversive, not holding up what American culture already perpetuates - that rape is a-okay. I think what is particularly telling is that so many of the people arguing that jokes about sexual assault are fine are dudes - the demographic that tends to be ones who, well...rape. (And who get assaulted at much lower rates than women.)

Similarly, some of the comedians arguing that racist jokes are okay are white - and appear to believe that we're in some sort of Utopian world where racism and sexism don't exist anymore.

A younger generation see things differently: challenging taboos is less a betrayal of their recent forebears, more a concession to a changing world. "In the 1970s, black and Asian people were getting shit put through their letterboxes," says [comic Richard] Herring. "But the world has moved on. Now we accept the [anti-racist, anti-sexist] tenets of alternative comedy as true, and don't need to patronise audiences any more."

Perhaps the world "has moved on" for Herring - but it sure hasn't for a lot of other folks. So long as racism, sexism, rape, and violence are accepted norms, telling these kind of faux-controversial jokes will do nothing but prop up a culture that thinks rape is not just not a big deal, but hilarious.

Related: Sense and Humor
Melissa's "Rape is Hilarious" post series
I'm Going to Rape You Later

Window displays at Barneys in New York City - featuring blood spattered mannequins who appeared to be fighting off attackers - were taken down after customers were horrified. (Inquiries from The Daily News didn't hurt either, I'm sure.)

Simon Doonan, creative director at the department store, said the windows were done while he was away. "We encourage our display people to be creative. We give them a lot of latitude, but this clearly crossed the line." Uh, yeah. I'd say so.

Related Posts: America's Next Top (Dead) Model
Wrangler features sexydead models
Dead women, furries and rehab: The pinnacle of fashion

Via BUST.

Chris Brown is sorry. Or at least he is sorry enough to almost say what he did (without quite saying it), furrow his brows and remind you that he is still a good boy and you should definitely continue to buy his records.

I don't buy it. I am sure on some level he is sorry, but that is not really the point. This is about what he is saying, accountability for what he did and the quickness with which the American public is willing to take an apology from someone that brutalized his girlfriend to the point of putting her in the hospital. What is most frustrating about this video is that his fans are probably swooning. And the message is clear; beat, bite, punch and strangle your girlfriend, and as long as you apologize, you are a-OK. You might think I am being too harsh, but let's be clear, dominant narratives indicate that when women are victims of violence, the first question people ask is "what did she do wrong?" That was true when the story first broke, message boards everywhere were asking "what she did wrong?" and "it wasn't that bad..." Or let's not forget the headlines that were out and surveys that found young men felt it was Rihanna's fault.

Furthermore, generally when people apologize they mention what they are sorry about. He doesn't mention what he did, while calling it the "situation." Ann just mentioned to me over IM, maybe if we spliced in the picture of what actually happened to Rihanna after the assault, "the situation" wouldn't be so vague and we could remember the extent of her injuries. I am obviously not actually endorsing this and we have written and talked about how TMZ shouldn't have published her picture. The public was fascinated by the picture, but apparently TMZ's claim about "raising awareness" really was bullshit, since so many have quickly forgotten. Anna at Jezebel has a really good analysis of the video. She writes,

By going the vague route, Brown allows fans to forget the visceral reality of what he did -- assaulting Rihanna until her face was swollen and bruised -- and instead focus on all the nice things he says about his mother, his "spiritual advisors," and his commitment to change. By saying he's sorry he didn't "handle the situation better," he casts the beating as a response to a bad "situation" -- and instance of poor conflict resolution, not of flying off the handle. And by implying there was something that needed to be "handled" in some way, this statement subtly implicates Rihanna too.

I concur. But ultimately we are not the ones that this video is for. We know this is bullshit, but the target of this video are other young men and women that might be in this very same situation. They might have to navigate a tense situation, violence might be used and if this is what our role models do, we don't have much to look up to. And while I appreciate him actually discussing that he experienced domestic violence so as to gesture towards cycles of violence, the moral of the story is, "it wasn't really my fault." It was a "bad situation" that he "didn't deal with well," and he himself is a "victim" which is true, but shouldn't be used as an excuse to not have to take direct accountability for his actions.

Yeah, I'm mad. What could he have said to make this an effective apology? Thoughts?

PS: If you really want to feel horrified read what people are saying on twitter about his apology.

Related:
Black women's bodies, voyeurism and Rihanna
Beyond Chris Brown and Rihanna: An interview with Elizabeth Mendez Berry
The media reminds us, famous women have no right to privacy.
Rihanna and Chris Brown might be getting back together, allegedly.

Remember Chrissie Brodigan, the woman who was allegedly assaulted by a NYPD officer who said, "If you're going to act like a woman I'm going to treat you like a woman"? Well, it looks like allegations of anti-Semitic comments during the incident has resulted in her getting fired.

The New York Post "revealed" a witness (very shortly after Gothamist broke the story) who claims she saw Brodigan yell at Officer Witriol, the city's first Hasidic officer, "You f---ing Jew, you're not even human. Jewish people think they own everything." But Brodigan claims (as do other witnesses) that she said nothing of the sort, yet was fired from her job at Plum TV shortly thereafter. Brodigan says:

I was terminated for "equivocating" in the press. My boss [Chris Glowacki] is threatening to not offer an agreeable severance package, including health insurance, which is crucial because i have cystic fibrosis and he is aware. He's angry that this is out in the press. I think he made a judgment based on perceived bigotry.

While obviously we can't know for sure who said what, Brodigan responded with a compelling letter to Gothamist about the allegations and her termination:

There were witnesses at the scene and these witnesses did not hear me make any anti-Semitic remarks and specifically did not recall the existence of the Post's alleged witness. I do not believe that this witness was at the scene nor did any witness hear me make antisemitic remarks.

The truth is that smearing the victim is a classic police technique to cover up abuse and protect the arresting officer. I am not a bigot, and accusations of bigotry are so absurd that I did not think it even necessary to respond to them.
...

These anti-Semitic comments printed by the New York Post never crossed my lips on the day I was wrongfully arrested and physically abused. And, to be even more succinct, those words and statements have NEVER crossed my lips on any other day in my life. EVER.

I believe that ultimately the evidence will come out that the police were involved in the Post's smear job of me, which was an effort to cover up police misconduct.

Brodigan also discloses her social justice-oriented academic background and that she has "devoted [her] adult life to studying and supporting the civil rights of minorities."

If Brodigan is right (and I'd personally believe her pug over the Post), the level of bullshit going on here is completely obscene. A woman who is slandered and subsequently fired (not to mention without the decency of health insurance extension, which she obviously needs) for being assaulted is pretty unreal.

Although I'm not holding my breath, I hope the truth is revealed behind this story; injustice has been committed here, one way or another.

Photo by Jason Wagner, via Gothamist.

The Obama Administration took a step in the right direction this week regarding immigration reform and domestic violence in attempts to reverse Bush's policy (or lack thereof) concerning DV survivors seeking asylum in the U.S.

The action was taken due to the revisiting of the landmark case of Rodi Alvarado (trigger warning), a Guatemalan woman who sought asylum in the U.S. because she feared for her life; her common law husband (who was really more her captor than anything) consistently beat her and raped her at gunpoint, including tried to burn her alive when he found out she was pregnant. Because there was no U.S. asylum law specifying for the protection of DV survivors, she wasn't granted asylum and was forced to leave her children in Guatemala when fleeing to the U.S.

Even as recently as last year, the case was addressed where Bush administration lawyers argued that Alvarado and other survivors could not meet the standards of U.S. asylum. According to the Times:

Any applicant for asylum or refugee status in the United States must demonstrate a "well-founded fear of persecution" because of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or "membership in a particular social group." The extended legal argument has been whether abused women could be part of any social group that would be eligible under those terms.

And Alvarado wasn't a part of any "persecuted group." Right.

Now the administration has submitted an immigration appeals court filing, requesting that Alvarado's case be further reviewed. While this may be a good sign of how Obama plans to handle immigration reform and undocumented women's rights, there are still strict requirements for asylum:

[A]bused women will need to show that they are treated by their abuser as subordinates and little better than property, according to an immigration court filing by the administration, and that domestic abuse is widely tolerated in their country. They must show that they could not find protection from institutions at home or by moving to another place within their own country.

Not to mention the issue of women seeking asylum from genital mutilation is not included in the new policy. But while these "requirements" aren't leaving me with a huge feeling of victory, it's certainly the right step moving forward.

I've written about GEMS (Girls Educational and Mentoring Services) before. Basically, I think they are the shit. In more official terms, they are "the nation's largest survivor-led organization serving American girls and young women who have experienced sex trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation." You may remember the amazing documentary on their work called Very Young Girls, which is now available via Netflix.

Well GEMS is at it again. This time they're joining forces with Beyoncé Knowles, Halle Berry, Demi Moore, Sinead O'Connor, Mary J Blige, Katie Ford and women across America for their Girls Are Not for Sale campaign. According to GEMS:

The campaign will use e-activism, live events, all-star artist collaborations and other initiatives to promote girls empowerment and education as critical tools in the fight against child traffickers and pimps who victimize between 100,000 and 300,000 American children and teens each year.

After seeing the film, Beyonce said, "I don't know how anyone could see that documentary and not want to help those young women. I didn't want to just donate money, I wanted them to know that someone really cared about them. My time, my heart, my ears, and my voice are the biggest gifts I could think to give." She hung out with the girls featured in the film and others who are now working with GEMS, and reflected: "I wanted to listen to every girl's story and the stories were all so different. I watched them dance. I heard them sing. I asked lots of questions. They were so open and so brave."

You go Ms. Fierce. Want to get involved? Join the Council of Daughters:

GEMS hopes many more women will join Knowles and other artists in spreading the girls' message. The organization has launched a national social network, The Council of Daughters, to empower women and girls to bring the needs of young survivors into local communities. Through its online hub - http://www.councilofdaughters.ning.com - Council members can meet, share news and ideas, plan campaign events, raise funds and introduce the needs of girls to their friends through a variety of social media tools. Council members across the country, in conjunction with Netflix, the world's largest online movie rental service, will host National Viewing Nights to celebrate the online and DVD premiere of 'Very Young Girls'.

We'd love to hear about your viewing night experience on our community site, so get registered, get watching, get reflecting, and make the world a better place for this country's most vulnerable girls.

On June 19 -- that's right, during Pride Month -- Leslie Moya (pictured above), a transgender woman from Queens, was walking home from a nightclub when two men assaulted her and brutally beat her with a belt buckle.

They stopped only when a passing motorist threatened to call the police. Throughout the attack, Leslie's assailants called her a "faggot" in Spanish. The attack left Leslie with multiple injuries, including bruises all over her body, and stitches in her scalp. Police called to the scene found Leslie nearly naked and bleeding on the sidewalk. They also recovered a belt buckle from the assailants that was covered in blood.

Despite the fact that Mora was clearly targeted for her (perceived) sexual orientation, the Queens District Attorney is refusing to investigate (PDF) the attack as a hate crime.

If you're a New York State resident, now's a good time to pressure the state Senate to pass the pending transgender hate-crimes legislation, the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA). (It has passed the Assembly and is awaiting Senate action.)

Click here for a list of states with trans-inclusive hate crimes laws. And also check out an alternate view on hate-crimes laws, from the Sylvia Rivera Law Project.

Via Media Matters, I wasn't shocked to find that Rush Limbaugh was happy to mock the White House appointment of Adviser on Violence Against Women Lynn Rosenthal, but felt it necessary to point out his thoughts on what one who occupies the appointment would advise: "Put some ice on it."

It's a domestic violence adviser. What the hell kind of advice are you gonna get? About the only kind of advice - I mean we're talking about democrats here, right? We're talking about the party of Bill Clinton. So I assume If you're going to have a domestic policy adviser, the advice you're gonna get - put some ice on it. Your lip's a little bleeding and swollen - put some ice on it, as you leave the swanky motel room.

Domestic violence, domestic policy, same shit. Read the whole transcript after the jump; his complete inability to make sense shines through.

Note: A reader pointed out that this comment was meant to be a reference to Bill Clinton's allegation of rape against Juanita Broderick, in which in her story, she said Clinton told her to put ice on her swollen lip after the alleged attack.

Vice President Biden announced the appointment of Lynn Rosenthal as the first-ever White House Advisor on Violence Against Women on Friday.

From the Family Violence Prevention Fund:

In this new position, Rosenthal will be a liaison to the domestic violence and sexual assault advocacy community; coordinate with the Department of Justice's Office on Violence Against Women on implementation of Violence Against Women Act programs; coordinate with the Department of Health and Human Services on implementation of Family Violence Prevention Act services (including the National Domestic Violence Hotline); coordinate with the State Department and USAID on global domestic violence initiatives; and drive the development of new initiatives and policy aimed at combating domestic violence and sexual assault with advocacy groups and members of Congress.

Rosenthal's expertise includes housing, state and local coordinated community response, federal policy on violence against women, and survivor-centered advocacy. She most recently served as the Executive Director of the New Mexico Coalition Against Domestic Violence, and was Executive Director of the National Network to End Domestic Violence from 2000 to 2006. She partnered with The Allstate Foundation to develop a highly successful national initiative to promote economic empowerment for survivors of violence.

Click to see larger.

Amnesty International has released a pretty high-tech public awareness campaign against domestic violence: in bus shelters, the poster has an "eye tracker," making the image change from a seemingly happy couple (if you're looking directly at it) to an image of violence when you look away.

The text on the ad says, "It happens when nobody is watching." Thoughts?

h/t to Shara.

Remember the Chris Brown/Rihanna drama? Well, Brown reached a plea deal admitting that he assaulted girlfriend Rihanna with the intent to do "great bodily harm."

via CNN.

Under terms of the agreement, Brown will serve five years of probation and must serve 180 days in jail or the equivalent -- about 1,400 hours -- in "labor-oriented service," said Sandi Gibbons, spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office. He must also undergo a year-long domestic-violence counseling class, she said.

Brown's sentence is comparable to other felony sentences when the defendant has no previous record, she said.

I think it is good that he at least plead guilty to one charge of assault but I am still conflicted on the long-term effectiveness of the sentence.

Thoughts?

In the latest issue of Essence magazine, Queen Latifah speaks candidly about her experience with sexual abuse as a child.

For a short period of time when she was a child, Latifah was the victim of sexual abuse at the hands of a teenager charged with her care. "He violated me," she says of the abuser. "I never told anybody; I just buried it as deeply as I could and kept people at an arm's distance. I never really let a person get too close to me. I could have been married years ago, but I had a commitment issue." Eventually, she opened up to her parents, who separated when she was young.

...She points out that one in four girls is sexually abused in some way. "That's 25 percent of all girls. This is a real problem," she says. Not unlike many victims of abuse, she wondered if she had played a role in what happened. Her talks with a therapist helped her find the unequivocal answer. "He said, 'Imagine yourself as an adult and think about what a child can do to you. Can they beat you? Can they defeat you? No. Now, imagine yourself as that child.' That really helped put things in perspective. I was a kid, and I had no power or control over the situation."

I have been a fan of Queen Latifah for...well, forever. And I think it's wonderful that she's talking about her experience in a way that recognizes just how common sexual abuse is. The US Department of Health and Human Services reports that 15-33% of females and 13-16% of males were sexually abused as children.

Via Racialicious.

Marilu Morales has filed a federal lawsuit after being allegedly shackled while giving birth at Cook County Jail in Chicago.

...Morales was eight months' pregnant when she was incarcerated in April 2008, according to the lawsuit. It could not be immediately determined on what charges Morales was being held.

When she went into labor three days later, she was taken to Stroger. A sheriff's deputy shackled a hand and foot to the hospital bed, the lawsuit alleged.

Morales was in labor for four hours before a physician ordered the deputy to remove the shackles shortly before she gave birth, the lawsuit said. The shackles were allegedly put back on immediately after the baby was born.

This is the fourth lawsuit that Flaxman has filed against Sheriff Tom Dart's office regarding a pregnant prisoner had been shackled while giving birth. Unbelievable.

Related posts: Judge jails HIV positive woman to "protect" her fetus
New report: Mothering in Prison
Woman gives birth in jail cell, alone
Bureau of Prisons bans shackling pregnant inmates
Critical Resistance: Prisons as a Tool of Reproductive Oppression

Today, Catherine Pierce, the Acting Director of the DOJ's Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the importance of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).

Some highlights from her testimony after the jump.

This is pretty unbelievable. Choi Jin-sil, a South Korean actress and model who died by apparent suicide in 2008, is being sued posthumously for failing to maintain a decent image while working as a spokesmodel for the Shinhan Engineering and Construction Co, LTD.

What's worse is that the South Korean Court ruled in their favor. The heirs of Jin-sil are being forced by the courts to repay the damages requested, totaling the equivalent of almost $400,000.

So what is it that Jin-sil did to fail in maintaining a decent image? She was a survivor of her husband's abuse. Pictures were released after Jin-sil ended up in the hospital as a result of this abuse.

From The Chosun Ilbo:

The company paid Choi W250 million in March 2004 for modeling for apartment buildings. The contract included a clause that if Choi disgraced the image of the company by damaging her social and moral image through her own fault, she would repay the firm twice the modeling fee. Five months later, pictures of her beaten and of the inside of her house in a chaotic state were released.

As the clause states above, the fact that the Courts ruled in the company's favor means they actually believe that this abuse was "through her own fault." It's disgusting victim-blaming at it's worst, and shows that some people still blame women for domestic violence.

*Potentially triggering*

This story is intense. An 11 year old was brutally raped. Members of her community beat up the man they think committed the crime. The neighbors will not be charged for the beating. Here's why,

Before making his decision, Ramsey said, he monitored Carrasquillo's condition and reviewed surveillance video of the assault. As soon as officers arrived at the scene, he said, the group stopped the beating.

"These people saw him, he attempted to run and they caught up with him," Ramsey said. "If the injuries had been severe, maybe we'd have to rethink it."

The Philadelphia chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police had offered a $10,000 reward in the rape case.

Carrasquillo has not been charged in the rape, but Ramsey said investigators have very strong forensic evidence and witness identification placing him at the scene.

Marc Lamont Hill makes the point that because of the erasure of the experiences of women of color and specifically black women with sexual violence in the justice system and the news media, there is an understanding within the community that no one is going to do anything about this injustice. So while we may fall on the side of never resorting to violence, many people do not have this privilege.

via Bird of Paradox comes the depressing news that a Memphis resident named Kelvin Denton was recently shot for "misrepresenting gender." (FIVE trans women have been shot in Memphis since 2006.) Cara notes that it's not yet clear whether the victim is transgender or not. But the alleged assailant has apparently made clear that confusion about Denton's gender prompted him to pull the trigger -- the all-too-common "trans panic" defense. Writes Helen at Bird of Paradox,

Mr Taylor told police he carried out the attack because he felt he had been "misled" about Ms Denton's gender - surely a clear indication that that Mr Taylor will be trying to use the trans panic defense to avoid taking responsibility for his actions. However, the Tennessee Transgender Political Coalition have urged Shelby County authorities to "prosecute Taylor aggressively and not permit the use of the trans-panic defense".

Denton is in critical condition.

Right now, California is the only state that has a law that specifically addresses "panic" defenses -- the Gwen Araujo Justice for Victims Act.

Take action: If you live in Tennessee, please contact your state legislators and ask them to add gender identity/expression to "make it easier for state and local authorities to track and prosecute hate crimes against all LGBT Tennesseans."

This is also an appropriate moment for all of us to contact our senators about the importance of including gender identity and expression in the Employee Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). It's looking like ENDA will be introduced in the next several weeks, so now is the time to express your support for gender-identity protections. (Some basic sample language is here.) Helen at en|Gender has more.

UPDATE: Thanks to mfemme in comments for pointing out that Memphis recently passed an anti-discrimination resolution, and noting:

I was *hoping* that passing this legislation a couple days ago would be a step forward for Memphis... passing the anti-discrimination act: which is a big win for LGBT people in Memphis who are forced to stay in the closet for fear of being fired.

But obviously, when LGBT (particularly transgender and genderqueer) folks who are living in a city where they are fearful for THEIR LIVES, what good does it do to say at least we can't get fired for being LGBT? srsly wtf Memphis. the atmosphere there is really hostile towards LGBT people...legislation can only do so much. it's a step, but just not enough to change the mindset citywide.

More information:
Julia Serano: There's Something About "Deception"
States with trans-inclusive hate crimes laws
Banning the "Trans Panic Defense"
What Does "Justice For Angie" Mean?

Recent updates about the photos taken at Abu Ghraib (and being withheld by President Obama) including sexual assault of the detainees is incredibly upsetting, infuriating and fills me with deep shame for being a citizen of a nation whose (previous) administration sanctioned this kind of inhumanity and violence. And these truths are ones that I along with so many others feel must be exposed. Author Tara McKelvey, whose book has accounts from female prisoners of Abu Ghraib, takes on the issue at TAPPED, saying that without the photos it's almost as if the crimes didn't exist:

While reporting my book, Monstering, I heard about an interpreter who had worked at the prison and allegedly raped a 14-year-old boy, and that there was a video or a photograph of the crime that had been recorded by a female soldier. (It wasn't Lynndie England -- I asked her about it.) Military investigators looked into the alleged crime against the boy - but half-heartedly -- and the investigation was eventually dropped. Since there was no photo or video that had been released to the public, it was not a priority.

At the same time, Mark Goldberg at UN Dispatch notes that not a lot of folks are talking in depth about the privacy rights of the detainees who were so brutally assaulted:

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for refocusing "public attention on the torture, humiliation and abuse of prisoners sanctioned by senior Bush administration officials" as Daphne Evitar says. But scanning memeorandum, no one seems to be balancing the rights of victims of sexual abuse with the need to air the previous administration's dirty laundry. (Emphasis mine)

It's so difficult to decide what's "right" in this situation as so many of us are advocates for survivors' rights but also feel that openness is the only way to wake Americans up to the realities of our Iraq policies. I have to say that amidst our horror of these atrocities, my gut feels it would be deeply problematic to ignore the rights of the individuals that these atrocities were perpetrated against.

After everything they have endured, shouldn't detainees be able to decide whether these pictures go public or not? If their privacy rights were violated by these photos being released "for the good of the country," aren't we relying under the same argument pro-torture folks might make for committing these crimes against them?

*Possible trigger warning*

While we haven't been the biggest fans of Amazon as of late and their history of selling a rape simulation game (which they did end up banning), it looks like another game involving violence against women seems to have"slipped" past their radar. "Stockholm: An Exploration of True Love" is a game that allows the user to experience,

"...a terrifyingly vivid exploration of Stockholm Syndrome, a psychological condition in which a captive falls in love with her kidnapper. And you play the part of the kidnapper. With a limited number of options, you must figure out how to make her fall in love with you."

This includes using poison gas on the victim, sexually assaulting her and using psychological abuse against her in efforts to make her "love" you. Unbelievable.

Contact Amazon and let them know that profiting off of sexual and psychological abuse is completely unacceptable.

h/t to Jennifer for the heads up.

*Trigger Warning*

If you know anything about femicide in Mexico, then you already know it is an epidemic of gross proportions. The mutilation, rape and murder of women along the US/Mexico border has become an annual statistic, with little mainstream media coverage and even less national outcry. And the worse part of it is that many of these disappearances are not even investigated, they literally disappear, vanish and are wiped from legibility.

From a piece written in 2004 in Off Our Backs Corie Osborn writes,

For the past decade, a sexual genocide has raged virtually unnoticed in Juarez, the largest city in the Mexican state of Chihuahua. Approximately 370 women have been found murdered in the State of Chihuahua over the past decade, according to an Amnesty International report published last August. At least 137 women were sexually assaulted prior to their death.

The majority of these murders occurred in and around Ciudad Jurez; however, in the past three years incidences of murder and disappearances have risen in the nearby state capital Ciudad Chihuahua.

Many of the violent murders that have taken place in Juarez follow a similar pattern. Authorities believe that 93 of the victims fit the same rape-murder pattern, which indicates that they are all the work of a serial killer or killers.

Why has a killer who has murdered more than twice the number of people as the Boston Strangler, Jack the Ripper and Ted Bundy combined, been able to continue terrorizing Ciudad Juarez for ten years with only vague interest from the international community or even from the Mexican federal government? And who is responsible for the killings of the other hundreds of women found dead in Juarez over the past decade?

Unfortunately, the answers to these questions are veiled by the power of a dominant machismo culture and what appears to be a police conspiracy preventing a thorough investigation of the murders.

Two years ago the documentary On the Edge: Femicide in Cuidad Juarez took on the horrific examples and sheer numbers of women disappearing in Juarez. The whole thing is up on youtube (in ten parts) and I strongly recommend watching it.

Here is the first part.

I bring this up today is because it was released yesterday that this epidemic hasn't stopped and that the disappearance of women in the Baja peninsula outnumber those disappeared in Chihuahua.

In Mexicali and other parts of Baja California, women's murders tend to get "buried" in the avalanche of news about violent crime, which includes hundreds of slayings, numerous kidnappings and street-side shoot outs since last year alone. While femicides in Ciudad Juarez and the state of Chihuahua garnered international headlines in recent years, little international attention was paid to women's murders in Baja California.

A report issued earlier this year by the femicide commission of the lower house of the Mexican Congress, found 105 women were murdered in Baja California during 2006-2007. Using official numbers, more women were murdered in Baja California than in Chihuahua (84 female murder victims) during the same comparable period.

In 2006-07 Baja California ranked eighth place nationally for women's homicides, falling slightly behind Mexican states with much larger populations including Jalisco, Veracruz and Puebla, according to the Mexican Congressional report.

This epidemic shows us that women's bodies are considered expendable and between patterns of globalization and a corrupt government the bodies of young women are not important and not worth investigating.

I've been following the horrible news about Johanna Justin-Jinich, a woman at Wesleyan University who was recently shot by a man who was stalking her. The man who allegedly killed her, Stephen Morgan, had been stalking her for quite some time. (It seems he had some anti-semitic motivations as well.) This story is harrowing:

As the investigation unfolded, the police focused on the only known point of connection between the victim and the assailant. It was a six-week summer program, in June and July 2007, at New York University, called Sexual Diversity in Society. [...]

The two lived in student housing, but not in the same residence hall, said John Beckman, an N.Y.U. spokesman. On July 17, as the program was nearing its end, Ms. Justin-Jinich notified the university that she had received repeated harassing e-mail messages and phone calls from Mr. Morgan. The school notified the police, and officers spoke with her. The case was referred to detectives.

The police report told of 38 e-mail messages that were "insulting" and "unwanted." It quoted one as saying, "You're going to have a lot more problems down the road if you can't take any criticism, Johanna," using an expletive. But she declined to file charges, and the matter was dropped.

One reason this news has me shaken up is that I know a lot of women who have been stalked. Thankfully, none of those situations has ended in violence. But stories like Johanna's are all too common. Asia McGowan. Elnora Caldwell. Natasha Hall. Countless others.

Whether these women were stalked by someone they'd been in a relationship with or by a total stranger, reading about so many acts of violence by stalkers really makes it home that we have completely inadequate ways of addressing this issue. Yes, the Violence Against Women Act funds various police programs and local services to assist stalking victims. Yes, women can opt to press charges or file restraining orders. But as with so many situations of violence against women, in the end, there is no guarantee of safety, no fail-safe answer. It's both depressing and infuriating at the same time. (Seems like a good time to point out again how messed up it is when products and magazines try to appeal to stalkers.)

Oh, and fuck you, Daily News. I'm sure Justin-Jinich, who was a women's rights advocate, would have really appreciated being identified only as a "raven-haired stunner."

Related:
NCVC tip sheet on stalking (PDF)
Is a restraining order ever enough?

I'm headed to DC this weekend for Code Pink's Mother's Day slumber party on the White House lawn for peace. I'm following one of their organizers for my book. The protest is inspired by abolitionist Julia Ward Howe's bad ass Mother's Day Proclamation, which I thought I'd post here in case folks hadn't seen it:

Arise then...women of this day!
Arise, all women who have hearts!
Whether your baptism be of water or of tears!
Say firmly:
"We will not have questions answered by irrelevant agencies,
Our husbands will not come to us, reeking with carnage,
For caresses and applause.
Our sons shall not be taken from us to unlearn
All that we have been able to teach them of charity, mercy and patience.
We, the women of one country,
Will be too tender of those of another country
To allow our sons to be trained to injure theirs."

From the bosom of a devastated Earth a voice goes up with
Our own. It says: "Disarm! Disarm!
The sword of murder is not the balance of justice."
Blood does not wipe out dishonor,
Nor violence indicate possession.
As men have often forsaken the plough and the anvil
At the summons of war,
Let women now leave all that may be left of home
For a great and earnest day of counsel.
Let them meet first, as women, to bewail and commemorate the dead.
Let them solemnly take counsel with each other as to the means
Whereby the great human family can live in peace...
Each bearing after his own time the sacred impress, not of Caesar,
But of God -
In the name of womanhood and humanity, I earnestly ask
That a general congress of women without limit of nationality,
May be appointed and held at someplace deemed most convenient
And the earliest period consistent with its objects,
To promote the alliance of the different nationalities,
The amicable settlement of international questions,
The great and general interests of peace.

Check out the video of famous ladies reading parts of it:

Check out this video by Al Jazeera's Tony Birtley reporting from Tokyo on the women who are speaking out about the problem of domestic violence in Japan.

Transcript after the jump.

Angie Zapata's family has made a statement on the trial of Allen Andrade. Below is Angie's brother, Gonzalo, speaking.

Potentially triggering

Read the transcript at Feministe.

Via TransGriot

You've all heard the great news - Angie Zapata's murderer, Allen Andrade, has been found guilty and last night received a mandatory life sentence. I don't know that there can ever be real justice - because Angie isn't here - but this is certainly something.

More from Pam's House Blend, Race Wire, Queerty, GLAADBlog, PageOneQ, the Human Rights Campaign, Womanist Musings, EDNAblog, TransGriot, and the Justice for Angie Twitter Feed.

Immigration reform is back in the news. I asked Christine Neumann-Ortiz, founding executive director of Voces de la Frontera based in Wisconsin, to help explain the latest developments.

Here's Christine...

From the CBC:

About 300 mostly young women gathered in Kabul to show their opposition to a recently passed law that forbids women from refusing to have sex with their husbands and requires them to get a male relative's permission to leave the house.

The demonstration, organized by women's rights activists in the country, occurred in front of a Shia mosque recently built by a cleric who helped craft the law. Critics of the law say it effectively legalizes rape within marriage and is a return to Taliban-style rule.

About 1,000 people opposed to the protest surrounded the women and threw gravel and small stones as police struggled to hold them back.

I am so moved by the courage of these 300 women, dwarfed by over two times as many in opposition, marching through the streets for their right to have control over their bodies and their sexuality--even in marriage. I'm also struck by the solidarity of the women police officers, who reportedly formed a human chain around the protesters to protect them from the angry counter-protesters. It's heartening to hear a story where law enforcement respects peoples' right to gather and express dissent, even on such a volatile issue.

Thanks to all the readers who made sure we covered this by sending in links.

Check out this piece from the NYT featuring two pediatricians talking about young people and sex:

It has never been easy for adults to deal with young teenagers honestly and sensibly on this subject, and it isn't easy now. We live with an endless parade of hypersexualized images -- and a constant soundtrack of adults lamenting children's exposure to that endless parade. There's increasing knowledge of dating violence, including well-publicized celebrity incidents. And there's always a new movie to see about how adolescent boys are clueless, sex-obsessed goofballs.

Stir it all together, and you may get an official worldview in which boys are viewed as potential criminals and girls as potential victims.

Thoughts on the whole article?

*Trigger Warning*

A young woman in Detroit, Asia McGowan, was shot and killed by someone who had been leaving her nasty comments on her Youtube account and also had been stalking her on Facebook. This was someone she knew in real life-it was one of her classmates.

This story is really upsetting me, but I am trying to keep my head straight about the issues at hand. It is stressing me out for two reasons. One, almost every woman I know that has an internet identity has received some sort of threatening, stalker-ish, troll-ish email, comment, forum posting, death threat, blog post or shit even a vlog. This story is chilling and it is important to remember the stalking and murder of women happened before the invention of social networking technology, but this story is chilling nonetheless. As Miriam just said to me over IM, maybe these cases are just more visible now because of technology.

Two, why isn't this story on any of the national news networks? Because black women getting stalked and killed isn't worthy of national news coverage?

For more on this story check out What About Our Daughters, she has all the youtube videos up.

Thanks to Tiffany for the link and reminding me that this type of thing happened even before the internet.

You know, I knew that Courtney's Friday Feminist Fuck You would draw out the assholes and rape apologists. But this just pisses me off to no end.

Wired has a post on us "furious feminists" and Courtney's video, writing that we have a problem with Observe and Report's "shocking sex scene." Shocking sex scene? No, assholes - that's called rape. It's unbelievable to me that people are arguing whether or not this scene depicts a rape, not only because of the obvious inability for Anna Faris' character to give consent - but also because Faris herself calls it rape.

So please, you fucking idiots, stop calling it sex.

It's also worth pointing out that the comments at Wired (and hundreds at the YouTube video that I moderated) trying to argue that the scene isn't rape are of the "no one would want to rape you anyway you stupid cunt" variety. So yeah. I swear, it's stuff like this that makes me want to give up on humanity.

Please give the folks at Wired a piece of your mind - or any one else who wants to argue that you just don't get the hilarious genius humor behind a dude raping an unconscious woman.

abyss2hope, Majikthise, Jezebel, Tiger Beatdown and nshay1031 at the Community Blog have more.

We don't know how we missed this! The first Global Symposium on Engaging Men and Boys in Achieving Gender Equality took place this week in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, concluding today. One of the things that came out of the conference was a Declaration and Call to Action. Here's a snippet:

We come from eighty countries. We are men and women, young and old, working side by side with respect and shared goals. We are active in community organizations, religious and educational institutions; we are representatives of governments, NGOs and the United Nations. We speak many languages, we look like the diverse peoples of the world and carry their diverse beliefs and religions, cultures, physical abilities, and sexual and gender identities. We are indigenous peoples, immigrants, and ones whose ancestors moved across the planet. We are fathers and mothers, daughters and sons, brothers and sisters, partners and lovers, husbands and wives.

What unites us is our strong outrage at the inequality that still plagues the lives of women and girls, and the self-destructive demands we put on boys and men. But even more so, what brings us together here is a powerful sense of hope, expectation, and possibility for we have seen the capacity of men and boys to change, to care, to cherish, to love passionately, and to work for justice for all.

While I've seen so many great local efforts by men working towards gender equality (like on college campuses, in organizational programs, etc.), to see activism on a global level like this is incredible. Check out the rest.

Trigger warning

The ad is for Women's Aid, a UK organization that works to end violence against women. It's definitely difficult to watch, but of course that's the point. Thoughts?

Via Copyranter.

Last Tuesday's post on the man in Oakland that killed 4 police officers yielded heated responses and I wanted to follow up after everyone (especially me) had some time to mull things over. I want to draw from some of the themes that came up and to update the news that broke last Tuesday night that Lovelle Mixon was also linked to the rape of a 12 year old girl. This act, along with the murders of John Hege, Mark Dunakin, Ervin Romans and Daniel Sakai, are reprehensible acts. I am stating this upfront so that it is not lost that this is a tragedy and there is no excuse for this kind of tragedy.

There seemed to be some concern that the way I approached my discussion of this topic made me sound like an apologist. Perhaps a matter of semantics but despite some folks understanding it was not my intention, there still seemed to be a need to accuse me of it. To clarify, there is a big difference between understanding what creates a condition/thought/action and then justifying that said action.

Thea Lim at Racialicious gave a very thorough breakdown of the fall-out around my post last week and the idea of trying to hold two thoughts at once. She writes,

Now, Mixon actually was guilty. But Mixon's guilt doesn't neutralise the rottenness of the system. In other words, just because Mixon was actually a dangerous felon doesn't mean that we are absolved from the duty to question how justice and innocence is defined and meted out in our culture.

It is not only possible for us to hold these two facts at once, but it is imperative in understanding the consequences of Mixon's actions for the greater community in Oakland and also for understanding how the youth in Oakland are dealing with this atrocity. Perhaps the huge backlash against my piece was due to a desire to use Mixon as an excuse to voice their own racism, whether conscious or subconscious. As lefties it is our job to point out these subtle nuances, as the implications are deadly.

With regard to the poster I chose to repost here, after posting the artist's statement and some conversation via comments and emails, I would just like to clarify why I thought it was powerful. I should have known that putting it up would make me look like I was complicit in making Mixon a poster-child, but the poster says, "Cop-Killer" not "American Hero" so I thought that the fact that I didn't think he was a hero was pretty self-explanatory. What I saw in that poster was several questions come up about what we need to be American. We need our villains, we need our heroes or the story is never complete. In short, people of color become the poster children for whatever we want them to be, Obama is on one side of the American dream, Mixon on the other. Also, while I don't totally agree with all of Weston's take, the one part I do agree with is that Mixon is a product of a culture of violence in America and we can either address that or we can write this off as a one off crazy man.

It is understandable why many different people are bound to the 'one off' point of view. It makes us feel comfortable to think that someone like Mixon is a 'one off' case because it takes responsibility off of us to look at, and, ultimately, change the systemic causes of violence. On the other hand, the belief that he is not a 'one off' incident will most definitely be used to justify further violence in the black community in Oakland and that is what we are afraid of. It is almost effective and more logical for those that live in the community to write this off as an aberration (which statistically it is) as opposed to part of a systemic problem.

But this story is not just about Mixon and his inability to get out of cycles of violence. This is about all the themes and ideas that have come out around Mixon and what that tells us about public perceptions of police brutality, black masculinity and why Oakland youth might be so juiced about this issue. As Puck clarified at the end of the comments section,

Regardless of whether or not she believes cop killing is a message of hope (and it's pretty clear that she doesn't), it's important to recognize that an image like the "poster" was created in the immediate aftermath of the shooting. It's important to recognize that there are a lot of people who see this as a tit-for-tat situation... and there are a lot of people who are conflicted - at once feeling sorry for the people who were killed (and their families) and simultaneously feeling like the system had it coming. Recognizing that these are perspectives that are very real and shared by a lot of people is not the same thing as holding such a perspective. Ignoring that such perspectives are worth considering or even exist stifles our capacity to understand all the angles on a tragedy such as this.

Mixon is a difficult person to build a narrative of police brutality around, but this story isn't about him. He is dead, he can do no more harm. But the police state can, and most likely will, use this case as an excuse to continually police and brutalize people of color in Oakland. Mixon was a very extreme example of violence, but he is still part of an entire system of violence. The more we have a repressive police system that engages in extreme forms of violence, the more people will support the actions of a cop-killer. Some have suggested that if perhaps Oakland police and stood up against what happened to Oscar Grant, Oakland youth would be singing a different tune right now.

For serious. I know I'm late on this one, but I just had to write something. (And no, it's not because the article is from the same woman who called me a "bridezilla" for daring to question wedding culture.)

Behold the wisdom of Kathryn Lopez:

According to an article in the Boston Globe, an informal poll taken among 200 teenagers has revealed that almost half of them blame the pop star Rihanna for her recent beating, allegedly by her boyfriend, Chris Brown.

It's just one survey. But it's very bad news. And feminists are to blame.

...What has happened -- and what Rihanna and Chris have to do with Gloria [Steinem] and us -- is that by inventing oppression where there is none and remaking woman in man's image, as the sexual and feminist revolutions have done, we've confused everyone. The reaction those kids had was unnatural. It's natural for us to expect men to protect women, and for women to expect some level of physical protection. But in post-modern America, those natural gender roles have been beaten by academics and political rhetoric and the occasional modern woman being offended by having a door opened for her. The result is confusion.

Right, we're just confused by all that equality - it's clouding our ladybrains! Plus, everyone knows that women were never ever blamed for the violence done to them before feminists came around. Sigh.

Trigger warning.

Do Something, an organization "using the power of online to get teens to do good stuff offline," has made a video re-enactment of the Chris Brown/Rhianna conflict as part of their 1 in 3 Campaign (designed to education young people about dating violence). It's obviously based on the actual police notes from the incident, making it highly realistic and unavoidably horrifying:

While I could understand why some people would be outraged by this bold PSA tactic, I'm completely in support of what Do Something is doing. They're making the incident--which has been so obscured by the media hype, ignorant commentary from pundits and the public alike, and so much disrespect--real again. A woman, a man, out of control emotions, and inexcusable violence. If Rhianna weren't already horribly outed by this whole incident, I might feel like it were an invasion of her privacy, but at this point, it's just so public. It seems like the most respectful thing we can do for Rhianna is make sure that this whole thing inspires young people to get educated about relationship violence--as the ad does.

What do you think?

One of the highlights of SXSW music so far for me has been seeing Grizzly Bear play in a church. Not only do the songs from their new album sound phenomenal, they played a cover of "He Hit Me and It Felt Like a Kiss":

Not from SXSW, but you get the idea. MP3 is here.

You're perhaps familiar with this song. It was recorded by girl-group The Crystals in the 1960s, and produced by Phil Spector (musical genius, perhaps, but total fucking misogynist). Songwriters Carol King and Gerry Goffin penned the song after learning their nanny, singer Little Eva, was being abused. King and Goffin meant the song as a critique of domestic violence. But Spector pushed the Crystals to record the song in a pretty straightforward manner:

Check out community poster ArmyVetJen's take (who beat us to the punch) on the new statistics just released by the Pentagon showing that there has been a 9% increase in the reports of sexual assault in the military over the past year. AP reports:

The Pentagon said it received 2,923 reports of sexual assault across the military in the 12 months ending Sept. 30 2008. That's about a 9 percent increase over the totals reported the year before, but only a fraction of the crimes presumably being committed.

Among the cases reported, only a small number went to military courts, officials acknowledged.

The Pentagon office that collects the data estimates that only 10 percent to 20 percent of sexual assaults among members of the active duty military are reported -- a figure similar to estimates of reported cases in the civilian sphere.

The military statistics, required by Congress, cover rape and other assaults across the approximately 1.4 million people in uniform.

The director of the Pentagon's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office says that the increase in reports is likely due to more women feeling confident enough to come forward rather than attributing it to an actual increase in sexual violence. While that would be great, as Cara says, there hasn't been any reported increase in awareness around sexual assault by the Pentagon so I'm not inclined to immediately buy that contention. (Also considering prosecutions are still low as ever.)

Reports in Iraq and Afghanistan have rose by about a quarter. You can find the report here. Feministe also has more.

A reader sent in this story, about how this 18 year-old man was given only 6 months in jail for raping two women. (Oh, and he gets work and school release privileges.)

Michael Philbin, son of a Green Bay Packers coach, said he was "ashamed" and "embarrassed." Well, that's lovely, but I wish he was feeling ashamed from prison for more than 6 frigging months. The short jail sentence aside, what really bugged me about this article was the language it used to describe the attacks:

Philbin had sex with one girl after she passed out and was placed on his parent's bed. He then joined another 17-year-old boy in the basement and forced a second girl to perform oral sex, according to the criminal complaint filed last month.

Excuse me, but you don't "have sex" with an unconscious girl. That's called rape.

Brown County Circuit Court Judge Sue Bischel, in accepting a joint sentencing recommendation, said by all accounts Philbin was a good person who made a horrible decision.

Making a "horrible decision" to rape someone doesn't make you a good person who fucked up - it makes you a rapist.

Reading from a pre-sentence report, Bischel said Philbin acknowledged that he took advantage of the girls knowing they had too much to drink.

Took advantage of? Again, rape. Judge Bischel also ruled that Philbin didn't have to register as a sex offender because it was "excessive" (and raping two women isn't?) and that after completing probation he could petition to have the convictions removed from his record.

I am so tired of the rape apologism - in the media, in the courts, in the culture. How much more can we really take?

This is not the kind of news I like to hear on a Monday morning. (Or I guess any morning for that matter.)

Nearly half of the 200 Boston teenagers interviewed for an informal poll said pop star Rihanna was responsible for the beating she allegedly took at the hands of her boyfriend, fellow music star Chris Brown, in February.

...Of the teens questioned, more than half said both Brown, 19, and Rihanna, 21, were equally responsible for the assault. More than half said the media were treating Brown unfairly, and 46 percent said Rihanna was responsible for the incident.

Ah, victim-blaming. It's always with us. What particularly depresses me about this statistic is that the victim-blaming is coming from young people. There's this optimistic part of me that likes to believe sexist attitudes and hating women will lessen with new generations. Articles like these snap me back into reality.

Thanks to Alise for the link.

Chris Brown's alleged violence against Rihanna has sparked intense debate and discussion about these celebrities.

I decided to ask Traci C. West, PhD, a professor of ethics and African American studies at Drew University's Theological School, for some perspective on the violence and the public's reactions. She researched the historical legacy of violence against black women for her book, Wounds of the Spirit: Black Women, Violence, and Resistance Ethics.

Here's Traci...

The Guardian and others have been reporting on the growing trend in South Africa where lesbians are raped and beaten in efforts to "correct" or "cure" their sexual orientation. And the authorities are not doing much about it.

After Eudy Simelane, the leading player on the Banyana Banyana national female soccer team was brutally raped and murdered last April, more awareness has been raised, but the prevalence of this horrific trend has only grown with it. One lesbian and gay support group in Cape Town says they get 10 new cases of "corrective rape" every week. And that's just in Cape Town.

And many of these cases result in murder, but with a barely existent conviction rate; there has only been one conviction out of 31 reported cases in the last decade. (The number of actual incidences are predicted to be much higher.)

In response, ActionAid and others have released a report, Hate Crimes: the rise of corrective rape in South Africa, bringing to light the prevalence of the "practice" as well as the failure of the South African legal system to take recourse; hate crimes on the basis of sexual orientation is not recognized under South African law. On sentencing of Simelan's case, the judge said that her orientation had "no significance" in the murder.

Check out The Guardian's video of interviews with some survivors. (Trigger warning.)

Apparently police in Minneapolis are so fed up with prostitution that they're experimenting with a truly bold tactic:

Whether teenagers walking to and from South High School or young women waiting at the bus, the unwanted solicitation by "johns" has left civic leaders such as Schiff fed up and ready to take a new approach -- if the rule of law isn't a strong enough deterrent to the men looking for illegal sex, perhaps advertising their public humiliation will be.

Enter a huge electronic billboard at the intersection of Interstate 35W and Lake Street, which fired up Wednesday with direction to www.johnspics.org, a city website that prominently displays photos of men convicted or charged with soliciting prostitution within the past six months. Clear Channel, which donated the billboard space, will run the signs for the next six months. Though the photos have been online since 2004, the new Web address will be easier for drivers to remember.

What do you all think about this strategy? After learning that the average age a girl gets into prostitution is 13 recently, I've felt pretty tenacious about any policy that can cut down on the power of manipulative older men. On the other hand, this seems like one step down a slippery slope of eroding civil rights and, besides, deterrents like this don't seem to actually work all that well.

Read the full article here.

Thanks to reader Jess for the heads up.

Shockingly good article from Newsweek on the way the media has been talking about Rihanna and Chris Brown.

This study is really interesting (link it to a PDF), if by interesting you mean deeply tragic and horridly upsetting. According to the Times UK, 1 in 7 people find it is sometimes justified to hit women.

One in seven people believe it is acceptable in some circumstances for a man to hit his wife or girlfriend if she is dressed in "sexy or revealing clothes in public", according to the findings of a survey released today.

A similar number believed that it was all right for a man to slap his wife or girlfriend if she is "nagging or constantly moaning at him".

The findings of the poll, conducted for the Home Office, also disclosed about a quarter of people believe that wearing sexy or revealing clothing should lead to a woman being held partly responsible for being raped or sexually assaulted.

If that is not upsetting enough, Jess at the F-Word breaks the studies down even further. and concludes,

These figures appear to actually show the situation is worse than we thought from that pivotal 2005 poll by Amnesty. For example, Amnesty found about 1/3 of people think women who've been flirting are responsible if they get raped, whereas the Home Office poll puts the figure at a shocking 43%. About 50% believe that women in prostitution bear some or all of the responsibility if they're raped.

The article also suggested that older populations (over 65) and what they call "lower social groups" had a higher percentage of supporting that violence against women is sometimes justified. I actually have no idea what they mean by "lower social groups," and find that language really problematic, especially if they are talking about working class communities and communities of color. I looked through the study and found no delineation by age or background.

Despite those perhaps journalistic assumptions made, this data is appalling.

Thanks to Meg for the link and community post.

The UN estimates that the expulsions would leave 1.1 million people without food, 1.5 million without health care and at least one million without drinking water.

As Mark Goldberg wrote recently, the NGO crackdown was expected.

This, however, is no reason to shy away from the court's intervention in Darfur. Rather, the arrest warrant provides critical leverage over the government of Sudan, which the Obama administration can use to coerce it into cooperating more fulsomely in a credible peace process. Under the ICC's statute, the Security Council has the authority to suspend proceedings should it decide that doing so is in the interest of peace. This is the carrot to the proverbial stick of an arrest warrant.

Problem is, the Obama administration hasn't yet really stepped up to use that leverage. And even if this plan manages to bring Bashir to the negotiating table, it's clear that holding Sudanese leaders accountable comes at a price for civilians who are already suffering.

Further reading... UN Dispatch has a round-up of reactions to the Bashir warrant. And check out Richard Just's thorough essay on "everything we know about Darfur" in The New Republic, which also has a roundtable on Obama and Darfur.

On a related note, Women's eNews calls for more women UN peacekeepers

Check out this reading by Eve Ensler of a section of her upcoming book, I'm an Emotional Creature: The Secret Lives of Girls Around the World. It's called "The Teenage Girl's Guide to Surviving Sex Slavery" and in it she speaks in the voice of a former sexual slave from the The Democratic Republic of Congo:

First let me say that I admire Eve's bold insistence on speaking truth, on writing deeply emotional pieces, on insisting that we talk about and stay conscious of and do something about the most horrific suffering on this planet--things that the rest of us often don't have the strength to face on a regular basis. V-Day is such an unbelievably successful movement--unparalleled in contemporary feminism. The idea that she got a nation of girls and women, and even a healthy number of men, thinking and talking about vaginas--as a metaphor for femaleness and violence and sexuality and so many other buried issues--is nothing short of a modern miracle. For all of this, I give her infinite props.

But I have to say that I find this piece really problematic and it makes me worried about the rest of the book that she's almost finished with.

The girl does sound real in many ways, authentic in her interactions with her friends and her experience of being abducted and raped. It's clear that Eve had spent a lot of time with these women, that she has talked to them about their lives and experiences in great detail. It's clear that Eve has the best of intentions, that she sees her own voice, her own persona, as the most effective way to amplify the messages that these young women from the Congo need the world to hear.

But no amount of reporting adds up to understanding, adds up to truly inhabiting the lives and experiences of others. As a journalist, I have continuously struggled with this reality. The most painful part of my job involves attempting to tell others' stories with empathy and clarity and honesty, while still respecting the living, breathing human being who owns them. I have a higher purpose--to paint a picture, for example, of the new normalcy of body hatred, to enrage people so they try to stop it, to lure people into a social issue with a good old fashioned story--but I also have an ethical commitment to respect people's ownership over their own stories, and quite connected, respect my own limitations.

I feel like Eve has lost sight of her own limitations, like this piece reveals this story of a girl, but also the story of an activist and storyteller who has forgotten to be humble in the process. I haven't read What is the What by Dave Eggers, but it seems that he tried to do something similar and he called it a novel (though he made clear that it was very grounded in reality). I totally get the impulse. You're an activist, a writer, a well-intentioned, empathic human being who feels like the most important stories aren't being told, so you think of the most immediate, palpable way to get them into the world. But it's not that simple.

Why not write a personal essay in her own voice about the experience of getting to know this girl, of hearing these stories? Why not publish an anthology of these women's stories or a collection of oral histories where we hear their voices exactly? Why not bring these women to the U.S. and let them stage their own play about what they've experienced? Why not make a documentary?

For me, Eve is taking too many liberties. She has the power to get these women's voices and stories out into the world, and instead, she has usurped them.

Last year we reported how a University of Portland student, after reporting being raped, was threatened by the school with charges of underage drinking.

In making the university's decision, UP judicial coordinator Natalie Shank suggested to Kerns that she could have been charged with violating university policies herself.

"Based upon my findings in my investigation, I am unable to determine if a sexual assault occurred," Shank wrote May 3, 2007. "I have reason to believe that intercourse occurred, but both parties admit to drinking and therefore, consent--or lack of consent--is difficult to determine. Given these facts, there are possible violations for which you could be charged."

Well, we have some good news. According to StudentActivism.net, the school's sexual assault reporting policies have been revised.

The school handbook now reads:

"To foster the safety and security of the entire community, the University of Portland encourages reporting of all instances of sexual assault. However, no disciplinary action will be taken without the consent of the survivor. To remove barriers to reporting, the University will not pursue potential policy violations of the survivor which occurred in the context of the sexual assault. Likewise, the University will not pursue potential policy violations of a person who comes forward to report sexual assault."

I love good news.

Trigger warning

From The New York Times:

Two police officers have been assigned to desk duty while prosecutors and the police investigate a complaint that at least one of them raped an intoxicated woman after they escorted her into her apartment in the East Village three months ago, the police said on Sunday.

Footage from a nearby bar's video surveillance camera shows the two officers helping the woman into her building on Dec. 7 and returning twice during the next two hours, according to the bar owner, who provided the video to investigators.

The woman was so impaired, that she got sick in a cab and the driver called 911. The video shows the officers helping her home and leaving. It then shows them returning to her apartment 39 minutes later, in which one of the officers notices the video. When the video catches them leaving, it appears as if they're trying to avoid the camera's range.

The Internal Affairs Bureau is conducting an investigation, but no arrests have been made yet.

Via Holly @ Feministe.

This is horrible.

Police are looking for a man who shot and killed one woman and wounded another in what is being called a bisexual love triangle gone wrong.

The NYPD says 22-year-old Janet Martinez was pronounced dead at the scene on Wednesday. A 20-year-old woman is in critical condition at Brookdale Hospital.

Martinez had obtained an order of protection against a man, and police said they are looking for him. There is no word on whether he is wanted for questioning in the shooting.

Note to MSNBC, calling this a love triangle makes it sound like hate crimes against the queer community is sometimes OK. It is not.

Via MSNBC and Daily News.

Thanks to Kenyon for the link.

Rumors are out that Chris Brown and Rihanna might have gotten back together. Whatever Rihanna does will be judged by everyone, but the reality is she is doing the best she can and the fact that this is a media spectacle makes it unusually trying I am sure. Jaclyn Friedman at the Yes means yes blog tells us what it doesn't mean if they do in fact get back together and let's just say it doesn't mean that Rihanna is "stupid" "should know better" or "doesn't know what is good for her."

It doesn't mean she is stupid. Leaving an abusive partner is hard - really, really hard. Some studies have shown that it takes an average woman 4-7 tries before she can leave her abuser for good. Why? Because abusers aren't transparent assholes all of the time. They can be very manipulative, and most of the time will wear down their partner's self-esteem quite thoroughly long before they start with the physical violence. They're also often charming and can be very loving and doting and romantic when they're not being violent. They can talk real pretty about what they've learned, how sorry they are, how they're going to change, how they can't change without the help of their wo/man. And of course, we want to believe that we haven't been so blind in choosing a partner for ourselves.

Go read the entire post, it is very important and flies in the face of all the bullshit that is going to come out about Rihanna's choices, along with the reality that it will not be her fault if she is assaulted again. And then circulate widely. We need to reframe the way we talk about women that have been victim to domestic violence.

And, no Kanye, we can't give Chris a break.

Related:
Black women's bodies, voyeurism and Rihanna
Beyond Chris Brown and Rihanna: An interview with Elizabeth Mendez Berry
The media reminds us, famous women have no right to privacy.

While we all know the media has been handling this situation disgustingly, I was still pretty stunned to see this Daily News headline. This is not to mention the actual content of the piece is full of victim-blaming banter:

[I]nsiders are rumbling that Chris shouldn't be taking the anger management classes alone. "Rihanna is temperamental, too," says our snitch. "They're both too hot-headed for their own good."

Adds another source: "It didn't help that Rihanna grabbed the keys out of his rented Lamborghini and threw them down the street. She knew it would really infuriate Chris, and it worked." (Emphasis mine)

Um, what? So not only does she need anger management for throwing keys out of a car (because of course that totally equates with domestic abuse), but she also "got what was coming to her"? Regardless of how angry a person may get or how much they're perceived to have "provoked" their partner, there is no excuse to turn to violence. Ever.

The Daily News should be ashamed of themselves. Send a letter to the editor and let them know.

Both statistically and anecdotally, incidents of violence against women increase as the economy falters. As Obama prepares to release his budget, now's the time to ask him and Congress not to reduce funding for preventing violence against women and helping survivors. According to Women's eNews:

Congress is currently authorized to spend up to $175 million a year for the program. But the actual allocation of federal dollars is subject to a congressional vote, and lawmakers last year set aside $123 million; over $50 million less than was approved. That was a slight cut from fiscal 2007, when Congress spent $125 million on the program.

Women's safety advocates also want Congress to fully fund the Violence Against Women Act, a broader anti-violence law originally passed in 1994 that provides some funds for domestic violence shelters but also sets aside money for a wide range of other services relating to sexual and domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking.

But with an ailing economy curtailing federal revenues from taxes, and lawmakers focused on economic-stimulus efforts, more money for discretionary social programs that combat domestic violence could be hard to come by.

In other words, the tanking economy means there's a greater need for these services, but less money to provide them. Marcella at abyss2hope writes,

I am asking each US citizen who reads this post to contact President Obama, your 2 senators (or 1 if you live in MN) and your representative and ask them all to support the reauthorization and the funding for the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act. After you contact your representatives, please ask those you know to do the same.

Again, contacted your elected officials HERE.

UPDATE: Obama's budget is up now. I don't have time right now to comb through for the info on violence against women, but will update this post later. In the meantime, post links in comments if you see some analysis elsewhere!

From the Associated Press: "A bill passed Monday by the state House would extend the protections of domestic violence restraining orders to pets owned by the person who secures the order."

I think this is actually great - abusers will often harm (or threaten to harm) pets as part of the violence against their victim.

Via Jezebel.

Trigger Warning

At some point or another you've probably heard of a Donkey Punch. If not, consider yourself lucky. The basic idea is that a man who is penetrating a woman from behind will punch her in the back of the head or neck as he's having an orgasm. Because beating women about the head is fucking hilarious and sexy, didn't ya know?

Well it seems that somebody thought it was be a genius idea to turn sexualized violence against women into a movie, where a woman gets killed via - you guessed it! - a Donkey Punch. The trailer is above.

It's movies like this one that make me wonder how anyone could ask why feminism is still necessary. We live in a world where sexual violence against women is a joke, an email forward, a fucking movie. This is not the world I want to live in.

Thanks to Maria for the link.

This is the shit that makes me want to crawl back in bed and never come out.

Wife-beaters.com, a Dallas-based business that sold wife-beater T-shirts, has been shut down after a San Antonio man complained to the company hosting the site.

...The Web site sold white tank tops, commonly referred to as "wife-beaters," and gave a discount to anyone who could prove they were convicted of wife beating.

Awesome that it was shut down, but the fact that anyone ever thought this was clever is just massively depressing.

I really wish I hadn't seen the pictures that were leaked of Rihanna after the supposed assault by boyfriend Chris Brown. I am not going to post them here, because I think they are too triggering. Needless to say, they show someone who was brutally attacked.

As I said the last time I wrote about this, it is rare that the media gives light to violence against women of color. From the jump, this story hinged from an angle of victim-blaming, from blaming Rihanna for "giving Brown herpes" to "cheating on him with Jay-Z." The narrative was clear; sometimes it is OK to beat a woman.

In releasing the pictures two things have happened. First, Rihanna's privacy has been violated in a very harmful way. We have no business seeing the extent of the harm done to her and this is a serious issue, not something we should be laughing at and making spectacle of. The video of her picture is in the top ten most watched videos on youtube. Our culture of voyeurism and the desire to be in people's lives never lets us down.

Secondly, releasing her pictures gave a validity to her story that she didn't have the right to prior to belief that she deserved to get hit. The picture has sent shockwaves around the internet and people changed their tune, some calling for Chris Brown to go to jail for a long time. What is unfortunate is that it took a picture that violated Rihanna's rights for the greater public to believe the perpetrator should be locked up. It is a sad world that we live in, when a woman is not taken at face value. And then her body must be consumed for the world to see in order to believe her story. The message is clear, women and especially black women, have no right to privacy, their image is for our consumption and story-telling.

In writing this, I actually didn't read what other people are saying, so please feel free to leave other links in comments. I am so deeply disturbed by this story and concerned for the impact it will have on not only what we consider the rights of women that have been victims of violence, but also the culture of victim-blaming. Can't we show our young women a better world than that?

Update: Don't forget to check out Jessica's quick video on why it is bullshit that TMZ published the picture and Jay Smooth's interview with Elizabeth Mendez.

Hating on TMZ on 12seconds.tv

This is probably my shortest Friday Feminist Fuck You ever, but I literally had nothing else to say.

For more info, see imbroglio's "Rant" on the Community blog.

Amnesty International is pressuring Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to work with the UN to put pressure on the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo to end sexual violence and the recruitment and use of child soldiers. As an email alert notes, these are deeply entwined issues:

Rape is used in the conflict as a calculated strategy to destabilize opposition groups as well as promote fear and submission. It is not unusual for mothers and daughters to be raped in front of their families and villages. Human rights activists working to end violence against women often face grave threats of violence themselves.

Justine Masika Bihamba is one such activist. Because of her work to end violence against women, she and her family have been targeted.

Justine described the current situation in Congo as a war against women. "When two sides fight, the one punishes the other by raping women," she said.

Putting an end to the rampant sexual violence and the use of child soldiers is essential to ensuring peace in the region.

This video is heartbreaking:

During her confirmation hearings, Clinton herself said of violence against women:

I view these issues as central to our foreign policy, not as adjunct or auxiliary or in any way lesser than all of the other issues that we have to confront.

Click here to sign a letter to Secretary of State Clinton, asking her to work for peace for women and civilians in the DRC.

Samhita and zp27 on the community blog have mentioned this, but I really appreciated what Hussein Rashid had to say at Religion Dispatches,

Last week, Muzzammil Hassan apparently beheaded his wife, Aasiya Zubair. Although the reasons for this heinous act currently remain unclear, there was a history of domestic violence.

God rest her soul.

Mr. Hassan was co-founder, with his wife, of Bridges TV, a station dedicated to improving the image of Muslims in the US. His work was well-known and admired, and the case has shocked American Muslims. Although their private life was private, it was assumed that a couple who lived and worked together for eight years did not have more than average amount of spousal disagreement.

Fatemeh at Muslimah Media Watch has more links related to Aasiya Hassan's murder, but because more details have yet to emerge, Fatemeh is holding off on weighing in. (It's not clear that this was an honor killing, although some media outlets have defined it that way.) Here, I'll defer to Hussein Rashid again, who continues,

I cannot fathom the anger, the rage that would result in a beheading. According to my TV, crimes of passion tend to be the most violent, but a beheading is just such a foreign concept, in any context, that it is inconceivable. Yet it happened. I believed that it would be described as an expression of innate Muslim values, as though only Muslims are capable of such a crime. Although there is no monopoly on violence, there is a discourse that projects violence as being only a Muslim trait. A typical Orientalist fantasy that holds that the "Other" is inherently violent no matter what the reality may be. Thankfully, aside from some of the fringe sites, the media has been responsible in reporting this as a case of domestic violence.

Horrible things are done to women every day, every minute, everywhere, by all kinds of people. It's not as though we are not aware of it violence against women in the Muslim community. We are and we are trying to do something about it. But a moment like this shows how immediate the need is. The reality is that every community suffers from forms of domestic violence. It's not about religion; it's about power and control. We don't know why Aasiya Zubair was slaughtered. We do know that in difficult economic times, men tend to act out more, in an attempt to exercise control. We are seeing an increase in domestic violence issues, and this case is one of a larger pattern, that has nothing to do with religion.

Read the rest here.

Also, you can join the Facebook group In Memory of Aasiya Zubair: A Pledge to End Domestic Violence.

*Trigger Warning*

This is grotesque and sad. And from everything I have read, people seem really fixated on the fact that the perpetrator is a "moderate" Muslim and this is somehow ironic, since clearly he hates women as much as his "sexist, barbaric, uncivilized" Muslim brothers.

But you know what? Let's not get distracted. It doesn't matter who killed her or what religion he is. Sexism, violence against women and hatred for women transcends all culture, religion, creed and ethnicity. Let us resist brash generalizations and focus instead on what this tells us about women and domestic violence that is frequently and unnecessarily deathly.

More on the community site from zp27.

Well, this is good news. After community poster Gexx alerted us on Friday to Amazon's sale of a rape simulation game where not only does the player stalk and rape women, but force them to get an abortion, Amazon has now pulled the game from the site. "We determined that we did not want to be selling this particular item," said a spokesperson for the company.

However (and not surprisingly), the video game company, Illusion, is defending the game's right to exist. Their statement: "We believe there is no problem with the software, which has cleared the domestic ratings of an ethics watchdog body."

I wonder what fucked up, misogynist "watchdog group" that was.

Jay Smooth of Ill Doctrine has a great interview up with Elizabeth Mendez Berry, who wrote a 2005 Vibe magazine article about domestic violence and the hip hop community, Love Hurts. Watch it. Seriously.

Via AP:

Police said Thursday they will investigate death threats against octuplet mom Nadya Suleman and advise her publicist on how to handle a torrent of other nasty messages that have flooded his office.

Word that the 33-year-old single, unemployed mother is receiving public assistance to care for the 14 children she conceived through in vitro fertilization has stoked furor among many people.

Police Lt. John Romero said officers were meeting with Suleman's publicist Mike Furtney about the flood of angry phone calls and e-mail messages against Suleman, her children and Furtney.

"We are aware of the media accounts of the threats, and that they are being sent to the West Los Angeles detectives for appropriate action," Romero said.

Furtney said 500 new e-mails were received early Thursday.

In the meantime, MSNBC ponders "baby addiction - when moms always want a newborn, even at the expense of other children." Sigh.

A few weeks ago a group of what I would call 'Men's rights activists,' in India walked into a bar and physically assaulted all the women patrons that they believed were drinking freely and exhibiting obscene behavior. Because apparently, public beatings of women by hordes of men is polite and decent behavior. Let us resist the urge to suggest that given the cultural climate of India these women shouldn't have been in a bar. Fuck that. They are revolutionaries.

Those outraged by the bar attacks have started a facebook group called, "Consortium of Pub-going, Loose and Forward Women." For Valentine's Day, they are sending Pramod Mutalik, the head of conservative anti-woman group responsible for the attack, Ram Senaall, up to 500 pairs of pink panties. They are also urging everyone to go a local pub and have a drink on Valentine's Day.

via BBC.

For more info on the Pink Chaddi campaign check here and Ultra Violet has more.

"Excuse me miss?"

You have probably heard about this, but pop-star Chris Brown was arrested Sunday night for allegedly attacking a woman. He is currently out on bail. At first there was speculation as to whether the victim of the attack had been his girlfriend Rihanna. Most newspapers protected her identity as they would any victim of domestic violence. The LA Times decided to run her name as the victim of the crime.

R&B; singer Chris Brown has been booked tonight on suspicion of making felony criminal threats in connection with an incident involving his girlfriend, pop singer Rihanna, according to Los Angeles Police Department sources familiar with the case.

Is it OK that they ran her name? Celebrity culture currently thrives on depicting the stories of women's demise. We have seen this with Amy Winehouse, Britney Spears, among others. There is an obsession with making spectacle of women. So, all the more reason to keep her name out of the initial press materials.

On the other hand, Rihanna is really famous and one would hope that she has the resources and support to deal with a situation of domestic violence. She is a model to young women and they are affected by how she responds to this problem. This is a tremendous amount of pressure for anyone, let alone a young woman who is a victim of domestic violence. So it is the double edged sword of fame. She has the power and influence to make a statement, get the help she needs and take whatever legal means she needs to. But what if she doesn't want to? What if she doesn't have the support she needs? There is a strong possibility she will be demonized by the media as well. When the mainstream media covers domestic violence, it is generally not on the side of empowering women, but instead how the legal system victimizes men.

I had a conversation on my facebook about this with some of my friends and one of them said, "what if she doesn't want to be the posterchild for DV?" I think this is an apt point. What if she doesn't want to become the spokesperson for this issue? Is it already not traumatic enough about what happened, let alone have it happen in front of millions of people watching?

I think this so sad for a variety of reasons. Rihanna is a model for young women of color who statistically have a close relationship with violence in their communities and historically a lack of access to resources. Chris Brown is a role model for young men of color. What do we tell our youth when our stars are plagued by the same realities they face in their homes? This startling example lets us know that it doesn't matter how successful you are or how rich you get, you can still be a victim of a violent assault at the hands of a man. I am almost scared to see how this will play out in the media.

via HuffPo.

This is pretty interesting. A Dubai organization combating intimate partner violence created these make up kits with a message. Specifically, each color in the palette represents a different kind of abuse.

The brush in the kit says: "Don't cover up injustice. Speak." Along with City of Hope's hotline number. The kits were given out at shopping malls in Dubai.

I like it.

Via.

Colorado State University Police Chief Dexter Yarbrough was suspended on a litany of charges, like falsifying police documents - but it was this quote that stuck with me:

Yarbrough told students in a class lecture that "women want the dick, even when they say 'no.' They want the dick."

Ah rape culture, enforced by media, education and police alike!

Thanks to Brad for the link.

From the Associated Press:

Police have arrested a Greenfield man for allegedly arranging to sell his 14-year-old daughter into marriage in exchange for $16,000, 100 cases of beer and several cases of meat.

Police said they only learned of the deal after the 36-year-old man went to them to get his daughter back because payment wasn't made as promised. The man was arrested Sunday on suspicion of human trafficking.

What was that again about feminism being unnecessary? Yeah, that's what I thought.

Our gal Courtney has a great piece at TAP on dating violence prevention programs and how they rely on gender stereotypes. Check it out.

Yeah, I had to write the whole thing out, since the news report calls her "beaten" which just doesn't site well with me as a headline or a way to describe someone who has suffered both from domestic violence and then job discrimination.

Let's face it, Hooters is one of my least favorite companies in America. They cater to the lowest common denominator of male arousal via normative white beauty standards and create spaces where women are objectified. They also serve crappy food. And while this story isn't surprising (unfortunately), it is disgusting.

A young women suffered a severe life threatening attack and since the physical signs of the attack were apparent, Hooters said she was not fit to work. The world according to Hooters, this is totally logical right? The world according to common sense, I think this is actually-inhumane.

A waitress was barred from working at the Hooters restaurant in Davenport after a violent physical attack left her bruised and unable to meet company standards for maintaining a "glamorous appearance."

The waitress alleges she was fired after taking time off to recover from the assault. Hooters officials say the waitress abandoned her job, but also say that the woman's bruised body made her temporarily ineligible to work as a "Hooters Girl."

You can read the rest of the story here. (Trigger warning)

A week after I blogged about the the recent case of a lesbian being gang raped right outside of San Francisco, we find that most of the suspects have now been found and arrested.

Two of those in custody are 15 and 16 years old.

It wasn't so long ago that Duanna Johnson was murdered in Memphis. Now, in the same city, Leeneshia Edwards was shot - she is the third transwoman to be shot in Memphis in the last six months.

Renee notes that in the small number of articles that have covered the shooting, all mention Edwards' involvement with prostitution, "as though this somehow justifies the violence that has occurred."

We are given no relevant facts about her life other than that she is a trans woman of colour and that she has been associated with prostitution. Can anyone's life be so minimized in this way. It is as though these aspects alone made up her entire identity. We are meant to think of her as soiled, and beyond redemption. By reporting her attack in this way without explicitly victim blaming the media has reduced her to a two dimensional being; and therefore less likely to illicit any form of empathy or emotion.

Edwards - who was shot in the jaw, side, and back - is in critical condition.

For more information and ways to take action, check out the Tennessee Transgender Political Coalition.

It takes a certain je ne sais quoi to unabashedly argue in favor of marital rape. Of course columnist Dennis Prager doesn't call it that. No no, he prefers to use some sort of bizarre high school logic about how ladies who really love their man will "give her body" on demand.

It is an axiom of contemporary marital life that if a wife is not in the mood, she need not have sex with her husband. Here are some arguments why a woman who loves her husband might want to rethink this axiom.

And here I thought the "if you really loved me" argument was only relegated to after-school specials! How wrong I was.

First, women need to recognize how a man understands a wife's refusal to have sex with him: A husband knows that his wife loves him first and foremost by her willingness to give her body to him. This is rarely the case for women. Few women know their husband loves them because he gives her his body (the idea sounds almost funny).

Haha, because the ideas of men's bodies as commodities is ridiculous, of course! Outside of the insulting notion that men only recognize love through sex, Prager also seems to think that sex is simply about women "giving" their bodies to men. (In fact, he writes some variation of the phrase "give your body" or "deprive your body" multiple times in the article.) The idea that sex could be a mutually enjoyable and wanted expression of love is lost on the dude. Which is actually pretty sad.

Prager goes on to write that men are no more than animals, and that "every man who is sexually faithful to his wife already engages in daily heroic self-control." (Seriously.) But don't worry, gals, Prager has a sensitive side:

Of course, there are times when a man must simply refrain from initiating sex out of concern for his wife's physical or emotional condition.

Talk about a keeper!

Yes Means Yes contributor (and long-time Feministing commenter) Thomas actually has a great essay that gets to the heart of what's wrong with Prager's ideas about sex:

We live in a culture where sex is not so much an act as a thing: a substance that can be given, bought, sold, or stolen, that has a value and a supply-and-demand curve. In this "commodity model," sex is like a ticket; women have it and men try to get it.

In this case, Prager seems to believe that men have an inherent right to the whole frigging box office.

Melissa, Jesse and Jeff have more.

Trigger warning

This is pretty devastating. Last Saturday in San Francisco, a lesbian was beaten and repeatedly raped by four men, while the perpetrators "made comments indicating they knew her sexual orientation." They then left the 28-year old naked outside of an abandoned apartment building, who was helped by someone living nearby.

This year has brought an increase in violence against LGBT individuals and a dramatic spike in murders resulting from LGBT hate crimes. And not surprisingly, some folks believe that anti-LGBT legislation such as California's Prop 8 is what is fueling the fire. Avy Skolnik of the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP) responded:

"Anytime there is an anti-LGBT initiative, we tend to see spikes both in the numbers and the severity of attacks. . . People feel this extra entitlement to act out their prejudice." (Emphasis mine)

The NCVAP is beginning to conduct research in the states that had gay marriage bans on the ballot this year to document the correlation with hate crimes.

Police in Richmond are offering a $10,000 reward to those who could lead them to the attackers. In the meantime, the local rape crisis center has set up a trust fund for her. Just donate in honor of "Jane Doe Richmond."

Trigger Warning

Apparently there's a comic called Rapeman that features a superhero who sexually assaults women who have "wronged" men. Anyone know anything about this craziness?

Thanks to Maddy for the link.

(Potential trigger warning)

Mind you she was resisting a false arrest.

Two officers in Galveston, TX were alerted to three white prostitutes soliciting a man and drug dealer, after which they mistakenly went to 12-year old Dymond Millburn's home, saw her outside in "tight shorts," assumed she was one of the perpetrators (even though she's not the same race as the suspects) and attacked her:

[A] blue van drove up and three men jumped out rushing toward her. One of them grabbed her saying, 'You're a prostitute. You're coming with me.'

Dymond grabbed onto a tree and started screaming, 'Daddy, Daddy, Daddy.' One of the men covered her mouth. Two of the men beat her about the face and throat.

The house where they were supposed to be going was two blocks away. And despite the fact that this girl was not only hospitalized with black eyes, throat and ear drum injuries, the police came to her school three weeks later and arrested her for assaulting a public servant.

The case is scheduled for a new trial next month (it was declared a mistrial originally), but her lawyer is confident, saying "I think we'll be okay. I don't think a jury will find a 12-year-old girl guilty who's just sitting outside her house. Any 12-year-old attacked by three men and told that she's a prostitute is going to scream and yell for Daddy and hit back and do whatever she can. She's scared to death."

Two years later, Dymond still suffers nightmares from the attack.

The thought that these officers haven't seemed to even be considered for reprimand after sending this girl to the hospital is unbelievable. Is it okay because they thought she was a prostitute and, you know, police brutality is okay against prostitutes? Or is it okay because she's black? This makes me fucking sick to my stomach.

Honey, I only hit you because I love fetuses!

Garth George, columnist for The New Zealand Herald, says that the main cause of violence against women is abortion. That and equality - but I'll get to that in a second.

I have said it before and I say it again: The number one cause of abuse against women and children is abortion.

George's argument is basically that by having abortions, women have opened the door to violence, that we "reap what we have sown." Charming. But it's not long before George's real gripe come to light - it's not just women's reproductive rights that irks him, it's the fact that women have rights at all.

The second major cause of violence against women and children is the belief held by too many women that they should not just be equal to men but, in all but physical appurtenances, are the same.

...The assumption by so many women of the roles traditionally exclusive to men has left many men in confusion, frustration and anxiety, and more are lashing out because they feel their maleness is under threat.

What's funny is that I actually don't doubt that there's some truth to that - it's called backlash, motherfucker. But you have to love that George writes this as if violence is a reasonable response to women's social and political gains.

If you're feeling feisty, you can email George here.

Thought this was interesting...I had never thought about the money/business angle concerning FGM.

Women in playing dead for photography and fashion purposes might be considered high art or cutting edge marketing, but it is usually just a tacky excuse for sexist art and the reason it is considered avant garde is because it is offensive. That type of art annoys me.

**This images are not safe for work and are potentially triggering.**

Exotified images of women of color being tortured and images put together to play to the fantasy of "savage" with sexual overtones is actually just deeply disturbing. I am well aware that you can't curtail someone's fantasies, but I argue you sure as hell can analyze them. Women's bodies placed in native and indigenous seeming contexts where they are being dragged and eluding to torture or essentially comparing their bodies to animals to be hunted is a shocking display of colonial misogyny and woman hate. This calendar should be protested.

Today is the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. Many of us are working to eliminate violence against women on a daily basis and we should be, but let's take today to really let it be heard, that we take a stand against violence and we will work to make a better world for women. According to the UNFPA,

Around the world, as many as one in every three women has been beaten, coerced into sex, or abused in some other way - most often by someone she knows, including by her husband or another male family member; one woman in four has been abused during pregnancy.

Violence against women crosses sectors, racial barriers, ethnicity, religion, sexual preference, size, ability, class and impedes a quality life for all types of women. It is a serious human rights issue. So let us commit again to eliminate violence against women and to let others know about it as well.

I was glad to see that the New York Times is continuing their important coverage of veteran issues, especially when it comes to violence stateside. Sunday they ran a story about the Army's major domestic violence problem.

This piece continued their commitment to reporting on the ways in which veterans' families have born the brunt of much of their PTSD problems. In February, they gave a deep and broad view of the emotional and physical violence characterizing so many families lives when a loved one returns from war. Prior to the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Pentagon had committed to revamping the military response to domestic violence (there has been a rash of "wife-killings" that prompted response). But as task force members told reporters, the huge surge in violence both overseas and upon returning home, has complicated their efforts.

Complications are inevitable, but there is simply no excuse for not providing veterans' and their families the counseling they need. For example, USA Today reported last week that there are currently one drug counselor for every 3,100 soldiers; this at a time when the soldiers seeking help has skyrocketed by 25% in the last five years.

I think the Pentagon could learn a lot from feminists. When will the government commit to an intersectional analysis of what veterans and their families are experiencing, both in war and after? Violence, addiction, rape and sexual assault, suicide, PTSD etc. are all intimately connected afflictions. We have a moral obligation to bring this kind of sophisticated analysis to veterans' healing.

For more, check out my column from yesterday over at TAP on veteran's affairs and Michelle Obama.

Today is the International Transgender Day of Remembrance, when we stop and take note of the fact that transgender people are murdered at 10 times the rate of everyone else. And, as queenemily says, "Many of the dead lost their lives because they were trans women of colour, doubly disposable."

Please take a moment to read about the people we memorialize today.

At least thirty people, most of them women, were killed this year because of who they are, because of their gender. Cara points out that four of the people on this list were killed in the past 20 days alone. Writes Mercedes Allen at Bilerico:

What's more chilling is what those numbers don't include. That number doesn't include the unknown numbers of transfolk killed alongside gay and lesbian brothers and sisters in the ethnic cleansing that has been taking place in Iraq (Activist Peter Tatchell estimates the total number of GLBT casualties at around 300 people targeted by religious extremists since the war began). Bordering Iran, where a GRS-or-die policy has become a horrific distortion of the medical model and has caused many gay and lesbian persons to forcibly transition, Iraq may have a higher-than-usual trans (by birth or legally mandated) population.

But remembering these people and reflecting on their lives should not be a quiet process, as queenemily writes:

Few will respect our lives as they were, and few will mourn them, and they must be mourned. Their lives were meaningful, their names and genders were real and important, and they lost their lives from hate.

Today we hold on to some memory, even if it only be a name and a photo, so that they are not as erased as completely as their killers would have.

Because the medical people treating them will have tried to erase them. The media. The police. The juries. Will try to excuse, to render less than real, the lives that have been lost. Because who would mourn? Who would bother?

We would. And we do. Today, when we say their names and remember them -- as individuals and as people, not "its" -- we reject that erasure.

Kellie Telesford. Brian McGlothin. Gabriela Alejandra Albornoz. Patrick Murphy. Stacy Brown. Adolphus Simmons. Fedra. Sanesha Stewart. Lawrence King. Simmie Williams Jr. Luna. Lloyd Nixon. Felicia Melton-Smyth. Silvana Berisha. Ebony Whitaker. Rosa Pazos. Juan Carlos Aucalle Coronel. Angie Zapata. Jaylynn L. Namauu. Samantha Rangel Brandau. Nikki Williams. Ruby Molina. Aimee Wilcoxson. Duanna Johnson. Dilek Ince. Ali. And two other Iraqi transgender women.

Again, I have to quote queenemily:

And yes, today we remember those of us still living-our fear, the fear that lives at the heart of every trans person, that someone will know that we are trans, and will kill us for it. Today we remember all the other times we murmured "oh fuck" as we read the news. Today we discover the deaths we missed, because we couldn't bear hearing about them anymore for awhile, even though we must. We must.

This Italian ad reads:

Who pays for man's sins? Only four per cent of women who suffer sexual violence report their assailants.

The poster is part of the national Telefono Donna rape helpline to help raise awareness for the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women on November 25th. It seems a bunch of male politicians are up in arms about it - what do you think?

Via.

I'm going to echo Kate's sentiments and ask Helen Mirren - for the love of all things good - to stop talking about rape.

Back in September the actress said in an interview that she didn't think that women should bring date rape cases to court and now she's said that female jurors on rape cases are "sexually jealous" of the victims. Seriously.

"Whether in a deep-seated animalistic way, going back billions of years, or from a sense of tribal jealousy or just antagonism, I don't know.

...But other women on a rape case would say she was asking for it. The only reason I can think of is that they're sexually jealous."

I'm speechless.

One in three Australian boys thinks that it's okay to hit girls; one in seven think "it's OK to make a girl have sex with you if she was flirting."

Via Feministe.

Last June, Duanna Johnson was brutally beaten by Memphis police - and it was caught on video.

Johnson was in the booking area at the Shelby County Criminal Justice Center when she was hit repeatedly in the face and head by a police officer while another held her down.

"Actually he was trying to get me to come over to where he was, and I responded by telling him that wasn't my name - that my mother didn't name me a 'faggot' or a 'he-she,' so he got upset and approached me. And that's when it started," Johnson said.

This week, Johnson was murdered. Helen at My Husband Betty brings us the tragic story:

She was shot execution style while on her "usual corner."

I'm tired of this.

I want there to be no reason for the Transgender Day of Remembrance. I want there to be no new names on that goddamn list.

I hope her mother, and her family, and her friends, find peace, and that she has too.

Johnson was suing the city for $1.3 million over the June assault, so something tells me they're not exactly going to give Johnson's case top priority.

Pam has more, including a statement from the Tennessee Transgender Political Coalition.

This seems too insane to be real. (Click here for larger image)

Via copyranter, we find this old ad for Heinz soup that starts with:

"The things women have to put up with. Most husbands, nowadays, have stopped beating their wives, but what can be more agonizing to a sensitive soul than a man's boredom at meals. Yet, lady, there must be a reason. If your cooking and not your conversation is monotonous, that's easily fixed."

Just cook up some nice soup for your man to keep him preoccupied, because you wouldn't want to make him bored, would you, lady??

Totally. Speechless.

Dahlia Lithwick at the XX Factor highlights the assholedom that is Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who thinks violence against women is "not that serious an offense."

Yesterday the Supreme Court heard a case about the reach of the Federal Gun Control Act and whether it includes someone convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence.

...Courtesy of the LA Times' David Savage, here's a report of oral argument, which evidently went poorly for the proponents of disarming wife beaters. Of note in the transcript is the following exchange between Justice Antonin Scalia and Nicole Saharsky, the Justice Department lawyer arguing for the stricter interpretation of the law.

JUSTICE SCALIA: And this was misdemeanor assault and battery, wasn't it?

MS. SAHARSKY: Yes, that's right. I mean, I really--

JUSTICE SCALIA: So it's not that serious an offense. That's why we call it a misdemeanor.

MS. SAHARSKY: Well, I mean, certainly the offense is this particular case was serious. The charging document reflects that Respondent hit his wife all around the face until it swelled out, kicked her all around her body, kicked here in the ribs--

JUSTICE SCALIA: Then he should have been charged with a felony, but he wasn't. He was charged with a misdemeanor.

Wow. Nothing quite like dismissive nastiness when it comes to beating up women!

This is just so unbelievably disturbing. A new Japanese augmented reality (AR) software program features a "virtual girlfriend" that literally allows you to hit her with a paddle her until she cries.

All she seems to do is sweep the floor until you undress and paddle her until she cries herself into a fetal position, in which then you give her a teddy bear so she'll become happy again.

(Possible trigger warning)

This isn't a virtual girlfriend at all; this is a virtual torture victim.

h/t to reader Trish

My best friend who lives in Oakland, CA called me over the weekend because her neighbor was violently murdered by an ex and stalker whom she had a restraining order against. Everyone knew he was crazy, she had kicked him to the curb, she had done everything within her legal right to stop him from coming near her.

Elnora Caldwell was always clear about what she wanted. And after a turbulent marriage, she wanted nothing to do with Robert Woods. The 46-year-old Oakland woman, a Nordstrom employee in downtown San Francisco known for her impeccable appearance, served Woods with divorce papers several weeks ago, relatives said, and filed for a restraining order. She told her landlord, "I kicked him to the curb."

But police said Woods, a burly weight lifter who once worked for the city of Oakland, did not leave his estranged wife alone.

Woods fatally stabbed her Saturday evening in his black pickup and pushed her out on a road just off Highway 24 near the Orinda side of the Caldecott Tunnel in front of stunned motorists, authorities said.

But see the problem is a restraining order doesn't restrain someone who is psychotic, obsessed or just hates women which is usually at the root of most violence against women. Perhaps if the abusive person is a rational human being, than maybe it would work, but how many abusive people that are capable of taking someone's life are rational?

A quarter of women experience domestic violence and the murder of women via intimate partner violence and homicide is the fourth leading cause of death for women of childbearing age and 1/3 of women murdered are by intimate partners. Yet all of the resources that are available to us do not effectively solve the problem, nor do they save lives. Where were the cops? Why was he not being patrolled or why was he not forced to relocate? Or why was he not put in rehabilitative services, counseling, anything? What does it take to take that kind of action? He has to kill her first?

Sorry to sound so frustrated, but when I had to leave my apt for a stalking incident I too was told that the only recourse I had for a man that lived under me and could get to my front door at any time of day or night, was to file a restraining order. I don't think a piece of paper will actually stop a mentally ill person that hates women from doing what he is planning on doing. That is not how it works.

It is stories like this where theory meets action and I feel so at a loss for how to move forward or what words of solace to even offer. I don't support the heavy policing of communities of color, I don't support increased rates of incarceration and I support rehabilitation for all kinds of offenders, however, given the current conditions of the prison industrial complex, it is difficult to see any of that theory in action. Without policy based support for alternatives to rehabilitation for people committing domestic partner violence, what hope do we have?

My condolences to the family of Elnora Caldwell and the community surrounding her. Our thoughts are with you.

Update: They are considering the death penalty for the murderer.

This web video from the Obama campaign highlights the importance of the Violence Against Women Act (and, of course, Joe Biden's role in its passage):

(Trigger warning.)

Related:
Quick Hit: Biden and VAWA
Meet Joe Biden

Jessica Lenahan (formerly Gonzales)

We've written before about Castle Rock v. Gonzales, a 2005 case in which the Supreme Court ruled that local police departments are not responsible for enforcing restraining orders. Well, the plaintiff in that case, Jessica Lenahan (formerly Gonzales) is taking her case before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights this week.

Here is a post from her on what the hearing is all about:

My name is Jessica Lenahan and I am a survivor of domestic violence. On Wednesday I will make my second appearance before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, DC. The IACHR is responsible for promoting and protecting human rights throughout the Americas. I turned to the IACHR three years ago because the justice system in the United States abandoned me.

In June 1999, my estranged husband, Simon Gonzales, abducted my three young daughters in violation of a domestic violence restraining order I had obtained against him three weeks before. I repeatedly contacted and pleaded with the Castle Rock Police for assistance, but they refused to act. Late that night, Simon arrived at the police station and opened fire. He was killed and the bodies of my three girls were found murdered in the cab of his truck.

I don't care if you call it domestic violence or intimate partner violence - but stop calling it a Facebook crime, or a MySpace murder. It has nothing to do with social networking and everything to do with violence against women.

Take this latest story from the BBC:

A man has been jailed for life for stabbing his wife to death over a posting she made on the social networking site Facebook.

Wayne Forrester, 34, told police he was devastated that his wife Emma, also 34, had changed her online profile to "single" days after he had moved out.

Forrester did not murder his wife because of her Facebook status, he murdered her because he was an abuser.

The couple, who had been together for 15 years, had a "volatile" marriage, jurors were told.

But talking about "volatile" marriages (you know, abusive relationships) isn't as trendy as talking about Facebook. I'm so incredibly sick of all of these stories coming out about women being killed by their partners and not hearing the words "domestic violence" once. Not once. Please, all, hold media accountable. When you see a story like this one, write a letter to the editor and tell them how important it is to call out violence against women for what it is.

Possibly triggering

This story from Canada is just peachy:

Told by a judge she should have 'walked out' of an abusive relationship and never to call police if she goes back to her former partner, a London woman has complained to Ontario's judicial watchdog.

Melodie White said she felt 'embarrassed and humiliated' by Justice Gregory Pockele, who heard the case in a domestic violence court last summer.

White has requested that the Ontario Judicial Council discipline the judge by "re-victimizing" and endangering her by telling her to not call the police if she goes back to her partner. This was all in front of the abusive ex-boyfriend, by the way. "It was supposed to be about (the accused) being violent to me and the police felt it was serious enough to lay four charges. But it turned out to be about me," said White.

And he dismissed the charges. He also told her that women today were not "not weak and disadvantaged" and she should have been gone "in a flash."

Megan Walker, head of the London Abused Women's Centre, responded, "Suddenly, he's saying women are able to walk out the doors into the sunset. He is closing his eyes to the number of women who have been killed trying to walk out the door."

h/t to Rory.

Trigger Warning

I'm way late to this, but I thought it was worth posting anyway. A woman has brought a lawsuit against against NYC's Metropolitan Transportation Authority after she was raped on a train platform three years ago and no one helped her.

And the victim, now 25, told the Daily News this weekend that she forgives her attacker ("I know he was sick in the head"), but not the token booth clerk clerk at the 21st Street station, "I can't forgive those five seconds when I stared into his eyes, screaming for help, imploring him with my tears and all I got back was a cold stare."

The victim's suit, filed two years ago, claims the MTA is negligent for not properly training its subway workers as well as lacking the proper communication tools between a booth and the platform below. As the woman, now 25, was being attacked, she says not only did the token booth clerk see her yet stay in his booth, but another conductor whose train entered during the attack saw her being assaulted and allowed his train to leave the station. The only action taken by both the clerk and the conductor respectively was to call into their command center for further help.

Apparently token booth clerks are not supposed to leave their booths, but I have a hard time believing he couldn't have done anything.

When asked in a pre-trial deposition why he didn't try to at least scare away the attacker by informing him that police were on their way, he said, "I did not even think about it." He says that when the woman was taken out of his view to the platform for the ten minutes that followed, he did "nothing really. I was just waiting for the police."

This absolutely terrifies me to my core.

Family Guy, which I must admit I enjoy, seems to have a thing for rape jokes. And I'm getting sick of it.

The most recent episode, I Dream of Jesus, featured this conversation with Peter and a waiter (Peter is trying to get the waiter to give him a jukebox record he likes):

Peter: Can I have that record? I love that song. I'll let you have sex with my daughter...

Waiter: I don't know...let's see what your daughter looks like.

P: She's...uhh...(pans past Meg to "hot" girl)...right there!

W: Ok, I'll do her. But can you tell her to cry and beg me to stop?

P: I think that can be arranged.

And this isn't the first time the show has made light of violence against women. Usually, I'd consider Family Guy one of my (Un)Feminist guilty pleasures, but I think I have to cut the show off completely. Sigh.

Thanks to Caitlin for the heads up.

Bad: Telling a joke about Sarah Palin being "gang-raped by my big black brothers."

Worse: Telling said joke at a women's shelter.

You've gotta love Planned Parenthood Action Fund! (For other ads, check out their YouTube channel.)

Transcript is after the jump.

Back in May, Postville, Iowa -- a small town not far from where I grew up -- was the site of the largest immigration raid in U.S. history. Nearly 400 undocumented workers were rounded up and detained. Today, 28 women remain in custody as they apply for political asylum and special visas for victims of violence (many have suffered sexual assault and/or sexual harassment).

New America Media has video interviews with two of the women who are fighting deportation, María Laura Gómez and Maricruz Rodríguez. (I can't figure out how to embed the vid, so you'll have to click here to watch.)

In Rodríguez's case, she's applying for political asylum, seeking protection from her alcoholic, abusive ex-husband, who she immigrated with but separated from nearly three years ago, completing her divorce earlier this year. Because Mexican authorities have proven woefully inadequate in protecting domestic abuse victims, she can apply for asylum under U.S. law as a "member of a particular social group" that a foreign government isn't able to adequately shield from persecution, says Rachel Yamamoto, an Omaha attorney.

"From what she's told me, the husband would follow her back to Mexico," Yamamoto says, "and she's terrified. You can't go to the police, the police won't help in Mexico."

Other women are applying for a "U-visa," which allows victims of violence to remain in the U.S. while their cases are investigated. But according to Legal Momentum's Immigrant Women Program (which does great work), there's a catch:

A couple of my friends found this offensive, but I think it's a hilarious way to shed light on the fucked-up-ness of Palin's involvement in charging victims of sexual assault for their own rape kits.

What do you think?

For a woman to be a high ranking police chief in Afghanistan is in fact a profound statement and considerable gain for women. So it is a statement that the Taliban assassinated one of the top female police officers in the country. An anti-woman statement.

The police officer, Malalai Kakar, who was in her mid-40s with six children, was an iconic figure among women's groups in Afghanistan and abroad. Often profiled in the Afghan and foreign news media, she was one of the leading totems for the wider freedoms gained by women when the Taliban, with their repressive policies toward women, were ousted from power by an American-led coalition in 2001.

From Gothamist:

The Health Department issued a report about "Intimate Partner Violence" in NYC, and, between 2003 and 2005, 44% of all women murdered were killed by intimate partners. The Health Department also noted that domestic violence also accounted for nearly 4,000 visits to the ER.

Those most at risk appear to be women in their 20s, black women, and women in low-income areas.

Say it isn't so, Helen!

In a recent interview, actor Helen Mirren talked about being raped and, shockingly, why she doesn't think women should bring date rape cases to court.

She told GQ: "I was [date-raped], yes. A couple of times.

"Not with excessive violence, or being hit, but rather being locked in a room and made to have sex against my will."

Dame Helen said it was rape if a couple engaged in sexual activity but the woman said "no" at the last second.

However, she said: "I don't think she can have that man into court under those circumstances."

Mirren said that she didn't report her own rape because "you couldn't do that in those days."

I feel terrible for Mirren, but I think her comments are really damaging. Jess at the f-word puts it best: "In reality, in this country, right now, men can rape with impunity. And in this country, right now, rapists are getting away with it because of woman-blaming attitudes."

Because fighting domestic violence makes one so unelectable. Via Barefoot and Progressive:

Exxon Eddie Whitfield's surrogate has just posted a clip of his opponent in KY's 1st congressional district race, Heather Ryan, performing a short piece from the Vagina Monologues earlier this year, which raised money for the Merriman House in Paducah for battered women. In it, he asks "Is this what we want to represent the first district of Kentucky?"

Uhhhh.... YES.

Violence, shmiolence - this woman is in a show about vaginas, people!! Sigh, how moronic. (Albeit not surprising.)

Trigger warning : This is very upsetting. At the convention, a CodePink protester was knocked down by a policeman saying (you can hear him in the video): "Back it up, bitch."

You can always count on The New York Post to bring you the bottom-of-the-barrel headlines.

And this one is no exception.

38 year-old Elizabeth Acevedo, a human being, was murdered in Brooklyn after someone hit her in the head. The police are still looking for a suspect.

Renee at Womanist Musings has more.

Via Ren at Feministe.

A reader sent in this story of a woman who intervened when she saw a girl getting physically abused, and I thought it brought up a lot of interesting questions about when to get involved.

I was waiting for my bus up to Ye Olde Transit Centre early this morning, and I noticed a young couple scuffling outside the Youth Employment Centre near my bus stop. They were older teenagers - the boy was 17 or 18, and the girl looked to be about 16. She was crying and yelling something at the boy, and suddenly they started pushing and shoving.

She took a swing and he grabbed her hand (he was easily 6' and she must have been 5'2 and about 100lbs) and he threw her up against the building and grabbed her throat. I was alone at the stop and reacted instinctively: I pushed my way between them and told the boy to back off. Predictably he started screaming at me to "stay out of his business" but I ignored him and worked on leading the girl away. She kept sobbing in apology, and flinched when the boy tried to grab her hand. The boy kept yelling at me to "stay out of it" and I told him that he if was going to assault his girlfriend on a public street than it damn well was my business, and that if he didn't back off and move away I was going to call the police.

...He muttered, "Fucking feminist bitch!" and moved away up the street.

Telling that he called her a feminist as a pejorative, but I digress. I've often seen things in public spaces that I found upsetting and/or well, criminal, and I've spoken up when I've felt safe. But how can we gauge safety, or if other women want us to get involved?

I'm reminded of two stories...

A women's studies professor I had as an undergrad told my class about how her sister was in an abusive relationship - his battering her was so loud that the neighbors called often the police. However, the police generally made things worse: Not just because they didn't arrest her boyfriend and treated her as if she was the criminal - not believing her, asking if she had attacked him - but also because once they left, she was beaten even worse. My prof went on to say that from then on whenever she saw or heard a woman being abused, she asked if the woman would like her to call the police - assuming that she knew what was best for her own situation.

Clearly, they're just ASKING to be raped.

Here at Feministing, we've seen our fair share of victim-blaming articles. But this one takes the asshole, rape-apologist cake.

Trigger Warning

Peter Hitchens (yes, they're related) writes that a rape victim that was drunk "deserves less sympathy."

Wait, it gets worse. As Melissa at Shakesville points out, Hitchens makes flat out false statements like "women who get drunk are more likely to be raped than women who do not get drunk," and that rape is "the inevitable result of the collapse of sexual morality." (You know, because rape never happened before free love, per-marital sex, feminism, etc)

But here's the real kicker:

Of course she is culpable, just as she would be culpable if she crashed a car and injured someone while drunk, or stepped out into the traffic while drunk and was run over.

Getting drunk is not something that happens to you. It is something you do.

Melissa's response:

At this point, as you can see, Hitchens has totally lost the plot. Indeed, "getting drunk" is not something that happens to you--but getting raped is. Comparing getting behind the wheel of a car and getting held down and forcibly penetrated without consent is patently ludicrous, not to mention about as divorced from the actual experience of being raped as I can imagine. Essentially, Hitchens' argument is that women should be responsible for their choices, without ever acknowledging that rape isn't a fucking choice.

Hitchens can't seem to get his head around the idea that rapists rape women, rather than women magically "getting themselves" raped. There's so much more to say, but really, it's impossible to unpack all of the idiocy in this article (including the charming accompanying art above). So I'll leave that you, lovely readers, in comments.

Apparently the cowboy jeans company decided to "spice up" their ads a bit: by featuring corpses along with the tagline, "We are animals." Because, you know, murder is so hot right now. The one after the jump is so disturbing (trigger warning) that I honestly felt like I might throw up. I don't think I've ever seen the sexualization of violence against women so disturbingly portrayed on an ad before.

They also come with a live ad that's being run in France (along with these gems), as Melissa at Shakesville says, is "featuring the jeans models engaging in some animalism pre-death...?--I've no idea. Don't ask me to explain. I cannot." Took the words out of my mouth.

Sometimes, there are no words.

Via The Curvature.

Girls Gone Wild crew supervisor Matthew O'Sullivan, 37, was arrested for sexually assaulting a 20 year-old woman on the "party bus" while the show was filming in Long Island, New York.

[Trigger Warning]

At O'Sullivan's arraignment yesterday, Suffolk County prosecutors said he and the victim started touching and kissing, which she had no problem with.

But things took a tawdry turn when he allegedly pulled down her shorts and underwear as he put his hands around her throat to keep her from running out.

The young woman was able to break free when her friends came on the bus. The pals yanked back a curtain and saw her struggling with O'Sullivan, prosecutors said.

The friends called 911 and the victim was able to flag down a passing police car...

Seriously, when is someone going to shut this fucking operation down? How many more women have to be assaulted by Joe Francis and Co. before something is done? And yeah, I realize that you can't put them out of business because of the actions of a few of their employees, but it's clear that this company breeds and condones violence against women.

Via Gothamist.

Contributed by Adrienne Elyse Wallace

It's been about eight months since the murder of Tarika Wilson.

Reporting on her tragic murder, Christopher Maag of the New York Times wrote:

A SWAT team arrived at Ms. Wilson's rented house in the Southside neighborhood early in the evening of Jan. 4 to arrest her companion, Anthony Terry, on suspicion of drug dealing, said Greg Garlock, Lima's police chief. Officers bashed in the front door and entered with guns drawn, said neighbors who saw the raid.

Moments later, the police opened fire, killing Ms. Wilson, 26, and wounding her 14-month-old son, Sincere, Chief Garlock said. One officer involved in the raid, Sgt. Joseph Chavalia, a 31-year veteran, has been placed on paid administrative leave.

On August 4th an all-white jury acquitted Sgt. Joseph Chavalia. Chavalia's attorney said in response: "What kind of world would it be if we didn't have police officers...Joe was doing his duty."

Oh shit, I'm sorry - I didn't realize that killing a woman holding her baby was in the Lima, Ohio Police handbook. The fact that Chavalia was acquitted speaks volumes. His actions were sanctioned by the jury. The take away message is that it's okay to shoot a black woman holding her child. I mean the racism is apparent in the actions of the police officer and the media that covered the shooting but conveniently lacked follow up coverage. Why isn't this story important, why aren't people outraged? Citizens of Lima have spoken up - why aren't they receiving attention from folks outside of the black activist community? It seems the death of a black woman at the hands of a white police officer is fine, even forgettable - at least to twelve jurors and a slew of media outlets. However let me just say:

Tarika Wilson, I will not forget you.

Adrienne Elyse is a general badass who works in the anti-domestic violence movement by working for economic justice. She lives / works / loves in Massachusetts (which is now, officially for lovers).

The Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) released a report yesterday afternoon on the prevalence of sexual violence in juvenile detention centers. An estimated 4,072 accounts of sexual violence were reported during 2005 and 2006:

An estimated 36 percent of the allegations of sexual violence in juvenile facilities were youth-on-youth nonconsensual sexual acts, such as rape and forcible sodomy; 21 percent were youth-on-youth abusive sexual contacts, such as unwanted touching or grabbing with the intention to exploit sexually.

About 32 percent of all allegations of sexual violence reported in state juvenile systems and local or private juvenile facilities involved staff sexual misconduct, defined as any act of a sexual nature directed toward a youth, either consensual or nonconsensual; 11 percent involved staff sexual harassment, including repeated comments or demeaning references of a sexual nature to a youth.

Victims of substantiated incidents of youth-on-youth sexual violence were more likely to be male (73 percent) than victims of staff-on-youth violence (49 percent). Females were more likely to be victims of staff sexual violence than victims of youth-on-youth sexual violence (51 percent versus 27 percent).

Check out the entire report.

Not only does this headline from 10News in San Diego victim-blame in the worst (and perhaps most common) way, the article itself is no dream either. Not once are the words 'rapist' or 'men' mentioned. Check out the lede, for example:

San Diego police are investigating a rising number of rapes involving young women who go on drinking binges, becoming too intoxicated to fight back or say "no," it was reported Tuesday.

What's so hard about instead writing, "San Diego police are investigating a rising number of rapes involving men who attack intoxicated women." It's shorter, more accurate, and doesn't blame women for being raped. It's like magic! I guess I won't be holding my breath.

Ophelia at Feminocracy observes something about the language used to discuss two very similar -- and very tragic -- cases in which a pregnant woman was murdered, her uterus cut open, and the fetus stolen.

The details provided about Kia Johnson's death are gory and detailed. Words like "eviscerated" jump out at you as you read the account. They call her a corpse. They note that the foul smell emitting from the body that was in "moderate decomposition" is how they found her.

Bobbie Jo Stinnet is called a "slain mom", a "pregnant woman" who had her "womb" cut open.

Kia is an "eviscerated pregnant teen."

Yes, there were gory descriptions of Bobbie Jo Stinnett's murder published, too. But I do notice a difference in tone -- especially in the headlines -- between the coverage of her and that of Kia Johnson. I think it's less subtle when you see those headlines (all from CNN) next to the pictures of these women:

Maybe this particularly resonates with me because I work as an editor, and I see it as a heartbreaking example of why language matters. How word choice can humanize (and dehumanize). How racism can pervade what probably, to the writer of those CNN headlines, seemed like straightforward, cut-and-dried sentences.

And sign this petition. Tomorrow is the three-year anniversary of LaVena Johnson's death (on July 19), which was ruled a suicide but was, in all likelihood, a rape and murder.

Phillip Barron has been working incredibly hard to bring attention to her case. And you may have read about LaVena recently on Feministing, or from Cara, Megan at Jezebel, Gina at What About Our Daughters, and Kate at Broadsheet,.

Retired Army Col. Ann Wright explains what we all want investigated:

From the day their daughter's body was returned to them, the parents had grave suspicions about the Army's investigation into Lavena's death and the characterization of her death as suicide. In charge of a communications facility, Lavena was able to call home daily. In those calls she gave no indication of emotional problems or being upset. In a letter to her parents, Lavena's commanding officer Captain David Woods wrote: "Lavena was clearly happy and seemed in very good health both physically and emotionally."

In viewing his daughter's body at the funeral home, Dr. Johnson was concerned about the bruising on her face. He was puzzled by the discrepancy in the autopsy report on the location of the gunshot wound. As a US Army veteran and a 25-year US Army civilian employee who had counseled veterans, he was mystified how the exit wound of an M-16 shot could be so small. The hole in Lavena's head appeared to be more the size of a pistol shot rather than an M-16 round. He questioned why the exit hole was on the left side of her head, when she was right handed. But the gluing of military uniform white gloves onto Lavena's hands hiding burns on one of her hands is what deepened Dr. Johnson's concerns that the Army's investigation into the death of his daughter was flawed.

They glued the white gloves onto her hands to hide burns. A literal cover-up. It's so clear that this and other details of LaVena's case don't add up to suicide. And it's sadly not exactly far-fetched that she was sexually assaulted: A full one-third of women veterans report rape or attempted rape during their time in the military. So it's important to keep the pressure on Congress and the military to open an investigation into her death. For LaVena, yes. Absolutely. But also for other military women whose rapes and murders have been covered up. Wright writes,

The military has characterized each of the deaths of women who were first sexually assaulted as deaths from "non-combat related injuries," and then added "suicide." Yet, the families of the women whom the military has declared to have committed suicide, strongly dispute the findings and are calling for further investigations into the deaths of their daughters. Specific US Army units and certain US military bases in Iraq have an inordinate number of women soldiers who have died of "non-combat related injuries," with several identified as "suicides."

Please sign that petition today. There may also be a legal fund established in the near future. We'll keep you posted.

Pic from raise_my_voice.

Trigger Warning

As I was going through my Google Reader today, I kept getting hit with story after story violence against women, of discrimination, racism and rape. We post on these stories often, so it's not as if I was surprised. But seeing them all together kind of overpowered me, so I figured instead of writing separate posts for each of these horrible stories - I'd put them together in one, so you could see what I'm seeing: the connection between racism and violence against women, the fear of women's sexuality, the straight-up awfulness of misogyny. (Not a light post, I warn you.)

This is great news:

The new law would make it possible for people in dating relationships, heterosexual or gay, to seek protection from abusers in family court. As it stands, New York has one of the narrowest domestic violence laws in the country, allowing for civil protection orders only against spouses or former spouses, blood relations or the other parent of an abused person's child.

An 18-year old girl from Auckland has accused four players of the England rugby union team of raping her, and the team has gone into victim-blaming overdrive.

But what has since followed that night at the Hilton is a mountain of suspicion about the woman's intent and an insane thought from the football union's chief, Francis Baron, that this has all been a "sting". Yes, a plot by the "bitter" All Blacks to bring down English rugby.

...The British paper The Independent said those insiders believed the allegations of rape after the first Test in Auckland were "designed to destabilise" England. "If there had been any substance in the case it should have been dealt with," a Twickenham official said. "The whole episode has been unsatisfactory, but you have to remember that New Zealand are still bitter with us over their exit from the World Cup." (Emphasis mine)

Ri-ight. It's amazing how this young woman has been completely erased and dehumanized - she's just part of a larger plan to bring down a team, she was a willing participant, a groupie, a liar. I'm just so sick of it.

Jessica Halloran, who penned the above article about the case, notes that in the past decade, all English soccer players who have had sexual assault allegations made against them have had the charges dropped. And for the past 28 years, "not one professional footballer from any major Australian football code has been convicted of sexual assault." And something tells me it's not because they're all innocent.

Yeah, charming indeed.

Thanks to Angi for the link.

Some very sad news out of Kansas. 25 year-old Jana Mackey, a feminist activist and law school student, was murdered by her ex-boyfriend last week.

Mackey, who worked with NOW (a Kansas chapter, I believe) on issues of violence against women and who organized activists to go to the March for Women's Lives in 2004, was killed by her ex, 46-year old Adolfo Garcia-Nunez, who subsequently killed himself while in police custody.

I really don't know what I can say about this, other than my heart goes out to Mackey's family and friends. What a horrible loss.

(Trigger warning: If you go to the videos, do yourself a favor and don't read the comments.)

Via Viva La Feminista.

I don't even really understand what this shirt is all about. But it's being sold on Amazon. And it's grossing me out.

Thanks to Anique for the heads up.

The headline above is from The Press Association.

Let's get something straight. Eleven year old girls aren't 'raped'; they're raped. Lose the scare quotes, seriously.

Thanks to Kate for the link.

A Supreme Court ruling made on Wednesday may make it easier for murders from intimate partner violence to go unpunished.

In Giles v. California, victim Brenda Avie called the police three weeks prior to her death, reporting that her boyfriend Dwayne Giles choked her and threatened her life. A trial court convicted Giles for murder which the California Supreme Court upheld, but the Supreme Court justices threw out the conviction in a 6-3 ruling. And it was because Avie wasn't available to be a witness:

The case revolved around the Sixth Amendment, which affords people the bedrock right to confront and cross-examine witnesses who give testimony against them. At issue is whether defendants forfeit their confrontation rights by doing harm to people whose statements are introduced in judicial proceedings.

So because she had made the prior report about his violent behavior and wasn't available for Giles to cross-examine, the conviction was thrown out. The exception of the amendment is if the prosecutors can prove that the accused purposefully killed the victim to keep them from testifying.

And Justice Breyer argued just that in his dissent: "The defendant here knew that murdering his ex-girlfriend would keep her from testifying; and that knowledge is sufficient to show the intent that law ordinarily demands."

What are people's thoughts on this? I find this really upsetting, but I'm no law expert.

Thanks to Jenny for the link!

Renee of womanist musings, guest-blogging at Feministe:

When you think of the Niagara region immediately the mind turns to the majestic falls. Some who have spent more than an afternoon here will think of places like the Welland Canal, The Skylon Tower, Fallsview Casino, Clifton Hill, and maybe even the dearth of reasonably priced hotels, and restaurants. The aforementioned sites are the Niagara region you are supposed to think about. It is what you will find printed in all of those handy little pamphlets, that the tour guides like to give out. Yes the safe family destination, where everything is bright and sunny.What you will not hear about are the women that have been killed here since 1996. What if I were to whisper these names in your ear?

Go read the whole thing.

Creating a "joke" list about how to kill your wife. Not funny.

Thanks to Jessica (and her boyfriend!) for the link.

Okay, I think It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia is super funny. This video promoting it, however, is not.

Thanks to Daniel for the link.

At Thursday's meeting of the UN Security Council along with Condoleeza Rice, a resolution was adopted declaring rape and sexual violence as a “war tactic” that aims to “humiliate, dominate, instil fear in, disperse and/or forcibly relocate civilian members of a community or ethnic group.”

We all know that this has been a long, long time coming, but nonetheless a sigh of relief to see the UN and other groups begin to recognize and document rape as a weapon of war.

Now we need the international community to adopt international law of rape as a war crime; let's hope this speeds the process. Check out the full resolution here.

Via Mighty Crankosaurus we find this oh-so-charming cartoon from a 1959 issue of Playboy magazine.

If you can't read the caption, it says, "Other than that, they didn't touch a thing!"

Ann reported in our Weekly Feminist Reader that John McCain canceled a Texas fundraiser to be given by Clayton Williams after it was revealed that Williams, during his 1990 campaign for governor of Texas, compared rape to the weather: “As long as it’s inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it.”

After canceling the fundraiser, McCain's campaign said that they would be keeping the money raised by Williams - more than $300,000. (Various bloggers suggested, and I agree, that McCain should donate the money to an organization that works to combat rape.)

But the latest, and perhaps most egregious news, is that the fundraiser is back on! Because what's the big deal about rape, right? This is completely unacceptable. You can contact McCain's campaign here to let them know what you think.

Some choice quotes from Williams, including the rape remark, are highlighted in the video above.

UPDATE: I was remiss in not mentioning that Williams will be not be hosting the revived rundraiser. I didn't realize that was the case. I still think this whole situation is fucked, and that the money should be given to an organization working against rape.

Contributed by Juhu Thukral, Esq., the Director of the Sex Workers Project at the Urban Justice Center in New York City. She has been an advocate for the rights of immigrant women in the areas of health, work, and sexuality for over 15 years.

Friday's post about the anti-trafficking law that Congress is in the process of reauthorizing explained the basics of the dangerous and unnecessary change to the Mann Act that the House has adopted. This proposed change may not seem problematic, but it actually harms women and victims of trafficking, and does not even address the problem of trafficking in persons, as intended.

The federal anti-trafficking law already defines anyone under 18 who is involved in commercial sex acts, and anyone in prostitution who experiences force, fraud or coercion—regardless of immigration status—as a victim of human trafficking. The law does not prevent anyone from being arrested for prostitution, since most trafficked persons are not identified immediately. Changing the definition of trafficking so that law enforcement does not need to look at a person’s age or experience of coercion (the heart of the trafficking crime) is not going to help victims be identified—in fact, it is just going to create more problems.

The proposed change is based on the notion that all sex workers are victims, and that work in prostitution is inherently victimizing, even when no actual incident of violence or psychological abuse occurs. Sex workers actually do want help from the police when they are victims of violence—46% of the sex workers we interviewed in a 2005 study had been victims of violence during the course of their work —but often find the police ignoring their needs when they try to file a complaint. Broadly categorizing all prostitutes as trafficking victims means that police will go looking for victims who look and act like “victims,” allowing for even less focus on prostitutes who really have been abused in some way, but who have made the decision to enter into sex work for reasons far more complicated than a local police department might understand.

As law enforcement look for more victims, they will inevitably arrest more sex workers—because arresting people is the way that police reach them. Arrests can have a devastating effect—a recent arrest of sex workers affected a woman trying to get professional credential. Arrests drive people away from mainstream work and toward sex work. Our clients express incredible fears of being arrested and having their neighbors or family find out about their other life.

The reality is that people go into this work for a variety of reasons, often complicated, but usually based on financial need—for example, we found in a study we did a few years ago that 67% of the sex workers we interviewed in that 2005 study did not make a living wage in other jobs such as waitressing, administrative work, or retail.

The proposed Mann Act expansion will also hurt people who truly are victims of human trafficking. People are trafficked into all sorts of labor sectors, and an increased focus on prostitution will mean that immigrant workers in coercive situations will receive even less attention from law enforcement than they do now. The Department of Justice and other law enforcement groups are opposing this change because they want to keep their focus and resources on actual cases of human trafficking.

Broadly proclaiming any group as victims is a dangerous road for women and feminists. Denying people their own voice as activists, workers, and members of their community falls in line with the many policies that have historically been used against women in the name of protecting them.

RH Reality Check has a great piece up about Jackson Katz, an educator and activist who works on gender violence issues.

Katz says, "As a culture, Americans first must take the step in acknowledging that violence against women is not a women's issue, but a men's issue...The first problem I have with labeling gender issues as women's issues is that it gives men an excuse to not pay attention. This is also the problem with calling them gender issues, because the majority of the people in the status quo see gender issues as women's issues."

I'm especially interested in Katz's ideas about how the messages that women get about rape (don't go out at night, don't drink) are risk-reducing rather than prevention - and how those messages completely take men out of the equation.

"These programs focus on how women can reduce their chances of being sexually assaulted. I agree that women benefit from these education programs, but let us not mistake this for prevention...If a woman has done everything in her power to reduce her risk, then a man who has the proclivity for abuse or need for power will just move on to another woman or target," he says.

I highly recommend reading the whole piece - there's even a section where Katz explains how passive sentence construction in the media coverage of violence against women perpetuates the notion that rape is something that just happens to women, rather than something that's perpetrated by another person.

While 134,000 deaths are mourned in the midst of bringing aid to survivors of the Nargis cyclone, two Canadian advocacy groups are addressing another crisis that has existed in Burma for quite some time - systemic violence against women by the ruling military junta. And they're doing it by sending their underwear to the Myanmar's embassy:

The Quebec Women's Federation and the activist group Rights and Democracy claim the secretive military leaders in the country formerly known as Burma are superstitious and believe contact with women's underwear will usurp their power, CTV News reported.

'The campaign was launched by women from Burma,' Rights and Democracy spokeswoman Mika Levesque told the broadcaster from Montreal. 'They believe this is a very powerful message to the military because they are very superstitious.'

The campaign is called Panties for Peace. The Burmese women's rights group Lanna Action for Burma made a statement regarding launching campaign in the midst of catastrophe: "This campaign empowers the women of Burma a sense of purpose and hope," they said, "and we need hope now more than ever."

For more info on the cyclone, check out Ann's recent post on natural disasters and women.

The Washington Post has an article (and video above) about the very low conviction rate in UK rape cases.

As Vanessa reported last year, 33% of reported rapes ended in conviction in 1977. By 2005, that number had dropped to 5.4%.

In Britain, a nation whose justice system has been used as a model around the globe, government officials and women's rights activists agree that rape goes largely unpunished.

Solicitor General Vera Baird, who oversees criminal prosecutions in England, estimated that 10 to 20 percent of rapes are brought to authorities' attention. According to government figures, 14,000 cases a year are reported and 19 out of 20 defendants walk free.

"There will never be proper female equality and appropriate dignity afforded to one-half of the population if it's possible to rape somebody and get away with it," said Baird, one of the highest-ranking women in the British government.

The article also reports that "acquittals are often won on the 'mucky sex' defense -- that the man got mixed signals from the woman and what resulted really wasn't rape." Mucky sex? Is this the UK version of "gray rape"? Kill me now.

This horrible story is via Racialicious.

18-year-old Mildred Beaubrun from Florida was getting some gas with her friends at a local 7-Eleven when a car full of men pulled up.

"Hey, baby, what's your phone number?" they called out as the cars traveled west through Orlando.

Then the banter grew more aggressive. The men threw a T-shirt, then an AA battery, at the Nissan. One of the women threw a broken cell-phone charger back. At one point, the HHR swerved into the Nissan's lane and tried to run the car off the road.

When the Nissan turned north on John Young Parkway, the HHR followed. Then, at Princeton Street, a shot rang out. Shrapnel flew as the bullet pierced the door and struck 18-year-old Beaubrun, who was sitting in the back seat.

It is unclear whether Beaubrun will live, and she does live, if she'll ever walk again. Latoya points out that violence against women is absolutely connected to the fact that men are brought up to think that they have the "right" to talk to and approach women out of nowhere. When our bodies are considered perpetually accessible to men, violence is bound to follow.

Starting next year, survivors of sexual assault will be able to undergo anonymous rape kits.

Starting next year across the country, rape victims too afraid or too ashamed to go to police can undergo an emergency-room forensic rape exam, and the evidence gathered will be kept on file in a sealed envelope in case they decide to press charges.

The new federal requirement that states pay for "Jane Doe rape kits" is aimed at removing one of the biggest obstacles to prosecuting rape cases: Some women are so traumatized they don't come forward until it is too late to collect hair, semen or other samples.

Some hospitals already offer anonymous rape kits, but most states refuse to cover the cost of the exam (approximately $800) unless the survivor files a police report.

Beginning in 2009, states will have to pay for Jane Doe rape kits to continue receiving funding under the federal Violence Against Women Act, which provides tax dollars for women's shelters and law enforcement training. States will decide how many locations will offer anonymous rape exams and how long the evidence should be kept.

Awesome.

Thanks to Thomas for the link.

Lynsay Skiba is the Reigle Human Rights Fellow at Justice Now. She is a graduate of the University of California at Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall), where she focused her studies on human rights law.

Many people who are pregnant inside California’s women’s prisons experience some form of mistreatment on a daily basis: they are deprived of basic information about their pregnancy; they lack access to responsive and consistent medical and mental health care; they endure degrading treatment at the hands of some prison staff; they lack control over important lifestyle choices impacting pregnancy such as diet and physical activity; and they are forced to cope with the prospect of being separated form their newborn shortly after birth, in some cases permanently.

Driving this mistreatment is the prison system’s apathetic and punishment-driven approach toward people in prison and their medical and mental health needs. What this means is that while people in women’s prisons who do not experience physical or mental problems during their pregnancies may receive treatment and experience medical outcomes that are unremarkable by accepted medical standards, those who have physical complications, mental health problems, or who choose to challenge their treatment are vulnerable to serious consequences, including death.

Using a participatory model of human rights documentation, Justice Now partners with those most impacted by these issues – people inside the two state prisons that house pregnant people – to expose pregnancy-related abuses through an international human rights framework. Together we have found that these prisons consistently violate the human rights to family, information, health, bodily integrity, dignified treatment, life, and the right to be free from cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.

Can we please stop calling every attempt at analyzing pop culture "outrage"? Kthx, moving on.

Annalee Newitz's piece from the San Francisco Bay Guardian last week embarks on the task of justifying the violence and misogyny in Grand Theft Auto 4.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving is lobbying to get the video game rated "adults only" (effectively killing it in the US market, where major console manufacturers won't support AO games) because there's one scene in the game where you have the option to drive drunk. Apparently none of the good ladies of MADD have ever played GTA, since if they had they might have discovered that when you try to drive drunk, the video game informs you that you should take a cab. If you do drive, the cops immediately chase you down. Which is exactly the sort of move you'd expect from this sly, fun game, which hit stores last week.

I actually stand at a different point than MADD and I don't necessarily support the censorship of the game, I don't really think censorship works. The more ratings and labels you put on something, the edgier and sexier it becomes. Censorship doesn't change the fact that violence and misogynist sex scenes make up the bulk of edgy popular culture or that violence is a serious problem for youth today and so is the sexualization of women, along with violence against women.

On some level, I do agree with proponents of GTA 4. Several of my friends have said, "but it is just fun." I don't deny that advances in video game technology are in fact mind-blowing and down right incredible and the they are fun. Hello, I am a blogger, I get the nerd new-cool-fun-fangled-technology thing.

What I can't get down with is justifying blatant misogyny by calling it art.

If GTA4 were a movie, it would have been directed by Martin Scorsese or David O. Russell, and we'd all be ooohing and aaahhing over its dark, ironic vision of immigrant life in a world at war with itself. But because GTA4 is a video game, where players are in the driver's seat, so to speak, it freaks people out. Earlier installments of GTA-inspired feminist and cultural-conservative outrage (you have the option to kill prostitutes!), and concern over moral turpitude from Hillary Clinton (you can beat cops to death! Or anybody!).

I think it is really problematic to lump all criticisms of GTA4 together. I believe at some point, I was written about along with a conservative writer (shudder to think) and that is not giving the full range of view points space to air their concerns. I am pretty sure if a movie had prostitute killing in it, I would write about it, but that is besides the point. GTA4 is not a movie, it is bigger than a movie. In fact, movies switched around their release dates for the release of GTA4. In the first week out it has grossed 500 million dollars. Furthermore, it is played, repeatedly and it is a role playing game, where you are the person engaging in violent acts. It is a fantasy, your fantasy. Perhaps there is a moment of identification like this with movies, but it is different then actually acting something out yourself.

Phyllis Schlafly, who is set to receive an honorary degree from Washington University this week has reiterated her support of marital rape. (Because, sorry, if you think that women who have gotten married have don't have a right to refuse sex - you are supporting rape.)

In an interview with Washington University's student newspaper, Schlafly held her anti-woman ground:

Could you clarify some of the statements that you made in Maine last year about martial rape?

I think that when you get married you have consented to sex. That's what marriage is all about, I don't know if maybe these girls missed sex ed. That doesn't mean the husband can beat you up, we have plenty of laws against assault and battery. If there is any violence or mistreatment that can be dealt with by criminal prosecution, by divorce or in various ways. When it gets down to calling it rape though, it isn't rape, it's a he said-she said where it's just too easy to lie about it.

Was the way in which your statement was portrayed correct?

Yes. Feminists, if they get tired of a husband or if they want to fight over child custody, they can make an accusation of marital rape and they want that to be there, available to them.

So you see this as more of a tool used by people to get out of marriages than as legitimate-

Yes, I certainly do.

Find out how can you can contact Washington University about this honorary degree nonsense here.

Via Right Wing Watch.

The above picture is from an anti-female genital mutilation campaign by the AMAM, Association of Women against Genital Mutilation. The copy reads: "More than 140 million women in the world are condemned to feel nothing." You know, like a blow-up doll.

I'm all for raising awareness about FGM, but this campaign really rubs the wrong way. It reduces women to their body parts and the issue to just a sexual one. Using a blowup doll to depict a woman who has undergone FGM is incredibly offensive - they're literally being portrayed as no longer human, just a sex toy. Not only is the ad dehumanizing, it also suggests that FGM is all about sex - that women who have undergone FGM will never enjoy sex and that a woman who is no longer sexual is no longer, well...a woman. What do you think?

For more information on FGM, you can go to Amnesty International, the Female Genital Cutting Education and Networking Project, and this report from the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

Related: FGM was named in the Beijing Platform for Action - a declaration and action items adopted at the Fourth World Conference on Women - as a form of violence against women to be eliminated.

Via BoingBoing.

(Trigger warning.) In 2003, 21 year-old Ramona Moore - a student at Hunter College in New York - told her mother she was going to Burger King down the street and would be right back. She never came home.

Moore was held in a basement a few blocks away where she was raped and tortured for four days before her captors beat her to death. The police, who Moore's mother begged for help, did nothing to find her.

Sean Gardiner at The Village Voice has a huge piece not only on the police's mishandling of Moore's disappearance - but also how it has sparked a historic racial bias case against the city.

Moore's mother Elle Carmichael is bringing forward a a civil-rights lawsuit claiming that the NYPD has a "practice of not making a prompt investigation of missing-persons claims of African-Americans, while making a prompt investigation for white individuals."

Not exactly shocking news, of course, but the case would be the first of its kind.

To prove racial bias, Carmichael's team would have to "show it's happened in a pattern of instances," says NYU law professor Paul Chevigny. And the only way Chevigny can think of to do so would be to take a large sample of missing-persons cases, identify the race of the people involved, and then determine whether there really is a pattern.

Carmichael's lawyer, Robert Barsch, is apparently attempting to do just that. He tells the Voice that he has heard from a number of black people who have also had their attempts to have police open up missing-persons investigations ignored. And he plans to point to the [Svetlana] Aronov case as a prime example of the flip side of that coin. After all, the NYPD tried harder to find Aronov's dog than they did Romona Moore. (Link added)

Tried harder to find a dog. "If this was a white kid, they would never had done this," Carmichael told Gardiner.

"I had to say to the detectives one day: 'You know, I feel the same emotions and pain as a white person.' "

Read more about Moore and the case against the NYPD at What About Our Daughters? and The Feminist Underground.

Several readers wrote in to tell us about this horrific "piece of flair" that you can send to friends on Facebook through this application. Now, users can create their own buttons so I'm going to assume that the creators of this application didn't make this - a user did. But that's not excuse. Contact the developers of Facebook's "Pieces of Flair" and let them know that rape isn't funny.

UPDATE: The developers of this application have emailed us to let folks know that they've taken the button down and are committed to their program being free of offensive, violent buttons like the one above. Kudos to them.

Check out this comprehensive new report by the Women & Girls Collective Action Network, comprised of 16 organizations in Chicago, about ending violence against women "with a focus on women of color, youth, queer and trans youth, women with disabilities, young women in the sex trade, among others." The report includes info on...

how groups have broadened their definitions of violence, rethought the roles of survivors and perpetrators, and identified systems of oppression as root causes of violence. Rather than copy the structures of the mainstream nonprofit system, many of these groups are creating new structures and negotiating older ones.

examples of how groups are building safe communities within the movement, responding to acts of violence within social justice communities, and grappling with the non-profit industrial complex.

strategies to end violence, including how to create community conversations, organize communities, use arts and performance, develop popular education, incorporate harm reduction, and partner with men.

Thanks to Ann Russo of DePaul U. for the heads up.

It's stories like these that make me doubt the idea that people are basically good. (Trigger warning)

Melissa Bruen was sexually assaulted on the University of Connecticut campus while a group of men cheered. Even more distressing is that the assault was retribution for fighting back against another man who was assaulting her.

On a weekend night, Bruen was walking home along a campus trail (actually known as "the rape trail" if you can believe that hit), when she was "picked up by [her] shoulders, pinned up against the pole and 'dry humped' by a stranger."

At first I thought it was one of my friends' attempt at humor, until I heard the man moaning.

I hung up the phone, and shoved the man off me. I am 5'5". He was around 5'11".

"My, aren't we feisty tonight," he said.

I was assaulted when I was very young - I wasn't about to let it happen again. When he came toward me, I grabbed him by the shoulders and pushed him down to the ground. I held onto his shoulders and climbed on top to straddle him. He started thrashing side to side, but I was able to hit him with a closed fist, full force, in the face.

A small crowd had gathered, mostly men. Now they seemed shocked. I was supposed to have been a victim, and I was breaking out of the mold. I hit him in the stomach, while clenching my legs around him to prevent another man from pushing me off. In all, it took three men to pull me off my assailant.

He got up and ran off, yelling at me, as if I were the would-be rapist.

Bruen started yelling, "You just assaulted me...He just assaulted me." Instead of coming to her aid, a group gathered around her.

Another man, around 6'1", approached me and said, "You think that was assault?" and he pulled down my tube top, and grabbed my breasts. More men started to cheer. It didn't matter to the drunken mob that my breasts were being shown or fondled against my will. They were happy to see a topless girl all the same. I punched him in the face, and someone shoved me into a throng of others. I was surrounded, but I kept swinging and hitting until I was able to break free of the circle they had formed.

If this doesn't ruin your day, I don't know what will. Though I have to say, I'm grateful to Bruen for sharing her story. Given how prevalent victim-blaming is, writing an article about your assault is no small thing.

What's truly incredible about this story is how it really dismantles the idea that teaching women to protect themselves (via self-defense, specifically) is truly effective. As Melissa points out, "Bruen did everything that she was supposed to do, but instead of being hailed a hero for pummeling someone who sexually assaulted her, she was further assaulted for her trouble." (Make sure to read Melissa's full post by the way.) This isn't to say that I think women shouldn't learn self-defense or fight back against assault - on the contrary, I think they should if that's what's best for them. But it's not an answer to rape culture (in which a crowd of people can stand and fucking cheer as a woman is being assaulted) - and that's what we need to be fighting back against.

Again, big kudos to Bruen for - as she puts it - "get[ting] a few good swings in." Not only against her assailants, but against a culture that would have her silenced.

So this video is NSFW (not safe for work) and it is very disturbing. Trigger warning! But it is one of the trailers to the new Grand Theft Auto coming out today, and it is reprehensible. All around the country posters for the new GTA have been removed due to their offensive nature. Most of the complaints have been about the violence in the video game. Not one article has been about the blatant violence and misogyny displayed towards women.

If you get through the trailer you will notice that not only are the sex scenes very real looking, most of the women are killed shortly after forcibly performing sex acts. So, many young men are going to have their first (or already have, as this is not new content for GTA) sexual experiences via GTA and then they are going to kill the women they are sleeping with. The implications of that are mind-blowing. It is no question that GTA is merely reflective of the bigger misogyny embedded in capitalist patriarchy, but the question is why is a game that depicts such violence towards women so popular? How is that acceptable?

I think this has two consequences in the land of no child left behind where standardized educational systems have led to a cutback in the teaching of metacognition in elementary schools. What does that mean? Youth don't get taught to think about why they make the choices they do, they are instead force fed information that they must memorize. So it can be argued that they are being force fed heavily marketed violent images (that often reflect the violence in the media, movies, government policy and in their own communities) that become normalized. And not only normalized, but given the popular nature of GTA, it is cool to be violent and kill prostitutes.

The second implication is where does this put young women gamers? How do they feel when playing video games with such violent representations of women?

I can tell you that watching that video was humiliating and I don't play video games, so I never have to see it again if I don't want to.

A lot of issues here. Other thoughts?

Actress and Goodwill Ambassador Nicole Kidman is at the UN today advocating for UNIFEM's Say No to Violence against Women campaign. As Mark at the UN Dispatch says, "Most coverage of this visit, though, seems to focus on the fact that Kidman is six months pregnant--and shockingly is showing a 'baby bump.' Amazing how that works."

Read the whole post here.

Talk about a fucking depressing statistic.

The British public gives more to a Devon-based donkey sanctuary than the most prominent charities trying to combat violence and abuse against women, a report released today by a leading philanthropy watchdog reveals.

New Philanthropy Capital (NPC) has calculated that more than 7 million women have been affected by domestic violence but found that Refuge, the Women's Aid Federation and Eaves Housing for Women have a combined annual income of just £17m. By contrast the Donkey Sanctuary, which has looked after 12,000 donkeys, received £20m in 2006.

Justine Järvinen, the author of the report, said, "As a society we are not spending enough on this issue whether through charities or the government...Violence against women appears regularly as the subject of media reports and in the storylines of soap operas but rarely does it come up in normal conversation, which suggests there is a stigma around it. The truth is it is very common."

Warning: This video is graphic and upsetting.

Current TV is featuring this short documentary on breast ironing in Cameroon - a practice that about 1 in 4 girls in the country are subject to.

This is from Wayout TV, a project of Damon Wayans'. I'm almost speechless. (Almost.) When will people realize that violence against women isn't fucking funny? Not to mention the fact that violence against women increases during pregnancy. So, yeah. Hilarious.

Thanks to Rachel for the link.

At the V to the 10th in New Orleans, activism is the word of the weekend.

Playwright and founder of V-Day, Eve Ensler, informed us that "Our destiny will not be changed by the people on top." In other words, this weekend was all about the grassroots movement. We can no longer rely on elected officials to eventually come around and see the light on issues that affect women worldwide; we must take back the power, motivate allies to increase our strength in numbers, and develop our own solutions.
Besides visiting the amazing Activist’s Lounge where a ton of feminist and environmental groups were giving out information, we sat in on a number of panels, one being the fantastic discussion "From New Orleans to the World: Women in Conflict Zones."

Mark Goldberg at UN Dispatch has a great video interview up with filmmaker Lisa Jackson, whose documentary The Greatest Silence: Rape in the Congo premiered on HBO this week. Make sure to check it out.

For more information on sexual violence in the Congo, click here.

For blogger's thoughts on the film, check out Elle, PhD, Faux Real, WOC PhD, KitKat's Critique, Shakesville, and Historiann.

We followed a line of women (and a few scattered men) into the Superdome early Friday morning. After being thoroughly searched and promising never to turn on our video camera, we were allowed admittance. The entrance was decorated with a selection of feminist art pieces such as poster board sized pages of a graphic novel entitled, “Oh fuck, I’m a Victim.� In it, artist Vicki Rabinowicz depicts a woman who is followed, kidnapped, and raped. In one frame, she is drawn small enough to fit in her attacker’s hand as he masturbates onto her entire body then flushes her down the toilet. At the end of the strip we discover that the victim is the artist and that she drew this on her 28th birthday, tens years after the attack. Not all of the pieces were as jarring though. To the left lay a ball of bras (think office ball of rubber bands) roughly five feet tall. The only thing holding this work together seemed to be the very godforsaken wired hooks of each boulder holder. Along the back wall was a timeline of shirts, bags, posters, and other promo items representing performances from around the world. Near that was an altar with lit candles to honor those who fell to final rest when Katrina hit.

Past the welcoming gallery inside is where we all met. We were an international collection of women and girls. Represented in the audience and on stage were activists from Bosnia, Kenya, The Democratic Republic of Congo, Iceland, Afghanistan, France, Guatemala, The Philippines, Iraq, and displaced Americans from New Orleans.

The amazing film, NO! The Rape Documentary is being screened tonight in Brooklyn at 7pm. The event is free and open to the public.

Filmmaker Aishah Shahidah Simmons will also be at the screening to answer questions and discuss the documentary, along with anti-violence activist Quentin Walcott and writer Kevin Powell. Seriously, this is not an event to be missed.

Doors open at 6:30 pm
program begins at 7:00 pm

at BROWN MEMORIAL BAPTIST CHURCH
484 Washington Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11238
(at the corner of Gates Ave. | Fort Greene, Brooklyn, NY)
A or C to Clinton/Washington stop

For a Feministing interview with Aishah, click here.

But I find this really disturbing.

It's not the first hyper-masculine, sexist ad the show has run (see after the jump), but this over the top. While it does seem like Henry VIII's character is also sexualized in other ads and the show (the series itself seems to exude sex), spousal strangulation is just not screaming "hot" to me.

(The picture actually makes me wonder if it's a precursor to Anne Boleyn's beheading, which would make it even more unsettling; although I tend to doubt SHO is trying to incorporate historical cues into their marketing.)

I'm really curious to know how fans of the show feel about this image.

This makes me want to tear my hair out. Remember the Nebraska judge who banned the word 'rape' from a rape trial? (You know, so the accuser was forced to use words like "intercourse" and "sex" to describe the attack. Charming.) Well, according to an appeals court, that's all fine and dandy.

The lawsuit argued that Lancaster County District Judge Jeffre Cheuvront violated Tory Bowen's constitutional rights in barring her from using certain words during her testimony in the trial, in which she said Pamir Safi sexually assaulted her.

While Cheuvront barred Bowen from using phrases and words like "rape kit" and "victim" in her testimony, he allowed Safi's attorneys to use words such as "sex" and "intercourse" when describing the encounter between Safi and Bowen.

Even worse, of course, was that the jury wasn't told about the banned words.

Dahlia Lithwick at Slate had this to say when news of the case first came out: "The fact that judges are not rushing to ban similarly conclusory legal language from trial testimony—presumably one can still say murder or embezzlement on the stand—reflects not just the fraught nature of language but also the fraught nature of rape prosecutions. We as a society still somehow think rape is different—either because we assume the victims are especially fragile or because we assume they are particularly deceitful. Is the word rape truly more inflammatory to a jury than the word robbery?" Indeed.

Bowen (who made her name public), has been an inspiration through this disgustingness. First, she refused to abide by the judge's rule: "I refuse to call it sex, or any other word that I'm supposed to say, encouraged to say on the stand, because to me that's committing perjury. What happened to me was rape, it was not sex."

Then, after there was a mistrial (because of the controversy over the word ban), Bowen sued. I'm just so disappointed that it's come to this end. But kudos to Bowen for not taking shit - she is one amazing woman.

A forewarning: This is about as bad as it gets.

A Maryland man with bipolar disorder with a history of suicide attempt murdered his children this weekend after a court refused to submit a permanent restraining order requested by their mother partly because she was still "having sex" with him in fear for her and her childrens' lives.

While the psychologist's report claiming that Mark Castillo was not someone of harm to his children was a factor in the decision, Amy Castillo said that her husband told her "the worst thing he could do to me would be to kill the children and not me so I could live without them," which she wrote in the petition for the order.

Nonetheless, Judge Joseph A. Dugan Jr. said, "I am not satisfied that indeed there is clear and convincing evidence of abuse in this case." And brought up the fact that Amy continued to "have sex" with her husband, including "twice on the day he allegedly talked about killing the children," despite Castillo testifying that she was - very understandably - scared of him and worried that if she didn't, he would suspect she was taking action against him.

This is beyond horrid. To discredit a woman for being raped to save her and her childrens' lives is unbelievably heinous. I wonder if Dugan has that on his conscience now that her children are dead. Fucking horrible.

Thanks to Sarah for the tip, who is from the same neighborhood.

Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle has signed a new law that will allow victims of domestic violence to break rental contracts without punishment.

Supports say the law removes a hurdle that often prevented victims from getting help and leaving abusive relationships.

“If you’re required to stay with an abuser because of a lease you can feel trapped in your residence,� said Kathryn Chapman, executive director of the Golden House shelter in Green Bay.

Naturally, landlords aren't too pleased, because they feel like the law "burdens" them. I get it, but sorry - I don't trump being "burdened" over not being killed by your partner.

Josh Freker, policy director for the Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence, said the bill’s sponsors worked with landlords so the provision wouldn’t be a burden to them.

Freker said anyone breaking a lease under the provisions of the bill would have to show documentation, such as a criminal complaint or restraining order.

For more information on the employment and housing rights of domestic violence survivors, check out women's legal rights organization, Legal Momentum.

Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) has an op-ed in the LA Times where she reveals that "women serving in the U.S. military are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq."

My jaw dropped when the doctors told me that 41% of female veterans seen at the clinic say they were victims of sexual assault while in the military, and 29% report being raped during their military service. They spoke of their continued terror, feelings of helplessness and the downward spirals many of their lives have since taken.

Numbers reported by the Department of Defense show a sickening pattern. In 2006, 2,947 sexual assaults were reported -- 73% more than in 2004.

Harman also writes that there's an "unwillingness to prosecute rapists in the ranks." Only 181 out of 2,212 people investigated for sexual assault in 2007 were referred to courts-martial (prosecution); many others were dealt with by "nonpunitive administrative action" or "nonjudicial punishment," the equivalent to a slap on the wrist. Just horrifying.

For a more information and resources on sexual assault in the military see the Veterans for America and their list of rape crisis centers near military bases; the National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence also has a long list of resources for military women; and the National Sexual Violence Resource Center has statistics. For those who are looking for more theory-based info, check out just about anything by Cynthia Enloe.

Via Think Progress.

Thanks to Erica for the link.

Next Tuesday, HBO is featuring a documentary exposing the scope of rape in the Democratic Republic of Congo titled, The Greatest Silence, reports UN Dispatch.

The Enough Campaign and HBO are working together to coordinate house screenings across the country. You can even hold your own screening or take part in a conference call the following day with filmmaker Lisa Jackson, ENOUGH Co-Chair John Prendergast, and Director of Public Policy at the Family Violence Prevention Fund, Kiersten Stewart, to discuss the film and find out about ways that you can help end violence against women in the DRC.

Check out more background on violence against women in the DRC.

This is definitely depressing: A national poll in Ireland showed that a shocking (well, I guess not) number of people think that rape survivors are totally or partially responsible for being attacked.

More than 30% think a victim is some way responsible if she flirts with a man or fails to say no clearly.

10% of people think the victim is entirely at fault if she has had a number of sexual partners.

37% think a woman who flirts extensively is at least complicit, if not completely in the wrong, if she is the victim of a sex crime.

One in three think a woman is either partly or fully to blame if she wears revealing clothes.

38% believe a woman must share some of the blame if she walks through a deserted area.

Just...wow. I really can't wait to get to WAM this weekend - there's something about being around hundreds of feminists that really cheers a gal up, even in the face of news like this.

Thanks to Denise for the link.

Via Cecelia's new blog, Ojibway Migisi Bineshii, the Rapid City Journal reports:

A small shelter offering a temporary haven for Native American women seeking to escape domestic violence has just six weeks to find a new Rapid City home.

"We're just kind of shell-shocked," Karen Artichoker, manager of Cangleska, said.

Cangleska's Ohitika Najin Win Oti (Standing Strong Woman) shelter has lost the lease on the home it has used as a shelter for the past seven years. [...]

The shelter's original intent was to provide transitional housing for women leaving the reservation for their own safety, Artichoker said.

Over the years, a growing number of local Native American women have sought refuge in the shelter. The average stay for a mother and her children is about 19 days. The shelter always has a waiting list, Artichoker said.

You can donate to the shelter here.

In happier related news, earlier this month Pretty Bird Woman House (on South Dakota's Standing Rock Reservation) opened the doors to its new shelter! (The previous shelter was burned down last year.)

No joke.

While the Steelers are getting quite the rep for violence against women as of late, the team managers have turned a blind eye to a player slapping his girlfriend because what he was trying to do "was really well worth it."

While Cedrick Wilson was released from the team for punching his ex-girlfriend on Wednesday night, James Harrison was decidedly okie dokie to stay after assaulting his girlfriend earlier this month.

On March 8, Harrison was charged with assaulting his girlfriend, Beth Tibbot, in her Ohio Township home. According to a police affadavit, Harrison broke down a door, broke Tibbot's cell phone in half as she attempted to call 911, then slapped her face with an open hand, knocking off her glasses. He was charged with simple assault and criminal mischief and faces an April 3 preliminary hearing before a magistrate in Bellevue.

When the team was questioned as to why one player is being released while the Harrison isn't, they replied that violence against women should basically be condoned on a case-by-case basis:

In Harrison's case, Rooney [team chairperson] said the player was trying to take his son to be baptized.

"What Jimmy Harrison was doing and how the incident occurred, what he was trying to do was really well worth it," Rooney said of Harrison's initial intent with his son. "He was doing something that was good, wanted to take his son to get baptized where he lived and things like that. She said she didn't want to do it."(Emphasis mine)

Beating a woman up is okay as long as it's "well-intentioned"! When the team was accused of condoning Harrison's actions, they released a statement saying: "To clarify the comments made earlier regarding the conduct of our players, in no way do we condone domestic violence of any kind. . . Each incident must be considered on a case-by-case basis. In the situation with James Harrison, he contacted us immediately after his incident and has taken responsibility for his actions." Not too convoluted, huh?

The Women's Center and Shelter of Greater Pittsburgh is attempting to reach out the Steelers about giving the players training on intimate partner issues. In the meantime, email the Steelers or call their administrative offices at 412) 432-7800 and tell them that condoning violence against women in any case is not okay.

Thanks to Breanna for the link.

Please, if you have a chance check out the Youth Blog-a-thon hosted by YO! and Wiretap Magazine. It is some of the dopest, fiercest youth writing and the topic this month is violence, both in Iraq and in our everyday lives. Support youth voices and go give them some Feministing style love!

Decidedly not hilarious.

The fabulous organization MADRE has released a statement on women and violence in Iraq. It's really a must-read. MADRE also lists resources for perspectives of Iraqi women, so get on over there.

Well, this is depressing.

According the South African Human Rights Commission, sexual assault has become so pervasive in schools that children as young as 7 are playing games such as "rape me rape me" and simulate sexual assault on each other.

Their findings, which took over a year to complete, were made primarily in the Western Cape province. According to the report, fifth of all sexual assaults on young people occur at school. A survey of 1,227 female students who were victims of sexual assault found that nearly 9% of them had been attacked by teachers. The commission also found a growing trend called "corrective rape," where boys justify sexual assault on lesbian girls by claiming that it would "make them" straight. Unreal.

Check out the commission's findings here.

Sara Gould, the President and CEO over at the amazing Ms. Foundation, has a really important perspective up at their blog about the deeper thinking that needs to go on with respect to the Iraq War. Don't miss it.

UN Dispatch and RH Reality Check are hosting an online salon, "A New Agenda for Girls' and Women's Health and Rights," this week and next about what global plans the new U.S. president should be creating to improve the status of the rights and health of girls and women worldwide. I'm thrilled to be a participant along with a number of intelligent minds including journalists, authors and leaders within the international women's movement.

Adrienne Germain, the president of the International Women's Health Coalition, kicked off the salon on Monday and we've had some great discussion since. Make sure to check it out on either site.

As many of us already know, Bush's budget proposal for 2009 includes a $120 million cut from the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Joe Biden has a bill on the floor of the Senate today requesting $100 million to be restored to the program. Tell your senator to vote for this much-needed amendment.

Detailing the findings of the rapid assessment of gender-based violence (GBV) suffered in camps, the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the Christian Children's Fund (CCF), said the women had repeatedly expressed fears of sexual violence because of makeshift sleeping arrangements, where men and women were forced to sleep under one tent or out in the open.

Correction, the women are not being repeatedly raped and abused because they are sleeping in one tent with men, but because when people are put in adversarial, life threatening, and impoverished situations, they do dangerous things, that are often violent and usually involve violence against women.

The post-election crisis led to the deaths of at least 1,500 people and the displacement of 300,000 others. They said: "The preliminary findings of this assessment confirm initial reports from Nairobi-based hospitals that sexual violence has increased during the post-election crisis that began on 30 December. Evidence suggests that perpetrators are exploiting the conflict by committing sexual violence with impunity, and efforts to protect or respond to the needs of women and girls are remarkably insufficient."

Disheartening to say the least.

via AllAfrica.com

There's much being done to celebrate International Women's Day tomorrow and bring the state of women and girls worldwide to the forefront. Here are a few efforts being made:

The Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq sent a message of solidarity through the Global Fund for Women. Sign their petition to End the Genocide of Women in Iraq.

Yesterday, the UNHCR released a new guide, "Handbook for the Protection of Women and Girls," which outlines strategies to address the challenges in protecting women and girls globally, as well as pushes for gender equality "through targeted actions to empower women and girls in the civil, political and economic sectors."

Also announced yesterday was Amnesty International's new report, "Safe Schools" Every Girl's Right" in which the agency called upon governments and school officials across the globe to take action to end violence against girls, specifically in schools where it's prevalent.

The 52nd Commission on the Status of Women concluded today. This year's theme was "financing for gender equality and the empowerment of women" with the emerging issue as "gender perspectives on climate change."

Anyone who knows of other happenings or action taken, please put it in comments.

You know, I just have no words. I'm too fucking mentally and emotionally exhausted to yet again explain why rape isn't fucking funny.

Lodge your complaints here.

Thanks to Ariel for the link.

Nora Niedzielski-Eichner from SAFER has a piece in the LA Times responding to Heather Mac Donald's recent op-ed claiming that there is no rape problem on college campuses.

Niedzielski-Eichner not only refutes Mac Donald's claims that commonly-cited rape statistics are wrong, but also points out that fewer than half of colleges have sexual assault prevention programs - something that must change given the very real problem of campus rape.

Check it out for yourself, and comment over at SAFER's blog.

I'm not getting wet, so there's no way it's raining!

This op-ed in yesterday's The Los Angeles Times is very likely to make your head explode. Or at the very least, inspire you to write a scathing letter to the editor.

Writer Heather Mac Donald, a fellow at the right-wing think tank the Manhattan Institute, says that the rape crisis is all in our heads - and that it's really slutty girls who are to blame for all this "rape" nonsense.

Such a crime wave -- in which millions of young women would graduate having suffered the most terrifying assault, short of murder, that a woman can experience -- would require nothing less than a state of emergency. Admissions policies, which if the numbers are true are allowing in tens of thousands of vicious criminals, would require a complete revision, perhaps banning male students entirely. The nation's nearly 10 million female undergraduates would need to take the most stringent safety precautions.

None of this crisis response occurs, of course -- because the crisis doesn't exist.

Last time I checked, institutional inaction has never been an indicator that something doesn't exist. But in Mac Donald's world or warped logic, the fact that people ignore rape culture means that it couldn't possibly be real.

And then comes the all-too-predictable victim blaming:

Many students hold on to the view that women usually have the power to determine whether a campus social event ends with intercourse. A female Rutgers student expressed a common sentiment in a university sexual-assault survey: "When we go out to parties and I see girls and the way they dress and the way they act ... and just the way they are, under the influence and um, then they like accuse them of like, 'Oh yeah, my boyfriend did this to me' or whatever, I honestly always think it's their fault."

Just because the sentiment may be common, it doesn't make it right. In fact, it's horrifying. But not to blame queen Mac Donald, who thinks girls who dare to leave the house and socialize are getting what they ask for.

Maybe such young iconoclasts can take up another discredited idea: College is for learning. Fighting male dominance or catering to the libidinal impulses released in the 1960s are sorry substitutes for the pursuit of knowledge.

Yeah, bitches, stop fighting rape and do something useful with your education.

Now, clearly I don't expect much better than this from anti-feminist assholes, eager to blame campus feminism for anything they're keen on making up. But the fact that LA Times would print this is just disgusting. Especially when you take a look at the full article the op-ed was adapted from, where Mac Donald actually takes a woman's story of sexual assault and opines how there's no way it's true.

Though the Harvard victim does not remember her actions, it’s highly unlikely that she passed out upon arriving at the party and was dragged away like roadkill while other students looked on. Rather, she probably participated voluntarily in the usual prelude to intercourse, and probably even in intercourse itself, however woozily.

The horror goes on and on in that one; I can't even bring myself to fisk the whole thing. There will always be anti-feminists, there will always be rape apologists, there will always (sadly) be rapists. But that doesn't mean we have to stand by while the media gives them space to spread lies. Please, write to the LA Times and tell them how you feel.

Via SAFER.

Note: We have been contacted by the company Running Free and they have cleared up that this ad is in fact NOT theirs; an ad agency pitched the idea to them and they rejected it because of their own offense to it. Regardless, the fact that any ad companies are even thinking to create these kinds of ads (and the positive online response to it) is still gross nonetheless.

This ad selling a sports bra is supposed to be humorous. I find it not. The ad reads, "Support bras, now available."

What's more disturbing is that this is being deemed "clever" and "hilarious" by a few sites I've come across. The fact that this "entertaining" image of women not only running with their boobs flying everywhere, but also smacking them in the face, has morphed into a picture of violence is really unsettling. And more plainly, any joke with a picture of a woman's bruised face like this is just not funny.

See other ads after the jump.

Thanks to Colleen for the link.

You see, he says he doesn't "want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there's evidence, hard facts..." Comforting, isn't it, that he wants to wait for the "evidence"?

Natasha Hall, 17, was interested in journalism. Though because of a violent ex-boyfriend and what can only be described as disgusting police misconduct, she'll never have the opportunity to write.

A junior at DeLand High in Florida, Hall was murdered by her ex-boyfriend - Clay Kufner - after an abusive relationship and months of stalking and harassment. Three days before she was killed, Hall was told by police to stop calling them so much (to relay concern about her ex) or she would be arrested.

"The police officer said if you call us one more time on him, I'm going to arrest you both," Sherry Hall [Natasha's mother] said. "So, the day she died, she knew she couldn't talk to police. So, she handled it herself."

Michele Karpowicz said everyone noticed the warning signs before the homicide -- except police.

"I was going crazy," Hall's best friend said. "He was psycho, jealous and abusive."

The police response? Chief Deputy Randel Henderson of the DeLand Police Department says that, "Basically we have a very young couple who are experiencing, at least up until last Friday evening, just very normal relationship problems."

The "normal relationship problems" include nine incidents of harassment and violence which were logged with the local police since November, including one where Kufner hit Hall in the face and another where he tried to drag her out of a store by her hair. Hall's family also noted that Kufner threatened to burn down their house. You know, "normal" teen romance stuff.

Even the media seems to be getting in on the normalizing-violence-against-women trend. One article says Hall and Kufner had a "stormy" relationship. Another headline reads: "2 teens shot dead in apparent murder-suicide," which is pretty damn passive considering this kid killed his ex-girlfriend. But this is my favorite headline: "Teddy Bear May Have Led To Murder-Suicide." Not violence, not abuse, not the idea that women are less than people. A teddy bear.

Now I'm aware that sensationalist headlines are par for the course. But between the media coverage and the police inaction, I just feel sick. In a society that romanticizes stalking and ignores violence against women, it's no surprise that Hall couldn't find protection. But it's still shameful.

Bambi Weavil is founder and CEO of Out Impact, Inc and publisher of its online magazine Out Impact. Based in Wilmington, North Carolina, Bambi spends her days and her nights working to raise money for LGBTQ issues...while also squeezing time to write about pro wrestling and her guilty pleasure, "American Idol."

Here's Bambi...

It's almost V-Day! And you know what that means... time to take stock of all the right-wingers around the country going nuts because some gals want to take this opportunity to say the word "vagina" and raise money to fight violence against women.

First up, the Seattle Times has refused to print an ad (at right) for a performance of the Vagina Monologues sponsored by the local office of the National Council of Jewish Women. The ad was carried by other local publications.

"The artwork was created by a member of my congregation," says Rabbi Yohanna Kinberg of B'nai Torah, which is located in Bellevue. "We have it hanging in several places in our Temple. I was just very disappointed that the Times didn't share our appreciation for what I consider to be tasteful and beautiful artwork."

Agreed, Rabbi.

An email from the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute (they of the "conservative hotties" calendar), indicates the organization is, like, totally grossed out by a vagina costume:

Share Your V-Day Stories With Us

These days, even God’s country is no longer safe from V-Day activities. A student from Appalachian State University in Boone, North Carolina sent us this photo of a vagina costume used as a promotional device for the play (viewer discretion advised).

A walking vagina on campus may seem extreme, but we know such blatant vulgarity isn’t isolated. If your college has a Vagina Monologues production, you probably have already come across some lewd promotional tactic. We want to know what’s going on at your school.

EW, vag-costume promotional device! Let's hope nobody sent these ladies a picture of the vagina sofa. They'd probably have a heart attack.

A V-Day production in Temecula, California has drawn complaints:

"In reality, 'The Vagina Monologues' does more to distort the truth about men, the truth about women and the truth about sexuality," said Bridget Blanton, of Temecula.

Um, has Bridget checked between her legs recently? The vag is truly a "reality" of most women's lives.

At St. Louis University, one of many Catholic universities where the Monologues have been banned, the campus feminist group, UNA, scheduled an off-campus performance... which campus administrators are trying to shut down. UNA member Anu Okuyemi explained the back story in an email:

Last year, in 2007 UNA was told by the SLU administration that we would no longer be allowed to perform The Vagina Monologues on campus--ever. On top of this, we are not allowed to advertise on campus at all, or even set up tables to sell tickets. Determined to still raise money for our charities, we found an off campus location last year and the protests and controversy surrounding the production helped us sell out all our performances.

The reason the administration gave us for banning the Monologues was that having the production every year was "redundant." They told us that they would be willing to support a future V-Day campaign on-campus if we found another production to do instead.

This year, we are once again performing The Vagina Monologues off-campus, and to avoid "redundancy," we chose another Eve Ensler production, A Memory, A Monologue, and Rant, and a Prayer (MMRP) to be performed on campus to raise awareness. We thought that this would satisfy the administration. We thought wrong. Just a week before MMRP was scheduled to run, we were told that they would not approve the play. They said that this production was basically "Vagina Monologues 2," and in order to be "consistent" with their previous decision they could not allow MMRP on campus since the Monologues were already banned.

Yeah, we call bullshit.

Elsewhere around the country, anti-vag wingnuts in Pennsylvania are sending threatening letters to theaters planning Monologues performances. And in Indiana, a conference of bishops fled the campus of Notre Dame, which is hosting a production of the Monologues, and instead chose to convene at a nearby convent. Where they are guaranteed not to have to hear the V-word.

And finally, in cheerier news, the website for this year's big blowout V-Day event in New Orleans has introduced me to something awesome: ({}) The vagina emoticon. So great.

Our previous posts on V-Day:
Anti-feminists hate vaginas
D-constructing V-day
The Hoohah Monologues?! and follow-up, "Vagina" deemed suitable for public consumption
Vagina Monologue backlash
They don't want your dirty vagina money

Now, I'm all for a police unit that's focused on violence against women, but this article is a bit silly:

They are woman commandos. Hear them roar anytime now against abusive spouses, hostage-takers and other threats to the safety of both men and women, young and old.

An all-female police unit has been created in the Philippines to specifically combat intimate partner violence and violence against children. Which would be great, if it wasn't inexplicably dipped in sugar and spice.

President Gloria Arroyo initiated this all-female unit (perhaps in response to her crappy record addressing human and women's rights in her country), saying in a speech, “We want to show that police girl power is not limited only to sisterly counseling. It also packs a mean punch.�She also ordered all the station desks to be painted in pastel "feminine" colors. What's next?

On a more serious note, what do y'all think of an all-women police unit focused on violence against women and children? It was fairly successful in Liberia, where an all-female UN peacekeeping force was dispatched (in part due to past sexual assault allegations against peacekeepers).

Thanks to syndicalist702 for the link.

A new survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that about a quarter of women in the U.S. have been a victim of intimate partner violence.

The CDC said 23.6 percent of women and 11.5 percent of men reported being a victim of what it called "intimate partner violence" at some time in their lives.

The CDC defined this as threatened, attempted or completed physical or sexual violence or emotional abuse by a spouse, former spouse, current or former boyfriend or girlfriend or a dating partner. The CDC estimates that 1,200 women are killed and 2 million injured in domestic violence annually.

The CDC also reported that many of these women have other long-term health risks. Rita Smith, executive director of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, says that the report confirms "that living in a dangerous and stressful environment has long-term health impacts...it's like living in a war zone."

The survey also showed high rates of sexual and dating violence on college campuses. (How long before someone is calling it a "gray rape" survey, I wonder?)

Wowza. Gotta love any article with that headline that opens like this,

WOMEN'S manipulation of men has been listed by anthropologist Dr Herbert Gayle among the reasons for male suicides, and more so murder-suicides in Jamaica.

"I can't say in the short term that we can begin to change the culture to be less male hostile. It is going to take years. But a part of what needs to be done is to re-socialise not only our males but also our females. Frankly, some of our females are far too manipulative," Gayle told the Sunday Observer, adding that it should come as little surprise that men were killing their women and themselves.

I'm speechless. To end violence against women we need to make society less male- hostile? WHAT?! Another psychologist, Sidney McGill, goes on to explain that men don't know how to deal with their emotions, so of course they're going to channel all that anger toward the women in their lives. He then makes this most appalling of logical leaps:

The result, he said, is that "some men will lash out, or even in a very cool way plan the demise of the person that they once loved and that of themselves."

In this regard, he agreed with Gayle that women have the advantage.

"Women have grown up without restrictions on expressing their emotions and so they are more emotionally developed than most men and pretty much manipulate men and make them feel incompetent and inferior," McGill said.

(Emphasis mine.) Women have an advantage when their male loved ones plot to kill them? The mind reels. And after faulting women for getting too uppity and making poor men feel inferior, he goes on to say they're too nurturing and home-based.

"Men cannot compete on that level, and the next thing for them to do is to lash out physically with violence. Women have to realise that men's weakness is their sexuality, so women have that sort of power. They also have skills in home management and nurturing so that they are pretty much in charge of their homes, leaving men to feel (at times) that they are strangers in their home."

This article is like an anti-feminist parody on steroids. I'm going to stop engaging with it before I go crazy.

(Thanks to reader titilayo for the link.)

This headline is from an article in The L Magazine promoting a ladies' night in Manhattan. Hilarious, don't cha think? I mean, rape always is.

Thanks to Darcee for the link.

Here's something you may not know (I certainly didn't): A new civil rights bill introduced in Congress last week makes it easier for students to sue schools where they were sexually harassed or abused, if the school didn't respond reasonably.

From Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER):

As the law currently stands, students have fewer protections than employees and so schools have less incentive than workplaces to curb their employees and educate against hostile environments. This excellent position paper explains why the changes are absolutely crucial. (Found via a Feminist Law Professors link.)

SAFER, an organization which aims to improve schools' sexual assault prevention and response activities, is encouraging people to call their representatives about the bill and specifically mention the student sexual harassment provisions: "Our elected officials need to know that we care and that we’re paying attention. If this bill were to pass, it could be a powerful tool for fighting administrations that turn a blind eye to sexual assaults and rape culture on their campuses." Indeed.

We've been remiss in not posting on the situation in Kenya. Violence related to national elections has already killed more than 800 people. And the violence is spreading. As is the case in many conflict situations, sexual assault is prevalent:

It is now recognised that women and children are bearing the brunt of the raging conflict, and now the red light is on. Sexual abuse has been thrown into the equation, and these two vulnerable groups are suffering double jeopardy.

First, they have to deal with the trauma of being violently uprooted from comfortable and familiar environments to live under deplorable conditions where their existence is dependent on relief efforts.

Then, it is emerging that sexual violence targeting women and girls is rampant in the camps. It follows that the recovery of women and children already traumatised could be fundamentally compromised.

It's no surprise, then, that Kenyan women are demanding a seat at the table during peacemaking negotiations:

"We are over 50 per cent of the population, but we have been marginalised and now we are requesting for an audience," [chairperson of the National Council of Women of Kenya (NCWK), Ms Isabella] Karanja said.

Addressing journalists at a city hotel, Karanja said they were holding talks with the national steering committee on how they could be represented in the talks.

Former chairlady of the Maendeleo ya Wanawake Organisation, Mrs Zipporah Kittony, said women have been undervalued and under utilised in the ongoing mediation talks.

Several women are wearing sacks in protest of the violence. Says one women, Philo Ikonya (pictured above),

I need to express myself through what I am wearing, and to pass on that message, the sack cloth is very powerful.

I shall continue dressing like this and urging other people to dress like this for as long as we do not have peace in Kenya; as long as we do not have justice and reform.

If you want to help out, donations can be sent to the Kenya Red Cross. And via UN Dispatch, I see there's a benefit concert in Boston on Saturday.

The LA Times had an great opinion piece on Wednesday with the following headline, "Does a rapist deserve a military burial?"

Hmmm, let me think about it a minute...No.

James Allen Selby was a rapist. He raped and assaulted at least 12 women (not including a 9-year old girl). In October 2004, he was convicted on 27 counts, which included armed robbery, rape, kidnapping and attempted murder (for slitting the throat of one of the women). Hours before his sentencing, he hung himself in a Tuscan, AZ jail.

James Allen Selby was also a Persian Gulf War veteran. So in respect to Pentagon policy, he was buried with full military honors. Anne K. Ream, author of the opinion piece, wrote:

The military policy of allowing honors burials for veterans convicted of rape sends a chilling message to victims: Even the most heinous sexual violence does not trump prior military service. It is a position that is as ethically indefensible as it is inconsistent. In 1997, after Army veteran Timothy McVeigh was sentenced to death for his role in the Oklahoma City bombings, Congress barred veterans convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death or life in prison from being buried with full military honors. Veterans convicted of rape or any other violent crime, however, encounter no such restrictions.

'By honoring those that do not deserve it, we dishonor those who do,' Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) said during 1997 hearings on the policy. McVeigh, he said, 'was worthy of honor at one time, but he is no longer worthy of honor.' Surely the same can be said of Selby. [Emphasis mine]

Just like the KBR cover-up rape case, this is showing not only the pardoning of military and government-related rape crimes, but also how these crimes are simply not dealt with and swept under the rug. Ream ends the piece:

In the wake of mass violation of women and girls during the conflicts in Kosovo and Rwanda, rape and sexual violence were for the first time codified as distinct crimes under international law. How telling then, and how troubling, that our country's policy on military burials is at odds with international standards the United States worked to establish.

But should we really be surprised?

Note to readers: Feministing is honored to have Congresswoman Louise M. Slaughter (NY-28) guest posting today on the KBR rape cover-up and violence against contractors abroad.

Yesterday, I, and over 100 of my colleagues, took a serious step to breaking the dangerous “boys will be boys� attitude that has been allowed to fester for far too long among United States government contractors in Iraq and around the world.

Many of you have heard the appalling tale of Jamie Leigh Jones, the past employee of US government contractor KBR, a former subsidiary of Halliburton.

While working in the Green Zone within Baghdad, Iraq, Jamie Leigh Jones was drugged, assaulted, and viciously gang raped by her coworkers. Upon learning of the attack, KBR had US Army doctors perform a medical examination showing that she had been viciously raped both anally and vaginally. After, the rape kit was turned over to KBR; she would later discover that portions of that kit had magically vanished into thin air.

Jamie Leigh was then placed under armed guard in a shipping container for 24 hours without access to food or water. There, she remained until she was rescued from her American employer by the State Department at the urging of her Member of Congress.

Over two years after these near unspeakable acts of violence and incredulously callous reaction by her employer, not only has the Justice Department not brought any criminal charges, but ABC News recently reported that they could not confirm that any federal agency was investigating the case at all.

Instead, it appears that the Departments of Justice, State, and Defense would prefer that the American public forget what happened to Jamie Leigh Jones.

It appears they do not want to rock the boat.

But this boat must be rocked. Because what happened to Jamie Leigh Jones was not an isolated incident.

It is increasingly apparent that there are many women working for United States government contractors that are regularly subject to sexual harassment, assault, and rape. And what is even more apparent, the perpetrators of these heinous acts are not held to account and justice is almost never served.

With over 20,000 Americans employed by US government contractors in Iraq alone, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates are in need of a big wake-up call.

Well, yesterday morning, I sent two letters that I co-authored with Reps. Jan Schakowsky (IL) and Ted Poe (TX) with the signatures of over 100 Members of the United States House of Representatives to demand answers from Secretaries Rice and Gates. We are demanding that they go on record and answer specific questions detailing the precise steps they are taking to ensure that what happened to Jamie Leigh Jones does not happen to another US contractor again.

We will not rest until these answers meet our satisfaction and there is a guarantee that criminal offenders are punished to the letter of the law and that contractors, getting rich on massive taxpayer funded contracts, are held to account.

It must be the Bush Administration’s unequivocal position that individuals working as United States government contractors, whether at home or abroad, have the same rights to treatment, services, and proper legal recourse when they are victims of a violent crime.

Take Action: Keep pressure on the Department of State and Department of Defense on the Jamie Leigh Jones case and protecting US contractors; let them know that you expect a timely and appropriate response to Rep. Slaughter's letters.

UNIFEM has launched an online campaign to battle violence against women worldwide. Today, the UN Foundation announced that it will donate $1 dollar for each of the first 100,000 signatures to this online petition - so please sign it! 18,000 people from all over the world have already added their names to the "Say NO to violence against women" campaign since November.

To find out more about the campaign, and to download the campaign toolkit, click here.

Here's an interesting story. The Women's Center at Yale University, which provides sexual assault counseling to students, has said it will sue the fraternity that posed in front of their building with a sign reading: "We love Yale sluts." And I say good on them.

It seems that Zeta Psi pledges not only posed in front of the center with the sign, but also intimidated women who tried to get into the building.

Former Women’s Center Public Relations Coordinator Jessica Svendsen ’09 said she found a group of men chanting “Dick! Dick! Dick!� in front of the Elm Street entrance to the Center, which is located in Durfee Hall, shortly before midnight last Tuesday. Frightened, she decided to take a detour through the Center’s Old Campus entrance, she said.

“I stopped even before I got to Durfee, because I recognized that as a single woman facing 20 to 25 frat boys, I wasn’t going to be able to enter the Women’s Center,� Svendsen said. “This was my first experience knowing that misogyny does happen at Yale — and right in front of the Women’s Center door.�

The picture, which you can see here, was featured on Facebook the next day. Naturally, once the frat found out that they were potentially in hot water, they removed the picture from Facebook and issued an apology.

All of the individuals involved wish to issue a formal apology to the female community, those directly or indirectly affected, as well as the Yale University community at large. We realize that the photographed actions were inappropriate, and we send our regards to any and all offended parties. The intentions of everyone involved were not to harm anyone socially or psychologically; rather, it was a lapse in the judgement [sic] of the group as a public organization.

A lapse in judgment? Really? Posing for that picture in their own frat house could maybe be a lapse in judgment. Going to a center that provides services to rape victims with a sign that calls women sluts is deliberate, it's fucking transparent, and it's harassment. I hope they shut them down.

Thanks to everyone who sent us links.

Warning: Potentially triggering

When I saw this on The Soup, I was just speechless. This "joke" is abuse, plain and simple. And her mother was in on it?! I'm just...done.

Stepha Henry (left) and Maria Lauterbach (right).

I hate posting about news like this, but I know I can't avoid it... Last week and today we found out about the respective fates of Lance Cpl. Maria Lauterbach and Stepha Henry, two women who had been missing. Lauterbach's body has been found and the suspect in her death is on the run; Henry's body hasn't been found, but police have made an arrest for her murder.

What (shockingly) seems to be missing from the coverage of both of these cases is a discussion of violence against women. In Henry's case, it's been difficult to find a lot news coverage at all about her disappearance--wonder why that is. In the coverage of Lauterbach's murder, we've heard nary a word on violence against pregnant women, sexual assault in the military or the silencing of rape survivors.

Every time I see a story on cable news about a missing (usually white) woman, I want to turn off the television. Not because I don't care, but because I can't stand seeing how the story is treated. But instead of tuning out, I'm committing myself to start holding our media outlets accountable--and so should you. Demand that missing women of color don't go missing in the news as well, and let the media know that they must talk about violence against women in relation to these stories. It's not that hard to contact news outlets, so when you see "missing women" coverage, get moving...

Amnesty International is campaigning for the end of stoning in Iran, which the international rights organization calls "grotesque."

There are currently eleven people in Iran awaiting death by stoning; nine of them are women.

The majority of those sentenced to death by stoning are women. Women are not treated equally with men under the law and by courts, and they are also particularly vulnerable to unfair trials because their higher illiteracy rate makes them more likely to sign confessions to crimes they did not commit.

Amnesty's report notes that stoning is "specifically designed to increase the suffering" and that victims typically take 20 minutes to die. Horrific. Visit the Amnesty International website to see how you can help.

When I first started writing about the myth of gray rape, a bullshit term made up by slut-shamer Laura Sessions Stepp, I didn't really think the term would end up being as pervasive as it seems to be. The Cosmo article certainly didn't help.

And stories like this are why the idea that there are somehow shades of rape is so dangerous. A young woman at Lewis & Clark College was raped--not "gray raped," because it doesn't exist--by a fellow student.

[The young woman] calls what happened to her something akin to “gray rape,� a term she learned from an article in Cosmopolitan written by Washington Post journalist Laura Sessions Stepp. Hunter admits she initiated the encounter. But she eventually withdrew her consent, she says. “The whole thing was very confusing to me, and I didn’t know what to do about it for such a long time,� she says.

Rape can be confusing, it doesn't make it "gray." Feminists have long fought to dispel the myth that initially consenting to one form of intimacy does not make it okay for someone to force another kind on you. In this case, the young woman was hooking up with her eventual-attacker when he forced her to perform oral sex on him. (Trigger warning for what follows)

[His] mattress was on the floor pushed up against a wall, [she] says. “I’m sitting up against the wall on his mattress, and he’s standing over me,� she continues. “It started happening, and then he, like, twisted his fingers around my hair and started pulling it and being just kind of violent. I started choking because he was just, like, pushing my head.… I started gagging and choking, and I couldn’t really breathe.�...She says she started pushing on Shaw-Fox’s abdomen to tell him to stop. “And he was like, ‘Yeah, that’s right, choke on it.’�

There is nothing "gray" about this. There is nothing "gray" about being violent. There is nothing fucking gray about "choke on it." There is nothing "gray" about rape. Please, enough already.

Thanks to Jake for the link.

UPDATE: To clarify, I'm not criticizing the victim for using the term "gray rape" to describe her assault. I'm criticizing Sessions Stepp and folks like Cosmo for promoting the false notion to young women that not all rape is equal.

Romney is asked a question about the ground-breaking Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and responds: "I'm not familiar with the act."

Clearly the guy asking the question is a Grade-A douche bag MRA who is trying to get Mitt Romney to say that VAWA is flawed, but it's still pretty fucking terrifying that Romney has never heard of the Act that provides for $3.9 billion in funding to help survivors of intimate partner violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. I'm also not quite sure why anyone, even Romney, would feel the need to pander to someone who obviously thinks that women have gotten too uppity with the whole not-wanting-to-be-hit thing.

This is an actual fucking poll taking from celebrity trash site TMZ. There are no words. Oh wait, yeah there are: Fuck. You.

Thanks to Rose for the link.

From the Associated Press: "A suburban Chicago man is accused of setting an apartment fire -- killing his pregnant daughter, her husband and their young child -- because the son-in-law didn't ask permission for the marriage, prosecutors said."

I really have nothing to add.

Thanks to Kathleen for the link.

You know, I'm aware that gross people can make all sorts of ridiculous things on Cafe Press, but this struck a cord with me. Because it's so telling. The vitriol directed at Hillary Clinton's run is so mired in misogyny that it's exhausting just keeping track of it all. But I think the message on this shirt gets to the heart of those who are so incredibly incensed that a woman (and a powerful woman, at that) would have the audacity to run for president: It's not enough to say that she shouldn't run--she should be killed. And not just killed, but murdered via domestic violence. If that's not fucking transparent, I don't know what is.

What better way to send the message that women who dare to seek power deserve to have it (and their lives!) violently taken away from them.

Thanks to Kayla for the link.

Nancy Northup is the President of the Center for Reproductive Rights, a global human rights organization that uses constitutional and international law to secure women's reproductive freedom. The Center has won groundbreaking cases before federal and state courts, U.N. committees, and regional human rights bodies, such as the European Court of Human Rights. Working at the state, national, and international levels, the Center has built the legal capacity of women's rights advocates around the world, working in over 45 countries.

Nancy is an attorney with extensive experience in constitutional impact litigation, criminal law, and reproductive rights advocacy. Here's Nancy....

The Saudi woman who was raped and subsequently sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in jail has been "pardoned" by King Abdullah. (Pardoned is in quotes because I can't bring myself to repeat rhetoric that frames this woman as somehow guilty of something.)

The Saudi king frequently pardons criminals at the Eid al-Adha festival which takes place this week, but correspondents say that is usually announced by the official press agency.

The BBC's Heba Saleh says the king's decision to pardon the woman victim is already arousing controversy with some contributors to conservative websites, who say he has breached the rules of religion in order to appease critics in the West.

I guess some folks forgot that the criticisms of the sentence hardly came form the West alone. Women activists in Saudi Arabia took to the streets recently to protest the sentence. Regardless of the controversy, at the end of the day it's just nice to get some good news.

Now this is an awesome campaign.

The New York State Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence is running a campaign developed by the Family Violence Prevention which is attempting to redefine the meaning of "manhood," by raising young boys to become leaders in the fight against domestic violence. In a society where notions of masculinity has become so distorted and, to a degree, contribute to violence against women, making "manhood" (as much negative connotation may come with the word) into something positive is all good with me.

Unbelievable.

A Texas woman says she was gang raped by her Halliburton/KBR coworkers in Baghdad, and that the company is trying to cover up the assault.

Jamie Leigh Jones, now 22, says that after she was raped by multiple men at a KBR camp in the Green Zone, the company put her under guard in a shipping container with a bed and warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she'd be out of a job.

"Don't plan on working back in Iraq. There won't be a position here, and there won't be a position in Houston," Jones says she was told.

In a lawsuit filed in federal court against Halliburton and its then-subsidiary KBR, Jones says she was held in the shipping container for at least 24 hours without food or water by KBR, which posted armed security guards outside her door, who would not let her leave.

Eventually, Jones convinced a guard to let her use a cell phone to call her father who subsequently called the State Department and their congressman. The State Department quickly sent help from the U.S. Embassy and Jones was rescued.

Jones, who was also drugged by her attackers, had a rape kit done which showed she had been vaginally and anally raped--the kit disappeared after it was given to KBR security officers.

Now, two years later, and still no criminal charges have been brought. Imagine that.

The lack of security in Iraq continues to astound as does the subsequent rise of woman hate that has been inspired due to the upsurge of Shiite vigilantes. You know, using Islam as a cover up for generic woman hate.

Via.

Religious vigilantes have killed at least 40 women this year in the southern Iraqi city of Basra because of how they dressed, their mutilated bodies found with notes warning against "violating Islamic teachings," the police chief said Sunday.

Maj. Gen. Jalil Khalaf blamed sectarian groups that he said were trying to impose a strict interpretation of Islam. They dispatch patrols of motorbikes or unlicensed cars with tinted windows to accost women not wearing traditional dress and head scarves, he added.

"The women of Basra are being horrifically murdered and then dumped in the garbage with notes saying they were killed for un-Islamic behavior," Khalaf told The Associated Press. He said men with Western clothes or haircuts are also attacked in Basra, an oil-rich city some 30 miles from the Iranian border and 340 miles southeast of Baghdad.

Our fight against the war in Iraq is a feminist issue, you already know that, but this is why. It is an especially disgusting form of woman hate that unleashes itself under dire circumstances, oppressive conditions and in war torn regions of the world.

Check out Violet Blue's interview (via SFGate) with Staci Haines, author of Healing Sex: A Mind-Body Approach to Healing Sexual Trauma.

She asks the hard questions.

VB: Why is rediscovering sexual pleasure important for survivors?

SH: Sex is a normal and healthy part of being human. Having good sex — where you feel pleasure, intimacy, intensity and longing — is one of the most powerful experiences anyone can have. Not having that can be as detrimental as sex can be powerful. Oftentimes, people who have been abused avoid sex so it doesn't bring up feelings about the abuse. To heal, they have to go toward, and eventually through whatever triggers memories of the abuse — that's where freedom is.

Today marks the 18th anniversary of the "Montreal Massacre" when 14 women were killed at the École Polytechnique in Montreal.

On Dec. 6, 1989, 25 year-old Marc Lepine opened fire at women engineering students at the university. This was immediately after he screamed, "I hate feminists." He later turned the gun on himself.

Two years later, December 6 was made into Canada's National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. There are a number of vigils to be held today across Canada.

A list of the young women killed is after the jump.

Documents show that Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee lobbied for the release of a convicted rapist out of prison, despite a number of letters sent from previous survivors and the families of survivors urging him otherwise.

This was due to their prediction that he would rape again, and even murder, if released. Huckabee ignored their pleas, Wayne Dumond was released 25 years before his original release date, and their predictions came true. Reports the Huffington Post:

In a letter that has never before been made public, one of Dumond's victims warned: 'I feel that if he is released it is only a matter of time before he commits another crime and fear that he will not leave a witness to testify against him the next time.' Before Dumond was granted parole at Huckabee's urging, records show that Huckabee's office received a copy of this letter from Arkansas' parole board.

Huckabee spokesperson denies that he ever received these letters, although authors of the letters as well as a former senior aide of Huckabee say that they were indeed, sent and received. And despite his denial that he pressured for the release of Dumond, four parole board members say that Huckabee did, in fact, push them for his release.

You must read the details at HuffPo, which includes the letters to Huckabee by the survivors and their families; it's pretty unbelievable.

Warning: This video is violent and potentially triggering.

This Canadian PSA never made it on the air (I'm assuming because of the content), but I tend to think that an ad against intimate partner violence should be shocking. Thoughts?

Thanks to Ramin for the link.

Raise your hand if you are tired of hearing about another way that the courts justify rape and blame women for the violence they have suffered at the hands of men.

Yeah, me too.

A women from the Philippines has decided to take her rape case to the United Nations' CEDAW because the courts in Manila decided that there are two kinds of women; rapable and unrapable (please no, neither of these are actual words) and that she fell into the "unrapable" category.

“The court, in effect, showed that there are two kinds of women: the ‘rapable’ and the ‘unrapable’ kind. I , according to the judge, fit the ‘unrapable’ mold,� she said with a chuckle, pointing out it was an absurd proposition from a judge she described as “unenlightened� about gender-sensitivity.

Karen said she did not fall in the “rapable� stereotype by society’s standards. “There was one conference when a rich lady from Davao City sought me out because she wanted to see the prominent businessman’s victim. She looked surprised when she saw me and said bluntly that she had been expecting somebody with a come-hither appearance,� she recalled.

Oh, hell no.

Via.

Thanks to Athena for the link.

"A 12-year-old girl was recently arrested for having illicit affairs with men." Ugh.

Amnesty International has launched an ad campaign to battle female genital mutilation (see full sized pics here and here). The images of sewn up flowers are striking, but effective. What do you think?

Apparently there's more than one woman-hating pencil product out there. First there was the headless doggie-style sharpener, and now Shakes shows us this: Lusty Linda the pen holder.

You'll note from the packaging that Lusty Linda can utter "8 lusty sayings," which fall into one of two categories—"good mood" or "bad mood," controlled by the click of a switch. Says one site (screen cap) that sells Lusty Linda, "too bad all women did not have such a switch." Ho ho ho!

Her "bad mood" sayings include "Ow," "Help, Help!" and "Get out you, you dirty old man." You know, because rape is hilarious.

Recently "men's rights activists" scoffed at the idea that we were offended by the pencil sharpener, which blogger Glenn Sacks wrote "depicts a conventional, common sex act which women enjoy." (What woman enjoys fucking without her head, I don't know.) I wonder if they'll find more excuses as to how "Help!" and "Ow!" are actually cries of unabashed pleasure.

Cara puts it well:

This promotes rape. If you buy one of these things, you are promoting rape. If you laugh at one of these things, you are promoting rape. If you don’t laugh but still think that it’s a harmless joke, you are promoting rape. If one of your friends has one, or thinks it’s funny, and you don’t say anything about it, you are promoting rape.

How many more times do we have to say it? Rape is not funny.

Don't forget we're in the middle of 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence...though stories like this make sure that we can't forget.

A woman in Spain, Svetlana Orlova, was killed by her by her ex-boyfriend after she rejected his marriage proposal on a television talk show.

Svetlana had no idea why she had been invited on to the daytime television show and she was shocked to find herself face to face with the man who had beaten her for years...She was further stunned when he produced an engagement ring and proposed. Looking deeply uncomfortable, she shook her head.

Ricardo Navarro, 30, had told Patricia’s Daily Show, which has an audience of 2 million, that he and Ms Orlova had broken up because of a dispute over money. Ms Orlova contested that, saying: “There were many other things�, but without elaborating or mentioning that she had a restraining order against her former boyfriend.

Days later, Navarro stabbed her to death. The television show is denying any responsibility for her death (shocking), though some are calling for the show to be canceled. How about this...how about they just not potentially put women in danger by enabling abusers to get access to them? Seems simple, no? But that wouldn't be good television, I guess.

In conjunction with the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence, today Take Back the Tech is collecting virtual postcards that portray women's take on the impact of gender violence. Below is one postcard I really liked, submitted by Jenny in South Africa:

Check out the other postcards here, and submit your own!

Women in the UK took to the streets this Saturday the annual Reclaim the Night March, organized by the London Feminist Network. Hotness.

Jess McCabe at the f-word reports that 1500 women gathered in London's Trafalgar Square to protest violence against women and sexual assault:

We were protesting against the epidemic levels of violence against women - against rape, domestic violence, and against the mentality that in order to protect ourselves from these threats, we should half live our lives, afraid to walk the streets, or wear what we want, or do what we want.

But, despite how serious these issues are, despite the impact they have had on us, our friends and our families (almost inevitably, if you consider that one in four UK women will experience domestic violence during her lifetime), the atmosphere in our bit of the crowd was joyful.

Awesome. I always have felt that the marches/protests I've been to for women's rights--whether the protest was about violence against women, racism, or reproductive rights--they really do always seem to be joyful. (Feminists know how to party protest, I guess!)

Julie Bindel at The Guardian, who was a speaker at the event, has a call for action for "armchair feminists":

...I do still believe that direct action can have an effect. It is 37 years now since feminists threw flour bombs during the Miss World final at London's Albert Hall, an action that ended that competition's unquestioned popularity. Then there were the successes of the group Justice for Women, founded in 1990: we would gather outside the Home Office or the Old Bailey in our lunch hours carrying fold-up placards and banners. Whenever a man got away with murdering his partner on the grounds of her "nagging", or a rapist was given a non-custodial sentence, there we would be, rain or shine. And guess what? Editors took note, articles were written and our issues were discussed.

Bindel seems concerned that the advent of online organizing takes away from the warm bodies at in person protests, but it seems to me that the two support each other. Just look at how many people were mobilized online to show up to the March for Women's Lives in 2004.

But in all, it seems like the event was a super success and checking out some pictures certainly made me wish I was there!

Question for discussion: The march is a "woman-only" event; the London Feminist Network has their reasoning here. Is this a way to provide a safe space or is it just exclusionary? And who defines who "women" are? Is this like the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival where trans women are shamefully excluded? (I have no idea what the LFN's position is, I'm wondering aloud--if anyone knows, please educate my ass in comments.)

Yesterday marked the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, kicking off a fantastic campaign: 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence.

Founded at Rutgers' (represent!) Center for Women's Global Leadership, the campaign begins on the International Day Against Violence Against Women and ends on December 10, International Human Rights Day, "in order to symbolically link violence against women and human rights and to emphasize that such violence is a violation of human rights."

Since its inception in 1991, over 2,000 organizations in 154 countries have participated in the campaign.

At Feministing, we're going to make an extra effort to cover issues concerning violence against women until December 10 and point you to resources (in the U.S. and abroad) to help you get involved.

For now, take a look at the campaign's action kit and if you have a blog, get involved in the Carnival Against Violence Against Women, which Black Looks is hosting.

And please, if you know of any events that you want to share--announce them in comments!

Women activists in Saudi Arabia are protesting the recent ruling that sentenced a gang-rape victim to 200 lashes and six months in jail for being in a car with a man who wasn't her relative.

Activist Wajiha al-Hweider said "[T]here is injustice against women in courts. It is a bitter situation that Saudi women have to endure...The kingdom is in an embarrassing position. King (Abdullah) should step in and stop this farce."

Hatoon al-Fassi, another women's rights activist, said, "It is good that the case has taken an international dimension. It is shameful that such a case could have stayed unspoken of...This is a ruling that has treated the victim as a culprit." She added, "Such logic is so distant from Islam. It is the result of a male-chauvinist reasoning."

And to add insult to injury:

Hweider highlighted the humiliation faced by women inside the courtroom, saying that a judge, who is always a clergyman, addresses only her male guardian.

"The woman does not have the right to represent herself in a court. She enters the court covered entirely in black. Some judges do not even allow her to speak," she said. (Emphasis added)

Sigh. In speaking out against the ruling, Senator Hillary Clinton brought up the Beijing Platform for Action, adopted at the Fourth World Conference on Women: "In 1995, I went to Beijing and said, 'It is time for us to say here in Beijing, and for the world to hear, that it is no longer acceptable to discuss women's rights as separate from human rights.' We have made some progress since then. But we have not made enough." Indeed.

A reader alerts us to this appalling billboard by a concrete company in Lockport, New York.

The humorous inference to “cement shoes� or “concrete shoes� as a method of doing away with one’s wife is at the heart of the controversy.

What company owner Kevin McCabe sees as risqué spoof, YWCA Executive Director Kathleen Granchelli condemned as ignorant.

“I’m sure it was considered to be a joke, or something cute, but with the number of fatalities we see in the domestic violence field, it’s not a joke,� Granchelli said Thursday. “It’s in very poor taste.�

No, it’s not, countered McCabe.

“I think the mainstream understands it,� he said. “It’s unfortunate that some people are reading much more into it than they should.�

McCabe goes on to give the classic excuse that women love this ad -- so how could it be offensive?! His wife isn't upset by it, he says, nor are her coworkers or a handful of women he informally polled at a restaurant. Shockingly, he did not solicit the opinions of the women at the local domestic violence shelter, but I'm sure they would have found it hilarious.

“The mainstream have seen it as a light-hearted joke; that’s all it is,� he said. “I’ve had women call (American Concrete) and say it’s one of the funniest things they’ve seen.�

Nothing like a little eggnog, a roaring fire, and some wife-killing jokes to make the season bright.

Contributed by The Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF)

Flushed pill packets. Holes poked in a condom. A boyfriend's sneer that "Depo-Provera is for sluts." Widespread but often unspoken, women's experiences of birth control sabotage offer a prime example of how violence and abuse in intimate relationships are often linked with reproductive health and rights.

This September, a groundbreaking study by Dr. Elizabeth Miller of the Center for Reducing Health Disparities revealed just how common the problem really is. Miller found that a quarter of teenage girls with histories of abusive relationships living in poor neighborhoods in Boston reported that their abusive partners actively tried to get them pregnant by manipulating condom use, sabotaging birth control, and making explicit statements about wanting them to become pregnant.

Troubling stuff. And something that needs to be more openly discussed—both in the feminist community and in the wider national arena.

That's where Feministing readers like you enter the picture. The Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF) is searching for women who are willing to share their personal experiences of birth control sabotage and other negative attempts--no matter how seemingly "minor"--to control their reproductive rights.

Have you ever had to hide your pill from your boyfriend or husband? Has your intimate partner been verbally or emotionally manipulative about your birth control choices? Have you ever been pressured into an abortion or an unwanted pregnancy? Sharing these and other stories with the FVPF will help us to launch an important new campaign to increase support for women's reproductive health.

Your stories can be emailed to safewomenstories@gmail.com. If you'd like to share anonymously, let us know; if you'd prefer to take a more active role as a spokeswoman against birth control sabotage, tell us that, too. We're eager to hear your thoughts, experiences, and ideas, and we think they'll be a crucial part of this new initiative to put a widespread and serious problem on the public's radar screen.

We're also seeking women's stories in a wide variety of communities and venues--everywhere from low-income health clinics to college sororities to domestic violence support groups. This project is a chance for you to speak out--recognizing that your voice is not alone and demanding that it be heard.

Editor's Note: Please also feel free to share your stories in comments.

It is not exactly shocking that sporting events tend to be laced with sexist actions, specifically, the mob mentality that seems to proliferate when a group of men get together and get *really* excited about their team. Big sporting events are one of the times you get a nice vivid play by play of the ways that sexism, nationalism, homo-eroticism and woman-hate all go hand in hand together. So although this story is not exactly shocking, it is disgusting.

At halftime of the Jets’ home game against the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday, several hundred men lined one of Giants Stadium’s two pedestrian ramps at Gate D. Three deep in some areas, they whistled and jumped up and down. Then they began an obscenity-laced chant, demanding that the few women in the gathering expose their breasts.

When one woman appeared to be on the verge of obliging, the hooting and hollering intensified. But then she walked away, and plastic beer bottles and spit went flying. Boos swept through the crowd of unsatisfied men.

The mood of previous Gate D crowds — captured on video clips posted on YouTube — sometimes bordered on hostile, not unlike the spirit of infamously aggressive European soccer hooligans. One clip online shows a woman being groped by a man standing next to her.

Lovely.

via NYTimes.

You have to really laugh when big, corporate, mainstream media shows its true colors through word choice. Reporting on the violent death of four sex workers last year, CNN calls them, "hookers."

That is so retro, clearly they didn't get the memo that it is not appropriate to call sex workers, "hookers," "whores," and other derogatory terms you can think of, especially when reporting on their violent death. It is not the words, as much as the thoughts they provoke that I take issue with. It is a rhetorical issue, if you are trying to show the serious nature of the crimes against these women, calling them a term that has been discussed as demeaning by activists, organizers and sex workers, takes away from being able to recognize that these are women that were violently murdered in an act of woman hate.

via CNN.

Thanks to Matt and Paige for the link.

UN Dispatch reports on how rape is being used as a weapon of war in the Congo:

The conflict raging in the eastern provinces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo is one of the most brutal wars in the world today. Four million people are thought to have perished in a civil war that raged throughout Congo from 1998 to 2002. And while peace has been restored to most of the country -- which is the size of western Europe -- the conflict lingers on in the east. Rape, as this report from The Guardian explains, is a preferred instrument of war and terror used by all sides to the conflict. How bad is it?

Read the full (upsetting) post here.

Let's file this under the what-the-fuckety-fuck-I'm-going-to-cry files:

A court in the ultra-conservative kingdom of Saudi Arabia is punishing a female victim of gang rape with 200 lashes and six months in jail, a newspaper reported on Thursday.

The 19-year-old woman -- whose six armed attackers have been sentenced to jail terms -- was initially ordered to undergo 90 lashes for "being in the car of an unrelated male at the time of the rape," the Arab News reported. (Emphasis mine)

I'm just...sigh.

Via Jezebel, we find out about perhaps the world's biggest asshole, Michael Karolchyk.

Karolchyk owns a gym in Denver that he calls an "anti-gym.

It has numerous slogans, from "Too chubby; Never find a hubby," to "Have Sex With The Lights On" to "Save The Chubbitos" to "No Chubbies." It also has numerous amenities, including "live DJs, cage dancers, and our elite co-ed Ravish Room." The Ravish Room turns out to be a sauna that admits only members who have reached a sufficiently low body mass index, but you also have to be screened to so much as join his gym, where motivational techniques include having cupcakes hurled at you on the treadmill...

Charming. But nothing, nothing, beats this horrific commercial, "Hottie" in which Karolchyk physically assaults a "chubby" crying woman by pushing her onto a couch (so that her cake smashes up against her full humiliation style) while yelling "Moo!" at her. And that's just the tip of the asshole iceberg. If you can't watch the full commercial, a breakdown is after the jump.

It's stuff like this that makes me just fucking hate people.

Oh, and by the way, if you have the audacity to contact the "Anti-Gym" about their disgusting ads and vile owner, you are a "bearded lady."

I'm actually kind of speechless on this one. And that doesn't happen often.

Thanks to John for the link.

FGM is a controversial topic that Western feminists have had a hard time figuring out how to address. The reality is, we have to listen to the voices, experiences, concerns and wants from the women in these particular societies and to follow their leadership in any kind of action taken. When someone from another country, comes to the US (the supposed land of liberated woman) asking for asylum status because of crimes they feel have been done to themselves due to cultural practices that have taken away their sense of self and sexuality, we should grant it. Don't you think?

Well according to the NYT, the Board of Immigration Appeals doesn't agree with this sentiment.

In September, the Board of Immigration Appeals rejected Ms. Traore’s plea for asylum and ordered her sent back to Mali. It ruled that she did not face persecution there, because the cutting, while “reprehensible,� could not be repeated. “The loss of a limb also gives rise to enduring harm,� the board said, but it would not be a good enough reason to grant asylum.

The board also said that Ms. Traore’s fear that any daughters she might have would be subjected to similar barbarity was of no moment. Nor did it matter that Ms. Traore’s father has said he will force her to marry a first cousin — his sister’s son.

What exactly does persecution look like? Interestingly enough, the Board has given asylum status to victims of forced sterilization and has ruled that FGM and sterilization be treated differently. But what Karen Musalo, the director of the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies at Hastings College of the Law, clearly points out is that this clearly hinges on the belief that reproduction is somehow more valuable than sexual autonomy.

Professor Musalo had a theory about why the board treated forced sterilization differently from genital cutting. Sterilization affects procreation and motherhood, which are valued by men. Genital cutting, by contrast, affects only women’s sexual pleasure and autonomy.

And perhaps some internalized subconscious xenophobic belief that sterilized women cannot reproduce more unwanted brown babies in the US.

Today people around the country are wearing red to protest violence against women of color.

Aishah Shahidah Simmons on why she's wearing red, and on an upcoming action:

I am wearing red because I am a survivor of incest and rape.
I am wearing red because I live in a City (Philadelphia) where a White Woman Judge Terri Carr Deni dropped all rape and assault charges in the case of a woman gang-raped at gunpoint. Because the woman was working as a prostitute, Judge Deni decided that she could not have been raped and changed the charge to “theft of services.� Deni later said that this case “minimizes true rape cases and demeans women who are really raped.�
On Thursday, November 1, 2007, in Philadelphia, there will be a Press Conference at 1pm Outside Municipal Court (Criminal Justice Center)1301 Filbert St. On November 6, 2007, I will voice my opinion to Judge Deni by voting “NO!� on her retention as Judge in the Municipal Court of Philadelphia.

I am wearing red because I am very clear that it doesn’t matter if you’re a stripper, a prostitute, a lesbian, a bisexual woman, a heterosexual woman, a single mother (especially with several children from different fathers), on welfare, a high school drop out, college educated, working in corporate America, working at a minimum wage job with no health insurance, or working in the film/music/television entertainment industry. Yes, I placed what some people would view as very different/distinct categories of women of Color in the same category because history has consistently shown me and all of us that if any of the aforementioned Black women are at the wrong place at the wrong time (which could be at any time), we, women of Color, will be left to heal our very public wounds alone.

Check out the images of women who are wearing red today, and find out how you can get involved.

A report by the Gender Violence Recovery Centre (GVRC) in Kenya says that more than 600 women in the country are raped daily.

The report...indicates that the youngest rape survivor is five-months-old while the oldest is 86.

The statistics, which have been compiled in hospitals and community-based organisations where the victims go for treatment and counselling, approximate that there are at least 16,482 rape cases every year.

Reported cases of assault and battery in the country have also increased from 6,255 to 9,169 while a third of adolescent girls' first sexual experience is coerced, Health Policy Initiative Kenya adds.

I feel ill. For more information on sexual assault in Kenya, click here.

According to Gothamist, this billboard in downtown Manhattan was receiving a number of complaints before the recent "addition" above.

Some Gothamist readers are arguing that the graffiti is implying blame on women for dressing provocatively, others on AA for objectifying them. Thoughts?

Thanks to reader Laura for the heads up!

Pic from GammaBlog.