Links for 10-5-2011

And it’s that time of the week again. Here goes :

October is domestic violence month

You’re probably all inundated with Slutwalk-related articles after the NYC march this weekend, but still, you should read Sady Doyle’s piece about it.
Also on SlutWalk is Latoya Peterson’s piece on racism and solidarity over at Racialicious!

Another event that you’ve seen loads of coverage around this week is Occupy Wall Street.I haven’t been to the protests personally, but here are a few pieces I think you should check out:
Manissa Maharawal at Racialicious on the struggle to make OccupyWallSt a fairer, more inclusive space.
Jessica Yee on the colonialist implications of the movement. More on the topic through this Racialicious link round up.

The NYPD’s response to the protests has been messed up in a number of ways, detailed by Jill in an earlier post, but if you need further proof – this is appalling. A trans man protesting was arrested and mistreated in an incredibly transphobic manner.

Enough about Occupying Wall Street: the rest of your weekly dose of depressing is provided by the Hyde Amendment. The amendment prohibits all federal funding for abortions except in cases of rape, incest or danger to the life of the woman. In celebration of its 35th anniversary, NPR tells us that ” even abortions that technically qualify for public funding often don’t reimbursed”. Yay.

Continuing on an anti-choice note, Saskatchewan Tory MP Brad Trost demands that the abortion debate be reopened. The Conservative position is apparently too far left for MP Trost, who thinks that a more aggressive pro-life campaign would result in a better, more moderate legislation in Canada. This occurs in the aftermath of a yearlong saga over Canada’s funding of Planned Parenthood International, recapped here.

Also. Still depressing but kind of awesome as well : the Berkeley College Republicans, in a classic College Republicans move, held a bakesale in which items were differently priced depending on your race. Affirmative action is evil message, protesting bill SB 185. But here’s where the awesome part comes in : the protests ! They ranged from serious vigils and demonstrations to counter bakesales, to this :

“UC Berkeley Professor of political science Wendy Brown tried to buy all the baked goods at the Republicans’ sale, but they did not allow her to do so.

“I thought the Republicans were free enterprise, but they won’t let me buy all the cupcakes,” she said.”

In other exciting news of the week, French feminist group Osez le feminisme has launched a new campaign : Madame ou Madame. The goal is to eradicate the official use of Mademoiselle (Miss) in paperwork, and generalize the use of Madame (Mrs) to all women regardless of marital status. Predictably, the argument that “it’s just semantics and doesn’t really matter” has been brought up a bunch…But still – check it out if you speak French, and if you do not and want more info, do let me know in the comments.

As usual, if there are links/stories/posts/etc you’d like to see included in these, please email feministe@gmail.com !

Author: has written 6 posts for this blog.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

12 Responses

  1. Sam
    Sam October 5, 2011 at 10:34 am |

    This is a comic I drew (poorly haha) in response to MP Trost’s ridiculous statement. Enjoy!

    http://wp.me/pAsLK-wc

    (For those of you not from Canada, the 23 years reference is how long ago abortion was decriminalized in the country)

  2. LC
    LC October 5, 2011 at 11:16 am |

    «nom de naissance» contre «nom d’usage».

    I want to start pushing for that in English, too. Actually, the whole concept of having a “name at birth” and “name in use” sounds fantastic to me in general.

  3. j.
    j. October 5, 2011 at 11:59 am |

    Someone in an earlier post linked to “Disoccupy.” I’d like to note here that they’re perfectly happy to edit comments that are critical of them in a way that dishonestly implies the commenter wrote the edited portion.

    http://disoccupy.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/hello-world/#comment-35

    In case of deletion, here is a screenshot:

    http://i56.tinypic.com/2dqolj6.png

  4. Shannon Drury
    Shannon Drury October 5, 2011 at 1:13 pm |

    May I pass on a great photo essay on SlutWalk Minneapolis, which occurred the same day as NYC’s walk?

    http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/blog/alan-wilfahrt/revealing-images-slutwalk-minneapolis

    I spoke at the event on behalf of Minnesota NOW, but nothing out of my mouth was a fraction as powerful as the signs carried by the survivors who were walking that day.

  5. Angel H.
    Angel H. October 5, 2011 at 1:36 pm |

    j.: Someone in an earlier post linked to “Disoccupy.” I’d like to note here that they’re perfectly happy to edit comments that are critical of them in a way that dishonestly implies the commenter wrote the edited portion.http://disoccupy.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/hello-world/#comment-35In case of deletion, here is a screenshot:http://i56.tinypic.com/2dqolj6.png

    They wouldn’t take your racist message seriously so you decide to dump on them here? How petty of you.

  6. Fat Steve
    Fat Steve October 5, 2011 at 1:48 pm |

    Shannon Drury:
    May I pass on a great photo essay on SlutWalk Minneapolis, which occurred the same day as NYC’s walk?

    http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/blog/alan-wilfahrt/revealing-images-slutwalk-minneapolis

    I spoke at the event on behalf of Minnesota NOW, but nothing out of my mouth was a fraction as powerful as the signs carried by the survivors who were walking that day.

    I much preferred these pics to the ones I saw on the Facebook site for the Ny Slutwalk, which really brought up a lot of issues that I hadn’t thought about.

    1) It bothers me that certain women were trying to make a political point, only to have that political point now turned into masturbatory fodder on the internet.

    2) Many of the women who wore revealing clothing had on outfits which represented exactly the type of woman the policeman in Toronto so wrongly referred to as being the cause of rape. However a minority (who seemed to end up in a majority of the pictures,) were wearing things like just a bra and a thong (or something which much closer to being naked than being dressed in a ‘slutty’ fashion,) and while I think a woman should be allowed to walk down the street naked without being molested, I think some people either misunderstood the aims or were there for the wrong reasons.

    3. The n-word (nuff said)

  7. Fat Steve
    Fat Steve October 5, 2011 at 1:57 pm |

    Angel H.: They wouldn’t take your racist message seriously so you decide to dump on them here? How petty of you.

    His message was racist? Bravo to you for being able to comprehend it, I couldn’t make heads nor tails of it.

  8. j.
    j. October 5, 2011 at 2:23 pm |

    LOL, yeah, my message was “racist” because I questioned their tactics and their goals. Of course! How dare I, etc. etc. Radicals are always pure of heart, and disagreeing with them is “racism.” Even when it’s obvious that they lie about what people state on their blog.

    Lying for Justice must be the leftie version of Lying for Jesus.

  9. Anon
    Anon October 5, 2011 at 2:44 pm |

    Angel H.: They wouldn’t take your racist message seriously so you decide to dump on them here? How petty of you.

    Regardless of the substance of the comment and whether it should be taken seriously, editing it to add a phrase that makes it much worse (and then lying about it) is pretty egregious behavior. If they found the comment sufficiently objectionable, they should not have published it at all.

    1. Jill
      Jill October 5, 2011 at 3:03 pm | *

      Regardless of the substance of the comment and whether it should be taken seriously, editing it to add a phrase that makes it much worse (and then lying about it) is pretty egregious behavior. If they found the comment sufficiently objectionable, they should not have published it at all.

      Wait I’m sorry, now we’re using this blog’s comment section to complain about the comment section of a totally unrelated blog? Nope. Next.

  10. LC
    LC October 8, 2011 at 9:28 pm |

    Actually, Google translate didn’t do too poor a job of it. Thanks for the offer, though!

    You’re welcome!

    (Just tested it out, it really does do a decent job.)

  11. Sarah
    Sarah October 9, 2011 at 9:30 am |

    to clarify the Madame/Mademoiselle issue: in spoken French, “Madame” does not simply signify marriage, as “Mrs” does in English, but age. Strangers on the street, waiters, etc. will address a younger female (child to twenties) as “Mademoiselle” and an older female (looks old enough to have had a kid) as “Madame” with no implications of marital status whatsoever. Using only “Madame” in official paperwork guards against the implication that unmarried women are not really adults.

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.