Two words: geh. valt.

Well, it's been a femilicious day for me (what day isn't really, especially given that my life now is consumed by a major feminist theory paper), but, for you, a few highlights:

The Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood case: aka, the case that demonstrates that being pro-life really IS code for being anti woman, since apparently an exception for bypassing parental notification in a health emergency is TOO BROAD for New Hampshire state legislators, who want to make sure there are no excuses for not giving your parents the chance to veto your reproductive freedom. legislators have been very clear that they considered a "health emergency" exception to the statute that requires notifying parents or getting a waiver from a judge, but conciously rejected it. "Come back with a legal challenge AFTER the law has gone into effect and a woman has been actually harmed" say the conservative justices. Can I ask? Why so much support for requiring a minor to tell their parents about their plans to abort? Because the only situations in which you would have to REQUIRE it, I would think, are in familys that are in some way abusive or, g-d forbid, in which a family member is responsible for the pregnancy. If Americans are repulsed by government interference into a family's decision to let a loved one die (Terri Schaivo, anyone?) then why allow government to interfere in family decision on how to handle abortion? Just because healthy, loving family's that can reach a consensus on how to handle a daughter's pergnancy is the ideal does not mean we can legislate assuming that it is the norm.
This is ALSO known as the case that makes a Roberts-Alito court a frightening tangible dystopia a la the Handmaid's Tale.

Everyone hates Broadsheet, or maybe just one blogger over at frolicanddetour.com. Broadsheet, for people who are not Marissa, is the blog of women-centered news items on Salon. I read it fairly regularly, and particularly enjoy Lynn Harris' funny and insightful items (though I am becoming less and less enamored of Rebecca Traister, partially for reasons I have already detailed here). But I had to come up with some defense of why I like an arguably ghettoizing and patronizing "women's news blog" that also undermines its feminist credentials by including celebrity gossip. Well, here it is: Broadsheet doesn't detract from main-page coverage of important feminist issues at Salon, first of all. It is not an isolated source for women-focused news items. It is, however, a useful clearinghouse for soudbites and small news items that otherwise get lost in the shuffle, like one about a talented Afghani poet who was beaten to death by her husband. By combining these items and making them accessible, you get more readers and give the information greater credibility. As to the celebrity gossip- We live and think on a spectrum of sacred and profane, substantive and superficial, and acknowledging and celebrating that makes for a richer, more human and more grounded publication than one that insists solely on high-minded debates. After all, I'm not afraid to put my narcissistic musings about the pertness of my butt next to dorky political thoughts, because, well, those are all parts of my life.

FMLA craziness. I really don't feel like going into a discussion of our fucking sweatshirt slogan debacle but suffice it to say that feminism is not served when one person's personal agenda is imposed on a divided group under the misleading rhetoric of "I want to have a choice available [and screw you because if you are hurt by my preferred representation]." I HATE the idea of a feminist shirt defining our philosophy by something so reviled and cliche as not wearing a bra, but I hate even more oblivious self-righteousness of so-called leaders who pay lip service to democratic decision making and then guilt-trip people who disagree with them when the group doesn't reach the decision THEY wanted.