One Year Later: The women of Haiti Cherie & an American feminist

For a while there it seemed as if most of the world had forgotten about Haiti (again). This week, by all indications from the news media, the ongoing tragedy has not been completely forgotten. Unfortunately, I can't help but feel discouraged when nearly half of the people I speak to about Haiti are sure that it was a hurricane that occurred last January (?!) or believe that Haiti is an island near Africa.

Immediately following the January 12 earthquake I began searching for volunteer opportunities, but quickly found that without a medical or emergency response background, few organizations were interested in taking advantage of my willingness to help. In May, however, I was finally invited to join an amazing group of nurses and doctors to volunteer at a medical clinic run by the organization Raising Haiti. In total, I have traveled to Haiti 3 times, working twice in a general medical clinic and once in a cholera treatment center. I return in 15 days (but who's counting).

There have been so many issues complicating the situation in Haiti this past year, but given my background as a passionate feminist and advocate for women's health & rights, I can't overlook how these circumstances will always disproportionately effect the women of Haiti. Women head nearly half of all households in Haiti, and face a constant threat of gender based violence (GBV).

Prior to chaos of 2010:

• An estimated 72% of girls have been raped
• 40% of women suffer from domestic violence.
• Contraceptive use is reported at a dismal 13.2% (including condoms)
• Pregnancy rates among school-age girls is approximately 3% - compare that to the US, which has the highest teen pregnancy rate of industrialized nations at 0.07%
• Abortion is illegal in Haiti - which leads many women to abandon education, enter into unsafe relationships, or seek risky illegal abortions
• Maternal mortality rates remain high, estimated at about 0.006% (compared to the US's relatively high rate of 0.00008%)
• Only approx. 26% of births in Haiti are assisted by a skilled birthing attendant

And this is all prior to the chaos which followed the earthquake which claimed the lives of over 300,000 people, and lead to increased civil unrest as well as a cholera epidemic whose death toll is approximated to be 2-4 times worse than the official reports of 3700.

But the Haitian people are warm, grateful and funny. They persevere in the face of insurmountable odds and great obstacles, always seeking to do what is best for their families, their community and their country. Every Haitian, whether living in Haiti or building a life in the expansive Haitian diaspora, knows the greatness which lies beneath the surface in Haiti. I've fallen in love in Haiti, in so many ways.

From a Campus Organizer who assisted in a impromptu pharmacy and monitored cholera patients:
"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little" - Edmund Burke
[A quote which can be found on the legendary table of the MMRC HQ in Port-au-Prince.]

For more information on the women of Haiti:
We Advance: NGO in Haiti focusing on GBV and women's health
Kay Fanm: "House of Women" Haitian non-profit focusing on health & GBV in Haiti
Ms. Magazine: Please also check related posts for information on rape & GBV. Additionally the Winter 2011 issue of Ms. has a story dedicated to the women of Haiti.
UNFPA: UN Population Fund work on GBV and maternal health

Sources & information

Thank You Thursday! 07/29/2010

We are excited to announce that we are adding a new weekly series of blog posts known as "Thank You Thursday!" Our "Thank You Thursday" posts will include a list of people who have done or said something pro-woman that we appreciate. We hope you enjoy seeing who is doing positive work!
This Thursday, we would like to thank:

• U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton for blocking several key passages of Arizona's new immigration law SB 1070
• Memphis City Council Member Janis Fullilove for supporting a proposed LGBT antidiscrimination policy even when faced with death threats
• ESPN Reporter Erin Andrews for advocating for the STALKERS Act
• Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for their efforts to get the Dream Act passed

• and a special thanks to everyone who help with the Pro-Choice Clinic Defense in Charlotte, North Carolina, last week!!!

THANK YOU!!!!!

From the Front Lines: A Warm Welcome in Charlotte

Last week, I went to Charlotte, North Carolina with Feminist Majority Foundation to help protect reproductive health providers from anti-abortion extremists Operation Rescue/Operation Save America during their national siege. This summer I've worked a great deal on with our NCAP project, and am following various anti-abortion organizations as part of my internship. Before this summer, I didn't really know a lot about NCAP or the history of anti-abortion violence. I heard about the murder of Dr. George Tiller over a year ago, and that was about as much as I knew.

FMF's National Clinic Access Project (NCAP) began shortly after FMF was founded and provides a great gamut of assistance to women's health care providers targeted by anti-abortion extremists. Just to give you an idea of what we do - NCAP specializes in tracking anti-abortion extremists, works with federal, state and local law enforcement to protect abortion providers, provides grass-roots organizing support for clinics, recruits pro-bono legal help for clinics under siege, and even makes emergency grants to targeted clinics to improve security measures. So when the National Clinic Access Project heard Operation Rescue/Operation Save America announce a national siege of Charlotte-area abortion providers in July, NCAP immediately began to organize to protect the clinics, their workers, physicians and patients in advance of the OR/OSA week of harassment.

That's where I come in. As part of my internship, I traveled to Charlotte as part of the NCAP team to work with FMF national organizer, campus organizer, legal coordinator and two other interns to help organize clinic defense, grass roots trainings, legal observing and escorting, but most of my efforts focused on clinic defense. Clinic defense is literally about mobilizing a ton of pro-choice peeps to create a human buffer zone between anti-abortion zealots and clinic staff and patients. Clinic defense is also critical to helping maintain access to clinic driveways and entrances while sending a critical message of support to the clinic.

Also, what I learned is that clinic defense can also provide a distraction for anti-abortion protesters so that they don't bother the patients. If OR/OSA is too busy yelling at a clinic defender, they don't tent to notice a car pulling into the drive way with a patient. Although clinic defenders create a buffer zone and often take the focus of the anti's attention, we (as clinic defenders) must not cause problems for the clinic -- or the police, which is why NCAP strictly enforces a non-engagement policy. No witty comebacks, no arguing, no general conversation with the anti's. You have to be completely stone-faced. Which frustrates them even more so they get caught up in "breaking" you and forget about patients (win).

This principle of non-engagement is covered meticulously in clinic defense trainings -- along with a pledge of non-violence. On the last training before the siege, the NCAP clinic defense team, along with ProChoice Charlotte and the UNCC Feminist Union, met with an eager group of activists who were ready to face Operation Save America. A few had done escorting in the past, but most were new to the clinic defense scene. We had everyone introduce themselves and explain why they were there and then gave some general information about the non-engagement policy and what should be expected throughout the week. We emphasized that we are the guests of the clinic and that we must abide by what the clinic wants, and engaging with anti-choice protesters would not be tolerated. We then all got up and practiced linking arms in a line and also how to create a buffer around a patient (you can never be too prepared, plus it's also just good to know). After getting the basic linking down, we then took a stab at practicing our non-engagement faces. We formed two lines and stood facing each other. We then started yelling insults at each other, one side pretending to be anti-choice protesters. Then one side pretended to be anti's while the other completely ignored them so we could get a feel of just how reserved we would need to be.

We also mentioned as clinic defense it's important to be aware of any information relevant to helping the clinic. This included alerting law enforcement when there was a problem, and notifying NCAP leaders if OR/OSA was trespassing or violating city ordinances.

Despite OR/OSA running amuck in the city, the pro-choice community of Charlotte was amazing. The NCAP team was welcomed with wide open arms. My campus organizer and I stayed with a professor from Davidson College that I had never met before, and he went out of his way to make sure we were as happy as could be. We were welcome in everyone's home, even those who weren't connected to the clinics at all. Pro-Choice Charlotte, Charlotte NOW, Planned Parenthood, UNCC Feminist Union, and many unaffiliated individuals who worked alongside NCAP created a dazzling web of pro-choice support and grassroots activism that would eventually lead to the first harassment-free day at a local clinic in eight years. Even local law enforcement which had been reluctant to help in the past took a new turn in supporting the clinics. It also lead to the creation of new alliances, friendships, and overall feminist fuzzy feelings between everyone there. My convictions were reaffirmed, and even strengthened by facing the extremist opposition. While draining emotionally and physically, and at times just ridiculous, I wouldn't trade this experience for anything.

--
Photo: Chalk message outside a local Charlotte clinic Friday, July 16th
Cross-posted at Ode to Patriarchy

Age-old bias for boys creates issues for China. Human trafficking is not the solution!!!

Women in China and neighboring east Asian countries are viewed as being of lesser value when compared to men. The Chinese traditionally prefer sons to daughters because of economical factors and I suppose this is somewhat understandable because residents in poorer regions rely on family resources to survive. However sayings among Chinese peasants like “The birth of a boy is welcomed with shouts of joy and firecrackers, but when a girl is born, the neighbors say nothing” upset me. I do not understand why a saying like this can be so common when in reality without women, all birth would be impossible!

We all know about China’s one-child population control policy which officially restricts the number of children an urban couple can have. And most are aware of China’s long tradition of son preference which is deeply rooted in the structure of the society. But the combination of tradition and policy has proved dangerous for women and young girls. There is currently a significant gender gap in several Asian countries because the birth rate of males in comparison to females is imbalanced. Such imbalance has created social issues and caused an increase in crime.

In many Asian countries human trafficking is on the rise due to a shortage of marriageable women. It is hard for men to find wives because their potential mates are often nonexistent due to the high percentage of families engaging in late term sex-selective abortion and infanticide. Now there is a demand for abducted women especially in poor rural areas where residents lack legal knowledge and are desperate to find work. Often women and children are tricked by unlicensed job and marriage agencies, lured through false promises of legitimate employment. Many are kidnapped and forced into marriages and prostitution. These victims suffer physically and psychologically and are often cut off from their families completely.
The Chinese government is working to reduce corruption and other economic crimes. Police are taking action and have made arrests within the human trafficking ring. I believe the issue can not simply be solved through these arrests however, it is also necessary for the Chinese to change their view of women. The chaos caused by the imbalanced sex ratio should be an indicator to the Chinese people that sustaining a female population is vital. It is quite simple, without women there are no babies, no female babies, no male babies! Yes, China is overpopulated but a country that is exclusively male just can’t work!
I’d like to see China’s perspective of women change for the better. Perhaps when women are valued, human trafficking, sex selective abortion and many of the other social issues will go away.

We've Been Stupak'd

While women won big with health care reform, we took a hard blow when it came to comprehensive reproductive health care, and we are doing so again. However, this time there are no trade-offs.

As soon as next month, transitory health-insurance pools for those with pre-existing conditions will become available. Yesterday the NARAL released a statement that said the new temporary health care plans for high-risk individuals will not include comprehensive reproductive health care. It seems the White House Administration has put a total ban on abortion coverage (with the exception of cases of rape, incest, or if the woman’s life is endangered) even though there is not a single thing in the federal law that restricts the use of federal or state money for abortion coverage within the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plans (PCIPs).

This ban is in essence the same as the Stupak amendment which was defeated months ago. With the enforcement of this ban there is no way women will be able to purchase abortion coverage within the PCIP system even with their own private funds. Because these women fall in the high-risk category, they will not have options outside the PCIP system to find insurance coverage for abortion. That's why they are participating in the PCIP system to begin with, because they can't get coverage anywhere else! So in the end the government is completely denying these women of any possible coverage for abortion period!!

We did not work so hard to defeat the Stupak amendment, to so quickly and without any reason find a Stupak ban enforced now! As the Center for Reproductive Rights stated: "Healthcare reform was a tightly bargained piece of legislation - and with this, the White House is threatening to renege on a fundamental part of its bargain with American women and families who truly need coverage."

Join me in speaking out by telling President Obama that this abortion-coverage ban was not part of the agreement on health reform and that abortion coverage should not be excluded from the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plans!

God has a Plan for Incestuous Rape Victim

Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle has been making headlines with her absolutist anti-choice views. This Tea Party favorite has spoken about her belief that all abortions should be illegal, even in the case of rape and incest, on multiple occasions.

Most recently, the buzz has been centered on her radio interview on the Alan Stock Show in late-June. Stock asked about her recent television interview in which the host asked if she would tell a 13-year-old girl that was raped by her father that she has to have the baby. Angle responded with an anecdotal story of how she saved the life of a teen rape victim's daughter from abortion. Angle claimed that "two wrongs don't make a right" in reference to aborting a rape-induced pregnancy and that the people she counseled were able to make "a lemon situation into lemonade."

However, this is extremely problematic. If Angle had her way, girls impregnated by their fathers would be forced to give birth! It is bad enough to deal with the trauma of rape, let alone incestuous rape, but to deal with the government forcing her to give birth to a child that will forever be associated with such a horrendous event is ridiculous! In addition, it can be dangerous. Still developing, teenagers are at a much higher risk of having serious complications.

How is Sharron Angle ok with putting women's lives at risk to save what isn't even a person yet?

Well... She believes that "God has a plan and a purpose for each one of our lives." Personally, I am an Atheist and am accepting of others' religious beliefs, but I take issue with her statement. I am ok with religious individuals making statements like "it's part of God's plan" or "God works in mysterious ways," but would God really want a young teen to be raped and go through a pregnancy to end up dying? Sorry, but isn't God supposed to be just and loving? Why would he want someone to go through so much pain-- is he teaching a moral lesson or punishing these young women?

Sorry, Ms. Angle, but I don't think religion justifies forcing rape victims to give birth. Perhaps, you are confusing religion and politics, or maybe you should let other people worry about their fate and allow them their reproductive freedom.

Photo Credit: Huffington Post

Hello Feminists!!!!!

Hello Feminists! My name is Laura Robles and this summer I will be a Choices Campus Intern for the Feminist Majority Foundation in Los Angeles! I am a senior at UCLA (will graduate this fall 2010) majoring in Political Science with a minor in Women's Studies, so the personal is very political for me! I am super excited to be here!

I grew up around strong super-women my whole life and I believe that women can change the world! I have a strong interest in protecting women's reproductive rights (specifically abortion) which are under attack at this present moment with the implementation of many restrictive policies and federal funding for CPCs (Crisis Pregnancy Centers). Women should have the protected right and access to safe and legal abortions.

I am a Chicana Feminist (see here and here) and I love to study women of color feminism! I analyze people and situations in regards to the concept of "Intersectionality" paying close attention to a person's race, gender, class, sexuality and how these factors intertwine. I am excited to be here this summer and contribute to this Blog (I have never Blogged before!!!)

Book Review - Targets of Hatred: Anti-Abortion Terrorism (Baird-Windle)

Cross-posted at Ode to Patriarchy

So as part of my work on the National Clinic Access Project was reading up on the history of violence against abortion providers, clinics, staff, and patients. The book I was given was Targets of Hatred: Anti-Abortion Terrorism by Patricia Baird-Windle and Eleanor J. Bader. Starting in the 1960's and tracking up until the book was published in 2001, Targets of Hatred recounts the major events regarding clinic violence and harassment (wins and losses).

While most people know or remember individual events, few are aware of the massive amounts of simultaneous battering that clinics faced. From stalking charges, to bombings, to cancelled insurance policies, to legislative losses and of course death threats, murder attempts, and murders clinics and their employees were denied refuge where ever they went. Many burned out after the threats increased in fury and hatred.

One of the most important messages from this book is that cooperating law enforcement is absolutely essential to a clinic's safety. Clinics that had a positive relationship with impartial local law enforcement that enforced injunctions against the antis who violated them had less violent activity from protestors and/or were able to recover more quickly from attacks. On the other hand, lazy, biased and involved reactions from law enforcement only served to encourage illegal activities by antis. Even though the police are there to enforce the law, doesn't mean they always do.

But by far, the best aspect of this book for me was the personal accounts of those affected. It's one thing to hear that two people died in a clinic shooting, it's another to read someone's story of actually being there when it happened. They have accounts of day to day death threats, worries concerns, fears, and victories. There's a lot of talk about what clinics and providers need, but not always do you directly from those affected. It's no longer just a part of abortion history, it's real life.

The book was published in 2001, and since then there have obviously been a few big updates needed. Kopp was convicted in 2003, Dr. George Tiller was murdered, the Stupak Amendment was included in HCR, and state-by-state, limitations to access abortion have become rampant. As a third wave/radical/difference feminists, we have to educate ourselves on what our history is and what's happening now. You can follow the escalating violence in the novel; it's no surprise that we are where we are today with another murder and restricted access.

We also have to be the front-runners in approaching clinic violence for what it really is: terrorism working in terrorist cells. Not every protestor is part of the terrorist network, many do not condone violence against providers as a way to stop abortion. However, the proof is there. We're not just talking clinic blockades (which violate FACE), we're talking FIREBOMBS, EXPLOSIVES, SHRAPNEL BOMBS, and SNIPER EXECUTIONS. If we're supposedly fighting a war on terror, why aren't we investigating the Army of God which has a MANUAL ON HOW TO ATTACK CLINICS AND THE PROVIDERS, and has also been connected to the murderer James Kopp (Dr. Slepian 1998), Scott Roeder (Dr. Tiller 2009) and numerous attempted murders, firebombs, and acid attacks? That many of the people connected to it are advocates for "justifiable homicide" against providers, clinic administrators, and pretty much anyone associated with a clinic? How is any of it different from a terrorist cell?

Because we, as a nation, choose not to treat it as such.

--
Photo-credit: MacMillan, also where you can purchase the book - http://us.macmillan.com/targetsofhatred

The Intersection of Abortion and LGBTQ Rights

Cross-posted at Ode to Patriarchy

I talk a lot about LGBTQ rights, and I talk a lot about abortion rights. So do a lot of people. But very rarely do they ever seem to be mentioned together. And I know the obvious rebuttal... "it's not like someone's going to get pregnant"...

But in reality, it's two different sides of the same issue. Politicians trying to control other people's bodies (especially white, upper-class, straight, cis men controlling the bodies of anyone different from them, especially women).

Think about it. All the fuss about the "sanctity" of marriage and how same-sex marriage would destroy such an institution is a way to prevent physical interactions between LGBTQ individuals. The actual success of such an argument can be debated, but really the message is the same. While many laws prohibiting sodomy and other types of sexual interaction have been removed or buried so deep in the history books that they have no purpose, some still exist on the record across the nation. In addition, we still live in a culture that looks down on premarital sex (to the point that you can lose your job in some areas), teaches abstinence until marriage in public schools, and is horrified by the scandal that is teenage pregnancy. In a last ditch effort to control what LGBTQ individuals do in the bedroom, anti-gay politicians push for the ban of same-sex marriage, dismissal of LGBTQ people from the military, and prevention of gay adoption. All under the guise of religious doctrine and "pro-family" politics.

Meanwhile, in the abortion debate, the justifications for controlling LGBTQ bodies are the same as the justifications for banning abortion. Mandatory waiting periods, lack of insurance coverage, and restrictions on who can have an abortion take control of a woman's body away from her and gives it to typically male politicians. The question of how does a male politician with no medical training in abortion or experience as a woman know what is best for a woman, of course, is never said. Access to birth control and abortion are restricted little by little with the full intention of placing control of women's bodies in the hand of male politicians. Like with anti-gay politics, religious reasons and "pro-life" mantras are used on the streets and in the courtrooms to dictate what a woman can and cannot do with her own body.

To those who would say that no one chooses to be gay, trans, or anything in between, while women choose to have sex with the risk of getting pregnant, I disagree. No one chooses to be gay, true. But women don't choose the circumstances that affect getting an abortion. Abortion may be a choice, but the financial, emotional, and physical situations that a woman is in aren't choices. When a woman gives a partner consent, she's consenting to sex, not a pregnancy. If pregnancy were a choice then we wouldn't have to pay for birth control, we could just choose not to have the sperm fertilize the egg. Simple. Saying that a woman who is pregnant and considering abortion should have thought about that before having sex is like saying a person injured in a car accident should have thought about that before buying a car. Or that a person throwing up from food poisoning should have thought about that before eating at a restaurant.

In response to the inevitable "why would a lesbian need an abortion anyway?" I would like to point out that it's not just straight or bi women who get abortions. Lesbians, like all women, can be raped or assaulted incestuously. To dismiss lesbian and queer women from the abortion debate is to dismiss the experiences of those who have been the survivors of sexual violence.

Both LGBTQ and abortion rights come down to asserting that WE are the ones who control our bodies. WE must fight to make sure that WE have control over who we sleep with and what can be inside us. These aren't separate struggles. If we give in on one, we give in on them all.

--
Photo credit: kevindooley on flickr.com

Ode to Patriarchy is Kari's personal blog. Don't worry, the name is ironic.

Crist Pulls Through for Florida Women

A woman's right to choose without stipulations prevailed in Florida when on Friday June 11, Governor Charlie Crist vetoed HB 1143. Proposed and passed in the Florida state legislature by an overwhelming amount of House Republicans, the bill would have required women seeking a first-trimester abortion to pay for an ultrasound exam that ranges in cost from $200 to $1000. Upon receiving the ultrasound, the patient would then be required to view the ultrasound and listen to her doctor describe the fetus.

Had the unnecessary legislation been passed, women would have faced excessively intrusive government intervention when making a personal decision that is constitutionally protected. The keyword being personal. As a dissenter of HB1143, I personally detested the bill for a variety of reasons, including because I believe it cruelly intended to afflict an emotional burden on women during their most fragile moments. On a personal level, I am a Florida resident and I have feared how much the bill could have potentially affected my future reproductive decisions and the choices of my fellow Floridians, including my family, friends, colleagues, neighbors and classmates.

Despite criticisms from Marco Rubio, his conservative opponent for Florida Senate, who slammed Crist for "[putting] politics ahead of principled policy-making," Crist expressed that he could not pass a bill that "would violate a woman's right to privacy." Some Crist cynics claimed he signed the bill to sway voters in the fall 2010 Senate election.

Regardless of his potential political intentions, I am proud of Charlie Crist for ignoring criticisms from Republicans and coercing from anti abortion groups. While reading his veto memo, I deduced that Crist just "gets it" when it comes to the constitutionality of a woman's right to choose. He seems to understand that the right to choose is more than a feminist issue, a women's issue or a political platform; it is essential to preserving the sanctity of the constitutionally ensured right to privacy.

Photo credit to: freddthompson on flickr.com

FMF Summer Intern's First Blog (ever!)

Hi, feminists! My name is Erin Coughlin and I am interning at the Los Angeles office of the Feminist Majority Foundation for the summer. As an intern, I will be writing a weekly blog and look forward to sharing my opinions, epiphanies and various experiences that strengthen my identification as a feminist.

Here are 10 (hopefully fun) facts that will allow me to introduce myself:

1. I just finished my sophomore year at the University of Florida in Gainesville, FL. I am a Political Science and History double major.
2. I was born and raised in Lakeland, FL and as a lifelong Floridian, I am becoming quite spoiled by LA's constant climate of 75 and sunny with no humidity. Oh, and by Trader Joe's! I can't get enough of relatively inexpensive and delicious organic groceries.
3. Tying in with my love of TJ's, I am a serious foodie. Seemingly overnight, I shed my obsession with food texture and fear of the unknown to wanting to try (mostly) every food. My most recent food conquest was Ethiopian.
4. I love running and believe that few feelings compare to the endorphin fueled runner's high achieved after a good run.
5. Bob Dylan is, hands down, my favorite musician.
6. My parents are feminists and have inspired me to promote equality.
7. My passions as a feminist most strongly lie in the area of reproductive rights.
8. I believe that young women need comprehensive sex ed that reaches beyond abstinence only teachings, and that all women deserve access to birth control and safe and legal abortions. I look forward to advocating for this issue over the summer.
9. I was drawn to the Feminist Majority Foundation because of the extensive work they do with revealing the truth about Crisis Pregnancy Centers.
10. My goal as a summer intern is to strengthen my ability to empower women by educating them about their reproductive and personal rights.

I look forward to delving into my internship and blogging about my findings with you.

For equality,
Erin Coughlin

Choice v. Freedom v. Abortion Rights

Last week, Katha Pollitt of The Nation and historian Nancy Cohen wrote that the repro rights movement needs a better descriptor than "pro-choice." Ms. Magazine contributor Carol Joffe wrote a similar post in February.

Cohen proposed "pro-freedom" as a patriotic alternative that would appeal to mainstream voters, while Pollitt, Joffe, and a number of progressive organizations prefer the term reproductive justice to describe the rights for which we're fighting.

I agree with Pollitt that we're probably not going to shift the language our country uses around abortion and reproduction at this rate. But I figured I'd weigh in anyway.

I like the term "abortion rights" since it is specific and normalizes the word abortion. I believe that as a movement, we should say what we mean. This also happens to be the language the AP style guide uses. NPR recently adopted the AP guidelines around this language in response to a post by their ombudsman, Alicia Shepard.

The repro justice approach is important and a more comprehensive way to discuss the variety of issues we work on. Both terms are descriptive and are not mutually exclusive, and we can use both where appropriate.

That said, "choice" feels like an old friend and I'd be a little sorry to see it go. Nor am I so quick to believe we have somehow lost the linguistic and cultural high ground to "pro-life" extremists. Your thoughts?

Still Going After All These Years: The Fight For Choice

In the early 1970s, trail-blazing feminists had a vision for women’s health centers and abortion service providers. Clinics were to function as places where all women could feel strong, safe, and supported - true centers of female empowerment. With the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, guaranteeing women the right to abortion, the pro-choice campaign seemed to be headed towards this idealist destination.

Few feminists of that era would have predicted that in June 2010 the New York Times would publish an article highlighting 11 states that have passed laws restricting or regulating abortion this year alone. Feminists, particularly those who defended clinics in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, are left wondering, "How is the fight for choice still going on?"

According to the Times article about 370 state bills regulating abortion have been introduced in 2010. Regulations that have made it through state legislatures include an Oklahoma law requiring women to undergo an ultrasound and listen to a description of the fetus prior to abortion, the banning of all abortions after twenty weeks in Nebraska, and a Tennessee bill requiring clinics to post signs stating it is illegal to coerce women into undergoing an abortion procedure. Even scarier, Utah legislators have passed a law allowing a 17 - year - old girl who paid a man to beat her into a miscarriage to be charged with homicide. While my pro-choice colleagues and I are left baffled by this wave of anti-choice legislation, abortion opponents are welcoming the turning tide. As quoted in the Times, Mary Spaulding Blanch, director of state legislation for the National Right to Life Committee, said, "This is a good year as far as victories." She continues, "I do get the impression that the [state political] climate is friendlier." Friendlier to anti-abortion laws, that is.

In an era where many Americans are unaware or dismissive of the gender inequities that exist in our culture, the question I all too often receive when I reveal my feminist passions is, "What do feminists have to fight for these days, anyway?" While there are an unlistable number of answers to that question, one response the feminists of the 70s didn’t think I would have to say is "choice." As evidenced by the recent passage of restrictive laws in numerous states, however, abortion is very much still on the agenda. So alas, the battle rages onward.

photo credit:Leo in Canberra on flickr.com

Abortion Democracy: Poland/South Africa

At least 80,000 women die annually as a result of botched abortions. But abortion, when performed under safe and legal conditions, poses fewer health risks than carrying a pregnancy to term and giving birth. So why are women dying needlessly?

The documentary film, Abortion Democracy: Poland/South Africa, by Sarah Diehl, examines two countries with very different abortion policies and thus, very different realities for women.

In South Africa, abortion is legal, but it is highly unavailable. In Poland, abortion is illegal, but easy (yet expensive) to obtain. These two localized scenarios perfectly demonstrate two facts that are applicable worldwide: 1) Making abortion illegal doesn't stop it from happening; and 2) Just because abortion is legal, it doesn't mean it is accessible. The film takes an extremely interesting and in-depth examination of the forces at play, shaping the policy and the reality for women in both Poland and South Africa.

Abortion was legalized in South Africa after the fall of apartheid in 1994, when the African National Congress was elected to power. Abortion is always legal in the first trimester, and in the second trimester, it is permitted due to mental or physical health problems, rape or incest, or socioeconomic problems (all of which are very vague and ambiguous classifications). South Africa is also one of only two nations (Vietnam being the other) where nurses and midwives are legally permitted to perform abortions. In terms of abortion policies worldwide, South Africa's is one of the most progressive.

But, women who want to obtain an abortion have an extremely difficult time doing so. More and more providers are beginning to refuse to perform abortions based on religious and moral beliefs and many providers are not informed of the new law. Further compounding the problem, training for abortion is usually not provided in obstetrics and gynecology medical school.

As a result, in the Western Cape Province, for instance, there are only three providers. They spend their time driving hours and hours between cities, only to be faced with more women in need than they can possibly help. Women find it difficult to even obtain contraceptives due to the shaming and harassment that accompanies the request.

Abortion providers and their families are being ostracized and shamed within their communities and one nurse recounted stories of the doctors he worked with acting like they were "just waiting for him to fail". Anti-abortion organizations and activity are on the rise, and one of their tactics is to try to label abortion as an import from the West, when truly, as in every society on the planet, abortion has been happening all along - the men just rarely found out about it.

Sarah conducts a particularly powerful series of interviews with a young woman who was raped, became pregnant, and then was kicked out of her house, who was unable to obtain an abortion. Her story drives home the interconnected nature of shame associated with rape, unwed motherhood, and abortion in a society where there are high rates of rape and incest and women often lack the power to negotiate safe sex, even with their partner.

Contrarily, in Poland, abortion was made illegal (except in cases of rape or the woman's health) after the fall of communism in 1993, when the right wing party, in an attempt to form a new national identity, sought the backing of the Catholic church and was elected to power. At the same time, half of all public child care centers closed and comprehensive sex ed ceased to exist. Essentially, it was (and continues to be) a reproductive health nightmare.

Despite the exception for rape and women's health (yet another vague term), women who truly do fall into these categories have an extremely difficult time obtaining a legal abortion. For instance, one woman suffered hemorrhaging in her eye, yet no one would perform the abortion. She is now partially blind. When she brought charges to the European Court of Human Rights, the first lady of Poland argued that she should have her child taken away for attempting to abort it. The Court ended up awarding her reparations.

While only 150 legal abortions are performed each year in Poland, it is estimated that 80,000-200,000 illegal abortions are performed each year in the country. These are almost always performed by doctors who do know what they are doing, so there is no record of any women dying from illegal abortion (although this is notoriously difficult to keep track of). But, should you obtain an illegal abortion in Poland don't expect to be treated well, see any follow up care, or to pay anything other than a pretty penny for it. Doctors, in fact, have a vested interest in keeping abortion illegal because it is so lucrative.

Poland became a member of the European Union in 2004 and along with Ireland and Malta (where abortion is also illegal), the EU admitted Poland without asking for a change in the country's abortion policy. While the EU does not have an official stance on abortion, it has to the power to adopt one and to regulate abortion policies of member countries. Pro-choice forces throughout Europe hope to begin exploring the avenues available to address abortion policies at the EU level.

I highly recommend seeing Sarah Diehl's film, Abortion Democracy: Poland/South Africa. It brings real life, global examples to the political and ideological issues we often address when talking about abortion in our local, state and national context.

Filmmaker, Sarah Diehl is from Berlin, but will be touring the U.S. with her film in fall 2010 and is available to screen the film and host a discussion at your campus! For more information about setting up a screening on your campus this fall, contact FMF Campus Organizer, Allie McDonald at amcdonald@feminist.org or 310-556-2500.

Miscarriage is Murder in Utah

We have all heard of the numerous personhood initiatives that have been popping up all over the country; the argument that fetus' deserve full constitutional rights, the same as all Americans. I never thought I would see the day when something more radical, ridiculous and offensive (and to be honest...laughable) than the personhood initiatives...yet here we are.

The state legislature in Utah has actually passed a bill attempting to outlaw miscarriages. Let me rephrase. If you experience a miscarriage, which happens to be the result of 18-20% of all pregnancies, you can be charged with murder. The law, proposed by Sen. Margaret Dayton (a woman, i know, my heart bleeds) makes it possible for a woman to be charged with homicide and sentenced with up to life in prison if the miscarriage was determined to be the result of an "intentional, knowing, or reckless act" to end the pregnancy; every miscarriage is a potential homicide. (Jezebel)

The intent of this legislation is to hold accountable women who attempt or succeed at an "illegal abortion;" illegal abortion meaning the forced termination of a pregnancy by, for example, intentionally subjecting oneself to physical or bodily harm in attempt to force a miscarriage. While, yes, there have been cases similar to the one described, and no, that is not acceptable or appropriate behavior, the language of the law does not clearly explain its intent or limitations and creates a dangerous potential for abuse by anti-choicers.

For example, the term "reckless" has broad and potentially devastating implications, as if this law couldn't be described that way already. The term was added in a reaction to a case in which a woman hired a man to beat her to force a miscarriage, a case in which she could not be held accountable. Although not its intention, the use of this term opens up this law to apply to pregnant victims of domestic violence; if a pregnant woman chooses to stay in a relationship with a violent partner, and her pregnancy is prematurely terminated as the result of repeated abuse, she can be legally charged with homicide and serve up to life in prison (The Salt Lake Tribune). This is right on par with considering domestic violence a pre-existing condition.

The implications of this legislation moves far beyond the inclusion of the term "reckless," but this stands as one example of how the intentions of this law only skim the surface of its potential.

Although I disagree strongly with the anti-choice movement, I can at the very least respect their opinion (or at least their right to have one,);abortion and choice are controversial issues and there will always be those who disagree with me. However, this law takes anti-choice to a new level.

To assert that a miscarriage is not only a forced abortion, but is considered murder, is ludicrous and an opinion that does not only deserve respect but does not even deserve to be heard, let alone legitimized through state legislation.

The Anti-choice movement claims that their message and their goals keep women in mind and are 'empowering' for women of all ages (*cough* Sarah Palin). But jailing women for having a miscarriage is not only dis-empowering, but it is a clear and direct attack on women.

The law now goes to Governor Gary Herbert for final action

photocredit: debaird on Flickr

Where do they find these people???

Hello my fellow activist,

I found some videos that I would love to share with you. I feel that these serve as a reminder of the ignorance that is consuming much of the American population presently. We can definitely see that people are not doing their homework before protesting on these key issues. Ignorance, like this, is running rampant in our country today.


40 Days for Life is an anti-abortion organization whose campaigns encourage anti-abortion extremists to lay siege to Planned Parenthoods and other womyn's health care clinics across the country. Their next campaign will be running Feb. 17th through March 28th. 40daysforlife is their website where you can find out more information about their campaign and the exact clinics they will be demonstrating at - harassing patients, doctors and staff and distributing false information. I used this site as a guide to set up pro-choice counter protests and organized clinic defenses, so it can be used as a tool to fight injustice. If a clinic near you is on their target list, call the clinic and ask how you can help!

Stay tuned for the FMF's new Adopt-a-Clinic Campaign kit which can help guide your efforts to support your local women's health care providers.



This organization, God Hates Fags, promotes ignorance and intolerance with large public displays and deplorable slogans on their signs. God Hates Fags is their site that shows their schedule of hateful demonstrations and tactics. This also can be used as a tool to organize counter protests and organize community members around fighting this brand of intolerance and ignorance.

I hope that these videos and websites will not only fuel your passion to fight for social justice in America but also give you an idea of where to organize and focus your protest efforts. The time for action is now! Let's unite in solidarity and organize on campuses to show that we are pro-choice and pro-equality!

Frank Perez

Trusting Women

Perhaps you've heard about a little TV commercial coming up this Sunday during a certain football game. Planned Parenthood just released a video in response to the Focus on the Family spot in this clip below:



Via Jezebel.

The Other Terrorism

Daily Kos published a great piece on anti-abortion extremism and violence, called "The Other Terrorism". While you may be familiar with anti-abortion activities, extremism and violence - whether you've been following the trial of Scott Roeder for the murder of women's health care provider Dr. George Tiller, or have had to push your way through protesters when trying to get birth control at your local clinic, or have even seen anti-abortion displays on your campus - you may not have considered the anti-abortion movement's link to terrorism.

Yes, terrorism. No, not international terrorism, or Islamic terrorism - not the type of terrorism our politicians, news pundits and society just can't talk enough about. I'm talking about domestic terrorism.

To paraphrase, the term "domestic terrorism" encompasses activities that violate U.S. criminal law and intend to coerce or intimidate a population or change policy or law through coercion and intimidation.

The Daily Kos article critically examines the activities associated with the anti-abortion movement: from misinformation, propaganda and scare tactics, to death threats, bombings and murders. It all seems to fit the mold. So why don't we talk about anti-abortion extremism in terms of the terrorist network that it is?

The article reads:

"...the violence is condemned, but always with the qualification that these are 'difficult issues.'

What's so difficult? What makes this kind of terrorism different from the terrorism some think we can't talk about enough? When discussing international terrorism or "Islamic" terrorism, there is no equivocation. There is no acknowledgment of the "difficulty" of the issue. There is no consideration for the different "sides" and "feelings" in this "debate." You want to affect policy by killing and terrorizing people? You're a terrorist.

But if you want to affect abortion policy by killing and terrorizing people? Well, then, the most blatant acts of violence are to be condemned, of course, but always with the caveat that it's complicated."

I highly recommend reading "The Other Terrorism" and giving it some thought. In the days to come, with the trial of Scott Roeder for the murder of Dr. George Tiller underway you can expect to read a lot more on this topic here and at www.feminist.org.

From Kim Gandy: Stop CBS From Airing Anti-Abortion Super Bowl Ad

Kim Gandy, FMF's new Vice President (and former President of NOW), writes:

Even as the trial continues for the murder of Dr. George Tiller, CBS is planning to air an anti-abortion ad during this weekend's Super Bowl game.

Tell CBS that this is no time to feed the anger and hatred of anti-abortion extremists.

CBS has a stated policy to reject all ads it deems controversial, including ads from MoveOn.org, PETA, and even the United Church of Christ, which dared to suggest that their church would model tolerance ("Jesus Didn't Turn People Away. Neither Do We").

In fact, CBS execs told the United Church of Christ that CBS rejects any ad that "touches on and/or takes a position on one side of a current controversial issue of public importance."

Although the ad itself is secret, Focus on the Family's own publicity indicates that it will "take a position on one side of a current controversial issue." The ad reportedly focuses on quarterback Tim Tebow and his mother, alleging that Tebow's mother was urged to have an abortion for medical reasons but did not. The implicit suggestion that pregnant women whose health is at risk shouldn't worry because nothing bad will happen is downright dangerous, even if the story is true.

The Super Bowl audience, one of the largest of any event, spans all ages and political positions, and should not be used to promote an anti-abortion message.

And why would CBS promote a clearly controversial message from Focus on the Family? That organization uses their millions to promote discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs - they even ran a campaign before the 2008 elections equating the U.S. with Nazi Germany!

Tell CBS that using the public airwaves to promote an anti-abortion message will lose the network both respect and business.

For Equality,

Kim Gandy
Vice President

Never Before seen Tiller Interview

Released byPhysicians for Reproductive Choice and Health, there is no better day to remember Tiller than on the 37th anniversary of Roe v Wade and the first day of his murder trial.