USA, USA, USA: Second in Child Poverty among "Developed Countries"

For real, the US ranks second above Latvia, Bulgaria, Spain, Greece, and 29 other countries. Romania is the only country to rank above us on this list. I have some problems with the language, particularly "developed", but the fact remains that this was put out by UNICEF so it is pretty complete. We outrank countries on life support like Greece...

The US has 23.1 percent of out children living in poverty. This refers to the relative poverty rate of children living in households where disposable income is less than half of the national median income. Some critics cite issue with this term and the definition. Of course the measurement has some weaknesses: children's well-being don't always correspond to their guardians' income and comparing relative poverty rates don't make sense unless the countries have similar median incomes. The researchers provided a list of 14 items found in most middle-class households and counted the number of children whose families couldn't afford them.

This was flawed too, but the end result for me is that we allow children to remain in poverty, we continue to force their guardians off welfare, and cut social benefit programs. We just accept that children live in poverty, or we just don't care at all, or perhaps worst of all we just don't know.

DC Residents 1: Representative Franks 0

Because legislating the reproductive rights of women in his own state wasn't enough, Representative Trent Franks (Az.) proposed a 20-week abortion ban in the District. He then barred DC's pro-choice female delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton from speaking out against the measure. You know, because he's a tool.

DC residents then decided to bring all municipal complaints to Franks, and they've taken to calling him "Mayor." Seriously, rats to potholes to metro issues, DC residents have descended on him instead of DC's government.

This appears to be a joint effort between the Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington DC and a group DC Vote, which wants to secure representation for DC in Congress. Thus far about 50 DC residents have taken to Representative Franks with suggestions on how to make the city a better place.

Franks has yet to admit how ridiculous it is that a man from Arizona is trying to legislate reproductive rights of women in the District. Franks claims it isn't about Arizona, DC, or women, instead, "the pain of the fetus."

District residents 1: Representative Franks 0

California farm workers are being sexually harassed on the job

Collect yourselves, I know the shock of this is difficult for you.

Human Rights Watch recently released a report on sexual harassment and exploitation of female farm workers in the US. Most people who are interested in this field aren't surprised at all by the findings.

Farm laborers are vulnerable to exploitation because of what can only be described as a perfect storm of factors. According to the Department of Labor statistics about 50% of the farm laborers are undocumented migrant laborers. Additionally, they are young, 20-24, and many do not speak English. Assuming victims of harassment or assault get as far as reporting they would need a translator to report the crime. These laborers tend to live on the property of their employers and live in poverty. This contributes to the exploitative nature of the employee/employer relationship. Additionally, those with guest worker visas are at the mercy of their employers who are able to decide when they have to leave the country. This contributes to the victims being unwilling to seek assistance.

Marginalized groups are more vulnerable to sexual assault and abuse. This population has specific fears and concerns surrounding deportation and losing their employment.

Now seems to be the time to reference VAWA, which as you know a version of this passed the House, but stripped out protections for immigrants...gee, I wonder why they needed the protections in the first place. Also, there is controversy about a farm bill which would protect child workers. It has been a while, so things may have changes a bit, but I'm pretty sure this was dropped without a fight at all by the Dems.

Yet again with the mind-numbing depressing posts. The article I read on this argued for food politics. Not buying etc. But I'd rather just see women protected by law. Silly me.

VAWA: Fail

The House of Representatives passed a VAWA bill on May 16, which grossly compromises the law and leaves many victims without protection from domestic and sexual violence.

For those of you who don't know, VAWA is the federal law that provides legal protections and services to women, men, and children who are victims of domestic and sexual violence and stalking. It supports rape crisis centers, temporary housing for survivors, and programs to address violence against people with disabilities. It has also provided protections for immigrants confronting violence.

So, the Senate passed the bill (S. 1925) with a vote 68 to 31, and the House bill (H.R. 4970), which contained different provisions passed 222 to 205. Vice President Biden has called for Congress to pass a bipartisan bill without rolling back any protections.

A few positive changes came from the House floor, it provides for sweeping changes to the current legal protections for immigrant victims of sexual and domestic violence. The House bill would change the requirements for abused immigrant spouses of US citizens and permanent residents to apply for immigration status. Also, the accused abuser would receive information about the spouse's immigration status. So you know, the government would deport the victims of abuse. Happy Christmas wife beating tools.

This bill also reeks havoc on the U visa program. The House bill only provides a small subsection of crime victims the opportunity to adjust their legal status after their temporary visa expires. The House bill also rejected amendments that would specifically protect LGBTQ individuals. The Senate bill maintains the current protections for immigrant victims and make a limited number of additional U visas available. It would also restore Native American tribal courts; criminal jurisdictions over domestic violence. Currently, those fall outside of both tribal and state courts, but are rarely prosecuted by federal authorities.

So someone tell me again how the US is has not declared war on women?

http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/05/17/us-house-vote-step-backward-women-s-rights

Women: Remain the cause of all evil

Yeah, so I can't watch all of this video. I just can't I fly into a blinding rage, and no one should have to endure that the eve of a friend's wedding. Lest, I mock and horrify all her guests, which is still a possibility. 


Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson gave a 12 minute lecture about how women have destroyed America. Now, I know you're thinking who and does he know you personally? But no. He's corespondent over at Fox (take a minute, stop laughing and collect yourself). Peterson specifically says giving women the vote was, "one of the created mistakes that America made." He continues to talk about how confused women are:

“Look at every place where a women is in control,” said Peterson. “You see nothing but confusion. There’s no good in it at all, none.”

This may come as a shock to you, but give me power, and confusion doesn't follow. Also, Lady Woman Person H-Rod is doing alright. More of the awesomely bat shit crazy quotes:

PETERSON: “I think that one of the greatest mistakes that America made was to allow women the opportunity to vote. We should have never turned that over to women.” 

“It was a big mistake…these women are voting in the wrong people. They’re voting in people who are evil, who agree with them…Men in the good old days understood the nature of the women, they were not afraid to deal with them.” 

“Wherever women are taking over, evil reigns.”

Yeah, sometimes I miss the days where men kept their women in line too through violence, wait, no. I also like that women voting for their own interests is somehow bad, and the assumption that men make great decisions. It is also worth noting that Peterson is a racist as well believing slavery was a good thing because otherwise Black people would have stayed in Africa. Also, Katrina was good because the victims were on welfare, lazy, and immoral. We can understand this to mean poor. 


So essentially, Peterson hates women, Black people, poor people, the continent of Africa, and I'm sure many, many more. I don't know about you, but I'll be causing some evil this weekend. 

Student Loan Debt and Congress

The Senate rejected the motion to proceed to legislation that would keep federal student loan interest rates from doubling. The vote was 52-45; they needed 60 votes to move to a debate on the legislation. Democrats and Republicans were unable to reach a deal to prevent a GOP filibuster.

So now, no one really knows what is happening in respect to moving forward. However, Congress would have to take action or the rates will rise from 3.5% to 6.8% on July 1.

President Obama is trying to use this issue against Republicans, but the Senate's refusal to move on the legislation makes it harder. Obama has threatened to veto a measure that would keep interest rates static, which has already passed the House. Obama supports extending low interest loans, and opposes the GOP cuts to preventive care funds from the healthcare law, which is how House Republicans want to pay for this measure.

So now, the Republicans and Democrats are playing politics per the usual. All and all, I think this is a clear depiction why nothing will ever happen in Congress, and how their constituents get screwed.

We love our free labor

Part of capitalism is to exploitative. There is really nothing that can be done about that; frequently it manifests as a race to the bottom of the labor market. Corporations set up factories with relaxed labor law or in countries where they can pay very little.

So while, Ohio and Wisconsin are beating back anti-labor bills and laws, we have a resurgence of sweatshop of course I'm referring to those abroad, but also state side. However, LaborNotes (Steve Fraser and Joshua Freeman) did a piece on prison labor. The privatization of the prisons has resulted in a host of various concerns and issues, but they have also provided a group of workers who have been coerced and have no rights.

The Corrections Corporation of American and G4S, two prison privatizers, sell labor to the likes of Chevron, Bank of American, AT&T, and IBM. This labor is provided for below minimum wage. In many states these companies are able to lease factories in prisons and prisoners to work outside. The prisoners make furniture, work in calls centers, taking hotel reservations, working in slaughterhouses, etc. They get paid between .93 and 4.73 per day.

The prisoners are easy to control and have no political rights. Prison labor provides companies with an opportunity to depress costs, prevent bankruptcies, deflation, etc. The article provides a historical background on prison labor, how it has changed, and not changed.

Prison labor have no rights and civil liberties, stripped of the right to vote, the right to protest and organize. Additionally, these companies are benefiting from government subsides and tax incentives so they can make use of prison labor.

The US imprisons 2.3 million people; we have the highest incarceration rate in the world. As a result of companies moving more and more toward using labor abroad has resulted in workers (specifically African American workers) are having trouble getting by. Corporations then realized that prison labor would be cheap and in their own backyard.

Prison labor is bad for labor in general; it allows employers to drive down wages. Anyway, we know that when able corporations will choice to exploit people, whether in prison or not. Additionally, we also recognize that when laborers are unable to organize the employers will exploit them. All of this means, that if we do not see prisoners are less than human they should be entitled to the same rights as free citizens. That being said with "right to work" and the anti-labor bills popping up everywhere, perhaps we're glimpsing into the future where no one has labor rights and civil liberties.

Angry Rant and a Sincere Thank You to the DC Police

I should first disclose that I do not have all the facts. But what I do know is am I livid, and this is distracting me from work and my thesis.

Last night, my friend was followed home. She was walking alone in DC (Columbia Heights specifically), and 7 men (though I use the term very loosely) decided to follow her. She didn't realize they were until a police lady stopped her and offered her a ride home. During this, the men stopped walking and waited for the officer to leave my friend.

My friend could have been killed. While sexual assault is an everyday reality for many women, the potential is there, haven't you heard about rape culture? Be afraid, hide under the covers. This was not that. This was potentially anti-trans violence.

I don't have figures on the violence focused on trans persons within DC. I know the figures are bad, and that it is coming out of neighborhoods that are gentrifying quickly. Of course, that is not to imply causation, but a descriptive statement.

To live in that kind of fear just because you express who you are and that happens to deviate from conventional standards is horrifying.

That all being said, I feel compelled to say thank you to the DC police department and that officer specifically. A lot of people wouldn't have stopped given the general dislike and disinterest in trans people.

Santorum, make the best of a bad situation.

I am so happy someone did this:

Rick Santorum Aborts Presidential Campaign from Ashley Judd      

ALEC Renews Commitment to Hate Workers, but Drops Everything Else

I thought the boys over at Train of Thought were going to do this, but they haven't so let's do this.

As my friend, or someone who barely knows me, well ok, anyone who met me on the street would know I am opposed to ALEC...and if you were ever going to speak to me, you better know what ALEC is. But for first time players: what ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) is according to their website:

"The American Legislative Exchange Council works to advance the fundamental principles of free-market enterprise, limited government, and federalism at the state level through a nonpartisan public-private partnership of America's state legislators, members of the private sector and the general public."

Well first, I don't think you can trust anyone who doesn't use the Oxford comma. Additionally, the term federalism, I'm guessing they are embracing post-Civil War federalism, "the federal government is too big (runs sobbing from the room)."

Need more information? These are the people who brought to the anti-labor legislation that reads almost exactly the same from Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, and several others. They also brought you voter registration/ID laws and "kill at will." No end to the fun with these guys. But that is all about to change. Below is a press release from this week explaining how ALEC will be dropping all other "causes" and focusing on labor.
                                                                                                                                                                               

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Kaitlyn Buss
Phone: 202-742-8526
Email: kbuss@alec.org 

ALEC Sharpens Focus on Jobs, Free Markets and Growth — Announces the End of the Task Force that Dealt with Non-Economic Issues

(Washington, D.C.) April 17, 2012—David Frizzell, Indiana State Representative and 2012 National Chairman of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), issued the following statement today on behalf of ALEC’s Legislative Board of Directors:

“Today we are redoubling our efforts on the economic front, a priority that has been the hallmark of our organization for decades. Fostering the exchange of pro-growth, solutions-oriented ideas is precisely why ALEC exists.

“To that end, our legislative board last week unanimously agreed to further our work on policies that will help spur innovation and competitiveness across the country.

“We are refocusing our commitment to free-market, limited government and pro-growth principles, and have made changes internally to reflect this renewed focus.

“We are eliminating the ALEC Public Safety and Elections task force that dealt with non-economic issues, and reinvesting these resources in the task forces that focus on the economy. The remaining budgetary and economic issues will be reassigned.

“While we recognize there are other critical, non-economic issues that are vitally important to millions of Americans, we believe we must concentrate on initiatives that spur competitiveness and innovation and put more Americans back to work.

“Our free-market, limited government, pro-growth policies are the reason ALEC enjoys the support of legislators on both sides of the aisle and in all 50 states. ALEC members are interested in solutions that put the American economy back on track. This is our mission, and it is what distinguishes us.”

###

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is the nation’s largest nonpartisan individual membership association of state legislators, with over 2,000 state legislators across the nation and more than 100 alumni members in Congress. ALEC’s mission is to promote free markets, limited government, and federalism throughout the states.

                                                                                                                                                                                      

Well hell, son. Part of me did the hell fuckin' yes. Then I took a moment to realize some of the damage has already been done, and they are suiting up for an all out assault on labor.

What damage? Voter reg/ID laws are being voted on in several states (yes Virginia, including Ohio). These laws target the poor, women, trans people, people of color, you know my homies. And we've all witnessed "kill at will" in Florida with the Martin murder.

I can't speculate what is going to come out of this of course, because A) I can't even pretend to be evil enough to anticipate the anti-work legislation they will come up with and B) there is no promise that some of their previous legislation will die. We know Walker and Kasich chatted daily over their anti-worker bills, so there is no reason to believe once this garbage is out in the world that it will ever stop. I imagine awful people will continue sharing awful legislation.

An Actual Right to Work Outside the Home or In It?

Thank you, Ann Romney. As a lifelong supporter of a woman's right to choice and labor, I feel that I owe her that much. I scoffed and rolled my eyes with every other feminist in the US when this whole "stay-at-home-moms-work" recognizing much to my frustration what this was about wasn't that labor inside the home being recognized as labor, but instead a nothing issue being made into something bigger. And it is quite simple, if we recognized feminized labor within the home as labor then domestic laborers would be paid a living wage and be able to unionize (I'm looking at you labor who as specifically excluded these workers) and perhaps more relevant to this: welfare mothers would no longer be forced into "workfare".

The WORK Act (The Women's Option to Raise Kids) was proposed by a few Democrats to allow welfare mothers to stay at home and raise their children. Under the current law, raising your own children does not count as labor, raising someone else's does though, but raising your own does not qualify you for TANF benefits. Some states have made exceptions for mothers with children under a year old. But I'm not aware of any state that doesn't enforce the rules about losing benefits if you have more children while receiving cash assistance.

This Act would allow mothers with children under age 3 to stay home with her children and continue receiving benefits. The Act is a direct result from the Ann Romney drama. President Obama and Candidate Romney emphasized how they feel that women who stay home with their children work. To which Representative Pete Stark (D-Calif) pointed out is unfair to have a different standard for low-income women. You don't say Stark? Stark told the Huffington Post:

"Mitt Romney was for forcing mothers into the workforce because he decided that 'all moms are working moms. I think we should take Mr. Romney as his most recent word and change our federal laws to recognize the importance and legitimacy of raising young children. That's why I'm introducing the WORK Act to provide low-income parents the option of staying home to raise young children without fear of being pushed into poverty."

Ok, so that isn't true, but I'm kind of with you in spirit. Welfare recipients live under the poverty line anyway or only above it through fancy accounting, but hell if I'm going to look a gift horse in the mouth.

The WORK Act wouldn't level the playing field. Women would be sent right back into the workforce when their children turned 4. In 1994, Romney agreed with this,

"Once there are no preschoolers at home parents should work to receive welfare support. A child needs to see firsthand the dignity of work."

Guess being a stay-at-home-mom isn't work after 4 years old. Then again, it is so hard to tell because in 2002, Governor Romney said:

"I wanted to increase the work requirement. I said, for instance, that even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work. And people said, 'Well, that's heartless.' And I said, 'No, no, I'm willing to spend more giving day care to allow those parents to go back to work. It'll cost the state more providing day care, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work."

Well, now I'm confused, but I've given up understanding these idiots a long time ago.

The supports of the WORK Act: Reps. John Lewis (D-Ga), Gwen Moore (D-Wis), Jim McDermott (D-Wash), Lynn Woosley (D-Calif), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill), and Rose DeLauro (D-Conn).

I haven't actually seen the bill yet. I only got word before I left work yesterday that this was even happening, and then Allison posted the HuffPo link. My preliminary thoughts are:

• Not a chance in hell this passes.
• If it did pass, would the years receiving benefits count against the maximum number of years you can receive benefits? 
• Reproductive restrictions in place, would they remain? Or could women have children while receiving benefits?
• The article makes it sound specific to women, are single fathers not afforded the same rights?

Movie Review: Brothers on the Line

I give Brothers on the Line 5/5, I mean to say it raised the bar on films about labor.

So the it was a film about the Reuther brothers and their commitment to the labor cause. The film discusses the brothers' efforts as labor organizers and social justice activists. Also, of course their leadership during in the United Auto Workers union. It was directed by Sasha Reuther, grandson of Victor, and narrated by Martin Sheen. The film followed the brothers from the 1930s to through their leadership in the international labor movement and civil rights movement. It employs archive footage, personal photos, oral histories, and original interviews. 

Naturally, the film had flaws, but they are small in respect to the potential impact of the film. I highly recommend anyone who has the chance to see this film. Added bonus the film included the song, "Which Side Are You On?" by various artists throughout the film. Below is my favorite. 

The film is incredibly timely given the anti-labor situations rising up in Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, and many others. Here's hoping someone other than me and other pro-labor faction saw it. 

Equal Pay Day!

Women don't receive the same pay for the same work as men. And as men love to tell me it is because of the choices we make and now women are getting the jobs they aren't. We're going to look at both of these assertions.

Legitimately, the articles I've seen on the pay gap today are a little skewed. 50 years since the Equal Pay Act was signed by Kennedy (1963), the wage gap has only changed half-cent per year. Women only make 77 cents for every dollar men make. This is raced and classes. What this means is women on average per men on average. The pay gap is much narrower between white educated men and women and likewise between black women and men, but the pay gap between Latina women and white men is vast. That is not to say that the pay gap between white men and women is unimportant, just to qualify what this kind of information means.

Yes, men and women make different decisions, but other times not so much. For example, given the attacks on reproductive choice and a return to "traditional" values leaves women with less choice. Women are expected to choice career or family and then take the consequences like lower pay or time off from their careers. This reminds us of the whole "motherhood debate" that we're dealing with again. Care work performed in the home is not considered real work, this translates to the low wages we pay care workers, but also women finding these choices difficult. More and more this is less of an issue just for women, men are choosing to be stay at home dads. Of course race and class comes into play as well. Poor people do not have either of these options.

Additionally, the research does not support the "mancession."It just doesn't. But I'll humor this discussion anyway. If we take this as true, women are being hired at a higher rate than men because of the recession, shouldn't we address the fact that companies are seeking low-wage labor? Pay equity is totes difficult to prove, just ask Lilly Ledbetter. While her situation resulted in a federal law, she didn't actually win the federal case, though she did win in the states.

The reality is unequal pay is a symptom, not the whole problem. The larger problem is sexism, classism, racism, etc.

Book Politics: A Literary Smackdown

So there is no Pulitzer Prize winner in fiction this year. Book politics. 

No seriously, the book world is having a rough year, or several. Recently, the DOJ files a suit against publishers who were trying to stall an Amazon e-book monopoly. 

This doesn't necessarily mean that there was no good fiction produced during 2011, this isn't true actually. The Pulitzer Prize is the best literary award for American fiction; it holds an amount of prestige internationally as well. Readers take the Pulitzer seriously so I cannot stress it's importance enough. That being said, it is a literary award, and thus fairly political. 

Laura Miller discussed her experience on the jury two years ago.

I can tell you that choosing the winner of the Pulitzer Prize for fiction is a two-tier process, a fact that even people well-versed in the literary world tend to forget.

The first tier is the jury’s selection. Three jurors (usually an academic, a critic and a fiction writer) are responsible for wading through huge boxfuls of books. Anyone can submit his or her book to the Pulitzer competition for a small fee, and believe me: anyone does. We got hundreds and hundreds of them, including many self-published novels with titles like “The Bikinis of Alpha Centauri,” most of which read as if they’d been run through Google Translate into Farsi and then run back again into English before being committed to print. 

From the many submissions, the jury picks three titles to recommend to the Pulitzer Board, and the board picks the actual winner, as well as selecting the winners of all the other Pulitzer Prizes. The board does have the option to select a title not on the jury’s list, but it rarely does so nowadays.

Miller mentions that the Pulitzer Board often consists of journalists, professors and others who rarely have time to read fiction. 

This year the three novels selected were: Swamplandia by Karen Russell, Train Dreams by Denis Johnson, and The Pale King by David Foster Wallace. The group couldn't reach a majority on any of these title. They also probably didn't read enough fiction to make a different choice. 

The more concerning part of Miller's argument is that if these people represent US public opinion of literature, then we're in trouble. The reality is that the Pulitzer is picked by people who don't spend their lives emerged in fiction so they have limited time. I'm hoping the US public spends more time on literature. 

Planned Parenthood Video

Cleveland Schools II: Update

This is what happens when I try to blog in advance.

Thursday evening the Cleveland Plain Dealer is reporting that the Cleveland Teachers Union and Mayor Frank Jackson have come to a deal on the disputed provisions of Jackson's school plan. This agreement overcomes a major obstacle cited by legislators earlier this week.

Jackson and the teachers' union came to a compromise after several weeks of negotiations. It will change the contractual rules governing teacher assignments, seniority, pay, evaluation, layoff and recall that gives the districts more flexibility. Lawmakers were backing the plan, but unions were threatening to oppose the measure. The union, district officials, and Jackson said that the negotiated agreement will benefit students.

The teachers' union said that the agreement is far from perfect, but it offers the possibility for better education for students. The plan has support from politicians and business leaders within Cleveland.

As part of the agreement Jackson dropped the "fresh start" provision, throwing out the previous contracts and starting over in the next round of contract negotiations. The provision would allow the district to impose terms of a new contract if sides could not come to an agreement. The union had objected to this because of it's similarities to Senate Bill 5.

In addition to the aspects concerning teachers, Jackson's plan aims to improve education by partnering with the high-performing charter schools, preventing poor charters from opening, passing a tax increase, and allowing successful district schools with more autonomy. Hears in the measure could start as soon as next week.

Cleveland Schools Part II

The Ohio Board of Education rejected Gov. Kasich's plea that the panel endorse Mayor Jackson's plan for fixing Cleveland's schools. The Board is asking for a "collaborative" and "bipartisan" fix. The 19-member boarded debated for more then an hour and then agreed to strip any reference to Jackson's plan. They unanimously passed a resolution encouraging the mayor, lawmakers, teachers, and others to work together on a plan to improve student performance and financial woes.

The resolution doesn't actually supply any suggestions for what a plan might look like. However Mary Rose Oakar, a board member, said, "It [the resolution] says that people should cooperate, which didn't happen in the beginning."

The Board wants to improve Cleveland schools, but they don't agree with Jackson's plan and don't want to appear to be endorsing the plan. A large complaint was the lack of teacher involvement in the plan. Ann Jacobs, a Lima board member, said, "I don't think it's appropriate to impose something upon the stakeholders when the input of the stakeholders."

As previously mention, Jackson's plan would allow the district to fire ineffective teachers, share local tax revenue with privately operated charter schools, expand preschools to all 4-year-olds in the district, and lengthen the school day or year to give students more time to learn. Originally, Jackson didn't include teachers, parents, and others in his planning process. Currently, Jackson is negotiating with teachers and the teacher union, the Ohio Federation of Teachers, over aspects of the plan which deal with collective-bargaining rights.

Jackson's plan was praised by Kasich, because it is like SB 5 lite. Ohio voters overturned Kasich's anti-union legislation so now they are trying to do the same thing on a smaller level where it won't be voted on by the public.

The Mommy Wars Part II: Let's talk about women's work

So the Internet is freaking out, and yet again I feel like we're having conversations we've already covered thirty years ago. Take up arms to defend your decisions ladies. Working moms vs. Stay at home moms. Bad moms who leave their children vs. Women who don't understand the value and pressure of work. Women who pay other women to raise their children vs. Women who have never worked a day in their lives.

Yeah, its the 80s, well at this rate we'll be in the 90s by summer. Who's ready for Riot Grrrrl? Alright, I'll summarize the dramas, and then get into the actual issues.

Ann Romney was attacked by Hilary Rosen, Democratic strategist, for being a stay at home mother; Rosen said that because Ann Romney has never worked she shouldn't be consulted on topics such as the economy by Mitt Romney.

"Guess what, his wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She's never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school, and why do we worry about their future."

Rosen, who everyone is stressing has no ties to Obama but H-Rod instead, went on to say Romney,

"seems so old-fashioned when it comes to women, and I think that comes across, and I think that's going to hurt him over the long term. He just doesn't really see us as equal."

Ann then took to twitter, and the Internet died a little. Ann defended herself and her decisions to raise 5 children at home instead of entering the work force,

"I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work."

This is all happening when Mitt Romney and President Obama are trying to convince the American people who's politics will be better for working women (slightly Obama, because Romney is a conservative, and thus his labor policies will blow). Naturally, Obama is running from Rosen's remarks; Obama's campaign manager, Jim Messina went so far as to encourage Rosen to apologize for her offensive comments.

Rosen has of course commented again and again since this all begin. Finally, she says she admires Ann Romney, but emphasizes her point that Ann is not an expert on the economy and Mitt shouldn't reference her as one.

Alright, things to note:

Women have been working forever [draw it out like Squints]. Seriously, women of color have worked always, and usually taking care of white women's children. Staying home isn't an option for some women. There is theory here, on the double day, women's second shift, etc. Of course domestic labor theory as well surrounding waged and unwaged labor, and the value placed on feminized labor, but I'm not going to get into too much detail because that's not really what we're talking about.

We're talking about a upper-class white woman staying home to take care of her kids, cool, yeah you. And another woman who doesn't see childcare as work, but it is, and should be waged labor. So this is really second wave feminism drawing largely on Friedan's Feminine Mystique. But I have a sneaky suspicion Rosen is referring to working class women who can't afford childcare or to stay home so they pay an obscene amount for mediocre childcare, rely on support systems, or extended family, which draws us toward classism and theory, Marx (who sucks on women), and welfare and race theory, Hill Collins and hooks. However, I can't follow her logic because Ann Romney doesn't know about that, but domestic labor is still labor no matter who does it, and H-Rod and Michelle Obama didn't face down those concerns as working mothers either if she was implying Obama could consult Michelle.

There is a stigma around motherhood and work. As mentioned at the top of this post: no one walks away un-judged. Maybe we should all be working a little harder on solidarity as women for mothers? Create situations, provide good childcare so women can choose to stay at home or work, you know to do what the feel is right for them?

Feel the privilege....

Am I pregnant? Maybe in Arizona

I read about this last week and decided there was no possible way this would pass, but I was wrong. Sad face. Tuesday afternoon, Arizona lawmakers passed three anti-abortion bills including one bill that declared pregnancies actually start two weeks before conception. In case there was any doubt this is a Republican controlled House of Representatives.

The bills:

• Prohibits abortions after the 18th week of pregnancy;
• Protects doctors from being sued if they withhold health information about the pregnancy that could cause a women to seek an abortion; and
• A bill to mandate how school curriculum address the topic of unwanted pregnancies.

All the bills were passed the Senate and are headed to Governor Jan Brewer (show us your papers woman). The 18th week bill defines when pregnancy begins, and it gives Arizona the earliest definition of late-term abortion in the country. Most states have a 20 week definition. 

This bill defines gestational age as "calculated from the first day of the last menstrual period of the pregnant woman." So pregnancy would begin up to two weeks prior to conception. This stems from a doctors inability to determine the exact date of conception, so they use the last menstrual period to gauge the duration of pregnancy.

Let's be clear, they are reducing access to abortions. 

One of the bills that passed is called "wrongful birth, wrongful life." I kind of love this bill's title; it protects doctors against lawsuits when they don't provide information about the fetus' health when it could lead to abortion. The parents can't sue on the child's behalf after birth either. Digest that for a minute. 

The last bill pushes for schools to push for birth and adoption as the acceptable outcomes for unwanted pregnancies. Brewer hasn't commented on the bills yet, but she has a long time commitment to the pro-life cause. 

So yet again unborn babies trump women in the hierarchy of what/who have their rights protected.