NEWSBYKENDALL MCKENZIE

Last Thursday the New York City Council held a historic hearing to discuss the incredibly pervasive problem of street harassment toward girls and women – the first time a major U.S. city has addressed this issue.

Over fourteen community members and representatives of groups like Hollaback!, Girls for Gender Equity, NYC-NOW, and RightRides, among others, testified at the hearing, including our own Mandy Van Deven, telling personal stories and appealing to council members to tackle the problem. Hollaback!’s Emily May proposed a ten year plan, beginning with a citywide study on the impact of street harassment, as well as the implementation of public education campaigns and “harassment-free zones” around schools.  Council member and chair of the Committee on Women’s Issues Julissa Ferresas organized and led the meeting, which received incredible amounts of press coverage – an encouraging sign that citizens and lawmakers are beginning to take the issue seriously.

As a woman who lives in NYC and experiences harassment on a daily basis – from leers to groping to comments to hisses to being followed, spit on, and threatened with violence, murder, and rape (yes, really) – I must say: it’s about time. One of the most prevalent tools of patriarchal social control, street harassment is difficult to combat because it’s often dismissed as harmless, boys-will-be-boys shenanigans, or even complimentary. But as May pointed out, it's really a “gateway crime,” and the acceptance and normalization of catcalling creates a culture where men feel entitled to sexualized interactions with any woman at any time. A culture where the public sphere is exclusively male territory, forcing women inside just to feel safe. A culture of rape and violence against women.

Tea Party Republican and seasoned forced-pregnancy activist Missy Smith is running for Washington D.C.’s shadow congressional seat against Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), a strangely bold move considering beating a progressive incumbent in the majorly Democratic District is pretty much impossible. Smith is even running against the wishes of the D.C. GOP (who objected to her campaign because it fails to address any issue besides abortion), leading some to suspect her intentions are more about cheaply airing unregulated "shocking" anti-choice propaganda than actually getting elected.

They're right.

In a letter to the anti-choice community, Smith admits she is "running for Congress with the express purpose of running political ads on TV of graphic pictures of healthy and dead babies," as well as compelling supporters to "dig deep into their pockets and give until it hurts, as Mother Teresa would say." Randall Terry, famous anti-choice terrorist, longtime Smith associate, and current "volunteer campaign manager," appears to have orchestrated her candidacy and freely revealed the true objective of this scheme last year.

The ads supposedly began airing in D.C. on Monday, and while one was already pulled from YouTube for violating community guidelines, television stations say they're legally required to run the spots unedited.  The ads feature bootleggy slideshows of babies and "aborted" fetuses, one with Missy lamenting: "I killed two of my babies by abortion. I was told, 'it's not a baby.' They lied. They exploited me. Then I learned the truth, and I have suffered for years."

"Dear ladies, if you’ve had sex before, you can't be raped! You're probably faking it anyways because you're just mad about that abortion you allegedly had. Vote for me, Ken Buck!"

No thanks, buddy.

The upcoming election has brought us some seriously sexist stuff, and it looks like the trend is continuing. GOP Senate candidate Ken Buck didn't say those exact words, but he came close. Buck is in a bit of a pickle over his refusal as a Weld County District Attorney to prosecute an obvious rape case in 2006, along with offensive comments he made about the victim.

The victim had asked a former lover over to her apartment because she was intoxicated and scared. He arrived and raped her while she, slipping in and out of consciousness, said “no” and tried pushing him away. Despite the fact that both the victim and suspect agree upon what happened and police recommended prosecution, Buck publicly called the case facts “pitiful” and claimed that, due to their consensual sexual encounters over a year prior, reasonable juries would see this as a case of "buyer’s remorse." In a private meeting with the victim, Buck lays blame squarely on her shoulders, telling her, “It would appear to me that you invited him over to have sex with him. Whether that you, at that time, were conscious enough to say yes or no … the appearance is of consent.”

The imagery that springs to mind when we think about abortion is typically pretty bleak. Coat hangers, screaming protesters, and other symbols of struggle and tragedy have come to be associated with the evolution of reproductive rights.

4000 Years for Choice works to transform this narrative from cautionary and solemn to “personal, positive, and powerful,” with colorful posters celebrating various milestones in the age-old effort to prevent and terminate pregnancies. And for those who mistakenly think that controlling reproduction is strictly a modern issue relevant only in this post-Roe v. Wade era, the 4000 Years for Choice timeline, which begins around 3000 BCE, provides a thoroughly enlightening history of abortion and contraception. Artist and creator Heather Ault says the three goals of the project are to produce broader symbols of choice, illustrate the natural role of reproductive control in all previous societies, and celebrate and reclaim the women’s health clinics around which much of the modern abortion debate is centered.

4000 Years for Choice kicked off earlier this year as a response to 40 Days for Life, an ongoing harassment campaign during which anti-choice bullies really crank up the abuse juice on reproductive health centers. Ault sent postcard versions of the posters to clinics targeted by 40 DFL, seeking to counter anti-choice persecution with supportive messages celebrating reproductive rights. 4000 Years for Choice continues through the late summer, coinciding with the second 40 DFL event this year which began on September 22.

Earlier this month, the FBI arrested freedom-hating terrorist Justin Carl Moose, 26, for his alleged assistance in a plot to blow up a North Carolina women’s health clinic.

The investigation began after Planned Parenthood employees alerted the FBI to Moose’s Facebook page, which was riddled with anti-choice hate speech encouraging and celebrating violence against reproductive health care providers. Some sample nuggets of wingnuttery, via the FBI affidavit:

Save a life, shoot an abortionist.

Make a bomb and light the fuse, another Hero in the news. The monster dead, with hole in head. His end was made and babies were saved.

…Calling all Tim McVeighs and Eric Rudolphs! We must take the war to the enemies of freedom and retaliate with all due force.

I have learned a lot from the Muslim terrorists and I have no problems using their tactics. People say sarcastically ‘what’s the difference between a Christian terrorist and an Islamic terrorist?’ I tell them simply that I’m right and I serve a living God! THAT’S the difference. [emphasis added]

Supplementing Moose’s compassionate Facebook musings was a tribute video to murderers of reproductive health providers called “Hey Man Nice Shot,” as well as thorough instructions for concocting the same explosive used in the 2005 London subway attacks. One of his more curious threats involved an “Oklahoma City-style” removal of the proposed “mosque” at Ground Zero, which seems a bit counterintuitive for a dude who simultaneously brags about emulating Talibani leaders and tactics. Moose is a self-proclaimed member of the homophobic and anti-choice domestic terrorist group Army of God, and he refers to himself as “the Christian counterpart to Osama Bin Laden."

A Molotov cocktail was chucked through the window of a Madera, CA, Planned Parenthood medical center on Sept. 2nd, in the first incident of violence this particular office has seen during its 20 years of existence. (Thankfully, nobody was injured.) The area experienced similar vandalism one week prior when broken windows and signs bearing hate speech were discovered at a local mosque. A group calling themselves the American Nationalist Brotherhood (ANB) has claimed responsibility for both attacks, and the FBI is investigating.

Sheriff of Madera John Anderson rightly denounced these vile, anti-American hate crimes as terrorism and promised to show no mercy in punishing the responsible individuals to the fullest extent of the law … haha, just kidding. In the most laughably offensive, insulting, pandering statement I’ve ever read, Anderson basically pleads with the terrorists to set up a lunch with him so we can all hug it out: "The fact that there have been numerous messages directed at several organizations makes it difficult to interpret ANB's true message.  I would like for ANB or a representative to contact me directly by whatever means is most comfortable. ... I promise to listen to ANB's message.  This is the groundwork needed for us to have dialogue."

For realsies?! You can’t “interpret ANB’s true message”? Um, they’re racist, anti-choice, right-wing terrorists who hate Muslims and women. What’s the big mystery?

Let’s get one thing straight: anti-choice violence is not just “arson” and “vandalism.” It’s terrorism. And the terrorists don’t need to participate in a sugary “dialogue” so we can “understand” them, they need to be put in prison.  Jeez, is he going to give them a back rub and feed them chocolate-dipped fruit, too?

A new study from Children’s Hospital Boston has detected a rather intriguing connection between Google searches for “abortion” and local abortion rates and policies. Researchers compared data from 50 US states and 37 countries and found that greater numbers of searches correlated with stricter abortion regulations and fewer abortions, while areas with higher abortion rates and more liberal laws actually yielded fewer searches.

Search volume was higher in states with restrictions such as parental notification laws, parental consent laws, mandatory waiting periods, and mandatory counseling, as well as states where fewer than 10% of counties had an abortion provider. Whether or not abortion was criminalized at the state level made a difference too (though abortion is currently a federally protected right, many states have laws on the books that would make abortion illegal should Roe v. Wade ever be repealed): states with abortion bans yielded higher search rates, while states that would keep abortion legal had lower ones. Interestingly, though search volume and restrictive policies were directly proportional, search volume and abortion rates shared an inverse relationship: areas with higher abortions rates, such as the U.S. coastal states, produced fewer searches.

So what does this tell us? The authors of the study believe that these findings support previous research, which concludes that local restrictions on abortion have always led women to seek services outside of their area, and now they’re using the Internet to help them do so. And while it initially seems odd that the rate of abortion was inversely proportional to the number of searches about abortion, it makes sense when you consider that women who can easily access reproductive health care probably don’t need to Google it – they’re able to utilize traditional avenues like their local physicians or known reproductive health centers. Women who live in areas where abortion is relatively inaccessible and/or highly stigmatized are likely to rely on more anonymous resources like the Internet to get information.

Even though philosophers, theologians, scientists, lawyers, and the general human population have never been able to conclusively determine or agree upon the exact moment when life begins, the Missouri state legislature decided this year that they’d just go ahead and answer that pesky question for us simple-minded ladyfolk.

"The life of each human being begins at conception. Abortion will terminate the life of a separate, unique, living human being." This statement will be prominently featured on state mandated literature doctors are now required to distribute to women considering abortions – regardless of the doctor, patient, or medical organization’s philosophy or beliefs.

The 2010 Abortion Restriction Law (SB793), which went into effect Aug. 28., couples this completely subjective and scientifically unproven definition with additional abortion restrictions that supplement the state’s existing 24 hour mandatory waiting period. It also requires clinics to post signs touting empty promises of state-funded assistance for completing the pregnancy and caring for the child once born, including resources like health care, housing, transportation, food, clothing, education, and job training … despite the fact that budget issues have forced the elimination of many of these programs, and more cuts are expected next year.

Congratulations Alaska: You’re now the 35th state to further limit the reproductive rights of young women by forcing doctors to violate a teen’s right to privacy.

On Tuesday, Alaska voters passed Ballot Measure 2, which requires medical personnel to personally notify the parents/guardians of girls under age 18 who are seeking abortions, subsequently forcing patients to wait 48 hours before they can receive the procedure. The law allows teens from abusive homes to circumvent this state-mandated tattling by appearing before a judge and receiving a court order, or obtaining a notarized statement from a law enforcement officer or qualified family member testifying to personal knowledge of abuse.

While it may seem reasonable on the surface, this measure is dangerous for a number of reasons. Instead of protecting vulnerable, victimized teenagers, it forces them to single-handedly navigate a complex and often unsympathetic legal system, and/or risks subjecting them to further violence from parents angry about their teen’s pregnancy. Furthermore, the mandated 48 hour waiting period adds an additional set of logistical obstacles: not every teenage girl has a Planned Parenthood around the corner, nor do they all have the time, money, resources, or ability to coordinate long distance travel and overnight accommodations. And when it comes to abortion, timing is crucial, and earlier is definitely better in terms of ease, safety, and cost. All of these barriers increase the likelihood that medical services will be dangerously delayed, or that desperate teens might seek an unsafe back-alley or self-induced abortion.

In a spectacular mash-up of sexual double standards, chauvinism, and the tired notion that a lady’s worth is inversely proportional to the number of dudes she’s diddled, the Washington Post is reporting that “revirginization” surgeries are on the rise in China. Also known as hymenoplasty or hymenorrhaphy, the procedure either sutures together pieces of the remnant hymen or recreates it entirely using new tissue, almost always for the purpose of “proving” virginity to a new husband via busting it on their wedding night. Lovely.

While there isn’t sufficient numerical data to conclusively determine a jump in revirginization surgeries in China, it does occur and appears to be increasingly common. Previously thought to be confined to Muslim countries, hymen restoration is making the rounds in places like Europe, the United States, and now China, which goes to show that misogyny and f’d up expectations of women know no religion, ethnicity, or culture.

It’s mind-boggling that virginity, which is entirely subjective and indefinable, still remains an appropriate yardstick by which to measure the humanity of women. But the emphasis on the hymen itself is particularly problematic. These thin membranes are an unreliable indicator of one’s sexual experience because they often perforate or disappear with normal childhood physical activity; some believe women can even be born without one. Sexual assault obviously factors in as well. In terms of proving the occurrence of prior voluntary intercourse, hymens are as useless as a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest.

Of course, this hymen-obsession is a blatant manifestation of one of the most toxic and unrelenting double standards, which places strict limitations on female sexuality, yet permits men to get their rocks off whenever they please. (It’s always been a head-scratcher for me: if guys are encouraged to sow their wild oats but women are supposed to remain chaste, um, who exactly are those men sleeping with?)