Put Your Vagina Where Your Mouth Is

I first stumbled across Dorothy King's blog because of her eminently sensible posts about cervical cancer, which I strongly recommend. Discovering that she was an archaeologist was the icing on the cake and I stuck her blog in my 'Classics' folder.

I have to say, following this recent post - which I assume was ill-thought-out tongue-in-cheek? - I am slightly less impressed:

So I am proposing reviving the Make Love Not War idea, with a twist inspired by Lady Godiva. Many men lust after and fantasise about actresses. If celebrities want to end War, why don't they offer to Make Love? They could lay down their bodies, on high thread count sheets and goose down pillows, for their countries. Let them put their bodies where their mouths are

And so today I am launching this visionary new campaign -
Make Love, Not War 2.0

If any celebrities would like to take part, feel free to drop me an email. There is a long list of military leaders from assorted countries for you to pick from - it will be first come, first served, so get in there early.
When applying to join the campaign, please indicate your preferences in terms of country of origin for your war lord: North Korea, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Iraq (please specify whether you prefer Sunni or Shiite insurgents), Iran, Burman, Hamas (Palestine), National Congress (Sudan).

'Dark' skintone - what does that suggest to you?

Max Factor have just advertised a new lipstick on TV, which has been designed for those in the three skintone categories of 'fair', 'medium' and 'dark'.

'Dark' in this case appears to be a slightly tanned caucasian (hint: 'dark' is the woman on the right*):



On a purely practical note, why are they cutting out a large proportion of the market?


* and yes, speaking as a goth who is around her fair share [no pun intended] of people who deliberately stay out of the sun, it is *very* rare to find someone as pale as the girl they're using for the 'fair' model. And that's in the goth community, never mind 'regular' society where fake tan has been all the rage for many years now).

Time is running out to keep our time limit

On Tuesday 20th May (so tomorrow) there will be a vote in parliament on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. There is currently a campaign to make some amendments to this Bill to reduce the time limit available in which to have an abortion, initially to 20 weeks (however note that there is also an amendment suggesting that 12 weeks is the cut-off).

Write to your MP at http://www.writetothem.com/ and urge them to vote against these amendments. We cannot sit back and potentially lose the right to have the option of an abortion (I believe that if the 20 week amendment passes we are on the slippery slope to further cuts) by assuming that our MPs will automatically vote against the amendments.

Regardless of whether one would personally have an abortion, it would be irresponsible for the government to take away this option for those women and their partners who need it.

The 20 weeks campaign is based on emotive language and very little scientific evidence.* They do not appear to have considered the trauma to both the woman (pregnancy and childbirth in itself is not a trivial matter), her family and the child of an unwanted pregnancy carried to term; the fact that foetal viability at this early stage is not without severe complications; nor the fact that we women are autonomous human beings with a right to control our own bodies.

I also feel if they truly wish to reduce unwanted pregnancies they would be campaigning to increase access to contraception.

Please go to http://www.writetothem.com/ to send a letter to your MP urging them to vote against the amendments lowering the cut-off point. There isn't much time left as the vote is tomorrow.

I would suggest using your own words if you write, but there is a suggested letter available here: http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/content/view/221/1/ which you could use as inspiration.



* http://www.badscience.net/?p=634
http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/lc/campaigns/coalition-for-choice/
http://rhetoricallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2008/05/20-obvious-rebuttals-to-nadine-dorries.html
http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/05/08/24-reasons-for-24-weeks/
http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/2008/05/a_slicebyslice

What is to be done?

A situation which I have read about quite a bit on blogs, but would like to see wider coverage of, is the story of the Jena 6.

I'm struggling to find the words to describe the situation, so will let you read this good summary from ColorOfChange:

Last fall in Jena, Louisiana, the day after two Black high school students sat beneath the "white tree" on their campus, nooses were hung from the tree. When the superintendent dismissed the nooses as a "prank," more Black students sat under the tree in protest. The District Attorney then came to the school accompanied by the town's police and demanded that the students end their protest, telling them, "I can be your best friend or your worst enemy... I can take away your lives with a stroke of my pen."

A series of white-on-black incidents of violence followed, and the DA did nothing. But when a white student was beaten up in a schoolyard fight, the DA responded by charging six black students with attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder.

Where's one of those big-eyed shock smileys when you need it?

Almost every sentence makes me fall of my seat in wonder that this is happening right now. Not that it is excusable during any era, but I honestly honestly thought the type of crap like a 'whites only tree' had disappeared from American life. Never mind the blatant racism in the choice of who to arrest, who to charge, and with what.

The Angry Black Woman has a brief compilation of links about the case.

For those in the US, this post has details of who to write to, and this one has information about a protest to be held on 20th September in Jena.

If you're planning on writing then this site has helpful information on why not to use a form letter. It refers to the British parliament, but is useful in general when writing to any authority.

New breakthrough in Goth Studies

Following on from recent reports about the apparent genetic link between women and the colour pink, scientists now announce a clear genetic background to those in the gothic community.

Researchers tested subjects from a wide range of sub-cultures across the world, by showing them coloured flashcards.

"Again and again, those who identified as gothic showed a strong preference for the colour black, and the deeper hues of purple and red," reported Dr Y. A. O'Rly.

The research studied goths from Britain, America and Germany, and common preferences across all three countries have led the researchers to believe that there is something more than cultural conditioning in place. "Whereas subjects taken from other sub-cultures tended to like brighter colours across the spectrum, the goths from all three countries tended to incline to the dark side," reads the report.

This striking world-wide correlation has led O'Rly to posit the theory that today's goths are descended from a common ancestor, and that there are clear, genetic links in the community.

"Our research clearly shows that goths favour blacks, deep purples and deep red - essentially the colours of ripe berries," said O'Rly. "This clearly shows that today's goths display a common genetic link back to their hunter-gatherer past. This theory was borne out when we tested our research subjects for taste preferences. Goths again and again chose snakebite-&-black as their favourite drink, evidently showing a genetic preference for the berries their ancestors would have gathered."

The fact that many goths have black, purple or red hair colours is yet more proof for the theory: "Since there is such a strong attraction for these colours among goths, and that they are related to the colours of ripe berries, we feel confident in asserting that goths must look for deep, dark hair colours on their mates. The hunter-gatherer peoples would associate the berry colours with food, and so it is clear that they would also gravitate to these shades in the opposite sex, as an indicator of fertility."

O'Rly was even able to theorise a possible homeland for the goths: "We are looking at a cool-temperate climate." Such a climate would be ideal for producing berries, and also led to the research team to find yet another genetic link among the goths. "A climate low in natural sunlight, such as Leeds, would not only explain the pallor that most goths exhibit," stated O'Rly, "but also account for the relatively high incidences of mopeyness and melancholy among goths."

Self-Sacrifice is NOT an excuse for FGM

Reading the f-word yesterday, this quote was included on their post about female genital mutilation (via The Urban Feminist):

I am a Bristish born woman who met and married an Egyptian man many years ago. I underwent female circumcision when I converted to Islam. I have no regrets. I have not suffered as result. Performed under proper conditions as Professor Munir Falsi points out, it brings the same hygenic benefits as male circumcision and focuses intimacy between couples on psychological aspects of devetion to each other rather than erotic. The West’s stance against female circumcison smacks of cultural imperialism.

This made me so angry on so many levels that I couldn't actually sleep last night.

1). Mrs British-Convert MADE A CHOICE. She gives no indication how old she was, but I'm assuming at least 16 (legal age of marriage in UK) - probably she was older. She was able to MAKE A CHOICE because she had already experienced life with a clitoris. Young girls do NOT have their choice; they are NOT making this decision FOR THEMSELVES.

2). Mrs British-Convert, it appears, had her mutilation operation done "under proper conditions". This is NOT the situation that the vast majority of girls are faced with.

3). "hygenic [sic] benefits"? "hygenic [sic] benefits"?!!! How many women do you know who have had to have their clitorises off for ANY reason other than FGM? I know a number of men who have had circumcisions in later life due to issues with their foreskin (and one who'd rather not be circumcised and so is dealing with it) - NOT hygienic reasons, though, I might add. I have NEVER EVER heard of a woman REQUIRING the removal of her clitoris, for ANY reason.

4). "The West’s stance against female circumcison [sic] smacks of cultural imperialism" - bollocks it does. The 'cultural imperialism' argument is rolled out any time a group of oppressors wish to keep oppressing. It is NOT "cultural imperialism" to require that women are allowed to go unmutilated, unless, like Mrs British-Convert, they wish - independently, and in full knowledge of the facts - to do otherwise.

5). "[It] focuses intimacy between couples on psychological aspects of devetion [sic] to each other rather than erotic" - you know, this bullshit self-sacrificing argument really really wound me up. Because I'm entirely sure that Mrs British-Convert's husband is able to experience the full range of "aspects of devotion", all the way from the psychological to the erotic. Because even if he has been circumcised, he will still be able to experience sexual pleasure and orgasm.

So Mrs British-Convert is wrong when she says that "[it] focuses intimacy between couples on psychological aspects of devetion [sic] to each other rather than erotic" - she means 'it focuses the feelings of the wife on the psychological aspects of devotion to her husband, rather than erotic, whereas he experiences the full spectrum'.

Everywhere I look this week I'm seeing female self-sacrifice being held up as the pinnacle of women's achievement - with, of course, the converse conclusion that any woman who - for whatever reason - would rather live her own life, fully, herself, is in some way 'wrong' or (heavens forfend!) trying to 'act like a man'.

Be it Mrs British-Convert who seems to think that she's some pure specimen of womanhood for giving up sexual pleasure, to Twisty's post highlighting the fact that more and more women are taking part in anal sex even if they get no enjoyment from it, to the fact that I keep hearing about vaginismic women who just bear the trauma of vaginal penetration so that he gets his rocks off, without any thought that they could do something else that would bring them MUTUAL pleasure without the pain. Sheesh, even to the fact that when I read through a bunch of plays by Euripides* looking for the theme of self-sacrifice all I could find again and again was women deciding that it would be best if they just died.




* I know, I know. My own fault for studying a subject based almost entirely on the works of Dead White Men.

Reasons to continue boycotting L'Oreal...

I do not use or purchase L'Oreal products due to their dubious record of animal testing (and I'm not too hot on the advertising either), but now it turns out that:
a) it has been found guilty over institutional racism in choosing 'hostesses' (women giving out samples);
b) there is a huge amount of evidence detailing this;
c) yet they are appealing the decision with the delightful quote of:

We believe that diversity and difference are a source of richness and we do not tolerate any form of racism or discrimination

O rly?

So what do they call

[stipulating the hostesses] should be.. "BBR", the initials for bleu, blanc, rouge... a shorthand used by the far right, was also a well-known code among employers to mean "white" French people

then?


Thanks to the f-word; quotes from the Guardian