New Mexico lawmaker: abortion after rape “tampering with evidence” –

All I can say is

Punish and blame the victim even more! It’s the Republican way.

New Mexico lawmaker resurrects bill making abortion after rape a felony

After the blowback of trying to prosecute rape victims, Rep. Cathrynn Brown wants to go after abortion providers


New Mexico lawmaker resurrects bill making abortion after rape a felony

(Credit: AP/Tim Korte)

We all remember last week when Republican state legislator Rep. Cathrynn Brown introduced a bill that would charge rape survivors seeking an abortion with a felony, right?

And we all remember when she was promptly Internet shamed and removed all evidence of the bill from her website, post haste?

Well, she’s back. And so is the bill.


The Palin Lens : Sarah Palin’s grab for feminism

Rebecca Traister writes a good piece here on the complexities of politics and feminism(s).  How one party can be able to “claim” feminism as their own and create it in their own likeness is a worrisome thought.  Is feminism that changeable and delicate that it just can melt down into whatever mold it is poured into? I think not.

But Traister’s point, I believe, is the characteristic unthinking gullibility of  some of our American people.  Fox News will claim feminism next.  That follows.  Hmmm…. feminism as a contested space…. now that’s a (not new at all) thought.  But it is up to people who believe deeply in women’s rights to become a chorus to the world and not keep their thoughts to themselves. Otherwise, the few powerful media voices will be the only ones heard or at least the only ones remembered.

Let’s talk about gender equality in healthcare, employment, education, or the lack thereof.  Let’s talk about economics and how our system takes basic rights away from the people who are the least able to afford it.  Palin’s lens is so microscopic and so gigantically uninformed.

See the article:  Sarah Palin’s grab for feminism in Salon, Tuesday, Jun 1, 2010.

Texas revisionists: term “Capitalism” in textbooks changed to “Free Enterprise System”

Texas Conservatives Win Curriculum Change

How did I miss this piece from the March 12, 2010, NY Times?

They also replaced the word “capitalism” throughout their texts with the “free-enterprise system.”

“Let’s face it, capitalism does have a negative connotation,” said one conservative member, Terri Leo. “You know, ‘capitalist pig!’ ”

Here are just a few quotes from this article so well written by James C. McKinley Jr.:

Texas Conservatives Win Curriculum Change


Published: March 12, 2010

AUSTIN, Tex. — After three days of turbulent meetings, the Texas Board of Education on Friday approved a social studies curriculum that will put a conservative stamp on history and economics textbooks, stressing the superiority of American capitalism, questioning the Founding Fathers’ commitment to a purely secular government and presenting Republican political philosophies in a more positive light.

Jack Plunkett/Associated Press
Mary Helen Berlanga accused fellow members of the Board of Education of “rewriting history.”

Efforts by Hispanic board members to include more Latino figures as role models for the state’s large Hispanic population were consistently defeated, prompting one member, Mary Helen Berlanga, to storm out of a meeting late Thursday night, saying, “They can just pretend this is a white America and Hispanics don’t exist.”

“They are going overboard, they are not experts, they are not historians,” she said. “They are rewriting history, not only of Texas but of the United States and the world.”

They also included a plank to ensure that students learn about “the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schlafly, the Contract With America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and the National Rifle Association.”

Mr. Bradley won approval for an amendment saying students should study “the unintended consequences” of the Great Society legislation, affirmative action and Title IX legislation. He also won approval for an amendment stressing that Germans and Italians as well as Japanese were interned in the United States during World War II, to counter the idea that the internment of Japanese was motivated by racism.

Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term “separation between church and state.”)

“The Enlightenment was not the only philosophy on which these revolutions were based,” Ms. Dunbar said.

Texas needs to secede again. And Arizona with them. This is not my country’s history. I dare Walt Disney to come up with a more outrageous history of the U.S.. People of Texas, are you on board with all of this?
Read the entire article at

Do Married Women Want Their Husbands to Cheat?

From the “some people have too much time on their hands” department.  Evolutionary Psychology.  Say what?

From the Psychology today blog

The Scientific Fundamentalist

A Look at the Hard Truths About Human Nature: Author  Satoshi Kanazawa is an evolutionary psychologist at LSE and the coauthor (with the late Alan S. Miller) of Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters.

Do Married Women Want Their Husbands to Cheat?

Married women face a dilemma.  It’s not that they want their husbands to cheat on them.  But then again it’s not that they don’t want their husbands to cheat on them either.

Once married to a man, it is in the reproductive interest of the woman to monopolize access to all of his resources (material or otherwise) so that he would invest them in her joint children with him.  Any sexual relationship he may have with other women might potentially jeopardize her exclusive access to his resources, so obviously it is in her interest to make sure that he does not have sexual relationships with other women.

The problem, however, is that, as I explain in a previous post, mating among all mammalian species (including humans) is a female choice; it happens whenever and with whomever the female wants, not whenever and with whomever the male wants.  The more desirable a man is (the more resourceful, the higher his social status, the physically more attractive), the larger the number of other women who would want to have sex with him regardless of whether he is married, either in an attempt to steal him away from his current mate (mate poaching) or in an attempt to be impregnated by him so that their child will have his superior genes but then to turn around and pass off the child as their current long-term mates’ genetic offspring (cuckoldry).

All women have a vested reproductive interest to marry a man who is as desirable and attractive (physically and otherwise) as possible, but the more desirable and attractive the husband is, the greater the chances that other women would want him as well and thus the greater the chances that he would be unfaithful.  There is a surefire way to guarantee that their husband will never cheat on them, and that is to marry the biggest loser that they can find so that nobody else would want him.  But obviously no woman would want to do that.

There is an additional complication in the matter.  Humans are naturally polygynous; humans have been mildly polygynous throughout evolutionary history.  So it is natural for resourceful men of high status to mate with multiple women simultaneously.  (But recall the dangers of naturalistic fallacy.  Natural means neither good nor desirable.  It just means is; it does not mean ought.)  So polygyny ­– marriage of one man to more than one woman – is a deeply embedded part of male and female human nature.  Men have always had multiple wives, and women have always been married to men who have had other wives.

It is true that, even under polygyny, many men still only have one wife while other men remain completely mateless.  But we are disproportionately descended from polygynous men, because polygynous men invariably have more children than monogamous men.  So most of us are descended from polygynous men (and, disproportionately, from highly successful polygynous men with a large number of wives), only a few of us are descended from monogamous men, and none of us are descended from mateless men.  So polygyny remains a significant part of human nature.

Such is the dilemma faced by women, especially highly desirable women who are more likely to marry highly desirable men.  The more desirable the woman is, the more desirable her husband is likely to be, and the more likely he is to cheat on her.  The more likely her husband is to remain sexually faithful to her, the less desirable he is (and the greater the probability that perhaps she could have done much better than him).

Read the post here

American Indian Charter Schools in California: Spitting in the eye of mainstream education – Los Angeles Times

May 31, 2009

Dave Getzschman / For the Times

Students sit in detention at American Indian Public Charter school in Oakland for offenses ranging from getting up during class or skipping a problem on a homework assignment. Students who misbehave in the slightest must stay an hour after school; if they misbehave again in the same week, they get more detention and four hours of Saturday detention.

Some of my favorite quotes from this article — you ought to read it — (or I may give you detention on Sunday!)

Reporting from Oakland — Not many schools in California recruit teachers with language like this: “We are looking for hard working people who believe in free market capitalism. . . . Multicultural specialists, ultra liberal zealots and college-tainted oppression liberators need not apply.”

Students, almost all poor, wear uniforms and are subject to disciplinary procedures redolent of military school. One local school district official was horrified to learn that a girl was forced to clean the boys’ restroom as punishment.

Do they ever have a boy clean the girl’s bathroom?

Conservatives, including columnist George Will, adore the American Indian schools, which they see as models of a “new paternalism” that could close the gap between the haves and have-nots in American education.

There’s a lot more. Read the article — or else!

From Feminist Philosophers…

Gender bias? Yup, it’s there. Unfair treatment in workplace? Check. Feminist? Why would I want to be that?

68% of women said they were being treated unfairly in the workplace.
61% of women think there is a gender bias in the media.

And yet only 20% of women are willing to call themselves “feminist”.

Read the article!

%d bloggers like this: