Has anyone ever asked to touch your hair? As a white woman in the U.S., it’s not something I’ve experienced, but if you’re a black woman, chances are you have. For most of the women who attended the “You Can Touch My Hair” public art exhibit on Saturday, June 8th at New York City’s Union Square, the experience was all too common.

The event, inspired by Un’ruly founder, Antonia Opiah’s article, “Can I Touch Your Hair?” was billed as an invitation to explore the “tactile fascination with black hair.” Sensing that there was more to this exhibit than an open invitation to touch various textures of black hair, I decided to check it out. As I arrived at the event Saturday afternoon, I immediately spotted three gorgeous black women holding signs that read, “You Can Touch My Hair.” They were standing in front of a crowd of mostly black women, who were actively conversing with one another on the topic.

While I had come to the event to learn more about this aspect of black women’s oppression, the conspicuous absence of white women seemed indicative of the disinterest in and disassociation with black women’s issues that the feminist movement is notorious for. “You Can Touch My Hair” was performance art that put U.S. gendered race relations on center stage. It did what good art has a habit of doing. It stirred up intense emotions and sparked meaningful dialogue. Through asking questions and conversing with women in the crowd, I got the sense that while having people want to touch your hair is nearly universal among black women, the reactions and feelings to the question are incredibly diverse. Some women didn’t mind as long as it was respectful, even finding it flattering at times. Others felt that their hair is part of their body, and any attempt to touch it is violating and dehumanizing.

Representing the latter viewpoint was a group of women who showed up in protest, holding signs that read “you CANNOT touch my hair.” Some were adamant that Un’ruly’s exhibit was disgusting and demeaning. One protester likened it to a slavery auction block or a petting zoo. It wasn’t hard to see her point. But as a lover of art and nuanced messages, I couldn’t help but agree with those I overheard saying that both groups had the same message. I wasn’t the only one interpreting Un’ruly’s exhibit as a statement about the objectification and dehumanization of black women when people ask to touch their hair.

Of course, however, the exhibit had many layers. It also seemed to be a genuine invitation for dialogue. It was clear that the issue of hair touching is more than just hair touching. It’s about entitlement, privilege and control. When white people (usually women I hear) feel entitled to touch and investigate black women’s hair, it is eerily reminiscent of the historic imbalances of power and race-based abuses that continue today. When white people ask to touch a black woman’s hair (or touch it without asking), they do so without recognizing black women’s experience or understanding the potential impact of their actions. In a society where black women are exoticized and made to exist as the other, a white person’s fascination with their hair can add to the feeling of alienation.

Laurel Macey, a woman who demonstrated in protest, eloquently explained how the question, “Can I touch your hair?” adds another layer to black women’s marginalization.

In speaking to women like Ms. Macey, “You Can Touch My Hair” affirmed what I already knew. It is imperative that white feminists listen to black women. When we shut up and listen, something amazing happens. Walls come down. We begin to understand what it’s like to be a black woman in the U.S. and how race intersects with gender to create an experience vastly different from our own. If, as feminists, we wish to break down structures of oppression, we must understand how that oppression manifests in different people’s lives and how we perpetuate it ourselves. “You Can Touch My Hair” was a step in this direction. It opened a door for dialogue that far too few white women walked through. White women must do a better job at listening to and being allies for black women. In the spirit of race and gender justice, we must recognize our privileges and seize opportunities to gain a better understanding of one another. So instead of reaching out your hand to feel a black woman’s hair, reach out your hand in friendship. The world will be better for it.

This post is cross-posted with permission from the Feminist Friends

Photo via Instagram user HairUnruled.

Believe what people tell you, because people show you who they are everyday. No need for in-depth analysis, what people do shows you who they are. The actions of Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett clearly tell us who he is.  When he and his cronies were saying that Pennsylvania would be like Saudi Arabia, he was not joking. Yes, he was talking about hydraulic fracturing and unconventional natural gas development that has overrun the state, with little to no oversight from the Commonwealth but damn if Corbett isn’t doing his best to codify women’s second class citizen status into the law of the land after callously disrespecting women.

On June 17th, Corbett signed a ban on abortion coverage in health care policies that would be available to purchase in the insurance exchange mandated by Obama’s Affordable Care Act. The funniest part of this is that the controlling GOP majority in Harrisburg doesn’t even want to run the exchange and the governor is in discussions with U.S Health and Human Services to have the feds run it.

Right.

The ACLU of Pennsylvania legislative director Andy Hoover said the law is different from past abortion regulations.

“This is a new frontier in restricting women’s health care in Pennsylvania, the state has never before prohibited a private insurance company from covering abortion for a private customer when the customer pays with their own money.”

Hoover said the federal health care law already requires separate abortion coverage payments.

Corbett has been mucking things up in Harrisburg since 2010, when he rode in on the coattails of the tea party hysteria. He’s well known to Pennsylvanian’s as being a stooge, but he became infamous nationally last year when he came under fire for supporting the Orwellian “Women’s Right to Know Act” which would mandate transvaginal ultrasounds for women before termination of her pregnancy. One of the most restrictive anti-abortion bills in the country, Corbett opined that a women could “just close her eyes” during her state sanctioned rape. The vote on the bill was postponed.

Corbett’s action further eroding women’s reproductive choices comes on the heels of a monumental shame for Pennsylvania. The Commonwealth’s draconian record on choice is well documented (You know that case Planned Parenthood v. Casey that’s always referenced? Bob Casey was our awful conservative Democratic governor back in the day and father to current Senator Bob Casey jr., who is also awful on reproductive justice!)

But the trial of Philadelphia back ally butcher Kermit Gosnell clearly showed that choice in Pennsylvania is on paper only. Gosnell is an expert opportunist who preyed on women with limited economic choices who were seeking second trimester and later term abortions. He was convicted of multiple murders, including the death of Karnamaya Mongar, a 41-year-old grandmother.

“Mongar’s daughter testified that her mother had been turned away from two abortion clinics in Virginia, where she lived, as well as one in Washington, D.C., because none of them did second trimester abortions. She was 15 weeks pregnant when she started seeking an abortion, and 19 weeks by the time she died”

Late term abortions and the Gosnell’s of the world are what happens when women are unable to access health care early in pregnancy, when most abortions are safely performed with few, if any, complications. When abortion is restricted this is what happens. We know this is what happens, because this is what happened pre Roe v. Wade. This is what happens now in the developing world. Why the hell is it happening in Pennsylvania? Corbett has blood on his hands. The take away from the Gosnell shit show should have been “Make sure all women, especially the most vulnerable, can safely access the full range of reproductive services as early as possible.”

Make no mistake abortion in Pennsylvania is an actual choice only for those who are affluent enough to jump through all the hoops to access it.

There is hope on the horizon. Corbett faces an uphill battle for re-election next year.  Surprise suprise, his predilection to blame everyone but himself for Pennsylvania’s lackluster job creation has gotten him into hot water. Apparently “a lot” of businesses are still having trouble filling their ranks because too many Pennsylvanians use illegal drugs. And asked if he had any Latinos as staffers, he remarked “If you could find us one, let me know.”  Iwon’t even get into is role as AG and the Sandusky investigation. Or lack thereof.

His favorable numbers are in the tank and according to a recent Quinnipiac University poll two Democratic challengers would beat him by a wide margin. One of those challengers is U.S. Representative Allyson Schwartz and if elected, she would be PA’s first woman to hold the office. She also would bring her experience running the Elizabeth Blackwell Health Center, a Planned Parenthood clinic, to Harrisburg.  Wouldn’t it be exciting to actually have an expert in public health putting forward health policy that is informed and accurate? I’m stoked.

The campaign season will not be kind to Corbett but you know what? I’m sure if he just closes his eyes, it’ll all be over soon.

Photo Credit: Paul Weaver via Creative Common

Trigger Warning: The following article discusses suicide and self-injury.

We’ve all heard by now: Paris Jackson was hospitalized last week for an apparent suicide attempt.

I say ‘apparent’ because we just don’t know the specifics of what happened. Perhaps we will never quite know the details surrounding Paris’ medical emergency.

Not that the media hasn’t tried to put the pieces together:

• Paris was pictured with what has been called ‘worrying scars’, suggested to be the result of self-injury.
• Paris is said to have been depressed, unhappy, and alone.
• Paris is said to be a ‘sensitive girl’.
• Paris is said to have taken a large number of pain relievers.
• Paris is said to have left a suicide note, an ‘obvious’ cry for help.
• Paris is said to have called a suicide helpline.
• Paris is said to be staying in hospital on a 72-hour psychiatric hold.

There you have it: the play-by-play of Paris’ ‘apparent’ mental breakdown.

Except there is a problem with this story. There is an obvious detail that the media forgot to include. A fact of the story that we already know to be true:

• Paris is a 15 year old girl.

Erase the close resemblance to her late father. Forget everything you’ve ever heard about Paris over the past 4 years. What’s left?

She’s a teenage girl who’s struggling, and a teenage girl who needs support.

Let’s say, for a second, that all of the ‘apparent’ events of yesterday are in fact true. Let’s assume, for a minute, that Paris was thinking about suicide, that she did hurt herself, and that she is in hospital getting psychiatric attention.

If all of this is in fact true than Paris did exactly what she was supposed to do. When she felt like she was at risk of hurting herself, Paris called a suicide hotline. She reached out for support.

That’s what hotlines, regardless of what type they are, were made for. They are available for us when we are at our most vulnerable, when we are in crisis, and when we need someone to talk to. And if she did in fact call the helpline, and the crisis interventionist did in fact call the police out of worry for her, than it may have saved Paris’ life.

All because Paris did the right thing.

And now? The media is punishing Paris because she reached out for help  and because she was taking care of herself. She is the butt of jokes, the source of gossip, the new ‘wild girl’ with the likes of  Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, and Amanda Bynes -all female celebrities who have endured personal attacks because they were forced to battle a mental health concern in the public eye. All relatively young women who were not granted privacy in their time of need. I have to wonder – would the media be focusing so much on their downfall if they were men or is this yet another attempt to further perpetuate the ‘irrationality’ of women?

More than likely Paris, like any of us, didn’t call the helpline with the forethought that others, anyone besides those helping her, would find out. And why should she? The helpline is meant to be confidential. Regardless of whom your father is.

Someone obviously breached her privacy. Multiple people, who are employed to help her, broke her trust for the sake of a news story. In their eyes, she didn’t have the right to keep this story to herself.

What is the likelihood that Paris will ever call a helpline again, knowing that it was non-confidential? In reality, how many other young teenage girls, after hearing Paris’ story, will be deterred from calling under similar pretenses? Or seeking help in general, knowing they will be characterized just as these other young women have been.

And that’s the danger of exploiting a celebrity with a mental health concern. You send a message to the rest of society that mental health doesn’t really matter. That mental health is something undeserving of respect. That those who struggle with mental health are weak, damaged, crazy. It all makes it seem as though such individuals are not worthy of our support.

It is this very mentality that has caused the stigmatization of mental health that is so prevalent in our society. It is this line of thinking that keeps far too many in pain and isolation.

This time, the media took it too far. What happened to Paris isn’t funny, and it’s not newsworthy. It’s her life. And it’s the life of millions of others who are struggling with mental health and in remain in harm’s way.

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons via Creative Commons

Reading all of the “he said” “she said” opinions relating to the ‘controversial’ abortion Bill in Ireland is enough to make your head spin.  Since the untimely and unnecessary death of Savita Halappanavar there has been almost constant discussion on the subject of abortion here.  When or if terminations should be allowed under a whole range of circumstances is being argued.

Last month The Heads of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013 was published.  This is a much needed stepping stone on the road to clarity in defining when a woman can legally have an abortion.  However, the Bill is far from finished.  Right now it is not including enough to protect the lives of pregnant women in Ireland, it has not addressed circumstances where a foetus has fatal abnormalities, when a miscarriage is inevitable or in cases of incest or rape.  Although it has included when there is a risk of suicide that a pregnant woman may be granted an abortion, this will only be allowed after the woman is seen by three different practitioners and they agree.  If they do not she is entitled to appeal where she will go up in front of another three ‘experts’ who have to unanimously agree that she is a danger to herself.  It sounds like a lengthy, unfair and potentially traumatizing thing for a suicidal pregnant woman to have to go through.  Many doctors agree with this.

Some see any new type of legislation allowing for termination under any circumstances as wrong and it will ‘open the flood gates’ to main stream abortion or have women everywhere pretending to be suicidal so they can obtain a legal abortion here.  That is ridiculous on so many levels.  For one doctors and psychiatrists aren’t that stupid maybe one or two ‘fakers’ may get through the radar but mostly I am sure these professionals would know the difference between an actual person at risk of suicide and someone who isn’t.  Also, realistically what woman in her right mind would pretend to be suicidal and go up in front of potentially six different people just to get an abortion?  They wouldn’t.  Instead they would get on a plane to England much like they have been doing for years.

Government TDs cannot seem to form a general consensus as to what they want in the new legislation.  Some are for abortion in all cases, others only in certain circumstances and others do not want abortion in this country at all.  The Catholic Church is getting involved as are numerous women’s organisations and student unions.  Pro-life groups are also getting more extreme in their efforts to keep abortion out of Ireland such as threatening to slit the throats of TDs and a distasteful and intimidating leaflet campaign.

Everyone seems to have an opinion on the matter but the bottom line is that right now abortion is still very much a grey area and it should not be.

The Irish government had a chance to legislate on abortion with regards to the X case 20 years ago and they failed to do so.  With all the ‘toing and froing’ going on within its ranks now (and the involvement of outside groups) it looks like it will be a long time before Irish women get the clarity and choice that they deserve and are entitled to.  Women should be trusted and allowed to make their own decisions when it comes to their reproductive rights.  They should not have to worry about breaking the law, convincing doctors they are going to kill themselves or travelling to another country if they do not want a baby for whatever reason.

Photo Credit Why I am Pro-choice / Dear Baby G

We are all Beatriz: Abortion rights in a life or death situation

As a young woman in Catholic school, I learned that abortion was the murder of a child. I learned that this reasoning was in-line with the commandment “Thou shall not kill”. As I am sure has happened every year this, was discussed a classmate raised her hand and asked: what if the pregnancy is going to kill the mom?

“Well”, my teacher said, with a satisfied mixture of exuberance and solemnity.  “That woman has a chance to become a martyr for her faith”. The girls in the classroom looked to one another, you could tell by their expressions that some rejected this outright and some were looking for reassurance that this may, possibly be the case.

There has been a woman, Gianna Beretta Molla, granted sainthood for rejecting an abortion, and a hysterectomy that would have been permissible by the standards of her faith to save her life (the removal of the womb would have killed the fetus of course, but because it was not the intended termination of pregnancy it is not considered the same).

There is now a young woman in El Salvador, Beatriz, attempting to get an abortion, which her doctors have argued is medically necessary to save her life. Even without the abortion the baby will likely die a few hours after being delivered. “I don’t want to do it but I know the child won’t live and I think it is the only way to save my life” she has said in a video. When/if she dies she will not be a martyr for her faith because she has no choice.

Imani Gandy puts this so eloquently:

“The point of the term “pro-choice” and the work that pro-choice activists do  is to ensure that “choice” encompasses all choices. The choice to have children. The choice to have children when you want to have them. The choice to stop having them after you already have them. It’s the choice to decide for yourself.”

The Government of El Salavador places a higher regard on the life of the baby who will not survive. They have had a complete ban on abortions since 1998 even in life-threatening situations like Beatriz, as well as no exceptions for rape and incest. Her doctors know better the urgent crisis she faces than the judges presiding over this case.

With all anti-choicers this argument about the sacredness of life begins to unravel when you look too closely at it. They scream from their self-righteous lectern that they want to stop abortion because it harms women. What about Beatriz?

Anti-choicers point to deranged doctors like Gosnell, while ignoring that this is what happens when you restrict access to abortions.  Anti-choicers concern-troll over thegenocide of black communities while ignoring the real plights that people of colour face, namely systemic racism.  They ignore the policies that chipped away at allowing clinics to practice safely. Anti-choicers could stand to take a cold, hard look at this situation and see a woman, a child, and a husband who want to be a family.

You see, Beatriz wants to live, she wants to go home with her 14-month baby and her husband. She holds sacred the same values we all do—hearth and home and the chance to join together and raise a family. But she may not see the chance to, because the Catholic Church values control over a woman’s body over her right to live.

Funds are being collected for Beatriz by Women’s Link Worldwide, an international organization working to promote women’s rights. Women’s Link will act as a non-profit, pass-through of tax-deductible contributions to the local Salvadoran organization Agrupación Ciudadana por la Despenalización del Aborto Ético, Terapéutico y Eugenésico, which is leading the legal fight for Beatriz. All funds will first and foremost be used for Beatriz’s medical bills, and any remaining funds will be used to help support the work of the Agrupacion. Donate here.

EDIT:

According to the Washinton Post: El Salvador’s health department OKs cesarean section to deliver baby of woman denied abortion.

This post was originally posted on Dispatches from Paradise. It was cross-posted here with permission.

Photo credit Steve Rhodes via Creative Common

He was a Polish immigrant. A husband and father. A Holocaust survivor. A Montreal-trained physician.

He was also a Canadian hero.

Dr. Henry Morgentaler, the man who spearheaded the reproductive justice movement in Canada, passed away yesterday at the age of 90.

It is said that Morgentaler performed his first abortion in 1968, at a time when such a procedure was still deemed illegal by the Canadian justice system. He was well aware of the risks; he faced potential imprisonment, anti-choice retaliation, and the revulsion of the medical community.

But to Morgentaler, the benefits of protecting women far outweigh any of the backlash:

“I decided to break the law to provide a necessary medical service because women were dying at the hands of butchers and incompetent quacks, and there was no one there to help them.”

In his eyes, the price of Canadian women’s safety was worth the risk.

Throughout the years, Morgentaler remained a proud defender of women’s health and an outspoken advocate for choice. As early as 1967, he urged the House of Commons to reconsider their stance on abortion, arguing that a woman should be able to protect herself from possible harm. He founded his first abortion clinic in Montreal in 1968 which was subsequently raided by police and resulted in formal charges. In 1973, he demonstrated his abortion technique on national TV to prove the safety of his procedure. And despite having served 10 months in jail and risking further legal action, Morgentaler went on to establish several other clinics throughout Canada years before the procedure became legalized.

He even went so far as to list ‘abortions’ as his primary source of income on his tax forms. Always proud of his work, Morgentaler never missed an opportunity to speak on behalf of reproductive justice.

In 1988, his numerous arrests and incessant protesting finally paid off; in what has been referred to as the ‘Morgentaler Decision’, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled the legal stance against abortion was unconstitutional under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Yet Morgentaler’s efforts didn’t stop once abortion became legalized. He worked to ensure that all women had access to abortion clinics and fought to have abortion covered under provincial health plans. He personally trained more than a hundred physicians and opened 20 clinics across the country.

In past blogs, I’ve often written about the restrictive abortion policies that plague New Brunswick, my adopted home province. We have one public clinic – a clinic that Morgentaler himself opened in 1994 - and share it with two Maritime Provinces. Unlike elsewhere in Canada, New Brunswick will not publicly fund abortions.

The restrictive New Brunswick policies angered Morgentaler. In 2003, Morgentaler sued the Province, combating the misogynistic New Brunswick healthcare system. In an effort to ignore the issue, the Province has continually stalled the proceedings; a decade later, the case has still not been brought before the court. But in spite of the long delays and what I would imagine was extensive legal bills, it didn’t lessen his resolve to fight for our reproductive rights.

So for us in the East, Morgentaler has a very special place in our hearts. He took up our cause. He defended our rights. And despite his ill health, and regardless of his age, Morgentaler continued to fight for the women of New Brunswick. He battled for me.

Our hero – my hero – is gone. We are left with an open court case that may sadly die along with him. We are missing our ultimate supporter, our selfless protagonist, our greatest champion. I, for one, feel a little bit lost without him.

But regardless of what happens in the New Brunswick legal system, and in the face of our sadness over his passing, it is crucial that we now honour him in the way he would have wanted – by advocating for the safety of Canadian women. Of all women.

We’ve come a long way since those early days in the 60’s, but we still have a long way to go. There are reproductive battles yet to be won, and it’s up to us now to win them. Continuing the legacy Morgentaler so bravely created. I can’t think of a more suitable tribute.

So thank you, Dr. Morgentaler, for protecting us – protecting me – for all these years. I am, as all of us are, grateful for your courage, your compassion, and your determination.

Rest peacefully. I can’t think of any one more deserving.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons via Creative Commons

WIN’s signature event, Women Opening Doors for Women (WODW) is always a night to remember. It starts with a reception, with amazing speakers (not to mention delicious food and an open bar), awards, and a chance to network with a room full of accomplished and inspiring women. The heart of the event though, are the dinners. Once the reception ends, everyone breaks out and goes to a dinner of their choice, organized around a topic, held all over the city. The evening invokes the spirit of WIN’s inception, where women came together around a dining room table, with the goal to help other women achieve their goals and provide a network that would only grow over the decades. These dinners offer attendees a chance to hear from the best in DC, and the intimate setting offers unparalleled access. The dinner topics range from personal care to professional development, with a lot in between. Past dinners covered topics like health care, women in the military, the need for a National Women’s History Museum, and how to get published. We’ve even had a dinner that included yoga! 

Our theme this year is “This Seat is Taken: When Women Lead Women WIN.” As WIN’s founding mothers recognized and we still practice today, we need more women in leadership – whether it be the boardroom, the halls of Congress, or a Sunday morning talk show. When women lead we all win. A recent study showed that women’s leadership skills improved when they were able to see an image of a successful women. We’re sure this happens on a certain day every June.

It will be a night to remember. So mark your calendars now and stay tuned for more details!

WODW
June 6, 2013
AFL-CIO
815 16th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
5:30 doors open
6:00 -7:00 reception
7:30 dinners begin
#WODW13

Interested in planning a dinner? Just go here and let us know your idea. If you are interested in hosting a dinner, please contact events@winonline.org.

This piece is cross-posted with permission from WIN, Democratic Pro-choice Women

Cross-posted with permission from Parentwin

In this new online world where voices of marginalized groups finally get somewhat of a chance to make themselves heard, the viewpoints that go against the dominant ideology challenge and make uncomfortable those sitting in a place of privilege. And oftentimes turn them into right assholes…or rather unveil them for what they really are. Getting the all the “buts” out of the way (I’m not racist, but; I believe in equality for women, but) is easier than ever before, and feminism seems to have the uncanny ability to strip bare these shallow repetitions of the status quo as never seen before.

I have for you an example of a men’s rights activist and general ahole lurking around in regular person’s clothing, who was taken to task and soon revealed his true trollish colors. It happened on my Facebook feed just a few days ago, and it’s not alone. I see these exchanges almost every day in one form or another.

Without further ado, let’s talk about how to unmask a jerk in just ten steps.

1) Post an article about something reasonable that forwards the perception of a marginalized group fighting for equal rights. In this case it was this Jezebel article entitled “If Your Boyfriend Thinks Your Vagina Is Repulsive, Break Up With Him.” Field some supportive comments from people who agree with the viewpoint. This forms “a base” against which some will invariably feel they need to take a stand. (Names are taken out because while this is reposted with the original poster’s permission, it was friends only.)

• SUPPORTER1 I have been fascinated by the many different vaginas I have seen and experienced

  May 17 at 6:26pm · Like · 1
• SUPPORTER 2 Why would guys act like they are disgusting and then want to use them? I think guys can be sad sad little creatures some times!

  May 17 at 6:46pm · Like · 2
• SUPPORTER 3 If they’re grossed out by vaginas, don’t have sex!!  ok, in all seriousness, this is very immature of guys. I don’t get grossed out by uncircumcised penises. And I especially get angry when guys ask stuff like ” does your vagina stink? If so I won’t go down there.” I always respond with. ” no, you dipshit. There’s this great invention called a shower, and clearly I use it. And that’s fine if you already want to carry negative thoughts about my vagina because you’re not going anywhere near it.” oh, how they back paddle as if they were in a canoe back paddling race and it’s an Olympic sport. Too late! You failed the maturity litmus test!

  May 17 at 8:51pm via mobile · Like · 4

2) Allow a dissenter to take up arms and do not engage right away, instead stand your ground. Watch misandry turn into “mis-kevin-dry.”

• DISSENTER What the actual fuck!!?? 
  This is getting out of hand

  May 17 at 8:52pm via mobile · Like
• ORIGINAL POSTER So look at someone else’s facebook?

  May 17 at 8:59pm via mobile · Like · 1
• DISSENTER Well it all keeps coming up on my feed. You’re a good friend, but I don’t want to keep reading how much of a fucking horrible person I am just because I’m a guy.

  May 17 at 9:06pm via mobile · Like
• ORIGINAL POSTER If you think this article or anything else that I’m posting is bashing on men simply because they’re men, then you clearly aren’t putting that much effort into reading them. I’m a feminist, not a man hater. If you dislike it you can always hide my posts, but I’m not going to censor what I share based on whether or not you want to see it.

  May 17 at 9:08pm via mobile · Like · 3
• DISSENTER I don’t expect you too. But I would expect you to be objective

  May 17 at 10:17pm via mobile · Like

3) Watch in awe as the dissenter posts links, quotes, articles or other “information” backing up his or her stance to prove you wrong about yourself. In this particular case, he happened to have a notebook full of wondrous out-of-context nonsense.

Impressive, no?

4) Gently (or not so gently) correct this strawman, and bring the dissenter back to the point he was originally trying to make (in this case that feminists hate him personally, apparently). Show him again the point and where he’s missing it.

• SUPPORTER 2 I don’t see anything about this article bashing men simply because they are men. It’s addressing a very real issue present in dating, relationships, and marriage that some men view female genitals as gross, yet expect sex and expect women to pleasure them. It has way more to do with maturity issues and irony. There’s nothing about this article saying ALL men are like this, nothing. There are some, absolutely. And I think it’s perfectly fair to say if a guy is grossed out by a woman’s vagina then she has every right to leave the relationship. I mean, c’mon. I would be an asshole if I told a guy to get a circumcision because his foreskin grossed me out….. are you assuming here that all feminists smear poop in boys’ faces? C’mon, seriously dude. You’re asking her to not bash all men. But aren’t you kinda calling the kettle black by making statements such as “what a wonderful group of people, huh?”

  May 17 at 10:30pm · Edited · Unlike · 7
• SUPPORTER 4 Um, what is happening.

  May 17 at 10:31pm · Like · 2
• SUPPORTER 5 where do i even start with this incredible tomfuckery. its like beautiful gem of tomfuckery

  May 17 at 10:31pm · Like · 4
• SUPPORTER 5 i said tomfuckery twice, thats how speechless i am at this BoH (TM)

  May 17 at 10:31pm · Like · 6
• Darlena Mariani Cunha Unless you’ve personally called a vagina that belongs to a woman you’re seeing repulsive, I’m not sure how this is directed at you…

  May 17 at 10:32pm · Like · 5

5) Allow a bit of a dogpile because we just went from vaginas aren’t repulsive, to feminists hate men, to feminists smear feces on male babies in .2 seconds. (Or whatever large gaps in logic are taking place in your particular argument.)

• SUPPORTER 5 like what even is this bullshit, apparently its “anti men” to not want to be in a relationship with some douche who finds your genitalia repulsive? if some guy told me my cunt looked repulsive, the muffin shop would be closed SO FAST.

  May 17 at 10:39pm · Like · 6
• SUPPORTER 2 exactly!!!!! How the hell did this even become an anti men issue????

  May 17 at 10:41pm · Like · 4
• SUPPORTER 5 because feces in the face
  or something

  May 17 at 10:42pm · Unlike · 6
• SUPPORTER 2 Oh yeah, that’s like my regular Saturday activity. Thanks for reminding me to go collect dirty diapers from the Wal-Mart dumpster for my Saturday slinging. *rolls eyes.*

  May 17 at 10:43pm · Like · 3
• SUPPORTER 2 Because obviously if I expect basic and mutual respect in a relationship and to be treated like a human being I MUST be a child abusing, poop smearing, feminist devil. ARE YOU SERIOUS, DUDE?!?!?!!?

  May 17 at 10:45pm · Like · 3
• SUPPORTER 5 EQUAL RIGHTS AND EQUAL PAY = poop smearing child beaters. trufax

6) At this point, the dissenter will most likely bring up another specific example that has nothing to do with the actual point and try to apply it where it doesn’t belong.

7) Show him what these things he is saying look like in real life.

• SUPPORTER 6 You know what guyz, fuck it I hate men cause a man said I do! He mansplained my ass!

  May 17 at 11:00pm · Unlike · 4
• SUPPORTER 7 Tell me more, please. I can’t think for myself because I have a gross baginer.

  May 17 at 11:00pm · Like · 6
• SUPPORTER 2 My baginer throws poop at babies apparently.

  May 17 at 11:01pm · Unlike · 7
• SUPPORTER 2 And drowns children……

  May 17 at 11:02pm · Unlike · 6
• SUPPORTER 7 Penises = My disgust even tho I’m hetero! I just can’t look at them!!!

8) Finally come around to engaging in this little argument aside from the point because the other person is just so wrong.

• SUPPORTER 2  look up what happens to baby girls in India and all over the world, and how many girls are abandoned to die of exposure simply because they are girls.

  May 17 at 11:18pm · Like · 4
• SUPPORTER 6 Like women. EVERYDAY. 
  “In the US 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.”
  Almost all rape is committed by men.

  May 17 at 11:18pm · Like · 2
• SUPPORTER 6 MRA’s, go join them, embrace them, they are your people. Neckbeard 4 LYFE.

  May 17 at 11:19pm · Like · 2
• SUPPORTER 7 Or how many women are raped, assaulted, killed all over the world…Domestic abuse is always a fun topic, too, because, you know, men endure it just as much as women!

  May 17 at 11:20pm · Like · 1

9) And at this point, you’ve usually got him.

DISSENTER You guys should be focusing less on your daddy issues and more on becoming a good cook for your future husband (I’d say chef, but we know that’s a male thing ).

10) Now, you may think he’s just being facetious, so allow the discourse to continue, just to make sure.

• SUPPORTER 6 Well, if telling women their vaginas are gross works for you? You go on with your wormy little self.
  AH HAHAHAHAHA!

  May 17 at 11:26pm · Like · 1
• SUPPORTER 6 BBL, lerning 2 cook for my future hubsand.

  May 17 at 11:27pm · Like · 1
• DISSENTER I love vaginas! It’s just feminist ones are a little hard to see through all the hair and shame.

  May 17 at 11:28pm via mobile · Like · 1

• DISSENTER Relax girls. Lol. By the way, is it daddy or the boyfriend paying for your internets?

  May 17 at 11:34pm via mobile · Like · 1
• SUPPORTER 7 Yes, all girls have men pay for their utilities. That makes perfect sense. NO!

  May 17 at 11:35pm · Like · 1
• DISSENTER Actually in regards to the violence against women, the statistics say that 30% of women killed are murdered by their boyfriends/husbands. 
  So… 30% of women should have just shut the fuck up?

  May 17 at 11:38pm via mobile · Like

Conclusion? End friendship.

ORIGINAL POSTER Wow. You know, I think I gave you too much credit. Way too much. I weep for your daughter. Thanks for showing me who the fuck you actually are, so I didn’t spend any extra time agonizing with the decision to remove you from my friends list. Seriously, I don’t know what the fuck made me think we were friends when all you ever do anymore is talk shit on my posts and stir up drama. Way to be a total and absolute tool. You give men a bad name.And there you have it. How to out a complete jerk in ten easy steps. Look out for them on your own list.

And there you have it. How to out a complete jerk in ten easy steps. Look out for them on your own list.

Darlena Cunha is a former television producer turned stay-at-home mom to twin four-year-old girls. When she’s not parenting, she’s writing novels, freelancing, going to grad school or blogging at http://parentwin.com.

Photo Credit the tartanpodcast via Creative Commons

Just days since a massive campaign was launched by a coalition of more than 40 groups and individuals, advertisers have already begun to act swiftly about seeing their ads adjacent to images depicting rape and violence against women on Facebook. Indeed, the response has inspired hope that the demands in the Open Letter to Facebook may just be met.

For those who missed it, organizers of the campaign are asking Facebook to take action about gender-based violent imagery and pages that proliferate on the site, while its moderators act quickly to remove similarly graphic and hurtful content that is racist or homophobic. Examples of these pages include Fly Kicking Sluts in the Uterus and Violently Raping Your Friends Just for Laughs. This is not new. Back in November 2011, I wrote about several pages on Facebook, including It’s Not Rape if you Yell Surprise and Kicking Sluts in the Vagina Because it’s Funny Watching Your Foot Disappear. When you combine this with tolerance, or even implied approval, of photo memes that depict violence against women with taglines like, “This bitch didn’t know when to shut up,” it adds up to a long history of a corporate culture that is a willing participant in spreading gender-based hate speech and rape culture.

As the coalition explains in an official statement:

Specifically, the group demands that the social media giant take three specific actions:

1. Recognize speech that trivializes or glorifies violence against girls and women as hate speech and make a commitment that Facebook will not tolerate this content.
2. Train Facebook’s content moderators to recognize and remove gender-based hate speech.
3. Train moderators to understand how online harassment differently affects women and men, in part due to the real-world pandemic of violence against women.

The message to Facebook is accompanied by a massive social media campaign, calling on advertisers such as Dove and American Express to pull their advertising from Facebook until they can be assured it won’t appear next to content that promotes rape or domestic violence.

And so far, several advertisers are not just listening, but reacting to the campaign. Half-a-dozen companies, including Candyopolis and Nissan UK, have pulled their ads after receiving campaign information released on May 21. At least as many companies have responded and have said they are looking into the situation, one of which being American Express. Unfortunately, a few companies including Dove, VistaPrint, and Audible, have declined to take action.

It’s time for Facebook to change and we’re glad to see that so many advertisers agree! (You can get updates on where companies stand on the Women, Action & the Media campaign page.)

We at Feminism 2.0 are proud to have signed on to this campaign (as well as this author, as The Sin City Siren) and we want to thank the campaign organizers for their diligence and hard work to launch and follow through with this seminal campaign, which may just change the landscape of Facebook and social media.

Follow the latest on the facebook campaign here and by using the hashtag #FBrape on twitter.

Image by Geoff Livingston, via Creative Commons.