And count another win for American women! Obama has officially signed The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act!

In his own words:

It is fitting that with the very first bill I sign … we are upholding one of this nation’s first principles: that we are all created equal and each deserve a chance to pursue our own version of happiness. If we stay focused, as Lilly did, and keep standing for what’s right, as Lilly did, we will close that pay gap and ensure that our daughters have the same rights, the same chances, and the same freedom to pursue their dreams as our sons.

Alisha and I had the privilege of meeting the courageous Lilly Ledbetter (that’s her on the right!) last year at the National Young Women’s Leadership Conference. Also pictured is Representative Maloney of NY, who was a fierce advocate for this legislation. They both rocked our socks and gave us SD girls some intense inspiration.

Knowing that past wrongs can indeed be righted is rejuvenating. But as NOW President Kim Gandy reminds us:

To move forward seriously on fair pay, we need the Senate to pass the companion bill to Ledbetter — the Paycheck Fairness Act. The House has already passed this act, which would close the loopholes that allow employers to pay men and women discriminatorily, and would provide consequences for that discrimination. To put on a full court press, we need your help again, because women deserve fair pay laws with real teeth.

P.S.

Don’t forget that you can donate TODAY! to help us go again this year and bring even more young SD women along to be inspired and motivated to lead.

Wouldn’t you think that this would scare the conservatives? (I’m only joking…although this feminist tends to be angry all the time, I would never resort to violence even for as much as that would be breaking a gender norm)  The conservatives in South Dakota are back at it again, trying to ensure their 2^nd amendment rights by permitting concealed weapons on university campuses.   This seems so absurd as to be ludicrous and I finally started to get their crazy line of thought when one of my fellow student senators presented the issue in a manner that infuriated me.  I was so angry that I’ll admit I can’t replicate what he said but it seems his line of thought was that armed “good guys” on campus could protect our women from the rapists.  (Just the way he says rapists makes my blood curdle) and that women on campus should feel safer in areas that display signs declaring our campus a concealed weapon zone.  WHAT? !@#!$%     Of course I could not let this be said without a feminist response.  I signaled to be recognized by our president and gave this senator an earful asking him who made him the spokesperson for the women on campus and declaring that the “little women” (I actually said it this way with air quotes and just as much contempt as you can imagine) would not feel safer knowing that anybody could legally be caring a firearm nearby.   

Well the student senate did pass a resolution to pass onto the state legislator urging them to give up this 2^nd amendment nonsense and despite the contingency of students who presented at the committee hearing the committee passed it onto the senate floor with a do-not-pass label because the conservatives had promised to smoke the bill out of committee.   After having to end sexist language in the student senate, I decided that the state senators should get an ear full or an e-mail inbox full of a feminist perspective on SB 82.  So, I sent the following e-mail to all of the state senators (with certain changes depending on their gender…you’ll understand where after reading the email.):

 

Sen. <Insert senator’s name>,

There are a number of reasons you should oppose senate bill 82.  First and foremost you should consider the fact that you would not want concealed weapons permitted in the capital building; by not permitting them on the premises you have done nothing to hamper second amendment rights.  All of that same logic applies to our campuses as well.  As a student, I would feel a great loss in my personal security if this bill were to pass.   I feel very strongly that as a female this would greatly hamper my personal security.  As females we are socialized to avoid violence, which makes us less likely as a gender to carry a violent weapon.   Although some would argue this would enhance our security, police departments regularly encourage women not to carry violent weapons in case any potential attackers should turn the gun on them.    If this bill were to pass I would not think that weapon toting “gentlemen” would help provide for my safety instead I would see it as legitimizing the right of any potential attackers to carry a gun on campus.    Thus in many ways I see this not only as a gun rights issue but as an equality issue.   As a woman, I feel I can assure my own personal safety using the resources I currently have available on campus (I don’t not need male legislators to pass bills to provide it for me) and would refuse to apply for a concealed weapons permit in order to carry a violent weapon even if any potential attacker could legally be carrying one.  I have a right to a safe learning environment; please vote to ensure that it stays that way!

 

Thank you,

 

 

<my signature>

SDSU student

Liz’s most recent post commented on the budget cuts that Gov Rounds has suggested, but I thought that our friends at DakotaWomen  nailed it in regards to the elimination of the HPV vaccine program:

Who’s the latest group to get screwed by Rounds’ budget for next year? 12 year old girls.
…
It’s not rocket science; it’s a pretty solid fact that prevention is MUCH cheaper in the long run than treating diseases after they’ve happened. It might seem easy now to say these vaccines aren’t important. But statistically, as many as 500 of these girls will contract HPV at some point in their lives. I’m no doctor, but I’m almost 100% certain that it’s a lot more expensive to pay for CANCER than it is to pay for vaccines.

But hey, times are tough. Every state department is feeling the hit. Oh, wait, what? You mean the Governor’s office gave itself a raise? And the Tourism department got an increase as well? (h/t Northern Valley Beacon)

 For all the young women out there, I’m going to go ahead and raise the bullshit flag.

Thanks to our wonderful PR chair, Campus Women’s Coalition is now able to accept online donations.

You simply click the “Donate” button on the right hand side of our blog page and follow the directions after that.

Easy, right?

This is a great way to help a local, grassroots student group that works hard for women’s rights. These donations will directly fund our efforts here at SDSU to help impact the campus in women-friendly ways by raising awareness and increasing our allies.

Some funded programs include:

• Sending feminist student leaders to national conferences! (Like this one and this one)
• Women’s History Month activities and speakers
• Vagina Monologues – (raises money for the local domestic abuse shelter and raises awareness about domestic abuse)
• “The Tunnel of Oppression” (raise awareness about the trials and tribulations of women in the past and present)
• Operation: Backpack
• Equal Pay programs – (women are still only make 78 cents/ male dollar people! let’s do something about it!)
• Our popular “Sexuality in the City” program (in which female academics share their research with students and community)

So please look into your pockets and pocketbooks to see what you can do to help our humble group of feisty feminists!

THANKS!

While not strictly a women’s issue, Gov. Rounds’ planned budget cuts – an attempt to make up for the $133.8 million budget gap – will negatively affect women across South Dakota. Some budget cuts are inevitable, but Rounds’ proposed cuts include closing the School for the Deaf in Sioux Falls and the South Dakota Arts Council. This would make South Dakota the only state in the country without an Arts Council. It would also stop us from receiving federal funds for the arts, as the federal government matches the state’s funding. 

Rounds’ program cuts would also lower teacher salaries and Medicaid reimbursement to medical providers, which could lead to poor people being denied healthcare. 

The advertising budget for tourism, however, would remain untouched. This doesn’t make much sense. The Arts Council contributes to tourism. People may come to SD primarily for Mt. Rushmore, Wall Drug, and Sturgis, but they just might extend their trip to see a gallery show or a concert. If Rounds is cutting the amount of tourist attractions in the state, the budget for tourism advertising should decrease, as well.

Thankfully, the Democrats in the legislature are speaking out. They want the state to take a higher share from the video lottery system, which would bring in more revenue and allow for smaller budget cuts, potentially saving the Arts Council and programs for the poor and disabled.

Please contact your legislators and let them know that saving these programs is important. If you’re going to Women 4 Women Day in a week, you can tell them in person. You can also email them here. It’s especially important to contact Republicans, as they haven’t publicly announced an opinion on the budget yet, so your influence could go farther.

 

For more information, see these Argus Leader articles: 

Rounds’ plan would end prominent state programs

Interests clash in budget debate

The Argus Leader recently came out with some disturbing statistics.  STD rates are up in our fair state, and by more than just a little.  Reports show that:

• Chlamydia cases reached an all-time high of 2,948, up 328 from 2007.
• Gonorrhea rose 29.4 percent to 370 – the highest since 1988.
• The number of HIV/AIDS cases returned to the 2006 mark of 34, compared with 25 in 2007.

The hardest hit are the Native populations.  Charon Asetoyer, executive director of Native American Women’s Health Education Resource Center in Lake Andes, astutely connects the dots.

“The statistics are proof that young people need sex education to be able to protect themselves.

If you do not have the tools to protect yourself – the information – you are going to see an increase in the number of sexually transmitted diseases.”

She cited Bush administration cuts in Indian Health Services as an example.  

“You cannot take health care away from communities and expect a community to maintain their health without information and resources,” she said.

Amen, sister. 

As of this time last year, 15 states had rejected abstinence only funds.  Hopefully, soon such funds will be a thing of the past.

A couple of great steps forward for women:

• Obama has signed an executive order to overturn the global gag rule.  Now we just need to get rid of a few more things that put politics before medicine, like, oh, I don’t know… abstinence-only funding and the Hyde amendment.
• Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act Passes Senate!!

The bill passed last night. That didn’t take too long after the House’s passage.  Last stop:  President Obama’s desk. Since he’s already expressed support for the bill, fair pay is only a penstroke away! 

But as the gals at feministing point out:  the Paycheck Fairness Act still waits in the wings for Senate’s passage. Kia Franklin at Tort Deform reminds us why both the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act are critical:

The passage of Ledbetter as written will be a significant victory, but it puts us back to square one. To give the new administration the tools to end wage discrimination, a second comprehensive law – also passed last week by the House – is essential. The Paycheck Fairness Act would update the Equal Pay Act of 1963. Shepherded by departing Senator Clinton, it would create incentives for employer compliance with equal pay laws, rearm federal enforcement and outreach efforts, and encourage programs to help eliminate the persistent wage gap.

So as SDSU begins a new semester, there are plenty of groans to go around.  Eventually, I’m sure plenty students — including myself — soon will be fighting that urge to skip skip skip those pesky 8am classes, or to take an early weekend.

I think we forget, all too often, how fortunate we are, especially we college women, to attend those “pesky classes.”

The New York Times recently ran a story that defines determination and dedication to education.  As we know, Afghani girls are now permitted to attend school since the Taliban isn’t officially in power.  But…

as  Shamsia Husseini soon discovered, there are those who are more than willing to keep that oppressive ideology alive.  One their way to school one day,  she and fourteen others were the victims of acid attacked that left them scarred. 

Reflected Shamsia, 

“The people who did this to me don’t want women to be educated. They want us to be stupid things.”

Well, it looks like the attackers won’t be getting their way any time soon.  Reports the Times,

Today, nearly all of the wounded girls are back at the Mirwais School for Girls, including even Shamsia, whose face was so badly burned that she had to be sent abroad for treatment. Perhaps even more remarkable, nearly every other female student in this deeply conservative community has returned as well — about 1,300 in all.

 These women may not realize the extent of how important education is, but they know that it’s a tool that their oppressors don’t want in their hands.  After all, with education, women would know what they were capable of, and how to push oppressive forces out of their way so that they may reach their full potential and rightful place as equals among men.

The new president has already closed Guantanamo, and with Obama’s promise to eliminate the global gag rule, this is definitely a happier anniversary for the 1973 landmark Supreme court decision than the past eight.

However, we still have a lot of work.  Not far from here, in St. Paul MN, anti-choice protesters peacefully protested across the street from the Planned Parenthood Highland Park Clinic. Not ideal, but much better than the decision of an extreme anti-choicer who opted to ram his SUV against the front door of the clinic .

So let’s take it all in stride.  The future is bright, but let’s not forget that the present still needs some work.

As a self-proclaimed feminist, I naturally find myself focusing on gender equality in terms of women and the things that affect us, and that we affect.  A wake-up nudge came from an unexpected source.

Last night I had the opportunity to hear Gloria Steinem speak, and she reminded me that “gender equality” meant equality for all genders.  Now this might seem basic, but for some reason, to me it was profound.  I think that sometimes the fact that sexism negatively affects men and women alike is forgotten.

Ms. Steinem gave a wonderful visual.  To paraphrase, imagine “the human experience” as a pie chart.  Now, certain characteristics, emotions, experiences, are socially deemed masculine or feminine.  Let’s say 2/3 are the former, and only 1/3 the latter.

While women, who are socially pushed to embrace the ideal of femininity, have access to less of the human experience, men too are denied access to full humanity.  Sexism denies everyone the chance to be fully human.

Sometimes fighting for women’s rights is reminiscent of when my car got stuck last night in the South Dakota snow.  While our engine is still revving, we sometimes feel like we’re just spinning our wheels.  Perhaps that is because our destination gets obscured by rhetorical snow.  Our goal is, or should be, to give everyone access to the fullness of their humanity.

When we take this idea and extend it into real life, we can see that its results in our culture are endless.  Socially prescribed codes of gender are what GLBT folks and their allies ram heads against everyday.  I’ve been reading Jessica Valenti’s He’s a Stud, She’s a Slut, a hilarious (and somewhat depressing) take on the double standards that abound in our society, and how when women and men flirt with or even cross the gender line, serious societal consequences ensue.

One such situation that Valenti discusses is that while “He’s Gay, She’s a Fantasy.”   She explains that this particular hypocrisy centers around two things:  men’s fear of being feminized and the dismissal of lesbian relationships (because a penis isn’t involved).  The consequences, she concludes, are dangerous:  “Lesbian women who are raped are often targeted because of their sexuality and told that they just need a ‘real man.’ Men who are gay-bashed are similarly targeted.”

These codes are also what give birth to violence against women, as men are supposed to be active, in control, and “strong.”  They also prescribe women’s silence and domestic place, no doubt manifesting in part in the meager 16% of women representatives in the US congress.  Likewise, men are pushed into things like sports and the military.  As Valenti’s fifty double standards suggest, no one has access to both sides of the gender line without serious societal consequences.

Some women and men subscribe and seem content in such roles; however, as Ms. Steinem suggested to our audience last night, in such world, how can any of us really discern what we really want?  While everyone should follow their bliss, I think that it’s clear that these societal codes put in place by a patriarchal system are at best stunting human progress and at worst the root of the world’s anguish.

So, fellow feminists and friends , let’s get back to our roots of “gender equality” and break down those barriers for the good of all!