California NOW

Justice Souter to Retire After Current Term?

News sources are reporting that Justice David Souter plans to retire after the current Supreme Court term, or after his successor is confirmed.

When I first heard that, I felt a moment of panic, and then I remembered who we had in office as President and relaxed.

As Liss of Shakesville has recently pointed out, Obama isn't perfect on reproductive choice, but I can't help thinking about what we would have been looking at under a McCain/Palin administration. 

Women Voters Are Destroying the Country?

You might think that the question of woman suffrage, women's right to vote, had been decided long ago. Even though the fight for the vote was a long and contentious one, it would be ridiculous for anyone today to argue that women shouldn't have been given the right to vote. Right? Apparently someone doesn't think so.

Yup, the Great Depression? The fault of women voters, clearly. H/T to Pandagon for covering this, because otherwise I would never have seen it, since I don't frequently read unresearched, non-reality-based political ranting.

But shockingly enough, this isn't just a one-man crazy-fest. In fact, the venerable Boston Globe has an article this week about New Hampshire's recent turn towards progressive politics, blaming the fact that it is now the first state in the country to have a female majority in the state legislature. Unfortunately, women can be oppressive as well, as shown in the New Hampshire Senate's unanimousdecision to vote down provisions which would have protected transgender women and men from being discriminated against in employment and housing.

Of course, the recent changes in New Hampshire politics tie into something that NOW has been behind from the beginning: the idea that having a truly representative democracy is naturally more likely to address the real needs of the population, 51% of whom happen to be female.

There's a fascinating piece up at Balkanization which discusses the idea that the men who first voted for woman suffrage did it simply because they had more to gain by giving women the vote than they had to lose. In essence, they chose to give up the power of the male-only franchise in exchange for the possibility of increasing their female population and the likelihood of future statehood.

Yes, extending the vote to new populations (like women, people of color, non-landowners, etc.) creates a change in the voting dynamic, and therefore a change in the legislative body, and what that body works on. This is only a negative for the people who were previously in power, and who seek to maintain their power unjustly. For the rest of us, those changes read as justice and equity.

Maybe the people complaining that women voters and women legislators are ruining things by caring about issues, like equal pay, health care, education and child care should take another look at the idea of democracy, and representative democracy, and who it's supposed to serve. (Hint: all of the people, not just some of the people.

Good News of the Week!

There's some great news to celebrate this week.  Here's our brief wrap-up:

Kathleen Sebelius was confirmed as Secretary of Health and Human Services, giving us a pro-choice head of the department!  She was confirmed despite conservative attempts to claim that the swine flu outbreak was concocted to force her confirmation.  Even better, she was confirmed after vetoing a Kansas bill that would have restricted abortion. 

A New York Times poll shows that just in the last month, attitudes towards marriage equality are changing for the better. The question asked was, "Which comes closest to your view? Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry. OR, Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry. OR, There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple's relationship." Answers in parentheses are from an identical survey in March.
Legal Marriage 42% (33)   Civil Unions 25% (27)  No Legal Recognition 28% (35)
To go along with this, New Hampshire's Senate voted to allow gay marriage, and in Maine the committee overseeing gay marriage voted 11-2-1 in favor. 

A 17-year-old girl in Quartz Hill used her marching band baton to beat back two would-be muggers. The girl was walking to school on April 24 when two men approached her from behind, tried to grab her coat and demanded money. Instead, she punched one in the nose, kicked the other in the groin, and beat both of them with her band baton before she ran away.

The Matthew Shepherd Act, which will add sexual orientation and gender identity/expression to hate crimes statutes, passed the House by 249-175.

The Senate and House passed the federal budget resolution.

Women Who Tech

We're excited about the Women Who Tech webconference taking place on May 12th!

The participants are the cadre of women from around the globe who leverage their technology savvy to inspire change and transform the world.  Panelists include a “who’s who” of women on the forefront of social change and technological progress, among them: Joan Blades of MoveOn and Moms Rising, Allison Fine of Personal Democracy Forum, Lynne D Johnson of Fast Company, Charlene Li, Holly Ross of NTEN, Rashmi Sinha of SlideShare, Lisa Stone of BlogHer and more.

Women Who Tech is also organizing fun after-parties after the TeleSummit on May 12 in Washington, DC, NYC, San Francisco, and London.

Join us online at the conference, and in using technology to help create positive change for women and girls!

"Battered Wife" as Metaphor

I came across this article yesterday, on a website that I usually enjoy reading, but for some reason I just could not get around my first immediate reaction to the title: Democrats' "Battered Wife Syndrome" (Article may be triggering for abuse survivors.)

The article is discussing the interactions of the Democratic and Republican parties, and equating the relationship between these political players to the relationship between an abusive husband and an abused wife.

The problems I have with using an abusive relationship as a metaphor are: