Items of interest found recently in my RSS feed. What did I miss? Please share what you've been reading (and writing!) in the comments.
- my five fav tools to dialogue about justice
- D.C.'s Murderous Anti-Prostitution Policy
- Manslaughter defense still an option for Roeder
- Oh, Feminists, Can You Stop Telling People With Disabilities How To Take Care Of Their Bodies?
- Another Feminist Pet Peeve: Woman-Bashing Commenting
- How objectification silences women – the male glance as a psychological muzzle
- A real-life Mrs. Robinson
– “below are tools that i use in workshops that have proven to be really helpful. i use these because they shaped the way i view things. most of these deal with how to talk about ableism, access, the kind of activists we want to be, and the importance of making our movements relevant to people.”
– “Apparently all you need to do to be arrested for prostitution in D.C. is carry three or more condoms. Seriously.” (Actually, no.)
– “Hendricks dismisses the opposition to Wilbert’s decision as “hysterical fears from abortion-rights groups,” which doesn’t sit too well with me — when an Army of God representative tells the press that a voluntary manslaughter conviction for Roeder could mean more zealots “may be willing to take that risk” of murdering providers, a fear response from people on the front lines is only logical. That’s why it’s called “terrorism.”"
– “This attitude is especially troubling when it comes to disability matters, because it reinforces the idea that other people know more about women’s bodies than they do, and that doctors can and should force procedures on their patients. That ladies don’t know what’s good for them, and therefore it’s up to other people to tell them what to do. That women with disabilities can’t possibly make informed choices because there’s no way they could possibly know more than a mainstream feminist who is providing a lecture about “what’s good for you.””
– “Any article discussing women, gender relations or feminism is bound to attract the hateful comments, and by those I don’t mean comments debating the contents of the article but comments about What Is Wrong With Women:”
– great post from Ed Yong – the comments are full of troglodytes though
– “Clearly, women are fully capable of screwing up their families and careers with tawdry sex scandals, too. Go, humanity.”
Related Posts:
- Femmostroppo Reader – January 15, 2010 by tigtog
- Femmostroppo Reader – July 11, 2009 by tigtog
- Femmostroppo Reader – January 20, 2010 by tigtog
- Femmostroppo Reader – June 4, 2009 by tigtog
- Femmostroppo Reader – June 10, 2009 by tigtog
* Quicklink to recent open threads
bluemilk: 
mindyhoyden: 
vivsmythe: 
CastIronBalcony: 
puzzlement: 
ChallyWrites: 
ilauredhel: 
That second one isn’t actually true – it’s a misunderstanding that’s been flying around the internet for a few days now.
See this DC blogger’s post for the complete story.
Thanks, Greta! Have added a link to your comment to the post.
The Roeder trial will be interesting to follow. My fear is that justice won’t be done, but I usually feel very pessimistic about abortion, gay rights etc when it comes to the US of A.
One question out of interest (I’m not sure whether their rules are the same as ours; either way, hopefully someone on here will know): is it possible that prospective female jurors can be asked whether or not they have had an abortion? And if so, whether a similar question can be posed to prospective male jurors (in terms of a partner, obviously)?