Category: sexism


Here’s some pictures from the Batten Library!  About half of the house-owned material has been cataloged on-line ( with even more on the way!



Mari Stein posted this on Happenin’ at Batten on Facebook…



“Outsourced Wombs”

Americans and Europeans are paying Indian women to have babies so that they can adopt with fewer legal costs and restrictions. Is this empowering for the women who might not otherwise have a job, or is this a nuanced variation on sex slavery?

“‘The human body is not lent out, is not rented out, is not sold,’ France’s highest court ruled back in 1991, when it outlawed surrogate motherhood. In the United States, lip service has long been paid to the notion that women can’t be instrumentalized as baby-making machines. Indeed, one of the ways that surrogacy survives here is under cover of the fiction that the women who bear other women’s babies do so not for the money – which would be degrading – but because they ‘love to be pregnant.’ But our rules of decency seem to differ when the women in question are living in abject poverty, half a world away. Then, selling one’s body for money is not degrading but empowering. And the transaction is not outsourcing of the basest nature – not modern-day wet-nursing taken to the nth degree – but a good deal for everyone concerned. ‘There’s nothing wrong in this,’ Priyanka Sharma, another surrogate, concluded the Marketplace segment. ‘We give them a baby and they give us much-needed money. It’s good for them and for us.’”

Surrogate mothers are seen at Kaival Hospital in Anand, India, in 2006. Photo: AP Photo/Ajit Solanki

The article, as well as the very very very interesting comments, can be read here. (Only slightly related, but, has anyone seen Juno? It’s pretty good [though the abortion-clinic scene is problematic] and the soundtrack is fantastic).

Where has the media been?

When I read the article “Women’s Support for Clinton Rises in Wake of Perceived Sexism” in the New York Times, I was kind of pissed. I was kind of pissed at the writer who acts like women are just waking up to the sexism that Clinton has faced.

Jodi Kantor writes:

“Now that Mrs. Clinton has gone from a solid lead to a tie with Mr. Obama in the latest national Gallup poll, some voters are thinking back to incidents that they say now seem suspect to them: the debate in which Mr. Edwards critiqued the bright jacket Mrs. Clinton was wearing, or the one at which Mrs. Clinton was asked, by a woman, if she preferred diamonds or pearls.”

Um, hello? We were there being pissed at this when it happened! I was on the couch with Jenny when they asked that jewelry question and I was stymied that such a question was allowed to be asked! (Incidentally, I forget who pointed out that diamonds vs pearls is a sort of homo litmus tests: diamonds=wedding ring, pearls=clitoris, which in itself is really stupid because it reduces heterosexual relationships to money and lesbian relationships to sex.) The point is, NOT ALL WOMEN were oblivious to the sexism in the campaign. And these acts are not SUSPECT, they are, in fact, REAL SEXISM.

Stupid media.