Pressure is mounting on Capitol Hill for a meaningful answer to the crisis of sexual assault in the U.S. military. In response, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) hosted a press conference Thursday to promote legislation that would remove from the chain of command in the nation’s armed forces the reporting and adjudication of sexual crimes, along with other felonies that are not specifically military in nature.
Gillibrand also introduced her audience to three military veterans who said they suffered punishment from the military when they reported having been the victims of sex crimes perpetrated against them by their comrades.
Jennifer Norris, a former sergeant in the Air Force Reserve, was accompanied to the press conference by a service dog who, she says, assists her with the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) she experiences because of assaults by four different perpetrators during her military career. (You can read her harrowing story here.) Norris’ military career ended, she writes, when her security clearance was revoked for having a PTSD diagnosis. Today she works as a victim advocate at the Military Rape Crisis Center, a non-profit organization that offers support to those who suffer sexual abuse while serving in the military.
As she sat in the front row at the press conference, Norris’ eyes began to overflow with tears, causing Sen. Barbara Boxer, who was then at the podium, to remark, “I hope those are tears of hope.”
Norris affirmed that they were, saying that she was moved because she never thought she’d see the day when such as change as that proposed by Gillibrand could take place.
Sometimes, what bothers me the most about the abortion debate is the people who talk like they know everything about abortion without having ever walked into a Planned Parenthood or listened to women talk about their experiences or researched unbiased information about the various abortion procedures. I wish everyone could spend a day as a clinic escort or a volunteer on a hotline or just talking to women and abortion providers instead of assuming they know all there is to know.
That was the most informative thing I have ever been told by a duck
And I have been told a lot of things by ducks.
(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)
In New Interview, Gabriel Gomez Again Does Not Clarify Views on Reproductive Rights
On the failed Blunt Amendment of 2012 that would have allowed secular employers to exclude contraception and other services covered by third-party health insurance plans to employees and dependents, Gomez told the Globe, “Honestly, I haven’t read the Blunt Amendment, so it’s hard for me to go yea or nay without reading the full Blunt Amendment. That’s part of the reason why these guys and women down there should read these whole things. … I’m happy to look at it.”
When further questioned, he said, “Oh, is this like the Catholic Church and all? Yeah, I don’t believe the Catholic Church—or any faith, any organization like that—should have to do something that goes against their doctrine.”
The Blunt Amendment went far beyond allowing religious or religiously affiliated institutions to refuse contraceptive coverage, for which the Obama administration has repeatedly crafted exclusions and compromises regarding third-party health insurance plans used by their employees and dependents. The Blunt Amendment would have made into law the opinion of, among others, the general counsel of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Anthony Picarello, who last year suggested that even if he were running a Taco Bell he should be legally empowered to stop employees from accessing contraception without a co-pay.
When violent masculinity goes unchecked, it’s really a failure of leadership. This must watch TED talk will explain why. #BroChoice
Benefits of contraception use in the US context
Did you know that pregnant women have been fired for using the bathroom to vomit, needing to carry a water bottle on the job, or asking to sit on a stool instead of standing in place all day? While employers have to make allowances like these for other types of temporary disabilities, a number of bad court decisions have encouraged them to feel they can get away with firing or mistreating pregnant workers with impunity.
It’s disgraceful and unacceptable that at a time when unnecessary budget cuts are decimating food, medical, and educational supports for low-income families, pregnant women continue to be pushed out of their jobs just as they take on all the expenses of having a new baby.
Read more about the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
and take action by contacting your congressperson.
Teaser of our latest blog post about the terrible things that are Crisis Pregnancy Centers:
“Pregnant? Need Help?”
Have you seen these signs around your community? You might be forgiven for mistaking them as advertisements for women’s health centers – but you’d be wrong. These are advertisements for religious organizations called Crisis Pregnancy Centers and they are the happy recipients of your tax dollars.
Click the link to read the full blog post and find out ways you can help shut these places down!
A must read:
Understanding Reproductive Justice: A Response to O’Brien
Having a broad, intersectional analysis does not mean that every organization has to fight on all fronts all the time. Achieving reproductive justice does require countering an opposition that is itself broad and intersectional, as it pursues an anti-woman, pro-patriarchal, and racist agenda. No one organization can possibly do this alone. It is precisely because we do not and cannot all work on the same issues that we need the cross-cutting analysis and shared values encompassed in reproductive justice. Embracing that framework enables us to shape our particular piece of the advocacy in ways that support each other’s work, without undermining our common long-term goals and values, and without sacrificing any group’s human rights for the political expediency of achieving limited gains.
…
“Inclusivity” and “intersectionality” are not just words. They describe the theory and practice of the reproductive justice movement with the potential to revitalize all of our advocacy and enable us to create the large and motivated base of support required to secure reproductive rights, health, and justice for all.
