By
81 Comments
By
51 Comments
By
29 Comments
By
22 Comments
By
12 CommentsThe Senate will vote as early as Monday on a bill to strip Planned Parenthood of federal funding, a largely symbolic vote causing pain for centrists in both parties and drawing fire from conservatives who say it won’t satisfy their quest to put the organization out of business. The bill isn’t expected to garner the 60 votes needed to advance, as nearly all Democrats object to it. Its defeat, however, won’t end the effort to cut off federal money for Planned Parenthood.When you consider the Hyde Amendment, you need to ask yourself, what is the real agenda of the GOP? The correct answer is that The War on Women continues. This is really about contraception... and women who have the ability to have an enjoy sex (a mythical creature in GOP land, among GOP men and women - which is really sad.) without the fear of pregnancy.
By
15 Comments
By
4 CommentsFor the study, researchers from Yale University asked more than 100 science faculty members at academic institutions across the country to evaluate one of two student résumés. The résumés were identical except for one small part: The candidate’s name was either John or Jennifer. Despite both candidates having the exact same qualifications and experience, science faculty members were more likely to perceive John as competent and select him for a hypothetical lab manager position.
By
34 Comments
By
10 CommentsThe proposal by Rep. Matt Krause, R-Fort Worth, would appoint a representative to speak on behalf of the fetus if a pregnant woman is declared brain-dead or otherwise permanently incapacitated. Krause is working with legislative bill-drafters and has yet to introduce a specific measure in the House. “You’ll hear what the family wants, and you’ll also give the pre-born child a chance to have a voice in court at that same time,” Krause said. “The judge weighs everything and he or she makes their decision based on that.”Please notice how the pregnant, brain-dead and/or permanently incapacitated woman's wishes aren't considered.
By
21 CommentsThe Supreme Court has declined to overturn a lower court’s ruling that an insurance company was within bounds when it fired a breastfeeding mother. The woman’s suit was dismissed by the Eighth Circuit Court on the grounds that firing a woman for breastfeeding isn’t sexist because men can lactate, too. The ACLU’s Galen Sherwin wrote Monday that former Nationwide Insurance Company employee Angela Ames sued her employer when she returned from maternity leave to find that no allowances had been made to enable her to pump breast milk for her baby during the day. When Ames asked her supervisor for accommodations that would enable her to express milk and store it for her child, the supervisor reportedly responded that Ames should “go home and be with your babies” instead. That supervisor went on to dictate a letter of resignation to Ames that day, effectively forcing her to resign.Men can lactate, too! They don't, but they can (or some can), so... hand that baby over to dad and get back to work, Ms. Ames! I breastfed both of my children, and while I sincerely enjoyed it I would have loved to hand off those 3am feedings to my husband. If only I had known at the time some men could lactate! I would have bought him his very own pump!
By
43 Comments
By
128 CommentsSometimes you come across an article that won't let you move onto other things. Here's mine:con·sent
/kənˈsent/ Noun Permission for something to happen or agreement to do something. Verb Give permission for something to happen: "he consented to a search by a detective".
MARCH 22--A New York City man flying cross country with his 12-year-old son allegedly put his hand underneath the skirt of a sleeping female passenger and massaged her thigh, an act he later defended by telling the victim, “It’s not like I molested you. It’s not like I stuck my my finger in your pussy or grabbed your tits.” [...] As detailed in a probable cause statement, a few hours into the flight the woman took medication to help her fall asleep. About 40 minutes before arrival at John F. Kennedy International Airport, the woman “woke up… to Zorse massaging her thigh underneath her skirt.” [...] When questioned by investigators, Zorse claimed that he believed the female passenger was “flirting with him, telling him he was attractive and he was a good father,” adding that he felt he had “bonded” with her. While copping to placing his hand on the woman’s leg for “approximately 30 seconds,” Zorse denied placing his hand up her skirt. He did acknowledge, however, that he “could have said something like ‘It’s not like I stuck my finger up your pussy or grabbed your tits,’” according to the probable cause statement.Here's what really bothers me about this ugly, illegal incident. Zorse confesses. Easily. He doesn't see anything wrong in what he did to a sleeping (NON- CONSENTING) woman because he believed "the female passenger was “flirting with him, telling him he was attractive and he was a good father,” adding that he felt he had “bonded” with her." It's all about his feelings. Those are his only social clues. Zorse determines what constitutes flirting. He also determines what constitutes bonding. He even decides that the conversation before the woman fell asleep progressed to the point where he could touch her. He had already granted himself permission.
By
13 Comments