Hi, everyone!

I’m a somewhat familiar face here at GirlwPen.  Deborah Siegel and Kristen Loveland have both very graciously edited some of my guest posts featured at this site over the last year, including interviews with noted feminist authors such as Leora Tanenbaum, Kyria Abrahams, Susan Campbell, and Kathryn Joyce, as well as the occasional book review.  I’m very excited to be a part of the new GirlwPen editorial staff and I greatly look forward to writing here alongside their work, every second Monday of each month!

For those who are not familiar with Shira Tarrant’s excellent new book, Men and Feminism, Shira will be on tour this fall, sharing her ideas on masculinity, feminism, and intimate connections between the two with longtime readers and newcomers alike.  Please check out her tour schedule here and make sure to take a look at her new book!

Identity politics are central to the writing I hope to share in this space.  Patricia Hill Collins, a black feminist writer and scholar, defines intersectionality as “the focal point where two [or more] exceptionally powerful and prevalent systems of oppression come together” (please see the article Patricia Hill Collins: Intersecting Oppressions for further explanation).  As a feminist, I have often been complacent in allowing my identity as a woman to exist solely without descriptors, as though my womanhood had no context other than gender (and not even an understanding of cisgendered womanhood, at that!).  It has taken me a lot of time, reading, reflection, and then some more time to come to terms with the impact of intersectionality in my life.  It has also taken me just as long to understand many of the ways in which the theory of intersectionality is both embraced and/or ignored by various feminist groups. I still have a ways to go and the journey, as far as I’m concerned, will never be complete and will never rest solely in my hands.

The description of this column includes a definition for one of the least-known but greatly critical academic terms: kyriarchy.  Like many in the blogosphere, I was introduced to the concept of kyriarchy via this fantastic post by Lisa at My Ecdysis.  In reading, I began to understand that unlike the term “patriarchy,” kyriarchy provides a much-needed framework for understanding many varied systems of oppression, domination, subordination and superordination.  Arwyn at Raising My Boychick notes that “most of us exist with a complex array of privilege in some areas and oppression in others” (see her complex and highly informative perspective on kyriarchy here).  These include, but are not limited to: age, race, gender, gender expression, nationality, social class, sexuality, disability, body type, weight, citizenship, religion, and much, much more. 

In understanding kyriarchy, I can see where parts of my identity have contributed to my personal experiences of oppression and subordination.  Just as importantly, it also helps for me to understand where I act as an oppressor through unearned privileges granted to me by facets of my identity.  As a white, cisgendered, twentysomething, bisexual, middle-class, able-bodied, zaftig, American citizen and woman, I struggle to fully own my identity and the facets which might seem contradictory.  One example: I was raised in a large family  by a single mother; there wasn’t much money growing up, and I find that even though my class status has changed from scholarship-student to white-collar employee and freelancing writer, I worry over money in many of the same ways I did as a child.  Despite having savings and some of the trappings of middle-class privilege, my mentality of being raised on food stamps, free lunches, and living on only a few “extra” dollars from paycheck to paycheck has not evolved as quickly as my circumstances have.

Yet kyriarchy has not only contributed to self-awareness, but also to a greater understanding of global politics.  Kyriarchy is never static; the shifts in power and powerlessness depend on context, and with ever-changing circumstances, we are all forced to contend with our changing social roles.  I often wonder how kyriarchy contributes to certain power structures and how those structures are overtly and subtly underminded by those who are not in power, yet still work to implement social change. 

I hope to reflect on some of these ideas, and hopefully more, in posts yet to be written.  I hope readers of GirlwPen will embrace this journey with me.

Just a quick shout out to a number of authors with FANTABULOUS feminist books out this fall.  Congrats, admiration, and heartfelt kudos to:

1. GWP’s very own Elline Lipkin, who penned Girls’ Studies, hot off the presses from Seal; it’s the latest in the Seal Studies series (which includes Shira Tarrant’s most excellent Men and Feminism of course too!) and gets the thumbs up from Peggy Orenstein who says “If I were to recommend one book to students of the field, Girls Studies would be it.”

2. Demos Distinguished Senior Fellow Linda Tarr-Whelan, whose book Women Lead the Way: Your Guide to Stepping Up to Leadership and Changing the World offers practical steps for women to bring their passions, brains, and background to the power tables and make life better for themselves, their companies/organizations, and the world.  We’ve still got a ways to go.

3. Clarie Mysko, formerly of Girls Inc, whose book Does This Pregnancy Make Me Look Fat?: The Essential Guide to Loving Your Body Before and After Baby and whose body activism could not have come at a better time for this soon-to-be mama over here.

4. Jacquette Timmons, a compadre of mine from Woodhull, whose inaugural book Financial Intimacy: How to Create a Healthy Relationship with Your Money and Your Mate smartly addresses the financial issues that couples face, examining how family background, personal choices, and socioeconomic and cultural influences affect the way women merge love and money.

…and lastly, a book long-awaited, the publication of which is now poignantly bittersweet…

5. Nona Willis-Aronowitz and the late (and much missed) Emma Bee Bernstein, whose Girldrive: Criss-Crossing America, Redefining Feminism. It’s a road trip, a blog, a book, and, quite frankly, an inspiration. You can join the community by visiting: http://www.girl-drive.com/community/.  Watch the trailer here.

I hope you’ll join me in supporting these amazing writers by buying, reading, and spreading word about their new and important work!

Welcome to my first column exploring gender stereotypes and realities in children’s lives. Whether or not you’re a parent yourself, it’s impossible to miss the countless ways in which our culture divides kids along gender lines. Just walk into any toy store and notice how the playthings are segregated–with action figures, race cars, and dinosaurs for the boys, and Barbies, Bratz dolls, and craft kits for the girls.

For decades, debates have raged over the “nature vs. nurture” question: Are we neurologically “hard wired” to behave in stereotypically masculine or feminine ways—or is gendered behavior acquired through culture and socialization? The pendulum has swung back and forth over the past fifty years, with scientists, educators, and parents vacillating between two poles of thought. During the 1970s, second-wave feminists came down on the “nurture” side of the fence, and worked hard to raise a generation of kids free from the restrictive gender roles that permeated the postwar, Leave-it-to-Beaver era. (Think Free to Be, You and Me, Title IX, and the ubiquitous parenting refrain: “you can be ANYTHING you want to be…”) Recently, however, some experts have been touting the “nature” side of the equation, arguing that boys and girls are “biologically programmed” to behave and learn differently.

Today, in my opinion, the most sophisticated and sensible answer to the “nature vs. nurture” question is: “both.” In her new book Pink Brain, Blue Brain: How Small Differences Grow into Troublesome Gaps—And What We can Do About It,” neuroscientist and mother-of-three Lise Eliot explains that there are some real inborn differences between the sexes, but statistically, they are very small. It’s our culture—what we do and say at home and at school, on t.v. and in the toy store—that amplifies those small innate differences, turning them into self-fulfilling prophesies that limit the aspirations, experiences, and skills of boys and girls alike.

It’s not simply a matter of banning Barbies or forcing boys to do needlepoint. The issues swirling around kids and gender identity are complicated, so simplistic, one-size-fits-all “solutions” won’t do the trick. But in the best feminist tradition, it’s worth asking tough questions about the messages our culture sends out to parents and kids on a daily basis. Why, for example, does the Toy Industry Association persist in having categories like “Best Boy Toy” and “Best Girl Toy” of the year? (More on that next month!) Retail stores gain when they sell pink drapes for girls’ bedrooms and blue shades for boys’—but what do kids lose when they grow up in such a gender-bifurcated world?

Please share your thoughts, opinions and questions by posting a comment or emailing me at rotscant@yahoo.com.

One of the things I like most about blogging is that your subject can change as you do. This summer I’ve been blogging pregnancy, and now, with just a few weeks more to go, and to keep up with the changes going on here at GWP, I’m changing the theme to (drum roll) Mama w/Pen. From here on in, keep an eye out for monthly contributions from me on the topic of emergent motherhood, feminist and otherwise, on the first Monday of each month.

And speaking of becoming a mama, I just put an “away” message on my email, in preparation for The Big Event. In the meantime, you’ve not heard much from me this past month because I’ve been either in the hospital or on bedrest, spending much of my time lying on my side (best for babies’ circulation for some reason)—all of which makes it rather difficult to type on anything but an iPhone.

What started as a very cutting edge pregnancy—all those high-tech fertility interventions!—has ended up an anachronism. I now understand, in a very personal way, why pregnancy was once called “confinement,” or “lying in.” Hospitalized for early contractions at 30 weeks, I’ve spent the past 3.5 flat on my side, holed up with Marco, Tula (pictured here), my parents for a little while, and the occasional intrepid visitor from Manhattan and beyond. While Tula thinks bedrest is the cat’s meow, for me, it hasn’t been easy. Never in my life have I felt so limited by my body. I’m a a 21st century woman on a 19th century cure.

There are days when I think, “I can’t believe women, everyday, everywhere, go through this kind of thing, have gone through this, from the beginning of time.” Intelligent design? I think not. There are days when I’m in awe of my sisters who bear pregnancy gracefully, stoically, and without complication. Granted, some pregnancies are easier than others. For me, all attempts at grace and stoicism went out the window with those early contractions, which seem to only intensify as the weeks go by. My knees buckle from the weight of me. I have dark, dark circles under my eyes.

But I’m trying not to complain. Or rather, at least not in public, not out loud. I still can’t believe the technology worked. I’m still in awe that at ages 40 and 48, we’re lucky enough to become first time parents, and that we’re having not just one but two.

So rather than kvetch, which I confess is indeed my inclination right now, I’m trying instead to embrace the absurdity of it all while I bide my time and courageously hope not to give birth for a few weeks more—even though I’m more than ready to be done. Though it’s become increasingly hard to breath, there have been moments of buckling laughter. Like the night Marco wheeled me in a wheelchair with no leg support to the church down the block where Kol Nidre services were being held. Like the other day, when Marco walked me over to stand in front of the full-length mirror. “See? You’re still hot,” he said. “In a funhouse mirror kind of way.”

Funhouse aside, I feel like a character from a Margaret Atwood novel—an incubator and not much else. “Having children is sacrifice,” says Shari, one of the kind nurses I see regularly when I go to the hospital for my twice weekly monitoring appointments to check on the status of my contractions and the babies’ heart rates. “It starts right here, right now.” But what about the incubator? I want to ask, incredulous that becoming a mother has to involve such prolonged discomfort and pain. Instead, I hold my tongue, think of my roommate during my stay at the hospital, who gave birth to twin boys at 26 weeks, and feel immensely grateful to be here, with babies still inside me, at week 34.

erich hagan is a writing performer from a dead-end street in a part of Boston its many fine institutions advise visitors to avoid. He’s honed his direct style of communication and obscenely sincere subject matter in bars, coffee shops, theaters, residences, warehouses and classrooms across the nation. The Boston Globe calls erich “tender, yet violent.” He was a member of the 2007 Providence Poetry Slam Team and represented Boston’s Cantab Lounge at the 2008 Individual World Poetry Slam.

Presently, erich is consumed by a project called The Analog/Digital Debate; a production team and stage show that blurs the intersection of independent music, performance poetry and noise art. In his spare time, he is a freelance audio workhorse and a volunteer sexual assault outreach advocate with no dietary restrictions, no pets, no advanced degree in any of the liberal arts and no idea what his living situation will be by the time you read this.

As long as rape and sexual violence continue, we have to keep talking about it out loud. We need to keep talking so we can figure out how to take action. And, anyway, talking with each other is action.

Click here for what erich has to say—in his own voice—about men and sexual assault.

And you can read it here:

i am here to facilitate a discussion of sexual assault

this is not what i do for a living
i hold no degree in any of the social sciences
yes, i am a man
no, i’m not sure what that means, either

and like many of you
i worry about giving the wrong impression
this is a difficult topic
but i believe that rape is not inevitable

the crazy stranger in the bushes
accounts for a minority of incidences
survivors are mostly acquainted with attackers

the predatory relative
the nice guy who has a hard time hearing no
the abusive partners of every gender, race and orientation

it is not an act of sex
nor a matter of miscommunication
it is a planned exertion of power

exploiting trust, confusion
and silence, relying on society’s
inclination to discredit victims of explicit crimes

what were they wearing?
what were they doing that late at night?
how could they have put themselves in that situation?

truthfully, it’s an understandable reaction
if the mistake was theirs, then the world is fair
we want to believe that it could not happen to us

but it does: one in four, one in seven,
one in thirty-three, nine out of ten times
rapists identify as straight males

statistics are not my expertise
i just recognize a threat when i see it
i can not let this remain a touchy subject

there are boys
taught consent is women’s fault
there are places where forcible intercourse is a military maneuver

i am here
because i believe there is a difference
between risk reduction and prevention

everyone takes precautions
clutches cellphones on the subway
avoids specific colors of clothing on certain streets

it solves nothing
personal awareness is important
but it does not address the source of violence

drunk driving used to be
something we were warned to watch out for
stay off the roads at night, after holidays

later, the issue was reframed
friends didnt let friends, and it was effective
less people were endangered, no one stopped drinking

it just wasn’t an excuse
it became an individual obligation
to stop violators from operating

each of us can intervene
in any way we are comfortable
but someone you know will almost definitely be affected
and it is not funny
that is unacceptable

all a perpetrator needs
is a target no one believes
should’ve known, had it coming, naive

there are dozens of ways to shift blame
none of them excuse the one person responsible
nobody asks for this, lost control is not an explanation

it is the effect, whether or not
she goes silent or fights, whether or not
he can call it assault or explain to his friends

this is not a women’s issue: men, this is one war
you will not be glorified for waging
we can end it

Catch erich performing live:

•Friday 10/16 @ Nuyorican Poets Cafe, NYC (236 East 3rd Street Between Ave B & C)

•Monday 11/2 @ LouderArts, Bar 13 (E 13th St & University Pl, New York, NY)

•Monday 11/16 @ Emerson College, Boston, MA

•Friday 11/17 @ The Bridge Cafe (1117 Elm St, Manchester, NH)

•Thursday 11/19 @ The Inkwell (665, 2nd Ave. Long Branch NJ)

For more contact: info@theanalogdigitaldebate.com

Photo Credit: @ The Mercury Cafe — Denver, CO

If I could think of a topic that travels around the conversations of most women I know, the choice to have a child, and when, often lives pretty near the top of the list.  Following it comes a litany of concerns: how to juggle career, partnerhood, personal and professional ambitions, and more.  Elizabeth Gregory, Director of the Women’s Studies Program at the University of Houston, as well as Full Professor of English, tackles the topic of timing in Ready: Why Women are Embracing the New Later Motherhood with results that bring relief — both in the sense that there is good news to uncover amid all the swirling anxiety, and relief as the strong, clear reasons why many women choose to delay motherhood stand out against a grey fog of cultural pressure that warns against it.

Over two and a half years, Gregory interviews 113 women of diverse backgrounds (gay and straight as well as single and coupled) and focuses on the choices of women who become first-time mothers at age 35 or older.  Recognizing that “later” motherhood is nothing new, Gregory articulates how the difference is that women are now choosing to have first children, rather than last, at what is labeled “advanced maternal age.”  The choices that spur this change swim the  currents of women’s lives: the advent of birth control, and correspondingly, advances with fertility treatment; access to education and the desire for a career; refusal to marry just to gain a spouse, with instead the desire to wait for a peer relationship; commitment to financial security that eschews dependence on a partner.  The best news is how often the women interviewed express deep contentment with their paths.

Gregory’s statistics are compelling: “One of every 12 babies born to first-time mothers in 2006 was born to a woman 35 or older. In 1970, the figure was one in 100.”  Her research reflects the financial as well as emotional rewards of this choice.  She points out that “among full-time workers between 40 and 45 with professional degrees, those who had their first child at 25 made an average of $46,000, while those who waited until 35 made $79,000. A woman’s average long-term salary increases by 3 percent for each year she delays children.” Her exploration of the politics surrounding labor (during birth and other maternal work) and childcare issues continues on her blog “Domestic Product” and in several thought pieces available online.

Ready rounds a spectrum of reasons why women choose to delay, with many citing better emotional preparedness at later ages, as well as not wanting to rush new relationships, or women’s own enjoyment of their 20s and 30s, alongside the desire to be more financially powerful and advanced in their careers, hence better able to leverage work/family balance.  Women who come later to motherhood are more likely to have higher levels of education, more stable partnerships, and be in “peer marriages,” with active partners who commit equally to childcare. Most cheering is the overall positive sense of choice.

more...

This was the reaction of more than a few folks when they heard that I was starting to blog about motherhood. While it put me on the defensive, I also concede that they have a point. My single friend in Manhattan is feeling a bit inundated on Facebook by friends writing about their children; my husband points out that given the amount of blogging about motherhood, a lot has already been said (some of it very eloquently, I might add!) and that I should probably think hard about what, exactly, Global Mama is going to contribute.

So here’s the idea that motivated me to start a column called Global Mama. A lot of the conversation I’ve seen about motherhood and family life is pretty focused on individual experiences in the good ol’ US of A, which is fine and well (and also important–last time I checked, we still don’t have universal health care or paid maternity leave or a host of other national policies that would help a whole bunch of working families). But we also live in an increasingly globalized world (witness the development of all those mom blogs and the virtual communities they have created). I’m not just talking about the fact that so much of what we bring into our homes in the U.S. is made elsewhere (plastic toys made in Chinese factories) but also that the U.S. is attracting huge numbers of immigrant women–many of them mothers–who come here to make money to send home to their families, so their kids can eat food and buy clothes and go to school. Many of them working for professional working moms. All connected by globalization and the changes we’ve witnessed over the past several decades. All global mamas.

This column intends to bring together a diverse community–including researchers, activists, writers, thinkers, scholars, parents, paid caregivers, and kids–about what it means to have families and provide care in a globalized world. What are the effects of globalization, migration, technological change, transnational and transcultural exchange, and the development of globalized media culture on mothering and parenting? on our ideas about what motherhood is and what it looks like? As Arlie Russell Hochschild puts it in the anthology Global Woman, how do we create a “global sense of ethics” in a globalized world? And how can feminist commentary from a range of perspectives help inform our take on the myths and realities of motherhood and on debates within the public sphere?

So here’s my invitation to you, dear Girl with Pen reader, to offer your feminist perspectives on motherhood and family life on Global Mama! Contact me at globalmama@gmail.com.

In The New Republic Online, “line of the day” post by Jonathan Cohn, see the “…back-and-forth at the Senate Finance hearings, between Jon Kyl, the Arizona Republican, and Debbie Stabenow, the Michigan Democrat. The subject is requirements that all insurance policies cover certain benefits.”

KYL: “I don’t need maternity care.”

STABENOW: “I think your mom probably did.”

Watch the video here.

As Jonathan Cohn comments on the exchange: “I’m hard-pressed to think of a single exchange that better captures the sensibilities of our two political parties–or the principle of shared risk upon which universal coverage is based.” (The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has taken note, as reported on TalkingPointsMemo, and has sent a fund raising letter to draw attention to the exchange–and how it reflects different values.)

Here, I’m stalled: I think Cohn’s excellent point is a kind of conversation stopper.
If we start from different principles, where do we go from here?

How about self interest and humanity? That’s where I’ll go. A very helpful article at Forbes.com reviews what health care reform means to women. In case you weren’t aware, most private insurance policies currently allow pregnancy as a pre-existing condition for exclusion from coverage. Most jurisdictions are able to have gender ratings that hike up charges for women over men.

Now lots of even the most pessmistic folks seem to think that health care reform at a minimum offers hope that we’ll make such “pre-existing condition” exclusions illegal and that we will establish community ratings that end subgroup ratings, like the gender one. That is the minimum, but I’m still holding out for Medicare for all, something that 65% of Americans favor, according to a recent Time/CBS poll. (yet we are still debating this because….?)

But there’s more: Columns like Adina Nack’s “HPM, Stress and the Inner Game” remind us about the important ways that health care is subjective–and those subjective aspects can cause negative (or positive) health outcomes. When we are disempowered, it wears us down, undermines the immune system. The overarching point of real health care reform is for us all to understand that, in the words of Deborah Lewis, “I do not believe that we earn our illnesses….” This suggests that women–and men too–should be empowered to seek and assert their need for care.

The dilemma is that in a world where it is “special treatment” to get preventative care, like mammograms (only 20 states require private insurance companies to cover these after age 40), or maternity care, or the like, such a personal empowerment view doesn’t get us all the way there. What gets us all the way there is health care for all. Maybe Macbeth would not care about it. But the rest of us, who have a mama, just might.

–Virginia Rutter

Writers these days–especially those of us writing for progressive outlets for little pay–need multiple revenue streams. Here’s a little plug for a 1-hour webinar being offered through SheWrites by the very woman who taught me everything I know about being a writing coach/consultant myself, the one and only Shari Cohen:

Become a Writing Coach/Consultant

The first in a series on recession-proofing your career as a writer, this webinar will help you navigate the future as a writer in these economically uncertain times. Perhaps you are already trying to make the transition from staff writer or freelancer to something that offers you more financial security, and wondering how you can expand your impact and your financial security at the same time. How can you continue to do the work you love in a new environment, one in which so many of the rules have changed? In this workshop you’ll begin to learn tools and tricks for developing yourself as a writing coach and consultant. This webinar will include some self-assessment to discover your niche, and reframing and expanding your own thinking and professional identity as you serve more and different clients. Subsequent webinars in this series will focus on the business side, market testing to discover the needs of your prospective clients, and practical tools for working as a writing coach.

To register, click here

What exactly is writing coaching you ask?  For a Q&A with Shari, click here.

Welcome to the first official post for Bedside Manners. As a sexual health researcher and book author, I receive a lot of emails from women and men who are dealing with sexually transmitted diseases. Yesterday, I replied to Liza, a 25 year-old married, monogamous woman who had just been diagnosed with a serious cervical HPV infection and treated via LEEP. She could not understand how this had happened, since she had been getting pap smears during her annual gynecological exams for the past 10 years, and her husband had never been diagnosed with genital warts. Her doctor told her it was “bad luck,” and now she is worried about the possibility of having an oral HPV infection, wondering whether her cervical infection is cured, and trying to figure out how to this will affect her marriage.

By getting annual pap smear exams, Liza has been doing the right thing. Unfortunately, most medical practitioners don’t explain that pap smears only sample a small area of a woman’s cervix. So, it is possible to receive a “normal” pap smear result when there are HPV-infected/abnormal cell changes in other portions of the cervix.

With Liza’s husband as her only sexual partner, it’s key for him to get thoroughly examined for HPV/genital warts. If HPV-infected cells are found, then he should have them removed via one of several treatment options. Once both of their bodies have healed from treatments, the couple should strongly consider using condoms during sex (note: condoms reduce but do not eliminate the risk of HPV transmission).

Given Liza’s concern about oral HPV, a ‘HPV test’ can determine the specific strain of the virus. HPV 16 has been linked to cervical cancer and to oral/head/neck cancers. So, an important follow-up exam after receiving a genital HPV diagnosis is to see a dentist: I encouraged her to share that she’s been exposed to HPV orally and request a thorough exam.

As I concluded my reply to Liza, I realized that I needed to address the stress that she was clearly experiencing. Medical sociologists have often written about how disease can cause dis-ease, an illness often causes a patient to lose her sense of wellbeing. In the case of socially stigmatizing and medically incurable infections, like HPV, stress is almost unavoidable for newly diagnosed patients. In my book, Damaged Goods?, I detail specific strategies for handling the variety of stressors that come with a genital HPV or herpes infection, but I’ve decided to wrap up today’s post with a general note about stress.

I was fortunate to attend a talk last night by the authors of a new book, The Inner Game of Stress. Tim Gallwey has teamed up with two physicians, who practice a patient-centered approach to integrative medicine, to combine medical research with his executive coaching techniques. The result is a thoughtful self-help approach to stress management that encourages readers to be assertive patients. As a medical sociologist, I have written about the health impacts of practitioner-patient interactions and was familiar with the body of research showing how stress can weaken a person’s immune system.

For people, like Liza, who are battling a virus, it is important to not only empower yourself with knowledge about your particular illness but also to strategize how to strengthen your immune system. In addition to the obvious recommendations of decreasing unhealthy behaviors and increasing healthy ones, I encouraged her to find sources of emotional and social support. Some who are facing a stigmatizing illness may find comfort by talking with trusted friends, while others may prefer the neutrality of a therapist, and many may find empowerment in a book.