Equal Pay for Equal Work

Others have made the point that health insurance is a part of women’s wages, wages that we earn–not a privilege benevolently bestowed on us by men who may revoke it at any time, because taxpayers and religion.

I agree with that point–I’ve said it many times in face to face arguments and on facebook over the last month.

Women have an established right to equal pay for equal work. Allowing employers to restrict our access to birth control is a violation of that right.

We earn our health benefits. No matter how icky you may find our cunts, and how we use our cunts, you cannot restrict our access to the health benefits that we have earned by our work.

The debate on birth control is merely a new verse in the same old song. This is nothing more than the next attempt to take away the rights of women to be free and to choose our own destinies.

Get Your Activism On: Stand Up For Gay Marriage

I got an e-mail from the Courage Campaign this morning–they’re gearing up for the next stage in the fight for marriage equality: Perry v. Brown is going to the Supreme Court.

Here is where you can donate to fund the campaign. Check this out, though: when I got the e-mail, CC was $5,343 away from their goal of $45,000. I just checked their page, and not only have they made enough, they’ve set a new goal of $50,000 and are less than one thousand away from meeting that goal as well!

If you can’t afford to donate, never fear–activism is about much more than raising money.

See this snippet from the e-mail I received from the Courage Campaign:

What are we going to do with those contributions? Well, some people think this is all up to to the lawyers in the courtroom… not so! Legal experts all agree: Supreme Court Justices read the newspaper, watch TV, and take stock of the nation. That’s why we need your support to move the polling numbers on marriage equality, get heartwarming stories of love and commitment between same-sex couples out in the news, and continue to be the #1 place for coverage of the Prop 8 trial on the web. It’s the best thing we can do to ensure the final nail in the coffin for Prop 8.”

If you can’t afford to donate, then help get the message out. Flood the blogosphere with posts supporting marriage equality. Write letters to newspapers across the nation. In other words, make sure that when the justices of the Supreme Court “take stock of the nation” be sure that overwhelming support for equality is what they see.

Check out my contribution here if you need inspiration. Now-let’s get our activism on!

I Believe in Marriage Equality

I believe in love. I believe in equality.

Those two simple facts mean that I must stand up, as an American, as a feminist, as a decent human being, and say this:

I believe in gay marriage equality.

Separate is not equal. Second-class is not freedom. It is a simple concept–and a lesson America learned a long time ago, yes? Well, apparently, we need a refresher course, so I’ll say it again:

Separate is not equal. Second-class is not freedom.

So long as gay marriage is available only in a smattering of states, and referendums on put on ballots across the country to actually vote for people’s right to be equal, America cannot call herself a free country. We are not the land of the free.

We are, however, the land of the brave. I see, every day, gay men and women standing up and openly existing–being who they are–in the face of hatred and violence. Here I am. I exist. I deserve equal rights. I am just like you. I love my partner. I want to be with them for the rest of my life. I, too, want the American dream.

Here I am. I exist. I am bullied. I am hated. I am harassed, assaulted, spat upon, and demonized. I am just like you.

Standing up in the face of such hatred, to put oneself in danger by openly being who they are–that is one of the bravest acts one can do, and I see it done every day.

How can I, as an ally, do anything else but stand with my brothers and sisters?

I couldn’t call myself a friend to the many people I hold dear if I didn’t stand up for them.

Stop that. That’s not cool. That’s discrimination. That’s not right. Your hatred won’t be tolerated here. I am not an ally to your bigotry. You won’t find a safe space to spew such hateful vitriol in me. I believe in equality. I believe my friends should be able to live their lives and marry who they love.

I believe my friends should be able to marry who they love. I believe everyone should be able to marry who they love.

I say this to friends and family. I say this to the people of Kentucky. I say this to Mitch McConnell. I say this to President Obama. I say this to the Supreme Court. I say this to Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul:

I believe in marriage equality. I believe in gay marriage. And I won’t give up.

A Letter to the President

Dear President Obama,

As the 2012 Presidential election season begins, I find myself trying to figure out whether or not I will campaign on your behalf.

You see, in 2008, I supported Hillary Clinton. As a feminist, I wanted dearly to see such a proactive, feminist, capable, and successful politician like Hillary to be my President. I cannot express how badly I wanted Hillary as my President. I’m not alone. Millions of women, of feminists, wanted Hillary to be our President. We were heartbroken when she lost the nomination–to you.

But even so, we rallied to your cause. We worked hard for you. Millions of women helped you in your successful bid to the Presidency. We didn’t do it because of admonitions from male liberals that “McCain would be much worse.” No, we did it because of hope. We hoped that, even though we couldn’t have Hillary, that we could still have a feminist as our President. We hoped that we would finally have a president that would stand up for our rights. We hoped that you would be the leader of the Democratic Party that would stand up and say, “Enough. We’re not going to use women’s rights as a bargaining chip with Republicans. We’re going to live up to our promises. We’re not going to settle for being “better than the Republicans.” We going to stand up for equality, and we’re not going to back down. This is the right thing to do.”

To our dismay, you’re not. As hundreds of anti-choice legislation appear across the country that would undermine our rights and drag us back to second-class status, you’ve said nothing. You allowed your party to use women as a bargaining chip in the health care debate. As many have said, you and the Democrats have “thrown women under the bus.”

Why should I campaign for you? Why should I lend you my support and my aid?

I cannot answer that question, though the echo chamber of male Democrats and male liberals are crying “because he’s a Democrat! He’s better than Republicans! Do you want another Bush?”

The only reason that’s being given is a guilt trip. Vote Democrat, or else Republicans will win and things will be much worse for you. That’s the threat. Instead of support from my brothers, I get a backhanded threat.

I won’t be blackmailed, Mr. President. I need a damn good reason why I should support you again. No more hope–I want support. I want action. I want scathing reprimand from you to your party for stabbing in the back the millions of women who have supported and continue to support the Democratic Party.

The 2010 election was a mandate–but it wasn’t in favor of the Republican agenda. It was our answer to the Democrat’s treatment of its large, active female constituency: This is what happens when we stay home. Republicans win, and everyone suffers. Do you want us to stay home in 2012? Then keep your promises to your sisters. Fight for equality.

Let me share how I would like the next twelve years to go: I would like you to become the President we all thought you would be, that is, a strong ally of women–unwavering support for abortion rights. Equal pay. Strong support for victims of rape, harassment, and abuse. Strong condemnation of the men who commit these crimes. Equality for lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgendered people. The end to restrictions on the jobs women may have in the military. And that’s just the beginning. I want action. No election slogans. Action. Then, I would like my dream of 2008 to come true: I want Hillary Clinton to be my President.

Idealistic? No more than you during the 2008 Democratic primaries–which is why I dismissed you as unelectable. I still maintain that you won the nomination because of the split in the party between supporters of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. Prove this political scientist wrong. Become the politician that women want you to be, and that Democrats need you to be.

Then I can give you my full, enthusiastic support. Until then, I’ll remain what my generation has been condemned to be thus far in our political lives: disappointed.

Brittany-Ann Wick

“They” Don’t Need Marriage, You Say?

So, this is for all you out there who think that our homosexual brothers and sisters don’t need marriage. This is what happens when you try to downgrade people into second-class citizens: even if they “do everything right” they still will be treated like second-class citizens. When you elevate marriage above all, and deny it to people because of arbitrary characteristics, those denied will not be given that social validation, and decades-long  relationships are disregarded, and lovers are called “roommates.”

The Fight for Domestic Partnership Benefits

The Benefits Committee may have recommended against it, but we’re not giving up! Yesterday afternoon, I received word that the faculty were holding a silent protest outside Wetherby–one of the administration buildings on campus. I tossed my laptop aside and rushed up the Hill.

WKU faculty silently protest against the benefits committee's recommendation against adding domestic partnership benefits. Courtesy of L. Dowell © 2010

Word has spread across campus, and other events are being planned, in the hopes of convincing the administration to do the right thing. I have heard, but cannot confirm, that the President of the university, Gary Ransdell, is on our side. If he is, that’s great! More visible support is always welcome. Unfortunately, Gary cannot do this thing single-handedly.

Stay tuned!

Not Accessible, Unacceptable.

Western Kentucky University is not, by virtue of geography, a disability-friendly campus. Western students are called Hilltoppers for a reason. The joke goes that you can tell freshmen from upperclassmen simply by looking at their calve muscles. Complaints about attending class are often paired with complaints about walking “all the way up The Hill.” However, these complaints are from able-bodied students.

Steep inclines and stairs (lots of them) are not a feature of The Hill, they are par for the course. There’s no avoiding them. That’s part of the problem, but not for the reasons many students, faculty, staff, and administrators would think. Ramps are too rarely seen on campus. If a person, for any reason, must avoid using stairs, it would take much longer for that person to get where they’re going. Ramps are few and aren’t near most main walkways, curb cuts are more common, but too often they are poorly maintained. Where most students could simply take a direct route to their destination, disabled students cannot.

Building access is another issue. Stairs are everywhere. Most buildings on campus have at least one entrance that is completely unaccessible by wheelchair or scooter. Often, the only wheelchair-accessible entrance is on the side, or the back of the building (of course, front and back are relative here). Two out of the three main entrances to the main library (Helm-Cravens) have only stairs. No ramps. The Helm entrance, where one of the coffee shops is located, is one such place. If I were wheelchair bound, I would have to go around to Cravens, through the lobby, across the bridge connecting the two buildings, through the first floor of Helm, and out the door to the coffee shop.

Able-bodied students have four steps.

This is unacceptable. The Hill is no reason for Western Kentucky University not to be a physically-disabled-friendly campus. There is no reason that every entrance to every building cannot be accessible. Every door should be automated. My fellow students should not have to speed up, calling for the person in front of them to hold open the door for them. My fellow students should not have to take a wide, circling, “scenic” route to get to class. My fellow students should not have to circle a campus building to find an entrance they can use.

It is unacceptable. Hilltoppers can do better than that.

Update: Domestic Partnership Benefits at Western Kentucky University

I first mentioned the issue here on Wednesday, when the news emerged that the Benefits committee declined to give their recommendation for Domestic Partnership benefits, yet again.

Today, the Bowling Green Daily News covered it.

Tony Glisson,  who is director of WKU Department of Human Resources and a member of the Benefits Committee, isn’t saying much about the decision, or how they got there. In fact, we don’t even know who all sits on the committee. The only members we know of are Glisson, and the appointees from the university senate, which totals three or four out of the fourteen people that sit on the committee.

“…I don’t understand the board’s decision,” said Skylar Baker-Jordan, now a senior. “And I don’t understand the secrecy around the decision. The board has not at all been forthcoming about their reasons and what they have said does not hold water because U of L and UK have both done this successfully.”

Secrecy at a public institution on issues and decisions like this are shady. Committees like this are supposed to keep minutes, that is, a record. But searching Western’s website reveals nothing–the committee has no page, nor minutes posted anywhere on Western’s web site. The closest you get is mentions of the committee on University Senate minutes, which are only easily found through the search box.

Glisson claims that the committee’s decision is based off of the amendment in Kentucky’s Constitution that bans gay marriage. However, the University of Kentucky, Northern Kentucky University, and the University of Louisville all offer domestic partnership benefits to their employees.

Dr. Patti Minter, a history professor, and an amazing woman, said:

“I’m a longtime advocate of equal rights for all people and equal treatment for all,” Minter said. “I hope that the university will implement domestic partner benefits for same-sex couples in consideration with the attorney general’s opinion as UK, Northern Kentucky and the U of L have done. This is not something that is out of keeping with practice in Kentucky and at other universities here and other benchmark institutions in other states. Equal rights for all in no way detracts from the rights of others. If we do not have equal rights for all, then none of us are free.”

Contact Tony Glisson and let him know you disagree with the committee’s decision. Or call him at this number: 270-745-5360

Also, because it is always great to hear from supporters, contact Dr. Minter here and let her know that you appreciate her vocal and enthusiastic support.

Lastly, if you’ve got time to spare, comment on the Daily News article expressing your support for domestic partner benefits. The Daily News requires you to register first, so put this last on the list if you’re short on time. Any public, vocal support helps!

The Fight for Domestic Partnership Benefits at Western Kentucky University

Skylar Jordan, a good friend of mine, has been trying to pressure the Benefits Committee of Western Kentucky University to add domestic partners to the list of those family members that share the benefits of Western’s employees.

He first brought it up last year in our Student Government Association, who passed a resolution supporting domestic partnership benefits. Next it came up at University Senate, where we also got a resolution passed supporting DPB.

But the Benefits Committee ignored both faculty and students, and voted against it. Skylar wrote his response, published on his blog, as well as in the student newspaper. He laid out a very eloquent argument; check it out here.

Women Are Boys’ Toys

This is probably going to be the first part of an ongoing series, because there are so many ways that women are used, spoken about, and advertised as toys that one post is not going to suffice. Today I want write about a very specific instance in which women are treated as toys by men.

Intimate relationships are a complicated thing to navigate. We have an entire fictional genre devoted to it, relationship self-help books have a huge market, movie producers make millions using the same basic storyline in dozens of different films, and we spend our entire lives trying to figure intimate relationships out, and how to get in the Perfect Relationship™.

Being human, we want the people we care about to be happy. Being involved in an intimate relationship is one of the many meaningful things someone can do, and when someone we care about is not in a relationship, we often find ourselves trying to set them up with someone they might like. And this is fine, provided it is done in a respectful manner, and with the consent of all parties, at every step of the way.

Respect.

Consent.

These two concepts are the very basis of all human relationships. Without both, no relationship, casual or intimate, can be meaningful or healthy.

Often, men will talk about the woman one has had an intimate relationship with, but for some reason is no longer with. Sometimes, a friend will express interest. This is fine. Here is the problem:

When the man gives permission, and they set about manipulating the woman or the circumstances in order to set up The Friend with The Man’s (former) Woman, who Owns Her For All Time, Since He Has Possessed Her Once.

This kind of thing completely ignores the woman, except in the context of Something to be Had. In 2010, it is assumed we’ve come ‘so far’ but in reality, we haven’t made it as far as others would like us to believe. We haven’t come as far as we’re told when a woman’s desires, consent, or personal agency as an individual human being is ignored.

Framing it as a friend’s consideration for the man’s feelings, again, ignores the woman. It’s hard to get men, who have never been treated as objects or property in any meaningful way, to understand this. They object, “But why would consideration for a friend ever be wrong?”

It is wrong because we’re talking about a woman. We’re not talking about the man here, the ex, the friend, the brother.

I’m not saying that it wouldn’t be difficult for an ex to see their former partner with someone close to them. I’ve been there, and done that. However, that’s between the two former partners. Depending, DEPENDING, on the degree of intimacy between the two former partners, it might be inconsiderate for one party to date a close friend, or sibling of their ex. It absolutely does not mean that anyone has to ask anyone permission for anything. Again, depending on the circumstances, it might be considerate for someone to give their ex a heads-up, but certainly not obligated to, though it is somewhat of a social rule.

One thing that I want to emphasize here is that it also completely ignores the feelings of the woman involved, in two ways. The most significant is her feeling about discovering she’s been spoken about in such a way. I’ve recently experienced this, and let me say, it was horrible. It was demeaning, embarrassing; I felt literally like a toy to be tossed around between buddies. I felt disrespected. I WAS disrespected. And that pissed me off. After living as a woman for 21 years, I expected as much from strangers (though I’ll say it doesn’t make it any less troublesome or disrespectful), but I expected more from people I cared about. I expected more from my former partner. I expected more from a friend of mine. They should, as people that are as close to me as these two men are, respect me more than their words implied. I don’t deserve to be treated like that. No woman deserves to be treated like that.

The second way in which a woman’s feelings are ignored in this situation is much less complicated: What if the woman has no interest in ‘the friend’? Asking permission of a former partner for a woman, ignores who she may or may not be interested in. Persisting, doing it anyway, sends a message that, hey, they don’t care what the woman wants. Friend wants her, Ex says “you can have her” and that’s that. The decision is made, no female input necessary. Or allowed. It sounds eerily familiar. Like, oh, I don’t know, arranged marriages? With “women’s liberation” being part of the justification for the continued war in Afghanistan, the hypocrisy of this practice astounds me. We’ll condemn forced/arranged marriages all the day long, but we socially ignore women’s autonomy every day. Just because it isn’t enshrined in law doesn’t mean everything is all better.

Here’s where women’s feelings, concerns, and anger are again ignored: we’re told we’re overreacting. To those who throw the ‘O’ word at women, I would say, stop, think carefully, put these same actions in a different context, and see if you don’t see any problem with it still.