Appropriate result for the long term abused

Supporters of victims of domestic violence are no doubt relieved to see that the case against a teenager charged with murdering her stepfather after years of abuse has been dropped.
The 19-year-old from northern Victorian had been accused of shooting her stepfather, 34, after he threatened her with a firearm. She had been subject to year of ongoing physical, sexual and emotional abuse.

You’ll recall my take on the case earlier this year. I’ve still not recieved any information about the repercussions to the school who failed to mandatory report the ongoing abuse.

100 Years of Victorian Women Voting

BOOK LAUNCH and PARTY

‘Women Working Together: Suffrage and Onwards’ presented by Women’s Web

5.30 to 7.30

Tuesday 31st March

320 Latrobe Street Melbourne

This event celebrates 100 years from when the Adult Suffrage Act 1908 became law, and the date Victorian women could vote for the first time in State elections

Speakers:

-:- Judy Small, songster of ‘Mothers, Daughters, Wives’ fame,

-:- Zelda D’Aprano, who chained herself up to the Arbitration Court in 1969 to demonstrate our need for equal pay
-:- Moira Rayner, ‘feminist extraordinaire’, discussing the enemies of the Women’s Movement.

There will be Devonshire Tea and more. Join a room full of feminists celebrating 100 years of the Women’s Movement in Victoria – and how it keeps overcoming the forces that try to destroy it!. Will you be one of us? Let us know at Women’s Web so we know how many scones to bake!

Check out the website for a history lesson with a difference!

 www.womensweb.com.au

Anna Bligh Becomes Australia’s First Elected Female Premier

A brief and celebratory note this morning: Anna Bligh has won the Queensland state election to become this country’s first ever elected female Premier!

She said that although the prospect of becoming the first elected female premier had not motivated her in the campaign, she was aware of the historical significance of her win.

“I grew up in a time when people regarded (Queensland) as backward,” she said. “Who would have thought we would be the first state in Australia to elect a female premier.”

Ms Bligh is a very inspiring woman – the Australian Story episode of last year, No Man’s Land, is well worth checking out for the details of her rise through student politics to the “big time”, as well as her passionate commitment to women’s rights and feminism. To have broken the drought, so to speak, and have Bligh the woman to claim this historic victory just makes it that little bit sweeter.

Thankyou Mr Smith For Finally Doing The Right Thing

In 1996 the Government created Family Planning Guidelines for the Australian aid program, which has meant that ever since no Australian aid funding could go to organisations involved with the provision of abortions. We can thank Brian Harradine for the Guidelines.

Following in President Obama’s steps, the Australian Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, changed the guidelines on March 10.

It’s a strange situation – great news but it’s truly a tragedy it didn’t happen sooner. Around 68,000 women die from unsafe abortions every year. Obviously Australian aid is not going to save that many women, but this is still certainly a step in the right direction.

Just How Much Does The Age Value Catherine Deveny’s Contributions?

Not a whole lot, it would seem.

Two weeks back, Deveny wrote – in honour of International Women’s Day – a stunning piece about the lack of female voices in the Australian media. Her weekly columns may be polarising, but there are many who turn to the Opinion page come Wednesday morning just to see what she has to say. Those of us who love her do so because we love her wit, passion and honesty. Two collections of her columns have been published. In other words, you could be forgiven for thinking that The Age would want to hang on to her for dear life – but you’d be wrong.

Since last Wednesday, Deveny has been on strike:

[New] editor Paul Ramadge declined to honour an agreement Deveny had struck with his predecessor Andrew Jaspan for a pay rise that, according to one Age insider, would have taken her into the stratosphere.

The Age (and Fairfax as a whole) has a recent and rich history of stuffing around its editorial staff, but such behaviour is even more injurious to its freelance contributors, of which Deveny is one. She is a contractor who recieves no super, benefits, holiday pay, maternity leave, sick pay or long service leave. The blokes at the top get paid performance bonuses for cutting costs. The last thing Deveny wrote about the was the lack of strong female voices in the media (and only 13 of the last 69 opinion pieces in the paper were written by women). Now she’s not there.

Complain and tell your friends – tell The Age (and Ramadge) that you don’t approve of their dealings: call 9600 4211 for reader feedback, or send a letter to the editor.

Brief Thoughts On The Pauline Hanson Nude Photos “Scandal”

I can honestly say I never thought the day would come when I found myself expressing my respect for Pauline Hanson’s handling of any situation; the One Nation leader has been racist, bigoted, infuriating and beligerent, but I never expected this. Some back-story for those who are confused: if you’ve read the Sunday morning papers today (or browsed the News Ltd online offering), you will have seen that an ex-boyfriend of Hanson’s, Jack Johnson, has released some “provocative”/”seductive” (Daily Telegraph‘s words) photos taken when the pair were on a holiday some time between 1975 and 1977. Charmingly (though also, on some level, rather refreshingly – at least in the context of “former associates” who usually labour under false pretenses of “the public deserves to know…”), he has more or less admitted he only released the photos as he needed the money:

He said he was happy to give them back to the politician – “but sorry it’s come to this, sweetheart … that’s the way it is”.

It’s the same old sordid attempt to derail a woman’s political (or any) career – but what strikes me in this instance as notable is Hanson’s refusal to collapse into the usual press conference mea culpa expected of the victims of such “smear campaigns” (I use the air quotes because it always bothers me when apparently all it takes to derail a career is a healthy sex life – and for the record, I consider “healthy” anything two (or more) consenting adults decide to do together and don’t use it as a synonym for the greatly unhelpful “normal”). In fact, Hanson’s response – via her campaign office, in the Tele story linked to above – has been wonderfully brief:

Hanson was campaigning in Logan City south of Brisbane yesterday. Her campaign manager Bronwyn Boag said Hanson was too busy to come to the phone and they did not “care about photos”.

That is precisely the right response. Obviously politics is a field wrought with considerations of one’s electorate’s feelings and responses to anything that could spell a drop in votes, but how often do we see politicians selling out their lovers, sexual preferences and former associates solely for the ability to say, in essence, “but don’t worry, I’m okay now”? Saying “I don’t care” is the right response – because we shouldn’t care, either, nor should we be shocked or surprised.

The only person who should feel smeared by this rather sorry affair is Johnson; he’s the one who realised he needed to sell private photos in order to make a quick buck and descended into that grimy world himself. Hanson – while she should very much still feel ashamed of her politics, both personal and professional – should feel no shame at all. Perhaps she might wince at her mid-’70s choice of boudoir gear, or her hairdo (probably not), or her makeup, or remind herself why she didn’t end up staying with Johnson, but she should not – and, correctly, has not – fallen into a puddle of regret and hand-wringing simply to assuage the 1950s-worthy moral tut-tutting of the media commentators.

But the media needs to learn that women – even the ones we don’t like – have sex drives and sex lives. They vary infinitely from woman to woman, but the moral of the story is that revealing that a woman once took photos with an intimate partner (see also: Vanessa Hudgens, Jess Origliasso…) is not – or rather, should not – enough to derail a career. It is not “porn”, it is not a “scandal” – the only thing that brings such terms into play is the media itself, and the vultures feeding (and being fed by) the machine.

Excuses, excuses, excuses

I wish I could say I was surprised. From an opinion poll commissioned by the British Home Office:

How acceptable or not do you think it is for a man to hit or slap his wife or girlfriend in response to … ?

Would you say that a woman SHOULD BE held responsible, should be PARTLY held responsible or should NEVER be held responsible if she is sexually assaulted or raped in the following circumstances?

- Full Poll Results.

Thanks to Claire for the link.

Bothersome babies and breast feeding

When I read news reports like this one about Shayne Sutton being told off for leaving a council meeting to express milk for her three month old baby I honestly wonder what year we are in.

Interestingly, the matter was raised by a female pollie, Families and Community Services chairwoman Geraldine Knapp, highlighting my suspicion that women in power are often more critical of other women.

Families and Community Services chairwoman Geraldine Knapp was the first to raise the issue, accusing Cr Sutton of “arrogance and contempt” for the chamber by absenting herself.

It seems rather like a gendered attack to me. When I go to meeting at my workplace, meeting are most often interrupted by people moving their cars (to avoid a parking ticket) , a cigarette break or to attend to a mobile phone.  I wonder if this is the same at council meetings, and if such interruptions are passed without comment?

The comments of Deputy Mayor Graham Quirk
“I might point out that there are other people in this chamber, other mothers who have very young children as well but are able and willing and are doing so … they’re performing their roles,”

seems to liken children and their mothers are some kind of homogeneous entity where there’s a norm of quiet, subserviant babies who all require the same kind of care at all times. I have never had children but I assume that expressing milk can’t necessarily be done at set times on the clock in between meetings.

Family friendly workplace looks good on paper, but making it work in a real active sense requires a level of flexibility and support which the council seems to be devoid of. I can’t help wondering what the response would have been if she starting breast feeding during the meeting?

Further, the reality is that many women do not have access to paid maternity leave and even those who do suffer negative consequences in regard to career advancement and superannuation. This would be even more that case for an elected female politican who’s need to be in the public eye would not be helped by a lengthy absence.

Godbags At It Again!

SO there is this article in The Age today. The headline reads as such:

Well, actually, it isn’t. But anything for a good headline right? Though, in my own personal dream world, something along the lines of ‘Catholic Church attacks women’s rights again! World expresses outrage but not surprise!’ would be preferable.

The basic gist is that the Church has gotten some legal eagles to state that a clause in Victoria’s abortion law contravenes international law and a bunch of federal senators have jumped on the bandwagon to state that it’s making them real sad and they’re full of a whole lotta concern. They’re worried about the rights of medical practitioners who have to reveal their religious beliefs! Yep. The rights of godbags to not tell people they’re godbags should come before the right of a woman to gain information that effects her health, well being and autonomy!

The international law they cite is in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and part of the make up of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. Also part of the DHR is the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, which covers measures to be taken for eliminating discrimination against women in political and public life, education, employment, health, marriage and family. But we must not let such unimportant things distract us from our important crusade of, well, discriminating against women.

Just to be clear. As I understand it both a covenant and a convention are legally binding and Australia has ratified both without reservation. Through ratification, a country becomes a “States Party” (sometimes called a “member”) to a convention, and must implement and enforce its principles.  This means that its national laws must conform to the provisions of the convention. Contained within the Convention is the following:

Article 10

(h) Access to specific educational information to help to ensure the health and well-being of families, including information and advice on family planning.

Article 12

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of health care in order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, access to health care services, including those related to family planning.

Article 16

1. (e) The same rights to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and to have access to the information, education and means to enable them to exercise these rights;

International law? Two can play at that game.

Personally I don’t care why said medical practitioners believe in forced pregnancy. I just need to know they do and be directed towards someone who isn’t a woman hating loony. I’m perfectly happy for them to keep their religious beliefs to themselves, honest. And yes, I don’t care if they get prosecuted for failing to refer their patients to someone who will provide them with adequate health care. If a medical practitioner can be prosecuted for negligence in failing to make such a referal I don’t see why another can hide behind the curtain of religious belief/godbaggery.

Send an email to Robert McClelland letting him know you don’t think the law should be overturned and support his current stance in rejecting such a notion.

ON a whole other topic I’m really interested in the senators quoted or named in the article who think the law should be overturned. Can they be named as having this opinion without their consent? Because if not it means they’ve either ratted out their own woman hating to the media or have at least confirmed it when asked. Which, to my mind, means they’re out there publicly announcing their concerns and objections as a method of bolstering the actions and views of the Church… gross.

“For Fuck’s Sake” Corner: Britney Spears Edition

So, I realise there are some newspapers and magazines out there that are about as right-on as a wet t-shirt contest, but that doesn’t stop me from being disappointed/angry/disbelieving at just how low they’ll stoop sometimes. As the pop-culturally-aware of you will realise, Britney Spears has just made her “proper” comeback by launching her Circus tour in New Orleans. She’s match-fit and, according to most reviews, back in fine form. So, leave it to our favourites, The Daily Mail, to come up with this single-entendre shocker:

Okay, got that? Wanna see what this hulking hambeast they’re referring to looks like? The actual picture they’re running, to illustrate said bulky bigness? From that headline, Britney must have been putting away the pecan pies, right? WRONG:

Wow – honk, honk! Move over, wide load, we’re trying to get etc etc.

Honestly, where will the madness ever end? As mscate noted the other day, the media doesn’t cause eating disorders or poor body image, but it’s a hard slog staying positive when someone as fit, healthy and gorgeous as Britney Spears is described as “bulky” and “big”. Everyone, all together now: SIGH. Now, back to the fight.