UN Report on Human Rights Takes Gender Binaries and Shatters 'em!

An article today on Feministing.com shared that a UN study titled "Protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism" was released that focuses primarily on gender discrimination within the issue. It takes a fluid and flexible approach to gender as a social structure and uses inclusive language to also recognize transgender identity and experience.

Most important, in my opinion, is that the report acknowledges the ways by which national security measures negatively impact transgender people. This is a quote straight from the UN report:

"Counter-terrorism measures disproportionately affect women and transgender asylum-seekers, refugees and immigrants in specific ways. For example, enhanced immigration controls that focus attention on male bombers who may be dressing as females to avoid scrutiny make transgender persons susceptible to increased harassment and suspicion. Similarly, counter-terrorism measures that involve increased travel document security, such as stricter procedures for issuing, changing and verifying identity documents, risk unduly penalizing transgender persons whose personal appearance and data are subject to change."

Click the title above to link to the full story.

International Sex-Ed

UNESCO, an education based agency of the United Nations has proposed setting voluntary universal sexual education guidelines for all UN members in what is titled International Guidelines for Sexuality Education. The initiative aims at reducing H.I.V. infections as well as other STI’s among young people, teaching the right to obtain an abortion as a fundamental human value, instructing on the different ways to have safe sex and educating on sexualities other than heterosexual as well as on masturbation. UNESCO states the guidelines are based on 87 studies from around the world and review curriculum's from 12 different countries. The guidelines, which are evidence-informed and rights-based in content, explain what sexual education is and why it is important to teach.

According to International Planned Parenthood Federation, at least 111 million new cases of curable sexually transmitted diseases occur among young people (ages 15-24) every single year which many, including UNESCO officials, believe is due to lack of education on safe sex. “Math and Science are valued as important knowledge for young people to have for their own sake, a sound sexuality education should be equally valued” states co-author Nanette Ecker. And she makes a valid point; education is recognized as progress in any country so why should sexual education be any different?

The guidelines have raised a lot of criticism from conservative and religious groups stating the content counters their personal beliefs and therefore is culturally insensitive. Strange, I was not aware of any culture that prescribed to ignorance. Teaching acceptance, safe sex practices and educating for safe healthy abortion rights simply means that those who want to exercise these rights will be better informed and lead healthier lives. No where in the guidelines does it advocate for young people to do anything except make healthy and safe life choices of their own and accept the choices of others. The simple purpose of these proposed guidelines is to educate kids on all the alternatives they have when it comes to their sexual health and everyone should be educated on their right to choose, what they choose is up to them.

How do you love it?

I wanted to post this early so that you could have enough time to plan your celebration! October 21st is Love Your Body Day and, yes, it seems sad that in our busy lives we must set aside a day to be conscious of loving your body, but it's so hard to LOVE YOUR BODY when often all you see in ads are incredibly hard to attain bodies. So, on Wednesday, take a moment with yourself or with your friends to ruminate on your curvy hips, your yummy legs, lovely tummy or that scar you got from falling off your bike when you were chasing the neighborhood boys down the street.

Leave a comment and let us know how you are celebrating!

"Be my date for my abortion?"

Lots of blog chatter about a short film directed by Gillian Robespierre, called Obvious Child. It captures the essence of Juno and Knocked Up but does what neither of them could: presents a meaningful representation of abortion.

A touch of unbelievable romantic comedy? Yes. Dialogue very similar to Juno? Yes. If these things bother you, get past it and quickly realize that your watching a conversation about abortion that is very similar to the experience that a majority of people have when it comes to unintended pregnancy. Guttmacher states that 1 in 3 women will have an abortion before age 45. That means many of us have someone in our lives who has experienced abortion. It's something that we don't talk about in our culture. The truth is, women have a wide range of feelings when it comes to unintended pregnancy and abortion. What to do following a postive pregnancy test may be simple for some and complicated for others.

Another great thing about this film is that it sheds some light on the actual process of abortion which is often mystified. Not only do some people make assumptions of what it's like for someone to decide to have an abortion but they also have assumptions of what the actual medical process is like. People may wonder what the clinic looks like or what the clinic "feels" like. This short film provides insight to the realities of abortion. When it comes to women's health and reproductive rights, demystifying abortion is an important step in educating others.

If you get an abortion in Oklahoma, your information will be published on the world wide web.

I thought Roe vs. Wade upheld that abortions fall under our constitutional right to privacy? Then HOW is THIS allowed?

The law...mandates that a 34-item questionnaire be filled out by abortion providers for each procedure. The questionnaire doesn't include the woman's name or "any information specifically identifying the patient," but it does ask for age, race, level of education, marital status, number of previous pregnancies, and the county in which the abortion was performed, information which opponents of the bill argue would be enough to identify a woman in a small town. The questionnaire also asks about the mother's reason for the abortion, her method of payment, and even what type of insurance she has, as well as whether the fetus received anaesthetic and whether there was "an infant born alive as a result of the abortion." (emphasis mine)

I suppose the makers of this law (which will be enacted November 1 - it has already passed) think that by leaving out a woman's name, all published information is completely anonymous, and can't in any way be incriminating or identifying? I am so disgusted.

They are saying the new laws will help get information to prevent future abortions, but I just don't see the correlation. All I can see is that women are going to be scared. And it's yet another hurdle women must get over before they are allowed to have this legal procedure.

Miriam at Feministing says:

Imagine these kinds of requirements for other medical procedures? Plastic surgeries, or vasectomies, or anything else? It's absurd beyond belief.

Luckily, lots of organizations have already begun fighting this new law. Let's hope it never goes into effect...

For now, here are some links to check out what others are saying:
Salon
Feminists for Choice
Feministing
Jezebel
Think Progress
And you can read the full version of the law here(pdf).

Georgia teen told by school officials to dress more "manly"

This is outrageous.

Dr. Phil: Another Irresponsible Talking Head

I’m on a forever media watch. We have lies about health care, propaganda of political agendas. I’m confused: is it the media’s job to relay information that is happening among the everyday people or is it to find little tidbits of material to sensationalize and broadcast over the air?

Dr. Phil’s latest episode Teen Sex Trends, has done an enormous disservice to people who are raising and caring for young adults in our society. Jezebel sums up the episode very well with an edited video clip. Dr. Phil's opening is infuriating, referencing “your” young daughters as these little stuffed animal toting powder puffs that are being destroyed by sex. He says he will “arm” and “prepare” you to “inoculate your daughter against getting caught up in this.” Ugh. He goes on misconstrue statistics to support his argument that “teen whoring” is every where.

His view, unfortunately, goes along with how a majority of our society approaches sexuality: that, in this case, young girls need to be “protected” from the evil ways of sex. Disease, disaster and dysfunction are is often the framework of how people think of sexuality and here is a prime example of it in the mainstream media.

Educating about sexuality is the answer here. Talking to kids and young adults is the answer. Making assumptions about why young people are participating in oral sex is not the answer. For some amazing commentary on this topic check out the Sex Positions blog on the National Sexuality Resource Center website (one of my fav sites!).

P.S. I'm excited for my first post here! I'm an outreach and education specialist here at PPRSR. You'll be hearing more from me soon.

College regulates student sex..

So, a new policy at Tufts University regulates sex in dorms, which actually (to me) seems fair enough:

"The Office of Residential Life and Learning (ResLife) has added a new stipulation to its guest policy that prohibits any sex act in a dorm room while one's roommate is present. The stipulation further states that any sexual activity in the room should not interfere with a roommate's privacy, study habits or sleep."

The new regulations also state that non-Tufts overnight guests must be registered with the student's resident assistant ("RA") and the roommate must consent to the guest's stay.

You can read the full article here, but I'll give you my two cents if yer just not feeling like it.

According to Tufts, the new rule is meant to address a common conflict between roommates in dorms: sex and sexual activity. It claims to help open the floor for dialogue about sex, something that officials think students are uncomfortable about discussing.

Personally, I think it's a good idea. Now, normally I am pretty anti-rules and regulations, but as a former dorm resident I think that this type of rule is necessary in protecting the individual rights of students to have a comfortable living space (and the right to study and sleep!). In the two years I lived on campus there were numerous times where partners staying the night was an issue, and unfortunately sometimes mere reasoning and compromise is not enough. It's pretty amazing and unfortunate how stubborn and disrespectful people are.

Now, I'm all about sex. And I'm all about college. But when we must share small spaces with people who we don't really know... mutual respect has gotta come first. Wait... shouldn't mutual respect always come first for EVERYTHING? Ding ding ding - we have a winner!

So... what do you think???

Sexual Satisfaction May Lead to Greater Well-Being in Women

This article is really interesting, and at first glance, makes me want to say "of course! I'm so glad a study is finding this out!"

But upon further investigation, it kind of leaves me confused. From the headline, I think the article would go in details about how a new study proves that sex is good for women's self-esteem and health - but instead, most of the article is spent wondering if this could actually be the case.

Of course, the data needs to be scrutinized - and it's fair enough to say that the cause-and-effect here isn't so clear -

...it is impossible to determine if dissatisfied women had lower well-being because they were sexually dissatisfied, or if the reverse is true, such that women who started with lower well-being tended to secondarily have sexual dissatisfaction.

Ok. So this is in a journal of medicine - it's going to be critical of data, as it should be. But why can't we focus on the benefits of having a healthy sex life - not the doubts that this claim brings up? I appreciate a good analysis of data, but I'm tired of people not being ready to say "SEX IS GOOD! DO IT!" There's always a caveat, it seems there's never any decisive reporting on these types of issues.

And furthermore, I wonder why this is even a study to begin with. By focusing it just on women, it insinuates that there are certain scientific doubts about women having sex in the first place (has anyone noticed this article that keeps showing on the CCN homepage? jeez). Why are we questioning why women have sex, and whether it is good for women? Nobody seems to be asking these questions about male sexual behaviors...hmmm....

I guess this study is important to dispel beliefs about female pleasure and women being sexually active, but the tone just puts me off, somehow. There has got to be a better way to report on these issues, and a more unambiguous, frank way to present this data.