As you may have noticed I just posted a slew of posts which I had meant to space out over the week. However I am going to be taking off due to a family emergency and will probably not be posting for at least a week. But be sure to scroll down for lots of interesting stories.
Hey guess what ladies, according to the Chicago Tribune, when it comes to the economy, it seems that women on their own are disproportionately vulnerable:
“The 26 percent of all households headed by a woman earn, save and accumulate less wealth than other households. The median annual household income for women who never married or are divorced or separated was $22,592, about half of the level of all households.“
and:
“Women living on their own had a median net worth of just $32,850, according to the data Montalto derived from the Federal Reserve’s most recent Survey of Consumer Finances. That’s just over a third of the $93,001 for all households.“
But here’s the zinger–the Trib reports that while “low incomes clearly are a problem for women living on their own, attitudes also stand in the way”,according to Consumer Federation Executive Director Stephen Brobeck.
Say what? I don’t suppose the fact that women are more likely to be custodial parents and less likely to have health insurance and other purse-emptying realities like that might have anything to do with our um, attitude?
Lack of a financial well-being can also be downright dangerous for women. As the AP reports,
With the recession and the collapse of the housing market, more and more couples who have broken up are continuing to live under the same roof, according to judges and divorce lawyers. Some are waiting for housing prices to rebound; some are trying to get back on their feet financially.
But this isn’t merely a case of economic awkwardness, the situation creates the potential of very real danger for women. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, between 1998 and 2002:
Obviously in a divorce situation where a couple is already under stress, tempers can easily flare and it isn’t hard to see that in a situation where a couple has no economic choice but to remain under the same roof, the result could be deadly.
There are few things that I am absolutely certain about, but one of them is that there is a special place in deepest hell for those who willfully cause harm to children, particularly when the perpetrators of these acts are those who are tasked with protecting the very lives they harm. Which brings us to to the matter of perchlorate, a known toxin that “poses a particular threat to pregnant women and breast-feeding children, whose long-term neurological development can be stunted by youthful hormone imbalances” and is found at unsafe levels in the water drunk by millions of Americans. So you ban it, right? Unfortunately not, if you are Bush’s EPA. According to Wired,
“Among the Bush administration’s final environmental legacies will be a decision to exempt perchlorate, a known toxin found at unsafe levels in the drinking water of millions of Americans, from federal regulation.
“We know that breast milk is widely contaminated with perchlorate, and we know that young children are especially vulnerable. We have really good human data. So why are they putting a model front-and-center?” said Anila Jacobs at the nonprofit Environmental Working Group. “And they used a model that hasn’t yet gone through the peer-review process.”"
“(P)erchlorate (is) a chemical found mostly in jet rocket fuel and detected in 35 states and 153 water public water systems. It is known to lower thyroid hormone levels in women; it poses a particular threat to pregnant women and breast-feeding children, whose long-term neurological development can be stunted by youthful hormone imbalances. As many as 40 million Americans may now be exposed to unsafe levels of perchlorate, and the EPA’s own analysis puts the number at 16 million.”
The double irony of this is that perchlorate is used in rocket fuel used by the military, you remember, those folks who are supposed to be protecting us, not poisoning us.
But the sick minds who think this sort of thing is perfectly okay will be in good company when the day of reckoning comes because they will be joined by the folks at the United Nations who built a refugee camp in Kosovo “on the tailing stands of the biggest lead mine in Europe, and next to a toxic slagheap of 100 million tons” As a result of that,
“77 people have died in these camps, mainly due to complications from lead poisoning. More than 50 women have also aborted because of the lead poisoning. One woman and her baby died at childbirth. During her pregnancy she was being treated for lead poisoning. After her death it was discovered by a well-known laboratory in Chicago that two of her surviving nine children has the highest lead levels in medical history.
According to medical experts from Germany and the United States who have visited the camps, every child conceived in these camps will be born with irreversible brain damage.”
Every child. Click here to read Paul Polansky’s poignant account of this atrocity here.
To label these acts as anything less than crimes against humanity is not possible. The perpetrators of these evils should be arrested and tried for their crimes.
Oh irony of misogynist ironies–I recently received the following mailing from the American Automobile Association (AAA):
It seems AAA is offering its members the opportunity to buy Mutual of Omaha Cancer Insurance. The highly pink-ified mailing was chock full of important/scary cancer facts for women. The one fact missing was the link between auto emissions and cancer.
Just as a reality check, I called a few male friends who are AAA members, thus far none have received any mailings about their chances of getting prostate cancer, although as the Mutual of Omaha site notes, men are more likely than women to get cancer. In other words, this offer is simply another cynical marketing ploy that capitalizes on breast cancer for corporate branding. While AAA provides many helpful services such as roadside assistance and travel planning, this shameful cause marketing campaign should give women members pause.
And while we’re on the subject of ironic cause branding, we applaud Mary Kay Inc. for its efforts to end teen dating violence. However, if they were truly concerned about the health and well-being of teens as well as older women, they would make their products free of harmful and cancer-causing chemicals. As Breast Cancer Action points out,
Mary Kay, whose web site proclaims that the company’s charitable foundation is ”committed to eliminating cancers affecting women,” does not make it easy for consumers to find out if its products contain potentially harmful ingredients. It’s extremely difficult for a consumer to identify what is in Mary Kay products: the cosmetics are not available in stores, their product descriptions on the web site do not list ingredients, and repeated attempts to get information about product content from a sales representative were unsuccessful.
After BCA began this project, Mary Kay representatives contacted us to let us know about an ingredient guide that is available on request. Call 1-800-MARYKAY for more information. Also, a concerned consumer sent us a web link to their product, which is housed on a part of their web site restricted to Mary Kay sellers only. The web link has since been made inactive, and the public and consumer part of their web site does not list this product guide. Lastly, in 2004, BCA co-sponsored important California legislation (AB 2012) regarding the public’s right to know about carcinogenic and reproductive toxins in cosmetics and personal care products. Mary Kay was a vocal opponent of the bill.
As the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence began, I have to confess that I harbored a fantasy that if we all worked our butts off for 16 days, on the 17th morning, we would wake up living in a world where it is safe to be a woman. Unfortunately, that is not to be, but it is truly awe-inspriing to know that so many people all over the world are working in so many wonderful ways so that someday that might be possible. As this period of empowering activism comes to a close, I want to highlight several excellent campaigns.
Kudos to Madre for their 16 Days 16 Entries blogging, highlighting the many ways in which Madre works throughout the world to end violence against women.
The Vancouver Rape Relief & Women’s Shelter has collaborated witht he Gallery Gachet to create an exhibition called Unmaking The Bed/Flesh Mapping: Vancouver Markets Pacific Women/ On each of the 16 days they have had a live video feed from the gallery where activists from around the Pacific Rim discuss trafficking and prostitution.
Open Democracy has 16 Days of coverage here.
Take Back The Tech has posted a fabulous speakout video from the AWID 2008 Forum here. Watch the video and then take part in creating a new video of what women really think about technology, violence against women and women’s rights.
While there is little doubt that instead of retiring to a tropical beach, I’ll be back at my desk tomorrow morning, here is a wonderful graphic from Antigone Magazine’s 2009 Dreams For Women calendar that says it all:
