Via Madre (see below for a link to take action):

On November 3, just a week before she was supposed to speak before audiences in the US about her work for sexual rights in Nicaragua, activist Silvia Martinez of the Trans Network of Nicaragua (REDTRANS) was denied a travel visa by the US embassy.

This decision came as a shock for several reasons:

- Silvia has been issued visas by other countries in the past. In 2007, she traveled to Panama to present recommendations of the LBTTTGI community to government representatives attending a session of the Organization of American States.

- She has an invitation through MADRE, a leading 26-year-old women’s human rights organization. MADRE has brought activists from around the world to speak in the US on previous occasions without a problem.

- She is firmly rooted in her community in Nicaragua and holds an important position in an organization (REDTRANS) that depends on her work in Nicaragua. There is no reason for her to give this up in order to live in a far less desirable situation in this country, away from her network of friends and allies.
Yet no member of the consulate even bothered to call MADRE to verify these facts.

Silvia clearly meets the above criteria that the US Department of State commonly uses to determine visa eligibility. The denial of this visa fits a broader pattern of the US embassy systematically rejecting visa applications from transgender people.

This discrimination constitutes a violation of internationally recognized human rights, which the US is obligated to uphold.

On a personal note, this is a huge disappointment because Martinez was planning to deliver a keynote lecture at the University of Louisville and many in the Louisville community were looking forward to meeting her and attending her lecture.  Please take a moment and click here to send a letter to the Consular Section of the US Embassy in Nicaragua.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

Via Gender Across Borders,

Women forced into sex slavery in Japan during WWII, nicknamed “comfort women”, are still seeking an official apology from the Japanese government. These now elderly women, mostly from North and South Korea, are hoping for the official apology they have deserved for decades. It is estimated that up to 200,000 were forced into sexual slavery in Japanese military brothels during the war. Then opposition party leader, now Prime Minister of Japan, Yukio Hatoyama, stated in 2002 that the Japanese government should officially apologize to these women. Prime Minister Hatoyama has yet to deliver on his promise, but the women have reason to be hopeful.

The Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery By Japan has put together a beautiful website that documents and memorializes the lives of the Comfort Women.  The site includes photos, artwork and written testimonies as well as a petition demanding Japan take responsibility for the crimes that were committed against these women.

Tu-ri Yun, 76 years of age, says in her testimony,

After a ride on the military vehicle, we arrived at the first comfort station in Yongdo, Pusan, at night. I begged them to take me back home since I already had a job, but in vain. There were 45 comfort women in that comfort station, all Korean girls.

I resisted and struggled against a soldier who seemed an officer, but ended up being raped there. My lower parts hurt for several days so much that I refused the soldiers coming to me, which got me badly beaten. I had to receive soldiers all day except at mealtimes. I must have had an average of 30-40 soldiers a day. In particular, on the days when a ship came in, there were more soldiers than usual. We had more soldiers during Saturdays and Sundays as well. When there were too many soldiers, I thought I was losing my mind. During busy days I could not even count how many soldiers I received, since one left then the other just came in. Even though I received so many soldiers, neither money nor army tickets were given or shown to me.

I didn’t get pregnant at the comfort station, but two of the comfort women got pregnant there. One of them died due to a botched abortion. The other became quite big with child, so she tried to kill herself, but was found by a soldier. She was sent somewhere else. I don’t know where she was sent. There was nobody who had a child at the comfort station.

In our period we were provided with gauze for sanitary napkins. We could use them while we did not receive soldiers. However, we had to receive them even during our periods, so there was no time to use the sanitary napkins. As long as we were alive, we had to receive soldiers, anyway. The disgusting and horrible conditions were certainly beyond description. During our periods, we put cotton rolled with gauze into the vagina and then received soldiers. The ones who got gonorrhea had an injection of the so-called number 606. The injection was as painful as if the arm were removed. I was also infected with gonorrhea at the comfort station. I went to hospital to get injections and had a lot of medicine. Even after leaving the comfort station, however, it recurred whenever I got weak.

Fifteen days after I arrived at the comfort station, I tried to run away from there. Even before getting several feet away, however, I was caught and beaten three times on my behind with a rifle and fell bleeding from my mouth. The beaten wound on my bottom festered and I had such a high fever that I could not even lie on my back. Even with my wound, I was forced to keep receiving soldiers. The flesh on my bottom kept festering and got rotten. Only after that, soldiers took me to hospital and cut the flesh off. I had three days off after the surgery. Three days later when the wound was not even healed and it was so painful that I could not lie down on my back, soldiers came to me. It was the hardest time. My behind was too painful to lie down, but I was forced to receive soldiers. It was so much pain. Every comfort woman in there wanted to run away, but after seeing that I was caught and beaten and suffered from the wounded, everybody just gave it up. Afterwards there was no one who tried to escape.

And yet Japan has still not apologized.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
Nov 042009
 

Health insurance provider Humana’s recent announcement of a 65% increase in their 3rd quarter earnings really got my attention because last week I participated in a health care reform rally at their corporate headquarters in Louisville, KY.  After an outdoor gathering attended by 150 or so people, many of those gathered walked peacefully into the Humana building to stage a sit-in.  One local newscaster breathlessly proclaimed that we had “stormed” the building, even though their own footage showed that clearly didn’t happen.  They then gave a Humana spokesman a fair and balanced opportunity to tell viewers that Humana agreed with the protesters that there should be health care reform.

Oh really?  Nothing says your definition of “reform” is slightly suspect like a 65% increase in profits while increasing premiums in double digit amounts and denying coverage for reasons that defy human understanding.

And that is truly the crux of it. Despite months of cynical political maneuvering in Washington, there really is nothing to debate about health care. Health care is not a commodity, it is a human right.  What is being debated now is whether we will allow our health to continue to be commodified to satisfy corporate greed.  And the answer to that absolutely must be NO.

The commodification of health care implies a hugely disproportionate burden on women for many reasons.  We are charged more, we are denied maternity coverage and frequently are less able to afford it because we are less likely to work full time for large corporations. If we are assaulted, let alone seek treatment for possible AIDS exposure, we have suddenly developed the pre-existing condition of having been victimized. Health care companies may be profiting from this system, but the cost to society is enormous and clearly not only unaffordable but also extremely detrimental to our health.

The conversation we need to be having right now is not about how to ‘reform’ health care but about reclaiming our health as a human right. Profiteering from the denial of those rights is, if you will, a pre-existing condition of a system that no longer works. What is needed is a change of paradigm that recognizes the intrinsic value of caring and the intrinsic right to be taken care of when you are ailing without fear of going bankrupt in the process or simply being denied care altogether.

When a person is sick or injured, they should be taken care of without having to jump through bureaucratic and economic hoops so that companies like Humana can make a 65% profit. When a woman decides to have a child, it should be the standard of society that she receive the best prenatal care possible so that she and her baby are healthy. When she goes to a hospital to deliver the baby, there should never be a question of whether she has enough money to do so. If a rape or domestic assault victim seeks medical care, she should never be penalized for doing so.  And if she or her children are sick, she should be able to stay home from work without fear of losing her job. And women should NEVER be charged more than men for access to health care as many are now. The benefits of such a re-statement of health and care as a right would be significant.

Over the last several weeks, rallies for healthcare have been held across the nation, and numerous people have been arrested for civil disobedience. And no wonder, after months of dithering by politicians who have taken so much money from pharmaceutical and insurance companies that they have effectively been paid to not act on our behalf, it is time to regain the commons.  One of the protesters’ chants last week at Humana was, “Health care is is human right.”  And it is.

You can read what other women bloggers have to say on health care as part of the Women’s Day of Action on Health Care Reform here.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

These domestic violence ads were banned from television:

and:

and:

But yet television executives apparently have no problem with onscreen violence against women. According to The Parents Television Council:

  1. Incidents of violence against women and teenage girls are increasing on television at rates that far exceed the overall increases in violence on television.  Violence, irrespective of gender, on television increased only 2% from 2004 to 2009, while incidents of violence against women increased 120% during that same period.
  • The most frequent type of violence against women on television was beating (29%), followed by credible threats of violence (18%), shooting (11%), rape (8%), stabbing (6%), and torture (2%).  Violence against women resulted in death 19% of the time.
  • Violence towards women or the graphic consequences of violence tends overwhelmingly to be depicted (92%) rather than implied (5%) or described (3%).
  1. Every network but ABC demonstrated a significant increase in the number of storylines that included violence against women between 2004 and 2009.

  1. Although female victims were primarily of adult age, collectively, there was a 400% increase in the depiction of teen girls as victims across all networks from 2004 to 2009.

  1. Fox stood out for using violence against women as a punch line in its comedies — in particular Family Guy and American Dad — trivializing the gravity of the issue of violence against women.

  1. From 2004 to 2009 there was an 81% increase in incidences of intimate partner

So there you have it, a culture of visual impunity that implies that violence against women is a perfectly okay form of entertainment is acceptable but talking about the real thing is unsuitable for viewers.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

This woman is my shero for confronting Sen. David Vitter on his vote against the Franken Amendment that prohibits the government from hiring contractors that won’t allow victims of sexual violence to take their cases to court. Transcript via The Huffington Post:

WOMAN: It meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me [behind bars]. And what allowed me to do that was our judicial process. I showed up in court every day to make sure that happen

VITTER: And I’m absolutely supportive of any case like that being prosecuted criminally to the full extent of the law.

WOMAN: But there are rape victims who are being kept silent.

WOMAN: But how can you support [a law] that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?

VITTER: Ma’am The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form.

WOMAN: But it is unconstitutional to have a law that says a woman does not have a right to defend herself.

VITTER: You realize Mr. Obama was against that amendment that his administration was against that amendment

WOMAN: But I’m not asking Obama. I’m asking you.

VITTER: Do you think he’s in favor in rape?

WOMAN: I’m asking you Senator. What if it was your daughter who was raped? Would you tell her to be quiet and take it? Would you tell your daughter to be silent?

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare