The Latest for Afghan Women

Afghanistan passes 'barbaric' law diminishing women's rights: "Rehashed legislation allows husbands to deny wives food if they fail to obey sexual demands."

A new law was recently passed in Afghanistan that allows Shia men to deny their wives food if their wives refuse their husbands' sexual demands. Another element of this new legislation grants full guardianship of children to their father exclusively.

Human Rights Watch noted that these laws contradict Afghanistan's constitution and called on leaders to repeal the new legislation.

In Light of International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers

Sarah made me aware that today is International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers. As such i'd like to repost a comment that a woman made, in regards to how she's been feeling post her attack.

Last week a University of Michigan Law School student sought help from the police after being assaulted by an associate professor at the university, Yaron Eliav.

Not only were the police unsympathetic to her, stating that she herself engaged in criminal activities by selling sex services, but many members of the community have spoken out, against the law student, through Above the Law, a law school online network.

Like Feministe, i think her voice deserves to be heard. She needs a safe forum to speak up and tell her story. No one deserves to be assaulted. Sex workers are human beings with human rights who deserve to be safe, in all situations, whether or not they are engaging in sex work. This is why i am reposting her comment here. I wish her all the best and truly feel for her in this difficult time:

Dear Law School,

I’m the girl who got into the mess with the professor. I posted a version of this in the comments on ATL, because using my uniquename email on lawopen means outing myself, which gives the press permission to publish my name. Fortunately, one of my classmates has offered to transmit this message to you on my behalf. Those of you who don’t know who I am yet will find out soon enough.

Most of you probably don’t know what it’s like to push a boxcutter into your own wrist and neck. Or what it’s like to walk home from the psych ward, and set to the task of cleaning a room covered in your own blood. Or how humiliating and degrading it is to be penetrated against your will. You probably read the newspaper story, but you should know that it contained factual errors, and that it omitted significant details from the police report. I had no idea what I was walking into, and I’m lucky that I’ve made it through alive.

A month after I was assaulted, I attempted suicide over the whole mess. I’ve been unable to sleep or study, for fear of this story being published. I’ve had PTSD rape dreams. Everything I’ve worked for my entire life, personally, academically, professionally, has been harmed, and I’ve spent $20,000 trying to put it all right again. And I have, in fact, been prosecuted and will be required to pay a debt to society. All I can hope is that the bar will see that this was an aberrant moment in the life of a severely depressed, suicidal, isolated person.

Reading some of your comments makes me want to go crawl under a rock and never come out. But some of your comments have made me think that maybe I can show my face again. It’s difficult reading all of these things written about me without being able to offer an explanation/defense/vignette:

I worked my way through undergrad on my own, doing crazy hours on top of a full course-load. In fact, I’ve worked every kind of menial, low-paid job since I was 15; I’ve never thought I was above any kind of work, or better than anyone else I worked with, because we were all there together. But last semester I’d been so depressed that I could barely even get myself to class, let alone keep up with my finances. In April I realized I couldn’t pay the rent for May, and my parents weren’t an option. Nor was anyone else, because there weren’t really very many people in my life at that time. The housing crisis made it so that I couldn’t get an additional loan without a co-signer. I should have found some other way, but at the time none of my thoughts were very healthy.

I love the law just as much as you do, and I like to think about the ways that it shapes the world we live in. I watch a lot of movies, and go to the gym when I can. I have dear friends at other law schools who I try to keep in touch with. I’m a quiet, introverted, sensitive person; I think I’ve read every post on lawopen and ATL, and taken them all very personally. I used to be a proud atheist, but now I know that God saved my life the night I tried to take it. I also know that God kept the man in that hotel room from killing me, because he was completely out-of-control.

I went to the police the following morning because my vision was blurred from having been hit in the face. The bruises from his belt didn’t go away for a week. I later found out that this man had targeted other sex workers, making him a serial sexual sadist. Violent men target sex workers because they know sex workers are isolated, fearful, and ashamed, and won’t go to the police.

Going to the police seems like a stupid move, as many of you have pointed out. But I was afraid for the next woman he “contracted with.” And I felt so worthless and used that I didn’t care about throwing everything I’d ever worked for. I felt so terrible, and I thought that the police would make it right… that’s what the justice system is about, right?

It’s clear to me now that the AAPD thinks this is funny. That’s why they’re not going through with the assault charge.

What I did was wrong, and I’m a criminal for having done it. But if this had been any other misdemeanor like drug use/possession, DUI, public intoxication, open container, gambling, vandalism, petty theft, or simple assault, there wouldn’t have been a two-page article in the paper. And if you got rid of all of the lawyers who had done one of the above at some point, there’d be a severe shortage.

I also feel compelled to say that despite what many of you have expressed, I am not disease-ridden; my lifetime number is still under 20. I consider myself to be well-informed in the area of reproductive rights and health, and I think everyone has a responsibility to inform their partners of their sexual history, not just sex workers. I’m recently tested, and I don’t have AIDS, herpes, Hep B, syphilis, the clap, or chancroid. And I don’t judge those people who have contracted an STD at some point, because if you’re not a virgin, you take a calculated risk every time you have sex. If you have had sex with more than one person and you don’t have a viral STD, it’s because you’re lucky.

I’m not writing because I want pity. I’m writing because the future lawyers who read this need to understand that the answer is seldom ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ but often ‘it depends.’ Good people do bad things sometimes, for a variety of reasons. The reason we have ‘bright line’ rules is because there is so much gray out there. And it’s only through compassion and understanding that anyone is able to make sense of it all. My crime was a cry for help.

Finally, I wish to apologize for having brought negative attention to this prestigious law school. But I expect that every amazing thing you do will outshine my mistake- it really is an honor to be a member of such an accomplished community of people. I hope that you won’t shun me, or completely expel me from social/academic/service life at the University. Many seem to think about this as if it were some complicated hypothetical on a Torts exam. But, I’m still the same girl you knew before. And right now I’m struggling with the reality of public humiliation. I haven’t directly talked to any of you about this because I imagine some of you will want to distance yourselves from me, and I don’t wish to impose myself upon you; I don’t really know who I can still call a friend, but I’ll find out soon enough.

- That 2L Girl (’A’ & ‘384′ on ATL)

Limited Time Offer: Rape Kits on Sale!

Thanks to reader, Bobbi, for sending me this video with the following message:

"Made me angry, made me laugh...made me ready to vote on Tuesday"

Bobbi, i couldn't agree with you more! Video below shows the ridiculousness of Palin's legislation in Wasilla that required rape survivors to pay for their own rape kits, costing $1,200:

Vote "NO"

Here are some important videos and links for voters in various states:

Colorado and South Dakota (but EVERYONE should watch this video):



Oppose Bill C-484, "Unborn Victims of Crime Act"

Connecticut:
Vote NO on Question 1 - Lindsay beat me to writing this post :) More info here and here

California:
Vote NO on 4 and 8, here for more

I'll update this as i find more info for various states...

Friday Feel Good: CT Equalizes Same Sex MARRIAGE!!!

Today i am proud to be a CT resident! The Connecticut Supreme Court just ruled that the state will now allow same-sex couples to marry. That's right, MARRY :) We're now the third state allowing gay marriage (along with Massachusetts and California).

The divided court ruled 4-3 that gay and lesbian couples cannot be denied the freedom to marry under the state constitution, and Connecticut's civil unions law does not provide those couples with the same rights as heterosexual couples.

"Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay persons are entitled to marry the otherwise qualified same sex partner of their choice," Justice Richard N. Palmer wrote in the majority opinion that overturned a lower court finding. "To decide otherwise would require us to apply one set of constitutional principles to gay persons and another to all others," Palmer wrote.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell said Friday that she disagreed, but will not fight the ruling. "The Supreme Court has spoken," Rell said in a statement. "I do not believe their voice reflects the majority of the people of Connecticut. However, I am also firmly convinced that attempts to reverse this decision, either legislatively or by amending the state Constitution, will not meet with success."

More info here.

Thomas Beatie on Oprah

Let's talk about Thomas Beatie. My mom excitedly emailed me yesterday that Thomas would be on Oprah so i TiVoed it... Oprah's show was Thomas' first TV interview.

If you're unfamiliar with Thomas' story, here's a brief recap in his own words via Advocate.com:

"I am transgender, legally male, and legally married to Nancy. Unlike those in same-sex marriages, domestic partnerships, or civil unions, Nancy and I are afforded the more than 1,100 federal rights of marriage. Sterilization is not a requirement for sex reassignment, so I decided to have chest reconstruction and testosterone therapy but kept my reproductive rights. Wanting to have a biological child is neither a male nor female desire, but a human desire.

Ten years ago, when Nancy and I became a couple, the idea of us having a child was more dream than plan. I always wanted to have children. However, due to severe endometriosis 20 years ago, Nancy had to undergo a hysterectomy and is unable to carry a child. But after the success of our custom screen-printing business and a move from Hawaii to the Pacific Northwest two years ago, the timing finally seemed right. I stopped taking my bimonthly testosterone injections. It had been roughly eight years since I had my last menstrual cycle, so this wasn’t a decision that I took lightly. My body regulated itself after about four months, and I didn’t have to take any exogenous estrogen, progesterone, or fertility drugs to aid my pregnancy."


Lots of people are really bothered by this... let's talk about why.

Before we get into anything, I will preemptively answer some questions that i've either heard or read over the past few days:

Q. But doesn't that mean he's actually a she?
A. Well no. Gender and sex are two very different things. Gender is how you act. It's how you present yourself and how you want to be viewed by others. Sex is your genitals and reproductive organs. (In Thomas' case, just to be clear, he has a penis - his clitoris enlarged as a result of taking testosterone, he does not have a surgically constructed penis - as well as female reproductive organs sans breasts). Maleness and femaleness include many different things such as: reproductive capabilities, the way a person presents him/herself and acts in the world, the person's ability to "pass" and mostly, what the individual feels and believes s/he is. Long story short, No, Thomas is not a woman. Thomas is a man. He is also transgender.

Q. Ew! Isn't that weird?!
A. No. Just because it's not something you have come across before does not make it "weird," "gross," or in any way "wrong." Wrapping our brains around something unfamiliar to us is a wonderful thing, allow this to challenge your notions of maleness and femaleness instead of disregarding it. Also, dichotomous thinking is dangerous, wouldn't it be better if we all viewed life on a spectrum - right Jacks? ;)

Q. Oh my goodness, isn't the testosterone Thomas takes to keep his facial hair dangerous for the baby?!
A. No. Thomas has actually been off testosterone for two years before even trying to conceive. His hormone levels were absolutely normal when he got pregnant and are where they should be as he progresses in the pregnancy. On Oprah, when Thomas' doctor was asked this question she responded by saying, "this is a normal pregnancy." Which it, very much, is.

Q. (All very similar) 1. What about the poor child? This is absolutely sick. 2. What terrible parents! 3. I truly wonder what sort of problems the child will have in the future. This is going to be a mine field of problems I believe. Posted by: Dr. Ray of Cairns...
A. Well since Dr. Ray of Cairns, Australia says so, it must be true... Or not. But for real, folks, "love makes a family." This child is going to be raised in an open minded, accepting, and loving household. Isn't that all we can ask for any child being brought into the world? Nancy (Thomas' wife) has two gorgeous daughters from a previous marriage that were on the show yesterday as well. Oprah asked one of the daughters how she felt when Tracy made the decision to transition to Thomas, the daughter said, "He actually got to be who he is and there wasn't much confusion after that." Honestly, it's pretty simple. The daughters talked a lot about Thomas and Nancy's great relationship and that the they model their marriages after Nancy and Thomas. The daughters, like Nancy and Thomas, were very honest, straight-forward, and sincere. This is the type of family i want a child brought into. I don't think those "worried" about "this poor girl" need to fret, she will be brought up in a loving household where being yourself and being open minded towards others are valued characteristics. She will be loved. She will be educated. And (hopefully) she will be armed with the tools she needs to defend herself and her family's lifestyle from those individuals that can't accept anything out of the "ordinary."

Q. Why on earth would this couple want all this sensationalist publicity? (AKA "Fine, whatever, they're pregnant, but why are they making this such a big deal and going public with it? Couldn't they have just been pregnant in their own home and kept quiet about it?)
A. Silence is never the answer. "Keeping it quiet" may be a fine solution for you but most people are extremely proud of their children and want to share with the world when they are pregnant. Why should this couple be any different? You have no right to silence anyone else simply because they don't fit in your definition of normal. Also, Thomas explained that they went public with this because they rather be the ones to tell their story than to have their story told by the tabloids and gossiping neighbors.

Q. (I don't want to link her post and thus give it more traffic but here's a question i found searching for info on the case) The day she decided to be a male and started artificial interference in her own body was the day as far as I am concerned that she ceased to have the right to carry a child as a mother. if she cared about having a child then she should not have artificially interfered with her sexuality.
A. Who the fuck are you to decide who "has the right" to carry a child and who doesn't? Also, Thomas made a statement yesterday regarding sexuality: "Sexuality is a completely different topic than how you feel, that's your gender. The gender role in society that i felt most comfortable being or gravitating to was the male gender role. It's hard to explain how it is a different issue. When i woke up in the morning, i felt like a man. it was difficult for society to respect me the way i felt on the inside if my outside didn't match it."

Q. Who the F cares? Why is this a big deal?
A. Well for Thomas and Nancy this pregnancy includes political, legal, and social consequences. They are legally married and Thomas is legally male. Because of this, Thomas' pregnancy may set political and medical precedents that don't only effect them but will effect others in the future. They have experienced discrimination not only from the community but also from health care professionals (I believe they said on Oprah that it took 9 doctors before finding one that accepted them and would take Thomas on as a patient). Not only that but Thomas expressed, due to their religious beliefs, "health care professionals refused to call him by a male pronoun or recognize Nancy as his wife."

Now that we got all of that out of the way, what's the problem? Why does Thomas and Nancy's nontraditional life bother so many people? Why is it so difficult for us to broaden our notions of sex, gender, and normalcy to allow Thomas and many others like Thomas (because even though they may not be pregnant, there are many transgender individuals trying to fit into these strictly binary definitions of sex and gender) in to our minds? Let's rewind pre-pregnancy for a second. Before Thomas become pregnant, his friends, family, community, and on lookers did not question his sex for a moment. He "passed" as a man. Why does that now change? Why do so many now disregard this story as, "so what, it's just a butch female having a baby?" My opinion? He is NOT a female having a baby. He is a male - legally, socially, (and for the most part) physiologically. Yes, Thomas may have the physical capabilities of a woman to give birth but he also does not have breasts. Does one outweigh the other? Well no. Thomas is a man. Thomas relates to himself and to others as male. Thomas is legally a male and before Thomas got pregnant, no one denied him of his "malehood." Why deny him now? Yes, i understand it's easier to reject what we are uncomfortable with than to expand our notions of categories but it is important to understand that not all people neatly fit into a category. Like i said, dichotomous thinking is dangerous. Don't deny Thomas the right to be what he is simply because you can't accept him into a binary or a social norm.

Male/Female argument aside, let's especially not ostracize Thomas and Nancy (as well as tons of other "nontraditional" couples) for making the choices that best fit into their lives. My vote is to not only accept and "tolerate" others but to celebrate everyone's differences, after all, isn't that how we all grow and learn from one another?

I'll end with a statement Thomas made yesterday on the show. In response to a question Oprah posed, Thomas asked the world to, "embrace the gamut of human possibility and to define for [yourself] what is normal"

What are some of your thoughts?
Let me just quickly say that ya'll know i moderate comments. Genuine questions and statement are always appreciated but just so you are forewarned, bigotry will not be tolerated.

Guantánamo Bay

Friday is the six-year anniversary of Guantánamo Bay. Why is this incredibly important? Because Guantánamo Bay is not only a blaring violation of human rights, but also undermines the constitution. The Military Commissions Act (MCA) unconstitutionally eliminated the right of habeas corpus for detainees at Guantanamo Bay. This means that our government can hold prisoners of Guantanamo Bay for more than five years without charges.

Basically, the "justice system" set in place at Guantánamo Bay allows the president to decide who is an enemy combatants, who should be held indefinitely without being charged with a crime, and define what is and what is not torture and abuse.

There are many human rights concerns. The legal system in place at Guantánamo Bay:

• Deprives defendants of independent judicial oversight by a civilian court.
  
• Restricts the defendant’s right to choose his lawyer.
  
• Prosecutes prisoners-of-war in a manner that violates the 1949 Geneva Conventions.
  
• Fails to guarantee that evidence obtained via torture or ill-treatment shall not be used.
  
• Allows wide latitude to close proceedings and impose a “gag order” on defense counsel.
  
• Provides lower due process standards for non-citizens than for U.S. citizens.
• Prejudges the detainees as “enemy combatants,” thereby keeping the tribunals from making determinations with full independence and impartiality.
  Place severe limits on detainees’ ability to make their claims, including denial of assistance of counsel.
  
• Erroneously adopts the U.S. government position that all enemy combatants at Guantanamo can still be held under the laws of war.
  
• Does not recognize any legal obligation on the part of the U.S. government to conduct reviews of their detention nor any legal right of the detainees to such a review process.
• Reflects the U.S. government’s assumption that all those detained at Guantanamo are “enemy combatants” and that none are entitled to prisoner-of-war status.
  
• Assumes, erroneously, that all those held at Guantanamo can be detained under the laws of war; an unknown number of detainees were taken into custody where the laws of arm conflict did not apply.
  
• Provides for only an annual review when the laws of war require reviews for security detainees at least every six months.
  
• Places the burden of proof on the detainee to demonstrate why s/he is no longer a threat to the United States.
  
• Limits the detainee’s access to relevant information.
  
• Requires family members to provide information through their governments even in cases where doing so would place the family at risk.

The image above is of detainees upon arrival in January 2002

On an international note, Guantánamo Bay is an abomination of American values and continues to shame our country. Detainees have been held for years without fundamental legal and human rights. Even former Secretary of State Colin Powell has spoken out against Guantánamo Bay, “we have shaken the belief the world had in America’s justice system by keeping a place like Guantánamo open and creating things like the military commission.”

Because justice is almost entirely about activism, here are some things you can do:

• Sign the petition to close Guantánamo
• Wear orange Friday
• Learn more about Guantánamo Bay
• Download and administer the fact sheet to help educate and outrage others
• Download the "toolkit" here
• Find more stuff to do here or here

Halliburton and Rape

I got an email this morning from MoveOn.org and truthfully, i don't always read the emails they send... this one I read though, I encourage you to read it as well:

Dear MoveOn member,

Jamie Leigh Jones was a 20-year-old woman working in Iraq for a subsidiary of Halliburton when she was drugged and brutally gang-raped by several co-workers. The next day, Halliburton told her that if she left Iraq to get medical treatment, she could lose her job(1).

Jamie's story gets even more horrific: For the last two years, she's been asking the US government to hold the perpetrators accountable. But the men who raped her may never be brought to justice because Halliburton and other contractors in Iraq aren't subject to US or Iraqi laws. They can't be tried for a crime in any court(2).

This is one of the most disturbing stories we have come across in a while. We're calling on Congress to investigate Jamie's case, hold those involved accountable, and bring US contractors under the jurisdiction of US law so this can't happen again. If hundreds of thousands of us speak out against this outrageous story, we can force Congress to take action.

Can you sign the petition? The text is in the blue box at the right. Clicking below will add your name:
http://pol.moveon.org/contractors_accountable/o.pl?id=11800-7663772-dPtSqY&t=3

After you sign, please forward this email to friends, family and colleagues—we all need to speak out together. When you get an email from us, it doesn't usually include a graphic description of a brutal attack. But when we heard this story, we knew we had to do something about it.
Here's how Jamie described what happened after the attack:

I awoke the next morning in the barracks to find my naked body battered and bruised. I was still groggy from whatever had been put in my drink. I was bleeding... After getting to the clinic and having a rape kit performed...I was blocked in a container with no food, no way to call my parents, and was placed under armed guard by Halliburton (3).

Jamie's attackers aren't the only ones exploiting a legal loophole to get away with their violent crimes. Another female employee of Halliburton says she was raped by her co-workers in Iraq (4). Employees of Blackwater, another private contracting firm in Iraq, were accused of killing innocent Iraqi civilians, and that incident turned into an international scandal. Worst of all, they may never be punished(5).

Private contractors in Iraq are making massive amounts of money, operating above the law and are accountable to no one. This has to stop. Congress needs to act now to bring these contractors under the rule of law. If they don't, nothing will prevent a case like Jamie's from happening again. No man or woman working in Iraq should have to fear that they can be attacked without consequences. Please sign on to the petition: Congress must investigate the rape of Jamie Leigh Jones and others, hold those involved accountable and bring US contractors under the jurisdiction of US law.

Please sign on to the petition: "Congress must investigate the rape of Jamie Leigh Jones and others, hold those involved accountable, and bring US contractors under the jurisdiction of US law." Clicking here adds your name.

Thanks for all you do,
–Nita, Wes, Karin, Marika, and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team


Sources:
1. "Halliburton hit in rape lawsuit," New York Daily News, December 11, 2007
2. "Victim: Gang-Rape Cover-Up by U.S., Halliburton/KBR," ABC News, December 10, 2007
3. Jamie's Journal, The Jamie Leigh Foundation
4. "Female ex-employees sue KBR, Halliburton—report," Reuters, June 29, 2007
5."Blackwater Probe Narrows Focus to Guards," Associated Press, December 8