When Women Attack Women: The Handmaid’s Tale and the Early 21st Century

by Nicolette Westfall

Continuing on from the Blog for Choice Day post about women and reproductive rights, today’s piece looks at women as a factor of suppression. The potential for women’s equality is hampered by divisive actions between women on behalf of men’s interests. When employed as a coping strategy, such actions result in maintenance of the status quo and damages to the gains made by feminism. A comparison of segregation within The Handmaid’s Tale to the lives of current high profile women (Ann Coulter, Hillary Clinton, and Britney Spears) reveals that women themselves often provide ammunition in the ongoing war against their own rights and validity.

Britney Spears, a.k.a. “Titney,” was raised as a sexual commodity for mainstream consumption by her own mother. Today, as she publicly grapples with issues of motherhood and drug use, the public debates over what role her mother, Lynne Spears, played in Britney’s downfall. A recent article in OK Magazine announcing the pregnancy of Lynn’s younger daughter, Jaime Lynn, points to a woman who willingly objectified an underage Britney to rake in the money. While Lynne asked people to “Just say prayers” for Britney, she only partially admitted to capitalist parenting, claiming that she simply could not supervise Britney, who grew up touring, because she had other kids to raise. Such comments are an attempt to justify the neglect while omitting her direct role in sexually exploiting Britney. The American Dream divided mother and daughter. The only consolation might be that the Spears women have found financial success that for some renders Britney’s consequential mental instability a minor side note generating income for the celebrity glossies.

The rupture between mother and daughter is also present In Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale; but instead of arising from willful actions, it manifests as state regulated separation. Offred and the other handmaids are not allowed to raise their own offspring, but must breed with the Commanders so that their Wives may take the coveted babies. While the birth mothers are allowed to nurse the babies for a couple months, the newborns are immediately given to the Wives so that a bond is established with them instead of the biological mothers.

Another divisive element that keeps women apart in The Handmaid’s Tale is the use of the “aunts,” who, under the guise of survival advice, train the breeders (handmaids) to be passively obedient. These women initially police the new handmaids with “electric cattle prods.” In a moment of clarity, Aunt Lydia asserts that it is the Wives whom the handmaids must guard against, not the men. The men are rarely present in the domestic sphere. Therefore the aunt is only doing her job when teaching women how to survive in a world where they are micromanaged by jealous and bitter women holding the power to dictate daily interactions, and who consistently brainwash male leaders.

The Gileadean handmaid’s ability to function in a man’s world at the cost of her own rights is similar to the actions of far right Republican pundit, Ann Coulter. Unlike Gilead aunts, the accomplished lawyer does not pretend to assist women in making it in the patriarchy. She plays it straight, like in the boy’s club, holding nothing back in her acidic approach. She has been negatively dubbed “mAnn Coulter” for her aggressively mannish and hateful presentation. Whatever her personal views are, it is her public persona that influences the like-minded in America. Although Ann is an independent, single woman, she has remarked that stupidly, women vote for Democrats—the solution is to remove women’s right to vote. The irony that feminist movements are what gave her the right to be single and independent in the first place does not even register in her speech. Promoting the far right’s agenda at the expense of women’s rights earns Coulter $25K to $50K a show. Women’s rights are an insignificant tradeoff for her personal gain.

Regardless of her monetary triumph, Coulter is still unable to break through the glass ceiling. Labeled everything from “…arch-conservative cutie…” to Cloud’s less appealing “telebimbo” and “Skank”, Coulter is firmly kept in her place as a second class body (woman), along with the objectified Britney. Criticism comes from the Republican camp. Old school conservative Daniel Borchers argues that she is a disgrace to the party and that she’s a living contradiction. Coulter’s controversial rhetoric is indicative of freedom of speech, but if she does get her way, women won’t have that manly privilege much longer.

While Coulter spews angry anti-feminism in an attempt to sway masses, Gilead women are conditioned to behave and watch. Their eyes echo God’s “eye” which covers the land; they police each other. The system is so efficient that the men do not have to lift a finger in effort. Gilead women micromanage themselves to the point that Offred is grilled by the house Martha about where and why she obtained a single match stick. These women, aside from the rare perks of beating a token man to death in a ceremonial Patricicution, do not have many outlets for their pent up emotions.

Though women in America rarely fight over match sticks, they do take out some of their frustrations on other women by being just as petty. Women writers such as Caryle Rivers and Rebecca Traister, among many others, have slammed Coulter for the way she dresses. Her controversial politics make her a much more acceptable target for women to objectify while voiding her arguments. Some women take it as far as criticizing presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for the clothes she wears. Fashion writer and Pulitzer Prize winner (2006) Robin Givhan devoted an article in the Washington Post to Clinton’s cleavage, arguing that the show of a lower neckline on the Senate floor (July 18, 2007) was something that made viewers uncomfortable and akin to a politician with his zipper down:“Just look away!”. Clinton’s advisor, Ann Lewis, said it was “insulting,” while Givhan back peddled by arguing there is a difference between Clinton’s neckline and breasts. Regardless, the distraction displays just how much more important a woman’s clothing is than her leadership potential.

Of course, for women like Spears, who present bottomless views for hordes of photographers in what has become known as “CrotchGate”, it’s her public lack of clothes that has women debating, whether they want to or not. Camille Paglia argues Spears is destroying everything feminism has achieved, while waxer Cindy Barshop argues stars are just comfortable and can bare all because they are “groomed”. Reactionary divisions and labeling Spears “white trash” is not the answer according to Liz Funk, who asserts that regardless of the loss of feminist gains through over revealing female stars, Spears has clearly been eaten up by the machine and needs support.

The competitive female preoccupation with clothing and all its rigid trappings is examined to great length in The Handmaid’s Tale. At one point in the story, Offred, who must wear clothing akin to a burqa, encounters tourists from Japan wearing Westernized style skirts, nylons, and heels. While appalled, she has mixed feelings for the sexualized attire. She longs for the freedom to be a prettied woman, and yet she also thinks of Aunt Lydia’s argument that modesty is protection from external penetration. The question arises of whether such a concept as modesty can be applied to a slave whose body is controlled at all times by the male regime. The government enforced covering of females also leads to their segregation by the colour coded gowns they wear. Only the poor women, who are responsible for all household tasks, get to wear multi-coloured dresses, but they are “cheap and skimpy.” Later, the thrill of being able to wear more freeing clothes, the left over remnants of Western fashion, draws Offred in as she’s forced to attend a sex club. She likens the sleazy, sequined outfit to “freedom” and a chance to “sneer at the Aunts” who have tried to condition the breeders into accepting the blandness of the piety façade. Her commander argues that women bought new outfits in the old days because they instinctively knew that men, by “Nature,” needed variety when it came to women.

Famous women are not only trivialized by what they wear, but by the fact that they are women. Under such conditions even the mother-daughter bond disintegrates. The totalitarian marginalization of the female sex in The Handmaid’s Tale is merely an extension of what both men and women prescribe to today, if reactions to famous women are any indication. Watching women tear each other down in competition for male attention and unattainable approval has changed my perspective on the issue. Making enemies of fellow women is a waste of time and only serves to keep us divided. When we do, we effectively keep the glass ceiling in place, making ourselves the oppressors.

Be a Hero. Help a Mother. It Might Just Save a Life.

by Karen Harrington

I am the unfortunate recipient of news articles about mothers who kill. Why? At one time, when I was learning about infanticide and its causes for my book, this was depressing research. Now it is merely depressing. The story is almost always the same. Only names and dates are changed.

A mother killed her x-month old child today.Relatives were stunned and shocked.

Her spouse/boyfriend said he noticed she seemed more withdrawn lately but attributed it to “hormones.”

This is the xth tragedy of its kind in the U.S. this year.

According to the American Anthropological Association, more than 200 women kill their children in the United States each year.

Homicide is the leading cause of death for children under four.

Eleven women are on death row in the United States for killing their children.

Today, someone forwarded an article to me that included one exception: a solution. A solution for those family members who feel helpless about ways to care for a new mother in crisis.

The solution: Crisis Nursery Centers

Here’s what the Sacramento Crisis Nursery center featured in this story says of its organization:

“The Sacramento Crisis Nursery offers a safe haven for children 5 years old and under whose families are facing a crisis. The nursery provides both emergency daytime care and overnight stays for up to 30 days.
Many of the clients who utilize the crisis nursery’s services do not have extended family in the region and feel isolated in their situation … “We think a parent is a hero to children when they can identify that they need support and help,” Roy Alexander [Chief Financial Officer of the Sacramento Children’s Home] said.The crisis nursery would like to reach out to new mothers and groups that deal with postpartum depression. “We encourage mothers if they feel like they really have the blues and they’re concerned about their ability to continue to take care of their child that they’ll call us very quickly,” said Alexander.

Can I get an Amen?

Amen!

For me, I am thrilled today to not merely report to you about this growing concern and the need for families to be vigilante in observing and helping mothers suffering from post-partum depression or other illnesses that might cause a mother to harm her child. Today, I can also offer information that might save a life.

Here’s a link to a list of all known centers nationwide. Keep it. Share it. Use it.

http://www.wku.edu/~darbi.haynes-lawrence/crisis_nursery.htm

Karen Harrington is the author of JANEOLOGY: the story of one man’s attempt to understand his wife and her sudden descent into madness.
www.karenharringtonbooks.com

Girlfriends Gather to Celebrate Books

by Rosemary Poole-Carter

In the tiny East Texas town of Jefferson, where population is low and the illiteracy rate is high, Kathy Patrick has found her calling. Dressed in hot pink and leopard print, a tiara sparkling atop her blonde hair, Patrick broadcasts her passion for books and reading. A skilled hairdresser, as well as avid booklover and former publisher’s representative, she now runs a beauty salon/bookshop called Beauty and the Book, styling hair and filling heads with her must-read suggestions. Patrick is also founder of the Pulpwood Queens’ Book Clubs, author of The Pulpwood Queens’ Tiara-Wearing, Book-Sharing Guide to Life, and hostess of the annual Girlfriend Weekend, a literary festival for readers and writers.

This year’s Girlfriend Weekend, January 18 - 19, 2008, was a loosely organized collection of book talks, panel discussions, and parties, concluding with a night of dancing and hilarity at the Ball of Hair–where bookish types let their hair down or teased it to new heights. With infectious enthusiasm, Kathy Patrick and the Pulpwood Queens live their philosophy that reading is fun and exciting and that readers can be outrageously glamorous or plain silly when they choose.

Along with numerous American writers at the festival were Paulina Porizkova, a former supermodel and political refugee from Eastern Europe, and Kim Sunee, an orphan from South Korea, who was adopted and raised in New Orleans, then sojourned in Provence. Both spoke of escaping into books, a coping strategy for dealing with personal trials and traumas shared by nearly everyone in attendance. For many, the love of reading has led naturally to a love of writing.

A pivotal summer in Paris when Porizkova was fifteen inspired her novel, A Model Summer. A quest for identity and the comfort of food inspired Sunee to write her memoir Trail of Crumbs: Hunger, Love and the Search for Home. Kathy Patrick found books transported her from a difficult early life in rural Kansas and has now made transporting and uplifting others her mission. What is particular about each reader and writer is also universal–through our reading and writing, through our sharing of ideas with one another and of the pleasures we experience in books, we find our place in the world. And once a year we can also find a warm welcome from our girlfriends in the piney woods of East Texas.

Rosemary Poole-Carter, a panelist at the ‘08 Girlfriend Weekend, presented her new novel Women of Magdalene, which is set in a 19th century ladies’ lunatic asylum

Handmaids and Politicians in the Promiseland

by Nicolette Westfall

Margaret Atwood’s “The Handmaid’s Tale,” originally published in 1985, offered a stiff warning about the future of women’s reproductive rights under the current 2007 American government—er, fictional right wing theocratic conservatives in the not so distant future. Atwood created the satire’s elements from newspaper clippings dating from the distant past to the time the book was drafted, using historical precedence as the basis for her story of Gilead (America), where the historical status of women as property, mere broodmares, is reinstalled during time of war. During an interview (393), the author explained that all of the events in the book happened at one time or another, yet one cannot escape the prophetic quality of the idea that women, at this moment in history, are treated as mere reproductive commodities. Here, we take a look at the loss of women’s reproductive rights in Atwood’s work and compare it to news excerpts from the past decade (1997-2007) in an effort to illustrate why it is important to maintain the individual’s right to reproductive choice.

Currently, reproductive issues exclusive to women repeatedly make headlines across the United States. Given that the right-wing power is aiming for increased cannon fodder for an extended war effort in contemporary colonies (countries) around the world, such as Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran, it is no surprise that the conservatives (and the conservative women who support them) are calling for the removal of women’s rights concerning birth control, abortion, and the morning after pill. Cloud reports that as of April, 2007, the United States military will extend both current and future Army tours abroad 12 months to 15 months which indicates the need for more American bodies on the war front. But cannon fodder is not the only motivation for the conservative push to ban birth control and abortion. As noted in Atwood’s story, pollutants (specifically, high air pollution) are a factor in human infertility (Rubes, 2005). Both the fictional Gilead and 21st century America face a decline in birth rates due to man-made sterility and birth defects. This reality, combined with the rapidly accelerating death and injury toll abroad, have the conservative camp on the offensive.

For many women, the ability to choose is a matter of quality of life, both for themselves and their unborn children. Gilead and contemporary American leaders would argue that the issue has nothing to do with quality of life; however one can be sure that the rich man in office cares little for the sufferings of those unwanted or unaffordable children born as a result of denied preventives. These privileged men do not take an active interest in seeing whether women denied the morning after pill have the financial stability or familial support to raise the unplanned children. What matters to these men is that the “unborn” are not denied the right to be offered up as disposable bodies in the government’s bidding. For that reason it is critical that the rich white man has the ultimate say in what is done with all American women’s bodies, denying all women birth control and the morning after pill–except for his wife. After all, their son’s and daughters will never be sent to the front lines. Gilead’s women are also destined to live out lives in which they cannot make their own reproductive choices. These women exist in a void, caged and used like farm animals—except, of course, for the Commanders’ wives, who enjoy the perks of drinking, smoking, and playing in their pretty gardens. Just as Gilead breeders suffer in isolation, American women denied access to contraceptives or abortive methods are also denied choice in life.

In Gilead, the removal of women’s rights is part of the “return to traditional values,” an approach taken by the rich and powerful conservative Christian politicians in Washington over the last decade. The extremely influential right wing Christians in power, such as Senator Sam Brownback, stand as clear examples. As stated in Rolling Stone, 2006, Brownback is part of the “new American crusaders” arguing that the unborn are what Christ brought a sword to fight for (Sharlet, 2006). Brownback and the like-minded are going to eradicate freedom of choice in the land of the free in order to save the fetuses.

Present swords appear in the manner of legal denials of women’s control over their own bodies and quality of life decisions. Feministing reports that according to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, company drug plans do not have to pay for birth control prescriptions. While women in America today do not face the enforced monthly reproductive examinations that broodmares or prized pigs (86) of Gilead must attend (73), they are encountering similar third-party control over their reproductive capacity. Borgmann reported that in November of this past year, the American Federal court ruled that pharmacists can deny women access to the morning after pill. The daily responsibilities of bringing those unborn to full term and then raising them for 18+ years will not be directly experienced or assisted by the pharmacists who make that judgment call.

Of course, in the world of Gilead, medical professionals in the previous era who performed abortions are dealt with in a violent manner, to discourage others from assisting women in ridding their bodies of the fetuses that the powerful government officials covet. They are war criminals. As poignant examples, they are hung on “The Wall” by grisly hooks, their heads bagged, and some to bleed red stains on the material. Reality is more potent than fiction. Clarkson has reported the 1994 assassinations of Dr. John Britton and an escort, James Barrett, by former Presbyterian Minister Paul Hill were celebrated this past December by a re-enactment of the murders. The life of a trained physician is assuredly expendable, especially when compared to an unborn.

Ultimately, the right to breed (or not) in Gilead is dictated by statesmen in power, who exercise god-like authority. Women who breed are treated slightly better than those that cannot. Like Orzek’s commentary on Republican Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee’s lip service to 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears for her decision not to terminate her pregnancy, Gilead’s breeders are given small but coveted nods for their efforts. They are guaranteed healthy food and, unlike in Spears’ case, whereupon Huckabee briefly acknowledges her undeveloped capacity to face “all the responsibilities of adult life,” Gilead women do not raise their offspring; it is the rich white men’s wives who get that privilege. Though they do not receive medals, as breeders of Nazi Germany did (the NSDAP initially gave cash incentives and various medals, depending on how many children were born to acceptable women (Digger History), Franzblau tells us they were to avoid smoking and drinking similar to approved German broodmares.

Despite the push for physically healthy breeders in Gilead, their health is not, however, controlled by their doctors. Rather, this control belongs to the state power, which has the final word on everything regarding their bodies. The idea of a third party completely controlling women physically is not very far removed from our own history or the present. Michael J. Franzblau discusses the compromise of the physician-patient relationship in Nazi Germany as a warning for Americans today. Increasingly, doctors must answer to HMOs, politicians, and religious views, instead of to the patients in their care.

While women still have the right to vote in America, it is important that they vote pro-choice. Unlike children who are farmed in Gilead and given to rich women who will raise them in the comforts of wealthy homes of Commanders resembling Bush, Brownback, and Huckabee, real children born to women without choice will not be given financial or emotional assistance from the anti-choice camp. The odds are high that the surviving unborn will grow up to help feed their struggling families by joining the war machine as low-paying, non-commissioned soldiers.

Works Cited:

Atwood, Margaret, The Handmaid’s Tale. Doubleday, Canada.

Rubes, Jiri., Selevan, Sherry G., et al., “Episodic air pollution is associated with increased DNA fragmentation in human sperm without other changes in semen quality.” Human Reproduction. 20.10 (2005): 2776-2783.

Sharlet, Jeff, “Who would Jesus vote for? Meet Sam Brownback.” Rolling Stone 25 Jan., 2006.

Artists v. Zealots

by Suzanne Sunshower

I am an independent writer/artist from a quiet little burg called Detroit, who for six years has lived on a farmstead in the wilds of South Dakota. Recently I’ve been asked to write articles on the South Dakota legislature’s yearly attempts to ban abortion within the state. (In three years, there have been three attempts.) Through these articles I have tried to paint a picture of South Dakota’s oppressively conservative evangelical landscape, so that ProChoicers living in less reactionary regions can better understand the South Dakota (mostly male) legislature’s unusual preoccupation with female reproduction. Folks outside the state don’t understand the misogynist social construct in South Dakota, and so aren’t always sure how best to assist the saner South Dakotans who are on the front lines of an exhaustive battle with the extreme Right.

Frankly, I’m tired of the whole mess. I’m tired of writing context articles in which I attempt to explain the inexplicable. I’m tired of doing updates…

Uh-oh, wait, here’s another update: Lawmakers propose yet another ban in 2008 [surprise!], but they also want to make women who seek a legal abortion [try and find one here] to first view a fetal sonogram. Ironically, a sonogram is given prior to an abortion in order to make sure the woman is indeed pregnant, and to see how far along she is; however, she is not made to view it. I must also note that, according to a recent article on the U.S. Food & Drug Administration website, it is the recommendation of medical personnel that “having a prenatal ultrasound for non-medical reasons is not a good idea.” Therefore, one could logically argue that a legislated sonogram would be just such a “non-medical” reason. However, unfortunately for South Dakota women, their legislature is not made up of concerned medical personnel, or even particularly learned individuals; the true occupation of many legislators is farmer or rancher.

As I was saying… I wish the backward people in South Dakota would simply EVOLVE, so this matter could go away. Surely - in a state where book learning is viewed suspiciously, where there are more prisons than universities, a state which consistently ranks 49th in wages, and 50th in white women business ownership (imagine how well women of color are doing!) – you’d think lawmakers would be busy finding ways to make South Dakota a more civilized, modern state in which women would want to raise children. But no.

Perhaps South Dakota is at the tipping point; maybe folks are so tired of the subject they won’t fight another ban? Voters will likely support a ban with exceptions for rape and incest (unlike the 2006 ban); some of them will do so just to end the matter. I am sure the extreme Right hopes voter fatigue will lead to a ProChoice loss. Zealots – and these so-called Christians do believe they are religious crusaders - oft times win battles by simply wearing down their opponents. And, by taking many tiny bits of ground until all ground is lost.

I asked two ProChoice artists in South Dakota to share photos of their political artwork, and to make a few comments if they liked. The above ‘editoon’, starring Mona Lisa, is Scott Ehrisman’s favorite creation on the subject. It was published in the state’s largest newspaper. A prolific poster artist and editorial cartoonist, Ehrisman’s popular works often feature recognizable figures in contemporary society or popular culture, sometimes presented in an admiring fashion, other times in an iconoclastic way to make a political point. Even working in Sioux Falls, the state’s largest city, Ehrisman and his work cause no shortage of controversy.

“There are girls in South Dakota who are panicked if they aren’t married and popping out babies by a certain age!” Ehrisman told me, adding that he has met young women who accept the regional belief that female identity and self-esteem are tied to marriage and motherhood.

The ‘broken record’ editoon (above) sums up Ehrisman’s feelings about the legislature’s repeated attempts to ban abortion.

Ehrisman’s editoon, at left, speaks to the issue of South Dakota being a ‘pharmacist’s right to say No’ state. There are few urban (or even quasi-urban) centers in the state. Women in many small towns find that their local pharmacist will not fill birth control prescriptions of any kind. In South Dakota, a pharmacist can deny a woman birth control, if birth control is against the pharmacist’s religion - as if that made any medical sense. In South Dakota, women have no legal right to birth control.

ProChoice artist Joy Crane discovered first hand just how conservative a local South Dakota arts council could be when she submitted her work, “Chastity Belt Circa 2001”, for exhibition in a college town called Brookings (a town that refers to itself as “progressive” on its website). Initially not accepted for exhibition because the Brookings Arts Council deemed the mixed-media piece “not appropriate” for that community’s viewing, the council later agreed to show the feminist work after the National Coalition Against Censorship, in New York City, became involved in a First Amendment case on Crane’s behalf.

The artwork that made the council nervous is made of foam core board painted and fashioned to look like brick wall, upon which there is attached a ‘belt’, rusty links and a padlock. The ‘belt’ features these words written on it: IMPLANTS, GENITAL MUTILATION, UNEQUAL PAY, BUSH vs. ROE/WADE, RIGHT TO LIFE, CHAUVINISM, MARRIAGE, RELIGIOUS RIGHT, DOWRY, RAPE, ABUSE, and DOUBLE STANDARD.

Crane says, “The word “JUSTICE” also appears on a gold bead-encrusted key hanging on a broken link above the padlock on the back of the belt, representing the view that justice is the key that will free females from all of the injustices that are listed on the belt itself.”

“Chastity Belt Circa 2001” is clearly a women’s rights piece, which the artist says she made because she was “driven to express my views…in response to the oppression I saw in the state of South Dakota after living in other, much more open and liberal places.”

Her views on Choice are simple: “The fetus is not a human, but only has the potential to develop into one. It is inextricably tied physically via the umbilical cord to the pregnant woman’s body, and thus is part of her until the birth and cutting of the umbilical cord. Until that time, she has domain over her body and whatever is inside or attached to it! It’s her choice.”

In an email, she wrote: “There are radical, religious, right-leaning, Republican legislators in the SD legislature and the governor is of the same persuasion. The Republicans have been entrenched as the ‘ruling party’ here for decades.”

Crane was also frustrated by responses from national groups to the 2006 ban bill, which is something I’ve heard from other South Dakotans I’ve interviewed. “NARAL and Planned Parenthood were using the fact that the anti-choice bill had no exception for a woman’s health, but I knew that such a defense would come back to haunt all of us. I think they thought it was the only way to stop the bill from going through, and they were probably right.”

However, she believes that “the problem now is they [national groups] are finally going to have to ‘get down to brass tacks’ and hinge the [Choice] defense on the fact that abortion is nobody’s business but the woman’s who is pregnant. She is the one who has the supreme right to her own body and her decisions regarding it.”

So, take heed ProChoice activists. Locals battling here on the front lines keep saying that the best way to get through to Western rural voters is to frame Choice as a ‘privacy ’ or ‘anti-government meddling’ issue and to forget about calling it a women’s rights issue. The battle continues to rage because, as anyone in SD can tell you, women already have few rights, here.

“Chastity Belt Circa 2001” by Joy Crane, 2001; foam core board, glass beads, thread, plaster, acrylic paint and found metal objects (rusty metal links, padlock and broken rusty metal link)

Bio: Suzanne Sunshower is editor/administrator for www.QuietMountainEssays.org, an e-journal of women’s writing. Versions of her print articles, “South Dakota: Killing Ground for Choice” and “Women Warriors Help Stem the Tide in South Dakota”, can be found online. Read more about Joy Crane’s censorship battle at www.NCAC.org, enter “Joy Crane Chastity Belt” in the onsite search. Read excerpts from (SD Native American Choice activist) Charon Asetoyer’s speech at the 2007 NOW National Conference, at www.QuietMountainEssays.org/Conference.

Speech to Pro-Choice Rally for Women’s Right to Choose - 35 Years After Roe vs. Wade

by Lorna Dee Cervantes
(delivered 1/19/08, San Francisco, CA)

35 years ago the fog was so thick on the valley floor I couldn’t see my face. I couldn’t see the cars on the road or the bus as it pulled up out of the fog to take me to the east side hospital where, at 16 years old, I became the 6th woman in the state of California to receive a legal abortion. Three years before, at age 13, the fog was the same ornery stew as when someone grabbed me on the way to school, threw me to the ground in the empty lot left over from the freeway construction and raped me at knifepoint. At 15, I tried to heal by making sweet love to my boyfriend, a gentle baby-faced boy.

35 years ago a whiteness gripped my life and held me in its decisive grasp. I couldn’t get away from the mass that held me down: the
oppressive poverty, the ignorant faces that ignored me and what I could become, the fog that clogged my brain whenever I looked at the
books I loved and thought I would have to leave behind forever, my mother, passed out on the floor every day when I came home from
school, the days which seemed like another shovel of dirt burying me under a muddy future — at best. 35 years ago, my life was over before it had begun — just like every other girl I knew. I was pregnant.

35 years ago, there was no one to tell. No one, I felt, who could save me from my fate. My nights were blasted by the beatings my
mother received from the men she met in bars. My nights were sirens and broken bottles and locks on the door against the male heaviness I felt outside. My nights were jobless, hopeless, futureless, a black hole, a darkening suction pulling me from my dreams. I wanted to study. I wanted to attend college. I wanted to “make something out of myself.” I wanted to become an university professor. At that time, it was as if I wanted to visit Mars, or Venus, where I imagined all the women are small like me, but free. 35 years ago, my life was over — I was pregnant.

35 years ago I tried to end my life. I took my mother’s extra long knitting needles and a bottle of alcohol under the bed and inserted
the point into my womb. The pain was nothing compared to the inner pain I lived with during those dark misty days. I wanted to die,
rather than live my living death. At the hospital, a nurse told me about a new program. I was sent to a bright office where a psychiatrist asked me one single question: “Do you want to terminate this pregnancy?” “Yes,” I answered, without hesitation. And, like a dream, my boyfriend appeared in another office, and together we answered the same question: “I do.” Yes. I wanted to live.

I will never ever forget that first waking, that first coming out of the fog of anesthesia. I will never ever forget this day, 35 years ago, when I gave birth to myself by aborting — a decision I have always felt I had to live up to — to honor that postponed being by being all I could become. I will never ever forget that feeling of extreme relief or those first words that came to me out of the mist that was my mind: “It’s over.” It was as if the enemy had lifted the gate to the underground cave and I was free. “Free at last! Free at last.” Thank God, Almighty, I was free at last! 35 years ago I made a choice, for life. I made a change.

At 17, I moved out from the foggy alcohol fumes that was my mother’s house, into a place where I could study. I graduated from high school with high honors, and followed my vocational counselor’s advice — the counselor who believed that all Mexicans were stupid and “not college material” — and so I attended San Jose City College where I graduated with high honors and transferred to San Jose State where I graduated with the highest honors. Then I attended the University of California at Santa Cruz for my doctoral study, just as I had dreamed 35 years ago. And for the past 19 years I have lived my dream as an Associate Professor of English at a major university. Today I am an internationally recognized and critically acclaimed author. My poetry has been translated into at least six different languages and studied in universities all over the world. At age 40, when I felt I could afford a life that I never lived as a child, I gave birth to my son.
My choice. My life. My happiness.

And now, 35 years later, I come back to the city of my birth, San Francisco, out of the fog and into the sun, to pass on that life-force, and to preserve our right, as human beings, to define our own destiny, to pursue our dreams, even through the fog of these dark times, to fight here today — for freedom, for liberty, for justice, for all.

Preserve Roe vs. Wade. Preserve the right of a woman to choose her life. Today I stand here to say:

We make the choice
that is our change.

We make the choice
that is our change.

WE MAKE THE CHOICE
THAT IS OUR CHANGE!

Gracias.

Lorna Dee Cervantes is the author of 3 award-winning books of poetry.  Her last, DRIVE: The First Quartet debuted with a solo performance at   the National Museum of Women in the Arts. Visit her at her blog:  http://lornadice.blogspot.com.

Writers Take Heart. You Have Your Own Saint

What if I told you there was a writer so determined to draw attention to his writing he posted it on walls, slipped it under doors and handed pages to anyone he could? Crazy? Some might say so. But it’s also a model of persistence, courage and faith. And as it happens, the man nailing those pages onto walls was writing, in fact, about faith. He was Francis De Sales, a writer so prolific and powerful he was proclaimed the Patron Saint of Writers and Journalists in 1665 by Pope Alexander VII. And his Saints’ Day is celebrated this week on January 24.

Writers at all stages can take heart!

De Sales wrote his whole life without ever being formally published. But his books, as we know them today, have not gone out of print in almost four centuries. (And they all enjoy an Amazon sales rank any writer would envy.)

De Sales was born in 1567, the eldest child in an aristocratic French family. His father had ambitions that his son should study law and theology, for which he eventually received doctorate degrees. After his studies were complete, he was expected to marry and take a position in the Senate. But De Sales refused and turned his attentions to his truest passion – a ministerial life.

He became a bishop of the Catholic Diocese in Geneva at a time when Calvinism was spreading. De Sales determined to lead an expedition to convert the 60,000 Calvinists back to the Catholic Church. In this regard, he developed a reputation as an exceptionally patient man. For years, no one would listen to him. No one would open the door when he knocked. So he found a way to get under the door. He wrote out his sermons and slipped them under the door.

His most famous book, Introduction to the Devout Life, is a collection of many of those letters and passages.

Today, the weary or discouraged writer, or anyone in need of encouragement, can look to St. Francis’ example of persistence in the face of rejection. So if you are waiting for that agent or publisher to call, perhaps a nod heavenward to St. Francis on January 24th wouldn’t hurt.

Following are some wonderful passages I discovered within his writings.

“True progress quietly and persistently moves along without notice.”

“Have patience with all things, but chiefly have patience with yourself. Do not lose courage in considering your own imperfections but instantly set about remedying them - every day begin the task anew.”

“Never be in a hurry; do everything quietly and in a calm spirit. Do not lose your inner peace for anything whatsoever, even if your whole world seems upset.”

Karen Harrington is the author of JANEOLOGY: the story of one man’s attempt to understand his wife and her sudden descent into madness. Follow this new author’s writing journey here at HerCircle Ezine throughout 2008.

www.karenharringtonbooks.com

One World Cafe Virtual Reading Series: Women Writing in the New Ireland

Join us Sunday, March 9th for a reading with the ladies from across the pond.

WWInI is a new initiative aimed at facilitating a dialogue between women writers in the New Ireland. The intention is to promote the creative work of women writers living in Ireland who are from migrant and new communities and to encourage contact between these writers and other women writers who were born in Ireland or who have lived here for a long time.

One World Cafe Virtual Reading Series: Women Writing for (a) Change

Join us Saturday, March 8th for this very special reading from Women Writing for (a) Change.

Women Writing for (a) Change is a feminist writing community located in Cincinnati, Ohio. Founded in 1991 by Mary Pierce Brosmer, teacher, speaker and published poet, Women Writing for (a) Change has grown in scope and in depth from its first small, rented home for fifteen writers to a movement in which women and girls “practice their voices” and go into the larger world to add women’s stories and women’s views to the critical conversations of our times. Women Writing for (a) Change offers weekly writing classes for women who are open to the change that a writing practice can bring into their lives. Daytime and evening classes meet for 15 weeks and form close-knit communities; over 80% of participants return from semester to semester. Since its beginnings, more than 800 adult women and 300 girls have been writers at Women Writing for (a) Change.

Restoring balance by amplifying and strengthening the “voice of the conscious feminine” is the heart of the mission of Women Writing for (a) Change. In 2001, it’s sister organization, Women Writing for (a) Change Foundation, was established to support the program of Young Women Writing for (a) Change—creative writing programs for girls and young women in grades 4 through first-year of college— as well as to offer scholarships for girls and women to attend its creative writing courses. In addition, the Foundation supported the development of our weekly radio show broadcast on WVXU, 91.7 from 1999-2005 (now available through our website) as well as School Partnerships, which offer after-school Young Women Writing for (a) Change programs at local schools. With the recent purchase of a permanent home in Cincinnati, 6906 Plainfield Road in Silverton, the Women Writing for (a) Change movement can now plant roots and continue its growth and deepening work of bringing the conscious feminine to the world.

Women Writing for (a) Change continues to grow out into the world, inspiring the founding of seven sister WWf(a)C schools in Bloomington, IN; Birmingham, AL; Burlington, VT; Grand Junction, CO; Indianapolis, IN; Portland, OR; and opening soon in Traverse City, MI. The movement has influenced organizations - nonprofits, schools, and businesses - throughout Greater Cincinnati, as both women and men attend its programs, and as consultants trained in WWf(a)C practices serve directly in social service, academic and other settings.

For more information, please visit our website: www.womenwriting.org.

One World Cafe Virtual Reading Series: Alison Aston

At 23 years old Rebecca Johnson is the epitome of success: she’s got a jealous-making job working for British society mag Reine, a fab flat in London and a continuous stream of attractive men passing through her sheets. This all sounds rather impressive, but in reality Becks sells the ads, shops in H&M and would rather go home with a girl in Manolos than Prince William in Armani.

Join us Friday, March 7th for author Alison Aston’s reading of her novel, Closet. Think the gay Bridget Jones meets The Devil Wears Prada.

Originally from the South West of England, Aston has lived in London, San Francisco, and Marseille. Her credits include work in women’s style magazines like ELLE and Harper’s Bazaar. Currently she works for BBC magazines, in addition to freelance work for Time Out. Aston lives with her civil partner in Bristol.

Next Page »