YoLadies | Frankly Speaking

SlutWalk Dallas

2011-04-23T21:37:24Z

Unless you've been living under a rock, you know about the furor that's been raised by a Toronto police officer when he suggested that women can avoid being raped by not dressing "like a slut." In response, women in Toronto organized SlutWalk to demonstrate that what a woman wears has nothing to do with rape, whether it's considered "slutty" or not.

Elizabeth Webb, a rape survivor, was inspired to organize a SlutWalk in Dallas. A huge number of women and men from the area gathered to support a woman's right to safely wear whatever they want, without fear that she'll be accused of "asking for it" if she is sexually assaulted.

This message is one of the most important that needs to be shouted loud and clear. Victims of rape are still, even in 2011, accused of asking for it a variety of reasons, the main one being her clothing. The fact is that any type of clothing, even a burqa, could theoretically be considered sexually attractive by someone. After all, rapists aren't exactly known for following the norm. It's not only unfair but dangerous to assume that clothing can instigate a violent sexual attack on anyone.

Kudos to the Toronto "sluts" for starting the ball rolling, and to Elizabeth Webb for keeping up the fight in Dallas.

Check out the slideshow of the Dallas SlutWalk participants!

Click, and anti-click: my feminist coming out

2011-03-31T04:22:41Z

This article is written as part of the Feminist Portrait Project Blog Carnival, inviting women to tell their stories of when the "click, I'm a Feminist" moment hit them. The discussion also involves "anti-click" in reference to non-white and oppressed, non-executive women who have many times been failed by Feminism.

Growing up in a small town in Oklahoma in the 70's and 80's, Feminism wasn't something I was raised to respect. Although there were a few Feminists in my community, Phyllis Schlafly was definitely more of an influence than Gloria Steinem, and the mention of the word "Feminist" evoked responses similar to Pat Robertson's infamous definition of Feminism: "Feminism is a socialist, anti-family, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."

To top it off, I was raised Catholic, and when I would ask why nuns didn't perform mass or why the Virgin Mary wasn't also considered as God, the way Jesus was, the only explanation available was, "because women can't." Even at ten years old, it bothered me to the point that I applied to be an alter girl, just to make a statement. When Father McGouldrick approved it (!) I chickened out...suddenly afraid of calling the wrong attention to myself or of being laughed at. I didn't want to be a spectacle.

None of this is to say that my parents didn't encourage me to do whatever I wanted, obviously, but in the structure of a small, highly religious community with conservative values, Feminism as a political statement was something that was not encouraged. Just as many women today state, "I'm not a feminist but I believe in women's rights..." people in my community in Oklahoma would say similar things. They believed a woman could work as hard as a man, but feminists were atheist, heartless, ugly, man-women and supporting them made you nothing less than the same.

My parents did fall into the "divorce phenomenon" of the early 80's, placing my brothers and I among the growing number of so-called latch-key kids. That's when making a spectacle about women's rights clicked in my mind as being okay. After holding my own with a house full of boys, I would see my mother come home exhausted and with more work to do, totally unprepared after years of being a housewife. I vowed very vocally that I would never be reliant on anyone but myself. I was a feminist.

Perhaps it was seeing women like those in my community who were caught off-guard by divorce - who never considered it as a possibility - that also gave me an anti-click moment. Many women born in the 40's and 50's were raised to only hope for a good husband who would provide. Education was put on the back-burner, or dropped all together. Divorce forced these women into the workforce as low-level employees - receptionists or factory workers - where feminism and women's rights were laughed at. Women in these positions had no one on their side - not even the executive level women, who at the time were fighting so hard to move up the ladder and gain respect that stepping on lower-level women was an afterthought.

Feminists, at that time, were mostly white and privileged and educated, and women in small town Oklahoma could not relate - nor could Feminists relate to them. The culture of the south still tends to lean toward weakened women in low-level positions, but as Feminism learns to reach out beyond the academic, and with the growing community of vocal feminists online, I have faith that will change.

Going on with life even as the world seems to crumble

2011-03-16T07:48:39Z

All over the web, there are blog entries asking what topics are appropriate in this time of global catastrophe. With Japan in a state of destruction, the uprisings and death in the Middle East, New Zealand recovering from the horror of the earthquake that hit them, and economic crisis world wide, people are asking questions like, "am I selfish for writing about body image or misogyny or about a skirt I fell in love with at the mall?" "If I write about the complete shite that is nuclear energy, will I be seen as taking advantage of a situation because it's a hot topic now?"

Offline, we're doing the same thing - lambasting our own wants and worries as petty and spoiled. It's like the feeling we had after 9/11: those of us who are fortunate enough to be able to worry about where we're having lunch, or what we're going to wear, or how we're going to deal with the shithead at the office today, are suddenly and violently slapped with the realization that things can change in a moment's time. We're at once grateful for the blessings in our lives and also judgmental monsters, berating ourselves and others for not devoting every breath to the thought of those who are going through a hell that we probably can't ever fully imagine. It's like sympathy pains - when we see others suffering, we have to suffer as well.

The problem is that there is only so much that we can do. Most of us can't go to Japan to help. We can't go to the Middle East and negotiate freedom and peace. We can't help those in Christchurch or Haiti or Chile or The Congo.

We can donate money to Red Cross or another aid agency and we can pray or meditate, or help communications through social media. But, as painful as it is to admit, we can't fix it. Spending every waking moment glued to CNN watching re-plays of the disaster, checking news feeds and watching video of other human beings in pain and loss...it won't help. It will just feed depression and a feeling of hopelessness and anger - more of something that this world does not need.

I came across a quote from Wayne Dyer that put it into perspective for me, and I wanted to share it in hopes that it will help others, too.

"People say how can they feel good when there is so much bad going around? With so many people out there who are being mean to each other. My sister-in-law has cancer. Soldiers are dying from explosions; my response to that is you can't feel bad enough to make someone else's life better. You can't get confused enough to un-confuse one person. You can't get sick enough to heal one person out there so anytime you are feeling anything other than the good or God, what you are doing is contributing to rather than encouraging others to reconnect to their source."

How are you coping with the constant influx of bad news? Please offer suggestions...I'm sure we can all use it.

Peace.

It's not just about abortion rights...

2011-03-07T23:23:14Z

There is something sinister going down in the United States, right now - something that every American woman should not only fear but fight. Right now, with the surge in conservative, religious-right thinking, women are not only in danger of losing basic human rights, but in many cases are losing basic human rights. Don't believe me? Check out these stories:

In Montana, authorities are trying to force a woman with cancer to have a hysterectomy. Why? Because she has hope of one day having a child, and chooses to keep the hope of living a long life and becoming a mother. She is a religious woman, and according to the article "The physician said that L.K.'s "religious delusions" interfered with her ability to make reasoned decisions about her care, and that L.K. didn't understand that she might die without the surgery, according to the petition."

I'm confused on a couple of things here:

One, if a woman is pregnant and her life is in danger without an abortion, let her die. BUT, if she has terminal cancer and yet holds onto the hope that she will live to have a child, she should be forced into sterilization so that she may live. Which way do conservative men want it? Are we better alive or dead - or does it just depend on their mood on any given day?

Two: The woman's "religious delusions" are called into question, as she believes that god has cured her. How is that a delusion, but GW Bush claiming to be annointed by god is not? Which way is it, conservative men? Women's religious beliefs are delusional (cuz we know that god hates women and fags) but a righteous man should be believed no matter the claim?

In Florida, a working pregnant mother of two toddlers was forced by the Supreme Court to be hospitalized at the insistence of her doctor. Why? Because he deemed that she was at risk of miscarriage. He would not refer her for a second opinion, she was not allowed (by the court, mind you) to choose the hospital where she was held, and "Three days into her forced hospitalization, Burton miscarried."

Since when does an American woman not have the right to get a second medical opinion, choose the hospital where she receives treatment, or - gasp - make her own decisions?

In Nebraska, a woman was forced to carry a non-viable baby - i.e. one that was dying in her womb - to term. Why? Because the state does not allow abortion after 20 weeks on the assumption that the fetus might feel pain. If the fetus was unhealthy, how can they be so sure that it didn't feel pain within the womb anyway? Maybe being aborted would relieve not only the mother's pain, but any that the fetus might have felt as well?

This woman was forced to carry and then birth a dead child to satisfy those who would rather have control over women rather than consider the facts. This woman must have gone through hell - forcing her to carry this dead child to term is nothing less than emotional torture. This action did not save a life. It did not prevent any health issues - in fact, it most likely caused more health issues for the mother, both physically and emotionally.

Women - I know to most of you, I'm preaching to the choir. It's for the readers who are in the anti-choice camp that this is written. We're not just talking about the right to have an abortion - we're talking about being able to carry your child the way you want - receive medical care according to your own wishes - to not be sterilized against your will. We're talking about not being forced to live for months knowing that you have a dead or dying fetus in your body, and then forced to give birth and grieve again.

It's not a conspiracy theory - it's happening right here in the "land of the free." If we don't have the rights to determine what happens to our own bodies, where do we have rights?

Not Just A Vagina... Not Only A Uterus.

2011-02-22T17:02:23Z

Thanks to author Leila Radan for letting us re-publish this article off of A Band of Wives. Check out ABOW - it's free to sign up, and it's magnificent!

by Leila Radan

Once upon a time I was Miz BoheMia. Once upon a time I wrote this. Many parts I'd edit for the me I am today and the critical writer/editor who knows it can be better. But that me that I was had a message I still agree with. And given what's going on today, I thought I'd share this with you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The abortion debate is getting hotter by the minute as well it should. A whole bunch of mostly men are pissed that women want complete ownership of their bodies. They claim to fight for the rights of the fetus. They are human rights activists they bellow! They have to put their foot down against all evil, abortion-crazy women who just want to get their freak on and f**k away, get pregnant, get an abortion and move on to some more f**king. Yes, because these women, them there that get these abortions do so easily and blindly and think only of themselves.

I have a vagina. That is all these men want to know. No need to tell them that I am a woman. No need to tell them anything about me it seems. It is my vagina and my uterus that take center stage. Me, I am just the receptacle that holds them. I have no mind, no heart, no soul.

There are some who claim that this must be a scientific debate. Forget religion, they declare in their show of openmindedness, and allow science to decide. And where am I woman, through it all now? Still just a uterus and a vagina only that now I am on the cutting room floor, being dissected, as men in white jackets search to decide my fate.

Yes, I have no mind, no heart, no soul. I am only a vagina, a faceless uterus with phantom fetus' floating around who must be saved from the cruel, cold-hearted receptacle that I am.

Funny how my children came out of that vagina, how I bore them, nurtured them, sacrificed my body for them while pregnant and how I sacrificed my body yet again after birth in order to feed them... yet I am only a uterus, only a vagina and my voice seems not to matter.

Well, I have news for you. Take your heads and scalpels out of my vagina and look up for a second. See the face, the mouth, the heart? That is where I am and I have plenty to say!

Talk of zygotes and embryos and fetuses and the unborn's rights and men's opinions, and the rights of fathers-to-be BE GONE. Science holds no answers and men, well, unless you agree that my body is mine as is the right to choose then your voice matters not. Women have the floor now and our stories matter and we will and we must speak up.

Like I said, I have two children. I bore them, nurtured them, sacrificed my body for them while pregnant and I sacrificed my body yet again after birth in order to feed them. I am not the same anymore. My body is not the same. My pregnancies affected me and only me physically. Funny how I am supposed to shut up and take it, grin and bear it then when this all affects only... say it with me now... me!

Abortion is not an easy task. Abortion is not a pretty task. You think it's evil? Then call it a necessary evil because that is just what it is...

I am sick and tired as a woman to have this reduced to a fight about body parts and women's rights... like homosexuals, we are tired of being a minority, of being second class citizens and we need this issue to simply be a part of the larger scope of human rights because these here men are stepping on my rights as a woman, on my rights as an individual, on my rights as a free being capable of making my own choices and of exercising my free will and when it comes to abortion it is, must be, should be and will be MY choice. ONLY MINE. Take that away from me and you are taking away my freedom, my equality and I am reduced to second class citizenship and so where is the equality and... enter Human Rights...

I have two children... count them... 1... 2.

My first pregnancy was not planned. My initial reaction was to get an abortion even though deep down I was happy about my pregnancy. I was just afraid to admit it. I was lucky in that I was in a committed, loving relationship with a loving and supportive partner who knew I was his equal. Saw me as, no. Knew because my not being an equal has never been an option.

So yes, I wanted an abortion and my husband wanted to keep the child... but... that did not matter he said. It was my body. Pregnancy had happened to me. Pregnancy was going to affect me. I would be the one giving birth. My body was going to suffer permanent changes. So yes, the choice was to be mine. Only... mine.

I decided to keep my child BECAUSE of the very fact that I was free to choose. Had I not had the choice, I would have found a way to abort. I don't like being caged in and I don't like being forced to do something I don't want to do and so I will not submit and I will get my way whether legally or no... I am not an animal to be caged. My free will shall not be stripped of me. Choice is my right.

The fact that I was free to choose and that I had a partner who wanted to keep the baby but said it was my body, my choice and the very fact that he would stand by me no matter what gave me the freedom and the empowerment to say yes to motherhood.

You want to strip us women of our rights? Then consider yourself at war. This is a war against me and my fellow sisters and we are outraged and we will NOT sit there and take it. And to the men who support our right to freedom, because that is what it is ultimately about, you shine, and thank you.

And psssst, let me let you in on a little secret. I said I have a vagina and I have a uterus. I never said I was one so take your filthy hands off me.

This is a human rights issue. Anything less is an insult. So women, speak up, write, scream, shout and ultimately fight. It is your right. It should be your duty...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted on the Daily Kos on Monday, April 10, 2006.

Please also read wife Amy Everitt's War on Women's Reproductive Health. (Amy Everitt is the State Director for NARAL Pro-Choice California.)

I also highly recommend MoveOn.org's Top 10 Shocking Attacks from the GOP's War on Women.

And please, STAND WITH PLANNED PARENTHOOD!

Video game a'la Monty Python

2011-02-01T06:28:50Z

I know I'm late here - Fable III has been out for several months - but my husband has recently gotten me addicted to this X-Box game. It's a role playing game that doesn't take itself too seriously - there are only two character choices (prince or princess), there isn't a lot of talky-talky, and it has a sense of humor that mirrors Monty Python. Having John Cleese voice the helpful butler enhances that feeling.

I love the pink haired merchants, crazy scenarios like having to go into a D&D like game being played by three wizards, dressing up like a chicken to gain the respect of one of the villages, and my favorite part is the crazy little gnomes that you have to kill as they shout out, in a funny gnome voice, that you're a worthless arse.

Usually, at the end of the day, my idea of a great game is a mindless game of Zuma or Tetris, but this game makes it easy to think just a little bit, laugh a lot, and chill for the evening.

Now, off to kill gnomes.

Corporate greed and abandoned cats in Dallas

2011-01-26T03:56:22Z

In one of the most exclusive neighborhoods in Dallas, a secret exists that many residents themselves aren't aware of. Tucked at the edge of a neighborhood known for homes the size of office buildings, couture shopping, and powerful residents is an abandoned street of boarded up 1920's bungalows. The only inhabited homes are those of residents who refused to sell out to a property company, which has to date refused to either renovate or tear down the homes they purchased, or otherwise make the street livable. This property company apparently had no plan B for dealing with the properties or the issues that came along with them. They thought that the money they offered was enough for people to leave the homes they lived in for decades, and never considered being turned down.

The true horror of this street is the homeless cat colony of approximately thirty cats, once owned by a resident who did sell out to the property company. Even though he reportedly received several hundred thousand dollars for a house worth a fraction of that amount, he didn't bother taking the cats he chose to own, when he left.

Meantime, a group of women started to take on the care of the cats on their own, making sure that the animals were all spayed or neutered and that they are fed several times a day. Volunteers bring bags of food and veterinarians offer free or low-cost services to help the cats. The searing Texas summer heat and the below freezing temperatures that occur in Dallas in the wintertime are worrisome for the kitties though, even the young and strong ones. Drug-addled rednecks make a game of speeding down the street to see if they can hit the cats - two were killed by one of these idiots simultaneously in front of one of the volunteers, recently.

While police officers try to monitor the street as much as possible, Dallas has suffered police layoffs like other cities have, and there are other areas of the city that need their services more. Some Dallas residents in the know love to drive down the street to gawk at the houses and the cats, but complaints to the property company or the city either aren't being made or are being ignored. Some of the volunteers have been verbally abused by people who think the cats should be left to die, and remaining residents have been accused of neglect and abuse, as passers-by assume they own the cats.

It's a shame that the original owner can't be found and put back in his now rotted, boarded up home, stripped of anything he gained by selling, and periodically put in the middle of the street as a target for the people just like him - criminal animal abusers. Since that can't be done, and since the parade of Lexus and Mercedes owners who love the curiosity can't bother themselves by helping, maybe getting the word out to ears beyond the city of Dallas will help.

Yes there are colonies like this all over the country, and more in Dallas for sure, but there shouldn't be. I was clueless that organized cat colonies like this existed until last year, and am surely not the only one. Even if all of the cats can't be adopted, volunteers and those who can donate food can make a difference.

Most of all, I hope to ram this point into the heads of anyone who may not have gotten it yet: This is what happens when you don't spend the measly $50 to spay or neuter a pet you agree to take responsibility for. This happens to them if they're lucky. And even lucky abandoned cats are vulnerable to the elements and the idiots.

Please spay or neuter your pet. If you chose to own one, please remember it's not disposable.

If you'd like information about adopting one of these kitties, please contact us and we'll put you in touch with someone who can help.

Presumed innocent is a two way street

2010-12-20T06:23:58Z

Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann, and Julian Assange: three men who are known for being confrontational. They pride themselves on presenting the truth in defense of the defenseless and, in Moore's and Olbermann's cases, out of the love of the United States.

Now, they are also known for something else: for hiding out when they themselves are criticized and confronted, crossing their fingers that if they just click their heels three times and don't tweet for a few days, all the mean people will go away. Worst of all, they are showing that they really do have a penchant for the good-ole-boy system - something they previously claimed to fight.

If you haven't caught wind of the #MooreandMe campaign on Twitter, you might be surprised to hear about the ruckus. After Moore's declaration of Assange's innocence in the Swedish rape charges (cuz you know, he's like so cool and all about the truth & shit) a lot of women couldn't believe their ears. The real shock came when Moore refused (and thus far, still refuses) to retract his statement and refuses to even acknowledge the criticism coming from his female fans. He's behaving a little too much like the officials that he's taken on in film after film. Olbermann, in his typical flying-off-the-handle-style, went so far as to block Tweeters who dared to question his almighty super-knowledge. He threw a tantrum and threatened to quit Tweeting as a result.

So what's the big deal? The big deal is that two major progressive activists, while defending another man's right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, deny the women who may be victims of rape the same respect. Instead of looking at their statements or lack thereof (as in Olbermann not questioning Moore's avid defense of Assange, even with no evidence), both Moore and Olbermann refuse to admit they were wrong, behave as if anyone who has a problem with them is an idiot, and just can't seem to bear parting with their Assange Fanboy ways. Getting into his good graces seems to trump defending not only the women who have helped pave their way to success by supporting their movies/television shows, but the women who raised them or otherwise contributed to their lives.

I wonder how they feel, being at the other side of a controversy. I wonder if they really think that women are just going to back down and say, "oh okay, just don't do it again." I especially wonder if they are going to exhibit the character that they demand of their own targets, and not only admit that they are wrong but maybe even try to make up for it by acknowledging the problems that victims of rape face every day. Like being accused of lying or "wanting it."

I've always been a fan of both men, but their response to being called out on gender insensitivity is a big red flag. As we'd say in a political race, if they want their success to continue, they might want to try relating to their female constituents a little better.

No, a lot better. Presumed innocent is a two way street, gents - even if one of those streets is a woman who may have been raped. She deserves the same respect that your beloved Julian does.

In case you missed it, the interview is below. Moore's comments in question begin at minute 13:

Wikileaks latest disclosure: what do you think?

2010-11-29T01:34:01Z

Once again, Wikileaks is treating us to a huge stash of secret government documents, with the help of The New York Times, The Guardian and three other major newspapers. The decision to make these diplomatic cables public, according to the newspapers involved, was to do what's best for the public interest and to make known what's going on behind the scenes of the US government in this time of war, terrorism and economic troubles. The docs have been sifted for months, presented to officials for comment, and over the coming week will be doled out for all of us to see.

The response from the US government has been urgent: they began performing damage control in previous weeks to inform friendly government leaders of the potentially embarrassing and sensitive information that would be made public. The UK Ministry of Defence has urged the Guardian to refrain from publishing the cables out of concern for the lives of British citizens abroad.

On this first day of dissemination, it's hard to see what's surprising. On one hand, it's embarrassing that criticism of the leaders of US allies is public, but on the other hand who really believes that shit-talk doesn't go down behind the scenes in any institution? There seems to be some shock in reading about US spying on UN officials, but if a 12 year old can't be assured of privacy in an airport security line, why should we believe that top officials aren't being watched?

There are a couple of zingers - like how Yemen has taken the blame for some US bombing raids and how the US pressured Germany to drop arrest warrants for incompetent CIA officers who illegally held a German citizen for months in Afghanistan - but much of the info published today doesn't seem to be that surprising.

Not all of it is embarrassing, either. In fact, what's been seen so far just fills in some of the holes in news about world affairs - something that a good percentage of the US media tends to either ignore or spin. There is grave concern over Iran's nuclear capabilities, something we knew but perhaps not to the extent that we know now. Pakistan has been watched carefully due to the explosive environment enveloping that country, again something we kind of knew but now we know that there is more to the story.

It will be interesting to see what other information the publishing of these leaked documents reveals. Considering that we're still involved in two wars and watching other countries around the globe flirt with the possibility of war, getting a little in-depth news on what's going on will be a refreshing change from the typical political-lite that we get on a daily basis.

What do you think about the recent leaks, also known as cablegate? Are you looking forward to reading more or do you think that publishing the info is irresponsible?

Fighting drunk driving with charity and love

2010-11-26T15:35:33Z

Drunk driving accidents are a year round problem, but as we all know, the holidays are the apex. While some larger cities in the western part of the US are trying to catch up with mass transit, finding alternative transportation for the extra-joyful can be excruciating. The rail systems in places like Dallas and Houston are great for those who live within walking distance of a station, but that's a small percentage of the population. Cabs, in the west, are expensive. That 20 minute cab ride home can set you back $30 or more, and for students and people who are just getting by, that's a big chunk of change.

There is a group in Tulsa, Oklahoma, who are taking on the problem in their city. When a drunk driver killed a beloved friend, they realized that drunk driving needs to be tackled through positive action, and this weekend they are getting the word out.

Missy's Keys 4 Cabs, created in honor of Melissa Eubanks, is a non-profit aiming to get drunk drivers off Tulsa's streets by providing free cab rides home. They're kicking off with a party, showing the program in action and reaching across generations rather than just putting out press releases. Maybe this is what other cities in the west and midwest need to do - stop preaching and start doing.

Getting toasty over the holidays is what a lot of people do. It's a fact. Dealing with it by making sure that toasty can be as safe as it is fun is true holiday love and spirit. Hats off to this group of caring friends and family for making a difference at a time some would spend in anger. Let's see programs like this pop up in other transit-deficient cities!

Military women, we salute you

2010-11-11T16:50:04Z

In the US, the idea of women in the military is still controversial. There are still rules in the military that prevent women from serving in combat, yet in the wars we fight today with no frontlines, even support staff is seeing action.

The reasons for keeping women out of combat vary from the physical differences between men and women to the psychological. Some traditionalists believe that a woman's mental makeup would adversely affect her ability to fight, or they put the psychological conundrum on the men, who might be less effective if they had a wounded woman around. Some think that women would purposely get pregnant to avoid combat duty, and of course to do that they have to be sexually involved with the male soldiers.

Even with the barriers of discrimination that today's military women face, they're out there fulfilling their support roles and handling any combat situation they find themselves in with the professionalism required of all soldiers. Those who are chosen to have roles in active combat - soldiers like Vernice Armour and Tammy Duckworth - are proving that women can successfully fulfill a multitude of roles.

There is no doubt that as women in the military continue to break barriers, there will come a day when those who want to serve are treated respectfully and given the same opportunity as the men. YoLadies would like to thank these women not only for serving our country, but for fighting on the frontline for future women's rights in the military.

Who the hell do Shape readers think they are?

2010-10-31T16:56:07Z

For those of you who missed it, Shape Magazine editor, Valerie Latona, sent an email to readers apologizing for putting LeAnne Rimes on the cover. Was it because they photoshopped her to oblivion or because Ms Rimes was involved with a dog fighting or child abuse ring? No. Ms Latona apologized - saying that "Shape has made a terrible mistake in putting LeAnn Rimes on the cover" - because readers were aghast that they had to lay eyes on an adultress.

That's right, it turns out that making a mistake in something as personal as marriage does score up there in the disgusting category, along with dog fighting and child abuse. Or, that's what Shape readers think, anyway. It is most ironic that she isn't blasted for cheating on her husband as much as she's blasted for being "a husband stealer."

Sure, affairs are bad. They cause heartache and pain, they're an ultimate betrayal, selfish, crappy, and I doubt that many out there think otherwise. They hurt friends who end up being involved in the ensuing drama, too. However, how many Shape readers are friends with Ms Rimes or her ex-husband? How many weren't sure whose side to take because they knew all the facts and were torn between friends? My guess is that none of these women knew her, her ex, or their situation.

It is sad that people can spew such hatred toward a woman who made a mistake, but they don't seem to mind that the NFL hasn't kicked Brett Favre out for being a married-with-kids sexist pig, or that Tiger Woods is still celebrated for his golf game even after he cheated on his wife with any woman who'd do him. Brad Pitt is still lusted after by millions even after he hooked up with Angelina Jolie while still married. Who doesn't love Lenny Kravitz, even though we know he cheated on Lisa Bonet?

Can a woman not be celebrated for her talent and for the parts of her that didn't make a mistake? Are Shape readers so pure-of-heart that their eyes will bleed if they even have to look at a non-perfect, mistake-making woman? LeAnn Rimes does not deserve to have her life and work beat into irrelevant submission because the moralists out there are afraid that she's out to steal their husbands. What year is it anyway, 1953?

It is offensive that a small group of judgmental are proud to have a no-tolerance policy with women, but not to men. It's more offensive that an editor would send an apology to these backwards women, further shoving Ms Rimes into the "whore" box instead of defending the mag's choice. It's one thing to listen to your readers, but it's another to join in on the hen-pecking girl gang activity, stepping in to agree that these readers are right in passing out scarlet letters as they see fit.

RIP, Ari Up

2010-10-22T14:23:54Z

Arianna Forster, known as Ari Up of the punk band The Slits, passed away on October 20 in LA at age 48. She was a leader in times when girls and young women were growing tired of the good girl image of most music. Along with other punk women like Exene Červenková, Poly Styrene and Chrissy Hynde, she showed just how tough and cool women can be, and gave a voice to a generation.

Her great talent will be missed. Here is a classic:

It gets better, believe it.

2010-10-14T19:21:57Z

I don't know if it's something in the water, or the cycle of the moon, but these past few weeks have seen a spike in media reports of bullied gay teens committing suicide. What is going on with our kids? Are we really raising them to be so insensitive to their fellow humans that they happily drive anyone different from themselves to end their lives?

I don't know what would devastate me more, being the parent of a child who ended their brief life, or being the parent of a child who tormented someones son or daughter so badly that they saw no way to escape their pain other than death.

What I do know is that if my children turn out to be as half as strong and brave and gracious and passionate as Fort Worth City Councilman Joel Burns, I'll be content that I did a good job raising them. The following video can be hard to watch, but it's worth it.

Thank you, Joel Burns.

Dan Savage 1, Homophobe 0

2010-10-06T18:23:37Z

There's really not much more to say about this article.

Dan Savage blasts narrow-minded and intolerant religious types about perpetuating hate against homosexuals.

Narrow-minded and intolerant religious type gets her panties in a wad.

Dan Savage slaps her so hard, her future narrow-minded and intolerant offspring will be rubbing their cheeks.

It's a thing of beauty and I cheered. Enjoy!

SL Letter of the Day: Almost Sorry