Category Archives: Politics

Feminism Science

Some sensible advice on fertility…

…every woman is different. Annalisa Barbieri in The Guardian today:

So, surely it would be far more useful for everyone if women were taught to read signs of their own fertility. This would attune them with their bodies and help them notice changes, and they could then, in certain cases, get help well in advance of actually wanting to have children. Such insight into your own fertility can be found by charting your monthly period, temperature, cervical fluid and cervix position. Easy, quick and empowering when you know how. It’s not fashionable to do this, but it can help determine if you have a short luteal phase (which may deter successful implantation of a fertilised egg), and can even help you see the menopause coming.

I’ve studied biological science and feminism and yet I’ve never heard of half of that. (Of course the fact that I never have and never will want to get pregnant might have something to do with that, but I doubt this info, which sounds rather important if you might be interested one day, is widely available.)

For those concerned about this issue it might be well worth looking into – you’re not a statistic but an individual body.

And I seem to be in the middle of something of a flood of babies at the moment. I’m 40, and I know a lot of now-pregnant women, most of them broadly around my age. I’m thinking about not drinking the water for a while…

Feminism

The usual suspect

Listening to the “Today” programme on Radio 4 this morning, their main, after the 8am news, item was that old abortion law issue. There was a quite interesting scientific bloke, then the usual, inevitable interview subject.

Why DO producers get Catholic church representatives on to talk about abortion? You get the predictable middle-aged single bloke, saying all of the predictable things, representing a tiny fraction of the British community.

There may be a case from lowering the abortion law limit from 24 weeks to 23 or 22, if foetuses are indeed viable at that stage – but the only people who can really set out the case are the medical experts. And of course the people running with this are just anti-abortionists (i.e. pro-coathangerists) grabbing whatever angle on the story they think might help their case.

And if the limit is lowered, then almost all of the abortions that will be stopped will be those of grossly disabled foetuses that women will then have to carry for another three months or so, knowing what they carry. Not something I’d like to do.

While I’m venting my spleen, you do have to wonder what the jury was thinking about delivering a manslaughter rather than murder verdict in this case. It is obvious the judge didn’t agree:

The judge said the fact that she was having sexual relations with another man had been disclosed a couple of days before he killed her and was therefore not “a bolt from the blue”. He said the relationship was only nine months old. He added: “The remorse you have professed in court is more directed at your own plight rather than for the woman whose life you cut short for no good reason.”

Simple, if a woman you’re with tells you she’s sleeping with someone else, leave. You’re perfectly justified in doing that. Not in attacking and murdering her.

Feminism

A woman in charge. The shock, the horror

The Anglican church is coming over all faint and having to lie down in a darkened room – or at least large parts of it are – after the US Episcopal Church (part of the international Anglican communion, as they call it) elected a woman, Katharine Jefferts Schori, Bishop of Nevada, as presiding bishop. What’s even worse, a liberal woman.

Sounds like a very necessary step forward to me, since:

Only three churches within the 38 provinces of the Anglican communion currently ordain women bishops: the US, Canada and New Zealand, though a further 11, including Ireland and Scotland have amended their canons to enable them to do so.

Feminism Politics

Women Suicide Bombers

I’ve got a review of a book of that title over on Blogcritics. The book is a bit of a quick cut and paste job, assembling material from the media and academia on the subject, but that does produce a useful survey. Its general conclusion – unsurprising, but likely to be unpopular – is that there is nothing “special” about the women bombers. They have the same range of motivations and character traits as the males.

The really surprising piece of information is that the suicide bomb belt was actually invented for use by women, by the Tamil Tigers. Perhaps the first weapon of war specifically invented for women. (If you don’t count those tricksy little deringers women always wield in Western movies, but I’m not sure those were really serious weapons.)

Environmental politics

You can make a difference

Time for some good news – a piece in the Telegraph about how one person – well two people working together – can really make a difference:

Endalk was now a king pin of Simien conservation, working for an Austrian non-governmental organisation in co-operation with Unesco. His influence was everywhere: new park headquarters were rising from the dirt, as were more sophisticated facilities at the campsites in the park. The rabble of self-proclaimed guides who used to besiege the tourist buses was gone, replaced by a licenced, trained, uniformed elite.
Best of all – to my mind, incredibly – animal numbers were rising. The formula was simplicity itself: harsher penalties for poaching, rewards for informants, more patrols, and village sessions to educate pastoralists about the benefits of tourism. I was in awe: the man was a whirlwind.

Politics

The crime hysteria

A comment just made on BBC Radio Five Live — “the newspapers are full of crime” — just about sums it up – you could even call it criminal. Hello folks – crime rates are going down, your risk of being the victim of serious crime if you are a normal, law-abiding citizen is very low (and the risk almost certainly, if you are female, comes from a member of your own household).

A piece in the Observer today sums it up well:

Almost 100 years ago, Winston Churchill, then Home Secretary, sought to define a civilised society by the way it treated its prisoners. He said in 1910: ‘A calm and dispassionate recognition of the rights of the accused against the state, and even of convicted criminals against the state … these are the symbols which, in the treatment of crime and criminals, mark and measure the stored-up strength of a nation and are the sign and the proof of the living virtue in it.’