Monthly Archives: November 2009

Talking Turkey: Polanski, Brown and Woods

November 30, 2009
By

turkeys

Turkeys, turkeys, turkeys. They were all over the news this holiday weekend.

First, there was the report that famed film director/infamous rapist Roman Polanski would be released on $4.5 million bail and placed under house arrest to a 19,000 square foot luxury ski chalet in Gstaad. (Remind you of Bernie Madoff?) Several news reports cite French President Nicolas Sarkozy as having been “very effective” in arranging Polanski’s new deal. Sarkozy reportedly never believed Polanski, who is 76, should have been arrested for a crime he committed 32 years ago. Maybe not if the courts were just now getting around to trying him, but Polanski fled the system after being found guilty and before serving his time.

What was most infuriating was the reporting by the Los Angeles Times, the AP and others who said Polanski had sex with a 13 year old. I understand Polanski pleaded guilty to this lesser charge, but the fact is he raped a girl. Sad that the media won’t just call the crime by its name.

Next on the turkey list was ABC. The network was planning to have Chris Brown, the one who beat up Rhianna, on “Good Morning America.” Supposedly, Brown was to give a “tell-all” interview or maybe perform on the show –he has a new album coming out. I just heard, minutes ago, that GMA cancelled and Brown will appear on “20/20″ instead.

Perhaps Brown is contrite. Who knows? But it is still incredibly irresponsible of ABC to give him air time and risk glamourizing him. However, we must consider the ratings.

And the weekend wrapped with plenty of turkey talk following Tiger Woods’ low speed, middle-of-the-night, one car crash. Being human, I too posited theories of what may have lead to the crash. But I won’t share them. First of all, it’s really none of my business.  Second, how could I possibly know what happened? I wasn’t there.

But what I will comment on is how quickly the blogosphere, gossip sites and sports sites jumped all over Tiger’s wife, Elin Nordegren, and the woman the National Enquirer says he is romantically involved with, Rachel Uchitel.

MyFoxLA used the headline ”Tiger Woods Drama Comes to Los Angeles” in reference to Uchitel flying out west  to meet with her lawyer. SFGate, a blog hosted by the San Francisco Chronicle,  points out that Uchitel lives in New York’s Meatpacking District where Glenn Close’s psycho “Fatal Attraction” character lived. And the BleacherReport.com asks about Mrs. Woods, “Is she crazy hot, or is she just plain crazy?”

So the moral of the story is: famous golfer hits a tree, media insults women. Nice.

Happy Thanksgiving

November 26, 2009
By

cornucopiaHave a Happy Thanksgiving.

Care2 has a post on the ten reasons women should give thanks this year. Sometimes it can be hard to remember what’s working, or where we’ve made progress. You can read the ten reasons here.

Shopping: Recession Style

November 25, 2009
By

shopLike most born salespeople, I enjoy the hunt — even when it comes to shopping. I find the pursuit of the perfect black pump or patent tote bag immensely more satisfying than the actual purchase. This trait has served me well during a recession. Money is scarce, but I still need to dress for success. Luckily, I’ve been able to use my prospecting skills at thrift stores, consignment shops and on Ebay.

And I’ve “closed” some incredible deals. I bought a Sonia Rykiel coat for $8, brand new Prada boots for $44, an Escada sweater for $4 and a vintage Douglas Stannard necklace for $29. Thrifty shopping requires a mix of luck and skill. As far as the luck, you’re on your own. But I can help with the skill. Here are my top ten tips for thrifting.

 1) Shop frequently: Merchandise moves fast in thrift stores. Shops usually bring in new stock weekly. Find out when the new inventory arrives and try to visit the same day.

2) Be willing to leave empty handed: If you don’t find something you need or love, don’t buy. Remember, an acrylic sweater with appliqué flowers is always hideous — no matter how inexpensive it is.

3) If it’s under $3, don’t hesitate: That being said, if you are on the fence about whether or not you “need” an item, ask yourself two questions: Can I think of a place to wear this? Is it $3 or less? If the answer to both questions is yes, than buy it. I still remember the $1 metallic Patricia Field bag I didn’t buy. I went back for it two days later, but it was gone.

4) Invest the time: You don’t need to spend a lot of money when you thrift, but you do need to spend some time. Thrift stores don’t employ merchandisers. There are no well-lit displays that show you what top goes with what pants. Often times these stores are very large and the racks are packed tighter than my closet. To find a treasure, you need to dig through the junk.

5) Shop for what you need and what you love: Only shop for items you need or love. On my Blackberry I keep a list of what purchases I need to complete my wardrobe or a specific outfit. The only things I buy that are not on that list, are items I absolutely, positively love, like the red Stuart Weitzman pumps I found last week for $70.

6) Know what clothes cost: It’s helpful to know the going rate for items before you shop – especially when bidding on Ebay. If you’re competitive, like me, it’s easy to get caught up in wanting to “win” against anonymous bidding opponents. Don’t pay $300 for an item that retails at $199.

 7) Find a good dry cleaner, tailor and cobbler: A good tailor and cobbler can make gently worn items look new again merely by replacing a zipper or re-soling a shoe. And never hang previously worn clothes in your closet without dry cleaning them first.

8) Don’t skimp on quality: Thrift doesn’t mean cheap. It means inexpensive. Always keep the same standards whether you’re shopping at Salvation Army or Neiman Marcus. Look for quality fabric and construction and check for a good fit.

9) Cultivate an individual style: Many people think thrift is synonymous with bohemian and eccentric. That doesn’t have to be the case. Sure you can find retro styles in vintage shops, but you can find classic items as well. You don’t have to sacrifice your style in order to save money.

10) Learn to accept a compliment graciously: When someone says, “I love your outfit,” try to say “thank you” and nothing else. For me, this is the hardest part of thrifting. I can never resist responding, “Thanks. It was only $5 at Goodwill.”

Guest post: What’s a woman to do?

November 24, 2009
By

This post, by Linda Tarr-Whelan, first appeared on Mom’s Rising. Here’s the link to the original.

Linda-Tarr-WhelanHealth care for women is in the news these days. But what does it all mean?  Having just researched for my new book what different decisions emerge when 30% women are at the table, I can’t help but wonder what would have happened if Congress were made up of 30% women, instead of 17%.  But more on that in future posts!

For today, I’m riveted by news stories that a “very prestigious independent medical panel” has recommended big changes in our health care routines.  As a colon cancer survivor and former nurse, it leaves me with more questions than answers. They talked about preventing deaths from breast cancer, but then told us to cut out several key steps we have learned to take.

We have walked, done relays, worn pink ribbons and educated ourselves to take practical steps:  do breast self-exams, have the mammograms we need after the age of 40 and regular doctors’ visits. Could these common-sense precautions really be unnecessary?  Really?.

First I went to the American Cancer Society, to see what they say at www.cancer.org.  The chief medical officer is very clear.  Even looking at the same studies as the independent group did, they came up with different conclusions. Their guidelines – the ones we know well and try to follow – stay in place.

Yes, there are risks that need careful discussions between a woman and her physician.  Yes, we’d like better science so there won’t be false positives on mammography that can cause anxiety.  But the bottom-line is clear:  we still need to check ourselves and get the tests we need for early discovery and treatment.

Then what about that flap over the House-passed health care reform package that traded a necessary part of health care away for a cynical political deal around abortion politics?  Most women don’t even want to think about ending pregnancies; we concentrate on having a safe pregnancy and a healthy baby.  Private insurance policies have generally treated women’s reproductive health as part of health care, not a separate political football.  That’s important because none of us can know what the future will bring.

Forty special interest members of Congress weren’t thinking about women’s needs.  They pushed for and won a provision to effectively prevent women from getting private insurance coverage for the full range of reproductive health options. These Members of Congress knew tax dollars cannot be used for abortion services; for 30 years, by law, no federal money can pay for the procedure.  Instead, like recalcitrant children, they held up agreement on the reforms millions of Americans including my family and maybe yours need for health care.

Think about it.  Every family knows someone who’s at risk with our fragmented health system. Our daughter’s employer – like many across the country – dropped health insurance coverage in this economic downturn.  Individual policies cost far too much for Montessori teachers like her.  Our son in the computer field was 36 years old before he had a job where the employer offered group health insurance. My aunt is only able to take the medications covered by her Medicare prescription drug plan.  Every family knows what is at stake.

Health care tops the list for moms to take care of their families.  Join the Moms Rising campaign.  Click here, because our kids need both health care and healthy moms!

Linda Tarr-Whelan is the author of Women Lead the Way: Your Guide to Stepping Up to Leadership and Changing the World.  Check out her website at www.lindatarrwhelan.com.

Is Mommy Hating on the Rise?

November 23, 2009
By

strollerThere’s an interesting article by Lynn Harris over at Salon called “Everybody Hates Mommy.” Go check it out. Harris makes the case that “mommy bashing” is on the rise.

Like the author, I too took a train to work while pregnant. But unlike the author, who says she was rarely offered a seat, I was NEVER offered a seat. There I was eight, nine, nine and a half months pregnant (pregnancy is 40 weeks –do the math) rocking and swaying as the train cruised along. Mine was a commuter train and the conductor would come through the cars collecting fares and I would block the whole aisle. He would still manage to barge by, sometimes shoving me. My protruding stomach would get mushed into the back of a seat and the conductor’s behind would rub across mine. Every morning was a new experience in humiliation, hostility and disgust. I never considered there was mommy hating going on. I just wrote it off as the sad world we live in where people keep their heads down and use newspapers, cell phones and iPods to tune out strangers.

And unlike the author, I dwell in the burbs not the city so I don’t witness the stroller gangs every day. Instead, I see the minivan brigade. And I confess, sometimes they really bug the crap out of me. You know, the way they absentmindedly drive those big ugly vehicles while talking on their cell phones. And the fact they arrive at school pick up 20 minutes earlier to get the best parking spots. And then of course they idle their cars while they wait.

I admit, I find it bizarre, and yes, annoying the way the “good” moms are always packing snacks for their kids. They have snacks at the park, snacks at soccer practice, snacks in the car. Why can’t their kids go an hour without a snack? And why do I care? Because I look like the bad mom who never has any damn Goldfish with her. But I digress.

So while I, clearly, have been known to do a little mommy-judging myself, I think Harris has a point. Mothers are under attack more so now, then maybe ever before. There’s been a media backlash on mother’s who drink, mother’s who let their kids walk alone and mothers-to-be who might harm their fetus.  Has Dad ever experienced this level of scrutiny?

 

What’s Lacking in Women’s Healthcare? Trust

November 20, 2009
By

healthcareJust days after the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) revised the screening guidelines for breast cancer, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) has revised its guidelines for cervical cancer screening. You can read the revised guidelines here.

Basically, the ACOG is recommending that women should have their first cervical cancer screening at age 21 and be rescreened less frequently than previously recommended. Previous guidelines called for yearly testing for young women, starting within three years of their first sexual intercourse, but no later than age 21. The reason for the revision is to “avoid unnecessary treatment of adolescents which can have economic, emotional, and future childbearing implications.” Cervical cancer is caused by strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV). The ACOG reports that cervical cancer rates have fallen more than 50 percent in the past 30 years and that although HPV infection is high among sexually active teens, cervical cancer is rare in women under 21. Apparently, the immune system can clear HPV infections within a year or two among most young women.

From the ACOG, “Because the adolescent cervix is immature, there is a higher incidence of HPV-related precancerous lesions (called dysplasia). However, the large majority of cervical dysplasias in adolescents resolve on their own without treatment. A significant increase in premature births has recently been documented among women who have been treated with excisional procedures for dysplasia.”

On their own, these guidelines seem reasonable. But many women are frustrated by the changes, and rightly so. After all, there doesn’t seem to be clear consensus on the USPSTF guidelines and now this? The ACOG actually issued a contradictory response to the USPSTF’s guidelines. So did the American Cancer Society. So who do we trust? Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius also issued a statement on the breast cancer screening recommendations. Here’s an excerpt (full text here):

“There is no question that the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations have caused a great deal of confusion and worry among women and their families across this country. I want to address that confusion head on. …

“My message to women is simple. Mammograms have always been an important life-saving tool in the fight against breast cancer and they still are today. Keep doing what you have been doing for years — talk to your doctor about your individual history, ask questions, and make the decision that is right for you.”

Her message may be simple but not realistic. When doctors schedule appointments every 15 minutes, when insurance companies make it very difficult for doctors and patients to order and receive testing outside of the recommended time frames, when referrals and co-pays and paperwork make the simplest procedures complicated, managing your health care is easier said than done.

When it comes to health care women don’t know who they can trust. These new guidelines follow on the heels of The House of Representatives trading women’s reproductive rights for the passage of a healthcare bill. Leading up to that vote, many women were surprised to learn that C-sections, rape, domestic violence are all considered pre-existing conditions by some insurance companies. Is it any wonder we are skeptical when told to scale back on preventative measures?

I am not a health care provider and therefore not qualified to comment on the guidelines. But I am a woman and feel quite comfortable telling the healthcare industry and the government, “Get it together with respect to women’s health.”

What’s Wrong with You?

November 19, 2009
By

supermom

Senator Harry Reid released the Senate Healthcare Bill last night. We are slogging through it and will have more to discuss later.

While we read the bill, check out this article and video from the New York Daily News. Aren’t you just so relieved to know Heidi Klum has lost the baby weight? (I didn’t even know she was pregnant.)

Once again the mainstream media is reminding us that not only should we all aspire to bounce back to our pre-pregnancy bodies, but it’s so easy to do.  Heidi Klum is a supermodel, and now she’s a supermom too. What’s. Wrong. With. You?

Oh, and if you want to look like a supermodel, get your liposuction now before the Senate votes on healthcare reform. The Senate bill includes a “Botax” – a 5 percent tax on elective cosmetic surgery.

 

 heidiklum

 (Photo used with Creative Commons license)

Sarah Palin on the cover of Newsweek

November 18, 2009
By

(NOTE: Please click the story headline to view this post. Pictures do not load properly on homepage.)

Sexist or not? What do you think?

 

Palin newsweek

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is the current cover better than this one?

palin_newsweek_closeup

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Media Matters discusses the photo choices that accompany the story too. You can read the analysis here.

(Pictures thanks to Creative Commons license.)

 

New Mammography Guidelines

November 17, 2009
By

breast cancer

Yesterday the government issued new guidelines on breast cancer screening. These guidelines are a major change to what we’ve been told for years.

From the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) website:

•The USPSTF recommends against routine screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years. The decision to start regular, biennial screening mammography before the age of 50 years should be an individual one and take patient context into account, including the patient’s values regarding specific benefits and harms.

•The USPSTF recommends biennial screening mammography for women aged 50 to 74 years.

•The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the additional benefits and harms of screening mammography in women 75 years or older.

•The USPSTF recommends against teaching breast self-examination (BSE).•The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the additional benefits and harms of clinical breast examination (CBE) beyond screening mammography in women 40 years or older.

•The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the additional benefits and harms of either digital mammography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) instead of film mammography as screening modalities for breast cancer.

Here’s what concerns me: The decision to start regular, biennial screening mammography before the age of 50 years should be an individual one and take patient context into account, including the patient’s values regarding specific benefits and harms. I have had too many interactions with condescending doctors who don’t value a patient’s opinion and dismiss intuition or a patient’s personal knowledge of their own body. It’s nice to think that a women interested in early mammography could have a reasonable discussion with her physician – and some will be able to – but the chances seem slim. Every doctor I visit schedules 15 minute appointments, hardly enough time to have a meaningful discussion.

Still, the research is interesting and the new guidelines are apparently more in line with international guidelines.  Read more from the USPSTF here.

The American Cancer Society, however, is not changing its guidelines. Read their response to the new guidelines here.

Take a look at both sides. What do you think? Do the benefits of regular mammograms outweigh the risks or vice versa?

A Long Way from Equal

November 16, 2009
By

whpI was complaining to my father after learning a male coworker made more money than me despite the fact I was on the management team and my coworker was not. My father responded, “I didn’t think women had to deal with that anymore. I thought women were treated as equals these days.”  I’ll spare you the 30 minute rant I shared with my father in response.

The idea that women and men are equals in the workplace is a common misconception. After all, there are more women going to work every day than there are men. And women are breadwinners: a working wife, on average, contributes 42.2 percent of her household’s income. (Source: The Center for American Progress).  Women receive the majority of college degrees. But for some reason, this doesn’t add up to women rising to the tops of their organizations in any significant numbers. We know that the wage gap is widening, not closing. And, in Massachusetts alone, women are losing ground at the top.

Now, a new report from the White House Project points out just how far women still need to go in several different industries. According to “Benchmarking Women’s Leadership” women represent a mere 18 percent of top leaders. Take a look at the percentage of women who are:

*Full professors 26%

*University presidents 23%

*Fortune 500 CEOS 3%

*Among the highest paid at the Fortune 500 6%

*Movie and TV directors, executive producers, producers, writers, cinematographers 16%

*Television station owners 6%

*Newspaper publishers 18%

*News directors of radio stations 20%

*News directors at television stations 28%

*Law partners 18%

*Judges 25%

*Top military officers 11%

*Members of Congress 17%

*State legislators 24%

*Mayors 15%

*Protestant clergy and rabbis 15% (The Catholic Church,  Orthodox Judaism and Islam prohibit women from holding ministerial leadership positions.)

*College athletic directors 21 percent

The sector where women come closest to parity is nonprofit. Women represent 45 percent of nonprofit CEOS. But when you take a closer look, you will see they represent only 21 percent of the CEOs at organizations with budgets of $25 million or more. And women CEOS at these organizations earn, on average only 66 percent of what their male counterparts earn.

Maybe you are reading this and thinking, “Well I don’t want to own a television station or be a mayor or a minister. I make a decent living and have a good life.” That’s fine. But the lack of women at the top still affects you. There is a growing body of literature showing the correlation between diversity of leadership and positive results.  

Women and men approach leadership, risk management, team building and other key skills differently. Women represent 51 percent of the population and at least 85 percent of consumer buying power. In order for the United States to compete in a global market, rebound from the recession, and best represent the interests of all of its citizens, we need to shift the balance of power.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes