Monthly Archives: March 2010

Won’t Work for Free

March 30, 2010
By Hello Ladies

I'm not a housewife with a hobby

I am reeling. Still. Yesterday morning my client asked me to work for free. The client runs a startup organization and I know money is always tight when a company is trying to get off the ground. Businesses need marketing to attract clients. And they need clients to pay for marketing. It’s always a bit of a chicken egg scenario in the beginning. So I thought what my client was asking was for me to defer billing for several months. I’ve done that before.

But no, that’s not what he wanted. He wanted me to work for FREE. I am glad I asked for clarification. In exchange for my expertise, honed for more than 20 years in the business, he was offering me “exposure.” And he said he “hoped” to be able to pay me someday.

I run a business.  I feed my family from that business. Hope and exposure don’t buy groceries or pay the mortgage. I am not a recent college grad just starting out and trying to build a portfolio. I am not a housewife with a hobby. I am a breadwinner.

Seriously, would my client have asked a man to work for free? I can’t say definitively but I tend to believe this kind of thing happens much more to women than it does to men. Wake up world.  More women are on the national payroll than men. In married couple families, the average working woman contributes approximately 40 percent of the household income. And one third of all U.S. households are supported by women breadwinners today. We are not working to fill the vacation fund, the shoe fund or because we suffer from some kind of homemaker ennui. We are professional women. Devaluing a woman’s work (and I’m not talking about laundry and dishes) is insulting to the individual woman and fiscally irresponsible to society.

Below are three related posts from around the web that address the more subtle version of “will you work for free?” which is “Can I pick your brain?” And note, one is written by a man.

Tara Hunt’s “10 Ways to Reply to: ‘Can I pick your brain?’”

Nicole Jordan’s “No. You Can’t Pick My Brain”

Kevin Dugan’s “Can I Pick Your Brain?”

Like I said on Twitter yesterday, “If one more person asks me to work for “exposure” I am going to flash them and tell them I can expose myself.”

Facebook Fatigue

March 29, 2010
By Hello Ladies

 I’ve grown tired of Facebook.  I have snooped all of my friends’ pages and friends of friends pages.  I’ve inspected all the photos and scanned all the status updates.  I’ve read quasi-political statements, viewed old yearbook shots and seen one too many pictures of cute kids.

Based on my anthropological endeavors, I have reached the following conclusions: 1) Facebook can get old real fast and 2) there are seven types of Facebook friends. They are:

  1. The Pretentious Posers: These are the friends, and I use the term loosely, who load their FB pages with deep thoughts/quotes from famous people like Dostoevsky, Plato and Warren Buffet. Or they only update their status when they’ve done something with a cultural bent like, “Drinking herbal tea and listening to Handel’s Sonata No. 4″ or “Picasso exhibit followed by lecture on socioeconomics and composting” or “Trekking endangered yaks in Andes. Be back next week.”
  2. The Foodies: These friends report on everything they eat and everything they feed their offspring. Typical status updates include, “Eating a caramel cupcake with sprinkles. So sweet and so guilty!” Some foodies are also Pretentious Posers. For example, “Braised lamb shanks, root veggie ragout, 1984 California Cab, followed by homemade vanilla bean ice cream.” And some foodies are also Proud Mamas (see below).  For example, “Took the kids to Bugaboo Creek for dinner and Junior ordered the chicken nuggets again. Will he ever embrace legumes?!?”
  3. The Proud Mamas:  These friends don’t realize that we only think our own kids are cute. We’re not impressed when one of their offspring loses a tooth. A typical Proud Mama post reads like this, “Madison did number two on the potty. Life is good.”
  4. The Slactivists: We all have slactivist friends. These are the people who chastise you week after week with status updates that read like this, “March is Save the Red Eyed Tree Frog month. Post this on your status if you care about animals. 93% of you hate animals and are cruel. Will you be in the 7% who make no difference at all by posting this?”
  5. The Lyricists: Come on, you must have a few of these friends. All they do is post song lyrics on their pages. Why? It doesn’t make them clever. They didn’t write the songs after all. To these friends, I say, “You’re so vain. You probably think this post is about you. Don’t you?”
  6. The People who Probably Have Stuffed Animal Collections in their Car: These friends play Bejeweled Blitz –a lot. They also play Farmville and Sorority Life. They hit you with virtual pillows, and send you virtual hearts and clouds and rainbows. You just know their back windshield houses a Beanie Baby collection.

And which category do I belong to? 7. The Boring People. I don’t update much at all. And after today you can probably add me to The People with No Friends category too.

 

Newsweek takes on sexism

March 24, 2010
By Hello Ladies

Brava to the three Newsweek writers who take on gender discrimination at their own magazine. In the March 29 issue Jessica Bennett, Jesse Ellison and Sarah Ball ask just how far women at Newsweek have come since 46 women filed a sexual discrimination suit against the magazine in 1970. They go on to describe a culture of sexism perhaps less blatant than the corporate landscape of the 1960s and 70s but harder to confront. It is the micro inequities women face every day that can be hardest to address. Tell me “women don’t write here” “or sell here” or “manage here” and I can deal with that. But fail to give me the choice assignments and instead hand them to my male colleagues and what do I do with that? And good luck getting any support from coworkers – male or female. No one wants to fight the good fight, especially since we’ve been told we already won.

Write the authors, “There’s no denying that we’re enjoying many of the spoils of those women’s victories. We are no longer huddled in secret; we’re reporting for a national magazine, and we’re the ones doing the writing. We have a president whose first act in office was to sign a law that promises equal pay for equal work. Yet the fact that such a law is necessary makes the point: equality is still a myth. …We’ve come a long way, baby. But there’s still a long way to go.”

What I found to be even more revealing than the article is a slideshow on the magazine’s website showing how Newsweek has reported on women over the years.

- There is the cover featuring Bryn Mawr students from 1966. The accompanying article says “for the first time, the career drive in girls exceeds the mating drive.”

- “The Divorced Woman” cover in 1967.

- “The New Woman” cover in 1971 featuring Gloria Steinem.

- The “Women at Work and Home” cover in 1980. The article inside the magazine states, “The women’s movement, after concentrating on legislative action in the past decade, has now vowed to make day care and other family issues top political priorities in the ’80s.” Wow. We’re still trying to make them a priority in 2010.

- Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears on the “Girls Gone Wild” cover in 2007. Apparently, celebrity bad boys got a pass.

- And the Sarah Palin in running clothes cover of 2009.

According to the White House Project, women account for just 22 percent of the leadership positions in journalism. Until women reach critical mass in the newsroom, we can expect more of the same – stories discussing us as alien beings who’s desires to learn, work, have children, not have children, marry, divorce, reach the corner office and the oval office, are radical new ideas instead of the normal desires of 51 percent of the population.

Until women reach critical mass in the newsroom, we can expect more of the same – stories discussing us as alien beings who’s desires to learn, work, have children, not have children, marry, divorce, reach the corner office and the oval office are radical new ideas instead of the normal desires of 51 percent of the population.   

 

 
 

 

 

 
  
 
 

Another Wild Weekend

March 22, 2010
By Hello Ladies

We spent all day yesterday glued to our Blackberry and to C-SPAN. The House finally voted in favor of healthcare reform sometime around 11 p.m. Sunday – but not before some very ugly moments elapsed and some serious negotiation –using women’s health as the bargaining chip – took place.

On Saturday, protestors in Washington yelled hateful racial and homophobic slurs at several Congressmen, and in cyberspace plenty of hateful posts could be viewed in Twitter streams. Then late Sunday night, someone on the House floor yelled “baby killer” at Rep. Bart Stupak.

Stupak had been threatening to derail healthcare reform unless the final bill included his amendment containing some very restrictive abortion language. But the bill before the House contained the Nelson amendment, which also restricted access to abortion coverage. Even though pro-choice advocates said the Nelson amendment was a major blow to women’s reproductive rights, Stupak wouldn’t yield. After whisperings about closed door negotiations between Stupak and Pelosi, and Pelosi and pro-choice Democrats, a deal was struck. President Obama agreed to sign an Executive Order effectively supporting the Hyde amendment, which is already in place and prohibits the use of federal funds for abortions, and Stupak agreed to support the bill.

Meanwhile, closer to home, it looked as if we might be getting our first application for the job we just posted. Late Friday a group of supporters posted on Blue Mass Group and Facebook that Harmony Wu, a Needham, Mass. resident and Democratic activist, was considering a run for the 9th Congressional District if Rep. Steven Lynch voted against the healthcare bill. He was indeed a “no” vote.

Here is a statement from Ms. Wu issued this morning. “Late last night, members of Congress cast an historic vote to pass comprehensive health care reform. I know I share my excitement of its passage with millions of Americans across the country. My gratitude goes to all who worked tirelessly to earn this important victory; when we work together, and each do our part, we can make great things happen. As excited as I am about this historic step toward health care for all, I am extremely disappointed that my Congressperson voted against the health care reform bill, demonstrating that he is out of touch with our families’ most important concerns. With this betrayal of key Democratic principles and priorities, we in the 9th district must strongly question whether Mr. Lynch can effectively represent us and stand up for our values. In the coming days, I will be in discussion with my family, members of my community, activists, and voters from across the district as I consider challenging Mr. Lynch for the Democratic nomination for Congress from our 9th district.”

We don’t know enough about Harmony Wu yet to determine if she meets all of the qualifications outlined in our job description. But she is definitely one to watch.

A job opening and an induction

March 19, 2010
By Hello Ladies

Wanted: A candidate for the Mass Ninth Congressional District. This individual will represent all of the people of the district and lead with courage and integrity. The candidate must value diversity and equality and must not allow their personal religious views to enter into politics. Must be able to vote for the people — not just to keep the seat. Disingenuous candidates need not apply. A strong track record of pro-woman actions and support is a plus. A small army of supporters is ready to assist you in this position. Applications will be reviewed immediately.

And now, an induction: Hello Ladies has “deemed” that Representative Stephen Lynch D-MA “passes” the test for an Ignorant Male Legislator Award and we are inducting him into the group. Rep. Lynch probably could have joined after he voted yes on the Stupak amendment, but we gave him a pass. However, after hearing his “disingenuous” reasons for why he plans to vote no on healthcare reform, we are welcoming him to the club.

Lynch told WBZ radio that the bill “stripped out all the significant reform.” We disagree. In the current system women pay significantly higher premiums and face other discriminatory practices based on pre-existing conditions that include having a c-section, being raped or having been the victim of domestic abuse. Righting those wrongs is pretty significant. The bill would also help the currently uninsured, an estimated 32 million Americans. Again, rather significant.

We agree with Lynch on one thing: this bill is far from perfect. For instance, the anti-abortion amendments in both the House and the Senate version are some of the most restrictive moves against reproductive rights in decades. And the lack of a public option is highly disappointing. But we need healthcare reform and cannot afford to “go back to the drawing board” for an indefinite number of years.

Lynch’s move smells of a calculated political play to hang onto his seat in November following a Brownswell of voters who shook up the Commonwealth in January.

One more thing: Katha Pollitt has a great piece in The Nation on pro-choicers and healthcare reform. Check it out here.

Drop Dead Diva Returns

March 18, 2010
By Hello Ladies

Save the date: June 6, 2010, 9 p.m. EST “Drop Dead Diva” returns to Lifetime. Here’s the preview for Season 1 to hold you over until Season 2 begins. (Click on post headline if you can’t see the video.)

Enjoy.

Women to Watch

March 17, 2010
By Hello Ladies

Several women are stepping up to challenge incumbents in the 2010 elections. Here are two to watch, and more importantly, if you like what you learn – support them and contribute to their campaigns.

Connie Saltonstall will challenge Rep. Bart Stupak for Michigan’s First Congressional District in the August Democratic Primary. According to her website, Saltonstall served as a Charlevoix County Commissioner in 2006, taught fourth grade in the Charlevoix Schools and was elected to the Charlevoix Board of Education in 1978. She was appointed to the Michigan Association of School Boards Taxation Committee, and served a three-year term on the Charlevoix County Commission on Aging. Saltonstall is a mediator and board member with Northern Community Mediation and board president of Hospice of Northwest Michigan.

Saltonstall says healthcare is a top priority for her campaign and issued this statement in a press release, ““Our Congressman has let us down. Bart Stupak has threatened to block healthcare reform unless the Amendment that bears his name is included in the final bill. I believe that he has a right to his personal, religious views, but to deprive his constituents of needed healthcare reform because of those views is reprehensible.”

Learn more at the campaign website http://conniesaltonstall.com and on Twitter and Facebook.

In Pennsylvania’s 16th Congressional District, Lois Herr will once again challenge Rep. Joe Pitts of the Stupak-Pitts Amendment. Herr ran against Pitts in 2004 and 2006. In 2006 she received approximately 40 percent of the vote. Like Saltonstall, Herr says healthcare is a priority as is investing in alternative energy and conservation.

Herr worked in the telecommunications industry and in the Office of Management and Budget as part of the President’s Executive Interexchange Program under President Ford. She has worked with Elizabethtown College since 1993 as a teacher, administrator and Scholar-in-Residence. She was chair of the Lancaster County Planning Commission and executive director of the Lancaster County Democratic Committee. Herr is also the author of the book “Women, Power and AT&T: Winning Rights in the Workplace.”

Herr has already been endorsed by the National Organization for Women, the National Women’s Political Caucus, the Women’s Campaign Forum and the Feminist Majority Foundation.

Learn more about Herr at her campaign website http://www.herr2010.com/index.htm and on Twitter.

Candidates like Saltonstall and Herr can help us reach a critical mass of qualified women in Congress. As we’ve stated before, “Diverse leadership leads to better problem solving, more creativity, representative government.” And let’s not forget the study from Stanford and the University of Chicago that says women legislators introduce more bills and bring in more money to their districts than men do.

Ladies, keep an eye on these ladies.

Happy St. Patrick’s Day

March 17, 2010
By Hello Ladies

Happy St. Patrick’s Day.

Anyone who drives the snakes out of town is alright by me.

The Right to Life

March 16, 2010
By Hello Ladies

More than two women die every day in the United States from pregnancy related causes. Repeat. More than two women die every day in the United States from pregnancy related causes. The incidences of “near misses,” complications where a woman comes close to dying, have increased since 2005. The maternal death rate has almost doubled since 1987. And some officials believe the numbers are underreported as the U.S. has no federal requirements to report maternal deaths.

These disturbing facts were recently highlighted in a report called “Deadly Delivery” published by Amnesty International. That’s right, Amnesty, the human rights organization. From the report, “According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), approximately half of all maternal deaths in the USA are preventable. Preventable maternal mortality is not just a public health issue, it is a human rights issue.”

The United States spends more on healthcare than any other country in the world. Yet women in this country face a greater risk of dying from pregnancy or childbirth than women in 40 other countries. Women of color face the highest risk. The risk of dying for a black woman is four times greater than for a white woman. The report points out that women of color are less likely to begin a pregnancy in good health due to lack of access to healthcare, thereby increasing the risk of pregnancy-related complications. Women of color represent 51 percent of all uninsured women even though they only represent 32 percent of all women in this country.

Said Larry Cox, executive director of Amnesty International USA, in a press release about the report, “Mothers die not because the United States can’t provide good care, but because it lacks the political will to make sure good care is available to all women.”

The report goes into great detail about what contributes to these staggering numbers including lack of protocols around c-sections and VBACs (virginal birth after caesarean), inadeqaute access to contraception and family planning methods, lack of comprehensive postpartum care and not enough prenatal care. Women cite lack of access to healthcare facilities, no paid time off from work, no childcare, language and a host of other barriers as obstacles to obtaining prenatal care. The challenges are greatest for women in poverty and women of color.

Amnesty also places responsibility on the current healthcare system. The report states, “…under the existing system, the way in which the health care system in the USA is structured and financed is failing to ensure that all women have equal access to the health care they need. …Half of all births are covered by private insurance. However, policies that exclude coverage for maternal care are not uncommon and pregnant women may also find that they cannot get private health insurance because pregnancy is regarded as a “pre-existing condition”. Some 42 percent of births are covered by a government-funded program for limited categories of people on low incomes – Medicaid. However, complicated bureaucratic requirements mean that women eligible for public assistance often experience significant delays in receiving prenatal care.”

Which brings us to healthcare reform. We have asserted all along that healthcare should not be a political issue. It is a matter of equity. As President Obama moves to pass some type of a healthcare overhaul, it is infuriating that people and organizations are derailing the efforts in the name of “life.” Supposedly, in the name of life, Reps. Stupak and Pitts, Senator Nelson, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops would not only restrict access to the full spectrum of reproductive health services, but Stupak would also derail the entire process, if he can gain the votes. Let’s be honest. “Life” is not the issue here. If it were, wouldn’t the lives of American women matter too?

No post yesterday. We were dieting.

March 11, 2010
By Hello Ladies

A new study, “Alcohol Consumption, Weight Gain, and Risk of Becoming Overweight in Middle-aged and Older Women” written about in the Archives of Internal Medicine, reveals moderate alcohol consumption could help combat weight gain in middle-aged women.

Researchers tracked women aged 39 or older, who were of “normal weight” (based on BMI not Hollywood standards) for 13 years. The women, who were light to moderate drinkers, gained an average of three pounds. The non-drinkers gained nine. Wine-loving women rejoice.

Not so fast. There is plenty of conflicting data about the risks/rewards of alcohol. A fine glass of red can be good for your heart but excessive drinking can increase your risk of breast cancer. Alcohol packs a caloric punch but it might save us six pounds (the difference between our fat jeans and the jeans we love) later in life.

Part of the problem, let’s be honest, is how we define light to moderate drinking. Just one glass can be a party if we fill it all the way. Thank you Crate & Barrel. First you brought us the oversized coffee cup and then you supersized the stemware.

One theory about the alcohol/weight loss study is that women are more likely to substitute alcohol for food, hence the reason a calorie-laden cocktail might not impact the scale. But even though the drink might not hit your hips, on an empty stomach it’s sure to hit your head.

And so it seems, despite the sensational headlines:

“Cheers, Ladies! A Drink A Day May Keep the Pounds Away,” ABC

“A drink a day could help keep the pounds away,” Globe and Mail

“Women Who Consume Alcohol Gain Less Weight: Study,” HuffPo

and our favorite,

“Bottoms up for skinnier bottoms,” Independent

the only reliable thing we know about controlling our weight is eat less, move more. And enjoy the occasional five ounces of wine a day.

Oh, and speaking of studies, did you hear older men want more sex than older women? Shocking. Forget the headlines like, “Healthy men need more frequent sex than women: Study” (World News), for a smart take on this study, read Echidne-of-the-Snakes.

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