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.

Lying on my couch dressed in yoga pants, my husband’s long-john shirt, and UGGs, wearing drug store makeup and a ponytail, and honored for absolutely nothing, I decided to judge the celebrities who walked the red carpet on Oscar night. It’s good to be an American.

From a fashion perspective, I loved the metallics and the blush colors (especially on Demi Moore’s dress) but I had hoped to see more color. And if I had paid a stylist to dress me in silver or gold, I would have been furious when Sandra Bullock, Kate Winslet, Helen Mirren, Jennifer Lopez, Miley Cyrus, Amanda Seyfried, and Cameron Diaz all showed up with the same idea. I loved the color of some gowns but felt they missed the mark on cut (Vera Farmiga, Penelope Cruz, Zoe Saldana, Maggie Gyllenhaal). Finally, I loved how the regular-sized and plus-sized actresses lent perspective on the red carpet. When Mo’nique stood next to her fellow Best Supporting Actress nominees during a pre-show interview, some of her peers looked absurd with their protruding bones and hollow cheeks. Eat something ladies.

Anyway, here are the Hello Ladies picks for Best and Worst Oscar Moments at the 82nd annual Academy Awards.

Best:

1. Sigourney Weaver looking statuesque in a red gown with perfect accessories.
2. Sandra Bullock dressed like a winner in a gown that looked like liquid gold.
3. Queen Latifah dressed to perfection in a lavender gown with jeweled trim.
4. Sara Jessica Parker in a stunning Chanel couture gown – just amazing.
5. Kathryn Bigelow as the first woman to ever win, and only the fourth woman ever nominated for, Best Director.
6. Tom Ford in Tom Ford.
7. Woody Harrelson in Burberry hemp. Love the eco-friendly design.

Worst:

1. An E! reporter telling Sandra Bullock, “Starving was worth it” referring to how good she looked.
2. Joan Rivers on the E! Fashion Police show saying Queen Latifah looked good for a larger woman. She looked good period.
3. Charlize Theron’s breasts covered in bizarre rosettes. The color and cut of her dress were gorgeous. And her face- beautiful! But those breasts.
4. The facial hair on several male actors. Can you imagine an unshaven woman walking the red carpet?
5. Scantily clad Vegas style show girls ruining a Neil Patrick Harris performance.
6. The “trophy escort” whose only job was to look young and pretty and carry the statues on stage. Seriously, what year is this?

Today is International Women’s Day (IWD). IWD was started in1911 to celebrate the economic, political and social achievements of women worldwide. IWD is an official holiday in China, Armenia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.  The theme of this year’s IWD is “Equal rights, equal opportunity: Progress for all.”

Here are five things you can do to celebrate the day:

1. Support equal pay. Women still earn, on average, only .77 cents for every dollar a man earns. For women of color the gap is even greater. Despite the signing of the Lilly Ledbetter Act at the start of last year, we are not making progress in this area. The wage gap has widened. Let your senators know we need them to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act.

2. Support a woman candidate. Make a donation or volunteer your time and help get a competent women elected. Better yet, why don’t you run for office? Organizations like the Women’s Campaign Forum and Emily’s List support pro-women candidates with coaching and fundraising. Start by visiting She Should Run. Women bring much-needed diversity, unique perspectives, creativity, hard work and problem-solving to public office.

3. Support healthcare reform. Healthcare should not be a political issue. It is a matter of equity. Call your legislators today and tell them to pass healthcare reform. Women deserve equal coverage for equal premiums. We are not preexisting conditions and we deserve the full spectrum of coverage – including reproductive health.

4. So while you’re at it, tell Congress to stop Rep. Stupak and demand comprehensive reproductive healthcare. You can also share this video from Pathfinder International and help support reproductive rights for women worldwide.

5. Support yourself. Brag a little. Tell your friends, family and or coworkers about something positive you did. Don’t hold back. Let the world know, one woman at a time, about the achievements of women –starting with you.

Have a great weekend.

If you want to send a message to pro-choice congressional leaders to Stop Stupak, sign on to NARAL’s letter here. You have until midnight Sunday to sign.

And while you’re clicking, why not follow Hello Ladies on Facebook and Twitter?

A friend recently pointed out to me that our weekly hometown paper disproportionately covers boy’s sports over girl’s sports. I never noticed because the only sport I follow is professional baseball. (Go Sox!) How sad given the fact our high school girl’s teams have had some incredible championship years. The boy’s teams haven’t fared as well. Still it shouldn’t surprise me.

Last year I questioned a local blogger on a statement he made that “people prefer men’s sports to women’s.” I asked, do we really “know” that or do we know that historically men’s sports have dominated the media? Another commenter on the blog cited advertising dollars and paying audiences as proof “that men’s sports are preferred by more people.” And further proof? He watches men’s sports almost exclusively. I bet during the recent Olympics he watched men’s ski jumping and not women’s. Oh right, the women weren’t allowed to compete. Anyway, enough complaining. Time to back our words with action.

If you understand the benefits of girls participating in team sports, if you believe women deserve equality, if you are tired of the mainstream media serving up male athletes and ignoring the women, join this group on Facebook, “I pledge to attend one women’s sports event (college/pro) in 2010.”

The group’s mission is fantastic. From the Facebook page, “Being pro-woman, feminist or full of girl power requires action. Spurred on by the attention women athletes received during the Olympics and the history of that attention waning afterward, we created this challenge to put our money where our heart is. Everyone who becomes a fan is pledging to attend one, just one, professional or collegiate, women’s sporting event by the end of 2010.” The group was partially inspired by this commentary from Frank Deford of NPR.

As we’ve said before, if we expect little girls to believe us when we tell them they can grow up and be anything they want, then we need to show them strong women role models. And this mother wouldn’t mind watching her daughter pitch for the Red Sox someday.

 I was sick last week* and therefore did not finish the posts for Ignorant Male Legislator Week. But just for you, Rep. Bart Stupak, I have extended the deadline.

Mr. Stupak appeared on ABC’s “Good Morning America” today and vowed to block healthcare reform unless “that kind of language” in the Senate bill is removed. The language he is referring to is the language on abortion courtesy of Senator Ben Nelson (who also makes the Ignorant Male Legislator list). Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, has said of the Nelson language, “If the current Senate language introduced by Senator Ben Nelson is maintained, it would result in the most significant restriction in access to abortion coverage in the nearly 35 years since the U.S. Congress first adopted the Hyde Amendment.”

But “that language” isn’t good enough for Stupak. Nope, Stupak says he and 11 other Democrats are prepared to block healthcare reform unless his even more stringent language from the House bill is included in the final bill. “We’re prepared to take the responsibility,” he said.

Stupak and Nelson are distorting the truth in order to advance their agenda – destroying a woman’s right to choose. Stupak says his bill merely protects current law that bars federal funding for abortion. Not true. His bill is much more restrictive than current law. And he claim’s Nelson’s bill would allow federal funding of abortion. More distortions.

Stupak told George Stephanopoulos, “I want to see health care pass. We must have health care but, boy, there are some principles and beliefs that some of us are not going to pass.”

Bottom line: Mr. Life-is-precious-Stupak is willing to gamble with the lives of all Americans in need of healthcare reform unless his principles and beliefs are adopted. And what does he believe? That women should not have rights.

Watch the GMA interview here. And for in-depth coverage on this unsettling issue, visit RH Reality Check.

*I received treatment because I, unlike tens of millions of Americans, am insured.

While we’ve been away and busy so many interesting things have transpired. So today, a roundup.

One of the things that had me occupied last week was my health – nothing serious just the standard end-of-winter cough, fever, chills - and I had to visit the doctor and take medicine. My appointment was the same day as President Obama’s healthcare summit, and as I watched the proceedings on C-SPAN I was grateful to be insured and to receive timely treatment when I need it. It turns out Erin Kotecki Vest, aka Queen of Spain, was grateful too. Her story is more dramatic than mine and a highly recommended read on the need for healthcare reform.

Speaking of healthcare, there is a heartbreaking and blood-boiling story out of Nicaragua. A pregnant woman, with metastasized cancer, is not getting treatment. The reason? Chemotherapy or radiation might harm her 10 week fetus. Under Nicaragua’s draconian abortion laws, doctors are prohibited from doing anything to help her. Abortion, even when the mother’s health is in danger, is against the law in that country. This woman is the sole caregiver of her 10-year old daughter. While the government protects the rights of the unborn, who protects this 10-year old girl? As always, Jodi Jacobson at RH Reality Check has the details.

And while we are discussing the rights of women in other countries, remember this coming Monday, March 8, is International Woman’s Day. This year’s theme is “Equal rights, equal opportunity: Progress for all.” We will participate in Gender Across Borders blogging event that day. In the meantime, Morgan Warners wrote a post, “Why this man will be celebrating women on March 8″ over at the Huffington Post. It’s another great read. 

Enjoy.

The American Red Cross has information on how to help earthquake victims in Chile.

Click here.

This week Hello Ladies is observing “Ignorant Male Legislator Week.” Yesterday, we took note of Virginia Delegate Robert G. Marshall, and his outrageous comments about disabled children and abortion.

Today, we focus on Rep. Carl Wimmer of Utah, who sponsored bill HB12 which ”amends provisions of the Utah Criminal Code to describe the difference between abortion and criminal homicide of an unborn child and to remove prohibitions prosecution of a woman for killing an unborn child or committing criminal homicide of an unborn child.”

Here’s the problem. The bill states, “A person commits criminal homicide if the person intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, with criminal negligence, or acting with a mental state otherwise specified in the statute defining the offense, causes the death of another human being, including an unborn child at any stage of its development.”

Define “recklessly.” This bill could turn women who have miscarriages into murder suspects. Take me, for example. I slipped on the ice when I was pregnant. Was leaving my house between November and March reckless? I was in a fender bender when I was pregnant. Was driving reckless? I ate a salad with gorgonzola cheese in it when I was pregnant. Was eating one serving of blue-veined cheese reckless? If I had miscarried during that pregnancy, should I have been prosecuted? Will miscarriage become the new rape? Blame the woman and put her on trial for her poor choices and bad behavior?

It’s not that far-fetched. We’ve already seen a case where a woman was jailed for falling down the stairs while pregnant. Then there is Samantha Burton who was ordered by the court to remain in the hospital while pregnant. And don’t forget the woman who was jailed for being pregnant and HIV positive.

Wimmer also sponsored HB200, informed consent legislation that makes ultraounds available to women prior to having an abortion. Too bad he didn’t work to make more ultrasounds available to women as part of their prentatal care.

This is the same Wimmer who opposed a ban on cell phone use by under-18 drivers. On that topic he was quoted in The Salt Lake Tribune as saying, ”Government does not need to mandate every good idea…We are a free people.”

Men like Carl Wimmer claim to value human life. Sure they do, as long as that life doesn’t belong to a woman who has already been born. 

So, who should we feature tomorrow?

 (Update: Click here for video of Marshall making his remarks.)

A Virginia legislator, while protesting funding for Planned Parenthood, said disabled children are punishment for aborting  firstborns.

Virginia Delegate Robert G. Marshall (R) said, “The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion with handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the first born of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children.”

“In the Old Testament, the first born of every being, animal and man, was dedicated to the Lord. There’s a special punishment Christians would suggest.”

You can hear the remarks  here.  

Marshall has since apologized, saying his comments were “misconstrued.” From his website:

“A story by Capital News Service regarding my remarks at a recent press conference opposing taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood conveyed the impression that I believe disabled children are a punishment for prior abortions. No one who knows me or my record would imagine that I believe or intended to communicate such an offensive notion. I have devoted a generation of work to defending disabled and unwanted children, and have always maintained that they are special blessings to their parents. Nevertheless, I regret any misimpression my poorly chosen words may have created as to my deep commitment to fighting for these vulnerable children and their families.”

I don’t think I misinterpreted what he said about people with disabilities being “vengeance” and “punishment’. And his reasoning about first borns was absurd. How ignorant.  

But then again, this is the same man who supposedly  opposed abortion in the case of rape and incest because “sometimes incest is voluntary”.  And he is the same man that compared a budget bill to slavery.