femwords

As Access Slides, Feminists Need to "Extract" From Our Self-Help Past

2012-01-12T11:34:00.000-08:00

[Originally published in On The Issues Magazine]
by Carol Downer

If working in the abortion movement for over 40 years qualifies me to gaze into my crystal ball to see the future for abortion rights in the United States, here goes.

Prediction Number One: I see the Supreme Court continuing to interpret Roe v. Wade in a way that will make abortion, especially later abortion, more expensive, less convenient to access and more humiliating, but I do not see the court reversing Roe v. Wade outright. I see clinics closing down due to restrictive regulations and lack of doctors, especially in areas far from an urban center. This lack of access will mostly affect young women and poor women of color. But, as was the case before the decision in Roe v. Wade, the majority of unwillingly pregnant women will continue to get abortions, no matter how far they have to travel or no matter how great the cost or risk.

Why? The hypocritical leaders of this country, both right and left, recognize that the U.S. industrialized economy is built on the small nuclear family with both parents working, so large families are out. This lowers the birth rate, which satisfies the leaders, who, rather than creating a more just, sustainable society, think reducing women's fertility solves social problems such as pollution and poverty. Immigration, legal and illegal, produces the influx of workers and soldiers so desired by the conservatives who have created an unjust society where one percent possess the wealth and resources, further enabling them to keep the 99 percent low-paid and politically powerless.

Prediction Number Two. I see successive generations of young U.S. women accepting new restrictions. I also see some radical feminist actions, such as the formation of an underground movement of menstrual extraction groups. This will keep the technology alive, but will not change the trend that makes abortion less available, more expensive and more stigmatized.

Why? Once Roe v. Wade became the law in 1973, all organized efforts to educate the public and to seize the technology of abortion came to an abrupt halt. The leadership, by default, fell to a few political advocacy groups, such as NARAL Pro-Choice America in Washington D.C. and Planned Parenthood Federation of America in New York and D.C. They keep a vigilant eye on how Congressional members vote on legislation affecting birth control and abortion. They, and NOW, have organized a couple of mammoth abortion rights marches on Washington over the years. But Washington D.C. ignores the masses who come in on Saturday, march through the streets, then board the busses and go home on Sunday.

In 1976, the first, most devastating blow to Roe v. Wade came through Congress, not the Supreme Court. Congress passed the Hyde Amendment, an addendum to an appropriations bill, to stop any federal funding of abortion for low-income women. Every year, Congress re-passes this amendment. Every year, Congress exploits the racist and classist bias of the women's movement. We were ignominiously defeated by the passage of the Hyde Amendment in 1976, 35 years ago.

Even though the vast majority of American women are pro-choice, even feminists are complacent and do nothing other than voting for pro-choice elected officials and sending a check to their favorite national pro-choice organization.

Turning Back the Attack
In my opinion, the factors keeping abortion "safe and legal" are: (1) the continuing broad public support for the decriminalization of abortion; (2) the stalwart daily work of hundreds of doctors and abortion clinics around the country in the face of anti-abortion harassment and violence, and (3) the policymakers' need to keep women in the workforce.

To regain the ground the women won in the past, we have to learn how we won it and apply those lessons to today. We must revive the spirit of the second wave of the feminist movement, which came out of the anti-war movement and the civil rights movement. The Women's Liberation Movement started out to liberate women by challenging the whole "system," but, unfortunately, changed its focus to raising women's status in that system.

Most American women today were not born then or were children, and have not experienced being part of a major social movement for women's liberation, as I experienced in the 1960s and 1970s. I joined the Los Angeles chapter of NOW in 1969, and was part of that huge wave of women who came forward to demand women's liberation, including repeal or reform of anti-abortion laws. Through the decade before that, I read frequent newspaper articles announcing that a respected community or professional organization had passed some resolution recommending the decriminalization of abortion. In 1962, I saw the television coverage of Sherri Finkbine's trip to Scandanavia to get an abortion.

This coverage was part of a powerful campaign to stop back-alley abortions. It was led by white religious leaders, mostly men, and professionals, mostly men, who educated the public and roused public outrage against these unjust laws. By the end of the decade, the women's movement started. Many women's groups set up "women's nights" at the local free clinic to provide birth control; they were referring women to New York and California to get abortions. One group, "Jane", in Chicago, set up an abortion service. The women at Harvard were delving into the medical library to write a newsprint booklet, "Women and Their Bodies," which was so popular that Simon and Schuster published it as Our Bodies Ourselves in 1970.

On the West Coast, our group worked with Lana Clark Phelan and Patricia Maginnis, the founders of NARAL (which stood for the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws). We learned to do abortions with a new hand-held device that used suction to remove the contents of an early pregnancy; Lorraine Rothman modified that device so that groups of us who were minimally trained could extract either our menstrual period or an early pregnancy. We called this procedure "menstrual extraction." In 1971, Lorraine and I toured the country, teaching vaginal self-examination; self help and menstrual extraction groups sprung up at most of the places we visited. Rebecca Chalker described the process of menstrual extraction in On The Issues Magazine in 1993.

It was the cumulative effect of all these years of mainstream efforts, topped off by the massive numbers of women coming forward to protest, to march and to start projects to circumvent the law that laid the foundation for Roe v. Wade. The seizing of the means of reproduction by the women of the self-help movement did not escape the notice of Justice Harry Blackmun, the Supreme Court justice who authored Roe v. Wade and referred to it in his opinion among a list of new medical techniques. I believe that in another couple of years, one way or another, abortion laws would have become irrelevant because women in the U.S. were taking the matter into our own hands.

The Women's Liberation Movement saw the right to an abortion as part of the right of a woman to control her own body and her own reproduction and sexuality, which, in turn, is part of women's full participation in society and their power to assert their values.

Through the years, women have been somewhat successful in raising women's status, but in a militaristic, environmentally destructive society. U.S. women may come closer to earning as much as their male counterparts and getting as much education, but the system has become more entrenched and women's education and work only makes it more so.

Women are losing ground every day in the control of our sexual and reproductive lives. Women seek genital surgery to make their vulva and clitoris look like some non-existent ideal; the medical profession dictates that women submit to radical intervention in their births, and, women face multiple physical and social barriers to nursing babies.

Even the movement pushing for liberation from the tyranny of heterosexual roles doesn't challenge the patriarchal nature of society, but rather seems to be challenging the legitimacy of women's pride in our women's bodies, our ability to bear and raise children and to fight together, as women, for social and economic equality and a humane stewardship of the environment.

Rebuilding the Future
There are powerful stirrings of people around the world challenging non-democratic structures; even in the U.S., we see the Occupy Wall Street protests. Perhaps the forces are shaping up that will promote a new wave of feminist activism.

Whether this is so or not, there are women's health groups building a sound base for a broader women's movement, doing radical feminist health and sex education with a holistic self-help foundation. Some midwives and full-spectrum doulas are rebuilding the network of menstrual extraction groups. In short, we will be ready.

Carol Downer is the author of "A New View of a Woman's Body," "How to Stay Out of the Gynecologist's Office," "Women Centered Pregnancy and Birth," and "A Book of Women's Choices."

WALL STREET USES ITS MEDIA MUSCLE TO TRY TO TURN THE WOMEN’S MOVEMENT AGAINST OCCUPY WALL STREET

2011-12-14T11:37:00.000-08:00

By Carol Downer

Wall Street and Michael Bloomberg must be in a dither of downright desperation about the Occupy Wall Street movement, which has risen up to protest against the gross economic inequality in the United States and the utter lack of power that we 99% have. Why else would a Bloomberg News’ New York bureau dispatch Esmé E. Deprez to interview Gloria Steinem, a notable feminist to explore any potential division there might be between the feminist movement and the Occupy Wall Street movement?

Ms. Steinem did not make any criticism of the Occupy Wall Street movement, but she did make use of opportunity to cite statistics about the continuing economic inequality between men and women. Undaunted by Steinem’s refusal to re-frame the glaring disparity between the super-rich and the rest of us as simply the result of male supremacy, Deprez characterized Steinem’s complaint about unequal wages for women as tantamount to saying “the international conversation that the Occupy Wall Street protests sparked about economic inequality is, at its heart, about gender.” (Deprez’ quote, not Steinem’s)

Much as I, or any feminist, agrees with Steinem that the inequity between men’s and women’s wages are one of the most serious inequities in the U.S. economic system, Occupy Wall Street is protesting the current rule of the super-rich, because they use their riches to decide who gets elected, which laws are passed, upheld and enforced, and robs the 99%, (of which the majority are women) of any economic, therefore political, power to deal with the absolute crises this nation and this planet are facing.

The signs that the American people are getting fed up with how things are run is way, way overdue. I’m guessing that Bloomberg, the mayor of New York City, fears that Occupy Wall Street is the start of an epidemic of protests that can’t be quelled so easily. Therefore, Bloomberg, the billionaire and publisher, is using the mega megaphone of Bloomberg News to distort Occupy Wall Street’s message by showing a newfound concern about the plight of women.

Occupy Wall Street and its progeny are shining a light how the American capitalistic system is producing calamitous results. We live in a country where the Gulf of Mexico can be polluted and the shale in New York can be “fracked” for the profit of oil companies. Bloomberg, a multi-billionaire, was elected to represent the citizens of New York City, but he’s not rushing to stop this dangerous process that has been shown to disrupt underground geological structures and may threaten the city’s water supply. If the citizens of New York have the accurate information and political machinery, they will stop it. We live in a country where the capitalist rule of “survival of the fittest” has been replaced by the “survival of the biggest”, and this mismanagement of Wall Street results in ever greater profits for the giant “too big to fail” companies and the foreclosure of mortgages on millions of Americans’ homes.

This is not the first time that feminist demands for equality have been used to derail criticisms of our system. In the late 60’s, the women’s liberation movement, along with the civil rights movement and the anti-war movement, demanded that we “change the system” under which women, people of color, and people in less powerful, economically dominated nations are being oppressed. Somehow, in the 70’s, that breathtakingly ambitious demand was watered down to campaigns for timid reform, such as “equal pay for equal work”, without ever questioning who owns or controls the place we work, or “breaking the glass ceiling” so that women can head up corporations, without questioning why a corporation should have so much power and how corporations are using their power to destroy our democracy and our environment. I’m sure that Ms. Steinem and every other feminist agrees with me that our goal is not to “have an equal piece of the rotten pie”, as we used to say in the heyday of the movement, but to make a bigger, better pie where all are equal.

No Stopping: From Pom-Poms to Saving Women's Bodies

2011-10-10T12:58:00.000-07:00

By Carol Downer

[Originally published in On The Issues Magazine]

In the 1970s, I got involved in the women's self-help movement in California, traveling the countryside to introduce women to vaginal self-examination and pioneering the use of menstrual extraction. I got there, and from there to here, because one action simply led to the next. And to the next. And the next. In fact, my own progression seems to have been to "Think Locally, Act Globally" – exactly the opposite of the popular activist slogan.

I have always been an active participator. I marched and waved pom-poms on the drill team in high school. I led a Girl Scout troop when my daughters were in elementary school in the late 50s and 60s. But my activities gradually changed from "brightening the corner where you are" to humanitarian, such as volunteering as a leader in a girl's club at a high school in a poor neighborhood in the mid-60s. Then I became involved in electoral-type activities through MAPA (Mexican-American Political Association), as did my Chicano husband.

My involvement mirrored the turbulent times. Everyone was getting more politically aware. I helped write a throwaway paper with other activists who were against U.S. military involvement in the Southeast; I headed a committee to recall the local councilman who was pushing an urban renewal program that would kick old people out of their homes, and my circle of mothers in my neighborhood enlarged to include activists in the northeast part of Los Angeles. When the "Watts riot" exploded in south central Los Angeles, I learned to call it "the Watts rebellion." Then, in 1969, along with thousands of others, I marched with my husband and my 16-year-old daughter, Laura Brown, in the Chicano Moratorium. At the march's end, we sat on the grass lawn of Laguna Park and listened to music and speakers until all of us were attacked by hundreds of Los Angeles sheriffs, clad in riot gear, who came across the field swinging billy clubs and shooting tear gas canisters.

With my moratorium experience, I "graduated" from the naive white liberal school. I saw the faces of my oppressors through their plexiglas masks. Afterward, when I complained loudly to one of my friends in Eagle Rock, the white working-class area where we lived, she asked me, "What were you doing there?" My disillusionment with community volunteer activities and electoral level projects was complete.

Stepping Into A New Women's Movement

I started my "post-graduate" work.

I answered the widely publicized call to work for women's rights and specifically abortion rights. In 1969, I attended a National Organization for Women (NOW) meeting. I had little in common with most of the members, white career women who apparently had not had the radicalizing experiences that I had. I was invited to join a committee. I had had an illegal abortion, so I joined the Abortion Committee, headed up by Lana Clark Phelan.

Lana, along with Patricia Maginnis, wrote The Abortion Handbook. I understudied her for a few months. Listening to Lana's devastatingly sarcastic speeches and reading her book demystified abortion laws for me. I learned that abortion had never been criminalized until the rise of the modern, industrialized nation-state. In nineteenth century France, women had figured out how to block the sperm and the egg, and the birth rate was declining. Napoleon Bonaparte needed more Frenchmen to serve as soldiers to fight wars of conquest for the French Empire; therefore, abortion was outlawed.

French peasants were encouraged in every way possible to have as many children as they could. The French peasant father received tax incentives, forms of "social security" to be paid in his old age and increased personal status based on the number of children he had sired. Under the "Code Napoleon," the status of women sank to an all-time low. French women were given in marriage at the earliest possible age. Young women were to be kept pregnant and at home for their own "fulfillment" as women.

Our three-woman committee -- Lana, Mary Petrinovich and me -- was small, but in 1969 and early 1970s, we were in demand. Progressive people wanted to hear about abortion reform and the need to end the estimated 5,000 deaths each year from illegal abortion. Mary traveled in from Riverside to bring women to an illegal clinic on Santa Monica Boulevard, and she introduced me to the abortionist, Harvey Karman, who was posing as a doctor and had been arrested for performing abortions, along with Dr. John Gwynne. Several demonstrations were held to support him and other Northern California doctors who had been arrested. Under the auspices of our committee, I organized a demonstration at Hancock Park of 500 people, the largest abortion demonstration in Los Angeles at that time.

A small, very loosely organized group of women coalesced around Karman's defense and some volunteered at his notorious clinic, which was under constant police surveillance. In the estimation of some of us, both Karman and Gwynne were "male chauvinist pigs." Also, we had a growing suspicion that we could learn how to do the abortions. Karman used an early abortion device that he claimed to have invented which suctioned the contents of the uterus out without the use of metal instruments to scrape its walls. He called it a "non-traumatic" abortion.

Mary invited me to visit the clinic. I accompanied her into the very small procedure room where Karman was inserting an IUD in a woman's uterus. I found myself looking into the woman's vagina, which was held open by a plastic speculum, and I saw her beautiful pink cervix, the opening to the uterus, which was well lit by the gooseneck lamp.

Following the Path of the Cervix

I was transfixed, looking at her rosy, knob-like cervix with a tiny opening. I thought of Lana's brilliant political analysis and I felt the frustration of our century-long suffering from these unjust laws. I had six children at this time, and I had never looked carefully at my genitals (except to look at my raw, bleeding episiotomy incision in the hospital to see where all that pain was coming from). I marveled at how close the cervix is; how simple it is and how accessible it is with the use of an inexpensive, plastic speculum.

A few weeks later, in April 1971, our small group called a meeting at a local women's bookstore, where we showed women the hand-held device that Karman used, and then we demonstrated vaginal self-exam. The women's skepticism about our learning to do abortion vanished upon seeing my cervix, and by the end of the meeting, we had seen several cervixes and had plans to learn to provide abortions underground. We held weekly "Self-Help Clinics" at the Los Angeles Women's Center. Lorraine Rothman was part of that group and she invented a modification of Karman's device, which we used in minimally-trained women's self-help groups to extract our menstrual periods, whether they were on time or late. We traveled up the West Coast and then across the country, demonstrating vaginal self-exam and talking about menstrual extraction, attracting many women to come to L.A. to work with us.

Our plans to open an illegal clinic were shelved because legal abortion was becoming available in Los Angeles just at that time. We believed that it was more important for us to give women the encouragement and the tools to learn about their bodies so that we would cease to be at the mercy of those who wanted to control us, whether to outlaw abortion or to manipulate birthing American women to consent to c-sections. And, we started WARS, a women's abortion referral service, where we counseled and physically examined women at the Women's Center and then accompanied them to the hospital for their abortion.

Our self-help movement grew; we wrote books, set up clinics around the nation after Roe v. Wade and we traveled to Europe, Canada, New Zealand and Mexico, among other places. Many of us became health professionals in traditional and alternative medical practices (and my marching daughter, Laura, began in self-help and then started the Oakland Women's Choice Clinic.) We attended national and international conferences. I witnessed the efforts of the anti-natalists who force birth control on women and want to limit the number of babies they have, such as in China. And I witnessed the pro-natalists, who want to force women to have more babies, such as the Catholic Church, but are also bankrolled by reactionary wealthy upper class people. I knew activism was needed to stop these forces, as well.

My actions have been rooted in my personal experiences, but as I expanded my worldview and became exposed to other ways of thinking and doing things, I was able to take new actions and develop new solutions, too. This is the power of activism on women's rights – constantly learning, constantly growing and constantly pushing the boundaries of activism in new and creative ways. I think I'll continue to be busy for many years to come.

Ina May Gaskin, US Midwife, founder of “The Farm” receives “Right Livelihood Award” for 2011

2011-09-29T15:31:00.000-07:00

By Carol Downer

Hooray!

Everyone in the “natural childbirth” movement celebrates this award. The Swedish charity is giving formal recognition to the fact that birthing women in the U.S., their babies and their families face an urgent threat to their safety and their ability to have home birth or birth center without the social isolation and medical interference that comes with hospital birth.

The “natural childbirth movement” has been seeking to restore access to midwives and home birth for over a half-century, but its struggles and accomplishments are usually not publicized beyond its immediate circles, except for an occasional newspaper article that as a thinly disguised promotion of hospital birth which contains alarming quotes about the dangers of home birth.

Almost 40 years ago, Gaskin founded the Farm Midwifery Center, an intentional community in Tennessee, to take childbirth out of the firm grasp of the medical profession who have medicalized this normal physiological function. She joined a small but growing number of parents that were seeking “natural childbirth” and lay midwives that were risking arrest (or were actually arrested) for assisting women who gave birth at home.

At the time Gaskin founded The Farm, virtually all births in the U.S. took place in hospitals where birthing women were kept in isolation from their families, drugged and cut. With the invention of the fetal heart monitor, in which an electrode is placed in the fetus’ scalp, cesarean rates rose from 5% to 15% in most hospitals, because in its experimental stages, no one yet knew the significance of every blip on the screen, and so a cesarean was performed whenever anything unusual was seen, because no doctor wanted to risk a malpractice suit for ignoring an unusual blip that might indicate a serious complication.

Due to Gaskins’ and others’ pioneering work, today most states offer some form of licensure for midwives and highly motivated and well-situated parents are able to seek out and obtain the services of a midwife for their home, or birth center birth.

Sadly, the rate progress of the natural childbirth movement has been outspaced by that of the medical profession. Today, physicians (with the assistance of hospital certified nurse midwives which they control) routinely use drugs and surgery in a hospital setting. Over a third of babies are now delivered by cesarean section in the United States.

Perhaps the awarding of this well-deserved honor will highlight the need for all of us who see a U.S. woman’s right to have a un-interfered-with natural birth in a home or birth center setting as foundational to all other women’s rights, including other sexual and reproductive rights such as access to birth control and abortion.

Read Seven Stories Press Release

Read about leading Organizations for Midwives
- Midwives Alliance of North America (MANA)
- Midwifery Education and Accreditation Council (MEAC)
- North American Registry of Midwives (NARM)
- The Big Push for Midwives

39th Anniversary of Gynecology Self-Help Clinics and women controlled health projects

2011-09-28T12:17:00.000-07:00

Message from Cathy Courtney: Greetings, thirty-nine years ago, I traveled to Iowa with an amazing group of women from CMU to attend the first women's self help conference. I was never quite the same after learning what I learned and meeting the women who gathered.

Some of us who attended this conference and/or became involved in the self help women's health movement, Our Bodies Ourselves study groups & related activities are gathering at my home (Detroit area) on Sunday, October 2, 2011 to share stories and break bread together. Please feel free to join us. We are especially hopeful that we will have women of all ages gather, those who were involved in this movement and those who weren't even born yet!!! A full spectrum of young and old! Please spread the word to women who might be interested in the US midwest. Housing available overnite :)

Invitation for a Gathering of Women to honor, celebrate and share stories about the early days of the 1970’s women’s health movement. Come celebrate the 39th Anniversary of Gynecology Self-Help Clinics and women controlled health projects. Hear about the first national conferences some of us attended in 1972 and 1974 in Iowa. The 40th anniversary year of Our Bodies Ourselves! Hear about how life changing it was for so many!

Herstoric gathering~ discussion~ reflection~projection: When did you participate in your first GynSelf-Help Clinic? When did you first read the OBOS? How did the feminist health movement influence your health, your life? How are you connected to current struggles for autonomy, health, single payer nat'l health plan, other health related projects & economic justice?

Share food & beverage, materials, photos, GynSHC slide show (courtesy of Chico Feminist Women's Health Center & Ginny Cassidy-Brinn), film, fun & the personal as political self-help stories...

Contact Host- Janice Fialka for more information at ruaw@aol.com or Cathy Courtney at HoustonC3Courtney@gmail.com. RSVP appreciated so we can plan for dinner. Look forward to seeing you!

RESPONSE TO CONCERNED MOMMA-TO-BE - RE: Letter to accompany LA Times’ article re Katie McCall’s conviction

2011-08-26T17:49:00.000-07:00

Email to Carol Downer and
Response from Carol Downer

Email from happymomma22:
Hi Carol,

I stumbled upon your blog site as I was researching my home birthing options in Los Angeles and was shocked and OUTRAGED to read your most recent posting about Katie McCall! My first instincts were to post but due to the sensitivity of the topic I thought it would be best to reach out to you. I am not an attorney nor a doctor. So please excuse any misused terminology.

You stated "The L.A. Times’ article states that both mother and baby are fine and that Katie McCall is now licensed as a midwife, therefore I fail to see the purpose behind this prosecution. "WOW! What a statement, especially from an attorney. At the time of the birth, the STUDENT midwife was NOT licensed, it doesn't matter what she is today.
"McCall assured the woman that she would contact a licensed midwife to supervise her when it came time for delivery, as required by state law." Need anyone say more? She knowingly broke the law. She knew the terms of her "training." The mother labored for hours and not once did the STUDENT attempt to call anyone else or re-suggest to the the mom to be that she's putting her and her baby at risk because she's not medically licensed. I understand a women's choice to chose but since when do patients education trump the education of a medical professional or in this case a NON licensed professional?

"In fact, since the shoulder getting “stuck” during birth constitutes one of the rare situations where expert assistance or technology are vital, it seems possible that McCall may have performed a tremendous service." Exactly, expert assistance, McCall was far from an expert; I highly doubt anyone would share these sentiments if we were reading about a death of mother and baby. Wouldn't McCall carrying/administering pitocin and stitches as a non licensed midwife illegal too? This case reeks of non professional/reckless behavior on the part of the STUDENT midwife. What she did was a huge dis-service to the midwifery professional and reputation. She behaved exactly as the stereotypical law breaking student midwife. We live in a county where laws are made to protect the innocent, McCall is far from innocent or protecting the public. She just happened to be LUCKY. NOTHING ELSE. Perhaps next time everyone would prefer to be reading manslaughter chargers.

"In my opinion, understanding these prosecutions can only be approached from a political perspective. The male-dominated medical profession has waged a relentless battle against midwives, ever since doctors have served the general public, not just wives of royalty and the wealthy elite, and presently midwives in the United States delivery only a small percentage of babies." Oh my goodness! She was put on trial by her peers and was given a fair trial - California's Operation Safe Medicine is comprised of MDs, Phds, LMs and JDs. She broke a law and we're not talking jwalking. "These" prosecutions are not political, they are a matter of public safety. If an attorney practices without a license there are consequences; the same for doctors who practice without a state license. If midwives want to be considered equals in the medical/professional community then they need to stop acting like idiots doing what they please and follow the laws that were put in place for this branch of medicine to survive and thrive. McCall put midwives two steps backwards in California. This has nothing to do with a witch hunt by other midwives, birthing community or "the male dominated" medical profession. If McCall was a man, the outcome would still be the same, guilty.

Unfortunately, there really is no organized, political effort to promote midwifery, doulas and to educate the public about the dangers of current obstetrical practices. The CDC is calling forth more midwives and Naturopathic Doctors, The AMA is publishing articles that home birthing is up by 20%, the UN is calling for breast feeding to be taught in the hospitals....Rome was not built in a day and you can't expect midwives to be received with credibility when they do things like break the law.

Again, I am a home birth advocate when done properly and legally. Please note that The Sanctuary, the birthing centre where Ms. McCall practiced which also houses an MD that has been sanctioned by the Medical Board until 2012 for having sex with his patient less than a week after removing a tumor after he medically advised her no sex for several weeks. Seems like the moral compass for these home birth professionals do not exist. http://www2.mbc.ca.gov/LicenseLookupSystem/PhysicianSurgeon/Lookup.aspx?licenseType=G&licenseNumber=52027. Birds of a feather flock together I guess. Again, I am a feminist at heart and fight for women's right but I am not going to fight for someone that puts any women or baby's life at risk and puts me two steps back from my male counterparts.

You also mentioned that this case was on a gag order. You should look on line under CourtUpdates on Facebook and you will see Katie McCall as an administrator of a closed group that informs other midwives, doulas and other birthing professionals of the on goings of the trial. This woman is wreckless!!!! You out of all people should understand that all those people in that courthouse and in the group should be held in contempt of court for talking about the case with each other and the birthing community via Facebook, regardless of guilty verdict.

Would love to hear from you.
Concerned Momma to Be

Response from Carol Downer
RESPONSE TO CONCERNED MOMMA-TO-BE
Hi: I was happy to get your letter in which you expressed shock and outrage at the comments I made about the trial and conviction of Katie McCall for practicing medicine without a license. I hope that your letter and my response is the start of a dialogue around the vital issue of how best to safeguard the health and well-being of babies and moms.

First, I want to make some general comments about how the law works and what I read in the paper and about people’s behavior at the trial that I observed.

Since I still have not learned the specifics of McCall’s behavior (are you saying that she administered pitocin or stitched the mother up?), I accepted the LA Times’ statement that the mother and baby were both recovered. As a practicing attorney, I know that the District Attorney has “prosecutorial discretion”. The public expects him to weigh the various factors in each case, such as whether the alleged illegal behavior resulted in physical harm, to reach a decision.

I also know that to convict someone of a crime (not just an infraction), the prosecutor has to show not just that someone did a certain thing, but also that they had a bad intent, or at least were reckless. The LA Times summary gives no facts which indicate McCall set out to deceive or that she showed no concern for the mother’s and baby’s well-being.

I was informed by others attending the trial that the Judge had ordered McCall to shut down her website, and the supporters were hesitant to fill me in on what was happening. They showed me a copy of the judge’s order that forbade observers to even express warmth or encouragement to the defendant. Regarding your statement about McCall statement on CourtUpdates on Facebook, how does that lead you to think that they were discussing the ongoings of the trial?

Second, you believe that laws are made to protect the innocent, and that the prosecution of Katie McCall was a matter of public safety. My view is that laws come about for a variety of reasons, but licensure laws are put there to protect the certain interest of certain professional groups as well as an unwary public, and may or may not involve public safety. Since McCall went on to become a licensed midwife (a fact that the jury was not aware of), how did McCall’s prosecution increase public safety?

I stand by my statement that there is no organized political effort to promote midwifery, doulas and to educate the public about the dangers of current obstetrical practices. Perhaps the CDC is calling for more midwives, but they are not lobbying to create more schools of midwifery or developing programs to educate more midwives, and CDC has no influence whatsoever on the various state legislators to implement legislation to fund and train midwives.

If you are a home birth advocate, I would be interested in working with you on ideas on how to stir up some real political support. C-section rates are skyrocketing and U.S. maternal and morbidity rates are abysmally high.

I hope to hear from you soon.
Carol Downer

Letter to accompany LA Times’ article re Katie McCall’s conviction

2011-08-19T16:09:00.000-07:00

By Carol Downer

I stumbled upon Katie McCall’s trial by accident. I was in the County Courthouse when Rebecca Pridiletto passed me in the hall and she told me about it. The trial was almost over, and I wasn’t able to hear the proceedings, so I wasn’t able to find out the bare facts until I read the L.A. Times’ article. There were about 20 women, mostly friends, family and fellow church members in attendance. When I asked where I could obtain more information about the trial, I was told that the Judge had forbidden any publicity, making Katie take down her website and had forbidden those in attendance from discussing what they observed in the courtroom with each other or anyone else.

I do not practice criminal law, so I had to do some quick legal research into “gag orders” and found that in California, they are disfavored and only issued when there are strong reasons why publicity would be harmful to the defendant getting a fair trial. There has to be notice, and the parties have a chance to oppose any motion for such a gag order. I do not know what happened in this case.

The L.A. Times’ article states that both mother and baby are fine and that Katie McCall is now licensed as a midwife, therefore I fail to see the purpose behind this prosecution. In fact, since the shoulder getting “stuck” during birth constitutes one of the rare situations where expert assistance or technology are vital, it seems possible that McCall may have performed a tremendous service.

In my opinion, understanding these prosecutions can only be approached from a political perspective. The male-dominated medical profession has waged a relentless battle against midwives, ever since doctors have served the general public, not just wives of royalty and the wealthy elite, and presently midwives in the United States delivery only a small percentage of babies.

Has this takeover benefitted women? Generally, I think not. Depending on local economic and cultural conditions, midwives have either been experienced women who shared a common lore regarding childbirth practices and provided birthing women with a high quality of services, or they sometimes were simply older women who supplemented their incomes by bringing their help and experience to birthing women, and their expertise was questionable. When doctors took over, sometimes the care women received was improved, but many, many times, it was not, and sometimes it was disastrous. Today, we see childbirth turned into a medicalized event, replete with drugs, surgery and isolation from loved ones and community.

Unfortunately, there really is no organized, political effort to promote midwifery, doulas and to educate the public about the dangers of current obstetrical practices. Midwifery is an old and honorable profession; not a social or political movement. In contrast, the medical profession is extremely well organized with it “code of silence”, and its paid lobbyists. They have used mystification of the birth process and parents’ fear of pain and death to convince the public that birth is a medical event and should only take place in a hospital, and they have used their money and political influence to get laws passed in every state to maintain their stranglehold on the “business” of childbirth.

As I find out more about this case, I will keep you posted.

LA Times article hyperlink - http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/08/la-midwife-convicted.html

Feminist: Stories from the Women's Liberation Movement

2011-04-18T11:03:00.000-07:00

Project by Jennifer Lee

Several years ago, Jennifer Lee interviewed me for her film about feminists in the 70's. Her interview questions were quite good. She is now ready to release and distribute it. I will be sending her a small contribution and I hope many people do, so that she can complete the project.

Please forward this to anyone you think would be interested.

Thanks, Carol Downer

Link: Feminist: Stories from the Women's Liberation Movement

CIMS "Reframing Birth and Breastfeeding: Moving Forward" Conference

2011-01-31T11:36:00.000-08:00

March 11-12, 2011 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Carol Downer will attend the CIMS conference in March. She will have a booth on behalf of the Women's Health Specialists and Women's Health in Women's Hands. If you have any questions, suggestions, or comments re: Carol's trip or booth please feel free to email whwh@womenshealthinwomenshands.org.

FROM CIMS: As our Valentine's Day gift, we're extending the deadline for registrants to take advantage of reduced Early Bird registration rates through February 14, 2011.

Another way that we are sharing the love this Valentine's Day is by offering an exceptional conference program. The conference program includes more than 22 hours of educational programming, and attendees may qualify for more than 13 contact hours for their participation. Speakers include Eugene Declercq, Miriam Labbok, Penny Simkin, Susan Ludington, Lori Dorfman, Best for Babes' Bettina Forbes and Danielle Rigg, Bernice Hausman, Jacqueline Wolf, and many more. That's a lot to love!

Pregnancy? It’s No ‘Accident’

2011-01-03T11:27:00.000-08:00

November 15, 2010, the Los Angeles Times ran a column, entitled “Pregnancy? It’s No ‘Accident’”. I wrote a response which was neither acknowledged or printed.

Dear Editor:

“Pregnant? It’s No Accident” points a finger at women who become unwillingly pregnant. It’s NOT an unbiased report of Center for Disease Control’s report of their interviews with 7,356 women about their contraceptive use.

Instead, Dr. Ulene uses one of many charts to launch her reproving lecture--a chart that CDC states “should be interpreted with caution because it was based on only 842 women’s interviews.

1. Dr. Ulene interprets the fact that 14% of women who didn’t use contraception and got pregnant as “lack of forethought” because they said they didn’t expect to have sex. Feminists might interpret this as “lack of control in male-female sexual relations”

2. Dr. Ulene implies that the Pill is 99% effective when used “correctly”. Actually, the “theoretical” effectiveness of the Pill is 99%, but no medication is used that perfectly, even when used “correctly” in hospitals under medical supervision. The real effectiveness is 91.3%. The Pill fails almost 10% of the time, and that is not because women are sloppy, mostly it’s due to our current imprecise understanding of hormonal changes in the body.

3. Dr. Ulene implies that the woman is at fault when an unwanted pregnancy happens. Seat belts and airbags are needed in cars because even when drivers are driving carefully, cars sometimes collide. Even though one-third of all pregnancies in the U.S. are mistimed or unwanted, those pregnancies are due to many factors, of which a woman’s negligent behavior is only a small part.

CDC’s major finding is that 99% of women who have ever had sex with men have used contraceptives, and 60% regularly use contraceptives. And they do this, despite the prohibition of some religions, cost, the inconvenience, the dangers and the lack of male cooperation. This is the real news. Dr. Ulene, not sexually active women, needs to “straighten up and fly right.”

SHOULD FEMINISTS SUPPORT THE EXTRADITION OF JULIAN ASSANGE?

2010-12-30T16:14:00.000-08:00

My position in 140 characters is: “Julian Assange’s sexual assault charges for not using a condom in consensual sex shows that laws punishing men empower the state-not women”

FACTS: There is an investigation going on in Sweden concerning statements made by two women who are concerned that Assange, for whatever reason, didn’t use a condom, and they are worried about sexually-transmitted disease. At first, the investigation was dropped because of insufficient evidence, but it has now been reopened.

Although I have heard that the level of the charge is at the lowest level; if, convicted, Assange would not face jail, I have also heard people discussing the charge as “rape”. It is unclear to those of us who don’t know Swedish law, if the use of the term “rape” means what it means in the United States, violent, unconsented sex, and this includes “date rape” and “marital rape”, then it makes sense that Sweden would want to extradite Assange to be interviewed, because this is a serious felony, carrying jail time. On the other hand, if “rape” in Sweden includes initiating sex in the middle of the night with someone you have been intimate with, there is so much room for interpretation, nuances, etc. and the social context of consenting intimacy, that it would seem overkill to extradite someone just to do an interview to determine if in fact criminal conduct occurred. So, a great deal of internet virtual “ink” has probably been spilled needlessly spent already.

The larger issue, and one that seems to be ignored by many of the “ink spillers” is why is Sweden insisting that Julian Assange be forced to come back to Swedish soil? Here, there is wider agreement that the Western powers, especially the United States, are so outraged that Wikileaks has revealed millions of their secrets, that they want Assange back on Swedish soil so that they can get Sweden’s cooperation in returning Assange to the United States to face extremely serious charges of espionage and other crimes against the state that could result in years of prison, possibly being shipped off to Guantanamo, and being exposed to lack of protection that could even result in his death.

So why are feminists even arguing about the precise definition of “rape” in Swedish law or the nuances of male-female consensual sexual relationships (interesting and important as these topics are)? Feminists are trying to achieve gender equality so that women can demand and get a world without extreme hunger and poverty, in which all children have primary education, where disease is eradicated and a sustainable environment with safe drinking water and clean air. (a la Millennium Development Goals for 2015). This means challenging the patriarchal, militaristic model and the capitalistic corporations and governments that perpetuate war, unsustainable use of natural resources, especially fossil fuels. Therefore, as feminists, we welcome the exposure of the secrets of those very institutions that are seeking to maintain the status quo.

And, it means not letting those institutions get their grubby fingers on Assange (they already have Bradley Manning). Assange, if guilty of these charges, and all men who abuse their power in sexual relations, even consensual ones, should be subject to whatever the penalty is in Sweden. He should comply with the Swedish governments requirement of an interview, but only with an ironclad guarantee that returning to Sweden for an interview does not open the door to being extradited to the U.S.

Our feminist movement has to be wary of powerful forces who want us to help them with their agenda which is to continue to rule the world without having to make fundamental changes. They cite women’s rights when they want to invade Afghanistan or Iraq (never mind that they never say a word about the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia). They cite pollution and depletion of resources when they want to force unsafe methods of birth control on women rather than changing wasteful consumption patterns, industrial practices or deep-water oil drilling (which might lower their profits), and they want us feminists to work for this in the name of “reproductive rights”. And now, they capitalize on women’s righteous anger against rape and other forms of sexual abuse to have us support their attempts to silence Assange, Wikileaks and all others who would bare their ugly secrets.

We rejoice that almost half of the members of the parliament in Sweden are women. No doubt the Swedish feminists felt that it was a triumph for women to pass a comprehensive law that would encompass not only vile, violent rape, but also would include pernicious, bullying tactics used by ordinary men. But see how their reformist efforts have been subverted? See how focusing on women’s victimization, rather than women’s empowerment, leads to an ironic outcome that a champion of democratic sharing of information, whatever his practices in consensual sex, becomes demonized. I heard a feminist spokesperson refer to Julian Assange as a “powerful white male” in a debate on Democracy Now! as though he was a member of the corporate and governmental elite that we feminists correctly fear and despise.

As feminists, rather than looking to the state to increase its power to criminalize more areas of our life and to increase the state’s ability to oversee, control and punish, shouldn’t we be helping women be more economically self-sufficient, and more empowered to assert their rights in all aspects of their lives, especially in the bedroom.

I especially hope that the American feminist movement will work internationally to condemn U.S. imperialism, the rape of other countries resources to enrich American corporations and the consequent cheapening and degradation of our own society.

WHERE IS MELINDA GATES GOING WITH BREASTFEEDING?

2010-12-29T11:16:00.000-08:00

I want to share the continued research that I'm doing into the Women Deliver Conference to discover what the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are planning for mothers and babies throughout the world and decide whether we should welcome this or organize against it.

Here is a YouTube video of a 13-minute excerpt of the 60 Minutes video interview of Melinda Gates in which they attribute high infant mortality to midwives using non-sterile instruments and say that they lay newborns on cold, dirt floors. Now, supposedly these rates have improved since they have taught the midwives to use sterile razor blades to cut the umbilical cord and they've taught them to wrap the newborn in a blanket, and infant mortality has gone down.

Now I want to ask you to look at some websites about Kangaroo Care, a practice of laying the naked newborn directly on the mother's bare chest, to see that this is the more advanced, enlightened way to stabilize a newborn, especially a low-birth-weight one. The mother's body keeps the baby warm, encourages breathing, and when the baby squirms and roots around, it will find the mother's nipple by itself within an hour or so, thus securing the best nutrition and "securing its safety in its mother's arms".

• Kangaroo Care - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_care
• Dr. Bergman - http://www.kangaroomothercare.com/drbergman.htm

What a difference between the Western-style medical approach of teaching "ignorant midwives" to keep the baby warm in a blanket, and the respectful, supportive approach of letting the baby have access to its Mom.

A personal note: I bottle-fed my first two babies, because I was told I had no milk (in fact, they gave me DES to dry up my milk. A nurse who had breast fed showed me techniques to "help" my baby nurse). I then went on to breast feed my other children and always passed along this knowledge to other mothers. I assumed that this was a cultural, woman-to-woman tradition. Imagine my surprise when I saw an 8 minute film a few months ago showing a brand-new newborn wriggle around on its mother's belly, crawling by fits and starts up until it "latched on" to the nipple.

I'm also enclosing the information so that you can order this 8 minute film to see this for yourself. Also, we hope to include a minute or two of this footage on the new page on my website, http://www.womenshealthinwomenshands.org/.

•breastfeeding - baby's choice - http://www.healthychildren.cc/skinlatchsuite.pdf

Carol Downer with the assistance of Aracely Hernandez

Dr. Andrew Rutland

2010-12-07T17:21:00.000-08:00

Dear Pro-Choice Movement,

Dr. Rutland is an obstetrician-gynecologist who is currently on probation. In July 2009 a patient receiving a paracervical block (local anesthesia) had a severe reaction and ultimately passed 6 days later. The Los Angeles County Coroner's office closed the case after autopsy ruled her death as accidental. Under pressure from anti-abortionists, Dr. Lakshmanan Sathyavagiswaran - Chief Medical Examiner changed the mode of death from accidental to homicide. The reasons are connected to technical violations of practice, which the department disapproves of, but are NOT connected to this event.

This case is about the CA Medical Board's attempt to close down an abortion provider very much like Dr. Bruce Steir in 1997. Originally charged with 2nd degree murder, in April 2000 Dr. Steir bargained for involuntary manslaughter.

We currently do not have an up-to-date on Dr. Rutland's case. But we do urge that people be extremely critical of this case and any other case where anti-abortionists are behind the attack.

Please read the following articles:
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/rutland-227209-board-documents.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan/08/local/la-me-doctor8-2010jan08

And, if you'd like further information please contact Dr. Rutland at drandrewrutland@yahoo.com

Thank you.

Blogspot: Women's Health in Women's Hands

2010-11-16T17:15:00.000-08:00

A NEW DEFINITION OF THE CLITORIS

In 1976, a self-help group spent several months studying the sexual response and the structure of the female sexual organ. On the basis of these observations and reading of anatomy texts, we now define the clitoris, the female sex organ, as being much, much more than a miniature penis, or various assorted structures collectively referred to as "the vulva" and the vagina...

Blogspot: Women's Health in Women's Hands

2010-11-09T16:22:00.000-08:00

Self-Help Clinic: A group of women not long ago banded together to seriously consider some mutual questions concerning the care of their reproductive and sexual organs...

Blogspot: Women's Health in Women's Hands

2010-11-04T15:35:00.000-07:00

HERSTORY OF ABORTION By: Colleen Wilson

"Forced sterilization, either through financial or psychological coercion, or by simply performing the procedure without a woman's informed consent, represents women's ultimate loss of control..."

Women's Health In Women's Hands: Racism and the Women's Movement

2010-11-03T14:14:00.000-07:00

Racism and the Women's Movement
By Carol Downer
Originally Published in Women's Health Movement Papers on July 1980

Women's Health In Women's Hands: Menstrual Extraction

2010-11-01T16:14:00.000-07:00

Visit and follow Women's Health in Women's Hands blogspot, this is the latest post: Women's Health In Women's Hands: Menstrual Extraction written by Lorraine Rothman. Please comment and enjoy!

What is the Women's Health Movement?

2010-10-21T11:59:00.000-07:00

What is the Women's Health Movement?

Originally Published in Women's Health Movement Paper, July 1980

The Women's Health Movement is a movement of women who are working on women's health issues so that women's lives will be improved by having more control over their bodies. Much of the work of the women's health movement has been to improve the ability of women to get health care within the health care system, to develop alternatives to the traditional health care system, and to fight unsafe medical practices which are harming women all over the world. Many women's health groups are directly confronting pharmaceutical companies which manufacture dangerous experimental drugs, hospitals for dangerous childbirth practices, sterilization abuse and unnecessary surgery. Other women's health groups have launched suits to get damages for women who have had health injuries from dangerous medical practices (such as DES, or Dalkon Shields).

The Self-Help Clinic is another major part of the womens health movement. In self-help groups women have learned much about the normal functioning of our bodies and how to control our health care, through self-examination. Self-help groups have focused on safe birth control methods, treating vaginal infections, lesbian health care, menopause, and early pregnancy detection. Women involved in self-help clinics are working in the spirit of women regaining control over their own lives.

Women-controlled clinic are another part of the women's health movement. These clinics offer a real alternative to women from the medical system. These women-controlled clinics offer many services, ranging from abortions, to pregnancy screening, vaginal infection clinics, VD screening, and some women health care clinics have home birth projects and/or lesbian health care clinics.

Women's support groups have also emerged on issues such as breast surgery, C-sections, rape, DES Daughters.

Battle Against Population Controllers Unite

2010-10-20T09:43:00.000-07:00

Battle Against Population Controllers Unite
Radical Feminists & People Of Color
By Carol Downer

Originally Published in Women's Health Movement Paper, July 1980

The U.S.'s clear (though unofficial) population policy until a mere ten years ago has always been extremely pronatalist (pro-birth), at least as far as the white population goes. Pushing women to have large families goes back to England and Europe and the struggle of the newly formed nations over territory and colonial possessions. Napoleon introduced many policies which rewarded men for its immediate acceptance and use by European men and women, the national leaders pressured the Catholic church for its support. In 1869, Pope Pius IX decreed that all abortion, from the moment of conception on, was murder. Queen Elizabeth passed the first law against abortion. The peasants in England were being forced off their lands into cities to live in abject poverty. Their culture, was lost. The European population swelled to the point where people literally sold themselves into slavery to get to America, the land of opportunity. While Indians were being massacred to wipe them off the face of the earth, white settlers were forced into childbearing to the point that it was common for white men to outlive two or three wives. The doctrine of "Manifest Destiny" demanded that whites settle and occupy the continent from coast to coast.

Then after World War I, a movement to reduce the population grew which adopted the theories of Malthus, an Englishman who, in the early 1900's had predicted that without the "natural" means of birth control (wars, floods, and pestilence) the poor of the earth were going to multiply much faster than the resources of the earth could support. This birth control movement was supported financially by American ruling class families, such as the Rockefellers, the Mellons, Fords and executives such as Cass Canfield, head of Harper and Row Publishers.

After World War II, the birth control movement took its cause to the public in huge ad campaigns, couching its concerns as fear of a population explosion and world hunger. In fact, the birth controllers were extremely afraid of a rebellion of the Third World, whose resources they were plundering. And, as the political awareness of the people of color living in the inner city increased, they were also afraid of a revolution.

Planned Parenthood, started in the 1950's, sponsored early experimentation into the Pill in Puerto Rico. They found out that the Pill would prevent pregnancy. Because of their studies on animals, they also knew that it caused many other undesirable effects, such as shrivelling up the ovaries causing sterility and early menopause, and cancer. They went ahead anyway. Today, millions of women around the world are subjects of the largest uncontrolled medical experiment in history. Planned Parenthood physicians also developed other procedures, drugs and devices, equally dangerous and totally physician-controlled. To mention just a couple, the IUD, Depo Provera, and mini-laparotomy for surgical sterilization of the woman.

The population controllers ultimate weapon against the fertility of the poor and Third World people is surgical sterilization. It is here that we can see most clearly their racist, imperialist motives. In the last 20 years, a third of Puerto Rican women have been sterilized, while during the same period, middle class white women were being denied sterilization in this country. In one example among many, one white woman, a wife of a psychiatrist, stood on the hospital window ledge after delivering her fourth child and threatened to jump unless they allowed her to be sterilized.

Antinatalism (attitudes and policies against birth) had spread so much in the U.S. that by the end of the '60's abortion laws were liberalized in California, New York, Washington and Hawaii. The abortion reform movement was not and still is not guided by feminist leadership. National abortion organizations meet in New York City at the Population Council in a large conference room under the watchful eyes of John D. Rockefeller, III, whose portrait hangs on the wall. Rockefeller, until his death, was the Pope of the antinatalist movement. He provided much of the funds in its early years. After 1950, the U.S. Government provided more and more of the financial backing, especially in the Third World. The Agency for International Development has a population department, which aggressively pushes birth control as part of any foreign-aid package to "underdeveloped" countries. For example, Depo Provera, the Dalkon Shield and self-abortion kits are outlawed in the U.S., but distributed abroad by A.I.D. Ray Ravenholt, Director of the Population Department, publically admitted that A.I.D. was trying to stave off world revolution by mass sterilization of women in poorer countries. Ha has been subsequently removed from that position.

The Feminist Women's Health Centers have led the fight against the population controllers since their early beginning in 1971. They exposed Harvey Karman, and infamous abortionist who has performed experimental and very harmful abortions on women of Bangladesh, poor black women in Philadelphia and poor Latin women in Los Angeles. They also have raised the consciousness of the women's health movement and many liberal people who had not recognized the imperialistic motives that underlay the popular appeal to concern about over-population and world hunger. They attended the Menstrual Regulation Conference in Hawaii in 1973, where Ravenholt, A.I.D., Batelle Corporation and the Pathfinder Fund, were trying to sell Third World physicians on early abortion. Ravenholt proposed to drop self-abortion kits on the rice paddies. The FWHC opposed this plan; subsequently it was squelched by Kennedy's Subcommittee on Human Experimentation.

Feminist and people of color formed an alliance in New York City to get regulations adopted to combat sterilization abuse. In 1977, they were victorious, as the guidelines were approved to be used in New York City Hospital. The group, called The Committee to End Sterilization Abuse, has formed chapters throughout the U.S. and has succeeded in getting similar guidelines adopted by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. This victory is a stunning blow to the population controllers, who are looking to sterilization as a preferable alternative for poor women. The upholding of the Hyde Amendment in July of 1980 will deprive poor women the financial help they need to have access to abortion. The inevitable consequence is that many will choose to be sterilized rather than risk getting pregnant. This is an excellent example of how population controllers use a variety of social control tools to shape the population growth. Today, it is fairly easy for middle-income women to get abortions. Teenage women of all ethnic groups have been targeted and many are coerced into abortions. Low-income women, which is often synonomous with women of color, will be coerced into sterilization.

Radical feminists are natural allies of those oppressed groups that are the target of population controllers. The Women's Health Movement recognizes the connections between imperialism and its logical expressions, racism and sexism. Unfortunately, many women of this generation have bought the anti-natalist propaganda that their decision to not have children is a sign of their liberation, rather than recognizing that it is necessary for them to maintain a decent standard of living, and that they are subject to many societal pressures to limit their fertility, even if they have to use dangerous methods to do so. It is a job for radical feminists to help women to understand how they are being manipulated.

A common perception is that feminists are anti-male and anti-family. Unfortunately, there are many right-wing feminists who do hold such limited views. However, radical feminists support the true from of the family and do not direct their energies against the individual man, but rather at the multi-national corporation which are indeed run by patriarchal ruling class families. These ruling class families have attempted to destroy everyone else's families, going so far as to redefine the family as the nuclear family. Feminists oppose the nuclear family, which locks people into rigid roles in an oppressive unite, and want to establish a society where all individuals can live in a mutually supportive, loving environment where they are cared about and nurtured.

Sitting Down with Two Sexual Revolutionaries

2010-10-05T14:06:00.000-07:00

Sitting Down with Two Sexual Revolutionaries

From DodsonAndRoss.com: Betty and I had the pleasure of interviewing Carol Downer - the mother of the abortion movement. She was jailed...she was censored but she never stopped teaching women how to take control of their own bodies. From contraception to menstrual extraction, she did it all. This is one of my favorite podcasts :)

Donations for Pa’ti Garcia

2010-09-15T16:52:00.000-07:00

Message from Pa'ti:

My beautiful people, I'm continuing my education this October in Australia. Adding another layer of sexological bodywork, including pelvic floor scar tissue remediation, bringing feeling back to scarred areas due to birth trauma, sexual trauma, cesareans, etc. If 300 fans would be willing to gift me between $8-$20, you... would be contributing to a revolutionary endeavor! PayPal: garcia.pati@gmail.com

Mil Gracias!

California NOW: NOW Founder, Lana Phelan Kahn, Passes

2010-08-02T15:43:00.000-07:00

California NOW: NOW Founder, Lana Phelan Kahn, Passes

Also read:
Lana Clarke Phelan-Kahn died last week of a stroke. (1921 - 2010)
Heroes page of Women's Health in Women's Hands

A Blast From the Past Can Secure Abortion Rights by Carol Downer

2010-05-26T15:20:00.001-07:00

A Blast From the Past Can Secure Abortion Rights by Carol Downer

Posted using ShareThis

International Women's Day 2010

2010-02-23T12:29:00.000-08:00

International Women's Day 2010

Break the Chains!

Unleash the Fury of Women As a Mighty Force for

REVOLUTION!

Saturday, March 6

4PM: Rally [Westwood & Kinross (N of Wilshire)]

6PM: March (thru Westwood)

There are no more monstrous crimes committed anywhere in the world than those against women. There are no more righteous reasons to resist than the horror women go through every day. And if this were the only reason - and it is not - these crimes alon would pose the need and demand for revolution.

For International Women's Day we will be marching in the streets with a spirit of resistance by both women and men who find a "woman's place" unacceptable and intolerable, whether under medieval veils or on display as "modern" commodities.

Here in Los Angeles, we will be standing in solidarity with women everywhere, especially the women in Iran who are courageously battling the woman-hating regime. We are inspired by these women warriors who are breaking through the suffocating silence, and refuse to choose between the Islamic fundamentalist theocracy or U.S. imperialism, as they aim to bring into being a world without this oppression. If you long for this kind of future, join with us and take an active part in International Women's Day.

From Carol Downer: Join-us and consider donating...I will speak at the rally!

Become a member of IWD Los Angeles Facebook

Donate at IWD Coalition of Los Angeles MySpace (located: left-hand side of web page)

Or Contact: International Women's Day Coalitin

IWDLosAngeles@gmail.com 323.490.2647

March in Support of Women Warriors in the Streets of Tehran...visit http://www.8mars.com/ - March 8 Women's Organization (Iran-Afghanistan)

2009-08-31T15:01:00.000-07:00

Hi Everybody: I want to commend the new issue of On the Issues to you. The entire issue is excellent, but there is a wonderful article about the Trans Health Initiative at the Atlanta Feminist Women's Health Center.

I wrote the staff, Nancy Boothe, Jac Camp and Lola Fleckenstein the following note to commend them on this program.

Dear FWHC Staff, Executive Director Nancy Boothe, Jac Camp and Lola Fleckenstein:
While reading about the Trans Health Initiative at the Atlanta Feminist Women’s Health Center in the article by Eleanor J. Bader in On the Issues Magazine, tears of joy came to my eyes. You courageously serve people who are undergoing medically complicated treatments with care and dignity. I commend you. I’m sure we’re going to learn a lot more about our sexuality and health through your program.
The Feminist Women’s Health Centers were founded to give us control over our own bodies. We gained first-hand knowledge of our bodies in a non-judgmental setting, the Self-Help Clinic. You are carrying on your thirty-two-year tradition, enabling those who make the healthy decision to express their sexuality to receive respectful, competent medical treatment.
Here is a small contribution to the Robert Eads Clinic. Please let me know if I can be of any support to your efforts.
In Sisterhood,
Carol Downer

Why I Favor But Will Not Work for Government Health Reform

2009-08-28T16:08:00.000-07:00

A respected colleague from the Women's Health Movement urges me to join in the battle for Obama's health reform. In one e-mail, she sent me and other pro-choice contacts a pro-choice joke that she did not feel free to send to the other contacts on her health reform e-mail list, who presumably are anti-choice. This is my response to her.

Dear Cathy:
You stated that you believe that the single-payer health care issue is the civil rights issue of our time. I would like to explain to you why I will not be putting my effort into this struggle, even though, of course, I would like to get rid of the insurance companies. Health care should never be commodified and sold for profit.
1. Single-Issuism: The demand for single payer health care has attracted the support of a broad spectrum of groups. That is the good part. Unfortunately, it seems that many people are so desperate for a coalition effort that they will betray their own interests, because they believe this to be a winning strategy. For example, some feminists downplay their demands for abortion rights so as not to offend those who oppose abortion. (I haven’t noticed anti-choice groups within our health reform coalition downplaying their bigotry, by the way.)
I believe it is a losing strategy to compromise your basic principles, especially when you consider that the majority of American people support health care reform already so it is unnecessary to compromise our principles to get support. (you notice that that widespread support hasn’t impressed President Obama. (Apparently, President Obama seems to think that going for the middle ground is a smart strategy even when the lines of the battle are drawn between big corporations against the will of the people. No matter how he has gutted his plan, members of Congress, who are dependent on contributions from the insurance companies, won’t support his weak-as-water proposal and, of course, he can’t get the American people excited about such a timid proposal either. Presently, even if we get a “public option”, that won’t stop health insurance companies from denying care on some pretext or another.
2. No demand for improved quality of health care: We in the women’s health movement know how downright dangerous a lot of health care is, especially for women, so how can I get excited about wanting more of it? For example, over a third of births in the United States are by cesarean section, and women with private insurance are even more likely to get dangerous intervention in their births.
Michael Moore’s “Sicko” didn’t even touch that taboo subject. What makes us think that doctors and hospitals will stop doling out drugs and doing unnecessary surgeries just because the taxpayers are footing the bill?
It’s true that many of the people without health insurance are poor and of color, so at first glance it seems “politically correct” to fight to get them insured some way or another. Rather, we need to be fighting for safe working conditions and fair wages, against locating toxic dumps in poor neighborhoods, decriminalizing drug use, for regulations to prohibit the over-processing of food and and the misleading of American consumers about the dangers of processed foods and for protection of independent farmers. The reason poor people and people of color have more health problems is their exposure to environmental hazards at work and in their communities, their lack of access to quality food, and stress.
3. No challenging of imperialism and capitalism. I’m not suggesting that we abandon our fight for good health care and to only fight to stop U.S. aggression and the takeover of American society by big corporations, but I think a successful fight for good health care needs to take careful aim at the real sources of the problem. For example, even though the money that our country has spent on the wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan could easily pay for health care, and therefore some make the argument that we should spend our budget for single-payer insurance, not war, the real problem is that our whole oil-based way of life is destructive of the our health, our planet and wasteful of our resources, and that these wars have been waged to maintain that lifestyle. Here again, when we make the argument that “a country as rich as ours should be able to provide health care for its citizens”, we’re ignoring that the wealth of this country comes from the exploitation of other countries, and we’re also ignoring that most of the wealth of this country is centered in the top one percent. This argument actually reinforces the myth that American’s hard work alone has resulted in having great wealth.

“Well, we didn’t succeed, but at least we tried”, isn’t a good enough rationalization for expending our limited time and energy on a movement that, even if successful, would exclude abortion from coverage and wouldn’t address the fundamental problems.
In struggle, Carol

Is a Gynecology Exam a Violation of our Body?

2009-07-17T15:37:00.000-07:00

I received an e-mail from Cassandra who has a blog, homebirthissafe.blogspot.com, who asked me to write an article on my blog and site about the harm from the routine gynecological visit. Cassandra also referred me to “women against stirrups” on Yahoo.
I totally agree with Cassandra that the annual gynecological visit is unnecessary. Many times women experience humiliation and distress, and in a fair number of cases, women receive unnecessary and sometimes harmful treatment. For example, many women in their forties and older dutifully go into the gynecologist’s office for a check-up, even though they have no symptoms of a problem, but leave the doctor’s office with a prescription for hormone-like drugs to treat their “dry vagina”.
How does this typically happen? If a woman is not having regular penis-vagina sex, the lining of her vagina becomes thinner. Because of the sexism in our society, men don’t seek out the company of women over 40 and those men that are married to women over 40 are getting older themselves and often they desire less sex. Also, many women are divorced or widowed or never-married and they are relieved that they don’t have to spend time and energy on maintaining a relationship with a man. As a result, even if a woman stays sexually active with other women or if she masturbates, the thick ridges of her vagina tend to flatten out some. Sometimes, the wall is so thin that when you put in a speculum, the vagina may develop small tears that bleed, leaving a trace of blood on the speculum when it is removed.
Immediately, the doctor informs the woman that she has “dry vagina” and has an inadequate supply of the hormone, estrogen, and she/he prescribes a hormone-like drug to build up the vaginal walls. The completely healthy woman is now taking a dangerous drug to cure a condition that she didn’t even care about.
Another common situation which leads a woman to become a candidate for hormone-like drug therapy is when a woman has some vaginal itching or discharge that prompts her to douche, and repeated douching can lead to vaginal dryness and itching. Unfortunately, since many women don’t know that vaginal secretions are normal, especially around the time of ovulation in the middle of their menstrual cycle, they douche and douche and douche, sometimes even using deodorant sprays for their nonexistent problem.
We found in our self-help clinics that we could treat this “dry vagina” problem by inserting a speculum or a dildo once a day for a few weeks (or sometimes women have used graduated smooth metal rods that their doctors have given them). This stimulation of the vaginal walls prompts them to thicken (much like the sole of the feet thickens by walking on them).
I have counseled several women to use this technique and it has been quite successful. One woman was referred to me by a women’s clinic, because she was having difficulty is having penis-vagina sex. She was in her early forties. She and her husband started a small business in their mid-thirties. Running the business took all of their time; they had no days off or vacations. Her husband, who was a few years older than she, lost interest in sex. Finally, when the business became more successful, they were able to recreate and have a social life. Then, when they tried to have sex, her husband had trouble maintaining an erection and she was experiencing pain and bleeding. I mailed her a speculum and she inserted it daily for a couple of weeks. We also talked about ways to make sure she was lubricated. She told me that her husband was attentive and considerate lover, but he was easily discouraged, and wouldn’t even try to have sex if he couldn’t feel confident that he could maintain his erection. She kept up her speculum routine anyway. Finally, he tried again and was successful and she was able to tolerate the insertion of the penis. In fact, she called the next morning to share how much she’d enjoyed herself!
The medical profession is totally ignorant of the realities of women’s lives, and it has nothing to offer us but drugs and surgery. I agree with Cassandra that women who are given hormone-like drugs for the treatment of “dry vagina” would have been much better off if they had never visited a gynecologist!

TRIBUTE TO DR. GEORGE TILLER, JUNE 6, 2009

2009-06-18T14:51:00.000-07:00

The following is a speech given by Carol Downer at the Santa Monica 3rd street Promenade on June 6, 2009.

MY NAME IS CAROL DOWNER AND I AM HERE TODAY TO HONOR GEORGE TILLER BY ACKNOWLEDGING HIS HUMANITY AND HIS CONTRIBUTIONS TO OUR SOCIETY.

OUR CLINIC, THE FEMINISTS WOMEN'S HEALTH CENTER, PROVIDED ABORTIONS IN LOS ANGELES FROM 1973, 50 DAYS AFTER THE ROE V. WADE DECISION. IT WAS BURNED DOWN BY ANTI-ABORTIONISTS IN 1984.

IT WAS MY PRIVILEGE TO KNOW DR. TILLER WHEN I WAS A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION WHERE I WAS ACTIVE FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS.

HE WAS A WARM, GENEROUS AND EXTREMELY WISE PERSON. I AM GRIEVING HIS DEATH DEEPLY.

GEORGE EXPRESSED HIS PROFOUND RESPECT FOR A WOMAN'S DECISION TO HAVE AN ABORTION.

I QUOTE: "IT IS MY FUNDAMENTAL PHILOSOPHY THAT PATIENTS ARE EMOTIONALLY, MENTALLY, MORALLY, SPIRITUALLY AND PHYSICALLY COMPETENT TO STRUGGLE WITH COMPLEX HEALTH ISSUES AND COME TO DECISIONS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THEM" Dr. George Tiller

Although only 5% of abortions are performed past the 20th week of pregnancy, and only 1% of abortions are performed past the 24th week of pregnancy, the circumstances that only the most ignorant or malevolent person would deny a girl or a woman access to an abortion, no matter what their religious belief.

Unfortunately, we have few physicians who are willing to perform abortions after the 18th week of pregnancy. Why? Because doctors not only fear that, if they have a complication, they will be harassed or even killed, but also because they fear they will lose their license to practice medicine, or they will even be criminally prosecuted. Remember, although early abortion is a safe, pretty easy procedure, later abortion becomes more risky, although never as risky as carrying the pregnancy to term and giving birth. So, even with the best of care, complications will happen. In the State of California, we have vicious people who have dedicated their lives to pressuring county coroners and the state licensing boards to investigate and prosecute every doctor who has a serious complication.

In 1996, Dr. Bruce Steir was charged in Riverside County with second-degree murder for the abortion-related death of a woman who was 20 weeks pregnant, and, despite the testimony of several nationally-known and respected medical experts at the preliminary hearing that he had done absolutely nothing below the standard of care, the Judge ordered a trial. Depleted of his life savings and fearing an unfair trial, Dr. Steir, 74 years old at the time, plea bargained and, there he was, a doctor who had performed thousands of abortions, sitting gin jail for six months.

Today, as I stand here, I can safely predict that within the next few years, another abortion doctor will find herself or himself needing support for a legal defense. Complications will happen, despite the best of care. We must not let abortion doctors who have committed no wrong find themselves serving time in jail or ending up penniless because they were not adequately supported by the pro-choice community.

Now I want to talk about what needs to be done.

It is necessary to speak-out about the lack of protection that Dr. Tiller and other abortion providers get from law enforcement agencies. Hopefully, they will the protests of the pro-choice community. But, it is not enough. Think about it. Approximately a million American women each year benefit from the courage and commitment and caring of abortion providers, hospitals, doctors, clinics and escorts and other supporters. I know these millions of women are with us in spirit today, but they are not coming forward to protest the killing of an abortion doctor.

Why?

Justice Blackmun, in his Roe v. Wade decision built a great, big closet for us who get abortions to hide in. He called it "The Right to Privacy". And, by the millions, we have hidden in that closet, and we have stayed hidden in that closet. We have got to come out of that closet if we want to protect the right of other women to have help, like we got help when we needed it. We have got to say, "Yes, I had an abortion. My name is Carol Downer. I had an abortion in 1965 when I already had four children and was getting a much-needed divorce. Then, after remarrying and having two more children, I had another in Los Angeles, and my e-mail address is cdowner@sbcglobal.net"

We need privacy when we become unhappily pregnancy, to consider our alternatives and we need privacy to seek out and receive abortion care. But, after our personal crisis is over, if we don't start coming out of that closet in the hundreds and in the thousands, the killers and bombers and screamers and misanthropes will get their way. George TIller will have died in vain.

I would like to ask anyone who has had an abortion and who is willing to speak-out publically to come forward to identify herself right now. Brothers, and sisters who have not had an abortion, we need your support too, but right now, right this minute, from this time forward, this is the time for us who have had abortions to make our voices heard. So, as Harvey Milk would say, come on out!

THANK YOU

DEMO AGAINST OBAMA WAR POLICY

2009-05-29T11:58:00.000-07:00

Wednesday, May 27, was a great opportunity to express my opposition to the occupations/wars in Iraq and "AF-PAK" and to reach out to similarly-minded women to invite them to our self-help clinic on Sunday, May 31. There were several hundred people there, standing on the grassy strip across from the Beverly Hills Hilton Hotel where Obama was speaking at a fund-raiser.

I gave out over 40 leaflets. The title of the leaflet "Women's Opposition to Imperialism Starts With Decolonizing Our Bodies" was quite well received. Especially 3 young women who were enthused about the day's event and helped distribute leaflets and carried my sign. I'm putting the leaflet on the blog. It expresses self-helper's belief that anti-imperialism and regaining direct control over our bodies are linked.

I'm enclosing some pictures of the World Can't Wait protest against torture and also some protesters against the Supreme Court's decision to uphold Proposition 8 that bars same sex marriage. The group photo is of Barbara Shank, Sandra Ramos and myself.

Photos courtesy of Sandra Ramos.

30 YEARS TOO LATE...

2009-05-26T16:36:00.000-07:00

LA Times, Sunday, May 17, 2009 "CHILDBIRTH: CAN THE U.S. IMPROVE? C-Sections are expensive. Doctors ask if we're doing too many." by: Lisa Girion (lisa.girion@latimes.com)

The article reported that C-Sections are performed 31% of births with an increase in complications and risks. I wrote the author the following letter:

Dear Ms. Girion: The answer to the headline is "Yes!"
I am very happy to see this valuable information on the pages of the Los Angeles Times. Thank you for your excellent coverage.

In 1979, I, (and 3 other women) was arrested for trespassing in Tallahassee, Florida for making an inspection of the maternity ward to protest the rise in cesareans from 5% to a shocking 15%. I was subsequently convicted and served a few days in jail, but my conviction was set aside by the Florida Supreme Court on the grounds that we had not had notice that our entering the maternity ward would be trespassing. Of course, any repetition would not have that defense.

I don't want to look a gift horse in the mouth, but I wish the article had been either in the front news section or the health section, instead of the business section where many women will not see it. Also, it continues to stun me that only a severe recession and spiraling health costs can force the medical profession to put women and children's health first.

Thank you, Carol Downer

WHAT WOULD A WOMEN'S REVOLUTION LOOK LIKE?

2009-05-26T13:18:00.001-07:00

This piece is a work in progress and any additional information or comments is greatly appreciated.

WHAT WOULD A WOMEN'S REVOLUTION LOOK LIKE?

Adapted from "War and Revolution" by Nicholas S. Timasheff, Sheed & Ward, New York, 1965

Re-paraphrasing by Carol Downer

Chapter 7, From Order to Revolution

The Pre-Revolutionary Stage

p. 139: NST: "Revolution is a political conflict within a nation lifted to the level of fighting between the government and an opposition party."

CAD: Revolution is an ongoing political conflict within a family, community, organization, political subdivision lifted to the level of sharp conflict between the patriarchal and/or capitalistic and/or imperialistic ruling and the women and their allies.

p. 140: NST: "In revolution, the antagonists are heterogeneous and partly undetermined: the government is opposed by a group (a revolutionary party), or a revolutionary movement (sometimes by a prophetic leader), or a revolutionary mob, quickly assembling and again dispersing."

CAD: In a women's revolution, the patriarchal family structure is opposed by an individual woman, an agency of the patriarchal state is opposed by either the individual woman or a women's group, or the patriarchal state is opposed by a collection of revolutionary women's groups, or a patriarchal agency or state opposed by revolutionary mobs of women, quickly assembling and against dispersing, such as anti-rape zap actions.

p. 140: NST: "In the origin of a revolution, it is of paramount importance whether the government is isolated, or supported by a minority which may be well or poorly organized, or by large masses, opposed by other, revolutionary masses). Consequently, in revolution both opposing groups may be small; one may be small and the other large; or both may be large, comprising together almost the totality of the adult population."

CAD: In the origin of a woman's revolution, it is of paramount importance whether the patriarchal structure (family, agency, state) is isolated, or supported by a minority which may be well or poorly organized, or in the case of the patriarchal state, us supported by large masses who may oppose the women's revolutionary actions.
CAD: In the second wave, the male superstructure was not isolated; it was supported by large masses of males and large masses of counter-revolutionary females; there were revolutionary masses and the revolutionary movement was split into at least two main factions; the reformists and the radical feminists (women's liberationists). There was no revolutionary party.

p. 140: NST: "Each of the revolutionary factions may remain unorganized (a mass), or organized, on the lower level of a revolutionary movement, or at the higher level of a revolutionary party (eventually, a conspiracy)."

CAD: In the second wave, the patriarchal government was not isolated; it was supported by patriarchal institutions and by large masses of males, and by patriarchal mobs who attacked women who tried to access abortion clinics, and who bombed clinics and shot abortion doctors. There were also large masses of counter-revolutionary females. The revolutionary movement was split into at lease two main factions; the reformists and the radical feminists. There was no revolutionary party.

p. 140: NST: "Between a government and the revolutionary opposition, a sharp incompatibility of goals is necessarily present. The goal of the opposition (eventually, of each of its factions) is change in political leadership and/or change in the government's policy; in more drastic cases, change of the total political and/or social order."

CAD: In the case of a women's revolution, between the patriarchal family, group, agency or state and the feminist forces, a sharp incompatibility of goals in necessarily present. The goal of the feminist opposition (eventually, of each of its factions) is change in political leadership and/or change in the patriarchy's policy; in more drastic cases, change of the total political and/or social order.

p. 140: NST: "The goal of the government is not to cede political power and/or not to grant the demanded changes. Every revolution is reducible to the political phase of human co-existence. The point at issue is always this: who shall make the political decisions, and what shall those decisions be? But the dissent separating the government from the opposition may be purely political, or it may reflect, in political terms and demands, dissent in other phases of social and cultural life, just as war, though always on the political level, may reflect economic, nationalistic, or religious or secular ideological conflicts."

CAD: The goal of the patriarchal superstructure is not to cede political power and/or not to grant the demanded changes. Every revolution is reducible to the political phase of human co-existence. The point at issue is always this: who shall make the political decisions, and what shall those decisions be?

In a true women's revolution, feminist opposition will reflect, in political terms and demands, dissent in other phases of social and cultural life, and will reflect a goal of changing the economic, nationalistic, religious or secular ideological order.

p. 141: NST: "Purely political antagonisms conducive to revolution may be divided into two levels. On the lower level, the existing organization of the government is not questioned, but, in the opposition's view, the existing government is inefficient, stupid, corrupt, oppressive, or combined two or more of these traits. The goal of the opposition, at least on the verbal level, is to replace inefficient and stupid personalities by efficient and intelligent ones, corrupt functionaries by models of honesty, abject tyrants by men respecting the freedom and dignity of their fellow men."

CAD: A reformist feminists' dissent from the patriarchal government may be purely political. For example, recent feminist opposition to the Bush Administration and its war policies, was limited to getting Hilary Clinton elected, or, failing that, at least getting Barack Obama elected.

p. 141: NST: "On the upper level, the very form of the government is questioned. In this case, new political ideals are involved. These new ideals were either generated in the society where the revolutionary movement is going on, or elsewhere, but received through diffusion."

CAD: On the upper level, the very patriarchal form of the family, organization or government is questioned. In this case, new political ideas, such as peace, stopping global warming, non-authoritarian child-rearing, are involved. These new ideals were either generated in the society where the revolutionary is going on, or elsewhere, but received through diffusion.

p. 141: NST: "An absolute monarchy may be under attack on the part of believers in constitutional monarchy or republic, an aristocratic republic may be denounced in the name of democracy. But the bearers of 'progressive ideas' have no monopoly: those preferring old-fashioned monarchy or one of the brands of dictatorship may conspire against democracy and eventually become a revolutionary opposition."

CAD: In a women's revolution, the goal is to start the process of taking the power away from the patriarchy and to implement feminist ideals of ending imperialism and modifying the industrial revolution to achieve the health and welfare of everyone without endangering the environment. But the bearers of "progressive ideas" have no monopoly; those preferring the old patriarchal world order with inadequate reforms may conspire against this process and co-opt these ideas to eventually become a reformist opposition to the feminist revolutionary process.

Los Angeles to eliminate backlog of Rape-Kits

2009-05-20T11:19:00.000-07:00

WE DID IT!

Good news! L.A. is going to eliminate the backlog of rape kits. Hopefully, this will help some women get justice and will prevent some repeat rapists from continuing their crimes.
Carol Downer

Hollywood NOW - WE DID IT!!!!

Last evening, LA City Council approved the budget and they have in fact funded a system that will eradicate the backlog of untested rape kits AND hold the LAPD accountable for the expenditure of funds allocated. THIS HAPPENED BECAUSE OF YOU!!!!

The City of Los Angeles and various organizations have been working on this issue for years. Because of your efforts, we were able to to show them that they couldn't ignore this problem any longer! Thank you especially to Human Rights Watch for their leadership and dedication.

We are so grateful to our leaders for this issue on City Council - Council President Eric Garcetti; Council President Pro Tempore Wendy Greuel (our next Controller!!); and Councilmember Jack Weiss. While it was the collective effort of the Council's vote yesterday that ultimately approved this budget item, these three leaders have worked hard to make sure this remains a priority for LA & we are grateful for their leadership.

Hollywood NOW thanks LA City Council for doing the right thing - not just by giving funds but also by holding LAPD accountable for their procedures. Over the next two years, we will eradicate the backlog of untested rape kits evidence as long as the Council continues to work with LAPD on a system that holds everyone accountable.

Thank you to everyone who has worked with us on this issue. We will continue to give you updates as we progress in testing the rape kit evidence.

Be proud today! We made a difference!
-Lindsey
President, Hollywood NOW

Recommender Book: Natural Liberty

2009-05-18T16:25:00.000-07:00

I'm writing about a new book on self-induced abortion. I have read thoroughly (except for the part on herbal abortifacients, about which I am not knowledgeable). I am excited about this book, because it brings together information that we women need to have about how to have an abortion outside the medical profession's control.

I have spoken to one of the authors and I am impressed with their responsibility. I know that at least some of the collective have experience in doing menstrual extraction in a self-help group. The book is written in a careful and comprehensive manner.

I recommend that your order the book. It is available on the websites, http://www.sisterzeus.com/ and http://www.moondragon.org/. It is also available on amazon.com, but when you order from the sisterzeus or moondragon, they get a small commission that helps them to exist. They're very worthwhile websites.

I would like to hear your comments, especially about the herbal information. And please forward this information to anyone you think might be interested.

NATURAL LIBERTY, Rediscovering Self-Induced Abortion Methods, written and published by Sagefemme Collective, 2008

e-mail: sagefemme.collective@gmail.com

website: http://www.sagefemmetoday.com/

Self-Help Clinic (May 31, 2009)

2009-05-18T11:32:00.000-07:00

Please post your comments on my blog

2008-05-30T17:25:00.000-07:00

I received several messages on my e-mail (cdowner@sbcglobal.net), most were in disagreement with my position that mothers' rights are a feminist issue, and that even though the FLDS mothers are not raising their children in a way that I agree with, I opposed the State of Texas seizing the children. Unfortunately, these opinions were not posted on my blog, so only I was able to see them. I am not going to copy them without the writers' permission and I am not going to try to represent their points of view. I think this question hits right at the heart of women's rights, and we should discuss it from all our points of view. Please post your comments on the blog. Thanks

Legal Rights of Mothers

2008-05-23T20:27:00.000-07:00

Is it a feminist victory for the Court to make the State of Texas return the children to their FLDS mothers (Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) in Texas? I believe it definitely is. We mothers are under siege by the patriarchal state from the very moment we give birth. We are given no help in raising our children, and the state is ready to jump in and take them away if we don't jump through hoops. When my children were young, I was very aware that I could lose custody of my children very easily.

Isn't it ironic, though, that our victory comes in a situation where the mothers in question, so strong in their fight to regain custody of their children, are so weak in their relationship to their children's fathers and to the men who dominate their sect? The state moved in and yanked those kids out of their homes without having established that they were in any harm, but it seems that the mothers support beliefs of women's subservience to men and do not insist that their daughters have full opportunity to education and other opportunities.

This poses a serious question for feminists. We want to support women to have the power to raise their children in the way they think best, but how do we work to create a society in which each woman asserts that power independently, without coercion. I saw an interview of a FLDS woman and her husband. Her husband sat quietly throughout the interview. She was articulate and forceful, but I wonder how forceful she is in demanding respect in her own relationship and in demanding respect for her daughters by the ruling males in their sect.

In the meantime, for every woman whose had her children taken away because she couldn't support them or take proper care of them or because the state wouldn't help her with her problems in a non-punitive way, I am very glad those children are going home to Mom.

Questions re Obama/Clinton race for nomination for President

2008-03-28T18:11:00.001-07:00

Question #1: Why don't Obama supporters get really angry about the blatant sexism that is being shown by the media or even seem to see it, and why don't Clinton supporters get really angry about the racism being shown by the media or even seem to see it?

Question 2: Obama's speech on racism was an historic speech. Why do Clinton supporters not acknowledge that?

Question 3: Why can't Obama supporters see that the attempt to minimize Clinton's political experience while being married to a governor and then a president is outrageously sexist? Some have even called it "pillow talk", a term that trivializes the real value of the contribution that women make to their husband's career.

Question 4: One radio commentator who is an Obama supporter said she was "surprised" at the tremendous surge of support for Obama, especially among white men? Does she think white men have suddenly lost their racist thinking? Doesn't this alert her that something fishy is going on?

Question 5: Why doesn't Clinton give support to Obama's membership in a church with an outspoken black minister, instead of saying that she doesn't belong to a church with such a controversial minister? Of course, as a Democrat, she doesn't. Only extreme right-wing churches have racist, sexist ministers. Ministers of mainstream white Christian churches are not challenging the status quo (shame on them!)

Question 6: Why doesn't Obama publically deplore hecklers who tell Clinton, "Iron my shirt, bitch!"

Question 7: As a woman, I am thrilled that a qualified, gutsy woman is running for president, even if I do not agree with her foreign policy positions (as I don't agree with Obama's). Of course, people of color are thrilled that a qualified, gutsy person of color is running for president. But, aren't all progressive people really happy that both a person of color and a woman are contending for the Democratic nomination? What is it with this pressure on Clinton to give up?

I voted for Clinton, and I hope she gets the nomination, but I will vigorously support Obama if he gets the nomination. If I see a black person elected president of this country, I will dance in the streets with joy!

Let's hear it for Hilary and Barak.

Feminist advice on a relationship dilemma

2008-03-16T11:26:00.000-07:00

I recently had the opportunity to visit with my friend, Varda, for a few days. We were able to "catch up" after almost 20 years of infrequent phone calls and correspondence. Piece by piece, Varda shared how her 2 marriages had ended in divorce and how she's agonizing over what to do about her relationship with the man that she's been living with, on and off, for the last 5 years.

Also, like many women in her age group (she's now in her mid-fifties and her two children from the first marriage are grown), she's finding herself without decent employment. She went back to school to become a social worker and earned a good living for a time, but then a large medical corporation came in and took over the small non-profit that contracted out the county's social work. Now she works at a Home for the mentally challenged in a non-rewarding capacity and for much less pay. In addition to her reduced circumstances, she is also facing problems with the I.R.S. On the advice of her first ex, she withheld part of her taxes to protest the war; he didn't advise her on what to do when they came after her. And, she has borrowed on her credit cards to the hilt, and she now faces the loss of her house. She's considering taking the last of a small inheritance to go back to school or going to live with her daughter and starting all over.

I forgot to say that Varda is an extremely talented artist, who has created beautiful art.. She helped to found the women's self-help movement in the 70's, and organized many fabulous events. She is beautiful in both body and spirit. She's idealistic and generous; "she'd give you the shirt off her back" applies to Varda.

I proceeded to give Varda, free of charge, the advice that I've given to many women over the years who've faced similar dilemmas about how to handle a relationship with a man they're living with and don't know just what to do next. The ones who have followed this advice, I'm happy to say, have experienced great success.

Varda asked me to write up the advice that I gave to her piecemeal over a period of days, because she wants to study it and fully understand it. She has given permission for me to publish it. I don't know if she will end up taking it, because this advice requires her to think about relationships with men in a whole new way.

The Problem

First of all, I think that Varda is on the verge of a serious financial crisis. She's about to end up in debt to the IRS, which is the worst kind of debt to have. She needs to take immediate action to get someone to represent her with the IRS (this does not have to be an attorney). Secondly, she needs money to keep her house. (Since her kids grew up, she's had a succession of housemates with all the problems that go with that).

WHAT DOES VARDA NEED TO DO?

I asked Varda, "What about your manfriend? Can't he help". "If we lived together again, he could take care of the mortgage and help with the IRS problem, but he doesn't just want to give me the money. He says it would be charity."

Varda told me her friend, Reggie, has the money. He has a good job, his own house and he takes her out to nice places.

To me, the solution is obvious. If Reggie meets what I consider to be the feminist criteria, they should get married.

I start off with the proposition that we live in a patriarchy, where, in general, men make more money than women and have more economic stability. Obviously, Varda prefers to have male companionship. After one to five years of living together, it becomes extremely disadvantageous for a woman to live with a man. Marriage laws, as restrictive and weighted in favor of men as they are, do give women some measure of security, compared to just living together. After investing a few years into her relationship with a man, a woman need to insist that they get married, or he must free her up to find someone else or she can pursue her goals alone.

I asked Varda a series of questions which I think are the basic questions to ask oneself before considering marriage.

1) Do you have a basically good sex life? Obviously, we all have a different idea of what constitutes a good sex life. The point is that both partners should have similar ideas. But, life is too hard and the stresses of everyday living with someone are too great unless you have the comfort and escape of affection, hugs, kisses and for some of us, deep and frequent orgasms.

Varda felt good about this aspect of their relationship. So, onto the next question.

2) Does he work? This used to be an unnecessary question. Before the 60's generation, a woman wouldn't consider having a relationship with a man that didn't work. It was a no-brainer. Increasingly, women get involved with men who don't work (Note: I did not say that the man needed to earn a lot of money. Lots of nice men are poor). Some women think they have more power in the relationship when they're the breadwinner; they think they can boss the guy around. In my opinion, they have the worst of all worlds.

Varda tells me that he likes his work and that he makes good money. Next question.

3) Does he have any serious personal problems, such as addictive behavior, gambling, violence or abusiveness? If a guy has any of these problems, they will only get worse with marriage.

Varda said that Reggie had none of these problems.

MY CONCLUSION: REGGIE MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR A GOOD HUSBAND

But, Varda then explains that Reggie and her kids do not get along, and she's constantly in between and she's afraid that he will not allow her to have the kids in her life. When she met Reggie, her kids were teenagers and they took an instant dislike to him and vice versa. Even now, the main problem is that Reggie wants Varda's exclusive attention and complains bitterly and loudly when she divides her attention between him and her children.

NEXT PART OF THE ADVICE: YOU NEED TO ASSERT YOURSELF IN YOUR MARRIAGE ON A DAILY BASIS TO GET YOUR RIGHTS AND NEEDS TAKEN CARE OF

Up to this point, most women would agree with my advice, at least as far as what are the criteria for a good marriage prospect. But, many do not. To them, Varda should move on until she finds a man who respects her right to give some of her attention to her kids (and soon, grandkids).

I think that here is where I think that many women fail to grasp the essence of male-female relationships in our present-day patriarchal society.

Today, the realistic goal of a male-female relationship is physical closeness and pleasure, raising of children, if wanted or necessary, mutual economic support, and companionship.

Many women are seeking a relationship with a man that includes intimacy and romance, maybe even shared interests; these women are doomed to frustration and disappointment. Why? Because, in a patriarchy, men are not raised to experience intimacy in a love relationship; they're raised to dominate. There are a few exceptions, to be sure, and most men can and do have sincere feelings for their mates, but in general, it's women who are raised to be in touch with their feelings.

Note: A good pop psychology book is "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus." The author, Gray, describes male-female relationships in a patriarchy pretty accurately. His whole message to women is to accept men as being unwilling and/or unable to invest the same emotional intensity into a relationship, and to find their fulfillment elsewhere. I thinks he gives good advice. Ironically, some women consider themselves to be a feminist and still expect a man to meet all their emotional needs; in fact, many of them consider this to be what a strong woman demands and gets from her relationship with a man.

My advice to Varda was, "Get married, get some financial security and deal with the problem of his possessiveness on a daily basis. It will never be easy. You will need to assert yourself, and work out compromises on a case-by-case basis. You won't get everything you want, but remember, he needs you as much as you need him."

The next day, we resumed our discussion. Varda said, "Yeah, I get it. All I have to do is to give into him and let him have his way, and we'll get along fine."

I realized that Varda hadn't heard a word I said about how a heterosexual feminist copes with pre-revolutionary relationships. Or, she had heard, and the prospect of living in a marriage under patriarchy didn't sound that great. Well, it isn't, folks, that's one of the reasons we want to overthrow the patriarchy. When men are in charge and get most or all of the goodies in the society, it's an unfair situation. To think that under these conditions, a man and a woman can have an idyllic relationship is (I can't fill in the word here; it's too sarcastic).

Personal note: when I became a feminist, I realized that probably I could have had a satisfactory life with my first husband. He was a decent guy and he was on the brink of making pretty good money (he died a few years after our divorce). We both loved our kids and we enjoyed working together. If I hadn't believed that my ultimate happiness depended on our having the perfect relationship and if I hadn't been unwilling to go out and create my own happiness, I probably could have managed his tendency to drink too much on social occasions and his carelessness about his health. My marriage counselor did try to give this advice to me. However, I did divorce and remarry, and I had a much better love life with my new spouse who I've been married to for over 45 years, so I guess it all was for the best.

Varda didn't say this, but my guess is that she also wonders if Reggie would, in fact, agree to get married? Perhaps this lack of confidence is undermining her ability to assert herself with him. My guess is that he would be willing. Otherwise, why is he saying that he won't give her the money unless they live together if he doesn't want to have her companionship?

While I'm on the subject of whether men want marriage, I am of the belief that they desperately want it. They devised the institution, didn't they? It protects their interests. They just want it on their terms. As a feminist, I eschew manipulation and scheming, a la "I Love Lucy", but I didn't park my brains when I became a radical feminist either. I have attempted, and I encourage women, to be a step ahead of the men we relate to at all times. I believe it's up to us to pick who we want to marry and then help them to go through the emotional growth that will lead to a lasting relationship.

Will Varda take this advice. I hope so.

When I mentioned my talk with Varda to one of the women I gave sisterly advice which she used to get herself established in a very good married relationship, she laughed and said, "Yes, my friends and co-workers just think I was really lucky to have found such a nice guy!"

City of Widows-book by Haifa Zangana

2008-03-15T17:56:00.000-07:00

How to Fight the Patriarchy: Actively Oppose the Iraq and Afghanistan Occupations

The ongoing violence of the occupation is preventing the Iraq people from rebuilding their country, and the desperate and dangerous situation of the women, especially widows, is resulting in their needing to leave the public sector to seek security and sustenance from their families, their communities and their mosques. Also, the US administration allies with and gives power to sectarian groups, creating sectarian violence in a nation that has been secular and desires to remain free and secular.

This is the position of Haifa Zangana, author of City of Widows, an Iraqi Woman's Account of War and Resistance. Zangana will be speaking at the Hammer Museum in Westwood on April 2, 2008 at 7 p.m. Her book will be available after the program, or order online http://www.sevenstories.com/book/?GCO1=58322100075330

You may ask, "How will actively opposing the imperialistic policies of the US fighting the patriarchy, and which patriarchy are you referring to--the male leaders of the different sects of the Islamic religion or the male leaders in this US? Who says our society is a patriarchy?

Our society is a patriarchy and I am referring to both the Iraqi patriarchy and the US patriarchy. Gerda Lerner, in Creation of the Patriarchy, defines patriarchy thusly: the wider definition of patriarchy means the manifestation and the institutionalization of male dominance over women in society in general.

As a humanist, I have always been against the Iraq war, because it is unjust and destructive. I was against the war in Afghanistan also. I have demonstrated against both, and I have attempted to use my vote to prevent or end these wars and occupations. But, I have come to realize that, as a feminist, I have to do more. The same guys that are plundering Iraq of their resources are the ones attacking women's rights in our country. Above and beyond opposing the atrocities, I can see that this occupation is undercutting the progress that Iraqi women have made in the last century. For example, they organized U.S. citizen Iraqi women to beat the drums for the Iraqi invasion, and the Independent Women's Forum, a right-wing American (Lynne Cheney's group) group was funded to give lectures on "Democracy" to Iraqi women. Also, there's dozens of USAID-funded so-called women's NGO's (UN affiliated Non Governmental Organizations) over there to push U.S. goals along with a few hand-outs.

We cannot work on our feminist projects here in the United States as though we're in a bubble. While we're busy accomplishing this or that reform, our leaders are lowering our status worldwide. The media has not made this connection. MADRE has put out an excellent report, Promising Democracy, Imposing Theocracy, Yifat Susskind, 2007. This report is available by mail by calling or e-mailing Nancy Khweiss at (212)627-0444 or nancy@madre.org or or she will send it to you online at http://www.iraqreport.pdf/.

Zangana educated me about the history of Iraqi women and their current situation. She helped me to put the custom of wearing a veil in the context that Iraqi women see it. I would love to have discussions of those of you who read this book about what you think about women wearing the abaya, the cloak that covers the entire woman's body. I think reading Zangana's book will enable you to see past the media's spin on this situation as it did me, and then I'd like to hear from you.

Notice to those on my Address List

2008-03-14T18:11:00.000-07:00

Sometimes I send out essays or letters to those on my Address List that I think will be interested in that particular information or piece. Now that I have a blog, I am going to place these items on my blog, because I do not want to constantly clog up my friends' inboxes, or guess whether they would be interested in what I'm sending them. I do not want my friends to think that being on my e-mail list means that they will be subjected to unsolicited stuff. I hope that what I put on my blog will be of sufficient interest to others that they will visit my blog to read the latest entry. And I especially hope that they will post their own comments so that we can get a discussion of sorts going.

Silda standing beside her husband while he apologizes

2008-03-12T16:39:00.000-07:00

The image of Silda Spitzer standing stone-faced and inexpressibly sad by her husband as he admits to the world that he patronized prostitutes and apologizes for his behavior should be put in a time capsule so that women from the far future can see twenty-first century subjugation of women in the United States (as well as the rest of the world). Here, an educated woman of high social standing faces pity and contempt.

My heart ached for Silda. I understood why she humbled herself before the merciless glare of the TV cameras. For each of us who live in a patriarchal society, the forces that cause our degradation are different, depending on a myriad of factors, and the form of that degradation is accordingly different, but ultimately, each of us, usually privately but sometimes very publicly, has to yield to these pressures.

Some women have foolishly and unimaginatively condemned Silva. "How could she allow herself to be humiliated?" Others have called it "phony" and "awful". They confuse the particular circumstances of Silva's humiliation-she being a politician's wife and no doubt part of the whole phony political scene-with the universality of her situation. Until we realize how circumscribed our lives really are and how each woman is doing what she needs to do to survive in a world that we women didn't make, we are destined to be manipulable, arrogant, and alienated from each other.

Some condemn her as a sell-out because she quit her lawyer job to advance her husband's career. Had she asked my advice in advance of doing this, I might have counseled her as to the risk she was taking, and maybe I would have lacked empathy for a woman making that choice, but in the final analysis, I really know that she had no choice, and my utmost sympathy goes out to her.