When it comes to discussing Female Sexual Dysfunction (or perhaps Dissatisfaction), all the medical jargon and scientific theories as to why women "don't like sex and are therefore dysfunctional" come out. Some doctors and pharmacists think FSD can be easily solved with a pill or patch-- no big deal. However does this "just give 'em a pill or a patch, and they'll start happily humpin' and climaxing" line of thinking conveniently gloss over the larger issue that some women are perhaps dissatisfied in their intimate relationships? What about stress from working, having to take care of children, and running errands all day? What about their past experiences with sex? Were some of them sexually abused or raped? What if the environment within their relationship and their partner make them feel uncomfortable about discussing their sexuality? What about society's stigmas around women being open and frank about their sexuality? Does a male-dominated medical and scientific field have anything to do with the lack of human-oriented (as in actually talking to women and getting them to be more open and frank) research of FSD? Don't these other concerns matter in the debate over FSD? Or are some women just doomed to remain sexually dissatisfied or dysfunctional for various reasons? Sigh-- just keep on faking it, ladies (or visit your local sex-toy store). Well Planned Parenthood has recently put out an interesting article on FSD and the issues surrounding the "controversy" of women's sexuality and women being open and discussing their sexuality.

Just the predictable, arrogant refusals of Bush Administration--which we can always count on happening--when it comes to releasing important information to the Senate Judiciary Committee concerning a judicial nominee's past records. True, we already know a great deal about Roberts' anti-Roe, anti-women's-reproductive-rights legal history, still, it is important for the Senate Judiciary Committee to know as much as possible when it comes to any nominee's past, especially when they have questionable ties to extremist groups such as the violently anti-choice and anti-women Operation Rescue group. (as I said, via Planned Parenthood)

On August 14, outspoken fundamentalist Christian leaders and their neoconservative wingnut political cohorts will be hosting yet another Justice Sunday--this time, Justice Sunday II. Also known as Pro-Christian-Theocracy Sunday. All in support of, you guessed it, *anti-choice, anti-women* Supreme Court nominee John Roberts, and other judges and politicians of faith who are supposedly "under attack" because of their faith. What_bullshit! We can expect more of the "oh, they're picking on him because he's a man of faith! Blessed are the persecuted Christians...," nonsense. It's the man's record that worries some of us, and I could care less about his faith or lack thereof. He could worship toasters for all I care, so long as he didn't impose that on the rest of us by using the Law and politics in order to do so. (via N.O.W.)

Three press releases from Feminist Majority for your Friday afternoon; seven Democratic Senators, all women, told the media at a press conference that they will push Roberts to answer specific questions dealing with abortion and his position on the issue. And what is at stake is the future of women's reproductive rights in this country.

Seven Democratic women Senators announced at a press conference yesterday that they will insist Supreme Court justice nominee John Roberts respond to questions about his position on abortion. The Senators are also demanding that Roberts clarify his position on the right to privacy, which underlies not only a woman’s right to legal abortion but also to birth control and a host of other civil rights for women and minorities. The Senators include Barbara Boxer (CA), Barbara Mikulski (MD), Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY), Patty Murray (WA), Mary Landrieu (LA), Debbie Stabenow (MI), Maria Cantwell (WA).[...]

In an effort to give the public a say in Roberts’ confirmation hearings, the seven women senators have unveiled a new website that allows the public to submit questions that they would like the Judiciary Committee to ask of Roberts. “The Supreme Court has the last word on issues that impact all of our lives….This is a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land…We want the American people to have a voice,” say the women Senators in a joint statement on the website.

For seven years, the National Organization for Women has had a court-ordered injunction that protected patients and staff of women's clinics from anti-choice protestor violence--because I suppose violence, assault, hurling hateful slurs, bombings, shootings, stalking, threats, and vandalism are all apart of the misogynist "pro-life" dogma. This injunction was known as NOW v. Scheidler, and recently the Supreme Court agreed to review the case. And what is at stake is the safety and even the very lives of those who enter, exit, and work at women's clinics all across the country.

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take another look at the nationwide injunction the National Organization for Women (NOW) obtained seven years ago against the Pro-Life Action Network (PLAN), Joe Scheidler and others, to stop violent attacks on women's health clinics.[...]

One of my favorite feminist books is Bell Hooks' 'Ain't I A Woman: Black Women and Feminism,' which greatly details the unique struggles of Black feminists during our country's most racist and sexist times. They faced both ugly racism and sexism during their fight for racial and gender equality for African-American women. Unfortunately, some times they were not welcomed by either the male leaders of the Black Civil Rights Movements or even White feminist leaders. So they formed their own activist groups dedicated to fighting both racism and sexism. Like all movements they faced hostility, but in their case from 'both sides'--Black men and White feminists. Some of the traditionalist male leaders of the Black Civil Rights Movement demanded that they submit themselves to sexist gender roles prescribed for women, and accept an inferior standing within the African-American Community. Some of the White feminist leaders of the Women's Liberation Movement trivialized the sexism Black women faced not only from Whites but from Black men as well, and even told them that racism was the only form of oppression Black women suffered. So Black feminists (and Black women in general) had a "two-fer" when it came to backlashes and discrimination. In this particular case, via Prometheus 6, we see a classic sexist hyperbole made by reactionary Black men against Black feminism and Black women's liberation from patriarchy--the very sort of misogynist defamation of Black feminist women Hooks' highlighted in her book.