The XX Factor: What women really think.

No Easy Calls in Surrogacy Disputes

A post from DoubleX writer KJ Dell'Antonia:

There are no heroes in yesterday's NYT story about "Building Babies," and there no villains, but there also didn't seem to be any easy calls to be made about who should or shouldn't be parenting the children created by the surrogacy arrangements in the cases profiled. One surrogate mother was able to remove the twins she bore from the couple who paid for the sperm and egg donations as well as the implantation procedure. Another has gained partial custody to twins she bore for her brother using his partner's sperm. In another case, it's child welfare authorities, rather than a surrogate, who are concerned that a man who arranged the birth of another set of twins by donations and surrogacy isn't a capable parent.

The question at the bottom of the first two cases is whether or not a contract to bear a child by surrogacy is enforceable, or should be. The third case is a question of whether the person who arranges a surrogate birth is automatically a parent—what rights does he or she have, and how difficult should they be to terminate? The one thing that stands out here, even amidst reasonably unbiased reporting, is that none of these cases can possibly be easy calls ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX.)

Infidelity Is Not a Feminist Priority

A post from DoubleX writer Amanda Marcotte:

Thanks, Phoebe Connelly, for speaking sense on this Jenny Sanford worship train: "It’s troubling to think that ... we’d pick a feminist icon for the simple fact that she left a bad marriage." I'm continually amazed by folks—usually folks who know nothing about feminism or actively hate it—who insist that putting a lock on the genitalia of married men should be feminist priority No. 1, as if a world that still has rape, domestic violence, forced pregnancy, unequal pay, and other major social problems for women should be put the back burner because men cheat. It goes without saying that women cheat, too. I fail to see why feminism should concern itself with the one issue where men and women are pretty much in the same boat and exert a large amount of control over their futures when it happens to them.

Oh sure, I'd be the first to say that cheating isn't a complete equal opportunity offense, or completely apolitical. Men probably still do it more than women, and probably for the most obvious reason, which is that they still have more freedom to leave a bad marriage than women do. But if feminists concentrate on achieving equality for women, the problem of men who feel entitled to cheat on long-suffering, trapped wives will take care of itself, because those women will get to walk away ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX.)

Rodarte for Target is a Major Sell-out

A post from DoubleX writer Erika Kawalek: 

I just returned from my first trip to China, the region that makes most of our clothes, to the news that the Rodarte for Target line hits stores on the 20th. The endeavor is, I think, an unfortunate misstep for Rodarte. Not that the nine looks are crummy, mind you. I rather like the leopard dress (No. 1; $49.99) and the see-through blue tulle blouse (No. 6; $24.99). But if you turn off your acquisitiveness for a sec and consider what Rodarte represents, their Target collection is a truly depressing move ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX.)

Rooting for Avatar

But, wait, Jess, Avatar is totally for the ladies! And you know how I know? James Cameron said so! In the totally rocking New Yorker profile of him, he told Dana Goodyear,

“With Avatar, I thought, Forget all these chick flicks and do a classic guys’ adventure movie, something in the Edgar Rice Burroughs mold, like John Carter of Mars—a soldier goes to Mars,” Cameron told me. “Of course, the whole movie ends up being about women, how guys relate to their lovers, mothers—there’s a large female presence,” Cameron said ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX.)

Does Sen. Baucus Deserve Cad Status?

Sen. Max Baucus has admitted to being involved with Melodee Hanes, his former state director and senior counsel. The relationship was made public because Baucus had nominated Hanes for the position of U.S. attorney in Montana. Politico has a juicy headline about the pair, "Max Baucus gave girlfriend 14K raise," but then buried deep on the second page of the story the authors mention, "the raise was on a par with the legislative director’s and less than the chief of staff’s." Both Baucus and Hanes were recently separated or divorced by the time they began the relationship, and despite the flashy ledes, the only major mistake the pair seem to have made was not disclosing the union earlier on ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX.)

Disney's Princess Tiana Is Brave and Loving

A guest post from cultural anthropologist Michael Baran:

The Princess and the Frog opens nationwide on Friday. In advance of the movie, many worried about how Disney would represent Tiana as an African-American princess in 1920s New Orleans. (Here's DoubleX on Tiana's accent and her friends and mom.) After seeing the movie, as a cultural anthropologist, I understand those critics who argue that Tiana and her fellow African-Americans are not black enough in terms of skin color or hair texture. But aside from those physical shortcomings, I find only find positive messages about Tiana. She is a waitress working hard to achieve her deceased father’s dream of owning a family restaurant, “Tiana’s Place.” She is kind, beautiful, loving, brave, and humble. Her one fault in the movie is that she is too driven; she doesn’t take enough time for love or for fun (certainly not the African-American media stereotype).

Not surprisingly, the positive portrayal is also the case with all of Disney’s recent princesses: Ariel, Jasmine, Belle, Pocahontas, and Mulan. What sets Tiana apart, unfortunately, is that she spends most of the movie as a frog ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX).

The "Glee" Finale Was Not Racist

Emily, I love when you get conspiratorial. Here are my couple of problems with your theory. If Fox did screw us in the end, they also turned the joke on themselves. The judges making the decision were parodies of Fox types—a slick, dumb anchorman and an even dumber beauty queen. Also, the ultimate end was no confirmation of heartwarming Fox family values. Neither of the two marriages is saved. Will looks into his wife's eyes and sees ... nothing, and then runs into the arms of Emma. I love watching Glee, but I recognize that most of the time it's completely incoherent, and I think that's true of its politics too. So no conspiracy here, I'd say.

Disturbed by the "Glee" Finale?

Did anyone else find the Glee finale faintly disturbing last night? I've been wondering all season what Fox is up to with this show. A sweet gay character with a great coming-out to his dad, a nice and three-dimensional kid in a wheelchair, a JAP who is actually funny, the fabulously diabolical and mannish Sue Sylvester, and the general multi-culti vibe—on Fox? But maybe this was all a set up to lure us to the finale, in which our heroes, the still mostly white, middle-class McKinley High Glee club triumphs over teams of deaf kids and poor black girls ... who cheated and who get their comeuppance. Meanwhile, gay Kurt is sidelined and even Sue seemed merely mean instead of hilarious. Am I being too sensitive, or were we set up?

Rachel Dratch and Amy Poehler Are Fed Up With "Cougars"

A post from DoubleX writer Lauren Bans:

There's a funny lady-on-funny lady interview in the December/January issue of Bust magazine. Rachel Dratch interviews longtime friend and former SNL cohort Amy Poehler on the enviable attitude of tween girls ("Girls between the ages of 9 and 13 keep reminding me of how fun it is not to care about what other people think"), Poehler's love of her son Archie, and their fantasy yupster vacation to Pinot Grigio Island. Unsurprisingly, neither of them are too fond of the term-du-jour "cougar" ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX).

Freedom of Speech for Hillary Clinton

Climategate and Sarah Palin

Emily, I think part of the answer to your great question about why Sarah Palin gets to make up facts and be taken seriously by serious publications is that serious publications are ever more terrified of antagonizing people who take Palin seriously. Better to let her speak than be seen as part of the vast media conspiracy to silence her. Whereas normal people see life as a series of complex events, Palin always sees a pattern of evil plots against her and people like her. Any attempt to marginalize her just proves she’s right.

The Strange World of Gay-Cure Activism

From DoubleX writer Amanda Marcotte:

I'm deep in unpacking hell right now, and yearning for some entertaining stuff to play on the computer to divert me while I empty boxes. Thank the powers at MSNBC, therefore, for this interview Rachel Maddow did with professional "ex-gay" Richard Cohen. Under Rachel's steady but fair line of questioning, Cohen seems increasingly bizarre, jackhammering in plugs for his Web site and trying to avoid admitting that he's not only been discredited as a professional, but that he had sex with men after he married. The comic highlight may have been when Cohen described being expelled by the American Counseling Association as a "hate crime" against him for being "ex-gay." The segment was funny but also incredibly enlightening for an 18-minute segment of cable news.

Many, if not most, Americans have probably heard of and laughed at the "ex-gay" movement, but as the segment shows, most of us probably don't know much more about them other than that they attempt to pray the gay away and usually fail. But you can't enjoy the true absurdity until you start digging in, as Maddow did. The world of ex-gays is one so thick with bad-faith rationalizations that it might constitute a whole new level of right-wing nuttery. And the fact that they offer a theory for the "cause" of homosexuality that they made up whole cloth is just the tip of the iceberg ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX).

Tiger Should Have Stayed Boring

Stay Calm About Abortion Rights

Obstacles Remain For Pro-Choicers

Apparently Sarah Palin is Allowed to Lie on the Op-Ed Page

Sarah Palin has been smart about using her Facebook page to say whatever she wants, skating right past reporters and their pesky follow-up questions. But it's another thing to read her lies and faulty reasoning on the Washington Post op-ed page, today on climate change. She whips up the hype over the leaked e-mails from climate scientists, asserts that "This scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in Copenhagen," and then gets to santimoniously intone, "I've always believed that policy should be based on sound science, not politics." Oh yes, that is surely the guiding principle of her creationism. And never mind that in the climate change context, the science is clearly and resoundingly on the side of action to head off C02 emissions, any meaningful version of which Palin opposes.

New York Woman Goes to Prison for Falsely Crying Rape

Biurny Gonzalez testified in 2006 that a man named William McCaffrey raped her after taking her for a drive late one night. McCaffrey was convicted and sent to prison for 20 years. The drive happened but the rape didn't. Gonzalez pleaded guilty to perjury Monday. She faces a prison sentence of two to seven years. She could also be deported to the Dominican Republic where she was born, though she is a legal resident in the United States.

What prompted the lie? Gonzalez says that friends she'd gone out with that night got angry with her—a fight among them broke a car window—and that "she wanted the group to feel badly." Then "the lie became too big for her to back out of." But the guilt, apparently, became too big, too. McCaffrey has been incredibly gracious in commending Gonzalez for coming forward to tell the truth. Should Gonzalez have to do every day of prison time that McCaffrey did? Will this story help deter other women who might be tempted to make up a rape story, or will the harsh penalty scare the ones who falsely cry rape (a minority, to be sure) from coming forward?

Barbara Walters' "10 Most Fascinating People" List Is Not Fascinating

A post from DoubleX writer KJ Dell'Antonia:

I'm 100 percent with you, Jessica—Walters' list is beyond lame, it's shameful. Now, if she'd called it "2009's Most Fascinating People Willing to Appear on My Television Special," it might make more sense, but even so, we're not "fascinated" by Kate Gosselin or Jenny Sanford for reasons that ought to make anyone proud. We can't look away from either of them precisely because they're NOT particularly accomplished or talented, and yet they are famous ANYWAY. Whether you aspire to fame or not, Jenny Sanford suggests that it could somehow descend upon you, and prompts us to wonder how we would appear in her stead. Kate Gosselin stands for the proposition that a gimmick (in her case, fertility treatment and a willingness to take a twist of fate all the way) rather than hard work or talent  could rocket you to stardom. Maybe we should ask ourselves why the women we click on aren't women we aspire to be, but women we imagine we could be ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX.)

Feminists Who Support Surge Are Wrong

A post from DoubleX writer Amanda Marcotte:

 Dana Goldstein's article about the few feminist groups that came out in support of a long-term occupation in Afghanistan sure has tongues wagging, as is inevitable every time a perceived gap between liberal and feminist interests opens up. Eleanor Smeal and a few other feminists object to President Obama's plan to leave Afghanistan in 18 months because they correctly believe that leaving will cause reactionary forces to swoop in and eagerly oppress women to the fullest extent possible. But the few feminists Dana covers hardly represent majority feminist opinion on this front. Many of us believe that we should leave Afghanistan sooner rather than later, even as we sympathize with Smeal's concerns.

How can I, as a good feminist, believe that we should just get out of Afghanistan, knowing full well what will happen to women when we do? It's a good question. On one level, the answer is actually quite simple: I don't buy the idea that you can shove good values such as feminism down people's throats with violence ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX.)

Solomon Island Teens Travel to Copenhagen Climate Talks

A post from DoubleX writer KJ Dell'Antonia:

Oxfam reporter Emily Gertz talked to Christina Ora, who described the effect a changing climate is already having on the Solomon Islands:

Residents of the low-lying Reef Islands are being forced to move inland to higher ground, she says, because their croplands are being inundated by seawater, their homes battered by fiercer storms and tides, and their supply of fresh water vanishing. Moving is a complicated matter, Christina says, because it puts communities into conflict for scarce and valued resources. “Back home, land is your identity,” she explains. “You are tied to that land, and your ancestors have been on that land for a long time ... (Read the rest of this article in DoubleX.)