I'M ON TWITTER!

MYbodyMYagenda

Empower Women

Here is an awesome 30 second animation Kelsey sent me. It's very simple in concept, but it hits the right note:

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Here are some images I found (mostly from the 70s) of women protesting for their right to choice.

This image is the idea I want to portray to the general public about choice (obv. mine would not alienate heterosexual men.) I want all who interact with my design to be able to grasp the feeling of having choices revoked:

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Abortion illegal? No worries; just tell them you were raped! [According to Rep. Eric Tucker, this is the loophole that will be abused.]

See his "logic" and Rep. Linda Lawson's emotional response.

Thanks, Congress. I can see just how little trust you have in women.


If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

This guy is awesome

All right, so I don't really know too much about this blogger personally but I can see through this blog entry he posted back in February that he's educated, open minded and doesn't believe that a patriarchal way is any way for society to treat all of its members equally. He sees women as people: individuals with the intelligence and right to make their own decisions. What's more is that while I know there are many men out there who support a woman's right to choose and do  not feel that they should have jurisdiction over this choice, I rarely see men taking the time to blog or speak out about it. I often see men as passive participants unless provoked in conversation.

Let me quote The Heterdox:

"Being a man I feel that no matter what my notions are on the act of abortion, it is an act and decision which is solely the concern of women as only women can have abortions. To complete this simple syllogism, as a man in this debate, I have no right at all to tell a women what to do with her body even to the extent that I may even be the one who impregnated her. This is an important distinction as it is the very idea or assumption that a man can legislate on a woman’s body from a position of patriarchal privilege...The ethical dimension of that choice resides solely with the individual woman involved and not with society. After all, she is the one who has live with her choice...Just ask yourself, if you do not have control over your own body, what do you have control over?"

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) shares her own personal experience and speaks out against cutting funds for Planned Parenthood

Not only does this member of Congress give thoughtful and succinct reasons as to why cutting Planned Parenthood's funds is not the answer, she also shares a very personal experience which I find to be extremely admirable.

Video Source: Youtube
If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Alice Bunker Stockham, MD

Alice Bunker Stockham, MD was one of the first women ever to graduate from medical school in the United States. Through her work as a doctor, she frequently treated patients who were forced into maternity which she found to be particularly distressing.

In 1903 she published Karezza: Ethics of Marriage, in which she discusses the importance of a woman's right to choose. In Chapter 7: FREE MOTHERHOOD, Stockham describes her experience visiting the Naiars, a society in India located on the Malabar Coast. She describes them as "intelligent and educated, have good schools and their houses average better than those in other parts of India..the women are the lords of creation...they are called the free women of India."

In this society, women take control of their own lives choosing their husbands who will ultimately be the father of the children they bear. If a Naiar woman deems a man to be unfit or he demonstrates after time that he isn't cut out for the responsibility of a husband and/or father, the woman's wish to sever the ties of matrimony is granted without any infiltration by religion or the government.

Karezza is "a mutual relation and it removes all vestiges of the old idea of man's dominion over woman. All the pleasure and benefits to be derived are hers as much as his."

There are a few chapters that are applicable from her book to women's reproductive rights which I will probably include as I delve into history more over the next few weeks. However, I found the following quote to be extremely compelling:

Women have demanded and received recognition in every profession
and vocation; they have eloquently appealed for the duties and
privileges of citizenship. In many states they have been allowed
through the ballot, a voice in adjusting disputed policies of city and country;
they have been given positions of responsibility and emolument;
but alas, how seldom are they accorded the freedom of choice for the
fulfillment of the inherent andnatural function of child-bearing.

Amen,  Dr. Stockham. Amen.



Information for this entry was found on www.reuniting.info
The image for this post was provided by www.wikimedia.org

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Does race make a difference in teen pregnancy?

I came across an interesting blog post by a copywriter for an interactive advertising agency in Chicago. Her name is Ryan Barrett, and while her blog covers a myriad interesting topics from politics to fashion and what it's like to be a single woman in Chicago, she posted back in 2008 during the election about the racism that exists when it comes to women's reproductive rights specifically with teen pregnancy. She includes this image and a social experiment:

1. Close your eyes and imagine Barack Obama’s beautiful 9-year old daughter, Malia. Now imagine her 7 years older, 6 months pregnant and unwed. Would she be labeled as a courageous young woman with strong family values? Would evangelicals rally behind her? Hmm… I'm thinking NO WAY, but that's just me.


2. Keep your eyes closed, but now imagine a Sarah Palin presidency with respect to reproductive rights. Roe V. Wade overturned. Abortion illegal, even in the cases of rape and incest—a position that even Cindy McCain opposes. Abstinence taught in schools (along with Creationalism! But that’s a different story). Funding cut for programs that benefit teen moms (see image below)… which would include her own daughter, Bristol. That is, if Bristol were any of the other 749,999 pregnant teens whose story wasn’t being exploited as a Family Values platform by the RNC.


She has a point, no doubt. What really spoke to me is her very last statement: And you know what stings the most? All this regression will come at the hands of one of our own, a woman. 

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Roe vs. Wade

This case is THE  most famous related to women's rights. It changed history and women's reproductive rights in the United States.

'Jane Roe', an unmarried woman, wanted to end her pregnancy safely and legally. January 22, 1973 the United States Supreme Court declared its decision in this case overturning the Texas law and for the first time, it was acknowledged that a woman's right to choose whether or not to terminate her pregnancy was included in the right to privacy. Previously, practically all states outlawed abortion with exception of cases of incest, rape, fetal anomaly and if the woman's life was at stake as a result of her pregnancy. Roe relinquished this restriction for women and made abortion services safer and more accessible to women in the 1970s through today.

In Roe vs. Wade the Supreme Court ruled that:

 "a state's interest in protecting maternal health is not compelling until the
second trimester of pregnancy and its interest in potential life is not
'compelling' until vitality, the point in pregnancy at which there is a reasonable
possibility for the sustained survival of the fetus outside the womb. A state
may - but it not required to - prohibit abortion after vitality, except when
it is necessary to protect a woman's life or health."

In coming to this decision, the Supreme Court revisited past cases that proved that the government could not interfere with certain decisions regarding procreation, marriage and other facets of family life. For example, in the case Griswold vs. Connecticut (1965), Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut was on trial for distributing contraceptives to married couples. The Supreme Court ruled that making contraceptives available to married couples was infringing upon their right to privacy. By 1972, single people were also included and provided with contraceptives.

The late 1960s were a time when many states began rethinking the abortion ban. Many groups, including health care providers, clergy members, woman's rights activists lobbied their state legislatures to overturn bans and/or limits on abortion. Alaska, Hawaii, New York and Washington repealed abortion bans between 1967 and 1973.


Information for this blog post was provided by ppfa.org
If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Margaret Sanger - "My Fight for Birth Control"

Anyone who is pro-choice and supports a woman's right to choose should know Margaret Sanger. Essentially, she is the reason Planned Parenthood exists, and women of low income and/or no health insurance today can get the necessary health benefits to stay healthy. Planned Parenthood provides women (and men, too!) with many services ranging from mammograms to pap smears, STD/STI testing and counseling. For the record, abortions account for 2-3% of their services. Perhaps that bears repeating; abortions account for 2-3% of the services provided by Planned Parenthood. As stated on the PPFA website, "more than 90 percent is preventive, primary care, which helps prevent unintended pregnancies through contraception, reduce the spread of sexually transmitted infections through testing and treatment, and screen for cervical and other cancers." With this in mind, doesn't that seem a little insane to stop funding for this organization when a majority of their services are NOT abortions? Let's go back to the beginning when this truly admirable woman make her mark in history.

In the 1880's, the Cornstock Law was in effect which was an attempt at controlling pornography and resulted in limited women's access to birth control due to the obscenity associated with pornography. Women were at a greater risk of potentially risky pregnancies. Margaret Sanger was a nurse and in the 1900 she worked at some of the worst slums in NYC. She assisted poor women in labor, where she became painfully aware of the negative impact women suffered as a result of poor health and welfare while they had no access to birth control. She witnessed illness and fatality of women due to unsafe abortions to avoid having more children. By law, Sanger was unable to educate these women on how to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Eventually, she decided to take action and began to educate herself on birth control, overturn the Cornstock Law and lobby Congress to allow doctors to prescribe birth control.

In 1914 Sanger created a magazine called Woman Rebel which encouraged women to think for themselves, and promoted family planning. Under the Cornstock Law this information was illegal to send via mail. As a result, Sanger was charged with obscenity. She fled to England and returned to the United States when the charges were dropped. Upon her return to New York she founded the National Birth Control League which later became Planned Parenthood.

Sanger opened a birth control clinic in Brooklyn in 1916 which was promptly shut down and Sanger was placed in a workhouse for 30 days. Upon her release, she reopened the clinic in her own home. Her lobbying and hard work resulted in the American Medical Association reversing the Cornstock Law, and permitting doctors to distribute birth control in 1936.

Margaret let the movement called "Voluntary Motherhood" which gave women to access to birth control as well as education on parenting "unter the most safe, humane and dignified conditions." It is unfortunate that while the idea behind the movement was a positive one, it was affiliated and combined with Darwin's theory (survival of the fittest) and eugenics to argue that birth control was necessary for the "unfit" to discontinue reproducing. At the time, the unfit were considered low income and immigrant populations as well as the "feeble minded" and criminals. With this argument, voluntary motherhood won the support of those needed to get things done.

Clearly, Planned Parenthood's stance has come a long way since the days of inception. Millions of people, regardless of age, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity or gender have benefited from the services and resources provided by this organization.

While I don't necessarily agree with the reason as to why the ball got rolling so to speak, I'm glad progress eventually moved past eugenics and now all who enter Planned Parenthood are accepted, guided and served with open arms.


[The information found for this entry can be credited to Women's Voices, Feminist Visions.]


*If you have found any information to be untrue, or feel there is some information that is pertinent and was missed, please feel free to comment.*
Image taken from: www.nndb.com
If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Celebrities & Reproductive Rights

I began searching for  celebrities who take stances on reproductive rights. As if I needed another reason for House to be one of my favorite shows - I remembered this ad I saw a while back starring Lisa Edelstein.

Pro-Choice

Lisa Edelstein (MoveOn.org)

According to an interview with WashingtonPost.com (written by Liz Kelly)  Edelstein had the following to say about reproductive rights:

"My opinion's no more important than anyone else's. It's just that I have the ability 

to have access to more ears when I speak because of my job."

I plan to research more on this topic, but also came across Morgan Fairchild, and I saw Kathleen Turner speak at the Planned Parenthood rally I attended in NYC back on February 26th. 

With regard to pro-life celebs, I am aware that there are many in this category as well. However, on one website I saw Mel Gibson listed as a supporter. I don't even think this is worth addressing when it comes from an openly sexist anti-Semite. Pro-lifers, you can KEEP this celebrity on your list of supporters!

More to come on this topic.


If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Not My Tax Dollars: We Asked, You Answered

This is a pretty great video clip.

The piece about it costing $20,000 in taxes each time a person is discharged from the armed forces due to their sexual preference is ridiculous. If a) there weren't so many homophobes out there, and b) WE WEREN'T FIGHTING AN UNNECESSARY WAR then there would be no one to send home at all.

I'm just sayin...

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose

adj \(ˌ)prō-ˈchȯis\

Pro \ˈprō\

in favor of, or supporting

Choice \ˈchȯis\

the opportunity or privilege of choosing freely <freedom of choice>

The reason I felt it necessary to define these words is simply due to the fact that I often feel I am labeled as "pro-abortion" when I am actually pro-choice. Pro-CHOICE means exactly what it means; each individual faced with the situation of being pregnant has full jurisdiction over what she will do with her own body. This doesn't mean that she is FORCED to get an abortion, it doesn't mean she's looked down upon for having a child or shamed for getting pregnant. It simply means that she has the choice of what she wants to do in that particular situation, given her own set of personal circumstances. What she does and the situation she is faced with is NO ONE'S BUSINESS but hers. 

Pro-choice supporters don't do cartwheels, sing and dance at the thought of experiencing an abortion, or at the thought of others having one. It is not a situation that most people take lightly, and it doesn't make pro-choice individuals heartless or evil. Regardless of pro-life attempts at forcing their ideological propaganda down everyone else's throat using fear tactics, I stand firmly that each woman should have the right to choose what to do with her own body.

I use the words 'ideological propaganda' because quite honestly I feel that's exactly what it is when people try to use something like religion and twist it around to try to scare people into joining their side. Religion is a sacred thing to many people, as it should be. However, what I find absolutely unbelievable is how so many of these people think that THEIR religion is the ONLY religion, and that everyone should follow its "teachings." I use quotes around that word because I feel there are many ways in which people choose to interpret their lessons and books of prayer to fit their own narrow minded and bigoted agenda.  Are we really to believe that "God" intended for his/her followers to be such hypocritical, misogynist human beings? I think not.

All I'm saying is, if you don't "believe" in abortion (I still have no idea what that phrase is supposed to mean, but I hear pro-lifers using it all the time - it's not a system of beliefs, it's a stance on a human rights issue) don't get one! You have the right to do whatever you want with your body because it's YOURS. What other human's do with regard to reproductive rights or anything else is NO CONCERN of yours.

I'm proud to be pro-choice; not pro-abortion.

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Pro Life Campaigns

McCain, 2008

Woodrow Wilcox Pro-Life Campaign

(running against Pete Visclosky for democratic candidate for first congressional district, Indiana)

2/22/10

Abigail Reilly, 2006

(no idea who this woman is)

This is just more proof as to how INSANELY CRAZY some pro-lifers are:

May 7, 2006

This one is particularly graphic. It's difficult to take this video seriously when there are fundamental grammatical and spelling  errors. It definitely undermines the entire effort on the part of the person who put it together. Finally, all these images do is gross me out. That's it.

This guy was under "Abortion is Wrong" seach, but clearly is being extremely sarcastic. I think it's funny.

These are a few of the videos and campaigns that I found. It was no surprise to me that, especially the videos created by crazy idealogical wackos, try to prey on peoples' fears with guilt and the use of words like 'slaughter.' 

I still like my idea of an interactive piece in which some objects (pair of hands, republican elephant, etc.) remains in contact with the figure mentioned in a previous post.

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Interactive verses User Interface Design

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.


With all the research that I am doing for thesis (admittedly out of order) I figured that one main point I need to distinguish about my design solution is which route I will take.

Interactive Design


According to use-design.com, interaction design aims to define and facilitate interaction between human beings by means of a product or a service. It focuses on the possibilities to create and encourage behavior facilitating an exchange between people.


We can therefore see interaction design on two levels:
. either between a user and a system;
. or between different users, in which case we speak about human interaction or “social interaction”.

Interaction design focuses on human behavior. It heavily leans on the material gathered during the observation phase. In general these observations are conducted by human factors specialists.  In the conceptual phase interaction design aims at pushing back the limits of known cognitive systems and to offer an optimized user experience.

Interaction design is not necessarily related to technological aspects, contrary to user interface design. It can touch upon a whole variety of means and carriers, not necessarily information technology.

User Interface Design

(Again) according to use-design.com, user interface design aims to enhance the visual, usability and technological qualities of an interface. It adds to the satisfaction of the person using a product or a service.


Six main qualities of a successful user interface:

1. usefulness: are user’s needs satisfied by the interface functionality?
2. learnability: how easy is it for the user to fulfill basic tasks when using the system for the first time?
3. efficiency: after the user knows the interface, how fast is s/he able to accomplish the given tasks?
4. ease of memorization: when the user returns to the interface after a while, how easily does s/he find the various functions again?
5. reliability: is the interface conceived in such a way that the user makes as few mistakes as possible?
6. user-friendliness : does the user like using the interface?

More attacks on women's reproductive rights

As we become painfully aware of how many Republicans are in office attempting to take reproductive rights from women, it is clear that something needs to be done. Check out Florida's attempts to retract this right on Jezebel.com:

http://jezebel.com/#!5782004/florida-passes-new-bills-to-destroy-reproductive-rights

Here is what one reader had to say about the topic:

"I guess the only way to make sure the Republicans leave my uterus alone is to make it a corporation."

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Memorable Ad Campaigns

I polled my friends on facebook, and here are some of the campaigns they were unable to forget:

Mentose, the freshmaker!
why it's memorable: catchy and/or funny

Make 7UP yours!
why it's memorable: funny

Huggies Jeans Diapers
why it's memorable: creepy

Optimum Triple Play

why it's memorable: annoying

My Life. My Card (Amex)
why it's memorable: celebrity?

Freecreditreport.com
why it's memorable: annoying

iPad
why it's memorable: the song is INCREDIBLY annoying

Old Spice guy

why it's memorable: hilarious!

Conclusion: While I don't really see how I can take the humorous route with my design solution, I might consider taking the annoying route. However, I don't want to stir up annoyed feelings with regard to my design, but with regard to the bigger picture and empower people to want to raise their voices as a result of the experience they have with said design.


If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Judith Jarvis Thompson: A Defense of Abortion

Kelsey sent me a link to this essay, and this quote was of particular interest to me:

"Perhaps a pregnant woman is vaguely felt to have the status of house...But if the woman houses the child, it should be remembered that she is a person who houses it."

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Snibbe Interactive

I found this interactive video on the website for snibbeinterative.com. This company looks very interesting, and seeing this video definitely sparked some ideas for what I'd like to create for my design solution.

Still out on the streets of a city (I'm thinking of NYC right now) it would be amazing to have an interavtive piece in which a person first indicates their sex by a choice on the screen, then their body is scanned, the reproductive organs are shown (the rest of the body is merely an outline) and a pair of hands, or GOP elephants follow the figure around no matter where they move, attempting to physically gain control of their reproductive organs.


For my own information:
Snibbe Interactive
1073 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94103
+1 415 822 144








If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

interactive pieces

In class today I got some more direction as to what more I should be researching as I move forward in my design thesis process.

Here is an example of an interesting interactive design that promotes the collection of change for a charity in London, 2009:

This clip is from 2008. This man is at Hartford airport, interacting with projections of umbrellas made of rose petals:

Apple interactive in Berlin:

Adobe CS3 interactive piece - Union Sq, NYC:

Not sure where this is from, but I suggest listening to this on mute. The concept is great, but the cameraman's laugh is pretty annoying:

And this one incorporates random human sounds:

http://vimeo.com/5269088

(made with open frameworks.)

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Great video about sexually active teens and young adults (i.e. We need Planned Parenthood!!)

If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Insanely sick bill: Women are to blame for miscarriages and should be punished.

I'm sure most of you who follow current events have had the misfortune of hearing about this preposterous excuse for legislation. Here is the representative who wrote it very clearly through his lens of intense hate for women:

Bobby Franklin (R-GA)

According to this gem of a politician, every woman who suffers a miscarriage should be criminalized and put to death.

What's even more frightening is that this legislation was already attempted in Utah and (shocker!!!) shut down. Hmm, maybe that's because it's certifiably INSANE to blame a woman for a biological process like this that is out of their control.

I searched him on Youtube to attempt to listen to his argument, and it's just as I'd expected; a slew of bible thumping, one sided beliefs that have nothing to do with any American who isn't a religious nut job. All it accomplished for me was a glazed over expression after about 30 seconds of listening to it.

Bobby, a) get some SERIOUS psychological help to deal with your extreme hatred of women, and b) educate yourself on something besides the bible.




Video Source: Youtube
If you are just beginning to read my blog, here is the first post that briefly describes the purpose.

Thesis

I'm currently a Graduate student at Pratt Institute, pursuing a Masters degree in Communications Design, with an emphasis on digital. For my Thesis, I plan to create a design solution that will educate and empower people to take action to ensure that women's reproductive rights are not relinquished.

In my blog I will report my findings specifically with regard to interactive design and inspiration, and the topic of reproductive rights including current events, case studies,  and history.

To be clear: I am pro-choice.
To be additionally clear: I am open to comments expressing other points of view, but please keep it at science and something I can relate to. I respect the institution of religion and each person's right to practice according to his/her own choosing. However, I do not currently practice anything (as can be said for many Americans) and being that there are many religions practiced all over the world, I cannot relate to a Christian argument any more than a Buddhist can relate to an Atheist's argument.



Thanks, and I look forward to learning more through this process.

Hillary