Ever wish you could meet Cyndi Lauper — or Tegan and Sara or Margaret Cho? Or ask Katha Pollitt or Kate Harding or Rebecca Traister to edit your manuscript? Or wear the iconic blazer Princeton Professor Melissa Harris Lacewell appears in on “The Rachel Maddow Show”?

You’ll have your chance today — but only today — to make these and other dreams come true.

Head on over to the Women, Action & Media auction, where you’ll find 53 amazing items, including:

* dinner with Jessica Valenti

* autographed guitars from Ani DiFranco, Aimee Mann, Emmylou Harris and Patty Griffin

* an original DTWOF comic strip by Alison Bechdel

* a customized recipe by Lisa Jervis

* lunch with Baratunde Thurston and a tour of the offices of “The Onion”

* Sarah Haskins records your outgoing voicemail message

* signed books and posters by the likes of bell hooks, Marjane Satrapi, Jane Hamilton, Suzan-Lori Parks, Jennifer Weiner and Venus and Serena Williams

* much, much more

WAM! — the annual conference turned national organization that is fighting for gender justice in media — is raising for money for its launch as a national organization, with WAM! chapters in all 50 states and beyond.

It’s a great cause — and you can do your holiday shopping. Seriously, there are great deals to be had. And no one else will give (or get) the same gift!

Bidding ends at 9 p.m. EST. Good luck!

New York Times columnist Gail Collins appeared on The Colbert Report earlier this week to discuss her new book, “When Everything Changed: The Amazing Journey of American Women from 1960 to the Present.”

in 1960, women were prohibited from serving on juries and it was perfectly legal to not hire women because of their sex. The book opens with the story of a woman who was kicked out of traffic court for daring to wear pants (and she was there to pay her boss’s ticket).

One of today’s biggest problems, said Collins, is that “half the workforce is female now, and we still haven’t figured out who’s supposed to take care of the kids.”

Colbert appeared shocked. “The women take care of the kids,” he said.

The reason, he added, is simply biological.

“I cannot produce milk. I’ve tried. It’s painful and it doesn’t work.”

Enjoy.

Under the unfortunate headline, “Which Side Are You On?,” the Washington Post has published an interesting article about the struggle to define gender and how that struggle has played out in legal cases around the country.

The article discusses the now well-known story of 18-year-old South African runner Caster Semenya, “who has been put through ‘gender verification’ amid suspicion about her muscular physique and low voice.” Testing was ordered after Semenya’s won the 800 meters at the World Athletics Championships back in August in record time. Though physical exams indicated that Semenya has both male and female characteristics, family members stressed her gender is not in question.

“This is a woman who was raised a female. She will always be female, no matter what people say,” said Semenya’s uncle.

Semenya’s case may be unique for the publicity it attracted — including embarrassing scrutiny and harsh comments from her fellow runners. Yet private battles are waged every day over issues such as sex designation on a driver’s license, or the legality of marriage when a person is transgender.

“These cases have left judges, doctors and athletics officials — those tasked with drawing a bright line between the sexes — struggling to find a reliable gender test, some trait that divides all men from all women,” writes David A. Fahrenthold. “But scientists say they don’t have one yet.”

That’s because “male” and “female” is not always an either/or classification. The story details the perhaps surprisingly high occurrence — one in every 100 people — of “disorder of sex development,” which refers to “congenital conditions in which development of chromosomal, gonadal, or anatomical sex is atypical.” Conditions may include androgen insensitivity syndrome, in which people do not respond to testosterone despite the presence of XY chromosomes. (The continuum of AIS is explained more fully at the Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome Support Group; here is AISSG’s U.S. chapter. Our Bodies Ourselves also recommends the Accord Alliance, which offers a useful glossary and identifies advocacy and support groups for specific DSDs.)

Alice Dreger, a professor of clinical medical humanities and bioethics at Northwestern University, tells the Post that officials could look at whether an athlete was raised as a boy or a girl, or they could look at some laboratory threshold, such as the amount of male hormones in an athlete’s blood.

Then she delivers the best quote in the piece: “To me, it’s no different than deciding where the foul line is … The line is not drawn by nature, it’s a line we draw on nature.”

Gender, after all, is as much a social construction as it is a biologically determined “fact.” And it can be as much of a performance as it is an irrevocable identity.

A tangent: Visit Dreger’s website. She wrote a terrific “Media Advisory on Sex Verification” to help reporters understand the issues at play in Semenya’s case. It’s a very accessible FAQ that should be required reading for all. For more on the importance of language, here’s her summary of a 2007 talk delivered at the Kinsey Institute on the history and politics of the term “intersex”; the adaptation of alternative terms, including “disorders of sex development”; and the whole trouble with nomenclature.

As debates over sex and gender identity continue, the state you live in may determine your gender. The Post story includes these examples:

In the D.C. suburbs, for instance, many authorities have decided on a simple test: Surgery makes the gender. In Maryland and Virginia, for instance, officials will alter the sex on a driver’s license if presented with proof of sex-reassignment surgery. The District, by contrast, doesn’t inquire about surgery: It requires that a medical provider or social worker attest that a person has a new “gender identity.”

But nationally, legal experts say that some courts have balked at the very idea of a sex change. Some state appeals courts have said someone born a man remains so, no matter how their bodies have changed.

In one 2002 case — voiding a marriage between a man and a transgender woman — the Kansas Supreme Court based its gender test in part on . . . Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary. Male, the dictionary said, meant “designating or of the sex that fertilizes the ovum and begets offspring: opposed to female.”

By that logic, the court said, the transgendered woman was not female, at least not in Kansas.

“Judges are very anxious; you can feel their anxiety,” said Katherine Franke, a director of the Gender and Sexuality Law Program at Columbia University Law School. “They don’t want to pick a rule, because they know it’s arbitrary.”

Women in the developing world are the focus of the Aug. 23 edition of The New York Times Magazine.

The main feature is an essay adapted from a new book by Times columnist Nicholas Kristoff and former Times correspondent Sheryl Wudunn. Titled “Half the Sky: Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women Worldwide,” the book and its companion website look at three major abuses against women: sex trafficking and forced prostitution; gender-based violence including honor killings and mass rape; and maternal mortality. Here’s the intro:

In the 19th century, the paramount moral challenge was slavery. In the 20th century, it was totalitarianism. In this century, it is the brutality inflicted on so many women and girls around the globe: sex trafficking, acid attacks, bride burnings and mass rape.

Yet if the injustices that women in poor countries suffer are of paramount importance, in an economic and geopolitical sense the opportunity they represent is even greater. “Women hold up half the sky,” in the words of a Chinese saying, yet that’s mostly an aspiration: in a large slice of the world, girls are uneducated and women marginalized, and it’s not an accident that those same countries are disproportionately mired in poverty and riven by fundamentalism and chaos. There’s a growing recognition among everyone from the World Bank to the U.S. military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff to aid organizations like CARE that focusing on women and girls is the most effective way to fight global poverty and extremism. That’s why foreign aid is increasingly directed to women. The world is awakening to a powerful truth: Women and girls aren’t the problem; they’re the solution.

Change, however, may not be that simple. In a separate article, “The Daughter Deficit,” Tina Rosenberg probes why discrimination against girls persists even among wealthier, more developed areas:

To be sure, development can eventually lead to more equal treatment for girls: South Korea’s birth ratios are now approaching normality. But policymakers need to realize that this type of development works slowly and mainly indirectly, by softening a son-centered culture. The solution is not to abandon development or to stop providing, say, microcredit to women. But these efforts should be joined by an awareness of the unintended consequences of development and by efforts, aimed at parents, to weaken the cultural preference for sons.

Other stories in this magazine issue look at women and philanthropy; a Q & A with Secretary of State Hilary Clinton on plans to push women’s rights issues on the international stage; a reporter returns to a school for girls in Afghanistan that was the site of a violent attack; an interview with Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the only female head of state in Africa; a look at the “feminist hawk” position that advocates the use of force to aid women; and a poignant “Lives” column that concludes with an HIV-positive 16-year-old’s simple plea: a safe place to be a girl.

Plus: If you want to share the work that you’re doing to educate and empower women, Kristof is collecting personal stories on his blog that describe efforts by individuals and organizations worldwide. Some of the submissions will be highlighted in future columns; three winners will be chosen to receive a signed copy of the book. You can also submit photos that capture the theme of women’s empowerment.

Clinton Prioritizes Women’s Rights: “Clinton intends to press governments on abuses of women’s rights and make women more central in U.S. aid programs,” writes Mary Beth Sheridan at the Washington Post. “But her efforts go beyond the marble halls of government and show how she is redefining the role of secretary of state. Her trips are packed with town-hall meetings and visits to micro-credit projects and women’s dinners. Ever the politician, Clinton is using her star power to boost women who could be her allies.”

“It’s just a constant effort to elevate people who, in their societies, may not even be known by their own leaders,” Clinton told WaPo. “My coming gives them a platform, which then gives us the chance to try and change the priorities of the governments.”

Whole Foods Fight: I’ll be posting a more studious healthcare round-up, but for the moment: The New York Times Opinionator blog did a nice job pulling together comments from around the web about the anti-government healthcare reform op-ed written by Whole Foods CEO John Mackey that has some shoppers calling for a boycott.

One commenter recalls a food boycott from years ago that was more win-win: “I *loved* the Domino’s boycott way back when. Pro-choice cred PLUS I don’t have to eat cardboard pizza!”

Our Genders, Our Rights: The summer edition of On The Issues Magazine discusses a topic that the editors describe as “both utterly fundamental and wildly revolutionary: gender norms and gender identity.”

Among the many offerings: “How a Feminist Found Her Sexism,” by Helen Boyd (with image at left by Gavin Rouille); “Trans Health Care Is A Life and Death Matter,” by Eleanor J. Bader; and “Virtual Switching, or Playing Games?” by Georgia Kral.

The Gender Politics of “Mad Men”: Cheers to Feministing for making Mondays that much better with a weekly feminist analysis of the popular AMC series “Mad Men,” and to RH Reality Check for hosting an ongoing “Mad Men” salon. And don’t miss Crystal Merritt’s insider perspective, as an ad woman and feminist.

New Column, Great Advice: Jaclyn Friedman is one of our favorite people for many reasons. She runs the annual Women, Action & Media conference as part of her role at Center for New Words; she co-edited, with Jessica Valenti, “Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and a World Without Rape“; and now she’s writing a weekly column for Amplify Your Voice, a project of Advocates for Youth.

Read Friedman’s “Open Letter to Miley Cyrus,” which should be shared with all 16-year-olds.

Ovarian Cancer Surgery and Fertility: According to a new study published in the journal Cancer, five-year survival rates for stage 1 ovarian cancer patients were the same for patients who had both ovaries removed and women who had only the cancerous ovary removed, reports the L.A. Times. Though ovarian cancer occurs most often in postmenopausal women, up to 17% of ovarian cancers occur in women 40 or younger and that rate is believed to be rising.

Plus: Chicago Tribune health columnist Julie Deardoff writes: ”One of every 1,000 pregnant women in the U.S. has cancer, a relatively rare but stark convergence of life and death. For these women, treatment is possible. But it comes with a host of terrifying decisions for the family.”  The story focuses on Sarah Joanis, who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer at age 26.

“Menopause, the Musical”: “This isn’t retro; it’s just old,” Anita Gates writes in The New York Times of the eight-year-old musical that, despite corny songs and stereotypes, has been produced in 14 countries and in more than 200 American cities. “Who calls menopause the change of life? Edith Bunker, maybe, on the 1970s sitcom ‘All in the Family.’ And she would have been in her 80s by now. Women who read ‘Our Bodies, Ourselves’ in their youth don’t use euphemisms.”

The musical is underway at the South Orange Performing Arts Center, and while Gates is clearly not enamored with the premise, she is a fan of the current staging and cast: ”And thanks to a shift from self-deprecation to self-actualization (and a few nice costume changes), by the end, against all odds, the show is actually exhilarating.”

by Morgan Clark
Our Bodies Ourselves intern

The first day of my internship with Our Bodies Ourselves began with a fascinating web conference on reproductive and environmental health, organized by Reproductive Health Technologies Project. Presenters from Planned Parenthood of Connecticut, Asian Communities for Reproductive Justice, and MomsRising spoke about their organizations’ efforts in addressing “increasing evidence that industrial chemicals are linked to infertility and a host of negative health outcomes such as early puberty, miscarriage, and reproductive cancers.”

During this web conference I learned about a new report (pdf) published by the Oakland-based Asian Communities for Reproductive Justice (ACRJ). The latest volume in their Momentum Series, “Looking Both Ways: Women’s Lives at the Crossroads of Reproductive Justice and Climate Justice,” highlights the interconnectedness of reproductive health issues and the climate crisis.

The report offers an insightful framework for approaching issues that disproportionately affect vulnerable people, particularly women living in poverty and women of color. An example is the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, which, among many of the disastrous outcomes, saw a rise in sexual abuse and a decline in access to reproductive health services.

The report finds that while Hurricane Katrina “brought shape to the emerging understanding of women and climate change in the United States, the scope of the climate crisis demands much more: that we not only address how women will be impacted— and how to protect their rights — but also how women’s lives are wrapped up in both the causes of, and potential solutions to, the climate crisis.”

Looking at how women’s lives are binded to some of the causes of the climate crisis, the paper also analyzes the effects of everyday workplace exposure to certain chemicals on women’s health and fertility. It underscores the importance of using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) research to determine “the impact of the entire life cycle of a chemical or material on the environment or a particular aspect of the environment – such as energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, or water contamination.”

An LCA study generally looks at the following phases: raw material acquisition, materials manufacture, production, use/reuse/maintenance, and waste management. In other words, it is important to consider the environmental impacts of how a chemical was made, distributed and disposed of, as well as look at how a chemical’s use in a workplace affects the health of a worker. For more information, the EPA has a website on Life Cycle Assessment Research.

The nail salon industry in California is one of the examples cited, because it is a fast-growing industry that exposes workers to toxic chemicals, some unregulated, that contribute to global warming. The ACRJ’s POLISH program works with the nail care industry to improve the health of nail care workers and to reduce negative environmental impacts. Further,

[a] reproductive justice analysis of working conditions in nail salons directs improvements not only to making the nail salon environment one that is conducive to good health, but also to increasing wages, improving benefits, reducing working hours, reducing harassment and discrimination, and creating more educational opportunities for workers.

ACRJ’s important work, with POLISH and its other programs, makes “clear that the preservation of the planet remains intimately connected to protecting the reproductive capacities and self-determination of marginalized communities.”

I found the ACRJ’s report enlightening. I appreciated its broad perspective on reproductive health and the causes and effects of climate change. As someone concerned with the rapid decline of our environment, and its effects on our health, I appreciate the efforts of the ACRJ and the other organizations that presented during the web conference in addressing these issues.

Morgan Clark is a PhD student in public policy at the University of Massachusetts, Boston.

Road to the Supreme Court: It may not have been great theater, but the confirmation hearing of Judge Sonia Sotomayor did offer fire(fighters) without brimstone; a lesson on the dangers of nunchucks; the theory of neutral man’s burden; and many, many words.

Through it all, Sotomayor displayed nothing but “intelligence, grace and patience.” Melissa Harris-Lacewell describes the public humiliation Sotomayor endured as an Elizabeth Eckford moment.

It appears that  Sotomayor will be confirmed — with at least some Republican support — as the third woman and the first Latina on the Supreme Court. But as Frank Rich notes, Republicans still have some ’splainin’ to do:

Southern senators who relate every question to race, ethnicity and gender just assumed that their unreconstructed obsessions are America’s and that the country would find them riveting. Instead the country yawned. The Sotomayor questioners also assumed a Hispanic woman, simply for being a Hispanic woman, could be portrayed as The Other and patronized like a greenhorn unfamiliar with How We Do Things Around Here.  [...]

It’s the American way that we judge people as individuals, not as groups. And by that standard we can say unequivocally that this particular wise Latina, with the richness of her experiences, would far more often than not reach a better conclusion than the individual white males she faced in that Senate hearing room. Even those viewers who watched the Sotomayor show for only a few minutes could see that her America is our future and theirs is the rapidly receding past.

Plus: How many words, you ask? Politico crunched the numbers and determined that between the start of the confirmation hearing on Monday and the end of the senators’ primary questioning and comments on Thursday, senators out-talked Sotomayor by about a third.

“And Republicans – clearly more leery of the Democratic-nominated Sotomayor than those on the other side of the aisle — spent the most time with Sotomayor. The average Republican had 5,908 words to the Democrats 4,217,” writes Patrick Gavin.

Millions More Like Her: Regina Benjamin, the new surgeon general nominee, attended a Catholic elementary school and attends mass regulary. Her numerous honors include an award from Pope Benedict XVI and another inspired by Mother Teresa. But — and here’s the shocking part — Benjamin, a family physician who has spent her life providing health care to the rural poor, supports abortion rights.

Not so shocked? Neither is this Catholic school grad. But this Washington Post story plays it up, noting that Benjamin’s position on reproductive health services “potentially could put her at odds with the Catholic Church.”

The story goes on to note:

Those who know Benjamin said her beliefs will not interfere with her role as surgeon general, which would include acting as the country’s chief health educator. If confirmed, she would lead the 6,000-member uniformed Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, issue public health messages and advise the president and health and human services secretary.

“We all have our religions, but when you speak as the surgeon general to the American people, it’s not about your religion,” said David Satcher, a former surgeon general under President Bill Clinton. Satcher taught community health to Benjamin at the Morehouse School of Medicine in Atlanta. “I don’t see why the surgeon general has to get involved in a discussion about abortion.”

Asylum for Battered Women: The pathway is a narrow corridor with strict conditions, but the Obama administration, reversing a Bush administration stance, has “opened the way for foreign women who are victims of severe domestic beatings and sexual abuse to receive asylum in the United States,” reports The New York Times. Julia Preston writes:

In addition to meeting other strict conditions for asylum, abused women will need to show that they are treated by their abuser as subordinates and little better than property, according to an immigration court filing by the administration, and that domestic abuse is widely tolerated in their country. They must show that they could not find protection from institutions at home or by moving to another place within their own country.

The administration laid out its position in an immigration appeals court filing in the case of a woman from Mexico who requested asylum, saying she feared she would be murdered by her common-law husband there.

According to court documents filed in San Francisco, the man repeatedly raped her at gunpoint, held her captive, stole from her and at one point tried to burn her alive when he learned she was pregnant.

Excess Pounds, Longer Life?: It wasn’t so long ago that we heard calorie restriction was linked to longevity. Now it seems the scales have shifted: A new report, published online in the journal Obesity, found that people who are moderately overweight live longer.

“[W]hy is it so hard to believe, even in the face of such evidence, that being fat’s not exactly a death sentence?” asks Washington Post columnist Jennifer LaRue Huget.

On another note, looking at the journal’s website, I wish access wasn’t restricted to an article touted on the homepage as an “important review” of weight discrimination and the stigma of obesity.  The “comprehensive update” features “sections on stigma-reduction research and legal initiatives to combat weight discrimination”; alas, only the citation is available without charge.

Plus: Also see Huget’s column on locally grown food. Miriam at Feministing has more on food politics.

Google AdWords Won’t Advertise Abortion: Lori Adelman of the International Women’s Health Coalition writes that as a result of policy changes, Google AdWords, the search engines’s advertising network, now prohibits ads for abortion services in more than a dozen countries, including Brazil, France, Mexico, Poland, and Taiwan.

“Google’s rationale behind disallowing ads in these particular countries, whose abortion laws range from conservative (Argentina, Brazil ) to more liberal by comparison (France, Italy), is shrouded in mystery: the spokeswoman deftly avoided answering my question about how the countries were chosen,” writes Adelman at Feministing. She includes an email exchange she had with a Google representative.

IWHC has an action alert over at its blog that encourages emailing Google.

Plus: Frances Kissling, a visiting scholar at the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania and the former president of Catholics for a Free Choice, wrote a provocative piece at Salon last month that asks whether it’s ever appropriate to say “no” to a woman seeking an abortion.

Nurse Stereotypes Are Bad for Health: Theresa Brown, an oncology nurse, writes about how popular culture misrepresents nurses and the work that they do. She recommends a new book — “Saving Lives: Why the Media’s Portrayal of Nurses Puts Us All at Risk,” by Sandy Summers and Harry Jacobs Summers.

“Saving Lives” is an important book because it so clearly delineates how ubiquitous negative portrayals of nursing are in today’s media, particularly three common stereotypes of nurses — the “Naughty Nurse,” the “Angel” and the “Battle Axe.” They argue that these images of nursing degrade the profession by portraying nurses as either vixens, saints or harridans, not college-educated health care workers with life and death responsibilities.

There’s a media advocacy website connected with the book: TruthAboutNursing.org.

Sex, Kids & Reality: Amy Richards and Jennifer Baumgardner’s new book-in-progress — “The Family Bed: Is There Sex After Kids?” — focuses on the sex lives of parents after having children. As research for the book, they’re looking for folks to complete this survey on sex and parenthood.

When Wives Don’t Know: The New York Times Room for Debate Club brought together an all-female panel to discuss modern marriage. The central issue? Political wives who said they didn’t know about their spouses’ infidelities and Ruth Madoff, who said she didn’t know her husband of 50 years was practicing massive fraud.

Sales Outpace Data in Rush for Natural Remedies: “In 2002, when the initial findings of a National Institutes of Health study — known as the Women’s Health Initiative project — suggested that women on conventional hormone therapy were at greater risk for heart disease, cancer, stroke and blood clotting, the market for alternative treatments soared,” writes Camille Sweeney at The New York Times.

“There are now more than 500 products that purport to relieve symptoms associated with menopause, including capsules, tablets, teas, gels and creams. In the United States, the dietary supplement market associated with menopause has grown to $337 million in 2007 (the last year tabulated) from $211 million in 1999, according to the Nutrition Business Journal, a trade publication.”

“Beauty” Aces Talent at Wimbledon: Anyone else watch women’s tennis at Wimbledon last week? Read how looks came under consideration in determining which matches were played in the premiere Centre Court. Slender white women with long hair clearly had the advantage.

What Would Buffy Do?: See what happens when our favorite heroine takes on Edward from “Twilight” in a mash-up not to be missed.

“My re-imagined story was specifically constructed as a response to Edward, and what his behavior represents in our larger social context for both men and women,” creator Jonathan McIntosh explains in a blog post at Women in Media & News. He continues:

More than just a showdown between The Slayer and the Sparkly Vampire, it’s also a humorous visualization of the metaphorical battle between two opposing visions of gender roles in the 21ist century. [...]

In the end the only reasonable response was to have Buffy stake Edward — not because she didn’t find him sexy, not because he was too sensitive or too eager to share his feelings — but simply because he was possessive, manipulative, and stalkery.

Fem 2.0 is hosting a blog carnival on caregiving. Here’s the notice we received via email with encouragement to share:

Women take care of children, spouses, parents, family members, friends. We dominate the caregiving professions, like nursing or social work. Ask anyone receiving care of any kind and he or she will most likely tell you that the primary caregiver is a woman.

Caregiving is a huge part of women’s lives, and so often it’s a job for which we usually don’t get or expect monetary compensation. How can caregiving be made easier to make our lives easier?

Over the next couple of weeks, Fem2.0 is partnering with the National Family Caregivers Association, the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation, and the American College of Nurse-Midwives to start a fresh discussion about caregiving and women.

What is caregiving in all its shapes and forms?
What role does it play in women’s lives?
What can be done, or what changes need to happen, to facilitate caregiving?

We are looking for insights, comments, and expertise. We are looking for personal stories to illustrate the human experience of caregiving and to build a sense of solidarity among all caregivers.

Here’s how you can get involved:

1. Blog about it at your own site by July 13, and send Fem2.0 the link, so they can add your post to the blog carnival on Fem2.0. Alternatively you can write a piece for the Fem2.0 blog and send it to info@fem2pt0.com.

2. Participate in the Women and Caregiving Twittercast Monday, July 13, at 10 p.m. (EST) — hashtag #fem2. Find out how to join a Twittercast here.

This Week’s Super Fun Health Reform Graphic: The award goes to The New York Times for the multi-tab Key Challenges in the Healthcare Debate. Below is the view from the section on “Getting Through Congress.”

Cuts to Medicare Drug Costs: The AARP has endorsed an offer by drug manufacturers to discount the price of some Medicare prescriptions by $80 billion over the next decade. The announcement was made today at the White House; a transcript of President Obama’s remarks is available here.

“The unusual offer by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) is part of its effort to convince skeptical lawmakers that it backs major health-care legislation,” writes Ceci Connolly of the Washington Post. “Though the agreement represents a fraction of the total cost of health-care reform, it has been managed for maximum public relations exposure.”

Connolly explains how the deal would work:

When the Medicare prescription drug benefit approved by Congress went into effect in 2006, it left a coverage gap that charges seniors the full cost of medications once a patient has received $2,700 worth of drugs, until the total reaches about $6,100. At that point, “catastrophic” coverage kicks in and covers nearly all drug expenses.

“The existence of this gap in coverage has been a continuing injustice that has placed a great burden on many seniors,” Obama said over the weekend.

Under the proposal, seniors who fall into the coverage gap known as the “doughnut hole,” would pay half price for all brand-name medicines. The discounts could save 3.5 million retirees up to $1,700 a year, according to AARP. In addition, the full price of the drug would count toward a person’s out-of-pocket total, thus maximizing the insurance benefit.

Connolly also wrote a good Sunday Outlook piece on Obama’s strategic approach to health reform, and this morning she participated in an online discussion about the article.

Study Time: It’s a busy week for Congress, as three House committees — Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce and Education and Labor — take up health-reform legislation. Here’s the draft bill released Friday by House Democrats.

Kaiser Health News’ Mary Agnes Carey discusses the highlights of the bill, which includes an individual mandate for coverage, with some exclusions, and an employer mandate – called “pay or play.” As for how it will be paid for:

They stressed that everything is on the table. They have some ideas. They want major Medicare and Medicaid system reform such as ‘accountable care’ organizations that really try to coordinate medical care to make sure it’s the best possible care for the patient and reducing hospital re-admissions.

But of course, they’re always talking about taxes as well. And these are some of the ideas that will be discussed in the coming weeks: a tax on the benefits that an employer provides, a payroll tax, a tax on sugary drinks, taxes on alcohol, value added taxes (also called VAT) on some goods and services.

Igor Volsky at The Wonk Room notes that the Tri-Committee proposal “seems to contain a fairly robust public insurance option.” The Times published a poll Sunday showing overwhelming support for a government-funded public option that would compete with private insurance plans.

“On the whole,” adds Volsky, “the bill’s affordability measures are impressive.” His post includes a comparison of the HELP bill, the Senate Finance Committee draft and the Tri-Committee bill.

Raising Women’s Voices notes that the new House bill includes a statement on meeting women’s health care needs. Two points in particular stand out:

• Include coverage of maternity services as a benefit category in the new basic benefit package. All plans in the Exchange would be required to maternity services and over time plans outside the Exchange would be required to do so as well.
• Prohibit plans in the Exchange from charging women more than men by banning gender rating. This protection will extend to all health plans outside the Exchange over time as well.

Pus: The Senate debate kicked off Wednesday, and it was a rocky start. Jeffrey Young at The Hill has more.

Here are six senators to watch for their involvement in crafting a bipartisan health-care bill, via The Fix. Three former Senate majority leaders — Democrat Tom Daschle, and Republicans Bob Dole and Howard Baker — have reemerged with their own plan. They must be missing the excitement.

Dan Balz writes that Obama is soon going to have to “make clear what he’ll accept and what he won’t” when it comes to “cost and coverage, revenue and savings, a public option or not, and the cost vs. the desirability of bipartisan agreement.”

Cost and coverage suddenly became a more central issue after the Congressional Budget Office issued new estimates last week. The goal of reform advocates long has been a plan that moves the country to universal coverage. Earlier assumptions put the price tag in the neighborhood of $1 trillion over 10 years. The CBO shattered those assumptions, though their numbers were based on incomplete plans.

A preliminary estimate of the Senate Finance Committee’s draft bill put the price tag of universal coverage at $1.6 trillion over 10 years. That was considerably more than anyone anticipated and forced the committee to delay work on the bill. The cost of the incomplete plan drafted by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee was pegged at about $1 trillion over 10 years, but the CBO said that would still leave 30 million (rather than the current 46 million) people without coverage.

Talking Points: Media Matters notes that during a Sunday morning interview with members of the Obama administration’s health care team, Good Morning America’s Diane Sawyer didn’t include any questions that reflected the concerns or positions of progressives.

Meanwhile, single-payer advocates continue to make news. The Boston Globe has a Q&A with Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a Cambridge Health Alliance internist and Harvard Medical School professor who co-founded Physicians for a National Health Program. And MinnPost.com interviews PNHP’s president, Dr. Oliver Fein, who notes how popular single payer has become, despite its unpopularity:

What I think is really interesting is that although Sen. [Max] Baucus says that single payer is off the table, at the minimum, we’re the elephant under the table. Everybody is referring to us.

So, you have someone like [Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen] Sebelius now saying we’ll create a public option that will not go to single payer. You have Republicans saying that the thing they fear is single payer; you have a whole variety of discussion that’s going on that keeps referring to this thing called single payer. Probably one of the real problems is there’s not enough of a definition for the public to make an assessment about what that really is.

Plus: Here’s Sebelius’s no-single-payer interview with NPR.

In other political news …

So About That All-Important Sounding Council …: Linda Lowen, About.com Guide to Women’s Issues, is waiting to hear what the White House Council on Women and Girls is doing. And she doesn’t like waiting. Via Feminist Peace Network (she doesn’t like waiting, either).

Did You Hear the One About the Republican Senator Who Wouldn’t Condemn Clinic Violence?: Sadly, it’s true. Jodi Jacobson reports at RH Reality Check that an anonymous Republican senator used his (it’s presumed, with good reason, that the Republican in question is male) power “to put a ‘hold’ on a Senate Resolution originally introduced by U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) condemning violence against women’s health providers, thereby blocking any vote on the resolution.”

Bush Bioethics Panel No More: The New York Times reports: “Members of the President’s Council on Bioethics were told by the White House last week that their services were no longer needed and were asked to cancel a planned meeting, a council staff member said Wednesday.”

Reid Cherlin, a White House press officer, told the NYT the panel was designed to a “a philosophically leaning advisory group” that was more about discussion than consensus-building.  that favored discussion over developing a shared consensus. Obama will appoint a new panel charged with offering “practical policy options,” said Cherlin.

The FDA’s Full Plate: FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg told USA TOday there’s no truth to the rumors that the FDA will split in two, with one half overseeing food safety and tobacco and the other responsible for oversight of medical products.

Drug safety, tobacco regulation and direct-to-consumer advertising top Hamburg’s agenda. On the subject of advertising, Hamburg said, “There certainly have been concerns about the quality and authenticity of some of the messages … We have a dedicated staff working on the issue.”

NOW’s Future: The 2009 National NOW Conference kicks off June 19 in Indianapolis. At issue is who will replace current NOW President Kim Gandy, who is stepping down after eight years: Latifa Lyles, a 33-year-old black woman who has been one of Gandy’s three vice presidents, or Terry O’Neill, 56, a white activist who was NOW’s vice president for membership from 2001 to 2005.

Feministing’s Jessica Valenti is quoted in this Associated Press story on the election and NOW’s generational divide.

Plus: I don’t think I’ve linked yet to Katha Pollitt’s excellent piece in The Nation on feminism’s false waves. It begins:

Can we please stop talking about feminism as if it is mothers and daughters fighting about clothes? Second wave: you’re going out in that? Third wave: just drink your herbal tea and leave me alone! Media commentators love to reduce everything about women to catfights about sex, so it’s not surprising that this belittling and historically inaccurate way of looking at the women’s movement — angry prudes versus drunken sluts — has recently taken on new life, including among feminists.

Losing Celebrity Weight Battles: When famous dieters like Kirstie Alley or Oprah Winfrey talk about being “disgusted” with their bodies, the comments have an effect beyond selling magazines.

“Kirstie looks the same as me, to the inch, height and weight,” Emily Schaibly Greene, 29, recently told The New York Times. “It took me a long time to get there, but I’m feeling good with how I look. But it’s difficult to keep liking the way I look when I’m reading that it’s gross.”

Lesley Kinzel, who writes for the blog Fatshionista, said, “When you have famous people turning their weight tribulations into mass-media extravaganzas, they’re contributing to a culture where passing comments on strangers’ bodies is considered O.K.”

Plus: Nia Vardalos, who rose to fame after starring in “My Big Fat Greek Wedding,” says her recent weight loss is all people want to talk about these days, pushing aside her personal and professional achievements. Her column is awesome.

And if you haven’t yet bought “Lessons From the Fat-O-Sphere,” go. Author Kate Harding – founder of Shapely Prose and contributor to Broadsheet — is still on the book tour this month and is looking forward to speaking at colleges in the fall. 

Summer Reading List: From Women’s eNews: From sensational memoirs to serious sociology, check out what women are writing about and the prizes they’ve been snapping up so far in 2009. Sarah Seltzer has the goods.

Women’s Health Clinic to Close: The University of Chicago Medical Center is closing its women’s health clinic, an essential community health resource, at the end of the month. Ironically, this is being done under the Medical Center’s Urban Health Initiative; U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush has called for a congressional investigation into whether the Medical Center has engaged in “patient dumping” by steering the poor to other health facilities.

“Medical center executives have said the steep downturn in the economy has forced them to trim $100 million from the hospital’s budget to maintain running a prestigious hospital, research center and medical school. They also have said the Women’s Health Center, which cares for thousands of Medicaid patients, is a money loser,” reported the Chicago Tribune last month, in a story on protests against the closing.

Plus: While looking up information about the closing, I came across a 2008 New York Times story on Michelle Obama, who at that time was on leave from her job as vice president of community affairs at the University of Chicago Medical Center. Stories like this made me wonder what she could/would have done about the closing:

When the human papillomavirus vaccine, which can prevent cervical cancer, became available, researchers proposed approaching local school principals about enlisting black teenage girls as research subjects.

Obama stopped that. The prospect of white doctors performing a trial with black teenage girls summoned the specter of the Tuskegee syphilis experiment of the mid-20th century, when white doctors let hundreds of black men go untreated to study the disease.

Too Poor to Make the News: Over on The New York Times op-ed page, Barbara Ehrenreich has written the first in a series on how the recession affects people who don’t neatly fit the downwardly mobile narrative: the already poor.

“This demographic, the working poor, have already been living in an economic depression of their own,” writes Ehrenreich. “From their point of view ‘the economy,’ as a shared condition, is a fiction.” She continues:

The deprivations of the formerly affluent Nouveau Poor are real enough, but the situation of the already poor suggests that they do not necessarily presage a greener, more harmonious future with a flatter distribution of wealth. There are no data yet on the effects of the recession on measures of inequality, but historically the effect of downturns is to increase, not decrease, class polarization.

The recession of the ’80s transformed the working class into the working poor, as manufacturing jobs fled to the third world, forcing American workers into the low-paying service and retail sector. The current recession is knocking the working poor down another notch — from low-wage employment and inadequate housing toward erratic employment and no housing at all. Comfortable people have long imagined that American poverty is far more luxurious than the third world variety, but the difference is rapidly narrowing.

Health Care & the Arts: NPR interviews Anna Deveare Smith about her show “Let Me Down Easy,” which is based on interviews with doctors and patients (previously discussed here). Her newest role: artist in residence at the Center for American Progress, which Smith will use as a perch for studying changes in Washington. Smith also plays a doctor in the new Showtime series “Nurse Jackie.”

Speaking of “Nurse Jackie,” David Bauder of the Associated Press notes that the ethically challenged nurse at the head of the show (wonderfully played by Edie Falco) has appalled some nurses — but is that a bad thing for Showtime? Well, no.

Apologies from California: I meant to post this next one when it first came out, but I still think it’s amusing — San Francisco Chronicle columnist Mark Morford would like you to know California is really, really sorry about the whole Prop 8 thing.

Meanwhile, tony Greenwich, Conn., has become wedding central for same-sex New York couples who no longer have to drive as far as Massachussetts. California sure could have used money spent on wedding bliss.

Far be it from us to add to unfriendly female fodder, but does it really make sense to call out “Our Bodies, Ourselves” for not focusing more on female consciousness raising parties — or for the book cover being pink?

Granted, most modern activism doesn’t involve mirrors, but has the author read feminist blogs or seen Twitter and Facebook? There’s plenty consciousness-raising happening, and plenty of feminist media critiquing our all-too critical culture.

Plus: Speaking of a consciousness raising party, if you’re lucky enough to be in New York on June 12, go celebrate Feministing’s 5th Anniversary. Happy early birthday, ladies!

Being “Maddy”: Jennifer Finney Boylan wrote a beautiful piece about her relationship with her sons as she transitioned from male to female. Published as a New York Times “Modern Love” column, the essay was adapted from “The Book of Dads,” to be published in May by Ecco.

Determining Which Medical Therapies Work: “Good luck trying to learn what medical treatment works best to relieve low back pain, alleviate depression or prevent the spread of prostate cancer. The information isn’t available — to you or your doctor — because studies comparing potential treatments and how effective they are haven’t been done,” writes Judith Graham at the Chicago Tribune.

The story looks at the government’s plan to invest $1.1 billion in “comparative effectiveness” research and evaluate potential therapies head-to-head. Four medical experts weigh in on conditions they consider most deserving of research on comparative effectiveness. Rachel previously wrote about public input sought on research priorities.

The War Against Women: Writing at The New York Review of Books, Hilary Mantel discusses the four volumes of “From Eve to Dawn: A History of Women in the World,” by Marilyn French. The collection is published by Feminist Press.

Words Matter: Feminist Peace Network has posted useful tips for reporting about domestic violence and sexual assault. It’s a good resource for bloggers, journalists and anyone writing about these issues.

Sticker Shock: “A new national poll, conducted by NPR, the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Harvard School of Public Health, shows that what most uninsured people are willing to pay is a long way from what insurance really costs,” reports NPR’s “Morning Edition.”  “Two out of three uninsured Americans say they’d be willing to pay no more than $100 a month for coverage. But, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, the average individual health plan costs about $400 a month, and a family policy costs more than $1,000.”

When Accidents Happen: According to the Guttmacher Institute, more than half the pregnancies in the United States each year are unintended; poor women are four times as likely to have an unplanned pregnancy compared with higher-income women. NPR’s “Morning Edition” looks at the use of and access to contraceptives. Reporter Brenda Wilson notes that “the health system often throws up barriers to contraception, especially for young women who are the most vulnerable.” The story, however, focuses more on one woman’s situation.

Call for More Family Planning Aid: Dominique Soguel writes at Women’s eNews about a report released Tuesday calling for aggressive investment in family planning to curb population growth, poverty and maternal mortality. Five former directors of the population and reproductive health program of the U.S. Agency for International Development recommend the United States increase its spending to $1.2 billion in the next year’s funding round from $475 million in 2008.

Also from Women’s eNews: Five women will be recognized this week for their scientific discoveries.

“There is still a very big glass ceiling for women in science,” said Milbry Polk, director of Wings WorldQuest, which runs the awards. “You don’t find them in the history books. Women are left out. Their projects aren’t.”

Search Me: One of my favorite reads last week was Dahlia Lithwick explaining how Supreme Court justices can act like total dingbats:

When constitutional historians sit down someday to compile the definitive Supreme Court Concordance of Not Getting It, the entry directly next to Lilly Ledbetter (“Court fails utterly to understand realities of gender pay discrimination”) will be Savana Redding (“Court compares strip searches of 13-year-old girls to American Pie-style locker-room hijinks”). After today’s argument, it’s plain the court will overturn a 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion finding a school’s decision to strip-search a 13-year-old girl unconstitutional. That the school in question was looking for a prescription pill with the mind-altering force of a pair of Advil — and couldn’t be bothered to call the child’s mother first — hardly matters.

Read the rest.

You Know You’re Not in the U.S. Anymore When …: BirthActivist.com posted an incredible video of a Barcelona couple’s at-home birth — a video made all the more amazing because it’s a commercial for a Spanish mattress company. The tagline: “Your bed, the most important place in the world.” Swoon.

Snow White, She’s Not: Almost three quarters of a century after the debut of Snow White, Disney is about to release a film starring its first black princess, Tiana. Neely Tucker writes in the Washington Post:

Her appearance this holiday season, coming on the heels of Michelle Obama’s emergence as the nation’s first lady, the Obama girls in the White House and the first line of Barbie dolls modeled on black women (“So in Style” debuts this summer), will crown an extraordinary year of visibility for African American women.

But fairy tales and folklore are the stories that cultures tell their children about the world around them, and considering Disney’s pervasive influence with (and marketing to) young girls, Princess Tiana might well become the symbol of a culture-changing standard of feminine beauty.

“If this figure takes off, you’re looking at 30 or 40 years of repetition and resonance,” says Tricia Rose, a Brown University professor who teaches both popular culture and African American studies, citing the enduring popularity of Disney princesses at the company’s theme parks, on Web sites and in videos.

Not only that, but Tiana learns that she needs love and a career to find happiness. Finally, my wish has come true.

Fan Club for Non First Lady Fans: “A first lady whose entire bearing says, “Here I am!” and who by all appearances is living comfortably in her own body is a compelling symbol of female agency,” writes Rhea Hirshman in the New Haven Register. “Even as she is being made into a fashion icon, Michelle Obama is subverting the status quo, thus pulling off the neatest trick of all.”

Plus: More on Michelle Obama from Patricia Williams.

Deadly Silicone: A 43-year-old woman died a day after receiving silicone injections from an unlicensed practitioner. The New York City Health Department is concerned that illegal use of silicone as an alternative to cosmetic surgery is on the rise, reports The New York Times.

Drugmakers Spend Less on Advertising in 2008: “Drug makers cut their spending on consumer advertising of prescription drugs by 8% in 2008 to $4.4 billion, the first pullback since at least the late 1990s,” reports the Wall Street Journal.

Pharmaceutical-ad experts blame last year’s spendng decline on fewer new-drug introductions and heightened congressional scrutiny of drug marketing. Critics say the ads, which are permitted in few other countries, inflate health-care costs by prompting patients to request brand-name medicines, rather than cheaper generic alternatives. The industry’s trade group, however, cites a 2003 statement from the Federal Trade Commission that argues that the ads educate consumers about drug options and haven’t been shown to lead to higher prices.

In the U.S., ads aimed at consumers typically account for only about 40% of the total marketing budget for prescription drugs, according to the pharmaceutical industry. The majority of manufacturers’ promotional efforts are directed at doctors.

Spending on drug ads peaked in 2007 at $4.8 billion, according to IMS Health. The market researcher last month reported that annual U.S. prescription sales grew 1.3 percent in 2008, to $291 billion.

Plus: FDA rules designed to clarify pharmaceutical companies’ online ads — such as paid Google ads — and provide more consumer information are causing more confusion than before, say industry officials. How do you list side effects in 95 words or less?

Plus 2: The AP reports that drug makers “spent more than $2.9 million on Vermont’s doctors, hospitals and universities to market their products in the last fiscal year, according to a report issued Wednesday by the state attorney general’s office.” The reports’ findings note that 25 doctors and nurses each got more than $20,000 in cash or benefits from the companies; 10 got more than $50,000; and one psychiatrist received $112,000.

$10 Million if You CanTransform Health Care: The X Prize Foundation is offering $10 million to the winner of a contest that aims to transform healthcare in a small U.S. community:

The Grand Challenge for the Healthcare X PRIZE is to create an optimal health paradigm that empowers and engages individuals and communities in a way that dramatically improves health value. The proposed prize is designed to improve health value by more than 50 percent in a 10,000 person community during a three year trial. In order to effectively compete for this prize, teams will need to fundamentally change health financing, care delivery, and create new incentives that will result in achieving the required improvements in health value for both individuals and communities.

Reuters has more.

“Be Fruitful and Multiply”: NPR’s “Morning Edition” reports on the small but growing Quiverfull movement. These conservative Christians shun birth control and advocate for large families. The agenda is political as well as religious.

“They speak about, ‘If everyone starts having eight children or 12 children, imagine in three generations what we’ll be able to do,’” said Kathryn Joyce, author of the new book “Quiverfull: Inside The Christian Patriarchy Movement. “”We’ll be able to take over both halls of Congress, we’ll be able to reclaim sinful cities like San Francisco for the faithful, and we’ll be able to wage very effective massive boycotts against companies that are going against God’s will.’”

Eight-Year-Old Denied Divorce: From Akimbo: “Earlier this week, a judge in Saudi Arabia refused for the second time to annul the marriage between an eight year-old girl and a 47 year-old man. The girl’s father promised her hand in marriage to a friend as payment for financial debts. The girl’s mother brought the case in an attempt to free her daughter from the forced marriage. While this disturbing case has made headlines, it is not uncommon.”

Read the full post for steps advocates and governments should take to eliminate early and forced marriage.

You may have heard this weekend that books on Amazon.com had been labeled “adult” and de-ranked — and, not coincidentally, the books affected happened to deal with LGBTQ themes and feminist health and sexuality topics. Twitter hasn’t stopped buzzing.

Books without rankings as of Sunday night included Gore  Vidal’s “The City and the Pillar” and Jeanette Winterson’s “Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit,” as well as titles by our colleagues and friends: Jessica Valenti’s “Full Frontal Feminism”; “Yes Means Yes,” which Valenti co-edited with Jaclyn Friedman; and “S.E.X.: The All-You-Need-To-Know Progressive Sexuality Guide to Get You Through High School and College” by Heather Corrina, who writes about the Amazon debacle here.

Deanna Zandt wrote a piece for Women’s Media Center today explaining that this was probably not a homophobic, misogynist campaign dreamed up by Amazon. Rather:

It’s far more likely that a group of tech “enthusiasts,” let’s call them, organized some sort of campaign over a holiday weekend (when Amazon was likely operating with a shoestring staff) to delist books they found objectionable. When I say enthusiasts, I’m referring to loosely associated hacker-types who enjoy wreaking havoc purely for the sake of the havoc. Rarely do they have a formal political agenda. Often women, particularly feminists, and queer folk are the targets (though recently, one notorious group called 4chan targeted and found a teenager who had posted a video of himself torturing a cat).

Not that we should feel much better about it:

It would be easy to dismiss this, and other cases, as Internet-gone-wild making the world unsafe for women and LGBT folk. Somewhat harder to discern, and admit to ourselves, is that the anonymity and freedom that the Internet provides pulls back the curtain on our culture: at work are the illusive mores of misogyny and homophobia that continue to shape our culture and lives.

Wired has more.

Update: Jessica is hearing this was no glitch.

Update #2: Deanna posted a follow-up. And another.