Chronic Fatigue No Longer Seen as “Yuppie Flu”: “The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which in 1999 acknowledged that it had diverted millions of dollars allocated by Congress for chronic fatigue syndrome research to other programs, has released studies that linked the condition to genetic mutations and abnormalities in gene expression involved in key physiological processes,” reports The New York Times. “People with C.F.S. are as sick and as functionally impaired as someone with AIDS, with breast cancer, with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,’ said Dr. William Reeves, the lead expert on the illness at the C.D.C., who helped expose the centers’ misuse of chronic fatigue financing.”

What’s a Working Mother Worth?: “What mothers do — and what mothers want — appears to have a limited impact on public values and societal norms. At the very least, the two-fold increase in maternal employment over the last 30 years has yet to result in a dramatic reversal of cultural attitudes that safeguard male privilege in the public and private sphere,” writes Judith Stadtman Tucker, editor of the Mothers Movement Online, in this piece at The American Prospect on attitudes toward the value of maternal employment.

More on Summer Films and the Missing A-Word: Ann Hornaday’s Washington Post story is a late-but-worthy addition to the recent spate of stories about “Waitress” and “Knocked Up.” The omission of abortion as even a discussion point “undermines anyone’s claim that Hollywood has a liberal agenda,” says says New York Press film writer Jennifer Merin, who is also president of the Alliance of Women Film Journalists.

Plus: Gloria Steinem: “In Defense of the ‘Chick Flick,’” via AlterNet.

Pro-Choice, Pro-Midwife: “If you care about a ‘woman’s right to choose,’ then you need to know about a little situation ongoing in Missouri,” writes Jennifer Block at the Huffington Post. “Yes, abortion is still legal there. It’s not that situation (not today, anyway). This is about a woman’s right to choose a midwife.”

Woman Sues County Over Giving Birth in Jail: A Seattle-area mentally ill woman who was arrested for trespassing is suing correction officials for not providing medical attention for her pregnancy until after she gave birth in her cell, reports the Seattle-Post Intelligencer.

The incident took place 10 years ago; her lawyer said she has been receiving mental health treatment in the decade since and has “come a long way.” The comments on this story, however, demonstrate that the public understanding still has a long way to go.

Eating Sushi While Pregnant: Writing in The New York Times, Steven A. Shaw, author of “Turning the Tables on Asian Restaurants: The Insider’s Guide to Chinese, Japanese, Indian, Korean and Southeast Asian Dining,” argues that fears about eating raw fish while pregnant are unfounded.

No Threat Here: “I remember hearing [former GOP Sen. Rick] Santorum ranting about how homosexual marriage threatens heterosexual marriage. I could be wrong, but I think heterosexual marriage is threatened more by heterosexuals. I don’t know why gay marriage challenges my marriage in any way” — Elizabeth Edwards talks with Salon.

Newsflash: Sen. Hillary Clinton Has Breasts: Two of ‘em! Thanks, Katha.

India Selects First Female President: Emily Wax writes in the Washington Post that the vote was “seen as a step forward for hundreds of millions of Indian women and girls who face bitter discrimination in everyday life. The position is largely ceremonial. But observers said the selection of Pratibha Patil, 72, in a vote by the national Parliament and state politicians, will widen the role of women in the country’s often male-dominated political scene.”

Patil also gets to be head of her family.

Empowered Female Characters on TV: Add to this round-up of representations of women on television Lisa de Moreas’ hilarious report from the Summer TV Press Tour about feminist-torch bearer Joseph McGinty Nichol. “McG,” as he is known, is behind the reality TV series “Pussycat Dolls Present: The Search for the Next Doll” and the new NBC dramedy “Chuck.”

The first comment on the story pretty much sums it up: “[Joseph McGinty Nichol] seems to have just learned to say ‘empowered women’ when he’s thinking ‘hot chicks.’”

Me thinks Nichol and restaurant owner Dennis Riese would make a great team.

“Few issues symbolize India’s contrasts and divisions more than the debate over public displays of affection, which touches on issues related to family values, politics and just how much and how fast India should mirror the West,” writes Emily Wax, in an interesting Washington Post story published a week ago Sunday.

A decade after the once-chaste Bollywood film industry got away with its first on-screen kiss on the lips, the proliferation of sexual displays in music videos, film and literature has angered a small but vociferous minority of Hindu conservatives, who say they want to preserve India’s vaunted and ancient heritage from what they see as the vapid values that come with globalization. [...]

“Moral police,” sometimes organized by regional Hindu nationalist parties and sometimes just vigilantes with a point of view, have been increasingly on the prowl recently. Last month, Hindu extremist mobs attacked Star TV offices in Mumbai, the cultural capital of the country, for airing a story on an interfaith couple who had eloped.

In the past year, members of a conservative Hindu nationalist party have attacked stores carrying Valentine’s Day cards, and a government-appointed committee has banned a channel called Fashion TV. Sex education books have been blacklisted in some state schools.

At the same time, notes Wax, there has been some criticism that the commotion over kissing is distracting from real issues:

“Where’s the outrage when a woman is raped by her brother-in-law or when thousands of daughters of India are killed every year for an unpaid dowry?” asked Girija Vyas, chairwoman of the National Commission for Women, who sat in her Delhi government office last week fielding calls from girls trying to escape abusive arranged marriages. “These protesters should come out when someone is raped.”

“Domestic violence, bride burning and sex-selective abortion . . . are all still there in many Indian lives,” Vyas said. “We should be opening the sky for Indian women and for India, not wasting energy when someone kisses a woman versus rapes her. These extremists are dividing society.”

New York’s governor seems ready to put New York at the center of the same-sex marriage debate.

According to The New York Times, Gov. Eliot Spitzer will introduce a bill in the coming weeks to legalize same-sex marriage in New York. Though the bill is unlikely to muster enough support in the state Legislature this year, gay rights activists are enthusiastic about it being part of the governor’s agenda.

Gary Parker, the founder of Greater Voices, a coalition of gay-oriented political clubs in New York City, said the fact that every statewide elected official now supports gay marriage had heartened advocates.

“During the Pataki administration, there was a lot of frustration,” Mr. Parker said. “We felt extremely stagnant and stifled. Now there is movement. And the fact that there is discussion is progress.”

Maybe, just maybe, this legislation will propel Spitzer to the ranks of People Allowed to Ask American Idol Cast-Off Sanjaya Malakar for an Autograph.

The American Prospect has outdone itself with a massive issue that is, quite literally, the Mother Load.

“Why Can’t America Have a Family-Friendly Workplace?” the cover asks. Inside you’ll find a special report on work/family politics that grew out of a 2006 conference titled “Who Cares: Dilemmas of Work and Family in the 21st Century,” sponsored by the Council on Contemporary Families.

The American Prospect website includes almost every article in full, along with related reports and advocacy, research and blog links. Web-only stories on work/family issues will be posted throughout the month, so keep checking back for new content. This is a must-save resource for current and future discussions.

One small note: Currently, the only aspect addressed by a male writer deals specifically with the role of fathers. There’s no shortage of male bylines in general, of course, but there always seems to be a paucity when the coverage is about work/family issues — even though both sexes are affected by the lack of institutional support and by damaging gender and cultural stereotypes.

Just as we crave women’s voices in traditionally male journalistic and political realms, we also need men to represent themselves on what traditionally have been considered “women’s issues.” This is essential not only to demonstrate that men have a real stake in these public policy debates, but also as a reference to male readers that this is an important political conversation.

As of 12:01 a.m. Monday, New Jersey became the third state in the country to offer civil unions for same-sex couples. From The New York Times:

The Legislature modeled its civil union law on those of Vermont and Connecticut, which allow for same-sex couples to take another’s surname without a court hearing, be able to jointly adopt and be entitled to inheritances. California also allows civil unions, Hawaii and Maine offer limited rights to same-sex couples and Massachusetts is the only state that allows gay marriage. [...]

Stuart J. Rabner, the state attorney general, said last week that couples who exchanged vows in states that have existing civil union laws were automatically entitled to the same rights in the Garden State. In addition, Mr. Rabner said that gay couples married in Massachusetts, Canada, the Netherlands, South Africa and Spain would also receive civil union rights in the state.

“The name of the relationship selected by other jurisdictions, however, will not control its treatment under New Jersey law,” Mr. Rabner said in a statement.

The first couple to be granted all the legal rights of marriage under the new law had already had a civil union in Vermont in 2002, but they wanted to be sure there was no doubt about their status in New Jersey.

“We’re scared that if there’s an emergency, and someone looks up whether we are civil unionized in New Jersey, who wants to go into an explanation that New Jersey automatically recognizes Vermont unions?” Garden State Equality Chair Steven Goldstein said. “It just seems safer to have the piece of paper from New Jersey.”

Unlike their first civil union, which was a lavish affair, this time the couple kept it simple — and political. According to the Bergen Record:

The ceremony took place above a Blockbuster Video, in the non-descript office of state Senator Loretta Weinberg (D-Teaneck), who co-authored the civil union law and served as their witness.

And instead of reading wedding vows, the couple pledged to press on with their campaign to lobby for same-sex couples’ equal access to marriage.

“Do you, Daniel, vow to continue fighting for true marriage equality, so that couples like you can legally marry in the state of New Jersey one day soon?” Rabbi Elliott Tepperman asked, in a twist that was not written by Trenton legislators.

“I do,” said Daniel Gross, as did Goldstein.

Here’s more close-up coverage from BlueJersey.com.

Now, about those public displays of affection …

Abstinence Only Sex Ed Finds Few Scientific Fans: “There is no good scientific evidence that teaching abstinence to teenagers will by itself prevent unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases, say the authors of a recent study. Yet they found that comprehensive sex education is declining and that more youngsters are being taught nothing more than abstinence,” reports the San Francisco Chronicle.

States Fund Anti-Abortion Advice: “At least eight states — including Florida, Missouri and Pennsylvania — use public funds to subsidize crisis pregnancy centers, Christian homes for unwed mothers and other programs explicitly designed to steer women away from abortion. As a condition of the grants, counselors are often barred from referring women to any clinic that provides abortions; in some cases, they may not discuss contraception either,” reports the Los Angeles Times.

Love Marriages in India Break Usual Arrangements: “When Shilpa Shetty, a Bollywood star, won the ‘Celebrity Big Brother’ reality television show in Britain recently, her mother’s first piece of advice was predictable: Seize the moment! Land yourself a husband!,” writes Chicago Tribune foreign correspondent Laurie Goering. “Parents just about everywhere are notorious for urging their offspring to settle down and produce grandchildren. But in India, where family-negotiated marriages remain the norm, ensuring that their children marry well is an obsession.”

The good news is that as women gain education and financial independence, they “are financially empowered to move away from the doormat status they had in marriage in earlier times,” said Shobha De, a Mumbai writer of racy novels, authority on love and author of “Spouse: The Truth About Marriage.”

But at this point, newspapers are still filled with matrimonial ads written by parents seeking suitable matches for their children — the most desirable brides (and grooms) must come from high-status families and have fair-skin. Which leads us to …

Who’s the Fairest of Them All?: Over at Feministing, Ann points to an Indian commercial for Fair & Lovely skin whitener. She writes:

High-end whiteners are also sold by Chanel and Shiseido in the U.S. But they’re huge in countries like China, India and Malaysia, where they help perpetuate the idea that whiter skin = more respect = success in life. They also pose health risks.

As Salon points out, the popularity of Fair & Lovely (the best-selling whitening cream in the world) provides fodder for a debate about whether marketing to lower-income populations helps or hurts them. [...]

But Fair & Lovely isn’t a step up or solution; it only enforces the prejudices that contribute to economic and social inequality.

Skin Color and Salary: Legal immigrants in the United States with a lighter skin tone made more money than those with darker skin, according to a new study by Vanderbilt University professor of law and economics. Using data from 2,084 men and women who participated in the 2003 New Immigrant Survey, Joni Hersch found that immigrants with the lightest skin color earned, on average, 8 percent to 15 percent more than immigrants with the darkest skin tone. After accounting for other factors, discrimination, said Hersch, was the strongest explanation for the salary difference.

Death is so Hot in Pink!: R.J. Reynolds introduces Camel No. 9, a “light and luscious” cigarette marketed to women. “Of course, advertising like this is nothing new,” writes Elizabeth Hemmerdinger. “Though it does seem even more ridiculous now that we know how deadly cigarette smoking is — and how particularly dangerous it is to women.”

Big, Beautiful and Not White: It’s the third week in a row for linking to a body-image story by the Washington Post’s Robin Givhan. This time around, check out the write-up by Tracy Clark-Flory.

St. Louis Surgeon Transplants Ovary: “A renowned infertility expert in suburban St. Louis transplanted a whole ovary from Lagos’ sister into [Joy] Lagos, a step that could enable her to have children. Dr. Sherman Silber completed the transplant Feb. 5, after performing the same procedure between twins last month,” reports the AP (via the Washington Post). Betsy Taylor writes:

The operations are believed to the first whole-ovary transplants ever done in the United States. Surgeons in China reported a successful transplant earlier this decade, but offered scant details.

The surgery could restore normal hormone function for women going through early menopause, whether because of cancer treatments or other, unexplained causes. It also could mean that one day, a woman with cancer could freeze an ovary, undergo chemotherapy and radiation, and have her own ovary returned later to restore her fertility.

Because the sisters are closely matched biologically, the recipient does not need immune-suppressing drugs to prevent organ rejection. “If they’re not a close match, we’re not ready to tackle that yet,” Silber said.

Jennifer Baumgardner’s story in the February issue of Glamour magazine explains what’s behind “purity balls,” where men exchange rings and vows — with their daughters. If it sounds a little creepy, well, it is. Just consider the title: “Would you pledge your virginity to your father?”

Welcome to Colorado Springs’ Seventh Annual Father-Daughter Purity Ball, held at the five-star Broadmoor Hotel. The event’s purpose is, in part, to celebrate dad-daughter bonding, but the main agenda is for fathers to vow to protect the girls’ chastity until they marry and for the daughters to promise to stay pure. Pastor Randy Wilson, host of the event and cofounder of the ball, strides to the front of the room, takes the microphone and asks the men, “Are you ready to war for your daughters’ purity?”

Wilson’s voice is jovial, yet his message is serious — and spreading like wildfire. Dozens of these lavish events are held every year, mainly in the South and Midwest, from Tucson to Peoria and New Orleans, sponsored by churches, nonprofit groups and crisis pregnancy centers. The balls are all part of the evangelical Christian movement, and they embody one of its key doctrines: abstinence until marriage. Thousands of girls have taken purity vows at these events over the past nine years. While the abstinence movement itself is fairly mainstream — about 10 percent of teen boys and 16 percent of girls in the United States have signed virginity pledges at churches, rallies or programs sponsored by groups such as True Love Waits — purity balls represent its more extreme edge.

Baumgardner does a good job of describing how protecting girls’ virginity has become “a national, not just familial, concern” and covering the commercial and social culture that has built up around the abstinence only movement. She also discusses the importance of fathers playing a role in their daughters lives and treats everyone she interviews with great respect.

“Encouraging girls to avoid sleeping around is, without a doubt, a good thing,” writes Baumgardner. “The same goes for dad-daughter bonding; research shows that girls who have solid relationships with their fathers are more likely to grow up to be confident, self-respecting, successful women and to make wise choices along the way. Question is, is putting girls’ purity on a pedestal the way to achieve these all-important goals?”

The answer, both from a public policy standpoint as well as from a feminist perspective, is a clear “No.” Teen pregnancy rates are on the decline, and experts credit most of the progress to improved contraceptive use, not virginity pledges. And then there’s that pesky patriarchy to deal with.

“In patriarchy, a father owns a girl’s sexuality,” psychologist and feminist author Carol Gilligan tells Glamour. “And like any other property, he guards it, protects it, even loves it.”

Or, as Eve Ensler puts it: “When you sign a pledge to your father to preserve your virginity, your sexuality is basically being taken away from you until you sign yet another contract, a marital one. It makes you feel like you’re the least important person in the whole equation. It makes you feel invisible.”

Some of the girls interviewed aren’t even clear about what the purity pledge means. But they do enjoy getting all dressed up for a special night.

Sen. Sam Brownback, a Republican presidential contender and conservative darling, inched ever so slightly toward the center with the announcement that he would no longer discriminate openly against gays and lesbians.

Well, that’s not exactly what he said. Neil A. Lewis writes in the Times:

Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, who blocked the confirmation of a woman to the federal bench because she attended a same-sex commitment ceremony for the daughter of her long-time neighbors, says he will now allow a vote on the nomination.

Mr. Brownback, a possible contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, said in a recent interview that when the Senate returned in January, he would allow a vote on Janet Neff, a 61-year-old Michigan state judge, who was nominated to a Federal District Court seat.

Mr. Brownback, who has been criticized for blocking the nomination, said he would also no longer press a proposed solution he offered on Dec. 8 that garnered even more criticism: that he would remove his block if Judge Neff agreed to recuse herself from all cases involving same-sex unions.

Continue reading here. My, how far presidential contenders will go so as not to appear too extreme …

Focus on the Family Founder James Dobson stands accused of misrepresenting the research of Carol Gilligan and Dr. Kyle Pruett, who were both cited in Dobson’s recent Time magazine guest column arguing against same-sex parenting, “Two Mommies Is One Too Many.”

Media Matters has a good breakdown of Dobson’s cherry-picked assertions and the response from Giligan and Pruett, the latter of whom has asked Dobson to refrain from quoting from his research in “media campaigns, personal or corporate, without previously securing my permission.”

Dobson began his column by noting that he and other social conservatives were asked to respond to the news that Mary Cheney, daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney, is pregnant and will raise the child with her partner, Heather Poe.

To which I have to ask: Why? What does Dobson have to say that we haven’t already heard before?

Was it enlightening for any Time reader to learn that Dobson believes “birth and adoption are the purview of married heterosexual couples”?

Or that “traditional marriage is God’s design for the family and is rooted in biblical truth”?

Dobson writes near the top that implicit to the invitation to comment on Mary Cheney “is an effort to get us to criticize the Bush Administration or the Cheney family,” and he uses that as cover for writing a supposedly non-political response “about what kind of family environment is best for the health and development of children, and, by extension, the nation at large.”

But Dobson’s views on the best family environment are nothing but political — and pathetically over-played. The fact that he’s misrepresenting research to suit his politics is the only newsworthy item. Maybe Time will invite commentary about his truthiness.

E.J. Graff’s betting on the future of same-sex marriage in the United States — with wedding bells ringing from coast to coast within 20 years — and I’m betting she’s right. Graff’s stats on the global state of same-sex marriage are pretty heartwarming:

While you were enjoying November’s tilt away from the far right, there’s some more good news you may have missed: The world is steadily warming toward same-sex couples. Just two days ago, the U.K. celebrated the one-year anniversary of its civil partnership law, which legally recognizes same-sex couples. And in November, both Israel and South Africa (a very odd couple indeed) joined the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada and Spain in recognizing marriages between two women or two men. That brings to total number of nations that have done so to six, in as many years, with the Scandinavian countries now jockeying to see which will be next.

And back at home, by any number of measures, it’s clear a seismic shift is underway. “Americans, like others all over the world, are slowly but steadily getting comfortable with their LGBT sisters, uncles, neighbors and coworkers — and becoming more and more willing to have the state recognize their bonds,” writes Graff, ticking off states that either have recently or are on the brink of passing civil union-style laws. Graff’s research also covers gains in opinion polls and the fading support for anti-gay constitutional amendments and statutes, as demonstrated in November.

Of course, it may take some folks a bit longer than others to come around. Paul Cameron, chairman of the Family Research Institute, clearly has some work to do. Cameron not only says very mean things about the vice president’s daughter Mary Cheney, who is gay and pregnant with her first child — “Cheney is cruel to children,” blasts Cameron — but he apparently likes to make up facts to suit his bigotry. How very un-Christian-like!

In the fact-based world, the truth of the matter is that Cheney and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, face a rough road if they choose to raise their child in their home state of Virginia, which isn’t exactly Massachusetts when it comes to supporting the rights of same-sex parents, as the Advocate reminds us:

Unless they move to a handful of less restrictive states, Heather will never be able to have a legal relationship with her child. If something were to happen to Mary and Heather needed to advocate for their child in an emergency room, at school, in the courts, the state of Virginia would not recognize Heather as a parent to their child. If Mary some day chose to deny Heather access to their children in terms of custody or visitation, Heather would have no legal standing to challenge her actions. If Heather chose to walk away from her life with Mary and their family, Mary would have no recourse to pursue child support to help her care for and raise the children that together she and Heather brought into the world.

Now that’s cruel. But thinking back to E.J. Graff’s assessment, I have to believe Virginia will have more in common with progressive states in 20 years than with Paul Cameron’s dark, ugly world.

Following up on the New Jersey state Supreme Court decision that calls for equal rights for gay and lesbian couples but left the matter of marriage up to the Legislature, The New York Times has great coverage, assembled together here: News Analysis | Court Outlines Rights | A Fresh Fight | The Plaintiffs | The Justices | McGreevey’s Reaction | AUDIO: Back Story (mp3) | The Decision (pdf) | Empire Zone Blog

If you’re pressed for time, jump right to the AP’s simple Q&A about the state Supreme Court decision (via the Boston Globe). Reuters published a round-up of reactions from same-sex marriage activists, opponents and public officials.

And did you hear about Hillary Clinton? Via The Empire Zone:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton told a group of gay elected officials last night that she would support a gay marriage law in New York if a future governor and legislature chose to enact one, according to three participants at the meeting.

Mrs. Clinton listened and spoke for more than an hour with the three-dozen officials from New York, as they sat down — by coincidence — a couple of hours after the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that gay couples were entitled to the same legal rights and financial benefits as heterosexual couples.

Continue reading Patrick Healy’s post here.

Healy also points to Paul Schindler’s story at Gay City News, which offers more details about Clinton’s exchange with participants. As for Clinton’s previous stand on gay marriage and how she got to this point:

She also suggested that language she used when she first ran for the Senate in 2000 explaining her opposition to marriage equality based on the institution’s moral, religious, and traditional foundations had not reflected the “many long conversations” she’s had since with “friends” and others, and that her advocacy on LGBT issues “has certainly evolved.”

On Wednesday, Clinton presented her position on marriage equality as more one of pragmatism.

“I believe in full equality of benefits, nothing left out,” she said. “From my perspective there is a greater likelihood of us getting to that point in civil unions or domestic partnerships and that is my very considered assessment.”

Every so often a discussion kicks up over whether men can be feminists or if men should call themselves “feminist allies” or “pro-feminist.”

For me, I’ve always considered the issue kind of a non-issue; I’m lucky to know guys who have considered themselves feminists longer than I have (relax: I wasn’t talking yet). They claim it because they support social, political and economic equality, period.

Then there’s Spain. “We have a prime minister who not only says he’s a feminist — he acts like a feminist,” María Teresa Fernández de la Vega, Spain’s first vice president, told the Washington Post, referring to Prime Minister José Luis Rodríquez Zapatero. “In two-and-one-half years, we have done more than has ever been done in such a short time in Spain.”

Half of Zapatero’s cabinet members are women — the highest proportion in any government in Europe. From the WP:

New divorce laws not only make it easier for couples to split but stipulate that marital obligations require men to share the housework equally with their wives.

To draw more women into the armed forces, the government is shrinking the height requirements for women entering the National Guard and opening child-care centers on military bases.

Not even the royal family is immune: Zapatero wants to abolish the law giving male heirs first rights to the throne.

The push for gender equality in one of Europe’s most macho cultures comes as both internal and outside forces are creating seismic social shifts: Spanish women are taking greater control of their own lives by waiting longer to marry and having fewer children. The European Union is exerting more pressure on members to enforce equality. And the growth of high-tech businesses with a greater sensitivity to hiring women is expanding job opportunities.

After he was elected, Zapatero affirmed his commitment to feminist principles. “One thing that really awakens my rebellious streak is 20 centuries of one sex dominating the other,” he said. “We talk of slavery, feudalism, exploitation — but the most unjust domination is that of one-half of the human race over the other.”

Of course, not everyone is down with the program. “Just because Zapatero says by law men have to do dishes, men are not going to do dishes,” Alberto Fuertes, a 37-year-old factory owner, told the WP. “That’s ridiculous. It’s totally absurd.”

All of his 11 employees are women mostly between the ages of 46 and 55. “If I hire a 36-year-old, the problem is that she’s going to take a lot of days off to take her child to the doctor. She knows her rights and knows I can’t do anything about that,” Fuertes said.

He notes that his mother does everything for his father — but he doesn’t want that kind of life for his 2 1/2-year-old daughter. “I would not be happy,” Fuertes said. “It would go against everything I’ve tried to teach her.”

Back in the U.S., when was the last time you saw feminist in a headline — and it didn’t apply to a woman? “Educator, Integrationist, Feminist Dies in Port Washington”

The story, from Long Island’s local Northender, an online publication, is about the death of David Saltern, an educator who in the 1960s oversaw the desegregation of schools in New Rochelle, N.Y. In 1958, he appeared as an expert witness in federal court and argued for immediate school integration in Little Rock, Ark., which the school board at that time was fighting to delay for two and one-half years.

“When certain types of surgery have to be done, it should be done quickly,” he said, according to The Associated Press.

The Northender included this quote, which seems to be from an interview with Networking Magazine in 2002:

“Surrounded as I am – first by three sisters; later, daughters, granddaughters and great granddaughters – I have always been an outspoken feminist – understandably so … the enormously powerful potential of women has not as yet been fully tapped in American industry, government and civic affairs. We have a long, long way to go.”

Saltern was influential enough that the New York Times also published a bylined obit (alas, with no mention of his feminist credentials).

Two representations of male feminists in the media in one week!

So, readers, if more men self-identify as feminists, will it have any impact on the number of women who claim, “I’m not a feminist, but …”?

In some rural parts of China, local custom puts a high premium on marriage — even in death. “To ensure a son’s contentment in the afterlife, some grieving parents will search for a dead woman to be his bride and, once a corpse is obtained, bury the pair together as a married couple,” writes Jim Yardley in The New York Times.

The family of the deceased will go to great lengths to find a female corpse, even paying the equivalent of $1,200, though the average farmer makes only about $300 per year. “Families of the bride regard the money as the dowry they would have received had death not intervened,” notes Yardley.

A woman’s family may also see it as a favor to their daughter:

Guo Yuhua, a sociology professor at Qinghua University in Beijing, an expert on folk traditions and burial customs in the Loess Plateau, said the minghun custom stemmed from both dread and sympathy for the dead. She said parents with dead daughters, like those with dead sons, were also carrying out an obligation to their child. They will sell their bodies as a way of finding them a place in a Chinese society where tradition dictates that a daughter has no place on her father’s family tree.

“China is a paternal clan culture,” said Professor Guo, who did postdoctoral work in anthropology at Harvard. “A woman does not belong to her parents. She must marry and have children of her own before she has a place among her husband’s lineage. A woman who dies unmarried has no place in this world.”

And no say about the afterlife, either.

Read the NYT article.

If your tolerance for stories about the “mommy wars” has reached its limit, you might want to cross the border and give this Toronto Star story a read before calling it quits for good. Writer Andrea Gordon provides a good overview of the issues that are debated ad nauseum in the media — and the concerns and voices that are lost in the crossfire.

Readers should also take note of a terrific resource that rises above the media clutter: The Mothers Movement Online covers the social, cultural, economic and political issues that affect the well-being of mothers by publishing a smart mix of news analysis, commentaries, reviews and interviews.

Editor Judith Stadtman Tucker last month brilliantly deconstructed Michael Noer’s now-infamous Forbes article “Don’t Marry Career Women.” Features from the most recent summer issue include a review of Linda Hirschman’s book “Get to Work,” and a reflection on Adrienne Rich’s “Of Woman Born.”

Stay tuned for September’s issue on the need for a mother’s revolution — and advice on how to start one.

After all, it’s much more rewarding to make movements, not war.