What Does Corporations Are People Mean?

In light of the recent SCOTUS ruling on Hobby Lobby and other corporate giants being allowed to deny women birth control within their health coverage plans because it goes against their religious beliefs, I thought a primer on the laws surrounding corporations as people was in order.

Slate does a good job covering some of the bases of this particular case, but let's sum up:

- Eric Posner, writing for Slate, reminds us that the word "people" in terms of corporations is a sort of legalese short cut--never a good idea, in my opinion, to mince inexact words when describing the law.

- This 'artificial person' (going back to the 1700s definition) has certain rights: property ownership and contractual rights, to be specific. As such an entity, it is responsible in the courts as itself, which protects the shareholders. In other words, the buck stops (or is supposed to stop) at the corporation because the Supreme Court went ahead and made it its own thing. This, in turn, protects the owners as well, because when Hobby Lobby (or any corporation) fails financially, the actual people behind the artificial person do not suffer the immense losses involved in billion-dollar industries.

- Until recently, according to the New York Times, the "Supreme Court, in business cases, has held that “incorporation’s basic purpose is to create a legally distinct entity, with legal rights, obligations, powers, and privileges different from those of the natural individuals who created it, who own it, or whom it employs.”"

- Until, of course, the Citizen's United case, where, as Slate says, the justices based their ruling not on corporations as individuals with rights but on the real individuals behind the corporations and their rights as a collective group.

The ruling this week was simply an extension of this incredibly garbled, incredibly unethical ruling.

What we are looking at now is Hobby Lobby owners asserting that their religious beliefs as individual people behind a corporation, should be a basis for how that corporation is ruled upon in a court of law. They are, in essence, making themselves responsible for the actions of Hobby Lobby, intertwining Hobby Lobby as an artificial person with them as real people. They are saying they want to become Hobby Lobby, so that they can use the business to push their agenda.

And, in doing this, they also want to maintain the separation of themselves from their business when it comes to protecting their own assets monetarily. And the Court said yes.

Nutshell: In ruling that Hobby Lobby can restrict women's health care, the Court has muddled two entities--the real person owner and the fake person corporation--giving the owner/corporation mutant all the protections of both--free speech, freedom of religion, freedom to engage in contracts, freedom to sue (as either entity), freedom to own property.

In doing so, the Court has neglected to relook at those protections on a grand scale, so that the owners of Hobby Lobby could turn around in bankruptcy and say "just kidding, we aren't Hobby Lobby, we're the people behind it. Don't punish us." And the Court would be like, "yup, you're good."

This week, we have seen the elevation of big businesses and their owners. We have seen the crippling demise of the worker, in real time.

Keep in mind, the average Hobby Lobby employee makes less than $9 an hour.

Who really needs protecting here?

And who is the bad guy?

Honestly, in this case, I blame our Supreme Court. Someone needs to delve into this corporation person thing and straighten it the hell out.


For more on how this impacts women and society, check this post out by Life, Love, Liturgy.

Sarah Galo writes about her personal struggle and how birth control is necessary for women in Relevant Magazine.

Bree Davis writes about the problem with the double standard on health coverage in Denver's Westword Blog.

A gripping personal tale here at Anatomy of a Mother.

Sarah Seltzer writes about how this ruling sets women into a second-class status for Forward.

Claire O'Connor, meanwhile, is stirring up dissent amongst commenters over what the decision actually means in the long haul, over at Forbes Magazine.

Raising Kvell has a piece about the effects of this decision on women.

Leslie Schwartz writes about the effects of this decision on the children, over at Build the School.


 

GoldieBlox vs. What Exactly? - Contributor Post

Pollychromatic brings up some really good points about the Goldie Blox / Beastie Boys issue.

....



GoldieBlox and the Beastie Boys. What a freaking mess. Right in the heart of the intersectionality between feminism and parenting. Add in copyright legalities. Add in free speech. Add in artistic expression. Add in the free market.

Really, what a mess.

So where do I start?

I’ll start with who came first. The Beasties. Hey there Beasties. Oh how I love you.

I was 14 when Licensed to Ill came out. I loved it unashamedly. It was probably the very first hip hop that hit me in the suburbs of Northern California. I mean, there was the stray shot of rap that was White Lines, but really. It was all about the Beastie Boys when it comes to bringing hip hop to most of white America. That’s what started it.

I loved “Girls.” I don’t even cringe at it nowadays because that love is so strong. We shook our teenage asses to that song because it was freaking fun. Because. Because reasons. Because, listen.


It’s hard not to shake to that.

It does not even matter how horrible the lyrics are. Sometimes we just like horrible things. Let’s be real, though. When I was 14 I did not know how horrible it was. It was just catchy, and I was just dancing.

That love continued, too, even though the Beasties evolved so much over time. I loved their new stuff (hey, if you don’t think Paul’s Boutique is one of the most perfect albums to ever come out, you don’t know music), I loved their old stuff. On the run up to getting the scan done to find out the sexes of my twins, “Girls” was one of the ringtones that I had one my phone for a solid week.

It’s just a solid riff, and as much as I am a staunch feminist who completely rejects the message of “Girls,” I’m also the girl who shakes her ass to it.

So there’s that.

Then there’s GoldieBlox.

Dammit, GoldieBlox. I grew up in a family that completely supported STEM for girls (and boys). When the GoldieBlox Kickstarter happened, my whole family ate it up. My daughter has one of the original Kickstarter sets. You know, it’s a pretty good toy, too. Both my son and daughter like it.

The box is orange and yellow, with multi-colored dots and the blonde tool-belt sporting “Goldie” on top. The toy inside consists of pieces that are blue, purple, lavender, red, and yellow. With a long peachy-pink ribbon, and five character figures to manipulate. Each of the figures are internet-nerd friendly. A sloth, a hound dog, a grumpy looking cat, a tutu wearing dolphin and a koala in a business suit. A book that tells their story while giving you building instructions, and then alternate building instructions for ideas for free-play.

Pretty okay. Very tinker-toy with it’s spools and sticks and connector bits, but also kitschy in a way that has a lot of wink to the parent, and a lot of play for the kids who don’t get that it’s kitschy. Not quite enough toy, but a good starter set. For those of us who are raising boys and girls, and are kind of horrified by the gendered changes in marketing of toys in the last couple decades, we were willing to buy in and get the company off the ground.

Company founder and inventor Debbie Sterling is from the Bay Area, too, so that was an extra selling point for my family.

Then came this.

A great little Rube Goldberg machine built out of princess girl toys backed by three little girls running around to the song “Girls,” but with new lyrics that say girls really want a change.

And this. GoldieBlox are one of four finalists for ad space for a small business to get aired during the Superbowl.

This was sort of a slam dunk for me. Even with these good arguments in the mix.

I liked the subversive message of taking a song that had lyrics that are pretty backwards, and all the pink princess toys, and turning it all into an anthem that says NOPE. Admittedly, I was also pretty happy that the Beasties had signed onto this. Because of course they would have had to. Right?

Oh. Wait. Nope. The remaining Beasties make it clear that they accuse GoldieBlox of using their song in an ad. Something that MCA specifically requested in his will to never be done. They didn’t sue, they simply accused. It seemed to be upsetting to them, too, because they specifically like the mission statement of GoldieBlox. The guys grew up a lot, you know.

What was even more brass balls for GoldieBlox than using a song they didn’t even get permission to use, was that they hadpreemptively sued the Beasties for the right to do it under the label of free speech parody. Something that at least one expert in fair use legalities said was likely a legally tight case. At least tight enough to hold legal water, that is.

My ass stopped shaking to the new “Girls” for a second. Now I’m not sure what the hell I feel. I think I support GoldieBlox. Right? Feminism? STEM for girls? The right to free speech? Wait. Where do I stand?

It’s a bit harder to dance to that music.

The next shot out of this mess is a needle scratching across the record for me, though. The Beastie Boys didn’t even sue GoldieBlox. Whhhhhut?

Dammit, Debbie. Dammit.

 

Six Outrageous Things about Texas That Have Nothing to Do With Women's Rights

Recently, Texas has done some unbelievable things--changed the space-time continuum, made rape kits into abortions, got out of voting fraud (but wasn't so lenient on these poor senior citizens), and managed to turn tampons into feces and urine...all before stripping the state of the majority of their abortion clinics, prompting the lovely Erick Erickson to encourage ladies to use coat hangers instead.

And with all this hullabaloo surrounding SB5 and then SB1,  people continually seem surprised that these over-the-top political maneuvers and backward logical stretches could happen in real life. To which we have to say, well, guys, it's Texas.

Let's not forget all of the other completely sane and rational moves the state has made.

1) They tried to secede.

And unlike the other states' little, laughable petitions, they got more than 100,000 signatures and sent that shit off to the White House.

But Obama told them "no".

Shame, really.

2) Creationism

No, seriously. Texas is solely responsible for almost half of America believing that the Earth is 10,000 years old. (Well, the Bible helps a little, but, honestly, even half of the people reading the Bible as, well, gospel, believe in a mix of Creationism and evolution.)

Here's how it works. Texas is the nation's largest textbook distributor. Come on, we all remember Texas McGraw Hill, right? So, once every ten years, the Texas Board of Education revises its standards for teaching and textbooks. This board is crazy politicized and is made up of only 15 people. In fact, the chairman, Don McLeroy, served for only a short time on his local board before moving up to the big stuff. He is an unapologetic Young Earth Creationist. Awesome.

For all you people mired in reality and science out there, Young Earth Creationists believe the following (according to their website):

"The book of Genesis should be taken as a literal account of the pre- and early history of the earth. The creation week is taken at face value: consecutive 24-hour periods adding up to six calendar days. Allowing for gaps in Old Testament genealogies, this means that universe was created between 10,000 and 20,000 years ago. YECs also hold that geological data, including the fossil record, should be understood in light of the worldwide flood depicted in the account of Noah and the ark."

And this is important enough to repeat: Texas only revises its curriculum once a decade. So, basically, it has control over entire generations of American learners. How is this possible, you ask?

"Texas is one of the nation's largest textbook markets because it is one of the few where the state decides what books schools can buy rather than leaving it up to local districts, which means publishers that get their books approved can count on millions of dollars in sales. Further, publishers craft their standard textbooks based on the requirements of the biggest buyers. As a result, the Texas board has the power to shape the textbooks that children around the country read for years to come." -- PBS

So, yeah, Texas, fighting science in the school systems around the nation.

For Teresa

3) They kill people.

Despite their intense love for life--be it right after conception, or during the embryonic stage, or perhaps as it grows into a fetus (but rarely, of course, after it leaves the womb)--they've just executed their 500th person.

52-year-old Kimberly LaGayle McCarthy died by lethal injection in January 2013 after being convicted of killing her neighbor in 1997.

4) They shoot animals with laser guns...while jogging.

Thank goodness Governor Rick Perry carries his trusty handgun with laser accessory attached when he goes out for a run. Otherwise, how would he be able to shoot coyotes out there in the Texas wilderness?

You see? Right there. A shining example of how very necessary our second-amendment rights are. 

But that is a cute puppy, though, right?

5) They totally ignore their poverty rate.

While Gov. Rick Perry brags about the falling unemployment numbers and the new job creations, he unfailingly forgets to mention that 18 percent of Texans are living in poverty. Actually, it's more like he's just ignoring it, as there has been little-to-no legislation aimed at dealing with the problem.

With all the money and jobs coming into the state, how can so many suffer poverty?

"The two biggest predictors of poverty are poor education and chronic health problems. Only about 80 percent of Texans have a high school diploma, the second lowest in the country, and Texas has the highest number of uninsured citizens," states KXAN.

I'd make a creationism joke here, but I just can't find poverty and lack of reliable education and opportunities funny.

6) They force their own legislators out of the state.

Years before Sen. Wendy Davis stood for more than 11 hours in a one-woman filibuster to stop the most over-arching abortion regulations the nation has seen in decades, Texas was running its democrats out on a rail, almost literally.

In 2003, 50 state representatives fled to Oklahoma and chilled there for as long as it took to block a redistricting bill that would have lost them at least five seats in Congress.

"Political observers say the redistricting plan before the House could mean a shift of up to five seats to the Republicans, giving them a 20-12 edge over Democrats in the Texas congressional delegation and better odds of keeping control of Congress." --CNN 

You tricky Texas republicans, you. Bet you didn't count on the amazing, vanishing democrats!

So, as you can see, women's rights take up just a small percentage of the shenanigans Texas is capable of.

Remember the Alamo, right, guys?

Abercrombie and Fitch Kerfuffle Blog Share

After the CEO of Abercrombie and Fitch came out with his less-than-savory remarks about their advertising techniques and sizings, there have been a multitude of intelligent, well-thought-out blog posts and articles address the situation.

Two of our bloggers have taken on completely different areas of the issue, and what they've come up with is pure gold.

First Elizabeth Hawksworth writes "Dear Mike Jeffries, The "Abercrombie Kids I Knew Wouldn't Call You Cool" stating:

"The popular kids I knew weren't interested in perpetuating stereotypes. The kids I knew weren't friends, but they were friendly. They stood up for kids who got teased, and they fought for equality. There were kids who did care about exclusivity and putting others down, but they were few and far between when I was in high school. So, out of a huge population of high school students, you've got maybe five percent interested in the marketing strategy you're coming out with. What about the other 95 percent?"

Meanwhile, Monika from Aias.ca talks about the campaign to give your Abercrombie wear to those in need in her piece, Giving Abercrombie and Fitch Clothes to the Homeless Is Not Inspiring; It's Insulting.

"Yesterday I noticed a video going viral on social networking. In the video, a man is giving Abercrombie and Fitch clothes from local thrift shops to homeless people in an effort to "insult" the Abercrombie and Fitch CEO, Mike Jeffries because of his fat phobic and tasteless comments about not wanting "uncool" or "fat" people to wear the brand.

I honestly can't think of anything more classist and insulting than this. Basically, what this act is suggesting is that homeless people are so disgusting, untouchable, and "the lowest of the low" that anything they represent or wear is to be considered a horrible insult to that brand. It's fantastic to help the homeless, but if you are just exploiting their misfortune by trying to make a political statement, that's just plain...mean."

To read more about what either of these two women have to say, check out their blogs!

Elizabeth Hawksworth - Writer
Aias.ca




 

Putting Delta Gamma to Sound

So, I read this article / email this afternoon, and I've been ruminating on it.

For those who didn't immediately click on it, it's a diatribe against members of a sorority who apparently are not being social enough with their partner fraternity, and boy, did the leader tell them about themselves.

Tomorrow a bunch of us are going to define what feminism means to each of us as individuals. Why? Because feminism, especially in its third wave, with all the "personal, individual choice" involved gets muddy and convoluted.

Reading this article really put some thoughts into my head about it. On the one hand, I laughed and laughed. Wow. I mean, really. Best thing I've read this week, probably. And I'm sure it's not going to affect every girl with the "internalized misogyny" (Anne Theriault, 2013) spewed all over the place. But it will affect some. And the sorority itself is cringing. Talk about "horrible PR," poor Julia's rant is sure to get her kicked out of the club (do they call them that? IDEK about sororities).

Let me copy a few choice phrases from it, and below, well, there's a video of a dramatic reading I did of the email which is NOT safe for work, and NOT safe for your kids. I have a piss-poor sorority voice, but then again, who said they all had to have high-pitched feminine voices, right? Women are women, yes?

I've been getting texts on texts about people LITERALLY being so fucking AWKWARD and so fucking BORING. If you're reading this right now and saying to yourself "But oh em gee Julia, I've been having so much fun with my sisters this week!", then punch yourself in the face right now so that I don't have to fucking find you on campus to do it myself.

Newsflash you stupid cocks: FRATS DON'T LIKE BORING SORORITIES. Oh wait, DOUBLE FUCKING NEWSFLASH: SIGMA NU IS NOT GOING TO WANT TO HANG OUT WITH US IF WE FUCKING SUCK, which by the way in case you're an idiot and need it spelled out for you, WE FUCKING SUCK SO FAR. 

Are you people fucking retarded? That's not a rhetorical question, I LITERALLY want you to email me back telling me if you're mentally slow so I can make sure you don't go to anymore night time events. 

"But Julia!", you say in a whiny little bitch voice to your computer screen as you read this email, "I've been cheering on our teams at all the sports, doesn't that count for something?" NO YOU STUPID FUCKING ASS HATS, IT FUCKING DOESN'T. 

Without further ado:





(PS - This was kind of fun. HAH)

Even more fun? Their hacked page.



 

The Steubenville Files - Blog Share

Two young men were convicted and given a year in juvenile hall for "essentially" raping a young woman. One also sentenced to few more years for having nude pictures of her on his phone.

The press coverage was abominable. Concentrating on the perpetrators, football players who made good grades and until this debacle had their whole happy future in front of them. (I know, right? If only there were something they could have done to prevent this from happening to the. Like, you know, not video taping themselves laughing about peeing on an unconscious girl.)

Pollychromatic has some intense words for the press and for the public in general. This is not "essentially" rape, she says to Candy Crowley. This is specifically rape. And women are not essentially people. They are specifically people.

Anne, at The Belle Jar, expands on that, saying:

"I am really tired of people saying "imaging if the Steubenville rape survivor was your sister, or your daughter." There's this idea that men shouldn't rape women because we're all someone's sister, daughter, wife, etc. This is fucking wrong. Mend shouldn't rape women because a) we're people and b) no one should rape anyone. I'm tired of being humanized because I'm, like, related to men."

Accidentally Mommy is just completely fed up with the whole thing, and urges people to take it upon themselves to change the rape culture in which we live.

My side of this? It's coming. Along with a blog from another fantastic blogger in which she speaks truthfully to her sons about what exactly is going on here. Stay tuned, and make sure to check our heated topics section regularly for incredible stories about incredibly stupid, enraging current events.