It’s now nearly 11:30PM EST (New York Time). At 12 midnight EST I will be porting all the posts and comments here on Feministe in Exile back to the main blog, and the conversation can resume there.

So if you happen to be hanging here just before midnight, please compose any comments you want to make in your favourite text editor on your own computer, and then wait until I give the all-clear to make your comments back on the main blog.

Cross your fingers, everybody!

But they came at a price — and as usual, women paid. As Ann put it, It’s pretty fucking cramped underneath this bus, what with 50% of Americans down here. The Stupak amendment to the health care bill, which blocks even private insurance companies from covering abortion services, passed — with 64 Democrats supporting it. You can read their names here. Thirty-nine Democrats voted against health care reform. The majority of those Democrats also voted for the Stupak amendment.

That’s right: There were 21 Democrats who voted to kill the health care bill, but who also voted for an anti-choice amendment to attach to that bill. If any Democrats need to be taken out in the next primary cycle — besides Stupak — it’s these 21.

I’m happy that a health care bill passed in the house. But checking my email Saturday morning and getting word about the Stupak amendment felt like a gut-punch. Spending the afternoon listening to the floor debates, and then watching the votes tick in, was sickening. I don’t envy Nancy Pelosi’s position, and I don’t actually fault her for putting the amendment up for a vote — but I do fault the anti-choice Democrats who voted for it. I especially fault Rep. Stupak, who is a Democrat himself. It’s one thing to be a pro-life Dem who supports lowering the abortion rate through contraception access and sexual health education (oh, and comprehensive health care reform), but who doesn’t need to punish women. It’s quite another to sponsor a bill that strips health care from women in the name of “pro-life” politics. Of course, Stupak and his co-sponsor, Joe Pitts, are no strangers to compromising women’s lives in the name of life:

The amendment, named for Representatives Bart Stupak, D-Mich, and Joe Pitts, R-Penn. Stupak is a so-called “Democrat for Life;” Pitts has been a dogged supporter of failed abstinence-only policies, domestically and internationally, and was among those who succeeded in adding language forbidding the provision of contraceptive supplies for HIV-positive women in US global AIDS funding.

Bravo, really guys.

Reproductive health care is health care. And thanks to spineless, misogynist Democrats, women are not going to get the care they need. Beyond that, this is just another example of a party reliant on women to win elections throwing women under the bus as soon as our needs become inconvenient. As Ann says:

[Liberal dudes will] be explaining that it’s not a big deal because the Stupak amendment can be stripped out by the conference committee (which I very much hope it will, but am not holding my breath) and because there are potential loopholes (though I have yet to hear a convincing one).

On some level, I don’t care about the nitty-gritty details of this amendment. This isn’t just about how the money is allocated or what workarounds exist. This has me so incredibly infuriated because it further segregates abortion as something different, off the menu of regular health care. It is a huge backward step in the battle to convey — not just politically, but to women in their everyday lives — that reproductive health care is normal and necessary, and must be there if (or, more accurately, when) you need it.

This also sets apart women’s rights from the Democratic/progressive/whatever agenda. As something expendable. But fundamental rights for women are not peripheral. They are core. And not just because of so-called “progressive” values. In a political sense, too: Seeing as how the Democratic party relies on women voters to win elections, you would think they would have come around to this no-brainer by now.

Yes, we got hosed.

I’m also not confident that this will be taken out. For that to happen, the Senate could not include the same restrictions in their version of the bill — and with Democrats like Bob Casey and Ben Nelson in the Senate, and with pro-choice senators like Claire McCaskill shrugging their shoulders, I think the chances of similar language not being adopted is slim. White House reaction has been mixed — first they sounded like they weren’t touching this one with a ten-foot pole, but now Obama has issued a statement saying that women’s insurance choices shouldn’t be restricted.

Who knows — maybe this will all work out. But that doesn’t negate the fact that 64 House Democrats voted for the Stupak amendment; it doesn’t negate the fact that a Democrat introduced it; it doesn’t negate the fact that a whole lot of liberals looked the other way.

But what’s really chapping my hide today — almost as much as the amendment itself — is the number of “progressive” dudes who have lectured me in the past 24 hours on How This All Works, and the number of progressive dudes who have just stayed silent. I’m apparently not the only one. Thanks, guys. Glad to know that women’s health care isn’t really health care, or isn’t part of the “big picture.”

So what can we do? A few things. Put pressure on your senator to only support a health care bill if it maintains the legal status quo on abortion — that’s especially important if you live in a state with an anti-choice or middling senator. Find out how your representative voted on Stupak and call their office, either to thank them or to tell them that you’ll be supporting a pro-choice democrat in the next primary. Call Stupak’s office at 906-863-2800: Tell him that you will be supporting a pro-choice primary challenger, and that you’re appalled at his amendment. Donate to the National Network of Abortion Funds — they’re needed more than ever. Sign this letter to Nancy Pelosi.

Other ideas?

The Asian Women Carnival: I’m very fond of this carnival, though it’s only been running a short time. Go read the most recent edition. The fourth should be up soon at viva la vida, on the theme of Storytelling, or reclaiming our selves through our words. In the mean time, check out the carnival homepage.

The Carnival Against Sexual Violence: It’s run by Marcella Chester of abyss2hope and is published twice a month. The carnival covers everything from law to personal stories to raising awareness. Go read the most recent edition. The 82nd edition will be held on 15 November, so get your entries in before then. More details are at the carnival homepage.

The Carnival of Feminist Parenting: This carnival is based at Mothers for Women’s Lib and is run entirely by Anji. Go read the most recent edition. Submission details can be found at the carnival homepage. Expect the next carnival on the 15th.

The Carnival of Feminists: COF is up and running again, thanks to Lindsay and Amelia of Female Impersonator. Go read the most recent edition. Don’t forget to read the carnival homepage. The next edition will be held on the 11th by Scarleteen, with a particular focus on teens and young feminist voices, so submit.

The Disability Carnival: It’s pretty fabulous stuff. Go read the most recent edition. The 60th carnival will be hosted at FWD/Forward. The theme is disability and intersectionality; check out the call for submissions. The carnival is coordinated by Penny L. Richards at Disability Studies, Temple U., so more details there.

The Down Under Feminists Carnival: The carnival, coordinated by Lauredhel from Hoyden About Town, covers posts of feminist interest from around Australia and New Zealand. Go read the most recent edition. See the carnival homepage for information on how to submit to the next edition at The Professional Lap Cat.

These carnivals don’t run themselves, so get commenting and nominating posts, your own or those of others. Some of the carnivals also need hosts for future editions. It’s a lot of fun (and I know because I’ve hosted the Down Under Feminists Carnival and the Carnival of Feminists in the past! And will be one of the hosts of the Disability Carnival in a few days!) and a great promotional tool.

My boy just turned ten years old (long time readers of this blog, yes, you are old) and he is an absolute joy.  He’s still affectionate with his mama, and doesn’t hesitate to give kisses or hold my hand or talk to me about the dramas in his life.  It’s pretty great.  We take long walks together in the evening and this is our talking time, the space we make available to discuss our lives and ask for opinions and share our secrets without the distractions of our home duties nagging at the corners of our minds.  Sometimes Ethan shares stories about his classmates at school, often about one in particular who was once his friend but has morphed into E’s worst enemy.

I was never fond of this other kid, or his family for that matter.  Culturally conservative and very religious, they were all very vocal about the kinds of traditional values that make me cringe:  strict gender roles, authoritative parenting, support for political measures that amount to very thinly veiled racist beliefs.  Ethan, being the child of a feminist and a child of color, was skeptical about some of the things this other child had to say about women or Latin@s for example, and when their friendship ended exchanged some words with the kid that amounted to E calling out the other kid for being “unfair” to others for superficial reasons.  Which then led to the kid mocking Ethan’s name and race.  Ethan, responding with humor, mocked the kid right back.   “Yeah, but you’re German, dude!” And with a startlingly accurate gutteral accent,  “Ach, ach, ach, nicht, nicht, nicht, ach, ach, ach, nicht!“  According to Ethan’s report, the children on the playground that witnessed this argument sided mostly with Ethan.

It might be a tad problematic from my adult perspective, but heartening as well.  E knew the kid was in the wrong, and he defended himself in a way that revealed the absurdity of bigotry.

I reminded him later that he is also quite German.

On our walks we talk a lot about what it means to live in the world compromised by discrimination.  This means I have a child who knows words like “discrimination” and “sexism” and  “accessibility” and can use them appropriately.  I’m always on the look for teachable moments, and do what I can to make them worthwhile.

The time we saw a working dog in training at the grocery store?  A perfect time to talk about working animals, disability, accessibility.

The time the boys at the birthday party didn’t want to watch “Coraline” because they said it was a “girl movie”?  A perfect time to talk about masculinity and homosociality and sexism.  Also a time to discuss our shared appreciation of a Good Story.

The time E accidentally let a curse word slip in front of me, despite being a TOTAL CURSE WORD PRUDE?  A perfect time to talk about appropriate social venues for certain language.  And we don’t really care at home within reason.  And don’t tell Grandma I said that.

The time E wanted to know if my friend was a boy or a girl?  The perfect time to discuss not only the performance and creation of gender, but also to discuss that we have loved ones who are queer and that they face discrimination and diminished equality because of bigotry.

The time Ethan asked, “If the baby is inside the mom, how the hell does it get out?”  SEX TALK.

When he slips into bigoted commentary?  I challenge it in a friendly but pointed way that (I hope) encourages him to reconsider the bases of his thought.

When I explain my values I am passionate (AACS is so cool!) but keep it age appropriate (not using the word “phallologocentric” but talking about linguistics and what words imply).  He feels free to come to me about any questions he has about the world, and I think one of the reasons he does is that I’ve been nothing but open to discussion.  Especially on our walks.

There has been a lot of discussion about parenting and feminism in the femosphere over the last few years, and I wanted to open space on the blog again so we can discuss how to teach our children our values.  It’s one thing to say that we ought to teach our children our progressive values, but it’s another thing in the details of actually doing it.  And if you’re not a parent, tell us how you were taught.  What works?

Here’s the text of his floor speech:

“Madam Speaker, I have spent much of my adult life fighting for greater health care rights and universal health coverage. This bill, H.R. 3962, makes great strides toward achieving those goals.

“Around the country, we see millions of people with inadequate or no coverage, with another 14,000 Americans joining the ranks of the uninsured each day. We see families who go to sleep at night knowing they are one serious illness away from bankruptcy, the reason for 55% of all bankruptcies filed last year. We see the rising ranks of the unemployed who face going it alone in the prohibitively expensive individual coverage market – or worse, going without insurance at all. And we see 20,000 people die every year because they have no health insurance.

“At the same time that this stark reality hits hard working Americans, insurance companies have conspired to keep costs high. These costs, upward of 15-35% squandered on outrageously high administrative costs, do nothing to make people healthier but do much to line the pockets of insurance companies and help their corporate bottom line.

“This is unacceptable. We must take action. That’s why I support the Affordable Health Care for America Act.

“As with any legislation, there have been some compromises made along the way. I would have preferred a single payer system, the most effective and least costly way to implement a health delivery system. But I, like so many of my colleagues, have come to see a competitive public option as the best available way to refocus our misguided health care approach. A public option will put patients and doctors, not corporate bottom lines, at the forefront. This public option will add much needed competition into an insurance market that must be kept honest, and it will work to drive down rates.

“Madam Speaker, this past August, political pundits and TV-talking heads had the public option dead on arrival. Yet, because of the efforts of progressive Members in Congress, in which I was proud to join, we succeeded in keeping the public option in this bill and ensured that the American people would be given an alternative to corporate health insurance. And make no mistake about it – the public option weathered the storms of misinformation, slander, and downright lies because the American people saw through the political game playing and saw the public option for what it is – an option, not a mandate, that will help stem the cost of ever-rising health care costs.

“In addition to the public option, this national health reform bill implements key insurance industry reforms, strengthens Medicare, and immediately gives hope to the millions of Americans currently living without health insurance.

“It will end discrimination against pre-existing conditions, and end the cruel practice of rescission, which allows insurance companies to drop people from coverage if their illness is considered too expensive. This bill also guarantees that people with insurance will not face devastating costs when they get sick by placing limits on out-of-pocket medical expenses, and creating, for the first time ever, a voluntary long-term care program. And H.R. 3962 would end the blanket exemption insurance companies currently enjoy from anti-trust laws. With this change, we can now bring anti-trust enforcement against the egregious practices of price-fixing and market allocation.

“H.R. 3962 contains numerous provisions that help our seniors by strengthening and enhancing the Medicare program. This bill reduces the donut hole to $500 immediately and eliminates it entirely by 2019. It allows the HHS secretary to negotiate prescription drug costs, which I have long advocated for, eliminates out-of-pocket expenses for preventive care for seniors, and extends the solvency of the Medicare trust fund for at least five years.

“Small businesses also receive desperately needed assistance from this bill. Initially, businesses with up to 25 employees, then growing to businesses with up to 100 employees by 2015, will be able to join the health exchange, which will allow small business employees to take advantage of group rates and a broader range of insurance options – a key change that will go a long way toward helping small businesses keep down their number one expense, which is the cost of providing health care coverage.

“For America’s young people, who make up 29% of the uninsured in America, H.R. 3962 will permit parents to extend coverage to their children until their 27th birthday.

“To help American families defray the costs of health coverage, this bill extends assistance on a sliding scale to families earning up to $88,000 per year. This will go a long way toward ending the cruel choice between health care coverage and other necessities.

“Madam Speaker, there are some who have said that health care reform is too hard. There are those who have allowed misinformation and politics to push them to root against helping their fellow Americans to have access to quality, affordable health care. There are even those who, for reasons I fail to grasp, want to continue status quo.

“To those people, Madam Speaker, I say – the status quo is not an option. We have a remarkable opportunity in front of us. We have an opportunity to make fundamental changes to the way we view health care and deliver services, to implement a competitive public health insurance option that puts the patient before the quarterly financial report. And, with passage of this bill, we will be able to say for the first time in this country that just because you lose your job, you won’t lose your health insurance.

“Madam Speaker, this is monumental. This is historic. And I am proud to cast my vote in favor the Affordable Health Care for America Act.”

Nadler also announced that he will oppose the anti-choice Stupak amendment:

“The Stupak amendment requires women to plan for unplanned pregnancy,” said Nadler. “This defies logic and is absurd,” continued Nadler. “This is a bill to extend health care to all Americans. It should not be used as a political football to change existing law regarding abortion coverage.”

Here are the lyrics in Swedish and English.

*Prohibit individuals who receive the affordability tax credits from purchasing a private insurance plan that covers abortion, despite the fact that a majority of health insurance plans currently cover abortion.
*Result in a de facto ban on private insurance companies providing abortion coverage in the health insurance exchange, since the vast majority of participants would receive affordability tax credits.
*Prohibit the public option from providing abortion care, despite the fact that it would be funded through private premium dollars.

It would, in effect, remove abortion coverage even from private health insurance. This is scary stuff, and it’s expected to pass. The House is voting on it as I write this, so please call your representative RIGHT NOW. If you don’t know who your representative is, you can find out here.

I just put in a call to Congresswoman Yvette Clarke, my representative, and urged her to oppose the Stupak amendment. Please call your representative now, and tell them their constituents want to see a NO vote on Stupak.