Michelle Obama in 2012?

By Lianne George - Monday, August 25, 2008 at 11:57 PM - 0 Comments

Did we just witness the advent of the next great U.S. politician?

For those who missed it, Michelle Obama’s address at the Democratic Convention in Denver last night was pretty spectacular. 

For weeks, observers have been complaining about her inability to convey sufficient warmth or, as one CBC commentator called it this evening, to generate the requisite “warm-and-fuzzies.” (Isn’t that what White House pets and Christmas decorations are for?)  But last night, she nailed all of the key First Lady criteria: affability, sincerity, accessibility, shiny hair. Her critics will have their work cut out for them in identifying traces of anti-Americanism and elitism in this speech—the core of which outlined the key elements of her “improbable” (her words) personal journey, as well as her husband’s. Barack Obama has one hell of a teammate. Now they just have to sustain the optimism. It’s a long way down.

The full text of Michelle Obama’s DNC speech is available here on The Huffington Post

You know what would help sell this whole God thing? Some hot nuns.

By Sarmishta Subramanian - Monday, August 25, 2008 at 3:53 PM - 0 Comments

For too long now, sexy nuns have languished in the shadows of convents and abbeys without so much as a catcall to flatter them. At last their hour has come. An Italian priest has announced a beauty pageant, the Sister Italia contest, along the lines of the Miss Italy pageant, but for ladies who won’t kick the habit. (No more of those, I promise.) Father Antonio Rungi, an entrepreneurial priest based in a town near Naples, seems to have been inspired by the strides nuns have made in recent years. “Do you really think nuns are all wizened, funereal old ladies?” the Times of London quoted him as saying. “Today it’s not like that anymore…” Father Rungi took special notice of nuns from Africa and Latin America—particularly Brazil. I’d make a joke here but, really, do I need to?

I’ll keep it short as this news will surely give media outlets everywhere a chance to run some photos of lovelies in wimples: Sophia Lauren in White Sister (see above), or Deborah Kerr in Black Narcissus, say. But in brief: no, there’s no swimsuit round; yes, there is an age cap (40); and Father Rungi expects a thousand or so nuns to enter. He’ll start posting their pictures next month on his theological blog (which appears to be down right now). Assuming it’s back up, the contest will soon start driving up site traffic and oh, yes, getting out the Word of God. Continue…

Witchy women

By Lianne George - Friday, August 22, 2008 at 6:45 PM - 0 Comments

A new study from the University of Derby claims that, for the past 20 years, more than 50,000 women a year have left the Church of England because they don’t feel it speaks to them. But here’s the strange part, the study’s author, sociologist Kristin Aune, concluded that many of the younger British women leaving the church are instead taking up…Wicca. Why Wicca? Three words, Aune says. Sarah Michelle Gellar:

“Because of its focus on female empowerment, young women are attracted by Wicca, popularised by the TV series Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

“Young women tend to express egalitarian values and dislike the traditionalism and hierarchies they imagine are integral to the church.”

Huh. Clearly, Buffy was a very powerful (and sassy!) spiritual muse. But I was under the impression that Hollywood was after us to take up Scientology and yoga and Catholicism and Kabbalah and The Secret.

Make up your mind, TV and movies!

Prescription: Turn that frown upside-down

By Lianne George - Friday, August 22, 2008 at 4:19 PM - 0 Comments

Researchers are now saying that some of women’s greatest health challenges can be remedied with one thing: happiness. Simple enough, right?

A team of researchers at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, questioned 255 women with breast cancer about their well-being and their levels of happiness, optimism, anxiety and depression before they were diagnosed. They studied them against 367 healthy control subjects. The study, published in the journal BMC Cancer, concluded that those with a positive outlook on life were better protected against the disease. Continue…

A scientist AND hot? She's got my vote

By Lianne George - Friday, August 22, 2008 at 3:09 PM - 0 Comments

Rule number one: when you’re the battle-weary leader of the Opposition, and an election could be imminent, don’t introduce your new star female candidate, an esteemed scientist, by pointing out that she’s hot. It is sure to come back to haunt you.

Today, during a media scrum, a reporter took up the matter of Stéphane Dion’s earlier comment about Dr. Kirsty Duncan, the 41-year-old University of Toronto professor who will run for the Liberals in Etobicoke North in the next election.

The following transcript of the exchange was provided by Maclean’s Aaron Wherry, long-time Skirts reader, first time contributor:

Reporter: Mr. Dion, earlier during your speech, when you were introducing Dr. Kirsty Duncan, you made a remark about her. ‘I prefer the face of science today than the face of the old Einstein, that’s my own taste.’ That could be construed as a sexist remark…

Dion: Oh, come on (laughing). I’m surprised at your question.

Reporter: … and did you mean any offense?

Dion: No, I think to the contrary. I don’t understand your question, sorry.

Reporter: Well, the question is, for someone in politics to compliment someone on their looks, some people consider that to be inappropriate.

Dion: I’m pleased that a young lady is one of the eminent scientists that help us to fight climate change and decided to be part of this fight as the candidate for the Liberal party at the next election. Do you have a problem with that?

Reporter: No, I’m just asking. It’s a reasonable question.

Dion: Well, I ask you a reasonable question as well.

Reasonable questions all around. To give Dion the benefit of the doubt, his comment was surely intended as a harmless compliment. He’s been accused of choosing his words poorly before. But as a politician, he should know better. It’s pretty widely understood that when you point out how hot a lady scientist is, implicit is the assumption that her hotness comes as a surprise because, well, she understands science. Continue…

Who's making who crazy?

By Sarmishta Subramanian - Friday, August 22, 2008 at 12:46 PM - 0 Comments

It’s interesting to watch the ripple effects of the American Psychological Association’s report last week that having an abortion does not mean a higher risk of mental illness. Pro-life/anti-choice groups are in conniptions about it: see here, here, and here. Wonder if the report will change anything in South Dakota, where a recent law already requires that doctors tell women who are considering an abortion that it might, well, make them nutso. And if John McCain will say with a straight face he’s heard nothing about such a report, or this strange practice you call abortion. (See Sarah Blustain’s recent piece on him in the New Republic:

Despite all this evidence, McCain’s anti-abortion fervor hasn’t registered with the public–in no small part because, in addition to his waffling on choice in the 2000 campaign, he hardly sounds like a true believer on other reproductive-health-related issues. When pressed to speak about them, he often evinces stunning ignorance, a fact that helps reassure the moderate middle that he could not possibly be as conservative as his record suggests. In early July, for example, a reporter raised the issue of whether it was “unfair” that insurance companies cover Viagra but not birth control. His response was painful to watch: “I certainly do not want to discuss that issue,” he said immediately. She then asked about his votes against legislation requiring insurance plans to cover prescription birth control, legislation the anti-contraception right strongly opposed. He rubbed his mouth, rolled his eyes, flexed his fingers, crossed his arms, and more, before admitting, “I don’t know enough about it to give you an informed answer.” Finally, he told the reporter that he did not recall how he voted. “It’s something that I had not thought much about,” he added.

At another press conference, when a journalist asked him whether he thought contraceptives help stop the spread of HIV, he paused–for much too long–then answered, “You’ve stumped me.” The reporter asked whether U.S. taxpayer money should fund contraception to prevent aids in Africa. “I’m not very wise on it,” McCain said. What about grants for sex education? A long pause, then, “Ahhh. I think I support the president’s policy.” And, when the reporter pressed again, he finally said (after a reported twelve-second pause), “I’ve never gotten into these issues before”–an odd statement, given that he has voted on legislation related to all of them.

Continue…

And now a word from your ovaries

By Lianne George - Thursday, August 21, 2008 at 5:30 PM - 0 Comments

Just because Sarah Haskins is awesome, click here to see her latest Target: Women report on Current TV.  It’s on the weird and wonderful world of birth control advertising. Nothing she does will ever live up to her yogurt report in my heart. Still, this is funny as hell.

Saudi Arabia's first hotel for working women

By Lianne George - Thursday, August 21, 2008 at 4:08 PM - 0 Comments

What do you do when you’re a businesswoman living in a country like Saudi Arabia, where until a few months ago, it was illegal for you to set foot into a hotel (where business is often conducted) without a guardian or “mahram”? (Now, after a Royal Decree was issued by Saudi prince Talal Abdul Aziz Al Saud earlier this year, the only requirement for women checking into a hotel is their national ID card. Also, the front desk must inform the local police of their room reservation and the duration of their stay.)

Well, the new Luthan Hotel and Spa, Saudi Arabia’s first women-only hotel, opened in March, was designed to ameliorate the situation. The project came together under the direction of 20 Saudi princesses and businesswoman, according to an article in Marie Claire magazine this month. Men (even boys) are forbidden from entering the property. All staff are women. Inside is a sort of “sanctuary” for female professionals where they can remove their veils, go for a work-out, or hang out at the spa, and presumably hold meetings without ever having to set eyes on a dude. Which is great. Except of course it doesn’t resolve the little matter of having to conduct business with men, who comprise 95 per cent of the workforce.

Sex Ed? Degrassi? Something's working

By Lianne George - Thursday, August 21, 2008 at 3:08 PM - 0 Comments

Is it official yet? That teenagers are more likely to engage in responsible sex (or abstain, for that matter) when they know a thing or two about how things work? According to a new Statistics Canada report, the number of 15 to 19 year-olds who reported having sex at least once is on the decline, down to 43 per cent in 2005 from 47 per cent in 1996/1997.

In and of itself, this news isn’t good or bad. The kids are always going to have the sex, no matter what kinds of fire-and-brimstone-type videos they see in health class. The real good news is that, if the report is to be believed, the way they’re going about it has improved: more consideration, more condoms.

Teenage girls, in particular, are holding off. In 1996/1997, over half (51 per cent) of Canadian girls 15 to 19 had had sex at least once. That number has sunk to 43 per cent. Which would seem to suggest that they’re more informed about the consequences of rash decisions. For one thing (Jamie Lynn Spears and her gushy Ok! Magazine spread aside), they’re figuring out that being a teen mom comes with a hefty price tag—and not everyone can pay it off with a few well-placed media snapshots.

So score one for Canada’s liberal sex-ed stylings. Continue…

Meet Skirts

By Lianne George - Thursday, August 21, 2008 at 1:24 PM - 0 Comments

All right, so the Women’s News Blog is not entirely a new idea. There are others that have come before us—Salon.com’s Broadsheet, and Slate’s The XX Factor, to name a couple of our favourites—that tackle all things girl (politics, culture, health, crockery) in smart, witty, thoughtful ways. But we’ve been passing around their blog posts and weighing in among ourselves for so long now, we figured the time had come to start one of our own. Besides, the Canadian woman’s experience is unique in its own ways. For one thing, we wear toques.

Our first step, of course, was to settle on a name for our blog. This is harder said than done. We wanted something that didn’t invoke reams of earnest windbaggery. For this reason, we avoided names like Herspective and Gynosaurus Rex. We decided not to go the feminine hygiene route either, even though feminine hygiene products are inherently funny, with their tabs and wings and promises of freshness. Cerebral Kotex—a brilliant suggestion from a friend—was off the list. Nor did we want to pretend to be any more edgy or grrlicious than we actually are. Chixx just sounded embarrassing.

We settled on Skirts. It just sort of fit (see?).

More to come…