Sometimes It Pays to Be a B*tch

I was a nice girl, a people-pleaser — and I looked the part. California blonde, a ready smile, and soft-spoken: a nice girl. I got good grades, played on the girls’ tennis team where I would never, ever argue an umpire’s call, and was always pleasant to everyone. The problem was that I never spoke up or voiced my own opinion, no matter how much I may have disagreed with others’ politics, beliefs, or ego-driven opinions. I just nodded my head, smiled, and let them think I agreed with them even if I knew they were wrong. Of course, I wanted to be a nice girl and not, heaven forbid, a bitch!

The word “bitch” gets overused quite a lot for women. It seems that whenever a woman asserts any type of authority, there is bound to be someone who doesn’t like it, and the title “bitch” gets bandied about. Granted, women as well as men are apt to use the word when referring to a female who has been especially nasty, or one whom they feel has used her position of power in a negative way.

I once worked at a newspaper where people completely avoided, if at all possible, one woman who worked in Human Resources. As a newbie I never had any dealings with her, until one day there was a mistake in the deductions on my pay stub. I asked to see her and went in breeze-y and pleasant, expecting that we would resolve the problem without incident. I came out frazzled, teeth clenched and shocked. I was also mad as hell. She had made the 20 minute session as unpleasant as hell.

“What is her problem?” I asked a colleague who saw me coming back to my desk in a snit.
His response was a simple summation: “Her? She’s a bitch” — and he was right on target.
Alright, it was what it was, and I did kind of accept the use of the word. Certainly I thought that particular woman in HR was a definite bitch. I was the nice girl, remember?

But “bitch” is also a word that is too often used to describe a powerful woman, a competent woman, or a woman of strength. The greatest women of all time have had the title used to describe them, albeit not always to their faces. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, England’s Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, etc.

Actually, the word bitch can be traced way back to Elizabeth I of England. Incensed by her rejection of his marriage proposal, King Philip II of Spain called her “a power-sated bitch.” He was further humiliated when his Spanish Armada was soundly trounced by the petite queen’s navy. Her own brilliant military and naval acumen were salt in the wound to his ego.
Very few women are true bitches when the word is used to denote a vicious mean-spirited person.

The vast majority of women who have been called bitches have been women of strength and courage who used their minds to create positions of power in the world and made sane, competent contributions in business, medicine and government. A CEO of anything is still a CEO regardless of gender. They have to make tough decisions that may not be agreeable to all who work for them. Men are not seen as bitches of course; they are seen as tough, strong, leaders. Why can’t that appellation be applied to women as well? Is being called a bitch a new type of modern compliment?

Maybe, just maybe, being seen as a bitch can a good thing to be. If being a bitch means that you are a woman who expects respect, who is a force to be reckoned with in business, politics and in life in general; if it means that you can be forceful when needed, make serious decisions and be a leader, then it is a positive affirmation.

I asserted my own authority last week. Having made dinner reservations for four at a swank restaurant, I was annoyed to see that another party of four people, without reservations, had pushed their way to the hostess and was being led to a table. I excused myself through the crowd, walked up to the maitre d’ and said, firmly but pleasantly:

“I’m sorry, but that table is for my party. We have reservations for eight o’clock, we’ve been waiting for thirty minutes. These people just arrived, and I heard them say that they do not have a reservation. I would like you to do the right thing and seat us first.”

The maitre d’ then told the hostess that those without reservations would have to wait until all parties with reservations were seated. As we were being escorted to our table, I distinctly heard one of the men in the other party say, “What a bitch!”

I took it as a compliment.

© 2014 Copyright Kristen Houghton

Bell Gardens, California Mayor Daniel Crespo Shot

Daniel Crespo, the mayor of Bell Gardens, California, has been shot, several Los Angeles news outlets reported Tuesday.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Crespo was shot at his home. Police confirmed to KPCC that a male victim was taken to the hospital, but did not confirm the victim’s identity.

Crespo’s condition is not known at this time.

Bell Gardens is about 10 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles. According to the city’s website, Crespo has served in city government since 2001.

This is a developing story.. Check back for updates..

Report: PayPal dropped from Apple Pay because Samsung

apple-pay-hands-on-sg-1-600x3472Apple Pay is going to make waves in the mobile payment realm, that much is certain. On launch, many wondered why Apple’s service didn’t just partner with another, similar service — or buy them. A new report suggests Apple was in discussions with PayPal to be involved with Apple Pay, but cut them loose because of Samsung. PayPal is currently … Continue reading

Why You Shouldn't Freak Out About the First U.S. Ebola Patient

Why You Shouldn't Freak Out About the First U.S. Ebola Patient

Today, the CDC confirmed the first case of Ebola diagnosed in the U.S.: a patient who was traveling in Liberia and is now at a hospital in Dallas. Should you panic about Ebola now? Nope, and here’s why.

Read more…



Arduino's New 3D Printer Will Cost You Less Than $1000

Arduino's New 3D Printer Will Cost You Less Than $1000

Arduino is at the heart of do-it-yourself electronics, and now the company wants to make inroads into additive manufacturing with its 3D printer: The Arduino Materia 101.

Read more…



Crackdown on spying apps leads to StealthGenie CEO's arrest

Apparently, the US government is now on a mission to bring down mobile applications offering spyware services — which, for a variety of well-documented reasons, simply seems kind of ironic. Controversy aside though, the Department of Justice…

Playdate: We're livestreaming 'Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor' on PS4!

Welcome, ladygeeks and gentlenerds, to the new era of gaming. The one where you get to watch, and comment, as other people livestream gameplay from next-gen consoles. Because games! They’re fun!…

Senator Alexander Needs to Read the NLRA

Sen. ​Lamar Alexander has become the newest worst expert on U.S. labor law. Instead of upholding the law as required by his oath of office, he wants to gut it while claiming to reform it.

For 80 years, the preamble of the National Labor Relations Act has stated that its purpose included “encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining… and full freedom of association.” As the ranking Republican on the Health Education and Labor Committee, who aspires to being the committee chair if his dream of a Republican majority is realized in November, he ought to read the Act or at least the preamble. Instead of promoting collective bargaining, Alexander wants to change the law so that the National Labor Relations Board, which administers the Act and prosecutes offenders, is stripped of its historic mission of promoting collective bargaining.

Even worse Alexander claims that he wants to restore the board’s role as umpire. The NLRB is supposed to be an advocate for working Americans to offset the enormous power of management. For 80 years, until now, it was well understood that capital and labor are not equal and that in part government needs to promote collective bargaining or it will disappear.

Ironic isn’t it that collective bargaining has all but disappeared with private sector collective bargaining coverage now at 6 percent or 1900 levels, and now Alexander wants to strip away the last vestige of support for working Americans. His fix is to change the NLRB composition from five to six members and mandate that three must be from each of the two major parties. Furthermore, four members would need to agree on any decision, insuring that the guts of virtually all decisions would be destroyed. 

Finally if decisions are not reached within one year, either party could move the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals. Alexander does not explain how that would speed decisions, since the current backlog at the U.S. Court of Appeals is one year, and in this case, he is arguing for the record to start de novo or from scratch.

The senator is also arguing that the general counsel needs to be neutral, and to achieve that he would give either party the right to ask for review any complaint issued by the general counsel in U.S. District Court. Again this adds months or more delay and by itself would clog the courts with review by corporate counsel of virtually every complaint against their clients.

But the big Alexander fabrication is his contention that he would return the board to its initial umpire status. In fact during its first 10 years, the NLRB played a significant role, as collective bargaining coverage rose from 8 to 35 percent and 10 million American workers organized. During that period the general counsel was extremely aggressive in promoting collective bargaining, by law, for the first time in our nation’s history.

Every other democracy in the world, but our own, has continued to promote collective bargaining. But in the U.S., with union busting management and their $1,000 per hour corporate lawyers hiding behind free speech rights, collective bargaining in the private sector is on the verge of extinction. Sad that Republican President Gerald Ford was the last president to actually extend collective bargaining coverage, in his case, to employees of private non-profit corporations such as hospitals.

Now the Republican Party and its “labor” leadership want to return to 19th century capitalism. In his senate speech introducing his bill, Alexander said that the NLRB was a significant cause of job flight to other nations like Mexico, with the U.S. losing its advantage. Once again this is a call for laissez-faire capitalism and a race to the bottom — cutting wages and worker protections rather than adopting national trade policy that sets minimum standards for imports that include labor rights.

But Alexander’s speech should be a call to action for working Americans whether or not they have a union. Currently only the NLRB protects the rights of most working Americans who do not have a union. Many of their cases involve discrimination against workers who ask the wrong question, such as a pay raise, or seek to change conditions on the job.

If Republicans take control of the Senate this November, Alexander will be leading the Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee. He is telling us now what he will do as chairman. We need to put his picture and quotes about cutting back on labor rights on flyers and distribute them in all seven states with close Senate elections. Sen. Mitch McConnell’s statements supporting the Alexander legislation are just as outrageous, and the minority leader is locked in a close election. Those who care about workers’ rights need to heed this warning and volunteer to knock on doors, make phone calls and turn out voters on election day.

In 1936 after passage of the National Labor Relations Act, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appeared on workplace posters saying, “If I was a worker I would join a union.”

Now we need posters saying if Republicans win control of the U.S. Senate, Alexander will be gutting the little that’s left of U.S. labor law. “Which side are you on?”

Thanks to McConnell and Alexander, we all have a new reason to engage in this debate between now and Nov. 4. This should be a wake up call for all of us.

2015: The Year of the Woman: Interview With Alisa Miller, President and CEO of Public Radio International.

Public Radio International commits to an 18-month long feature on the power of women to fuel economic development and improved medical care around the world.

2015 marks the 20-year celebration of the 1995 United Nations Conference on Women, which was held in Beijing. At that conference, representatives from 189 governments hammered out the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, which was a blueprint for ensuring that women around the world would:

1. Have access to education,
2. Have equal pay for equal work,
3. Be protected from violence, and
4. Participate in decision-making.

How far have we come over the last two decades? What goals have been achieved, and what remains to be realized? 2015 will be a year where the United Nations, concerned citizens, non-government organizations and the media will dive into the details. It doesn’t take a forensic researcher to see that there is still a lot of work to be done 0 — with ISIS making the rules in areas of Iraq and Syria, and a 2012 assassination attempt on a schoolgirl, Malala Yousafzai, in Pakistan.

And that’s where Public Radio International is stepping up their coverage to solutions journalism. On September 22, 2014 at the Clinton Global Initiative, PRI announced a new 18-month series, Across Women’s Lives. According to Alisa Miller, the CEO and president of PRI, “Current coverage of women and girls is woefully inadequate.”

Across Women’s Lives will feature the stories of women from India and Africa, from all walks of life and ages, on PRI’s The World program. Financial assistance will be provided by The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, with editorial contributions from Global Voices, All Africa and the BBC World Service. The focus will be on engagement, where listeners can produce their own mini-documentaries, learn more about the data and statistics presented in the story and even build action toolkits.

Can radio reach into the homes and hearts of women in remote regions, inspiring them to make meaningful improvements to their own lives and the community at large? This commitment is designed to test that idea.

I discussed this and more with Alisa Miller last week.

Natalie Pace: You’ve said that coverage of women and girls in the news media is “woefully inadequate.” What do you hope to achieve with this commitment?

Alisa Miller: Across Women’s Lives is an ambitious news initiative to increase knowledge about and deepen engagement around the resoundingly positive power of women in the world. Our hope is not only to reach millions of people with what we are doing, but also to put the topic of global women and girl’s issues as part of what should be regularly covered within the broader news cycle. What happens to women and girls in society is often what happens to society in terms of success or failure.

NP: How will you vary the content and keep the series engaging over the course of 18 months?

AM: We’re going to be exploring the status of women at various stages of life: birth and infancy, early childhood, adolescence and young adulthood, middle age and old age. We’re using that as a lens to determine what the issues are and what they are facing depending upon their stage of life.

NP: Why did you choose Africa and India as your primary focus?

AM: We’ll be focusing initially on storytelling from Africa and India, but our aim is to expand this over time. We want to make a global/local connection. We’re interested in that cross-cultural conversation.

NP: This series has an ambitious goal to engage the listener to take action…

AM: We’re interested in where journalism and engagement meet. We know that people are very motivated and learn things based upon our stories. We’ll have ongoing multi-media storytelling, which will include radio, video, text and infographics. We’re fascinated with mobile technology and how our phone makes it possible to engage, to get together, etc. based on the spark that we ignite, based on stories. We’re interested in how people take action on stories, co-creating content with us. [We’ll be] able to use partnerships to track when that’s happening, so we can see that broader ripple effect.

NP: I love the generational approach. We often think about empowering women on the lower end of the scale. I’ve heard some compelling research and statistics from economist Sylvia Ann Hewlett. She says that in India, 11% of CEOs are women, whereas here in the United States it’s only 3%. Her research indicates that has a lot to do with having multiple generations in the home. While the mother works in the executive suite, the grandparents cook the meals and provide the afterschool and home care. When you think of women in America being so stretched in terms of work/life balance, that kind of story might really resonate with women in the U.S.

AM: Absolutely. That’s one of the things I’m excited about. Women in various regions of the world, and in different stages of life have so much in common. We face so many of the same issues. One of the ideas of this project is to build that empathy and connection. That can go in both directions. There’s so much that we have in common.

NP: What are some of the things that women in the Western World have in common with women in India and Africa?

AM: One in three women in her lifetime will [experience] some sort of violence. That is universal. A billion people are affected by this, from a celebrity’s wife to someone in a remote area of Africa, who is facing various forms of intimidation and violence because of her gender. When we see someone being hit in an elevator by a celebrity, this becomes a part of the topic of conversation. That’s actually an important opportunity.

NP: Have you already run across some stories that you are interested in featuring?

AM: There’s a gentleman here at CGI who is working on an effort to increase parental leave for men around the world. When men have that opportunity that allows for expansion for women, who can get up to 7% more on a monthly basis depending upon how long her partner is providing childcare. That’s a really important part of the conversation, too.

NP: Are you worried about opposition? There are some parts of the world where society doesn’t want women to have a voice, where change is outlawed and the consequences are dire.

AM: This is where the solutions journalism comes in as well, where we are showing things that are working, as well as things that don’t. There is a misperception that change for women and girls cannot happen in a generation. In fact, it can. Because of that misperception, it holds back further progress or conversation because people feel it’s hopeless.

NP: PRI has the ability to imbed data into these stories that should be hugely empowering to women in the developing world. There are so many myths and Stone Age beliefs that stand in the way of progress.

AM: Absolutely. Analysis and facts are so important. It’s astonishing how little is known, given how much research, data and stories have been done. We believe that is due to the lack of frequency in the news cycle. We’re hoping that with that frequency, that knowledge can grow.

NP: I do a lot of mentoring with schoolgirls in Kenya. Online access is always an issue. How are you going to get these stories heard in the rural regions of Africa and India, where they are most needed?

AM: We have BBC Calling, which is on the BBC World Service. I fully expect that a number of these stories will be selected over time to be on that program. That program reaches over 45 million people across the world. It’s through radio, which is free and hugely powerful in these countries. We’re hopeful that we’ll be able to get past any barrier because of how it is being delivered.

NP: Is there anything else you wish to share?

AM: We’d love your feedback and your participation. We have a new special series on women’s health and development. We have a big effort around women and science. We do a lot of interesting work about women in leadership around the world. Part of what makes our coverage great are the men and women who are interested in this topic and can add to the story. So, tune in and log on and all of that good stuff because we’d love to hear from you.

About PRI:
Public Radio International is creating a more informed, empathetic and connected world by sharing powerful stories, encouraging exploration, and connecting people and cultures. PRI’s content is available on almost 900 public radio stations nationwide, at www.pri.org, and through podcasts and digital platforms.

Good2Go Is An App For Consenting To Sex

Want to have safe and consensual sex? There’s an app for that.

Good2Go is a new smartphone application that encourages users to give consent before engaging in any sexual acts. The app targets college-aged adults and its creators from Sandton Technologies hope it will prevent unwanted sexual conduct by facilitating a step-by-step process to ensure both parties are on the same page.

Lee Ann Allman, president of Sandton Technologies, created Good2Go along with seven other mothers and fathers of college-aged children. The idea emerged from conversations with their children and their children’s friends about the overwhelming number of sexual assaults that happen on college campuses all over the country.

screenshot

So, once a user decides she or he wants to have to sex with someone, the app works as follows:

  1. Launch and log in to Good2Go and hand the phone to your potential partner.
  2. Good2Go then asks your potential partner if she/he is ready to give consent by asking “Are we Good2Go?”
  3. The three answer options are: 1. “No, thanks”; 2. “Yes, but… we need to talk”; and 3. “I’m Good2Go.”
  4. If the potential partner decides “No, thanks” a screen pops up that says “Remember! No means No! Only Yes means Yes BUT can be changed to NO at anytime!”
  5. If the potential partner decides “No, thanks” a screen pops up that says “Remember! No means No! Only Yes means Yes BUT can be changed to NO at anytime!”
  6. If she/he decides “Yes… but we need to talk,” a small bar at the bottom reads “Let’s talk!”
  7. If the potential partner says they’re Good2Go the app asks if she/he is “Sober,” “Mildly Intoxicated,” “Intoxicated but Good2Go” or “Pretty Wasted.” If the potential partner chooses “Sober,” “Mildly Intoxicated,” “Intoxicated but Good2Go” the user can give consent, however, if she/he is “Pretty Wasted” the app says the partner cannot consent and to give the phone back to its owner.

When asked why the app informs a “Pretty Wasted” user that she/he can’t consent (even though they’re sober enough to be using Good2Go), Allman told The Huffington Post in an email: “If someone answers ‘I’m Pretty Wasted’ the app will not allow an affirmative consent answer even though they probably aren’t at the legal threshold of incapacitation. We have set a higher bar concerning sobriety than the law defines.”

Allman also made it very clear that the purpose of the app is to teach young people “the language of affirmative consent.” “If the app becomes a tool that is adopted across campuses, we believe that it will reduce sexual assaults, unwanted or regretted encounters,” she said.

good2go av screenshot

These days, it seems like there’s an app for everything, so why wouldn’t there be one to facilitate consent? But some are skeptical about whether Good2Go could actually prove effective at combatting sexual assault.

As Slate’s Amanda Hess pointed out the app doesn’t clarify what kind of sex people are consenting to: “Good2Go is obviously a euphemism for sexual activity, but it’s not clear what that means exactly — is it making out, oral sex, vaginal intercourse, or anal sex, and with protection or not?”

When asked about this gap, Allman told HuffPost that, “Affirmative consent should be asked for and given for all sexual acts, no matter what they are. This should be part of the conversation that they will have as part of using the app.”

Molly Mirhashem from The New Republic also criticized the app, writing that “situations where consent is often misunderstood or disregarded — one or both parties being intoxicated, ‘implied’ consent within relationships — will not be addressed with this or any app.”

While Good2Go’s structure could be helpful in making sure that there’s no miscommunication between two parties, it doesn’t necessarily allow for any of the gray area that exists in real life sexual situations and conversations. For example, the app doesn’t address exactly what you and your partner are comfortable (or not comfortable) doing in the bedroom.

HuffPost spoke to the managing attorney of the Victim Rights Law Center (VRLC) Colby Bruno to find out if the 11-year veteran of the field thinks this app could be useful on college campuses. Overall, she seemed hopeful.

“Anything that helps students get to a mutual understanding is important for consent,” Bruno told The Huffington Post in a phone interview. “If it helps just one student or one couple with understanding what they’re about to do then terrific.”

If young people are willing to use it, Good2Go could definitely signal a step in the right direction.

Bruno put it perfectly, stating: “There are clearly flaws [with Good2Go], but if it brings some consciousness to the issue [of consent] then fantastic. Why not?”

To download the app for free go to iTunes or Google Play.

H/T Slate