Well, the book manuscript is finally done, printed (despite a broken department printer — found one in another department) and sent off to the publisher. Now I’m gearing up for the annual meeting of the American Historical Association in Boston, which starts tomorrow. I don’t often attend this meeting — it’s an inconvenient time of year, I prefer smaller conferences, etc. — but the chance to meet other digital history folks (aka twitterstorians) had me enthusiastic. One of them is even more enthusiastic — see this post at the blog Notes from the Field — and I’m looking forward to meeting her and others in person.
Over the holidays, I continued to read and post to Twitter (see my stream at right) and discovered that History Carnival was looking for someone to host an upcoming carnival. So, I’ll be hosting the History Carnival for February. Please go to their website to submit nominations.
What is a blog carnival you ask? Well, it’s not this kind of carnival, and it’s just a coincidence I’m hosting in February (although maybe I’ll work in something about Mardi Gras). According to if:book, a blog carnival “is an interesting subculture of the web that has been adopted in certain academic, or quasi-academic, circles. A blog carnival is like a roving journal, a rotating showcase of interesting writing from around the blogosphere within a particular discipline. Individual bloggers volunteer to host a carnival on their personal blog, acting as chief editor for that edition. It falls to them to collect noteworthy items, and to sort through suggestions from the community, many of which are direct submissions from authors. On the appointed date (carnivals generally keep to a regular schedule) the carnival gets published and the community is treated to a richly annotated feast of new writing in the field.”
The original carnival was Carnival of the Vanities, started in 2002. Medieval and early modern historians were a natural for this platform and started Carnivalesque a few years later in 2005, the same year that the History Carnival started. For an example of a recent History Carnival, check out the January History Carnival at Writing Women’s History. There’s even a clearinghouse for carnivals here.
I’m still powering through the last few papers and exams, but am taking time to post this short documentary by/about the National Women’s Health Network. The Network celebrated its 35th anniversary on December 16, 2010 (happy belated anniversary!) They l will have a prominent place in my forthcoming book (which I plan to mail to the press after Christmas, I promise!)
And here’s a call for donations rom Executive Director Cindy Pearson:
Together, we have been improving women’s health in the US since 1975.
We bring the voices of women consumers to the policy and regulatory decision-making bodies in D.C.
We work to improve the health of all women by providing unbiased, evidence-based information that women need to make informed decisions about their own health.
We are supported by our diverse members from all across the country.
We play our watchdog role fearlessly. And, we do it without taking any financial contributions from drug companies, the health insurance industry, medical device manufacturers or anyone else with a financial stake in women’s health decision-making.
Will you help us?
We have a great opportunity with our 35th Anniversary Challenge Campaign. A small group of members are stepping forward with pledges to give $35,000 if we raise $35,000 from gifts ‘above and beyond’ usual year-end gifts. These members generously pledged to help encourage others like you to step up and give more as well. You can be sure that any gift you give to NWHN, large or small, will have a big impact on the lives of women and their families. Now, it’s on to the next 35!
Taking a break from grading to post this job announcement — yay, someone is hiring!
Search for the Executive Director
Wellesley Centers for Women
The Wellesley Centers for Women (WCW), an influential research institute with the goal of generating knowledge that can lead to positive social change, seeks an Executive Director. With an operating budget of over $7 million, an endowment of $32.7 million and a staff of 75, the Centers are recognized internationally for groundbreaking, rigorous research and scholarship that places women’s perspectives at the center of inquiry. Located at Wellesley College, one of the nation’s leading women’s colleges, the Centers benefit from a unique relationship with the College including student internship and employment opportunities, some collaborative teaching and research with Wellesley faculty, and financial support.
This is an exciting opportunity to direct a highly motivated and committed community of researchers, and to ensure that WCW continues to push the boundaries of understanding and have significant impact in the public sphere. A successful Executive Director will build on the strong leadership of Susan McGee Bailey and chart a course for the future that will heighten the Centers’ visibility; increase revenues through new and existing donor networks, research grants and contracts; and attract and retain top-notch researchers. The Executive Director will also spark innovative thinking about how to create fresh synergies between WCW and Wellesley College, two world-class entities that share a commitment to research, education and the empowerment of women.
The position calls for a creative, deft, consultative leader with excellent strategic, communication and fundraising skills. Distinguished scholarship and a terminal degree in a relevant discipline are expected, as is experience in an organizational leadership role. Demonstrated passion for women’s issues is essential. The Executive Director reports to the Provost of Wellesley College and is guided by a 27 member advisory board, the Wellesley Centers for Women Board of Overseers. The Board of Overseers includes two members of the Wellesley College Board of Trustees, which has final authority over the Centers. For more information on the Centers, please view this website.
Please direct inquiries, applications and nominations to Sheryl Ash and Rebecca Swartz at Isaacson, Miller. Candidates should provide a C.V., letter of interest, and reference list electronically to 4148@imsearch.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . All replies will be held in strict confidence. Wellesley College is an EO/AA educational institution and employer.
This message is from Barbara Dunn of www.haiwatch.com If you have further questions, please contact her at
barbara@haiwatchnews.com
————————————
The Department of Health & Human Services recently released its annual report on the quality of health care Americans receive. While there have been some improvements, hospitals still have work to do to put an end to the ongoing – but solvable – problem of Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAIs).
To help achieve this goal, Kimberly-Clark Health Care launched “Not on My Watch” (www.haiwatch.com), a website that provides tools and information to help facilities eliminate HAIs. I’ve created a useful microsite that you’re welcome to grab resources from:
I’m also pleased to announce that Kimberly-Clark will match all year-end gifts to the AORN Foundation made by AORN members up to $20,000. All donations will be used to support education, research and patient safety initiatives.
I’d also like to let you know that the HAI Watchdog* Awards are still accepting submissions until midnight December 15th. Individual facilities will be recognized for their outstanding programs and efforts. The goal of these awards is to publicize HAI prevention initiatives on haiwatchdog.com, allowing healthcare providers to share and learn from each other.
Where Rachel Larimore says that “Julian Assange is Creepy: So is His Arrest on Rape Charges.” In a turn of phrase oddly reminiscent of Whoopi Goldberg’s comments about the rape charges against Roman Polanksi, Rachel writes:
“It’s not that the charges aren’t serious. They go beyond Assange allegedly not using a condom when a woman asked him to. He comes across as a creep and a misogynist. But they are still cases of “acquaintance rape,” which is notoriously difficult to prove. And that just contributes to the idea among skeptics—and Assange’s lawyer, naturally—that these are trumped up charges designed to keep Assange from causing trouble for the United States and its allies. It doesn’t help that the last time Assange had a document dump, Swedish authorities wanted to question Assange and then released a statement backing off and saying that he “is not suspected of rape.”
So, according to Rachel, date rape must not _really_ be rape? WTF?!
In response to Rachel, Amanda Marcotte argued that “Assange Defenders Attack Rape Accusers for No Good Reason.”
” I have to agree with you that the circumstances of Julian Assange’s arrest are suspicious as hell and that the charges against Assange seem credible enough. I’m surprised at how many people find it impossible to hold both thoughts in their heads at once and believe that because Interpol is exploiting the sexual assault charges to get Assange, it must mean the charges themselves are lies. I often caution people not to assume conspiracy when opportunism is what’s likely in play. Even before all this came out, I really disliked the hero worship of Assange, who has always put me off my lunch. It’s possible both that Wikileaks is a necessary curative for government overreach and that its leader is out to serve his own ego needs above all. Anyone who thinks that’s impossible needs to think harder about what’s going on when politicians get sentimental on the campaign trail.
What is disgusting to me is how much of the left has conveniently forgotten that women who file rape charges can pretty much always expect to have their names dragged through the mud, unless they were “lucky” enough to be raped by someone of much lower social status who also jumped out of the bushes to rape them.”
Thanks, Amanda. This needed to said, and now it has, and I don’t have too! Back to grading. . .
via Postbourgie, where Brokey McPoverty posted a Humpday Hate against the John Lennon song, “Happy Christmas” and other sad Christmas songs:
“Y’know? Listening to this song, I get the sneaking suspicion that John Lennon isn’t really all that excited about war being over. Or that war just really isn’t over. He clearly went to the Stevie Wonder School of Christmas Song Writing and got an A in reminding everybody of how much things really suck. Looking at the title, you expect some kind of joy, right? And I guess he tries, for what it’s worth. He does sing, ‘a very merry Christmas/and a happy new year/let’s hope it’s a good one’ and all that. But, like: And so this is Christmas/ For weak and for strong/For rich and the poor ones/The world is so wrong.”
Since this is the 30th anniversary of Lennon’s assassination (man, has it been that long? – my senior class at Hartford High School — the one in Vermont — dedicated our yearbook to Lennon, so officially I’m an old fart), I’m sticking up for him and pointing out to fellow members of Christian faith traditions that this is the season of Advent, not Christmas. Last Sunday, we at Trinity Episcopal Church in Collinsville had guest lay preacher Donald V. Romanik, President of Episcopal Church Foundation, remind us what Advent is all about:
“OK, I really like the image of the Peaceable Kingdom, although I’m not too crazy about playing with snakes. Also, as a Gentile, I warmly embrace Paul’s pronouncement that although a descendant of Jesse and David himself, Jesus came to save me as well.
Why not just leave it at that. Why do we have to even bother with that eccentric, dirty, obnoxious and in-your-face fanatic called John-the Baptist? Isn’t he just the skunk at the garden party, the loud intoxicated uncle at dinner or the smelly homeless person on the park bench? While I may be ready to confront John the Baptist in January when we celebrate the Baptism of Jesus during Epiphany, the last thing I need during this season of joy and cheer is to be insulted by a crazy man who dresses in camel’s hair and eats wild locusts and honey.
I’m afraid, however, that rather than the Peaceable Kingdom., the real message of Advent is that of John the Baptist. Before we can hear the songs of the angels about peace on earth and good well to all of humankind, we need to be told that sometimes we are indeed a brood a vipers and we have to repent. John the Baptist and the apocalyptic images of the end of time are not there to scare us but they are meant to shake us up and provide us with an incredible sense of urgency.”
Okay, Lennon wasn’t John the Baptist obviously — but certainly his song is appropriate to a season that is supposed to remind us of the inconvenient fact that not everyone is enjoying a holly jolly you know what. So, Let’s not get ahead of ourselves, folks. Before we Christians have a Happy Christmas, we need to ponder the mystery of Advent:
I turned my ramblings on the 50th anniversary of the contraceptive pill into a paper proposal for the 2011 annual meeting of the American Association for the History of Medicine. Yay! The title of my paper is “The Pill at 50: Scientific Commemoration and the Politics of American Memory.” I’ll write more later but just thought I’d share this exciting news!
Added later: here’s the abstract:
This paper will use coverage of the 50th anniversary of the contraceptive pill as a case study of collective memory and commemorative practice in the history of science and medicine. As Pnina Abir-Am observes in her introduction to Commemorative Practices in the Sciences, a “commemorative mania” has swept the world in the past several decades and relationship between memory and historical writing has become “a major element of both scholarly and public discourse in the twenty-first century.” I will show that like the Clemence Royer centennial celebration described by Joy Harvey in the same volume, celebration of the Pill’s 50th anniversary was a “focal point for feminism, politics, and science” in the United States. For the scientists who developed and tested the first contraceptive pills, the anniversary of the Pill was a way to affirm their collective professional past as well as reassert their professional authority in the present. The celebrations also illustrated culture wars over reproductive rights and the meaning of controversial events in the history of science and medicine in the United States. Finally, I will show that feminist analysis of this historical event was not monolithic, but reflects the complicated history of women’s relationship to contraceptive technology and medical experimentation since the 1960s.
Learning Objectives:
Explain the ways in which different political, scientific, and social groups commemorated the 50th anniversary of the contraceptive pill.
Understand how memory studies can be used as an analytical tool in the history of medicine.
Explore the difficulties historians face in interpreting a politically controversial subject for the public.
“I’m somewhat annoyed at all the coverage A MAN talking about lost women scientists is getting, when we have several decades-worth of women historians of science who have been saying the exact same thing. This seems to me pretty much the standard thing of no-one listening until it’s said by a bloke (even if the women have already been saying it).”
Right on, Leslie! The History of Science Society has an award dedicated to this subject, named after esteemed historian Margaret W. Rossiter (and on of my graduate committee members at Cornell). Previously it was just the History of Women in Science award, which Rossiter won in 1997 for her encyclopedic book, Women Scientists in America: Before Affirmative Action.
Now, I’m not saying men can’t do women’s history — but hey, how about giving credit to those who paved the way for you?
“The Bush family has a long history of support for Planned Parenthood. Prescott Bush, father of George H. W. Bush (Bush 1) and grandfather of Bush 2 was the treasurer of Planned Parenthood when it launched its first national fundraising campaign in 1947. Birth control being controversial in the period pre- Griswold v. Connecticut (and yes, history obviously repeats itself), Prescott Bush was attacked for his pro-choice position and knocked out of the running for a Senate seat in Connecticut.
While he was a Congressman, George H.W. Bush was a leader in establishing Title X, the program that most in the contemporary right wing love to hate. The fact is that most programs today targeted for extinction by Republicans and Tea Party fanatics were either supported or established by…Republicans, albeit for reasons having more to do with population control than women’s rights.
In the sixties, the connections between family planning and economic security were becoming clearer. President Lyndon Johnson was the first to establish public funding for family planning services as part of the War on Poverty. According to a brief review of legislative history by the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association Johnson began offering grants for family planning services in 1965, the same year the Supreme Court struck down the Connecticut law that prohibited the use of contraceptives by married couples in Griswold. Then, in the late sixties, the Social Security Act was amended to require state welfare agencies to makefamily planning services and information available to recipients.
Following on this platform, Republican President Richard Nixon “took a special interest in family planning.”
“Soon,” the NFPRHA brief states, “Congress responded, enacting Title X of the Public Health Service Act, the first – and to this day, only – federal program dedicated to providing family planning services nationwide.”
Signed into law by President Nixon on December 26, 1970, champions of the program during its enactment included then-Congressman George H.W. Bush, who said in 1969: ‘We need to make population and family planning household words. We need to take sensationalism out of this topic so that it can no longer be used by militants who have no real knowledge of the voluntary nature of the program but, rather are using it as a political steppingstone. If family planning is anything, it is a public health matter.'”
I’m not surprised by this at all. Support for population control was pretty mainstream in the 1960s and 1970s, but the reasons behind it were not exactly pro-choice (and not just because they were talking about contraception, not abortion). Rather, the Johnson and Nixon administrations and Congress at this time supported federal funding for birth control clinics because they believed that overpopulation contributed to international terrorism and domestic political unrest. This is quite different from a rights-based framework that advocates expanding women’s access to birth control because it gives them more control over their bodies. Because these programs targeted poor women of color, militant civil rights groups alleged that these programs were “genocidal.” Women of color who supported reproductive rights criticized this argument, but they also found fault with the population control approach that disproportionately affected their community. For these women, reproductive freedom meant not only the right to limit their fertility but also the right to reproduce regardless of race or income level. For more on this topic, see Jennifer Nelson, Women of Color and the Reproductive Rights Movement.
Knitting Clio 